The characters of the campaign - heroes or everymen?

[Lord Dynel]

Over in this thread, mgtremaine made an interesting point (in my opinion):

PC's are meant to be heroic, it's part of the game, A bunch of crappy stats and the players feel less heroic.

How do you all feel? I've always been of the opinion that heroes forge their own destiny, that their legacy is crafted from their own hands. Farmer's kids, street urchins, wizard apprentices, church acolytes - nothing particularly out of the ordinary for these folks who have taken to a life of adventure. Other than their desire to leave whatever profession they're in and striking it out on their own, for one reason or another, to try their hand at making a bigger difference in the world. I've always looked at it like they become heroes, and become heroic, through action and deed. They don't start out that way. They haven't been predestined to be heroes or anything like that. Maybe they have an above average attribute, or a bravery or fearlessness the "truly ordinary" folk don't have but that's about all that separates them.

I think this has a big impact on the game. This determines how character stats are rolled. This may also have a resonating effect on encounters, the plot of the game, and many effects of the world around the PCs (such as how they are viewed in the campaign world by the NPC populace). So, what do you all think? Are PCs cut from a different cloth and are heroes from the beginning? Or are they little more than commoners who have taken up sword and spell to try to make their world a better place?

[MormonYoYoMan]

Are the PCs born to greatness? Fudge the stats & make 'em high.

Are they ordinary people who do great things and become great? Play 'em as rolled.

Each are heroes.

[Lord Dynel]

Are the PCs born to greatness? Fudge the stats & make 'em high.

Are they ordinary people who do great things and become great? Play 'em as rolled.

Each are heroes.

That is true, MYYM, PCs usually - eventually - becomes "heroes," in one sense of the word or another.

My post, however, is more a question about how characters are conceived at the beginning of a campaign, and the impact that conception has.

[MormonYoYoMan]

My point was that the GM has to choose between the two.

And he or she has to determine what the players want.

Then, somehow, blend GM desire with player desire.

There were reasons they were called "Monty Haul campaigns" though.

[Lord Dynel]

I understand where you're coming from, hoss. Talking things over with your players to get their input on what kind of character they want to play is always an important thing at the start of a campaign.

I guess I was looking more at your (or mine, or whoever wants to answer ) own personal opinion about how PCs are viewed. I suppose your answer would be "it depends on what you and your players decide," which is a valid answer, of course (and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, YoYo, so my apologies if I'm wrong!) rather than a particular opinion one way or the other.

Looking at mgtremaine's comment, that PCs are supposed to be heroic, I kind of thought most of us had an opinion one way or the other. Considering only two paths of logic ("Heroes are born, not made," or "Heroes are made, not born") I was wondering what side of the fence we all were on.

In my mind, I'm of the "made, not born" mentality. I run my games this way, and that's reflected in how I allow for attribute generation. My player's aren't bound by that in things such as backstory and the like, but they know how I view PCs and why stat generation is the way it is for my games. But even when I'm a player, even if the GM allowed a favorable roll method (such as 4d6, take out the lowest and reroll 1s and 2s) I'd still play that way ("made, not born") because that's how I feel about PCs. Even if my lowest attribute score was a 15, I'd probably consider my character blessed with good looks, natural speed and strength, a strong will, etc. but I would still think of him as a normal dude until he did something heroic.

So my apologies if my original post was confusing. I guess I was asking more for each of our own personal thoughts how we viewed "hero" PCs and not so much how we run campaigns (even though I gave you how this mentality affects my play and GM'ing).

[MormonYoYoMan]

It's the age-old question: Superman or Batman? I've always liked each character and each type of story. But there's no denying that the self-made hero is the popular one. Spider-Man outsells Batman or Superman since at least 1974. D&D started the same year. Maybe there's a connection there, but it would take a book.

So yeah - I can and have GM'd and played both types of games. No problem.

[Arduin]

According to char gen rules, they are heroic from the beginning. IF, it is measured by ability scores.

[MormonYoYoMan]

I had a BRP character whose stats were VERY high, but I played him as physical coward. Our GM, my wife, liked this dichotomy so much that she slowly transformed her campaign into a bronze age Call of Cthulhu campaign.

Norman was, stat-wise, born a hero but became a wimp. Fun, but these aren't the PCs you're looking for.

[serleran]

It is an odd thing. Classical heroes (that is, those of a mythological origin, such as a Gilgamesh or Herakles) are defined by both the actions they take and "what" they are... sons of gods, or "more than men." Modern day heroes are more defined by their deeds, and this loose definition goes back to at least St. George the Dragonslayer.

For me, high attributes simply make it easier to do the super, but then, those are expected to be done. But, when you're not "supposed" to do it, and you do... well, that's where the memories are made.

I'll just say it, because it has been said before: 99% of this argument boils down to frequency of use of the SIEGE Engine.

[Rigon]

I think it really depends on what kind of game you and your players want to play. I've run both "low" stat games and "high" stat games at different times. So for me, it really depends on what kind of feel I want in a game. If I want high fantasy, I usually go with higher stats. If I want gritty fantasy, I go with lower stats. I don't know if that makes any sense or not, but it does work for me.

R-

[Lord Dynel]

According to char gen rules, they are heroic from the beginning. IF, it is measured by ability scores.

So, Arduin, does your opinion coincide with this? Do you feel that attribute scores determine the "heriocness" of characters?

It seems that's a common perception in discussions I've had in the past.

[Arduin]

According to char gen rules, they are heroic from the beginning. IF, it is measured by ability scores.

So, Arduin, does your opinion coincide with this? Do you feel that attribute scores determine the "heriocness" of characters?

It seems that's a common perception in discussions I've had in the past.

In as much as char gen is concerned. There is the addition datum of having a PC class that also boosts the PC above the common man. Pretty much every discussion I've seen of this topic in the last 3 decades primarily concerns attrib scores...

[edit] with 3.x also came "Prestige class" munchkins though.

[Lord Dynel]

For me, high attributes simply make it easier to do the super, but then, those are expected to be done. But, when you're not "supposed" to do it, and you do... well, that's where the memories are made.

Emphasis mine.

I think this is what it boils down to, for me. Campaigns, stat generation methods, or anything else that would lend itself to a particular type of game - all that aside. I like the moments when you truly "become" the hero. When you can look back and think to yourself, "dang, I just did some pretty epic stuff!" Those are my favorite moments as a player. Being heroic, or being cut from a different cloth, right from the beginning doesn't mean those moments don't exist. But considering where you start, I love the times my "normal" character crosses that threshold into the realms of hero.

[alcyone]

I prefer a grim slog through an uncaring universe where death is around every corner. If you can make it through that, and still care about things like "heroes", then by all means, you've earned the title.

I don't do anything special to achieve that though except let the chips fall where they may. I don't change starting stats or hit points or anything like that. High stats can certainly help a character survive, but I don't think they make them more heroic. I get often that people want their characters to be on par with characters in novels who can make it through a few series of books unscathed, performing miracles. That's not where the power level is in my games, though; it just seems boring to me.

[Treebore]

Attributes help with the ability to survive. The choices of the player determines how "heroic" their character is.

For an extreme example, Superman is not "heroic" because he is super strong and pretty much invulnerable. He is heroic because he uses his powers to help and protect. He could use them to subjugate and destroy, and be a villain.

[Treebore]

Plus, if their attributes are between 3 and 18 they are by definition "normal", because they are within the "normal" range of physical and mental ability normally seen across humanity. If they are an elf with a 19 Dex they are still "normal", because that 19 is something seen within elven populations on a regular, or normal, basis. Granted, it is very uncommon, so defined as "exceptional", but it is still within the mechanically defined biological "norms" of the race.

Then within this range of "normal" attributes we have a range of "average" stats, "high" stats, as well as "low" stats. High stats make you more likely to succeed and presumably survive, but still far from invulnerable or unbeatable.

"Heroic" is putting yourself at risk for others. Whether your team mates or some stranger you meet who is at risk of harm or death. So actions, not attributes, determine if your playing a "heroic" character. You can go your whole "career" without ever putting yourself at risk for others. You can always "play it safe", doing your best to never put yourself "on the line" for any reason, let alone for someone else.

Others may perceive you as "heroic", because they saw you save someones life, but you know better. You know you minimized your risk to save them, and got lucky doing so, because you needed them to get to the treasure vault. However, you really didn't put yourself "out there" because you already had a plan in mind if they died. You were going to go back to town and recruit some more cannon fodder to sacrifice their lives getting you to that treasure vault.

Such players usually chose to play the neutral and chaotic neutral alignments. Just eventually they often decide they really like their companions, and grow beyond their alignment, to actually put their own life at serious risk to save them. So at least among these friends, even these normally very narcissistic characters, become heroic. Everyone else can still drop dead as far as they are concerned.

[Ronin77]

I said something different. Because both was not an option.

[Rigon]

Plus, if their attributes are between 3 and 18 they are by definition "normal", because they are within the "normal" range of physical and mental ability normally seen across humanity. If they are an elf with a 19 Dex they are still "normal", because that 19 is something seen within elven populations on a regular, or normal, basis. Granted, it is very uncommon, so defined as "exceptional", but it is still within the mechanically defined biological "norms" of the race.

Then within this range of "normal" attributes we have a range of "average" stats, "high" stats, as well as "low" stats. High stats make you more likely to succeed and presumably survive, but still far from invulnerable or unbeatable.

"Heroic" is putting yourself at risk for others. Whether your team mates or some stranger you meet who is at risk of harm or death. So actions, not attributes, determine if your playing a "heroic" character. You can go your whole "career" without ever putting yourself at risk for others. You can always "play it safe", doing your best to never put yourself "on the line" for any reason, let alone for someone else.

Others may perceive you as "heroic", because they saw you save someones life, but you know better. You know you minimized your risk to save them, and got lucky doing so, because you needed them to get to the treasure vault. However, you really didn't put yourself "out there" because you already had a plan in mind if they died. You were going to go back to town and recruit some more cannon fodder to sacrifice their lives getting you to that treasure vault.

Such players usually chose to play the neutral and chaotic neutral alignments. Just eventually they often decide they really like their companions, and grow beyond their alignment, to actually put their own life at serious risk to save them. So at least among these friends, even these normally very narcissistic characters, become heroic. Everyone else can still drop dead as far as they are concerned.

I think this really nails it for me too. It's not attributes/abilities that make a PC "heroic," so much as the actions the PC takes.

R-

[CKDad]

Haven't read through the whole thread yet, but here's my 2 CP:

It depends on the campaign, and sometimes upon what game we're playing.

From a general roleplaying standpoint, I'm a fan of the everyman hero character; it's my preferred way to play, and in some games (like Traveller) that's the way I run my campaign. The characters become heroic by their deeds.

But sometimes, you want to run a game in which the characters are simply more powerful than normal people, sometimes superpowered. This tends to be the way my fantasy games go.

[jdizzy001]

ultimately i think it is up to the CK and how they frame the world around the PC's. as a writer of fiction I firmly believe that a character must be able to connect with the people enjoying the story. if you run superheroes they MUST have very real human emotions. if you're running ordinary people then you MUST allow the pc's to do extraordinary things (I dont mean fly, but just things that are out of the ordinary). i like pc's who are regular people who live in extraordinary things.

[Ancalagon]

I prefer a grim slog through an uncaring universe where death is around every corner. If you can make it through that, and still care about things like "heroes", then by all means, you've earned the title.

Well said, Aergraith.

[shadowspawn]

I'd have to say a hero is defined by his actions. Now, a PC has many opportunities to become a hero that's the nature of the game but he still needs to do it. Obviously the CK (I prefer GM) helps create the situations that are memorable too.

[lobocastle]

I believe that Player Characters are meant to be heroes and as such have better than average abilities scores. I will establish some context like Omote suggests.

I prefer lower magic setting such as: Shannara by Terry Brooks, Mythgar Series by Dennis. L. McKiernan, Lone Wolf Magnamund by Joe Dever, Corona by R.A. Salvatore, and Diablo by Blizzard Entertainment. I am not a fan of Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk or Mystara as there is too much magic for my tastes. I limit spells to 7th level in my campaign worlds for balance reasons.

I use the following method for abilities score generation; role three d6 six times and consult the chart 1 for the ability score. Players can arrange the scores as they wish. If a player has less than six points of ability bonuses they can chose one of the four standard arrays in chart 2 below.

Chart 1:

Role 3 or 18 = 18
Role 4 or 17 = 17
Role 5 or 16 = 16
Role 6 or 15 = 15
Role 7 or 17 = 14
Role 8 or 13 = 13
Role 9 or 12 = 12
Role 10 or 11 = 11

Chart 2:

One Two Three Four
17 15 15 15
15 15 15 13
13 15 13 13
11 11 13 13
11 11 11 13
11 11 11 11

[Julian Grimm]

Since I get enough of the everyman slogging through life trying to do good I go with heroes from the beginning. I have no desire for a game where I'm stuck being another average joe trying to survive. Especially when the world I try to survive in has things like dragons in it.

[serleran]

One reason I very rarely play a human character. It's so boring being myself role-playing myself role-playing myself. All I need now is Inception: The Human RPG and I'll be set... to never play it.

[Ronin77]

I still think its a little of both.

I mean you do start out a cut above the common man. And at higher levels you are nothing close to average. Or at least in my game no one starts out as Orgo the pig farmer with no class and 2hp. So by being a cut above it gives you the ability to do heroic things. Even a level 1 warrior is not the common folk.

After all if you charge the beast attacking your village and your cut down in a single blow....you are not the hero who saved the village.

But using your class powers you choose to defend the village, you are a hero.

Means and opportunity.

[finarvyn]

Most of the time I like a somewhat low-power, low-magic type of game. My usual style is to start players off with 3rd level characters and allow them to slowly advance to 6th-8th level or so through adventure. This starts them off as "heroic" (or close to it) and ends their campaign when they start to build too much power.