Your party submits to the Plinkett test.

I don't get why appearance is apparently bad

"he's an old bearded man" is fine. "She's unkempt, but still wears an expensive necklace" describes a character

So fuck your "le funnay bad movie man with le funnay voice" shit because it reduces characterisation to a fucking meaningless checklist

I agree describing a character with a word salad of game classes is terrible but appearance is pretty fucking universal

>>49435297
>I don't get why appearance is apparently bad

Appearance isn't bad.

It's that you should be able to describe a person without saying what they look like. You should be able to tell a person about a character and they'll come up with an accurate picture on their own.

Character traits inform non-genotype appearance, not the other way around.

>>49435218
>Describe members of your adventuring party without saying what they look like
> other players at your table can't read your thoughts. What matters is the outside perspective
What the fuck do you want me to do?

We've got a party of six:

-One character is a father figure to the team and literally a family man. He's dry in humor and dialog, something of a food and drink snob, at times overly serious and a little impatient, but he makes sure to watch over everyone else around him, both physically and emotionally. He's the guy who throws himself to the front in hopes that nobody else has to get hit.

-Another is team mom (no relation to the previous character), who's a lot more hopeful and optimistic and has a tendency to think with her heart more than anything else. She's a pious woman with a lot of trust in her faith and her teammates alike, and always make sure to patch people up once they get their scrapes. If Team Dad keeps everyone in line, Team Mom keeps them on the right path.

-One character is an accomplace to team mom and nearly the opposite; she's less knowing of the outside world but very inquisitive and more than a little bit on the shy and restrained side. She often looks to the others for guidance as a result, but is always quick to (often literally) leap boldly to her teammates' defense.

>>49435504
(cont.)

-The Thrill-Seeker. She's boisterous, she's a little aggressive, she acts before she thinks and she's always first in line for drinks and nights with the opposite sex. Not to say she's a bad person, but she has very little self-control and tends to tackle every issue, problem, or opportunity by diving in and winging it from there.

-Yet another character is a quiet, calm, and rather independently-minded professional who's still getting used to working in a team. She's well versed in her trade and has very little patience for wasted time and wasted words, and always tries to make sure if something's done it gets done RIGHT. When she does end up in a panic, it tends to be intense.

-The last party member is flashy, silver-tongued and extraordinarily charismatic, quick to form connections and ideas where the other party members might be roadblocked off. He shares the dry sense of humor of some of his colleagues but his smirking delivery, clever improvisation, and flamboyant presence make him just as much of a one man morale squad as he is a good negotiator and talker.

I'll take this.

Tiffany was a kind soul - perhaps too kind. She suffered from a severe case of a messiah complex - every problem around instantly became her problem, and by extension - the party's, even when we had reasons not to care about those people. At the same time, she was quick to assume leadership of anything around and absolutely intolerant of dissent - if her authority was challenged, she got angry quickly, though never violent.
While Tiffany viewed herself as a born leader, Clarence viewed himself as a born follower. He never really had any drive or desire to do anything, no goal in life, no purpose, but when given one, he was always effective and quiet. Clarence always prefered trying peaceful solutions and talking things through first, but he never got upset if the failure of negotiations called for his blade.
Arianne was a vain, self-absorbed woman, an obvious noblewoman. She had no real respect for anyone around her and repeatedly made it known that she neither had any desire for adventuring, nor was made of adventurer material. Only forced to work with others due to circumstances, she just wanted to get this over with and kill everyone as quickly as possible, so she can split away from the others and go her own way.
Sslar was cold-blooded and pragmatic. Just like Arianne, he preferred the quickest and most efficient solution, and he never really cared for good or evil - he was a creature of simple morals. Whatever works - works. And like Clarence, he never really had ambitions - he viewed everything that happened to him as the trials from gods that he just had to live through, one way or another.
Gorok was big, strong and dumb - he respected strength and nothing more, and he only wanted to get into more and more fights, with bigger and stronger enemies. Killing was his way of life and getting stronger was his only joy.

>>49435486
Are other party members at your table so fucking boring, you can't describe them beyond looks and class features?

>>49435218
I like RLM, but the Plinket test is retarded.

>>49436021
Why? Explain.

>guy exiled because he believed in an idealized version of the religion, sells magazines, went back and became the jesus king of his people after killing their god

>a guy who was a slave soldier who became so bitter they made his a duke, and then he accidentally ended up destroying everything he was duke of with the help of his wacky sidekicks

>a guy who was forced to kill his own brother in a ritualistic honor duel and then left his country to earn enough money to pay for his brother to be brought back from the dead

>a masochistic interplanar dance sensation drug addict who is now just trying to start a family, and failing at it miserable

File: 69803c63bf5e96c064be3c7fadda44a3.jpg (16KB, 236x407px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 236x407px

>>49435218
Our party consists of three,

>A man who prides himself on his and his family's civil service. His father is respected but never gained war-glory, something important to the character's culture. So our hero in turn wants to surpass his father in polis-wide respect and awe, inspired by the stories of heroes and personalities gone and past. Is something of a family man, though he has yet to marry (and is a bit late as far as that goes) and his desire for greatness acts as a driving force of the party when the second character's curiosity does not quite stretch that far.

>A woman who is exploring the world because her step-family unofficially drove her out through cultural precedence. She is the youngest of us and has a sense of curiosity and adventuring spirit that matches and competes with the former character's drive and desire for respect and a Name. She has a love of animals and nature, and is learning to acclimate to this strange new culture of built-up cities and politics that she finds herself in. This can be difficult, as she grew up with a love of a warrior's simplicity of form and desire.

>A man who is something of the big father to the party. He tries to temper the ambition of the first character with his own niggardly way of approaching risks, and tries to ensure that he and his live to see the next harvest. Compared to the others he is lazy, lacking ambition and a sense of adventure; but he is incapable of leaving his friends, such as they are, to face the dangers of this world themselves.

A troublemaker who is always looking for action and adventure. He'll stand up for the weak but has flexible morals when it comes to what he considers victimless crimes. If put in a situation where it's the only way, he would sacrifice himself to save others.

1.) An old man in a young man's body. If something doesn't directly inconvenience him, you're going to fight an uphill battle to get him to intervene. Loves pies, has likely replaced his blood with coffee by now.

2.) A hot tempered loud mouth, who is passionate to a fault. Is commonly the one that fights the uphill battle with 1, looking to make the city a better place for its inhabitants even if not directly connected to those poor souls that end up in the wrong place at the wrong time. Is also extremely loyal to those she considers friend.

3.) Is more comfortable running blind than planning every step. Has high aspirations, but takes the path of least effort to get his way. Has no moral compass, only goes where the money is. Always talks his way out of a fight, or runs away if that doesn't work.

did I dun did it? There's a few others in the party, but I can't exactly remember their characters and don't feel like trying to make mine sound more grandiose than he really is.

>>49435624
Yeah.

>>49435486
Describe the OTHER player characters.

>>49435473
>come up with an accurate picture on their own
Not unless you bundle a physical description along with the actual character description.

>An angry, brash, and thoughtful racist.

>a detached, cool, functioning alcoholic.

>a crass, obnoxious, daring tactician.

>>49435218
>Absolute social incompetent of a girl, no social graces whatsoever, likes animals.
>Intelligent scholar with no wisdom and too much smugness.
>Well-intentioned rebel who doesn't seem to realize how edgy he gets. No seriously this guy's not even trying and the edgelord is pouring out.

>>49436630
>tactician
YOU FAIL -1000 OUT OF 10 etc etc

>>49436722
>scholar
>rebel
same to you, or something

this test is stupid

>>49436740
Are you a prequel fan or something, does the name "Plinkett" trigger you because you loved Amidala and clones so much?

File: 1418460495893.gif (1MB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x400px

>>49436740
>this test is stupid
Depends on what angle you are used to describing from.

The point of the test is to look at the person purely from a perspective of personality traits, cultural biases, and motivations.

If their motivation is to become a certain role/occupation/thing, then that should be mentioned, but only in the context of it being a desire.

If their appearance is particular enough that it effected their upbringing and life, then that should be mentioned, but only in the context of how they were effected or where their personality is now because of how they were effected.

It's not hard, and it has a purpose.

>>49436740
Those aren't classes or abilities. Those are things they /do/ as a result of their own skills. You don't have to be a Wizard to study things, or a Rogue to have problems with authority.

File: roll-players.jpg (402KB, 1200x1350px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1200x1350px

>>49436740
>>49436825
To expand on this, why is this their motivation to become this thing? If you want to look at it from the angle of someone who is a workaholic or who only ever focuses on their career/rebellion/role, then WHY is this their primary motivation? Why are they a workaholic? Why are they a rebel? Why does that matter to them?

It's purely a matter of why. Who they are and what happened to them to make them the way they are.

If you're playing a person, coming up with answers to those questions can help inform you on what actions would be the most in-character. It helps make that person a person instead of just a role or a sheet with numbers on it.

>>49435473
>and they'll come up with an accurate picture on their own.
And it probably will be incredibly inaccurate because they have no clue what he looks like. Is he fat, skinny, tall, short, ugly, handsome? Is he poorly groomed or professional looking? If you are able to accurately assume the appearance of a character based off of their personality the character is probably far more one-dimensional than a character that you cannot accurately guess the appearance of.

>He's a cynical and bitter loose cannon who doesn't play by the rules
>He looks exactly like every 80s cop that doesn't play by the rules, tall, fit man, perpetual 5 o clock shadow, looks tired and worn out
Is a much more bland and boring character than the same who doesn't adhere to appearance stereotypes.
>He is tall and lankey, he makes a point to be well dressed and well groomed because he realizes that looks matter more than actions, he doesn't play by the rules but instead of going under cover without permission or beating suspects up he manipulates people using his unassuming appearance and clean cut look to get people to do what he wants.

Also
>Describe their characters to me as if I've never played DnD
So someone would probably have no clue what the hell they would look like since they wouldn't know their race, what kind of clothes they would wear, their weapons, how they would try to look. If you really wanted to describe a character to someone who never heard of DnD or the setting you should absolutely describe their appearance. Saying that he's an elf lets someone know "this is some kind of fantasy, the character is probably tall, thin, and lithe." Saying he's armed with a longbow and wears leather armour lets people know that its pre-industrial technology and he probably relies on speed, grace, and dexterity to fight as opposed to brute strength.

>>49436887
But why the fuck would I need to know if the character uses a bow or a sword, or whether ot not he's an elf? None of this shit matters, what matters is the personality.

>>49435218
>A narcissistic, sociopathic, greedy dilettante who believes themselves much more intelligent and creative than they actually are.
>A genuine psychopath who doesn't even understand that his terribly misguided attempts at maintaining the appearance of humanity only make him look like nore of a monster.
>A committed ideologue who cloaks himself in patriotism because he is fundamentally an outsider and cannot ever be relieved of that status.
>A weak-willed, spineless sycophant who has neither the guts to stand up for his ideas of good nor to actively endorse what he sees as evil.

>>49436935
I want to know more. Is there more?

>>49436848
>>49436881
Scholar and tactician is just as much a job title as prostitute or thief.

Technically you could use the words "scholarly" and "tactical-minded" to give a better understanding of someone's personality with people, rather than what they do.

(It's still a stupid test in my book)

>>49436909
>Appearance doesn't matter.
So it wouldn't matter if Legolas was a fat sack of shit? It wouldn't matter if the Joker was a massive slab of muscle who looks like he could rip a man's arms off? Why even mention "Describe their characters to me as if I've never played DnD" if appearance doesn't matter? The game system or setting doesn't change the overarching ideas of a character's personality. Case and point (not picking on him, I actually like his examples)

>One character is a father figure to the team and literally a family man. He's dry in humor and dialog, something of a food and drink snob, at times overly serious and a little impatient, but he makes sure to watch over everyone else around him, both physically and emotionally. He's the guy who throws himself to the front in hopes that nobody else has to get hit.
That could work for literally any setting or system. He could be a veteran sergeant in Vietnam looking out for the soldiers under his command who are barely kids drafted into the army. I have no idea what he looks like or what he does for a living, I have no clue what kind of setting he is involved with. If someone asked you about your DnD character and you said that the response would probably be "what does he look like?"

>>49435218
>tfw you think your character through but never get the chance to show off their traits without it feeling tacked on

>>49436887

You're overthinking it. The test isn't to determine fine details like that, it's just to determine whether or not the person IS a "character".

Their appearance, profession, setting details, these are all relevant, but they don't mark the difference between a 3-dimensional character with personality, and a flat cutout defined only by what they look like. IE: lacking "depth".

A complex character should be recognizable by the fact that they have features that aren't just external.

>>49435218
As the GM, describing my PCs

>spoiled, rich girl. totally selfish, with a real taste for power, unwilling to trust people in her new environment

>stalwart, noble, but shrewd man seeking to ferret out hidden evils. Fairly suspicious.

>tough guy McDorf.

>absent-minded, kindly, middle-aged lady looking for her family or perhaps a new family, somewhat distrustful of authority.

>terrified teen, running from the law, extremely defensive and judgmental.

They're all coming to work in a handsomely paying guard position out in the middle of the spooky scary forest, in the town that is a haven for weirdos and people with socially-disapproved-of lifestyles.

>>49437017
Then why mention "explain them to me like I never heard of DnD?" Even then its a useless metric since it just gives a very vague idea of their character, most of their character comes from their background, job, and interactions with others.

>He's cynical
>He's supportive
>He's nice
these things are so vague that they are pretty much worthless, your average fanfic OC could be described using this metric and not fire off any red flags.

>>49435218

The thing about the plinkett test is that it was mostly just there to show that the characters in Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars were almost entirely devoid of personality because Goerge thought "stoic and cool but occasionally snarky" would be a good character description for all Jedi and "occsionally snarky" only really applied to Obi-wan.

Luke for example is idealistic, curious an naieve a very prototypical hero character. Han meanwhile is rogueish, daring and kind of a fuckup. Obiwan (old) is wise, contemplative and methodical in his old ways.

It's more of a test meant to say whether or not your character is a one note robot who goes from scene to scene and just does whatever is necessary for the plot.

My character is a piece of shit, who lies, steals, and extorts people to get what he wants. What he wants is more drugs and booze. He has a knack for making money and a knack for losing it just as fast. He has no respect for rules and authority, but he won't go out of his way to antagonize anyone if it's not going to get him something. He entirely incompetent except for the one thing he's good at, and he's particularly good at that thing. He starts a lot of fights and can't finish any of them, and this is probably going to get him killed pretty soon.

>>49437119
t. person who can't read

>>49437138
My bad. You're an asshole though

5 psychopaths with varying degrees of social restraint.

>>49437008
>So it wouldn't matter if Legolas was a fat sack of shit? It wouldn't matter if the Joker was a massive slab of muscle who looks like he could rip a man's arms off?

>If someone asked you about your DnD character and you said that the response would probably be "what does he look like?"

You could just say "[Legolas] is someone who keeps fit, maintaining his physique so as to carry out his job of protecting his homeland better". That provides a good hint as to someone's body while also giving information about their personality.

"[The Joker] is someone who does not care for their personal appearance or physicality due to his derangements, though an odd quirk of his is to paint his face entirely white in an allusion to clowns."

This provides a better understanding of the character, greater than one would have compared to just saying "he's fit" or "he's wiry".

>>49436950
Well I can tell you that these characters are all vampires and that we're playing VtM in 11 AD.

The first guy is a con artist Cappadocian who, before being embraced, was also a serial killer who practiced human taxidermy.

The second guy was just some aimless loser before becoming embraced, but he was sired by a Salubri because he /seemed/ like a good person. That assumption was fundamentally wrong, and he has since become a diablerist.

The third was a Gallic auxiliary who fought against Jewish rebels and considers himself to be a true Roman. He was actually sired by a pureblooded Baali, though he didn't know it until later. He sees the Jews as Rome's greatest enemy and is motivated almost entirely by a desire to wipe them out, to the point that he's set up a paramilitary and quasi-vampiric organization to frame them for trouble and exterminate them.

The last was an unassuming merchant who was beat over the head and embraced by an unknown sire. He is treated as the party's punching bag since he's a worthless 13th generation Caitiff.

My character is a Brujah, and former legionary (who fought alongside the Gallic barbarian) though he was embraced for his martial talents rather than his dedication to some cause. He's almost totally disinterested in the politics and interests that drive the rest of the group, largely because he's got incredibly low Humanity (2, presently). I play this more as a naive Stoicism than depravity, and my character considers themselves to be very reasonable, but in fact this is almost fundamentally untrue, since he's so callous towards the crimes his comrades commit. I'm also more or less the party leader, and my laissez-faire attitude towards the rest of the group means we constantly attract a lot of trouble.

>>49435218
>A cynical, bitter man, disgraced from nobility. Wishes to tear down the establishment and abandon the old ways and God, as they do not care for the people in his eyes. Pragmatism and pure spite leads him down whatever dark path gives him power.

>A complete and utter monster. She's so desensitized to it all that only the grotesquely obscene gets her off. Has no pride or dignity anywhere, would stoop to any depth just to feel like it. Only ever does anything for herself. Doesn't understand the concept of caring for others.

>An arrogant, self-important shithead. Sees everybody as beneath him because of his family. Burns with rage that somebody had the balls to betray him of his valuable property and leave him for dead. Vain to a fault.

Left my character out of it, as requested.

File: ARESweb2.jpg (160KB, 450x503px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 450x503px

>>49436206
Forgot to leave my character out of this one, but hopefully I did a good enough job of describing the other characters that it's at least not obvious who I am playing.

>>49437306
The first one.

>>49437320
Yes. Was it a guess because I'm more likely to put my own first, or is the character just THAT MUCH MORE filled out/described?

>>49437384
You know way too much about his backstory. As I've learned from years of playing DnD, nobody cares about your backstory apart from yourself. Especially the DM.

>>49437384
There's a lot of personal background stuff that I wouldn't expect to naturally come up in a conversation, and also some traits that are clearly yet to be actually demonstrated, like that family man thing.

>>49437219
>though an odd quirk of his is to paint his face entirely white in an allusion to clowns.
Physical description

>>49437108
I mean, with all the one-note, dish-water-dull characters that people make, it seems like a valid question.

OP didn't say it meant that the character was good, but it does suggest whether or not the character is utterly bland.

File: 93c1a388590dcff1fe923207db10fb77.jpg (20KB, 400x475px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x475px

>>49437407
>>49437425
To be fair, the girl hasn't filled that much out about her backstory aside from the fact that she was unofficially kicked from her home, because she's playing someone younger, and the third guy is basically going "I'm a farmer, I had a normal life and serve in the city militia during war time like most men of the city."

But I will certainly keep the criticisms in mind if I have to do this again in the future.

File: WoD Game.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>49435218
>Describe their characters to me as if I've never played DnD.
Well, shouldn't be hard considering this isn't D&D.

>>49435218
Intelligent, tactical, and adaptable. Incredibly meticulous to a fault. Good hearted and believes in second chances (for the most part), but not necessarily "Lawful Nice", especially around certain types.

The straight man to end all straight men. Muted sense of humor, pretty level-headed, and helps leash the more spontaneous members

Spontaneous, the king of random ideas. Sometimes they're great, and sometimes not. Plays nice well enough, but does things his way, and we've learned to accept that. Taunter of eldritch horrors, he seems to have a knack for pissing things off

>>49435218
A murderous and jovial cunt, a simpering and holier-than-thou girlyman, and a bumbling jackass whose stupidity is a constant source of entertainment.

>>49438113
well this just sounds awful

>>49435218
>Describe their characters to me as if I've never played DnD.
Im running three games and none of them are dnd, what do i do?

File: image.png (5KB, 297x144px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 297x144px

A racist, stubborn old man with a fervent devotion to his gods that is not afraid of anything in his way. Equally devoted to his sons due to the loss of his wife years before.

A foreign nobleman with a shady past, but is always meaning to do well if a bit awkwardly. He has a tactful mind and tries to think things through unless action calls immediately.

A runaway bastard daughter of a highly ranked official of a far away country, with a vindicative spirit that deep down just wants to settle in a quiet life to give her family a better chance than she had.

Fourth I can't say much because she's a new addition that has a broken mind and doesn't remember too much of her past

Spiteful, Sarcastic, Opportunist.

Acts like hes tough shit and has a rude/sarcastic comment about almost everything, Is all to aware of shitty the world is and how small he is in it. Will jump at most chances to raise his perceived status and/or lower others.

>>49440407
Shit that was my character, I was supposed to say my parties.

My group is Freaking huge so Ill just throw out the ones who stick out the most:

>A manwhore more concerned with living life then dealing with ANY responsibilities

>A Warmongerer whose main concern is gaining power and keeping it. Not a big dick to those under him, probably because it it would increase assassination attempts.

>A guy obsessed with shows of Strength and Personal Freedom. Strong sense of Justice, (Player got balance card from the Deck of many things, so hes supposed to be "evil", but I dont think he has it in him and it mostly comes out as "am i invested enough to care")

>A Hairy Dwarven Sailor, Literally anything you get from that is correct. He wheres a his racial hat loud and proud, and then hot a new hat (actually a belt) that made those qualities Even stronger.

> A quiet pesron who prefers animals over people, even herself. possibly curious and scared of what she might find out if she looks inward?

>A jovial ball of "Fuck you I do what I want and I can *probably* get away with it".

He's surprisingly charismatic, despite the fact that he came back from trading with outsiders to find his village burned. It's just his way of coping with that kind of loss, I guess. That, and his exquisitely crafted bow serves as a physical connection to those that he lost, since it's been passed down for generations. He's hoping that during his travels to find the source of the fire that claimed his home

>>49435218
Five others.

>A mercenary that's just in it for the money. Likely to either betray the party or become the permanent leader unless someone stops him
>A big guy. Literally no personality
>A helpful guy that's extremely gullible. The guy that plays him almost never RPs though
>A selfish bitch. Only been around for 1 session so no personality has come out really, but the player is keeping secrets about her, so who knows
>A stealthy guy that has no personality

Honestly I would probably just pair up with the mercenary dude and join another campaign where RP is the focus, but he has no other time slots available

Our Kobold barbarian is a very seldf concious man, despite hos air of confidence and tough guy act he constantly needs to remind people that the minor god he champions is in fact relevant, and gets very upset when no one has hesrd of him.

Then there's the other three. Uh, our cleric is kind of innocent and naive? Our sorcerer has a thing for the cleric. And our druid is, well, she like nature?
Our party consists of two veterans and three newbies, and since I'm not allowed to describe my special snowflake.

>>49435218
Jacque
Scummy, rougish, and obsessed with his reputation on the surface, but secretly cares about the party and has really started to try helping others.

Siegfried Braur Von Eisen
Boisterous, merry, and honorable most of the times, but his age is catching up on him and he sometimes snaps. He recently beat a man into a catatonic state and is slowly falling apart.

Sebastian
I'd call him a womanizer, but he goes for the men just as often. Although it seems he just moves between lovers, he genuinely cares about all of them and would stay with any of them if being close to him wasn't so dangerous. Your typical "lover, not fighter", he'll always lean towards diplomacy and mercy, but is still an accomplished fighter.

Magnus
Very eloquent despite his background as a Viking. Loves telling stories of his people and sewing up the rest of the parties wounds.

Santiago
Aloof and slightly selfish. Now that he's working for a crime family he finally feels like he has a purpose.

>>49435218

Not describing classes and abilities seems kind of stupid. A person is not just what they think and believe, but also what they do and choose.

All these names are the character's real names. I hate my party.

Then Disnigh
He's an insane conspiracy theorist and a cultist of the Old One. Recently has been warning the townsfolk about the danger of the "taint" in their water.

Oromir the Forgotten
He's a retard.

Leeroy Jenkins
He's even more of a retard and he talks with the ghost of basically Genghis Khan who is trapped in his head. He is very devout, always knocks before opening doors, and once murdered a child.

Kung Pow:
He's Irish and drunk. Fond of sneaking up enemies while muttering "I am the nougat" and then yelling "get fucked".

>>49435297
Because the point of the Plinkett test is that if the entirety of your character can be summed up with "he's a bearded old man" or "she's unkempt but with an expensive necklace" and that's all there is to the character then the character is too shallow to make for a compelling lead character in a story.

The problem that was being pointed out originally is that in The Phantom Menace there are many characters who defy any description except what they look like and what their job is. Other than those features they don't have any consistent personality traits or memorable qualities.

>>49435218
Let's see...

He's basically attracted to absolutely anything pretty...
Aaaaand he is the duke of a small dukedom... (not sure if being a duke would count as a class in this case)
He's married to a snake woman?

Seriously, you know basically nothing about this character other than his position and his sex life. This test is TERRIBLE. So much of the character is wrapped up in how he looks and how changing his appearance changes how he interacts with people. His abilities are a big facet of where he comes from and his class is also a normally accepted English word that would at least get you on the right track to imagining the right thing.

In short, this system is TERRIBLE because it completely can't do much to get across a character whose persona is largely based on looks or abilities and is utter shit at describing characters who find those traits to be a core to their person.

Seriously, try to Plinkett test Batman.
Costume is out along with all skills. Somewhere between having money and control of a company his gear is definitely based on an ability of the character (either that or the utility belt is a costume).

"Rich guy who fights crime because his parents were killed and is definitely at least a little mentally ill" does NOT get across what Batman is.

>>49444727
Let's try a few more, each one or two sentences for a different person.
>He is a noble's son who gives major fucks about honor
>She is unpredictable and annoying
>He likes nature and dislikes slavery
>He is here to protect one of the women in the group. He very much dislikes slavery.
>He is in a leadership role. He is the son of a farmer.
>He makes monsters for fun and wants to be immortal
>He gets angry and hits things
>He is semi-undead and kinda a douche.

Seriously, inability to pass the test is pretty awful but describing a character under the parameters of the test is just useless. Here's another line for each that helps bring the character a whole lot more into focus:
>He wears heavy armor and tries to defend the others, often to his own detriment.
>Her magical powers often fly out of control and cause problems for the party.
>He is a healer who comes from a race almost unheard of in this region
>His race is quite often enslaved in this region and he often acts as our face when speaking to them.
>He wields a powerful artifact passed down from his father's time in the military before becoming a farmer
>He also has a tendency to turn into a monster to solve his problems
>I'll be honest... this one is pretty much a textbook rageaholic barbarian.
>He absorbs the souls of evil people and uses them to kill other evil people, perpetuating a cycle of justice.

Each of those lines was basically something that gives you a much better idea of what the character does but would have violated one of the rules.

A character who can't pass the Plinkett test is shit. A character who can pass it should NEVER be described by it.

>>49435218
They've all got pretty big sticks up their asses. Super uptight and go nuclear over insults, big on decorum and etiquette. One of them is decidedly less so, though, but doesn't talk much, preferring to throw in snarky quips from time to time. Another likes to tell cheesey jokes and riddles when not scowling.

It's L5R so that's all we've got, really.

>>49437008
>So it wouldn't matter if Legolas was a fat sack of shit?
Tolkien was never one to give many details about his characters appearance. With Legolas about the only thing he said was that he was a really well built dude with massive arms, and that wasn't even added until after people started portraying him as nimble and thin. Even today there's an argument about wether he's supposed to be blonde or have black hair.

So no, appearance really matters fuck all in a non-visual medium.

In our current game:

Guy who sounds and acts like a crazy old man despite nobody really knowing what his age is, the amount of time he yells "I'M LUUUUUCAS!" has become a running joke. (Never said anything about names)

Guy who is trap salesmen (profession, not class), does a lot of get-rich-quick schemes. Started off as one class, died and came back as the exact same person but with a different class, the group just sort of went with it.

Guy who sort of leads a loose collection of revolutionaries, loves sheep, still manages to be relatively joyless and standoffish to others.

Guy raised by gnomes, has an equally silly name because of this, half the party doesn't bother to remember it, fights with a trident, his nickname I won't say as it'd break one of the rules, but it has "bitch" in it, and he just sort of accepts it.

My character is there too.

>>49446098
The game that took place in the same setting before this one:

Rapist

Drug dealer

Bartender

Basically David Lo-Pan from Big Trouble in Little China except dumb

My character again (Pimp)

>>49444727

The test isn't to try to decipher who it is with the information. The more descriptive you can be, the better the character is.

I mean, It's also primarily a tv/movie thing, but still.

A naive, blood thirsty psycho who always seems to have things go his way.

A gruff but genuinely good guy struggling with addiction, who solves problems with his fists.

A strong and proud guy who is very loyal but who can become terrifyingly callous and bloodthirsty.

An intelligent fellow setting out to make a name for himself in spite, and to spite, his father.

A devout foreigner seeking to prove his worth to his people and organization.

>An angry, stern woman, who has little tolerance for those who don't balk at her bite. She doles out threats like they're going out of style, and resorts to violence a little too quickly, but it's usually all intimidation. Tries to do the right thing in the end, often suceeds without too much bloodshed. Dislikes liars, thieves, and deal breakers, is compulsively honest herself.

>A man who fancies himself a playboy, but can't quite back it up. Loose morals in regards to intimate relationships (his own and others). Doesn't like to see weaker beings hurt. Aloof and artistic. Often goes his own way, plays to the beat of his own drum, so to speak.

>A clever, squirrely little man, with no time for anything outside his own interests of astronomy, cosmology, and arcana. Brusque, but fair. He says what he means and means what he says. Often sticks his foot in his mouth, but doesn't understand why. Rude, and slightly megalomaniacal, but doesn't wish anyone who doesn't deserve it any real harm.

>The hero of his own headcannon. Naive and none too bright, but kind a brave. Trusts others to do the right thing. The heart of the party. Raised disciplined, but faltering against many of the temptations of this unfamiliar new world. Likes the drink a little too much. Taught not to start fights, but never backs down from a challenge.

>>49446294
Second campaign:

Formerly a proud and honest man from a primitive society, seeking to prove his worth to his people.

He was replaced by a simple brute who will set a goal and pursue it to the ends the ends of the earth but give up on it on a whim.

A violent simpleton who drinks too much but will throw himself into danger to save anyone.

A secretive outcast who has made bargains that are starting to catch up to her, forcing her to keep secrets from and act against everyone else.

A man struggling with his heritage and is always looking for the upper hand in every situation.

>>49444727
> Missing the point this much
The reason this test exists is to show that your characters are shit.

My character is OMG SO RANDOM and HYPER GENKI and is like ALWAYS making jokes

There we go, according to le funny voice bad movie man I have THE BESTEST CHARACTER EVAR1111!!111

>>49435218
>wise knight (can I say knight is general terms, it's not like paladin what is specific class) who while really loyal to his order he also is very critical of it and you could say he rouge/cowboy like member of that order acting against it's customs and traditions if he believe it is right thing to do or for good of said order he could be higher ranking in order if not for this attitude, he have a lot of patience even when dealing much crap, he fully believe in great power and destiny
>young knight apprentice, by contrast is more by the book than his master, soon to become full knight, he trust judgement and teaching of his master but he often challenge and argue with him, questioning some of his actions and taking side or point of their order, while still being noble and kind he is not above giving sarcastic or cynical remark
>girl who pretend to be servant of teen ruler of their kingdom she actually is that ruler who employ decoy in her place unless there are some official royal duties to perform, she can't stand be just passive and take part in action, joining group in exploring local town for needed supplies or fighting herself, as political leader she is to young and inexperienced often manipulated but she will not let herself or her kingdom to be push over
>member of semi-aquatic race, while rather unique member of his race, he twist other people image of that race if they judge it by his example what is rather not good, he is dumb and clumsy, he annoy everyone, his race exiled him and above mentioned knights question him being intelligent creature, but he mostly hurts himself and is not that much burden for party, just useless
>little, tag along kid, taken from his home and slavery because knights discovered great power in him and claimed great destiny before him, while have alot of impressive skills he is still naive kid, easy impressed, despite growing in shitty place as slave he is cinnamon bum style good and pure

>>49447218
You're violating the rules of the test once every couple of words, and you mostly fail at actually describing the party.

>>49444879
Yes?

>>49436055
>>49436021

The Plinkett test is retarded when applied to /tg/

The test on /tg/ is "let me tell you about my character, but not his clothes or class, so its OK"

Applied to movies, the test makes a whole lot more sense.

Also, when you ask /tg/ if their characters pass the plinkett test, of course only the ones who think they're gonna pass are going to respond.

>>49435218
4 assholes and a pussy.

File: frozen north.jpg (75KB, 750x500px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 750x500px

>>49435218

A manipulative, scheming megalomaniac who is willing to step over anyone or anything to get her way.

A cruel, greedy narcissist who indulges his every petty and sadistic whim.

A disgusting, ill-mannered wretch with a talent for survival, a breadth of useful knowledge, and a great aversion to bathing.

A fearless, amoral thug who has no greater ambitions than the thrill of savage violence.

These four are a walking blight on the land, bringing ruin and death everywhere they go. Those who do not submit are torn asunder and fed to the horde of monstrosities that follows in their wake.

>>49447294
That's why you describe the rest of your party, not your character.

>>49437426
It's an act that he does, that demonstrates part of his psyche, that coincidentally shows a physical appearance.

I'm the GM and this is my group.

One character is an atrocious flirt who has some serious attachment issues towards male human figures. She has a silver tongue and will always be looking to use it to her advantage. She has a tender side too in respect to caring for animals and has demonstrated an animal cunning at times too.


One character is a kinda ditzy , happy go lucky , 'hippy type' who is always overtly friendly to others and has a habit of coming off as pretty quirky and forward as a result. She's also in contrast to this an extreme temper which flares up randomly and violently and a very loose idea towards morality happily stealing if it suits her. Likewise has some serious father issues going on as well.

One character is greedy, wealthy and ambitious . He will do just about anything in pursuit of his goals. He however proves a strong ally as long as his goals and his allies are aligned, he will however always value himself over anybody else which makes him pretty selfish to boot and ruthlessly intelligent.

One character is a headstrong , dimwitted brutish type who is rather arrogant as well. Tends to want to resolve issues with his fists and has a love of food , just don't ask what the meat is...

One character is err protective of her people I guess... She needs to roleplay more.


One character is a fucking faggot who can't be fucked to roleplay at all so I can say nothing about him. I asked this shit during a tense scene where the players were entering a dungeon after a fight what he was doing and he goes 'eating popcorn I guess lol'. Prick.

Ugh.

This post is where I realise half my group sucks.

>>49447378
>This post is where I realise half my group sucks.

And this is the entire point about the Plinkett test, realising when characters suck.

Don't take it out on your players though, maybe they just like killing orcs more than roleplaying, which is sort of the equivalent of watching a michael bay movie.

>>49447354
Of course nobody would ever break that rule on an anonymous message board

Like how anons never turn to sarcasm to belittle others in discussions

>>49447431
Of course people will break it, but if they're not using the premise then that's not really an argument against the premise. An argument against /tg/, maybe, but it doesn't make it a bad idea to see if your group actually bothers with characterisation.

>>49447409
I'd actually say most of the group enjoys roleplaying and a couple of members just don't at all and they drag it down for everybody. I'm probably going to ask popcorn boy to leave if his shit continues. The sessions he isn't there are so much better.

>>49447431
>>49447460
You are in the right about that, and I was wrong.
>>49447378
best post in thread

>Nervous and tired most of the time, but she is stubborn to a fault in seeking her goals

Is actually a human slowly being taken over by a parasite lodged in her brain

>>49435218
A cheery, kind dwarf from a prosperous, far-off city on a mountain. He is stricken by wanderlust and carries around great sheets of parchment, lots of ink and surveying/outdoorsman supplies, as his profession is that of explorer and cartographer.

>>49447646
Your party consists of two people?

>>49435218
Here's my party.

>One is a caring woman, she acts as the emotional and physical support of the group as she tends to all the wounds and inspires everyone with her words, she often attempts to negotiate but she isn't very good at reading the situation whatever it may be at hand.

>One is a man who has prided himself on his strength however he has died once and fallen many other times, he is damaged both inside and out from his first death, however he is a good business man often getting the party deals and selling whatever cargo they may be carrying at a slightly inflated price.

>One is a skilled hunter who is a bit racist towards anything that has green flesh and they suffer from Mysophobia, he is rather apathetic however and shows no sign of a personality even when noticing enemies he may not even warn his team.

>One is a librarian who has set out of her home land to gather more information to put into books for her home, she lacks common sense and is rather crude often ruining negotiations and even beneficial relationships for the party.

As for looks I'm just gonna give ratings in order.

8/10 amazonian beauty

5/10 noble beast

4/10 racist hunter

9/10 autistic bookworm

>>49435218
Socially inept hacker thrust into living in the underworld because the secrets she stole were far worse than the secrets she meant to steal. Moral compass for the group.

Ex-cop who turned while in deep cover after learning of corruption in the dept. Lots of underworld contacts means he finds work for the group and thus makes him the default leader. Helps that his cop roots make it easier for him to listen to the moral compass.

Ex-soldier with a lot of emotional baggage. Very willing to kill but self-hates because it's so easy for him. Conflicted about moral compass because she reminds him that he's losing his own compass and becoming a monster but appreciates that she keeps him sane enough to fight that monster... one day at a time.

Ex-soldier,redneck, prepper who is happiest following orders and in the field.

>>49448225
Completely missing the point.

You guys arguing are being really stupid. The reason a character's appearance and profession aren't necessary to say out loud in a movie is because you can fucking see them. Mike was highlighting how boring the prequel characters are. In a TTRPG, you can't see shit; if someone doesn't describe their appearance, no one at the table will know what the fuck they're looking at.

And appearance/profession can be important to a character, but it doesn't need to be stated to give an idea of who they are as a person. "Self-conscious" and "self-conscious because of a facial scar" is the same fucking thing. The why might make a cool story, but it doesn't change anything. Everybody's character has a reason to it, doesn't mean everyone knows why. Do you know why you're so bitchy?

>>49435297
Butthurt SDN user spotted.

>>49435218
A man who escaped from the justice for a crime he didn't commit. He's wary of people who may know his past, but holds onto the forgiveness he's been granted. Generally tries to do right by people, especially travelers. Remains calm in the face of antagonism.

A noblewoman in the service of another lord. Dutiful, though playfully abusive of her followers. Keeps her faith close to her, though doesn't proselytize. Obsessed with the history of the land, very interested in the artifacts of old kings and warriors.

A commoner brought up in recognition of his deeds. Took up his father's commission after the latter's disappearance. Is motivated more by survival than anything, remembering his days of hunger. Keeps his mouth shut generally.

A merchant's son, who has turned away from his family's work to pursue his studies. Serves as a tutor and confidant to his master's child. Secretly investigates entities from another world, whose voices he can hear.

Guess which one I am

My current cyberpunk 2020 party:

>The leader
A naturally charismatic, good man held back by his libido. He has a great drive for revenge that comes from his love for his family, and takes on a fatherly role to the rest of the party as a result.

>The netrunner
An awkward, withdrawn young man who lets his anxieties control him. At the encouragement of the party, he's ventured from his comfort zone, but still strongly prefers to hide and watch rather than explore.

>The techie
A braggart and a cocky little shit, whose bold face hides great insecurities about his (lack of) accomplishments in life.

>The (ex) corp
A beaten down grump who experiences ennui as his default state. While generally a nice guy, he can be incredibly petty. Meeting the party has helped break him from his rut somewhat, and he's started to grow more energetic and excited lately.

>The muscle
A cheerful, friendly person, he has a kind, open attitude with others, but generally prefers to keep to himself. His upbringing led to a great distrust of others that melted in the wake of the party, he has since come to view them as a sort of surrogate family.

>>49448450
>Butthurt /swco/ user spotted
FTFY.

File: 1473832458307.jpg (273KB, 939x939px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 939x939px

So I've got a player who I'm having trouble getting immersed and involved in their characters. I'm going to refer to them as B. B has been with us for about a year, give or take a month or two depending on him being too busy to attend our two sessions a week. He has a lot of trouble roleplaying and creating characters in feneral. He fails the plinkett test in every respect as his characters are all basically him with no personality. He can only describe them by their 'role' and what they are wearing or their skills or what equipment they have. He also discards them and gets them killed the moment he gets bored since they are all cardboard cutouts to him.

>>49448866
>that pic
YOU FUCKER
WE TOLD YOU IT DOESN'T WORK

File: 1466337782475.jpg (183KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1280x960px

>>49448866
On top of that other players have complained that they can't get attached to any of his characters because of how flat and non emotional they are. The only characters of his are 'lol so random' gimmick characters that everyone ends up hating since all the other players try to take their characters somewhat seriously. I know I need to start putting my foot down, and it's what I'm planning to do at the start our out next campaign. What I'm hoping to find however are some tips, excersices, or advice to get him to connect with a character.

File: anatomy-of-a-pug-300x297.jpg (16KB, 300x297px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x297px

>>49448915
No idea what you're talking about. Honestly I just found it in a thread a week ago and I like dogs.

>>49448948
sorry then, chummer
some guy is semi-regularly coming into /srg/ and asking how to turn that pic into a character

A total edgelord obsessed with death. He's running away from the only people who ever treated him well for reasons I don't think he's ever made clear.

A spaced-out idiot who isn't paying attention most of the time, and this frequently becomes a plot point. More than once the party would have gone on a completely different course if this character had remembered to reveal some critical piece of information that only he knows.

A cartoonishly uncouth bully who is confused as to why a sophisticated upper-class lady wouldn't want to run away with him.

A grouchy guy with a heart of gold who basically never talks. He's the only member of the party with any kind of conscience, but it never comes up because he routinely declines to offer input when the party is making decisions and refuses every position of power ever offered to him. And this is not the kind of party where it's okay for the moral center to quietly lead by example. He really needs to beat some discipline into these people, but he never will.

A guy who's... just normal, i guess, just sort of normal.

I guess I have kind of a shitty party.

File: 1473472712355.jpg (164KB, 900x1154px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 900x1154px

>>49448988
Ah makes sense. /srg/ is one of the few generals I visit regularly.

>>49448332
I'll grant that maybe I am... but how does your post help me get it? I realize this is 4chan and the knejerk reaction is to be an asshoe rather than helpful... but, to be fair, it's also to e an asshole rather than ask for help.

Let's break the mold, you and i. Where did I go wrong?

I'm gonna take a stab at it since imwasn't sure if saying what they do talks about their abilities. I tried to avoid talking about what the ex-soldiers did in their military careers... could have been mechanics or paper pushers or infantry or whatever... but it should talk to the kinds of people they are. Ex cop can be an anyone, too.. maybe mentioning the moral compass was a hacker...

Anyway, i'm open to correction.

>>49444879
>>49444727
Your problem is that you're playing D&D, and thus can only see things in terms of race/class/alignment, and the absence of those qualities reduces characters to almost nothing. Fix your brain, stop playing D&D.

>>49448988
How hard would that be?

Within that dog are the remains of some asshole who drowned in that 6" puddle because he slotied a BTL and didn't know he was drowning. He's
a character.. dead.. soon to emerge from the stinky end of a good looking dog and probably partially smeared on a carpet as the good looking dog drags his as across the living room floor.

>>49449466
Because you can't just have a normal dog in a puddle as a character

>Within that dog are the remains
has no effect on anything

>>49444879
You're arguing against a strawman over there. Nobody is saying that the Plinkett Test is the best way to describe a character in any other context. It's not an argument that you should never refer to someone's appearance or job when writing fiction or when just talking about them in normal conversation. The Plinkett Test is exactly that - a test to see if a character has a personality and just just an appearance and a job. You seem to agree that a character who can't pass the Plinkett test is shit, and that's literally all anyone is saying. Sit down.

>>49449416

I think the "Stop playing D&D" turds are the weakest link. If they played D&D, they would be unable to see things other than in terms of class, race and alignment so they insinuate that this is inevitable for everyone. If they were just a little smarter, these turds might be retarded. As soon as someone reveals themselves as one of those "Don't play D&D" turds, nod sagely and walk away. There is nothing to be gained by conversing with it.

>>49449402
"Hacker" is a position or role. "Ex-soldier" or "ex-cop" is also a position or role. Just like you're not allowed to refer to a character's current job, you're also not allowed to refer to their past jobs. Having underworld contacts or stealing important secrets also has nothing to do with a character's personality.

Does that help?

>>49449515
He's dead. He has the same effect as al dead characters before and after him. And the idiot who posts this pic looking to have someone make a character has an answer that he won't like so he'l stop asking.

>>49449562
>al dead characters before and after him
so nothing

>>49449553
Yup. I'll blame that faggot, op, though. His message says to describe the character but doesn't mention personality at all...

>>49449578
Yes. Nothing. You're acting a though some schmuck posting a picture of a dog in a puddle and asking you to make a character out of it deserves more.

>>49449682
>Yes. Nothing
Oh
Reading your post it seemed to imply that it had some effect on the dog

File: image.jpg (112KB, 818x1000px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 818x1000px

>>49435218
He's a goofy but smug little fuck with a sense of humor and a heart of gold that has an absurd plan for every situation, plans that usually work regardless of how intensely illogical they are.

>>49435218
I am of a mind that your occupation is an important part of who you are, what social class you belong to and what kind of ideals you hold.

I will not name classes, but jobs contextualise your behavior and style.

My group has:
A compassionate medic who has been more lenient with drug abuse than he should have, but clearly holds the spirit of the law over the principle to preserve the function and not the letter of the law.

Then we have a shifty cop who landed his gig with us because he didn't adhere to the letter of the law, or general codes of conduct. Despite his infractions, he is loyal to the law, but paranoid to a fault. He has been crooked so long he can't tell a straight-laced man anymore.

Then we have the emissary, a good-natured man of choice words and a peaceful agenda. And he better be, because he has to make sure we won't get tossed out over some spat.

The scrapper man I know nothing about, but so far he mostly seems a rat.

My own man is a soldier by heart. And an engineer with a mind for defenses. You could call him a patriot, I guess. But his loyalty is not to a flag so much as the defense of civilisation.

>>49449660
Is this bait? It seems to be bait.

>>49440235
That fourth character sounds like a huge drag. I hate when players make a character that's 90% emotional baggage.

>halfling bard
Fast-talking, brave, adventurous
>elf rogue
Cowardly but kind, looks out for his friends
>gnome monk
Protective, just, quiet and serious
>tiefling paladin
Quick to anger, selfish, passionate
I'm the DM.

>>49451057
It's a replacement character to play since the other one was captured, and she's not all crying wah wah poor me, just a bit unhinged and vengeful.

>Religious, despite his own failings in proselytizing. Pretty good when it comes to ordering his henchmen around, but despite wielding considerable magical power still wants to go fight on the front lines like he used to. After a good venture out into the wilderness, loves coming back home to the wife and children. Absolutely hates the color purple; started as a cute little irrational quirk and was actually validated within the first month's sessions when the DM used some purple goop that turned out to be insta-death poison. This, surprisingly enough, has saved the party more than a couple of times over the course of the campaign, mostly because the DM keeps forgetting.

>Headstrong, brash young kid looking to strike out and find her lost brother. Reckless to the point of dangerous to herself and others, but seems to pull through and get shit done. Never willing to back down from a good fight, even if it's not really that good a fight. Has had moments where the party has questioned her utility given the attitude, only to have her pull out ridiculous plans that end up working out in the party's favor.

>Jaded, cynical asshole who's seen too many kids die. Tired of the life of a soldier, but doesn't know anything else. Is estranged from family for reasons yet unknown. Despite hard exterior, is definitely visibly paranoid around bounty hunters; it's assumed there's a bounty on his head, but unsure as to how it got there or how much it is.

Plot twist, these are all my characters from various campaigns.
Double secret plot twist, these are all descriptions of my characters as told to me by my other players.

>>49435218
Party of Three

The weary tactician - A humble and polite man, this adventurer has seen many mental hardships, and is often weary of the actions of both his allies and himself. Lest he bring negative criticisms upon the group, again, he constantly tries to use reason in a world devoid of it.

The man of action - full of bravado and foolhardy courage, our man of action is the first in and the last out. Fighting for glory and honor because he both wants and has to. A past of debauchery, he now hopes to find salvation by guiding others with a firm and confident hand. But deep down he questions his own faith, and if he truly deserves the victories hes experienced.

The depraved fiend - Our trouble maker, always reckless in his actions is the source of much pain. A soul whose seen too much, this depraved fool broke a long time ago. Now he lives for gore, gold, glory, and pissing everyone off. But at great moments of danger he'll throw himself upon his own sword if it means saving the team.

The first of my traveling companions is the one most important to me, my little brother. He's a reckless man in every sense of the word, and his brash personality, sharp tongue, and hot temper got himself thrown out of the land that I loved so very much. Still, he is my ward as much as my closest ally, and I'll go to any length to keep him out of the very trouble he seeks with such dedication.

The second is one that we picked up for the very skills and cunning that we need him for. Still, he has ultimately come through in every one of the many crises we find ourselves in. Our peoples may be traditionally at odds, but at this point we have sacrificed much for each other, and I will gladly call him brother, just not with him within earshot. His particularly friendly brand of rowdy mixes well with my brother, and he never takes a playful ribbing to seriously, often striking back with a clever line himself.

The third and final member is a bit harder to pin down. He's certainly a quiet fellow, often keeping to himself while the rest of us are engaged in banter. I know that he keeps strength in high regard, and it's the target of his spiritual devotion. Despite his unwillingness to take part in the teambuilding , he's always willing to buckle down when things get rough. Even when in a situation where knows that he won't be of much use, he'll go through anyway, unafraid of the dangers we often find ourselves in.