We've all seen it. Some people play stereotypical elf rangers. Others play dwarf fighters. Some play some homebrewed special snowflake race/class. So on and so forth.
My question to you, Veeky Forums, is: do you actually judge people for their choice in race/class? If you see a guy playing a human paladin, for example, do you think of him in a certain way? Do you see him differently from the guy who plays a half-orc barbarian?
>Being a racist and a classist
>Know an actual thief as a friend.
>Plays a paladin who hunts down thieves.
How does even become a full-time thief for a living?
Nice try.
It's different for me, because usually my associations are based on what people around me seem to play.
I have a lot of friends online who play tieflings and elves, and primarily play casters. I have a thing against casters in most cases already, since I've had some that made fights unfun for the party in the past, but I can deal with that. But every time a tiefling or elf comes up I go 'oh god, another one.' I have seen every variation, far beyond just horns and red skin, and I am bored of them all.
I would to see more dwarves and half-orcs. I don't even like playing as them that much, but I'm tempted to make such a character just so it doesn't feel like there are only humans, tieflings and elves out there.
Nah man. I play d&d with is this little cringe chittlin who plays a necromancer, and he's a dumb shit. Like, he legit spends time on his turn trying to figure out what spell to use. Nigga, it's not like you even bothered prepping anything other than damage, what are you contemplating?
I judge them on how well they play.
Even a bog-standard 'hur-dur' ork barbarian can be made into something not 'hur-dur' and be legitimately good.
These are ROLEplaying games after all.
>do you actually judge people for their choice in race/class?
Absolutely. The characters people play reflect a hidden wish deep within their psyche. So if you're playing a Human Paladin you wan to be a strong, white male paragon of justice and goodness; likewise if you play an Orc Berserker you want to be a violent, black murderer, etc.
I hate you.
...
>Tiefling warlock
I lold
no
>Daphnir rogue
Special snowflake alert
>Tieflings bard
Special snowflake alert
>Half-orc barbarian
Uninspired character alert
>Haha nice uninspired character
Alright then, I'll play thi-
>Special snowflake
^ this is you.
Kinda. Extends to wargaming too, like how Tau players are scum of the earth.
Play something that isn't played to death. Like a human or a gnoll or whatever.
>Kitsune
>Little girl
>Werewolf
>Tiefling
>Dragonkin
Player is a deviant pervert of some kind, GUARANTEED.
>elf anything
Munchkin, for sure.
this image will never not be funny, no matter what is inserted at the end.
it will always be funny.
It really depends on the character, and how deep they are.
I've found an easy way of giving a character depth is to give them at least two personality traits that clash on a fundamental level, eg. Devout Fundamentalist Christian who's also gay. Then you can get a lot of conflict out of the character's inner thoughts, and even if it's not the focus of the campaign viewing everything through those two lenses makes the character feel like they have a lot of depth as long as you don't take the easy way out and immediately have one or the other give way.
For example, in D&D, a character that promises depth (it's up to the player to give it, in the end) would be something like a teifling Paladin of Tyr who's nevertheless Chaotic Good (a reason why I don't like Pallies being restricted by Alignment). And so the character is given depth by the conflict of three things, internally. One, he's a teifling, and thus by nature tends to be self-absorbed and assholish, ergo evil, but he's also a paladin of Tyr, and so he has to be Good to remain doing what he wants to do, which is a decent conflict. Then this is layered under the fact that the Lawful ways of the Paladin also conflict with him being Chaotic Good, and he's vowed to bring justice despite having a stronger tie to freedom. So then he has conflict as far as what he wants to use his Pally Power to do and what Tyr wants him to do with his Pally Power.
Then you view external conflicts through that lens. Say some goblins were slaughtering a local village. Well, while Teifadin doesn't particularly want to throw himself into danger like that - Teifling nature - he feels like he has to - Pally and CG nature. So he goes there and kills some Gobbos, and then they surrender. Now he has to make a choice between Tyr's JUSTICE - Pally LG acting - and trying to redeem the gobbos - the more CG (honestly more NG) path - which creates internal conflict. So maybe now he looks to his companions.
Basic, but functional depth.
I do recognize some patterns.
>Druid focused on shapeshifting, especialy big cats
Character has all the personality of a brick and will never drive the plot or scene forward. Exists to be silent, growl at people he thinks are bad or just in opposition to the party and demand head scratches.
>female elf or similar, adopted by savage race
Utter disregard for anything but their own power fantasies, horrible taste. Will endlessly pick fights with her host race over petty things to prove she is the strongest. Expects to be untouchable via superior elven speed and still pack the hardest punch despite petite waifish figure.
>human fighter or rogue with urban gutter background and a strong accent
Masquerades as competent or even excellent roleplayer, but will over time turn into an obnoxious spotlight whore, who wants to rule over other players and frequently start some form of drama.
>human
>not played to death
Spotted the guy who doesn't actually play. Humans are the most popular race.
What does playing a Kobold bard tell you?
Most based race/class combo coming through.
You love Deekin, just like me.