Burned out, no characters seem appealing?

[jaappleton]

I've reached a point where no character concept seems exciting to play.

And I have no idea what to do.

I've either played it or built it a hundred times over. Super optimized, min-maxed, to off the wall crazy ideas that just sounded fun. And I've had a blast either building characters or playing them.

And now its at a point where nothing sounds exciting, and this feeling sucks.

I don't know what happened. Is it because I'm building optimization playstyle concepts and not characters?

It's been a few weeks now and I can't think of any way to bust myself out of this slump. Any ideas, playgrounders?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

It's been a few weeks now and I can't think of any way to bust myself out of this slump. Any ideas, playgrounders?

Do something else for a while. If you're actively involved in a game, great!, but if not, don't seek one out for a minute. Take a small step back, catch up on the reading you've been meaning to do, play a video game, repaint the trim in the living room, go to the gym, whatever. The cure for burnout is relaxation and diversification. The game and the ideas will still be there when you're refreshed and ready again.

[LeonBH]

Is there any major event going on in your life right now? Are you feeling generally down and uninspired?

[Talamare]

Don't play builds
Play people

[Pelle]

Is it because I'm building optimization playstyle concepts and not characters?

Possibly, try making a character instead of a build. Try to see how much fun you can have with for example a human champion fighter, if you focus on making an interesting personality...

[Ritorix]

Sounds like it's time to put on the DM hat.

[Leon]

You optimized the fun out of the game. As others have said play the character not the numbers. Play something other than D&D for a while and don't over analyze the character and how exactly its going to Do anything.

One of my most enjoyable PCs has been a Archivist (later a Cloistered Cleric due to DM problems) who spent a lengthy period as a Werewolf and picked up some barbarian levels to fill that bestial hole in his soul that was left when the curse was removed. Im not an optimizer and i know from these boards the mere thought of a full caster taking several non caster levels would make them weep at loss of Optimal but it makes for a better character than merely resuming what it was before.

[Unoriginal]

Is it because I'm building optimization playstyle concepts and not characters?

I'd say it's probable.

Aside from taking a pause or read/watch/play other works for inspiration, maybe looking at D&D from another angle could help you?

Have you read the "Let's Read the Monster Manual" threads on this forum? They have a lot of plot hooks that could inspire you.

Otherwise, yes, try making and playing characters, not builds.

[Throne12]

Make a character not a build. Roll up a wizard or a sorcerer with spells you wouldn't normal take. This will force you to get a bit more Creative with your actions.

Unoptimized characters are fun too. Instead of tossing a fireball. Try casting melf's minute meteors. Then next turn cast Tidal wave then meteors as bonus action for disadvantage theres saves.

[jaappleton]

Ok.

This is... oddly enough, the first time I've ever asked this. I've been playing D&D for about 5 years, and I've never asked this.

How do you create a character?

We all know how to fill out a character sheet, that's not what I'm asking.

I've made hundreds of PCs. I've put on the DM hat and I've made tons of NPCs. They were all, 'This person is X Class and they like Y and Z, and dislike A, B', etc. It's typically "I want to be a Wizard, so let's make a Wizard, and figure out what kind of Wizard this person is after".

How do you do it? How do you draw inspiration for the character, their personality? Do you start with that and work out the class from there?

[LeonBH]

How do you create a character?

A really simple tool is, you think of something they're bad at, and that defines their life.

You can make an outwardly nice guy who is secretly suffering from PTSD.
You can make an amnesiac who can speak an exotic language and has no idea why.
You can make a widower who is doing everything to resurrect his wife, whom he killed.
You can make someone who fell in love with someone who doesn't love them back.


Here's their D&D incarnations:

A Wild Magic Sorcerer who gets along with everybody.
A Barbarian with the Linguist Feat.
A Necromancer Wizard.
An Archfey Patron Warlock.


The key is to make them vulnerable. If possible, don't kill their families, so that the DM can try to kill them in front of you (and you can save them).

[Unoriginal]

Ok.

This is... oddly enough, the first time I've ever asked this. I've been playing D&D for about 5 years, and I've never asked this.

How do you create a character?

We all know how to fill out a character sheet, that's not what I'm asking.

I've made hundreds of PCs. I've put on the DM hat and I've made tons of NPCs. They were all, 'This person is X Class and they like Y and Z, and dislike A, B', etc. It's typically "I want to be a Wizard, so let's make a Wizard, and figure out what kind of Wizard this person is after".

How do you do it? How do you draw inspiration for the character, their personality? Do you start with that and work out the class from there?

Well it depends.

Sometime I see a character in a work and go "man, it could be fun to play someone like that", or I see/read something and go "man, it could be fun if instead of X this went in Y direction" (ex: "it could be fun to have a Dwarf inspired by Jack Sparrow").

Other times I read a piece of D&D lore and think "this would be interesting to explore", "that will subvert the players' expectations, it can be memorable" or "you could make it something interesting if X thing happened with Y" (ex: prideful hobgoblin captain targeting an half-elf adventurer to force their elven parent to surrender).

And yet other times I just think of characters and story plot I'd be interested in seeing, as I would if I was trying to write a story, and think if they would fit the world or not.

A Paladin who loves gold but who is still a good guy, a ruthless pirate who managed to capture a sea serpent and is using it to power a monstrous ship, a pugilist who's searching for giants to defeat, an high elf bard who's constantly trying to rope people into risky ventures, a goblin who wants to be a knight, all could be characters in a campaign, as NPCs or PCs, just as they could be characters in any fictional work.

So, the question is, jaappleton, what kind of character would you like to see in a story?



The key is to make them vulnerable. If possible, don't kill their families, so that the DM can try to kill them in front of you (and you can save them).

Eh, I disagree with this. Making them vulnerable is not the key, it's just a non-automatic consequence of making them people .

Some people are vulnerable, others aren't. Some people were marked by tragedies in their lives, others dealt with them differently or simply didn't have such tragedies.

For exemple, Aquaman from Batman: The Brave and the Bold is a boisterous, hammy, nice man who will support his friends to the end and who has little in the "personal drama" department. It doesn't make him a lesser character.

[lebefrei]

I was going to come here and suggest you take a break from the game, but now that I've read your post I also recommend that you actually try making a character that exists in the world instead of a stat block. That is probably my greatest desire as a DM and the thing I work hardest on for my players. Unless you're just playing a game that has dungeon after dungeon, and no interactions or roleplay elements, I think that adding character to the character you play is a great thing.

As humans, we are driven by motivations and held back by insecurities. What motivates your character, and what are their problems? Just think of them as a real person, with depth and issues and fears, and it should come to you. Also, I suggest you try to play something a fair bit different from yourself. I find most people that are mostly into min/max just play an idealized version of themselves. Instead play someone unlike you, so instead of spending your time bored by the class choices, your focus is on what your character would do next. Good luck! And if you're still bored, try a different game or take a break for a while. We all burn out sometimes, not every hobby can last forever.

[alchahest]

I will tend to pick a part of the world (this relies on input from the DM of course, if it's homebrew, which my games usually are), and ask about the culture and things that happen in the area. If I'm not inspired by that (and I usually am, but I have imaginative DMs), I'll take a peek through random backgrounds, and try to apply that template to the area/culture.

another thing I do is if I have a vague idea for a thing like "spellcaster" or "armored guy" I'll just log on to pinterest and search for those terms, and there's usually tons of character art that can also provide a kickstart.

[Airk]

You can also create a character "from the ground up" by looking at where they came from and who they were before we meet them. Note: To some extent this can be difficult if you lack the context of a world, but a lot of things can be abstracted.

Where were they born? (Doesn't need to be a specific place, but a description like "A major trade city" or "A frontier settlement" or whatever work well.)
Who were their parents?
What kind of formative events happened to them during their youth? Who were their friends? What did they learn to hate or love?
Why did they decide to become an adventurer?
Did they decide this before or after they acquired the skills to do so?
How did they acquire those skills?
Why those particular skills? (Try to avoid bland, useless options like "He had a natural talent for magic, so he became a wizard!" Even the trite old chestnut of "Had frail constitution, so spent a lot of time in the library." is better than that, because it raises the question of "Why did they stop just hanging out in the library?")
Who taught them? Why?

Then take the answers to these questions and ask more questions about the ("Why?" is usually a good one)

And then you can do all the goofy "character building" stuff like "What are they afraid of?" or whatever that all the "How to build a more interesting character" type blog posts always suggest. Or you can just do those, but if you need more "Help" this method can sometimes bootstrap things up.

[Requilac]

i may not be the best person to ask on the matter, but I think that the solution to your problem is easier than you think. Create a character based on a role playing concept instead of a mechanical concept. Don’t start with creating a character that works interestingly on a mechanical level, think of something that you would like to role play as, then choose mechanics which make sense for that character. It does not matter whether it is optimized or not, just make it interesting for you to play.

For example, how many people on this forum would refuse to play a champion fighter because its boring? You may find this a surprise, but my most favorite character I ever played was a champion halfling. On a mechanical level, he did abosuletely nothing interesting. He would stay close the wizard and hit whatever target came too close and hit it with his rapier every turn. If the target was out of range, he would throw daggers. That was it, every single combat turn. Over the course of a cumulative 24 hours I think he shoved an enemy once and took the dodge action once, the rest of them were all stabbing and throwing. He was the most boring possible character mechanics- wise.

But he was also the most favorite of the table. He was not even that dynamic role play wise either, he was literally just an archeologist who wanted to explore. Both parents were alive, no tragic backstory or anything, jsut a simple explorer. But everyone liked him because he developed his own (slightly overly paranoid) personality. He was actually rather logical and almost spockish, but his assessments were always incorrect due to terrible rolls and misunderstandings. The entire table can still remember when he questioned the quest giver for half an hour after they requested him to take down some yuan-ti (he was convinced the quest-giver only wanted them dead to gain a political advantage). And the table all still laugh at the time where he tried to get past a set of ankle-chopping blades in a tomb by standing on the flat side of his shield and intentionally activating the trap (He though the shield was wide enough to put him at a high enough position). He has a peg leg now and won the title “limpy”.

Were I to suggest this halfling sword and board champion to this forum, they would all berate me for how boring and useless my character is, but he turned out to be one of the most distinct characters at the table. Things that are mechanically boring are not necessarily disinteresting in actual play. You have to actively make your character’s personality come out.

But it even appears you have trouble with creating a personality too. That kind of thing comes naturally to me, but if it does not for you, than base it off of a character from another source of media or even a person from real life. This character does not have to come from a fantasy or even an action source, I once played a paladin who behaved like Atticus Finch (TKaM). And if that even fails too, than think of a rather specific action that you specifically wanted a character to be able to do better than anyone else. It does not not have even have to be relevant in the slightest bit, I once DMed for someone who played a Druid based entirely on the concept “I want to become the rock climbing champion”. I also once saw someone become a beast master ranger because they wanted to “become the world’s best bird tamer”. There is many things you can do here.



I think perhaps you have just become too used to seeing a role playing game as a game that you have forget that role playing is a crucial part. Think of whatever you may want to role play, no matter how straight up ridiculous, and then build mechanics.

[Joe the Rat]

I'm not an original thinker. I get stuck in conceptual ruts. I steal everything.

So when I sit down to a character, here's what I do:

1. The Seed
This is the point of inspiration. It's a personality, an archetype, a character from another story, a proof-of-concept combination, or a straight up Playing With Tropes idea.
- Guts from Berserk
- The Perfect Physician
- The gadabout deal-maker
- Hey, wanna be a kobold?
- Warlock + Crossbow Expert = Ersatz Monk
- Robert Johnson
- A frontline blocker

2. The Spike
Expanding or twisting the seed concept. For 5e, backgrounds come into play here.
- Guts... as a halfling
- A Physician taught by Giants
- Sounds Warlocky - but let's make Fairy contracts instead of Infernal pacts
- Kobold + Hamlet + Beggin' Strips
- Is he a failure, or a faker?
- This ain't the delta. What brings you here?

3. The Fiddly bits
How we transition from the seed into a character - taking the missing bits (personality, role, class) and filling them in.
- Assigning numbers to a basic build idea
- pegging the class(es) to emulate a character idea
- what sort of person would think this combination of features was a good idea?

4. The Hooks
- Connecting the character to the world - filling in the people, places, and events that tie the character to the game. This can be filling in blanks left in the background, or adding elements to the world.
- make sure there are at least 3 potential plot hooks for the DM to use.
- often, elements of the above change as the connections are made. "Tentacle Rod, Melee Warlock" ends up losing his, er, "sea monster" aesthetic when his city guard Background morphs into retired city guard, and a tragic pact-story is added.

[LeonBH]

A Paladin who loves gold but who is still a good guy, a ruthless pirate who managed to capture a sea serpent and is using it to power a monstrous ship, a pugilist who's searching for giants to defeat, an high elf bard who's constantly trying to rope people into risky ventures, a goblin who wants to be a knight, all could be characters in a campaign, as NPCs or PCs, just as they could be characters in any fictional work.

I disagree with this. This is already what the OP is doing. It's in the style of [Class X] wants to do [Thing Y] and likes [A] and dislikes [B]. They're not people, they're concepts.


Eh, I disagree with this. Making them vulnerable is not the key, it's just a non-automatic consequence of making them people .

Some people are vulnerable, others aren't. Some people were marked by tragedies in their lives, others dealt with them differently or simply didn't have such tragedies.

For exemple, Aquaman from Batman: The Brave and the Bold is a boisterous, hammy, nice man who will support his friends to the end and who has little in the "personal drama" department. It doesn't make him a lesser character.

I've never read that but Aquaman is a fictional character. That makes him a lesser person from the perspective of reality. In reality, everyone has issues, whether you see it or not.

The point is, your character needs internal conflict, which informs their actions and world view. Otherwise, they are just a concept you're playing out.

[DivisibleByZero]

I don't know what happened. Is it because I'm building optimization playstyle concepts and not characters?

Probably.
Build a person first, with a personality and goals and fears and passions. A real person. Warts and all. And I don't mean "my goal is to become the greatest fighter in the history of the realms!" That's garbage. I'm talking about: "My name is Bob, and I am the middle child of three. I like to fish, and I'm scared of spiders. I have a bit of a dry sense of humor, and few people understand my sarcasm so I usually come off as a jerk. I really love pie, and I cannot resist making fun of short people, even though I know it's wrong. I cannot abide any woman being disrespected or assaulted, under any circumstances. One day I hope to open a bakery, like my father before me, but these damn kobolds terrorizing the countryside have put that on hold until I know that my wife and children are safe."
And then play that guy at the table.

Don't even think about a class or a role in the group. That comes later. Figure out who you are as an individual first, before any other consideration.
Is Bob a Rogue, or a Wizard, or a Paladin? He could be any class. He's a person first.

Personality is who he/she is (BGs factor into this, but only after the "person" exists).
The role he/she will play in the party is what he/she does.
Class is how he/she accomplishes it.

Build your character in that order. Most people these days do it completely backwards. If you do it in the order suggested, you'll be much more invested and usually have much more fun.
Who > What > How. In that order. That's the recipe for a good character.

[Unoriginal]

Nice advice, Requilac, but one part intrigued me:


This character does not have to come from a fantasy or even an action source, I once played a paladin who behaved like Atticus Finch (TKaM).

What do you mean by that? A paladin who doesn't care if a lower class man is abusive with his children, to the point of probably raping his daughter? A paladin who's ok with his acquaintances being homicidal racists if given half a chance? A paladin who's ready to falsify evidences to spare someone he likes a trial they'd likely have won?

[alchahest]

The point is, your character needs internal conflict, which informs their actions and world view. Otherwise, they are just a concept you're playing out.

this!

Internal Conflict is pretty vital. It's one of the best things to use to grow a character. It doesn't even have to be resolved during play - so long as it creates tension, or drama, or a reason to consider your actions beyond just the numbers attached to it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Any ideas, playgrounders? DM for a while.

Sounds like it's time to put on the DM hat. Aha, I see I am not alone.
Don't play builds
Play people This.

How do you create a character?
I write a back story. Before I write the story, I ask the Dm a little bit about the world so that I have an idea for the setting of the character's back story. Here's an example. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22619288&postcount=6)
I do a bit of iterative process in this way, as I look for a background that fits the class and my back story. Here's another one, about a Ranger called Zam.

Zam, I am
I lost my horse to the mastiffs, so I had to drag the damned body for three days to collect the reward. He was wanted dead or alive. Or so I thought, as written on the poster.
Dead or alive, huh? Looks like they changed their minds. The bounty was for “alive, 50 pieces of gold.” As it worked out, “dead” got me 10 gold pieces when I showed them the hand bill that I’d pulled off of the wall at the trading post. Maybe the blood stains swayed them. He’d been using up good air for too long I reckon.

Marzol wasn’t just rustling cattle, he was rustling people – the bodies and chains that I found in that hole under his barn told me that. Did they believe me? No. Captain of the guard said I was a killer by preference; said there was blood on my hands; said I needed to clear out of town, before he changed his mind. He had enough pike men with him that I didn’t argue.
Blood on my hands? Yeah, there’s been blood on my hands, has been since I can remember. Pa taught me to hunt. Taught me to butcher and skin my own game, only kill what you can eat, get rid of varmints, and keep an eye open when you sleep. (That last part’s trickier than it sounds). I cook my own food, not all fancy like these town folk.
Blood on my hands. I’d laugh if it hadn’t cost me my horse. I brought Marzol in, as posted, but now they wanted “justice” and a trial so they could hang him. Pa taught me to get rid of varmints, and I did - I do. Might have done it for free if it were my goats, my sheep, and my oxen he’d been rustling, or if it had been my folk he’d been selling to flesh merchants.
After picking up his sign, I’d say that my arrows brought him justice. Old Marzol sure looked surprised, sitting there looking up at me, and back at the arrow in his chest while he was still grabbing the one in the back of his knee. I think he saw my blades covered in his hired hands’ blood when he ran. I must have looked a sight, with his dog’s blood all over me. I didn’t take too kindly to having to put down my horse.

His hired help, the three with the axes and shovels? There was no bounty on them. I didn’t tell those city fools about burying them all proper, the way we buried Ma and cousin Lemuel -- the way I buried Pa. I doubt Marzol treated them well – men like him use folks, or abuse them. He paid ‘em, they were loyal. I told them to back off, but they still came at me. A decent burial was fair and proper.

I played the same song on my pipes over their graves that I played over Lemuel’s. Asleep Under the Moon. Seemed fitting. Buried the dogs too. They were loyal, and it was a shame to kill them but they tore up my horse something bad. They’d have done me as well if they could. I was in their marked territory. Fair deal, all the way around.
Carrying Marzol into town was for show. I dragged him on a litter most of the way. The guards at the gate weren’t happy to see me, but were happy to report that Marzol had been taken. I’d have liked to stay for a few pints but that Captain was insistent that I leave.
I don’t borrow trouble. There’s bound to be someone who needs a man like me pretty soon. This world’s full of filth like Marzol. Like Pa said to me, *you kill the varmints to keep your place clean* Ranger, human, background of bounty hunter. Proficiency in pipes (sort of like pan pipes).

[clem]

Have you looked at the backstory tables in XGE? I'd say roll two or three parameters and use them to flesh out an idea.

Alternatively, have you considered trying out a role-playing system like FATE where the need to optimize isn't so dominant? It's a nice change of pace and I've found it really changed my style as a 5e DM so that I'm more flexible with players.

Diaspora is a great FATE-based system where players not only generate their characters but the planets of the system they adventure in. Characters are generated together in phases so that players decide how their characters' backstories interact. Doing this as a group lets you take inspiration from others' ideas and vice-versa. It's a fun process I've considered adapting for a 5e session zero.

Here's a link if you want to learn more: http://www.vsca.ca/Diaspora/diaspora-srd.html

[strangebloke]

1. Pick two fictional character concepts you like.

Ok, I'm picking Mulan from disney and... Edward Elric from FMA brotherhood.

2. Now, pull out your favorite traits you like from both those guys.

Well, I like how Mulan tries to do the right thing, heedless of preserving herself. I also like how dutiful she is to her family.
I like how Edward is cocky in his abilities to an extreme degree and also incredibly annoyed by people who underestimate him.

So as far as traits go we have:
Dutiful.
Selfless.
Cocky to the point of recklessness.
Short-man complex.

3. Build your character's history.

Well, they're both from a rural environment, so my character will be as well. Yeah, from a rural environment and the character was a big **** there, which is the reason for the cockiness. The character needs to have living family so that there's a touchstone for my character's trait of 'duty.' A noble, maybe, to reinforce the idea of 'duty'? Yeah, a disgraced one though, which is where the short-man complex comes from.

4. 'Wrap' the character with mechanics and race, etc.

So I'm thinking a female for personal preference. A human female, since she's from a dirt-farming region. The character is cocky in her own skill, so a warlock, sorcerer, or cleric really don't make much sense. A monk, paladin, fighter, or wizard, I guess. No good way to justify a wizard learning in a dirt-farming region. Don't like the fighter class. Guess I'll go monk. Fits well with both Ed's and Mulan's fighting styles anyway.

5. have fun! A big key here is to never forget your character's quirks. Its easy to pick up a session and just start playing your character as 'generic adventurer #266, forgetting all that work you did.

[Unoriginal]

I disagree with this. This is already what the OP is doing. It's in the style of [Class X] wants to do [Thing Y] and likes [A] and dislikes [B]. They're not people, they're concepts.

No, they're the starts of characters. It's not [class X] wants to do [thing Y], it's [X person who happens to have a profession or fit an archetype] is involved in [Z story hook]. Then you add personality, appearance, history, and such and such, to make them more well-rounded character.



I've never read that but Aquaman is a fictional character. That makes him a lesser person from the perspective of reality.

It mays shock you, but D&D characters are in fact, fictional characters.



In reality, everyone has issues, whether you see it or not.

And? They don't need to be major issues caused by horrible tragedies, nor do they have to be the starting point of a character.



The point is, your character needs internal conflict, which informs their actions and world view. Otherwise, they are just a concept you're playing out.

No, not at all. A character needs a personality, some kind of goal, and to interact with the world and the story. Conflict is what happen when the character interact with the world or the story in a way that put them in an unfavorable position. A young conqueror who wants to show their might and rule their country as a benevolent ruler will probably be confronted to the fact they'll have to kill people to obtain and maintain their dominion, but this internal conflict can be solved once they reach their decision to go forth with their conquests or not.

In the same way that the gold-loving paladin I mentioned earlier could have a strong internal conflict between their greed and their desire to help others, but they wouldn't be a lesser character if this trait wasn't problematic and if they just got grouchy when they had to pass up on gaining gold.

Not all characters are driven by massive drama. Hamlet is a character, but so are Guildenstern and Rosencrantz. And some people prefer playing characters who are an adventure-loving swashbuckler who needs to pay their bills or an exasperated bodyguard who's trying to keep his foolish boss alive rather than playing the conflicted heir of a kingdom that got usurped.

Sure, having difficulties and problems to overcome or live with is a good way to make a character have depth, but you first need to have an outline of who they are.

[DivisibleByZero]

No, they're the starts of characters. It's not [class X] wants to do [thing Y], it's [X person who happens to have a profession or fit an archetype] is involved in [Z story hook]. Then you add personality, appearance, history, and such and such, to make them more well-rounded character.

This is already what he's doing, building a mechanical concept first and tacking character onto it after.
It isn't working for him.
Doing it the other way around always, and I do mean always, leads to the player being more invested in the actual character (rather than the mechanics of the character). Character first. Mechanics later. That's how you avoid burnout, because you actually care about the "person" and what happens, instead of caring about where the next +1 is going to come from (which is what mechanics first promotes).

[LeonBH]

Unoriginal, if you don't mind me asking, may I know your credentials in terms of story writing, literary works, or at the very least, units of drama in college? May I also know your personal opinion on "dramatic" stories?

When you said this:


No, not at all. A character needs a personality, some kind of goal, and to interact with the world and the story

In response to the need for internal conflict, it set off a few red flags in my head.

I won't debate with you how to create a compelling character. There's an entire field of study dedicated to this (and lots of people making money from it). I am curious as to your non-gaming experience with it, though.

[Unoriginal]

This is already what he's doing, building a mechanical concept first and tacking character onto it after.

And at no point in my post have I mentioned a mechanical concept. I said "paladin" as I could have said "knight errant" or "defender of justice", and I said "bard" as I could have said "street performer" or "traveling minstrel", because even if those terms are used for classes, they're also common archetypes.




Doing it the other way around always, and I do mean always, leads to the player being more invested in the actual character (rather than the mechanics of the character). Character first. Mechanics later. That's how you avoid burnout, because you actually care about the "person" and what happens, instead of caring about where the next +1 is going to come from (which is what mechanics first promotes).

Then we agree.

[KorvinStarmast]

Unoriginal, if you don't mind me asking, may I know your credentials in terms of story writing, literary works, or at the very least, units of drama in college? None of that is required to write a story. I've been writing stories since I was about 6. (And of course, the stuff in 4th grade that my mom still has is obviously stuff written by someone in 4th grade). You can learn about writing by taking classes, doing your own research, and writing. Fan fic is something I've done for years, and the nice thing about the internet is the feedback you can get on what's good, bad, and indifferent.
No credentials needed. Experience? Never hurts.
A writer writes.
Oh, yeah, and read a lot.
Have a wide variety in what you read, in topic and genre, as well as in form: novel, series, pulps, short stories, novellas.

Conflict is what happen when the character interact with the world or the story in a way that put them in an unfavorable position.
Rich / The Giant made an observation about writing fiction that rings true to me. I think he said he learned it in a workshop.
Something like "if this isn't the most interesting, or most life changing, period in the lives of your major characters, or your protagonists, why are you writing this story?"

One of my favorite short stories was written by Janny Wurts: the title story in her collection called "That Way Lies Camelot." It is speculative fiction of the kind I really enjoy. Another Spec Fic author I really like is Paul Witcover. Waking Beauty was a good debut, but IMO his best book (which includes some RPG references) is called Tumbling After.

[DivisibleByZero]

Then we agree.

No, we do not. Because your advice was to "add personality, appearance, history, and such and such, to make them more well-rounded character" as the last thing, when they should be first if you want to build a character that you're invested in.
You also suggested that he take the story into account. I disagree again.
"[X person who happens to have a profession or fit an archetype] is involved in [Z story hook]"
If someone is having a problem with burnout, I disagree with this method wholeheartedly.

So no, we do not agree.
The way you describe is a fine way to do it, generally speaking. I believe it is absolutely the wrong way to do it if burnout is a concern, because doing it that way (personality last) is part of what leads to the burnout in the first place.

[LeonBH]

None of that is required to write a story. I've been writing stories since I was about 6. (And of course, the stuff in 4th grade that my mom still has is obviously stuff written by someone in 4th grade). You can learn about writing by taking classes, doing your own research, and writing. Fan fic is something I've done for years, and the nice thing about the internet is the feedback you can get on what's good, bad, and indifferent.
No credentials needed. Experience? Never hurts.
A writer writes.

Never said you need it to write a story. Anyone can write a story, that's why it's a beautiful thing. However, I would bet you won't say your stories at age 6 are spectacular or compelling. But if Unoriginal was, for example, a drama teacher or a published author, I would respect his ethos more substantially, and I'd be interested in his technical understanding of "internal conflict" and why it isn't necessary.

[KorvinStarmast]

Never said you need it to write a story. Anyone can write a story, that's why it's a beautiful thing. However, I would bet you won't say your stories at age 6 are spectacular or compelling. This would be true. :)

But if Unoriginal was, for example, a drama teacher or a published author, I would respect his ethos more substantially, and I'd be interested in his technical understanding of "internal conflict" and why it isn't necessary. The internal conflict element of a story is one option for creating conflict. Some stories do just fine with the bulk of the conflict being external.

[denthor]

How I build a character.

Roll dice
Assign to proper places. If you want a real challenge roll all 6 in order then run what comes up.
Now pick race

Once I have that figure out alignment. This is a must for me. Chaotic is easier than lawful for me.

Take feats and skills I think will be needed. Hint I always miss something.

Then let the personality come in game play. Start 1st if possible.

If it is not optimal continue playing

[Unoriginal]

Unoriginal, if you don't mind me asking, may I know your credentials in terms of story writing, literary works, or at the very least, units of drama in college?

Define "credentials". If you're talking about sort-of-academic-related ones, I've written a story and analysis on the genres of mystery novels as my maturity work for my high school graduation, and I've studied English and Old French literature (including theatrical plays) for years at my university.



May I also know your personal opinion on "dramatic" stories?

Depends what you mean by "'dramatic' stories".



When you said this:



In response to the need for internal conflict, it set off a few red flags in my head.

Why? Plenty of characters are considering compelling without having internal conflict. The Dark Knight's Joker has no internal conflict, yet he's an oft-praised part of the movie. Sherlock Holmes in "The Hound of the Baskerville" has no internal conflict, aside from maybe regretting to put his client in danger in order to solve the mystery, and the same can be said of Watson in the same story, but they come off as interesting and fun to read.

The same way that if I create an hobgoblin captain, I don't need to give them a tragic past or make them conflicted about his gruesome job to make them a character the players will enjoy encountering.


I won't debate with you how to create a compelling character.

As you wish.

[alchahest]

The Dark Knight's Joker isn't a character though, he's a force of nature. He represents the chaos of unpredictability.

[LeonBH]

The internal conflict element of a story is one option for creating conflict. Some stories do just fine with the bulk of the conflict being external.

Yes, some stories are driven wholly by external conflict. Cherry picking only the good ones, can you tell me their names and why they are good or compelling?

[Nifft]

A character needs a personality, some kind of goal, and to interact with the world and the story. This.

This is what drives my dudes.

I start with an aspiration, a goal, an thing that the character wants to get done.

Then, I work backwards and try to figure out who would want to do such a thing, and why. But if I can't think of a good backstory, that's fine. My dude can be just an average joe with an impossible dream, that he's going to make happen anyway.

I don't start with a backstory. Some people do, and that's fine if it works, but for me a backstory is basically dead weight.

So, @OP, try this way: start with a reason for action, and let the rest follow.

[LeonBH]

Define "credentials". If you're talking about sort-of-academic-related ones, I've written a story and analysis on the genres of mystery novels as my maturity work for my high school graduation, and I've studied English and Old French literature (including theatrical plays) for years at my university.



Depends what you mean by "'dramatic' stories".



Why? Plenty of characters are considering compelling without having internal conflict. The Dark Knight's Joker has no internal conflict, yet he's an oft-praised part of the movie. Sherlock Holmes in "The Hound of the Baskerville" has no internal conflict, aside from maybe regretting to put his client in danger in order to solve the mystery, and the same can be said of Watson in the same story, but they come off as interesting and fun to read.

The same way that if I create an hobgoblin captain, I don't need to give them a tragic past or make them conflicted about his gruesome job to make them a character the players will enjoy encountering.



As you wish.

Just points of clarification, not contention, in response to your questions.

Credentials: a thing that validates your expertise in the area.

Dramatic stories: a story that follows Drama Theory.

As for my personal opinion on the written Sherlock Holmes, it was honestly boring, especially the Hounds of Baskerville. I get it was a smash when print was relatively new and he opened up an entirely new line of forensics in real life, but I just did not enjoy the story.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I'm going to speak against the crowd here, who-- as usual-- have sized the opportunity to decry anything that smacks of optimization or mechanics. It doesn't matter where you start building a character. Sometimes you start with a personality, sometimes with a mechanic, whatever-- you'll wind up in the same place with the same level of detail either way.

If you're bored with 5e mechanics, that's probably because 5e mechanics are fairly flat-- there's not a lot of depth to the interactions, but they're important enough that they WILL have a big impact on things. Taking a break or DMing might help. So might trying a different system. Particularly if you're a person who enjoys the crunch side of things-- check out something the pulls away from the D&D paradigm. Fate, something World of Darkness-, Mutants and Masterminds, some wonky-but-acclaimed indie game...

[Deox]

One of my personal favorite methods is to randomly generate then just go with it.
I like to use some online tools (such as "who the F is my D&D character") to start overarching or broad themes. Once I've generated 3 to 5 I find genuinely interesting, I move on to (IMO, one of the greatest published WotC books) the 3.5 Hero Builder's Guidebook. In there, I will use the wealth of tables to randomly generate everything about the character. From home climate to town size to family and personal political affiliations, it has amazing starting points to help fill out the "extra bits".

Once all that is done, I'm always left with a compelling character. The rest is filling out numbers.

[CantigThimble]

When I make a character's personality, I try to figure out the ways in which the character thinks differently than I would. If I can play the characters personality without stretching and interpreting things I don't really 'get' then their personality is just going to turn into my personality after I play them for a few sessions. A few examples I've played:

A Knowledge cleric who believes that deception is the root of all evil. He will never lie or bend the truth for any reason.

A highly superstitious fighter who believes that the fey are meddling with his life, when things go wrong he needs to find a way to appease them, or turn their attention elsewhere.

A nobleman who considers it his burden to change the fate of the world. Everything he does is the duty he owes the common people to protect them, even when they're too ignorant to understand and need to be coerced into his plans.

These are slightly extreme examples, but you can do this in more subtle ways as well. (Though it's easier to lose the character that way) The point is to pick some traits that don't make sense to you or don't mesh well with your personality so that you have to be constantly thinking to play your character true to themselves.

[Nifft]

Credentials: a thing that validates your expertise in the area.

If you don't mind my asking, what's the goal of validating credentials?

Are there actually people who have a Masters Degree in Dungeoning?

Or is it a rhetorical intimidation tactic?

Or something else?

[alchahest]

I'm going to speak against the crowd here, who-- as usual-- have sized the opportunity to decry anything that smacks of optimization or mechanics. It doesn't matter where you start building a character. Sometimes you start with a personality, sometimes with a mechanic, whatever-- you'll wind up in the same place with the same level of detail either way.

If you're bored with 5e mechanics, that's probably because 5e mechanics are fairly flat-- there's not a lot of depth to the interactions, but they're important enough that they WILL have a big impact on things. Taking a break or DMing might help. So might trying a different system. Particularly if you're a person who enjoys the crunch side of things-- check out something the pulls away from the D&D paradigm. Fate, something World of Darkness-, Mutants and Masterminds, some wonky-but-acclaimed indie game...

most of us haven't mentioned optimization at all though, are you actually reading the responses? we're just giving notes on what the OP requested - how to build a character beyond the optimization.

[Temperjoke]

Or is it a rhetorical intimidation tactic?


Judging from how it's being used here, I'd say this is what is happening, intentional or not, given that the OP is making an appeal for advice, which can largely be a subjective topic. Asking for credentials is a backhanded way of asking, "how dare you offer a different opinion, if you aren't as educated as me?"

To the OP:

Honestly, sometimes the best thing to do when you're getting burned out is to step away and do something different. Maybe that means being a DM for a while (as others have said), maybe it means trying a different sort of game (as it has also been pointed out). I don't know that creating a character with a different method will "fix" it, but it might be the way to offer insight into a different aspect of the game, and that might be enough to renew interest.

It could also just be a case of maybe it's time to put the 5e books down, and consume media in various forms for a recharge. I've found that sometimes that's enough to re-spark my interest, trying to replicate a type of character I saw, or a play a concept that seemed interesting.

[LeonBH]

If you don't mind my asking, what's the goal of validating credentials?

Are there actually people who have a Masters Degree in Dungeoning?

Or is it a rhetorical intimidation tactic?

Or something else?

Not credentials in being a DM or player (though if you are a live streamer with a sizable fan base, I'd say you have credentials). Credentials as it involves published works or the like involving narratives. Not necessarily academic works.

I asked because I was curious, that's it. It struck me that if Unoriginal was an authority on the area, I should update my belief system. For example, can he concretely demonstrate his position? If yes, I'd be very interested in learning his ideas for my own growth.

Otherwise, I wouldn't have been sure of his credibility. Creating compelling characters isn't just a thing you accidentally stumble upon, after all. People study that stuff. It takes time and careful thought.

The question was triggered by his first statement when he said internal conflict was not required, which contradicts common characterization techniques as it applies to novelists (not D&D players). I was very much willing to listen to him, not debate with him, if he was experienced in the field.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, some stories are driven wholly by external conflict. Cherry picking only the good ones, can you tell me their names and why they are good or compelling?
Ever heard of Grimm's fairy tales?
Ever read The Hobbit? The choices Bilbo faces are reactions to external tension/conflict once he decides to take that big leap and have an adventure.
And to be clear, mostly by external conflict is not "wholly" by external conflict.
I do not agree with your attempt to presume an either or condition.
In a great many stories, the matter of overcoming fear is a staple, in particular when dealing with the fantastic, or in the swords and sorcery genre.
As John Wayne is oft quoted (or misquoted) ... "Courage is being afraid but saddling up anyway."

[LeonBH]

Ever heard of Grimm's fairy tales?
Ever read The Hobbit? The choices Bilbo faces are reactions to external tension/conflict once he decides to take that big leap and have an adventure.
And to be clear, mostly by external conflict is not "wholly" by external conflict.
I do not agree with your attempt to presume an either or condition.

Why would you say those stories are good or compelling? I don't find Grimm's Fairytales compelling at all (but they are a good base for other stories, being so well known).

And I'm sorry, if you're saying internal conflict is necessary, then we're on the same page. I'm defending the position that internal conflict is necessary. Are you saying the same thing?

[Grod_The_Giant]

You don't want to ignore characterization completely, to be sure, but I think the distinction is in what primarily drives the plot. In something like Hamlet, the main drivers are internal, with external events being used mainly to set emotions in motion. By contrast, something like The Odyssey, the focus is on external events, with the inner conflicts largely serving to spice up and flesh out the external stuff.

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't find Grimm's Fairytales compelling I am sorry to hear that. Tastes differ.

And I'm sorry, if you're saying internal conflict is necessary, then we're on the same page. I'm defending the position that internal conflict is necessary. Are you saying the same thing? It isn't an either-or proposition. You can have both with a significant weighting one way or the other. (Or even a 50-50 type of balance).
What now appears to be happening is that you want to play a game of "gotcha."
I thank you for your time, and your thoughts on this part of the discussion, but this particular sub-game I have no time for, nor interest in. Perhaps one of the other does.

[LeonBH]

Huh, I honestly don't understand where that reply came from. I said at the beginning that you want to create a character with a vulnerability. The point was to generate internal conflict which motivates your character and acts as a lens to see the world through.

I was disputed by Unoriginal, who said neither vulnerability nor internal conflict were necessary for a character. When you jumped in, Korvin, you said not all stories are driven by internal conflict. I disagreed with Unoriginal but agreed with you, and asked you to expound.

Now that I'm finding you aren't saying the same thing as Unoriginal, I'm asking you to confirm. I've only ever stated "internal conflict is necessary." Where is the gotcha in asking if we agree or disagree in the first place?

Edit: At any rate, thank you for your patience in turn. Let us please never have another discussion again. But, I hope you roll 20's consistently in your game.

[Unoriginal]

The Dark Knight's Joker isn't a character though, he's a force of nature. He represents the chaos of unpredictability.

The thing is, both points are wrong. The whole idea behind the Joker in that movie is that he gives the *impression* of being those things, while he is not. It's all smoke ad

He's not a force of nature. He's just a clever man in a clown disguise who gets away with bold moves because people have given him the means to do so, and so people think he's a force of nature.

And he doesn't represent chaos or unpredictability. Even the opening scene shows that: he has a well-ordered plan to rob the bank, a plan which requires everyone to act with precision and great timing, to the point that the Joker can afford to play with the man holding him at gunpoint because he knows the bus is going to crash into said man.

Later on, he walks in the mob boss meeting. Chaotic and crazy, right? No. It's just a show of force, as he has taken precautions to make sure he wasn't going to get killed here. He then make them a proposal that play with what they want (Batman out of their ways) and what they think he wants (money), when in reality it's a trick to get them to give him what he truly want, their manpower and ressources, when at this point he's just a guy who pulled off one clever caper with an handful of goons.

Then he plays with the police with the mole on the the mob bosses' payroll (making him look omniscient/impossible to stop), kill people to force Batman to reveal himself (a simple plan which play on Batman's predictable response, not on chaos), attack the places people think they should be secure to create a panic (again, yet another plan based on predictable outcomes), and lie to an Harvey Dent who's out of it to make himself look like the chaotic "dog who runs after cars" peopel think he is, which convinces the man when the Joker seemingly put his life on the line (if you look, you can actually see Dent couldn't have shot him given how the Joker was holding the gun). And when he's caught off-guard, he plays it cool to feed the "force of nature" impression and to hide how he got bested.

It's all smoke and mirrors. As SF Debris said, the Joker had to calculate the length of rope and the timing to make a man fall against the window of the mayor's office when someone looked through it. This is not the action of someone who leaves anything to random chances.



Credentials: a thing that validates your expertise in the area.

Then I've already told them in my last post.



Dramatic stories: a story that follows Drama Theory.

Just to be clear, are you talking about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drama_theory



As for my personal opinion on the written Sherlock Holmes, it was honestly boring, especially the Hounds of Baskerville. I get it was a smash when print was relatively new and he opened up an entirely new line of forensics in real life, but I just did not enjoy the story.

Yes, because enjoying a story or characters is subjective. Which doesn't change that many people do consider it a compelling text, and OP was asking about advice on how to make a character that they would subjectively enjoy.




I asked because I was curious, that's it. It struck me that if Unoriginal was an authority on the area, I should update my belief system.

If I said something dumb, me being an authority on the subject wouldn't make it smart. The reverse is true: a well-thought argument coming from someone who is not an authority is no less valuable than the same one coming from an authority.



For example, can he concretely demonstrate his position?

Depends what you mean by "demonstrate his position".


Creating compelling characters isn't just a thing you accidentally stumble upon, after all.

Actually, both factual accounts and studies show that yes, it is. Not always, but it does happen.

For exemple, one of the most popular character in Star Wars, being both beloved by the fans and used a lot by various authors, is Boba Fett. What made Fett be so compelling? Stand around, look cool, pursue the heroes in a way that showed he was good at his job, and deliver a couple of memorable lines.

And that's it.


People study that stuff.

Yes, they study it. They study it ex post facto, to try to figure out why X character was compelling, not as a way to create compelling characters.

Not that it doesn't help to know methods to write a character or to learn how others achieved their work, but it is not like cooking: you don't have a list of ingredients and tasks to follow to make your character ready for consumption



It takes time and careful thought.

If that was the case, then Jar Jar Binks would have been a more compelling character than Boba Fett




The question was triggered by his first statement when he said internal conflict was not required, which contradicts common characterization techniques as it applies to novelists (not D&D players).

Because the common characterization techniques are just that: here to create common characterizations. They're what you tell people to help them learn to write until they don't need the help.

Again, internal conflict can be good for a character, but it's not required. Nor is it required that instances of internal conflict have to be major. The same way that having a tragic backstory can be good for a character, but it's not required either.


I was very much willing to listen to him, not debate with him, if he was experienced in the field.

I have some, but I suppose not the kind you seek.

[KorvinStarmast]

Huh, I honestly don't understand where that reply came from. I said at the beginning that you want to create a character with a vulnerability. The point was to generate internal conflict which motivates your character and acts as a lens to see the world through. That's a method. One of a number of choices. I read Unoriginal's point as internal conflict is not being necessary (as in it's not the only way?) but perhaps we read the same thing differently. (??)

We may be talking past one another a little bit, which happens.

Best wishes.

[Unoriginal]

By contrast, something like The Odyssey, the focus is on external events, with the inner conflicts largely serving to spice up and flesh out the external stuff.

In the Odyssey, the only major internal conflicts are "do I believe Odysseus is still alive or do I move on?" (for several characters) and "do I kill those people who are not respecting sacred hospitality or not?". Both are resolved pretty quickly

[LeonBH]

Unoriginal, that's not the drama theory I meant.

As for Sherlock Holmes, it was inaccessible. I learned a lot while reading it for sure. In particular, things not to do. But I read it all the same. I actually don't know anyone who enjoyed reading the books, so my sphere may be limited.

About experts being wrong and rookies being right, yes, it does happen. But in this internet culture, rookies think they're experts at certain things, myself included. When you contradicted something well known to work, I asked for your ethos for my own curiosity.

But beyond that, I'd like to disengage from this conversation. Several walls of text traded between us will not be enough to discuss characterization.

---

To the OP, I'd like to simply reiterate my answer to your question. Make a vulnerable character. That is not a weak character, but a character with a weakness.

You've played concepts and builds and now you seem bored by it. Then try something different.

[Hyde]

As there are many, many arguments in favor of "Make a dude, and then give them stats", I shall endeavor to provide you with the reverse, because if you're used to making stat blocks, you may struggle with this "backstory-first" approach. (For clarity, I endorse either method, but telling our friend to do the wild opposite of what they're used to may not be as helpful as you think).

So, generate your Gish, or your Snoozelock, or you Peanut Butter & Paladin (Pretend that is a common and popular build name). Then start asking why.
Why do they have their starting equipment? Where did it come from? did they dredge it up from a battlefield (whose was it before)? Gift from a mentor (who are they, what happened to them)?

Why is their low stat low (childhood illness for low CON, for example)? Why is their high stat so high (Special training? Diving Boon?)?

You can explain every number on the character sheet, every decision point, beyond "it was the optimal choice", even if they're all optimal choices. Do this enough, and when you go to play, the character itself is probably going to have some things to say. They might start making sub-optimal choices (because, oh boy, are people just bundles of sub-optimal choices).

It might help, it might not. I was burned out on DnD for several years because some ****ty people made me hate playing. I only really recovered my joy for the game when I found new people who were just so enthusiastic about it. There's nothing wrong with taking a step back if you need to.

(Watch Critical Role. It'll probably make you mad at first)

[jaappleton]

Wow.

Somewhat overwhelmed by the responses.

I do think someone hit the nail on the head; I optimized the fun out of it.

And maybe it's simply a lack of inspiration, to some degree. One tactic I used to do was to browse artwork and find something that really jumped out to me.

There's a lot to digest in this topic. A lot of answers to the same question, a lot of different ways to approach solving this problem.

I think... I've got an idea.

Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate

Now, that can be a Rogue, that can be a Bard, that can be a... A Ranger, I suppose, a Paladin if he was the Robin Hood kind of pirate, etc.

I suppose this is the point where I say, 'How does he pirate?', and that answers the Class question, right?

[DivisibleByZero]

I think... I've got an idea.

Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate

Now, that can be a Rogue, that can be a Bard, that can be a... A Ranger, I suppose, a Paladin if he was the Robin Hood kind of pirate, etc.

I suppose this is the point where I say, 'How does he pirate?', and that answers the Class question, right?

You've got it, yes.
You have an idea of who he is. Now take that and run with it, flesh it out completely, with personality and goals and fears and beauty marks and warts.
Then tie his Noble BG into who he is and why he does what he does.
After all of that, you'll have the Who and the What, and you can decide on a class to get the How.
But really take some time and figure out who he is and how he would react to different things, and what drives him, and what stops him cold in his tracks. Once that all falls into place, and you have a bromance with him, you won't even care about what class he ends up being. He'll just be fun to play.

Then you'll actually start role playing (instead of roll playing) and that's where the real joy of this game will blossom if you haven't felt it before.
(I'm not saying that was true before, but by your problem I suspect it [even if you never realized it], and then you might see a whole new element open up which offers a whole new satisfaction from the game)

When we say "play a character, not a build" this is what we're saying.
Make the mechanics almost an afterthought, and your character will be fun regardless.
And of you can somehow get everyone at the table to play like this, then the games become truly epic!

[KorvinStarmast]

I think... I've got an idea.

Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate

Now, that can be a Rogue, that can be a Bard, that can be a... A Ranger, I suppose, a Paladin if he was the Robin Hood kind of pirate, etc.

I suppose this is the point where I say, 'How does he pirate?', and that answers the Class question, right? Sounds like a story just waiting to be told. Best of luck.

[Unoriginal]

You could also just make a "Former Noble Turned Pirate" background and let it do the job.

A pirate could have their levels be in Sorcerer, Wizard, Barbarian, Monk or any classes. What's important is that you imagine your Tabaxi being someone and doing something, and only after that worry about handling the mechanical side to make those stuff possible.

In any case, best wishes for this, jaappleton, and if you want to share stories about your Cat O'Nine Tails, I'd be happy to read them.

[Requilac]

What do you mean by that? A paladin who doesn't care if a lower class man is abusive with his children, to the point of probably raping his daughter? A paladin who's ok with his acquaintances being homicidal racists if given half a chance? A paladin who's ready to falsify evidences to spare someone he likes a trial they'd likely have won?

Unoriginal, i think you got the characters mixed up. Atticus was the lawyer and, and the main character’s father, he did none of the things you have stated above. That was Robert Ewell, he is the person who accused Tom Robinson of the crime that he (most likely) did not commit and did the act of domestic violence. Atticus was trying to get a person who committed domestic violence arrested, was actively trying to stop racism, and was certainly not falsifying any evidence. I am referring to To Kill a Mockingbird, and Atticus from that story does not behave like you have described at all. I am very confused by what you have stated, I think you got Atticus mixed up with Robert Ewell. I am talking about this person (https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/t/to-kill-a-mockingbird/character-analysis/atticus-finch), not whoever you are describing.



Back on topic though: Jaapelton, you are in the right line of thinking. I think you understood what we are saying. You created a character’s role play concept than you develop there mechanics, that is a good way to create a character if mechanics have bored you. You are doing great!

[DivisibleByZero]

I'll even take it a step further.
In our decades long home game, we switch up the GM periodically. Sometimes we keep the same characters and play the same game with a new DM continuing the story. Sometimes we make new characters for a different story.
Sometimes we change systems altogether. Sometimes we make new characters for the new system, and sometimes we keep the same characters under the new system just because we were having so much fun playing that particular character.
The mechanics don't matter.
If they did, we wouldn't be able to completely swap systems with the same character. But that's happened before.
I played an immigrant refugee on the run from the law (to oversimplify it). The character itself is system independent. In DnD he was a Rogue. In Hunter he was a Defender. Who he was and What he did for the group played the same. How he did it was all that changed between systems. The mechanics changed, but the character played the same.
The character. That's what matters. That's what will help save you from burnout.

[Jama7301]

I try to do the character's mechanics and personality side by side, piecing things together. Sometimes I"ll get on a run of mechanical choices that I wrap a character around, then I'll come up with some details that I want to try to reflect in and out of what's on the sheet.

"Huh, I want to play a Paladin, they seem neat."
"What kind of person is drawn to a paladin type job? Someone who believes in goodness, right? We'll start with that."
"Dragonborns have some good flavor and I like their abilities (4e)"
"A noble dragonborn who believes in doing the right thing, misguided as he may be. I kind of want him to be naive to the outside world, but eager. I like happy characters"
"Oh, I can reflect this in his stats. That's cool. High CHR for positivity and magnetism..."

This helps me build a character I like while tangibly reflecting them in the build. It helps obfuscate the mechanics a bit by wrapping them in fluff.

[Requilac]

Wow.

Somewhat overwhelmed by the responses.

I do think someone hit the nail on the head; I optimized the fun out of it.

And maybe it's simply a lack of inspiration, to some degree. One tactic I used to do was to browse artwork and find something that really jumped out to me.

There's a lot to digest in this topic. A lot of answers to the same question, a lot of different ways to approach solving this problem.

I think... I've got an idea.

Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate

Now, that can be a Rogue, that can be a Bard, that can be a... A Ranger, I suppose, a Paladin if he was the Robin Hood kind of pirate, etc.

I suppose this is the point where I say, 'How does he pirate?', and that answers the Class question, right?

Really, pirate is more of a background than it is a class. The literal definition of pirate by the Oxford Dictionary of English is just “someone who attacks and robs ships at sea”, that can be of any class really. In fact, I could probably come up with a pirate build for each class at the top of my head. Perhaps these ideas maybe of some inspiration to you...

Barbarian: the Brutish rower and boarder that quit being a nobleman so it would become more socially acceptable for him to get drunk and bash heads. Just Reflavor rage as drunken stupors (not an original idea, but I have no idea where I heard it from)
Bard: swashbuckling tales are some of the people’s favorites, and why not learn a couple first hand? After all, who needs to come up with creative ideas for stories when you can just find inspiration form the things that try to kill you on a daily basis?
Cleric: you worship a god of deceit, domination or the accumulation of material wealth, and what better way to spread their god’s ideals than directly ensuing it on the high seas?
Druid: all these merchants ships coming into your beautiful natural habitat will result in the pollution and destruction of your home. Stories of a vicious pirate that can transform into a bird and scout them out then turn into a shark and devour them dissuade merchants.
Fighter: What better way to put your weapons to good use than to further your wealth and reputation alongside a crew of vicious brigands?
Monk: you are the world’s best fist fighter, and sailing all the way around that world makes that fact known to everyone
Paladin: these greedy merchants are robbing from the poor, and there is no way you are letting them get away with it!
Ranger: hunting animals can make some people rather wealthy, but hunting ships makes you more wealthy. What better prey is there to hunt than one who instead of being filled with organs is loaded with gold!
Rogue: do I even need to detail this one?
Sorcerer: You have inherently been given unbelievable power, and you believe that the person who said “with great power comes great responsible” did not think it through as much as you did
Warlock: back when the seas were unexplored and wild, cthulhu could take a good nights rest, but now people keep breaking into his home in rlyeh and taking his stuff. While the easiest solution would be to address the directly, the stars have not aligned yet and he still likes naps. Why don’t you take care off his problem for him while he is snoozing?
Wizard: sea-fairing people are notorious for being superstitious, and they tend to rever those that wield magical power. You want to become the most supreme ruler of the seas, and most people are more afraid of someone who can summon a Kraken than they are of someone with a sharp metal stick.

[Horatio@Bridge]

One thing you might try is to leverage the Inspiration system to flesh out your character. Make it a goal to get Inspiration every session, which requires you to play out your personality traits, ideal, bond, and flaw. And don't randomly generate those - tie them to who your character is.

Fate is a good model for this. In Fate, your backstory and personality traits /are/ your powers. You describe how these Aspects influence whatever you're trying to do, and that gives you a bonus to your role. For instance, you might have a Bond where you are the bodyguard of one of the other players. When you take actions to defend them you can ask for Inspiration to help them out.

One of the key things with this is to make sure that your traits, etc, are relevant to the game you are playing. That requires you to work with the DM and the other players to come up with stuff that will see the light of day in the campaign. If the adventure revolves around Undead, a cleric of Kelemvor will not only have good tools to fight them, but will also get Inspiration when he puts them down due to the Ideal of their religious devotion. And once you've established that devotion, it's easier to have it come up in other circumstances where your faith might be relevant. Another good trait is to have some connection to a campaign villain, giving you a good reason to tangle with them as well as the mechanical support to make confrontations with them epic.

Even a dungeon crawling game can make use of inspiration. Think of why your character goes to these dungeons: what in his personality drives him to these places and how would that impact their approach to the game? For instance, maybe your barbarian loves the Thrill of a Challenge and would get inspiration any time they survive a Hard or Deadly encounter. Once you've established this motivation, then you can play it out during the fights as you put yourself in danger or just get excited as things get more dire. It could also influence your RP as you push yourself to take on greater and greater challenges, driving you to the tougher dungeons.

[DivisibleByZero]

Really, pirate is more of a background than it is a class. The literal definition of pirate by the Oxford Dictionary of English is just “someone who attacks and robs ships at sea”, that can be of any class really.

Yes. Correct. That's the entire point.
Class/mechanics is/are an afterthought to the character. He's burned out on the mechanics. So they shouldn't be a factor in creating a person to play.

[Requilac]

Yes. Correct. That's the entire point.
Class/mechanics is/are an afterthought to the character. He's burned out on the mechanics. So they shouldn't be a factor in creating a person to play.

Umm, I do not disagree with you, so I do not quite know what this means. Are you saying that I may be confusing the OP by telling him to create a role playing concept first then contradicting myself by talking about mechanical possibilities? I do not quite know what you wanted me to respond with in this post. It seemed to be aimed at me, but I am at a loss for what you expect me to do.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Xanathar's life builder is actually a pretty great muse for creating an interesting character. Give it a try, or one of the many others that have existed throughout RPG history. There's a fantastic one to start with that I can't link here called "Who the *#@! is My DnD Character", try using the first thing that pops up and fleshing them out.

A wood elf grave cleric I played with a few weeks ago used these things to create a sad, miserable devotee that had a perfect home life before an uncaring death god chose him as his mouthpiece, twisting his life into one of misery that he's incredibly bitter about, losing the two loves of his life and running up a tally of enemies he's on the run from. His roleplaying was a highlight of those games.

[DivisibleByZero]

Are you saying that I may be confusing the OP by telling him to create a role playing concept first then contradicting myself by talking about mechanical possibilities?

That's pretty much it, yeah.

[Malifice]

Play something fun, or that you've never played before.

Screw optimisation and builds. Just pick based on fluff.

[Laserlight]

It's okay to start with stats. Or concept. Whatever works.

Then give him a tag. Something he does to differentiate him from those around him. "He's a redhead" is not something he does, so that doesn't work, but if he's often--at least once a session--braiding it, or pulling it back to a ponytail, or messing with it, that works. Particularly if that signals something else. "He's tying his hair back, that means he's expecting a fight." He speaks with a heavy accent, if you can do the accent. He carries around the doll his sister gave him, and treats it as if it were alive--making sure it can see, for example, unless he's in particularly ghoulish circumstances, when he will make sure to cover the doll's eyes so it doesn't get scared. But don't (at first) give him lots of tags. Just do one or two, and bring them up often.

Then give him a motivation--something other than "stays alive" or "hauls in a lot of loot." Perhaps he has a burning desire to impress the princess. Or he's a devout worshiper of Shar and will actively advance her interests. In the campaign I'm running right now, the Disgraced Young Nobleman wants to go back to his home city and win a particular political office; his marginally Trusty Manservant wants to keep him in exile so as not to risk further shame to the family; the Xena clone wants to wipe out slave traders and also to seduce the druid; and the druid wants to do whatever she wants, without much regard to concepts like "modesty" or "monogamy" or "not turning into a giant snake in a city which hates and fears the Serpent Cult". Ideally you want to pick a motivation which leads to a specific event which could be filmed: "In this scene, the Family Matriarch formally thanks the Trusty Manservant for keeping Disgraced Nobleman away from the City." Then measure your choices not by "how risky is this" or "how much money will I make", but "does this lead me to that scene I want?"

[opaopajr]

I personally find it inspirational to "scry the bones," as it were. I let randomization guide me and force me into making a connection to the stats as a character first. Sometimes I get an idea within the first step of randomization. Other times I randomize everything from which Abilities to input my Standard Array, to race, class, background -- even to spells, fighting styles, and skills.

At some point I "get it" and run with the bubbling conception, (hopefully before I gotta randomize quickstart equipment! :smallsmile: ).

It's not for everybody, but it does apply pressure upon me to conceive a character.

[Nifft]

I personally find it inspirational to "scry the bones," as it were. I let randomization guide me and force me into making a connection to the stats as a character first. Sometimes I get an idea within the first step of randomization. Other times I randomize everything from which Abilities to input my Standard Array, to race, class, background -- even to spells, fighting styles, and skills.

At some point I "get it" and run with the bubbling conception, (hopefully before I gotta randomize quickstart equipment! :smallsmile: ).

It's not for everybody, but it does apply pressure upon me to conceive a character.

Very true.

When I have neither concept nor aspiration, the dice can be a source of inspiration.

[Requilac]

That's pretty much it, yeah.

I doubt that what I said was throwing the OP off that much, I was simply showing him that his character concept could be whatever mechanical mix he wanted, and possibly giving him some inspiration on what to do. I can see why that might be confusing to some though. I still think it was a good idea to include. I guess that addresses that then, right? Still confused as to what I am supposed to say.

[Hrugner]

One thing that's helped me in 5e is to make sure I'll have something to do in the game. If you create your character and give them a place in the world, a personality and all that, and the DM doesn't engage that in any way, you need some way to be able to express that through whatever play is available without monopolizing table time with exposition or pushing side quests.


Taking 3 levels of thief rogue gives you a lot more organic play options as you can inject lots of irregular activities into turns that you'd generally expect to be able to do and the expertise grants you a more distinct level of competence preventing your characters life experience from disappearing into random chance.
Elf and warforged offer a bit more wiggle room as well with their short rest time. This gives them extended down time that doesn't cut into the rest of the party's time that can be used for fulfilling the character in some way.
It's also helpful to focus your character on something. Don't necessarily min/max, but ensure that your character has a wide variety of weaknesses so that they have reason for practical interaction rather than merely superficial interaction.
Some low investment RP injections involve things like crafting and performance. These let you explain or describe something that shares mood and subtext to your actions and don't require much more time than a brief description.
I'm also a fan of the elemental evil elemental cantrips as an expressive method. They support the idea of a highly magical character and allow them to manipulate things in a way that can show who they are. It's a shame you can't use these spells as a bonus action in a way similar to an arcane trickster's mage hand, they provide tons of flavor and it would be cool to let the operate in combat without wasting everyone's time.


Or just freeform RP and ignore the game for the most part. I'm not a fan but it works for some people.

[Bahamut7]

So many great responses so far. Let me see if I can add anything helpful to you from my experience.

Initially, I did the same as you. I optimized based on mechanics. Created an archetype but not a character. Anyone could take on this role. So after some experience, I began trying to roleplay more than roll play.

One of the biggest things that have helped me? Explaining in-game as the character, how I learned all my new tricks when I leveled up. I try to rationalize the process of leveling up from the character's perspective. Once I have that road map figured out, I fill in the details on who would want to walk this path and what motivates them to keep walking it.

For example, I had a Sun Soul Monk that was known as the "****ty" wizard in the group. Even though, his comrades made fun of him especially when the actual wizard could do far more effective magic then he could, he would still smile because they called him a wizard. All he could do was make smaller fireballs (Produce Flame), fix broken things (Mend), and thanks to what a Druid showed him, make some really good berries that kept hunger at bay (Goodberry).

What kind of character could this be? Why would he still be happy? The reason is he came from a city where magic was everywhere and if you couldn't do it well, you were second class. He tried everything in school but couldn't do more than the 2 cantrips. This led to him being bullied a lot. He got really good at avoiding firebolts from his peers (good dex) and really understood the world around him (good wisdom).

He began working in the Library to try and learn how to like his peers and finally accepted. One day he found an old battered tome that seemed to have a magical quality to it. He opened it to discover many pages gone. He asked the head Librarian about it and she explained it to him. The book was found in a massive crater and though damaged seemed to be "frozen" in that state, for nothing could mend nor damage the book. One day, one of the city elders found a page written in the same text, that could also not be damaged. Bring the page and book to each other, the page returned to the book and could no longer be torn out.

This inspired him. He read what remained of the book and kept seeing things about the power of the Inner Light (Ki) and decided he would find the remaining pages and learn what the book had to teach.

There is more of course, but as he leveled, the book would be more complete and reveal more tricks and power (Sun Soul Monk class progression). My DM loved the idea and I loved playing that "****ty" wizard.

[ad_hoc]

I've either played it or built it a hundred times over.

5e hasn't been out that long. Are you playing multiple times a week every week?

I would get burned out too.

As for 'internal conflict' and the story structure...D&D is its own thing.

1) Characters are part of an ensemble. Bad characters are ones who are written to be the central protagonist. No one should be building Luke Skywalker. A table of Luke Skywalkers is a bad idea.

2) D&D is improv with the audience being the performers. It's not a book, or a movie, etc. Character traits need to be shown as the results of actions in game.

My advice is to not over-complicate things. Pick a strong fantasy archetype. Stay single class, spend time on the background bonds/ideals/personality traits and the inspiration system are great tools here.

The bottom line is to ensure that character defining attributes are strong enough to come through in an ensemble where the only way we know about your character is through your actions.

A complicated backstory explaining the character's inner struggles isn't going to cut it.

Instead think about well known characters from fantasy and describe them in a couple sentences. What has stood out about them? What have they done in those stories that we remember? Why are they memorable?

[SiCK_Boy]

5e hasn't been out that long. Are you playing multiple times a week every week?

I wondered the same thing. I guess 100s of characters may be a bit of an hyperbole from the OP, but really, how can you go through all those options? Are characters dying left and right? Are you playing 30 hours a week in multiple simultaneous campaigns? Did all the characters get complete, successful story arcs justifying retiring them?

I've played for close to 10 months in a weekly game (3-4 hours per week), and I've only created 5 characters (and 2 of those never got used).

I cannot even imagine reaching the point when I'll have gone through enough permutations of the basic PHB options to feel bored...

One suggestion that has not been made to the OP: maybe you could bring out some of your earlier characters from retirement? Or try using pre-made characters? This way, you would not worry so much about the "character creation" game and could instead focus on the "playing" part of the game?

[DivisibleByZero]

I had a bit of burnout once with 3e. I told the DM to make me a character with amnesia, who was learning who he was as we went along. Every level was a surprise as new memories were unlocked and new abilities were granted/remembered.

[Beelzebubba]

You're just a bit burnt out. It happens to everyone.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mental-downtime/

OP, go take a break. Go ride a bike, hike, camp, cook, read a few books, go on a movie watching marathon, whatever. You're tapped, and you need some downtime to replenish.

Just make sure it's not a 'production' hobby. Be intentionally lazy and just feel and absorb.

[jaappleton]

To those asking how often I play:

I have played once a week since 5E was released, and had a two year 4E campaign before then. Of course, some sessions were missed for life reasons.

The kicker, though, is that my head would constantly churn out new ideas, new builds, new concepts.

So in 5E, I’ve played.... Maybe 14 characters since 5E’s release? However, I’ve built.... Hmm. This is honestly not an exaggeration: I’ve build, as in put pen to paper, full character sheet, everything statted up... 90? 100 more?

And I had fun with almost every character I played. Some more than others. I retired some that were TOO strong (Tempest Theurge, and a Totem Barbarian that got too many Boons). And I had fun writing up all those other ones I never played.

But lately, over the last two months, there’s been just... Nothing. Nothing popping into my head, making me excited to put pen to paper, no new concept. And most of them were ‘optimal’. No Charismatic Half-Orcs, for example, though I do think going against stereotypes is awesome, but my table is a high-casualty one, so things need to work pretty well. It’s not high-casualty due to anything in particular; Bad rolls, poor but hilarious planning, etc. Encounters are tough but never outright impossible, and I’m proud to say I’ve done plenty to outright invalidate some of my DMs encounters with my creativity.

But yeah, lately, it’s just been.... There’s nothing there.

We’re a party of two, so I often feel pigeonholed into the role of ‘Mage/Healer’. I’ve played a lot of Clerics, I’m currently a Life Theurge. And honestly, I’m kicking a lot of ass in combat. The DM has been fairly generous with healing potions, even occasionally dropping a ‘Mana’ potion so I can recover some spell slots (since we’re such a small party).

Drunken Master looks exceptionally fun to play and RP. I picture some Jack Sparrow style combat, where I comically duck and cause enemies to hit each other via Tipsy Sway, for example, but I will likely die in three sessions because we’ll be missing my normal healing and spells, so why bother getting invested in that character?

I’ve spoken with my DM about feeling the need to fulfill certain combat roles, and would encounters change if I did, and the response was ‘Find out’. He’s coy about everything.

I’m really heavily leaning Rogue or Monk for my Tabaxi Pirate. Something as opposite of what I’ve been playing as possible.


EDIT: For the record... I want to play. I'm excited to play. I still love the game. It's just that the creative juices have dried up.

[Asmotherion]

I know the feeling.

Try exploring something you have never considered. Instead of focusing in the mechanics and numbers, focus in the actual role playing aspects of the character.

The same character sheet you have (from a lower level) could very well represent a very different individual. See an other perspective. Make an other story for a character, and delve deeper into his backstory. Change the appearance. Change alignment. Change Religion. Change Race. Change Favored Weapon/Spell. Give a small trinket that has a lot of value to the individual (a carving of a dragon from his grandfather, or a dagger that is in the fammily for generations).

You can keep the same stats and numbers, but explore more the Role playing aspect.

[Mikal]

That's why I come up with a fun concept, and build my optimization around that, instead of just making the build.

I.E.- X looks interesting without delving into the mechanics, I figure out a concept that would be fun that can fit into X and then optimize from there, or I'm watching/reading/playing Y, and I try to figure out how to modify and play something like that with optimization.

If you just focus on the mechanics, it's very easy to get burnt out. Of course part of being inspired is being in a game that can make you inspired, so if you're just making the characters without an actual world to put them in, that can easily make you run out of steam as well.

[Hrugner]

To those asking how often I play:

I have played once a week since 5E was released, and had a two year 4E campaign before then. Of course, some sessions were missed for life reasons.

The kicker, though, is that my head would constantly churn out new ideas, new builds, new concepts.

<snip>

EDIT: For the record... I want to play. I'm excited to play. I still love the game. It's just that the creative juices have dried up.

It sounds like you aren't burnt out on characters as much as disappointed you get to play so few of those you've made. Have you looked through your old characters to see if any of those seem fun to play now?

[Requilac]

To those asking how often I play:

I have played once a week since 5E was released, and had a two year 4E campaign before then. Of course, some sessions were missed for life reasons.

The kicker, though, is that my head would constantly churn out new ideas, new builds, new concepts.

So in 5E, I’ve played.... Maybe 14 characters since 5E’s release? However, I’ve built.... Hmm. This is honestly not an exaggeration: I’ve build, as in put pen to paper, full character sheet, everything statted up... 90? 100 more?

EDIT: For the record... I want to play. I'm excited to play. I still love the game. It's just that the creative juices have dried up.

So let me get this straight, you have made like 100 characters but have used less than 15% in actual play. No wonder you are having problems Jaappleton, you do not need to create more characters, you need to actually use the 86 you have not played as! Take a character from the graveyard of sheets that never got used and play as them, don’t create another to add to the hoard unless you intentionally want to run out of ideas. The answer to your problem is lying in a heaping stack stashed someone in your house or brain right in front of your nose.

[SiCK_Boy]

We’re a party of two, so I often feel pigeonholed into the role of ‘Mage/Healer’. I’ve played a lot of Clerics, I’m currently a Life Theurge. And honestly, I’m kicking a lot of ass in combat. The DM has been fairly generous with healing potions, even occasionally dropping a ‘Mana’ potion so I can recover some spell slots (since we’re such a small party).

Thanks for further clarifying your situation.

I can see how, with a 2 players group, you would dedicate a lot of time to the "character creation" game (nothing wrong with it, it is a fun game and certainly a creative endeavor as valid as many others).

Maybe this is the area you should look at? Finding more players would make the game go "slower"; you could also dedicate more time to expending your various character's relationships with the rest of the party (something that is difficult to determine in advance at character creation).

Have you considered asking the DM to allow each player to control 2 PCs instead of 1 each? You could use more of your existing backlog of characters, the game's pace would slow, it would certainly make the DM's job easier in terms of planning (it must be difficult to always plan for only 2 players, adjusting CR, etc.), it would also let you feel less pidgeon-holed in specific character roles (like healer).

Or, as many people have said, maybe you just need to take break and come back to the game with a fresh mind. Holidays are coming up; it's often a time for gaming groups to take a break anyway, so the timing could work well for you.

In all cases, good luck!

[jaappleton]

So let me get this straight, you have made like 100 characters but have used less than 15% in actual play. No wonder you are having problems Jaappleton, you do not need to create more characters, you need to actually use the 86 you have not played as! Take a character from the graveyard of sheets that never got used and play as them, don’t create another to add to the hoard unless you intentionally want to run out of ideas. The answer to your problem is lying in a heaping stack stashed someone in your house or brain right in front of your nose.

It's such a big haystack to burn to find the needle! :smallbiggrin:

I'm really loving the idea that I mentioned earlier: A Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate.

He's a Robin Hood style of Pirate. Not necessarily the sea faring one. He's quite a low ranking nobleman, barely registering as one, but he still knows some people. His adventuring life is somewhat of an alter-ego, using his adventuring life to cut through the bureaucracy and red tape which prevents real action from taking place.

For Class, I've decided to go quite far from the standard Spellcaster that I've normally been. I wanted to rely not on spells, but on skills and raw ability. That led me to two Classes; Rogue and Monk. Honestly, while powerful, the limited attacks of a Rogue frighten me. The thought of waiting for my turn to just swing and miss is quite disheartening. So what's the opposite of a single attack? A ton of them.

That led me to Monk. While synergizing naturally with the insane speed of a Tabaxi, it's also one of the only Monk archetypes to have abilities which lend itself insanely well to outside of combat: Shadow Monk.

So, I have a class I've built before but have never actually gotten the opportunity to play. I have some spell style abilities without being a 'Mage'. I'm a race that sounds damn fun to me. The character has some fears, as if people discover whom he is, he's likely to land it quite a bit of hot water politically. As a Tabaxi, it's funny to me if he also has a fear of water.

I'm excited. I'm really excited! :smallbiggrin:

[Cynthaer]

One of my personal favorite methods is to randomly generate then just go with it.
I like to use some online tools (such as "who the F is my D&D character") to start overarching or broad themes. Once I've generated 3 to 5 I find genuinely interesting, I move on to (IMO, one of the greatest published WotC books) the 3.5 Hero Builder's Guidebook. In there, I will use the wealth of tables to randomly generate everything about the character. From home climate to town size to family and personal political affiliations, it has amazing starting points to help fill out the "extra bits".

Once all that is done, I'm always left with a compelling character. The rest is filling out numbers.

This is often how I do it as well, although I do a little more iteration back and forth between mechanics and characterization. It helps me indulge my natural urge to optimize numbers without feeling "trapped" by the need to pick the "correct" choices.

For the OP, as a case study, here's how I created my most recent character.

Step 1: Find an arbitrary starting point for the character concept.

The site "Who the F*** Is My DND Character" randomly generates a description in the form "a [personality] [race] [class] from [location] who [personal quirk or experience]", and it's a popular tool for this. You can also use the background randomization tables from Xanathar's, or define a personality, alignment, and/or mechanical role based on what's missing from an otherwise complete party.

(For the OP, I wouldn't recommend the latter, because it sounds like you've been doing that already, and the "gap" in the party build is always the same in your group.)

For this character, I used "Who the F", and got "a courageous half-orc wizard from the scorched plains who was a weapons instructor for the city watch".

Step 2: Find something interesting in this description to focus on.

For me, the thing that stood out was that literally every race feature of half-orcs is geared toward melee combat, making them very awkward wizards. Plus, this half-orc was a weapons instructor, so how did they end up learning magic in their watch career anyway? The bit about the "scorched plains" didn't really grab me, so I didn't focus on it.

Step 3: Here's where it gets fuzzy. Basically I follow the interesting bit wherever it takes me. That could be the character's personality itself ("top-down design", in Magic: the Gathering terms) or the mechanics ("bottom-up design").

Here I started by filling in the story of this courageous half-orc wizard in the watch. I settled on the idea that she was the daughter of a scribe, giving her a basis for learning magic. And looking through the published backgrounds, I noticed there was one for City Watch, with a suggested variant of "Investigator". That sounded like a perfect role for a bookish, Int-based character like this one, and was interesting enough that I discarded the detail of being a "weapons instructor" specifically.

Turning back to the mechanics, I wanted to actually use the half-orc features and not just make a wizard with bad stats. I looked around and what others had done, and discovered some discussion of high-Str mountain dwarf abjurer builds, using the armor proficiency to survive on the front line. It doesn't work quite as well, but I decided to do something similar, relying on Mage Armor and Shield to survive and using Booming Blade with a 2-handed staff as my main damage output.

Going back to the background, this wizard investigator wanted some appropriate investigator spells, so I went with Detect Magic and Identify as thematic choices. They're not amazing, but they're not completely useless. They also something about the character: She specialized in magic-related investigations. Cool.

From this, I had the idea that she actually learned magic to help with investigations specifically. Also, with her being a half-orc, who are generally regarded as brutish and violent, I decided she didn't just apply to join the watch, but actually encountered them first as a prisoner (falsely convicted due to bigotry). While serving her sentence, she used her knowledge and intellect to assist the watch in their investigations, eventually getting a pardon and becoming an official investigator herself. Her study of magic came when the watch provided her with materials to study, specifically so she could be even more useful even while she was imprisoned.

Finally, I went back to the mechanics. She was a front-line wizard with 8 HP, 16 Str and 14 Int, two 1st-level spells devoted purely to keeping herself alive, and two more 1st-level spells basically there for flavor. Her primary damage output was a melee strike with a simple weapon. In other words, she represented the character concept quite well, but was far from optimized mechanically.

This let me feel free to straight-up optimize the remaining spells for power and utility, so I chose Sleep and Find Familiar (Owl), plus Minor Illusion and a damage cantrip to round things out.

The result was a character I like so much I ended up writing [url=https://www.myth-weavers.com/showthread.php?t=417182]1700 words of backstory[/link] for her. The last 600, incidentally, came from having to merge her backstory into the start of the campaign she joined, so she ended up being a member of the Baldurian Watch wandering around Phlan because she had killed in self-defense and needed to lay low until her captain could sort out the political situation.

So far, she's been great fun to play, because I know her character so well. I know why she will go along with a given plot hook, I know how she will respond to other characters, and most importantly for me (since she's in a play-by-post game), I know how she speaks. From her experiences, I know that when someone begs for help after a random goblin raid, she has a slight doubt in the back of her mind because goblins are an easy scapegoat, and when she sees lazy guards neglecting their duty, she rants about the philosophical role of law enforcement entities for the next hour.

She's not responsible for a ton of damage output in combat, but the owl familiar provides absurd amounts of utility, so she's hardly useless. The build may not be optimized, but it's more than good enough to let me focus on playing the character, not the numbers.

[DivisibleByZero]

I'm really loving the idea that I mentioned earlier: A Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate.

He's a Robin Hood style of Pirate. Not necessarily the sea faring one.
<snip>
he also has a fear of water.

I'm excited. I'm really excited! :smallbiggrin:

That sounds like amazing fun!

Let me ask you a question. Is this a new way for you to create a character, or is it just the working through the process that has you excited again?
If the latter, that's still good. But if the former, don't lose your momentum now, and actually try to stay in character pretty much at all times. Then you'll really see what we mean by "play a character, not a build." If the former, and if you stick with it, this is going to feel like a completely different game now.

[Beechgnome]

Though it sounds like you've got it covered, I'll chime in late.

One thing I find is I need to play a class/race I will enjoy, so I come up with that first. It may be optimised, but maybe it's not. For example, I wanted to play an earth genasi land (desert) druid, who could cast erupting earth and earth Tremor but be immune to the effects (and maybe have long strider too). I also wanted find familiar, because I'm a druid... I should have a pet.

Then after I've figured out the fiddly bits, I ask: how did this happen? How did this character get to here? That's when story and character and creative juices get going.

For example:

Name: Saphir Al-Hazim (female)
Race: Earth Genasi, but disguises this and acts/dresses like her foster parents, desert tribes people who travel the northern lands as part of a performance troupe.
Class: Druid
Background: Customized. Circus performer. Skills: Sleight of hand, Performance. Tool proficiency: Jewellers tools. Extra language: Gnome.
Bonus feat: Magic initiate (Wizard): Mold earth, Prestidigitation, Find familiar (most often an elemental lizard named Jub-Jub).
Racial abilities: Can move through difficult terrain of rocks, rubble and earth at normal speed. Can cast pass without trace once a day. +1 Str, +2 Con.

Druid cantrips: Magic stone, Thorn whip.
Druid spells: Animal friendship, earth tremor, longstrider.

Going to go desert druid and add absorb elements and guidance at 2nd, Silence, Blur, Dust Devil at 3rd. (Yes, not optimal. But I'm from the desert and look like a mummy. I need dust devil!)

Str 14 Jump 14', 7', 5'
Dex 14 Sleight of hand +4 Performance (dexterity) +4
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 14 Animal handling +4 Perception +4
Cha 11 Performance +3

Alighnment: Neutral Good.

AC 13 (leather armor)
hp 10
Init +2
Speed 30 (walks slowly with her staff, more like 20-25 when acting frail)
Spell Attack +4
Spell Save DC 12

Saphir, so the story goes, is the daughter of a dao, one of a score of children the foul earth prince is said to have sired during a rampage through the desert clans of [insert name here]. He vowed to return 16 years later to claim the children for his court, to act as servants to his every whim. Saphir's mother vowed not to let that happen. She gave him up to one of the dreamwalkers, a travelling druid of her people, and told him to spirit her as far away as possible, and to hide her true nature, for Saphir didn't just have piercing blue eyes, she also had what appeared to be Sapphires peeking out from her dusky skin.

The druid raised her as a father and took her far across the desert and into civilized lands, where he chanced to fall in love with an acrobat with a travelling menagerie. He joined the troupe as an animal handler, and they toured the northern lands, while their 'daughter' learned to hide her identity beneath a cloak of infirmity. They claimed exposure to sunlight burned her flesh, and kept her wrapped up and mostly inside.

Naturally, a kindly gnome magician with the troupe took pity on her and began to tutor her, first in simple sleight of hand tricks, the gnomish language (for many of his spellbooks were written in gnomish) and later some elementary magic, though she didn't have the knack for more than a few parlor tricks. She was also learning the ways of the druid from her adoptive father, too. And with that knowledge came boldness, and in a moment of weakness, at the age of 15, she showed her true self to the gnome. Unfortunately, an agent of the dao saw it as well, and her adoptive father was forced to slay the man before he could inform his master. Her father and mother were arrested, but not before they sent her off, telling her to get as far away from circus as possible. So begins an adventuring life.

Now she vows to use her abilities to gain enough strength to face her true 'father' before he finds her.

Trait I hate being wet. I use prestidigitation to keep my 'bandages' dry.
Trait I try to hide my strength and mobility beneath a performance of infirmity.
Trait I do not let others see my true self. I guard my privacy zealously.
Ideal None should be held by the bonds of slavery.
Bond My father is a powerful dao who wishes to collect me. I will do anything to prevent that from happening.
Flaw Against my better judgement, I am fascinated by gems, particularly sapphires, and wish to acquire them.

[Stormjack]

Glad you figured it out.

A great method is to use a film or book character as inspiration. Ignore the genre. Personality, motives, preferences, attitudes, style, etc. can stem from that selection. Here are two examples.

1. My last PC was styled from Cody Lundin of Dual Survival. He was a Druid with high strength who always walked barefoot. Other class options I considered were Barbarian and Ranger. But since I never played a Druid, I went with that. When playing this character I wore a bandana and kept a picture of Cody with my character sheet. Reminders like that helped me role play the character. With that high strength he wasn’t primarily a summoner. He was a toe-to-toe combatant that held the front line with the fighters.

2. My current PC is modeled from Robert Redford’s role as Sundance in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Sundance is a handsome, gambling gunslinger. So he gets high charisma and high dexterity. High charisma suggests swashbuckling charm, so I flavored his background as a sailor. From a class perspective, you could go rogue or archer, but why waste the high Charisma? So he’s a Warlock (gunslinger) with pact of the blade Rapier which is a finesse weapon (swashbuckler). Then I multiclassed into Sorcerer after 3rd level. That’s not optimal for a Sorlock, but character flavor was more important to me. And he’s a blast to play. Sundance informs how that character is played. In our party’s first combat he sat at a table and placed bets on the Half Orc beating the goon squad sent to harass our group.

You could do this exercise with any number of characters from books, TV, or movies. For instance, take John McClaine from Die Hard (or Hans Gruber), or Gordon Ramsay from Hell’s Kitchen, or Gene Hackman from Unforgiven (a whip-cracking lawman). Each suggests something different, and could give you ideas when playing.

At this point you’re so good at optimizing it would probably be hard for you to create a bad character. You can trust that your optimization mechanics will be sound. So be willing to take a few risks in that area. That means you will not always make the most optimal choices. But your choices will honor the spirit of your character.

So pick a person, a personality, that excites you and trust your gut to make it work.

[Laundry55]

I think you should try a different system. DnD systematically encourages people to optimize, which is not a bad thing, because it is a game.

The issue with 5e is that there are not a lot of options in character creation that result in strong builds. Your build is important in DnD, because you are expected to have 6-8 encounters per adventuring day, and your build allows you to deal with these encounters efficiently. The vast majority of class features are combat abilities. DnD is a game that works best when you fight a lot of monsters and get treasure.

I'm not saying that you can't incorporate narrative and complex characters into DnD. On the contrary, I think it makes the game much more interesting, but the mechanics of 5e cannot support this as a primary focus. The mechanics of the game are built primarily around combat, and you should not be ridiculed for optimizing your character because other people want to make DnD into something the system is not built for.

It doesn't help that WOTC do a terrible job of balancing and providing meaningful decisions for character creation. Whatever concept you want to play will be most efficient as a charisma caster half-elf with a 2 level hexblade dip, but that's a different discussion for another time.

My recommendation is to try another system, like GURPS, where the system encourages players to create a concept, and THEN build the mechanics for that concept. All systems have their flaws, but GURPS is much more flexible, and is capable of building the game and characters that are right for you.

TL;DR I think your issues are a result of DnD as a system. I suggest you try another system, such as GURPS.

[Longman]

I've only scanned the thread but it seems to me there's a lot of emphasis on methods to develop the "right" character. But what if your GM stinks?

Player: "I've finally got a character concept I really like! This is gonna be great!"
GM: "You go down a corridor and see an orc in a 10' room guarding a treasure chest. Roll for initiative."
Player: "This is boring already! I knew I should have gone with a different character concept."

[LeonBH]

I've only scanned the thread but it seems to me there's a lot of emphasis on methods to develop the "right" character. But what if your GM stinks?

Player: "I've finally got a character concept I really like! This is gonna be great!"
GM: "You go down a corridor and see an orc in a 10' room guarding a treasure chest. Roll for initiative."
Player: "This is boring already! I knew I should have gone with a different character concept."

Well, if you're playing with a DM you know, you shouldn't have this problem because you will be pre-warned.

[krugaan]

I've only scanned the thread but it seems to me there's a lot of emphasis on methods to develop the "right" character. But what if your GM stinks?

Player: "I've finally got a character concept I really like! This is gonna be great!"
GM: "You go down a corridor and see an orc in a 10' room guarding a treasure chest. Roll for initiative."
Player: "This is boring already! I knew I should have gone with a different character concept."

Then obviously you need to deadpan it as well to maximize experience gain.

GM: "You go down a corridor and see an orc in a 10' room guarding a treasure chest. Roll for initiative."
Player: Jawohl mein fuhrer! I roll ze dice! 16!
GM: Orc rolls 12, you go first!
Player: I attack! /slaps chessclock
GM: Roll! /slaps chessclock
Player: 4! /slaps chessclock
GM: Miss! Orc attacks, 16! You take 2 damage! Go! /slaps chessclock
Player: Hah! You must speak more words than me! I attack! /slaps chessclock
GM: Curses! Rocks fall and you die, I win! /slaps chessclock
Player: Gah! /slaps chessclock

[Unoriginal]

Then obviously you need to deadpan it as well to maximize experience gain.

GM: "You go down a corridor and see an orc in a 10' room guarding a treasure chest. Roll for initiative."
Player: Jawohl mein fuhrer! I roll ze dice! 16!
GM: Orc rolls 12, you go first!
Player: I attack! /slaps chessclock
GM: Roll! /slaps chessclock
Player: 4! /slaps chessclock
GM: Miss! Orc attacks, 16! You take 2 damage! Go! /slaps chessclock
Player: Hah! You must speak more words than me! I attack! /slaps chessclock
GM: Curses! Rocks fall and you die, I win! /slaps chessclock
Player: Gah! /slaps chessclock

Player: "Such defiance!"


But what if your GM stinks?

Find a better DM.

It's the one solution to that question, if you've tried to make them not stink already and it didn't work.

[Longman]

Find a better DM.

It's the one solution to that question, if you've tried to make them not stink already and it didn't work.

A good suggestion for the OP.

If the OP has seriously run through all the character choices they claim, and is finding it all boring, then I highly doubt that character choice is actually the issue.

[djreynolds]

I've reached a point where no character concept seems exciting to play.

And I have no idea what to do.

I've either played it or built it a hundred times over. Super optimized, min-maxed, to off the wall crazy ideas that just sounded fun. And I've had a blast either building characters or playing them.

And now its at a point where nothing sounds exciting, and this feeling sucks.

I don't know what happened. Is it because I'm building optimization playstyle concepts and not characters?

It's been a few weeks now and I can't think of any way to bust myself out of this slump. Any ideas, playgrounders?

Try old school....

Choose a race..... choose a class.... and the roll 3d6 or 4d6 stats inorder and leave it. This is your character

Try a new table and DM....

Find a game with new players who don't know or care and are just pointing at that drow rogue in the PHB and saying... "I'm playing this"

Look at old book covers and art work....

Have your table try a different campaign, low magic or high magic, something different.

I played a Dune inspired game, its SCIFI but has lots of fantasy. Because of these body shields, you were forced to fight hand-to-hand

Take a break, take a course in something at the local college.

[mgshamster]

As John Wayne is oft quoted (or misquoted) ... "Courage is being afraid but saddling up anyway."

As a child, I read that quote in a Xanth novel. It's been one of my guiding principles my entire life.

"Courage is not the absence of fear; it's the presence of fear and still continuing on."

It kept me going through two wars in the army, and it's the same principle I teach my children.

[Ovarwa]

Hi,

A bit late to this. I'd start with the following.

What do you want to get out of the game?

You've done and enjoyed many things. What do you want now?

Anyway,

Ken

[kilpatds]

About creating characters. I think it's important to realize that a good D&D character is not the same as a good fiction character. In D&D, you don't really control the external conflict. You don't get to make it interesting or not ... your DM has a lot of responsibility there.

So your character should likely have a source of conflict you can control. This is likely why the earlier suggestions for internal conflict: Your DM isn't responsible for that.

My knee jerk advice is always to start pretty wide in your characterization... FATE calls this "high concept", but here "high" is as in an altitude ("from 10,000 ft...") not culture. "Angry Dwarf". "Spoiled Useless child". "Pirate captain"

Then figure out why they're off risking their lives and chasing danger. "Had to get out of dodge after he murdered someone", "Trying to prove his dad wrong about being useless", "A close encounter with a god's avatar converted him on the spot"

As per above, the key to the motivation is that it SHOULDN'T be TOO tied to the world. You don't really want it to be something you can complete, because then the character's done. So "has to throw the ring away where the BBEG can't get it" is terrible for a D&D player, because it presumably ends at some point. You have some option to do so (because the DM forgot... and thought a planar rift was a good McGuffin for some other story), and you have to do it, and now your character is just going to go back home at 10th level. This, again, goes back to something more on the internal side... but that motivation needs to lead to external conflict, because that's what the other players get to interact with.

Once that's done is the first point where the mechanics can fit in...and I'd consider suggesting that you pick the least stereotypical mechanics to fit the concept, because that will help scratch your optimization itch. Angry Dwarf isn't a Barbarian, he's a Warlock who sold his soul for more power while feeling wronged... Useless Dilettante isn't a Rogue/Bard, he's a Paladin.

And then the last suggestion I have is to not worry about it between games. Let the game grow the character, don't go insane creating lots of characters.

[clem]

I'm really loving the idea that I mentioned earlier: A Tabaxi Nobleman turned Pirate.

He's a Robin Hood style of Pirate. Not necessarily the sea faring one. He's quite a low ranking nobleman, barely registering as one, but he still knows some people. His adventuring life is somewhat of an alter-ego, using his adventuring life to cut through the bureaucracy and red tape which prevents real action from taking place.

Nice! Reminds me of the Scarlet Pimpernel.

[jaappleton]

That sounds like amazing fun!

Let me ask you a question. Is this a new way for you to create a character, or is it just the working through the process that has you excited again?
If the latter, that's still good. But if the former, don't lose your momentum now, and actually try to stay in character pretty much at all times. Then you'll really see what we mean by "play a character, not a build." If the former, and if you stick with it, this is going to feel like a completely different game now.

A good question, and one I don't truly have an answer for.

I don't think my previous method was wrong. Optimization doesn't equate to a lack of role playing, Stormwind Fallacy, etc.

I think a large part of my problem was that I'd done damn near every build, and despite XGtE having just been released, we all had a pretty decent idea of the final archetypes due to their UA. So the book didn't have anything too exciting, because we'd known about its contents for awhile. The new spells didn't do much for me because while it has some GREAT spells, I'm so burned out on spellcasters because of what I've been playing.

The most exciting part of a new character is shaping it. Who is this person? I'd focused for awhile on what is this person, and I'd work out the who later. I don't think doing one before the other is incorrect, but I was neglecting to do one aspect of it at all.

I've made Shadow Monks before. Never played one. So I'd had three Shadow Monks in a pile of papers, each one being a Shadow Monk. Who are they? That's what I neglected to answer. And I've played before without knowing who, and I figured it out along the way, molding their personality as the game unfolded through the scenarios presented.

This time, I did things in a different order, of course. That was the whole point, right? :smallbiggrin:

And this method certainly has me excited. Next time, will it? I can't answer that yet, it hasn't happened. Various methods of character creation have come through for me. Sometimes its a piece of artwork, or a character in a videogame. I honestly don't recall the last time I did the Who --> How --> What method.

But I certainly don't hate it. :smallbiggrin:

[DivisibleByZero]

I don't think my previous method was wrong. Optimization doesn't equate to a lack of role playing, Stormwind Fallacy, etc.

I never said it was wrong.
I just think that with your current conundrum of burnout, this should be the first thing you try (if you hadn't before). It might be the answer. If not, then a break might be in order.
With this method getting your excitement back, hopefully it stays and you'll be on the right track.

[jaappleton]

I never said it was wrong.
I just think that with your current conundrum of burnout, this should be the first thing you try (if you hadn't before). It might be the answer. If not, then a break might be in order.
With this method getting your excitement back, hopefully it stays and you'll be on the right track.

I never meant to imply that you implied my previous method was wrong. It was me stating that I think there’s tons of valid ways to generate a character.

If it came off any other way, that’s not my intent. Your advice in particular throughout this topic has been exceptionally stellar, Zero, and I truly thank you for it.

[Ganymede]

Try out the randomized backstory tables in Xanathar's the next time you make a character.

Roll up a bunch of fun background weirdness then challenge yourself to make it all one cohesive whole.

[Arkhios]

Just my personal thoughts:

A good character is imperfect, has attachments, and has a reason to adventure.

In other words:
Imperfections: Emphasize the character's personality flaws (and other background traits for that matter).
Attachments: Come up with people connected to the character; family, friends, former companions, mentors, as well as enemies and maybe even a sworn nemesis. Also, a place he/she might call home, no matter how recent. Other meaningful locations, even if they might be viewed as unfavorable for his reputation. Maybe a family heirloom (doesn't have to be valuable).

And most importantly, come up with a reason why your character would seek adventures, as all too often I have seen people make characters who have zero agenda for their adventuring career.

One more thing which I like personally. Add a twist into a stereotypical character of a specific class. (For example, my current primary character is a Paladin, but has "barbarian" written all over his background – Uthgardt Tribe Member)

[Unoriginal]

So, Leopard Zorro?

[jaappleton]

So, Leopard Zorro?

.......Actually, yeah. Never noticed it, but yeah. Though with claws instead of a rapier.

[Unoriginal]

.......Actually, yeah. Never noticed it, but yeah. Though with claws instead of a rapier.

Hope I haven't accidentally diminished your enthusiasm.

[Ivor_The_Mad]

Have you looked at Xanathar's there are some cool RP opportunities and new subclasses.

[jaappleton]

Hope I haven't accidentally diminished your enthusiasm.

Not at all. On the contrary, it's a bit more inspiration on the 'alter ego' side of things. Wondering how much I can ham it up? Maybe it's an open secret that it's him, but he desperately clings to his 'secret' life?

[sithlordnergal]

So, here is what I enjoy doing when I am unsure about what character I am going to use:

I just roll for everything. Just roll a d12 for your class, roll for your subclass, roll for your race, roll for your background, and I generally roll for those personality traits the backgrounds suggest. As a result I have made a Goblin Noble Fighter, a Human Cleric Criminal, and many others. I then have to work around the things I rolled to make them more believable.

For example, the Goblin comes from an evil noble house who raised him. Rather then seeing the goblin as family, or even intelligent, they showed him off at parties as a "Civilized Goblin" to make fun of him. He now adventures to try and earn his family's love and respect.