RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

(10-09-2014, 03:00 PM)ProvaDiServo Wrote: Does this mean I can finally be a kung fu chef duelist? With frying pan kung fu skills?


In all seriouness I think we all typically do make pressumptions, but we are more often than not pleasantly surprised, right? I know I nomally am.

Technically, I don't see why not--I mean, if you're guy is trained as a monk it doesn't seem to stop Law or Prince Peach from kicking ass with a frying pan.

(10-09-2014, 02:56 PM)CrookedTarot Wrote:

(10-09-2014, 02:04 PM)Berrod Armstrong Wrote: I avoid that by not assuming to begin with! If I see a character, I wait for the player to describe and introduce them. From that, I have my character respond accordingly.

So someone wearing an acolyte robe and holding a book can be described as a warrior and I'd be okay with it, because I'm looking more at what is written than anything else.

Everyone's a little bit Classist!

-points to Avenue Q song of a similar title but not quite-

Not me! I really honestly look at the posts. If the posts indicate that the way the toon is dressed is similar to what is being written, THEN I give myself leave to say, 'Okay this character is a gladiator'. Even then, I don't think, 'Oh this person is gonna be one of them knightly types'. I wait with a clean slate, and let what is posted paint the picture for me. It's a fantastic approach for me -- and one that eliminates the pitfalls of assumption (oh those pitfalls...!).

Think about it this way -- I'm watching a movie and there's this loud guy behind me who keeps guessing and assuming things about the characters on screen ("Yeah I bet this guy is gonna be a real asshole -- but he's totally gonna get the girl!"). That's annoying as hell, and it just hinders my ability to just sit back and enjoy the movie! Why would I do that to myself?

However, that's just how it works for yours truly. Weapons, class even personality and what they're wearing -- I always wait to see what the player writes about the character first.

I am a heavy swordsman and regularly steal oranges from the marketplace.

Behold, I am now a thief.

(10-09-2014, 03:10 PM)Seriphyn Wrote: I am a heavy swordsman and regularly steal oranges from the marketplace.

Behold, I am now a thief.

Lo! Those Oranges were free samples! 
You are now a botanist.

(10-09-2014, 01:57 PM)CrookedTarot Wrote: Is it good or bad to let your in-game class choice define your character?

I think just as jobs speak at least a little bit for who a person is in real life, classes do speak in some way what kind of person takes up that profession. However, these aren't always to be expected. For example, when I was in the nursing program at college, many people were in it for the money, not to be nurturing like you'd expect from a nurse.


But overall, I think it is bad to define a character by their class. A class impacts a character and what he or she does but it's not the sole identity of them. When you interact with other characters, the nature of your class should not come up often--that's where your character's personality should shine through. You can write so much about what your character does for a living but it will only speak for a small fraction of who your character actually is.


It's even considered a test to be able to describe a literary character without talking about their job, their looks, or what they do in the plot. People are more than that.

That's a good question.

Let me give you an opposite question.

Is it okay to base your class choice around the way your character is defined?
Because that's pretty much why I will be playing Rogue/Ninja as Lyriell.

I created her in 1.0 with one thing in mind:

She will be a fighter that wields 2 swords/daggers.

I had to wait a loooong time, but now I finally get the dual wielding class I wanted so I'm very happy. <3

It's something I've managed to avoid, for the most part, as Yvelont. Despite his primary weapon being the lance and his status as a (former) knight of Ishgard, I define his current role as a ranger of the Twelveswood. I've come across a few people who hear that term and automatically assume, "Hey, I get it! He's an Archer now!" - even though that couldn't be further from the truth. (My completionist tendency to level ALL OF THE THINGS doesn't help in that regard.)

So I try to do other characters the same courtesy. I don't look at a character with an axe and say "Aha! One o' them Lominsan pirates!" or assume a non-Sworn bearing a sword and shield is a current or former gladiator. After all, it's not as if everyone in Eorzea who knows how to swing a longsword around trained at the Colosseum.

Edit: I will say I'm excited as all get-out for Rogue and Ninja. I've always played my alt, Kendha'to, as a character who favors agility and swift strikes, even going so far as to glamour his former incarnation's tank gear into light clothing, a small buckler, and a dagger - before they replaced the GLA/PLD dagger models with actual swords. So to actually see that represented in the game is going to be awesome. Even still, he's neither a Rogue or a Ninja!

While I don't scoff at people who let a class define their character (since I see nothing wrong with it), I would say that Kiht's IC classes are an aspect of her character rather than the defining traits.

She is trained as a Lancer, Archer and bit as a knife-fighter(not an in-game class). If I was to give her a more accurate class label, I would call her a hunter or a scout much like TheLastCandle uses the title ranger for Yvelont. Even then, that only defines part of what she is like in action.

The various guilds all seem to emphasize different mindsets that they repeat over and over again through their story quests. For example, Ywain is the Guildmaster of the Lancer's Guild. He is constantly preaching courage.

But courage... Can be interpreted in many ways...

I think of class as a good starting point for a character - we can think of what kinds of stereotypes might lay at the feet of such a class. We'll see rogue, and we can think of Zidane from FF9, or Locke from FF6: they're thief-y type characters, but one is driven by a desire to do good all the time because he's bored and it sounds like fun, the other is driven to find progressively more fancy treasures to save his beloved from a coma-sleep.

We see a lot of traits and ideas in them, we see how characters react to them, and can kind of gauge in our heads how we want our characters to present. Then, we get to FFXIV, where we can be everything with just a swap of a gear set. This is a little trickier to figure out what's "canon" for our character - maybe right now I see Nivie as the scholarly detective kind of character. In a year, maybe we have Red Mages, maybe we have Samurai. And, maybe I like playing them better!

I like to think in the span of a year I'll have a basis for what I want my character to be, and I'll have an idea of what story point could happen to explain going from point A to point B.

But, I think we're in a neat position where we don't particularly need to let the class define what our characters are: we can have our "canon" idea of what each character is, we can set out to dress them in this fashion.

To bring this back around: I think classes give us a good backbone to figure out who our characters are. But, I don't think they define our characters unless we decide they do in a manner beyond "Hey this is hella fun to play, I'm gonna stick with this and build its relic weapon or raid Coil or it's next expac equivalent" or what have you.

I don't use class per se when dealing with others, but more their appearance. If you have a bow and quiver, I'll assume you're a hunter of sorts and F'eora will mention it. An axe a mercenary of some type, and a sword and shield a "Pah-lay-din". If you have no weapon and armor falling into those general categories, I'll assume you're a tavern denizen.

For myself I use the class as a framework and then build outward from there. The class more or less dictating the character stereotype as a foundation.

With F'eora I've blended the role a bit leaning more towards huntress back at her tribe (archer), but more of a social butterfly, chatty Kathy, and trobairitz with lyrics poking fun at people around her (bard).

I don't think it should define your character each and every time: an in-game class is just a tool that you can form the character around. If it fits for so-and-so to be their actual in-game class, and it works for them then more power to them. You NEED a balance in demographics. Fortunately when it comes to physical combat classes (no magic), it's very easy to simply use the class to express their combat skills without necessarily pidgeon holing them: just because you have an axe doesn't mean you're a member of the Maurader's Guild, for example (which is what I did with my main)

It gets a little trickier with magic, and to be honest, it should be because there is lore surrounding the type of magicks seen in FFXIV's Eorzea (my WHM is a conjurer of Gridania for example)

Unfortunately with FFXIV the lore itself kinda makes some classes really difficult to RP in-character at all, let alone as templates or foundations, particularly scholar and summoner. If you ever plan on incorporating actual gameplay into your RP (which is something I like to do, and I think if it's done right it adds something full on text simply can't do) you have to really stretch to play a scholar or summoner: by lore there are no scholars left, and with them, their fairies...so how are you using one in battle? Summoners have to witness or be the instruments of a primal's demise in order to capture some of their essence and conjure an Egi...and for sake of realism, and for the sake of making the primals a grave threat rather than a trivial challenge that can be overcome with just a handful of people (product of the world being in a video game, unfortunately) how many times can you have people beating down the primals?

Any hurdle can be overcome with that "one-off" explanations that mirror the special circumstances for the player character and the soul stones and whatnot, but when you can explain away something that easily then everyone will have that as the background for their characters, which leads to the community breaking the lore. In this manner, the game's lore itself actually blocks off many people from letting their class define them, but in a negative/restrictive manner, rather than one that promotes creativity.

Im solely a rogue for dual wield. Everyone who knows Aaron IC will tell you he's a guy with many swords and dual wield is his most noted combat attribute.

IC he's still just a swordsman just you'll actually see him with dual wield actions visually etc.

I couldn't care less about a back story involving it. Im only getting it for the dual wield. he's no Paladin, or rogue. Just an ex pirate.

Still with the death of DF imminent it's gonna be a bitch to level.

Honestly I might switch between PLD and NIN IC mainly because

1 - DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG IT TOOK ME TO GET AARON'S SWORD COLLECTION TOGETHER!? I LITERALLY WENT TWO DAYS NON STOP ON LEVI EX JUST FOR A WAVE SHAMSHIR and missed out on Odin for WEEKS BEFORE I GOT ZANTETSUKEN AKA SWITCHY blade Badassery. That and the other 10 unique swords he has as PLD im not throwing all that time away.

And

2 - He doesn't always dual wield when fighting.

For me it depends on the game, where there are clear mono class toons then I tend to stay within the confines of that class (eg Jedi, Mage, Paladin)

In FFXIV as I don't have the class constraint I have instead borrowed from classes to allow for a character that is more diverse, being the sum of her experiances rather than the template of any one class. This has allowed me to let RP shape her.

Some things that I have done to soften the steriotyping of a single class.
1. Made her a generalist in terms of magic, so more a gifted amater than a master
2. Have outfits that are character based rather than achivement based and try and keep these consitant.
3. The "T" -broard skills and only good/deep in a couple of things (bard & healing)
4. Play the character not the class, as in don't define who you are or what you do by the class
5. Pick something to lable yourself that is not a class, so I went with Witch. Though this can be diffivcult as a Paladin is a Paladin?

I think the main thing I would say, which is universal is play the character not any template, be that class, roll, disability, items etc..

Considering I craft my characters around the limitations of the system, yes.

I've held onto this type of idea since Guild Wars 1.  Characters can certainly learn how to use a weapon, but mastering a weapon involves signing up with a mentor or trainer (hence the in-game classes).  A class won't define the character, but some classes do attract certain personality types more than others. 

Finding an incredibly happy go lucky thaumatage pacifist won't be a common occurrence; neither will finding a embittered hate-filled white mage who reverse-heals.  Which is not to say it can't happen, just it isn't common.

So when I make a character, I consider what skills the would have learnt casually or on their own; followed by what class (if any) would their personality have led them to specialize in.  In some cases, a character might've chosen a class they didn't fit into well, and that struggle could become a part of them.  It's also important to remember that mastering a skill/class takes -time- and that needs to be considered in your character's backstory/age.

As for Jobs, that's a whole different can of worms, since mentioned before; some jobs simply aren't very usable like Scholar or Summoner.  Most cases I tend to stick to the class and not the job.