|4 people marked this as a favorite.|
Another pitfall, IMO, is defining yourself by the ways you differ from your race. Not quite as dangerous, but still not terribly interesting.
By this I mean, if the *only* defining part of your character is that you're a Dwarf that drinks tea and lives above ground, that's not particularly interesting either, by itself. What makes Harsk fun is the complete package.
The way I see it, a "normal" version of the race can be interesting if they have an interesting character (character meaning goals, dreams, personality, motivations, which can be informed by race, but shouldn't just be the stereotype of the race). A "rebel" version of the race can be boring if they lack an interesting character. And vice versa, of course.
So the tl;dr is to play a character. You can let the race be an important part of the character, or play a "human with elf ears", all that matters is that the character is interesting. This is also why I don't mind all human parties- if that's the story we want to tell, so be it.
Item 1 on the list of egregious differ-types is the Drizzt-clone. Not Drizzt himself, but every [url=http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0044.html]non-satirical[url] rebel to their kind (unlike linked entry) is basically as one-dimensional as a regular stereotype. It is basically all the stereotypical traits, inverted, which still just leaves you with a list of traits and not a character.
On a separate but related note, I like to think of character dimensions as such:
1st dimension: Actions
e.g. a vampire hits with a sword, a farmer tills a field
2nd dimension: Mannerisms, quirks, method of action
e.g. a vampire reluctantly hits with a sword, a farmer joyfully tills a field
3rd dimension: Motivations, goals, philosophy, reason behind action and mannerisms
e.g. a vampire reluctantly hits with a sword because his target was a friend, a farmer joyfully tills a field because he loves a simple life
4th dimension: Evolution of actions, methods, and reasons over time
e.g. a vampire reluctantly hits with a sword because his target grew to be a friend, a farmer joyfully tills a field because he learned to love a simple life when he almost died in his murderhoboing days of youth
Complexity of quirks varies, and one can make an incredibly detailed 2-D character. The Man with No Name is essentially one: His actions consist of really cool shooting, and his mannerisms are basically all Clint Eastwood death stares. And you don't need to go dimension-by-dimension, in order. A character made of mannerisms and evolution, but no actions or motivations is basically a Stan Lee cameo. Poor roleplayers may often have characters with actions and goals, but no quirks or evolution. Many unrealized characters are made of mannerisms and motivations, but without a game, they cannot act or evolve. Note that player characters will intrinsically have actions. But roleplaying a race as a set of mannerisms leaves you 2-D at best.