Why I Don't Use "Personality" Sections Anymore

Squidward Uchiha

Squidward Uchiha

Squid Style: Clarinet Jutsu
Just popping in another thread about my personal RP biz and hopefully people will read this one this time xD

So, as the title suggests: whenever I make a character sheet for a sign-up thread nowadays, I do not include a personality section in said sheet. I'm not sure if this is a common practice around these parts, but it sure wasn't where I hosted RPs last.

Why is this? Well, I came to a realization -- setting specific personality traits limits characterization.

Let me explain: picking out character traits for your OC is a natural process, and I have no qualms against that as a concept. It's natural to assign a certain archetype since that is what makes your character unique and stand out from the other players' characters. However, it's the part after you assign those traits where things get murky. Now it feels like you have to stick to a certain guideline and only said guideline whenever your character speaks or reacts to situations within the story, something you have no control over unless you're the host. And in these scenarios, I've found it, in hindsight, difficult to write characterization that I feel is not only appropriate for the character but also makes them authentic at the same time.

After all, a character is defined than more than just their set traits. A truly fleshed out character is able to respond to pretty much any situation with a well adjusted characterization that still fits in line with said traits. Even if they're naturally happy, they're should be moments where they're allowed to be angry. Even if they're angry, there should be moments where they're allowed to be rational. Even if they're rational, there should be moments where they're allowed to be irrational. It makes them flawed, but it makes them all the more real at the same time.

What I'm basically saying is I feel like a personality section can box you in creatively when writing your character and make them come off as 2-dimensional. But of course, this is just my opinion. This is more of a personal preference than anything, so I don't enforce this as a rule that all RPers should follow or anything. It's just easier for someone like me to handle my OCs this way.

So, do I have a point or do I just sound like I suck at writing characters? You decide. xD
 
I definitely agree with you! Though there are many, many, many, ways to create characters and in turn the characters personalities. There's no better way to find the one that works best for you then to try them all out, even if nothing significant comes of it they're good exercises and after all is said and done you will have grown as a writer!

One of the main benefits of this for me is that I enjoy the freedom to have a character evolve over the course of the time that they are in use. While a character with the personality trait 'stubborn' may always be stubborn there should not be anything that says they must remain that way forever - or even that they have to change if you want to look at the other side of that. Part of what I love about creating well rounded characters is the character development over the course of a plot or an arc.
I've found - with at least one of the RPs that I am currently involved in for sure - that having a set of morals or other similar preferences helps to shape a personality without directly labeling anything and boxing you in. Not to mention that it can help you to get a better feel for how a character would react to something rather than just having them react 'shyly' or 'angrily' or 'happily'.

The only other reasons that I feel a 'personality' section works is more for mechanics purposes, though even then you can rely on a few base traits. In a large group RP you don't want two characters with the exact same personality because it wasn't made clear that a certain archetype was already going to be in use - not saying that you can't have two witty bards or noble swordsmen (if you're taking the fantasy route) but it can drastically change things. The same goes for smaller RPs, if you're doing a 1/1 it's good to have an idea of the personality of both of the characters involved so that you can create a good chemistry and balance between the two - a pair of shy librarians in a murder mystery setting are not going to be able get much done while still retaining those traits.

Hopefully all of this makes sense, I just read this and figured 'hey, why not throw in my two cents'!
 
Great points!

I myself like throwing in personality traits for the way I see my characters and things that make sense due to their backgrounds, but I love to discover who my character actually is during play. I believe certain traits are great to be challenged in a story, like for example a closed off or suspicious character. I don't think I should end a story with my character exactly how she began, but rather evolve in manners I can't even predict. It's one of my favorite aspects of role-play.
 
I feel like it you feel limited by those traits, that maybe there was a failure to correctly identify accurate traits for the character. Like, if I list my character as a, y, b and w, but then I find the character feels like they'd naturally respond in an h manner, then that doesn't mean my character needs to be limited, it means I need to update my CS because obviously I made some mistakes. In most of my roleplays we all start without Chars and they chance with time. I encourage CS updating every few months because even as the writer grows, the character can change, not to mention how much the character changes with the plot. It's hard to know a char until you play it, which is why I think that one shouldn't feel limited by the words, but rather look at the CS as a storage place for their personal experiences with the char. If they're inaccurate at first, don't look at it as limiting, but rather revel in the amazing experience of having a character write its own sheet. Do your best at first but don't hesitate to correct it after.
 
Soulserenity20 said:
I feel like it you feel limited by those traits, that maybe there was a failure to correctly identify accurate traits for the character. Like, if I list my character as a, y, b and w, but then I find the character feels like they'd naturally respond in an h manner, then that doesn't mean my character needs to be limited, it means I need to update my CS because obviously I made some mistakes.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point.

The reason I don't use those sections anymore is because of that eventual realization that a character can grow beyond their one-note traits, not in spite of it.
 
Squidward Uchiha said:
I think you missed my point.

The reason I don't use those sections anymore is because of that eventual realization that a character can grow beyond their one-note traits, not in spite of it.
Click to expand...
And my point is simply that you don't have to eradicate prewritten personalities once you understand the basics of character growth and development :)
 
Soulserenity20 said:
And my point is simply that you don't have to eradicate prewritten personalities once you understand the basics of character growth and development :)
Click to expand...

When I refer to personality, I'm talking about one-note traits that define a character, not the entire extent of their personality in current time and going forward.
 
I love your way of looking at it. I suppose personality is just a sort of reference sheet us writers look back to when we need to figure out the actions of our character. It's sorta pointless showing the GM/co-writers this, because they'll understand the character in due time. The GM/co-writers get an understanding of your character through the way it is played, and their character can react to the small actions, motions and dialogue of the other character, and make decisions from what they perceive of them. This creates believable characterisation, which you can never have too much of.

As Bee said before, it helps the development of dynamic, changing characters. I've seen tons of characters with hundreds of posts become 'flat' over time, stagnating and remaining their static self throughout their entire plot. By not throwing down who or what the character is, they can develop, altering existing traits, or gaining new traits altogether. This helps us to establish change through emotional and social pressures, rather than a (slightly) cliché physical pressure, e.g. losing an arm, or losing magical abilities. This is so much more nuanced and most of all, realistic.

I've yet to have a roleplay that I've taken part in give me the ability to not immediately state my character's personality traits. I can't wait for the possibility to join in on an rp like this. I sure hope once I'm approved, I can join one of your existing rps, (not tryina force anything) because I believe that this small change, is an exceptionally important measure to help develop real, and interesting characters. :)
 
While I, by and large, agree with what you say, I also feel that the personality section is a good way to see how an author intends to write his character. This, to some extent, helps to see which characters are dangerously Mary Sue-ish (e.g. "Her only flaw is that she's so pure that the slightest injustice makes her cry" and other crap like that).
 
Squidward Uchiha said:
You callin' me a hack writer then?

I'm just saying it's easier to cut out the middleman and not have to list a section in the first place so you don't have to deal with that issue.
Click to expand...
I'm saying, that you think that, and That's fine! But not everyone will agree that it's necessary to. I was simply expressing an alternative view that has nothing to do with the validity of your own view. I'll still insist players make a personality section. I find it helpful and I don't think there's a reason to cut it out, even if character development and character fluidity are at play.
 
Soulserenity20 said:
I'm saying, that you think that, and That's fine! But not everyone will agree that it's necessary to. I was simply expressing an alternative view that has nothing to do with the validity of your own view. I'll still insist players make a personality section. I find it helpful and I don't think there's a reason to cut it out, even if character development and character fluidity are at play.
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to clarify myself as much as possible because I think I have a solid case and don't want to come off as a scatterbrain.
 
Squidward Uchiha said:
I'm just trying to clarify myself as much as possible because I think I have a solid case and don't want to come off as a scatterbrain.
Click to expand...
XD you're not at all! I was just coming here to add to the conversation haha. I know this post is about your opinion, and I think you've explained it clearly! I just thought I'd add in another opinion to the mix :p
 
I know a lot of GMs that now just ask for an in-character response to a prompt instead of (or in addition to) a basic character sheet. Such a GM may ask for a character photograph or appearance description at the top, a simple name-age-gender-appearance block preceding the post, or for all necessities (such as gender, age, and appearance) to be included in the post. I quite like this system as I feel it gets players more involved in their characters and lets them 'test drive' before they commit to a game with a character they may dislike writing.
 
I relate to this a Lot, actually. Once you've chosen a few defining traits for a character and put them out there for everyone to see, it's really hard later on to change or adapt those traits. It's your character--only you know exactly how they'd react to a certain situation or reply to a certain question. By keeping personality off of any official document and being able to use the character we see in our minds, completely unconfined and free of any written limits, we can create diverse characters that really bring life to the story/universe. Besides, anyone can say their character is nice, or selfish, or hotheaded. Only you can show that even if your character shares that trait with someone else, it doesn't define them in the same way. I do, however, agree with the method stated by Meredith. Having an in-character response is a good way to put a character out there an get an idea of the personality without setting anything in stone.
 
I agree that it can limit characters, but I found this one day while researching how to be a better writer and I've started using this for determining my character's personalities. It gives a generic basis without being so restricting that they can't change:

  1. Courteous: Usually
  2. Risk-taking: Sometimes
  3. Ambitious: Sometimes
  4. Curious: Always
  5. Self-Controlled: Usually
  6. Nurturing: Usually
  7. Trusting: Generally
  8. Honest: Generally
  9. Loyal: Always
  10. Affectionate: Usually
  11. Romantic: Occasionally
  12. Flirty: Occasionally
  13. Sympathetic: Generally
  14. Altruistic: Sometimes
  15. Optimistic: Generally
  16. Observant: Usually
  17. Logical: Sometimes
  18. Social: Mostly social
  19. Emotions: Somewhat controlled
Other terms I've seen used in the same list are "typically" "rarely" etc. It gives more of a general guideline for how the character most often behaves but does not limit them to "X has a bubbly personality and is naturally happy and positive thinking!" A suggestion, for anyone not willing to give up personality completely... though this is something you can absolutely do on your own and doesn't have to be included on a character sheet, naturally.
 
I really like the two methods proposed by Meredith and BrookeDI, they seem to be much more intuitive ways of letting you, as an author, fully understand your characters inner workings (also a much better way of explaining your character's personality to others) compared to a personality section. I will definitely try them both in the future :)
 
Personally, I agree with you totally but hey- some people always will enjoy using personality sections or boxes because it makes them feel more comfortable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top