Characters vs IC Reality

[Wyvern76]

I think a common problem is people only conceiving their characters at one point and not being willing to adjust there characters role play around their in game current reality.

Let me exlpain in two examples:

1) Bob Jackboots is the third in the line of paladins to the throne of Assomass. He is the mightiest warrior and scurg of evil and anyone else he doesn't like. State in his bio/background that he has been in dozens of campains against evil and trimphed!

- But Bob is level 3, just joined the server and no one has ever heard of him. Bob acts like he's Mr. Asskicker and demands respect and simply ignores reality. Bob should be played as a man of decent who is begining his career and has high hopes and must learn much. But often players who make chars with such personalities/backgrounds- often just ignore reality or worst rush levels, to force in game to match the vision of themselves.

2) Melina Mouse, is a harmless halfling that seems inocent like a little girl and has rearly been seen leaving town and never speaks of having fought or adventured. A character known for chatting about a common area. Seems to have no proffesion and rely on kindness to survive.

- Meline happens to be a level 18 Monk, who could clean the floor with just about anything and have 200,000gp on her. The mistake here is oppisite of Bobs. How can someone have that much money and power and still play her as a fearful child? Perhaps when she first started, but it's extreamly discountinouitous now.


My point is to treat your characters as people who live and learn and grow. Not as a fixed character concept that does not change to match the reality of the game mechanics. Having a character grow and learn is much more fullfilling and interesting than one that is a fixed concept from creation.

I am not trying to bash others play style here, except for anyone who's played a "Bob" or even a "Meline". Both "Bob" and "Meline" are parbels real characters I have run into in my time on PWs. I'm just sharing what I think is some wisdom and how I personally view a good way of playing a character. Play them as a evolving growing person.

[sparkeh]

Wholeheartedly agree.

Its very tempting to think of a char concept like 'I am the greatest figher ever...EVER' and go out and play it. But playing the char is the evolution from the ordinary Joe who sets out as an adventurer to that ideal.

I actually like the low level interaction when people are aware that they aren't the best adventurer since sliced bread and actually a bit crap. Some the best RP I have had is where we have realised we can't handle the task we have taken on and turn back.

Picking something out of another thread highlights this:

How is this fair? Roll against roll, the higher level will win, even if the lower level has built their ENTIRE character concept around being a smooth-talker, or an underhanded, compulsive, social liar. Its just not right. Its one of the reasons people want to level up so fast; they want to be able to invest points in the skills they need to fulfill their character concept, just because that concept can't be fulfilled at a low level, when talking to higher-levels who really only have the IC difference of having smashed more Gnolls than the lower-levels.

Experience is called experience for a reason. If you envisage a smooth talker then when you start the game, he is an inexperienced smooth talker. One day he might be a great smooth talker, but not yet.

[Scavar]

I have to agree, I know I am gulity of writing descriptions that don't make sense later on. I do my best to have my character live and breath, to the point that in many cases rerolls happen, along with explanations that make sense.

I've run into Bob and Meline, and a Bob and Meline together before elsewhere. Scary.

And how sparkeh explains that one part, makes me think about how I responded to that in a different thread. I must now meditate! The last portion of his response that is...I realize now how odd that sounded.

[Rhifox]

True, and agreed that the experiences a character has should lead them to grow and development, but this sometimes isn't always so black and white.


With the Bob example, that somewhat limits character concepts. Not everyone wants to play a clean slate. Some characters are veterans and there's no reason to deny that. However, such character should, for some reason or another, have their power somewhat diminished and thus have to work to get it back up. Thus cannot claim to be all-mighty when they first arrive here. Perhaps they have fallen from fame and glory and are working at regaining it. In other words: it's okay to play a character with extensive background, it isn't okay to RP as if said character is still in their prime level of power when, in-game, they're only level 3. They must have some reason for losing said power and the need to regain it. This is why certain item creation, spells, events, and so on can deduct experience points.


For the Meline example, is it possible for a fearful, innocent character to get to level 18? Yes, I'd say it is. Fear can be a prime motivator for character development. The desire to pursue certain things (power, magic, etc) might be out of fear. Some classes spend many levels in cloistered existences devoid of outside influence. Many wizard orders, for instance, keep their students in academies that have little to do with fighting monsters and critters or doing any sort of 'adventuring'. In some orders, said wizard doesn't come out of apprenticeship until long down the level line. DnD is built around adventurers, but that doesn't mean that the only characters that are viable are the adventurers. Usually, NPCs are said non-adventurer characters who got their positions without adventuring. Many of the powerful opponents in games are said non-adventurers who trained purely through non-risk environments and study. Why can't PCs also be said high-level non-adventurers? If the DMs allow it and promote the ability for it (as Sundren does, that's why you get DM experience for completing events even if combat was not involved.. experience is global, not just combat).

Having large amounts of money, as well, is not something that requires personal power. Political power for whatever reason can also bestow such. Thieves might have a lot of money, especially if they're powerful members of a guild, even if an individual crime lord has rarely ever fought in combat (or, perhaps, is even fearful of it).

For the Meline example, why can't a peaceful, combat-avoiding, maybe even fearful monk be level 18? Monks promote peace, seclusion, and so on. Monks train amongst themselves. Real life martial artists are rarely involved in real combat situations, they train against others in safe, non-risk situations. It is quite possible for someone to be extremely skilled, yet still be afraid of getting involved in a REAL combat situation. Remember the NWN2 OC... the Khelgar monk story. Khelgar was the prime example of a character who goes out and fights all the time and gets stronger for it. Yet who does he get beaten by? The small scrawny monks drinking water who avoided getting involved in the fight, the monks who promoted peace and secluded themselves away. Just because video games promote the 'Khelgar' method of advance, doesn't mean that's the only way a character can gain combat skill.



In other words: Experience is a global thing. It involves a character's advancement. This advancement does not always have to be the typical method (adventuring), this advancement and development can come from many other facets which could lead to a variety of character traits. Experience points aren't equal, one character's experience might lead them to become entirely different from another person's experience. And this experience can be lost or forgotten, leading to once powerful characters who are suddenly down on their luck and no more powerful than other individuals. And again--not all low level characters have to be clean-slated, and not all powerful characters have to be fearless adventurers. There's a variety of reasons why different characters can exist at any level of play.

[Sammael]

My own personal rule on this is: never start a character with a long and developed background. That is to say, you can play as an 80-year-old wizard if you like, but they'd either have to be a wizard who's never tried very hard or one who's just started wizarding. Otherwise, three levels of build on a char with 80 years of wizarding experience makes no sense.

[Echelon13]

As both a DM and a player, there is nothing I hate quite as much as a static two-dimensional character that will never change no matter what scenarios you put them in. I despise that so much I honestly don't think I can put it down into words.

But, I agree with Rhifox regarding low-level characters having an extensive history or experience, so long as it's actually a feasible backstory [i.e. not "I am the son of Ao, have three penises and when I speak I spew rainbows," "I am the heir to an ancient kingdom," or my personal favourite: "I am another Drizzt Don'tSueMe clone"].

Again, I agree on the subject of powerful characters being fearful or seemingly innocent. Just because you are high level does not mean you are fearless and have seen everything. These supposedly fearless people are known as heroes, and we know what happens to heroes. As an old character said once: "What good men do when faced with evil - die, usually. Heroically, pitifully, eventually."

As a note, because I know some of you can't read between the lines too well: feasible also equals realistic in this matter.

[Machiavelli]

I've gotta say that I usually play characters with extensive backgrounds. The sorts of levels people get in Sundren tend to skew perspective, a level 3 character is actually someone who has likely accomplished a fair bit. No, they won't be an archmage, or the greatest warrior in Faerun, but there's no reason they can't claim to have a fair bit of experience with magic (if they're a mage), or to have been a soldier and perhaps even have fought in several wars (if they're a fighter). I'm not saying that people should be representing their third level characters as super-powerful, but these are already individuals that are waaayyyy above the norm (being level 0) in terms of their abilities.

I'd say that not only is some form of background to people's abilities allowed, I'd say it's a requirement to explain how they already became as exceptional as they are. Nobody decides to become a warrior, straps on platemail, miraculously begins wielding a longsword in each hand with a fair amount of proficiency, and suddenly gains the ability to survive in a fight with a horde of vicious goblins.

In summary, I think people should have some way of explaining how they acquired the abilities they already have. I'd tend to agree that some people can go too far with the "I am great" thing, but I'd like to remind people that while a new character may not measure up to the local adventurers, they are nonetheless already an exceptional individual!

[Xanderleo]

Bob died in the Spittlefist caves, Melina went insane.

--

I think Rhifox's final paragraph is a very good point and well said.

As far as being a high level character that is fearful or actually has fear ... part of what helps make a character three dimensional is specific fears. Everyone has them, and I don't mean spiders, or ghosts necessarily. Some people have deep-rooted fears of being left alone. Others might be afraid of failing .. etc, etc.

Obviously some of these fears are hard-set personality traits that may never go away, others may develop as the character progresses, others may lessen.

When I make a character, part of me analysing his starting personality is to figure out fears and shortcomings. Some end up being dynamic as he progresses, others end up static.

[Scavar]

I know it might not be the best example, but I'd like to throw my guy Taallic out there to get stabbed at.

He is currently afraid of his pants falling and catching on fire. So much in fact that he has been looking for a remedy to this, and will be for awhile. One of several things that is important to his character and personality that did not exist when he first showed up....

[Machiavelli]

When I make a character, part of me analysing his starting personality is to figure out fears and shortcomings. Some end up being dynamic as he progresses, others end up static.

I'd agree with this approach, and I'd say it ties in with what I said about backgrounds. A background should give weaknesses, but also strengths. Characters should be dynamic in terms of personality, but if there isn't much there to start with, then there isn't really anything to change.

[GodBeastX]

When I think of characters, I think of Echelon, then put him in a bra and miniskirt, and make that my PC...

...okay, seriously I actually think of a class I want to play, then a crap ton of quirks that might be entertaining for others to interact with. Then think of the race that best fits them. Then I make up a backstory as I play. Having one prewritten to no end usually isn't so fun for me. If I don't know my character that well, it helps me relate more to how other people might percieve it. It also gives me time to make up crap when asked. I usually write it down as I do.

[Godzr]

My Character Titch always when introducing himself add his honorific titles.. (I will be posting a thread on his extensive background of how these came about, but thats another thread )

Mighty Titch Goblinbane, Orcsbane, Slayer of Undead and Scourge of Magix users everywhere!

Even at level three Titch introduced himself as Mighty Titch Goblinbane and Orcsbane. Why because he has fought these all his short life, and the honorifics were bestowed upon him by his village elders.

People laugh, some people accepted and some well..

But why not. Might, as Titch will tell anyone does not have to equate to strength alone.. Titch will also tell anyone who will ask or listen why he considers himself to be Mighty. The short answer is a combination of intellect, speed and knowing where to strike.

But if you take into account that a level three char is three times more stronger, quicker, wiser etc than the base population then its easy to envision Titch as the most powerful warrior in his village.

You can also extend this to the comparative level of the enemies he fights. In Titchs case they were swarms of them, but if I was to put a level on them, I would say level one... So again in the eyes of his peers it is easy to envision Titch as the Bane of Goblins..

Now when he came to big wide world, and boarded the wrong ship he ended up in sundren. Do those titles he earned and is proud of disappear.. No.. why should they. Yes the goblin here are stronger tougher smarter, but Titch over came them. Same with the Orcs, and following his tradition when he slayed enough banedead, then zombies he added the title of Slayer of Undead.. Why not, he feels he's earned the right.

The scourge of Magix users is harder to explain, but in simple terms he was mocked by arcanists more than anyone else. And having a long wick in general let it go. But one or two found this to be a weakness... They soon found out how quickly Titch's wick can burn.

Anyway I think I have exhausted my reasonings of how I play Titch with a extensive background. Hopefully it makes sense, if not... *Shrugs*

[ThePaganKing]

I never put a background for my character because I want people to learn about him IC. I then sprinkle tidbits of his background to those he trusts or sometimes just around the campfire with people he knows and has kicked around for a bit.

Take for example Salagar, he has fears and the biggest one is being bored. He is always looking for the next adventure or story. He has also sprinkled bits about his past, why he is in sundren, why he became an invisible blade, why he likes females so much (yes, he always calls them cutie).

bottom line is you should let people get to know your character as you would get to know someone in real life. And, IMO, if you act like a badass and talk about yourself all the time, you are usually not a badass and probably are an asshole, just like in real life.

[Wyvern76]

My main issues was with players of "Bobs" that simply refuse to admit there char is not level 20. And since there character concept is of All mighty asskicker, they ignore reality and grind like mad until they get said level where they suddenly think that they can start to RP.

I have honestly gotten many tells like this:

" I have to grind to get my level up so I can start to RP my character as I created him/her to be."

"I am here to fight off the undead scourge (world event), I can't do that until I get at least level 12, so shut it"

"I'm a famous Thayan Wizard, ignore my 4th levelness until I can cast Wish"

etc....


Hate to have to do this, But I'd honestly like to see how Jospephine was played at level 3, given Rhifox's comments that always seem to come off as eliteist and always looking down on those who choose to play adventures.
*steps away from the keyboard and oddly gets an umbrella and rain coat*

[GodBeastX]

Hate to have to do this, But I'd honestly like to see how Jospephine was played at level 3, given Rhifox's comments that always seem to come off as eliteist and always looking down on those who choose to play adventures.
*steps away from the keyboard and oddly gets an umbrella and rain coat*

Let's see, she was scared of her own shadow if I recall. I ran an event for her with a vampire, and I think she passed out from fear. I can't remember every detail of it ^_^

She was a wuss. But thanks for reaffirming my post about how people attack other people's RP too much on these forums. Somewhere baby GBX is crying from that response.

Also, I get annoyed by people like that too. Which is why we forced a slow progression ^_^