But Am is really onto something here. Using Grand Affair as an example is quite easy.
Benedict's character is built literally on the concept that he'll never be happy and must make the best of a range of terrible paths.
I was less extreme with Passel and Walker. But it is worth noting that in a game where you could write your PCs as anything at all (having no GM to contradict), Walker is in a very awkward place, feeling completely incapable of interacting with royal and diplomatic folks.
Passel, really without specific plot, finds herself getting 'ground up' between the stories of several other Characters that she loves a lot. Love is capable of destroying her and she is not good on holding back her love.
So I'd say Am and I are taking a very similar approach to the Meta of our PCs.
And it works really well.
For another perspective—take a look at this excellent blog blurb at Roleplay, Lda.
With me, I didn't actually create any of my characters with bad situations in mind. Mirelle was just coming home. There'd be some difficulties there, sure, but nothing like the choices she's having to make. Jayla was supposed to be a schemer, looking for power in any way she can. I wasn't expecting growth with her - I was expecting fun. Rhianwyn was a last minute addition that started incredibly nebulous and has grown as the game has gone on.
I did no metaing with anyone while I was creating the characters - other than Kris, Tara & Rich, I didn't know anyone well in the game, and most of y'all, I didn't know at all. So everything that's come out, every choice I've had to make, has come from the excellent players in the game with their excellent characters and my desire to see how they react in different situations.
I think it's a bit of a confidence thing, too. When I started in the beginning of the game, I wasn't sure of people or play styles - I wasn't sure of MY gaming. So I played it safer. As I've come to trust, it's gotten easier to take risks with my characters, to put them in situations that they may not want to be in but are in anyway.
And now that I talk about trust, I have another idea for a post that I want to explore. Thanks, Arref!
Posted July 23, 2004 9:56 AMHaving the confidence to put your PC in a weaker, vulnerable place is part of possible 'sticky' interaction.
And it is a good catalyst sometimes to plot.
It's interesting that many folks might say that Passel has tons of plot. She doesn't really and isn't designed that way, but like Martin, she moves through many other PC's stories.
Posted July 23, 2004 10:11 AMI think for Passel, it's more that plot finds her than she has plot. She's a good facilitator for others. She also makes connections very quickly and very strongly. It gives her more working room and makes it easier to pull her into other plots.
So, I wouldn't say that she HAS tons of plot as much as she's INVOLVED in tons of plot. :)
Posted July 23, 2004 10:13 AM