I see a lot of times people will put down that their character is extremely smart or charismatic or something like that yet I rarely see any of this in the actual RP. So I have a question: How do you RP those traits exactly?

Taking the popular Dungeons&Dragons as a reference:

Intelligence is the ability one has to memorize and recall information.

Charisma is a representation of presence and force of personality.

These are definitions that the system gives to these terms so that they can be used to represent a numerical value. Without this supplied definition, the terms are meaningless.

The biggest issue is not in the playing of these traits, but in the misconception that they mean something without specification, and can therefore be quantified as part of a character with terms like "extremely."

It's better character design to describe your character using more specific terminology, rather than broad debatable concepts.

Going back to the Dungeons&Dragons reference, it's the difference between Strength and Athletics, Charisma and Diplomacy, and Intelligence and Knowledge: History.

Once you provide a definition of your own for these terms, you can play them to your heart's content. If your definition of Charismatic is "can tell boldfaced lies straightforwardly and never questions his own opinions," just use that to determine how your character should act.

How do you RP those traits exactly?

Okay, let's see! The time I used "smart" and "charming" to qualify my character was around the time I started role playing so by using myself as an example—

_{oh no.}

To put it bluntly, you don't. At least not well, usually. To piggyback on @Zurnt's point, you have to round out your character with qualifying traits. If you're playing someone is smart, you don't just say they're smart. You say they are quick witted or have an incredibly amount of knowledge about dragons or are really good at puzzle solving. You give them qualities and then you have to actually show them off in the RP. Meaning if you yourself aren't quick witted and funny, don't try to role play as someone who is quick witted or funny. If you can't bullshit about dragons, don't play as a dragon expert. If puzzles hurt your brain, don't play as an old lady who does the crossword and Sudoku every Sunday. Give them another trait that'll show they are smart instead of just telling us they are smart, and if you can't make think of one or aren't able to pull it off then, well, you can always play it like me and just role play as big dumb jerks so that you feel smarter.

Meaning if you yourself aren't quick witted and funny, don't try to role play as someone who is quick witted or funny.

Naw naw, this don't fly. People can't just RP themselves. That would be awful. It's like saying a writer can only write characters who are extensions of them. Like, holy shit, that would just all around suck.

It is true that, to RP traits that you don't have, you have to understand those traits. That does take empathy, which might make it difficult for younger people to pull it off, but that doesn't mean the effort isn't worth it. Hell, you might improve your own empathetic skills through learning how to write characters unlike yourself.

But to add to everything else you guys said: yeh, you need to go deeper than dating-profile adjectives. Words like smart, funny, charismatic, etc, have limited abilities. You have to get a feel for who your character is as a person. What they like, what they don't like, how they see the world, how they see themselves. Everything else is extensions of that.

So smart isn't enough. Are they mechanically inclined? Are they more book-smart, with the ability to remember terms and ideas? Are they good with numbers? People? Or do they have a knack for the tricks that make day-to-day life easier? Remember that most people are "Smart" with something, and that actual cognitive abilities play second fiddle to what you are smart at. Football requires a certain amount of tactical know-how and the ability to make snap decisions, but it isn't as intellectually respected as Chess which requires similar skills.

Charismatic isn't enough. Are they good public speakers like a politician? Are they good at manipulating people on an individual level like Charles Manson? Or do they just naturally exude a strong presence, like a good Shakespearean actor?

Once you've worked out these details, you have to make them count. Do not write characters as avatars of whatever action you want to do. When it is time to address their reactions, plan them based on their personalities and then move on from there. It might make your plans difficult to achieve, but it makes the journey interesting and believable.

<Snipped quote by Atrophy>

Naw naw, this don't fly. People can't just RP themselves. That would be awful. It's like saying a writer can only write characters who are extensions of them. Like, holy shit, that would just all around suck.

It is true that, to RP traits that you don't have, you have to understand those traits. That does take empathy, which might make it difficult for younger people to pull it off, but that doesn't mean the effort isn't worth it. Hell, you might improve your own empathetic skills through learning how to write characters unlike yourself.

Shoot, didn't mean for it come off quite like that. I actually agree with you, people shouldn't be playing carbon copies of themselves. If you are a generally nice, good, law-abiding citizen it doesn't mean you can't play a mean, evil, criminal mastermind. I feel like you can just easily put yourself in that situation and be like "Okay, cool, what would I NOT do here?" and still be able to create a great bad dude. Likewise, if you're generally shy and quiet you can still play a character who is outgoing and talks a lot by taking what you know and tweaking it. I totally agree with you that a good writer or role player would be able to use empathy to portray emotions that they usually don't have or use themselves to create an unique personality that is different from their own.

I just don't think you can empathize actual intelligence, since being smart isn't really an emotion. Going back to what I originally said, I feel that if somebody was able to portray a character that was smart, quick witted, whatever, then it would mean that person role playing them was also smart, quick witted, whatever. Sure, someone could get some dumb luck, but it wouldn't hold up throughout a whole RP.

Hopefully that cleared it up a bit. Feel free to tell me if I'm just being a jerk.

In my book, there's a deep, deep challenge in RPing as a medium, and this is kind of it.

"Charismatic" requires the one who is charismatic and the one who finds them charismatic. In order to prove your character is charismatic, another IC character has to find them charismatic: therefore, you have to invent a character to be a plot device or explain to another player that you're supposed to be charismatic. Neither is an ideal solution. It's a similar story with "smart", acknowledging that there are different kinds of smart; assuming it's book-smarts about a given universe's magic system, you the player need to know everything your character knows about the universe, and clarify that your character has an above-average access to that information.

For either of these traits to definitely manifest in an IC where characters actually interact, you either have to be in a really cooperative group, where people want to help you to tell your story (and where in return, you should do the same) - or it's Godmodding: "My character is officially charismatic and therefore your character should be persuaded" won't really work.

I'm reminded of a game on another forum. My character was basically a slacker and a coward, and had some information he wasn't letting on in order to avoid taking any responsibility for fixing a given situation. Another character, who had no possible way of knowing that he was concealing something, immediately rounded on mine when I mentioned OoC what he knew, and tenaciously pursued her baseless hunch based on the fact that she had the written the word 'perceptive'. The player clearly wanted to make good on her Character Sheet, which promised a total Mary Sue character who was clever without realising that firmly sticking to her guns put her firmly in godmodding territory. Character sheets don't translate directly into the IC.

I'm also reminded of another game, before the guildfall, where two players kinda wanted to put their characters forward as the 'big guns' of the group. Mine was more of an aggressive, arrogant ace archetype; the other was more of a hard-working team player with a flair for battle. At first we kinda felt that they were mutually exclusive, but, when we talked about it, we found that we could both tell really interesting stories about powerful characters. To begin with, we agreed that my character would be more powerful (or at least, win encounters), giving the other character the chance to prove her hard-working team-oriented nature, and eventually surpass mine, at which point my guy could learn a very important lesson about the power of friendship.

I know people disagree about this, but I firmly believe that for certain games, everybody talking about their characters and kinda what story they want to tell through them is an effective (I won't say "best") way of preventing player-to-player conflict and helping people to work together to tell the stories that interest them. You can't use charisma on a character that is too suspicious. A smart-alec grade-schooler with a high iq probably won't outwit their headteacher if their headteacher is a functioning adult. Character sheets are good indicator of where you are and where you want to get to, but, in my book, you need to talk to each other in order to actually plan your route. Otherwise, cross one set of fingers, stick the other set up your ass, put on your astronaut helmet and run around your living room shouting the word optimism because otherwise you're really just hoping for the best. I appreciate that some people like to play this way but ... ahem, I'm not convinced by the 'hope for the best' route.

I see a lot of times people will put down that their character is extremely smart or charismatic or something like that yet I rarely see any of this in the actual RP. So I have a question: How do you RP those traits exactly?

I have a character currently who's morphed after me in a lot of ways. We have the same astrological sign and some of the same mannerisms. I describe him as very mathematical and calculated - even during emotional, non-analytical, and technical situations. I incorporate this for example by 1) when realizing he's been living in the same town as an old flame, in his head, calculates exactly how many steps, at his height, she was away. My post goes into mathematical detail. 2) when discussing how his lover's mood changed with the wind, his eyes kept flickering to the display on his rear view mirror that gave him the wind speed and direction, waiting for it to alter.

You can't just claim your character is intelligent and have them read everyone's minds.. Flawless characters are so extremely boring and they lack any dynamic angles.

I see a lot of times people will put down that their character is extremely smart or charismatic or something like that yet I rarely see any of this in the actual RP. So I have a question: How do you RP those traits exactly?

I'd think of how an actor portrays a character and use that as a building basis for your own.

I'll give an example of Gary Oldman with his actions in The Fifth Element and Harry Potter. In one movie he portrays a vain, power hungry individual who sees himself as an authority over others, while in the other he is a humble, affectionate person who cares deeply for his godson, telling him that Harry is not a bad person, simply someone who has had bad experiences.

The same can be applied to your own characters. Playing someone as intelligent, smart, charismatic, or charming doesn't mean that you yourself have to have those abilities, but it's your choice of words and descriptions that can help create the persona. What you are probably seeing is a lack of people expressing their characters correctly by not choosing the right words and not using the correct mannerisms (ie, using "madam" instead of "miss" in speech, or "thank you my dear" instead of "thanks bud").

Also keep note that it actually is amazing how much a character can change when you don't choose the right words and happen to not be in the correct mindset for that character. I actually have to have a physical break between my RPs because I know I can't switch that thought pattern well enough, and on one instance between friends, I had one of them tell me that I might need to correct my character because I did something that I necessarily wouldn't have done as that person. It all worked out in the end with a few minor adjustments, but it still made me aware how much words in themselves can influence a character even without speech or proper actions.

I usually take inspiration from myself, my surroundings(people in my life), and usual traits I like to use for my characters(observant, lazy, reserved, vulgar, etc). After that, I simply imagine myself as that kind of character; I put myself in their mind. I think of what they might do in certain situations, what they would say in response to questions, how they might act when such and such happens. Pretty much, I become the character I am writing for. Sure, sometimes I come up with carbon copies of certain characters, but that's my formula and it has not failed me this far into my RPing career(10+ years).

You don't have to have a trait, but you do have to be able to understand it. If you're normally fairly silent and private, you won't have an easy time playing a gossiper. We're not saying its impossible, but we do think it'll be more challenging to play than a trait you have/understand fully.

our characters tend to have traits that overlap ours, but they are not carbon copies of our own traits.

When we play with traits like intelligence, we provide the character with a better understanding of how things work, give them a more natural understanding of knowledge that is partially OoC. But it can be even more fun to give characters misunderstandings of such. like seeing a series of facts, and making it so that two plus two equals five.