Is it bad to make a character really similar to yourself?

[Yqatuba]

I know a lot of people do that when they are first starting out, which seems reasonable to me, as it's easiest to play yourself, so to speak. I would say it's only bad if you make all your characters really similar to yourself, as that's pretty unimaginitve.

[Davor Firetusk]

For me the biggest concern is over identifying with such a character, especially for a newer role player. It becomes to easy to take things personal that really shouldn't be and that degrading player trust in the GM and possibly other players.

[Kasoh]

As a GM, I do not care if you play yourself in every game. If playing a fantasy self insert is what makes the player happy, fine. Especially if they play the same character over and over, its easy to motivate and reward that player because you know what they want.

The GM is not there to be the player's life coach or drama teacher. Just here to run a game.

I don't judge the source of a PC (and rarely ask). So long as the PC fits tonally and is willing to go on the adventure, I do not care if its a self insert, Abraham Lincoln, or Mary Sue. The mechanics will sort it out if they live or die and they can play Self Insert's brother, Belf Insert. No skin off of my back.

[Mark Hoover 330]

Meh, I'd venture to guess every PC you run is more similar to you than not. Maybe they're not EXACTLY you, unless you're playing a very tame D20 modern game w/no magic or super powers, but attitude-wise I'm gonna go out on a limb and say your PCs mostly simulate you.

Let's stick with PF1 though. You're running a fantasy RPG character - you IRL are unlikely to understand the physicality of being a fighter or warpriest, the devotion of will it takes to be a Cleric or a Kineticist. Depending on your school career, you might not even relate to the intense amount of study it takes to become a Wizard.

But then look at how your PC approaches problems, how they deal with stress. If you're a very pragmatic person, are you playing someone blindly headstrong? If you use humor to decompress, does your PC do the same? Some of these minor personality quirks creep into our characters unless we're really paying attention.

It takes acting skill, discipline and practice to truly transcend yourself and inhabit a role. IMO, most players don't have this devotion to the craft. Heck, there are even some famous actors (character actors) that play the same "type" over and over and make a great career of it.

My point is only that there's nothing wrong with a little or even a lot of "you" inhabiting your character. This is our hobby, not a vocation. If you're genuinely looking to immerse yourself in a role though, maybe do some community theater or take some classes locally instead.

[Albatoonoe]

It's the X-com problem. You make you friends into soldiers and they all get killed by aliens. It's better to have some distance to the character

[Dragonchess Player]

At some level, pretty much all characters are similar to the person playing them. Even if the character was created with a radically different background and stated personality, the person playing them is still the one actually thinking and reacting.

Exactly how much overlap there is between the player and the character can differ. Sometimes, the character can take actions that the player would consider but consider too risky to attempt in real life (because of ability, training, social status, legal implications, etc.). Or the player may want to emphasize certain tendencies that they don't have many opportunities to explore as themself.

Even a character with a large overlap with the player isn't "bad" if it is appropriate to the character's background, goals, and the campaign. It may get a bit old if it becomes a habit, however; just like the players who almost always play "the same" character for a given race/class combination.

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

Eh, people can do what they want, I suppose, but I find that people who do this end up ignoring the most interesting aspect of roleplaying: roleplaying.

[Ryze Kuja]

All characters you create are an extension of yourself in some way, whether that's 1% or 99% similarity. Even if you create a character that is "Captain America" all the way down to the lawful good alignment, ricocheting shield, improved unarmed strike, and 26+ Strength, it's a character that you can identify with as "I really want to be a Shield-trick Fighter" or "I really want to do good for the sake of doing good" or whatever reason.

I had a first-time PF player who played a druid our first campaign, and then he played druid again our 2nd campaign. It didn't bother me in the slightest and I think it was because he "wasn't done" being a druid. I could tell that he really loved the class in general. What's funny is this guy works for a construction/electrical department in a major city and is constantly jackhammering concrete to access electrical and plumbing, and I think being a guardian of nature and in tune with forests, animals, and plants is a wild departure and an escape from this.

[Reksew_Trebla]

I may be different from the normal person, based on some of these responses. My first character, named Torrex, was based off of Batman, but I changed some things up. She was, well, a she, a half-elf, and a Fighter//Rogue gestalt, that for her last 5 levels, was going to take levels in Druid. I just based the starting situation off of Batman.

She quickly became her own character though, as she adapted to the story.

My next character was actually an NPC, that I adopted, because I joined that game later (it was with family, so I wasn't prepared with a character of my own), and I played him as having some brain damage that caused memory loss. He was a kobold named Meepo, that eventually ended up worshipping the dwarf in the group, thus in proxy, worshipped Torag.

My point being, is that they were not based off of me.

[SheepishEidolon]

Reksew_Trebla wrote:

She quickly became her own character though, as she adapted to the story.

I guess this also applies to most characters that start out as a fantasy version of the player. Since the character deals with a different environment (NPCs, other PCs, objects etc.) than the player in RL, they start to diverge.

But I also noticed that long-term development of a player can influence their character inside a long-lasting campaign. I am playing in the same campaign for 9 years now and my rogue gained a boost to self-confidence comparable to my own.

To get back to the original question: If a player sticks with playing fantasy versions of themself, I point that out to them, since they could miss out on something. It's their decision, but it should be a conscious one IMO.