Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BenjaminBinder 09-27-04, 01:41 PM	It's one thing to create an interesting character. It's another thing to create a group of characters that are all interesting together. In most of the parties I've been in or DM'd for, for most of the time, all interaction has been on a professional level ("How can we work together to solve this puzzle/beat this monster?"). It's a lot more fun when the party can interact on a personal level, too-- when they develop feelings about one another (love or hate) and play off of each other. Lately, I've been trying to think of ways to create a party so that there is room for this kind of interaction. One of the best classic examples of a good, dynamic team is the Ghostbusters. You start out with three oddball scientists, each with wildly different personalities. Then you throw in Winston, who is kind of the ordinary guy, the voice of reason who reigns the others in. The great thing about watching 'Ghostbusters' is watching these four characters play off of each other, creating memorable dialogue. So what are some ways we can achieve this kind of group dynamic? One method, I think, is to create a list of archetypes (the Leader, the Cynic, the Comic Relief) and assign them to each player. What kind of archetypes do you think work well together? Does a party always need a Leader? How do you plan for a larger group (6-8 people)?
daphne 09-27-04, 02:31 PM	for a starter, i'd take into account some (more or less) famous examples of dynamic parties: - the fellowship of the ring: 9 characters, each with deeply developed traits and feats, having his role in the party (the sad ranger, the snob warrior, the wise wizard, the merry scoundrel, the stubborn fighter, the gracious archer and a few other stereotypes...). - dragonlance: a little more variegated and dnd adaptable than Tolkien' one, it makes a very good example of a dynamic party... the sad ranger half-elf, the grumpy dwarven warrior, the pesky kender thief, the moron human warrior, the wicked human sorcerer etc etc... - the order of the stick (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript): reading through the lines, you can spot a very nice party, with amplified common stereotypes' traits (if you tweak such amplification down a bit, you get your own dynamic party going perfectly).
BenjaminBinder 09-27-04, 03:34 PM	Which character in the Fellowship is a 'merry scoundrel'? :confused:
daphne 09-27-04, 03:56 PM	merry or/and pippin (and frodo and sam, in a lesser way).
Morka 09-27-04, 05:26 PM	You could add "Save Private Ryan": the mysterious leader, the sniper, the rude sergent, the coward translator, the devoted medic...
daphne 09-27-04, 05:38 PM	yup, very good example. and so on. movies, literature, comics and toons are a great pool for such examples. and real life as well: try analizing how every person interacts with each other in a long-date group of friends (your group of friends, or one you can examinate closely).
BenjaminBinder 09-27-04, 05:40 PM	Okay, getting lots of good examples of a good party. Now how to go about creating one from scratch?
daphne 09-27-04, 06:08 PM	pick a character for each stereotype. quick example: let's say out party got 4 members, 1 - moron, material human fighter 2 - snob, haughty gold-elf wizard 3 - pesky, greedy halfling rogue 4 - sad, compassionate half-elf ranger now we should create some interactions (which will result in defining our characters' traits), trying to imagine how every character would react to each other (eg: the wizard despises the fighter's ignorance, the fighter can't stand the halfling, the halfling thinks the ranger is too sad, the ranger thinks the wizard is too haugty and so on...). thus, we can define typical behaviours for every character, and build their traits and personalities from there. in the end, we'll have a nice party of 4 quite different characters (up to you to think of a story that explains why they are partying together) which will often interact, quarrel, joke, help one each other and 'live'.
Lanoitakude 09-28-04, 12:41 AM	Alignment differences in the party (as long as they aren't too extreme) can make for great interactions. Having an evil person in a mostly neutral party can make for some interesting RP. I wouldn't suggest telling players that they have to be a certain archetype. If they are really good RPers, then their characters will be more complex than "I'm a stuck-up elf wizard". If the characters have well thought out stories and character concepts, the party interactions should be memorable. A single pious PC in a mostly un-pious group can be interesting, as can a single highly intelligent PC in a mostly dim-witted party. PC's that break the mold can be great fun too. The half-orc wizard, elven barbarian, or hafling paladin are just a few examples. I think you'll enjoy party interaction more enjoyable if you don't plan it out.
daphne 09-28-04, 05:56 AM	mmm. i didn't want to suggest to be a certain stereotype, i was using stereotypes just as examples (being stereotypes, they are -supposed to be- well known and thus they are a good example subject). what Lanoitakude says is true. i left the alignment thingie out because it added even more complexity to the whole thing, and i was trying to keep it simple. of course, align has a BIG part in making the party dynamic, and adds more and more variables to inter-character relations. mold-breaking pc's are sure fun to play, but they are also more difficult, and someone new to the game might find it hard to enter such roles. I think you'll enjoy party interaction more enjoyable if you don't plan it out. well, this is the ultimate thruth. nothing else to add.