Skip to main content
Role-playing Games

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

6
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ This is too short for an answer all on it's own, so a comment. Giving out full descriptions might indeed be lengthy... but if your characters are indeed "archetype" characters, you can just use that. So, describe the characters by their archetypes and the players should have a fairly good idea of what each character represents without going into too much detail. Five people should be able to get along and pick an archetype which fits them without much trouble after that. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 29, 2014 at 7:08
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I've run several games at conventions, and pre-generated character assignment is usually as easy as "Okay, who wants the healer? Here. The barbarian? There you go. The wizard? Oh wait, Kevin likes wizards. Have a wizard, Kevin. Which means the rogue goes to you." It's never taken longer than a minute before. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 29, 2014 at 11:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ I thought it could be just as easy, but my concern stemmed from the fact that the players never played in the setting (WoD), and as far as I know, they are very familiar with "fighter, rogue, wizard" etc. but might be confused when choosing from "ex-cop, conspiracy theorist, used car salesman". \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 29, 2014 at 11:08
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ As a side note, a bloke named Arrow actually won a Noble prize for proving that you can't fairly aggregate different "ordered candidates" lists if you have more than 2 candidates and more than 3 voters / lists - Surprisingly, it's mathematically impossible! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 29, 2014 at 18:58
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Shaamaan Actually, there's no such thing as an answer that's "too short" so long as it's a complete answer in that short length. Comments are really not for answers, and that one will probably be deleted (at some point, maybe a year from now), so needs to go into a proper answer if you want it preserved for posterity. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 30, 2014 at 3:16