Character Development: Static or Game-to-Game?

Here's an interesting question I would like to put out to all of the roleplayers out there that have a character they continuously use (use in more than two roleplays).

Do your characters develop from game to game, or do they start every game the same and develop from there?

Both methods are equally useful. If your character develops from game to game, they tend to be a lot more developed, and have a better personality. On the other hand, though, they can become warped, so that you have to re-adjust who they are and what their purpose is in life. Since I have no one else to use, I'll use one of my characters in example.

Jay started out as a dark, somber character. He didn't say much, but was ghastly good at what he did (killing people, if anyone cares to know). He started out as a free agent, doing whatever jobs he could find. Then he was hired. The character became harder to play, because now he had orders to follow, (which he slavishly did,) but he now had a purpose for his life. The character developed. Then came the revelation. One day, I was roleplaying and a friend told me: "You know, you play Jay like a non-angsty teenager." That's when I realized that he WAS, or at least should be. The character developed. Then I used him in an unfamiliar place: a highschool roleplay. He suddenly had weaknesses: social interaction. That's when I learned that he was only good at combat, but since combat didn't apply here, he was floundering. (Come to think of it, it's slightly like Full Metal Panic, now that I look at it.) The character developed. And it went on and on. He fell in love. The caracter developed. He met his match in combat. The character developed. His girlfriend died. The character developed. He became evil. The character developed. He was brought back to good. The character developed. See where I'm going with this? This wasn't in just one or two that this happened. This took months of roleplaying to get him to that point. But once he was there, I realized something: He fit the role better than he ever had. And all because he developed outside the scope of one or two roleplays.

But then you have the other side of the coin, static character development. The character are created for the game, not the game for the characters. If the character is used continuously, then it is started out in each roleplay the same. It also has its good points. It allows the character to "have a fresh slate," so to speak. I know, you're bored, but I am constrained to expound yet another example.

Charden Tiphares is another of my darker characters. He is usually young, with a bad history. He also is one of the best characters to use when I need an on-the-line character. He always starts the same way: Dark, with very few things to live for. He also starts coming out of the shell at the beginning of whatever roleplay he's in. This lends him mounds of untapped potential. By making him dependent on the actions of others, he can become just about anything. If I were to develop his personality past just a few roleplays, he would become a saint-serial killer-drug addict-paladin. He would be so conflicted inside, struggling with both his perfect good and his perfect evil that I wouldn't be able to roleplay him at all, because every action would take weeks of explanation. But by making him start the same, I can have an enjoyable roleplay not caring that in previous lives he was an angel or a demon, because his past doesn't define him.

So now I put the question to you: What do you think the best way to develop your character is?

I think it depends on your style, mostly.

Dynamic Characters

The problem with fully dynamic characters is that, at a point, they no longer make sense because their experiences are too wild and unrealistic for them to truly be appreciated. Furthermore, people with long-lived dynamic characters tend to have said character become more powerful as time progresses. This can make such a character an excuse to godmod and otherwise be absolutely ridiculous. That being said, I've also seen the polar opposite. I think the ability to play a dynamic character is a skill, and like many skills, you learn it by doing it.

My first dynamic character was terrible. Rather than being interesting, he was very sloppy and very unrealistic. He had a wide array of super-powers and had been in multiple world-ending cataclysms and was in a group of similarly dynamic characters that, when presented with the medieval equivalent of an atomic bomb, would moan arrogantly with the sentiment of, "Oh, dear Lord, not again."

I think the chief skill of playing a dynamic character is the ability to know what to keep and know what to throw away. You can't just have a dynamic character constantly dynamic. Just because you've roleplayed them saving the world four times doesn't mean that your new rendition of the character needs to have had the same experiences. Rather, they can have the same personality and well-rounded appeal and have simply had a similar, but less "epic" experience in their history.

I also think an important skill of playing a dynamic character is the ability to age them. Physically. A lot of characters are teenagers who have been revived from the dead 1,235 times, saved the world 323 times, attained a power level over 9,000, and can cast "Create Supermassive Black Hole" at will. I think you get the point. Would it kill you to play that character as if they were... I dunno... forty? Most of my heavily dynamic characters get old the more experience they attain, and it makes the character believable.

Continuing, I think another big trick of playing a dynamic character is knowing the changes going on with them and only displaying them subtly. A dynamic character doesn't just undergo a binary shift with discrete state. They don't go from saving puppies to building the "Mark 9 Puppy Rocket Launcher" overnight. And I see this a lot in dynamic characters, surprisingly. They never hint towards their personality changes. There's never an intermediate period of time where they spot an injured puppy and shrug and walk away. They just take that leap all in one go.

And finally, the other thing I see happen a lot in dynamic characters is a situation where only beneficial events are considered. For example, after the battle your character has with the main villain, do you take note that they now have the "1337 Sword of Saint McPwn" or do you take note that their foot was absolutely crushed during the fight, meaning that after recovery they might never walk as well as they did before? A lot of people fake taking notice of negative occurrences towards their characters, but they don't really pay attention to what they don't want to add. They add the "negative" stuff that "looks cool." Most popular I notice are mental conditions, which are rarely roleplayed very well in such characters.

Static Characters

They can be good or they can be bad. I think everyone starts out playing static characters, really. I've never seen anyone genuinely start out playing a dynamic character. Static characters are relatively easy to play, and I'd say the only major hurdle is making them interesting. Making a static character is tougher than making a dynamic character, because you need to make them so detailed that they can compete with dynamic characters in terms of how interesting they are. Again, this is a skill, but there are so many ways you can do this that I'm not qualified to even bother trying to hash them out.

Anyway, I don't really think there's a best way. I play dynamic characters, but I've seen plenty of great static characters. Do what suits you, in my opinion.

I know it's stupid, but I really would like to see what people think on this. This is one of the greatest questions facing a roleplayer. There really are only two answers. Either you let your character be affected by past roleplays, or you don't. Now I know that quite a few people have looked at this thread. Please... all I'm asking is for you to post what you think. Your thoughts on which is better, a statement of what you do and why, or a personal story talking about one time when you played a character one way or the other. I know Fractal Resonance and I are not the only ones who have opinions. I'm not asking for an essay; but if you come and read this, would you please do me the honor of posting what you think?

Thank you.

I find that creating new characters, is one of the things I enjoy most about role playing. Every time I create a new character, I try to make it totally none resembling to previous characters I've played. It tests my ability to understand different personalities. It also makes my gaming style different from game to game. Sometimes I like creating strong, smart, able characters. Other times I like to challenge myself with weak, naive characters, who are highly dependent on other peoples help.

When I create a static character, for a new game, I don't know what the character has in store for it, I don't know how its personality will change. I give it a history but its future remains unclear, till the game or character comes to an end.


I understand that by dynamic, you mean, a character that goes on with you, from story to story, from game to game. Constantly evolving, becoming more complex, more detailed. I guess it's just a matter of perspective. Some people could consider a dynamic character as a sort of trilogy of the characters life. Being actually just one long story of various different events in the life of your character.


The static character becomes more dynamic as the game develops.

Also, I've found it easier to do things with a static character that would be very difficult for me to do, with dynamic character.
One of those is that I find most people who play a dynamic character, gradually make the character resemble a figure that they themselves would like to be. With a static character, I find it easier to play a character that does not resemble myself, my beliefs and my personality.
Another is the ability to kill off a static character, it is much more difficult to kill off a dynamic character, one that you've grown attached to.

Yes, I would agree with you Leyloth, most dynamic characters tend to evolve to resemble an idol or a self-representation of oneself, but "perfect." The problem is that plenty of static characters simply begin as being the ubergod. Though, again, I would agree that most dynamic characters evolve to be overpowered or too perfect or idolized in some way. I think I already said it in my last post: people feel that if their character has been around forever, it's fair game to be overpowered. Part of being dynamic is maintaining the character's personality without necessarily maintaining the events that happened to them, in my opinion. This is because the important part of a character is their personality, not their abilities or equipment, but most people don't realize that.

Probably already said that, but I figured I'd respond and try to keep this alive.

I guess it really depends on the persons ability to play a dynamic character. It can be very rewarding but you must be willing to sacrifice, in order to keep your character balanced.

I've seen people who took their characters with them from game to game, from story to story, always growing, always getting stronger, smarter and more powerful. Eventually the character became mentally unstable, got crippled, amnesia, severed a limb, anything to keep the character from becoming godlike. Since you have 100% control over the fate of your character, it's up to you to find a way to keep him from being "ubergod".


I really see little difference between Dynamic and Static characters.
Like I said before, every dynamic character has to start out as a static character and every static character can become dynamic, given enough time.

Personally, I have to say that the insights the two of you have been propagating have been very amazing. I love the way you think outside of the box, even when there isn't even a box to think inside of.

However, I feel that I've been misinturpreted, and I'd like to clear that up before someone challenges me on it. When I was talking about static and dynamic, I wasn't talking about the problems that come up when you try to transfer entire characters. I was talking about the transfer of the essence of characters. Personalities, basic data like age and appearance, and the way you roleplay them. I've always hated the "Backstory Gods", and am ashamed to say that I've done it several times. However, I thank you for misinturpreting me. I've gotten to hear some of the best philosophy roleplaying has to offer.

Anyone else who has an opinion, you're welcome to tell it to us. In fact, I'm begging you.

I've a character I've played in many guises for about 14 years now.

I keep trying to find an opportunity to retire him gracefully, but each time I think he's ready I get some kind of raw-deal-involuntary-character-changing-DM mandated screwing over, and I refuse to let his story end on that kind of a note.

So I reinvent him and try to find another opportunity. So he's definitely aged, beginning as an impulsive youth (a ploy to get my new-to-gaming 9 year old nephew to step up and take the initiative in situations) and maturing into an adult with adult concerns.

I've rewritten his personality repeatedly to deal with all the weird loss-of-control situations he's been through. Currently he's decided to work within the system, and has become upper management, a complete turnaround from his devil-may-care youth.