How to decide which "monsters" can be played?

[Bernd]

Hey Guys!

How do you decide which supernatural beings can be played? One big factor is obviously the free will, but who decides which creature has a free will? (Even the Fae Queens could have a free will: They cannot act against their nature, but they are aware of their nature and find ways to act according to their will and still satisfy their nature)

Personally, I like the "everything is possible" approach (everything can be played if there is a refresh level of at least 1), but this can lead to campaigns that are not "canon" (this is obviously not a problem if you don't care).

How do you decide which creature has enough free will to qualify as playable?

[CMEast]

Anything that can fit in to a group without totally twisting the story or conflicts around it. Anything that can have free will i.e. no pure fae, pure demons, animals etc.

[wyvern]

Short answer: I don't.  If one of my players is, say, dead set on playing a full-fey sylph, for example, knowing the restrictions such a character will face - I'm not going to stop them.  Likewise, there's no indication that a changeling who chooses fey automatically becomes an NPC; the only comment referencing that explicitly is that such a changeling "often becomes an NPC as his power costs rise to exceed his refresh" (YS74).

The only real must I'd require is a mind, and goals / outlook that are reasonably compatible with what everyone else is playing.  No characters that are consumed by mindless hunger (or mindless anything else, for that matter); no predatory ghouls in a game that features wardens and Venatori acting to defend the common man; that sort of thing.

[Bernd]

Anything that can fit in to a group without totally twisting the story or conflicts around it.

The only real must I'd require is a mind, and goals / outlook that are reasonably compatible with what everyone else is playing.  No characters that are consumed by mindless hunger (or mindless anything else, for that matter); no predatory ghouls in a game that features wardens and Venatori acting to defend the common man; that sort of thing.

This ist naturally the case. I disallow concepts that don't fit the campaign style, even if it's a pure mortal.

Likewise, there's no indication that a changeling who chooses fey automatically becomes an NPC; the only comment referencing that explicitly is that such a changeling "often becomes an NPC as his power costs rise to exceed his refresh" (YS74).

I asked, because the RCI explicitly states, that RCI inevitably become NPCs if they kill feeding, so it is somehow intended that some beings just aren't playable.

[Lanir]

Both of the above views are totally valid. It just depends on how conservative you want to be on the topic (guessing the answer to that is "not very" since you asked in the first place). The point wyvern brought up about the mind of the character is pretty key. A PC should have to do one hell of a job to convince a GM that their fae, despite having wholly gone over to live in that world, is more concerned with being a human and thinking like a human does than acquiring more power. Especially when that would make their enchanted life easier. Not to mention any significant interaction with other fae would tend to suck them more into that side of things as well. Do they really want to play an outcast?

Of course "will it fit in the group" would be the overriding concern within any game first and foremost.

[austinmonster]

I let my players play whatever they like - however, they have to understand that whatever they play has to be "special."  If they want to play something that normally is nature-driven, they'll have to be one that's a head above the rest... one that still maintains a vestiges will.  

For example - I have a player who is playing an exiled Fey with the high concept "Exiled Fey Cop."   She HAS will.  She CAN lie if she really, really wants to, but would face a compel every time she tried to.  Whenever she uses the one power she still has, I compel her to show her true fey nature, being unable to use glamors to hide her true self for the rest of the scene.  

What makes her different from any other fey though, is that she can choose.  She CAN choose to do what she wants.  

The PCs are different from your standard Our World baddies, they can make choices that said baddies cannot make.  Sure, they may be hard choices, and they may cost them a load of fate points to do what they want, but they have the option.  

Look at it this way - Thomas is very much so a PC in Mr. Butcher's campaign.  He SHOULD be like every other white court baddie on the face of the earth... but he's not.  Does this mean that he has some sort of power that allows him to choose to moderate his feeding and not kill?  Not really.  it's just one of those things that comes with being a PC, with being important to the story.

Could a Red Court be a PC?  most likely no... but if we were a high enough refresh value, and a player came up with a really good story... I'd be more than willing to try it.  Sure most Reds are evil monsters that see people as cattle, but maybe this one is different?  Maybe there is something about them that enabled them to keep a little bit of their selves alive? 

What makes free will?  Is it the presence/absence of a soul?  Well, listen to Bob's explanation of it then?  Everyone can GET a soul, we give little pieces to each other every day.

[luminos]

If you do care about canon, then no, you don't let players play as monsters.  Red Court vampires in the butcherverse are not the same as vampires in other fiction.  They are not humans that drink blood, they are monsters that have taken over a humans body, and the human that was there doesn't exist anymore.

Of course, its a game, its supposed to be fun, so if you can come up with a cool reason to play as a monster, and the group doesn't care about those kinds of deviations from canon, then go for it.

[wyvern]

Hm.  I think, in the case of the red court vampire, that that's not so much a case of "the character becomes an NPC" as "the character dies, and a new entity twists the remains of the PC's body for use as its mortal shell".  Of course, that's open to interpretation; we don't have any example of what happens, mentally, when a character completes the transformation from infected to vampire.

And, of course, there will be some games out there where having a red court infected turn into a full vampire and stay a PC will be entirely appropriate; such games are likely to be rather dark, and involve PCs trying to take over and/or destroy the world, but hey, if that's what your group enjoys playing, more power to you.

On the topic of fey: It's clear that there are some fey that hold themselves bound only to their own nature (or code of honor, or will, or however you want to put it), and not the whims of Summer or Winter.  The Erlking comes to mind.  I could see a PC trying to follow in that path, trying to forge themselves into an independent power that bows to neither season.  Would it be easy?  Of course not.  But that could make for a very interesting chunk of story.

Alternatively, there are some fey (such as pixies) that seem to be low enough on the totem pole that both Summer and Winter pretty much just leave them alone.  The one really strong example we've got there seems to have *chosen* his allegiance (albeit with a few bribes) rather than having it forced on him.

[austinmonster]

Remember this though - if there's one consistency in life, it's inconsistency. The vampires in buffy worked in a similar way to reds.  The person who used to live in that skin is gone and a demon has replaced them.  Sure, they still have the same mind, but their nature has completely taken over.

In THAT series, we saw two vampires regain the ability to make free-willed choices.  Both of them were very PC-level characters too. 

Maybe you want to play a red court vampire that's had a run-in with the Catholic saint of Blood Donors (a quick google search says it's "our lady of the thorns") and is charged with a holy quest?  Maybe you are playing a RCV that the infection only took them "mostly" over and didn't fully set hold? 

You are almost never going to be able to play a "normal" monster like this... but special situations abound.

[tymire]

Though you really shouldn't use Thomas as an example for any of this, or really any of the White Court as they are character options (white court and white court virgins).  Part of it am sure is that they are born into it and live with the hunger from the time it first gets them.  Part of it also is that they don't have to kill when feeding and they generally have much more control over their hunger than any of the other types that we have seen so far (unless they are far pushed beyond their limits like what Thomas did to Justine when almost killed her or the first feeding). 

Imo at least don't see any reason why you cannot play anything you want too, however the player has to live with the consequences of it.  I wouldn't hand out a fatepoint from the compel either.  Heck would even say you don't have a choice when it comes to your compel (the player should just have to do it).  If infact the PC managed to avoid it somehow, based on the theory/lore/principle of how freewill/nature is spelled out I would even say a good part of your magic or powers are significantly reduced as in breaking a pact sworn on your power.   And nope you cannot use the little fey as an example of them able to pick who to go to.  Yes they were non-aligned with Summer or Winter but if you remember they were scared to death about some higher up (either side) calling on them and making them go to war in the 4th book.  Could they resist a call?  Seriously doubt it.  Hehe, could a character resist a call?  Seriously doubt it, not without major consequences.  =P 

Now if you are letting them play what is defined a monster and giving them freewill, by that very act they are no longer monsters they are something else *shrug*.

This is the really hard part about playing "monsters".  The unknowable "why" of why they do things.  It's extremely hard to get that right and not just rp a quirky human with powers.  Going from another setting look at warhammer fantasy (forest) elves, if you actually read about them and their mentality/outlook/culture on life it's so alien that I don't like being a group playing one because only about 1/100 actual rpgers could do it right.  For example step back and just think about the ramifications of not being able to count..... it's; as many stars in the sky or grains of sand on the beach, ect.. (sorry for the cheezy examples) the fact that NONE of the clothes you will be able to find in human lands will EVER feel comfortable.

Hehe, and this is where the rule of cool vs game mechanics/setting always gets interesting and house rules come into play.

[osteomancer]

Though you really shouldn't use Thomas as an example for any of this, or really any of the White Court as they are character options (white court and white court virgins).  Part of it am sure is that they are born into it and live with the hunger from the time it first gets them.  Part of it also is that they don't have to kill when feeding and they generally have much more control over their hunger than any of the other types that we have seen so far (unless they are far pushed beyond their limits like what Thomas did to Justine when almost killed her or the first feeding). 

Ah, but Red Court vampires don't have to kill when they feed, either.  That's part of why Bianca was so mad in Grave Peril, the loss of her favorite girl was such a waste.  Paolo Ortega and Arianna did not come off as ravenously short-sighted, and the 'hungry' nature of the female half of Butcher's general 'vampire twin' could be argued more as a genre trope that an actual creature feature.

Contrariwise, Madeline Raith is every bit as monstrous as any Red Court Vampire.  Lara uses people without compunction, lining up hundreds of 'refreshments' the same way Paolo Ortega keeps his villages.  The White King is more suave than the Red King, but no less callous with people's lives and selves. 

The only thing that makes White Court more protaganistic is author fiat.  If you switched Bianca and Lara, the story would not change; you could even switch most of the characters between courts, but keep their personalities, and it wouldn't do much.  Thomas is defined by his forbearance, but he could still display that trait and keep those aspects even as a Red Court.  Dresden would pass rows of people pale with anemia rather than panting in emotion in White Night, but his reactions could be about the same.  And in Turncoat, how Lara Raith's sisters kill the downed security guards is a matter of offscreen detail, what matters are the deaths themselves.

By logic, Red Court vampires are just as playable as White Court vampires.  The RPG makes the call because of Jim Butcher's tastes, but as a game rather than a series of books I see no reason to forbid one kind of phage but allow the other.  Even Refresh can be worked with; trade in some of the powers because the character is younger, or of a weaker vassal family, and even that objection doesn't matter.

[Steed]

It depends on how close you want to hew to canon, I think.  If you want something that could be considered canon, then yeah, monster PC races are fairly limited.  If you don't care and just want to kick back and tell cool stories with some friends, you can open up a lot more options.

For instance, a player that wants a RCV.  Perhaps this vampire was previously RCI and a member of the Fellowship of St. Giles.  Even with those tattoos, resisting the Red Court side takes an incredible force of will that few have, and even fewer can maintain for long.  To survive with that curse without letting it claim you, you must by default develop supreme discipline and willpower.  Perhaps, even after the transformation, that strong will imprints on the monster that's twisted into your flesh.  You, in the strictest sense, are dead and gone...but you've left a tiny little shadow of yourself on the monster, changing it from its original nature, implanting a conscience into this beast.  You're still very likely a brutal bastard, but perhaps your brutality is limited to the bad guys.  Of course, determining who the bad guys are isn't always the easiest thing...  Picture Marv, from Sin City.  The guy is a total psychopath and enjoys the cruelty he causes on those he considers "evil" or "bad" or just "enemies", but he does have a set of morals he hews to.

Is it likely?  No, very probably not, but if you aren't too worried about departing from canon, it can work.

[luminos]

@osteomancer its author fiat in the sense that as this is the world Butcher created, he gets to say how the world works.  Red Court vampires are literal monsters with human faces and white court vampires are humans with monstrous symbiotes.  You might as well say that the only reason Mab is the queen of winter and not summer is author fiat, because its on the same level of establishing basic facts about the world.

[Lanir]

About fae choosing courts, this alone doesn't make them suitable as PCs. The thing they're getting at with what makes a character idea only suitable as an NPC is something based directly upon stuff in the books. It's the whole "can you grow as a person" thing. Tagging it as free will is just a shorter way to say it that also implies some overtones. The real gist of it isn't about choosing a court. That's a built-in part of the fae race/condition. It's whether you can actually change who you are. The Erlking is awesome and all but he's not going to change his essential nature for anything. Neither is Toot-toot.

To give a counter example, Marcone could be a PC if he fit into the game. Not just because he's human but because he evolves and changes. The stories show him adapting to the unusual things around him and dealing with magic in a fairly intelligent way. That's actually kind of a huge attitude adjustment and a lot to take in stride.

The Erlking by contrast couldn't care less about science. It's not hunting. You see? No growth. No ability to adapt. In the same vein, Mab is never going to see the simple value in just being a nice person. Even if it could get her what she wanted, even if she was treated with a great deal of respect and given room to grow into it, she wouldn't. Change isn't necessarily easy for humans but it's not even an option on the table for most of the supernatural creatures around. The only way it can be is if they copy us. And then they can be PCs, albeit ones with significant issues.

[Bubba Amon Hotep]

How do you decide which supernatural beings can be played?

All depends on the people around the table.  For instance:
Player 1) Wants to play a pure mortal that has just begun discovering the "Dresdenverse"
Player 2) Wants to play a wizard-in-training
Player 3) Wants to play a red-court infected
Player 4) Wants to play a skinwalker.

Well I am sorry but Player 4 is the odd man out, a higher power level than the rest, and is going to be going solo for most of the story.  Therefore there will be less team building, and long stints of the Storyteller ignoring 3 people around the table while focusing on player 4 and vice versa.  So I would say he needs to come up with another character concept, and tell him NO.

On the other hand . . .
Player 1) wants to play a troll.
Player 2) wants to play a necromancer
Player 3) wants to play a ghoul
Player 4) wants to be a skinwalker.

I would frown at player 4's lack of creativity, (I mean he wanted to play a skinwalker twice now!)  But it would be perfectly fine.  As a storyteller it would be easy to run a dark and evil campaign with the four concepts around the table.