Should Character Creation be at the back of the book

[1337 b4k4]

This is a raw idea that popped into my head listening to a podcast with a group that switches systems often. Almost every TTRPG makes character creation one of the first if not the first item in the book after the "what is role playing" section.

B/X D&D: two pages of intro and we're off to character creation
AD&D: A page of introduction and then to character creation
3.x D&D: An overview Character creation is the first thing after the TOC, beating out even the standard introduction by a page, and then continuing not 2 pages later
4e D&D: 8 pages of introduction, then character creation
5e Basic: 3 pages of introduction, then CC
Delta Green: you get a basic overview of the game premise and then right on to character creation
Fate: 30 pages of general "making a fate game" before character creation, but a vast majority of how to play the game comes after
Red Markets: 30 pages of intro and an explanation of the core mechanic and onto CC
Dungeon World: A basic "playing the game" section before you get to character creation, I could almost give this a pass because pretty much everything after that is GM stuff, but it's still fairly early in the book
Mg Traveller: Page 5
Classic Traveller: Page 15
D6 systems: Page 6

And so on and so forth.

There are in my collection two notable exceptions. Eclipse Phase actually has 127 pages of story, setting and general game mechanics before getting to the actual character creation, although there's another 200 pages of additional rules after the character creation. And the one that sort of triggered this idea in my head while listening: Basic D&D (red box) gives you a full on solo adventure before you hit character creation (although even this has CC before most of the rules).

So I got to thinking, because like most GMs I know, I want to play and run more systems than my players do, and the times I have been most successful with getting my players to try a new system or even switch systems has been when we've skipped character creation entirely, and I've handed them pre-made characters. And I think this makes sense. Learning a new system is a lot of work. There's a lot of things you have to keep track of and understand (especially in modern systems) how everything interacts. Trying to learn to create a character first, understanding what skills or attributes are really important, understanding whether taking this or that advantage or disadvantage is worth the cost, all of that is just additional load to take on for something you're not even sure you're going to like. And the sort of character you create is honestly dependent on the game itself. If a player tells me they want to be an "Investigator" well that builds very different characters in Call of Cthulhu than it does in Delta Green than it does in GUMSHOE, but until they've played the game, they won't know that. And I think that's part of why D&D Basic (red box) really did well for folks. It basically dropped you into a game with a pre-gren before introducing you to character creation. And lets face it, the person most likely to read the rulebook is the GM.

So why do we keep putting character creation at the beginning of the book? Tradition obviously, but I think it's also because of how we think of starting a game. You need to have characters to play a game, but if "the order in which you need things" was the true driver of book order, then the skills and equipment chapters would come even before character creation, and yet they don't. And we frontload these systems with their character creation subsystems, which leads GMs and Players alike to think they need to do this first.

But maybe we shouldn't. Maybe the first pages should be pre-gen characters, and then the general system play stuff (you know, the Combat / Adventuring sections for D&D, the space faring (and combat) sections for Traveller etc). Heck maybe all the GM stuff should come first too, and character creation should be an appendix at the end. You don't NEED character creation rules to play the game, you need characters, and that makes a difference. Both to the players, who can pick up and go and worry about learning and playing the game itself and not the character creation mini game. But it also helps the GM. All too often when reading through the rules I have to go through the character creation process so that I can have a character to reference as I read the rest of the rules. Play examples are nice, but sometimes they need to highlight something specific, or they want to sell something awesome (I'm looking at you Captain Jamison from Traveller), and I need to see what the likely outcomes are with a normal character.

[Darth Ultron]

I agree.

I am, after all, a Basic D&D (red box) kid.

One cold winter day, after I had seen an add in the back of the Choose your own Adventure: The Dungeon of Dread for ''if you liked this book, you will like this game: D&D", I headed over to my local Waldenbooks to spend some of my x-mas money and buy that game.

And what I bought was the Basic D&D (red box).

Now nobody in my area that I knew played D&D, or any TRPG. So I had no mentor or already gamers. I just opened the red Basic D&D box, and started reading. And went through the adventure, and will hate Bargel forever more. THEN after that, I read the ''rules".

Then I showed the game to my friends, and had each of them run through the adventure and then read away.

Then everyone made characters, except me as I was DM as I owned the box/books/dice, and we ran through the adventure in the DMs book.

But just think....if I had bought ANY D&D players handbook...or most other TRPG books. I would never have gotten that experience.

And for YEARS after word, I would always use the ''pre made characters" for new people that would join our group. Luckily a lot of the old modules had pre made characters in them too. You could just have the new player 'play' along, and 'not worry' about the rules...but then that was really true of just about all players too.

[ImNotTrevor]

I believe it is at the front of most books so that it is easy to find.

I also think that the character creation process does a great deal to describe the most basic focuses of a system, so starting there is a good idea. It also provides context for what everything following will be about.

If I know from chapter 2 that I can be a wizard, then I don't have to wait until chapter 8 where they talk about spells to learn that I can be a wizard.

Granted, in systems with wildly complicated char gen, I might say the opposite. I know Shadowrun 4e is wildly unhelpful as books go, and I feel like the character generation is rather deep in. (I can't look at it right now thanks to my pooter being on the fritz)

[johnbragg]

Hmm.

It would make sense for a game aimed at brand-new roleplayers.

"What kind of hero do you want your character to be? A tough, strong hero? Start with Warrior. A sneaky, skilled, clever hero? Start with Trickster. A master of magical powers? Start with Magic-User."

Other than that, you may be right--the first thing should be content that communicates what kind of roleplaying game this is--how is this game different than 34 other d20 RPGs that have wikipedia listings. And yeah, the Red Box set was great about that--it put you right into a dungeon with your character.

[1337 b4k4]

I believe it is at the front of most books so that it is easy to find.

I mean arguably it would be easy to find in the back too. And while in the days of black and white print books I could definitely see an argument for that, I would say today's full color prints have no excuse for not color coding the page edges for different sections.

I also think that the character creation process does a great deal to describe the most basic focuses of a system, so starting there is a good idea. It also provides context for what everything following will be about.

If I know from chapter 2 that I can be a wizard, then I don't have to wait until chapter 8 where they talk about spells to learn that I can be a wizard.

Hmm, see I think the character creation system doesn't provide context, and that's part of the problem. In character creation you're asked to make a bunch of decisions, but you can't actually make those decisions until you have context. If you want to know how you should spend your GURPS character points, you need to read the skills sections first. If you want to know what class to pick, you need to read the various class bits and bobs and equipment lists and skills lists and spells list before you can reasonably make that decision. And how can you know how important each stat is going to be without knowing how those stats interact with the system?

I agree that having a fully fleshed out character can make reading and understanding the other rules easier, but like I said, we should be doing that with pre-gens then I think.

It would make sense for a game aimed at brand-new roleplayers.

Arguably it works for both. D&D is sticky in part because D&D character creation (in 3.x and 4e) was complex, and so lots of players who had never played other systems thought other systems would be that complex too. Then add in that the way the books and material is presented, they have to learn to build a character before they can even see how the game is played, and I think you have a perfect storm where even if a player wanted to try something new, it just takes too much work to get to the "not-D&D" part.

[Anonymouswizard]

There are in my collection two notable exceptions. Eclipse Phase actually has 127 pages of story, setting and general game mechanics before getting to the actual character creation, although there's another 200 pages of additional rules after the character creation.

My theory is that most books are organised roughly in the order of 'the more people need to know the rule the further forward', so character creation and basic rules will generally be at the front, and GM rules at the back. Note that whether or not you get an explanation of the basic rules before character creation is highly variable, a lot of my favourite games do it but a lot of other games don't explain more than 'you'll need this kind of die'.

My general advice is that books should be organised like Eclipse Phase is, setting -> basic rules (ideally including basic difficulty thresholds) -> character creation -> advanced rules -> GM rules. Beginning with the setting is nice, gives an overview of what the game's about, and knowing what consitutes a skilled character is kind of important before detailing how to make characters (one of the things that bugs me about Rocket Age is that it goes through all the character creations and options before telling you how to roll checks). But a good number of people will begin reading the book at the front, and a good number of people just don't want to learn the rules (which, as somebody good at both learning the rules and mental addition/subtraction, I've had to learn to be more tolerant of), and as these categories tend to overlap I really like organising books so they can be dropped after Character Creation without people missing important mechanics.

Now putting it at the back is interesting. I might actually do it for my game, it'll make it easy to find.

[Celestia]

You know, I never thought about it, but that would be interesting, and I think it could actually work very well for the game I'm making where context is important for a lot of character creation aspects, like social class and careers (which are all tled to factions).

[1337 b4k4]

My theory is that most books are organised roughly in the order of 'the more people need to know the rule the further forward', so character creation and basic rules will generally be at the front, and GM rules at the back.

Yeah that's probably another part I left off of why we still do it.

Now putting it at the back is interesting. I might actually do it for my game, it'll make it easy to find.

Actually for a physical book (and going of course against the entire premise of this thread) it might also be a good idea to place the character creation rules in the (physical) middle of the book. Why? Because most groups won't have one book per player, and the character creation process is the one most likely to have the books laid out across the table and being passed around. Putting it in the middle makes it so that the book can generally stay open on its own at the right page.

[Pelle]

IME, most players don't read the rules, they just want to know how to create their character. They expect the GM to explain them the rules either before chargen, or during play, not read everything themselves. Anyways, for a first game, before understanding how the rules work, a one-shot with pregens is a good idea.

[Quertus]

the times I have been most successful with getting my players to try a new system or even switch systems has been when we've skipped character creation entirely, and I've handed them pre-made characters.

And I think that's part of why D&D Basic (red box) really did well for folks. It basically dropped you into a game with a pre-gren before introducing you to character creation.

IME, most players don't read the rules, they just want to know how to create their character. They expect the GM to explain them the rules either before chargen, or during play, not read everything themselves. Anyways, for a first game, before understanding how the rules work, a one-shot with pregens is a good idea.

This is kinda how I teach new players. But then they generally make their own characters (often with help) afterwards.

And I think this makes sense. Learning a new system is a lot of work. There's a lot of things you have to keep track of and understand (especially in modern systems) how everything interacts. Trying to learn to create a character first, understanding what skills or attributes are really important, understanding whether taking this or that advantage or disadvantage is worth the cost, all of that is just additional load to take on for something you're not even sure you're going to like.

if "the order in which you need things" was the true driver of book order, then the skills and equipment chapters would come even before character creation, and yet they don't.

For twenty Flagnubd, I can get a +20 Farfignutin.

So, what order do we actually need information? In programming, there are two general schools of thought: top down, and bottom up.

In top down, you start with the highest level ideas, and slowly work your way down. So, you want to play the game? Here's what the game is about. To play, you'll need a character, dice, and imagination. For a character, you'll need stats, a class, level, gear, skills, and maybe spells. For stats, you have...

In bottom up, you start with the most basic underlying mechanic. So, there's the concept of making a check. It's a d20 roll, plus modifier, against a target number, or DC.... What can you use that for? Well, there's... and opposed rolls...

Most games sound like they intelligently implement top down design. I get to know how many skills I can buy with what package before I start drooling over skills. But what would be more intelligent? Hmmm.... Brief setting / theme overview (hyperlink / page number for more details), sample characters (hyperlink / page number for character creation), "skills" (and spells and...), rules, detailed fluff, character creation. That's my guess.

If a player tells me they want to be an "Investigator" well that builds very different characters in Call of Cthulhu than it does in Delta Green than it does in GUMSHOE, but until they've played the game, they won't know that.

How so?

And lets face it, the person most likely to readignore the rulebook is the GM.

FTFY.

You don't NEED character creation rules to play the game, you need characters, and that makes a difference. Both to the players, who can pick up and go and worry about learning and playing the game itself and not the character creation mini game.

Not everyone is cool with playing pre-gens. Heck, some GMs are so linear and railroading, you don't need to know the rules, roll the dice, or even show up - the game will go on exactly the same no matter what!

But it also helps the GM. All too often when reading through the rules I have to go through the character creation process so that I can have a character to reference as I read the rest of the rules. Play examples are nice, but sometimes they need to highlight something specific, or they want to sell something awesome (I'm looking at you Captain Jamison from Traveller), and I need to see what the likely outcomes are with a normal character.

Characters provide context for rules. Agreed.

It also provides context for what everything following will be about.

If I know from chapter 2 that I can be a wizard, then I don't have to wait until chapter 8 where they talk about spells to learn that I can be a wizard.

This.

But, do you need character creation to provide that context? To what extent would, say, sample characters provide less context with which to understand the rules?

I think the character creation system doesn't provide context...If you want to know how you should spend your GURPS character points, you need to read the skills sections first.

Yeah, but when I've spent 207 out of my starting 159 points on skills, because I've read skills first, and know what I want before knowing what I can have, it's rather disheartening.

Actually for a physical book (and going of course against the entire premise of this thread) it might also be a good idea to place the character creation rules in the (physical) middle of the book. Why? Because most groups won't have one book per player, and the character creation process is the one most likely to have the books laid out across the table and being passed around. Putting it in the middle makes it so that the book can generally stay open on its own at the right page.

Another valid consideration. Although, perhaps, "advancement" should be in the middle, then.

Or, better yet: character creation, plus a rules cheat sheet is in the middle. Advancement is at the end, easy to find, but not needed by everyone at once. Because the system is designed such that characters advance at different rates, so very few players will need that section at any given time.

[Rhedyn]

Considering that Fate was the first RPG I couldn't get a rough idea about just by glancing through the first couple dozen pages, then I would say char gen should be in the front of the book.

It's the bedrock of playing. The closer it is in the front, the easier the game is to learn (I still don't get how Fate is actually played)

[Pelle]

This.

But, do you need character creation to provide that context? To what extent would, say, sample characters provide less context with which to understand the rules?

Yes, character creation rules are usually not needed for understanding how to play the game. It's the stats and abilities that those rules generate that get used in play. IMO, sample characters are much better for providing context.

You could split off all character generation and advancement rules, equipment and spells and so into separate manual/handbook for players to build their characters. Then you could have a shorter book on the rules for how to play the game, for those who want to learn the rules themselves. Or if just having one book with everything, I would just put all the character building stuff into appendices.

[Quertus]

Yes, character creation rules are usually not needed for understanding how to play the game. It's the stats and abilities that those rules generate that get used in play. IMO, sample characters are much better for providing context.

You could split off all character generation and advancement rules, equipment and spells and so into separate manual/handbook for players to build their characters. Then you could have a shorter book on the rules for how to play the game, for those who want to learn the rules themselves. Or if just having one book with everything, I would just put all the character building stuff into appendices.

... Equipment isn't just for character creation. Unless you're arguing that all equipment rules text should be listed on the character sheet (which is rather difficult for my cyber-endocrine system or whatever)... In which case, I'd argue 3e-style feats are even more strongly character creation only. Spells in most any system generally have way too much text to be encapsulated on the character sheet, so they're stuck with the rules. Any tables (such as 3e skill DCs) are rules, but the rest of the skill section can be moved to an appendix.

[Anonymouswizard]

Actually for a physical book (and going of course against the entire premise of this thread) it might also be a good idea to place the character creation rules in the (physical) middle of the book. Why? Because most groups won't have one book per player, and the character creation process is the one most likely to have the books laid out across the table and being passed around. Putting it in the middle makes it so that the book can generally stay open on its own at the right page.

Honestly? After having played umpteen games where there'll be at most two of us with the rulebook you learn how to deal with it. Would be amazing, and I'm glad Legend of the Five Rings does it (man, wouldn't it be great if they were making a 5e? I suppose we can continue with 4e and dream of the day).

Considering that Fate was the first RPG I couldn't get a rough idea about just by glancing through the first couple dozen pages, then I would say char gen should be in the front of the book.

It's the bedrock of playing. The closer it is in the front, the easier the game is to learn (I still don't get how Fate is actually played)

Fae is weird. Learning character generation doesn't teach how the game is played, because it doesn't really touch on how Aspects influence gameplay.

In general, it's your classic 'roll+skill versus difficulty' system, except you use 4(d3-2) as your roll and can spend Fate Points for a +2 bonus or reroll as long as you have a relevant Aspect or a situation Aspect would help you. But if an Aspect would logically cause you bad stuff and you take that bad stuff then you get a Fate Point.

Try reading Fate Accelerated, it's much easier to grasp by reading it because it's designed for new players (I think the nonGM rules only last for about 30 pages).

[Cluedrew]

There was another thread about a similar topic recently, it was more generally about rule-books but it included ordering of topic and similar notes.

For me... I don't think so. I do think they come after basic mechanics and introduction. You should know what HP, Hot or Aspect is before you read about how figuring out what goes in that box in the character sheet. But on the other hand, how much damage is 4? There are systems where that is almost enough to kill a PC, others where that is barely enough damage to register. Character creation has the build information that can give you some perspective on that.

It coming after an adventure is a weird idea to me, I feel like I should know the characters going on this adventure before I see the details of what they are doing.

[Max_Killjoy]

My experience is that most rulebooks are fairly horrible when it comes to organization, with a single topic or subject scattered across at least half a dozen different locations, with no references listed to the other locations at any one location. Not to mention terrible indexes and TOCs.

[Cluedrew]

... So should character creation be at the back of the book?

[Pelle]

... Equipment isn't just for character creation. Unless you're arguing that all equipment rules text should be listed on the character sheet (which is rather difficult for my cyber-endocrine system or whatever)... In which case, I'd argue 3e-style feats are even more strongly character creation only. Spells in most any system generally have way too much text to be encapsulated on the character sheet, so they're stuck with the rules. Any tables (such as 3e skill DCs) are rules, but the rest of the skill section can be moved to an appendix.

Depends on the system I would say. But I think generally that the rules for how to put things down on your sheet should be in an appendix/handbook, and the rules for using what's on your sheet along with an example should be in the main rules.

"Cool, I have written 'a shovel' on my sheet, how do I use it?" The actual mechanics for digging can be looked up in the rules, or explained by someone who knows them.

[ImNotTrevor]

[QUOTE=1337 b4k4;23005792]I mean arguably it would be easy to find in the back too. And while in the days of black and white print books I could definitely see an argument for that, I would say today's full color prints have no excuse for not color coding the page edges for different sections.[QUOTE]
1. If you mean edge printing as color you can see b when the book is closed, I encourage you to go check the prices of that with publishers. It is expensive.

2. Most people don't hit page 1 of an RPG book they picked up and immediately start building. Most people, even new players, scan the character genetation portion and then keep reading, searching out parts of particular interest.

Hmm, see I think the character creation system doesn't provide context, and that's part of the problem. In character creation you're asked to make a bunch of decisions, but you can't actually make those decisions until you have context.

As mentioned above, this is only true if you believe people robotically begin character building the moment they hit that page.

If you want to know how you should spend your GURPS character points, you need to read the skills sections first. If you want to know what class to pick, you need to read the various class bits and bobs and equipment lists and skills lists and spells list before you can reasonably make that decision. And how can you know how important each stat is going to be without knowing how those stats interact with the system?

Ironic that I covered highly complicated systems already.

I agree that having a fully fleshed out character can make reading and understanding the other rules easier, but like I said, we should be doing that with pre-gens then I think.

I think knowing the generals of how character making goes informs the rest of the read. If the system is so complex that it requires a great deal of understanding of the mechanics to even approach char gen, then yeah. Expect new players to hate it and put chargen in the back.

[JoeJ]

It's find if you put character creation in the back, but what I'd really like to see is a couple of completed sample characters at the front. Then use those characters as examples throughout the rules.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'll admit to not reading RPG books straight through. I use them as references, reading chapters where needed. I want to see the following:

* A discussion of the basic style of the game (to set expectations)
* Something that gets me excited about playing it
** Could be a gameplay example
** Could be lore that sparks a "that's cool, I want to do that" feeling
** Could be character building
* Basic rules somewhere in there.

I prefer my rule-books modular, with stuff I have to refer to often either at the front or at the back. The middle's harder to find.

[1337 b4k4]

So, what order do we actually need information? In programming, there are two general schools of thought: top down, and bottom up.

In top down, you start with the highest level ideas, and slowly work your way down. So, you want to play the game? Here's what the game is about. To play, you'll need a character, dice, and imagination. For a character, you'll need stats, a class, level, gear, skills, and maybe spells. For stats, you have...

In bottom up, you start with the most basic underlying mechanic. So, there's the concept of making a check. It's a d20 roll, plus modifier, against a target number, or DC.... What can you use that for? Well, there's... and opposed rolls...

On the other hand writing and designing a program is very different from learning a system. When learning something, it's almost always easier to start abstract and learn how the sausage is made later. Character creation is sausage making at its finest.

How so?

A CoC investigator is more likely than not an "ordinary joe". They have limited actual "going against the eldritch horror" skills, and in many cases won't even be a real investigator. Think most horror movies set in the "real world", it's people going up against something they don't understand.

A Delta Green investigator is more likely to have seen some things. They're better equipped for the things coming at them and have more knowledge and resources to lean on. Think X-Files or Monster Hunter International

Gumshoe I don't have direct experience with, but my understanding is it's more classical detective/mystery stuff. You're likely to be an actual inspector or have other inspection resources at your disposal. Think everything from pink panther to murder she wrote.

Characters provide context for rules. Agreed.

But characters are not character creation. I'm not arguing that characters shouldn't be introduced until the end of the book, only that the creation part isn't nearly as important for learning the system as a whole as the end result of the creation.

But, do you need character creation to provide that context? To what extent would, say, sample characters provide less context with which to understand the rules?

I don't think you clean much context from the actual creation rules. In most systems, the rules for actually creating the character are pretty divorced from the rest of the rules around running that character. Mostly creation ties into advancement, but beyond that, you don't learn much about D&D combat or exploration via building a character. You don't learn about flying through space and exploring planets through traveller character creation. And Fate character creation is almost useless for actually understanding how the system works.

Yeah, but when I've spent 207 out of my starting 159 points on skills, because I've read skills first, and know what I want before knowing what I can have, it's rather disheartening.

Why would you have started spending any points at all given that if you hadn't encountered character creation you wouldn't even know you had points to spend?

Or, better yet: character creation, plus a rules cheat sheet is in the middle. Advancement is at the end, easy to find, but not needed by everyone at once. Because the system is designed such that characters advance at different rates, so very few players will need that section at any given time.

I'm not necessarily opposed to putting it at the middle. I guess what I'm trying to get discussing is does putting it at the beginning actually serve a useful purpose, or does it possibly harm new systems.

Considering that Fate was the first RPG I couldn't get a rough idea about just by glancing through the first couple dozen pages, then I would say char gen should be in the front of the book.

Fate's character creation is pretty close to the front of the book (30 pages in). Hardly a counter point to the idea of putting it at the back.

There was another thread about a similar topic recently, it was more generally about rule-books but it included ordering of topic and similar notes.

Indeed there was, your lamentation that threads about things other than arguing over rules don't seem to go for very long inspired me to make this thread and ask a question that was about something other than rules interpretation. So while I apologize for not having this brainstorm back when your thread was current, you can rejoice in the knowledge that the existence of this thread is at least partially your fault.

For me... I don't think so. I do think they come after basic mechanics and introduction. You should know what HP, Hot or Aspect is before you read about how figuring out what goes in that box in the character sheet. But on the other hand, how much damage is 4? There are systems where that is almost enough to kill a PC, others where that is barely enough damage to register. Character creation has the build information that can give you some perspective on that.

But couldn't having some pre-gen characters give you the same context? If I see that "John Smith Pre-Gen Extraordinaire" has 10 HP and I read the weapons section in the equipment list and see most weapons deal 4-8 damage, doesn't that tell me just as much as if I had to go through the whole creation process, learn how HP was calculated and then read the weapons chapter?

It coming after an adventure is a weird idea to me, I feel like I should know the characters going on this adventure before I see the details of what they are doing.

We do this all the time in other fiction. In fact, dropping you in medias res is a pretty standard story telling device.

My experience is that most rulebooks are fairly horrible when it comes to organization, with a single topic or subject scattered across at least half a dozen different locations, with no references listed to the other locations at any one location. Not to mention terrible indexes and TOCs.

Generally agreed, book layout (and information distribution) is definitely something our hobby needs more work with, especially because I think the layout of our books has to be pretty unique. They're not classical game instructions, but they're not reference manuals either

1. If you mean edge printing as color you can see b when the book is closed, I encourage you to go check the prices of that with publishers. It is expensive.

Nope, doesn't have to be edge printing, just something easily visual as you flip rapidly through the book. GURPS 4e and Eclipse Phase are good examples of what I'm talking about

2. Most people don't hit page 1 of an RPG book they picked up and immediately start building. Most people, even new players, scan the character genetation portion and then keep reading, searching out parts of particular interest.

Which seems like an argument in favor of not always having character generation at the beginning of the book.

As mentioned above, this is only true if you believe people robotically begin character building the moment they hit that page.

Again, if you're going to have to read other rules first, why not put them first?

I think knowing the generals of how character making goes informs the rest of the read. If the system is so complex that it requires a great deal of understanding of the mechanics to even approach char gen, then yeah. Expect new players to hate it and put chargen in the back.

Again though, is it knowing HOW to make a character the give context or is it knowing WHAT a final character looks like. Because I'm arguing that it's the later. I'm arguing that putting some pre-gens up front and using that for context for the rest of the rules and putting creation at the back is a better flow than putting creation up front and either requiring they create a character without context, or jump back and forth to get context to create a character that then gives the remaining context they need to other rules.

[Quertus]

On the other hand writing and designing a program is very different from learning a system. When learning something, it's almost always easier to start abstract and learn how the sausage is made later. Character creation is sausage making at its finest.

I meant to address this earlier, but people learn differently. Me, I learn by making. So, your statement is nonsensical in the context of my learning, as learning and creation are the same act.

Sight exaggeration, but hopefully you get the point. Not everyone processes new information the same way. What layout is best for the most people, or least bad for the worst case?

Because I'm a Builder, a Creator, I can't objectively answer how "normal" people learn differently from building.

A CoC investigator ... Think most horror movies set in the "real world", it's people going up against something they don't understand.

Delta Green ... Think X-Files or Monster Hunter International

Gumshoe ... Think everything from pink panther to murder she wrote.

Why would you have started spending any points at all given that if you hadn't encountered character creation you wouldn't even know you had points to spend?

These are related. If I know how many points I have to spend, I can calibrate my expectations, rather than reading the skills and wanting getting my heart set on Fox Mulder, when all I can afford is Gary, the Grocer.

And Fate character creation is almost useless for actually understanding how the system works.

But couldn't having some pre-gen characters give you the same context? If I see that "John Smith Pre-Gen Extraordinaire" has 10 HP and I read the weapons section in the equipment list and see most weapons deal 4-8 damage, doesn't that tell me just as much as if I had to go through the whole creation process, learn how HP was calculated and then read the weapons chapter?

Eh, when I looked at Fate, I had several characters in mind, and was asking myself how their concept would translate to Fate. For example, building a Quertus-like starting character was, IIRC, best modeled with knowledge +4, resources/contacts +3, magic only +2, etc etc, and some Spellcraft-related skill tricks (aspects?). I, to use a 5e term, get Advantage when I have something "solid" to "ground" my understanding of the new system in.

How likely is each member of your target audience to use sample characters vs character creation vs starting with the underlying systems vs etc etc? I don't know. I can only definitively state what I have done.

[Max_Killjoy]

... So should character creation be at the back of the book?

It might work better there.

If an RPG also has its own unique setting, I almost think that should be front and center, but I'm a worldbuilding junkie so I'm probably biased.

[1337 b4k4]

I meant to address this earlier, but people learn differently. Me, I learn by making. So, your statement is nonsensical in the context of my learning, as learning and creation are the same act.

Sight exaggeration, but hopefully you get the point. Not everyone processes new information the same way. What layout is best for the most people, or least bad for the worst case?

Because I'm a Builder, a Creator, I can't objectively answer how "normal" people learn differently from building.

You and me both. I prefer to learn by doing. But in the context of learning a game system, character creation is not doing. To use an analogy from the computer world, trying to learn a TTRPG system by doing character creation is akin to trying to learn linux by doing bash scripting. Yes, bash scripting and some of the concepts behind it underly a lot of *NIX philosophy, but it's only a very small part of it, and you're better served understanding other pieces first.

These are related. If I know how many points I have to spend, I can calibrate my expectations, rather than reading the skills and wanting getting my heart set on Fox Mulder, when all I can afford is Gary, the Grocer.

This is where the pre-gens are important. They should set some baseline expectations about what a character looks like. If I open CoC and the sample party of characters doesn't have Van Hellsing, Vampire Killer or anyone remotely close, that let's me know that I shouldn't be expecting such a character from the system. Now obviously you can't cover all the possible characters, but a collection of "average" characters should be good enough to get someone started, especially if the rules reference those characters and when you get to character creation could talk about how those characters could have been built differently.

[ImNotTrevor]

Nope, doesn't have to be edge printing, just something easily visual as you flip rapidly through the book. GURPS 4e and Eclipse Phase are good examples of what I'm talking about.

That's fine, then. No argument there.

Which seems like an argument in favor of not always having character generation at the beginning of the book.

Not in the context of character generation rules outlining what is important to the system and being a good hook for potential buyers, along with all the other hooks at the start. (Fiction, lore, TRPG introduction, etc. You want your hooks at the start, not the end. Character building is a hook.)

Additionally, regardless of the mechanics it is fairly easy to tell if character generation will be easy or tedious by reading through those rules. Often, it also presents a good intro for how the book will be layed out. For a simplified example:

1. Intro
2. Character generation overview
A. Basic stats
B. Side system A.
C. Side system B.
D. Miscellaneous.

3. How Stats work.
4. How Side system A works.
5. How Side system B works.
6. How the Miscellaneous stuff works.

The above is super simplified, but is a coherent layout that prepares you for what is coming. Often the Character Generation steps really can be super simplified, and that's sufficient. (In Apocalypse World, the Character Generation steps are:
1. Pick a playbook.
2. Look at the "Making a ______" section of the playbook.
3. Do what that says. (Everything is on the playbook already)
4. You're done.

For something like Apocalypse World, the Players only need the playbook for their class and one additional printout to cover everything they need to know. The GM needs... the rest of the book.

Putting the player stuff in front means that when the GM shares that digital copy around (I do this for game purposes,) they don't have to scroll for 5 minutes to grab the 3 pages they need. Just dip in at the start, nab your junk, and go. For digital? Wildly more convenient.

Again, if you're going to have to read other rules first, why not put them first?

They read the character generation steps because:
1. It's a potential hook.
2. It can be used as an outline for the rest of the book.
3. It can be used as a summary of later mechanics that is quick at hand.
4.

Again though, is it knowing HOW to make a character the give context or is it knowing WHAT a final character looks like.

MiguelAndTulioSayingBoth.gif
But the former is a great setup for how the rest of the book will go. Let's take an RPG about Wizards. The character generation steps could look like this:

1. Pick a name for your wizard.
2. Pick one of the 5 schools of magic (Zappy, Healy, Changy, Hidy, or Deady, See Chapter 2)
3. Pick your Wizardly Robe (See chapter 3)
4. Pick your Wizardly Staff (See chapter 4)
5. Select the spells in your spellbook (See chapter 5)

Since character generation is often a workflow, this doubly makes sense as that workflow can be indicated early. If the Robes depend upon your School, then you can introduce that basic concept in the chargen outline. You are now primed to look for that before getting to Chapter 3.

Because I'm arguing that it's the later. I'm arguing that putting some pre-gens up front and using that for context for the rest of the rules

Errant the Faceless
Hard +3
Cool +2
Hot -1
Sharp +0
Weird +1
2 armor
Chainsaw (3-harm loud messy hand)
Rasputin
Insano-like-Drain-o
Wilson
[ ] 3:00
[ ] 6:00
[ ] 9:00
[ ] 10:00
[ ] 11:00
[ ] 12:00

That's the current information I need for my AW character. I've removed parts that are explicitly explained on the playbook.

If you can tell me what even half of this means better than my wife who has never played but can read the playbook, I'll eat a hat.

[QUOTEP
and putting creation at the back is a better flow than putting creation up front and either requiring they create a character without context, or jump back and forth to get context[/QUOTE]
Or they are a normal human being, read the creation steps, know what will be in the rest of the book, and then read with an understanding of which bits go where in the workflow, OR, they follow along with the rules and build as they read, giving them both current context and an ongoing instruction guide. If bits of your character creation REQUIRE backtracking, the problem is the chargen, not the printing order. It will suck regardless of where you put the steps.

to create a character that then gives the remaining context they need to other rules.

Or... they do what reasonable human beings do, as seen above.

The argument seemingly stems from a belief that people are inherently stupid and either:
A. Cannot witness instructions without following them
B. Cannot comprehend a general overview of a process until they comprehend all the deep mechanics of said process. Yet my 2 year old knows that food goes in your tummy, and turns into poop. She seems ok at grasping that process without knowing all the minute How's and Why's.

I know the general process for making bread, from planting to slicing, but I probably couldn't go out and write a book about it. Yet I have a comfortable understanding such that if I read a book about bread, I would know more or less what was going on at all times, because I am coming into that content with a basic overview of how it works. So even if presented with rhe baking first and the grain growing second, I would not believe that you bake the bread before growing the wheat. I would find the layout strange, but not paralyzing.

Maybe I'm the reincarnation of Einstein, though, and other people panic if presented with a non-exhaustive process guide.

[RazorChain]

My experience is that most rulebooks are fairly horrible when it comes to organization, with a single topic or subject scattered across at least half a dozen different locations, with no references listed to the other locations at any one location. Not to mention terrible indexes and TOCs.

Are you specifically referring to WoD or just coincidentally?

[1337 b4k4]

Not in the context of character generation rules outlining what is important to the system and being a good hook for potential buyers, along with all the other hooks at the start. (Fiction, lore, TRPG introduction, etc. You want your hooks at the start, not the end. Character building is a hook.)

Maybe we just have very different experiences then, because most of my players have never liked character creation. Character concept creation, sure, but the actual mechanical process? Most of them would rather farm it out to someone who does like it.

Putting the player stuff in front means that when the GM shares that digital copy around (I do this for game purposes,) they don't have to scroll for 5 minutes to grab the 3 pages they need. Just dip in at the start, nab your junk, and go. For digital? Wildly more convenient.

Honestly, it's a digital file. Not having bookmarks to relevant sections should be considered a sin. And if 3 pages is all the players need to get started, it should be a separate file. I know my players would be much more receptive to a 3 page PDF than a 300 page one, even if when I sent them the 300 page one I say "just read pages 6-9". I guess that's my point, we don't live in an age of 50 page rule books in black and white and limited distribution choices. We should stop making our designs fit that model and start making them work better for the people using the books. And i'm suggesting one of those "better" options would be putting character creation in a different spot.

But the former is a great setup for how the rest of the book will go. Let's take an RPG about Wizards. The character generation steps could look like this:

1. Pick a name for your wizard.
2. Pick one of the 5 schools of magic (Zappy, Healy, Changy, Hidy, or Deady, See Chapter 2)
3. Pick your Wizardly Robe (See chapter 3)
4. Pick your Wizardly Staff (See chapter 4)
5. Select the spells in your spellbook (See chapter 5)

Since character generation is often a workflow, this doubly makes sense as that workflow can be indicated early. If the Robes depend upon your School, then you can introduce that basic concept in the chargen outline. You are now primed to look for that before getting to Chapter 3.

Ok, but allow me to present an alternate book flow:

1. Introduction to Wiley Willy's Wonderful Wizard World
2. Sample W5 Characters: Master Blaster, Healing Hands Luke, Play Doe, Tiny Dancer, The Doominator
3. The 5 Schools of the Wizard World: direct references to the created characters and how the schools make those characters different
4. Every One is Crazy 'Bout a Sharp Dressed Wizard: what makes a robe important, and how the different school choices affected the robes each character is wearing
5. Wonderful Wizardly Weaponry: Choosing a staff, again with direct references to the pre-gens
6. Scintillating Spells and Interesting Incantations: All about spells and spell books, with references again
7. Mister Mikes Magical Magician Maker: Building a Wizard of your Very Own: Now we cover the creation process, with pointers backwards (rather than forwards) to the information already presented, and already primed to the reader.

Rather than dropping the reader into the middle of a mechanical system and telling them "go read this, then come back", we have them "read this" and present it in the context of the finished product, then at the end show them how to put it all together for themselves.

Errant the Faceless
Hard +3
Cool +2
Hot -1
Sharp +0
Weird +1
2 armor
Chainsaw (3-harm loud messy hand)
Rasputin
Insano-like-Drain-o
Wilson
[ ] 3:00
[ ] 6:00
[ ] 9:00
[ ] 10:00
[ ] 11:00
[ ] 12:00

That's the current information I need for my AW character. I've removed parts that are explicitly explained on the playbook.

If you can tell me what even half of this means better than my wife who has never played but can read the playbook, I'll eat a hat.

I mean you removed any of the section headings that would be present in a character sheet (or at the minimum would be labeled on a pre-gen but:

Errant the Faceless is the name and possibly "class" of your character
Hard, Cool, Hot, Sharp and Weird are all attribute descriptors (just like STR,DEX etc), and the +/- are modifiers, probably to dice rolls against those attributes
2 armor and chainsaw are clearly the armament of the character with the items in parenthesis describing attributes of the chainsaw

Rasputin and Insano-like-Drain-o are probably either class moves or some sort of further character tag

Wilson could be either the same as Rasputin/Insano-like-Drain-o or might be a contact/connection

The clock values are I believe your damage/HP track essentially

Now to be fair I have passing familiarity to the *World systems, but realistically the only guesses that couldn't have been made by anyone familiar with D&D would have been the damage track and the class moves, and those would have become obvious as soon as they were seen in a filled out character sheet.

The argument seemingly stems from a belief that people are inherently stupid and either:
A. Cannot witness instructions without following them
B. Cannot comprehend a general overview of a process until they comprehend all the deep mechanics of said process. Yet my 2 year old knows that food goes in your tummy, and turns into poop. She seems ok at grasping that process without knowing all the minute How's and Why's.

I do not believe either A or B And I will note that Character Creation at the beginning is not equivalent to B at all. Character creation isn't a general overview, it's an in depth system. Of course people can figure this out, they've been doing it for years, and there's no reason to think they couldn't keep doing it. But just like someone said "you know as much as people can learn intricate and arcane assembly language and create programs, wouldn't it be better if maybe we stepped back from that a little bit, made something that was easier and let them learn assembly later" and thus were modern programing languages born, so to am I suggesting that maybe just because people can do something doesn't mean it's the easiest or best way.

I know the general process for making bread, from planting to slicing, but I probably couldn't go out and write a book about it. Yet I have a comfortable understanding such that if I read a book about bread, I would know more or less what was going on at all times, because I am coming into that content with a basic overview of how it works. So even if presented with rhe baking first and the grain growing second, I would not believe that you bake the bread before growing the wheat. I would find the layout strange, but not paralyzing.

Ok let's go with this. Let's say you wanted to learn about bread baking. Do you want your book to start with information about actually baking bread and various techniques and important things to know like what the various ratios are good for, why and when you use salt or oils or water, or do you want the book to start with:
"here's how to grow your own wild yeast starter and mix it, whatever wet ingredients you want to use (chapter 3), whatever dry ingredients you want to use (chapter 4) and knead it (chapter 5) and then put it in the oven at your chosen temperature (chapter 6). Chapters 7, 8 and 9 will go over how different ratios of the wet to dry ingredients get you different bread types, how each ingredient affects the bread type in general and general baking principles respectively"

Remember your goal is to learn about bread baking as a whole. Chapter one being about how to make a sourdough starter, though an important skill is probably not the best place for it, and certainly a recipe before you've even been given the basics might be a bit much. And in fact, if you look at The Fresh Loaf's Handbook you'll notice that they leave the recipes until after they've covered the general information. Heck, just poke around the table of contents on bread baking books on amazon. Almost all of them front load the book with the background and whys and wherefores of bread baking as a whole before presenting you with recipes to start making bread.

Maybe I'm the reincarnation of Einstein, though, and other people panic if presented with a non-exhaustive process guide.

I'm not suggesting anyone panics. I'm suggesting that maybe our current layout and design choices put people off learning new systems because it doesn't start them in the right place. It doesn't hook them into wanting to create a character because they don't even know what they should or could be creating yet because they know nothing about the system in the first place.

[oxybe]

Depends.

In a game like D&D we don't really have a setting, or at least a shared one. D&D has a ton of setting and going into a diatribe about Forgotten Realms would be a waste of space for people who don't care for it (hi!) over the other D&D settings like Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Eberron, Grayhawk, Dragonlance, etc...

Shadowrun has an implied setting, in that it's the world of next tuesday after a magic-pocalypse. Many of the game assumptions are built upon that idea: an alternate universe where it will name drop real world locations in it's modules, like Seattle. You can make up your own setting for it, but it's largely meant to be run in it's faux seattle filled with orcs, elves, trolls and whatnot.

Setting the expectations in that kind of game is paramount to informing the types of characters the players will be running (get it? shadowrun? running? no? well, there's a reason i ain't on tv).

D&D at best would need to go over some common tropes or genre conventions, like the adventuring party and whatnot... but even then, consider how Eberron, Dark Sun & Forgotten Realms treats something as ubiquitous to the D&D experience as how it treats magic: the first as a common commodity, the second as the cause of it's dying universe and the third as a somewhat-unknown force studied by few and mastered by fewer. And that's not even counting how it's treated in Little Timmy's Forgotten Sun of Graylance homebrew setting.

In a game like D&D which doesn't have a set universe, having character creation at the front with a short forward about having a proper session 0, where your GM describes the setting & you create appropriate characters is a better idea, followed with a step by step "After some discussion Johnny will be playing in Timmy's Forgotten Sun of Graylance setting, and after going over the basics, he decides he want to make a Guardsman for the city of Townsburgh." and it then walks through the process.

[Dimers]

Front, back, middle, separate book, doesn't matter. If it's the kind of game where I care about keeping a character alive, I'm going to spend a long time flipping back-and-forth.

Okay, fine, it does matter -- my left thumb is better at controlling number of pages simultaneously flipped than my right is, and English reads left to right, so the bulk of character creation should be at the front. That way my controller digit takes care of the harder job. All my right thumb has to worry about is the one spot I access over and over.