That isn't a quirk! That's heavenly! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

These are a few of my quirks:

1) Due to a certain issue with my real-life personality (like getting the leader of a high school clique that was always snotty towards me fired from her job at McDonald's when I know she doesn't have the credentials to work in anything except fast food and none of the other joints are currently hiring), my GM has houseruled that all of my characters must have the Vindictive flaw (I am allowed to enjoy the extra BPs, though).

2) I'm a killer GM, when I GM. I don't pull punches, don't play soft, make the players fight for every advantage, and am not unknown for throwing out mixtures of APCs, dragons, cyberzombies, and high-innitiate mages. I typically only GM when my GM has decided he wants to throw the group an extremely tough one. I typically GM holiday-themed runs lately, for some reason.

3) My characters all tend to be psychopathic. I'm talking the kind of character who starts a kidnapping of a corp's exec by walking into the room and headshotting his secretary with a silenced pistol while pumping him full of gel rounds with a machine pistol.

4) I'm the only person of my group who is allowed to simply rely on a dice roll for intimidation checks and not having to describe how. This ties in with #'s 1 and 3.

5) Typically, I avoid the Matrix; this isn't due to any particular dislike of the Matrix systems (though, I think my criticisms of the current one are well-known), but simply due to circumstances. The two who play the rigger and hacker are fast at generating those characters.

6) I am not allowed by my group to play trolls, orcs, or metavarients thereof. See #3.

7) On occasion, I like a game where we know from the very beginning that the characters are going to die. Where you are told, in no uncertain terms, that they will not survive. It's fun seeing how long you can avoid death and how long you can managed to escape; and, on a couple of occasions I've actually, despite the GM's best efforts, managed to get a character to survive. Usually, my characters in those games go out due to a gun malfunction while it's loaded with EX-Ex and the character's got several kilos of plastic explosives and grenades all around them.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) I'm the only person in the group that's played a mage who uses grenade launchers instead of spells for combat.

Bah humbug. Christmas, another thing those blasted keebes have messed up. Why we had to mix up a perfectly find religous holiday with those dreking elves I'll never know.

----

One of my quirks as GM is always asking the players "Are you SURE you want to do that?" I started doing it only when they were doing obviously nutty things, but have increased its frequency so as to make them doubt perfectly reasonable decisons (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) .

I'm also bad about accidentally revealing my hands through fruedian slips. Such as "No you can't search the body there is still a trap on top of him" when of course I do not intend to reveal the fact that there is in fact a trap there! Luckily for me, my players are often times oblivious to these slips of my tongue (Oh no problem, we'll move the trap first!).

I also do terrible accents for my NPCs.

My quirks:

I generally start out with a concept, rough out the stats, then do the background, changing the stats as I need to. Doing the story first doesn't work as well - I find doing the two together makes for a character whose stats and background match better. I like structured formats like Bull's 50+ questions, which help me avoid writer's block and organize the background. I try to keep it relevant - if they had a life-changing experience that led to their becoming a shadowrunner when they were 18, then their childhood years don't need as much detail.

I like combat and chewing up the scenery, so my characters tend to be combat-oriented with a touch of face (the non-face ones tend to have more extravagant personalities). I like being good at my specialty, but not to the point where that's all the character can do. I like having a good secondary specialty or sometimes more than one.

In SR3, I loved sorcerers, because you could max out their specialty with one skill and two Attributes, leaving you plenty of points to spend on other things - and the spell selection itself gave the character plenty of options. In SR4, I favor adepts with a bit of bioware. Mages and sammies are both okay, but sorcerers are not really worth it any more - for the very slight difference, you might as well play a full mage. I have not gotten that into conjurers or riggers, even though they are probably the two most powerful archetypes. I guess I prefer a character with personal power over one who can command an army of spirits or drones.

I find that my actual played characters aren't as maxed-out as some of the dice pool exercises that I have posted on the forums. Partly because it reaches a point of diminishing returns. A face with 40 dice will dominate social tests (and be bored) and be weak (and bored) in other areas. I would rather have someone rolling 12-15 dice, who succeeds most of the time but fails some of the time, and who can also ride a bike, shoot a gun, and so on.

My main flaw as a player is playing characters that do not fit into the general group. This is usualy a problem with making a character seperate from the group. I tend to have similar problems when GM and trying to link together completely seperate people into acomplishing one goal. I think this might be more a group flaw then just myself as a player.

I do have a bad habbit of playing underpowered characters by not min/maxing. This is as much as a problem as min/maxing can be as I don't fit the power level of the group hen its very difficult to challenge the other players or just not completely destroy my character.

As a quirk, one thing that drives me insane as a player or a GM is the character with no social skills who insists on argueing, persuading the NPC or other players. Always using thier own natural skills at speaking and getting thier point across when the character has no skills at this and has a cha of 1.

Lets see, I have a number of little quirks.

-I tend to place a heavy emphasis on game mechanics, which irks some method actors. I tend to look at a characters numbers before looking at the backround, and often criticize people who don't apply their numbers in a logical fashion.

-I strongly believe in creating strong, well balanced characters, and often cite the hard to argue role play point that my shadowrunner/adventurer(depending on the system) won't party with someone who has a huge gaping deadly flaw (like someone with a body score of 1 who tries running in the meat), I don't care what the roleplay reason is, someone with that big of a flaw doesn't survive this long.

-I usually play in the third-person. I will say what my character does, how they do it, even in great detail if need be, but I rarely every talk like my character word for word, which annoys some players. I personally see it as a valid way to play a character with better mental stats then me(mainly charisma).

-I usually always play magical characters, and I almost always play the charismatic manipulator types, with illusions and mind-altering magics if possible. When I don't I usually play the biggest toughest meanest tank you can find.

-I have a tendency to play very...morally ambiguous characters. You usually couldn't call them out-right evil, but they can't always be called good either. To be specific, my characters intentions are usually someone good(if oftentimes selfish) but I usually pick the most effective means to reach those goals, whatever they may be.

-I tend to use Occum's razor a lot, my simple solutions oftentime angering GMs with very complex plots. (We could do that, or I could just astrally project inside, and summon a spirit to open the door from in there instead of tailing someone for hours to steal their key).

I don't GM often, because I tend towards the sadistic.

As a player, I have no concept of "restrained application of force". Panther cannons to hold up a stuffer shack? Yes! Force 10 fireballs to intimidate children? Yes!

I tend to be WAY to detail oriented, sometimes to the detriment of the big picture. Or, I refuse to let anyone see something until it's 'done', which means I over think it and then refuse to let anyone ever see it because I can't decide on it's final form. It's one of the pitfalls of having OCD. Everything must be perfect!

My quirks, hmmm.... I'll try the short version.

As a player:

I usually get a lot more involved in the surroundings than the other players and do a lot more research on the relevant background of the campaign. This results in several issues:

1. I hog spotlight. Even when I play silent type characters, I tend to inadvertently be the one who interacts most with NPCs because I know most about the situation without resorting to metagaming.
2. I can't keep myself from OOC commenting on the situation constantly. Call it multiple MST3K persona disorder or whatever. It can make for a good joke, or destroy immersion and annoy the others.
3. I cringe everytime another player decides on a certain action because of ignorance of rules or odds. Like a mage with magic 4 and a drainpool of 14 not ever casting stunbolt above force 4, when a force 8 would have instantly knocked that guard out, because he never sat down and thought about the odds of taking a real hit from the cast.
4. While I go along with it, I hate acting first person. It just feels ridiculous to me.

Also in the recent years I shifted from playing more male characters to female characters. Maybe it's got to do with that tendency in cRPGs where I think "If I have to look at my character's butt while I play the game, it better be a cute one." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

And as a GM:

1. I loooove conspiracy plots. Which often results in the players not knowing what's what after a few sessions.
2. I never write anything down. Intricate plots have been too often destroyed by Occam's Razor.
3. I hate dwarves. Seriously.

And to twist Max's #3 around AND send more people into TVTropes hell: I hate Darker and Edgier, as well as The Chosen One. As a rule most characters who don't try to be someone special come out very well-rounded and reasonably interesting.
As soon as you go to implant any chosen destiny and probable singificance of the character on a global scale (i.e. something like "He's the child of Dunkelzahn and a Horror!") it gets ridiculous, boring and twodimensional quick, also because usually every aspect of the character becomes about this one thing. I have observed the same problem with SR novels too.

Quirks of mine:

I occasionally cheat. It's a habit I have learned and one which I am again learning away from. Sometimes I want to fail. Sometimes I want to succeed.

I like making involved characters that during the game I flesh out into "real" personas.

I like writing things, keeping a diary, drawing pictures about my characters or the campaign I am involved in.

Most of my characters also seem to have a death wish of some kind. I have yet to have a character die like that, but I keep hoping.

In Shadowrun I have so far played a few psychopathic characters. Vera was a serial killer and Sonya goes from calm to violent with a drop of a hat.

Quirks of mine:

As a GM:

I'm a softy. I hate killing characters...for me, taking a character unconscious is sufficient enough for death. The players know they could be dead and always seem relieved when they make it to play another day.

I hate rolling dice. Normally I print out pages of random numbers and just go down the line and use those results. When I do roll dice, I like to fudge the outcomes in favor of telling the story or adding stress to the scenario.

I like to tailor adventures, singling out each of the players. This keeps the spotlight moving and gets everyone ready for some "shine time".

I like the players to direct the show, sometimes to the detriment of the gaming session. I will let the players self-destruct before I bring them all back the the game and move them along.

As a Player:

I love handicapping my characters. Although, the GMs I usually play with, being their min/maxing selves, always find in-game ways to "improve" my character...even when I tell them I don't want help.

I like all my dice in front of me with the highest number on top.

I don't let anyone else roll or touch my dice (and in DnD, I have a d20 that I've been playing with for 15+ years, in fact it rolled four 20s in my last session...its enchanted!).

I tend to choose a character after everyone else has set theirs so I can fulfill a missing role.

Ugh. I'm guilty of that as well. Though in my defense I only do it if I want the game to JUST END ALREADY SO I CAN GO HOME!!!

We call it ''dice training'' at our table. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

And I have to admit, this is new for me, believe it or not:



I know people hate elves(usually claiming them too 'special' for whatever reasons), and orks/trolls(usually claiming them overpowered with their high Bodies or the latter just not being able to fit anywhere), and plenty of folks who dislike the metatypes/weirdo stuff, but I think this is the first time I've ever heard hate for the little guy. It just proves there's something for everyone in the game...and sometimes not. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) (I personally have no dislike/hatred for any of them, even the special stuff, thinking they all have their place. I believe there is a time and a place for the REALLY strange stuff, but even then it can fit sometimes.)

When I see someone doing that, I tell them it's aversion therapy. The dice will get tired of having that side up. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Kinda like when someone rolls a lot of sixes on an unimportant roll, and they say, "it's good practice," I'll reply, "use 'em up!"

I'm just contrary that way. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I must say I do find the elf-hate curious. If you strip out the poncy Tolkein and D&D themes and look at the original mythology from the Norse and proto-Germans, yeah, they are like a human in every single way except better. They were believed to be a race of eternally youthful nature and fertility gods. As a fan of myth and storytelling, I think that's kind of cool. Who wouldn't want to be one or bang one? And now that I think about it, every fictional race is "just like a human except better" in some way. Hobbits are just like humans except quicker and more playful. And cuter. Dwarves are just like humans except more comical and mysterious. And beardy. As for vampires, hell, who doesn't want to live forever and look beautiful in satin? It's unfortunate that Anne Rice and immature drama queens and man-children Cam members have made the modern vampire into an effiminate mockery but there's nothing wrong with the flawed but eternal beautiful theme conceptually. And how is that any different from being a benevolent ork? Tolkein created "orqui" as demons made flesh, not just big dummies with green skin, bad teeth and pointy ears.

Oh well, I guess that's why we're talking about quirks, right? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Aren't shadowrunners in general "just like a human except better"? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I often create characters and write their stories, and end up never using them. Still, it's fun.

I also min/max, though I try not to overdo it. And I tend to stick to magical characters.

Relevant, me thinks.

I find that view to be rather dour but it makes sense as anthropological theory.

I've always loved that about elves in SR: you take the almost mystical elves of Tolkein etc, stick them in the 6th World and suddenly they're strippers, hookers and gangers with needles in their arms. SR turns the mythology beautifully on it's head: the romance is stripped away.

- I lay my dice out in patterns. Generally fives and sixes, but after a dice roll I generally try putting it in a pattern at times.

- When in combat I try to squeeze whatever I can into those complex, simple, and free actions. I feel like I'm cheating if I can't use them all for each and every IP.

Just thought of another one: all of the RPG manuals on my bookshelf are grouped by system and placed in order by product number.

My little non-secret is this: The second-worst GM I ever played under was myself. This is why I'm so sensitive to what bad GM's can do. I like to think I've become better-- hell, looking back, I can't see how I could have done worse-- but I still know I have far to go.

That's about, why I have no problem with elves in SR. Known stereotypes about the fantasy race are deliberately and completely subverted. Dwarves on the other hand seem to be right at home in SR with all their clichés. Except maybe for the thick scottish accent, every dwarf in fantasy seems to have (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

well, in a world that's dominated by the markets demands, why should a race of good workers not fit in?

First I should remind the crowd, that I ,infact am a human, and thus judge everything from that perspective.

Now, with that proviso in place, I find different races compelling based upon how they compare to the human experience. And one the things I find most compelling about being a human is that we are flawed, imperfect creatures (well at least I am). How then do other race concepts relate to this experience? Orks and Trolls despite being physically the most different from humans, are actually often closest in experience to us. Their physical advantages come at a price of both their looks and their mental assets. They are, as humans, built from the ground up as fundamentaly flawed creatures, arguably even more flawed then humans in some depictions. Thus I can find their stories compelling. Dwarves likewise have their flaws as characters, while they may be stouter, sturdier, and a stronger than a human, but they pay for that with an asset precious to us humans, height. As a flawed being, I can relate to the dwarven or orkish or trollish experience.

Elves however, as you point out, are designed to be without flaws. Or at least very minimal ones. As I said before, they are just like humans in every way, except, you know, better. Maybe this kind of escapism appeals to you. But it grates on me (obviously). Being flawed, imperfect, is the core of the human experience. Maybe because without flaws, there is no room for improvement or development in ones character. There is no room for growth, no drive to become better. Indeed this point is very evident in many fantasy depictions of elves who are said to already have achieved this perfection. If you remove the flaws, the drive for growth and improvement from a race, can it truly said to be human any more? I believe it can not.

And maybe it grates on me because elves are presented as humanish, but better. They are presented as a race of what man might be like, if he was perfect. They are present as a race that we should be able to empathize with, as something we should be able to compare ourselves with. But IMO elves ultimately are not. As I said, man without his flaws, ceases to be human. It goes against my human experience of what man could become, perfection might be our goal, but it will never be our result, we will always have room for improvement.

And yeah, I think the escapism present in elves is immature. It is healthy to desire something greater or better than you currently are. But I think it is more mature to recognize that no matter how great you might become, to be human, you must still have your flaws, your drawbacks, your... quirks (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) .

--

As for vampires, yeah the winy drama kings/queens kind of spoiled that for me. As their are aspects of the concept I like.

However I do have to say as a human, I find the concept of another race that feeds on my blood for its substinance, rather distasteful. I don't seek escapism in that flavor. I don't empithise very will with the concept of 'lossing ones humanity' or seeing other humans as prey. Being human (maybe a different flavor of human, but human none the less) is what it is all about for me.

--

Oh, and if it helps you understand me better, I hate characters like Superman to.