Roleplaying » Discussions


Discussion: Which Class Do You Roleplay as and Why?

Tags: #ZonnoSpark +1  #RP:Discussion 
  • Member
    August 18, 2017

    Legion said:

    I play as a Paladin. Sword & board in heavy armor that uses restoration. He's honorable AF and absolutely wrecks face. 

    You disgust me with all your Holiness. Nah, I am kidding, but I have to ask why a Paladin?

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    Sorry I missed the start of the discussion, Ama, and another great one at that.

    I think I usually roleplay as a magey character (usually with some physical components added - ie Battlemage) for a similar reason to why Phil roleplays a Paladin. Open and mysterious concepts such as magic and religion change drastically not only from culture to culture, but also from person to person, making every character even more unique than the last. Just as a priest of an Aedra and a Daedra would be worlds apart, a typical scholar from Cyrodiil and an Argonian Shaman are also as far from each other as possible.

    So in a word, versatility. And also magic is cool.

  • August 19, 2017

    Amadeus Targaryenus said:

    Legion said:

    I play as a Paladin. Sword & board in heavy armor that uses restoration. He's honorable AF and absolutely wrecks face. 

    You disgust me with all your Holiness. Nah, I am kidding, but I have to ask why a Paladin?

    Paladins are just all around solid. There's something really satisfying about playing someone who can withstand pretty much everything head on, wreck face, and be a helpful dude through it all to the folks of Skyrim. Mechanically, the Paladin I play is focused, simple, and strong; he uses 5 skills total, and 4 only 3 are main. For main, you got one-handed, block, resto. Secondary are heavy armor and enchanting. I naturally play the goodie one-shoe in games, Paragon pretty much all the time. So it's a very natural fit for me. 

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    Zonnonn said:

    Sorry I missed the start of the discussion, Ama, and another great one at that.

    I think I usually roleplay as a magey character (usually with some physical components added - ie Battlemage) for a similar reason to why Phil roleplays a Paladin. Open and mysterious concepts such as magic and religion change drastically not only from culture to culture, but also from person to person, making every character even more unique than the last. Just as a priest of an Aedra and a Daedra would be worlds apart, a typical scholar from Cyrodiil and an Argonian Shaman are also as far from each other as possible.

    So in a word, versatility. And also magic is cool.

    Eh, I knew you would see it eventually and thank you once again.

    Magic is indeed cool and your point about magic being different from people to people is a good point. In most cultures, Necromancy is shunned upon and such, but the Khajiit kind of don't care, if memory serves me correct. Mannimarco's followers see Necromancy as the ultimate form of Magic in a sense, while a Priest and Priestess of Mara, Kyne, and Stendarr see Alteration and Restoration as the purest and "safest" form of magic. That also maybe why I love magic so much because in ES, DnD, or anything with magic there is always different concepts of it and beliefs.

    Legion said:

    Amadeus Targaryenus said:

    Legion said:

    I play as a Paladin. Sword & board in heavy armor that uses restoration. He's honorable AF and absolutely wrecks face. 

    You disgust me with all your Holiness. Nah, I am kidding, but I have to ask why a Paladin?

    Paladins are just all around solid. There's something really satisfying about playing someone who can withstand pretty much everything head on, wreck face, and be a helpful dude through it all to the folks of Skyrim. Mechanically, the Paladin I play is focused, simple, and strong; he uses 5 skills total, and 4 only 3 are main. For main, you got one-handed, block, resto. Secondary are heavy armor and enchanting. I naturally play the goodie one-shoe in games, Paragon pretty much all the time. So it's a very natural fit for me. 

    I mean a plain mage can be helpful and withstand anything, but I get your point. That is my problem I can never play a "Goodie to Shoes" character because I easily get bored with them due to the strictness of them, though I have played as a Chaotic Good character once before and it was fun, he soon turned evil.

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    I always fall back to a Warrior of some sorts. 

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    Amadeus Targaryenus said:

    I mean a plain mage can be helpful and withstand anything, but I get your point. That is my problem I can never play a "Goodie to Shoes" character because I easily get bored with them due to the strictness of them, though I have played as a Chaotic Good character once before and it was fun, he soon turned evil.

    See, for me it's the opposite. An evil character has no restrictions or inner conflict. He or she could feasibly just do what they wanted, no need for introspection. Whereas a character aligned with the ight will have doubts, challenges, and turmoil. The Old Orc wants a good death, but is it right for this character to give it to him? Is it murder? Depending on that small choice, potentially game-changing RP could ensue, you know? Regret, self-loathing, etc..

  • August 19, 2017

    What Phil said. 

    Edit: PAWS

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    Legion said:

    What Phil said. 

    Edit: PAWS

    :D Confuses me also. If read backwards it's Swap.

  • Member
    August 19, 2017

    Paws said:

    Amadeus Targaryenus said:

    I mean a plain mage can be helpful and withstand anything, but I get your point. That is my problem I can never play a "Goodie to Shoes" character because I easily get bored with them due to the strictness of them, though I have played as a Chaotic Good character once before and it was fun, he soon turned evil.

    See, for me it's the opposite. An evil character has no restrictions or inner conflict. He or she could feasibly just do what they wanted, no need for introspection. Whereas a character aligned with the ight will have doubts, challenges, and turmoil. The Old Orc wants a good death, but is it right for this character to give it to him? Is it murder? Depending on that small choice, potentially game-changing RP could ensue, you know? Regret, self-loathing, etc..

    I have to disagree there are serval villains in movies, books, and other items of the sort that do have restrictions and inner conflict, and most of the time they actually have a plan, unlike the good guy who is good because...well there needs to be a good guy in the story. Good guys tend to be bland and boring with nothing really exciting about them nor interesting, while the villain has a backstory that details why they are the way they are and think the way they do. I do think Marylin Manson said it the best though.

    "In any story, the villain is the catalyst. The hero's not a person who will bend the rules or show the cracks in his armor. He's one-dimensional intentionally, but the villain is the person who owns up to what he is and stands by it." 

  • Member
    August 20, 2017

    Well this is awkward, because I agree with Ama and Phil. An antagonist and protagonist can both have moral dilemmas and chinks in their armour, the main difference to me is often the scale. A bandit leader wouldn't typically feel bad about killing a travelling merchant (although arguments such as desperation could change this) but a typcial protagonist would. But what if the leader has to kill one of their men to maintain power, someone who's risked their life for them, stayed through thick and thin, and been loyal until the bitter end? Its a trade off between love and power, and eventhough ultimately its often shown that they'll choose power every time, its not for certain. You only see the BBEG killing the friend, you don't see the crying and despair afterwards.

    At the same time, both sides can have issues such as addiction (e.g. Sherlock Holmes), illness, religion etc. What seems to set them apart is that for the antagonist its usually shown in a negative light, while for the good guy it shows humanity - they're only human after all (or Beast Folk or Elf).

    Seems like I've got a little off track here, but I thought I'd chip in my opinion.