Decision - character persistance

[jtkaufman737]

Question - seems like we could have a few different character options.
1 - You pick a character for each campaign you enter
2 - You have a static character that can accompany you from campaign to campaign
Thoughts?

[tyberious-1]

Static characters create attachement which I think is good for games like this it is my understanding that you only have one character in MUD's.

[stain88]

Couldn't a campaign requirement be "new characters only"?

[tyberious-1]

campaigns are long term adventures scenarios are short term affairs. So if implemented in the DND sense you would make a new character every campaign but you are also stuck with your party members generally. Or you have a static character accross multiple smaller adventures set in the same world. That everyone is experiencing together.

[jtkaufman737]

Hmmm ok, I don't have a dog in this fight. Want to invite someone in to tie-break? @tyberious-1 @stain88 @angelocordon @kvie

[jtkaufman737]

I think we can do either, so really it will be a) does one cause us much more pain than the other (I think maybe not) b) will the users really be expecting one vs the other

[cbelsole]

Locking characters to campaigns is a subset of characters jumping campaigns and for a West Marches style campaign necessary. We should build the system in a way that supports both and eventually if we want to relax the rule of 1 character per campaign we can.

[angelocordon]

I think we should have static characters that are owned by players. You shouldn't have to make a brand new characters every time (though we could look into implementing a workflow where you can have more than one character).