For me, its risk-adverse lawful neutral types who tend to regard everything on a strict risk-vs-reward axis and weigh the benefits with drawbacks. "Folks, why are we going to the dungeon? We can manage a much better pricing option if we use the summoned creatures to run a courier network across the city and we won't get shot.'
Or
Rampaging CG lunatics. Notably a quasi-senile barbarian in a Super Robot Wars game, who had to earn his way into the warrior's paradise but kept surviving despite his literally suicidal behavior.
If I play the former, I usually get shoved back behind the DM Screen.
I'm guessing that you care so much about the risk that it makes the most sense either to reject the risk, or irrationally embrace it?
How do your feelings regarding risk affect your GMing?
The majority of my characters are female and attractive. Also nonhuman.
Not sure what that says about me, really I'm just living out a sort of ambivalent gender identity. (not really sure what to call it)
Their personalities have ranged anywhere from very compassionate, empathetic and full of good advice to completely egotistical murderous psychopaths.
They just represent whatever I feel like going for with the character at the time. Same goes for classes. I often get inspired to characters by artworks or characters from a piece of fiction i have just recently been exposed to etc, so they can really go in all directions.
|
For me, its risk-adverse lawful neutral types who tend to regard everything on a strict risk-vs-reward axis and weigh the benefits with drawbacks. "Folks, why are we going to the dungeon? We can manage a much better pricing option if we use the summoned creatures to run a courier network across the city and we won't get shot.'
Or
Rampaging CG lunatics. Notably a quasi-senile barbarian in a Super Robot Wars game, who had to earn his way into the warrior's paradise but kept surviving despite his literally suicidal behavior.
If I play the former, I usually get shoved back behind the DM Screen.
I'm guessing that you care so much about the risk that it makes the most sense either to reject the risk, or irrationally embrace it?
How do your feelings regarding risk affect your GMing?
That's the odd thing. Apparently when I DM I'm fair, generally fun to be around, more narrativist and kind of let the players find their way around stuff and try to challenge them without like...power stomping them into the ground.
Friends have called it the Player-Spook vs the DM-Spook breakdown. When I'm a player I'm a simulationist survivalist lunatic 75% of the time, with no attempt at drama, who basically goes through almost every game system as if he were scrounging for gasoline in a post apocalyptic world.
As a player (when in my LN idiom) I strip the copper wiring out of walls, assume everyone is trying to kill me, entertain no romantic or friendly affiliations with NPCs, do not drink, undertake no action unless it provides an immediate benefit to the character's objective, compile cash, try to avoid "adventure" at every turn, and try to avoid rolling dice.
As a DM I don't have my players sweat the small stuff, I fall a bit more on the 'sure, why not' scale of DMing (although I still hold fast on a lot of stuff), and I never spring the crap that I fear as a player (like barmaids coated in contact poison, sleeping bag asps, or meteorites).
That's the odd thing. Apparently when I DM I'm fair, generally fun to be around, more narrativist and kind of let the players find their way around stuff and try to challenge them without like...power stomping them into the ground.Friends have called it the Player-Spook vs the DM-Spook breakdown. When I'm a player I'm a simulationist survivalist lunatic 75% of the time, with no attempt at drama, who basically goes through almost every game system as if he were scrounging for gasoline in a post apocalyptic world.
As a player (when in my LN idiom) I strip the copper wiring out of walls, assume everyone is trying to kill me, entertain no romantic or friendly affiliations with NPCs, do not drink, undertake no action unless it provides an immediate benefit to the character's objective, compile cash, try to avoid "adventure" at every turn, and try to avoid rolling dice.
As a DM I don't have my players sweat the small stuff, I fall a bit more on the 'sure, why not' scale of DMing (although I still hold fast on a lot of stuff), and I never spring the crap that I fear as a player (like barmaids coated in contact poison, sleeping bag asps, or meteorites).
But I bet that all has to do with it. When you're a GM, you are safe. The players could loot and pillage your game world, but they can't harm you. So, you can loosen up and do what you want.
If you're seriously fearing GM fiat items like meteorites, though, you're looking for protection from the GM and not finding it. You're stuck trying to gird yourself against physics. You don't fear the world, you fear the person presenting the world to you.
(Incidentally, back in my high school days, the other players came up with spells like "Protection from Bob" and "Protection from Steve" so that they could ignore it when Bob or Steve pulled some antagonistic fiat, as a player or as DM.)
My gaming habits.
I usually play chaotic good or true neutral characters.
I go for full Babers or half-babers but rarely 3/4 babers.
I don't play anything that is forced into an alignment except for Druid.
Most of my arcanists wear armor, even if I must take light armor proficiency and wear kilt armor which has ac of 1 and no arcane spell failure chance.
I try not to have less than 12 str so I can carry things without load penalties.
With core races I usually play humans, elves, or Dwarves
I try to max init with most of my characters, even if I have to play an inquistor
With other races I look for something that gives a plus to Str, Dex or Int. And I ignore races that -Str or Dex.
My RPG habits have changed dramatically quite recently.
My two most recent characters I am playing are both evil materialists. One is a vain Chelaxian sorceress who considers herself a diva and is obsessed with jewelry/finer things. The other is a cleric of a money god who is a walking parody of capitalism (well, at least the darker side of it). He's a cutthroat businessman who puts a price on human life and helps himself and only himself because "helping yourself is helping others".
So why the sudden trend towards evil characters who care about nothing in the world other than money? I wasn't sure until a few months after making these characters.
I think it is because I'm in a transitory part of my life where I am entering the career world after just getting my degree. Unfortunately I'm going to have to pick between what I love to do and what actually makes money. So I attempt to disarm the frightening realization that having a solid and reliable income isn't concurrent with my dreams by parodying it in a roleplaying game. This is just my way of handling those emotions I guess.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My habits?
Of all the characters I've built for PbP, only three of them are male: my Paladin, my Wizard, and my Rogue. Everyone else is female.
Also, no matter what class I play, I'll move heaven and earth if I have to in order to have Diplomacy as a class skill. In fact, one of my most successful characters is an aasimar barbarian who has Diplomacy as a class skill from a trait--I've had a lot of fun playing her.
And I NEVER dump Charisma or Intelligence if I can help it.
I gravitate towards wise mentors with a stillness of soul... and showoffs...
A kwai chang caine/qui gon jin/older kevin flynn/younger kevin flynn/tony stark/sherlocke type.
The thinker, adviser, planner, tactician, strategist... As seldom as possible the 'leader'. Help as you can... Self preservation above all.
-- this is entirely reflective of my personality out of game.
-- on a good day I'll manage both in the same character.
Always play pacifists if at all possible. 'Reluctant participant in combat'...
I remove myself from the equation until its time for my character to have a 'moment' of greatness.
-- I think this has become more prevalent as I attempt to show folks that gaming can be about more than just crunchy combat and epic battles. I attempt to teach by example.
I'm chaotic neutral almost exclusively on paper but my behavior is almost unswervingly neutral good.
-- I think this is true out of game. I wish I were NG but the crapsack of the world has made me more CN... I like having a value system but I dont like being 'beholden' to a value system
I dont really play philanthropists with money, but I'm very keen on providing magical services/assistance.
-- I'm generous of spirit but not of pocket.
I have had a habit of playing this same trope for decades, culminating in my most recent magnum opus, the evolutionist summoner.
Which has been hands down my favorite character ever. Impossible in any other system that has come before and fits the character concept I seem to have always had in my head since I was 10. If paizo and pathfinder offer me nothing else, my character concept from 30 years ago finally 'arrived completely' with that character.
-- This is probably a result of not having much opportunity to play characters much at all... As a player you want a certain catharsis of character concept and it's hard for any campaign or group to achieve that 'total catharsis of concept' so I guess i'm 'persistant' about experiencing the fantasy I set out to achieve decades ago...
Habitually never lawful or evil.
-- Again rather have ideals than be beholden to ideals. But never really a 'bad guy'
Prefer spontaneous casting to prepared casting.
-- Versatility means nothing when you dont have it when you need it.
I gm far and away more than I play. I am benevolent simulationist...
-- I gm the same as I play. I want the players to survive and have fun. The campaign should be interesting more than it should be challenging, and it should be more challenging than realistic/pedantic... in that order. If death has to happen I want it clear that it was death by dice and not death by malicious gm.
-- I also think the reason I gm more than I play is that I trust myself more than others to provide the kind of gaming experience I think is appropriate... The opposite is also true. I find very few gms that run a game in a way that doesnt alienate its own players in some very basic way... I guess I run games because I dont like how other gms run them...
-- This also leans a bit into that need to not be beholden. freedom of concept is a lot easier when you're controlling the world. I'm much happier creating a limitless versatility of reactions to players in the moment than I am trying to fit my cherished concept into someone else's world that often resists its presence and has designs on altering its substance or bringing about its ruin wholesale.
-- It therefore seems I'm much more comfortable letting craziness run amok in my setting than letting someone elses setting run amok over my character concept. I think this is one of the most important dualities to be mindful of as a gm, a player, or someone who vaccilates between the two. If you are a player who's used to winning at all costs, hanging on to that 'the players are my enemy and I must win at all cost' philosophy makes a horrible gm.
I mostly run sandbox but I always prepare a few 'events' in case my players show up with twiddlethumbs.
-- On the one hand I hate running modules because I dont run into many players than can resist sneaking a peak at a module if they know they're in one... so I do sandbox to prevent them from having the opportunity...
-- At the same time I like most giving players the feeling that when I run a game the vectors are limitless. Its what separates the hobby from video games. If my game is just another edition of 'super punchout' with dice, I feel like i've shortchanged my players and the hobby.
-- If I thought about it for a second I'd tell you my ability to improv is horrible, my players keep coming back and marvel at the facility with which I turn their random actions into exciting content... This indicates I'm far better at improv than I give myself credit for... Truth be told I just seem to be very good at 'preparing loosely'
Thats kinda the conclusions I draw about my gaming proclivities. They do paint a pretty specific portrait of what kind of person I am and what kind of game I'm going to enjoy.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person who enjoys more options rather than fewer. I've never played the same race/class combo twice.
The only reason I'm playing a human fighter in my current IRL game is because I was kinda forced to. It's a sequel campaign to the previous campaign where my half-orc married into a family of humans. I played fighter because I saw my character as the odd duck in a family of barbarians or casters.
There are so many awesome concepts to play; I can't see why anyone would just play the same class/race over and over again.
I also prefer sandbox style games. I handle a strict plot as long as it's really good.
I love being the rogue. Even if I'm not the class, I still think like one. I'm always the first to suggest stealth, blackmail, assassination, spying, etc.
I find I have trouble playing TN and NG characters. I am generally better at playing characters with more forceful personalities and I guess I'm not good at making TN and NG characters that are forceful enough. I kinda blame this on my IRL group which forces me to carry RP more than I'd like. If I played one of my quieter, subtler characters, there'd come a point where no one would speak. It's a shame because NE is my second favorite alignment after CG.
I predominately play arcane spellcasters, almost to the exclusion of all other classes.
I usually imagine my character as portrayed by a Hollywood actor and envision other players' characters in much the same way.
I like to help other players optimize their characters, though I've come to recognize over time that my unsolicited help isn't always welcome.
I like a strong narrative. Whether I'm GMing or playing, a powerful, well-structured story is more important to me than any personal notions I may have about mine or any other character's agency in the story. That being said, the characters need to be the central figures of the game; Elminister problems need not apply.
I almost always speak with in a British dialect (BBC/Received Pronunciation, typically) when in character.
This thread has been a very engaging read thus far; I hope it continues to grow.
|
1) I tend to play classes with magic, prefer full casters, and rarely play martials.
2) My martials are almost always male, while my casters are almost always female.
3) I dont like beat things dead with dmg, and usually cant optimise for it (except on my animal companions) and tend to prefer non damaging stuffs to do. Glitterdust is a favourite of mine, so is tripping.
4) My favourite alignment is N (so whatever you do isn't really out of alignment).
5) I'm noisy on the table.
6) I generally have a good sense of self preservation, and don't do heroic stuff well, and have a tendency to want to hide behind someone else.
7) Rarely play humans, but have yet to play a halfling or a dwarf yet. Just can't see what halflings and dwarves can do that others can't do better. Or maybe I don't like shorties.
8) Guns and bombs do not exist it D&D, thus I will not play an alchemist/gunslinger. Investigators are fine, because ye know, magic potions like Asterix? (I am IRL a luddite with the computer constantly bullying me).
9) Most of my characters don't adventure alone (familiars, animal companions a-plenty!).
10) I have yet to roll up a paladin(though it may change in the future). I suspect it contradicts with Clause No. 6 regarding random heroic deeds and a shortened life expectancy. Can't figure out why anyone would want to paint a Bulls-eye target on their back and walk around with it?
That being said, I do admire paladins, and players who can deal with the Paladin code without being a total jerk to the party. A well played paladin is a marvel to behold.
Dunno what it says about me :)
I tend to play chaotic-lawful neutral characters that are smart and have lots of tricks. Alchemists are my absolute favourite. Inquisitors and magus's second. Mad Science ALWAYS.
Also because I fence in real life, my martials tend to be less strong and more light armoured and dextrous.
I tend to play tough guys who will have a shot at surviving dangerous situations. I generally focus a little more on defense than on offense and it is rare for me to play a glass cannon (though I have). Even my wizards are often multiclassed fighters or rangers. This includes a bodyguard archetype in Shadowrun, a major robot suit in Heroes unlimited, a protagonist/judicial champion dwarf in Warhammer, even my Malkavian vampire non offense character had great obfuscate that often kept him safe in combat.
I tend to come up with a lot of crusaders against evil as character motivation, even in things like Vampire the Masquerade.
There is a little theme of insanity among some of my more major characters.
Online I like to talk and notice lots of details and figure out plots.
In person I like to talk but also punch things in the face in as straightforward a mechanical manner as I can. In person I miss things at the moment like last week when I cast improved invisibility despite the DM having said the worm dragon appeared blind, and since it is a dragon I am background aware they generally have blindsense/acute dragon senses.
I prefer mechanically simple, but I only do moderately well to poorly in resisting complex character options.
|
I've always taken a strong interest in the natural world, whether that involves animals and plants or rocks, minerals, and geography, and I love hiking and exploring the outdoors.
Most of my characters have been rangers or druids, along with a hunter or two since that class was introduced.
Also, there was that extreme risk-taking adrenaline junkie who played in my 3.5 campaign. His characters tended to get blasted by various traps and other hidden bad stuff, and he had four characters die over the course of the campaign.
My typical personality is basically just Paragon Shepard. I usually play paladins, clerics, oracles, wizards, and alchemists, though I also enjoy druids and cavaliers. Almost always male humans, but lately I've been trying to diversify.
I come up with tons of character ideas all the time.
I start with mechanics, but I design and entire mini story around them, personality traits, quirks, flaws, values, etc., and end up with a fully fleshed out idea really frequently...to the point where I start to get so excited about the new character that I want to swap up characters.
The GM usually lets me get away with that once or twice. Then I stop asking, because I feel guilty about it, but I still want a new character, so I start to play risky...foolishly risky... I come up with awesome plans that are death-or-glory, but because I'm decent at optimizing, often they end up succeeding, giving me such awesome memories with the characters that I don't want to lose them. So I hang on a while longer, adding more concepts to my backburner until I start the cycle over again. Luck isn't always in my corner, so the gamble doesn't always pay off, and I have a pretty big character turnover by death. I'm currently working hard to overcome this self-defeating play style and stick with a character, developing depth through play, rather than imagination.
Almost none of my characters are similar to one another. I think the only class I've ever played twice, barring dips or the like, was...um...nothing really, unless you count across editions. Each one was different than the one before it somehow, and I love role-playing a new "type"...not just class or race, but personality. I think the only alignment I haven't played is lawful good.
The only real thing they have in common is they're male. I really never wanted to be a female, and never understood the mind of a female. I don't mind ladies in the group, but I just don't really want to be one.
So, I don't know - It obviously means my ADHD diagnosis wasn't exactly wrong, that's for sure, and I'm comfortable in my masculinity.
Just realized I forgot the "what they say about you" part.
Most of my characters are just idealized versions of myself, which suggests that I'm comfortable just playing what I know. I also try to be a decent person in my own life.
I tend to play (when I get a chance) a variety of characters, both male and female. If the gm allows us to know what everyone else is playing I will pick something to fill any possible need for the party. If we aren't allowed to know what the other players are, than I simply ask the GM what role he needs and go from there.
With the exception of a paladin, I have played just about everything else prior to finding pathfinder. Now there's a whole new bunch of classes I can tackle.
Perhaps I am scitzophrenic? When I was in junior high drama, I was always 2-3 characters in any given play. None where main characters but I always had lines for each character.
Apparently I am secretly a Chelaxian. Every single character I have made in Pathfinder has been Lawful and Chelaxian, be they halfling, human, or elf... I've played Hellknights, Asmodeus worshippers and even a member of the Aspis Consortium.
Furthermore, every single one of my characters is a smooth talker. Even those with low charisma have some trait or class ability that allowd them to use either their intelligence or wisdom modifiers for Diplomacy or other skills.
So, a person leaning towards lawful evil who is used to getting his way with words... sounds a lot like me actually...
How can I forget? Even my good characters almost always have one absolutrly loathsome quality about them, usually something they did in the past. Whether or not my character actually shares that information is dependent on the setting... yet this flaw always has a reason the justification of which is enough for the character.
I guess that symbolizes the wrong I've done in real life, yet always making sure that it is for the greater good of society as a whole.
The big eye opener for me: All my characters need to be self sufficient. If they have to rely on a party member for something, it's not an option for very long.
As a fighter, I will let the caster "fly" me once or twice, but if it becomes apparent that it will continue, I will spend an enormous chunk of change so I can fly by myself.
If I'm the caster I will still, somehow, find a way to have the highest AC in the party, cause I don't trust the front-lines to always be there.
And I think teamwork feats are a waste of a slot unless I'm playing both characters.
I love the idea of rogues, but I will not play one on the assumption of flanking being how I get sneak attack.
..I, Apparently, have trust issues... ('_')
Hmm, looking at my character history it feels like my character dispositions tend to drift slowly over time with streaks of consistency.
PFS Character 1 - Generally compassionate with a strong sense of justice. Eventually converted from worshiping Sarenrae to Milani when she decided that too many people were beyond redemption for her to keep trying.
PFS Character 2 - Somewhat naive, lawful and well meaning but lacks the social acumen to realize that she sometimes comes off as abrasive and doesn't get that things may not be as black and white as she thinks they are.
PFS Character 3 - Well meaning but misconceptions about society sometimes mean that he's a little too willing things that aren't morally justifiable. Is fine with making personal sacrifice for the benefit of others but his expectations from others are somewhat skewed.
PFS Character 4 - Believes that he is someone who stands up for the oppressed and tries very hard to live up to this. Unfortunately he lacks the self-restraint to keep his actions reasonable and doesn`t realize that he himself is a rather oppressive presence among certain people.
PFS Character 5 - Believes himself to be a champion of virtue and order but lacks the determination to set out on his own path so finds himself unquestioningly following whichever master he has decided to dedicate himself to at the moment.
Home game Character 1 - Trusting and naive she attempts to find the beauty in everything. While more patient than most reasonable people would be, she is extremely vicious when she decides that someone is no longer worthy of the benefit of doubt. However, taking heavy handed approaches with people generally weigh on her conscience even in situations where being firm is necessary.
PFS Character 6 - Arrogant and narcissistic. Generally believes that she is apt enough that she doesn't have to concern herself with the opinions of others.
Home game Character 2 - Aggressive and overbearing. While she has been known to have moments of compassion, it usually stems from a perception that she's superior to others and those people need her grace than from any sense that other intelligent beings deserve a certain degree of dignity.
PFS Charater 7 - Lighthearted and does what he can to avoid responsibility. Generally well intentioned towards others but does suffer from an inability to see his own faults or weaknesses.
On the whole I do have a bit of preference for playing the conflicted good guy. While I'm more than able to make a character who is a self serving jerk, I generally still try to make excuses to be kind to others from time to time with such characters.
My weak spot is compassion. I actively dislike killing in games, so I need to relate to it some way. A number of my characters are genuinely nice and caring, to the point of brainwashing the completely and massively wicked and unrepentant necromancer villain into a nice guy (he still had... issues with how to solve problems...) rather than putting him down. Of course, others of my characters revel in bloodlust instead, throwing frag grenades at museum visitors for the merry heck of it. Others are rough and self-absorbed, but still not happy about killing. I guess compassion is a pretty big part of who I am.
Let's see.
My characters:
I am incapable of not being a smartass.
I also tend to wind up as the party leader or constantly challenging whoever takes that position.
I always think I'm right and hate being proven wrong.
I like blowing things up way too much.
At least one of my characters struggles with a drinking problem.
I cannot stand having negative ability modifiers.
I tend to play skillful characters.
I tend to play sneaky characters.
Money is often a character motivation.
If all else fails, use violence.
Me in real life:
I'm a smartass more often than not. When not aloud, I usually am in my head.
I tend to take the lead in projects, or at least suggest ways things could be done better.
I always think I'm right and hate being proven wrong.
I like blowing things up way too much. Also fire.
I have in the past struggled with a drinking problem
I'm pretty sure that I don't have any negative ability modifiers.
I usually am not as skilled as I think I am.
I am not very sneaky.
I am not particularly interested in money.
When all else fails, I sometimes wish I could use violence (but I don't). Instead I usually yell and curse a lot before accepting what can be done/that nothing can be done.
Most of my characters are really objective/neutral with how they handle things. I am that way in real life also. Even though I have had "good" on my character sheet they have been played more like they were neutral.
I game with 4 different groups (something like 7 or 8 campaigns between them).
1. I have a lot of free time on my hands
2. I have lots of friends
I've actually made the mistake of running my Neutral characters as if they were Good. I usually follow that with indignant rationalization of their actions.
I had a CG barbarian who appeared to be violent, reckless, amoral and uncaring. If you paid attention in hindsight though, he was always accidentally helping people and never killed anyone who wasn't already planning on killing him. It was my interpretation of consequences>intentions. He intended to maim, slaughter and steal, but the consequences was protecting the innocent and giving back to the needy.
|
I invariably play a LG character when I do get to be a player - typically a LG cleric in the most classic 1st ed sense (St. Cuthbert or similar type of god). I also try to make them either crusader types or monster basher/occult expert with a heavy Van Helsing (not the movie) vibe. Even at low level I try to make sure he is knowledgeable about evil and fighting evil - with a trade-off on mechanical optimization if need be.
Last time I played 2e, I got to play a paladin - something I haven't been able to do for years. He was a quiet, introspective with high ideals and a regard for all life. I spared a bandit (non-evil, just a knucklehead) after a battle with the hopes of changing his ways - the DM humored me, but it was fun to try.
I suppose I play these characters when I can because I GM 99.9% of the time - so I get to create, rp, plan and plot out some of the vilest dirtbags or evil bastards my mind can conjure up. From Racist Knights of Genetic Purity, marauding road trash, Cannibalistic priests and golems who double as serial killers...it can wear on you. Getting to actually play, for me - it would be a good aligned and moral character almost every time. Almost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh, I wonder if I can work that into my barbarians a little.
We had just made characters and were having our little intro scene. We determined my barbarian and the paladin knew each other and were friends (they met in a bar fight). We're at a crossroads, in the ruins of an inn, a common resting point. Also present:
-2 thugs
-a merchant group
-pilgrims bringing a dying elder to a holy place
The thugs start ruffing up the pilgrims, demanding their stuff. I walk over and have the following exchange:
Me "Hey, how about we kill them and split their stuff."
Thug "Go away, we saw these guys first, we've got dibs."
Me -pointing at the thug- "Dibs"
We fought them briefly and scared them off. Not being one to violate dibs, I left the pilgrims alone, though they did reward me for protecting them.
While in a dungeon we had accidentally befriended some kobolds. They had been kicked out of their home by troglodytes, so we allied with the kobolds, since the trogs were the bigger problem (the kobolds had been hiding under the village for centuries without incident). While going through the caves I found some religious idols and wanting to be a great thief, I felt that stealing those idols was the equivalent of stealing their gods (he wasn't too bright).
After dispatching the trogs, we relocated the surviving kobolds (maybe 5 out of 80 left) into the village proper. My barbarian seeing himself as the champion of the village wanted to be declared mayor, so in an attempt to secure the kobold vote, he gave them their idols back. The town neither had a mayor, nor did it elect it's leaders. Since he was running unopposed and had 5 votes, he declared himself mayor. He then promptly left town, never to return.
Most of my characters are NG-CG eccentrics with an academic bent-even if they're spontaneous casters. One time, in 5E, my character was too busy reading books to notice that Greenest was on fire. The other party members had to literally pry this massive tome of occult lore out of my hands while my character blinked owlishly behind spectacles.
On the rare occasion I play cyberpunk games, my characters are always leather-wearing mages with bubblegum pink hair who are into punk and have a snarky disposition.
My characters in fantasy games are definitely my reals self-academic, zany, and a bit inattentive. My characters in cyberpunk games are who I want to be-punk, hip rockers who are insanely smart and charismatic.
Have always made a mystically influenced character (either spell caster/psionic or character with otherwise SU/SP abilities). My alignments tends to be NG on average (some C, some L, some E, but in general NG is the predominant). I favor @ will abilities vs. limited use (witch hexes, RH-occultist spirits, Wilder powers).
For long term campaigns I tend to create a Meyers-Briggs personality profile in order to understand how they handle situations. My characters usually have some dark past involving betrayal (committed by or against them- sometimes it is both).
I tend to play utility characters usually placing points into a Knowledge, Interaction and Movement skill (Arcane/Bluff/Acrobatics or Nature/Diplomacy/Climb, etc.) and generally a character who CAN survive on their own- if for only a limited time.
---
So what do my characters say about myself?- I want more than what is possible in reality, and enjoy having reliable/reusable solutions vs. varied/eclectic solutions to adversity, I find the motivation for behavior as important as the behavior itself, I prefer characters who have a: "I know(can do) a LOT about a little and a LITTLE about a lot" approach to information/athletics/interaction, and I appreciate the diversity and specificity others can add to my experience but enjoy being self-reliant when I can.
|
Contributor
|
I play "helper" characters pretty consistently. Part of this comes from running in-party NPCs a lot, since I usually have to be the DM. (Of course, the concept comes first. But even my witch in RoW took the Ancestors patron - when I can be bothered to do something other than say, "Sleep", anyway.)
As a martial, I adore Oath of Loyalty paladins, and I like the Order of the Dragon cavalier a lot.
In the skilled role, I play bards. The bard is everything I'm looking for there.
I love clerics, both because I like religious characters and because I'm glad to buff and heal. Evangelist gets special mention, obviously.
I love sorcerers thematically. The one I'm playing tonight casts a lot of haste, telekinetic charge, and named bullet (we have a rifle-wielding paladin).
There's a theme, is what I'm saying. :P
I play many different type of characters across the alignment spectrum and classes, but no matter what I play, no matter what they began as, they end up learning unarmed fighting somewhere along the way (if they weren't an unarmed fighter from the start).
It probably reflects on my obsession with martial arts and MMA :P
Even my bard characters ended up punching people in the face
Lately many of my characters have been mentally unbalanced.
I guess I've lately felt the strain of life. Playing a nutjob lets go of steam and makes me realize I'm not that crazy IRL.
I like to play fanatics - this is a nice change from my scrupulous and "afraid to hurt other people" every day persona.
I like to play "evil" characters sometimes. Or good characters who do horrible things for begnin reasons.
I think that's my way of telling my gamer friends : "You're not exactly the good person you think you are. You just rarely connect consciously with your monstrous side. Have compassion for those that do."
I like to surprise people around the table with unexpected in-character decisions.
That's my way of saying that people are never who they appear to be.
I often RP a character that is spunky, fresh, outgoing, and super social. Which is funny, seeing as I am a very down to earth, quiet little mouse in real life.
But it´s rather normal that people add some things to their characters that reflects themselves or make up for qualities they wish they had in real life. And I can indeed mention a few I know, both friends and acquaintances. But hey, I do it myself too. After all, RP´ing is for many of us an escapism from the real world, and a way to unwind, recharge our mental batteries before we have to face the real world yet again. And to some it's just a nice relaxing hobby :D
I often RP a character that is spunky, fresh, outgoing, and super social. Which is funny, seeing as I am a very down to earth, quiet little mouse in real life.
Noooo! You may be a mouse (I'm not sure I agree with this one either, but I'll let it fly), but you're not quiet. There are far, far too many fart-related jokes coming from your corner for you to be considered quiet, m'dear :D
I often RP a character that is spunky, fresh, outgoing, and super social. Which is funny, seeing as I am a very down to earth, quiet little mouse in real life.Noooo! You may be a mouse (I'm not sure I agree with this one either, but I'll let it fly), but you're not quiet. There are far, far too many fart-related jokes coming from your corner for you to be considered quiet, m'dear :D
But Fart jokes are hilarious! We have both agreed on we share the same toilet humor, ahahaha!
|
I often RP a character that is spunky, fresh, outgoing, and super social. Which is funny, seeing as I am a very down to earth, quiet little mouse in real life.
That. I try playing characters with low charisma and I just hate it. The game table is the one place I feel comfortable enough to try on that persona, in a safe space with friends, and I always end up feeling like if I wanted to play a quiet, shy person I can do that in real life easy enough.
I also almost always play religious, despite being an atheist in real life. Although truthfully I think it comes from the same place - the real world offers no real evidence of any higher power whatsoever (not trying to start an argument here, just how I see it) so it's an enormous waste to dedicate yourself to it. In a world where the gods are active and produce tangible effects every single day - I mean, even a Level 1 Cleric or Adept is performing what anyone would accurately define as a miracle - the evidence is overwhelmingly against atheism in that world. You would have be A) delusional and B) an idiot to not be some sort of religious. And with dozens of gods with different ideas and portfolios there's really no good reason you couldn't find SOMEONE whose philosophy is congruent with your own. (Really if you want to include distheists in your story, and not just as some crackpot tiny minority but as an entire city-state, it would make a LOT more sense with a dominant monotheistic or much smaller polytheistic religion that has rigid codes of belief and conduct for ALL followers. *coughRahadoumcough* Just sayin'.)
I always dump physical stats for mental. The best, most interesting heroes are not the strongest or fastest. They're the ones who overcome seemingly insurmountable odds by force of cleverness, insight, or guile.
I rarely play Neutral, and when I do they still have a strong center and code of conduct that might just be dark enough to tip them over the edge from good. I believe strongly a murderhobo that just does it for gold and drink is a good easy concept to make in ten minutes for a one-shot, but nothing else. I don't care about people like that and I find them incredibly dull in a world of grand villainous schemes and knights in shining armor and spellcasters who have made a pact with forces they don't fully understand and lunatic conspiracy theorists.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Good underdogs. These are the characters I play, the people I root for and how I've come to see myself over the years.
Good: I loathe evil. Seriously. In real life it makes me NUTS when people drive recklessly (I have KIDS man!), take up 2 parking spots (I'M following the rules, what makes YOU so special?) and have bad manners (would it KILL you to ask, not tell, and use "please" and "thank you?") While that's not really "evil" its as close as I get in RL (THANK GOD!) In games I never play evil characters. When I run games my villains tend to be so irredeemably vile that they elicit pure hate from the PCs, even if one of them happens to have an evil alignment.
Underdogs: For years I only played Halflings. My favorite villainous sentient race isn't orcs or even goblins... it's kobolds. I make "mean wheenies" decks in Magic card games. Bottom line: if you've been pegged as weak, overlooked and written off by everyone else around you, I'm your cheerleader.
Finally, above and beyond all of this I've revealed myself as the classic "Sensitive guy from the 80's" that my mother raised me to be. I try to humanize the whole game. I add mature themes. My kobolds have more of a reason to ambush the heroes than "because they were there."
The last PC I played was a human ranger. He comes upon a mass grave; a plot device to explain a necromancer's "node of power" mechanic that was granting a +1 Caster Level to his spells. Here I am, first level, descending into the pit. "What the hell are you doing" one of the other players asks. I looked right at him: "we can't just LEAVE them there! They were villagers, people. Those are someone's sons and daughters, someone's FAMILY! Sure we drove the necromancer off and sure I could die down there amid a sea of undead, but some of those lucky souls haven't animated. We OWE it to the village to rescue these people, if only for closure. What if it was your brother, or mother; what if your SON was down there?"
So we went down, beat some skeletons and zombies, and then spent the next half an hour of the session detailing how we rescued the dead from among the undead, scoured the pit with fire, the cleric muttered some prayers and then we somberly delivered the dead back to the village and helped them bury their own. It was kind of sad but at least it was human.
I don't like playing murderhobos. If others play them, fine, but that's not me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I usually try to make characters that aren't going to be overtly religious ... because I always make characters that end up being overtly religious ... and then they, despite my best attempts, turn out at some point to be overtly religious.
It annoys the snot out of me by now. I need to get away from that but I'm pretty sure if I made an atheist, she'd end up being overtly religious.
Meh.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I try to play characters (on the RARE occasions I get to be a player) that take risks and attempt the nigh impossible, despite the frustration it might cause a GM. I do this regardless of what class I play. I'm playing a hero; I want to do heroic things, not just sit in my chair and say "I roll to hit".