Developing characters

How boring would Achaea be if characters were all archetypes, right? If a knight is nothing more than honorable or valiant or strong then he might as well be a denizen. Cliches suck. 

Tell me how you make your characters interesting, specifically their flaws (and just general ideas on the topic as well).

I don't mean simple character traits as much. Being impulsive, arrogant, gullible etc. are 'negative' character traits, but these by themselves are things that are easily justified from your character's point of view, and they're not going to lead to internal conflict or development. These 'flaws' can just as easily be called quirks. 

What I mean by 'flaws' are contradictions in your character's beliefs or his situation- often ironic!. Like a priest who is greedy for gold and turns blind to his faith, or a fighter whose superstitions hinder him, or a nihilist that is really attached? Is your character actually really pretentious? (As a conscious decision by you the player though, as opposed to you the player being unable to create a convincing character,  ;) ) I don't know. I'm sure you all could come up with much better, and I'd love to hear.

-
-
Side question (if there's room for one!): What do you think about there being an 'end' to your character? In a play, there are several acts but there's also an appropriate time for the curtains to fall, isn't there? Does it ever feel forced to have to think of new reincarnations of your character over and over, like sequels to sequels to sequels that won't end. Do you sort of just play a static character?

Comments

  • Plays are much more interesting when the plot is slowly discovered/revealed in acts then everything being outlined in the first act or reading spoilers before actually going to see the play. That's how I make Tahquil interesting, but not telling people on the first meeting (or on the forums) every little thing that makes her tick. It takes many meetings to see the quirks beneath that rather 'denizen-esque' exterior.

    Hell, even denizens can be deep an intriguing. Look at Tritons for example.
  • KlendathuKlendathu Eye of the Storm
    Tahquil said:
    Plays are much more interesting when the plot is slowly discovered/revealed in acts then everything being outlined in the first act or reading spoilers before actually going to see the play. That's how I make Tahquil interesting, but not telling people on the first meeting (or on the forums) every little thing that makes her tick. It takes many meetings to see the quirks beneath that rather 'denizen-esque' exterior.

    Hell, even denizens can be deep an intriguing. Look at Tritons for example.
    Only good Triton's a dead Triton.

    Tharos, the Announcer of Delos shouts, "It's near the end of the egghunt and I still haven't figured out how to pronounce Clean-dat-hoo."
  • Your face.
  • I'm playing a siren scientist robot zealot. She's pretty interesting.
  • Ironically, Drizzt wasn't that sort of character originally - fan reception to Drizzt put him into the leading role (the role originally belonged to Wulfgar, with Drizzt intended as a combat teacher and sidekick-like character).
    - (Eleusis): Ellodin says, "The Fissure of Echoes is Sarathai's happy place."
    - With sharp, crackling tones, Kyrra tells you, "The ladies must love you immensely."
    - (Eleusian Ranger Techs): Savira says, "Most of the hard stuff seem to have this built in code like: If adventurer_hitting_me = "Sarathai" then send("terminate and selfdestruct")."
    - Makarios says, "Serve well and perish."
    - Xaden says, "Xaden confirmed scrub 2017."



  • My character has such a problem with being as good as she can be at any one thing it boarders on self hatred. She is an over achiever and cares way to much about what People think. She had a very dark side that like most people,she steers away from.  Though people like Mhaldorians and enemies tend to draw those dark flaws out. @Tahquil is right about things developing over time.  Other characters abs situations tend to reveal natural flaws in your character you didn't know he or she had.  
  • TarausTaraus The Gypsy Wind
    Personally, I don't think that its particularly horrible to involve cliches in character development. - because like Aerek said, so many people strive to avoid them here, that being anti-cliche has become the norm.

    An example, and just a loose one - a few of us have a tongue-in-cheek game set up, where you earn a point for every description you see that features "almond-shaped eyes".  I would imagine that most people write this description thinking they're being pointedly descriptive, and with something you don't see often -- but with everyone having this same thought, 90% of the population winds up with those eyes.

    So given that mindset, in our little Achaean world - traditional cliches are actually a rarity, and I relish encountering those individuals who wholly embrace them, and play characters that are seen as "normal", rather than the soul-possessed-by-demons-parents-murdered-as-a-child-kidnapped-and-raised-by-wild-mhun sorts.



  • edited January 2016
    I have almond eyes in my desc :( but purely because in the mhun help file it is said slanted eyes are a indicator of heritage.
  • There was a point where grey eyes might have been the most common in Mhaldor. :confounded: 

  • Quisse said:
    I'm playing a siren scientist robot zealot. She's pretty interesting.
    She recently interviewed my character about why he was born Atavian and stayed that way even though he has been a paladin for 400 years and it's a very non-ideal race for them. 

    I guess that's a bit of my character. 
Sign In or Register to comment.