Personally, I tend to see a lot of the same types of characters over and over again. Not in every RP but in a lot of them. Sometimes it really feels like a contest to out-angst each other with tragic backstories/upbringings/abuse in an attempt to create depth and empathy. I mean they’re classic tropes and popular for a reason, and there’s nothing wrong with them, and I’ve used them too. I’d just like to see more variety. Where are those characters who had a perfect childhood and then turned out evil anyway? What about a disabled character navigating the difficulties of whatever setting/time period they’re in? What about a character who is not a minority/loner/last of their kind trope?

I’m not saying I never see these kinds of characters but they do seem to be a bit more rare. Also, I’m not knocking anyone’s preferred style of character. You do you. I feel like I used to play the same style of character in every RP and only recently started playing around with characters more outside of my comfort zone and less “romanticized.” I love character creating and stepping outside of what I was comfortable with actually turned out to be a lot of fun.

What do you guys think? Do you feel like you encounter a great variety of characters in RP or are they all pretty similar? What style of character do you like to play as? Are your characters very diverse in their traits and personalities or do you prefer to follow a similar structure for them? Discuss.

Started GMing Cardinal Rift a few months ago. We've got 12 players, and, personally, I'm ecstatic with the amount of diversity. Each character feels unique, we've got different backstories, origins, etc.

One thing that I'm really proud about is how I believe CR's diversity was brought about by the setting my coGM and I created. We wanted to make a world where anyone could play any sort of character they wanted. One of the principal character traits was magic. Our magic system is very limiting, and yet open at the same time. By giving people the chance to explore the boundaries of what magic can or can't do, I think we sort of brought about creativity in other aspects of character creation.

Of course, magic isn't all of it. Personality is big too. By making a world with very different areas and backgrounds, we let everyone really expand what they liked.

Sorry if it was a bit of a ramble. I suppose my end conclusion is that the setting itself is often what fosters character diversity. If the GM makes a world where there's options, the players will take those options. To answer the bit about through different RPs, I really don't know. I haven't been on the guild long enough to say.

I think that as people grow as writers, they grow the diversity in the cast as a general rule of thumb. Unfortunately not always true. It irks me the most in 2 instances: when I am GMing an RP or when I look at faceclaims.

First of all because when I am GMing I'm forced to read all the CS's in depth and review them and the type of RP's I tend to run (Naruto) tends to invite a certain type of people that create certain types of characters. TL;DR all characters are orphans, edgy and introverted to the point of asocial disorders but they're nice deep inside. Yawn.

Second, everyone uses a fucking standard white guy/white girl faceclaim or in terms of digital art, the same 3 pieces of artwork that anyone can find when they type in certain keywords.

How many times have you seen this redhead piece of shit staring back at you with that emotionless face? Fucking exactly.

I'd like to see more ethnic variation, more background variation, and less edgy protagonist backstories.

I feel largely the same way as you all seem to. I used to RP a lot and almost exclusively in the setting of Fallout. Came to be annoyed at how often I saw characters that were either explicitly or implicitly pretty much the same few characters over and over.

1 - Mega Mysterious Guy (who is probably going to betray you)
2 - Heir Apparent to Elite Forces (who is well loved by the current head)
3 - Slightly Too Cruel Elite Forces Guy, Rival to Guy 2 (who is probably in league with mysterious guy)
4 - Bad Ass Bitch (nothing wrong with that unless that is her only defining character trait)

Came to realize I was doing the same thing just with different character archetypes. Either the older shot out doctor/professor/something like that or my standard Big Dumb Angry meathead. I started doing the older guy thing to get away from my meathead type that I used pretty reliably.

It's hard to break out of familiar tropes but can be a lot more interesting. Been looking at like one of two types for RPs lately. Halflings who are either sneaky scouty non-combatants (for the most part) or an Orc Shaman. Those have their own tropes too though. The Orc who is actually pretty noble and trying to redeem himself/his race or the Halfling on a grand journey who basically just Frodos all over everything.

I liked what Odin had to say just now about "TL;DR all characters are orphans, edgy and introverted to the point of asocial disorders but they're nice deep inside. Yawn." Super common thing in general. Party of characters who all kind of keep to themselves but are actually very friendly and caring once you break through their shell. Traumatic pasts, loss of family, last of their kind. All that stuff.

I heard of a good way to kind of get past that, basically just a Session 0 where the GM has people elaborate on such character traits like "Ok Bango, so your Big Dumb Beefstick character is basically Autistic and doesnt talk to anyone until they break through his hard shell...ok...but which of the characters in our party have you developed a bond with? Who is the exception to your rules." Similar questions like "Who does your character aspire to be like, who does your character think needs to get his/her shit together, who does your character owe, who owes your character" stuff like that. But that requires a party willing to put in that effort.

I dont know that anyone would find folks willing to do this, but it would be fun to get together with folks, have them create character sheets and then roll for who plays who. Like everyone makes 2 characters up, make sure there are enough characters dissimilar enough to each other to have the right number of real options, then have folks vote on what the Party is composed of, then roll for who plays what. So 5 participants = 10 character options, voted down to the 5 characters to actually be played, and then you roll for who plays which of the 5.

I think the only thing my characters have in common is that they're male, they're generally young (so as to be more active) but I've played wizened older characters in big roleplays, and they don't sexually harass anyone. I would say "because I find that reprehensible" but I murder people and steal in roleplays and I wouldn't do those in RL either so

But I play all kinds. To name a few I've been a

• Hardened merc
• Slave
• Crazy pilot
• ruthless captain and swordsman
• Suave cutthroat
• Con man
• Heroic Knight
• Warrior Monk
• Academic Sorcerer
• Academic 1930's Adventurer
• PTSD Soldier

Etc.

I guess none of them have any problem going into combat either, which is the last similarity. I did start out with a very narrow set of caricatures, but over the years (as Odin stated) I branched out. I don't think anyone should be criticized for playing in their comfort zone either, however. It's all in good fun and as long as your partner doesn't mind, you shouldn't let anyone tell you what to do.

It might also be a player vs. GM mindset as well! Does the person have experience GMing an RP that needed lots of NPCs? They'll probably be more diverse in who they play!

What do you guys think? Do you feel like you encounter a great variety of characters in RP or are they all pretty similar? What style of character do you like to play as? Are your characters very diverse in their traits and personalities or do you prefer to follow a similar structure for them? Discuss.

It may sound counter-intuitive, but I actually find that RPs with stricter GMs tend to have players with more diverse character types. Roleplays with more rules or which encourage cooperation over individual agency tend to encourage more creativity in terms of character design, whereas more lenient GMs tend to have more characters gravitating to the usual types. If you were to ask me why this happens I wouldn't be able to tell you, I mean limits breed creativity and all that, but somehow that just doesn't feel enough to really justify the kind of pattern I observed.

If I were to throw a wild guess, I would probably say that being forced to make a choice that isn't necessarily better helps define character identity more. I find that a lot of times, characters tend to be trying to exploit the system, and thus end up much more similar in types. Like the way that if you ask someone their three wishes and you give them no rules, then like 90% of people will start by asking for some variation of "more wishes". Likewise, a GM that is lenient regarding personality is more likely to have characters whose personalities are designed as Mary Sues or war-machine-assassin-teen etc... Or one with more leniency in powers will start seeing the standard catch-all pretty-much-insta-death powers and the like. There's no point in reinventing the wheel unless the terrain isn't favorable to just going with the standard wheel.

- - -

There are definitely a few patterns I see in terms of my characters..

Overall Type: My absolute favorite character type is the child character. I'm not talking about teens here, younger than that. My reasons are fourfold. First, I like the unique perspectives of such characters, the naive and incomplete view they have of the world, and the sometimes simplistic or struggling attempts at explaining things they just can't comprehend. Another is the unique inherent challenges of such characters, which I'm sure hardly need any elaboration on. Natural physical weakness, lack of experience and knowledge etc... Thirdly, these characters can bring out sides of others characters that you don't normally see. Lastly, it's a character that often has a unique role in the group by nature that isn't usually occupied. For one who is concerned about having such a unique distinction within a group, that is excellent for me.
There are other types of characters I like as well, but they tend to come more in waves or seasons in which I focus more on other particular types, whereas the child character one is more consistent.

Gender: Almost all of my characters are either female, or some kind of trap. The reason for this is nothing special, I just like female FCs more, and ended up getting a ton of potential FCs saved up on my PC.

Personality:
-Curious ---> Very useful trait to have, allows me to get the character to do things and go to places and ask questions others might not be overly inclined to.

-Not overly intelligent---> I used to roleplay a lot of very intelligent characters, but as time went on I realize that these are both more fitting for the kind of more light-hearted/comedic sort of roleplays I prefer, and can be overall a lot of fun to play, for any of the many potential reasons: some are just less intelligent, others are too naive and bubbly, others are too prideful or clumsy... Plus, this way I don't have to try to compete with the constant metagaming that happens whenever a character tries making any sort of plan.

-Easily Embarrassed---> I like to put characters in embarrassing situations and have them react accordingly. It's hilarious.

-Cowardly and/or paranoid ---> I usually like to keep my characters alive, and I find this trait helps find an IC way to be especially focused on that.

Backstory / Arcs: Regret and guilt are too feelings that really resonate with me in stories due to my own life experiences. My characters often go through tragic or ironic fates, but this is almost never a situation in which they are strictly 'victims', almost all of my characters are the causes for their own problems or downfall, or at the very least they are being slapped back by karma.
-Downfall and Redemption

Powers:
-Shapeshifting
-Copy
-Mental Influence (when permitted)

Besides these patterns though, I actually feel I have a ton of variation, and of course I do actively decide to make characters outside of my comfort zone as well, though I tend to make characters more within my comfort zone for RPs I am more inclined towards in my commitment, as I want my favorite types of characters to go into the RPs I hope last longer and would be more at a loss in losing.

Either way, a lot of the times what makes me join an RP is getting a specific character idea for it.

I think the only thing my characters have in common is that they're male, they're generally young (so as to be more active) but I've played wizened older characters in big roleplays, and they don't sexually harass anyone. I would say "because I find that reprehensible" but I murder people and steal in roleplays and I wouldn't do those in RL either so

But I play all kinds. To name a few I've been a

• Hardened merc
• Slave
• Crazy pilot
• ruthless captain and swordsman
• Suave cutthroat
• Con man
• Heroic Knight
• Warrior Monk
• Academic Sorcerer
• Academic 1930's Adventurer
• PTSD Soldier

Etc.

I guess none of them have any problem going into combat either, which is the last similarity. I did start out with a very narrow set of caricatures, but over the years (as Odin stated) I branched out. I don't think anyone should be criticized for playing in their comfort zone either, however. It's all in good fun and as long as your partner doesn't mind, you shouldn't let anyone tell you what to do.

They're all quintessentially you <3

Whenever I've GMd, I try to do a first round of feedback and offer suggestions on the sheets. I don't mind repetitive and common tropes. What I care about more than that is how well the player knows and feels the character. I care that my player has a direction for said character and is happy and motivated to write them.

I'd rather have a tropey character who the player is stoked to write with, than a character that eventually falls flat because the writer loses steam, or didn't know the character to begin with. Does that make sense? I also think that a good way to add diversity is on playing with strengths and weaknesses. I tend to stack weaknesses as opposed to strengths. Like, yes, my man can fight amazingly well but he's shithouse in a social situation.

As for me, I have a handful of characters who I think are pretty diverse! I tend to play in Elder Scrolls universe, which in terms of diversity more often than not offers a delicious array...

I have my bratty healer, who had that normal and perfect childhood and still turned out like a pretty bad apple....
A disabled, older Dunmer who uses her illness to her advantage
A big massive cat-boi who smashes through opponents by getting his hands on pretty much anything around him a la John Wick.
A nord monk type who has a tendency to talk a lot and over embellish his accomplishments for entertainment
An older woman who was once accomplished in her medical field, but when her husband and daughter died she's been depressed and a shell of herself, waiting to die.

I also think that a good way to add diversity is on playing with strengths and weaknesses. I tend to stack weaknesses as opposed to strengths. Like, yes, my man can fight amazingly well but he's shithouse in a social situation.

Want to tag on here is something that is really important. I feel that Sanderson's Second Law (that limitations are what make a magic system interesting, not capabilities) applies to characters too. Since you're writing, your character can do anything htat you write them to. That's cool, but not super interesting and it definitely doesn't create conflict. What's the most interesting is what they CAN'T do, and how they work around that INcapability to achieve their goals. THAT's the essence of story.

<Snipped quote by Stormflyx>

Want to tag on here is something that is really important. I feel that Sanderson's Second Law (that limitations are what make a magic system interesting, not capabilities) applies to characters too. Since you're writing, your character can do anything htat you write them to. That's cool, but not super interesting and it definitely doesn't create conflict. What's the most interesting is what they CAN'T do, and how they work around that INcapability to achieve their goals. THAT's the essence of story.

That is completely true as well. Nobody likes a character who can do everything, every time. Unless of course, they do everything, every time - until they suffer a very very very big, bad, awful failure and they have to get over it.

I suppose my end conclusion is that the setting itself is often what fosters character diversity. If the GM makes a world where there's options, the players will take those options.

I agree, sometimes the setting inspires more creativity in the players allowing for greater character diversity.

I'd like to see more ethnic variation, more background variation, and less edgy protagonist backstories.

This is what I was initially thinking when I started this thread. I rarely ever see non-white characters or characters that challenge gender norms. One of my favorite RPs was a “Small town punk band tries to make it big” and the ethnic diversity of the characters was amazing compared to other RPs I’ve GMed or been involved in. I’m not sure what prompted it but I was extremely happy about the turnout.

One of my other prompts for posting this was that I happened to be searching shutterstock images for character inspiration and came across one that made me want to write up a transgender character, because I’d never seen a trans character in RP and the model inspired me to consider the possibility and it seemed like it could be a fun new challenge. I’ve branched out quite a bit since I started RPing, I used to play exclusively male characters who were always in/near my own age range. Now I find myself creating characters in the 30-50s age range, both male and female, and I find it’s more fun to create depth in characters that have actually lived long enough to accrue a greater measure of life experience.

I dont know that anyone would find folks willing to do this, but it would be fun to get together with folks, have them create character sheets and then roll for who plays who. Like everyone makes 2 characters up, make sure there are enough characters dissimilar enough to each other to have the right number of real options, then have folks vote on what the Party is composed of, then roll for who plays what. So 5 participants = 10 character options, voted down to the 5 characters to actually be played, and then you roll for who plays which of the 5.

This could be a fun, experimental exercise. If you ever decide to give it a try I’d be interested in participating.

—

Also as several of you mentioned, creating intentional weakness and character limitations. And I mean specifically physical weakness, not just mental/emotional. And I mean obvious weaknesses, real thought out character flaws instead of an afterthought addition. When I see stuff like a powerful pyromancer battle mage who’s only “weakness” is that they’re afraid of spiders or something, that’s lazy.

@Raxacoricofallapatorius I tend to play males but generally not around my own age. The problem is, a lot of the time I don't get a chance to play females. Either the RP is already female-sided, or the partner wants me to play a male, or I just happen to feel like playing a male more. Ethnic diversity is.. hard for me, because of the way people often want me to portray certain ethnicities.

"Can you play a black man?"

"Of course!"

"... but like, a stereotypical BBC ghetto gangsta?"

"No thanks."

@OdinI tend to decide what gender I’ll play as based on the existing characters, as you said you do. But that extends further than gender, if I see there are certain character types/classes already in existence I’ll do my best to make my character markedly different from the other archetypes.

I’ve never been asked to play a specific ethnicity, but when I do play a character ethnically different from me stereotypes weren’t really an issue since the character’s origin is almost always culturally familiar (American Midwest for example). Country and region of origin play a bigger part of defining a character as opposed to their skin color. If I was to play as someone from another cultural background I’d stick with what I’m most familiar with: English-American, Spanish-Mexican, Japanese, and Korean culture. I feel if I wanted to make a character who was, say, a Mexican migrant, I could accurately represent someone like that without risking perpetuating harmful stereotypes. On the flip side, and what I’d more likely go for, would be playing a black/Asian/latinx character who’s cultural origin was simply American, or English, and who didn’t have strong ties to their ethnic heritage as being a major part of their identity. Totally great if you wanna make characters like that, it’s just my preference. Being ethnically different doesn’t have to be a big deal.

Fantasy settings make ethnic diversity easier in a way because in a world where racial tension is more like “human vs elf vs orc” ethnic variation in human characters suddenly doesn’t matter at all culturally, for the most part, but fantasy RPs are where I happen to notice the least ethnic diversity in human characters.

Fantasy settings make ethnic diversity easier in a way because in a world where racial tension is more like “human vs elf vs orc” ethnic variation in human characters suddenly doesn’t matter at all culturally, for the most part, but fantasy RPs are where I happen to notice the least ethnic diversity in human characters.

I know I'm deviating a bit, but it's pretty funny how they call elves, orcs, etc. "races" instead of, you know, "species".

<Snipped quote by Raxacoricofallapatorius>

I know I'm deviating a bit, but it's pretty funny how they call elves, orcs, etc. "races" instead of, you know, "species".

I prefer to use race in fantasy because while species is also accurate, I feel that race implies different intelligent people-groups, and species can also mean to include animals. I only have a problem when “race” is used to describe different ethnic groups of humans because the human race is one race, one species, with ethnic and cultural diversity. Species can be used to classify an intelligent being or an animal, whereas race limits that category to intelligent species. And by intelligent I mean a species with culture and language.

<Snipped quote by stone>

I prefer to use race in fantasy because while species is also accurate, I feel that race implies different intelligent people-groups, and species can also mean to include animals. I only have a problem when “race” is used to describe different ethnic groups of humans because the human race is one race, one species, with ethnic and cultural diversity. Species can be used to classify an intelligent being or an animal, whereas race limits that category to intelligent species. And by intelligent I mean a species with culture and language.

That is a good point. I hadn't considered that.

I'll chip in with another perspective real quick as I take a brief break from studying:

Honestly? I don't really care too much, if at all, about recurring motifs in characters. I'm actually super apathetic to other people's OCs, and not really for the reason of me being the most self-centered guy on earth(even though I am), but more for the reason that I have no guarantee how long I'm sticking around other people. CSes more often than not fall into several trappings, including my own on more than a single occasion(and a friend's given me insight in how I distinctly make one of three archetypes worth of characters usually). I'm not really here to go all "REEE" at CS quality though; it's more to say that the core concept for a character barely interests me, if at all, when it comes from another person. The exception to this is when the concept is beyond cool, making me unable to look away, or so bad I can't look away for different reasons.

"But Ammokkx, if you don't care about other people's characters, why are you RPing?"

Good question. Idk myself. But if I had to try and give an answer: Through the course of the RP, I usually start caring once the characters in question get going and rolling and engaging with others. Only once the dynamics of the cast start to settle in place, do I start seeing the other characters as actual entities rather than temporary nuisances before the RP's untimely demise. Therefor, I also barely look at what external gimmicks a character may have. To me, characters are no more than a voice in a room. Unless it is something you can absolutely not get around, such as being wheelchair bound or interacting with a blind dude, my characters are about as indifferent as I am on the subject. Even in the aforementioned two cases, unless the RPer makes a note to remind you of those facts at every turn, I'm prone to just skim over it and treat the other character as just about anyone else, only paying special attention to the fact if a situation were to come up in which it is relevant again.

I just care much more about a character's actions rather than a character's nature. Usually, unless I'm in a Gming position, this just means that I skim other people's sheets at best and only read them more thoroughly once an actual interaction happens IC.

I'd say I've gotten more 'generic' in my characters the longer I've RP'd, too. While in the past I wasn't shy of going with 30 something gruff dudes(no old ladies tho; only once did I get a chance to play an adult vampire woman), now I'm more prone to just playing 16-18 y/o teens in settings fit for 16-18 y/o teens. Whether that's because I've become more of a weeb over time or because I've not had an original RP concept allowing for older characters stick out to me, remains to be seen. Since a character, to me, is so unquestionably defined by their role in the RP proper, I've also gotten more vague on CSes as I await the day to play them IC.

Ironic, then, that almost all of my favorite characters are more concepts than they are execution. Granted, 3/4 had some basic relations blooming in their short-lived RP which are the foundation of this favoritism, but I didn't get to go much in detail. The 4th, then, is one that never even hit the IC, and is to this day, still a complete 'what if' where I just went all-out with designing her gimmicks in the character sheet.

Personally, I try to avoid

<Snipped quote by Raxacoricofallapatorius>

I know I'm deviating a bit, but it's pretty funny how they call elves, orcs, etc. "races" instead of, you know, "species".

Funny thing when I'm working on fantasy I keep flip-flopping between the two terms

Where are those characters who had a perfect childhood and then turned out evil

*Suddenly remembers Ted Bundy*

@Idea

Though, I suppose they might not be species, considering in most settings there are half-elves, half-orcs, etc. That means that they can reproduce and stuff, which fills the species definition.