Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Admiral Terghon

"Rerolling" a character

Recommended Posts

I have one player in my campaign that wants to adjust his stats.  It's a bit of a meta-game min/max thing, but at the same time it's also a bit of genuine roleplaying.  He's concerned that the things he wants to do most are on one of this '2' stats, instead of one of the '3' stats. 

I'm inclined to just let him, but I don't want people retooling their characters for any given situation and I don't want to encourage that line of thinking.  On the other hand, we've only played two sessions so correcting a 'mistake' in character creation seems fine.

If I let him, do I assess some penalty?  Or do I just make it clear that it's a one-time, just because we're new at this, and we just started the campaign thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm pretty lenient about players tweaking PCs. If a player feels like they made a mistake; especially if they haven't gotten a lot of use out of a talent/skill/characteristic, or if they thought it was going to work a lot differently than it actually does.

 

My reasoning is that I want them to have fun playing the game. So if they can make their PCs more fun to play, I'm all for it. And I feel like I'm discerning enough to recognize when a player is trying to be abusive, and thus I would not allow them to take advantage of my good graces by being all "gamist" about the whole thing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At our table, we typically allow for 1 rebuild per character, so long as the character remains tied to their 'core' concept.  This has lead to a couple of funny situations (such as our Force User/3rd mechanic having to "come clean" with the group that he "had lied about knowing anything about starship repair so he could get on the ship")  but for the most part has been very useful for allowing us to make use of the new books coming out and, at least in one case, adjust an attribute that had been misapplied.  (Placed in presence when it really should have been placed in willpower for Coercion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends really. If the PC in question is at 200exp and wants to up an Attribute they are likely getting close to the Dedication Talent and should probably take it rather than having them re-spec. A PC is a process and can develop in unexpected ways so I think it's best to let that happen. However if the Player is unhappy with their PC or just wants a change then I'm find with them building a new PC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We started playing EotE when the Core Rulebook came out after trying the Beginner game to see if we like the system. We we started playing, we decided everyone could get a free reroll on his character, that includes changing career, specs, stats, talents, everything.... The only limiting factor is the character concept must stay the same. One of our players wanted to be a hyperdrive/hyperspace wiz, he took the Explorer-Scout specialization but later changed to Engineer-Scientist when AoR came out. If one player wanted to change again, I would probably allow it unless he's really trying to powergame the system. I'm pretty strick about powergaming, I don't allow it ; your character must grow from your adventures....

 

On the other hand, if a player wanted to make a whole new character, I'd give him the same XP has everyone else... but I'd only give him the starting gear allowed RAW. Having to start your gear up from scratch is a hefty price to pay to start a new character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My standing policy for any new campaign is latitude as the numbers and the concept come into sync. Many a time I've started a character with X, Y and Z in stats only to find that she was more of a A, B and C type of character. So yes, give the whole group one respec. to be used within the first 6 weeks or so of gameplay. 

 

Or with new archetype books coming out all the time, if a character tree comes out that fits their character better, let them drop the one and pick up the other. When I was playing my Politico turned businessman, she was well on her way down the Quartermaster tree when the Far Horizons book was announced. I told the group that if nobody minded, if the Entrepreneur was a good fit, I'd like to swap when the book dropped.

 

The book dropped, the tree was a better fit with what I was trying to do, I made the swap and everyone is happy!

 

Now don't let them do it all the time, but the game is suppose to be fun. If a character is turning out to be no fun, why not fix it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I did the same thing with my trader character, who had started with the Politico Specialization but no skill or interest in Coercion, which is nearly half the talent tree.  Quite some time later, the Scoundrel book comes out and I learn about Charmer.  I asked the table if anyone minded me swapping out my Politico xp for Charmer and I got a chorus of "that makes much more sense!"  So I did.  In the end it was the change of 2 skill points and 1 talent, but I now have a bunch of options open that interest me, instead of things I'd never take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any time I'm running a system that my players are relatively unfamiliar with (as was definitely the case with EotE), I give them a "respec" after two sessions.  It's a one-time offer and they sort of have to justify the changes they want to make.  If I feel like it's too 'min-maxy' ("If I just put one more point here and buy this talent, I'll be able to double my base damage when I blah blah blah"), then I usually disallow the change and remind them that this is not the sort of game where character optimization is all that important.  If I feel like their proposed changes are more like nudges ("I think I spent too much on characteristics and not enough on skills"), I'll allow it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my AoR players is re-speccing his female Bothan Spy as a Bothan Sentinel, and this after gaining about 150 XP and having a run-in with a few Dark Jedi. She had come across a Dark Jedi on Dxun early on in the campaign and, through sheer luck of the draw and some real gumption, had managed to kill the Force user with his own lightsaber. So she's been using the lightsaber every now and then while they were on Dxun. There have been "hints" throughout the campaign that his character was actually a Force sensitive, and that was why she was able to dispatch a Jedi. 

 

Later, she met another Dark Jedi (a friend of the one she killed) and convinced him to train her in the ways of the Force. So now she has been absent for a few game sessions and he is essentially just using her original characteristics to build a Knight-Level Sentinel: Shadow/Shien Expert. He's kept the flavor the same; only difference now is she has fewer career skills, a Force rating, and some Lightsaber skill ranks. After the session tonight, his character is due to make a dramatic return.

Edited by awayputurwpn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all.  I'm going to let him adjust one of his '3' stats down to '2' so he can raise his Presence to '3' where he wants it. He has a Chiss Charmer, so that starting Presence of 1 threw him off a bit.

 

Just make sure it is one that he added XP to not one that was increased due to Racial Mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good hearing postive opinions about issues like this. For anyone curious, this is also super encouraged by the CRB (page 291 - Continuing The Story) basically stating that the GM should give players a chance to tweak, alter or scrap characters entirely, especially early on. Because I can tell you, it's no fun being stuck with a character you've become unenthused about.

 

Example: I rolled a Politico in one of my previous groups with solid social/speechcraft skills, but our GM was somewhat uninspiring and outright said no to any improvised Charm/Deception/Coercion checks unless it was specifically mentioned as a solution in an official adventure booklet. But even then, it was tenuous. The rest of my group always preferred to fight, always overuling any proposed alternatives and I felt incredibly wasted as a character because I had the combat skills of a potato and the GM wouldn't let me re-roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rolled a Politico in one of my previous groups with solid social/speechcraft skills, but our GM was somewhat uninspiring and outright said no to any improvised Charm/Deception/Coercion checks unless it was specifically mentioned as a solution in an official adventure booklet. But even then, it was tenuous. The rest of my group always preferred to fight, always overuling any proposed alternatives and I felt incredibly wasted as a character because I had the combat skills of a potato and the GM wouldn't let me re-roll.

 

Not flexible (If it's not in the book, you cant do it?!?) and doesn't give each player a time to shine in the game? Dear god, what a terrible GM! To hell with flipping the table and storming out - here's how I would have handled it!

 

PMqw0.gif

(subtitle: Wade Barrett slams Randy Orton through a table)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not flexible (If it's not in the book, you cant do it?!?) and doesn't give each player a time to shine in the game? Dear god, what a terrible GM!

 

The group basically disbanded the following session because of it, nobody was having fun.

 

I'm actually kinda thankful though. Now I'm the GM in my own group and we always have a spectacular time! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After our time playing D&D where we let people readjust their characters on a constant basis every level or every session, I decided to nix most of that idea.

 

Since the line is still relatively new and not all the career books are out and if a player finds a race/specialization that fits more in line with their character, I give them one pass at remaking their character.  After that, it's up to XP.

 

When Talley Darkstar was created 11 years ago, he was a Rebel officer, but when EoE came out, the rules weren't out yet for AoR so reluctantly he was a Merc Soldier, when AoR came out, I remade him as a Commander/Tactician.  I consider that a free pass since not all of the rules were actually out.  My "one pass" will come once the Commander sourcebook comes out.  If there isn't anything pressing in that book, I'll just tweak the stats.

 

I don't personally see a problem with it until people start taking advantage of it.  I think had they known the rules better at character creation they would've made different choices originally, but getting to know the rules takes time and a character who can't find his way out of a cul-de-sac, while gameplay may lead to funny moments, it doesn't make the character very productive and can make the play bored and unhappy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...