PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying without Emotions



Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 10:51 AM
The last session we played had us fight two Joy Stealers (I think that's what they were called). I am playing a cold-calculating wizard and one of them drained my Charisma down to 0 then fled. When I came out of my coma, I had lost all my emotions.

This is freaking sweet. My DM explained to me that I am now immune to all morale effects (good and ill) and other such effects based on emotion such as fear. My only problem is that playing a character completely without emotion is going to be hard.

Emotions and feelings are different so while I can't be happy or glad that I've lost my emotions, I can like it. I have no desire to exact revenge on the Joy Stealer and I don't hate the thing, I can still want to kill it (though I can't think of a reason that I would want to other than self preservation if I encountered it again). Food still tastes good, I can express whether I enjoyed the food or not, and I can even have cravings or a favorite dish, but it can't make my happy or fill the empty void of my angsty heart and get me fat on depression.

So basically, are there any ideas or tips anyone has for me? Any funny things you think I should try? Does this character act like a complete robot or what?

kamikasei
2009-02-10, 11:14 AM
Being an intelligent being without emotion is basically meaningless and impossible, so from the point of view of self-consistent roleplay and motivation you're kind of screwed.

You can try to come up with a way of being "without emotion" which does make sense, and satisfies the intent of the Joy Stealer, though.

Emotions are our subjective experience of physiological and instinctual reactions to stimuli, triggered by whatever they evolved to respond to and also by the huge number of things we learn to associate, however indirectly, with those stimuli. Cutting out the reactions is probably a bad idea, but cutting out the experience might not be. An "emotionless" person would still experience an adrenaline rush, but wouldn't feel panic, fear or excitement. They might become sexually aroused, but mentally feel like they might as well be doing their taxes. All their involuntary physiological responses would be intact, but their behaviour wouldn't match up with them. It'd be a case of extreme disconnect between mind and body.


Emotions and feelings are different so while I can't be happy or glad that I've lost my emotions, I can like it.

Can you explain?

Darrin
2009-02-10, 11:19 AM
So basically, are there any ideas or tips anyone has for me? Any funny things you think I should try? Does this character act like a complete robot or what?

Inform the PC you like the least that since your character hasn't mated in 7 years, he must undergo pon-farr and fight him to the death. He gets first pick of lirpas.

Next time you go into combat, tell the DM you want to grab an enemy's neck and nerve pinch him. If he asks why, just tell him you want to see if it works.

Find a horta. Mind-meld with it. See if it knows any dirty xorn jokes.

Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 11:24 AM
Ah, so play him like Spock? I'm not too familar with Star Trek, I'll have to read up on that.

kamikasei
2009-02-10, 11:41 AM
Ah, so play him like Spock?

GAH NO AARGH.

Pet peeve: Vulcans are a terrible example of emotionlessness. They're either written with a pretty poorly-thought-through notion of what it would entail (I AM EMOTIONLESS, I AM PERFECTLY LOGICAL AND ROBOT-LIKE) or they're well-thought out and in fact have emotions in abundance but channeled and controlled by profound discipline.

Of course, the caricature of emotionless rationality that is Spock in the popular consciousness may work perfectly well for your table - I assume you're not both a) all psychologists and b) taking the game absolutely seriously.

Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 11:44 AM
Can you explain?

Liking something isn't an emotion. I might like or dislike beets for their taste, or like or dislike being single for various reasons, but those reason won't include beets making me feel good about my stuff, or the love and affection I feel from my mate.

MorhgorRB
2009-02-10, 11:47 AM
My robots are undeniable.

Heliomance
2009-02-10, 11:50 AM
I think that like and dislike are in fact emotions. The closest you would get to liking or wanting something would be considering it a desirable state of affairs for purely functional reasons. You don't dislike being injured, but it reduces your functional capacity and so is an undesirable state of affairs which should be remedied at the earliest convenience. Liking beets, for example, is defined purely in terms of the fact that the taste brings you pleasure. Lacking emotions, you don't particularly like beets. They are just a means for supplying your body with the necessary substances that is no less efficient than any other type of food.

Lycanthromancer
2009-02-10, 12:10 PM
You'd basically have to play as cold and logical, like someone who's had the portion of the brain that regulates emotions lobotomized. Either play it as Mr. Spock, from the original Star Trek, more like Data, from The Next Generation, or like Seven of Nine, from Voyager (who is somewhat of a mix between the two).

Of course, Data can't (or couldn't, prior to the movies) experience emotions and was intensely curious as to why people act the way they do. I'm not sure this would fit your character, as he can remember having feelings, and can understand (intellectually, if not empathically) why people do as they do.

Seven of Nine had her emotions stripped from her (or, rather, muted greatly), and she's trying to rediscover her humanity, to figure out how she fits in with this strange species she is a part of. She can vaguely recall having emotions, but views them as illogical and alien, but wants to understand them anyway.

Spock disdains emotions, and tries to act cold and logical (though he doesn't always succeed). He actively pushes them away, viewing them as useless, despite the many many times Kirk's more emotively-driven actions prove superior.

Choose which one works best, and maybe watch a few episodes dealing with the character in question (or maybe find another source of inspiration, such as 2001, a Space Odyssey, or the Terminator movies, or something).

Haven
2009-02-10, 12:38 PM
What Heliomance said. Without emotions the only reason to prefer one food over another would be for nutritional value, how long it lasts without spoiling, etc.

Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 12:49 PM
See, taste is a sense, not an emotion. So while beets may taste good, they can't bring me pleasure. But if my character likes the taste of beets, he would of course prefer them to another source of sustinance. Either way though, eating something that brings him discomfort won't ruin his mood any more than eating beets would make him happy. Seeing or hearing something could be considered good or bad for my character, but he wouldn't have any feelings for them the same way we do.

He may have a preference to listen to wind instruments because they sound softer to his eardrums than harsh string instruments do, but the music cannot move or inspire him in any way or provoke any feelings.

Being attacked still hurts, and he'd want to end the pain as soon as possible, but he won't cry out over it.

Pain is a feeling, I can still feel pain or discomfort or relaxation or hunger, but I can't honestly say that I enjoy relaxing, just that it is more desirable for my body to feel that stimulus than it is for it to feel pain.

I think I should be able to want things too. Wanting isn't an emotion either, it's just need I wish to be fulfilled. I can't want things for the reason that they bring me happiness though. I can only want things out of functional reasons.

Heliomance
2009-02-10, 01:02 PM
But he wouldn't like the taste of beets. Yes, things taste different, but to say he likes the taste means that the taste brings him pleasure. No emotions, no preferences. Being attacked may hurt, but he has no negative response to that pain, therefore no particular desire toend it unless it is impairing his functioning. Saying that he prefers wind instruments to string because the string sounds harsh is saying that the string instruments bring him displeasure. Again, emotion.

Emotion is in too many things for this to be at all easy. You can't have preferences except whe they are based on concrete and definable advantages - your character would prefer vegetables to chocolate because they have a higher nutritional content.

Spiryt
2009-02-10, 01:10 PM
Either way though, eating something that brings him discomfort won't ruin his mood any more than eating beets would make him happy.


Here's the problem. Not happy, he doesn't feel stuff like that.

Personally I would say that human being without emotion's can't really go on.

Even mentioned Spocks or other guys keep going just to feel satisfaction from feeling more "pro" than more emotional types.

Lycanthromancer
2009-02-10, 01:10 PM
But he wouldn't like the taste of beets. Yes, things taste different, but to say he likes the taste means that the taste brings him pleasure. No emotions, no preferences. Being attacked may hurt, but he has no negative response to that pain, therefore no particular desire toend it unless it is impairing his functioning. Saying that he prefers wind instruments to string because the string sounds harsh is saying that the string instruments bring him displeasure. Again, emotion.

Emotion is in too many things for this to be at all easy. You can't have preferences except whe they are based on concrete and definable advantages - your character would prefer vegetables to chocolate because they have a higher nutritional content.

+1

"Like" and "dislike" no longer have any meaning for your character. He can sense things, but they mean nothing to him other than how they further his goals, or whether they impede them. He would have no preferences in music, and, in fact, would likely prefer it not to exist in his world, if only because they're distracting (unless he can use it to his advantage).

[edit] In point of fact, he probably would no longer have any real goals, and would just be going through the motions of doing whatever he's doing. He no longer has any drive, any reason to continue to exist, other than existence's own sake. He no longer wants things. He might require them, but he won't want them. He doesn't have any purpose. He might as well not exist as exist, because it won't matter one way or another.

He might continue with his previous goals because he knows he once wanted them, and that if he regains his emotions he'll want them again, and knows he'll regret not achieving them, but he won't really care one way or another.

It's all the same to him, really.

Dyllan
2009-02-10, 01:17 PM
You can't have preferences except whe they are based on concrete and definable advantages...

You do realize this is a license from your DM to become the ultimate munchkin. No motivations except what is most advantageous in a measurable way...

Any chance you can adapt your build into something Pun-Pun-ish?

Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 01:18 PM
Emotion is in too many things for this to be at all easy. You can't have preferences except whe they are based on concrete and definable advantages - your character would prefer vegetables to chocolate because they have a higher nutritional content.

My character has no knowledge of what's nutritional so he can only go by what tastes good. But if his mom cooks him beans for the 50th time in a row, he won't complain about it. If string instruments are harsh on his ears, he won't sit there and listen to them if there is an alternative, and if someone punches him in the face he isn't going to shrug at it, but he won't fear that person either.

Discomfort isn't an emotion. It's a concrete and definable disadvantage. Just becuase I like the taste of something doesn't mean it brings me pleasure. I eat mushrooms because I like them, but they've never evoked any emotion out of me. I've commented that they have a good flavor or texture, but there is no reason I need to say this with a smile or be happy about their taste.

And now I finally understand why my friend says I should get a bonus to bluff checks. After eating a cooked meal I could say, "That was quite satisfactory." And without any facial expressions or tone, who would know if I was lying or not?

theMycon
2009-02-10, 01:18 PM
I've had a DM rule that "hunger is an emotion", and thus if your charisma score was below 3 you'd turn ascetic and ignore food 'til you went into a coma.*
I think that's stupid, but it brings to mind one good question. If you're without emotion, you're without desire. If you don't want anything (and, as the PHB says for a CHA 0 being) can't really tell an important difference between you and your surroundings, why are you adventuring? Why are you doing anything at all?

A truly emotionless character, even given the leeway to make him care about his own life, the life of his kids, or the fate of the world, would still need one heck of a motivation to continue the adventure. Playing it simply logical-to-the-extreme and ignoring the actual emotionless bit is the only way to make him playable.


*This was also my least favorite DM, as he used any excuse he could to treat PCs like scenery (lazy excuses, too. "The spell fails, and you don't feel like casting it again today.") and would make us to spend three sessions straight roleplaying getting lunch & having our laundry done, while he planned the next bit of NPC badassitude. First time I realized it's okay to quit a game.

Jack Zander
2009-02-10, 01:25 PM
Entire post

Well, preferences or not, he is still going to become hungry and want food. I was thinking about his goals and how those may change. He actually owns a magic shop becuase it was fun. It's no longer fun so he might as well sell it, but it does provide him with a larger source of income than even adventuring gave him, so he could keep it running to gain riches so that he can live ... comfortably? securely? He doesn't worry so I guess he only needs enough to eat food.

Perhaps he thinks that this way of life is better, and is going to try to get all emotions erased to create a more powerful society. Not becuase he cares, but because that's what all people are obligated to do, is strengthen their society and leave it in a better condition when they leave than it was when they entered the world.

valadil
2009-02-10, 02:09 PM
Watch Equilibirum. It's a movie about a dystopian world where emotion is suppressed and wiped out. I found the movie boring due to the lack of emotion (though it was a good story), but it should be relevant here.

Narmoth
2009-02-10, 02:09 PM
Actually, I would approach this from a completely different angle, basing everything on knowledge and intelligence:
He doesn't feel anything by hunger, but he knows that he will die if he don't eat.
He knows that something is changed, and might decide, that returning to the previous state of things would be something to strive after
I'm not sure if he will remember previous emotions, but he would still continue to follow old goals, as he has no drive to change them. He might be unmotivated, but he will proceed with completing any previous plans, and might still come up with new plans and schemes, especially if someone who he remembers as doing things for before asks him to do it again.
Since the group knows something is wrong with him, they will thus be able to get him on to doing something with it

Person_Man
2009-02-10, 02:27 PM
Actually, this sounds like a good alternate class feature for a Paladin:

Emotionless (Ex): Your dedication to law and justice is so profound that you have learned to suppress all emotions. You gain immunity to all mind affecting effects, including all morale, fear, and compulsion effects. In addition, your rigid mind prevents you from using or being effected by an aura of any kind that is related to emotion or morale, (such as a Paladin's Aura of Courage, Frightful Presence, a Marshal's aura, Bardic abilities, etc). For example, a Paladin 4/Bard 1 with the Emotionless ability cannot use Inspire Courage to effect himself or his allies.

This class ability replaces your Aura of Courage and Divine Health class features.

Tempest Fennac
2009-02-10, 03:00 PM
I agree with everyng else about how impossible RPing without emotions would be. Can you get your emotions back at all?

Narmoth
2009-02-10, 03:03 PM
Actually, this sounds like a good alternate class feature for a Paladin:

Emotionless (Ex): Your dedication to law and justice is so profound that you have learned to suppress all emotions. You gain immunity to all mind affecting effects, including all morale, fear, and compulsion effects. In addition, your rigid mind prevents you from using or being effected by an aura of any kind that is related to emotion or morale, (such as a Paladin's Aura of Courage, Frightful Presence, a Marshal's aura, Bardic abilities, etc). For example, a Paladin 4/Bard 1 with the Emotionless ability cannot use Inspire Courage to effect himself or his allies.

This class ability replaces your Aura of Courage and Divine Health class features.

Or a class feature for the blackguard, as you have completely forgotten that the paladin is first and foremost good, and then the champion of good, and only then lawful

Innis Cabal
2009-02-10, 03:19 PM
The thing is, emotion is more then just a response from the brain, there is more to science then having emotions. There are plenty of psycological disorders that cause emotional responses to cease or to come about in improper sitatuions. So a character that lacks emotion ins't as impossible as others have said.

There is no clear scientific evidence to support how they come about, there are plenty of theories but thats all they are. Emotions are as much a product of your culture, upbringing, and general local as they are about what part of the brain is fired up at the time. Not everyone reacts to fear or surpise the same way, the same things don't produce the same response of pleasure in different people. Not only that, but taste is not an emotion, its a sense. Knowing if something tastes better then something else has -nothing- to do with how you feel about the particular dish. Garbage still tastes awful no matter how chiper you are. You simply won't care what you eat, you simply won't have a prefrence.

Some of posted some good stuff on how to do it. Emotional disconnect will be the real first step. If someone you loved is killed, it won't matter, you really don't care about them anymore. Yourself getting stabbed, sure there will be pain, again thats not an emotion but a feeling, but you won't care that you got injured, it won't deter you from what ever it is your doing.

The big issue is, you won't have any desire, or really any want to do anything. You may have a goal, but it lacks any real motivation. Its not like you completly forgot how to have emotions, you just don't have them anymore. You won't instantly drop what your doing. Its not like you can feel the emotion of despair or dread, you won't be able to tell yourself "This is pointless because A, B, and C. You lack the ability to do that now. You also lack the ability to really make any connections past the point. You are more or less a program now, dedicated to what ever it was you wanted before you lost your emotions.

You can't be detered from it. Nothing anyone says can pull you away from it. No logic can be argued against it, because the emotions that motivate things like right and wrong no longer matter or apply to you.

Graymayre
2009-02-10, 03:25 PM
I'm pretty sure this thread is supposed to be about how an emotionless person would act under these rules; not whether that person can enjoy food.:smallconfused:

I'd suggest acting as more of a god-like figure in this situation. Almost as if emotions were below you. Dr. Manhattan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Manhattan#Doctor_Manhattan) from the graphic novel "Watchmen" is an excellent example, as he personifies intellect over emotion.

Innis Cabal
2009-02-10, 03:28 PM
But it answers the question.

Dr. Manhatten is not really a proper showing, he still has emotional responses, he has -goals- he has desire, thats why he

leaves to create more life

A real emotionless being wouldn't have the desire to do that.

Graymayre
2009-02-10, 03:34 PM
I understand, but as a being who favors intelligence over emotion (like most stereotypical wizards) he's the Bee's knees for an evenground between playing a character that is truelly emotionless, and a character with little emotion that is actually playable.

Innis Cabal
2009-02-10, 03:58 PM
Oh absolutly, i'm saying its possible after all, but if your going to really do it, and its full on no emotion, you should at the very least look at how far it really goes.

Prometheus
2009-02-10, 04:51 PM
It's hard to gauge what the DM means when he says that he wants you to RP feelings but not emotion. The only thing that I can think is that you have no emotions, but you do have goals. You can recognize things as good or bad, but are not personally affected by the consequences.

I actually tried to live completely without emotion for a period of time in my life, so feel free ask away what this meant to me. This is of course, impossible to actually do, but it translated into thinking about the long-term, asceticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism), stoicism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism), and rationality. Perhaps the best way to understand what this means practically is to write out some boundary conditions (of course, depending on how your DM separates feelings and emotions, not all of these may apply):
-If you think something bad or good is going to happen to you (or it has happened to you), it does not affect your decision making. You still try to optimize good and minimize harm. You will show neither hope nor fear - your state will be to continually try to do better no matter what [This isn't actually a bad thing, it's usually referred to as resilience or living in the moment. Of course, it is also important to actually enjoy that moment].
-Emotional experience is worthless. That's where the asceticism comes in. You will do nothing to excess and not do anything that doesn't have a utility beyond experience. For example, you will not eat sweets unless they are necessary for dietary reasons or are easier to procure (both unlikely) - but you will of course eat, and never forget to do it. When you talk to other people, it is either strictly business (what information to they have? What information do they need?) or persuasive (If I could only motivate him to train harder, we would be better off). [This is one of the big losses of going emotionless - you don't see values that do in fact exist and you aren't selfless]
-Thought should be as rational as possible. You should always consider alternative possibilities and resist falling prey to logical fallacies. Just because you want something to be true doesn't mean that it is. Things aren't always the way they appear (but you should generally assume so unless shown otherwise). You should always seek to analyze, categorize, and predict things that occur and why. [see Skepticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism). Contrary to popular belief, this isn't an emotional response known as doubt and neither does it spoil all the fun]
-Motivation will also be affected - but it depends again on how the break-down between feeling and emotion go. On the one hand, no laziness or inefficiency should get in the way of accomplishing your objectives. On the other hand, the set of your objectives, their magnitude, and your perceived role in them have all diminished dramatically. Chose how this balance goes and stick with it. [For me, it was the latter. This really kind of emphasizes what a paradox it is to actually try this.]
-Is Empathy an emotion or a sensation? Would you be able to tell what someone else is feeling and if so would it matter? When I tried to go without emotion, I lost some, but not all empathy. I believe a complete lack of empathy would not necessarily make you a sociopath but it certainly is a prerequisite. Again, this comes down to one of those nebulous definitions.

vicente408
2009-02-10, 07:33 PM
A sense of empathy would certainly be diminished, though not nonexistent. Even without feeling emotion oneself, it is not unreasonable to be able to recognize physical or behavioral clues and infer the emotional state of another.

EndlessWrath
2009-02-10, 08:14 PM
I'd play it something like this: The character only thinks logically. Retains his objectives from earlier, but fulfills them coldly and to the point that yields the greatest result. You're solutions are quick and to the point as well as your conversations. That's the best i can do. Being emotionless doesn't mean you have no objectives... it just changes your view and reason behind your actions.

imagine :vaarsuvius: with 0 emotion... more like recent (before the dragon of course)

MickJay
2009-02-10, 08:20 PM
You have to start with deciding what exactly you want "being emotionless" to mean for your character. Maybe read wiki's article on emotions, it's lengthy, but it may give you some ideas.

Think also about how lacking emotions will change motivations of your character. In worst case, it could mean your character turned into a psychopath (they tend to simulate emotions when interacting with other people, so you could keep acting like you were before) and now concentrates on getting as much as possible from every situation without any inhibitions - but you can hide that very well.

Not having emotions doesn't mean you don't want anything - insted of relying on gut feeling, you rationalize your needs and priorities and act accodring to those.

SlyGuyMcFly
2009-02-10, 08:22 PM
A sense of empathy would certainly be diminished, though not nonexistent. Even without feeling emotion oneself, it is not unreasonable to be able to recognize physical or behavioral clues and infer the emotional state of another.

I´m inclined to agree. While the character in question no longer has emotions, I dont see why he would be unable deduce the emotional state of others, watching body language, facial expressions, tone of voice, etc. That said, a penalty to Sense Motive would probably be appropriate.

JonestheSpy
2009-02-10, 09:49 PM
Interesting conversation. A couple of points to throw in:

I think the word "feelings" is confusing the issue. Hunger, taste, etc are sensations. You can still be happy right after you break your arm, and be miserable while getting a back massage. It can certainly be tricky to differentiate, as sensations so often trigger emotions.

Second, I think that the whole "no emotions=selfish sociopath" is a very limited perspective. I mean, it could be that way, but morality is not necessarily founded in emotion (though obviously empathy plays a big part). A good alignied character would easily regard "Do unto others as you would have them do unot you" as a perfectly rational statemnt, no emotion needed. ST:NG's Data was clearly a "good" character, even without emotion (interesting that his evil twin COULD feel emotion, btw).

More esoterically, I highly recommend the Argentinian film "Man Facing Southeast". A man in an asylum claims to be from another world, and that he has no emotions (and displays none). But he helps people, when the opportunity arises. His doctor questions why he would do this if he has no emotions, and the patient explains that and kindness and helping people is rational - and that the doctor and the "normal" people who accept all the suffering around them are in fact the crazy ones.

LCR
2009-02-11, 03:47 AM
Read "The Fountainhead" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountainhead) by Ayn Rand and play your character like Howard Roark, only with wizardry instead of architecture.
He basically shows no emotions whatsoever throughout the book, which is kind of interesting for the first one hundred pages and gets annoying afterwards. But he'll be a much better example than Spock.

Halaster
2009-02-11, 07:23 AM
Hi.

I'd like to shed a somewhat different light on this matter: while your character's emotions are gone, his instincts should be pretty much intact. So, when something attacks him, he won't feel fear or anger, but his fight-or-flight response should still kick in, since it is an older evolutionary development - animals have it, even those that have no emotions as such.
So basically he would be left to rationalize these instinctual responses, and you should work out what they are. I'd list the following: food, sex, comfort (warmth, shelter), physical intactness. Those rely neither on intellect nor emotion. You might want to add company (if you think humans are social creatures by nature), to make your character more group-compatible.

As a result, while he may no longer feel friendship for his comrades, he would still stick with them, since he has a vague need to have other people around. When he sees a good meal, he will still eat it, out of a similarly vague need to eat. Likewise, an attractive woman will arouse him and so on.

How he integrates those responses into his behavior is up to you. He can intellectually comprehend what emotions his friends expect from him, and attempt to emulate them, like the mentioned sociopath, he can respond to questions as to whether he liked his lunch with a standard answer and he could even make up lines to hook women.

However, his situation, at least initially, should be quite confusing, after all, our emotions help us make sense of our experiences. He might ask himself, why he is killing that orc, or running away from that dragon, since the responses he has come to expect (anger, fear) no longer show up. He will probably try to find reasons that do not depend on emotion, but how he succeeds is an interesting question.

CU,
Halaster

Jack Zander
2009-02-11, 10:24 AM
Thanks for everyone's input so far.

My DM and fellow players read this and came to the general consensus that I can still prefer one taste or feeling sensation over another, so that's a moot point now.

My DM said that the hardest thing would probably be my motivation, and I'm still trying to think of reasons for me to continue to adventure. Any help in that area would be appreciated. Thanks for the ideas.

Tempest Fennac
2009-02-11, 10:55 AM
Will there be a way to counteract the emotion loss, or are you stuck with it?

lilhowie624
2009-02-11, 11:41 AM
as for adventuring you could just want to fullfill the oblegations of those around you. to be useful when you can. knowing your craft you can rationalize that your help would be needed. since you dont care about weather you stay behind or go with you can say your a tool that just needs to be used.

Jack Zander
2009-02-11, 01:14 PM
There are two ways you can get your emotions back. One is to kill the joy stealer that stole them. I have no idea what the other one is, but I expect it is some sort of spell.

However, having my emotions gone is totally awesome so I don't even want to try to get them back.

MickJay
2009-02-11, 06:05 PM
What was motivating your wizard before he lost emotions? If it was something like seeking knowledge, then losing emotions would only allow him to concentrate on this task even better. If it was something more complex, you'll need to rationalize it more, but that can be done with practically any idea.

If the wizard ever gets his emotions back (willingly or not), I'd expect him to be overwhelmed by them for some time - he'd be overreacting to everything for a few days before things go back to normal.

Runeclaw
2009-02-11, 06:47 PM
He can sense things, but they mean nothing to him other than how they further his goals, or whether they impede them.

Why does he even have goals?

I mean you'd have to, to have any reason to get up in the morning or even to prefer existing to not existing. But with no emotions, what's the source of that?

Jack Zander
2009-02-13, 01:09 PM
I think my character would still want to survive. Even single celled organisms eat and they surely don't have emotions. In fact, apathy is a response to depression, which is an emotion, so I'd say my character doesn't have the ability to be completely uncaring about everything, especially his well-being.

LibraryOgre
2009-02-13, 04:42 PM
1) Having once been mortal, you character will still understand emotions, and will be able to logically process that emotion X is appropriate at this time. That means he's not going to do wildly out of place things, simply because he has no emotions.

2) Likewise, not feeling fear doesn't mean recklessly suicidal. He can still process that a situation is not safe for him, and withdraw... not because he is afraid, but because it makes sense in terms of self-preservation.

3) Remember, however, that you don't really WANT things anymore. There can be statements of "I can make the best use of this", but it's not a matter of "I want that thingy."

4) You might also go with it being somewhat intellectually disturbing that you cannot feel. You know what is the appropriate emotion, but you cannot feel it. You cannot feel disturbed at the lack of emotion. You can just be somewhat intellectually curious as to why you cannot.

Diakos
2009-02-13, 10:03 PM
It is likely the worst possible thing to roleplay, perhaps besides an inanimate object.
A big thing to consider (and one that many have pointed out) is, does he still have have a drive to move forward?
Or does he stagnate, tread water, keep the status quou.
Would he WANT his emotions back? Hazard through dangerous lands, fighting of various horrid monsters for something he is unable to miss.
Would it not be more comfortable, safe and easy to settle down in a moderate sized city selling his magical skills, letting him stay dry, warm, clothed and well-fed, with harlots close by should his baser urges arise (seeing as love is no longer an issue), he could live out his life there easily.

Llama231
2009-02-13, 10:11 PM
Wouldn't being depressed count as an emotion?

Lycanthromancer
2009-02-13, 10:44 PM
Wouldn't being depressed count as an emotion?

Some depression is. Other kinds are a damping of emotions to a dull, dead gray.

If that kind of depression is anything like what your character is going through, I seriously doubt he'll have the drive to continue adventuring. Then again, you can make it playable (and maybe even fun) if you do it right.

LibraryOgre
2009-02-15, 02:32 PM
It depends on his other motivations, and how he views being an adventurer.

He may continue to adventure because he recognizes that being without emotions is a non-natural state, and could have unforeseen consequences. Returning to his natural state is more logical, as it avoids these complications.

He may have a goal that is incompatible with staying put. "We're trying to save the world" makes sense even when you don't have anyone you love. The world, is after all, where you keep your stuff.

He may have a sense of responsibility, or an oath to maintain. While he doesn't feel loyalty or the like, he may recognize that keeping the oath will cause him less trouble in the long run, or may be seeking to avoid emotional trauma in others... he knows that it hurts, and even if he doesn't want, in an emotional sense, to avoid causing emotional trauma, he may force himself to do so because of the memories of pain.