Two More Questions For Character Creation

14 Sep, 2024

Last week I shared a bit about how I approach character creation based on successes I've had in the past. Not all of my PCs have been perfectly successful, however. Keeping with the theme of questions I need to answer about my character, I plan to start asking myself the following to avoid some of my past mistakes:

1. Why and how will my character investigate mysteries?
2. Why will my character engage with plot hooks or worldbuilding details that I notice in the game?

Of course these do not need to be stated as questions. They could be imperative statements like, "Make sure your character can investigate mysteries that you notice," and, "Make sure your character can engage with plot hooks and worldbuilding details." Phrased like this, these statements seem much the same thing, so I'll elaborate on the different things I hope these questions will do for me.

Sidney Paget's 1892 illustration for Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Adventure of Silver Blaze," in which Sherlock Holmes explains the story's events to John Watson

Why and how will my character investigate mysteries?

Once upon a time I played in a few sessions of a 7th edition Gamma World game my brother ran, taking place on a derelict offshore oil rig. In the spirit of 7th edition Gamma World, he instructed us to roll for every aspect of our characters. I rolled a Cryokinetic Reanimated with high Charisma and low Intelligence. I called her Frostenrime's Monster. Now, I do know that you don't need to play such a character as a fool; all low Intelligence means is that your character lacks education and training in formal reasoning, not that they are oblivious to the world around them. But I got the idea that she could be a sweet airhead whose macabre appearance and brain-eating manners were at odds with her friendly, hospitable disposition. I decided to play her as a bit oblivious.

The game my brother ran, however, was more than just post-apocalyptic pirates and monsters; it turned out there was also a mystery. He did not signpost the mystery in any obvious way, but little details about the oil rig did not add up. I can't recall all the details now, but I do remember that the rig's pre-Mistake records were clearly fake. I noticed these oddities and began to develop theories about what they might add up to, but I felt that Frostenrime's Monster wouldn't have thought much about it, and so I did not investigate any further. Unfortunately, I was the only player who noticed the mystery, and while some of the other PCs might have had the awareness and skills to pursue it, that does not help much when the players fail their Perception check.

What I've learned is that I'm a player who notices incongruities somewhat more often than others do, and at some tables I'm the only player who notices them. Because I also want to investigate mysteries when I see them, I think the characters I make should also be able to notice the mysteries. Of course, this can be difficult in a situation like the Gamma World campaign, where you have to roll for statistics. My PC might have low Intelligence and low Wisdom. Even then, though, I think I can reliably make characters who investigate mysteries because I don't need them to be good at it. I only need them to try.

For instance, I mentioned in my post last week that I have a character in a Tachyon Squadron game who believes strongly that there are aliens, even though the GM told us there aren't aliens in the setting. This is the lie I built him around. His name is Martin Pine, callsign Spooky, and he's well-versed in conspiracy theories, sure that governments and corporations are engaged in clandestine activities. Moreover, he and his compatriots relentlessly pry into those secrets, looking for evidence of alien life. As much as they're right that these large institutions are plotting nefariously in the shadows, they are systematically wrong about what those plots are. This character's ability to investigate mysteries well is impaired by his preconceptions about the answer, but he can investigate.

(Now, I pulled back a bit on the conspiracy theorism for this character: he is skeptical and, even though he wants to believe, he is careful to reserve judgement until the evidence comes in. He also has some of the skills for investigation: he is a competent hacker and two of his Stunts have to do with knowledge and counter-intelligence. Despite this I think he is still sufficient proof of my claim that a character doesn't have to be a great detective to let me engage with a mystery. If I played as one of his more credulous collaborators it would work about as well.)

The point here isn't that all players should make inquisitive characters. The point, instead, is that I should, because of the kind of player I am and want to be. There are people who probably shouldn't play investigators. Instead, ask yourself what sorts of things you want to do reliably in games, or at least to be able to do? You should make characters who are able to do it.

Why will my character engage in elements of the setting that interest me?

I also mentioned last week a PC I play in an OSR game who believes, wrongly, that he is a rare good man. His name is Makepeace Barebones and he is an unpleasant young zealot who took part in a failed insurrection. (The place I started was, "Guy Fawkes but a Puritan.") On the run from more than a few enemies, he is hiding out in a distant jungle where he hopes to found a colony for holy men to be pious together; if this fails, his backup plan is to find enough treasure that he can buy enough black powder to blast the world clean.¹

Makepeace is a character for a West-Marches-style game, which works best when characters provide their own motivations. I have until recently been particularly proud of how good Makepeace's motivation has turned out to be: I know what makes him tick and I know exactly what kinds of things he's interested in. He wants to learn about previous failed colonies in that jungle, and why they failed; he wants to learn about the resources available in the jungle; and he wants to know about heathen threats to the holiness of his project. At least early on, I had no problem finding things for Makepeace to do in this sandbox. He is a very good wind-up toy: he marches steadily on his own.

However, I have started to find that I have a difficulty: Makepeace is almost too focused on the things he's interested in. He doesn't give me much scope to poke around the places, politics, and situations that don't clearly benefit or threaten his mission. Of course there is no character who would be interested in everything in the setting, and Makepeace's narrowness isn't a problem yet. (Indeed, there are a few interactions that have got him on a strange and unexpected trail, tapping something in him that I don't think he fully understands.) But as I've passed by some story threads that I'm not engaging because I don't think Makepeace would care, I can see the limits of having such a clear direction for my character.

I suspect this has come up in part because of the questions I mentioned last week. So, if I have a search that propels my character forward and a lie that estranges them somewhat from the world around them, I run a risk of ignoring elements of the setting that the GM didn't share in the session 0, either because these elements were secrets, they emerged in play, or were later additions to the game. I should be careful to give my PCs traits that let them go off-track sometimes, or that open them to the setting as it is, not just how they (or I) might already think of it. I suspect there are multiple traits that could work here: curiosity, skepticism, impulsiveness, greed, and compassion all seem like possibilities.

While I do not think the first question in this post is something all other players should also ask of themselves, because you should be asking the question that helps you play the way you play best, I suspect I'll feel differently about this one. First, very rarely are you the only player. You'll need some reason for your PC to go along with the other PCs' quests, goals, and preoccupations. It's also just considerate to follow up on some of the things the GM is interested in. If you want them to show an interest in your character, you should show an interest in their setting. Second, in order for your character to grow in ways that surprise you, you'll need to respond to elements of the game that you didn't expect. In other words, it is both more considerate and more fun to make a character who can engage in unexpected parts of the world. Of course, I have not made a character yet with this question in mind, so I cannot say with certainty how helpful it is. If it does turn out to be useful, though, I think it will be useful in general and not just for me.