Cantr II Discussion Forum

What good words

Providing a background of the character wouldn't be a good idea, in my opinion. Namely, because I thought that this is supposed to be...your character didn't know anything before when they spawned. This means that the way they think, what they believe, the way they react...it's all based on what they see in whatever town they spawn in.

I have 7 characters and all of them are "characters"...must be why I always use my 200min
now most of them wont be remembered in the history books, but they all add a twist of personality anywhere they go. Some started off as preconcieved characters and some developed. I'd say my most complicated character was originally ment to be a vanilla guy I made just so I wouldnt have to worry about saturating the game with psychopaths... I don't play sain well . It's not the place so much as the player that determines a "character" and I think that's where most people miss out and decide that they should waist a charie by either becoming bland or going Suicidal New Spawn Sydromn

I actually think that Agar's idea is a bit backwards, I think your first characters should require a backlog so that unexperienced RPers can get used to the idea of following a personality and as they get better at that they can start making charies that develope after spawn. That's basicly how I did it and it worked well for me.

I try to make a personality for my characters before or soon after their spawn however I always try to not put too many limits in because I want my characters to develop from what happens around them. Things like political ideas or job ideas should be developed in game, very basic personalities on the other hand like how ambitious they are, how quick to anger they are or how friendly they are I make before they spawn. (Though, again, these can be affected in game).

The problem is that characters are often heavily influenced by their surroundings. What if you'd write up a nice guy who wants to help and is likely to be loyal to the local government, only to be spawned in a place like Missy descrived in the other topic - a place where people do not even wake up to say where you are, let alone offer you a job.

But indeed having those afternoon boredom characters is a big problem. Although I usually tend to have a bit of a background (usually limited to external things such as hair colour), the characters are actually rather hollow. Much depends on who they meet in their first days.

Surprise, surprise, I agree with my girlfriend here.

I love the intention of the idea and I would love to motivate that kind of thinking, but I also believe that good characters are a product of their environment just as much as their internal motivations. Rather than developing back-story, I would like to try and encourage developing culture-independent internal motivations and quirks.


This character will have a short temper.
This character is nauseaously nice. (EDIT: did I spell it correctly this time? Could pie be metastatic?)
This character is a psychopath that twitches every time he says the word mad. (Inspired right now by Eric Idle the jailor in Life of Brian. )

Combine that with....

Character spawned in a hostile environment, bit by a sheep on day #2 of life.
Character spawned in a developed city of 30 people, with two people carrying on an actual conversation at any point in the day.
Character spawned in a location where 15 people are speaking three different languages.


Wrap it all up and respond to the enviornmental stimuli and you create a unique character. I don't think this process can be forced, because artistically, we all work differently.

What does mean "nautiously"?

I don't know about you all, but half of may charries that I planned to be one way before I spawned them... ended up quite the opposiet way... One for example was going to be a criminal wanna-be who tried his hardest to be bad... but is just plain bad at it... Instead, he's just plain a friendly, pacifist guy... pretty fun too... We can't really try to force the characters before they're spawned, because at least half of those wouldn't fit their environments.

wichi.. nauseously

I think it should just be left to the player to decide how to develop the char. If they want to have a more preconceived concept of the char, let them, but don't make other people do that if they prefer to let the char develop tabula rasa. I tend to do the "here's a set trait or two" thing, though quite often, that will change drastically. So yea, I agree with wichi.

I think it's actually more fun indeed to have a well-thought-out personality before you spawn, and then have that personality deal with the particular circumstances of the town. Rather than a char that immediately conforms to whatever is there already.

Where I disagree, though, is to force it in that manner . I believe more in a more voluntary / nice style. E.g. more initiatives to help new players to learn how to play the game, like a voluntary game-playing course . Or a system whereby senior / qualified / selected players are assigned as tutors to new players, who can, if they want, get more assistance. Something along those lines. Rather than this forced feature.

We could, of course, create that form to describe the personality, but not make it obligatory ...

I don't like the idea.

A person's character is supposed to shaped by their life, not the other way around.


As for conformity, I admit, my characters usually do. They gain trust and friends, become very popular, and then go nuts and call up all the favors.

Schme wrote:A person's character is supposed to shaped by their life, not the other way around.

But it's a combination of the two, isn't it? A personality is changed by its environment, not purely generated by it? At least, that's what I think leads to the most interesting roleplay - independent of the social science debate on nature vs nurture ...

There was a good test of this theory in Trading Places.

wichita wrote:This character is nautiously nice.

Sicofonte wrote:What does mean nautiously?

the_antisocial_hermit wrote:wichi.. nauseously Wink

wichita wrote:This character is nauseaously nice. (EDIT: did I spell it correctly this time? Could pie be metastatic?)

No I think... in the dictionary you can find out nauseating, but not nautiously, nauseously, nauseaously...

I'm sure, writing in Spanish is quite far easier than in English

"Nauseously" and "nauseatingly" are both words. End of offtopic nitpick.