So this is a short, sweet and interesting discussion I had with myself. As many long time members may know, we've had a slow and steady progression towards including more Roleplaying, Character and Backstory in our builds, it's been a slow build up but I'd say for, at least the last 12-18 months we've hit the point where a build's Backstory and Character work are generally more what's considered 'Great' in a build than it was, say three years ago.

For those that are newer, older builds were generally focused on finding interesting mechanics or gameplay styles and focusing on them, you'd create a build around your combat and have smaller, focused RP sections or Backstories, that still generally fit towards the fighting style. The Demonhunter is the most liked build in Vault history, amassing hundreds of likes and actually I think hitting Legendary 5 or 6 times over (so 500-600 likes). That's fairly insane, and a quick read of the build will show that...it's almost entirely focused on the Combat, actually, I daresay that it's almost entirely combat and gameplay with nothing to break down the character itself. And yet...by modern standards it would be a fairly boring build, well written and I'd give it full points for Gameplay any day, but I would imagine that a lot of people would complain about the lack of a character behind it. 

Even today we still have builders that tend to focus on Gameplay over Character, and some that focus on Character over Gameplay, or weird people like me who will write a build similar to the Demonhunter, focused on making a combat style work and only vaguely defining a character, and then my next build will be a multi-thousand word long build that breaks down a Character and each Quest in extreme detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, enough discussion. Let's get to the debate, or really the question. If you could, would you provide something to define a difference between a 'Combat' and 'Character' based  build, creating a divide that clearly lables them as seperate ideas. Maybe naming one Character Build and the other Character Breakdown or Combat Guide...

So when your posting your build, you would have to decide what the focal point is and define it by that area. The actual content is more or less the same, but you make it clear that this is 'Combat' focused or 'Character' focused, and thus get different advice based on what it is. 

Surprise! I bet you thought I was dead... and I'm definitely going to follow this discussion closely because it has an impact on what I'm currently doing. Before I died disappeared, I was the resident "You need to work on adding an improved Gameplay and Combat section to your build" person. I'm... probably still that person, so you all probably know what I'm going to say.

But I digress. Let's kick off, shall we?

I've personally always thought of "character" as something more personal, who the character is; while the "build" as in perks, gameplay, combat is the mechanical crunch, how the character works. Clearly there has to be some (in fact, a great deal of) intersection. I would not hesitate to say that the more intersection there is, the better.

And yet... and yet I'm just a little wary of builds focusing too much on the character's backstory and personality. I may be the exception here, given the number of comments I've seen that say "I love your backstory!" but I don't look at builds to read chunks of backstory. To me the backstory is fluff. I'll stop short of saying it adds nothing to the build, but I've seen a hundred sob stories about nobles from High Rock running away from home, or people getting their village sacked by bandits or vampires, or something that sets them up to be a special snowflake. It is definitely my opinion that in a supermajority of cases, less is more.

So what role do I think backstory should play?

Backstory can inspire a build. It can inform a build. But I'm of the opinion that if the backstory is the majority of the build, it's gone too far. Frankly, a lot of great builds are simply, "Hey, I want to play as xyz in Skyrim. Hold my beer and check this out!" Then picking the appropriate skills and having fun. That's how we got an Argonian build that RPs as the ----ing Loch Ness monster.

To be perfectly frank, I think any dedicated backstory section that's over five lines is definitely too much. Three lines should be more than sufficient to give me an idea of what the character is like. Three lines doesn't sound like a lot, but the rest of the build should be reinforcing those three lines, if not directly via interwoven RP snippets, character quotes, and suchlike, then indirectly through choice of skills and perks and why you chose them.

That's the point I'm trying to get at. Show me what your character is like in your choice of skills, perks, and gameplay. Don't tell. Don't neglect your gameplay explanations and perk choices. In the end, it's the intersection between the build and the character that really makes a character-driven build shine.

Surprise! I bet you thought I was dead... and I'm definitely going to follow this discussion closely. Before I died disappeared, I was the resident "You need to work on adding an improved Gameplay and Combat section to your build" person. I'm... probably still that person, so you all probably know what I'm going to say.

But I digress. Let's kick off, shall we?

I've personally always thought of "character" as something more personal, who the character is; while the "build" as in perks, gameplay, combat is the mechanical crunch, how the character works. Clearly there has to be some (in fact, a great deal of) intersection. I would not hesitate to say that the more intersection there is, the better.

And yet... and yet I'm just a little wary of builds focusing too much on the character's backstory and personality. I may be the exception here, given the number of comments I've seen that say "I love your backstory!" but I don't look at builds to read chunks of backstory. To me the backstory is fluff. I'll stop short of saying it adds nothing to the build, but I've seen a hundred sob stories about nobles from High Rock running away from home, or people getting their village sacked by bandits or vampires, or something that sets them up to be a special snowflake. It is definitely my opinion that in a supermajority of cases, less is more.

So what role do I think backstory should play?

Backstory can inspire a build. It can inform a build. But I'm of the opinion that if the backstory is the majority of the build, it's gone too far. Frankly, a lot of great builds are simply, "Hey, I want to play as xyz in Skyrim. Hold my beer and check this out!" Then picking the appropriate skills and having fun. That's how we got an Argonian build that RPs as the ----ing Loch Ness monster.

To be perfectly frank, I think any dedicated backstory section that's over five lines is definitely too much. Three lines should be more than sufficient to give me an idea of what the character is like. Three lines doesn't sound like a lot, but the rest of the build should be reinforcing those three lines, if not directly via interwoven RP snippets, character quotes, and suchlike, then indirectly through choice of skills and perks and why you chose them.

That's the point I'm trying to get at. Show me what your character is like in your choice of skills, perks, and gameplay. Don't tell. Don't neglect your gameplay explanations and perk choices. In the end, it's the intersection between the build and the character that really makes a character-driven build shine.

Well look who it is, great to see you again Soly :D I'm not going to bring myself too far into the debate at the moment, would rather let it get going between multiple others before jumping into things, but, you make some excellent points, I think it's especially something I'd recommend to those earlier on in their building careers if they don't already have a set thing they want to do. For older builders, it's a bit harder to be honest, as much as I'd love to pretend to be able to come up with a gripping Gameplay section, a lot of the time I find it easier to create a build based around the 'Character' side of things, especially at this point if it's Vanilla. Though, to be fair if I look at that critically my worst builds are the ones with limited Gameplay focus, so can't exactly disagree with the idea that people seem to like Gameplay focused builds more (if you look at it purely as Likes) or that they...work better to create a well-rounded build.

Interesting stuff Soly, not entirely in agreement or disagreement with you to be honest. 

I think what Liss and Ilan have found great styles in blending character and gameplay well

You talk to yourself, Deebs? :D That sentence was just so funny. I can picture your head turning back and forth. 

I'm really not qualified to define or categorize anything. I just build what I like and that's it. And if people enjoy what I do that's great, if they don't, that's fine too. 

So, I've been playing Skyrim for about 5 years now, and I've thought about this question a lot.

Most of us have gone through dozens, or even hundreds of characters each. Between us, that's a lot of characters. And because of the breadth of variation among playstyles, builds that focus solely on gameplay have become extremely "Samey".

Let's say you're making a character build. You have 3 options of armor type (unarmored, light, heavy), 3 options of weapons (One-handed, two-handed, archery), and 6 schools of magic. I'd be willing to bet that every combination of these has been done at least once times on this site. Of course, there's still room for variation between, say, two light-armored archers. But so many builds are so similar to eachother that it's hard to stand out anymore.

Take the youtube channel fudgemuppet, for example. They have about 200 unique builds on their channel. They've invested a lot of time and effort into these build videos. And yet, look at any given build on their channel and scroll down to the comments and someone will be ready to call them out and say that this build is just [XXX] with one or two skills changed around. That's why roleplaying and backstory sections have become more important. Because, unless you find some zany new playstyle that is super unique (which usually is overpowered by glitches or extremely handicapped), your build is going to look a lot like a bunch of similar builds.

That's where backstory comes in. Backstory and Lore allows a character to be unique. A sneaky thalmor assassin archer is a hell of a lot different than a nordic bow hunter trying to avenge his family. However, that isn't to say you can't go overboard with backstory. A roleplaying profile with perks and equipment does NOT equal a character build. I've been very guilty of this my last couple of builds. The gameplay portions feel almost tacked on to the characters while the roleplaying has taken the front seat.

I thing it's a really interesting time in the life cycle of a game, because Skyrim won't be a big focus once TES:VI comes out. Until then, though, the character building community is really trying to push the envelope of what we can do with the game after so many years.

In conclusion, I don't think the shift towards backstory is good or bad; but it's definitely interesting to examine.

It's funny how things change and to see how CB has evolved. I remember my first build and being advised to cut back some of the backstory, which by today's perspective was very little to trim. The Demonhunter is one of my favourite builds, a lot of the reason for that is because it is, mostly, just a build - a scaffold or skeleton that NoSnakess invites the reader to add to.

However, that's not to say I dislike the opposite. Many of my other favourites aren't as technical or as gameplay-focused. I guess that's why I've never been a fan of restrictions or categories to diffferentiate. Guides are good, but they tend to create a box in which people may struggle to think outside of. I remember simlar discussions way back about how there are or should have been "RP Builds" and "Build Builds" and that never really made sense to me, either. Most builds have a degree of RP and story in them, just some lean heavily one way or another.

Tired and rambling, but nah... I'm never keen on what is considered a proper build or not, or any sort of category. It's a piece of creativity that must include some specific criteria, but other than that it remains a blank canvas - or should to my thinking. The most memorable stay with you after you log off becasue the build in some way inspires you. That can be done through great salesmanship and charm, stunning presentation, badass gameplay, a deep and moving story of a very specific character, or any combination of the above plus other things. In essesnce, a good build is one that captures a certain something in whatever way the builder feels is fun and enjoys doing. Like, I don't need consensus to know if I have just read something I like, or if something contains something which in some way stays with me, nor do i need my hand held to tell me if something is a proper build or not. It just is what it is.

I suppose I'm a big fan of interpretation. I think back and I rarely set the stage in a build preamble. It just is. Let the reader decide what it is or isn't, you know?

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/khajiitxenla]Xenla[/url] said:[/b]

So, I've been playing Skyrim for about 5 years now, and I've thought about this question a lot.

Most of us have gone through dozens, or even hundreds of characters each. Between us, that's a lot of characters. And because of the breadth of variation among playstyles, builds that focus solely on gameplay have become extremely "Samey".

Let's say you're making a character build. You have 3 options of armor type (unarmored, light, heavy), 3 options of weapons (One-handed, two-handed, archery), and 6 schools of magic. I'd be willing to bet that every combination of these has been done at least once times on this site. Of course, there's still room for variation between, say, two light-armored archers. But so many builds are so similar to eachother that it's hard to stand out anymore.

Take the youtube channel fudgemuppet, for example. They have about 200 unique builds on their channel. They've invested a lot of time and effort into these build videos. And yet, look at any given build on their channel and scroll down to the comments and someone will be ready to call them out and say that this build is just [XXX] with one or two skills changed around. That's why roleplaying and backstory sections have become more important. Because, unless you find some zany new playstyle that is super unique (which usually is overpowered by glitches or extremely handicapped), your build is going to look a lot like a bunch of similar builds.

That's where backstory comes in. Backstory and Lore allows a character to be unique. A sneaky thalmor assassin archer is a hell of a lot different than a nordic bow hunter trying to avenge his family. However, that isn't to say you can't go overboard with backstory. A roleplaying profile with perks and equipment does NOT equal a character build. I've been very guilty of this my last couple of builds. The gameplay portions feel almost tacked on to the characters while the roleplaying has taken the front seat.

I thing it's a really interesting time in the life cycle of a game, because Skyrim won't be a big focus once TES:VI comes out. Until then, though, the character building community is really trying to push the envelope of what we can do with the game after so many years.

In conclusion, I don't think the shift towards backstory is good or bad; but it's definitely interesting to examine.

[/blockquote]

Hah, that last bit more or less entirely sums up my thoughts. Really I have to agree with your points about, for the most part, Backstories, Roleplaying and Lore are much more important than they used to be, constructing 80% of builds without them can be dull and boring...but I question this when we look at Modded builds. Now to be fair I do kinda agree with the whole idea that there's only so many skill combinatons that can be done, then weapons and armour and so on, but mods give us a whole new range, and enough new content that I was surprised there hasn't been a real resurgence of Modded, Combat/Gameplay focused builds. The combinations between our most popular mod overhaul, Ordinator, are astounding and can make characters that test very differently than Vanilla characters.

But yeah, I do agree with a lot of what your saying Xen, some really great thoughts :)

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/LissetteLongChapper]The Secret of CHIM[/url] said:[/b]

You talk to yourself, Deebs? :D That sentence was just so funny. I can picture your head turning back and forth. 

I'm really not qualified to define or categorize anything. I just build what I like and that's it. And if people enjoy what I do that's great, if they don't, that's fine too. 

[/blockquote]

Bah, Dragonborn is wonderful to talk to, he has so many good ideas :P

Fair enough, I'm probably a mix of being focused on what people enjoy (I do like getting likes) versus what I enjoy, sometimes I'll post stuff just because I enjoyed something about the gameplay, sometimes I try and do things that more people will enjoy. It's 50/50 but any approach is fine in my books, I'd rather people build because they enjoy it but I don't think there's anything wrong with building for others either.