Fluidity
-
I've played maybe 5 mains since I arrived here in Arabel, and with the exception of the first 2, all my characters thus far have had something in common. It's a trait I like to call "fluidity," and it's something I just do naturally with my characters, but I'm starting to think I'm in the minority with it.
I wrote a post once on how to "create" a good, lifelike character, and the key was basically this: Come up with the background of an everyday, common fellow who has gone through an event or two that have shaped a certain attitude. The events should be both traumatic or inspiring, but certainly lifechanging. This is why he/she risked all and became and adventurer. From there, let the game world interactions shape you.
The advice seems good to me, but I realize that some players instead like to play "archetypes," characters that fit a specific mold of ideals and notions. These characters, to me, seem influid and unchanging, and quite honestly, I have a good deal of trouble interacting with them. Characters that have "absolute" standards and ways of thought seem to compose most of the characters of fantasy novels, for they are the stalwart hero or the dastardly villain, but when I interact with such characters, I am bored and discouraged. It seems to me like I'm interacting with a sound board, with limited script and versatility, and its utterly infuriating when you play what I've referred to as the "fluid" build.
I'm honestly not sure if this is a rant, or a call for opinion on which type of character makes the world more fun to play as, and play with. It was just one of those things I had on my mind, and needed to discuss.
-
All my PC's have "a specific mold of ideals and notions." These PC's though are all this way for what happened in their past. Idk if i am misinterpretting what your saying by "a specific mold of ideals and notions." or not
-
While having characters that change, grow and strengthen/diminish as their circumstances change around them is a key to creating a realistic, interesting character, I don't agree that you have to make them a common person who's been altered slightly by the world around them. Extremes are interesting! A Paladin obsessed with the destruction of evil who while fighting criminals, realises they've connections to the government and thus declares war against the police force and goes so far as to lose his Paladinhood by fighting the good guards alongside the bad is an example of a character that possesses a superhuman, "absolute" devotion while still being a fluid character.
I guess all I'm saying is don't throw the baby out with the bath water, because characters that you can relate to and characters that are fluid and great to RP with are not always the same thing. Otherwise, reaction to the world around you is one of the foundations of proper RP; a character can't change the world if people won't be changed by the character.
-
What are you saying? Don't create zealous characters? >.>
Of course our characters are always subject to change due to events, but some are just more stubborn than others.
-
In my opinion, I favour creating characters that are fluid. However, I also see the legitimacy of the inflexible character.
In real life, I see many of these around me. People who have, over a lifetime, or even in a short period of time, taken hold of an ideal or concept and locked themselves into it. They are the Heros, the villains, the outright frustrating bastard of a neighbour who does everything he can to spite me just for the sake of spiting me, because I allowed my dog to piss on his roses 18 years ago.
You describe the inflexible character as the architype of the fantasy novel. Surely this is what many people are trying to create? They read about the Paladin who… and wish to recreate that themselves and live out that Hero of Arabel or the Dastard of the sewers.
I say both are valid and we need both. We need characters that can be molded so that the Priest can convert them to a new faith, or the Dastard can corrupt the paladin, or the villain can be redemed and become Arabels new Hero of the day.
-
I prefer fluid characters, expecially since I have the feelings that with the other kind, no matter what you do, your actions will not have effects on the character.
-
For me, its hard to "interact" and develop when I'm out adventuring, looting crypts and exploring ruins. My play style is adventure rather than intrigue. I don't think of CoA as a soap opera, but more as an Indiana Jones server with annoying talking in between action sequences. :D
-
Well, can't speak for others but I have never made a zealot in that reguard, that they are completely unchangable. Most, in fact, I design deliberately that they are having a tumultuous part of their life when they come to Arabel, that they are actually more receptive to manipulation/influence of other characters. I enjoy my characters to really react and grow to the people around him/her, and find that the most fun.
Having said that, sometimes you really need to work at changing people. Obviously you can't just say to Mr. Goodytooshoes, "Hey, we should totally assassinate this guy.. uh, because he kicked a puppy once", and expect them to go along and be epicly affected by you.
-
I like black and white, not grey. get off the fence and stand for something.
-
I like gray!
-
-
Please stay on topic. There is much to be said for playing archetypes vs. fluid character types. It is true that fantasy for some is enjoyable because of the archetypes, for others it is often criticized for the lack of fluidity in characters.
I would point out that playing a zealous character does not imply it isn't or can't be a fluid character. Javert from Les Miserables is a prime example of an archetypal character who changes quite dramatically.
-
My problem in the last year or so, from what I have seen, are faction characters who are build TOO much around the factions they serve. Might be my need for destruction and my love for chaos over structure, but I always find it dull when you dont really feel there is a difference between approaching character A, B, C, D or E of a certain faction.
I imagine if the alignment restrictions were removed from factions you would find much more… fluid characters in the positions that inspire, and from there it will spread.
That, and personalities seem to have taken a secondary position on the server. Too much focus on adventure and intrigue has done that I suppose.
-
I do think that all characters should have buttons to push or something similar. This was why we added the weaknesses field to applications. I'm not saying that your chaotic evil guy should suddenly burst into tears and seek redemption the moment someone gives him a puppy, but the otherwise terrifying evil villain who can be manipulated once you work out he's secretly fathered a child and doesn't want anyone to know about it makes for awesome stories and characters that actually seem real and not avatars of their players.
-
We don't have alignment restrictions on the factions O'louth. But thanks for playing!
-
Greatly preferred alignments then?
-
Not even greatly preferred, so much, as "here's what's typical for the faction and anything else should have a reason".
-
I wonder if by Fluidity KOH means not so much that they are a archetype, but rather that they are defined by what the player decides at apptime/creaton time and nothing that happens IG will be allowed to shift that.
One could look at it as if it's a character sheet being played as opposed to a character being played. If thats what KOH meant then I also feel as if I'm interacting with a cardboard cutout.
but it doesnt have anything to do if theyre a "archetype" but rather if it seems they dont care what "happens" but only what the player has planned.
Thats, of course, grossly subjective,assumptive, and usually incorrective