So I'm about to start a new campaign, playing as an Android Sword Saint Samurai and I was looking for some ideas for personality traits or habits an Android might have.
I'm having a hard time figuring out how an "emotionless" character would act. I don't want him to be just a sword with legs, but at the same time I'd like to try to play him as close to the lore as I can. I tried looking at some Androids in fiction and the best example I could find was Data from Star Trek, but I don't want to just rip off his character. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't get too hung up on the name of the trait; it was very poorly chosen. It says 'you have problems processing emotions', meaning 'you don't understand other people'. Notice that you don't take penalties to any other social skills, which a total lack of emotion would produce.
Now, you probably aren't as emotional as an organic, due to a lack of adrenal glands and other endocrine elements, but that's a far cry from being emotionless.
Meh. I am not particularly fond of the idea that an emotionless character has to be inherently logical and rational. They can have their own motivations...simply not ones that necessarily have to connect with their desired well being or entertainment.
So you could give him a fixation. Have him programmed to catalog...something... and use his profession as an adventurer as both an opportunity both to travel and do field studies, as well as provide funds in order to continue his work (with his powerful body, it might be a 'logical' way to get such funds).
Deciding on what to have him fixate on depends largely upon what you are doing in the campaign. You could ask for some rather general hints at what you are going to be encountering (it is common courtesy for the GM to advise a ranger on some good favored enemies, so why can't he do the same for you?). Maybe he is trying to make an encyclopedia of all the dragon species in the Garund region. If you are playing Rise of the Runelords, then maybe he is a scholar studying Thassilon culture. Just find an appropriate topic, and maybe throw a skill point into the appropriate knowledge skill.
Of course, the interesting thing occurs when you have to deal with your priorities: do you rashly rush forward towards the object of your fixation, or do you listen to advice telling you to turn back and stick to the 'job'. That kind of friction is important for character development and tension. You are not afraid of trekking into the lair full of shadow demons you need to dissect to finish your 'collection', but the fleshy humans are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't get too hung up on the name of the trait; it was very poorly chosen. It says 'you have problems processing emotions', meaning 'you don't understand other people'. Notice that you don't take penalties to any other social skills, which a total lack of emotion would produce.
Now, you probably aren't as emotional as an organic, due to a lack of adrenal glands and other endocrine elements, but that's a far cry from being emotionless.
The text taken as a whole makes a pretty strong case that androids don't have emotions as we know it. The "trouble processing emotions" part refers specifically to why androids have trouble with Sense Motive. You actually do take penalties to other social skills in the form of a -2 racial penalty to Charisma. But your reading isn't really wrong, and there's no rule against treating it that way.
As for roleplaying "emotionless", the two obvious models I can think of are Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation and KOS-MOS from Xenosaga. I'm sure you can think of others from science fiction or fantasy if you're into reading or other media. Use such characters as a starting point, adjust them to fit your circumstances, and then modify them to make them your own.
Note that you can certainly exhibit emotions as part of your "programming". This can be really interesting when the emotions are inappropriate to the situation at hand.
I suspect a lot of these questions won't be answered in full outside of the release of more lore regarding this race.
Meh. I am not particularly fond of the idea that an emotionless character has to be inherently logical and rational. They can have their own motivations...simply not ones that necessarily have to connect with their desired well being or entertainment.
So you could give him a fixation. Have him programmed to catalog...something... and use his profession as an adventurer as both an opportunity both to travel and do field studies, as well as provide funds in order to continue his work (with his powerful body, it might be a 'logical' way to get such funds).
Deciding on what to have him fixate on depends largely upon what you are doing in the campaign. You could ask for some rather general hints at what you are going to be encountering (it is common courtesy for the GM to advise a ranger on some good favored enemies, so why can't he do the same for you?). Maybe he is trying to make an encyclopedia of all the dragon species in the Garund region. If you are playing Rise of the Runelords, then maybe he is a scholar studying Thassilon culture. Just find an appropriate topic, and maybe throw a skill point into the appropriate knowledge skill.
Of course, the interesting thing occurs when you have to deal with your priorities: do you rashly rush forward towards the object of your fixation, or do you listen to advice telling you to turn back and stick to the 'job'. That kind of friction is important for character development and tension. You are not afraid of trekking into the lair full of shadow demons you need to dissect to finish your 'collection', but the fleshy humans are.
Good stuff. It's very true that emotionlessness doesn't have to be imply logic or reason at all. Emotions aren't the only things that make people do stupid things. Sometimes they just have bad judgment.
Good stuff. It's very true that emotionlessness doesn't have to be imply logic or reason at all. Emotions aren't the only things that make people do stupid things. Sometimes they just have bad judgment.
True. And sometimes, emotions can be very important for logic. As I mentioned with the example at the end- fear is an important emotion. It makes use reconsider and exercise caution when in healthy doses.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of my group's favorite NPCs was an android. She was what they called an "infiltrator" an android trying (sometimes too hard) to act human to better study (to better kill) humanoids. She didn't get jokes, she was naïve, she was blunt, her data on humanoids and their culture/habits was out of date and she had problems understanding morals when logically killing solved the problem that letting a potentially recurring enemy could become.
I basically played her as a child genius that doesn't know any better, can easily explain nuclear physics but doesn't know how to tell when someone is straight up lying to her face or how to act cultured during a nobleman's dinner party.
An android i play is devoid of emotion, but goes on on reasoning.
She's a slayer btw... :)
Bit of a mix between 7/9 and Bishop from Aliens.
But the synthetics from Aliens try to avoid getting identified as such.
Well, if you're confused as to how an Android is technically supposed to behave, it doesn't hurt to wiki it. Here's what it has to say:
An android is a robot or synthetic organism designed to look and act like a human, especially one with a body having a flesh-like resemblance.
That being said, it's more likely to assume that an android can have emotions and feelings the same as any normal human; the difference is that it is artificial, not biological.
It's not uncommon for artificial entities like Androids to have their emotions and decisions questioned from themselves, and when you throw in that the Android doesn't even know he's an Android, it definitely leaves him to question whether the morals he was built to assume and follow are the right ones.
Ironically enough, with this definition and angle presented, I find that the Reploids of the Megaman X series fit the bill the best, as that series constantly shows the theme of questioning the morals you're built to assume versus the everchanging world.
|
While Mass Effect's Geth are very different than our Pathfinder Androids, I do think that some of them, the ones who know they are not completely organic, might think or act like they do. Especially considering the Nanites are a part of their body: if they are so intimate to the Android condition, is it possible that they are less of an "external" object and more of a part of their very being. Having millions of nano-sized computers running around inside you may change how you relate to concepts like identity and the "self".
My android in Iron Gods will have emotions: They wont be strong, and they may not even be relatable to other humanoids. But He has two points where I am going to be more than emotive: His desire to know why he was created, and his constant frustration at the other humanoid's peculiarities.
He'll also refer to himself in ways the other party members wouldn't relate to. I'm thinking he does not consider his body anything more than a "borrowed form inspired by dominant species" an object. If his left leg was crushed, he would refer to it as "leftside primary ambulatory module". He would refer to his spellcasting as "onboard magical energy manipulators" and would refer to specific spells like Magic Missile as "Pinpoint magical offensive physics application"
I'm going to have so much fun playing my Android, and again, all the advice above by others is good stuff, but talk it over with your GM to really make this character "pop". There's too much flavor to play with, and I'm sure you could make 10 different androids and have them be completely different persons.
think Data from star trek
wow, lotsa
My favorite android who constantly tries to better himself is from the movie "The Bicentenial Man" starring Robin Williams as Robbie the android. Doesn't follow the original book well, but nails it on the head pretty well.
How about I, Robot with Will Smith? The android doctor is a good look at emotionless. The book really does go into a LOT of good detail (Asimov was the early authors of early sci-fi robotics, lotsa good details in there).
Maybe consider them as having a psycosis with muted emotions... they get happy and angry and such, but it's all translated by a twitch of one lip or a slight raise of a pointy eyebrow (I'm looking at YOU, Vulcan!)
If they're trying to fit into "human" society, maybe they're overplaying the emotions too much. Think of the Emotional Magnifying Glass every drunk person gets, or a Manic Depressive. Happy is VERY happy. Angry is destructive. Sad is blubbering into their cup of WD-40.
Or play him as the surly ranger sitting in a corner of the tavern trying not to be noticed, with the vocabulary of Silent Bob. No-nonsence mercenary looking to go in, get paid, go home, recharge.
My personal choice for modeling an android character would be the replicants from Blade Runner, especially Roy Batty or Leon. They aren't emotionless but they certainly aren't "normal" in their behavior. Bishop from Aliens is another good choice.
+1. This is just about word-for-word what I would have written if MrRetsej hadn't, already.
Sheldon.