Experiences What do you think about when you give a character a negative trait?

[Metallic Bold]

For example, I randomized the positive trait: self-reliant. It means to work independently, able to make their decisions with their own experiences with little to no outside help. And I thought: "Hey, that's a pretty helpful trait but what if my character didn't have that? What if he struggled with making decisions for himself and often leaned on others?" This is a great negative trait because throughout the story his growth could be becoming independent and confident. But on the flip side, wouldn't that be kinda annoying? To constantly have a character not know what they're doing with themselves and being useless to the conflict? Don't people hate those kinds of fumbling, princess needs to be saved kind of characters? I'm a firm believer that anyone can bring something to the table despite their experiences, but this little mull over made me wonder what other role-players do in this situation.

So, what do you think about when you give a character a negative trait?

 

[nerdy tangents]

So my best advice don’t take criticism of your character personally. That’s where a lot of people go wrong. They make a character who has qualities other people don’t like (either intentionally or unintentionally) and then they get personally offended when the other players don’t like their character or call out their behavior.

And it goes in reverse as well, sometimes personality traits you personally find off putting won’t be off putting to your partner or their characters. It all comes down to how you act with the other player(s).

Are you as a player making your partner do all the work? Are you getting angry when they don’t compliment your character/writing/whatever? Are you being mean about their writing/character/whatever?

That’s the stuff that’s gonna piss off your partner. You writing a character (no matter what the character traits) isn’t going to be that annoying. Not as long as you still remain cool in the OOc.

 

[Jet]

Can you make it entertaining? That's the most important thing imo. Writing is entertainment and that's forgotten when people discuss literature, because people want to seem "elevated."

People will forgive anything if a character is entertaining. Look at how many characters are genuine pieces of shit wrapped in more shit, like Negan from the walking dead. He's a murderous, lecherous bastard who killed several fan favorites, but he's funny and charismatic, so fans loved him.

So make the indecision entertaining in some way, maybe comedic even? Then people will like the character despite their "annoying" traits.

One other suggestion — don't make them whiney. They can be indecisive but whiney is another thing entirely. I think that's what people hate more than anything. You can also make them self aware and have them bemoan their own indecision, which is a pretty common thing IRL.

 

[Revatra]

Hm, personally from my own roleplay experiences, I think about whether or not the negative trait I give to a character matches what you want to do with them. Roleplay is first and foremost meant to be fun for everyone, but shaping and molding a character can be complex for some. I usually offset a character's negative traits with their positive ones, then think whether or not this'll make for an interesting story.

For example, say I give a character the trait of always being paranoid. This might lead to them constantly looking over their shoulder, scrambling in their mind , doubting themselves, and not trusting others. But I also slap on accident prone/clumsy on top of it. So you have a character who thinks things are going to be wrong while stumbling over themselves constantly. Here, I'm setting up both a comedic aspect to a character as well as painting a story and making it interesting and entertaining for others. Why are they so clumsy? What happened to make them so paranoid? This character is hilarious, I wanna know more about them!

That's typically what goes through my mind when creating characters. Of course, this is an example, and clumsy and paranoid won't always work since they are somewhat negative traits themselves. Charismatic, wise, smart, fearful, funny, angry, sorrowful; there are a bunch of different combinations out there. Mix and mash a few, see whatcha get! Then experiment with others!

 

[Rojuc]

Its a good thing to practice but its difficult to maintain. Negative traits and flaws are cool to have since it makes the character's personality more dynamic. Also, a tool for character development. But remembering that its there feels like a chore most of the time.

 

[cheeseburger90210]

Giving character negative actions and traits, and adding weaknesses in addition to that; makes a character appear more real.

 

[GrumpySwallow]

I don't actively think about positive and negative traits for my characters. I don't look at my character sheet and go, "Okay, what are their good and bad traits?" I generally think of their history and who they are as a person, and their strengths and weaknesses come naturally. If my character is a hermit who has always lived in the woods, it's a given that they may not be the best at handling social events. If they are nobility and has always lived a very cushy lifestyle, then it stands to reason that they may be naive to the ways of the "real" world. A very stubborn and tenacious character may never give up no matter how bad things get, which can be a positive trait, but this might also cause them to disregard the well-being and feelings of their party members, which suddenly turns that tenacity into a negative trait.

 

[cheeseburger90210]

I don't actively think about positive and negative traits for my characters. I don't look at my character sheet and go, "Okay, what are their good and bad traits?" I generally think of their history and who they are as a person, and their strengths and weaknesses come naturally. If my character is a hermit who has always lived in the woods, it's a given that they may not be the best at handling social events. If they are nobility and has always lived a very cushy lifestyle, then it stands to reason that they may be naive to the ways of the "real" world. A very stubborn and tenacious character may never give up no matter how bad things get, which can be a positive trait, but this might also cause them to disregard the well-being and feelings of their party members, which suddenly turns that tenacity into a negative trait.

well said.

 

[Idea]

A concept I used to apply when I reviewed characters in group RPs is what I called a 'serious flaw'. It's characteristics were as follows:

• Negative personality trait - Flaws, as opposed to handicaps as per terminology from a certain podcast I used to hear, are related to a character's personality. They are faults of a character rather than a limitation on their capabilities. It's the difference between a character who is a picky eater and a character with strong allergies.
• Concrete - Serious flaws couldn't be too vague, lest it be too open for interpretation.
• Consistent - Serious flaws are consistently a part of the character. It's not dominant in every decision, but they should be present in decisions relevant to them.
• Real Cause of Failure - Arguably the most important point: When the chips are down, serious flaws should present a real risk of failure for your character. What's more, it has to be your character's actual fault. A positive trait can also be exploited by someone with nefarious intent, but a flaw will make you the cause of your own downfall.

I am no longer of the belief this is necessary for a character to be properly flawed, though I would remain firm on the last two points. Either way the standard above had its purpose: It was meant to give a firm answer on whether a character had flaws that a player would actually have to commit to in RP. A flaw that only shows up when it's convenient to the player or which is so vague you can remove it from any situation in which it would actually matter is no flaw at all.

In RP, the purpose of flaws are:
-Humanize the character
-Allow other characters to share the spotlight
-Give the DM and other players something to make your character do things wrong
-Be something your character needs to grow out of
-Be a potential cause of failure for the character

All of these can be summarized in two things: (1) Enable other participants (DM and players) to have their own role and contributions you can't and a plot of which you are a participant (2) Be a centerpiece of characterization and character development.

In the end of the day, like just about every other aspect of a character, negative traits and how well they perform in a character it's a function of compatibility with the RP and other characters, your overall character design, and importantly, the execution of your idea. I would advice keeping the whole point of the character having flaws in mind though. If you evade their consequences, or you fail to account for those in your design and the way you roleplay the character, then you've missed it.

For me personally, character flaws are rarely an issue. Often the character's personal struggles or flawed traits are one of my main basis or a core aspect from which I built my characters. The flaws are the interesting part, so I'm already thinking about how to explore them and make them fun at the outset. Add to this my use of the golden rule of consistency which I find immensely helpful in just coming up with content for my characters, plots etc... and it really ends up coming quite naturally. Well, assuming I have a relative grasp on what personality I want to go for in my character concept anyways.

 

[StrixDesmodus]

I try not to get paranoid about character flaws, but I'm aware of the subjectivity of what makes a character liked or disliked by those on the other side of the fourth wall.
Some people hate certain traits in characters to the effect of not wanting these traits present no matter how the narrative frames them. Traits in this category not only vary from person to person, but can be inconsistent based on what character exhibits them.
What someone might find comical if a male character did it could be considered annoying when done by a female character. A White character who is involved in organized crime might be considered to be "less stereotypical" than a Latino character who is also involved in organized crime. A character who crosses another character's boundaries to get what they want could be considered by some people to be a manipulative jerk while others might consider them to be "go-getters" who "aren't afraid to take what they want" as though it were a good thing.
Another issue: Many people screed against "flawless" characters, but the characters they're talking about actually are flawed; They're just treated as flawless by the person writing them.