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

K'nahli · **03-05-2015, 11:56 AM**

I thought I replied in this.

Anyways, I've always been wary of overpowered characters because I don't understand how they are supposed to meld well together with regular characters who lean more toward realism. Like, take for instance someone who, in previous scenes, used to drop numerous enemies like flies and now they find themselves in a situation where 2-4 people are surrounded by 4-5 Amalj'aa and are treating it like a very threatening situation... what is the OP character supposed to do? Stay true to his character and clean them all out swiftly and easily? Or downplay his character so that it doesn't eliminate the sense of tension/the scene in general for the others - in which case it just stops being a character's trait and more of a "I am OP when I can get away with it" card?

(03-05-2015, 07:06 AM)Edvyn Wrote: from my own experience, rpers in general tend to think of things in real simple, concrete terms. in many cases, not only do they think in concrete terms, they focus solely on physical aspects i.e. what their imaginary person can beat up and how totally cool their imaginary character is for being able to beat things up!

if any thought is given to what goes on in the character's head, it's often just as concrete and measured in terms of "my character is THIS strong". i have seen many, many characters that are "intelligent" solely because the player says they are. they don't demonstrate any knowledge beyond what the average joe has (emoting reading a book doesn't count), they don't say anything profound or wise, they don't show cunning or wit. these "intelligent" characters often just use their VAST cognitive ability to throw bigger fireballs, say really condescending things and various other forms of dickwaving (in other words, their intelligence is really just another ability that helps them beat things up). it's a power fantasy of the mind.

i hold the belief that it is the player's responsibility to prove, through action, their character's personal strengths and weaknesses. it's all well and good to tell people about your character and what they can do, but nobody should be expected to simply take what's told to them about someone else's character at face value. a self-described "badass" character is almost invariably not badass in the slightest. the player just desperately wants the character to be seen that way without doing anything for it. other people decide if you're badass, not you. similarly, a self-described witty and sarcastic character is probably neither witty nor sarcastic but pretty likely to be annoying as shit (and not in the funny way either).

While I'd agree in the case of self-proclaimed beautiful/pretty characters, funny characters, wise and witty characters, I'd draw a line at intelligence. I don't see any good reason why someone needs to be intelligent and very well-versed in the lore because they want to play a particularly smart character. Is it nice if they can live up to the title? Sure... but that's a pretty big expectation of them otherwise. In the case of personality quirks then they seem far more necessary because they rely a lot more on delivery and reception whereas people can conclude that someone is knowledgable or smart and perhaps OOCly help their character come up with ideas or offer advice for an IC scene if they struggle otherwise.

Poll: Which Character do you relate to most? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Adventurer 1	4.76%	2	4.76%
Adventurer 2	23.81%	10	23.81%
The Voidsent Potato	42.86%	18	42.86%
The Courier	28.57%	12	28.57%
Total		42 vote(s)	100%

Overpowered or underpowered characters?

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