Topic: How do you feel about joining a game with an established character?

[Colin-ICE]

I just joined a game that has been going on for a couple of years and was given a character that has been in the game from the beginning but has been an NPC for a few months since the last player left.

It's the first time this has happened to me and I have to say I'm really struggling to get 'into the skin' of the character and understand who he is and how he would react in situations.

The other players have been really helpful but I have to say, it is making playing a lot more difficult.

What are your experiences?

[PhillipAEllis]

It only happened to me once: I joined a game where I was given an established magic-user, and told nothing (this was 1st edition AD&D), and was annoyed by the way the GM made life difficult for me. I eventually died 1/3 of the way through when I cast lightning bolt at an opponent who had a ring of spell turning: the DM ruled, by fiat, that the spell was automatically turned and that I was instantly dead.

I got my (petty) revenge when I later started up a group chant of "The DM is a cheat!" among the players. Not one player held back....

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I've had plenty of experiences with using Pre-gens, at Conventions. There really isn't that much difference TBH. If the GM/writer made the character then they already had an idea of how they should be played and what they were capable of.

This can lead to problems if the character strengths/weaknesses and character flaws are not well presented, but ARE on the other characters sheets.

e.g. A character is afraid of rats, the other characters know this as does the GM, the player fails to notice it and reacts "out of character". The GM penalises that player...

[intothatdarkness]

I think it depends a great deal on how the character was established and how much background the GM gives you. I've done this from time to time in my game (bringing in a new player by letting them use one of the established NPCs I keep on hand), and I've had to do it once or twice as well when I was a player. GMs who pull crap tricks like the one Phillip mentions taught me a great deal about how NOT to run a game and how NOT to use established characters.

Normally I only do this is if a player knows they won't be in the game for very long. If it's someone who plans to stay, I tend to boost their own character during character creation (bringing them to the average party level) instead.

[Thom @ ICE]

The difference between this and a pre-gen convention is that at a con, you only play the character once, and the others don't have preconceived notions as to how that character is supposed to act.


As far as this situation goes, as a GM I would allow the player plenty of leniency as to how the character is played. As long as it is done in accordance with some basic history/character concepts that were pre-established, then I'd be good with it.  I would fully expect the player to make that character their own.


From the player side of things, I'd talk to the other players and GM as much as possible outside of the game to understand the character, then I may even keep asking questions about lots of different scenarios until eventually they would probably say, "It's your character... just play it the way you want."    If there is any significant pushback as to how you play the character, simply advise the GM that while you enjoy the game, playing someone else's concept isn't as much fun.  Ask if you can create your own and work with the GM to bring it into the game (at the same time return the other character to NPC status).

[VladD]

I never would force a character on a new player. Sometimes main characters get whacked off, or there's a logical change in characters in a story. Usually I kill off retired characters (so they can't be abused) and I am loathe to divide the spoils amongst the remaining characters so they likely get killed "off screen".

New players should start from scratch and bring their own character and play style to the table.

Once in a while I allow a spectator to join a bit of gaming using an established NPC. Sometimes this leads to that someone joining the game and stick with that character. Thats ok with me.

[jdale]

Our retired characters have tended to go off and do other things in the world. Some have become useful contacts, which is nice because then there is an NPC with deep characterization, with relatively little GM effort....

[Cory Magel]

I just joined a game that has been going on for a couple of years and was given a character that has been in the game from the beginning but has been an NPC for a few months since the last player left.
...
What are your experiences?

Wouldn't happen in our games.

A very short campaign for us is 6-8 months.  A year is usually considered short.  Some can go for years.  So, as a result, you are given a basic outline of the world, where you have ended up (start of the campaign), and you write your own history.  You come up with a basic character concept with the GM - who sometimes nudges you in certain directions, then you write a more full history (if you want to) and then give it to the GM who integrates that history into the campaign however much is needed/wanted/possible.

Having someone come in and play that character for single sessions as a sit in might happen, but we would never have someone just take over that character.  If that player left we would likely have the replacement create a new character that is on par with the rest of the groups level.  The old character would (in-game) simply leave the group for whatever reasons the GM came up with (or the player).

[markc]

 I have seen it done in some games as a way for a player to get the hang of the game and what skill they will need for creation of their own PC later down the line. Also with my PC creation taking on average 4 hours for a new player to get all of my game info for then to create a PC it is a bummer if they drop out after a few games or decide they do not like my style or the style of the campaign.
MDC

[Zhaleskra]

I've had the issue of introducing new players to established characters in a PbMB game. My experience is that many people do not like taking over someone else's character. Probably the better the first player described it, the easier any transition is.

[KacyCrawford]

I have never had an issue with this.

[arakish]

It only happened to me once: I joined a game where I was given an established magic-user, and told nothing (this was 1st edition AD&D), and was annoyed by the way the GM made life difficult for me. I eventually died 1/3 of the way through when I cast lightning bolt at an opponent who had a ring of spell turning: the DM ruled, by fiat, that the spell was automatically turned and that I was instantly dead.

I got my (petty) revenge when I later started up a group chant of "The DM is a cheat!" among the players. Not one player held back....

Perhaps not exactly the same, but I have had this done to me.  I left the game that night.

As a GM I would never force a pre-gen character/NPC onto a new player.  I always give them an option: "Create a whole new character and we will work him/her into the game.  However, if you would like to play one of these NPCs, here are the sheets I have for them."

I then let the player decide.  If the player decides to go with a NPC, I allow the player to study the sheets as thoroughly as the player desires.  I also answer any questions the player may ask about things I don't have listed on the sheets.  I never rush them into the game.  If necessary, we will end the playing session, and usually all persons help the new player with creating a new character.

Sometimes, the player will play a NPC until they get an idea for a character of their own.  Then we end playing to help in the chargen.

As a rule, due to the bad incidences that have occurred in the past, I would rather sit and watch the role playing while also reading the GM's handouts for House Rules, CharGen, setting, history, etc.  Then I will generally work to create a char that fits, tweaking as necessary.

rmfr

[Cory Magel]

I, myself, walked out of a campaign during the first part of character creation because I knew I wasn't going to be happy with even what I created.  We started rolling up characters (D&D) and the GM said "Ok, roll three dice for each stat, that's what you get in that order, no re-rolls, no changes, no swapping." while enforcing prime stat reqs.  I couldn't play the class I wanted (ranger) let alone a melee type at all.  My only option was a mage.  When I said as much the GM said "That's how my game works" I said "Well your game sucks" got up and walked out - and this is someone I consider a friend (I only cut him slack on it later cause it was the first game he ran).  I wasn't even willing to play a character I created myself because, due to the limitations placed on me, it was not what I wanted to play.  The player HAS to be happy with what they have or there's little to no point for them being there.  I, as a GM, either need to adjust or simply tell them the campaign just isn't for them.

[jdale]

We played D&D that way for a while. We played those characters to death. And by that, I mean characters with bad stats might get played but did not last long. Many did not last a full session. Why be careful when dying gets you a reroll? Kind of disruptive for a game though.

[Keen_Man]

I have had this come up plenty of times in my games actually. Old player shows back up and instead of taking an hour of everyone's time rolling him up a character BOOM play this npc.

Personally what I do is make the player not do the RP for the npc for the first hour ish of the session just the mechanics so he can hear my portrayal of the npc for a bit before handing over the reins.

If the players personality is WAY different than the npc's standard I have him hit on the head and knocked out as an explanation of the personality shift. I figure if it works on tv it works in gaming.

[GrumpyOldFart]

That's pretty similar to my answer. If someone wants to "drop in" to an existing game, they are welcome to play an NPC if they wish while studying the scenario with an eye to the character they want to add to it. If they'd rather let me keep the NPC, watch, learn and make their decision on what character they want to create, that's fine. If they want to play an NPC "while they're thinking about it," and decide to keep him instead of creating a new one, that's fine too. Just don't gripe about what I do with "your" NPC once he's mine again.

[Zhaleskra]

I, as a GM, either need to adjust or simply tell them the campaign just isn't for them.

I knew there was a reason I favor the ICE boards over other gaming boards, and this is it.

[DavidKlecker]

I actually don't mind if the character has a rich background and I can understand it, however it's not as fun as building up your own character from the beginning. I do not give out established characters to other people though unless I know they can play them right because I do not want to give out personal information about a character to the players at the table. Often times I would just let a person create a new character and just play it from there.

[DavidKlecker]

I, myself, walked out of a campaign during the first part of character creation because I knew I wasn't going to be happy with even what I created.  We started rolling up characters (D&D) and the GM said "Ok, roll three dice for each stat, that's what you get in that order, no re-rolls, no changes, no swapping." while enforcing prime stat reqs.  I couldn't play the class I wanted (ranger) let alone a melee type at all.  My only option was a mage.  When I said as much the GM said "That's how my game works" I said "Well your game sucks" got up and walked out - and this is someone I consider a friend (I only cut him slack on it later cause it was the first game he ran).  I wasn't even willing to play a character I created myself because, due to the limitations placed on me, it was not what I wanted to play.  The player HAS to be happy with what they have or there's little to no point for them being there.  I, as a GM, either need to adjust or simply tell them the campaign just isn't for them.

I kinda did this with my first campaign as well. Afterwards I learned that hard lesson as well; players do not have fun if they are not playing the character they want to play. I have learned to adjust my style since then. The only thing I will not compromise on is power gaming which I know the rest of the forum mostly agrees. As long as the character is balanced.