rpanons | Okay

Rundown:

rpanons is an anonymous community for role-play related topics. This place serves as a forum for game discussions, canon discussions, RP solicitations (ATP, game ads, open memes), and advice. The occasional off topic comment is inevitable, but please keep heated social and political topics to their respective communities. Posting them here will only get them frozen. Subsequent threads made to bypass a freeze will then be deleted.

Rules:

Do not post pornographic or shocking images.
Do not share private entries, plurks, chat logs, etc.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.
Do not be redundant. One page does not need three or more threads on one topic/theme.
Do not treat this comm like your personal Plurk or Twitter. Off-topic happens, but it should be open for discussion and not just a play-by-play of your life. No one cares.

CONCERNS | RESOURCES

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

what makes for interesting character flaws, in your opinion? applicable to both canon and original characters.

It depends on how it's played, honestly. If you don't fall into trope traps for a given flaw, you're usually golden.

When they're well thought out and make sense given the character and the background. Also, flaws which aren't actually flaws drive me nuts. Like you have a character with poor physical coordination. That could be a flaw or that could just be the writers' way of making someone kawaii desu uguu moe. It depends on the specific trait and how it's played as you got some leeway, but in its worst case it's like someone saying that their weakness is that they work really hard and you just want to roll your eyes and call them out on their bullshit.

you know i always think poor physical coordination could actually be an interesting flaw if it actually got in the way at crucial moments and the character actively worked towards having better coordination. but it's never done like that.

It really isn't. If it's a guy it's for slapstick and they're meant to be the butt of jokes. If it's a girl it's to make her more cute and endearing. It never is seen, really, as something to be surmounted.

pretty much. the only exception i've seen lately is the girl in bates motel with cf, because she isn't cuter for it. instead you just wonder if her lungs will kill her before norman does.

Always thought the same thing. These sort of "flaws" disappear whenever it would actually seriously affect things, which kind of defeats the point of a character flaw.

Which brings another thing for OP: flaws are interesting when they actually have logical consequences (whether they're subtle or dramatic) and come from understandable places. Not necessarily sympathetic at all, but you can see the train of thought.

flaws that create roleplay opportunities, either through giving hooks or for permitting interesting character developments

and a flaw that might otherwise be dumb or worthless can be great in the hands of a good writer

make the dude who works too hard into a raging workaholic who sinks himself into it to avoid his problems to the detriment of other parts of his life

make the gal who's too nice and trusting make horrible decisions other than just going to tea with hannibal lecter, like getting conned out of all her money or being too nice to say no to clingy friends and getting mooched off of

i play a guy who has the generic lame shonen negative trait of being too full of himself, but i play it as he regularly genuinely fucks himself over with other people because sometimes he's too self-absorbed to remember other peoples' feelings and it makes for amazing cr

i think interesting flaws need to be almost paradoxical because they give characters internal conflict that manifests itself in their actions.

for example, one of my characters is very, very stubborn with a short temper and judgemental attitude. however, she's also quick to adapt when bad things happen to her (e.g. she loses all her money and suddenly becomes a champion of the working class when she has to get a job).

just think of two seemingly contradictory traits and think of ways that they can be combined. for example, something as simple as "free-spirited vs controlling" can be someone who loves to be around their friends doing dumb shit, but only if they're in control of what everyone is doing.

Agreeing with other anons in that it can depend a lot on how it's written and if/when it crops up. I really, really dislike it when flaws are told rather than shown and never seem to have a negative impact on the character or story, and they're magically over it as the plot demands. For example, let's say you have a character who's said over and over to have poor aim with weapons and even gets crap for it from their canonmates. Yet when it comes time to fight, suddenly they never miss their target. This same flaw could be interesting if the character wastes time and ammo having to reload because they do miss or only graze their target, even moreso if they have limited resources. I don't mind it when flaws are overcome, but it has to be realistic and not instantaneous, "I took one shooting lesson and now I never miss"-type things.

The kinds of flaws I personally find most interesting are things that have an impact on how a character relates to others and forms relationships. A character who is painfully shy or withdrawn, or has trouble relating to others outside their culture/time/personal bubble, or who is closed-off and afraid of getting close to others, or who is socially inept (and it's not played for comedy)... if these are written well, I love exploring these characters and the ways they adjust to or overcome these barriers.

I think the most important thing about a flaw is that it should be built into the character as they are, rather than slapped on afterwards to spice up a too-bland or too-perfect personality. Character flaws are part of a person, and they should have repercussions not just during a story or a thread but as part of the forces that make that person who they are. They also shouldn't appear and disappear unless there's a really good reason (like, "this character tries really hard to control their bad temper, but it doesn't always work," for example. In which case you should remember that they have a bad temper, even when they're successfully keeping a lid on it.)

If you're concerned about a character not being flawed enough, I think one of the best things to do is think about the way that their "positive" character traits could lead them to make mistakes or bad decisions. No trait is 100% positive, and exploring the negative consequences of their actions is a great way to make your character appear realistically fallible and vulnerable.

Okay

no subject

no subject

no subject

da

ayrt

Re: ayrt

+1

no subject

+1

no subject

no subject

no subject