RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Gaming Community] >> [Role Playing] >> Role Playing General Discussion



Message

TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 16:25:08)

All of this has to do with creating interesting characters in my opinion.

These are the types of discussions I wanted.



Ted Zlammy -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 17:40:59)

I suppose~

Hmm... I feel like bringin' up another point out of boredom. What do you all think of character quirks? You know, those things that aren't necessary for your character, but you have them anywho. For example, a quirk might be that a character smokes, so you might seem that character lighting up a tabac pipe outside of combat a lot. Or a character that likes to wear a hat, who might replace one after losing one in combat, or do their best to hold it on their head all the time.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 18:23:40)

Definitely makes the character a lot more memorable in my opinion Ted Zlammy. I like the idea, it brings out something more characteristic about them and it makes them more dynamic and round. I'll probably try to use them in the future.

For a RP I planned, Ghost of the Northern Seas, my character was disabled, very shaky and with terrible heart conditions. He was the navigator and captain of a merchant ship-turned pirate vessel and was one of the best navigators along the coast. What do you guys think about disabilities?

Also, I've never said this, but I like your forum name. 'Ted Zlammy'.



dethhollow -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 22:27:43)

Might be a little late for this, but mages vs. warriors. All video game logic aside, a mage has clear advantages over a warrior and, for the most part given a medevil setting, rangers are about on the same level as mages. When you get guns involved, however, you can kill someone before they can even charge a spell so in most modern settings, mages and warriors fail HARD!

Think about this. You're a warrior with steel armour and a metal sword fighing a lightning mage. Your entire body's pretty much a walking lightning rod! Even if you get in close, they could just cast an energy spell and fry you. If they're a fire mage, then you'll fare better but armour's not exactly heat-proof most of the time unless it's enchanted. Earth mages have an advantage since you'd be vulnerable to hevier blunt weapons than cutting ones. Water mages wouldn't do that great, I assume, but they're still fighting at a distance. Ice mages could REALLY mess you up in alot of ways. Like just freezing the armour's joints or using blunt ice attacks. Even if they shot ice spikes, it's not something that you want to really hit you. Wind magic has some great potential to simply knock them over or get some distance. And as for light and darkness magic, it's hard to say since they're not exactly corperal elements.

Take a warrior running at a ranger, however, and he won't be effected by arrows. So they wouldn't be able to really stop the warrior from ruining thier day. Try that against a mage and they'll drop a thunderbolt on your head from a mile away. And even if you get up close, who's to say they're not at least somewhat compitent with a sword? Prehaps they're prepared in case they run out of mana. That's a viable excuse to at least carry a silent weapon like that around. So even if a warrior does get in and the mage has 0 armour for some reason, he's still in for a fight. And, honestly, I don't care how comfy they are.... Why would a mage willingly go into a fight without any armour and choose to wear robes? Realistically, it doesn't make alot of sense. Also, I'm assuming they would know about as much ahead of time as the warrior would because the warrior's got armour already.

Finally, mages vs. Rangers. The reason I say this is pretty much even is because assuming neither of them has armour. Just traditional mage vs. traditional rogue. Both of them are fighting at a distance and have to hit thier target. Both of them run out of rounds they can fire off eventually. Whoever gets hit first isn't going to be able to really fight back that much, so it's whoever can aim and dodge the best. But, as I've said, modern setting guns would just dominate a mage. You would have to have such a crazy barrier to stop a bullet unless you were just an unbelievably powerful mage or something! Same goes for warriors, thier armour just can't stop it.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 22:33:32)

Unless they had bulletproof armor. :p

No, but Mages are powerful characters indeed, but in the RP world we tend to just think mages are on par with everyone else. Mages are always hugely underpowered in RPs, and rightfully so.

But I like to think their is no such thing as classes in RP's. :)



Starstruck -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/18/2013 22:36:31)

I have a wonder boy. He is a child prodigy. He also cheated by being bound to an elemental spirit of water wind and music. He trained under an ultra powerful wizard, invented his own branch of magic, and mastered it in 2 years.

He has all the trappings of youth and all the benefits of intelligence. All in all, I like him as a character and find him to be more balanced than most young characters.

Quirks are amazing. I had a character once who only spoke in limericks. I wonder where I put his bio; it was extraordinarily fun to create. Guess what it looked like.



Legendium -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 3:12:07)

quote:

What do you all think of character quirks?


Vital for characters with personality. Quirks belong everywhere. Even in combat.

As to the mages being able to beat everyone, I have to agree. Ranged, if put to good use, will always trump the melee. Which is why I've been wanting to make an RP where magic was practically non-existent. Or at least, it existed, but no mere mortal could wield it.

quote:

Guess what it looked like.


The first line had seven syllables,
The second fourteen,
and the last seven again.

Correct?

Or it all just rhymed.



Lord Darkblade -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 8:53:01)

@dethhollow: Mages don't wear armor because of one thing, the spells, armor gets in the way, making it harder to make the delicate motions of the hands and fingers causing the spell to fizzle.

Quirks are good, I generally play characters who are social outcasts, and thus don't understand social conventions, doubly so when it comes to modern times characters.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 9:50:53)

I like to think that especially-skilled warriors have enough willpower to withstand magic-based attacks and enough knowledge to deal with magic-based characters.

Also, I like to think of warriors as being experts in not only melee, but ranged as well. Think of them as a sort of soldier, trained to use various weapons. I don't think Ranged attacks are specifically geared towards rogues.

Rogues on the other hand deal mostly with covert operations, and while they are exceptional with the bow, I like to think of them more along the lines of daggers.

Then again, I don't like to think of classes in roleplays at all. Feels like it causes, like someone mentioned earlier, a triangle, and I don't like that.



Vanir -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 11:02:37)

quote:

Mages don't wear armor because of one thing, the spells, armor gets in the way, making it harder to make the delicate motions of the hands and fingers causing the spell to fizzle.

Well, that depends on where you get your magic lore. The way I see magic, if you are a good sorceror you can feel magic. Magic is a force in the universe, like gravity or inertia, except that it is conditional. The force of magic might be stronger in one area than in another, or unstable in an area so that when you access the magic it does not cooperate. I see it in this way, a sorceror can tap in to the forces of magic and manipulate them. Hand motions and things may be used to help direct the flow of magical energies, but is not necessary. I do not like the idea of spells. He is the Archmage of Fire and he can only do 10 things? I like spells in video games simply becuase it would be near impossible to code a living force of magic like I imagine it to be. But in RPs or stories and literature, I do not like spells. It limits your mage character incredibly. All of your creativity is no longer able to be used, all you can do are these 10 things.

Anyways, without needing hand motions to cast "spells," you can wear whatever you want to.

quote:

Then again, I don't like to think of classes in roleplays at all. Feels like it causes, like someone mentioned earlier, a triangle, and I don't like that.

I agree. Classes? No. Not in roleplays. Again, like what I said about the spells, using classes is like binding your character in a straight jacket. Actually, Classes aren't so bad. Classes don't have to be a set skillset of moves or abilities. It could just be a descriptive item to stick in your bio to give other player a general idea of what he/she specializes in or is capable of.

Class could also be a one word job discription. So if I made a blended rogue and warrior character who gets his coin from being hired to do miscellaneous work. I might put a "class" section in a bio and call it Mercenary.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 11:08:40)

Yeah I prefer to just say "This is what I wear, this is what I use, and this is what I can do" and just let that be who my character is, rather than say "Class: Warrior" and have everyone assume "Oh, this character wears heavy armor, uses melee weapons, and probably doesn't use magic as good as a mage character!"

If that makes sense. But I'm not sure how the community looks at classes.



Lord Darkblade -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 11:10:54)

I know, but, I grew up with the D&D roleplaying, so, that is where I base most of my characters at, and my explanations of magic, and from books that generally have the same concepts of magic, just each a little different.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 13:41:34)

Which leads me to wonder, how effective is it when a fireball hits a metal shield?

Also, warriors tend to wear padding up under their armor, which would not conduct electricity.

?



Lord Darkblade -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 13:45:59)

The fireball, could potentially super heat and melt the shield. Also, the padding my protect you from electricity on your body, but not the head, if you are using those big helmets knights use, also fire can super heat metal if it is hot enough, and that could effectively roast you alive in your so called uber-protective armor.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 14:00:29)

My characters tend not to wear helmets, so I like to think I'd be fine there. Also, I don't know if I've ever been in a RP with fireballs that hot. :p

Also, what is a warrior to you? My warriors tend to use smaller weaponry like shortswords, a lighter and smaller shield, and very light armor - sometimes not even metal armor, and they tend to be rather agile and cunning. I dislike huge tanks with uber-awesome armor and heavy weapons.



Lord Darkblade -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 14:07:47)

Anything, I'm just assuming you are a stereotypical warrior until otherwise said, also fireballs, in the hand of a master pyromancer can maker fireballs that hot. My characters are spellsword mercanaries, skilled with a sword, but can use magic and don't have many reasons for adventuring. Also, leather can be flammable, so, deserts are where to stay away from. So, the fireball is still a viable tactic.



Legendium -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 14:39:55)

quote:

Also, what is a warrior to you?


Someone who can use at least one kind of melee weapon. A wizard is someone with at least a small degree of magic. A rogue is more of morality thing to me. Rogues simply care more for themselves and don't always have the honor that most knights and such do.



Ted Zlammy -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 14:46:23)

@TJB , Thanks I guess? Hehe, haven't really had anyone say that about my username before. Just that it was odd. X-D

Anywho, my opinion on quirks... I find that it brings out character in a well, character. All and all, me likey.

@Starstruck, Not sure if serious, or excellent at messing with my mind.

As for fire fireballs... I find fireballs an incredibly vague spell. Sure it's the first thing that comes to mind for a spell for a mage, but there's great variation for such a spell. My personal belief though for a simple fireball is this; A fireball spell is well, a ball of fire that gets hurled at something. Part of the damage is from the impact of the ball, and the rest from just the heat alone, and if it manages to light someone on fire. If it were to hit a shield or the armor of someone, it'd just more or jerk them back bit from the impact, dissipate after the impact, leave a scorch mark and leave them uncomfortably hot for a short moment. Reason being, the heat hasn't reached the skin directly, due to the armor and the padding on the inside of it blocking the heat. Pretty much like an oven mitt man.

If I were a pyromancer and I wanted to have an armored warrior back off, I'd let off a continuous flame(more or less like a flamethrower) that'd actually leave the protective armor red hot after awhile, and make the inside of it an oven that would literally cook the person inside the armor alive.

quote:

Also, what is a warrior to you?


Honestly, the first thing that comes to mind for a warrior character is a barbarian with a huge arse axe that barely wears any armor. But in general, I think a warrior is a character that doesn't know any magic, and focuses only on melee combat at close quarters.



TormentedDragon -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 15:52:12)

It's important to realize the distinctions between the various types of Roleplay. On these boards, we do what people tend to call Free Form roleplay. Aside from the general, overarching rules that cover the common courtesies, there is no actual system. There are no calculations to be made, no health pools, no saving throws, no rolls of the dice, no code to work within. You can play almost anything in any way, so long as the other people are cool with it. So things like classes, alignments, specific spells, etc. are not truly necessary. For those who come into this from more structured forms of roleplay, such as D&D or other D20 systems, Shadowrun, or even the Computer RPGames like Neverwinter Nights, WoW, and AE's own AQ, AQW, DF, etc. this sudden lack of structure can be a stumbling block in character creation. I can't count how many times I've seen a character that was clearly based on something straight out of Adventure Quest.

It takes a shift in thinking to get your head around freeform, and around making interesting characters for it. There's nothing wrong with sticking to what you know, but you can't take your D&D character sheet and use that in the same fashion here. But you can convert it.

Take the classes, for example. In a game, your class either describes or dictates what your character is capable of. Fighters use weapons, mages cast spells; whether you become a mage by training your magic or get magic because you're a mage depends on the game; regardless, the class is tied to a character's skills, abilities, powers. You tell me you're a fighter in D&D and I know immediately what you mean. In freeform, you tell me you're a fighter and I'm left wondering what kind; sure, you've told me you can fight, but not why, how, or who.

In freeform, it's the details we want. The history. You're a fighter, okay. Why do you fight? Was there a war on and you were a soldier? Law enforcement? Mercenary? Bandit? Gladiator? A warrior of the tribe? Hunter? The possibilities are endless. So rather than think of your character's Class, think of your character's Profession. What is it they do for a living? How do they survive? From this, naturally will follow the skills they need. A mercenary obviously needs to know how to fight, a court wizard needs his magic and knowledge, a sailor needs to know his way around a ship, and depending on what era you're in, will probably need to know how to board a ship, fight on deck, fire a cannon, etc.

Your profession, your job, is to freeform what class is to games. You choose what s/he does for a living, you're already a quarter of the way to figuring out the character. Of course you'll probably want to figure out how s/he got into that business, why s/he got into that business, if s/he's any good at it, etc. And your character can obviously have multiple professions, or be between them, or jump from job to job, just like real people do - and pick up skills and knowledge along the way.

I think I had more to say, but I got distracted and lost the thread. So this'll have to do.



Ted Zlammy -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 21:00:33)

^
Aye true enough. The reason why I think there is a fair bit of characters who are bare bones and incredibly similar to classes from any sort of RPG game/ incredibly similar to characters from some sort of media, is probably the familiarity of transitioning into free free form with them. The first time coming up with a character for free form RPing for me was a bit hard honestly. Honestly, I started off with a bit of a Mary Sue in mind(if you haven't seen one of these, I applaud you), but even I saw my character was getting out of hand, and I also didn't want to just copy paste a character I know from some sort of fiction. So, I ended up with a young nice fellow that was a guardsman to a town, because his father taught him to fight and was also one. A rather simple character but eh, I had a bit of fun all the same.



TJByrum -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 22:25:26)

Agreed TD.

But I have been interested in doing a RP with stats and attributes and dice rolls...



Starstruck -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/19/2013 22:39:27)

quote:

No, but Mages are powerful characters indeed, but in the RP world we tend to just think mages are on par with everyone else. Mages are always hugely underpowered in RPs, and rightfully so.
This is untrue.

The general idea behind a mage being physically overwhelmed by a fighter of some kind is because someone who spends her life studying magic is not going to have the physical finesse needed to engage in combat with a trained warrior. Basically, they're an ordinary person with psychic strength and mental fortitude, not an athletic warrior or rogue. This enters into problems, though. Why exactly does a mage only feel like studying in a closed tower? Good thing they aren't problems that anyone actually cares about.

quote:

@Starstruck, Not sure if serious, or excellent at messing with my mind.
Tiure is my favorite character I have ever made, which makes me frustrated that I got him wrong in the Elemental Championships. Ugh. Silly Starstruck, Sound belongs in "Wind" not "Water."

quote:

this sudden lack of structure can be a stumbling block in character creation
"There's no need to pick a class, Starstruck; you can have any kind of character you want. You aren't restricted in any way. Basically, this means you can escape the restrictions and abilities of each class and devise your own kind of character, balancing, rules, and restrictions. It's fun!"
"Any...kind of...character? ANY KIND? ANY KIND?!"
"Uh, what's that look in your-"
"HYAAAAAAAAAH"

>Fish monster in mecha suit
>Crystal gargoyle
>Young sonomancer with giant scythe
>Purple Turtle Golem

"I feel...so...empowered..."
"STARSTRUCK THIS IS NOT WHAT I MEANT"

Sort of what I meant by that is that it's up to you to create and use a character you find fun. Inspiration can come from any source, but it's your job to turn it into something unique and original. Origin stories is where all of the creativity happens, and I suggest that you place your focus there. Isis' witch would not be half as great as it? she? is if it weren't for the back-story involved.



Lord Darkblade -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/20/2013 5:47:50)

Those are allowed, but not a guy who can travel dimensions because it was predestined that it was to happen? Although, the spells were a bit OP(referring to my first character for the step one) so, I could have just changed it to umbramancy and pyromancy, but, to late for that, maybe another RP, once I graduate.



Sir Nicholas -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/20/2013 14:30:26)

For my Heroes - I have a liking for the armor wearing knight. The prototypical warrior that will brave any challenge - fight any opponent - if it means saving the world. I also like the kind of Hero that embodies "Good is Not Soft". He's compassionate, perfectly polite and genuinely a fighter for justice - but if the villain crosses the Moral Event Horizon, he will unhesitatingly kill them.

For my Villains - I really like the "Dangerously Genre Savvy" character. He's a genuine threat, because he will physically and mentally best the Hero in his first encounter - and in the ensuing battles, he learns from his mistakes, even becomes more dangerous as time goes on, rather than suffer from Villain Decay.



Arthur -> RE: Making Interesting Characters (Discussion) (5/21/2013 7:00:23)

Most of my characters are rogues who wear dark clothing, preferably with scarves and drapes.

I am not much for heavy plate or armor and definitely not much on the pure magic side as well.

For me, it is very important that my character is fast and flexible, not strong or the heavy duty type. So naturally I need to focus more on his outward appearance and so you'll find that most of my characters are rogues, mercenaries, shades, Wraiths etc. Thieves too.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.109375