My version of the IC info section! Improved!

Name: <First and Last Name>

Age: <Age>

Height: <Height>

Profession/Title: <Profession/Title>

Class: <Betelgeuse Class>

Bio: <Self Description>

Background:<Race/Family Description>

Appearance: <Description of appearance>

Weapons and tools:
- <Weapon/Tool>
- <Weapon/Tool>

Skills and Abilities:
<Skill Name>: <Description>

Additional info:

I'd like an admin opinion of it.

I'll be reworking the application format for the new forum post. I'll likely be using some of your ideas here, but not all of them. On the whole though, I like it.

I have Revised it. Please give it another look.

I....don't see what you changed.

Arc/Sieg wrote:
Bio: <Self Description>

Background:<Race/Family Description>

Skills and Abilities:
<Skill Name>: <Rank> : <Description>

Bio and Background have been split into 2 separate sections.
Bio is about the character himself/herself and his/her travels from where he/she came (their background) to where they are now (Betelgeuse).
Background is about the character's race, family, related information.
And Skills and Abilities have been merged and given a new template including name rank and description.

Good job! I think this is a great start to the new character creation process. Might even help with dice rolls, if they are implemented.

Might I suggest that Stamina and Dexterity be merged into "Speed", and constitution/hardiness simply be a part of strength? Also, perception could possibly be a part of wisdom. Luck doesn't necessarily need to be an attribute, but hey, if people want to put points into luck, go nuts

So then the stats would be Elder Scrolls style, like so.
-Strength
-Speed
-Charisma
-Intelligence
-Willpower
-Luck
With perception being part of willpower, stamina being part of "speed" and constitution being part of strength.

The skill ranking is great, because it won't bog down combat and will make sure people have both strengths and weaknesses. It also opens up the possibility for characters to have interesting but not entirely combat-relevant skills, like a beautiful singing voice (My idea, do not steal! Lol). We could even use the Dungeons and Dragons skillset: much of the skills are used ,pretty frequently and some of them are really interesting (for example, the "Knowledge: <insert knowledge>" skills and the ability to speak different languages.) But really, its entirely up to the admins.

What do you guys think?

I just ask you don't make the app have to require a ton of 'stats', it'll just become a chore for the person applying and I think some of these things should develop in character, not have a set 'stat' for the character before joining.

We most likely won't be including a stats section in the application. They wouldn't be used for anything, and there's nothing stopping a person from giving them self straight 18s

Arc/Sieg wrote:
Stats:
-Strength: <Rank>
-Stamina: <Rank>
-Intelligence: <Rank>
-Charisma: <Rank>

I've decreased the amount of Stats to these 4. I feel the stats are as i say in OP are a good way to power-scale between characters. Say Char. 1 wrestles with Char. 2. 1's Strength is B+ and 2's is C. IC 1 has a better chance then 2, but i wouldn't want these stats to be definite, like Dedtoo always beats Arc, or Lucius always beats Monk. For example, someone with a B+ COULD beat someone with an A, but it would be harder for them. and as for the "Nothing stopping them from giving themselves all 18's" these are meant to give others an idea of how strong your character should be. If a small young child with no training who came from a dirty town of hooligans had A+'s in Strength and Charisma..well that wouldn't be very believable. and those people wouldn't have a very good chance of getting in with unbelievable stats like that.

Arc/Sieg wrote:
For Stats and Skills I Believe a ranking system is in order.
what i have prepared is the following:

EX (Unmeasurable, Possibly god-like! Most people should NOT have EX stats)
A+
A (Unbelievable)
A-
B+
B (Amazing)
B-
C+
C (Above Average)
C-
D+
D (Average)
D-
E+
E (On par with Children)
E-
N/A (None)

this scale was created to get an idea of power-scaling between characters. I feel this has potential to help.

I have also re-scaled the Rank chart.

Basically, what Arc said. It's simply unrealistic to give onesself all perfect scores in the stats and attributes. They would probably be used more for determining what is possible for a character to do, and what their weaknesses are relative to strengths. In other words, its for interest and roleplaying sake moreso than for actual dice rolls.

@Hardeu: the skills/stats could change based on in-game skills and individual character circumstances. Example: Ridgire is a warrior. He wants to have better willpower so that he can become a Reaver or spellsword. He accepts philosophy lessons from Eli, which raises his intelligence and willpower.

I think the stats thing should be left out completely, it'll be easier to work with an application that requires detail rather than a set of numbers. I'd rather someone tell me how strong they are, rather than "Yeah, my strength is 12, my speed is 2, and my charisma is 8".

Edit: In addition, if we take these 'stats' to combat IC, it'll become a pain in the rear if someone says "[Hey, that was supposed to injure you horribly, my strength stat is 17, and your defense is 4!]. Example:

Hardeu: *Throws a punch at Qualins face*
Qualin: *Steps back a bit, regaining his balance*
Hardeu: [Dude my strength stat is 17, your defense stat is 6, you should experience more than just imbalance and a stepback]
Qualin: [...]

Anyone get my drift? I think stats would just get too technical, unless I'm taking all this the wrong way. I think 'stats' should be left to skills/character development/biography, etc.

Arc/Sieg wrote:Name: <First and Last Name>

Age: <Age>

Height: <Height>

Profession/Title: <Profession/Title>

Class: <Betelgeuse Class>

Bio: <Self Description>

Background:<Race/Family Description>

Appearance: <Description of appearance>

Weapons and tools:
- <Weapon/Tool>
- <Weapon/Tool>

Skills and Abilities:
<Skill Name>: <Description>

Additional info:

I have removed all stat and rank parts of the template.

Arc/Sieg wrote:

Arc/Sieg wrote:Name: <First and Last Name>

Age: <Age>

Height: <Height>

Profession/Title: <Profession/Title>

Class: <Betelgeuse Class>

Bio: <Self Description>

Background:<Race/Family Description>

Appearance: <Description of appearance>

Weapons and tools:
- <Weapon/Tool>
- <Weapon/Tool>

Skills and Abilities:
<Skill Name>: <Description>

Additional info:

I have removed all stat and rank parts of the template.

Ah, I like this. Disregard my previous post then.

Edit: If it's not too much, would a fault section be applicable? Instead of just having a section dedicated to skills and abilities, I think there should be a section dedicated to what is WRONG with the character.

hardeu wrote:
Ah, I like this. Disregard my previous post then.

Edit: If it's not too much, would a fault section be applicable? Instead of just having a section dedicated to skills and abilities, I think there should be a section dedicated to what is WRONG with the character.

I feel that would be a bit weird, although one could always put it in the Additional Info section if one could not fit it anywhere else.

Arc/Sieg wrote:

hardeu wrote:
Ah, I like this. Disregard my previous post then.

Edit: If it's not too much, would a fault section be applicable? Instead of just having a section dedicated to skills and abilities, I think there should be a section dedicated to what is WRONG with the character.

I feel that would be a bit weird, although one could always put it in the Additional Info section if one could not fit it anywhere else.

I feel it's as necessary as a skills section. If not, a skills section is just as 'weird' as a fault section. But perhaps.

hardeu wrote:

Arc/Sieg wrote:

hardeu wrote:
Ah, I like this. Disregard my previous post then.

Edit: If it's not too much, would a fault section be applicable? Instead of just having a section dedicated to skills and abilities, I think there should be a section dedicated to what is WRONG with the character.

I feel that would be a bit weird, although one could always put it in the Additional Info section if one could not fit it anywhere else.

I feel it's as necessary as a skills section. If not, a skills section is just as 'weird' as a fault section. But perhaps.

Skills were on the original application template by Eli and sight. besides that I'm not sure what else to say.....but I'M not adding a Fault section.

IC Name (First and Last) :

Age :

Race :

Appearance (Height, weight, distinguishing features, overall) :

About Me (Bio and Background (Should be at least TWO paragraphs)) :

Strengths (EX: Dedicated, trained as a swordsman, fluent in three languages, can tap dance) :

Weaknesses (EX: Any fears they have, color-blind, physically weak, not necessarily good at tap dancing but insists on doing it anyway) :




NOTE - This is subject to change

I think it'd be good to still have "class/profession" listed in the application, even if its just an idea of what they might do. Reason being, its not a good idea to choose a class without thinking about it first and knowing what kind of role your character would fit into. You are, after all, pretty much stuck with your class barring admin intervention and/or a reroll. Besides, there were a lot of really good character ideas in the "old world" which fell apart when the player chose a questionable class (ie Qualin :/)

Qualin_Silverward wrote:I think it'd be good to still have "class/profession" listed in the application, even if its just an idea of what they might do. Reason being, its not a good idea to choose a class without thinking about it first and knowing what kind of role your character would fit into. You are, after all, pretty much stuck with your class barring admin intervention and/or a reroll. Besides, there were a lot of really good character ideas in the "old world" which fell apart when the player chose a questionable class (ie Qualin :/)

agreed

Class is perfectly fine. However, this time around everyone will start out as the neutral class: the Freelancer. From there they will become a major class through roleplaying.

We found that starting out with "Here, I'm supposed to give you this cobweb" Is a terrible way to make someone a necromancer. Its much more natural and organic for them to become a necromancer through their roleplaying. In short, if you want to be a warrior, RP as a warrior. That way you'll actually be one instead of simply having the title.

As for profession, I have to admit to not seeing the point. That could easily be put in their backstory that they used to be a bard, or a baker, or a blacksmith. It doesn't add too much to the development of the character, unless you're planning to roleplay a rogue and you list your profession as "Grand-Master Assassin" or something equally as ridiculous.

Eli wrote:IC Name (First and Last) :

Age :

Race :

Appearance (Height, weight, distinguishing features, overall) :

About Me (Bio and Background (Should be at least TWO paragraphs)) :

Strengths (EX: Dedicated, trained as a swordsman, fluent in three languages, can tap dance) :

Weaknesses (EX: Any fears they have, color-blind, physically weak, not necessarily good at tap dancing but insists on doing it anyway) :




NOTE - This is subject to change

Can things i would have put under skills and abilities go under strengths?

Yep.

I actually think that that idea of starting neutral is fucking brilliant.

The reason I would include profession is just so that the character has a role to play in the town's activities. Every town has a blacksmith, priest, king, etc. That way, it would provide some degree of mandatory roleplay and importance for the character to exist in that town. In a sense, nobody gets left out because everyone has a role to play. I think it would really help with some people complaining about being "unimportant to the story". Because hey, if the town blacksmith makes a large majority of the military's weapons, and he/she kicks the bucket, the town loses something valuable even if that character wasn't particularly story important.