Which race is the hardest to play and why?

[boog]

Being sterile, and thus outside of the typical chain of reproduction,
muls often suffer from a sense of meaninglessness. This is compounded
when they learn (often too young) that they were born as a tool or
bargaining chip. This tends to make many muls into angry people, full of
distrust and hatred.

[RogueGunslinger]

however, I don't think many players are willing to deal with the plethora of negatives that come along with playing a mul.  Especially considering that one flip of the code can cause one to a lose a mul if the proper precautions are not taken.  I would be curious to know how many muls in the history of the entire game have lasted over fifty days.

....

Is mul-rage coded, or are you referring to something else? That would be crazy.

Very much so.

[Bogre]

City elves are hard to play because you aren't accepted and codedly, you have to play to your strengths and guard your weaknesses. However, achieving the elf mindset I think is easier than some of the other non-humans (as long as you don't go super klepto or sociopathic).

Dwarves are hard because it's difficult to make them faceted and interesting. They don't -have- to be automatons.

I found HG's pretty easy to play, actually, but I have seen some great and so not so great ones. I just took mine to the hilt of just...not comprehending much of what others were telling him, and imposing his own schema to things that others told him. The gullibility isn't hard- you just have to be committed to making choices that can get your character in trouble/hoodwinked. Not many players, I don't think, like 'losing', so I think that aspect can be difficult. 

[Dan]

Or going into a rage and killing one of your only friends unintentionally, your rock, the one person who knew how to keep you in check.

...how do you live with yourself after this? Destroying the one thing you love, or that loved you? Also knowing that your entire life was created, you are a monstrosity, a trading token or "dead in the desert" as some of the slaves in the cities might call an escaped mul. There are a lot of reasons why a mul is difficult to play out properly depending on background, and current goals/situation. They can be difficult and watching their up and downs can be trying on the player as well as the character, but also rewarding at times.

[Dan]

Dwarves are hard because it's difficult to make them faceted and interesting. They don't -have- to be automatons.

It isn't that dwarves don't -have- to be automatons, but rather that they should be far from being automatons.

People tend to get stuck on the single-mindedness aspect of being a dwarf, and assume that all of their actions must make a bee-line for the end goal of their focus. Why?

Instead of doing everything to get to the end goal, they should be weighing each act, opportunity and person they meet against the level of risk vs. benefit toward their focus. Is this person going to help or hinder me toward my end goals? How much? Hinder me to the point where I need to kill them or ignore them?

A dwarf should be as diverse as any other character, only once they make a decision on something and how it will positively or adversely affect their end goal should they be really locked in and become stubborn.

Seriously, all you have to do is be able to justify the actions of the dwarf as that whatever they are doing eventually leads back to being beneficial to their ultimate overarching plan to accomplish their focus. Like, why is the dwarf who wants to be the best fighter in the world picking leaves? Because the girl in the market said if he picked certain ones for her, she would appreciate it. Well, the dwarf knows that to be the best fighter in the world he might need to know a few people who can bandage him back up after some nasty mistakes along the way, and fix his injuries. So he wants this herbalist to like him, since herbalists know healers. So he is out picking some fucking herbs. This is how I see the dwarven focus. It isn't "Well, I want to be the best fighter in the world so I spar as often and as much as possible." It is "I want to be the best fighter in the world, so I need to surround myself with others who will help me be successful in this, like other experienced fighters, healers, and people who can get me the proper equipment that will keep me alive along the way." (Also, this is a poor focus choice in my opinion, as you should probably pick something you can quantify and eventually achieve, but I digress.)

Anyway, long story short- dwarves can be just as interesting and multifaceted as any other character out there.

[gfair]

I couldn't ever play a breed, I don't think. Fuck the (inward) melancholy, and the social pariah bullshit. I had enough of that in high school.

Boog, that's what would make you a perfect halfbreed player, is that experience. You could draw on it, add nuance and idiosyncrasy to the character, really define him and it would allow you to inhabit the character. Give it a shot.

[Synthesis]

Ugh, please...no high-school half-breed bullshit.  There are vastly more serious and interesting conflicts in life than, "Becky didn't sit with me at lunch!"

[Is Friday]

Ugh, please...no high-school half-breed bullshit.  There are vastly more serious and interesting conflicts in life than, "Becky didn't sit with me at lunch!"

Sadly, a majority of the halfbreeds I interact with are this way.

[boog]

That's why I've never played one. Nooo thanks.

[Is Friday]

Booohooo you ignored me at the bar I'm gonna go walk into the silt sea now!

[Yam]

I've seen way more good half-elves than bad. But I think they're very hard to play.

[RogueGunslinger]

Breeds are very difficult to play. Especially when you're trying to play one that doesn't look like a breed, and isn't thought as one. Displaying that conflict between what your character outwardly projects and what he's inwardly thinking and feeling can often times make for very sticky situations that often presents too few of options for interesting character dynamics, that other people might pick up on.

[Sunburned]

I enjoy playing half-elves and I -despise- the high-school moodiness RP cited by Synthesis.

Both of my long-lived half-elves, Legionaire Zak and Expansion Division Hunter/Byn Sargeant Hawk, expressed their racial dysfunctionality in being hypersensitive to the expectations of their peers.  They were overwhelmingly driven to prove their worth to society, and in some contexts, they excelled at their jobs... but always as minions.  Contrary to more confident races, they weren't driven so much by practical personal ambitions as much as a nonrational desire for approval from the people they respected, along with an earnest desire for "normalcy".  This drove them to be suppressive of any emotions that would elicit acknowledgment of being a lesser; it wasn't until Hawk became a Sargeant in the Byn (something he did out of a desire to fight a battle that belonged to his former bosses) that he began fighting back when people threw insults at him... and even then, it was largely a reluctant effort to protect his perceived image of authority.

I think its difficult to play half-elves without allowing the adolescent archetype to take over, but I that listing a few core consequences of your character's socialization before getting into the world goes a long way for adding depth.

[Incognito]

This topic has been discussed many times in the past - as can be expected.

All the races on Zalanthas have their individual pros and cons.

All of them are playable, depending on the mindset and capability of the player.

Polling these choices basically gives us a perception of the preferences of the voters ONLY.

However, the poll in no way conveys the actual difficulty in playing any given race.

Some players find the elven mind-set too tough to handle, others find the Half-Giant mind-set too dumb to RP, others find the generic angst of muls and half-breeds difficult to cope with, while yet others conceive the racial discrimination against elves and half-breeds to be a severe playability handicap.

Having said that, there are always other players who can handle each of these racial roles with ease.

Quite simply put - it just depends from player to player.

The only constant I would pen down is - a plain vanilla Human role - is the easiest to play, from a racial point of view. All the rest of the races have their unique perks and quirks, and you as a player need to decide what you can play comfortably.

Think of it like picking out a vehicle for yourself - there are a lot of choices, and each one has pros and cons: compacts have high maneuverability but lack space, minivans have extra space but low maneuverability, sedans have a mix of all the best categories (I'd equate them to Humans), sports cars have speed, but usually come with a stick-shift, and trucks have very high power, but are bulky and hard to maneuver. Now, you as a driver (player) can definitely drive all these vehicles, but, for the particular ride you're planning (as in role you're planning), you are the best judge to choose the one best suited to your needs.

[Kalai]

Mm. Even the human thing's not always a constant. (Ask Cind.) Playing the 'race on top' of society, with all the dizzying possibilities that entails, may be somewhat overwhelming.
"Roleplaying: Human character is as broad as human ability. Virtually any sort of disposition can be found amongst humans, and humans are allowed the greatest latitude in inventing their personalities. For all intents and purposes, a human is able to become whatever he or she wishes to become, without restriction."
That's, well, one less tool you can use to narrow down your character concept. Rather than having a racial and regional culture to reference, humans have only the regional (aside from perhaps a generic sense of privilege).
I often prefer the guidance of a slightly alien mindset and consequently tend to play humans to a somewhat minimal extent.

[valeria]

It always baffles me just a little when I see people say or imply "This is the only way I've seen X played lately."  Unless you're a staffer or possibly a psionicist, there is no way you can know the deeper stuff that is going on.  I know that for me, sometimes the way my characters is outwardly manifesting and what is going on inside their head can be vastly different things.

[boog]

It always baffles me just a little when I see people say or imply "This is the only way I've seen X played lately."  Unless you're a staffer or possibly a psionicist, there is no way you can know the deeper stuff that is going on.  I know that for me, sometimes the way my characters is outwardly manifesting and what is going on inside their head can be vastly different things.

Yeah, agreed. Some of my characters seem weak (physically, outwardly), but they are basically Jean Claude van Damme's inside their mind.

[Is Friday]

It always baffles me just a little when I see people say or imply "This is the only way I've seen X played lately."  Unless you're a staffer or possibly a psionicist, there is no way you can know the deeper stuff that is going on.  I know that for me, sometimes the way my characters is outwardly manifesting and what is going on inside their head can be vastly different things.

Sorry. I guess I'm a bad person for not interacting with characters that act like they're aspiring to be on a reality TV show.

[Talia]

Hey, look, bashing on people's roleplay. This thread appears to be headed in a moderation/locking direction. Maybe we don't wanna do that? I dunno, just a thought.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Probably a city elf, for me.

It's less to do with coded stats and more to do with a general understanding of the theiving thing, but sort of feeling like....maybe a race which is on average more intelligent than humanity might also come to the conclusion that you don't shit where you eat. Which can make 'actual' theiving (not loosely defined cheating people, not weaselinf information) a terribly stupid thing to contend with. Especially given the differences in the documentations allusions to them as wanderlusty and the actual coded tribes being so hardcodedly stuck in one place.

I never caught a bit of theiving from them and don't recall their name/sdesc, but I really loved the roleplay behind an elven pc who was around years ago. He seemed a merchanty-type, but he would make regular trips on foot between settlements with a mount packed with wares and he was always interesting to run into.

[Cind]

I know I'm in a minority for loving playing elves. Being discriminated against, depending on all the jillion factors involved, is 92% of the time fun for me as a city-elf and 8% of the time I either don't like it or I can't really react to what they're RPing (out of ideas or something). I think mounts are a horrible bother and I don't usually get a role in which fighting is the foundation, and I _love_ the stealing aspect of their culture, and how rare and truly deep their real loyalty is, and how fecking fast they can run.

Mm. Even the human thing's not always a constant. (Ask Cind.)

I always forget that people watch pcs quite a bit and I'm not even going to ask. But yes, I distinctly remember playing at least two very challenged human pcs for at least a combined total of a real-life month who would never, ever get anywhere socially who were not 'rinthis, traitors or nonmundanes. I recommend trying it, I had fun with both of them, and if you want a real job the Byn will take you if you didn't go and make a character with no limbs.

[Kalai]

Heh, you might've been Cindy42 when you stated that humans were one of the most challenging roles for you. 

[Cind]

Heh, you might've been Cindy42 when you stated that humans were one of the most challenging roles for you. 

Yeah, its because their advantage makes the game feel a little too easy. You don't have to try like the dickens or get lucky to make it past the second promotion.

[Morrolan]

Yeah, its because their advantage makes the game feel a little too easy.

I feel the same way. Why would anyone play a cripple, or an incompetent?

One of my favorite bynners (full human) was a non-combatant class who made sergeant (briefly) and died trying to save the lieutenant from certain death. He was known as the guy who would do supposedly incredibly stupid stuff because he was fearless. Like, when we had to climb down a cliff to check out a wreck, he said "Sure, I will manage. Anyone have any rope?"

But in a straight-up fight that is 90% of status among bynners, he was a one-hit wonder. The bad way. And he was trying his hardest, he just did not have any talent in that direction.

I can completely see playing a halfbreed or a sharp just because it is tougher. Or a character who cannot speak, to one extent or another.

For me, the two races I have never played by choice are elves and dwarves. The mind-set is just too different for me. Dwarves are not enjoyable because I play Arm to get away from being an obsessed perfectionist. Elves...well, I just do not enjoy stealing. I find it stressful, even IG.

I suppose that is a failing of mine in my RP range.

[valeria]

It always baffles me just a little when I see people say or imply "This is the only way I've seen X played lately."  Unless you're a staffer or possibly a psionicist, there is no way you can know the deeper stuff that is going on.  I know that for me, sometimes the way my characters is outwardly manifesting and what is going on inside their head can be vastly different things.

Sorry. I guess I'm a bad person for not interacting with characters that act like they're aspiring to be on a reality TV show.

I don't even know how you drew that conclusion from what I said.  I wasn't directing any statement at you personally.  Also, you're perfectly welcome to have your character not interact with people that act in ways that your character would not want to interact with.

What I was actually saying is that blanket statements like "Dwarves are only played like X" or "Half-elves are only played like X" don't make any sense for a variety of reasons.  Mostly because, unless someone is a psionicist or staff, she's never going to be able to get into another character's head, especially if you're giving them cursory treatment.  Second, again unless she's on staff, a person's sample size is going to be limited to what she's playing around.  Third, when people are approaching people, situations, or in this case other characters with prejudice, they're is more likely to pay attention for that trait they're looking for, and pay a whole lot less attention to everything else.

I see these really broad generalizations cropping up from time to time in different contexts... and that's all they are.  Generalizations, and based on limited perspectives.  There is simply no way most people know what's going on under the surface, even if they have seen three half-elves crying in corners in bars in their general area.