TEXT: Uncle Figgy's Guide to Good Roleplaying, 
  or...How to Make Your Minor Deity Earn His Pay 
  v 1.2 
   
   
   
  I wrote this as a "sequel", if you will, to Uncle Figgy's Guide to Good GameMastering. I 
  realized (after it was all done with, of course) that there are always tips for how a person 
  can be a better GameMaster, but very few on how a person can be a better player. And 
  that's why I decided to write this guide. 
   
  In so doing, I make the assumption that the reader has more than just a passing 
  familiarity with roleplaying. That he or she has roleplayed in the past, knows the 
  important terms and concepts, and is now looking to be a better player. As such, Uncle 
  Figgy's Guide to Good RolePlaying really isn't for the person seeking to learn the basics 
  of roleplaying, but more for the player who has mastered the basics and now seeks to go 
  farther. (If you are brand new to roleplaying, you may want to check out Uncle Figgy's 
  Guide to Roleplaying for Non-Roleplayers.) 
   
  If you like this guide, feel free to print it up, photocopy it, and even give it to your 
  friends -- I wrote it as a labor of love, not a way to make money -- just do me the favor of 
  leaving my name, byline and copyright notice intact. And note that I'm not allowing 
  anyone to use this for commercial gain, if you try to sell it, my lawyers and I will come 
  after you for the money you make, got it? 
   
  And don’t forget to check out Uncle Figgy's Realm. "Uncle Figgy's Realm" has 
  links to other gaming sites, information on writing, the popular "Ask Uncle Figgy" 
  column, and links to the other "Uncle Figgy's" guides. 
   
   
  Dragon Dog Press, the Dragon Dog Press logo, Uncle Figgy, Uncle Figgy's Realm and Uncle Figgy's 
  Guides are trademarks of Dragon Dog Press, Inc., all rights reserved. The Copekey logo, Keylock logo, 
  and Copekey gemstones are trademarks of Dan Cope. Some images and all copy on this page are copyright 
  © 2004 Dragon Dog Press, Inc. The Uncle Figgy's Guides may be freely distributed so long as proper 
  notice of copyright is provided. 
  
  Chapter 1 
  Why Try? 
   
  Have you ever noticed that there seems to be a glut of players but hardly any 
  GMs? Unfortunately, this means that there are fewer games that you, as a player, 
  can get into; and that puts you square into the middle of the law of supply and demand. 
  Players are a dime-a-dozen commodity, so if you want to be invited (and re-invited) to 
  games, you have to make sure that you're not one of the common rabble. After all, why 
  should a new GM invite you to her game when she's got others vying for her attention? 
  Because you'll be a player who brings so much to her game that she wants you involved 
  more than anyone else. At least, that's the goal I hope this guide can help you accomplish.  
   
  Forget Winning 
   
  It doesn't exist in the roleplaying world, especially when you're a player. Unlike 
  video or board games, there usually is no definitive end to a roleplaying game. There may 
  be an end to a specific adventure or an epic quest, but sometimes the end of one 
  campaign will be just the beginning of another. 
   
  If you absolutely must focus on "winning", here's a new perspective to do it with: 
  You're winning if you're playing your character to the best of your ability, even if that 
  means putting him in situations where he might be killed. You're winning if you are 
  involved in the game and not talking to the other players about your day at work. And 
  most importantly, you're not losing if your character dies (those who've read Uncle 
  Figgy's Guide to Good GameMastering will remember that I'm not very big on PC death 
  unless it's totally warranted). In some games, remember, death is only a temporary 
  inconvenience for those with enough money and/or power to get it reversed. And even if 
  death is more serious than that, a good GM will reward a player who's character has died 
  as a result of good roleplaying.  
   
  Have Fun 
  If you're not, why are you playing? You already have to waste a good portion of your life 
  doing stuff you don't exactly want to do (work, school, chores, whatever) so why give up 
  your free time to play a game that you're not exactly thrilled about? GM won't let you 
  play the characters you want to play? Find one that will. Other players harass you 
  because they like hack-n-slash and you like roleplaying? Leave 'em. 
   
  There's no shame in leaving a gaming group that doesn't fit your style of play. By 
  stubbornly sticking around, hoping that it will change or because (how many times have 
  you heard this one, or said it?) "it's the only game around", you only make yourself, and 
  possibly the GM and other players, miserable. Take it from your Uncle Figgy, who's left 
  
  many gaming groups for one reason or another. I've played games that almost put me to 
  sleep or that were the exact opposite of the style I like to play. I've played with GMs who 
  were nothing more than module-reading droners. All of these games I gave a couple of 
  chances, and when they didn't improve, I left to seek a game that was more to my liking. 
  Some GMs got upset at first, but I'm sure that they were happier in the long run as they 
  no longer had to deal with a player unlike any they had encountered before.  
   
  Take it Easy 
  There is a tendency in roleplaying for players to become very attached to their characters. 
  And it's perfectly understandable; in some game systems it takes forever for a character 
  to advance to the point when he is something special, in others it might take hours of 
  sweat and blood just to create a starting character. While a good GM will strive to avoid 
  killing off PCs arbitrarily, sometimes events turn so that a character will die. Sometimes 
  that death will be deserved (GM: "That lever looks like it controls the gate that holds 
  back the lava." Player: "I'll pull it and see what happens.") and sometimes it won't be 
  (GM: "Sorry, Phil, but I just rolled a critical strike against your character, the blow goes 
  to his heart, make a roll to avoid dying." Player: "Darn! Missed it!"), but whatever 
  happens you need to keep in mind that it's only a game. That's what they're called, after 
  all, Role-Playing Games. 
   
  Whether you lose a character to death, capture (Uncle Figgy has seen players who 
  would rather their characters die than be taken captive), injury, disease or GM control, 
  always remain positive and remember that (for death) you can always start again or (for 
  capture or other) there might be a way out. 
   
  This also means that you shouldn't get upset with the other players, either. 
  Sometimes, if a player is very deeply in character, she'll do things she would never do as 
  a person. I've seen players who were married play characters who hated the other with a 
  passion, then, when the game took an intermission, be just as loving to each other as 
  newlyweds. I've seen players who were just friends play romantically involved 
  characters. And I've seen players who were so goody-two-shoes they would make Sandra 
  Dee look like Satan play the most vile, evil creatures to ever walk the face of the earth. 
   
  In one game in which your Uncle Figgy played (a time-travel campaign), my 
  character was a Japanese ninja from the fourteenth century. The other characters were a 
  World War II general, a 1920's inventor, a futuristic cyborg, an Amazon warrior-priestess 
  and a modern-day individual who believed he was Elvis. Now, I must admit that Uncle 
  Figgy tends to get very deeply in character, and the ninja was one of those times. He 
  believed very strongly in finishing the mission (whatever it might be) and getting the job 
  done -- and let nothing get in the way of, or in any way endanger, the mission lest they 
  suffer the consequences. And he would act on it no matter how slight the threat. When an 
  NPC got between the group and their goal, the ninja slit his throat. And when a PC had 
  his leg torn off, he became (at least in the ninja's eyes) a liability to the mission. The ninja 
  shot him at point-blank range. Needless to say, the player got quite upset with old Uncle 
  Figgy. Was I being mean? Did I do it just because I didn't like the player? No. I did it 
  because that was what the character would do. Once I explained that, the player calmed 
  
  down. He started a new character, and this time he decided to play it as in-depth as I 
  played mine.  
   
  Pay Attention 
   
  Roleplaying Games are games of the mind, and that means you have to listen to 
  the GM as she describes things around you. You're not watching television or looking at 
  pictures, so you cannot see those things being described, you can only imagine them. And 
  you cannot picture in your mind those things you don't hear. Paying attention means 
  staying focused on the game, the GM and the other players. If you don't, and you miss 
  something important, that's your tough luck; the GM is perfectly within his rights to 
  refuse to repeat himself at any time. In one game I ran, one of my players would sit and 
  draw while the game went on around him. This guy was only in the game because he had 
  nothing better to do and that was where most of his friends were, but he really wasn't 
  interested. At least until combat-time came around and he would happily roll dice and tell 
  me what his character was doing. So the party encounters a group of robots who explode 
  when destroyed, but Captain Boredom wasn't paying attention until it was his turn. He 
  immediately jumped up and told me his character was going to do a flying tackle on one 
  of the mechanoids and slam it into a wall with his shoulder. BOOM! I thought that 
  episode would cure him, but it didn't and eventually I just stopped inviting him to my 
  games.  
   
  Cheating: Why Bother? 
  We've all seen it (or possibly done it) before: Gristle BoneMeal, the warrior, needs to roll 
  a 15 or higher on a 20-sided die in order to whack his opponent. Gristle's player tosses a 
  13, but the GM isn't looking so he says, "Whoa! 15! Just made it! I hit him" Or maybe the 
  die gets "accidentally" jostled so that it has to be rerolled. Now here's the big question: 
  Would you like the GM to do that to you? "Okay, the villain needs to roll 12 or less to hit 
  Gristle" *roll a 15 behind the GM screen* "Ouch! 12! Just made it! He hits!" 
   
  It all goes right back to the winning and losing thing again; the need to "win" 
  creates the need to cheat. But cheating can breed resentment among players and can even 
  get you thrown out of some games. You wouldn't want the GM to cheat against you, don't 
  cheat against the GM. 
  
  Chapter 2 
  Player Types 
   
  In all my years of roleplaying, I've encountered many different player types. 
  Some are quite interested in roleplaying. To others, roleplaying is just something to do 
  when nothing else is available. Below, I've listed the types I've come across, and I've tried 
  to arrange them in order from most interested in playing to least interested. There are 
  more types than these (see Uncle Figgy's Guide to Good GameMastering), but in this 
  Guide I've only included those that are likely to be looking to become better roleplayers. 
  The Mad Gamer. To Uncle Figgy, this is the best type of player out there. Hopefully, 
  the hints in this guide will help everyone become a Mad Gamer. 
   
  You're a Mad Gamer if you use props in the games -- you'll suck on the end of a 
  cigar just because your character smokes one. 
   
  Your characters' names always closely match the atmosphere of the game being 
  run (In an oriental, martial-arts style game, you'll actually look in an English-
  Japanese/Japanese-English dictionary to find a good name). 
  If you're a Mad Gamer, you do things that will likely get your character killed as long as 
  they are IN CHARACTER. 
   
  Your characters are often "concept" characters that, more often than not, totally fit 
  the game genre. Min-maxing is a foreign concept to the Mad Gamer. Sure you'll try to 
  make the best character you can, but only if it fits the concept you've created. Maybe you 
  can get a physically-stronger character than the one you wanted, but if what you really 
  wanted is a thinker instead of a fighter, you'll pass. 
   
  The problems with being a Mad Gamer are finding good GMs who can keep up 
  with you and other players who can understand you. GMs find you hard to predict 
  because you're nothing at all like the average gamer. Often, it will be difficult to find a 
  game with a GM flexible enough to allow you to do all those things you want. 
   
  There is also a tendency for fights and arguments to break out around you when 
  the other gamers can't understand why you would do such things as your character does 
  (especially if he does something harmful to another PC). Here there are two choices: You 
  can either back off from the character a bit and not do something because of the hurt 
  feelings it might cause, despite the fact that it wouldn't be IN CHARACTER to do so (a 
  fate worse than death to most Mad Gamers); or you can go ahead and do it and hope that 
  the other players realize that it's just a game and you're playing it to the best of your 
  abilities (as they should be, too). It's your call. Good Luck. As a Mad Gamer himself, 
  your Uncle Figgy sympathizes with your plight. 
  The Powergamer (Min/Maxer or "Munchkin"). Do you want to win? When you make 
  a new character do you do everything in your power to get the most bonuses. The most 
  plusses. The best armor, best weapons, best and highest skills? You just might be a 
  Powergamer. 
   
  If there's a point-break or die bonus, you find it. You genuinely like role-playing, 
  
  but you're locked into the concept of "beating the game". Instead of being "concept" 
  characters, yours are the "best" that the genre or game system has to offer. 
   
  You've examined the rules as much as you can and you've found the most useful 
  character type and that's the one you always play. In games where point values are used 
  to design characters, you constantly redesign your characters for maximum cost-
  effectiveness and point-breaks. 
   
  There are few inherent problems involved in being a Powergamer. You tend to 
  shine in whatever it is the game calls for. If it's combat-oriented, your character is a 
  combat monster. If it's all about adventure, your character's a veteran who was right there 
  at the opening of King Tut's tomb. 
   
  The problem with being a Powergamer is that you tend not to use much 
  imagination when creating a character -- you pick the one that you feel has the most 
  advantages in a given game and you stick with it. And when that one dies, you go for 
  another one that's exactly the same (or at least as close as you can get it). In some games 
  (run by some GMs), unfortunately, that's probably for the best. But in a game that 
  rewards good roleplaying above all else, you may be stuck. You should try to get out of 
  the habit of looking for the most powerful characters, and instead focus on how you can 
  find the advantages (and fun) of other types. 
  The Average Joe. The basic gamer. There is nothing extraordinary about the Average 
  Joe in any way, either positive or negative. You like roleplaying, but your characters all 
  tend to have the same personality; usually yours. They think the way you think. Talk the 
  way you talk. And act the way you act. 
   
  A big problem with being an Average Joe is that you don't really shine in any 
  given game. You will always be overshadowed by the Powergamer who is busily trying 
  to blow the game away or the Mad Gamer who just has so much depth in her characters. 
  You're also easy for a good GM to predict and manipulate. Because your characters are 
  all the same, it's very easy for a GM to know that what worked with one will work with 
  them all. 
   
  Break out of your mold. Give your characters a background (ask the GM for help 
  if you need to, the good GM will fall all over himself because he's so thrilled that you 
  asked). Give your characters a mind of their own. When put in a situation where you need 
  to come up with something, don't think "what should I do?", think "what would my 
  character do?". 
  The Copycat. You really, really like a certain comic strip, television series or movie, and 
  you think that this one character is just the greatest. When it comes time to play, you 
  absolutely must be able to play that one. 
   
  Problem is, in a game with randomly-determined attributes and/or skills, it's 
  highly improbable that you'll luck onto the exact die-rolls needed to recreate your favorite 
  character. In a game where attributes and skills are based on a point cost, you might not 
  be allowed enough starting points to perfectly mimic his abilities. And then there's the 
  problem that the GM might be just a little bit too familiar with the character you're 
  copying, and will then use what he knows the weaknesses of the character to be. 
   
  Instead of trying to exactly duplicate these characters you love so much, take a 
  moment to analyze exactly what it was about them that made them special to you. Was it 
  
  attitude? That comes free with any character because you add it. Was it one or two 
  special abilities, perhaps? Maybe you could get them at a much reduced level of power; a 
  character like your favorite only just starting out on his adventuring career. Take those 
  one or two things that really made you fall in love with the character and build something 
  new from there. That way you keep both the GM and the other players guessing. 
  The Psycho Killer. You like roleplaying, but your character is "the boss". And when an 
  NPC (or sometimes even a PC) gets in your way, it's time to kill them. When you go 
  shopping for a weapon and the store-owner won't give you a price you want, you kill 
  him. If a cop stops you for something, you kill him. If anyone in the least bit annoys you, 
  you kill them. You believe that your character is the penultimate being and every NPC 
  should bow to you just by right of being a player character. And there should never, ever 
  be consequences to any of these deaths. 
   
  Problems? You definitely won't fit in (or like) a realistic game where the 
  authorities hunt down psychotic murderers, because your character will be labeled one. 
  Chances are, you'll only fit in with a group of Combat Monsters or more Psycho Killers 
  (but watch your back). Some game systems were designed exclusively for this type of 
  player. Others weren't. If that's all you want to do, fine, go right ahead. Just don't do it in 
  a game where it's not appreciated. 
   
  Uncle Figgy once played in a supers game where one of the players was a serious 
  Psycho Killer. The GM actually had the mayor of the town hire the Killer's teammates to 
  bring him in... 
  The Combat Monster. You like roleplaying but only because of the combat. For the 
  most part, you sit back and let everyone else run the game until combat time comes, then 
  you leap into action. You're not particularly happy with adventures that consist of traps, 
  puzzles and thinking. You mostly just want to roll dice and see how much damage you 
  can do to things. 
   
  My advice is the same for the Psycho Killer -- some games are made for this sort 
  of play and some aren't. If you like what you're doing, stick with that kind of game. 
  Whatever you do, don't try to sit through a game where the GM rewards roleplaying 
  rather than hack-n-slash, because neither of you will be getting what you want from the 
  other, and the unhappiness in the air can't do anything but make all the other players 
  miserable.  
   
  All the World Hates a Rules Lawyer 
   
  Don't be one. It goes right back to the "Take it Easy" section. But that doesn't 
  mean that you're not allowed to question rules that you aren't clear on. A good GM will 
  have explained any rules-variants before the game started, and if you're unclear on 
  something during play, go ahead and ask. It's possible that the GM might have made a 
  mistake or he could just be fudging rules to try to cover up a mistake. No matter what the 
  GM says, don't argue with the call -- you only antagonize the GM (and the other players 
  who have to wait until you settle things), and chances are good that you won't change his 
  
  mind in the least (people, GMs especially, can get very defensive -- even to the point of 
  stupidity -- when challenged). And, horror of horrors, there might even be extenuating 
  circumstances in effect that your character (and therefore you) would not be aware of. In 
  one superhero game that I ran, the PCs ran into a supervillain whom they promptly 
  surrounded. One of them got blasted and the player went off like a firecracker: "What do 
  you mean Tank gets hit'!? Superpowers take one turn to activate!" At which point your 
  Uncle Figgy calmly responded. "Makes you wonder how it happened, then, doesn't it?" 
  The other players took the hint and began to search for the villain's laser-toting toady 
  hiding behind a car. But Tank's player wouldn't be mollified so easily. "I didn't even get 
  to roll for a dodge!" He insisted. "You didn't see the attack coming," I said. "That's bull! I 
  would have seen it coming if he'd taken one turn to activate his powers!" (It's been Uncle 
  Figgy's experience that most Rules Lawyers are usually Powergamers who feel that 
  they're somehow "losing".) "Maybe that's because he didn't activate his powers," I told 
  him so I could get the game back on track. Finally, he seemed to get it. 
   
  Again, like I said, that doesn't mean that you're not allowed to question obvious 
  rules mistakes (though a bad GM might think that his word is unquestionable law), but 
  don't argue with the GM even if he is wrong. If it really bothers you, bring it up after the 
  game and see if you can resolve the problem. If you can't, and you really didn't enjoy the 
  game, walk. There's no law that says you have to put up with bad GMs or rules-variants 
  that you don't agree with. Here's another example (another supers game, this one in which 
  Uncle Figgy was a player): During a fierce battle, one of the PCs was struck by a laser-
  blast. The rules of the game system we were playing state that when a potential hit is 
  made, the character in question gets to roll against a defense score to dodge or block the 
  blow (roll the number or less, and it's usually a pretty low number). The GM, however, 
  had gotten the rule confused with a different game system rule stating that the defense 
  score was subtracted from the offensive score of the attacker. Unfortunately, in the game 
  system we happened to be playing, that meant the almost certain annihilation of the entire 
  party. It wasn't my character getting hit, but I found the mistake to be vastly unfair, so I 
  said something about it. The GM immediately became defensive (he was used to being 
  considered infallible by his regular gaming group) and told me that "as far as he knew", 
  his interpretation of the rule was correct. To me, the "as far as he knew" part meant that 
  he wasn't sure, so I showed him the rule (which was so solidly-written that there was no 
  way to misinterpret it), at which point I was assailed with, "Don't argue with me, man. I 
  don't appreciate Rules Lawyers." Realizing that this was a man who could not admit a 
  mistake, I apologized and we continued with the game, even though I (and a couple of the 
  other players) knew I was right. I tried speaking to him about it afterwards (when several 
  players had gone home), but he was immovable in his stance. Neither Uncle Figgy nor 
  anyone else at the table that night ever played another game with that particular GM.  
   
  RolePlaying vs. Adventuring 
  The Main Event! 
  Throughout the course of modern gaming, one question usually comes up; a 
  question that splits gamers down the middle -- each group totally, adamantly, 
  
  almost violently, pro or con. "Which is better?" They ask. "Roleplaying or adventuring 
  (usually translated as having strong, combat-oriented characters)?" 
   
  Uncle Figgy says that it's like trying to compare a filing cabinet to a banana. 
  Filing cabinets are great when you need to store important business papers, but they aren't 
  very nice to eat when you're hungry. And, like most everything in this world, it's not just 
  a simple, black-or-white, on-or-off, light-or-dark question. They're not mutually 
  exclusive. No law says that a game with roleplaying can't have adventure or vice versa. 
  To me, the good game has both. 
   
  As a player, you need to come up with a strong character who can survive the 
  adventures your GM constructs. But you also need to do something with that character to 
  make it more than just a piece of paper scribbled with numbers. In my campaigns, I will 
  reward the player who makes an effort to roleplay (even if he is the most pathetic actor in 
  the world) more than the player who has the best character in the world but who does 
  nothing with it other than tossing around the dice when it's required. But as that avid 
  roleplayer, your character had still better be somewhat suited to the game I have planned 
  (and I always give warnings during character creation; such as: "It's going to be a very 
  swashbuckling type of game so pirate-style characters will probably do best" or "It's 
  going to be a game of action, adventure and mystery, so you'll need well-rounded 
  characters with a variety of combat and non-combat abilities.") or it will likely end up as 
  a stain on the pavement. 
   
  Test me. Stretch my limits. I enjoy running an exciting game just as much as you 
  enjoy playing in one, and I can't do it without good players. GMs who just roll dice and 
  announce the results run games in which I would never play. The game can't exist 
  without both of you, so it's just as much your property as it is the GM's. He's making you 
  work for what you get out of it. Make him work for what he gets. Make me think. Make 
  me have to dig through the rules or improvise one on the spot. There is much more to true 
  RolePlaying than just rolling dice and killing monsters. Give it to the good GM and he'll 
  reward you in return. 
  
  Chapter 3 
  Get to Work 
   
  "Wait!" You say. "RPGs are supposed to be fun!" Have you ever known a serious 
  model enthusiast? Some of the work they do is so minute, detailed, precise and exacting 
  that it'll wear you out just to watch them. But to them it's not work at all -- they're having 
  a blast. Roleplaying is a hobby just like model-railroading, stamp-collecting or any of the 
  others out there. They take a little bit of effort, but that effort should be fun. 
   
  So what's your job as a roleplayer? The main one: Know your character. Know 
  what it can or cannot do. Know the stats and what they mean. If the GM asks you what 
  your character's IQ is, you should be able to rattle it off in a heartbeat. If you can't then it 
  means that either you have too many characters to keep track of, you don't really care 
  about this particular character or that you don't really care about this particular game. If 
  your character can cast spells, know what those spells are and what they can do – that’s 
  the only way you’ll know the best times to use them. You shouldn't ever need to ask the 
  GM "can my character do this...". 
   
  Also, "knowing your character" goes above and beyond the game mechanics; it 
  drills right to the heart of the character itself. Worse than asking the GM if your character 
  "can" do something is asking if your character "would" do something. You’re the one 
  who decides that, not the GM. The good GM decides only what her NPCs would or 
  would not do, she doesn’t make those decisions for the Player Characters. 
   
  Second: Know the game system you're playing in. Now this doesn’t mean that 
  you have to know the rules like the back of your hand including every monster type and 
  how much damage they can take before they die. This means knowing things like which 
  actions are acceptable and which aren’t. If your game gives no rules for martial-arts 
  combat, you should know better than to tell the GM that your character is going to go for 
  a spinning hook-kick to his opponents face. 
   
  Third: Learn how to separate yourself from your character. The actual phrase is 
  "player knowledge versus character knowledge" -- although you might know every 
  monster type and how much damage they can take before they die, your character 
  probably won't. Here's a good example of what I mean: 
   
  The party of PCs has split up, and your character goes with Group B. Meanwhile, 
  Group A finds out that a powerful artifact is hidden in the well just outside where Group 
  B is waiting. Now you, as a player, will most likely have heard this exchange between the 
  GM and the players of Group A, so you are well aware of the location of the artifact. 
  Now forget about it. Act as though you didn't hear any of it -- because your character 
  didn't. Don't try to weasel some "innocent-yet-contrived" way of getting into that well. 
  Uncle Figgy has seen many players who, in the above-described situation, will start 
  making all sorts of excuses to go to the well: "It's hot out, isn't it? Maybe I should go to 
  the well and get some water. Oops! I fall in!" or "You know, that well looks suspicious to 
  me, I'm going to check it out." In all of these cases, Uncle Figgy was more than happy to 
  penalize these players for poor roleplaying. If the GM ever has to say, "Your character 
  wouldn't know that", you know you've crossed the line.  
  
   
  Be Original 
   
  Okay, so your GM is starting a new campaign and everyone is starting new 
  characters. The first temptation is to powergame; find the strongest type of character, 
  create just that kind, and min-max the bejeezus out of it. The second temptation is just to 
  play the same type of character you've always played; you like warriors, why not play 
  another warrior? 
   
  So why not play another warrior? But why not play that warrior a little bit 
  differently this time? We've all seen the barbarian with the sword that could be used as an 
  I-Beam in a skyscraper. We've all seen the armored knight walking around in his 
  Sherman-tank plate-mail wielding a two-handed sword. But not all warriors have to be 
  like that. They can use different weapons -- I've yet to see rules (though I might be 
  wrong) that say all warriors MUST use swords. A warrior doesn't have to be just a 
  muscle-bound doofus who beats the tar out of anything that gets in his way. Remember 
  Conan the Barbarian? Believe it or not, he was a thief! (There are more ways to steal than 
  just picking locks or pockets). And a person very close to me once created a warrior-type 
  character who was about seven feet tall and stronger than three men -- but she refused to 
  ever shed blood (or even kill) and she would fight only in self-defense. She used her great 
  strength only to subdue. 
   
  By taking the stereotype and twisting it, she created a character with much more 
  depth than the average braindead brawler. Do the same with your own characters. 
  Granted, in some game systems it is easier to do this than in others. In one system, Uncle 
  Figgy was able to create a wizard who used throwing hammers as weapons instead of the 
  usual staff and/or dagger. In another system, such a character could never have existed 
  (unless the GM were playing a very alternate set of house rules). But there are still things 
  you can do to make the character different, read on...  
   
  Add Depth 
   
  What if you're playing in a system (or with a GM) where you simply can't twist 
  the stereotype? Add some little details that make your character different. What made 
  Uncle Figgy's wizard character so special? It could have been the 
  strange choice of weapons, but ask the other players what they 
  remember most about him and they probably won't even remember 
  the fact that he used throwing hammers. First of all they would 
  probably tell you about his smile. He never stopped grinning, even 
  when he was angry or bleeding to death. Some of them might 
  remember more the fact that he was a compulsive liar, even 
  contradicting his own stories just so he could lie even more ("Well, 
  when I was in the Queen's Navy..." "You never told me you were in the navy!" "What are 
  you talking about? I was never in the navy!"). And then there was his real name, Tree 
  Snake, but the other players would never have remembered that because he never told 
  
  them; anytime someone introduced themselves, he had a new name! 
   
  Whether they're minor personality blips like a warrior who talks to his sword or 
  sings whenever going into battle, or major vows like that taken by the thief who will not 
  steal from those of his own race or nationality or the noble knight who must always 
  announce a challenge to his foes, these things can add dimension to an otherwise flat 
  character. Just don't get obnoxious with it because then it leaves the realm of good 
  roleplaying and enters into the realm of childishness. In one campaign I ran, I had a 
  player who decided that her character liked to chew on licorice root. Every time the 
  characters weren't doing anything important, the player would announce "Quartz pulls 
  out a stick of licorice root and starts chewing on it" (and I do mean every time!). Every 
  time the party would camp outside, the player would ask if any of the plants nearby were 
  licorice. After awhile, it began to get very annoying, both to the GM and the other 
  players. After all, the fact that the character likes to chew on licorice root isn't exactly as 
  important to gameplay as a character who refuses to kill his opponents. It just shouldn't 
  have come up as often as it did. 
   
  Once you've settled on the "what" of these character extras, come up with a 
  "why". Why does your character dislike boats? Did he almost drown as a child? Did one 
  of his siblings drown? Why does this other character prefer a staff to a sword? Does she 
  feel that shedding blood is worse than pummeling someone to death? Is it some form of 
  religious or philosophical belief about the differences between wood or steel? The "what" 
  makes your character different than any of the others, but it's the "why" that gives them a 
  history and a background. J.R.R. Tolkien, author of one of the all-time classics of Fantasy 
  literature, spent years creating an intense history for his world before he ever began 
  writing even the first novel -- and it showed in his writing. You don't have to work years 
  on the "why" of your character's personality quirks, and you don't even have to tell 
  anyone about all of them (just like Tree Snake's true name), but just the fact that they 
  exist will influence the way that character acts and interacts. Just by having this 
  background, you've taken your character one step farther away from game stats scrawled 
  on a piece of paper and one step closer to three-dimensional, dramatic life.  
   
  Overuse Your Imagination 
   
  Player: Gristle hits. *roll, roll* The monster takes 7 points of damage. GM: 
  *roll* Okay, the monster hits. Gristle takes *roll* 5 points of damage. Yawnsville! 
  Granted, the biggest job of imagination falls upon the GM's shoulders, but the player has 
  to carry his share of the burden, too. How many swashbuckleresque movies have you 
  seen where the combatants stand in one place and take turns swinging swords at each 
  other? Uncle Figgy would be surprised if you'd seen any like that. In the movies and in 
  literature, the characters jump on tables and climb steps. Gun battles are fast and furious 
  with characters shouting "cover me!" while they run from behind one car to the next. 
  Mugs get thrown. Tires get shot out. Stuff happens. 
   
  In a roleplaying game, "stuff" to happen requires a little bit of effort on both the 
  GM and the player. Surrounded and weaponless? Tell the GM that you're picking up the 
  nearest folding-metal chair and, holding it by the legs, swinging it at the first thing to 
  come near you. Let the GM worry about penalties and bonuses and damage -- that's his 
  
  job. You've done yours by spicing things up a bit. Has the GM described something that 
  would seem totally innocuous? Pencils in a pencil-holder on the desk, maybe? Do 
  something with them, don't let the GM off the hook by thinking, "Pencils. Okay." (One of 
  your Uncle Figgy's characters has the talent of taking anything pointed and turning it into 
  a throwing weapon. The GM has to decide how much damage that pencil does, but he 
  better be ready for any way it can be used because if he's put it in a game that I'm playing, 
  it will be put to any use.) Think long and hard about some of the most harmless things 
  and you'll probably come up with thousands of uses for them. Let the GM come up with 
  the game particulars for those things (and if he can't or won't, point him to Uncle Figgy's 
  Guide to Good GameMastering). 
   
  So how would Uncle Figgy (as a player) spice up the above combat? UF: How 
  big does the monster look? GM: He looks pretty strong and tough. A little bit bigger than 
  Gristle. UF: What's in the room around us? GM: Gristle is standing next to a smallish, 
  rectangular table and the monster is standing next to his bed of dried straw. There are a 
  couple of torches hanging on the walls of the room. UF: Okay. Gristle's going to pick up 
  the table and run it like a battering ram into the monster's gut. GM (caught totally 
  unawares because he was expecting Gristle to draw his sword and rush for the thing): 
  Okay, picking the table up is no problem. Roll against... um... your Dexterity to hit the 
  monster. UF: *rolls and makes it* Piece of cake. GM: Okay, you ram the table into the 
  monster's stomach and it *roll* fails a roll against it's strength to keep standing. You 
  knock it down onto the pile of straw. UF: Okay, I grab one of the torches and toss it onto 
  the pile... 
   
  You get the picture. Things like this, of course, would depend entirely on those 
  aspects of your character that you've decided make up his personality. Some warriors 
  would just wade in, sword swinging. Some wizards might do the same. It all depends on 
  the character and what he's hoping to accomplish, but it doesn't have to be a simple (and 
  boring) matter of "I swing. I hit." 
   
  Remember, no one wants to play a boring game where nothing happens, but it's 
  not all the GM's responsibility to keep things moving. By coming up with a good 
  character conception with a fully-realized personality, and then by playing that 
  personality to the best of your abilities, you add more drama and excitement to the game 
  than if you were to just rely on stats and stereotype to tell you what to do. 
  
  Chapter 4 
  Sample Characters 
  What Works and Why? 
   
  Here, for your amusement (and possibly education) are some sample characters. 
  Some were created by your Uncle Figgy, some by players in his games. Some worked 
  and some didn't. In keeping with the tradition of being non-system specific, all game stats 
  and attributes have been removed, leaving just the basic idea and personality of the 
  characters. The names of all have been changed to protect me from the wrath of the 
  guilty. Enjoy! 
  Character: Luanne Schaumberg 
  Genre: Supers 
   
  This was a decent character concept for a Supers game -- a liquid-metal robot that 
  had somehow convinced itself that it was a normal (albeit super-powered) human. The 
  problem wasn't in the character concept itself, but in the playing. When selecting minor 
  character traits, the player settled on ideas that did nothing to further the actual concept. 
  Things like, "the character thinks she's better at sculpting than she really is" or "thinks 
  she's a good liar" and even "she doesn't understand the concept of having pets". HUH!? 
  Wouldn't something like "she always carries around a picture of a family that came with 
  her wallet, claiming that it's her own family" have been just a little bit closer to home? 
  How about "she thinks June Cleaver is her mother"? 
   
  As far as play goes, the player was an Average Joe at best -- the character's 
  personality was the same as the player's and no extraordinary effort was put into 
  roleplaying. 
  Character: Lucinda 
  Genre: Fantasy 
   
  A rather common stereotype for a Fantasy game, Lucinda was nothing more than 
  a sorcerer. Although she could have been just another robe-wearing, fireball-tossing 
  magician, the player took her above and beyond -- stretching the stereotype to the 
  breaking point. First was her physical description: 4 feet tall and 90 pounds. Then came 
  her personality; she constantly mothered everyone else in the group, even if it meant 
  being brutally honest with them ("yes, dear, you do look impressive with that sword, but I 
  think that knight will slice you to ribbons") and brutally honest she was. The game 
  system offered quite a bit in the line of magical spells, but Lucinda's player opted away 
  from the traditional power-blast sorceries and instead settled on a selection of bizarre 
  spells that were more suited to her motherly personality. 
   
  In play, Lucinda's player was an Average Joe who was well on her way to being a 
  Mad Gamer. She never missed the opportunity to mother the other characters, and those 
  opportunities came up a lot. Although she didn't go over the top with her roleplaying, she 
  stayed in character throughout the games and Lucinda's personality wasn't quite the same 
  as the player's own. 
  
  Character: Wink 
  Genre: Fantasy 
   
  Another stereotype for a Fantasy game, Wink was a thief. And he didn't go 
  beyond it, either. Quite frankly, Wink was so stereotypical, he was incredibly boring. His 
  character traits were a tendency toward overconfidence and acting without thinking, as 
  well as (surprise, surprise) being a kleptomaniac. And that was the extent of it. 
   
  The player was unable to rise above the boring nature of his character, even 
  though he tried playing it with an accent and a small bit of acting. It takes an excellent 
  actor to work well with a cardboard-cutout for a character, and Wink's player was 
  definitely not going to be up for any Oscars... 
  Character: Dominator 
  Genre: Supers 
   
  Another decent (and already-used) concept for a Supers game: Dominator had 
  once been a police sergeant who had discovered too much and so had been silenced. 
  Instead of letting good raw materials go to waste, his killers removed his brain and spinal 
  cord and placed them inside an ultra-powerful robotic body -- the computer's program 
  can't override the cop's human mind, so he rebels and a new force for justice is loosed 
  upon the world. The player did well in adding personal touches to the concept, such as an 
  obsession to find others like him ("if they did it to me, they have to have done it to 
  others") and a sense of discomfort around people he considered to be "alive". The 
  crowning glory was a very sad touch: he always carried around his old badge to remind 
  him of the person he'd once been. 
   
  The concept was decent, the personality was good, and the player didn't let a good 
  thing go to waste -- Dominator was played with a tragic air that the player carried off 
  quite well indeed. Even the other players felt sorry for him.  
  Character: Steven Lynch 
  Genre: Pulp Horror 
   
  If Wink (see above) was an example of what a mediocre roleplayer could do with 
  a boring character, Steven Lynch is an example of what an excellent roleplayer can do 
  with one just as boring. 
   
  he hard-boiled Private Eye, what a stereotype for the pulps! And the player didn't 
  take it beyond that. The character had a penchant for cigars, fedoras and his pistol 
  (though not necessarily in that order). Everything else about him seemed to come right 
  out of the pages of a 1920's dime-novel. 
   
  Despite the apparently boring nature of the character, the player went so far over 
  the top with his roleplaying that he was able to carry it off to good effect. His enthusiasm 
  and energy for the game resulted in some very memorable scenes. A Mad Gamer of the 
  highest degree, the player used props, spoke with an accent, and was responsible for 
  moving the game along when a mediocre plot and poor GameMastering could not. 
  
SOURCE: textdata/thevault/_GM Books/World Building & Game Design/Game Mastering and Design/Uncle Figgy's Guide to Good Roleplaying.pdf