Character Creation - Dungeon World

Character Creation
Make a character based off of DW rules. Start with Human and we'll see where we get from there. Do think about where you come from and what got your character adventuring in the first place.

As usual, I am happy to wait for others to choose Playbooks, then I can fill in any gaps in the party.
If anyone wants me to play something particular --maybe as a foil to your gem-- let me know, I can try accommodate you. This goes for the GM as well, if you guys even want to experiment with running for a particular Playbook, I am happy to play it.

It might also help to get a roll call for this 'game'. Who is wanting to take part?

vagueGM reporting for duty.

OkumHart: This is your show. You must let us know how much backseat GMing you want from us.
You can set a default at the start and then change your mind at any time. One-off changes are also a way to go "I know I said I wanted lots of input but let me try do this one on my own", or "I know I said I wanted to do this on my own, but what ruling do you all suggest I use here?"

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind as this moves forward.

Something to add to character creation. 1 truth your character knows is inherent to the world (within reason).

GM: Do you have anything to tell us about the world first? Without any guidance 'within reason' might be anything. :)

Oops. I was thinking your average fantasy world, but I'm remembering you posting elsewhere that there should be a world already in mind? So should I spend a little time on world building before hand?

Not necessary. 'average fantasy' is enough, but I did not want to assume.

I will play and I would like to be the Druid.

Great idea, I'll mock up a DW PC from a playbook (Paladin) tonight.

In this short game, your characters were tasked by Gladelf the wizard to find the McGuffin of Mysteries within the Dungeon Deep. Soon after entering the dungeon, your characters find themselves, without a clue as to how or why, at the end of the dungeon in the Cathedral of Containing. Resting before you is the McGuffin of Mysteries upon a raised dais, the very item you have come in search for. You go to make you way out when you realize you have been stripped of your possessions.

What do you do?

I'd like to play too, just tossing up between a Wizard or another Ranger

Is everyone cool with the idea that you start having to find your gear? Or should I nix that and we just do the dungeon backwards?

Fine by me.

Remind me --it has been a while since I read the book-- does DW allow duplicate playbooks?

Yeah Dungeon World has everyone start out as different playbooks. So if there conflicting ideas we can talk it out

Okay, I'll go along with that.

Does this mean ignore all the gear listed on the playbooks, or does it mean something else?

Also I think I will be a Bard, making one now

I was thinking that you pick out what you want, and while in the first few posts you might not have it all, you'll be coming across it as you go.

Now that we have a Bard it is worth having a chat about... well, about having a chat.

The Bard has that Bardic Lore feature. When making a bard it is worth chatting to your GM about which ones are appropriate for this game. If we are never going 'planes wandering' then Planar Spheres might be a bad choice. It would suck for the player to have one of their core features never come up in play. If there are no undead in a game, the GM should warn the player not to pick that one, unless they are interested in the dead and funerary rights or something.
If the player does not bring it up, the GM might want to address this issue when someone announces they are picking the Bard.

Likewise, the Cleric is sometimes seen as the 'healer' but the Bard and the Paladin are also compulsory healers while the Cleric needs to pick Cure as one of their spells to even qualify.
The unique thing the Cleric brings is Turn for dealing with undead. If the GM knows there will be no undead in this game, they should mention that so anyone thinking about Cleric can temper their expectations. (Especially in a game with a Bard and a Paladin already).

The decision to play a spell caster can also be heavily tempered by what levels we can expect to achieve --more so than most other playbooks. It can help for the GM to make their intents in this regard clear at the start.
Presumably leveling up will not be a focus in this sample game?

Similarly, the Thief has a unique ability for dealing with traps. If the GM does not plan to use traps in their game a Thief player may wish to know before picking. The Thief brings more than just traps to the table, though.
Some GMs might not want a thief in the game because they can mess with their ability to use traps. It is common for GMs to present a curated list or playbooks for players to choose from, removing the ones they don't want or that don't fit.

Another thing to chat about is the Paladin's Quest Move. This is a powerful move, but relies a lot on the player and the GM working together to make an interesting story of it. Else it can become a war of intents and avoidances. Make sure you are on the same page.

vagueGM this is great advice. As for the undead, there will be some. I am not quite sure how far we will be getting so leveling up might or might not happen, we will see. And I am willing and interested in working with both our Bard and Paladin on how their abilities will work.

I can whip up a character pretty quickly. Let me know once everyone is onboard (for the start) and the character choices are settled, then I will fill in.

Thanks for the tip, @vagueGM!

re the Bard, currently Edwyn is a charismatic weakling, good at talking his way into and out of things. I'd thought the most useful thing he can do for a party which doesn't otherwise know much about the world is, well, know stuff that's been said about the world in songs and stories. It'll help us deal with what we come up against, and provide tips re where to look for adventures or treasure too, and where hazards might be. So I am leaning towards one of

- Grand Histories of the Known World (past kingdoms and conflicts = places treasure or traps might be)
- Legends of Heroes Past (as above)
- A Bestiary of Creatures Unusual (how to deal with different monsters)


Let me know what you reckon though!

I'd say that the bestiary or legends of past heroes will come in handy during this little adventure.

Thanks!

Also, are we doing Bonds, as per the playbooks? Is that something we discuss, or just keep to ourselves?

Bonds are sorta important to the Bard. Bards have more than anyone else as part of the character design. (A Wizard only has half the number a Bard does.)
Your number of Bonds is a stat that you roll with when Aiding or Interfering with another. The Bard is just better at manipulating their friends.

By RAW they are discussed and everyone has to be happy with them (mainly the two players involved and the GM).
In PbP, this mechanism --Bonds, Hx, Strings, or whatever the game calls them-- can take a long time. They are meant to help get the story going quickly, but that is only true at the table. We can fill in Bonds as we play rather than now.

This is key, and a terrible part of paladin-ing. You're set up the adventure, and so it would be useful to work together on the appropriate move that matches the adventure. Taking your lead, I propose:

I dedicated myself to a mission through prayer and ritual cleansing, to Discover the truth of the MacGuffin of Mysteries.

You don't have to declare your Quest right now, you can do it at any time (though the 'ritual cleansing' might take a while). You can declare it when you know of something worth Questing for.
There is no provision in the rules for giving up a Quest, so choosing the wrong one can be a problem. It can be handled in the fiction, but would have consequences.

Well, Bond might normally be better for a fuller campaign or adventure, I don't see why we can't use them and get a feel for how we can resolve them in PbP.

We could do an End of Session partway through the dungeon, that way we can see the Bond Resolution mechanics in action (and get some XP).
But Resolving Bonds is only one of their uses. They are also a mechanical Stat that we Roll, so they are important.

The book suggest defining at least one at the start, then filling in the others whenever we see an opportunity. In PbP there is lots of these opportunities during play, so we could even start with none and fill them all in as we play.
I have gone so far as to suggest to a player --during End of Session where they had nothing happening-- that one of their Bonds had 'clearly been the constant headbutting you had with Bob, which you have resolved, right?' The more Bonds you have them more likely one of them will be resolved each session.

---

Do we know each other or is that part of our memory also a bit hazy? We know we signed up together, but, since we don't remember our trip down here, we might not recall our Bonds and have to discover them on play.

As always great advice vagueGM, thank you. I'll say that we will definitely have at least one End of Session part way through, maybe two if everything is going well and we want to extend the experience.
Let's go with you all have worked to get her before, so at least one bond should be filled with another of the party members. Leave at least one open for a good opportunity. Maybe establish how each bond has been created between those it includes?

Sounds good.

Are we expecting more players? (Yeah, yeah, I know, who can say:)
The Bard will almost definitely have more than one Bond with some characters, they just count up the total number they have with that character when they roll+bonds.

It seems like this might end up being a significant game. Do we want to make make full characters for this and deal with sheets and submission and 'approval' and such?

I am not sure how that will work out in the long run, nor how many characters a game can handle (we may need to cull them as time goes on), and other people's games may want characters as well (which probably means we will eventually end up adding them anyway).

If any of you want to copy from the playbooks template I used on another site, go for it. TK DW Template. The formatting will be a bit off, this site does not handle lists, and copy-paste does not keep formatting.

If we decide not to go with proper sheets, we could use a 'Character Introduction' thread here for that instead. It will be harder than with a sheet to look up each time, but could work.

I have been so tempted to join because I love DW! But I have stuff going on and cannot accept any further commitment, so will happily just read along.

For what it's worth, here is a sample character sheet I made that you may find useful as a template.

That's a nice looking character sheet.

I am sure there will be more DW 'games' later. It is popular.

Indeed.
Though I do find that, with PbtA Playbooks, it can be useful --mainly for the GM-- to be able to see the options one did not pick to help them understand what the picked options mean:
Cool visuals, but knowing that the eyes are 'Fiery' is less useful that they are 'Fiery as opposed to being Cold or Weary'.
Looks can be a little more than skin deep, but they are still just looks. Having a reminder of which mechanical Moves and Feature the player did not pick or gave up having to get the ones they did pick can be very useful (not that you pick Moves at the start with DW, it is sorta unique that way). Alignment and Rave interpretations can sometimes benefit from the context.

It is much messier to have all the unpicked options on the sheet all the time, so I don't know if it is worth it, but they would be there if using the PDFs. I sometimes maintain my own sheet with them all (in Org Mode).

Can I just check who else will be joining this scenario? Edwyn is not a character I would have designed to survive alone :)

Absolutely, Bards are not meant to be solo-artists. :)

I will create a character once we know that I am not taking up a choice that someone else would want. It does seem like we have our group now, though.

We still have Qralloq with a Paladin, and possibly Verrain with a Druid.

Verrain: We have not heard from you in a while. Do you need any help with making a character? Do you want us to start without you and find you later (OkumHart, let us know if you would be happy with that).

theatreofcomets: Given those others, do you have a preference as to what I pick? We have Fighter, Mage, Thief (the OG trio:), Cleric, and Ranger from the core book, I could do any of those.
Does Edwyn maybe have a bodyguard or servant along for the trip?

We can make that work...

re type, if we have a Paladin then maybe what we need most right now in the midst of creepy magic is a Mage?

I feel like Edwyn talked his way into joining this trip, and then talked an acquaintance with complementary skills into joining too, so your character and he would be roughly equals, rather than one being a servant or retainer. Does that work for you?

Can do.
There can be a fair bit of overlap between the Wizard and the Bard, especially at lower levels. They are both about gaining knowledge (and Spouting Lore) until the later spells start distinguishing them apart (unless the Bard Mullticlasses and takes on Wizard Spells as they level up).
But, happy to be a Wiz if that is what people think will be most useful or want to see.

I mean, you know this game much better than me! I'd be interested in your thoughts re the pros and cons of the other classes you could choose.

(..especially as they pertain to the dungeon we find ourselves in)

Off-topic, but out of interest: what time zones are you all in? I'm in Melbourne, Australia, which is Australian Eastern Standard Time, or GMT+10. It's 10:37 in the morning here.

Given when you're each posting I'm guessing it's much later in the day or night?

The playbooks are very open to interpretation by the player. Their direction can also vary greatly based on which Advances the player chooses or the nature of the world.
The Bard is very much an Information/Knowledge based character, as is the Wizard. Bards are, of course, the social one, being largely about working with others (PCs or NPCs), while Wizards' Spells can turn them into power-houses in the later levels.

I don't get to play DW very often (and also don't GM it that much). And these are off the top of my head. So take them with a grain of salt.

The Wizard's Ritual Move is probably the single most powerful thing in this game. Given enough time they can achieve ANYTHING. As the rules say 'Ritual effects are always possible...' the GM does not get to say: "No, you can not do that", and it is not in the spirit of the game for the GM to put insurmountable obstacles before them. Players should not abuse this power.

Given the likely time constraints in this sort of 'practice' game, Rituals might not come up much, and will need to be simple.


I am not sure what to say, aside from that, and what I mentioned earlier about thieves and their impact on traps. When the Thief was first introduced into DnD there was a uproar since it made it sound like the rules now said other characters could not sneak, or hide, or disarm traps, or open locked doors (which, technically they did say), before that all classes were assumed to be competent at these sorts of skills, they were the bread and butter of being an adventurer. Turning the Thief into a Rogue instead was a good move.


Rangers are sorta like fighters, but with a pet and they excel at wilderness travel and can be a huge boon during the Perilous Journey Move (which we probably won't see while in a single dungeon). They are flavorful though, so even if that is not a thing they do (and if they are not an elf they are not that dominant at Perilous Journey) they can be a lot of fun. It is a common favorite archetype.


Fighters are a cool class, especially long term if they get to develop their Signature Weapon. Many rag on Bend Bars/Lift Gates, but I think it rocks (you can lift rocks too). And a player can give them a lot of personalised flavor because the playbook doesn't force much upon them.


Clerics are sometimes considered essential for the healing, but they are more than just healbots, and others can heal pretty well too. In later levels their Spells can become very potent.


I have never really seen much of the Barbarian (it was added later and is not in my book). I can not comment.


The Immolator is widely agreed to be broken/unfinished. I think they can work if at least one of the stats requirements is removed to make them less M.A.D. (Multi Attribute Dependant). I usually recommend changing the use of INT for attacks, to something they use already. I like using CON (their messy attacks don't seem precise (DEX) nor very WIS to me) and CON is already used by that Move). Their lack of Advanced Move choices can be a problem, though I have never seen a game play long enough for them to run out. Adding the Multiclass Dabbler Advances to the sheet could fix that to some degree. They are already an unfocused Playbooks that does too many things.


If you have any playbook specific questions, I can take a look and give my thoughts. But playbooks are very personal, aside from letting the GM/players know what you plan for the character, they are largely up to the player.

CST in the States. 7pm for me

vagueGM other than the paladin who could easily be the tank, the group could use some alternate forms of damage. Barbarian, fighter, and ranger seem to be good additions to the group.

So we have settled on... 'anything could work'. :) That is usually the case. :)
I can roll a dice to decide if no one has any strong preferences.

I have my druid together. Are we just sharing in this thread or should I make up a proper character sheet?

A character sheet linked here would make my life easier, but as we are doing something short with this dungeon and I am very experimental with my GM skills, it isn't needed.

I think I'll pass on actually RPing. My time is getting away from me. But I'll lurk.

Then everyone go ahead and Submit character sheets. It will make it easier if a 'game' is going to be more than a scene or two.
Remember to click the 'Add to Library' button on your character list so the 'GM' can view the sheet.
Red means others can see the sheet.

If the character sheet is Added to the Library as above, you can post a link to the sheet here, that way our 'GM' can look at it even before I have time to 'Approve' it.

Here's Edwyn

And if I have done this right Gareth is the link below.

https://gamersplane.com/characters/custom/20055/

'Approved'.

So, which do we want. An overlapping Wizard or a random Ranger?

Basically, I will go Wizard if theatreofcomets still wants a buddy, else I will go with the damager as the GM suggested.

I reckon a Ranger

We have a ranger.

GM: You implied a possible need for more damage, so I want with a +3 Ferocity Brear, but I did not select 'fight monsters' as a training, it seems boring. Instead I went with 'guard'; that coupled with 'adaptable' could mean the bear needs to be taught how to fight each type of foe we face, and since they are also 'forgetful', they may need to be taught again if it has been a while.
It might also make sense for the ranger to be able to concentrate on shooting if the bear is guarding them, thereby gaining the +Ferocity to Damage boost? That will heavily depend on the events in the fiction.

Ranger Jon's Bonds
I think my number 2 bond is fairly clearly with Gareth, any objections?

I also think it would be interesting if I guided Edwyn on some quest of his before. theatreofcomets: Any thoughts on what that was? It can come out in play as can what you owe me.

1. I have guided Edwyn before and they owe me for it.
2. Gareth is a friend of nature, so I will be their friend as well.
3. ˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍ has no respect for nature, so I have no respect for them.
4. ˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍ does not understand life in the wild, so I will teach them.

One other option: I see Edwyn as a creature of the town and sometimes city, and the roads between them, but quite out of his element in the wild away from the roads and inns. So it could be #3 or #4 as well as, or instead of, #1?

If a previous quest: you helped me recover my father's mandolin from the mountain fastness of a cruel noble, which meant traveling through wildlands I'd never dare go through alone. The mandolin was lost in the fight which lead to my father's death when I was young, and despite the songs I'd learned and the books I'd read, I couldn't bring myself to actually call myself a Bard without recovering it or at least trying.

Depending on what the other characters end up looking like those Bonds might also apply to Edwyn. If we only have three players there will be more than one Bond with some of them.

Still working on not editing, but that last one would have been weird otherwise

I am fine with the bond to Ranger Jon. In return, I'll offer this one.

I have showed Jon a secret rite of the land.

Any objections to this one for Edwyn? Edwyn smells more like prey than
a hunter.

Perfect! :)

I'll take a look at what I can offer too.

Absolutely. :)
Just how 'secret' is this rite? Are you worried there will be trouble if others find out you shared this information?
Do you have ideas about what the rite entails or does? Otherwise we can work that out in play as we see the characters. I would assume it has something to do with water, but if you want to add another aspect to your character, this would be a good place.

Makes sense, cheers!

Verrain, do you have any thoughts re Bonds between your Gareth and my Edwyn? I currently have:

1. This is not my first adventure with Jon.
2. I sang stories of _______________ long before I ever met them in person.
3. _______________ is often the butt of my jokes.
4. I am writing a ballad about the adventures of _______________.
5. _______________ trusted me with a secret.
6. _______________ does not trust me, and for good reason.

Edwyn is always composing verses and bits of songs, sometimes heroic and sometimes comic, and trying them out on you both as a captive audience, so I think he will have bonds 3 and 4 with both of you, unless there are objections?

Beyond that I am not sure - do you think we have traveled together before? And/or have I held or broken your trust?

To clarify, the verses and bits of songs are usually about us and the adventure we are having. Someone has to write the songs others will sing to remember us!

Since the intent behind Bonds is to Resolve them and then write custom new ones, I see no harm in writing new ones from the beginning as well, GM permitting. We treat the ones on the sheet as merely suggestions.
Stick to the numbers though. The Bard gets 6, the Wizard gets 3 and everyone else gets 4 (I think). This is not arbitrary, it is part of the design.

Are we still waiting for a Paladin? They will probably warrant many Bonds.
I am not quite sure what you mean by 'with both of you'. A bond can only apply to one PC, else it would count twice for Aid/Interfere, and would be very difficult to Resolve.

As above, you could duplicate the wording of a Bond into a separate one, thus having two Bonds with the same words applying to two characters. This does not change the numbers and makes it possible to Resolve them one at a time, while still writing ballads about the group and individuals. The new Bond might even make that fiction stronger, Resolving it does not mean it loses meaning.
That could be a fact in the fiction, but does not need to be a Bond. When the Bond is Resolved this fact does not cease to be true in the fiction.

(3) Might Edwyn poke jokes at my stubborn and forgetful Bear? (The Bond would still technically apply to the Ranger Character, they one and the same).

Oh I hadn't thought of that, cheers for the flag.
No, I believe Qralloq is sitting out actual RP:
Yes, that sounds good.

Verrain, I wonder if Gareth has made a name for himself previously, but this is only his first or second quest with Jon and Edwyn? In which case perhaps I'd written something about him before meeting. What do you think?

Ah, I missed that. Pity.
If time permits later we could look at adding our Pal later in the dungeon.

Good thing my Bear has Guard, we might need it to tank. The Druid might be able to help there too.

I'll allow it, doesn't seem to change much and allows more in the narrative.

Hmm... 'enough' varies so much, from group to group. Best way to gauge that is to see if people are constantly asking for more information, or if they are forgetting what you said by the end. Too much description can hamstring the players' choices, so watch for frustration if they feel they have not option but to follow your railroad. "Balance in all things."
Ask the players in the specific game. Do this for each game, and maybe every few sessions as well, watch for reactions (body language is missing here in PbP, so we need to be a bit more explicit about things and speak up long before we think we need to, but that is a whole other topic).

On thing I did take note of, but did not feel warranted comment, was the use of Discern Realities. Personally some of those answers are things I would have given for free, and possibly I would not have called for the Rolls at all. But I am not GMing here, and everyone has their own style, both as a GM and as a group, some groups roll for everything, some only roll for the most important things, both are OK. The number of rolls can severely impact the rate of XP gain, especially in the early game where 6-s are the main source, so factor that in as well.

A concern is always what to do on those 6-s. If the GM is going to have a hard time coming up with a Move to make on a miss, then there probably should not have been a roll. Some GMs fall back to the traditional 'nothing happens', but that is not in the spirit of PbtA. To speed things up some have players add --to their initial post-- rolls that might not be needed, but that again causes complications on a 6- when the GM needs to go back and say, "ignore that roll, and give me back that XP". I have possibly also seen players toss out weak-stat-rolls in scenes where nothing bad can really happen, just hoping to steal a few XP (or just trying to help speed things along, it can be hard to tell):.

Also: Don't let a 6- stall the game. For instance, with the illusion wall situation above, while I feel it was added by the GM as a reward, think about what would have happened on a 6-? Would we have missed an important clue and been denied that route? Is it our only real way out and we would have had to find it anyway so the roll did not matter? *

---

Footnotes:
* I suspect the GM added these things because we rolled. This is a good technique: If the players show interest in something, add more detail there. I suspect --from the first description-- that if we had just grabbed the McGuffin and left, neither the trap nor the illusion would even have existed. If so, well done, if not, not a problem, but it is a useful trick. :)

For instance: Something that might be obvious to us (or to a Range) without a roll is: Do/did we see footprints showing how we got in here? Did we come though the illusion wall? Is there another door? (I assume so, it would have been mentioned if we were in a room with no exit.)
If there are no footprints, that is a thing that would stand out to a tracker, the player might not think to ask.

There were hints in my RP post that maybe:
3. Edwyn has no respect for nature, so I have no respect for them.
Or some variation on that. If that does not fit I could be trying to teach Edwyn about nature, but that does not strike me as realistic, what say you?

I will make up a new one for Gareth once we see more of their interaction, neither of the existing ones work for a druid.

To be honest, I initially forgot to write about the door (which was always there in my mind) but saw an opportunity to add to the narrative with the illusion. Still figuring the switch between DnD style narrating and DW narrating.

So, is there still a door? Or did it vanish when the illusion came online? :)

Nope just the illusioned one

I am fine with the bard singing a song about Gareth.

Sorry for the late reply I've been without internet for two days and unable to get anywhere else with it. I should be good for now

It happens.

As mentioned, I don't think my fourth starting Bond ("does not understand life in the wild, so I will teach them") works for Edwyn (I don't see Jon viewing them as 'teachable':), and it would be nice to have two with Gareth, and that one definitely does not work for our Druid.

We can make something up, but I took a quick look through the unused Playbooks for some that might fit.

"I worry about the ability of ˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍ to survive in the dungeon" (Fighter) can work if this place seem very foreign to our 'swamp druid'. Remember these don't have to be based in reality, this one is a thing that Jon worries about, and not a fact.

" ˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍ is a brave soul, I have much to learn from them" (Paladin) fits what we have, but I don't see it being resolvable, it is also a bit boring. Still an option if we like it.


" ˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍˍ knows why I truly left home, and why I stay away" (3rd party Elf) seems like it could be interesting. I do like that one, though it might not see much play in a short game.