What matters most to you in Champions character creation?

[Katherine]

When making a character what do you consider the most important goal?

1. Character Concept
2. Game Balance
3. Potential Fun
4. Point Efficency

[Battlestaff]

When I design, I look at what kind of character I want to play. I may have to adjust things when the creation begins, but I need a concept I can live with the make a character that is playable.

[OddHat]

When I design I think about all of these things; still, the deciding factor is Potential Fun.

Character Concept is very important, game balance is fairly important, point efficiency is a game in and of itself, but none of it means anything if the character won't be both fun to play and fun to GM.

[JeffreyWKramer]

All those are important to me, but if I'm designing a PC, the primary question is "will I have fun playing this character?", and if designing a villain or NPC, the question is "will using this character in the game result in me and the players having fun?"

[Supreme Serpent]

Fun is most important. But the others help support "fun".

When making a character, I start with the concept - and most important part of that concept is that I will have fun with it. If not, try another. Next, work on game balance/point efficiency to fit it into the campaign.

As a GM, I try to help the players make their concepts work. Identify what it is they like the character for, how they will have fun with it, what's important to their vision of the character. Then try to get the points/game balance to fit. If it's a concept that I like, that I think I, the player, and other players will have fun with, I'm a lot more lenient on game balance, etc.

[RDU Neil]

Fun is most important. But the others help support "fun".

When making a character, I start with the concept - and most important part of that concept is that I will have fun with it. If not, try another. Next, work on game balance/point efficiency to fit it into the campaign.

As a GM, I try to help the players make their concepts work. Identify what it is they like the character for, how they will have fun with it, what's important to their vision of the character. Then try to get the points/game balance to fit. If it's a concept that I like, that I think I, the player, and other players will have fun with, I'm a lot more lenient on game balance, etc.

It's not by chance that the only two answers are Concept and Fun... at least so far. When they click... these two support each other. Concept becomes better/fuller and people have more fun...

... but at the same time, I'm sure we've all had the issue where one concept ruins the fun for others... or one persons idea of fun, is to screw with others concepts. These two can be diametrically opposed. This is classic gaming style issues.

What I would have loved is to force rank the importance of all four of these. From my point of view... as listed... is what I look for. (But I'm a GM).

I want first and foremost the concept to fit with the overall game.

I then want all characters to be balanced... with each other and with the game world.

If the first two happen, I guarantee that "fun" is much more achievable.

Point efficiency is only something to worry about if someone min/maxes too much and upsets the balance... or if someone needs tweaked up so that they can be effective and live up to being a "hero." (I've had plenty of folks try to be more than they should... but also some who underpower their characters and need to be tightened up a bit.)

[OddHat]

Point efficiency is only something to worry about if someone min/maxes too much and upsets the balance... or if someone needs tweaked up so that they can be effective and live up to being a "hero." (I've had plenty of folks try to be more than they should... but also some who underpower their characters and need to be tightened up a bit.)

The most problem point problem I see is charaters who design a power with limitations that make it effectively un-useable in game. Extra-time is the big one here; many powers that require Extra Time or multiple applications (Aid) are worthless unless the Character knows for a fact that combat is close, something that many players forget.

[aylwin13]

I’d say that Character concept is the most important of these. Although, IMO, Potential Fun is directly related to the Char Concept. When you build your character you make it “3 dimensional”. You give it an entertaining, interesting BG/History; while making sure that there are “hooks” for you and the Gm to work with. You build powers, skills, talents, etc. that make the character the one that you really want to play. These powers and such should fit the concept and (hopefully) allow you to take part in all aspects of the game (combat and non-combat). If your concept misses in any of these aspects, your character’s potential to be fun will probably be lowered. YMMV.

[proditor]

For me, it's concept. As a trained method actor in the Stanislavsky System....oh wait....I'm not a trained actor of any sort. Darn, talking out my rear again...

Okay, I like to work from BG and concept through potential hooks for the GM to exploit, to interesting things the other PC's might pick up on and that will generate RP. It's sort of a blend really though, it's a combination of concept and how much fun will I have playing the PC.

[Soulcatcher]

For me Character Concept/Story is the font from which all fun flows. I have found that the background of the character has become integral to my development of the character concept. I make alot of changes to a character as I develop the background story. What I develop, in thwe end, is a story driven character concept. Of course, effective character design goes hand in hand.

[Hypnotoad, the]

If I believe I have a good character concept, the fun will follow, IMHO.

[rbezold]

Fun is most important. But the others help support "fun".

I agree. I answered 'fun', but I did it from a GMs perspective. I don't always expect great writing from my players. I think it's a joint player-GM responsibility anyway. Play balance is important only when the players are likely (for whatever reason) to step on each others toes. Short of that, if I've got a player who has a really great but potentially game unbalancing idea for a power, and I know I can trust that player to act with restraint, then I'm going to say go for it.

[Metaphysician]

Character concept, naturally. However, point efficiency is a concept that can be applied to *any* character concept. :)

[WhammeWhamme]

Well, I tend to START with a concept that I can make point efficient... because that's fun... and then focus on matching the concept.

[DoctorItron]

I went with "Potential Fun".

The other 3 choices are all factors in this fun. Depending on the game group, those choices come into play in varying amounts. A short-term combat oriented campaign might focus on Point Efficiency, while a long-term RP heavy campaign might focus on Character Concept. Game Balance is needed to make sure that one player doesn't interfere on another player's fun.

[freakboy6117]

as teh other 3 are aspects of the potential fun part(and ideally everything in the game should be) id say my favorite part is the concept ist so much more rewarding to come up with a rich concept insted of a two dimensional combat monster and even if it isn't the most point tweaked or even game balanced because people will be willing to let it slide for a good concept becasue they will be having fun.

[tmutant]

Ultimately, the goal of roleplaying is to have fun. Sometimes a quick and dirty randomly generated character with virtually no concept or efficiency can be a blast to play. (Only for one-shot games to be sure) In a long term campaign, you design a character you can "live with" from an efficiency or concept/history perspective in order to have fun with it, and so that the GM and other players also have fun.

[RDU Neil]

Ultimately, the goal of roleplaying is to have fun. Sometimes a quick and dirty randomly generated character with virtually no concept or efficiency can be a blast to play. (Only for one-shot games to be sure) In a long term campaign, you design a character you can "live with" from an efficiency or concept/history perspective in order to have fun with it, and so that the GM and other players also have fun.

Funny... in that I totally agree that "fun" is important, but despite your name, I believe I'M the mutant. The point of role playing... for me... is not to have fun... but to create a powerful experience... great story, intense "world, interesting characters... all of which creates a deep shared imagination experience with the whole group.

Often, this is not necessarily "fun"... but a whole lot of work. It can be tiring, grueling... requiring lots of analysis and research and prep... lots of interpersonal negotiation, etc. In the end, it is often the most rewarding experience I can have outside of intimate personal relations. I guess this is how some people feel about their jobs. (I can't imagine that... I'm not one who thinks of work as anything other than a necessary evil...) Yet, I often go through the process of running games that are very draining... but it's all worth it when I see the grins on the players faces, have them compliment me, and relive the adventures and come back every week wanting more.

It's a passion for me... almost like the need to write... a way to express myself in a semi-social, intellectual, imaginative and somewhat artistic way. Fun happens, but it is incidental to the actual role playing... not the reason for role playing. (Again, for me.)

Anyway... just had to say this, as I realized I just didn't agree with what seems to be a common statement, "It's about having fun."

[jackalope]

I tend to start with a rough concept ("A heroic Magento clone") and then start building. All the time I'm building, I'm percolating concepts ("He needs a job, how about he's a lawyer?"). Designing the character and writing the background become part of the same action. Usually the last 20 points triggers a massive series of rewrites and stuff as the concept comes together and I try to cram every concievable KS ("Oh, he should have some background in civil rIghts...") and Perk ("He wins a lot of lawsuits, so he ought to be Well-Off at least...") the character should have into the design.

[DoctorItron]

Funny... in that I totally agree that "fun" is important, but despite your name, I believe I'M the mutant. The point of role playing... for me... is not to have fun... but to create a powerful experience... great story, intense "world, interesting characters... all of which creates a deep shared imagination experience with the whole group.

Often, this is not necessarily "fun"... but a whole lot of work. It can be tiring, grueling... requiring lots of analysis and research and prep... lots of interpersonal negotiation, etc. In the end, it is often the most rewarding experience I can have outside of intimate personal relations. I guess this is how some people feel about their jobs. (I can't imagine that... I'm not one who thinks of work as anything other than a necessary evil...) Yet, I often go through the process of running games that are very draining... but it's all worth it when I see the grins on the players faces, have them compliment me, and relive the adventures and come back every week wanting more.

It's a passion for me... almost like the need to write... a way to express myself in a semi-social, intellectual, imaginative and somewhat artistic way. Fun happens, but it is incidental to the actual role playing... not the reason for role playing. (Again, for me.)

Anyway... just had to say this, as I realized I just didn't agree with what seems to be a common statement, "It's about having fun."

Some of us, myself included, might be defining "fun" more liberally than you are thinking of. For the purposes of this thread, I consider "fun" to be gaming that is pleasant, satisfying, rewarding, or otherwise enjoyable.

No frivolity, humor, or silliness is required, although that can be fun, too, depending on what a group seeks from their games. A hack & slash dungeon crawl or an immersive roleplaying experience can both be fun depending on the moods of the people involved.

RDU Neil, from what you wrote, I think your games count as my version of "fun". Am I wrong?

[Blue]

If I'm making a character it has to primarily be something I'm dying to play or what's the point?

[Evil Steve]

I voted Potential Fun, but I caveat that with Potential Playability. Nothing worse than a character with little growth potential, no personal life, and little personality. A close second in bad is no personal life.

I can't see any potential fun in a character who will only leave home to take down bad guys and then immediatly goes back home to wait for the next Trouble Signal.