who puts more thought into chargen: codexer or devs

[JarlFrank]

Character creation is one of the best parts of an RPG, especially if it's complex and offers a lot of options.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Butter]

creating whole party is bad

and not just because you need to plan 6 characters. Creating party waters down character planning.
When you get party your skills dont matter. Suddenly its not a game of pros and cons, choosing what you will be able to accomplish, which obstacles you can bypass.
Once you create whole party its different game: how to cover all the skills provided. Gameplay afterwards is not fun anymore as you can just bypass every obstacle.

The alternatives are a) recruiting companions who fill in your PC's gaps, b) not having more than one character in your party. I'll take full party creation every time.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[FeelTheRads]

Oh, yeah, it's been a while since the last "hurr respect muh time I have jobs and fuck women not like you nerds and all games must conform to me" retard. It was about time for another one.

 

[Incendax]

Why even bother playing the game? You've already made all the important decisions. All that's left is -- as you derisively mentioned re: PST -- choosing your own adventure.

To see the story? Explore the world? I can easily pack away an 8 hour day on character creation alone, but you play the game to actually see what the hell is in it.

I mean, I agree with you in general. The older I get, the less time I have to do shit like grinding for stats and items. But character creation? That shit is fun.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

in dire need of female companionship

If that's the case, then remember to quickly run out of the web.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

Why even bother playing the game? You've already made all the important decisions. All that's left is -- as you derisively mentioned re: PST -- choosing your own adventure.

To see the story? Explore the world? I can easily pack away an 8 hour day on character creation alone, but you play the game to actually see what the hell is in it.

I mean, I agree with you in general. The older I get, the less time I have to do shit like grinding for stats and items. But character creation? That shit is fun.

I agree. Experiencing the world is worthwhile. IMO it's the most important thing (and clearly the Codex agrees; see which kinds of games dominate the top 10).

Lukaszek, on the other hand, clearly enjoys character generation screens more than anything. He even said that he uses the game to test the character, only to repeatedly restart and change it up again -- the game is serving his enjoyment of character generation. Character creation is the game. (More power to you, my man.)
I see things 180 degrees the opposite direction. Character generation should serve your enjoyment of the game.

 

[Okagron]

HarveyBirdman

How this dumbfuck doesn't have any of the appropriate tags is beyond me, dude pukes some of the biggest nonsense i ever read in my life. Let's not forget this is the braindead mongloid that claimed "Oblivion is a flawed masterpiece" and also said that "Fallout 3 is a good game".

 

[Viata]

I find it difficult to start a new game because I know I will always take at least an hour to create a character or god forbid a party.

This. Because of college, I play games only at the end/begin of the year and most of the time is spent creating a party that pleases me, by the time I have to go back to college, I may have finally the right party.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

Let's not forget Okagron is the homo habilis who said... wait, who is Okagron again?

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[sser]

If a game has party creation I'll probably spend most of my time there, beat the first act probably about five times, get to the second act twice maybe, third act once, never actually finish the game, make about eighty parties to min-max my larping soul, and walk away still thinking I got my money's worth.

 

[Master]

creating whole party is bad

and not just because you need to plan 6 characters. Creating party waters down character planning.
When you get party your skills dont matter. Suddenly its not a game of pros and cons, choosing what you will be able to accomplish, which obstacles you can bypass.
Once you create whole party its different game: how to cover all the skills provided. Gameplay afterwards is not fun anymore as you can just bypass every obstacle.

That would make sense if the game has just one type of encounter throughout.

 

[Wunderbar]

looks like half of people in here played f2 with premade char.
No shame in that, zwanzig_zwoelf did it too*

*EDIT: codexer fact checkers kicked in and I was wrong. Im sorry for spreading lies.
It was f1

1. zwanzig_zwoelf:
   i played f1 with a premade char for an hour before making a custom char
2. zwanzig_zwoelf:
   since i played f2 straight after f1 playing with a premade char would be retadred

premade characters in Fo1 were pretty shitty, but in Fo2 they are actually decent.

 

[Background Character]

Yeah I love chargen just like any other person and can spend hours in it if it's good enough, maybe not creating the whole party but definitely creating the "main character", I hate to admit I'm more of a larper than powergamer to me the character has to "make sense" and that's why I can never manage to lower an attribute down enough to be considered atrophied/retarded in universe (unless I intentionally create a retarded character I love you F1). That being said maybe my "sense" is skewered because I always want to play a jack of all trades characters that start relying on their fighting skills and wits and later gain magic all the while being charismatic, that led to trying to make a fighter/rogue/sorcorwiz/eldritch knight build that works and makes sense and it's not too gimped; "why don't you play a bard?" you ask "they're the jack of all trades class after all" WELL BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE FULL SPELL PROGRESSION THAT'S WHY AND THE SPELLS THEY HAVE ARE LAME WORSE OF ALL I HATE THE MUSIC ASPECT SINCE IT'S A CONSTANT REMINDER WHEN I WAS A KID I REALIZED I COULD NEVER PLAY THE GUITAR AND THE ONLY THING I COULD PLAY WAS WITH MYSELF FUCK BARDS

In the end I just went full sorcerer, which flavor wise is the absolute worst you get your MAAAAAAGICAL POWERS during teenagehood, come on that's some x-men/mutant Harry Potter shit, lame beyond words

And you can't generate your own character, you just pick one premade class.

Deprived forever

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Raghar]

Character creation is one of the best parts of an RPG, especially if it's complex and offers a lot of options.

You spend 3 hours on character creation, then wipe party in 7 minutes on ironman, and you can do 30 minutes of char creation again.

 

[Kliwer]

In my opinion it is not very wise to argue, which method of character creation is ultimately better because this aspect of game could be well done in several ways. As someone already said: it is more important how your character system fits the gameplay.

Everyone have, of course, some preferences. There are some things which are important to me:

-I trully hate clasless systems. In practise our hero becomes (sooner or later) an ultimate fighter-wizard-thief. Good example is Divane Divinity: you could learn every single good skill. Classles systems could be good only with some kind of story limitations (as in Gothic 2 - only mercenary could be master smith) and only in single-character RPGs.

-In party-RPGs class systems are the best for me. However I do not like whole party creation. Take IWD. Your group is not a fantasy fellowship but some kind of optimally designed squad of battle robots. Perfect thief (18/19/17/3/3/3), great fighter (18/00 /18/18/3/3/3), perfect wizard... It is so souless.
From this point of view the perfect RPG for me is Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. To designe your party you maust consider many factors: technical needs of your group, aligments, avaiable equipment... You heve one super-hero (your main, optimal character) but the rest of the group is not so perfect - as it should be. You need a thief? Montaron could be a good choice from mechanical perspective but he do not fit to your good companions and high reputation - so you decide to hire someone weaker (Alora), but not so evil. Ajantis is good fighter, but his dexterity is low, so he needs the Braceles od Dextrity so it is bad idea to hire another law-dexterity frontliner. Your fellowship will never be "optimal" which is much more intersting. But- it should be highlighted - any avaiable character is "good enough", if you know how to use them. I played many times with Garrick, Alora and other "weak" characters and all of them were enough powerfull and useful in corectly designed group.
The additional thing is - those characters have some personality (especially in BG2). Call me larper, but I prefere companions with some special features and story then simple battle-puppets from IWD and Gold Box games.

One more note: this system, to work, needs one important thing - abundance of avaiable characters. For example in Pillars of Eternity there are too few companions to make party composing interesting.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Wow this character generation stuff sounds complicated.

 

[Maggot]

Kliwer if you were a larper you wouldn't spend 10 hours getting 90-95 rolls for your entire party then whining about it.

 

[Shadowfang]

-I trully hate clasless systems. In practise our hero becomes (sooner or later) an ultimate fighter-wizard-thief. Good example is Divane Divinity: you could learn every single good skill. Classles systems could be good only with some kind of story limitations (as in Gothic 2 - only mercenary could be master smith) and only in single-character RPGs.

Only the bad classless games. Underrail is classless and does not suffer from this. The same is true for Fallout and Age of Decadence.

 

[ZodoZ]

if you dont spend 1week before starting game properly you are doing it wrong

Idiot