Character Concepts you're scared about using

What are some characters you want to run but you're worried about using them? For fears of them going FUBAR, looking like a special snowflake, etc.

I'll start:
>Campaign is a Fallout setting
>Moderately interested in making by backup character (not the one I'm starting with, I'm not that retarded) a Deathclaw
>Said Deathclaw was the subject of some fucking nasty experiments and shit from the Enclave's experiments to make them into soldiers
>Addicted to Wine to keep the pain away
>Can't tell if this is a fun idea or actually fucking retarded

Child (actually hundred something y.o.) Ventrue

Man, I'm torn as well. A sentient deathclaw is pretty stupid and snowflakey, especially when you're trying to be serious. However at the same time I like the idea of it. And it does seem fun

Isn't there a follower in FO2 that was pretty much a sentient Deathclaw? I'd say go ahead if the game is more FO2 instead of FO1 in tone.

Anyway:
>Campaign is WoD mortals
>Want to really play a character that is a combat monster but with the Coward Flaw
>He wont fight anything and anyone he doesn't feel he can instantly demolish in two hits
>Pretty much a bully

>Dark Heresy in general
>Really want to play a Tech-Priest with the Hive Mutant background
>It's only thrown around as an innocent question
>Afraid that I'll sound like a min-maxing munchkin if I push the GM for it

Rapist, Murderer, Child-Molester Priest who is Female identifying as a Male and had a crazed surgeon attach a "wooden stake" between her thighs.

>wont fight anything and anyone he doesn't feel he can instantly demolish in two hits
That's a good one. Worth playing, I'd say.

...

You are the one who's supposed to be scared of using the character, user, not your group.

I forgot to mention this is for a LARP.

Any "monstergirl" character.

Every single cute girl I have prettying up my roster of characters I'll never get to play.

This. I have a number of female characters I've made over the years, some of them throwaway, others I've dedicated some time to and feel good about, but I will never actually play one.

I really want to play a supremely fucked up character, sadistic, crude, just all around piece of shit human. Likes to torture people and shit like that. Think the edgiest character you can, then tone it back so he's not a hilarious parody of edginess. Probably an assassin in 3.5 because I love death attack ability, or maybe a necromancer because I love swarm control and I'd love to lead swarms of zombies and skeletons into battle. But anyway, yeah, he's a fucked up human being, might be more evil than the BBEG himself. But the party needs him because he is the background of their power. I have seen this in parties, not even in D&D parties, in tons of RPGs where one character is about 50% of the power of the group. I want to be that guy who gets shit done and the party can't live without me, but also hate him, and have to decide how long they can tolerate his fucked up shit, realizing that if they do the right thing and kill him, they might be killing one of the few people who can help them stop the BBEG.

Problems with this:
>fa/tg/uys who get pissy at even the hint of edginess
>party will think it's rude to kill my character
>people who don't understand roleplay will probably get offended
>would have to be a pretty specific campaign for it to work

Basically I just want to be an evil character in a good group but they need me around for the time being, but in-RP I want to stretch their patience on letting me live by doing fucked up things. The problem is a lot of people don't understand how to leave RP in RP and might get ass-hurt over it out of game. Like my friend who DMed Hommlet for us and ran the villagers like the greedy fucks they were, and one player flipped out at him for making all the villagers dickheads even though it was actually really entertaining.

>economically-minded Druid a Jewid if you will based wholly on Kraft Lawrence from Spice and Wolf, right down to wolf companion for snuggles
>don't want people to think I'm taking any kind of furry stance with the character in spite of the source material

>pirate Rogue that's based wholly on Captain Nathaniel Joseph Claw from the namesake game Claw
>want him as the quest-driver/DMPC for campaign based off aforementioned game
>don't want to accidentally turn into That GM with DA BESS DUDE that's strong enough to whip the party back onto rails
>still want there to be the option for him to be convinced to help with the quest at the cost of snark
>don't want him to be weak/unoptimized enough that the party could just turn on him and steal the two magic items he has

A low power self-insert. I've heard of some more light hearted DMs saying if you personally are capable of an action, you're character is allowed to do it despite stats, which would make a self-insert even more gratifying.

It's one part narcissism, four parts uncreativity preventing me from really enjoying a world by means of a surrogate too different from me.

I want to make a pregnant adept in shadowrun, but feel like it'd be too easy to just be called fap fuel instead of it being about a desperate woman turning to crime to prepare for a kid.

All of them. Because they're not core. I hate core, boring humans and their boring billion cousins.

In fact, many of my concepts are gnolls, cause I like the race. Immediately I get jumped as a "furry" and whatnot and they think I'm gonna be That Guy.

I also draw their visual design, and make extensive backstories and personalities. Since I mostly play D&D for the roleplay, I really go through.

But people are like NOPE NOPE NOPE.

I'd show you pictures but I'm afraid doing such a personal thing might not be the correct etiquette here.

I want to make a character who just suffers from crippling mental health issue, getting more severe the more the GM throws shit at us. Basically there would be some sort of stat check that comes up once in awhile in extreme circumstances, where the character could succumb to anger which would have them, for example, go to far and accidentally kill an important character. Every failed check would contribute to an overall "insanity" debuff that would increase the chance of these checks coming up, as well as modifying stats, such as damaging charisma but increasing strength during combat.

I don't know, seemed interesting to me. Also not a part of any campaign right now, and not really sure where to look for one. Last time I played was just with friends who no longer play.

Not in my games, user, unless I notice worrying patterns with your profile pages and avatars.

There is a follower that's a sentient deathclaw disguised in heavy robes, and is part of a larger group of them. I forget what his whole deal was, but I think he was a pretty cool dude.

Shaddowrun character concept I've been working:
>Trap who grew up on the street with his older sister.
>Had to sell their bodies to survive.
>Learned how to defend himself and to seduce people to rob them.
>Infiltrator/assassin face who bats his eyelashes to get close to someone, then stabs them in their throat with his cyberspur when they don't expect it.

Is it snowflakey if they existed in the actual games? Stupid, sure, but snowflakey might be slightly debatable.

I'm also a victim of this. I run Kobolds, Lizardfolk, Gnolls, and such because I think it's awesome. I usually get weird looks and accusations of being a furry/scaly, when honestly I just like the pizzazz that comes with not being a human, buff human, skinny human, short human, really short human, or really short skinny human. I'm usually the least creepy person at a table, because Kobold Batman has a hundred better things to do than get laid.

I figure so long as you don't ask for any special treatment, then since it existed in the actual games at one point you are mostly clear.
People don't just magically accept you, there is a regular and tiring procedure you have to go through whenever you meet someone new. You are hand challenged. Keep things mostly realistic, don't make your justification so hideously complicated that it starts trampling on the setting the GM makes, and it should go fine. And do't do it first game. You earn your GMs trust with a more regular game or two of not doing stupid shit.

>being a human, buff human, skinny human, short human, really short human, or really short skinny human.

Damn, did we meet? I'm asking this in all seriousness as those are the SAME EXACT WORDS I give everyone.

>Kobold Batman has a hundred better things to do than get laid.

Hah! Half my guys are normal living beings. They DO wanna get laid... But on their own free time. It's a joke that one of them is hopelessly girl-shy, and it's a plot device that another may never get what she really wants.

You both sound like boring faggots 2bh

Good. Because we don't want to play with you.

kek at least you aren't playing with anyone though let's be real.

Or... I do. I'm literally playing a gnoll in a campaign right now. He's a bit of a tool and they call him "Tobbi" due to his addiction to tobacco, which he has contracted on purpose to shield his delicate nose from the horrible daily smell of the shithole of a city he is forced to scrape a living in nowadays. He is the antithesis to the flamboyant hero born for a cosmic purpose as he was directly concepted as a mook, since someone like you, user, once told me "gnolls were only good as low-level mooks to throw at players for cheap XP", and that is my way of mocking it.

I've played a lady character before, it was fun. Difficult to do a voice for her but still fun, managed to work around that by making her a slightly gruff tomboy. She was a Pathfinder swashbuckler so she got kind of broken too. Would play her again but she got killed and reanimated by a grave knight. Ironically she had better luck on attack rolls as a zombie lord fighting her former comrades than in life.