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

[Crenando]

I've seen a lot more embarrassing attempts at OCs than embarrassing attempts at writing canon characters.
I've also seen a lot of elitism when it comes to OCs, when the most I've seen in terms of canon characters is the expectation to actually read/watch/listen to/play the source material, which is common sense.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

In the end of the day, Canon or Orignal... I see no difference except for the chance of someone telling you that you're playing the canon character wrong. Meanwhile with OCs they'd just say the OC sucks.

 

[Idea]

I've seen a lot more embarrassing attempts at OCs than embarrassing attempts at writing canon characters.
I've also seen a lot of elitism when it comes to OCs, when the most I've seen in terms of canon characters is the expectation to actually read/watch/listen to/play the source material, which is common sense.

There are a lot more recognized ways to fail at making an OC than at making a cannon character. If someone is playing a character with a terribly written personality, and it's a cannon character, that's not going to be atributed to the person playing the canon character for instance.

Furthermore, most of the time you don't just pick any cannon character, you pick one that already did the work of making a strong impression on you and which you know better. It's only natural that the most successful, well-written or at least impactful characters are chosen, which is going to be more refined than you average OC by default.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

Does it mean that they are "canon"? Absolutely not, unless the author says so

Pretty sure those movies are canon to themselves... I don't get what you're trying to get at here... I mean I might as well tell every writer at Marvel and DC writing a character that they didn't create is instantly non-canon. I think you don't actually seem to understand the word "canon." I mean the MCU is its own Continuity much like the DCEU. They're both OFFICIALLY a part of the companies respective multiverses. Also George Lucas sold the rights of Star Wars to Disney so it's not his say anymore legally speaking.

I fandom RP but I'm not gonna say it's canon to official work. I know that it isn't so I use it as an excuse to do my own spin on things to keep things fresh for the reader.

As a fledgling writer in the comic book industry... I must strongly disagree with you.

Stay safe, love you, bye.

 

[Crenando]

I'm just gonna put this out here, before we move forward:
Most things that are officially published in certain popular, long-running settings with a multiverse are canon somewhere. Officially, they only really use the term for things that were intended to be part of the main universe but were then contradicted later (DC's Earth-85, all the contradictory Transformers media, those Pokemon remakes, et al.)
A story can be non-canon to a particular universe but still be canon overall somewhere else, if that's what it takes to have a story matter to you personally.

Some dude's RP on the internet is by definition non-canon anyways, because it's fan fiction, and I think that's something most people in the community will agree on anyways. I don't even know how canonicity entered the discussion, honestly.

 

[BNY]

i always find it really interesting when people vehemently dislike seeing canons being played. i mean, i'm not saying people have to like canon rp by any means! but a handful of successful authors, even outside of E.L. James (who i kind of feel is probably the most famous of this group), got their momentum from writing fanfiction.

even more interesting is that plenty of creators love seeing fanfic, love seeing the works that fans produce! the most prominent example i can think of is gene roddenberry and his love of the fanzine spockanalia. he would even give copies of the zine to new writers and anyone else who made decisions on the show as "required reading" because he felt that fan interpretations of his work were equally as important as his own, and that in some cases, fans had a better understanding of the character spock than he- spock's creator- did.

of course, not every creator feels that way, but the fact that even some creators enjoy fanworks and use them to direct their creations, respect the interpretations that fans derive, and even see all interpretations as valid, means that there's not really any way to definitively say that fanworks will never be as valuable or even as accurate as canon material when creators can and do use fans and their derivative work to influence and develop their canon.

(though, to clarify, i don't personally see either playing canons or ocs as better. i do both, and it totally just depends on my craving at the moment. i've dropped rps bc i don't appreciate the interpretation of a canon someone else has, and i've changed my own stance on how i view a canon when someone plays them particularly well!)

 

[Delinquent]

I don't really like playing canon characters. If nothing else then because I find it too hard to write a decent character arc for them without repeating the one from their source material.

Also, it doesn't excatly help that the vast majority of characters I like enough to roleplay as wouldn't really work in roleplays anyway.

 

[BNY]

Just because an author is successful and started off by writing fanfiction, it does not mean that their works are good. E. L. James is a perfect example of this as well.

These authors are successful because of their own original works, most part of the time. Not because of fanfiction they wrote, even though the first case might be based on a Twilight fanfiction.

And again, if authors agree that some of their fans' works are canon, then they are, indeed, cannon, because the original author said so. Being canon or not doesn't need to influence one's enjoyment of fanfiction, canon roleplay or even the original work. In my case, it does though. And if I am to be honest, maybe I'd prefer it didn't. That way I'd have a whole new world to explore of fanfiction and canon roleplay.

Look, I don't deny the benefits of writing fanfiction/roleplaying as canon characters: you are practising your writing skills, you are enjoying something.
Again: there is NOTHING wrong with liking fanfiction and roleplaying as canon characters.

Still, canon is canon, fanfiction is fanfiction, canon roleplay is not canon, people who don't enjoy fanfiction/canon roleplay are not saying that fanworks suck.

i definitely don't think you're saying fanworks are less valuable, but some responses (definitely not yours, definitely not all of them) in this thread have definitely alluded to it, including talking about how no one but the creator will ever be able to accurately portray/understand the canon characters (which is obviously not true, and mostly what i was referencing in my own post).

(also, there's no way to definitely decide what's good and what isn't. while i don't, plenty of people LOVE 50 shades of gray and think it's good.)

 

[BNY]

Well, I do think that the author is the one that has the clearest idea about their own characters.
In fact, I mentioned that I don't believe that any human being can replicate the artwork of another human being: it happens in plastic arts, why not also in writing? It is art, nonetheless.
This doesn't mean that fans don't have a clear idea about the character, it simply means that, when roleplaying as them, they will inevitably put a bit of themselves (I mean, a few their own ideas) into the character, and that does make me feel uncomfortable. It happens, we are all human, it is part of us. And that does not correspond with the canon version of the character, even if just slightly. That makes me uncomfortable. But just I am uncomfortable, that doesn't mean that such work is not good work. Being uncomfortable with fanfiction/canon roleplay does not, in any way, devalue fanwork. It is simply just not for me.

This is why you have literature classes, for instance. One can affirm that everyone has a different take on a story/character concept and that that interpretation is right. Imagine if historians interpreted historical documents just as they please. That would be chaos. When it comes to literature, it doesn't make that much difference, because we are normally talking about fiction, in general (even though you have non-fiction as a literary genre, and in such cases not having an objective interpretation makes the difference). Still, an objective interpretation will allow the reader to even notice stylistic details that contribute to the original concept. If things are interpreted in their own way, they might not be consistent with such stylistic details. This happens a lot when it comes to studying poetry, for instance. There is a reason why you have people that dedicate their lives to studying literature, and I believe that the idea "you can interpret everything as you please" is a romanticised version of what studying literature actually is. Just a bit as the idea of "there is no bad art, art is whatever you want it to be". Sure, for someone who doesn't study literature it is perfectly fine to accept the feelings the book gives them, or even trying to explore them in different ways. Professionally, things are different. But roleplaying and writing fanfiction are not things we do so professionally, therefore there are no strict rules over interpretation. Still, I don't think it is correct to say that we can interpret everything as we please and that all interpretations are valid.

Take, for instance, an extremely talented artist, that is going to try to recreate the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, by Michelangelo. It will probably be an artwork that might even be as good as the original. But it won't be the original. To me, it happens the same when we are speaking about roleplaying canon characters or writing fanfiction. I am, by no means, saying that not being able to portray a character 100% accurately makes the roleplayer a bad writer. Not at all! It makes them human.

i actually think we’re more in agreement on this than disagreement because that’s the way i feel about it too. the human additions to canon characters make them BETTER to me, personally, but i concede that honestly there’s not going to be a 100% accurate portrayal to nearly anyone since fans and creators have different perspectives on any given work and an idea of what’s right and wrong.

honestly, i just got rankled by the tone i perceived in some posts in this thread. it read less “i don’t like this” and more “this is bad,” which i don’t personally believe is fair, you know?

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

honestly, i just got rankled by the tone i perceived in some posts in this thread. it read less “i don’t like this” and more “this is bad,” which i don’t personally believe is fair, you know?

I just don't like how that one person was putting words into my mouth.

 

[BNY]

Wel, I definitely have to disagree here. There is good and bad art, and that has to do with the way certain techniques are used, in which extension, etc. Granted, my field of study is not arts, but I try to study it as an hobby.

Yes, I totally understand. And I never wanted to pass that idea. I try to make my tone as neutral as possible, as we are debating, and impartiality above all. But if I came off as rude, I am sorry. I respect everyone's opinions.

aha see, i graduated in fine arts and philosophy, so we're definitely going to disagree, but that's not a bad thing. something i learned from a cool professor is that if it makes you feel something, it's art and art only has the value you assign it. you might think it's good, or you might think it's bad. naturally, there are ways to approach it; you can't pass off a impressionist work as a dadaist statement, but neither school of art is bad, and in in fact, many schools of art eschew the idea that there even is form! so we have fundamentally different worldviews, but i don't know that either is inherently wrong.

that being said, you honestly didn't come off as rude to me or in response to me. i'm glad we could talk and share our perspectives.

 

[BNY]

True indeed! And that's great, art and philosophy are two things I love as well, not professionally, as my field is focused on biological sciences.
I don't disagree with you when you say that there is no superior art school/thinking. I quite agree with you on that!
Indeed, having different views is not bad, in fact, it is extremely necessary. Agree to disagree! And, once again, I am sorry for anything. I don't want to come off as rude nor arrogant, that was never my point.

genuinely no worries with me. i came away with some new perspectives!

 

[Crayons]

aha see, i graduated in fine arts and philosophy, so we're definitely going to disagree, but that's not a bad thing. something i learned from a cool professor is that if it makes you feel something, it's art and art only has the value you assign it. you might think it's good, or you might think it's bad. naturally, there are ways to approach it; you can't pass off a impressionist work as a dadaist statement, but neither school of art is bad, and in in fact, many schools of art eschew the idea that there even is form! so we have fundamentally different worldviews, but i don't know that either is inherently wrong.

that being said, you honestly didn't come off as rude to me or in response to me. i'm glad we could talk and share our perspectives.

I studied art too, and I definitely think there is a big difference between "good or bad", and "like or don't like" and actually I find it a little worrisome that your art professor says that it's all down to feelings.... seems very fluffy and maybe an excuse to not teach properly. Go get your tuition fees back! "You've drawn one leg about a foot longer than the other one." "But it's just my styyyyyle!" Ah no honey you are just objectively bad at drawing.

But idk maybe fine art is different to applied arts in that respect. It is a bit woolly and fluffy and as much as I wish it wasn't, things that are objectively terrible get accepted by the fine art world very easily. cough cough Tracey Emin's monoprints cough cough.

That said I don't think there's anything inherently good or bad about playing canon characters - RP is not an art to be consumed, it's an art that's enjoyed in the act of creation, so do what thou wilt. Likewise, no one is judging fanfiction. Well, obviously the critical reader is judging it, but again, the enjoyment is in the act of creation as much or more than in the act of reading. Literature is different in that it is written in order to be read, therefore it is open to judgement and criticism, and absolutely should be judged and criticised on an objective as well as subjective level.

 

[Araellion]

I only write OCs. Mostly because it makes me feel kinda iffy to use other people's characters. I worry about butchering them or not portraying them right. Also, I have had bad experiences with other people controlling my characters and make them say or do stuff they usually wouldn't so that may have something to do with it.

It doesn't bother me when other people do it though. For example, I love reading fanfiction and I usually don't even really notice if something is off about the characters unless it's glaringly obvious. Maybe because I go into it knowing that the fanfiction isn't canon. It's just a way for me to interact with the universe more once I have already seen everything that's canon.

 

[M.J. Saulnier]

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.

It's generally bad when they pay someone else to do it, but they've done it legally so it is what it is. And at least in those instances you get a coherent, professionally structured and organized story arc with characters that gel. That writer probably got access to the full bio pic for every character. Fans tend to have predispositions and bias when writing their idols.

The structure of generic role play also makes these attempts worse by default. I'd love to read all of your solo fanfic work, but in RP but you should really stick to telling your own stories with your own characters.

 

[Hella Downweather]

I use both OC and Canon characters pretty fluently, depending on what mood I am to be honest :3 I don't think there is one superior way to do things, though I do know people here can get a bit squeamish when Canon characters are portrayed in a romance with an OC. I also tend to play pretty different characters, as every RP scratch a different need of mine.

When playing in a fandom setting, I'm all for Canon characters! They are established in universe, they already have relationships with a lot of characters, and you have a solid base for them. I also really enjoy playing Canons that would be outside of my OC comfort zone because it allows me to draw from the source material when I get stuck in a scene. For example, I started writing introverts with Tamaki from BNHA or Bleach characters and slowly moved towards making more shy and silent OC in other RPs once I understood the dynamic better.

I love playing a Canon character against an OC (platonic or romance, doesn't matter), because it allows me to spin the character in a way or light that is more personal, and to give a bit of myself to a fandom I really enjoy. And vice versa, I love playing OC against canon character because it would put a character I enjoy in a totally new situation. It's fresh, it's fun, and when the banter starts it's really satisfying.

Again in BNHA, I discovered a favorite character of mine, Denki, AFTER roleplaying against him. I didn't care much for him before, but my partner played him so well that I reread parts of the manga and quickly placed him amongst my favs.

The risk with playing Canon characters is that your partner wants instant gratification without a nice and sweet build up before hand. (hello love at first sight, trope that I hate so much)

Whereas when you start an OC character, it can take more work. You need to create a story, a family, powers and abilities, a balanced personality, all from scratch. It can be hard to roleplay right of the bat something on the polar opposite of yourself, since you don't have a lot to base yourself on.

It can also feel a lot more personal, and some people simply refuse to have negative relationship with their OC, since they can be so close to the writer IRL. (personally I don't mind/even enjoy it in group setting, but it's not everyone's cup of tea). The boundary between an OC and it's writer is sometimes a bit ambiguous, and I must admit that I have trouble creating a character that doesn't share a few interests or personality traits with me. For example, a common theme for my OCs is their love of technology, since it's something that is dear to me, even if some have no clue how anything with a circuit board works whereas others can control them without trouble.

Some people will only play one OC, that they polish with every partner. Others (like me) have a library of different characters that they like to play, with different ages, sex, personalities and so on.

TLDR : For me, a Canon character and an OC have different uses, but I enjoy playing them pretty equally

 

[Murdergurl]

I only play as OCs, and typically only in original settings. I'm not a particular fangirl of a whole lot of popular topics, so 9 times out of 10 I don't know a damn thing about said fandom. But even in the very few fandoms I'm into, I still only play as an original character. I also don't write alongside canon characters. So while I can sometimes use the backdrop of a preordained universe (but usually in an abstract way not concurrent with the main storyline it came from), I only involve myself if it's an all-original cast.

I could explain, but... I don't think anyone cares. lol

 

[Hyde]

I think that it really depends on the plot or setting for me.

I tend to enjoy canonical characters on occasion, like when I'm craving to write for a certain fandom or if I'm writing a crossover, but other than that, I really prefer to write as OCs. I feel like there is much more freedom with OCs and you aren't chained to pre-established behaviors, timelines, and relationships. There are fanfictions and AUs that change this, of course, but there is still an underlying rule that you shouldn't write completely out of character. I also don't really like the notion that playing as a canonical character usually means that you're willing to write a pairing between that character and someone's OC. These kinds of Roleplays are becoming less and less common, but still, I see them and the entitlement on other sites about these kinds of ships are unbelievable.

 

[IamTheBus]

Having learned and primarily used tumblr for RP, I'm mostly used to canons, but it's been a bit of a culture shock seeing people say they don't write canons because they wouldn't be able to do them justice. I've always seen these two things as pretty much two sides of the same skill; no matter how much canon writing there is, you're always going to have to fill in gaps that aren't detailed in canon and take your own interpretation to the character. An OC is just the logical extreme of that- in both cases you're using your own sensibilities and skills to create a coherent whole out of themes and motifs.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

It's generally bad when they pay someone else to do it, but they've done it legally so it is what it is. And at least in those instances you get a coherent, professionally structured and organized story arc with characters that gel. That writer probably got access to the full bio pic for every character. Fans tend to have predispositions and bias when writing their idols.

The structure of generic role play also makes these attempts worse by default. I'd love to read all of your solo fanfic work, but in RP but you should really stick to telling your own stories with your own characters.

If I'm gonna write a story about my own characters... I'm not gonna waste them on an RP that would stunt my ability to write personal stories about them.

 

[M.J. Saulnier]

If I'm gonna write a story about my own characters... I'm not gonna waste them on an RP that would stunt my ability to write personal stories about them.

The scene isn't what it used to be. Artists have been replaced by hobbyists. So no, no one will see value in playing a supporting character in said personal story.

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

The scene isn't what it used to be. Artists have been replaced by hobbyists. So no, no one will see value in playing a supporting character in said personal story.

I don't want to play the bit role in someone else's story. If I'm gonna express myself... I prefer that the blockades be those I impose on to myself. Also Hobbyists could still have the same amount passion as "Artists". I suggest you don't generalize people.

 

[M.J. Saulnier]

I don't want to play the bit role in someone else's story. If I'm gonna express myself... I prefer that the blockades be those I impose on to myself. Also Hobbyists could still have the same amount passion as "Artists". I suggest you don't generalize people.

The bit role?


90% of CSs are schticks.... Glorified bits. Most people can't make a character without some sort of gimmick to distract from the fact that it's essentially a bag of pulp to "have fun" with. As a writer, I have no problem with playing supporting roles in a story that is more centralized and focused on one main character. It's so relaxing and interesting vs the usual destruction derby of egos smashing around a sandbox.

 

[Crayons]

The scene isn't what it used to be. Artists have been replaced by hobbyists. So no, no one will see value in playing a supporting character in said personal story.

The horror that a hobby is populated by hobbyists! How very dare they?!

 

[Phantom Thief of Hearts]

The horror that a hobby is populated by hobbyists! How very dare they?!

I know, right? How dare people just do things for fun and not take role playing (Which is considered cringey in the greater internet community) super seriously.