On the topic of bad-asses with flaws: have a fear that drives them into combat rather than fleeing from it . The archetypical example is the paladin who’s terrified of their friends getting hurt, but it could also be, ex. A Barbarian who’s afraid of being seen as weak, or the wizard who’s afraid to be seen as a burden by not helping
I always try to tie one of the personality traits to the flaw, making the flaw a negative reflection of the personality trait. Your character likes to be dressed in the best fashion? Their flaw might be that they look down on people who have little to no taste. Your character enjoys helping people? Their flaw might be that they place the others' needs ahead of their own to their detriment.
Yes, I love doing this! And adding onto that, one of my favorite characters' flaws *built up* their personality traits. One of his flaws is that he's extremely naïve, having been raised in a small village where any wrongdoings weren't kept secret for long. *because of this,* one of his personality traits is that he sees the best in people, even when he arguably shouldn't. One of my favorite things about this is that, should he stop being so naive (effectively 'overcoming' his flaw), the 'attached personality trait' so to speak would also fundamentally shift. That to say, having flaws that build off of your personality traits and having personality traits that build off of your flaws are both great ways to deepen your character with relatively little effort, and they're really fun to develop over time as well, seeing how the characters' problems and quirks shift through the campaign.
Give your character personal issues and don't blab them to everyone straight off the bat. Secret past trauma is always a good one to play around with. Tell the DM/GM and nobody else and then wait for them to give you an in world reason to wrestle with those demons. Surprises make getting to know each other's characters more engaging, sometimes even more enriching. The pitfall that addresses is being an open book. Unless of course that is an actionable character trait.
@@archersfriend5900 lol citation needed. Secrets are ubiquitous not anti social. Do you tell everyone you work or study with your whole life story? Not unless you're an annoying over sharer. I never suggested deceitfulness or to be conspiratorial (though a good player can make that work too, and perception checks exist for a reason) but maybe try avoiding first session lore dumps sometime and talk about stuff on dungeon crawls instead? Or don't. Nothing more corny than the first session AA meeting though; "Hi, my name is G'nrrgkk. I'm an orc. I was abducted from my tribe when I was a child and raised to hate my own kind. I have a violent history and know little other than turmoil. I suffer recurring nightmares about being buried alive. I fear weakness and helplessness, but more than that I fear never knowing peace or having a place to call home... also I'm an alcoholic." Rest of the party: "Hi, G'nrrgkk!" Never seen a good campaign begin by going around the table like that. If it works for you then that's fine I guess.
@@archersfriend5900 Yeah I find that players keeping secrets for personality traits are usually more annoying than if they'd just explored them normally in a way that the rest of the players can actively interact with
@@MiroredImage it is super annoying. As the dm, I can't incorporate stuff I don't know about, as a player I cannot assist roleplay, because I have no idea. It is terribly selfish game play or even worse it is trying to out cool everyone at the table.
One big thing I find is check in with everyone and make sure you build a parallel theme into your character that everyone has. This helps with making a more cohesive group. My example is for a group where the question of “home” is tackled. You have a few who genuinely had good parents/siblings and home life. Then you have someone who grew up in an orphanage and doesn’t know what that means. You have another who is a refugee. And you have someone who lost their fiancé and also has a complicated and toxic relationship with their blood family. In this way, everyone has a way of discussing home and what it means to them during rp moments and to teach each other what it means to them. In fact, this theme ended up part of the party name too, which was neat. But basically, pick a theme that will come up. Another theme I have had a party tackle is loyalty. Vague right? Lol well in this case there are a few who are beholden to some shady entities. There is another who’s honor keeps them beholden to another player, their original employer (is bodyguard basically), another who is dedicated to their philosophy, another who is dedicated to honoring their lost loved ones (yes, revenge story), and then there is my own who is dedicated to the person they are trying to find, their childhood friend and love. The concept of loyalty comes up a lot as well as the reasons behind it and we often have rp moments around it. In all honesty this party has the most complexity for “good” and “evil.” Basically a shady bunch lol, with only some of us having a more “heroic” personality. We also have all formed connections with different factions of that world. It’s an interesting counterbalance to how well we actually all work together and are slowly reforming a lot of our loyalties towards each other. Like you said, adapt. I’m a big believer in making sure you leave room for your character to adapt. Personally I prefer to have characters that are made to go through character arcs, learn new things, and decide if they will stay the same or change, usually choosing change.
FINALLY SOMEONE ON DND RUclips SAID IT!!! "This is a creative game, so dont trap yourself in a creative box. If yoy have an idea and you think it'll work, go for it!" That is quite literally my core axiom when it comes to D&D (and creativity in general), and I'm SO glad to see a video of this type not be about "things you should ABSOLUTELY NEVER DO IN DND". TYSM, this is amazing advice. i think every dm and player should live by
I think all this greatly benefits from a character having a strong belief. Maybe the character who leaves things better than he finds them is that way because he believes kindness solves everything. Then put him in situations where he is pushed not to be kind and see if he truly sticks to that way of life or not. That makes for very interesting roleplay.
When it comes to being passive may I make a suggestion: a character can be passive and not want to adventure UP TO THE POINT where it hinders the party, but it should never cross that line. So maybe they don't want to go on an adventure but begrudgingly do for some reason (maybe they like the rest of the party more than they'd like to admit and don't want to see them hurt, maybe they're canny enough to realize it's safer to run with a party so they follow even though they're scared, etc)
A good thing to do (which has to be done by the DM), is to have an inciting incident very early in the campaign where BBEG or his henchmen do something that makes that character throw aside their apprehensions with wild abandon. To use some very cliché examples, maybe they hurt a loved one or destroy a prized family heirloom with deep sentimental value. Maybe BBEG's henchmen are hired to do something so deplorable that the character feels they HAVE to take this person down. Maybe BBEG burns down the orphanage that took the character off the street when they were at their lowest point in life, etc etc etc. I feel like most people who write characters like that, do so because they want the DM to put in something like that so they can roleplay that moment, yet so many DMs just don't. So often, it's just "you guys get hired for a job as an adventuring group to clear out some goblins" and it isn't until session 10, after real-world months of small jobs and mystery to work out what the big plot is before the DM finally introduces the BBEG. Up until that point, your individual character motivations have to singlehandedly carry your character's involvement in the story, and it usually leads to feelings of "why am I even still here? What is motivating my character to keep clearing out goblins and hobgoblins when they're trying to find their kidnapped son?"
@@madeleine61509 yeah collaborating with the dm makes any character concept or personality better! I will say though, that I don’t think the character really qualifies as “hesitant” at that point, it’s more like they *were* hesitant.
@@paevepailbrack6899 They can still play as hesitant regarding what leads they follow (perhaps there are certain traits in NPCs that might make the character less trustful, or they're just downright paranoid), but they don't need to be hesitant about the *entire concept* of being on this adventure. At the end of the day, the reason the character type works in books and movies is specifically because they aren't hesitant the entire way through. They start as a reluctant hero, until there is an inciting incident that motivates them, and causes them to accept the gravity of the situation or the responsibility that they hold. After that incident, they embrace their mission with determination and vigor. Part of this links back to number 5 in the video: you need to be willing to adapt and change your character. There needs to come a point where the "is" becomes "was", otherwise the character trait just doesn't work. (For reference: I am specifically talking about in long-running campaigns. Any annoying character trait could technically be bearable for a oneshot or mini-campaign)
That comment reminds me of an incident of really good role-play, actually. I was playing online, via discord, with a bunch of other people. Please, pardon dictation errors, I will warn you in advance that I am blind, very much functionally, blind, and so all the other players. We use Dad technology of all sorts to make it work, everything from dice rollers to digitize books to 3-D print dice to apps on our phones that allow us, through voice and other technology like it, everybody else does. Anyway, onto this beautiful story. we were in Dragonlance, on our way to a place called Zack Soth, bought party composition was this: one Kender, a slick Knight, that would be me, an L, he was a bar, a goblin, and your guns, what was Charles again? I want to say human, but I’m not sure. We had another goblin and I’m with us. So we’re headed across the plains toward the swamp where we need to go, and of course the goblin doesn’t want to go, so what does the kinder do? She tanks his bag, runs away with it, and makes him chase her for it. It was my character due to not smile or laugh out loud, mainly laugh out loud, because I have a distinct feeling we were walking straight into each double toothpicks.
@@madeleine61509 You put the work that you, the player should do, on the DM with that. It is your job to come up with a motivation, not the DMs. Because what happens more often than not is that it is "not good enough" for the reluctant character to fully engage. Just dont do it. Dont try to make it work. There are a thousand thousand tropes out there that you can try your hands on. Dont do this one just to proof you can or to be a contrarian.
About passive traits: "No, but..." can work really well in improv. If you want to refuse one idea, put another one into play. Maybe start a conflict between the two ideas.
My first ever character was an elf who had lived completely alone in the woods for over a hundred years and was weary of other people. I thought it would make for decent roleplay moments as they learn to warm up to other people, and it could have........ if I was the only player. What ended up ACTUALLY happening is because my character was hesitant to interact with others, every other player at the table would just talk first. I was in that campaign for close to a year and *never once* had a full conversation as my character (or contributed more than a single sentence to each scene). Never ever have your first character be a recluse when you're in a group, because you will just find that you're never even interacting until you're forced to during your combat turn.
And another thing is: don't pick a flaw/fear that is going to absolutely cripple your character, or be annoyingly repetitive. I made a melee-build character who had a crippling fear of blood thinking it would be funny. "That will REALLY affect my character, so that must be a great flaw! It will be so easy to turn that flaw into actual roleplay!" I thought, until I realised that I wasn't the sole dictator of when we do or don't get into combat. I very quickly noticed how annoying it was to have to constantly acknowledge this supposedly crippling fear, which basically equated to every combat turn saying "AH! BLOOD!" before still swinging my weapon so I wasn't a dead weight to the party. If at the end of combat my character didn't hog the table conversation to complain about being covered in blood, then I was "breaking character" and "not bothering to roleplay", but when I did do it, it just felt like "here we go again....... ahh! i feel lightheaded after seeing blood!.... anyway-"
Your elf character sounds very similar to mine, although she wasn’t a recluse, she’s just highly Untrust of other people, especially though she doesn’t know, except for when it comes to children or animals, complex preacher. And yes, I took the raised by wolves, literally, And then pulled inspiration from one of my favorite book series, and you can see the interesting amalgam that ended up being Keelan, don’t make her shoot you, because she will also known as the reason why it took me over a year endgame to forgive another players character. We’re doing something insanely dumb, let’s just say it involved a very large spider like creature that nearly got us all killed. She tends to treat her feral fellow party members like her Wolfpack.
I'm also planning a shy character, but I already have a decent idea of how they will overcome that shyness fairly quickly. Firstly, by getting used to being around the party and starting to talk to them during rests, and also by adding a workaround like saying that adrenaline overcomes their shyness. That way you've got a way to bring them in to certain conversations quickly, and a path to bring them into all conversations in any time from a couple of sessions to a couple of levels. Hopefully I can even make it look like character growth if anyone notices.
My DM kinda got my character into a spot where he's a bit of a recluse. He's the party cleric, and my DM had the idea that he should be unknowingly part of a pretty sketchy cult, thinking he'd warm up to the party, and eventually have a badass moment of destroying said cult... I'm really struggling to figure out how to make him interact with the other characters tho, because he's the only one with a high social standing in a campaign with the main conflict being injustice. Best idea I've had, is that he's just putting up a facade, being arrogant and distant, because it's what he was taught to do, while being down to earth and soft beneath... after a hard battle he might take care comforting the fighter who took the blunt of the damage, or maybe if he had something to drink he just loosens up and starts talking openly. I dunno, still working on it.
Great list! The passive one in particular has gotten me a couple of times. I would also suggest a note against playing a character that would actively hinder the party. Like the rogue who steals from their allies. May be active but damn is it annoying
A rogue has to rogue, but better to play it as a bit of a jerk who MIGHT steal all your stuff and pawn it if you crap them off too many times, rather than a cartoon villain. Trust issues in the group need to be dynamic or you're just playing among us, except the traitor is always the same person.
One thing I did when making my character if they were ill-defined, was in the first sessions I just acted as I naturally would, but then after the session I would examine the choices, take note of them and ask: "Why was this their first choice?" For example, in the first session if someone needed to be the sacrificial lamb, he was the first to volunteer to be the guy in peril. So I looked at that and came up with an idea of him being from a very "For the greater good!" type of society and thus felt like it was his duty to lay down his life for others. Also, I had a lot of bad roles compared to the other players, but my character was meant to be a hero of his people, so I ran with that too and fused it with the above point. He was the "Main Character" in his home country and he's getting used to being around people just as competent as he is. He was a big fish in a small pond and it's created a bit of an existential crisis.
It's like the homebrew system I am working in. The first part is that my character actually has a nice, happy family, and another player has a bit more of a rough story to him. The reason why the group prefers my character, despite both characters being much more masculine, energetic, go-getters, is because my character's support cast actually reacts differently, and I accept the plot hooks, whereas the other player just seems to not bite the plot hooks, and goes a bit too sandbox, and he doesn't bond with the NPCs as much. The background I created at the beginning of the campaign also worked in his favour. (Like the military family background, and the love of the Zorro movies) Because of events, he grew to distrust the military, and he started spending more time with his father and sister. (He is currently not pleased his sister is dating, and constantly sasses her about it.) But we don't know anything about his character, so the party prefers my character.
another great video. i've recommend these "how to create your character"-videos to my players (mostly inexperienced) and it helped them a lot to have more fun at the table and roleplaying in general. thank you!
One of the best comments I have ever seen on this topic. Especially #2 with the passive personality is something a lot of new players do not understand. You come from movies and books where this works? Sure, but it is completely different at a table.
I think another important thing to consider is group dynamics. If you’re playing a group of strangers, then traits like the Lone Wolf and the Homebody don’t make a ton of sense… but if you and another member give your characters a pre-existing bond you can strengthen both characters. For example, a really outgoing gungho adventurer and a hapless, reserved best friend who’s along for the ride but brings finds he brings his own brand of expertise to the group and slowly opens up to the whole adventure and the rest of the party. Basically, make sure there’s a reason the party doesn’t just say “you don’t want to be here. We don’t know you. Why would we take you along?”
I have a character from the Hordelands, essentially a Mongol. His class is eldritch knight. One of his personality traits is that he views his horse as part of his anatomy. He fights from horseback whenever possible including as an archer and sword and shield. When we arrive at a town and are staying at an inn he sees to his horse before looking after himself. He once turned his horse invisible before going off to fight on foot. (OK, that may have been a bit extreme.)
I’m currently playing a chaotic-neutral good champion fighter. He was once a lawful good, loyal knight that left his order because he believed their rules were too restrictive, preventing him from doing what he thought was right. He ended up becoming a vigilante mercenary protecting the innocent whenever and wherever he was needed while making some coin on the side. Mainly when playing him and making decisions I think “What would *Insert pretty much any superhero here* do?” Only major difference is while most superheroes would not only not ask for but also likely refuse a reward for what they do, my character isn’t going to expect or ask for a reward but he’s not going to refuse said reward. He protects people out of the goodness of his heart but payment is a more than acceptable bonus. And he’s certainly not a goody two shows, the law means nothing to him if it gets in the way of protecting people. He’s not even above committing what would be considered war crimes if he believes doing it will benefit the greater good.
Don't try to plan out to much in terms of how your character is gonna devellop during the campaign. It is very likely for the campains to work out way different that you expect anyways, so instead of planning to change your negaitve character trait into a positive one by having your character grow, just start out with that flaw and react to what will happen.
I played a character that had a normal childhood, a stable family……. His only thinks was a love for adventure, but not fame. He started his adventuring career with a traveling circus as a side show carney. Over time he became the circus “scout” so he did not have a CHA dump stat. He would travel ahead of the circus to scout towns for shows. He believes in fair play and has some spells that can manipulate probability but he only uses it against cheaters or defensively. Part of his scouting is finding wondrous items to be put on display with the circus. So he has history, arcana, and investigation skills from the skilled feat as a freebie to round out the character. He is a ranger rogue multi-class that isn’t exactly optimized but holds up in most boss fights……. The big thing is he is a wise cracking history buff who can talk…. Fey wanderer ranger arcane trickster rogue.
@@monkeibusiness It was an example of a character that was interesting to play. The character’s motivation to live a life of adventure and what not was not based on a trope but the character’s motivation for a life of adventure but he didn’t want fame, just the adventure. His motivation was to explore and learn while traveling the world….. experiencing it, not reading about it. I start with the character’s motivation for a life of adventure and build around a theme. In this case it was a lvl 5 campaign at the start so I started with a Fey wanderer rogue multi class (Ranger 3/Rogue 2) and didn’t dump CHA. When he came across the party I was with the circus had come to that town and the shenanigans began. He left the circus at that point because he had traveled far and wide with the circus…. It was the same circuit so when he met the group he left the circus. The character had a “big brother” vibe due to life experience and his penchant for story telling. I had decent rolls to drop into INT and CHA so it was a good fit for a skills based character…. Nothing great but just enough to get +1 base rolls outside of skills.
I’ve got a character who is very manipulative and always tries to stay in a position of power over everyone. She would definitely not have her real personality traits on display, how do you (and anyone else reading this) think she would display herself?
I will say the best way to play a character like that is ask yourself what is a reasonable amount of control. For example do you want complete control everyone private life or just pubic. The second thing to ask yourself how does your character hide their manipulative side? Do they overstate the dangers if they don’t do what they say. Do they try to charm/deceive their way to make to sign bad deals? The last part 2 parts are the important one to answer. Why do they want the power to begging with. Lastly do not expect the party to always do what you suggested and let them have their fun. After all a better result in completing a task would let you be able to rule the place easier. Those are just my thoughts hope you enjoy dnd game.
I love the inclusion of the 6 point - I always appreciate people who do not think of themselves as infallible experts. Still, about the rest, I am not so sure. So as the random person from the internet, with too much time, as it seems... I will give you few tips what makes your list pretty weird or plainly wrong. 1) To answer the question "who you are", personality trait is not a good solution. "Polite" tells me about my roleplay as much as "I am great". Being polite is just a behaviour pattern. Your reaction. No, even less. The way you "phrase" your words and actions. But what is behind being polite. What does it mean? From where it stems from? Where it goes? With just personality trait, you are as lost as you where before establishing that. What you really need to answer "who you are" are three elements: reasons, goals and way of handling things. With that you can have the core of your character.And it can be done with like two-three sentences. For example, let's go with your "polite" and create two different characters. Polite character A: A merchant with sick daughter, who needs money for expensive medicines. He is a shrewd manipulator, who steer you with his sweet words. Polite character B: A young priest who cannot bear to see anyone's suffering. The try to ease the pains of the world while not harming anyone, even with their words. Two polite characters, which will react to each situation totally differently. And both could be described as "polite" 3) Your examples contradict each other. For example number 3 is about not being vague. But on first entry you used being "polite" as example of who you are. How being polite is not vague? 4) I think passive is not the word you wanted to use. A person who is negating invitation to the journey or saying no to propositions is not passive -- they are "reluctant" or "unwilling". And actually, being passive is not a bad thing in RPG. Yea, you want players to be active and make decisions. But if everyone would be hiperactive all the time, they will just fight for that spotlight during a session... and it won't be fun. Each character should be active about certain things, but also passive when other story beats come into play. Tagging along to help other party members is great example of being passive - because someone is leading while they just agree. 5) How is not "Adapting" a trap when creating a good personality for the game? It is a bad practice, wrong idea about your character or something... but not really "a trap". And since all the tips were about creating character, including it in the list feels totally out of place. Digressions are fine, but that is not really something I would put on the list here. 6) On the topic of this list... what exactly is your list? Because you say that it is a list of traps, but somewhere in the half of it, you stoped listing "problems" but rather started giving "solutions to problems" like "Humanize" or "adapt". While watching it doesn't hinder any information you are giving, but whenever you were pointing another entry it was just getting weirder and weirder. Cheers and good luck with your future videos
Don’t necessarily “humanize”. Not every character is human. Play to the type. I had a goblin PC who treated being forced to sleep in the basement or in the stables of an inn like he was being treated like a king. Nice fluffy straw to sleep on and all the rats he could eat were good things to his way of thinking. The humans didn’t get free food in their rooms and they had to live above ground too. I used to brag about the free RATions I got at the inn too, just to annoy the pallydingaling. That’s the same character that never wanted to leave the inn, which violates one of your “never do this” personality types. He didn’t try to stay at the inn, but would always say things like, “there wasn’t anybody trying to kill us at the inn, you know?” after combat. I even turned it up a notch after one of the innkeepers actually paid me in coin for getting rid of his rats, saying things like, “I could have just stayed at the inn if I wanted coins, but you had to go being all heroic.” Once you have those pieces in place, you start to get things like saying, “get your fat ass up here already. You watched me climb up and I started lower than you did” to the paladin while I was lowering a rope down to him. My personal favorite was always, “if you weren’t covered in metal from head to toe, we could sneak around them.” It’s all about the personality, not necessarily following this rule or that when making the personality.
I may do this a bit differently than everyone else, but if I don’t, I’m all for being told I’m not some special snowflake. I have a tendency to leave a lot open ended so the damn gets to play with it how he wants however I do give him some general idea of where I’m going, where my thought process is. When I go to create character, The first thing I do is give them a job. Oh, and I don’t auditorily cross dress, I don’t have the vocal range to do that, I know people who do, you know who you are. So the first thing I do is I pick my race, and then I want to learn everything there is about that race. I have a thing for elves, I did play Dragonborn once, I had an idea for a half, oh yeah, and my groupment in college, so sometimes our majors playing. For example, when I pick a race, I’ve been wanting to know everything about its culture, what does the Lord say, what is their society like, how do they function, how do they view other cultures. It’s also why not big on playing Ohio, unless I am the bastard redhead stepchild who doesn’t think like everybody else and consider everybody equal. I can’t fuck up any better than I can fly. OK, at least not very long. My longest running character is a ranger, And since I learned that what elves generally treat the natural world as the natives of my country do or did, I gravitate toward it. I’d already decided that my very first character is going to be an elf, since DND is in escape from the limitations I have in real life. I was I was born with Janet every organ system in the body. It most obvious signs are profound blindness, and partial deafness. If the vision isn’t already shot at birth, it will be by the time you hit puberty. That couple with some of the medication‘s I take which physically limits me, I could never play ice hockey, for example, And you can see why I like DND so much. I have my heart set on Ranger, even though that’s a pretty complicated character to start out start out with, because of a book series I read. Blame our. A. Salvatore for my first character. But I also made sure to make the flaws realistic to me. She hates creepy, crawlies, especially if they are oversized, mind, flares, the undead, hermit, dragons, oh yeah, and has a thing against fire. She’s gotten better about that fair, but I suggest that you make fears and flaws you make it so that way they are more relatable to you. If you’re afraid of something in real life, put it into your character. Don’t make yourself your character, mess yourself into it, That way it’s easier to drop into character and out of it, it will. It’s hard to role-play something that isn’t you to begin with
So, to recap: 1: Stop asking "Who am I?" 2: Stop being passive 3: Stop being vague 4: Stop humanizing 5: Stop adapting 6: Don't stop listening to me. Got it.
Worst advice for dnd I've ever seen. You're stats are 100% more crucial to you're character. There personality can develop along the campaign, but without you're stats, there is no gameplay. You need you're ability scores and everything they govern to play. You can however play the game without any personality traits on paper. This kind of false information not only shows little understanding of dnd, but can and does discourage new players from even trying it. If you want to be hung up on personality traits, might I suggest you go write a book. Been a dm for almost 20 years now, and I've run plenty of games without personality traits, but without attributes and skills, speed, and saving throws, there just simply is no game.
I’ve been playing just as long. He’s not as wrong as you suggest. Some players lose interest when they don’t feel a connection to their character as a persona with personality. Some are perfectly happy to vibe along hacking and looting and maybe solving whatever world-or-village-threatening crisis the DM cooked up without ever thinking about their character having a personality. Straight up telling people don’t bother thinking in terms of personality is just as likely to scare certain people off as making it sound like a complex improv exercise is likely to scare others off. This guy’s advice is fine for the kind of person who would click on it, who wants to get more out of their roleplaying, deeper into their character’s headspace. Believe me, if I thought my characters were little more than some randomly rolled stats and some kind of optimized build path, I’d play video games instead. And some people wouldn’t, and that’s OK! I’m just saying you’re pushing the old “worst advice ever!” routine a little hard, rather than simply suggesting there are different ways to play.
@adamgreenspan4988 you misunderstand me. I'm not saying personality is not needed, nor am I saying it's worthless. I'm saying it's not the most important thing. Most new players don't know what they want to create. I've sat ages trying to get players to fill out those things on there sheets. Only to have them finally finish, and still not vibe. It's obvious you don't understand the spirit of the game. Otherwise you'd realize that a pcs character comes out through gameplay. This is why the original games never bogged down there sheets with trivial bullshit. You're characters personality is how you play them, not what a sheet of paper says. Now, if I have a player that wants to fill that part out, and it helps them. Hell ya, I love it. It gives me a idea of who they are. However most the time, players either lose interest in that character or outright ignore the pre set 2 bit personality. There's also character development, which again challenges the cookie cutter bull on the sheet. I'd recommend the white wolf games such as world of darkness for that kind of play style. After all, unlike dnd, it's built around it. Or there's the gurps books, which again have a larger focus on narrative over dnd's mechanical focused system. Dnd is a system set up for strategic combat, and skill based dialog encounters. At its heart, it's a terrible system for narrative purposes. Not that it can't accomplish good narration, in fact it's a necessity. However, character personality, takes a back seat. This video suggests it as if it's the most important aspect, however it is the least important aspect. Again, I invite you to try out the more narrative focused rp systems, and realize dnd is strategy focused, it has encountered, not scenes. The difference being encounters are setup to be overcome. Scenes are setup around you're pcs personalities. That's why dnd has its inspiration system, although in need of minor tweaking, it allows the personality to become strategic in its own right. So, filling out the personality is a intelligent thing to do, but again it will always be second to you're build in dnd. You're main statistics will always tell a better story. Example would be low intelligence vs low strength. Those will always be more fun to rp, over pre decided personality that should morph throughout a campaign. I'm not the same person today as I'll be tomorrow, because I'll have another days experiences under my belt. The change may be slight, but it is there. As it should be throughout a campaign. So you are most certainly wrong, and most definitely short sighted. Unless you've run games with little combat (although I usually let that be player choice, when possible) then yeah, you need to fall back on personality, but then, if that's the case, please stop giving bad dnd advice and go play some wod, all flesh must be eaten, gurps, or something actually built for the game type you prefer. Not only will you and the group you play with find it more enjoyable, it'll be easier for you to prep, due to the base rules not needing you to rewrite them. Ooh! Go play shadowrun, shadowrun is pretty freaking awsome. And it's built around narration, seriously built around narration. And it still keeps at least some of that dnd feel. If not mildly futuristic.
Check out The Wandering Tavern Kickstarter - www.kickstarter.com/projects/homieandthedude/the-wandering-tavern?ref=dzaie3
On the topic of bad-asses with flaws: have a fear that drives them into combat rather than fleeing from it . The archetypical example is the paladin who’s terrified of their friends getting hurt, but it could also be, ex. A Barbarian who’s afraid of being seen as weak, or the wizard who’s afraid to be seen as a burden by not helping
My first thought was barbarian with arachnophobia, who decided to just kill every spider they come across to solve it
I always try to tie one of the personality traits to the flaw, making the flaw a negative reflection of the personality trait.
Your character likes to be dressed in the best fashion? Their flaw might be that they look down on people who have little to no taste.
Your character enjoys helping people? Their flaw might be that they place the others' needs ahead of their own to their detriment.
Yes, I love doing this! And adding onto that, one of my favorite characters' flaws *built up* their personality traits. One of his flaws is that he's extremely naïve, having been raised in a small village where any wrongdoings weren't kept secret for long. *because of this,* one of his personality traits is that he sees the best in people, even when he arguably shouldn't. One of my favorite things about this is that, should he stop being so naive (effectively 'overcoming' his flaw), the 'attached personality trait' so to speak would also fundamentally shift.
That to say, having flaws that build off of your personality traits and having personality traits that build off of your flaws are both great ways to deepen your character with relatively little effort, and they're really fun to develop over time as well, seeing how the characters' problems and quirks shift through the campaign.
Give your character personal issues and don't blab them to everyone straight off the bat. Secret past trauma is always a good one to play around with. Tell the DM/GM and nobody else and then wait for them to give you an in world reason to wrestle with those demons. Surprises make getting to know each other's characters more engaging, sometimes even more enriching.
The pitfall that addresses is being an open book. Unless of course that is an actionable character trait.
Secrets are awful in most d&d. They are anti-social by nature.
@@archersfriend5900 lol citation needed. Secrets are ubiquitous not anti social. Do you tell everyone you work or study with your whole life story? Not unless you're an annoying over sharer.
I never suggested deceitfulness or to be conspiratorial (though a good player can make that work too, and perception checks exist for a reason) but maybe try avoiding first session lore dumps sometime and talk about stuff on dungeon crawls instead? Or don't.
Nothing more corny than the first session AA meeting though; "Hi, my name is G'nrrgkk. I'm an orc. I was abducted from my tribe when I was a child and raised to hate my own kind. I have a violent history and know little other than turmoil. I suffer recurring nightmares about being buried alive. I fear weakness and helplessness, but more than that I fear never knowing peace or having a place to call home... also I'm an alcoholic."
Rest of the party: "Hi, G'nrrgkk!"
Never seen a good campaign begin by going around the table like that. If it works for you then that's fine I guess.
@@archersfriend5900 Yeah I find that players keeping secrets for personality traits are usually more annoying than if they'd just explored them normally in a way that the rest of the players can actively interact with
@@MiroredImage it is super annoying. As the dm, I can't incorporate stuff I don't know about, as a player I cannot assist roleplay, because I have no idea. It is terribly selfish game play or even worse it is trying to out cool everyone at the table.
One big thing I find is check in with everyone and make sure you build a parallel theme into your character that everyone has. This helps with making a more cohesive group.
My example is for a group where the question of “home” is tackled. You have a few who genuinely had good parents/siblings and home life. Then you have someone who grew up in an orphanage and doesn’t know what that means. You have another who is a refugee. And you have someone who lost their fiancé and also has a complicated and toxic relationship with their blood family. In this way, everyone has a way of discussing home and what it means to them during rp moments and to teach each other what it means to them. In fact, this theme ended up part of the party name too, which was neat. But basically, pick a theme that will come up.
Another theme I have had a party tackle is loyalty. Vague right? Lol well in this case there are a few who are beholden to some shady entities. There is another who’s honor keeps them beholden to another player, their original employer (is bodyguard basically), another who is dedicated to their philosophy, another who is dedicated to honoring their lost loved ones (yes, revenge story), and then there is my own who is dedicated to the person they are trying to find, their childhood friend and love. The concept of loyalty comes up a lot as well as the reasons behind it and we often have rp moments around it. In all honesty this party has the most complexity for “good” and “evil.” Basically a shady bunch lol, with only some of us having a more “heroic” personality. We also have all formed connections with different factions of that world. It’s an interesting counterbalance to how well we actually all work together and are slowly reforming a lot of our loyalties towards each other. Like you said, adapt. I’m a big believer in making sure you leave room for your character to adapt. Personally I prefer to have characters that are made to go through character arcs, learn new things, and decide if they will stay the same or change, usually choosing change.
FINALLY SOMEONE ON DND RUclips SAID IT!!! "This is a creative game, so dont trap yourself in a creative box. If yoy have an idea and you think it'll work, go for it!" That is quite literally my core axiom when it comes to D&D (and creativity in general), and I'm SO glad to see a video of this type not be about "things you should ABSOLUTELY NEVER DO IN DND". TYSM, this is amazing advice. i think every dm and player should live by
I think all this greatly benefits from a character having a strong belief. Maybe the character who leaves things better than he finds them is that way because he believes kindness solves everything. Then put him in situations where he is pushed not to be kind and see if he truly sticks to that way of life or not. That makes for very interesting roleplay.
When it comes to being passive may I make a suggestion: a character can be passive and not want to adventure UP TO THE POINT where it hinders the party, but it should never cross that line. So maybe they don't want to go on an adventure but begrudgingly do for some reason (maybe they like the rest of the party more than they'd like to admit and don't want to see them hurt, maybe they're canny enough to realize it's safer to run with a party so they follow even though they're scared, etc)
A good thing to do (which has to be done by the DM), is to have an inciting incident very early in the campaign where BBEG or his henchmen do something that makes that character throw aside their apprehensions with wild abandon.
To use some very cliché examples, maybe they hurt a loved one or destroy a prized family heirloom with deep sentimental value. Maybe BBEG's henchmen are hired to do something so deplorable that the character feels they HAVE to take this person down. Maybe BBEG burns down the orphanage that took the character off the street when they were at their lowest point in life, etc etc etc. I feel like most people who write characters like that, do so because they want the DM to put in something like that so they can roleplay that moment, yet so many DMs just don't. So often, it's just "you guys get hired for a job as an adventuring group to clear out some goblins" and it isn't until session 10, after real-world months of small jobs and mystery to work out what the big plot is before the DM finally introduces the BBEG. Up until that point, your individual character motivations have to singlehandedly carry your character's involvement in the story, and it usually leads to feelings of "why am I even still here? What is motivating my character to keep clearing out goblins and hobgoblins when they're trying to find their kidnapped son?"
@@madeleine61509 yeah collaborating with the dm makes any character concept or personality better! I will say though, that I don’t think the character really qualifies as “hesitant” at that point, it’s more like they *were* hesitant.
@@paevepailbrack6899 They can still play as hesitant regarding what leads they follow (perhaps there are certain traits in NPCs that might make the character less trustful, or they're just downright paranoid), but they don't need to be hesitant about the *entire concept* of being on this adventure.
At the end of the day, the reason the character type works in books and movies is specifically because they aren't hesitant the entire way through. They start as a reluctant hero, until there is an inciting incident that motivates them, and causes them to accept the gravity of the situation or the responsibility that they hold. After that incident, they embrace their mission with determination and vigor. Part of this links back to number 5 in the video: you need to be willing to adapt and change your character. There needs to come a point where the "is" becomes "was", otherwise the character trait just doesn't work.
(For reference: I am specifically talking about in long-running campaigns. Any annoying character trait could technically be bearable for a oneshot or mini-campaign)
That comment reminds me of an incident of really good role-play, actually. I was playing online, via discord, with a bunch of other people. Please, pardon dictation errors, I will warn you in advance that I am blind, very much functionally, blind, and so all the other players. We use Dad technology of all sorts to make it work, everything from dice rollers to digitize books to 3-D print dice to apps on our phones that allow us, through voice and other technology like it, everybody else does. Anyway, onto this beautiful story. we were in Dragonlance, on our way to a place called Zack Soth, bought party composition was this: one Kender, a slick Knight, that would be me, an L, he was a bar, a goblin, and your guns, what was Charles again? I want to say human, but I’m not sure. We had another goblin and I’m with us. So we’re headed across the plains toward the swamp where we need to go, and of course the goblin doesn’t want to go, so what does the kinder do? She tanks his bag, runs away with it, and makes him chase her for it. It was my character due to not smile or laugh out loud, mainly laugh out loud, because I have a distinct feeling we were walking straight into each double toothpicks.
@@madeleine61509 You put the work that you, the player should do, on the DM with that. It is your job to come up with a motivation, not the DMs. Because what happens more often than not is that it is "not good enough" for the reluctant character to fully engage.
Just dont do it. Dont try to make it work. There are a thousand thousand tropes out there that you can try your hands on. Dont do this one just to proof you can or to be a contrarian.
About passive traits: "No, but..." can work really well in improv. If you want to refuse one idea, put another one into play. Maybe start a conflict between the two ideas.
My first ever character was an elf who had lived completely alone in the woods for over a hundred years and was weary of other people. I thought it would make for decent roleplay moments as they learn to warm up to other people, and it could have........ if I was the only player. What ended up ACTUALLY happening is because my character was hesitant to interact with others, every other player at the table would just talk first. I was in that campaign for close to a year and *never once* had a full conversation as my character (or contributed more than a single sentence to each scene).
Never ever have your first character be a recluse when you're in a group, because you will just find that you're never even interacting until you're forced to during your combat turn.
And another thing is: don't pick a flaw/fear that is going to absolutely cripple your character, or be annoyingly repetitive. I made a melee-build character who had a crippling fear of blood thinking it would be funny. "That will REALLY affect my character, so that must be a great flaw! It will be so easy to turn that flaw into actual roleplay!" I thought, until I realised that I wasn't the sole dictator of when we do or don't get into combat. I very quickly noticed how annoying it was to have to constantly acknowledge this supposedly crippling fear, which basically equated to every combat turn saying "AH! BLOOD!" before still swinging my weapon so I wasn't a dead weight to the party. If at the end of combat my character didn't hog the table conversation to complain about being covered in blood, then I was "breaking character" and "not bothering to roleplay", but when I did do it, it just felt like "here we go again....... ahh! i feel lightheaded after seeing blood!.... anyway-"
Your elf character sounds very similar to mine, although she wasn’t a recluse, she’s just highly Untrust of other people, especially though she doesn’t know, except for when it comes to children or animals, complex preacher. And yes, I took the raised by wolves, literally, And then pulled inspiration from one of my favorite book series, and you can see the interesting amalgam that ended up being Keelan, don’t make her shoot you, because she will also known as the reason why it took me over a year endgame to forgive another players character. We’re doing something insanely dumb, let’s just say it involved a very large spider like creature that nearly got us all killed. She tends to treat her feral fellow party members like her Wolfpack.
I'm also planning a shy character, but I already have a decent idea of how they will overcome that shyness fairly quickly. Firstly, by getting used to being around the party and starting to talk to them during rests, and also by adding a workaround like saying that adrenaline overcomes their shyness. That way you've got a way to bring them in to certain conversations quickly, and a path to bring them into all conversations in any time from a couple of sessions to a couple of levels. Hopefully I can even make it look like character growth if anyone notices.
My DM kinda got my character into a spot where he's a bit of a recluse.
He's the party cleric, and my DM had the idea that he should be unknowingly part of a pretty sketchy cult, thinking he'd warm up to the party, and eventually have a badass moment of destroying said cult...
I'm really struggling to figure out how to make him interact with the other characters tho, because he's the only one with a high social standing in a campaign with the main conflict being injustice.
Best idea I've had, is that he's just putting up a facade, being arrogant and distant, because it's what he was taught to do, while being down to earth and soft beneath... after a hard battle he might take care comforting the fighter who took the blunt of the damage, or maybe if he had something to drink he just loosens up and starts talking openly.
I dunno, still working on it.
Great list! The passive one in particular has gotten me a couple of times. I would also suggest a note against playing a character that would actively hinder the party. Like the rogue who steals from their allies. May be active but damn is it annoying
A rogue has to rogue, but better to play it as a bit of a jerk who MIGHT steal all your stuff and pawn it if you crap them off too many times, rather than a cartoon villain. Trust issues in the group need to be dynamic or you're just playing among us, except the traitor is always the same person.
One thing I did when making my character if they were ill-defined, was in the first sessions I just acted as I naturally would, but then after the session I would examine the choices, take note of them and ask: "Why was this their first choice?"
For example, in the first session if someone needed to be the sacrificial lamb, he was the first to volunteer to be the guy in peril. So I looked at that and came up with an idea of him being from a very "For the greater good!" type of society and thus felt like it was his duty to lay down his life for others.
Also, I had a lot of bad roles compared to the other players, but my character was meant to be a hero of his people, so I ran with that too and fused it with the above point. He was the "Main Character" in his home country and he's getting used to being around people just as competent as he is. He was a big fish in a small pond and it's created a bit of an existential crisis.
This video was extremely helpful in making my character flourish so thanks for the help
It's like the homebrew system I am working in. The first part is that my character actually has a nice, happy family, and another player has a bit more of a rough story to him. The reason why the group prefers my character, despite both characters being much more masculine, energetic, go-getters, is because my character's support cast actually reacts differently, and I accept the plot hooks, whereas the other player just seems to not bite the plot hooks, and goes a bit too sandbox, and he doesn't bond with the NPCs as much. The background I created at the beginning of the campaign also worked in his favour. (Like the military family background, and the love of the Zorro movies) Because of events, he grew to distrust the military, and he started spending more time with his father and sister. (He is currently not pleased his sister is dating, and constantly sasses her about it.)
But we don't know anything about his character, so the party prefers my character.
You always have the exact video I need at that moment haha
Fly fly! My beautiful dove!
another great video. i've recommend these "how to create your character"-videos to my players (mostly inexperienced) and it helped them a lot to have more fun at the table and roleplaying in general. thank you!
One of the best comments I have ever seen on this topic. Especially #2 with the passive personality is something a lot of new players do not understand. You come from movies and books where this works? Sure, but it is completely different at a table.
I think another important thing to consider is group dynamics. If you’re playing a group of strangers, then traits like the Lone Wolf and the Homebody don’t make a ton of sense… but if you and another member give your characters a pre-existing bond you can strengthen both characters. For example, a really outgoing gungho adventurer and a hapless, reserved best friend who’s along for the ride but brings finds he brings his own brand of expertise to the group and slowly opens up to the whole adventure and the rest of the party.
Basically, make sure there’s a reason the party doesn’t just say “you don’t want to be here. We don’t know you. Why would we take you along?”
I have a character from the Hordelands, essentially a Mongol. His class is eldritch knight. One of his personality traits is that he views his horse as part of his anatomy. He fights from horseback whenever possible including as an archer and sword and shield. When we arrive at a town and are staying at an inn he sees to his horse before looking after himself. He once turned his horse invisible before going off to fight on foot. (OK, that may have been a bit extreme.)
This is great! I’ve got some burgeoning players that I can tell are looking for ways to enhance their play, so I’m going to send them this video!
I’m currently playing a chaotic-neutral good champion fighter. He was once a lawful good, loyal knight that left his order because he believed their rules were too restrictive, preventing him from doing what he thought was right. He ended up becoming a vigilante mercenary protecting the innocent whenever and wherever he was needed while making some coin on the side. Mainly when playing him and making decisions I think “What would *Insert pretty much any superhero here* do?” Only major difference is while most superheroes would not only not ask for but also likely refuse a reward for what they do, my character isn’t going to expect or ask for a reward but he’s not going to refuse said reward. He protects people out of the goodness of his heart but payment is a more than acceptable bonus. And he’s certainly not a goody two shows, the law means nothing to him if it gets in the way of protecting people. He’s not even above committing what would be considered war crimes if he believes doing it will benefit the greater good.
YOU ARE AWESOME! ❤❤❤
Don't try to plan out to much in terms of how your character is gonna devellop during the campaign. It is very likely for the campains to work out way different that you expect anyways, so instead of planning to change your negaitve character trait into a positive one by having your character grow, just start out with that flaw and react to what will happen.
I played a character that had a normal childhood, a stable family……. His only thinks was a love for adventure, but not fame. He started his adventuring career with a traveling circus as a side show carney. Over time he became the circus “scout” so he did not have a CHA dump stat. He would travel ahead of the circus to scout towns for shows.
He believes in fair play and has some spells that can manipulate probability but he only uses it against cheaters or defensively.
Part of his scouting is finding wondrous items to be put on display with the circus. So he has history, arcana, and investigation skills from the skilled feat as a freebie to round out the character. He is a ranger rogue multi-class that isn’t exactly optimized but holds up in most boss fights……. The big thing is he is a wise cracking history buff who can talk…. Fey wanderer ranger arcane trickster rogue.
ok what does that have to do with the video
@@monkeibusiness It was an example of a character that was interesting to play. The character’s motivation to live a life of adventure and what not was not based on a trope but the character’s motivation for a life of adventure but he didn’t want fame, just the adventure. His motivation was to explore and learn while traveling the world….. experiencing it, not reading about it.
I start with the character’s motivation for a life of adventure and build around a theme. In this case it was a lvl 5 campaign at the start so I started with a Fey wanderer rogue multi class (Ranger 3/Rogue 2) and didn’t dump CHA. When he came across the party I was with the circus had come to that town and the shenanigans began. He left the circus at that point because he had traveled far and wide with the circus…. It was the same circuit so when he met the group he left the circus.
The character had a “big brother” vibe due to life experience and his penchant for story telling. I had decent rolls to drop into INT and CHA so it was a good fit for a skills based character…. Nothing great but just enough to get +1 base rolls outside of skills.
I’ve got a character who is very manipulative and always tries to stay in a position of power over everyone. She would definitely not have her real personality traits on display, how do you (and anyone else reading this) think she would display herself?
I will say the best way to play a character like that is ask yourself what is a reasonable amount of control. For example do you want complete control everyone private life or just pubic. The second thing to ask yourself how does your character hide their manipulative side? Do they overstate the dangers if they don’t do what they say. Do they try to charm/deceive their way to make to sign bad deals? The last part 2 parts are the important one to answer. Why do they want the power to begging with. Lastly do not expect the party to always do what you suggested and let them have their fun. After all a better result in completing a task would let you be able to rule the place easier. Those are just my thoughts hope you enjoy dnd game.
I love the inclusion of the 6 point - I always appreciate people who do not think of themselves as infallible experts.
Still, about the rest, I am not so sure. So as the random person from the internet, with too much time, as it seems... I will give you few tips what makes your list pretty weird or plainly wrong.
1) To answer the question "who you are", personality trait is not a good solution. "Polite" tells me about my roleplay as much as "I am great". Being polite is just a behaviour pattern. Your reaction. No, even less. The way you "phrase" your words and actions. But what is behind being polite. What does it mean? From where it stems from? Where it goes? With just personality trait, you are as lost as you where before establishing that.
What you really need to answer "who you are" are three elements: reasons, goals and way of handling things. With that you can have the core of your character.And it can be done with like two-three sentences.
For example, let's go with your "polite" and create two different characters.
Polite character A: A merchant with sick daughter, who needs money for expensive medicines. He is a shrewd manipulator, who steer you with his sweet words.
Polite character B: A young priest who cannot bear to see anyone's suffering. The try to ease the pains of the world while not harming anyone, even with their words.
Two polite characters, which will react to each situation totally differently. And both could be described as "polite"
3) Your examples contradict each other. For example number 3 is about not being vague. But on first entry you used being "polite" as example of who you are. How being polite is not vague?
4) I think passive is not the word you wanted to use. A person who is negating invitation to the journey or saying no to propositions is not passive -- they are "reluctant" or "unwilling". And actually, being passive is not a bad thing in RPG. Yea, you want players to be active and make decisions. But if everyone would be hiperactive all the time, they will just fight for that spotlight during a session... and it won't be fun. Each character should be active about certain things, but also passive when other story beats come into play. Tagging along to help other party members is great example of being passive - because someone is leading while they just agree.
5) How is not "Adapting" a trap when creating a good personality for the game? It is a bad practice, wrong idea about your character or something... but not really "a trap". And since all the tips were about creating character, including it in the list feels totally out of place. Digressions are fine, but that is not really something I would put on the list here.
6) On the topic of this list... what exactly is your list? Because you say that it is a list of traps, but somewhere in the half of it, you stoped listing "problems" but rather started giving "solutions to problems" like "Humanize" or "adapt". While watching it doesn't hinder any information you are giving, but whenever you were pointing another entry it was just getting weirder and weirder.
Cheers and good luck with your future videos
I find myself disagreeing with number 4 in some situations. What if you're playing a demi-human?
Don’t necessarily “humanize”. Not every character is human. Play to the type.
I had a goblin PC who treated being forced to sleep in the basement or in the stables of an inn like he was being treated like a king. Nice fluffy straw to sleep on and all the rats he could eat were good things to his way of thinking. The humans didn’t get free food in their rooms and they had to live above ground too. I used to brag about the free RATions I got at the inn too, just to annoy the pallydingaling.
That’s the same character that never wanted to leave the inn, which violates one of your “never do this” personality types. He didn’t try to stay at the inn, but would always say things like, “there wasn’t anybody trying to kill us at the inn, you know?” after combat. I even turned it up a notch after one of the innkeepers actually paid me in coin for getting rid of his rats, saying things like, “I could have just stayed at the inn if I wanted coins, but you had to go being all heroic.”
Once you have those pieces in place, you start to get things like saying, “get your fat ass up here already. You watched me climb up and I started lower than you did” to the paladin while I was lowering a rope down to him. My personal favorite was always, “if you weren’t covered in metal from head to toe, we could sneak around them.”
It’s all about the personality, not necessarily following this rule or that when making the personality.
I may do this a bit differently than everyone else, but if I don’t, I’m all for being told I’m not some special snowflake. I have a tendency to leave a lot open ended so the damn gets to play with it how he wants however I do give him some general idea of where I’m going, where my thought process is. When I go to create character, The first thing I do is give them a job. Oh, and I don’t auditorily cross dress, I don’t have the vocal range to do that, I know people who do, you know who you are. So the first thing I do is I pick my race, and then I want to learn everything there is about that race. I have a thing for elves, I did play Dragonborn once, I had an idea for a half, oh yeah, and my groupment in college, so sometimes our majors playing. For example, when I pick a race, I’ve been wanting to know everything about its culture, what does the Lord say, what is their society like, how do they function, how do they view other cultures. It’s also why not big on playing Ohio, unless I am the bastard redhead stepchild who doesn’t think like everybody else and consider everybody equal. I can’t fuck up any better than I can fly. OK, at least not very long. My longest running character is a ranger, And since I learned that what elves generally treat the natural world as the natives of my country do or did, I gravitate toward it. I’d already decided that my very first character is going to be an elf, since DND is in escape from the limitations I have in real life. I was I was born with Janet every organ system in the body. It most obvious signs are profound blindness, and partial deafness. If the vision isn’t already shot at birth, it will be by the time you hit puberty. That couple with some of the medication‘s I take which physically limits me, I could never play ice hockey, for example, And you can see why I like DND so much. I have my heart set on Ranger, even though that’s a pretty complicated character to start out start out with, because of a book series I read. Blame our. A. Salvatore for my first character. But I also made sure to make the flaws realistic to me. She hates creepy, crawlies, especially if they are oversized, mind, flares, the undead, hermit, dragons, oh yeah, and has a thing against fire. She’s gotten better about that fair, but I suggest that you make fears and flaws you make it so that way they are more relatable to you. If you’re afraid of something in real life, put it into your character. Don’t make yourself your character, mess yourself into it, That way it’s easier to drop into character and out of it, it will. It’s hard to role-play something that isn’t you to begin with
So, to recap:
1: Stop asking "Who am I?"
2: Stop being passive
3: Stop being vague
4: Stop humanizing
5: Stop adapting
6: Don't stop listening to me.
Got it.
Worst advice for dnd I've ever seen. You're stats are 100% more crucial to you're character. There personality can develop along the campaign, but without you're stats, there is no gameplay. You need you're ability scores and everything they govern to play. You can however play the game without any personality traits on paper. This kind of false information not only shows little understanding of dnd, but can and does discourage new players from even trying it. If you want to be hung up on personality traits, might I suggest you go write a book. Been a dm for almost 20 years now, and I've run plenty of games without personality traits, but without attributes and skills, speed, and saving throws, there just simply is no game.
I’ve been playing just as long. He’s not as wrong as you suggest. Some players lose interest when they don’t feel a connection to their character as a persona with personality. Some are perfectly happy to vibe along hacking and looting and maybe solving whatever world-or-village-threatening crisis the DM cooked up without ever thinking about their character having a personality. Straight up telling people don’t bother thinking in terms of personality is just as likely to scare certain people off as making it sound like a complex improv exercise is likely to scare others off. This guy’s advice is fine for the kind of person who would click on it, who wants to get more out of their roleplaying, deeper into their character’s headspace. Believe me, if I thought my characters were little more than some randomly rolled stats and some kind of optimized build path, I’d play video games instead. And some people wouldn’t, and that’s OK! I’m just saying you’re pushing the old “worst advice ever!” routine a little hard, rather than simply suggesting there are different ways to play.
@adamgreenspan4988 you misunderstand me. I'm not saying personality is not needed, nor am I saying it's worthless. I'm saying it's not the most important thing. Most new players don't know what they want to create. I've sat ages trying to get players to fill out those things on there sheets. Only to have them finally finish, and still not vibe. It's obvious you don't understand the spirit of the game. Otherwise you'd realize that a pcs character comes out through gameplay. This is why the original games never bogged down there sheets with trivial bullshit. You're characters personality is how you play them, not what a sheet of paper says. Now, if I have a player that wants to fill that part out, and it helps them. Hell ya, I love it. It gives me a idea of who they are. However most the time, players either lose interest in that character or outright ignore the pre set 2 bit personality. There's also character development, which again challenges the cookie cutter bull on the sheet. I'd recommend the white wolf games such as world of darkness for that kind of play style. After all, unlike dnd, it's built around it. Or there's the gurps books, which again have a larger focus on narrative over dnd's mechanical focused system. Dnd is a system set up for strategic combat, and skill based dialog encounters. At its heart, it's a terrible system for narrative purposes. Not that it can't accomplish good narration, in fact it's a necessity. However, character personality, takes a back seat. This video suggests it as if it's the most important aspect, however it is the least important aspect. Again, I invite you to try out the more narrative focused rp systems, and realize dnd is strategy focused, it has encountered, not scenes. The difference being encounters are setup to be overcome. Scenes are setup around you're pcs personalities. That's why dnd has its inspiration system, although in need of minor tweaking, it allows the personality to become strategic in its own right. So, filling out the personality is a intelligent thing to do, but again it will always be second to you're build in dnd. You're main statistics will always tell a better story. Example would be low intelligence vs low strength. Those will always be more fun to rp, over pre decided personality that should morph throughout a campaign. I'm not the same person today as I'll be tomorrow, because I'll have another days experiences under my belt. The change may be slight, but it is there. As it should be throughout a campaign. So you are most certainly wrong, and most definitely short sighted. Unless you've run games with little combat (although I usually let that be player choice, when possible) then yeah, you need to fall back on personality, but then, if that's the case, please stop giving bad dnd advice and go play some wod, all flesh must be eaten, gurps, or something actually built for the game type you prefer. Not only will you and the group you play with find it more enjoyable, it'll be easier for you to prep, due to the base rules not needing you to rewrite them. Ooh! Go play shadowrun, shadowrun is pretty freaking awsome. And it's built around narration, seriously built around narration. And it still keeps at least some of that dnd feel. If not mildly futuristic.