Prettiness Guilt

[Marauder Moe]

Is maybe a thread split required?

The OP has repeatedly gotten the answer of "don't feel guilty, play what you want."

[Desertman]

Insincere manipulative compliments will put you at a disadvantage. But they dont move me to acts of violence. It seems an inappropriate response. Ergo, it never occurs to my characters. This doesn't make them weak. Just sane.

I'm fine with that. I'm just letting you know why I made the assumption I made since you asked....because apparently it's what you do, according to you.

Having to kill people for minor offenses in order to look strong is exactly the lack of parity I was referring to. Its right up there with keleoid scarring to be seen as strong.

Also fine with that. I'm just answering your question. You wanted to know what made me think that. What made me think it, is you said it. I'm not questioning your reason for saying it.

I'm not sure what the issue is.

[Delirium]

Okay... I'm going to hint a little louder this time...

Stop trolling.

[hyzhenhok]

My philosophy is your mdesc should draw attention to what it is about your character that is not simply average. Then, just let people have their idiosyncratic opinions of what a TYPICAL ZALANTHAN must be, and let them project it onto your character.

To implement this, I usually deliberately avoid mentioning my character's teeth, complexion, skin quality, filthiness/sandiness/lack thereof, etc. Unless I'm playing a character that's supposed to be uglier than average. Thus, people who want to assume all typical Zalanthas have nasty teeth, horrible sun-marred complexions, etc, can go ahead. My mdesc doesn't say my character doesn't have those things. Those who usually assume all character attractive, sure, go ahead. It's not a big deal, either way.

The only time I would mention stuff that tends to be subjectively considered as markers of attractiveness/unattractiveness is if my character is definitely supposed to be atypically so.

[Narf]

My philosophy is your mdesc should draw attention to what it is about your character that is not simply average. Then, just let people have their idiosyncratic opinions of what a TYPICAL ZALANTHAN must be, and let them project it onto your character.

To implement this, I usually deliberately avoid mentioning my character's teeth, complexion, skin quality, filthiness/sandiness/lack thereof, etc. Unless I'm playing a character that's supposed to be uglier than average. Thus, people who want to assume all typical Zalanthas have nasty teeth, horrible sun-marred complexions, etc, can go ahead. My mdesc doesn't say my character doesn't have those things. Those who usually assume all character attractive, sure, go ahead. It's not a big deal, either way.

The only time I would mention stuff that tends to be subjectively considered as markers of attractiveness/unattractiveness is if my character is definitely supposed to be atypically so.

That's a good idea. It lets you play a character that you conceptualize as pretty, but doesn't terribly impose on people's view of the gameworld. I mean how often is the exact color shade and number of your teeth going to need to come up in rp?

[Delirium]

My philosophy is your mdesc should draw attention to what it is about your character that is not simply average. Then, just let people have their idiosyncratic opinions of what a TYPICAL ZALANTHAN must be, and let them project it onto your character.

To implement this, I usually deliberately avoid mentioning my character's teeth, complexion, skin quality, filthiness/sandiness/lack thereof, etc. Unless I'm playing a character that's supposed to be uglier than average. Thus, people who want to assume all typical Zalanthas have nasty teeth, horrible sun-marred complexions, etc, can go ahead. My mdesc doesn't say my character doesn't have those things. Those who usually assume all character attractive, sure, go ahead. It's not a big deal, either way.

The only time I would mention stuff that tends to be subjectively considered as markers of attractiveness/unattractiveness is if my character is definitely supposed to be atypically so.

I do this as well. I also try to leave anything variable (such as hairstyle, cleanliness, etc) to the tdesc, so that I can adjust their description over time. Especially handy for male characters and their beards.

[HavokBlue]

I avoid including anything about variable cleanliness unless it's a PC that is likely never going to be cleaned, like a dedicated alley rat.

I don't generally set out to make an ugly PC or a pretty PC. I tend to write my descriptions to convey the feel/vibe of a character as best I can without imposing anything subjective.

[Barzalene]

I
I don't generally set out to make an ugly PC or a pretty PC. I tend to write my descriptions to convey the feel/vibe of a character as best I can without imposing anything subjective.

This makes sense to MW.

[hopeandsorrow]

I always wondered if it was natural for some of my characters to be naturally frightened and not trusting of "attractive characters" .

I tend to play low life/gutter trash/desert rats type characters and tend to associate attractiveness with nobility and as well as social ruthlessness.

MY logic being, if they're obviously unmarred by the life of the lower class, they must either be A.) an aide, so thus dangerous B.) Really good at manipulation back stabbing so thus dangerous. C.) A witch and thus dangerous.

I run... as fast as I can from pretty people.

Is this also meta gaming?

[BadSkeelz]

Sounds reasonable to me. Distrusting the unusual is a natural response.

[Jihelu]

I always wondered if it was natural for some of my characters to be naturally frightened and not trusting of "attractive characters" .

I tend to play low life/gutter trash/desert rats type characters and tend to associate attractiveness with nobility and as well as social ruthlessness.

MY logic being, if they're obviously unmarred by the life of the lower class, they must either be A.) an aide, so thus dangerous B.) Really good at manipulation back stabbing so thus dangerous. C.) A witch and thus dangerous.

I run... as fast as I can from pretty people.

Is this also meta gaming?

Not really.
Life is hard. Hardship shows. Why does that person not show hardships? Life must be too easy for them. Must be a gicker. Or have money. Fuck that person. (Not literally, or if you want to I guess)

[PriestlySiren]

See now... to date I have played more female warriors than other classes, and if I sometimes use pretty words in my mdesc as a connotation, it's because the word fits. But I give them flaws, and they aren't perfect. This one has no curves at all, and a very strong jaw. This one is very typically pretty, but she's got mental issues. Wild hair, broad shoulders, crooked, broken nose, big nose, etc. No guilt there.

[hyzhenhok]

I stored a long-lived female warrior PC of mine when I realized realistically, I needed to start obliterating her appearance with disfiguring scars.

(Mostly kidding.)

[BadSkeelz]

I thought this was relevant.

[In Dreams]

Wow! My little thread grew up and got big and it's 11 pages old already!

They grow up so fast.  

Anyway, I saw a few things suggesting females be warriors, or more masculine or mean. Problems!

1 - Warriors seem really super boring to me. So do merchants. To me it's like... hey, let's play chess and ONLY USE THE PAWNS! There's a whole board and lots of pieces to play with! I want to use them all. I wish we weren't locked into guild limitations.
2 - It's possible to be in masculine professions and still be girly, or be an aide and be masculine! You don't have to be Sissy McSmoothface and you don't have to be Hulkia von Muscleneck either. Like the answer to #1, I find it most interesting to be something inbetween, or even kind of both. Making a complete, multifaceted person is far more interesting than trying to live up to stereotypes or anti-stereotypes.

[bcw81]

Wow! My little thread grew up and got big and it's 11 pages old already!

They grow up so fast.  

Anyway, I saw a few things suggesting females be warriors, or more masculine or mean. Problems!

1 - Warriors seem really super boring to me. So do merchants. To me it's like... hey, let's play chess and ONLY USE THE PAWNS! There's a whole board and lots of pieces to play with! I want to use them all. I wish we weren't locked into guild limitations.
2 - It's possible to be in masculine professions and still be girly, or be an aide and be masculine! You don't have to be Sissy McSmoothface and you don't have to be Hulkia von Muscleneck either. Like the answer to #1, I find it most interesting to be something inbetween, or even kind of both. Making a complete, multifaceted person is far more interesting than trying to live up to stereotypes or anti-stereotypes.

Just want to ask you to try playing a male, masculine, gruff aide. You get thrown on your ass and told you can't join the fru fru club so fast by your peers.

[Patuk]

Hell, for that matter, try playing a traditionally feminine male anything. I believe I made a rage comic about this sometime.

Edit: Yup.

[Barzalene]

Wow! My little thread grew up and got big and it's 11 pages old already!

They grow up so fast.  

Anyway, I saw a few things suggesting females be warriors, or more masculine or mean. Problems!

1 - Warriors seem really super boring to me. So do merchants. To me it's like... hey, let's play chess and ONLY USE THE PAWNS! There's a whole board and lots of pieces to play with! I want to use them all. I wish we weren't locked into guild limitations.
2 - It's possible to be in masculine professions and still be girly, or be an aide and be masculine! You don't have to be Sissy McSmoothface and you don't have to be Hulkia von Muscleneck either. Like the answer to #1, I find it most interesting to be something inbetween, or even kind of both. Making a complete, multifaceted person is far more interesting than trying to live up to stereotypes or anti-stereotypes.

You don't need advice. You're doing it right.

[Rhyden]

Sometimes, I intentionally make ugly, disfigured, or otherwise physically displeasing characters.

And yet they still get hit on.

[CodeMaster]

Sometimes, I intentionally make ugly, disfigured, or otherwise physically displeasing characters.

And yet they still get hit on.

Personality goes a long way in a text game

[whitt]

Sometimes, I intentionally make ugly, disfigured, or otherwise physically displeasing characters.

And yet they still get hit on.

Kind of gives you hope, no?  A world where someone's worth as a partner isn't just based on physical appearance?

[valeria]

It's all those pretty, flowery emotes.  So misleading.

[nauta]

It's all those pretty, flowery emotes.  So misleading.

There's more truth to this than you might have intended.  Mdescs are just part of the story with portraying an ugly person - pulling off ugly emotes is an art form.

[valeria]

It's all those pretty, flowery emotes.  So misleading.

There's more truth to this than you might have intended.  Mdescs are just part of the story with portraying an ugly person - pulling off ugly emotes is an art form.

Nope, it was totally intended 

[Clearsighted]

Wow! My little thread grew up and got big and it's 11 pages old already!

They grow up so fast.  

Anyway, I saw a few things suggesting females be warriors, or more masculine or mean. Problems!

1 - Warriors seem really super boring to me. So do merchants. To me it's like... hey, let's play chess and ONLY USE THE PAWNS! There's a whole board and lots of pieces to play with! I want to use them all. I wish we weren't locked into guild limitations.
2 - It's possible to be in masculine professions and still be girly, or be an aide and be masculine! You don't have to be Sissy McSmoothface and you don't have to be Hulkia von Muscleneck either. Like the answer to #1, I find it most interesting to be something inbetween, or even kind of both. Making a complete, multifaceted person is far more interesting than trying to live up to stereotypes or anti-stereotypes.

I dunno. Warriors is more like playing with all rooks.