Author Topic: 'Flavor' Characters?  (Read 3781 times)

'Flavor' Characters?
« on: August 24, 2008, 02:28:56 AM »
When I plan a new character, I sort of mentally sort him into one of two categories.

"Achievement" characters, or as I tend to think of them, "standard" characters, because these are the characters I usually make, and the characters I think most players play. These are fully-fleshed out characters that, while they may have some quirks working against them, generally have the potential to be 'successful' from an IC standpoint, and as a player, I am interested in making them "successful". I don't spam spells or eschew roleplaying in favor of sparring, of course. But I do things like set goals, join clans, attempt to get promoted in these clans, attempt to network and interact with other PCs, etc. All of this is perfectly IC, but until the mysterious powers of Plot intervene, my PC is mainly concerned with "getting ahead." Being the best he can be, or at the very least, being the best he wants to be.

And then there is the other type of character I occassionally make. I've dubbed them "flavor" characters. We've all interacted with "flavor" characters, at one point or another. These are characters whose sole purpose is to roleplay some niche of Zalanthan life, usually one that is unattractive to or impossible for "achievement" characters. These characters add a little bit of "flavor" to the world- hence their name- but are otherwise more or less "useless". These include things like the incorrigible, unemployed drunk, the senile old man, the legless beggar, the insane, schizophrenic, poo-slinging 'Rinther, the male prostitue, the harried waitress at the Gaj, or the mysterious old fortune teller. These characters are fun to play, and provide entertaining roleplay for those around them, but their possibilities for real 'success' or advancement are limited at best. Kurac doesn't have a reason to ever hire a mysterious old fortune teller, no matter how good her fortune-telling might be, and a templar would sooner kill a spice-addicted beggar PC than try to draft him into the Legions or what-have-you.

"Flavor" characters are gimped by their glaring IC flaws- an utter lack of skills (waitress) or a set of skills that provide no coded benefit (fortunetellers/lousy bards), or their inability to function in normal society (cripples, bums, addicts, and crazies). I enjoy playing "flavor" characters, but I ultimately end up storing them. The newbie money runs out, or every active player has already seen the "I'm a crazy useless drunken bum" shtick. I always try to make my "flavor" character fully-developed characters, with a good background and a real set of goals, fears, and likes and dislikes. But, on the rare occassions that my insane Drovian 'Rinther -does- get a chance for advancement, for plots and plot-making, or real IC power, I find myself hesitant to take it. "He can't work as a super-secret spy for this templar!" I reason, "He's too crazy! It goes against his character! That's not the point of this guy... if I want to work for templars, I should store and make a gemmer/warrior/assassin."

What do you all think? Do you like or dislike "flavor' characters (if you wanted to be unkind, I think you easily term them "gimmick" characters)? In order to be a 'good RPer', should you treat all your characters equally? Are all characters created equal? Have I set up a false dichomoty in my mind? Can a flavor character become an achievement character, and vice versa? Do you think it's right, proper, or good for the game when a player makes a character with the intent to store him in a week or so, once his gimmick has worn thin?
« Last Edit: August 24, 2008, 02:31:57 AM by FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit »
EvilRoeSlade wrote:
Quote
You find a bulbous root sac and pick it up.
You shout, in sirihish:
"I HAVE A BULBOUS SAC"
Quote
A staff member sends:
     "You are likely dead."

Marauder Moe

  • Posts: 13005
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2008, 02:34:43 AM »
I'm not sure I understand why achievement and flavor are mutually exclusive.

solera

  • Posts: 1783
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2008, 02:47:07 AM »
I think if they hang round long enough and haven't got a self destructing lifestyle, a PLOT, or at least a life will find them.  And its fun following their fortunes, even if they were just a pseudo NPC to start with.  As long as they don't lose touch with their roots , I guess.  (I speak from experience of just one of these creatures.)

Gimfalisette

  • Posts: 8314
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2008, 02:56:57 AM »
I'm not sure I understand why achievement and flavor are mutually exclusive.

What Moe said. All of my characters are both. If I'm not adding to the world in a vibrant way, I don't feel like I'm doing my job. However, I also have a need to achieve in the areas of skills or knowledge or projects or goals.

I think you do have a false dichotomy thing going on.

As to flaws, all of my characters have terrible flaws--though they might not be glaring to YOUR character if you're not looking closely. Sometimes these flaws do prove fatal, but mostly they produce a lot of character development and some extremely poignant scenes with other characters.
I'm gonna go all Gimfalisette on you guys and lay down some numbers.

Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2008, 03:12:25 AM »
Of course they're not mutually exclusive, but some characters do tend towards one or the other. Of course 'achievement' characters like the Kuraci Sergeant are going to try and add something to the world, to prove the best roleplay, to enrich scenes through emotes. By 'achievement' characters, I do not mean powerplayers. Achievement characters (good ones, anyway) are going to add flavor.

Go with my example of a legless beggar with a drinking problem. Although a legless beggar can be a fully-fleshed and deeply poignant character, his chances for actual IC advancement are slim to nil. He can't do much of anything without breaking character- a legless beggar can't join the Byn, and similarly, an old fortuneteller has little reason to decide, at age sixty-five, that she'd suddenly like to work for House Borsail. Or become an assassin. Or start experimenting with that Whiran magick she suddenly feels in her blood. To do so would invalidate the character.

But what does this mean? Does this mean that we shouldn't play legless beggars or fortunetellers with crippling rheumatism? Are we detracting from the game when we make characters that can't really create or advance plots for IC reasons?
EvilRoeSlade wrote:
Quote
You find a bulbous root sac and pick it up.
You shout, in sirihish:
"I HAVE A BULBOUS SAC"
Quote
A staff member sends:
     "You are likely dead."

Maso

  • Posts: 3772
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2008, 06:32:59 AM »
I don't see why characters such as your described 'flavour' characters could not end up involved and useful. A secret, well-connected super assassin might see your legless beggar and decide he is the perfect bait for his target, and thus you are connected and involved in a way that might lead to further interactions. Even if your beggar is crazy.

A templar might be having an attack of paranoia and demand to see the best known fortune teller in the world to discern if he really is going to die in fourteen dies, as the crazy eyed desert elf told him he would. And then he might decide he likes having fortune teller around and wants every single day of the rest of his life predicted for him the night before.
Quote
emote pees into your eyes deeply

I don't always act superior... but when I do it's on the forums of a text-based game

My 2 sids

  • Posts: 1921
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2008, 09:24:23 AM »
Personally, I love Flavor PCs.   Sadly, I also find they are some of the hardest roles to play.   Often times, players have a concept that _all_ PCs have some grandiose political connections  (anyone who doesn't wave house-colors is really a spy or big-time thief).

"The Highlord casts a shadow because he does not want to see skin!" -- Boog

<this space for rent>

Yam

  • Posts: 7610
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2008, 09:33:38 AM »
If you don't understand why 'flavor' characters and 'achievement' characters tend to not have overlapping qualities, you should reread the original post.

My 2 sids

  • Posts: 1921
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2008, 09:49:48 AM »
"flavor" and "achievement"  are OOC terms.

A player may create a "go with the flow" type PC  -- but OOCly will guide that PC into landing jobs/ networking with other PCs/ and affecting plot lines.    Not so with "flavor" PCs -- the player goes into the character knowing this character will never achieve "connections",  never greatly affect plot lines, maybe even never take full employment.  A "Flavor" type PC may have ambitions and dreams -- but the player will never guide the PC into achieving those pipe-dreams. 

"The Highlord casts a shadow because he does not want to see skin!" -- Boog

<this space for rent>

Yam

  • Posts: 7610
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2008, 09:52:21 AM »
Most likely because the flavor PC has too many flaws to ever realistically achieve those dreams in Zalanthas.

Sure, a one-armed half-elf with debilitating alcoholism and spice addiction may dream of joining the Kuraci Fist, but there's no chance in hell he would be given the shot. He would be doomed to waste away from his chosen poisons.

My 2 sids

  • Posts: 1921
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2008, 10:01:31 AM »
Most likely because the flavor PC has too many flaws to ever realistically achieve those dreams in Zalanthas.

Sure, a one-armed half-elf with debilitating alcoholism and spice addiction may dream of joining the Kuraci Fist, but there's no chance in hell he would be given the shot. He would be doomed to waste away from his chosen poisons.

yep yep
"The Highlord casts a shadow because he does not want to see skin!" -- Boog

<this space for rent>

Semper

  • Posts: 1091
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2008, 10:30:46 AM »
Most likely because the flavor PC has too many flaws to ever realistically achieve those dreams in Zalanthas.

Sure, a one-armed half-elf with debilitating alcoholism and spice addiction may dream of joining the Kuraci Fist, but there's no chance in hell he would be given the shot. He would be doomed to waste away from his chosen poisons.

yep yep

I'm going to agree with this statement, and also agree that they are likely some of the hardest roles to play. IMO though, as a player, you have the option to create your character in a way that makes him both a 'flavor' character, and add enough potential to be both a challenge and enjoyment to play and make achievements with. The limiting factor that prevents such 'flavor' characters from advancing is mostly a burden placed on by the player, and with some foresight and planning before-hand, can be avoided.

Quote
But, on the rare occassions that my insane Drovian 'Rinther -does- get a chance for advancement, for plots and plot-making, or real IC power, I find myself hesitant to take it. "He can't work as a super-secret spy for this templar!" I reason, "He's too crazy! It goes against his character! That's not the point of this guy... if I want to work for templars, I should store and make a gemmer/warrior/assassin."

This is actually an example of what I'm referring to, and probably is one of the reasons that makes flavor characters hard to play, as it takes a bit of pre-planning to make it successful. With any character that has history and ambitions, s/he will be able to advance and move forward. The question to ask in this situation is -why- the insane Drovian 'Rinther can't take the advancement, participate in plots or plot-making, or have IC power, and if it is a good enough reason. For whatever reason it may be, once you find out the reason why or why not, you have an opportunity for advancement there. I would take this further in illustration, but it is difficult to determine what makes up this character with just "insane Drovian 'Rinther". The character still has motivations and goals and history, no matter how bad his flaws may be, and anyone with goals and/or motivations has opportunity to advance.
"And all around is the desert; a corner of the mournful kingdom of sand."
   - Pierre Loti

Morrolan

  • Posts: 2760
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2008, 11:09:51 AM »
I've had what I thought were "flavor" characters go quite far.  One of my favorite characters was socially debilitated (not physically) and avoided promotion like the plague for about 6 OOC months.  After a hiatus from the game for a few months, he came back and found out that one of his best friends had been killed in a worldwide plot.  He began working for the destruction of the person who did that, and when they were dead, he ended up being hired by a GMH.

I tend to create characters that are at least as much flavor as achievement.  Achievement is quite slow that way, skills rise only slowly, but I have more fun.  And I hope the people around me do, too.

Morrolan
"I have seen him show most of the attributes one expects of a noble: courtesy, kindness, and honor.  I would also say he is one of the most bloodthirsty bastards I have ever met."

staggerlee

  • Posts: 2570
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2008, 12:11:13 PM »
My problem with most of the 'flavor' characters I've met is that it seems to be synonymous with 'throwaway.'
Meaning, they tend to have no particular regard for their own personal good or safety and will fling their feces at a templar as quickly as at a bynner.
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."

"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.

"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."

Gimfalisette

  • Posts: 8314
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2008, 01:01:53 PM »
My problem with most of the 'flavor' characters I've met is that it seems to be synonymous with 'throwaway.'
Meaning, they tend to have no particular regard for their own personal good or safety and will fling their feces at a templar as quickly as at a bynner.

Yeah, I agree with this. I've encountered a few of these throwaway "flavor" characters and I'm always a little sad that there doesn't seem to be any room for creating real relationships or making good plots. Some of them are clearly played by great players, but I'm not sure what the point is, I guess. Then I just miss them when they go. So I'm tempted to not take them seriously and not put any effort into interacting with them.
I'm gonna go all Gimfalisette on you guys and lay down some numbers.

Yam

  • Posts: 7610
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2008, 01:03:20 PM »
I'm greatly entertained by interacting with and playing throwaways.

Semper

  • Posts: 1091
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2008, 01:05:04 PM »
Here's my response to this thread, (and I don't usually respond to threads unless they have my interest). What I'm going to ask and attempt to answer are the basics, When, What, Why, Who, How, and Conclusion in that order.

When do you play a 'flavor' character?

For myself, and from what I've witnessed and experienced, flavor characters are best played when you have the motivation and inspiration to play a particular character concept. What makes this different is that most normal roles have open-ended development, where your generic ranger/hunter will have a background and skills, but enters the game world with the goal of just trying to survive, get to know the mechanics of things, or just a general lack of any plans for your character. Also, a good time to play such 'flavor' characters is when you see a need in the game for the particular concept, or even if you think the game could use it, or players would enjoy having it around. What I'll mention further is the 'achievement' character aspect, and I suppose you could consider this with the 'normal roles' I mentioned.

What is a 'flavor' character?

It's been defined with the first post, but I'll repeat it here for reference sake, and add to the definition a bit.

Quote
These are characters whose sole purpose is to roleplay some niche of Zalanthan life, usually one that is unattractive to or impossible for "achievement" characters. These characters add a little bit of "flavor" to the world- hence their name- but are otherwise more or less "useless".

Certainly, flavor characters (in the OP's term) can have this definition, but I'm going to hijack the term and define it in another manner to remove the limiting factor. 'Flavor' characters are characters that add to some niche of Zalanthan life, and add a little bit of "flavor" to the world. These characters are geared around roleplay, and making interaction amongst players enjoyable and portray realistic aspects of the game world. These roles don't necessarily need to be unattractive or have no ambitions and goals (and actually need such to be a realistic person) and are -not- useless, otherwise they would be long dead or -made- useful by someone or other (slavery).

Flavor characters have ambitions, they have histories, and families, and friends and all the other things intelligent beings would have. If not, or missing elements of these, it is due to their circumstances (such as newly created character, or due to character flaws). The flaws that the character has must also add to the game. For example, a paralyzed, blind man won't add much to the game, and also won't likely be fun to play. I'm going to add that most character's made by players are 'flavor' characters if they are centered around playing a certain role. A shit-shoveling, bad-mouthed Byn can be just as much a 'flavor' character as the ancient, hunch-backed fortune teller with eight fingers and a missing leg.

Why do you play flavor characters?

Such characters are fun because you are able to play a role in which you could not in RL. You read a book and was inspired by the master pickpocket or famed and deadly warrior you read about. In real life, you most likely couldn't do and experience what you would have in mind to do and experience without affecting and risking a lot of permanent things. In Armageddon, because it is a game, you can experience and do all that you may wish in the settings of the game without having to risk damaging or risking your real life. Also, role playing with other people provides fun and excitement, and concepts based around role play give you more of what you enjoy.

Who should play flavor characters?

Similar to when you try to play such characters, they are best played when you have the motivation and inspiration to play a particular character concept, or in other words, to play a particular role. Most experienced roleplayers will be making such characters to begin with, hence their name, "ROLE players". For Armageddon, specifically, the player should have a good idea of the culture, atmosphere, and elements surrounding their potential character's location in order to play their concept accurately and in the right setting. For example, a spice-hunter concept won't work if you're located in Tuluk, many many leagues away from the nearest spice deposits. If you're wanting to play the host for a well-known tavern, you'll want to know the culture and atmosphere of people who would be visiting the tavern to play the role accurately and as well, know how to please them to be successful. Your character can and most likely will have flaws in their role, and this can be played accordingly, but as a player, you should understand the why's and why nots to act accordingly.

How do you play flavor characters?

I think this is one of the more important questions to address, and in a sense is a continuation of the Who question. Making a successful flavor character begins with the character creation process. Build up a realistic background, have realistic families and experiences, and have realistic hopes and goals for your character. Even the lowliest of slaves will have hopes and goals to live for, or they are otherwise considered dead, mentally/emotionally. Once you enter the game with your character, have your character live as s/he would, but allow enough room for flexibility and adaptability, as intelligent beings are known for. Animals live by instinct, and even animals can adapt to circumstances. Your character is an intelligent being, so allow the character a chance to change as things happen around him, whether for better or worse. I think here's a good place as well to mention about what the OP said about 'achievement' characters.

Quote
These are fully-fleshed out characters that, while they may have some quirks working against them, generally have the potential to be 'successful' from an IC standpoint, and as a player, I am interested in making them "successful". I don't spam spells or eschew roleplaying in favor of sparring, of course. But I do things like set goals, join clans, attempt to get promoted in these clans, attempt to network and interact with other PCs, etc. All of this is perfectly IC, but until the mysterious powers of Plot intervene, my PC is mainly concerned with "getting ahead." Being the best he can be, or at the very least, being the best he wants to be.

'Flavor' characters, in the way I put them, can also be achievement characters in the OP's term, but I believe there's a fine line to differentiate between the two. Using the definition given by the OP, the achievement character wants to achieve, but this is also a goal that the player wants to achieve for the character. Though roleplaying comes in play, roleplay is the clothing on achieving the goal. So, an assassin character will want to become the feared and respected assassin envisioned by the player, and the training of skills that is necessary with this goal is clothed with roleplay. The assassin emotes and thinks in a manner that is realistic (hopefully) with how the character would think and act as they are training their secret and deadly skills, but this is for the purpose of becoming that master assassin. The difference between the 'achievement' character here, and the 'flavor' character, is that the 'flavor' character comes into the game with the eventual hope of becoming the master assassin, but succeeding in this is secondary to the process. More than realizing the goal, its the situation that dictates how skills are used and trained. And as well, more than likely, the character could start off with a simple goal of protecting their family. Because the manner in which they think and their background, (determined by the coded guild and subguild) how the character goes about this will eventually lead him to become the master assassin, but achieving this 'master' status isn't the primary goal for the character, and most likely isn't for the player. The coded skills become the clothing for the playing of the role.

Neither the flavor character or the achievement character is right or wrong in play. It is simply what the purpose of the character is, determined by the player. If the player wants to play the master assassin role, train accordingly with roleplay. If the player wants roleplay more than achievement, play the role accordingly with the skills. In the end, that's the difference.

Conclusion

Quote
What do you all think? Do you like or dislike "flavor' characters (if you wanted to be unkind, I think you easily term them "gimmick" characters)? In order to be a 'good RPer', should you treat all your characters equally? Are all characters created equal? Have I set up a false dichomoty in my mind? Can a flavor character become an achievement character, and vice versa? Do you think it's right, proper, or good for the game when a player makes a character with the intent to store him in a week or so, once his gimmick has worn thin?

Personally, I like 'flavor' characters, as I enjoy the role play, and without them, I'd feel the game would be dearly lacking. I've noticed with my own playing style though, there are periods when I play my characters as the 'flavor' character, then switch to the 'achievement' aspect when I'm hoping to advance my character IG, and switch back, and so I see the merits and enjoyment in playing them both. As mentioned in earlier posts, playing the flavor character makes it one of the hardest to successfully play, because of the inherent desire for players to see their character advance, and it can be difficult to balance these two aspects of role play and achievement, as I experience myself.

Because the inspiration and motivation for playing our characters differ with each one, we most likely won't treat them equally. You may want to play the fortune teller for a time, which doesn't need any coded skill at all, but later on you may want to play the feared and respected warrior, which has a lot to do with coded skill. If you understand what you enjoy playing, you can plan ahead and make a fortune teller that has the coded skills to become the feared and respected warrior, and build your concept and role play around this desire. I find that when you plan well, such characters become enjoyable to play for a long time, but this is a personal experience. I know players that make throw-away characters and end up having them become their favorite character of all time, but because I don't know the specifics of individuals and choices, I couldn't explain how to replicate this, though I'm willing to say that it is because of how the concept played so well with the coded skills that the character became so enjoyable.

As for making a character with the intention of storing them, I don't think this is inherently wrong, and can be a good way to get a better understanding of the game, but I believe making a flavor character with goals and achievements that the character can see fulfilled and met over time is both rewarding for the character as well as the player. This doesn't necessarily mean the character would go about trying to reach that particular goal, as the goal/s of the character can very well change as situation and time permits (because goals are most often secondary to the role play for such characters), but having goals and hopes and ambitions adds the finishing touches to such characters.

There's probably a bit more I could say on the topic, but I think I've covered the most of what I had in mind. Hope this helps some players.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2008, 01:07:03 PM by Semper »
"And all around is the desert; a corner of the mournful kingdom of sand."
   - Pierre Loti

Agent_137

  • Posts: 5532
    • a crapy clawn
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2008, 01:40:16 PM »
Quote
but I'm going to hijack the term and define it in another manner to remove the limiting factor. 'Flavor' characters are characters that add to some niche of Zalanthan life, and add a little bit of "flavor" to the world. These characters are geared around roleplay, and making interaction amongst players enjoyable and portray realistic aspects of the game world.

uhhhh, semper, i'm pretty sure EVERY character in Armageddon should be geared around roleplay and making interaction amongst players enjoyable and portray realistic aspects of the game world.

hm, yea, that sounds like the definition of a standard character in an RPI mud, which is what we're playing.

Semper

  • Posts: 1091
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2008, 01:45:58 PM »
Quote
but I'm going to hijack the term and define it in another manner to remove the limiting factor. 'Flavor' characters are characters that add to some niche of Zalanthan life, and add a little bit of "flavor" to the world. These characters are geared around roleplay, and making interaction amongst players enjoyable and portray realistic aspects of the game world.

uhhhh, semper, i'm pretty sure EVERY character in Armageddon should be geared around roleplay and making interaction amongst players enjoyable and portray realistic aspects of the game world.

hm, yea, that sounds like the definition of a standard character in an RPI mud, which is what we're playing.


That was what I was trying to get at.  ;D  Just because there are handicaps or character flaws does not make it any less a character as a flawless one. As I mention in the post though, I believe there's a difference between roleplay centered and achievement centered. Both are geared around role play, but the difference is the OOC motivation of the player.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2008, 01:48:49 PM by Semper »
"And all around is the desert; a corner of the mournful kingdom of sand."
   - Pierre Loti

Marauder Moe

  • Posts: 13005
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2008, 02:00:51 PM »
So it's not really flavor vs. ambition (IC or OOC), it's ambition vs. non-ambition?

Semper

  • Posts: 1091
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #20 on: August 24, 2008, 02:21:34 PM »
So it's not really flavor vs. ambition (IC or OOC), it's ambition vs. non-ambition?

I guess an easy way to put it is ambition vs. non-ambition. You play the beggar for the beggar concept, not because you want to play the bad-ass warrior, though the beggar may very well become the bad-ass warrior, you just don't have that as the driving motive of playing the beggar.

[edited to add] For clarification, ambition in the OOC sense. All characters have ambitions, but those ambitions are determined by the player and the player's preferences and enjoyment.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2008, 02:26:23 PM by Semper »
"And all around is the desert; a corner of the mournful kingdom of sand."
   - Pierre Loti

jstorrie

  • Posts: 4564
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #21 on: August 24, 2008, 08:27:47 PM »
My 'flavor' characters are also my 'achievement' characters.

That they succeed at their bizarre life goals, despite their glaring character flaws, is proof of my 3-leet-ness.

Setting obstacles in your own path–whether physical, social, racial or otherwise–and then overcoming them? This is awesome because it lets you choose the difficulty level of the game. Can you achieve great things in Allanak by playing a wise, handsome, physically fit, socially able special-app templar from a high-tiered noble family? Sure! If you achieve those things with a reckless, ugly, disabled, socially inept northern half-elf, though, that's a hell of an achievement. If anything, playing a suboptimal flavor character increases the value of your achievements.

touringCompl3t3

  • Posts: 273
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2008, 08:48:33 PM »
Awesome post.  I totally dig.  I alternate between achievement characters and flavor characters. 

People ought to play more flavor characters.  I think it would help the game.  People could learn from the original post.

Rairen

  • Posts: 636
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #23 on: August 24, 2008, 10:03:33 PM »
People ought to play more flavor characters.  I think it would help the game.  People could learn from the original post.

A qualified yes*, for two reasons:

1.  Some people have a knack for picking flavor characters that are one-hit wonders.  No power in the 'Verse can get them to do anything else but this one "wouldn't it be cool if Arm had more people who do this" trick.

2.  There's nothing wrong with being milita-member #15.  To be fair, in most situations, militia-member #15 is far more beneficial to both the RP and the mechanics of plot.  That's why there're fifteen of them.  Once the necessities are filled, there becomes more room for flavor characters who are (usually) less useful to arcing plots.

* From a confirmed player of 'niche' characters, sometimes to my downfall and sometimes to my enjoyment.  Mostly, though, they take patience.  They rarely fall into plots.  Plots may be out there and and the characters may inspire people to do plots they otherwise never would be able to, but it takes time because you're an oddity.  That's, in my experience, the hardest part of playing them.  Beyond finding a character that other people can enjoy is the finding one that won't make me want to strangle myself when I have to turn down things because they 'don't fit'.

Quote from: saquartey
Rairen, what would we do without you?

My 2 sids

  • Posts: 1921
Re: 'Flavor' Characters?
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2008, 09:31:23 AM »
I remember we've had a few threads about PC's place in the world.   It was generally accepted that PCs become the "special" people of Zan.   They become that one-in-a-million type of 'rinither that make it big; they are those hunters/ crafters/ etc who _stand out_ in these HUGE GMH; they are the citizens who get to actually interact with nobility.

"Flavor" characters, by contrast, are like real-life VNPCs.  They're the ones who _don't_ stand out.  They're the ones who keep those well-known (less role-played) biases.  They're the ones who _push_ the docs in game.
"The Highlord casts a shadow because he does not want to see skin!" -- Boog

<this space for rent>