Players With Odd Concepts

[Volos]

It may just be my luck, but I've noticed an odd trend with players' concepts for their characters. If you ask for a background or concept for a character you'll get one of the usual cliché characters. It may be tied to their race, their class, or some other feature of their character; but you will realize the cliché. This I have come to accept as a part of gaming, but every once in a while I'll ask for truly original characters. No clichés, no cardboard cutouts of the latest hero from that movie/book/game that just came out, and no old characters from X number of years/months/weeks ago. What the players come up with are always the most insane group of misfits you could imagine. I've seen it run the gambit from a half-undead paladin, to a terminator warforged druid, multiple persona rouge anyone?, and the appears-to-be-a-nice-guy-power-hungry-murderer. So why is it that when asked for original characters, players seem to come up with psychopaths? Is there something wrong with gamers in general or have all the good character concepts been used up already?

[dsmiles]

Well, if you've been limiting your characters to "good-guy" concepts in the past (which I'm not saying you have), when you ask for an original concept, you're likely to let out their darker side. People are like that. Everyone has a darker side, roleplayers just get to let it out to play more often.

I know I'm usually free to play with my darker side, as most of the players in my group generally play neutral-aligned characters (unless the DM asks for "good-guys").

[Quietus]

Hm. One of those does sound somewhat familiar. I wonder where the inspiration for it came from?

However, yes, I'll agree - every time I've asked for players for a play-by-post, I get some extremely ... let's say unique, concepts. Some of them have made it into the games, and you're playing alongside one right now, actually. But I think it's just that people will either latch onto something in the settle and aim for that, or have this idea that they think is just so cool, that they'll seek to play if at all possible.

[shadow_archmagi]

I think dsmiles hit it before.

If up until now, they've been doing cliche heroes, then asking them to step away from cliche can often translate directly into stepping away from heroes.

[Otherworld Odd]

Well, unless you're playing with writers or designers of some sort you're bound to get a little odd character concepts I believe. I believe when asked for original characters, most people will go all out in an attempt to make their character 'unique' and they don't realize that even a regular human rogue could be unique (Flynn Rider from Tangled anyone?). Nothing wrong with psychopaths though. Lol.

[Volos]

No, that hasn't been the case. I always allow my players to run on the darker or murkier side of grey with their morality and the actions their characters take. For good measure I've run evil games with some of these players and have been given cliche, but atleast manageable characters. What really confuses/bothers me is that some of the CE characters I have allowed through have been less insane or down-right-bonkers than some of the good or neutral characters players have come up with on their own. If you give players room to be evil, in my expierence, they will enjoy the concept of being evil enough that they won't feel a need to break out of the box. But if they are left in the good to neutral range, they go really bonkers.

[GolemsVoice]

The problem here is that, with today's vast media landscape, and the internet making you aware of things that you wouldn't know otherwise, being truly original is hard, or even impossible. So, most "normal" characters WILL ahve some clichés in their background, simply because it's hard to completely avoid them. So if you ask for something that really contains NO clichés, you force your players to reach into concepts that aren't normally associated with heroes, just because heroes with such premises tend to not work.


and the appears-to-be-a-nice-guy-power-hungry-murderer.That, by the way, is a clichè, too.

From the tone of your post, I get the feeling you dislike clichés, but maybe you'll have to admit that some clichés aren't bad, but rather neccessary to make a working character within the environment of a roleplaying game. I may be wrong though, judging tone and meaning is a tricky thing on the internet.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

It strikes me that what many people don't realize is that avoiding cliches isn't done by mashing together crazy concepts. Cliches are simplifications of real characters. All that you need to do in order to make a cliche real is add depth.

For instance, let's say that you have a blond elven archer who lives in the forest. Cliche. But what if he's trying to avoid crazy adventures, because he's been dragged into all sorts of peril in the past? Maybe his little brother's been trying to tag along, and he's trying to keep the kid out of danger. Those two details already begin to flesh out the character concept.

When you think about it, a race and a class are great big cliches waiting for you to add to. Instead of asking the players for totally original characters, how about you ask them to add depth to their existing cliches? Work with them one step at a time.

[TheThan]

Well I'd like to point out that a good roleplayer can take an otherwise cliche character and turn him/her/it into a unique and dynamic character.

this is why most of the time you'll find generic races and classes in the core rulebooks. its so a player can take them, individualize them and make them unique and interesting.

interesting and unique does not necessarily equal exotic.

[valadil]

So why is it that when asked for original characters, players seem to come up with psychopaths?

Because deviating that far from the norm is the easiest way to ensure originality. It's really hard to play a grandfatherly wizard and make him seem unique. But a schizophrenic wizard who thinks he's a cleric is another matter. Picking something like this is a lazy way to achieve originality.

[BiblioRook]

To most people, in games like D&D violence = efficiency. Regardless of the amount of roleplaying you or your players try to add in, unless you are running a game centered around roleplaying, the road to success typically is lined with the slaughtered corpses of your enemies. Keeping that in mind it's not all that surprising (though still discouraging) that so many players opt towards evil psychopath; because as morally ambiguous as they might be, they still (technically) get the job done.

This also goes with what dsmiles said about players tapping into their darksides. I would imagine that far fewer people would play these games if it wasn't more or less centered on killing people and taking their stuff.

[Toliudar]

It's easy to see cliche in writing, but concepts that sound cliche, in the hands of the player, as TheThan alludes, often turn out to be nuanced and different. I've seen players who develop extensive backstories and character profiles, but can't follow through once it comes time to play, and others who write down five point-form notes and come up with something fresh and memorable. In a way, it's annoying.

So...the cliche backgrounds only become problem if they translate into bland, uninteresting characters.

[Telok]

I wrote this up for a xeph warblade I ran once. I think it's more like what you're looking for.

Baldor the Magnificent

His father was an itinerant wandering priest, his mother was a refugee from the southern wars with the gift of (minor) prophecy. He grew up honest, less because of the preaching than because his mother knew what he had done even before he got to do it.

His father disappeared when Baldor was about eight years old, going to preach in northlands for a season. Dad usually went abroad to preach, he liked to travel and claimed that the neighbors were happier with traveling stories than with sermons. It probably helped that he brought back bags of gold and held a feast for everyone when he returned. But what Baldor liked best were the tales of heroic (if somewhat suicidal or stupid) adventurers, valiant last stands, and harrowing escapes from overwhelming odds.

At age fourteen Baldor single handedly killed the two-and-a-half headed hydra of Blackmarch. It was originally an eleven headed hydra but Baldor got lost in the swamp for a week and a couple other adventurers found the beast first. It was a bit worse for wear when he finally stumbled across it. But he still claims bragging rights for being the one to kill it.

Three years later Baldor joined the Iron Legion. He served for five years and eventually became a squad leader for a light infantry rapid assault squad. Besides the fighting experience and teamwork skills he actually managed to acquire a modicum of discipline. His eventual split with the Legion was because his superiors didn’t really approve of his war cry (“Glory and honor!” while nice, is somewhat out of place in a mercenary unit) and total failure to control his heroic impulses. Indeed it was a common joke among his unit that if someone said “Can you help me with this knot?” Baldor would hear the word ‘help’ from halfway across the camp, cry out “I’ll save you!” and perform a running leap off the commander’s map table ending in a triple backflip and sunder the rope into a dozen tiny bits. All before he could even begin to think about it.

After a failed attempt to join the temple of Ishvaria (the mantra of “Boobs boobs boobity boobs” got him reprimanded, with a flail) he has spent the last several years alternating between solo adventures and favors for the local temple of Tormak in exchange for glory and looting rights. When not adventuring he stays at his mother’s house in western Velmont and keeps trying to persuade the half-giant girl next door to marry him (breasts as big as his head and at eye level!).

While not astonishingly religious Baldor is devout, in his somewhat straying way, to both Tormak and Kardala. Several temples of Ishvaria have banned him from thier premises.

[bloodtide]

Psychopaths are just modern fictional characters. Take most any character created in the last century, and you will see a ton of psychopaths.

Batman, Wolverine, James Bond, or any Clint Eastwood character. Plus cartoons and worse anime are full of psychopaths.

[TurtleKing]

Psychopath is just another term for mercenary. Well actually not completely, but comes close overall. Or would it be bandit, raider, vagabond, nomad, wanderer, and many more names. Frankly in some settings that type of character is normal. If you put that type of character in a modern setting then yes psychopath would fit with all the consequences that come with it.

[Mutazoia]

My last character was Honest Achmed, the used camel salesman. He was happily involved in the family used camel business but had to turn to adventuring when the family's entire stock of used camels contracted mad camel disease and had to be put down.

[Lord.Sorasen]

I wonder, if someone made an evil campaign and told people to make original characters, would people make a bunch of paladins?

[Yora]

I always tell my players that they have to come up with a concept for the group first, and then make their own characters that fit into the group.
So far, I always had to make the descision what kind of group they play, because player always want "whatever you want", but it does get you a group of characters that work well together.

[jamesnomoon]

True originality is the holy grail of nearly every art form in existance, and is very rarely achieved. Even if someone manages to make something no-one has seen/heard/tasted etc. before, there's *always* something it can be compared to. I think the main thing to do is know the difference between a stereotype (a simplified common image or concept) and an archetype (An original template from other concepts can be derived). Make a knife wielding maniac? You've got a stereotype. Make a knife wielding manic who believes that the Divine can be perceived at the moment someone passes from this world, and lives for the day he finally touches the face of the great beyond when he makes "The perfect kill"? Thats an archetype, someone who has elements we all know well, but has motivations and beliefs that are part of what he is but set him apart from the other faceless killers of the genre.

If players have a tendancy to create very similar characters (The woman who *always* plays an empathic healer, the guy who *always* plays the fight-crazed front line combatant) encourage them to step outside their comfort zone once and a while, to push their bounderies. they may not create "original" characters, but they may surprise themselves, and you, with what they do create and how much fun they have with it.

Telling the players that they have to come up with original concepts I suspect puts them under pressure, and makes them try their hardest to come up with *something*, which generally mean they'll go to the extreme ends of concept creation. With that it mind though, sometimes its fun go nuts and have a crazy campaign for a bit. Clears out the cobwebs when you can just let go with no regard for that "serious roleplaying" stuff. :smalltongue:

[Tengu_temp]

Because deviating that far from the norm is the easiest way to ensure originality. It's really hard to play a grandfatherly wizard and make him seem unique. But a schizophrenic wizard who thinks he's a cleric is another matter. Picking something like this is a lazy way to achieve originality.

This. Bonus points if the player thinks that playing a more ordinary character is boring.

Personally, I think that avoiding cliches, in both DMing and playing, is stupid - some are bound to pop up anyway, for example the "extremely random character with a weird class and race who's supposed to be fun and wacky, but ends up being extremely annoying" cliche. What you should focus on instead is playing the character/telling the story well. A well-played cliche is better than going out of your way to avoid all cliches at the cost of consistency and storytelling.

[valadil]

Personally, I think that avoiding cliches, in both DMing and playing, is stupid - some are bound to pop up anyway, for example the "extremely random character with a weird class and race who's supposed to be fun and wacky, but ends up being extremely annoying" cliche. What you should focus on instead is playing the character/telling the story well. A well-played cliche is better than going out of your way to avoid all cliches at the cost of consistency and storytelling.

Agreed. I used to obsess over originality. At some point I realized that my cliched plots were better than my original ones. Why? Because all the other GMs in the world had the good sense not to use the plots I was running. If an idea is original, it's because everyone before you rejected the idea. I'd rather run an exemplary instance of a common story than try to polish up a turd of an idea that nobody else thought salvageable.

[Mazeburn]

Ask for originality and people will just grab random words out of their head and stick them together, which usually results in a bit of a mess. Better is asking them to add a twist to a cliche. :)

[Choco]

These days I tend to make characters that are the embodiment of one cliche, and then purposely throw one major thing in there that is the exact opposite of what people would expect. For example, the cliche Super Ninja, who after doing all sorts of cliche Super Ninja stuff finally lands behind his opponent and moves in for the kill, by pulling out his gun and shooting the guy in the back of the head :smalltongue:.

I used to go out of my way to make original characters, but the first few games I played in were nothing but kick-in-the-door style, so it didn't matter anyway and I seem to have been trained out of it...

[Shademan]

you just have bad players

I play a warforged fighter who sees himself as a father figure for the rest of the party, he is incredibly strong and likes baking. the rest of the party is a LE james bind halfling and a CE wizard who really likes burning things (including herself)
and they are both played with sheer excellence.
A good player can get nearly any concept to work

[Gamgee]

There's no such thing as original, though there is a cliche frequency meter. Distinctions matter, or else you live in a world of illusions.

[Telasi]

I've run into both this problem and the opposite one. My group is divided: half play odd characters, one plays a horribly cliche, and the rest play reasonably sane characters.

The first half of the party consists of a thri-kreen unarmed swordsage/rogue/blood claw master, a soulknife/elocator (replacing the late Elan telepathic psion), and a drug addict human inquisitor/crusader (of the goddess of sex/love, he insists).

The horrible cliche is an elf archer ranger. In and of itself, this isn't that bad, but he both plays out and insists that all other elves follow every cliched stereotype (despite my elves being established as psionic city-dwellers whose only problem with dwarves is a trade/border dispute... :smallyuk:).

The other two are a human cleric of the slumbering god of storms and nightmares and a human warblade. The cleric, oddly enough, manages to be mostly normal, despite collecting an assortment of unusual people and creatures at home (so far, a succubus, a recently deceased goblin mage, and a soon to be zombie dragon) and trying to awaken an elder god. The warblade is normal except for being a bit CHAOTIC good, an an ADHD sort of way.

So I have one special snowflake syndrome victim, one guy who just can't stand normal magic, and a wise guy in the first group, a guy who can't accept that elves aren't necessarily tree-hugging archers, and two guys with quirky but sane-ish characters. Don't get me wrong, I have great players, but I do wish they would stop digging out crazy new books and concepts once in a while.

[erikun]

So why is it that when asked for original characters, players seem to come up with psychopaths? Is there something wrong with gamers in general or have all the good character concepts been used up already?
You are asking for a character concept that is not "normal" or "usual". Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason - they represent common, normal, or usual aspects for characters. (Not always accurately, but generally are.)

When you remove the possibility for anything regarding normal, you're left with the bizarre and schizophrenic. I mean, what were you expecting? If my Gnome Druid can't have a personality that's related to being a Gnome, can't have a personality that's related to being a Druid, and can't have a personality that's a "cliché" (meaning somewhat normal), then you're going to end up with a character with a personality and backstory that makes absolutely no sense.

[Lord Raziere]

heh, I can come up with an odd concept and have them still be hero.

you can make a human fighter weird and unique by making him a very devout believer is astrology and roleplaying everything from that.

going more exotic, a warforged bard is easily explained as a warforged who decided to cheer everyone up with music to get over the Last War- or a Warforged who decided to play the blues so that people would never forget what was lost during it, or a warforged bard who does both.

an elf archer ranger becomes very unusual when he is cast instead as a city detective.

heck, name a cliche combination, go ahead, I'll come up with as many ways to twist and make them original as I can imagine.

[MidnightOne]

She cleared her throat and set her sewing aside before sipping at her tea. "Sinari woods - we call it Rhun Calen - borders your barony of Clovian to our east. My family is one of many wanting to re-establish trade and ties with Baron Clovian and his people." She stopped a moment, her eyes a little distant. "Baron Ercis Clovian made war on the fae of Rhun Calen for three decades, seizing land and killing everything in his path. Anything he could not control, he destroyed."
"In any event I could not go along with their decision to attempt to renew ties, and left Rhun Calen for the depths of Sinari."
"You were not there. I remember what it was like when Clovian invaded and set fire to lands we have lived in for centuries. You have never watched as mages levelled fire against Ents and Fae alike, not caring for those they kill. None of the Barons Clovian can be trusted. If they are capable of doing this once, they are completely capable of doing it again."
"And yet today Baron Nirun Clovian still supports the town of Wood's End who cuts our trees and hunts our game," Lindorie spat. "The reaving of Rhun Calen continues, and the more short-sighted of my people want to 'make peace' with them." She shook her head. "The newer generation does not remember the time of smoke and fire, the Kotyaerea. I do. I remember the fear and loss. I remember the smell of buring bodies and the end of the treetop homes. I remember the wailing of a dryad whose home had been destroyed. No. There will be no peace until Rhun Calen is returned to its previous state."

Is this Elf Ranger evil? She won't hesitate to bring ruin to those of the nation who invaded her borders, but doesn't hold any hatred for other humans...