Allowing Class to Define Character

[ZindelloTarantella]

As Rogue/Ninja approaches quickly, I have been doing some thinking. This started with just Tarot but now I can't help but see it spread into other things as I notice the more rogueish types around-abouts prepping like I was for a while.

 

Is it good or bad to let your in-game class choice define your character?

 

Case in point, we've been told outright that Rogue, as a class, will not have 'Thief' abilities. Likely not bonuses to loot drops, gill multipliers or the like since that would make Rogues far and away more desirable. This is a safe assumption, I think.

 

Now, with that in mind, Rogues use knives as their weapons of choice--dual-wielding knives or katanas which eventually becomes Ninja. Maybe Kunais at that point, I dunno.

 

So, that is what led me to my thought.

 

Tarot doesn't use knives. Or rather, not as a mainstay. He doesn't kill unless absolutely necessary. In fact he's ICly killed one person in all the time I've played in all the MMOs I've used him.

 

So why am I so psyched about Rogue? There is nothing that Rogue will offer that makes Tarot more Tarot.

 

They use knives.

He doesn't.

 

They don't (presumably) have skills that are thief-based.

Tarot is a thief.

 

So here's the thing. Let's say you meet two characters in, I dunno, Grindstone in one year from now, and let's assume NO new classes have dropped since then. Now, one of those characters is a Rogue class and the other is a Marauder. Would you think immediately (and I am talking instinctively) 'Oh, they're a rogue, they likely play X type character'.

 

Now, before I get the onrush of 'Oh I'd never' I am talking simply based on pure instinct and snap judgment before you actually have a chance to meet the character. Do you judge (even if for a single moment) the content of the character based on class? Nothing wrong with this at all, mind you--it's human nature blah blah blah.

 

We categorize based on past experiences--just like I've heard numerous folks say 'Once Ninja drops there will be Naruto clones everywhere'. And yeah, I've heard more than a few people say this, both in game and in forums. Again, past experiences talking here.

 

On a more personal level, do YOU identify your character by their class? When you created your character, did you think 'Oh, well there's no a Blue Mage option so this won't work for my character concept." I know I did for Tarot--oops, no Thief, Tarot cannot BE!

 

I've probably got more to say about this but my train of thought got derailed by someone so I can't remember my other point. :evil:

 

I guess my main point is; would you assume a character is less legit in their claims to be something if they don't have the class to match? if someone was playing an archer but wanted to say they were using black magic as their mainstay with the bow being a fall back? Or if a character was claiming to be a Warrior but chose to utilize a Mining Pick rather than an axe?

[Aya]

Many, if not most of us, are RPing characters that are (at most) loosely designed around in-game classes.  I don't think you have to worry

 

If that weren't the case you and I would be in a lot of trouble until they came out with the merchant, barmaid, and dancer classes!

[Warren Castille]

To answer your Grindstone question: Yes, I categorize people into the stereotypes and then see where it takes me. Hell, I stereotype people based on 1) their introduction post and 2) how long it takes them to write it.

 

I don't hold them to those ideas, mind you, but it's safe to say that a big burly Roe wielding an axe fits a certain oeuvre of personality. Similarly, someone playing a rogue is likely to be a dodgier, trash-talkier sort of person. Tropes exist for a reason.

 

To answer the personal question: I suppose? Warren started as a miner, not anything else. The rest of the stuff is history, but in his core Warren was meant to be a shoulder-down-face-task-now-work sort of guy. He still is, he's just got a different set of tools to do it with now.

[Eva]

I personally feel that class/job is too shallow a thing on which to define a character.  It can be a central/focal point.  But it should be one of many, at least for a compelling character.  If that's your thing, than great.  But my belief is it makes for a pretty dull character.

 

"Hello my name is Kain the dragoon.  I'm from Ishgard and I train with my lance day in and day out.  I'm all about the dragooning and dragoony things.  I have a love affair with my spear.  I hate Dravanians."

 

Yeah, it's neat.  But a character should have more dimensions than just a job/class in my opinion.

 

Think of it in real life.  I'm a computer technician.  That's swell.  But that doesn't define me.  I enjoy spending time around the fire pit with friends and drinking hard lemonade/cider.  I listen to prog metal.  I love certain TV shows (omg Gotham is ossum so far!), I am a compassionate person, I enjoy a particular MMO.  I am a creative soul who loves to write.

 

So... yeah... call me a computer technician if you want.  Call Eva a priestess.  You wouldn't be wrong.  But there's more to us both than that.  

 

 

EDIT TO APPEND:  I think a certain amount of suspension of disbelief with regards to gear and such is acceptable.  RPers will often disagree upon this point though.  In short, just RP what you want and in the way that you want.  I've known PLD's who have been RPing dual-wielding swords, for instance.  Nothing wrong with that.  Doesn't seem to me there's any force in Eorzea that would literally prohibit a character from using two hands to each pick up a sword.  No, the game mechanics don't allow it, but... reasonable deviation is reasonable for the sake of realistic and enjoyable RP.

[Berrod Armstrong]

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.

[Aduu Avagnar]

I would say it happens, and it will continue to happen, and like with all roleplay, there are pros and cons to it. However, it should also be said, that some of Nako's gear can only be worn by DoW, so although he is primarily a mage, he wanders around as a Gladiator half the time. (he also is trained in the use of a sword, but thats another matter... its more a fallback than a primary armament.)

 

But yes, the safest way to avoid it is indeed to not pigeonhole people based on the class they currently are running around as, as Berrod said.

[ZindelloTarantella]

Many, if not most of us, are RPing characters that are (at most) loosely designed around in-game classes.  I don't think you have to worry

 

If that weren't the case you and I would be in a lot of trouble until they came out with the merchant, barmaid, and dancer classes!

 

I still have my fingers crossed for the first and last ones there, Aya--though all three have been Jobs in other RPGs.

 

(Dragon Quest has had Merchants and Jokers and Enix made the Dragon Quest games so...here's hoping~)

[Melkire]

To what extent - how closely or how loosely - your class helps define your character is, ultimately, up to you, the roleplayer.

 

In contrast to Tarot, Osric does use knives as a mainstay. I'll be using Rogue in-game for that purpose, to depict something that otherwise would require a little imagination from everyone involved in such a scene.

 

As for thieving... pffft. I don't have to let the lore behind Rogue dictate my character's history. He grew up poor and destitute in Limsa, and he stole, robbed, and burgled regularly. That's a roleplay matter; unless the Rogue class quest storyline straight out says "there are no thieves in Limsa anymore" (which I would call total bullshit on, as no city is ever free of crime unless, like, The Flash lives there) then I see no conflict between character backstory and canon lore.

 

 

 

EDIT: To answer the ultimate question posed in the OP... no, I wouldn't go so far as to say that a class must define a character to such an extent that a warrior cannot go around using a pickaxe as his weapon of choice.

[Zyrusticae]

Well, I personally tend to judge people more by what they're wearing and such than I do their class or job. If your character is wearing something deeply impractical but highly ornate, that says a lot about them right there (i.e. that they put personal appearances over personal comfort). This can fall apart in the case of players who don't really give their RP outfits that much thought but, um, well, I can't say I really want to RP with such individuals to begin with.

 

But okay, T'rahnu. See, the problem with T'rahnu is that she is actually a budding weapon master, and there is literally no way for me to properly represent that in-game. I can't really have her holding a spear, a bow, claws, and an axe at the same time, after all (though it would be really nice if I could have those hanging off of my chocobo...). So that first impression of her, if you take her current weapon as an indicator of her focus, can be really highly misleading.

 

So that's one of the reasons I tend to look at outfits over weapons. ...Hmm, actually, that's pretty much the primary reason. I already know that it can be a poor indicator as it is, so I focus on other things. Yep. That's how it goes.

[Roswyn]

Personally, my process was a little in reverse.

 

Ros's backstory and development influence what classes were chosen to depict what was happening to her as she changed and grew up.

 

Ex:

 

"This character was born in the Shroud so it seems logical she'd know how to use a bow. "

 

Instead of:

 

"I want my character to use bows so I think I have to make her be from the Shroud."

[Unnamed Mercenary]

Personally, my process was a little in reverse.

 

Ros's backstory and development influence what classes were chosen to depict what was happening to her as she changed and grew up.

 

Ex:

 

"This character was born in the Shroud so it seems logical she'd know how to use a bow. "

 

Instead of:

 

"I want my character to use bows so I think I have to make her be from the Shroud."

 

That's about how I figured mine too. Although, it's kinda hard to RP out a class from Eorzea when your character isn't. Makes it fun though.

[ZindelloTarantella]

See, the problem with T'rahnu is that she is actually a budding weapon master, and there is literally no way for me to properly represent that in-game. I can't really have her holding a spear, a bow, claws, and an axe at the same time, after all (though it would be really nice if I could have those hanging off of my chocobo...).

 

Which I get this, but then you get into the debate on what IS a weapon? For instance, in my example, pick-axes are not only useable as a weapon but have been used as weapons before hand.

 

Adding to that, the moment you say 'weapons master' I think 'Firion' who also has experience with magics too. So does your character also have magical training as well?

 

Or let's say I have a character that uses a bo staff--obviously the closets options are lances (which there are none that don't have a sharp, pointy end) or a Conjurer or Thau using a staff. Naturally, Lancers use a stance more akin to how a bo-staff wielder MIGHT fight but a mage has the more 'staff' looking weapon.

 

This crosses in the 'reminder' discussion. Having to remind other players that 'X Character isn't using a X Weapon but actually a Y so please remember and use your imagination'.

[Sophia_Grave]

Sophia has a veritable utility belt at this point. she has her sword, a handgun, a few knives, as well as some other doohickeys. I run into the same problem as Zyrusticae; there's no way to represent my character the way I'd like to. And that's alright; I've run into plenty of people who have the same issue. Its convinced me not to take anything at face value, until the player proves that the case.

 

Otherwise, I think classes roles in general are a great starting place. While sort of shallow on their own, they do provide a nice base of advantages/disadvantages/problems/whatever for your character to work with. The interesting part is how your character chooses to overcome or not overcome those challenges. Take Sophia for example. She's a tried-and-true, third eye-having (hidden, of course!) Garlean agent. That alone says a lot about her, but its how she handles it and does with it that says more.

[ZindelloTarantella]

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! :thumbsup:

 

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

[ProvaDiServo]

Does this mean I can finally be a kung fu chef duelist? With frying pan kung fu skills?

 

 

 

[video=youtube]

 

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.

[ZindelloTarantella]

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.

[Berrod Armstrong]

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! :thumbsup:

 

-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.

[Seriphyn]

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

 

Behold, I am now a thief.

[Berrod Armstrong]

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.

[Flickering Ember]

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.

[Lyriell]

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

[TheLastCandle]

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!

[Knight Kat]

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...

 

[video=youtube]

[Ermine]

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.

[Michelleswain]

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).