Advice/Help To GMs (or others) do you notice/care if your players are reusing their characters from other RPs in your roleplay?

[Aes_Dragon]

Before I explain why I'm asking this question, I like to be perfectly transparent about the fact that this is something that I do, so it's not coming from a bad faith perspective. I don't RP very much, but when I do I pick from one of maybe three-ish characters that I've been using since forever and mold them to better fit the RP. This is something I don't feel bad about or struggle to do since I lean towards more barebone character sheets (my bases are almost nothing more than a name I like, general appearance, and personality blurb) and I hope to have characters fleshed out by their experience in the RP. I also lean towards fandom RPs, so when I reuse a concept the base is usually coming from the same universe. I've also never been approached by a GM or another player for reusing a character. As for why I don't make new characters often, I'd say it's more of just a lack of inspiration than being averse to the idea.

Anyways, I've been thinking of starting a RP and was wondering if this is something I should address. It probably goes without saying that I wouldn't really care if one of my players decided to reuse a character from another RP - I'd be a hypocrite otherwise. I'll clarify that this post isn't talking about characters that are taken from another RP and obviously don't fit into the new one; I'm talking about potentially disallowing the idea just based on principle even if it is executed well. I can see it from both sides. Perhaps a GM just doesn't want to take risks with allowing it at all, or wants their RP to be more 'fresh' by encouraging players to come up with totally new ideas. Or a GM might say, 'as long as the character fits well, who cares if they've been used in another RP?' Heck, there's an entire section of the site dedicated to storing characters, and obviously if you're storing characters somewhere, you intend to use them for something. I think it would suck to spend lots of time making a character, only to not be able to use them in another RP just because you've used them before (potentially in an RP that didn't get very far to begin with). Perhaps this whole thing is more common than I think, or maybe even normal, and I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill.

But I am curious. What are your thoughts? As a GM, do you notice, or even bother to check if a player's submitted character has been reused from another RP? If you do find that this is the case, do you ask them to come with a different character, whether or not they've gone to appropriate lengths to make sure their character is consistent with the roleplay? As a participant in an RP, do you notice or check if this is the case with the other participants? Does it bother you, or not?

 

[chaotic cat cutie]

You could address it but I'd suggest in a simple manner. Be like - I expect a diverse range of characters with interesting and unique characteristics and a one of a kind personality. Try to stray away from face claims reused in other roleplays as this may confuse people's perceptions of your origional character. ?? Maybe?

I mean it's still a long winded sentence but it hits the point without pointing fingers. Also, gives those an opportunity to use an old character but make sure its unique to this one.

Hope this helps

 

[Ayama]

In all my time as an RPer (both player and GM), I have never seen a case of a GM asking about or looking into whether or not a character submitted to their RP had ever been used before. The only times it's ever come up is in the cases where the player just recycles a character verbatim without bothering to adapt them to the RP's setting at all (which you did mention was not the case you were asking about). So no, outside of those cases, I don't believe players or GMs generally care if characters get reused.

 

[Idea]

While I've certainly warmed up a little more to the idea of characters being re-used than I used to, my primary concerns with it remain. Now don't get me wrong, I don't exactly go on witch hunts trying to see who might be a re-used character or not. Unless you make it exceedingly obvious or tell me directly, if you do execute it well enough I might not notice and I wouldn't really be hounding you about it. It's quite possible many characters in my RPs have been of that type and I never knew. What works works in the end, even if I am a little categorically bothered that you couldn't even put in the investment of a character for the story.

There's also something to be said of fandoms specifically. I find it far easier to accept a character being re-used in a fandom rather than an original setting roleplay, the reason being that often the focus of fandom is the fandom itself, which is to say it's setting. This is also true of many original setting RPs of course, but the fandom is setting-focused AND has a shared setting between the various roleplays. A character specifically made for that setting is still more or less just as specifically made for the same setting in a different roleplay. Aside from just the vibe of it such a character has an easier time with some of the other issues.

My actual problem with the pre-made character can really be boiled down to one issue that generates the rest of them - The player is WAY too attached to the character. There is a level of baggage that the character carries, even in those cases where the character isn't some kind of self-insert or otherwise presents some kind of special attachment beyond just being a character they use a lot, both of which are far more common in re-used characters rather than ones made 'fresh' for the RP. The attachment and baggage impacts the flexibility with the character in various ways - from having fixed aspects in the character that may have to be extremely contrived to even begin to resemble something that could fit the host roleplay, assuming the player is at all willing to change them, to the player being unable as the saying goes "kill their darlings" because of the aforementioned attachment. I don't mean killing the character necessarily, but bad things happening to the character or even just a lack of success of things that make the character not live up to the ingrained internal image the player may have of their position or role within the roleplay or group.

Furthermore, while I do generally believe that players tend to come more for their own content than yours and that is often their characters, I do see a special degree of detachment from the world, plot and fellow players when someone is this attached to their own characters. When the roleplay and its story become vehicles to host the character rather than a priority in themselves that's a significant issue. Adding to this of course, when someone is comparatively detached from the roleplay's story and world and likely their fellow player's characters, there is a reduced appreciation for what others contribute as well.

I want to stress that these are not things unique to these types of characters (which is part of why unless told you are using a pre-made character I may not know. I could just think you are experiencing those issues for other reasons), but the fact that the player is so attached to them as to bring them to RPs so frequently and be unwilling to work on a new character makes such players more prone to these issues.

The inflexibility I mentioned has an impact on the credibility of someone saying they will 'adapt' the character. It to be has the same credibility issues of mirroring post lengths, "I will RP anything" claims, no preference claims etc, doubling trading... It's all too often (and for some of those, always) a veneer of being adaptable disguising a lack of self-awareness. Passion and motivation are extremely important particularly in things that take effort. I don't doubt you can probably mirror my post length - But I don't want you to fill it up with empty, pointless content because this isn't actually how you like to write. Saying you have no preferences just means you'll half-ass it when you inevitably run into the stuff you don't actually like. Saying you will 'adapt' the character to the setting often means the player will do the absolute bare minimum work to make the character not incompatible with the setting.

Now I am of the mind that characters shouldn't be slapped into a roleplay half-formed. From my perspective a character should be tailored to its story and setting, it should be built to not only fit them but to take advantage of its characteristics and explore them. A great character isn't a mere self-contained piece but exists in synergy with the context in which they are inserted. Pre-built characters outright lack this entirely as they weren't built from the ground up to fit the setting and plot, but they can theoretically reach the point of being sufficiently adapted without in effect being an entirely new character that they can at least reach 'good' though not necessarily 'great'. At the same time, I think the motivation behind playing a character, that attachment I already mentioned, is in conflict with this goal. After all, both good adaptation and flexible execution of the character requiring taking from the character for the RP.

 

[Cogwork]

Personally I find the idea that one should have to create a completely new character for every roleplay to be asinine. It's only going to result in people putting minimal effort into writing a character because 90% of most roleplays die before they reach 2 pages.

 

[A Sparkling Zombie]

I let people reuse characters as long as they fit the roleplay. A lot of roleplays die before a character can really be used, so I get not wanting to put a character away, or just because someone really enjoys the character. I've done it myself.

I think one way to reduce the issue of character attachment could be to be upfront in the interest check that character death and injury are likely. If a player doesn't heed and respect that warning, that's on them. I'm not sure about the other scenarios Idea raised.

It's probably okay to not be explicit about accepting recycled characters of that's what you decide to do. But if you don't want them, then yes, specify, so that players can be aware.

 

[Sagey]

I'll note now that I am not a GM.

But if someone, GM or RP partner tells me I can't reuse a character and attempts to police that for any reason, that won't be a very kind conversation. I will reuse names and there may be some likeness between the versions, but you can't decide if a person wants to use a character (be they the same exact or not) for two different RPs.

The only person who owns the characters is the one who made them.

 

[Daisie]

Yeah, that's kinda... weird?
I've never heard of a rule stating that you can only use NEW characters... and this is coming from me, the rare breed that basically never recycles characters. In my case, a new RP joined = a new character created, 9 times out of 10.

That being said, if I saw this rule, I couldn't exactly help but wonder how they intended on policing it. So... you gonna shift through all of my private messages and jot down all my character names? Are you going to come to my house and find my D&D character sheet tucked into the back of my closet? If you're going to do that, you'd better memorize the personalities and backstories too, cause a simple name change is a painfully easy workaround.

I'm pretty sure I don't need to say this, but... don't make rules if you can't enforce them?

And what about characters inspired by other characters? I once created a realistic/modern man, and I loved him so much that I decided to make a high fantasy offshoot character with many of the same traits - and because I'm an artist, many of the same facial features as well. Where does that fall in terms of this weird, arbitrary rule?

I dunno. The more I think about it, the more this idea of "only new characters" seems super nonspecific and shortsighted. I get it if you're maybe worried about a player's over-attachment to a character, but if that's the case, then the problem is the over-attachment, not the fact that the character happened to be used previously. The rule doesn't even remotely address the root problem, and unnecessarily punishes a bunch of people who aren't guilty of anything.

 

[Idea]

I dunno. The more I think about it, the more this idea of "only new characters" seems super nonspecific and shortsighted. I get it if you're maybe worried about a player's over-attachment to a character, but if that's the case, then the problem is the over-attachment, not the fact that the character happened to be used previously. The rule doesn't even remotely address the root problem, and unnecessarily punishes a bunch of people who aren't guilty of anything.

It's not inconceivable that someone finds the idea of a character being a recycled one itself to be an issue. It may be close to impossible to enforce, but I would be far more able to trust a GM that is upfront about saying they don't want things in their RP over one who doesn't say anything and springs up the problem after the fact.

 

[Daisie]

It's not inconceivable that someone finds the idea of a character being a recycled one itself to be an issue. It may be close to impossible to enforce, but I would be far more able to trust a GM that is upfront about saying they don't want things in their RP over one who doesn't say anything and springs up the problem after the fact.

I suppose I just don't understand why it could be inherently conceived as an issue?

 

[Sagey]

I'll second Daisie here, I don't understand how it could be an issue. As long as the character is fitted to the roleplay setting at hand, why does it matter if it's a very brand new character or a recycled one? Honest curiosity. Idea

 

[Idea]

I suppose I just don't understand why it could be inherently conceived as an issue?

I’m sure any person would have their own reasons, but one thing that always bothered me about it is that the person couldn’t even be bothered to do that much. It’s a matter of the principle really, and it goes double when you yourself are putting in the effort to make that new character, and one can feel used just a means for the other person to get to use the character rather than genuine collaboration. I do understand of course that the other person is presumably making the effort to adapt the character (well, not really by my experience but my bad experiences with it aren’t necessarily representative of the whole, particularly as premade characters are the kind of thing that tends to only be apparent when done poorly), but that’s the best way I can explain the discomfort with the idea.

I should note that I do not generally make rules banning pre-used characters, not in group RPs anyway nor do I actively look for such. But that discomfort is there and I can’t deny it’s there and since it is I think it’s valid for someone to not want it in their RP, which as I previously mentioned is the kind of thing I’d rather a GM be upfront about.

Ended up getting ninja’d, but I suppose this answer works for Sagey as well.

 

[Sagey]

I’m sure any person would have their own reasons, but one thing that always bothered me about it is that the person couldn’t even be bothered to do that much. It’s a matter of the principle really, and it goes double when you yourself are putting in the effort to make that new character, and one can feel used just a means for the other person to get to use the character rather than genuine collaboration. I do understand of course that the other person is presumably making the effort to adapt the character (well, not really by my experience but my bad experiences with it aren’t necessarily representative of the whole, particularly as premade characters are the kind of thing that tends to only be apparent when done poorly), but that’s the best way I can explain the discomfort with the idea.

I should note that I do not generally make rules banning pre-used characters, not in group RPs anyway nor do I actively look for such. But that discomfort is there and I can’t deny it’s there and since it is I think it’s valid for someone to not want it in their RP, which as I previously mentioned is the kind of thing I’d rather a GM be upfront about.

Ended up getting ninja’d, but I suppose this answer works for Sagey as well.

I see what you're saying. Effort is the big thing behind it, which is a very valid thing. Ty for the explanation. Also sorry you've had to deal with that in the past.

 

[Daisie]

one thing that always bothered me about it is that the person couldn’t even be bothered to do that much. It’s a matter of the principle really, and it goes double when you yourself are putting in the effort to make that new character, and one can feel used just a means for the other person to get to use the character rather than genuine collaboration.

I guess I can see that, but you could also take it the other way. You could say that your RP partner is using a previously RPed character because it's something they're comfortable with, thus they will be playing with much more confident and quality writing. They are giving you a much more fleshed out and detailed character that they are guaranteed to be invested in, rather than struggling to find a new one.

Saying someone who is using a character for a second, third, fourth time simply "couldn't be bothered" just seems a bit mean to me - just because you haven't seen the effort they've put into their character doesn't mean it isn't there.

Edit to add on: If someone is genuinely using you to just have an excuse to RP their character, that's... yeah, that's bad lol.
But my point is more like... it doesn't seem like the mere fact that the character has been used before is the problem, here. Rather it's the self-centered attitude of the player. That's going to be a problem no matter if the character is new or old, yes?

 

[Idea]

I guess I can see that, but you could also take it the other way. You could say that your RP partner is using a previously RPed character because it's something they're comfortable with, thus they will be playing with much more confident and quality writing. They are giving you a much more fleshed out and detailed character that they are guaranteed to be invested in, rather than struggling to find a new one.

Saying someone who is using a character for a second, third, fourth time simply "couldn't be bothered" just seems a bit mean to me - just because you haven't seen the effort they've put into their character doesn't mean it isn't there.

Edit to add on: If someone is genuinely using you to just have an excuse to RP their character, that's... yeah, that's bad lol.
But my point is more like... it doesn't seem like the mere fact that the character has been used before is the problem, here. Rather it's the self-centered attitude of the player. That's going to be a problem no matter if the character is new or old, yes?

First of all - I'm talking about the feeling I, and I presume some others, experience. I'm not stating it's accurate necessarily, and as I pointed out I don't take this sense of discomfort as something to impose in a group setting, and I do recognize that adapting the character to a setting can itself constitute quite a show of effort, but such feelings are also not the kind of thing that is so easily dismissed. Especially if the attitude is to dismiss those concerns as unfounded by default.

Second the issue of investment concerns more where they are invested than whether they are. As you pointed out this is an issue that will manifest in other problems and it's likely more fair and productive to focus on those problems. But it's no coincidence that those issues are associated with a character that is being re-used. The propensity to give too much weight and focus on the character or for it to fit poorly into the RP it's made of are not exclusive to pre-made characters, but they are tied to the motivation to use them repeatedly. The one inescapable characteristic of a pre-made character is that you need to like them enough to use them over and over, with the exception of such circumstances where the person is just genuinely too lazy or non-committal to make a new character (which, to be absolutely clear, I must stress is the exception not the rule. The reasons people care so much for the particular character they are using is varied, but all those reasons share that fundamental attachment). The things needed to avoid the pitfalls of re-using characters directly clash with the motivations to use them, which makes the hurdle to do it well harder. Possible for sure, but less likely.

That part though regards my other reasons. The important part in our discussion and in my objection to what you said, is about the feeling of discomfort regarding another using a pre-made character: Future effort they put in is not something you can observe until the time comes. Past effort is guaranteed but also guaranteed not to have been directed towards the current roleplay and the current group or partnership (because neither existed when the character was made. The character was by definition not made for that roleplay, partner and/or group.). And the person is deeply invested in their character, but the only sign you have of whether they are also invested in the current roleplay is them not making something for said roleplay, even if it ends up really adapted to fill in. Its jarring to work on someone on a shared project only for them to try to shove in something that was originally entirely unrelated to it in the place where something made to fit there should go. You may be able to replace a lever with a mop (not a great analogy but eh) and it may work perfectly but it will continue to look and feel out of place.

The long and short of it is that when there is fire there is smoke. And if you suddenly see a trail of smoke in a forest, a glint of light far away and its getting hotter and hotter it could well just be a friendly campfire on a sunny day that will offer you to sit down and you'll have a great time eating some marshmallows. But I don't think it would be unjustified for someone to get out of there and assume it could be a fire.

 

[Daisie]

First of all - I'm talking about the feeling I, and I presume some others, experience. I'm not stating it's accurate necessarily, and as I pointed out I don't take this sense of discomfort as something to impose in a group setting, and I do recognize that adapting the character to a setting can itself constitute quite a show of effort, but such feelings are also not the kind of thing that is so easily dismissed. Especially if the attitude is to dismiss those concerns as unfounded by default.

Second the issue of investment concerns more where they are invested than whether they are. As you pointed out this is an issue that will manifest in other problems and it's likely more fair and productive to focus on those problems. But it's no coincidence that those issues are associated with a character that is being re-used. The propensity to give too much weight and focus on the character or for it to fit poorly into the RP it's made of are not exclusive to pre-made characters, but they are tied to the motivation to use them repeatedly. The one inescapable characteristic of a pre-made character is that you need to like them enough to use them over and over, with the exception of such circumstances where the person is just genuinely too lazy or non-committal to make a new character (which, to be absolutely clear, I must stress is the exception not the rule. The reasons people care so much for the particular character they are using is varied, but all those reasons share that fundamental attachment). The things needed to avoid the pitfalls of re-using characters directly clash with the motivations to use them, which makes the hurdle to do it well harder. Possible for sure, but less likely.

That part though regards my other reasons. The important part in our discussion and in my objection to what you said, is about the feeling of discomfort regarding another using a pre-made character: Future effort they put in is not something you can observe until the time comes. Past effort is guaranteed but also guaranteed not to have been directed towards the current roleplay and the current group or partnership (because neither existed when the character was made. The character was by definition not made for that roleplay, partner and/or group.). And the person is deeply invested in their character, but the only sign you have of whether they are also invested in the current roleplay is them not making something for said roleplay, even if it ends up really adapted to fill in. Its jarring to work on someone on a shared project only for them to try to shove in something that was originally entirely unrelated to it in the place where something made to fit there should go. You may be able to replace a lever with a mop (not a great analogy but eh) and it may work perfectly but it will continue to look and feel out of place.

The long and short of it is that when there is fire there is smoke. And if you suddenly see a trail of smoke in a forest, a glint of light far away and its getting hotter and hotter it could well just be a friendly campfire on a sunny day that will offer you to sit down and you'll have a great time eating some marshmallows. But I don't think it would be unjustified for someone to get out of there and assume it could be a fire.

Ahhhh okay yeah, I think I get it now!
It's not necessarily something that condemns a roleplay/partner, but more of a red flag to keep an eye on?
Somewhat like how there are certain "Mary Sue-ish" character archetypes, but one or two of those showing up here and there doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to go down in flames. Just something that puts you a bit on alert.
I totally understand stuff like that lol

 

[Idea]

Ahhhh okay yeah, I think I get it now!
It's not necessarily something that condemns a roleplay/partner, but more of a red flag to keep an eye on?
Somewhat like how there are certain "Mary Sue-ish" character archetypes, but one or two of those showing up here and there doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to go down in flames. Just something that puts you a bit on alert.
I totally understand stuff like that lol

Yep. It's a feeling of discomfort in my case. I ask people to avoid it in 1x1s where things are more personal, but in group RPs the rules are for when it actually becomes a problem through all the consequences of over-attachment.

That being said because I have that discomfort with the idea of it I can understand that others might want to put a rule even in group RPs saying they don't want pre-made characters there and as I said before I think it's better for that rule to be there than to be something in the back of the GM's brain.

 

[chaotic cat cutie]

Oh wow, there are a lot of people who feel very heavy and heated about this. Not like, pointing out in any sense but like it surprises me.

I can understand really being attached to a face. Especially if you see that face in the current role play your in and your like ; ohmygoshmyfeelings. Though, this only happens if I really know the person really well. On average I'd make it a mole hill. Keep it super simple. Like if it becomes a necessity to do then just say it in a sentence.

Now, regarding general moderators going out of their way to moderate faces for characters. I mean. That's a little weird. I'll just input my opinion. Though, not completely out of the context of understandable. Also, along that line, I'd give grace. Unless they have asked me to change three to four faces.
Then I'm like - perplexed.

I do believe, even though there are so many characters in the character grave yard, it's important to strive to make a fresh new character each role play.
In my humble opinion.

 

[Cogwork]

I do believe, even though there are so many characters in the character grave yard, it's important to strive to make a fresh new character each role play.
In my humble opinion.

Why?

 

[chaotic cat cutie]

Why?

Why? Because each story is unique to a moderator. If you re-use a character from an old role play, for me, personally, I would not be enthused. I wouldn't be rude about it but it would be sort of like giving a friend a birthday present they had been given last year. It's just sort of tacky in my eyes? Perhaps a tad self absorbed and I would red flag that person as having possible main character syndrome. There is a reason people re use characters and sometimes it's not always nice. Sometime's it's a red flag. Also, there is attachment. You want players to start fresh. No feelings invested in the characters till the time is right. I mean, this is just what works for me.

Like I said, everyone is bound to have an opinion which works best for them.

added: but I'm not going to go out of my way to find that out like I said I truly only think this is an issue if you've roleplayed the same person over and over and over with friends and it then just get slightly annoying.

 

[Daisie]

added: but I'm not going to go out of my way to find that out like I said I truly only think this is an issue if you've roleplayed the same person over and over and over with friends and it then just get slightly annoying.

I did have a friend once who only ever joined new RPs with the same character - exact same name even, but reskinned for the different RPs. I always thought it odd, and it's definitely on the more extreme end of character recycling.

They HAD other characters, and I liked those, but I'm pretty sure they were always "in addition to" the one.

 

[Naril]

When I'm playing the part of GM (which I'd like to do more, but goodness, I don't have that kind of time all that often), I don't spend any time checking to see if someone's re-using a character. From the perspective of both a GM and a fellow player, I don't usually find it hard to tell when a character's being used again, and it doesn't bother me. Like others have said, what does bother me is when a character is not adjusted to match whatever the current setting is, or is poorly-adjusted into a "this character is a mysterious and distant loner who doesn't need anyone and that's how they fit in here" chameleon, offering no particular angle on the shared plot or world.

When I'm joining a story, my personal process is to put together characters that are very bespoke to the setting, story, and fellow cast members. I certainly have a collection of 'core concepts' for characters that help define what I might find interesting about them, and I might pick one of them to build a character out of when I'm interested - though it's no less common to have some new idea drop in. Still, for me, whatever I write is always wholly designed to fit specifically in that story, even when the core concept might be similar to another character I'd written a month, a year, or more in the past.

I'm not saying that because I think more people should do it; I happen to quite like writing characters and solving the little narrative puzzles of "why are they in this story," and "why are they one of the protagonists," and "what would make them exciting to read about." I like getting to try new narrative devices, new turns of phrase, and new ways of creating imagery; it's honestly one of the best parts for me.

 

[Sagey]

I did have a friend once who only ever joined new RPs with the same character - exact same name even, but reskinned for the different RPs. I always thought it odd, and it's definitely on the more extreme end of character recycling.

They HAD other characters, and I liked those, but I'm pretty sure they were always "in addition to" the one.

See now I would find that very odd myself.

I've never used the same exact character, just the names. There are AU's of a few of them but they share very few similarities and tend to develop a different personality for their different settings.

I'm starting to wonder if this topic got a little side tracked in what was originally being asked?

 

[Daisie]

I'm starting to wonder if this topic got a little side tracked in what was originally being asked?

Oh yeah absolutely
Continue, everyone! Don't mind me

 

[Lorsh]

I wouldn't encourage it, personally!