New here and new to GURPS

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I hear that there are people who can do that. I can't; seeing the points is a huge boost to my creativity. So I recommend that new GMs should try it both ways and see if the points help them or not.

Bill Stoddard

I do a bit of both and frankly don't get the extremists on this issue at all. I do think it's important to point out that not every person (or thing) in your game world needs a full character sheet (since some new GMs do seem to fall into this trap).

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I do a bit of both and frankly don't get the extremists on this issue at all. I do think it's important to point out that not every person (or thing) in your game world needs a full character sheet (since some new GMs do seem to fall into this trap).

Yep which is what I was thinking of when I said that.

[sir_pudding]

For example even if a PC has a deity as a Patron, you don't need to stat that diety as a character. You certainly don't need to build the deity's ability to grant prayers, powers or spells to worshipers as some kind of complicated Affliction, which I've seen a few new GURPS GMs think they need to do. I'm pretty sure even Bill would agree with this (not sure about jeff_wilson, though).

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

For example even if a PC has a deity as a Patron, you don't need to stat that diety as a character. You certainly don't need to build the deity's ability to grant prayers, powers or spells to worshipers as some kind of complicated Affliction, which I've seen a few new GURPS GMs think they need to do. I'm pretty sure even Bill would agree with this.

At the climax of Sovereignty, when the 1500-point-plus supers went off to Olympus to battle Ares and Athene, I did up character sheets for both gods. Fair's fair. But a god whose function is to grant knowledge or powers to worshipers doesn't need a character sheet at all. You write it up as a Patron with a high base point value, a frequency of appearance, and suitable modifiers, and that's all you need to know.

Bill Stoddard

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Novembermike

Yeah, if I'm making a Town Guardsman I'm just going to give him spear and shield at 12, Observation at 13 and stick all of his stats at 10. An Orc is going to have Axe 12, Dodge 9 and ST 14. A peasant is going to have Spear 10 and not much else combat wise.

I often do a low-point-value template and use it for all the minor NPCs of a given type, especially if they're going to recur. But I don't have a problem with just handwaving if I haven't prepared a template.

Bill Stoddard

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

The simple "choose your concept first and then pick out the things that fit it" really may not work with some people.

It can take some practice, particularly if you haven't played much, or just in systems that more or less hand everything to you. Pre-gens and templates are ways to generate a concept. And it can certainly be an iterative process, as you discover interesting things in the rules that pull the character away from the original idea.

What I actually recommend fior newbies is a heavily guided character creation process with the GM and all the players together deciding what sort of characters they all want

Certainly a good idea to at least check what the other players are thinking, if not a full-on group session. You want a concept that fits with the other characters, and with well-chosen conflicts if you have to have those.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

It can take some practice,.

Some people who start out poorly at it will get better with experience but some other people's minds just don't work that way. I'm one of them. I don't do "top down" chargen for my own characters.

I find the foreign language analogy to be a good one and I search for a graceful and natural way to express myself in the language/game system I'm using and not try and bend it to my whim.

I also don't like being out of place with the setting or out of step with the other characters. You end up either trying to do or unable to do things which don't make sense or which the game has no time for.

I do _much_ better if you give me a starting point. In situations where the GM doesn't give me one I usually end up making up one for myself even if I do it at random. So give me a set of constraints to work inside of instead of telling me I can do whatever I want out of a set of infinite possibilities.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

- Build characters starting with a concept, not by treating the rules as a shopping list. It's much easier to flip around and find traits that suit an existing idea than it is to try to pick things that look powerful at random. Describe the character's role, what cool things they're expected to do; then find abilities that fit. Personality and background suggest other sorts of Ads/Disads.

I will add two related suggestions:

- Build from effect, rather than wording. For example, if you must do something other than sleep (recharge, meditate, etc.) that takes you out of the adventure, it's usually easier to just treat it as sleep, rather than taking Doesn't Sleep and Dependency, or some other awkward combination.

- It's generally much easier and more satisfying to take inspiration from a source rather than converting exactly. Don't try to convert a D&D creature writeup line-by-line or figure out exactly what level Legolas had in Bow.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I do _much_ better if you give me a starting point. In situations where the GM doesn't give me one I usually end up making up one for myself even if I do it at random. So give me a set of constraints to work inside of instead of telling me I can do whatever I want out of a set of infinite possibilities.

I can't relate, because I'm on the far end of the spectrum -- I start with a full concept (either original or inspired by fictional sources) and simulate it as best I can within the rules and available points.

Can you elaborate on what qualifies as a "starting point" for you? Do you prefer templates? A list of useful character concepts?

I've definitely had players who approach character creation in ways I don't understand, and I'd like to be able to help them create the type of realized and consistent characters I appreciate.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Can you elaborate on what qualifies as a "starting point" for you? Do you prefer templates? A list of useful character concepts?

I can't speak for him, but one thing I like that I see too rarely is a good grounding of what kind of characters would be appropriate. Take a look at any prospectus Bill Stoddard has posted for an example. Many new (or even experienced) GMs will give little more than a broad genre and ask for characters, all too often leading to characters that are at best marginally compatible with each other or the campaign.

Poor: "Create characters for a TL3 fantasy campaign."
Better: "Create characters suitable for the Imperial court of a TL3 fantasy version of the Constantinople. Politics will play a significant role in the campaign."

Poor: "Create 500 point supers."
Better: "Create 500 point supers for a Silver Age style setting. Heroes should be wholesome, honorable, and, above all, heroic."