Small question

[Rynn]

I'm not entirely sure if this is the correct place to ask this, but ah well...I'm sure that if it isn't, someone could be able to point me in the right direction hopefully?

Anyway, for my question - Which do you prefer?
(1) Characters who are completely your own creation - no face claims or set personalities a/o relationships
(2) Characters with face claims but no set personalities a/o relationships
(3) Characters with set personalities a/o relationships but no face claims
(4) Characters with complete bios - face claims and set personalities a/o relationships

I know Tumblr roleplayers mostly favour complete bios, and on another roleplaying website I was part of a long time ago, the term 'Face Claim' didn't even exist, but where do the members of this site stand? I'd like to know your opinions before I create my first roleplay on here so I don't end up failing horribly.

Thanks ^^

[Jag]

I wholly prefer the first option and find that the other three have very, very limited appeal for games where everything is tailored for quick and easy romance RPs with will character development or plot. This is only my personal observation, but it is one that I find to ring true across many years.

[Rynn]

I wholly prefer the first option and find that the other three have very, very limited appeal for games where everything is tailored for quick and easy romance RPs with will character development or plot. This is only my personal observation, but it is one that I find to ring true across many years.

Thanks for your opinion and your help :)
This is the second time I've been told this on this website (the first time being a couple of years ago or so with my first account) but with all of the roleplays I created back then, I found that the more successful ones were the ones I had used Face Claims for, and the ones where I allowed free-reign for the characters didn't even get started, despite people saying that they did like the plot. It's just kind of frustrating to have people be telling you one thing, and then for the opposite to actually be true, and I'm just kind of hoping things have changed a little bit now. ^^

[Romaneck]

I prefer 1 but it ultimately depends on the balance between play and story telling.

For example, as a player I like to have my freedom, I want my character to be mine and to alter the world through its interactions and background, thats why I like to play it is a collaborative storytelling.

Yet the options 3 and 4 have its advantages to the DM in storytelling purposes, you might need a key figure like an antagonists, or someone who has to be part of the tale since they are monumental to the development of the story, this can be things such as the chosen one, the prince, the last of their kind etc.

Ultimately it tends to vary to the freedom people are given, if I am going to play someone who has had his development and characterization written for him/her, then why am I playing this person at all instead of the GM rolling out with it?

Now say the GM calls for a character like a priest or a medic, then it is only required for the character to have this profession and the characterization is entirely up to me

If the GM ask that he has need of a supporting antagonist, say the depraved black knight of the decadent realm or the gleefully sadistic corporate killer then I am given someone who through its interactions might delve more into sides of the story that could be left untold but has relationships and positions in the opposing force.

So yea it always boils down to the players

[Patcharoo]

I can fit into a mould, like I can play an elf or I can play a business man or whatever.
But I can't stand other people choosing the details of my character, like their personality, looks, history. Oh sure there can be a core detail for the sake of the RP (though really the GM should be saying 'give me a core detail and I will work it into the RP'), like a fear or something, but yeah...

It really bugs me when I'm meant to play 'This character in this relationship'. I'm practically not playing them at all. I'm clicking the 'next' button to see what happens. I don't actually have any input on my character or how they got into the relationship. It's just there.

And I hate that :P

[VitaminHeart]

This is just from my very limited experience but, from what I've seen, RPs with face-claim type set-ups seem to attracts plenty of people, but I've never seen one holding up for a long period of time. There may be some that I've missed, but I've not seen any personally.


The whole concept bemuses me a little as someone who's been roleplaying for years, and have only recently come across them. To me, writing characters is one of the biggest draws of the activity, and I find having to make a character resembling a 'celebrity du jour' is far too restricting in the face of character creation.

What if you want the character not to be traditionally attractive?

What if you want to reflect some sort of hardship?

What if you don't want them to have a lot of money? (In which case accompanying it with a celebrity photo often looks silly.)

What if they subscribe to a style of appearance that's not typical?

What if you don't want them to be caucasian?

What if you don't want them in the 18-21 age bracket?


IMHO, I would probably not so much mind the concept of 'face claims' if they embodied a bit more diversity and choice in what you went for. If you had a decently varied cast it might be more interesting, but the vast majority of the RPs I see with them are 'All characters must be affluent, slim, fashionable, inoffensive, blond or brunette, aged between eighteen and twenty one and white at all times.'

Edit: Also, as Patch mentioned, I've never got the whole 'Here's a pre-made character and the relationship they'll have.'
Even if romance is your thing in RP you'd think that'd be dull. The interesting plotlines I've had where relationships have been involved have all revolved around uncertainty, love triangles, cheating, lying, pride, hurt,having feelings for someone but feeling inadequate, having feelings that are not reciprocated, human feelings essentially. There's no drama if characters are just going to neatly pair off and scamper away to separate corners to spoon and think about how perfect each others' faces are.

[Sonicx00]

I believe on here of course that it depends on your roleplay and what you as a GM want of it. If you want to give a roleplay more freedom in which many people enjoy then you do the first one. This allows those who join to be able to create something out of their own perspective. This also makes rp more open to the creativity of the authors to come out further enhancing a player driven story. From what i see of the other's its basically decreasing each time in the creativity and put limitations upon the authors which often means it is going to be very linear and GM driven which these are the RPs i often see die out quicker then others.

[Bosch]

For me role playing is about adaption and improvisation. More so for RPers than GMs but none the less GMs should be prepared to alter their plot based on the actions RPers take. If they can't do this they would be better writing a book. That's why option one to me is the best in fact it would never cross my mind to provide a character for an RPer.

Of course it's different when an RP is established and you need a character with a particular attribute. Maybe you need to introduce a new character who is a scientist. I'd mention that but leave the rest of the character in the hands of the RPer.

[Rynn]

Thanks so much everyone, you've all been a massive help. Time to get writing now, I suppose. ^^