Please, Uncliché My Character Concept

[Hazkali]

Okay, normally I can come up with half-decent character ideas. However at the moment my abilities have been drained, and I'm left with a cliché-ridden clone of a character idea. Whilst I like the idea, I'd quite like some inspiration about how to round it out more.

The campaign is historical (using d20 Past rules), and set at the start of the Hundred Years war. My character is a priest or monk (haven't decided which) who in his younger years was a crusader in the last crusade. One day, consumed by battle-lust he commits an as-yet undecided atrocity. Returning home a hero but in his own eyes a damned man, he takes up holy orders in order to atone for his past misdeeds.

Okay, it's a Cadfael clone. But how to make it less clichéd?

[Brue]

Well, a small tweak here might be that it wasn't a one-time attrocity. Or at least it's a weakness or tendency the character has to want to repeat said attrocity and he's currently fighting to repress it. Perhaps it will come to a boil inside him and burst out in a rampaging chaotic frenzy?

(Or maybe I just wanted to write the phrase rampaging chaotic frenzy).

I'm sure others will have better suggestions.

Brue

[SpikeFightwicky]

Isn't he going to be REALLY old? The 100 year war started in the late 1330s, and the crusades ended in the early 1290s. That makes him at least 50 something.

That aside, how atrocious was his crime? Maybe he was born slightly after the Crusades ended and banded together some like-minded individuals to try and start an ill-planned last crusade because he felt 'unchatholic' for having missed out on it. Lacking any real unfaithfuls to fight (and unwilling to venture into enemy territory), they start looking for ANY sign of corruption or unfaithfulness, eventually 'cleansing' a backwards village of innocents because of some slight incident (the village church was dirty or something simple like that. You were part of a mob, and mobs just need a spark). After the slaughter, you all looted and burned the town and on your way home let everyone think that you were successful in rooting out a corrupt town of devil-worshippers. Anyone that questioned what happened mysteriously disapeared overnight. (Ok, this may be somewhat cliche, though I'm not sure who this 'Cadfael' is so I don't have a good point of reference)

[Skjaldbakka]

mmm . . . rampaging chaotic frenzy.

Is there anything wrong with a Cadfael clone? Cadfael isn't exactly an overdone character. Nothing like a certain dark-skinned pointy eared man with a panther fetish.

[Illiterate Scribe]

Well, a small tweak here might be that it wasn't a one-time attrocity. Or at least it's a weakness or tendency the character has to want to repeat said attrocity and he's currently fighting to repress it. Perhaps it will come to a boil inside him and burst out in a rampaging chaotic frenzy?

(Or maybe I just wanted to write the phrase rampaging chaotic frenzy).

I'm sure others will have better suggestions.

Brue

It's a nice idea - perhaps a habit (drug dependency, anything) that he picked up abroad, and wants to try and stamp out withing himself. The problem is, as far as those who interact with him are concerned, how do they know that he really has kicked the habit?

Also, you receive +10 culture points for adding the accented é.

[Hazkali]

Isn't he going to be REALLY old? The 100 year war started in the late 1330s, and the crusades ended in the early 1290s. That makes him at least 50 something.

Whilst I admit that 50 was fairly old for the time, in human standards it isn't really that old at all. I did do my homework on this one, and I think it would be an interesting challenge playing an older character.

Ok, this may be somewhat cliche, though I'm not sure who this 'Cadfael' is so I don't have a good point of reference

He's basically a sleuthing early-Middle Ages monk, a character from novels by Ellis Peters and played in the '90s TV adaptations by the wonderful Derek Jacobi.

As for the idea, I'm going to take it on board. I've read that there were often reports of "Crusaders" burning European villages on their way to the crusades; I'll have to do more research. To Wikipedia!

[Illiterate Scribe]

As for the idea, I'm going to take it on board. I've read that there were often reports of "Crusaders" burning European villages on their way to the crusades; I'll have to do more research. To Wikipedia!

Didn't that happen with Constantinople?

[Yami]

You could make the event something that wasn't an atrocity as other see it. "So he was a kid? He had a helm on, and had kill 4 of our brethren. Besides you couldn't have known."

Don't make it battle lust, but rather a mistake or misunderstanding, perhaps?Something that others might know about, but don't condemn that character for. Communally accepted, but outside of thier own code of morality.

Or, you know, just give him a sword. That pretty well kicks the Cadfael clone out.

[GolemsVoice]

Maybe he tagged along with the crusade, as a monk, not to fight, but to watch, rejoice at god's work beeing done, and find spiritual enlightenment. The actual crusaders have just razed a "heathen" village, and brought some townsfolk as captives. Of course, being infidels, the captured villagers had little rights. and many were subject of torture and violence. SO one day, you monk decides to have his share of fun, and does something he shouldn't have done. Maybe he let's himself go and rapes one of the women. At the moment, the rush of power and pleasure makes him forget that he has not only done much harm to an innocent, but also broken his monastic vow of celibate. So, although it may be that no one knows of his crimes, or no one cares, he ist still legaly an outcast, for breaking his promise, and a criminal before himself (and before god, that would only be logical for him) for his atrocity.
And I don't think you concept is clichéd. Medieval times were pretty hard, and many people with power forced their will unto those with less ability to defend themselves.

[goat]

Well, if you want him right at the end of the crusades, you could put him at the siege of Acre (1291). Perhaps he escaped the city at the cost of others, or maybe he just feels guilty about not staying behind to "defend the faith" and letting the city fall.

Though, if he was 18 then, by 1337 at the outbreak of the hundred year war, he'd be 64...

[kemmotar]

Building on golemsvoice idea, he could have gone along with the crusaders, blessed them and prayed for them while they went to battle the "heathens". Then one day they burned down an innocent village for no reason at all. While trying to stop a soldier from killing a child in the said village he pushed him and he fell on his sword or something...he saved the child but killed a fellow crusader, a man of god (supposedly). He lied that he found him dead and carries the sin of murder and lying deep in his soul, a wound that might never close. He does god's work to atone for his sins however he fears telling anyone about it because they would probably execute him before he had properly atoned but knows that he can't ever atone without confessing. He may or may not have confessed to the head priest of his order and received forgiveness but that did not lift the burden from his heart. He now has gone outside the walls of the monastery to seek god and salvation while doing god's work...?

[littlechicory]

Is there anything wrong with a Cadfael clone? Cadfael isn't exactly an overdone character. Nothing like a certain dark-skinned pointy eared man with a panther fetish.

I agree with this comment.

[Darkantra]

To put it simply, give him a dark side. Maybe he liked putting heretics to the sword, maybe he took great enjoyment in the sheer release of the kill, while still believing that it was god's work that he was doing.

Let's say that he reutinely was part of a group of soldiers that burned villages accused of housing heretics. In fact, he even volunteered for the work, revelling in punishing the enemies of god. After one particularly brutal slaughter he took part in the burning of several townspeople, but at the same time acquitted their children of wrong doing. That night he gets attacked by one of said children in his sleep, and receives a grievous wound before killing the child in the dark. After realising what he had done, and hearing the child's last words (Something like, "Give papa back.") he loses his faith and uses the wound to leave the military, retreating to a monastery where he meditated on his failings, crimes, and sins while also pledging not to let such tragedies happen again.

Sorry , I didn't so much give you an idea as write his entire backstory, but I think that if he was in an army during the crusades then he'd be pretty inured to a certain degree of violence while at the same time upholding some personal ideals. Change wouldn't come easily to a person like that, it would only occur after they personally did something that broke their ideals. Hope this helps!

[Yodaman23]

Post Traumatic stress disorder and War time flash backs. What more must I say.
Here is a happy monk who witnessed the cannabilism that took place in several of the middle eastern cities because of the the seigeing of the cities while he was a great warrior. When ever hearing the crying or screaming of women and children or the tang of metal on metal, or the loud sound of battle he can make a will save or fly into a fury in which he thinks he is back in the war.

[Caledonian]

Then one day they burned down an innocent village for no reason at all. While trying to stop a soldier from killing a child in the said village he pushed him and he fell on his sword or something

Alternate possibility: to save the innocent child, he picked up the nearest weapon and struck down the soldier from behind, killing him.

Disillusioned with the Crusade, and aghast at the murder he committed, he returned home to take monastic orders and repent his sin.

[Serpentine]

An easy shortcut, without going into the excellent depth of the other responses, is to think about giving him fears, fetishes and goals. The fear/s could range from all-out phobia or breakdown to sever discomfort, and the fetish/es could indeed be literally so or just a soft spot. For the goals, think about what your character wants to achieve in the long run. For example (though this is pure fantasy), Goff's rogue is determined to get his hands on a Philosopher's Stone, while my exiled dwarven knight just wants to go home. These might be able to give your character some depth away from the original concept.

[Dave Rapp]

If the details of a clichéd character are not cliché, then the character itself ceases to be cliché. (well mostly anyway)

Whatever his past crime was, make it something original. What's the worst possible thing you can imagine someone doing? It has to be a hell of a lot worse than just murder. Maybe... he raped someone? I don't know if that's likely to happen when "consumed by battle-lust" but it could work. To make it worse, it could be someone underage. 16, 15, maybe even 14? To make it more believable, maybe he could have been under the influence of some kind of drug(s) at the time.

Make the way in which he 'sees himself as damned' more unique, for example, maybe he physically punishes himself? Like, he cuts himself to make the pain go away. (mental pain, that is) Heck, you could take that even further and turn him into a fairly psychologically broken person. Or go even further than that and make him slightly outright insane?

I can imagine that. A man experiments with a new performance-enhansing drug to help him on the battlefield, (double meaning NOT intentional!) he goes kind of berzerk, he rapes an underage girl, and, later, when he finds out what he did, he goes crazy from the guilt. I'd call that fairly original.

[Funkyodor]

Hmm, maybe it wasn't so much an atrocity that he performed, but what he feels is an atrocity. Lets say he was in the Crusades with a dear friend. Dear friend performs some heroic act with only your character as witness, but this results in friends death. He takes credit for it and becomes a hero, then later feels guilty for his false heroic status and enters a monastery where he trys to attone. Now, for whatever reason, he feels the need to push himself to heroism because of the false deed he took credit for.

[Tengu]

I agree with this comment.

Me too. There's nothing bad in cliches as long as they're done well. It's better to concentrate on making a good character or scenario than to try to avoid (or follow) cliches.

[Ossian]

A king may move a man, a father may claim a son. But remember that, even when those who move you be kings or men of power, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God you cannot say "but I was told by others to do thus" or that "virtue was not convinient at the time". This will not suffice. Remember that.

Like the movie or not, the words in bold fit perfectly in your background, especially the line about virtue. Without making him a mass murderer of fleeing women, a children butcher or a mosques/synagogues torcher, ambition and weakness of soul will get your story a long way.
Even after the crusades were over, a European/Christian presence was still felt there for one reason or another. If you were a Hospitalier, for example, you might have stayed a little longer, thus making the numbers check ou. You can play a more mature character (around 50) without having missed those troubled times at all. And still, even a Hospitalier/Templar/Teuthonic knight, or just a plain old crusader, has a soul, and a life. And people are most of the times weak (that's why heroes should be few).

Perhaps it was more convenient to look the other way, perhaps he was convinced that taking a small bribe was a nicer option than being arrested and slaughtered for not being cooperational. Perhaps those principles he was supposed to defend at the cost of his life, even if no one would have know it or even given a damn about it, wasn't in his chords. And he convinced himself that "after all they're still infidels", and "God wills it" and "the Pope himself said he would have been pleased if [xyzk] happened" (when you said the Pope by then it was like saying "Julius Caesar" in 50 AC). "I was forced by the circumstances, and told by my superiors to do so" ,"They said it wouldn't be a sin", "I was forced by the circumstances to allow / participate in a smaller evil in order to avert a greater one" and lots of blah blah blah....

Perhaps defending an "infidel" who (was totally right about something) against a Christian would have resulted in a charge of heresy (this normally got you burned at a stake after torture).
There were laws, and land was administered by authorities, and technically even muslims had their rights in a trial (although it was truer the other way round, at least under Salah Ad-Din, i.e. Christians enjoyed a somehow higher level of civil rights). Land confiscations were not uncommon, but they also came normally after a trial. Even if the parties were both of Catholics, one could have been just abusing his power in order to get land, wealth, a woman, the ownership of a commercial hub (channel, dam, bridge, crossroad, water well in a desert trade route). A charge of heresy, and you could get rid of a political / commercial opponent (that wasn't so common, but it's a game you're playing, so no need to look up for actual cases in a 700 years old codex).

The consequences of such a negligence could have been fairly worse that what your PC had anticipated (perhaps in good faith). It happens thagt you make an assessment and then something goes horribly wrong and everything gets screwed and people (lots of people) suffer or die for it.

So, long story short, think if it's necessary to make another Vietnam Veteran or if you can just mess your character's psyche with something more "normal"

O.