Viewpoint Canon characters RP vs. Original characters RP. Which do you prefer?

[Mera]

Okay!! So I always lurk around Group interest checks, and I noticed that some of them allow Canon characters from different series. This has always been a foreign concept for me since I've always RPd with characters I made myself, and so I was wondering why people use Canon characters instead of using an OC? :0 I'd love to see some viewpoints!!

I love OCs and I love OC interactions, and this is probably because I'm an artist myself TBH but I don't see myself ever playing a canon character :0 But I wanna see how y'all feel

 

[Chordling]

I've never roleplayed as a canon character myself because I don't think I could do the job justice. But I think people find the same enjoyment playing as the characters that they know and love for the same reason we find enjoyment in creating our own characters and watching them develop and grow. They're different styles of roleplaying that are both acceptable.

 

[Mera]

I've never roleplayed as a canon character myself because I don't think I could do the job justice. But I think people find the same enjoyment playing as the characters that they know and love for the same reason we find enjoyment in creating our own characters and watching them develop and grow. They're different styles of roleplaying that are both acceptable.

Agreed!! I also tbh get a little nervous thinking about playing as a character that has a set-in-stone personality and such and I think unconsciously I'd probably pound my head into wondering "Would this be how X acts?? In the series there was something similar I think, but would this be different or the same??" And so forth LOL I'm a worrywart

 

[Chordling]

Yeah, I would constantly concern myself over the same things. But come to think of it, a lot of people play characters with "set" personalities in roleplays quite often. There are many writers who like to flesh out characters with elaborate character sheets before beginning a story. Granted, maybe there is a difference in flexibility between a canon character and an original character when it comes down to how the personality changes and develops.

 

[Mera]

Yeah, I would constantly concern myself over the same things. But come to think of it, a lot of people play characters with "set" personalities in roleplays quite often. There are many writers who like to flesh out characters with elaborate character sheets before beginning a story. Granted, maybe there is a difference in flexibility between a canon character and an original character when it comes down to how the personality changes and develops.

I'm pretty sure there's a difference in flexibility in how a character proceeds, I agree! In OCs you have some leeway since, in the end of the day, they're your own characters and you decide what development they have, whereas a canon character can only be developed with assumptions with what's been shown :0 But both ways of roleplaying are valid ^^

 

[rae2nerdy]

So as someone who will do canons if the story allows I tend to find it fun to imagine different story arcs for them.

Basically a game of what if - what if they had different families, different friends, different spouses, different schools/jobs, etc.

I also love crossover roleplays which is basically - What if Canon A lived in Universe 2 with Canon B?

I don’t look at it necessarily as making a carbon copy so much as writing my interpretation of the character. Ask anyone who deals in canons and they’ll tell you interpretations vary wildly.

It’s why I don’t do canon romance, because I am more concerned with telling my canons story than making them someone’s crush.

 

[Mera]

So as someone who will do canons if the story allows I tend to find it fun to imagine different story arcs for them.

Basically a game of what if - what if they had different families, different friends, different spouses, different schools/jobs, etc.

I also love crossover roleplays which is basically - What if Canon A lived in Universe 2 with Canon B?

I don’t look at it necessarily as making a carbon copy so much as writing my interpretation of the character. Ask anyone who deals in canons and they’ll tell you interpretations vary wildly.

It’s why I don’t do canon romance, because I am more concerned with telling my canons story than making them someone’s crush.

Oooh! This gives me a good view on it! Yeah I can totally see that! ^^ It's the same with me putting same OCs in different RPs with different plots! That's so interesting aaa

 

[Onmyoji]

I like to play canon Characters.

The thing about doing them justice and playing them close to how they could act in canon is indeed a challenge but for me that challenge is also a part of the fun.

Sometimes I'm literally looking for the "proper" reaction of the character I'm playing by thinking about different things they could do.
I often play canon divergent AU, which puts the familiar Character in different circumstances so it's a lot of fun to try to get into the character's head and explain their motivations in those circumstances.

Not saying that it can't be done with OC. I play OC too.

It does limit me to certain characters though. When I play them I pick the ones that I know I can play, not just pick a favorite character and roll with it. I have plenty of characters that I like but I wouldn't want to rp them because I don't "know" them enough.

 

[Crow]

I just do whatever I want. For the most part I prefer Original Characters because there's no one behind my back berating about how poorly I portray certain characters.

 

[Jannah]

I'm strictly OC's. Half the fun of writing for me is being able to create my own characters. Plus, from my experiences, a lot of people looking for others to play canons are often doing so to play self-insert OC's. That's a huge nope from me.

 

[Crayons]

I highly prefer OCs-only RP, maybe with canons as occasional NPCs if it's a fandom. However, I would play canon characters under the right circumstances, but verrrrry unlikely to play canonxOC for the reasons Jannah explained above.

I really, really dislike any mixing of separate universes, it feels really wrong to me. If it's an AU and all the characters from X fandom are in Y setting, then that can be fun. But if it's characters from A, B, C fandoms all hanging out together then no. I don't even like it in video games when you have crossovers or guest characters. I am strictly a one-continuity-at-a-time person. XD

 

[Idea]

I do not play cannon characters myself, nor participate in RPs that allow them to be used, with the single exception of using a cannon character which due to the fandom in question is unavoidable, and even then it's only as an NPC.

There are several reasons for this. To begin with, I think it's better to have a character made that is tailored to the RP in question, rather than shoved into it, not just because I think this helps things go more smoothly but also because there is a certain level of commitment that is lost if this is not the case. This is also why I had a problem with pre-built OCs, though my mind has been gradually shifting on that topic lately.

Second, I cannot see a cannon character being used that does NOT distort the original work. Even the best, most skilled writer using cannon characters will still ultimately portray them however they experienced that character, or try to anyway, which is just a slice of the original form of it. Furthermore, a lot of the best characters aren't as good as they are by themselves, but instead the context- other characters, the plot, the specific arc they go through etc...- it all contributes to making a character work. All of that is pretty much lost when extrapolating a character from their original story into a roleplay.

Third, cannon characters tend to come with unrealistic expectations. Most of the time, cannon characters are played because there is some kind of admiration that the player has towards them. This admiration, whatever form it takes, is what drives a player to want that specific character, what gives them passion for the RP. But all too often things like basic RP etiquette are in the way of fulfilling that vision they may have for the character they want to play. The most obvious examples is that, if the character is an incredibly powerful badass in the original, a player may be prone to godmodding, and if they are incredibly intelligent, then metagaming is almost certain to ensue. There are also less obvious cases, such as a character that is viewed as someone who endures a lot of crap from life having a player that always feels the need to one up everyone else on whatever suffering they inflict upon their own characters. Which is to say nothing of the behavior displayed if they are confronted with the effect that their attempt to get to that vision they have for the character has on their partner or other players in the same RP.

Now, I do want to make it clear, while I believe that playing cannon characters makes it easier to slip into those problems, I am not saying that it automates it happening. This kind of behavior is extremely common from what I've seen, but it's at least partially due to the relative percentage of more inexperienced roleplayers present in fandom. Most roleplayers start out playing fandom, so there's naturally going to be a larger amount of players who are simply new rather than bad and rather than the thing they are playing being inherently terrible, I certainly don't think it is.

At the same time, however, it's a risk without reward for me. The fact is, because of what I mentioned, cannon is prone to distorting the original characters and distorting them in a poor way, with undue expectations that often miss the point of why the character worked in the first place. The causes for this are so fundamentally tied to the very cause of why someone would play a cannon character in the first place, that I don't think one can fully rid themselves of them. Add to that a mismatch of player goals, and what you get is that I'm just better off avoiding them entirely.


Still, even this explanation may not be perfect. It's hard to put to words.

 

[Windsock]

Expy-based OC all day errydeigh. "it's totally based on X but it isn't X so go nuts" is my preferred methodology. To make something definitively inspired by a source or two and heavily based upon them, but distinct from them so that you can go bonkers with it and go new directions without possibly souring the original taste for other people or alienating the resulting work from the source material is the best way of going about it in my opinion.

 

[Daisie]

I've never actually ROLEPLAYED canon characters before, but there was a brief time where I tried my hand at fan fiction.

Honestly, at first I tried canon and OC, but was shocked to find that I found my own character incredibly boring. I hated writing her, and I would have much rathered putting my focus into working on the canon characters.

I found there's a sort of sense of accomplishment that stems from playing a canon character correctly, in my mind. I get an amount of pride when I can imagine everything about the character in my head. A certain way of phrasing something, a hand gesture, the manner and cadence of which they speak, if I can imagine them - their voice saying the lines I've madefor them - then it gives me a great sense of accomplishment.

I should try doing that again sometime, actually.

 

[M.J. Saulnier]

Originals, all the way.


Canon characters are basically impossible to write long-term. The moment you pick up someone else's IP, particularly a pop culture icon, the game changes entirely. It's no longer fun, no longer some silly story hidden in the depths of the internet. You've now picked up something that means a great deal to a great number of people, and you've picked up something that simply isn't yours. Now you have an innate responsibility to that creator, that character, and that fan base to know what you're doing if you're going to even try in the first place.


No one is good at canon characters. Even the people who firmly believe they are one with the character, and those who manage to get by doing fandom on a regular basis. 99.9% of all role players cannot write canon characters. It's too much to ask of someone to write them for 500+ pages. You don't know them that well. Chances are that RP is longer than their actual canon appearance lengths...


No. Just no. I love you for trying, I get it, but no.










Just no.

 

[Bone2pick]

Okay!! So I always lurk around Group interest checks, and I noticed that some of them allow Canon characters from different series. This has always been a foreign concept for me since I've always RPd with characters I made myself, and so I was wondering why people use Canon characters instead of using an OC? :0 I'd love to see some viewpoints!!

I do it for the opportunity to tell a story with a character I love, or see potential in. I've been "playing canon characters" since I was young child. Storytelling with my X-Men action figures (eh, toys, who am I kidding), or my ninja turtles. Good times.

I don't experience playing a canon character as more of challenge than playing an original character, so that's not an issue. And it's deeply satisfying to hop into the shoes of an iconic villain like DC Comic's the Penguin and tear through Gotham's underworld.

 

[missflags]

I play exclusively canon characters. Writing a good OC is REALLY hard for me. I find that the constraints of having to stick to a personality that has been laid out for me really helps. The characters that we write for should be as complex and we are in real life. When I write for a canon and think “what would the character do in this situation?” or “I need to stay true to this character,” it helps me portray an ACTUAL personality. If I roleplay an OC and do not ask those questions, I take it as a red flag that I have not developed that character enough. I know a lot of people view it as constraining, but I feel like good writing (for me at least) requires at least some constraints. In real life, I as a person have certain ways that I will and will not respond to events. My OC should not be this free form kind of limitless person with endless capabilities and possibilities. There should be some sort of consistency in their alignment and behavior. For me, it’s really hard coming up with this on the fly.

Also, when I roleplay a fandom, I enjoy replicating the feel of reading or watching the fandom. There may be some head canon to an extent, but the goal is to get a feel as close to the original. That’s because I love the fandom so much and use roleplaying as an outlet to explore that more.

I also really do not enjoy it when an OC exists for the pure purpose of being the romantic interest of a canon character. This happens more often than not. If it develops, sure. But often times, that development takes away from the charm of the fandom, especially if the canon in question already had a pretty clear canon love interest.

Not all OCs lead to terrible situations, obviously. But writing a good OC is HARD. I’ve played with my fair share of really developed OCs with brilliant plot contributions. But I’ve definitely been in more precarious situations with OCs than I have with canon characters.
But maybe it just boils down to how you screen your potential roleplay partner.

 

[rae2nerdy]

M Mesenterium I have a quote that I think might help you with understanding canons. It has to do with books/fandom but it works for canon based roleplays as well.

"A book exists for the readers not the Author."

Basically any fandom exists because the audience has a personal connection to the source material and interprets it in their own unique ways. At the end of the day if canon were solely about what the original creator intended than it wouldn't be published. It would just be some screenplay/manuscript sitting on their computer.

You are already going to have your own interpretation of the canon work anyway so by playing a canon character you are merely fleshing that out and asking yourself to delve deeper into what you feel about a character and why.

A good example - Your age related thread. You started out with a surface question but talking it out with other people helped you clarify your stance. Playing a canon is similar you start out with a surface understanding and playing the character just helps you flesh it out.

 

[Idea]

At the end of the day if canon were solely about what the original creator intended than it wouldn't be published.

I have to disagree on this point, as I believe there is a mislabeling of the word "canon" here, or at least a very different philosophy when it comes to the "correct" interpretation of a book.

I'll keep it short since I don't want to derail this thread, but as always if you'd like further discussion on the topic my PMs are open. Basically, I do not believe in the idea often referred to as "death of the author", the idea that the audience interpretation of a work is as valid as the author's writing of it. I believe the claim that the audience- composed of a myriad of different viewpoints, all of which different, and all of which only grasping a fraction of what was actually written and linguistic interactions of what was written, sometimes reading even in an entirely different temporal, geographical and cultural context than the work was written in- would be even capable of giving a correct interpretation of a work by more than chance or perhaps intense study (and even then, it'd be extremely difficult). I believe that the correct interpretation starts from what is written and is complemented by the author's intentions as they wrote for nuance.

As such, I have to argue that "canon", if by that we mean the valid interpretation of the events, characters and so forth from a literally work, is not something a fandom can claim ownership of. Which is not to say their individual experiences with the book are invalid, but just that those experiences and interpretations derived thereof can only describe someone's personal experience with the book, and not the book itself.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Idea from a practical perspective though it also doesnt matter what the author intends. Because unless they are handholding their audience through a consumption of their materials (i.e. this is how you should interpret this, this is what I want you to feel about that) than it is ultimately no more meaningful than a readers interpretation

Because you first interpret materials in a vacuum usually. The first reading of a material is colored by your own personal experiences. Then you will argue and flesh them out through interacting with fans or the author.

But just in the same way you cant dictate to me how I feel about your character in a roleplay you can’t claim that the author can dictate how the audience feels about canon work.

It’s great if you feel a personal connection to your stories and characters, but that is totally disconnected from how your audience is going to interact with them, which is something I think a lot of role players struggle with.

They assume their interpretation of their characters is going to be carried over onto their audience. It’s a bit of a cognitive dissonance with a lot of players.

“I can’t connect to a character I didn’t create but I also want my partners to connect with my original character the same way as me. “

I think canons sort of bridge that gap. Because you are already acknowledging that you don’t have to have the same connection/interpretation of a character as it’s creator. That you get to make that character your own through writing it in your stories.

In the same way I can interpret my partners OC in ways they never intended based on my lived experience (a good example is when people try to make characters with mental illness. As someone whose family has a lot of mental illness I am going to interpret those characters very differently than someone who maybe has no experience and only knows about it from research or pop culture)

Does this mean their interpretation is invalid? No. It just means it’s not universal. Same with a published work, an author has merely only interpretation of their work. It is not the “correct” one just because they made the work, it is only correct in the sense it’s how they view their work.

But you can’t send something out into the world (even the small world of a roleplay on this site) and expect every person to agree with your interpretation of it.

 

[Idea]

from a practical perspective though it also doesnt matter what the author intends. Because unless they are handholding their audience through a consumption of their materials (i.e. this is how you should interpret this, this is what I want you to feel about that) than it is ultimately no more meaningful than a readers interpretation

Let me put it this way:

Imagine a message written on a language that is now absolutely dead. No one alive can read or speak the language anymore. Does this mean that the message means nothing, that the moment the last person who could read it passed away, the message suddenly magically lost the meaning it had?

Imagine now that you write a letter to someone. However, because of cultural differences, lived experiences, mood that day anything but what would affect the actual content of the letter, the person interprets the message to mean the opposite of what you intended and wrote as per that intention. Is this truly not the other person simply misunderstanding the meaning of the letter?

Why is art, another form of expression often even more deliberately tailored than either of the first two examples, arbitrarily exempt from the notion that people can interpret it wrong? Once produced, the content of the written word does not change, and if it did then it would be a new version of the work and not the original one. The author's "interpretation" is not so much an interpretation, it is in fact the very meaning which the art is seeking to convey, it is the meaning of that art piece in of itself. And if the author changes their mind later, that does change the meaning of the art either.

Because you first interpret materials in a vacuum usually. The first reading of a material is colored by your own personal experiences. Then you will argue and flesh them out through interacting with fans or the author.

No one interpretation, be it the first or any other, is done in a vaccum. It is done with all the circumstances with which you are surrounded. The simplest thing, things which have nothing to do with the art in question, can radically change how you view something on a reading.

Stepped on a leggo? Your bad mood can make you have a negative impression of the events, perhaps misinterpreting a conversation for an argument, or presuming malicious from a character giving simple advice.

A word in your community carries a certain uncommon connotation? That can color how you view places in the work that use that work.

But just in the same way you cant dictate to me how I feel about your character in a roleplay you can’t claim that the author can dictate how the audience feels about canon work.

It’s great if you feel a personal connection to your stories and characters, but that is totally disconnected from how your audience is going to interact with them, which is something I think a lot of role players struggle with.

They assume their interpretation of their characters is going to be carried over onto their audience. It’s a bit of a cognitive dissonance with a lot of players.

But that is not what I am saying in the slightest though. Saying there is a correct interpretation, is not the same as saying that everyone will have that same interpretation. However, if they ascribe their interpretation to the work itself then chances are they are wrong. But in honesty, that is not what most interpretations actually refer to. The meaning a character has to do is not about the character as written, it's about your personal experience with them.

Does this mean their interpretation is invalid? No. It just means it’s not universal. Same with a published work, an author has merely only interpretation of their work. It is not the “correct” one just because they made the work, it is only correct in the sense it’s how they view their work.

But you can’t send something out into the world (even the small world of a roleplay on this site) and expect every person to agree with your interpretation of it.

And I have to disagree there. It is the correct one because they made the work. Doesn't mean everyone has to have the same interpretation. However, if someone makes the statement:

"I have this interpretation which is different from the author's intentions as they wrote the book, and that interpretation correctly describes the book itself not simply my experience with the book"

Then that statement is false.

 

[bobamilktea]

I like both! Honestly, there are pros and cons to either.

- Canon characters give you an outline of what to do and how to do it, complete with a faceclaim that has tons of images to use. It also gives you a world, a universe to adhere to which for some people, provides a desperately necessary structure. Some people have favorite ships too, which makes RPing them and not OCs kind of a necessity. I love to discover new ships through RPing, characters I never thought would interact well, interacting well! It's part of why I love crossover RP so much. But yeah, the structure is good.

- OCs give you full control of your character. There is no 'being in-character' for OCs, YOU create what's in-character for them. This means people can't really judge you for an off performance as they can with canon characters. You have the reins of a whole universe you can change at a whim for the sake of the RP, you can basically make a character that's malleable to your partner's needs and to your own needs. OCs have a downside, though: sometimes we get too much of what we want out of them, and people can find your OCs very self-serving. I think RP should be an indulgent hobby, though, so that's just my Opinion ™ on it. As long as you aren't breaking the game, or acting too differently from what your character sheet lists, having fun is the top priority.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

No one is good at canon characters. Even the people who firmly believe they are one with the character, and those who manage to get by doing fandom on a regular basis. 99.9% of all role players cannot write canon characters. It's too much to ask of someone to write them for 500+ pages. You don't know them that well. Chances are that RP is longer than their actual canon appearance lengths...

So it's ok when it's people who get paid to do it... But when it's a fan it's 110% bad? I don't get it.

 

[Crow]

So it's when it's people who get paid to do it... But when it's a fan it's 110% bad? I don't get it.

There is a point here. There are lots of characters with hundreds upon hundreds of authors, many of which have fans agreeing on who the best is rarely being the original iteration of the character.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

There is a point here. There are lots of characters with hundreds upon hundreds of authors, many of which have fans agreeing on who the best is rarely being the original iteration of the character.

Yeah also a lot of comic writers tend to start out on fanfiction. Hell, people remember the G1 Transformers cartoon more than the original Marvel Comics. Granted, the people who do know about the comics agree the writing there is better. Also Honestly... I see no difference between Canon vs. OC... Because sometimes people tend to use expies in those RPs anyways.

It's all about the quality of writing.