Retconning is often a last resort, but there’s at least one situation where it’s a great first choice: When a player’s character is boring, un-fun, or didn’t turn out as expected.
In that situation, retconning can allow you to maintain continuity while ensuring that that player has fun at the same time.
This was a new experience for me, and it’s going to require a bit of setup to explain. Bear with me, though — I promise not to tell you about my character’s shoe size, star sign, favorite kind of chutney or embarassing personal problems.
Last night, my group picked our next game (we used a weighted list, a variant on method #2 for choosing your next game — how nerdy is that?), and we settled on Stargate SG-4. This campaign, run by Don Mappin, had been put on indefinite hold last year, and although it made the #6 spot on my top 10 list of all-time favorite campaigns, I wasn’t at all excited about getting back into it.
Why not? Because I didn’t like my character.
When I designed him, I made a huge mistake: I wrote a crappy background. Or rather, an okay background that didn’t leave the GM anything to work with — and didn’t tell us much about my character. Since this was a character-driven game, that didn’t work out so well. He was often fun to play, but never felt tied to the world or the storyline.
Since then, I’ve learned a lot about writing PC backgrounds — especially for games with lots of character drama. Writing TT has been a big factor in that, as has simply learning from experience. I wanted to put that knowledge to use, and continue the game with a different character. My old one would fade away, exiting stage left, and my new one would come in.
Problem was, this didn’t work for the storyline. Our GM wanted at least some continuity from the old SG team to the new iteration, my PC was the group’s leader and we’d already lost one member (a player who stopped gaming with us). I could see where he was coming from — I just didn’t want to play a boring PC.
Don’s solution was simple, but brilliant. If you’re familiar with Stargate, the movie, and Stargate SG-1, the TV show, you know that Jack O’Neill was a very different character in the movie than he was in the show. In a nutshell, that’s what Don suggested: My old PC had developed in some fun ways during play, but everything else about him was a blank slate — so why not rebuild him from scratch?
And last night, that’s exactly what we did. I kept some of the more important — and enjoyable — character elements, and scrapped the rest. We worked together as a group to build a background laden with hooks, baggage and other juicy tidbits for Don to work with, and voila! I’m excited about playing again.
There’s enough that’s the same that he’ll be able to take on his old role in the party, and more than enough that’s different that I’ll enjoy playing him much more this time around. I’ve never overhauled a character like this before, but I’m very pleased with how it worked out. If you run into a similar situation in your game, Don’s solution might work equally well for you.
I’ve known players who’ve made new iterations of old characters for new games, but I don’t know anyone who’s done this kind of retconning — rebuilt a PC for the same game (I’m sure you’re out there, though). Have you ever done this in one of your campaigns?
I just did this, too!
We just made the switch from D&D to Savage Worlds for systems, but kept the game in the Scarred Lands.
My character was a Druid 9/Barbarian 1. He had an amazing repetoire of spells. But he was all about the violence and berserking and the system always made me feel like I was wasting one part or the other of his strengths.
In Savage Worlds, the magic system works a lot different. Without getting into boring details, I kept his Druidic abilities comparable for this system while maximizing his potential to go nuts and hit things!
The result is a character MUCH closer to my original concept. Instant renewed enthusiasm!
I’m even making a new custom miniature to commemorate the change. But that’s getting a little too much into talking about my character. (He’s a Virgo!) Maybe some other time… 😉
Several of my friends play “Living Arcanis” through the RPGA. The game system has classes and races not found in D&D, as well as a complex historical and political background to the setting. Players are allowed to remake their character concept as many times as desired during the first three levels, to be sure that they have a character they enjoy and that had the features they want. Literally the only thing that has to stay the same is the name and experience points.
That provision allows people to try something and discover they don’t like it at all, without tying them into it for long-term play. By the time the players have gamed enough for the characters to advance to fourth level, they usually have a good handle on the uniquenesses of the system and setting and can tailor characters with which they will be happy. A couple people in our group have used the system to craft characters that fit very closely the concepts they had in mind, and are quite pleased with their characters.
Mango chutney, actually, but that’s not important. I don’t think my players would be much of a fan of this, but I would do it in a heartbeat if the situation necessitated. The players I”ve got now all like a solid and set story arcing around them, and hate to see things mess up the continuity. Also, the system we play allows you to add new skills onto your character anytime they have enough experience to purchase them. So I’ve seen people start as combat hauses, realize it’s a more political game, and “grow” into that role, becoming a general or higher up who was noticed on the field, and gained political manipulation skills in their new position. The one time I offerred to let a person change, since they hadn’t built according to what I had intended the game to reflect, and there wasn’t much for them to do in the party, they said no, and just built their character up as they went along.
I would have loved to do this with an old DND character though, one who had an intelligence of 9 (2nd Ed.), and a wisdom of 15. The DM made me play him super stupid no matter what. I would have retconned that guy in an instant if I was allowed. The concept was a backwoods woodsman, with little idea of civilization, but a good grasp of how the world worked, physics wise. He wasn’t even that much of a combat haus. In that case it was more the GM’s style, than the actual character though.
On a similiar theme, I’ve got one person who is playing a reocurring character, a True Orc named Bixby. The character was cursed when he pissed off the elemental lords, yes all the elemental lords, and none of them wanted to provide him an elemental attunement. He couldn’t live without one, so every 12 to 15 years they switch off, his element changes, he loses his memories, his appearance modifies based on his element and he redesigns a character. It never happens in game, but it does happen between campaigns when people are rolling up new characters. It’s kind of fun to see a brand new itineration of an old character, and seeing bixby the sailor, bixby the ganster, bixby the general, bixby the homeless guy, bixby the etc…
Gospog: It wasn’t my focus, but I had a similar mechanical benefit from revamping my Stargate PC.
He was a boxer, and I liked that element enough to keep it in the new version. But it was a sidelight the first time around, not really supported by feats. This time, I made it a focus, and it looks like it’s going to be a lot more fun.
Cassandra: Neat! I’ve never heard of a setup like that, but it’s a great idea — particularly with new players, or players new to the setting. Very cool.
I haven’t really done a full rewrite, but there have been times it would have been better for us all if (someone in the group) had done so. In the great failed campaign, a couple of PCs took opposing histories that really ruined the “casual group cohesion” that I tend to rely on. A GM who turns from a general plot (save the world) to a character specific plot (save your girlfriend) can transparently change a lot about the character, just by highlighting a different part.
When I saw the topic, I figured you were inspired by the rebuilding your character option in the back of the PHB2. I like your version– it should make a lot of sense between major story arcs. It reminds me of both PTA, in that your issue can change during/after your spotlight episode, if you resolve your old issue and FATE, where skills can shift up and down the pyramid when you gain a new Aspect.
The interesting thing is that we didn’t do anything in preparation for S2 that I wouldn’t have done during the course of play during S1.
Had you come to me in epsidoe #8 of S1 and said, “I really don’t like my character” I would have been totally fine re-doing him right then and there. It’s D20 point-buy, so it’s not like we can’t reverse-engineer them.
The largest disconnect for me is that the problems with the character didn’t seem to be (mostly) mechanical…they were background-related. That’s so easy to fix that I don’t see it as a problem. When the problem is “I don’t have (a good) background” then the answer — to me — is “make one.” 🙂
It’s all about having fun!
Oh, and speaking of “big changes” in characters, not only did Jack O’Neill get a new personality in the TV show SG-1 but he got an extra “L” as well!
In the movie Kurt Russel’s character was “Jack O’Neil” while in the series RDA’s character is “Jack O’Neill.” The other changes were at the insistence of RDA who thought that O’Neil in the movie was “too serious.”
So even actors and writers feel the plight of your average RPG gamer. 😉
Yeah, this was a big conceptual barrier for me. When I play a character, even if I’m not wild about them, my default is to set them aside rather than retooling them — because they exist, and changing them feels weird.
This route has been an interesting learning experience for me. 😉
I always allow people to rebuild their character after a session (or sometimes two) if they realized once they actually played the character something is wrong.
If a player becomes dissatisfied with a PC after playing for some time, we do sometimes change the PC. For example, in my first Arcana Unearthed campaign, one PC had all sorts of language skills, when called upon to actually translate, the player just froze up (she is learning disabled). She couldn’t even deal with just handwaving, saying “ok, I translate everything” and then holding the conversation in the clear with all players present. After that, we re-tooled her PC and got rid of the language skills (and since then, have steered her characters away from things she isn’t going to want to play).
Another solution is to retire the PC and start a new one. These days, where the “start at 1st level” scheme of old is pretty well burried, there’s no reason to force a player to continue with a dissatisfying PC. On the other hand, there should be some downside, or something that encourages players to not bring in a new PC every few sessions.
The most important thing – if a player is dissatisfied, address the issue.
Frank