@ Joychi: Take your time! This thread will be here later. :] You can also PM me your idea, if you'd like!

I will say this on the issue of people overdoing the dead parents/scar/otherwise tragic past thing - I get it. I understand it, I know why people do it, but for me personally, I think it makes for (on average) boring RPs. In my experience, the people who I thread with like that spend 90% of their posts randomly talking about how much they miss their parents, or brooding over some dark event of their past... that's ALL they do. It's uncreative, it gets old, and unless their writing is out of this world I usually dislike threading with those people because it shows a lack of ability on their part to really think outside the box. Again, I don't want to make any broad generalizations, so I will say that that's simply been my experience.

I also understand that that probably sounds hypocritical coming from someone who RPs a canon character with a sad past, because in many ways it's easier to write for a canon. The information's already there, and I don't have to come up with any kind of back story. What makes a canon interesting to RP to me isn't their history, it's what you do with it. It's how you dig in and make the little details come alive and have THAT be what makes the character unique, not whether or not their parents are dead. I think the same thing goes for OCs. Instead of trying to make some giant, horrible event take place in a person's life to make them 'interesting,' make them come alive. Everyone here is, not to insult anyone, unremarkable. I'm not saying that we're all boring, I'm saying that we're all just average people living our lives and as far as I'm aware, nobody is a president/celebrity/whatever... and we're all different. We all have our own ways of standing out from the crowd.

So that's how you make an OC unique, to me. Not scars, not being an orphan, but by making them as real as you can. Think of the little things that make you who you are and try to think of things like that. Maybe they have some hidden talent, or some little habit, or a cool hobby, or one of those things develops over time. Maybe they have something GOOD in their history that's shaped them. Maybe instead of having dead parents, they had two great parents who gave them a wonderful life and because of that, they've excelled in some particular area. I hate focusing on the "boohoo my mother's dead" aspect of Asami because that's boring. I'd rather focus on how she's made herself extraordinary in other ways that have absolutely nothing to do with that.

As far as the application process goes, I don't like the idea of publicly reviewing a profile. To me, that's more of a private matter, even if they say it's okay. Maybe if someone is absolutely dead-set on having their character be some kind of trope, they should be held to a higher standard - kind of like canons. Are there people out there who can make the orphan thing work? Sure, absolutely. I would say that if they REALLY want that to be a part of their character, they need to show in their profile that it's not their defining characteristic; as Kami said, they're a character who happens to be an orphan, not an orphan who happens to be a character. They would need to display the ability to not have that tragic thing be all there is to their character, and that they're not just being lazy. That way, people can still have the character they want - so long as they're not falling into the same routine as everyone else - and there don't have to be tons of restrictions. It just becomes something that you need to step up and earn rather than something that you can easily fall back on.

Edit: And sorry if I brought it back to the earlier subject there, I was writing this up before Karena posted. I can take the top part out if needed.

I think Joychi may be suggesting more experienced members offer helpful critiques for new members to lessen the load on the mods.

The argument is that with so many similar characters it eliminates conflict to a degree. Two scrappy yet lovable orphans in the same RP won't have a lot to disagree about. A world full of them would just be too much.
The more diversity of characters we have the more exciting our RP world becomes.

The nice thing about writing is that characters can evolve. The problem is that with virtually identical backgrounds the evolutions of two characters can easily mirror one another.

We all want our characters to stand out in some way but when you have so many standing out in the same way they just become another group.

I know that it's troubling when you come up with an idea and discover it's been done. I once wrote something the length of a novel and later found out my "original" idea was already a book.
I have faith in the writing ability of the people here. I know a few restrictions won't stop even better characters from being created.

@ Asami - thank you for your reply! I think it was very well written, and I think gets the point I was trying to make across a little better. :]

@ Hangetsu - hm. That's an idea, but roughly equals the same thing as training new mods. While peer review is fine, the staff is generally on the same page about profiles, and a not-trained mod or member might not be! More hands would lighten the load, yes, but there is such a thing as "too many cooks in the kitchen". (Yay clichés)

Peer review is fine and dandy, but if it's (a) mandatory, it will hinge a lot on members responding promptly, which as we saw in the RPG School didn't work very well; or (b) voluntary, and not everyone goes for a voluntary critique process, as indicated by how empty the Practice Arena has been. xD;'

I suppose my biggest problem with this so far is that all I'm reading (and disregard the rest of this if I read this wrong) is that people having traumatized pasts, sad lives, and all that jazz is unrealistic.

I agree that having a butt ton of them is boring, and uncreative, but I do not agree on it being unrealistic, or unlikely. This may be just where I'm from, and I know I"m injecting my own personal experiences with this but it seems far more likely that someone would have had at least one traumatizing, or to a lesser degree, sad thing happen in their life, at least once!

It seems far LESS likely that everyone, even in a time of "peace", would have the perfect household, perfect family, and perfect amount of friends. I also realize that this is based in the 1920's but the most I know is from history books detailing the MAJOR events of the entire era, and not the families, or their friends, or their everyday life. Was it hard to make a living for the generalized population? Sure, but we don't know what they all went through.

What I'm trying to say is, and this is my main point, that I don't disagree in wanting creative OC's, creative and original ideas that make this board diverse. I agree, and would rather have that but it is far more likely that each character would have one thing that happened, instead of them having the "Perfect" life. I say this because while an even if your life may not define you, but I personally think the way you react to whatever happened DOES define you. Not that single event entirely, but it does play a part and then limiting EVERYTHING may not be the way to go.

If I read all of the previous post wrong, I apologize. If this is too much of a derailing, I also apologize. Do not kill me.

I believe that I really understand where Kami and Z are coming from. I really like my first two characters (Mizu and the Black Fox) because I had the opportunity to take character traits from my best gAang-era characters and revamp them into new ones, and I'm really excited to make my next character(s) because I think I have some really good ideas. I also like Mizu and Kayako because neither of them fit the tropes we're discussing in this thread. My Earthbender Mei is a different story, but I digress.

Anyway, I think that with a little effort, we can all come up with some interesting, diverse characters.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using ProBoards

@jin: As I have said repeatedly (I'm really not sure how I can emphasise this any more) tropes are not bad. Tropes can be good! What is unrealistic is to have so many of them in our population. We have less than 100 accepted characters, and a vast majority of them have some sort of tragic past, that generally follow the same pattern. Tropes are FINE. Just not the same ones on a constant basis.

What we want out of this thread is not a dissection of why people do it! So come on, ideas, suggestions: This is happening - what can we do to encourage people to break out of the "easier" patterns without making more rules (or making only small rule changes)?

I'm going to add a pretty important note as an accessory to the part about trigger warnings in the OP:

I need to take a minute to talk to you about exactly why we need trigger warnings and what they are.

We have members, multiple members, here on TARP who are abuse survivors. We ask all of our members to use trigger warnings not only because of this, but also because it is the right thing to do. As a noun, a “trigger” is something (like a picture or text post) that elicits panic/anxiety attacks or flashbacks among survivors of violence/rape/abuse. As a verb, to “trigger” is to provoke that response (“that photo triggered me,” for example). Essentially, when someone is triggered they feel as though they are responding to a traumatic event from their past, not to the present trigger.

Trigger warnings are inserted into the titles or opening lines of text, or can accompany links, the same way a 'NSFW' warning can give you a heads up before you find something you weren't expecting on your screen. Their purpose is to prevent people who have an extremely strong and damaging emotional response (for example, post-traumatic flashbacks or urges to harm themselves) to certain subjects from encountering them unaware.

Trigger warnings are often used to warn readers about potentially upsetting content (written or otherwise), commonly including sexual violence, self-harm, disordered eating, torture, suicide, domestic abuse and child abuse, although this list is by no means exhaustive. It's not just direct descriptions or depictions of traumatic events, some people find discussions and responses to traumatic events triggering too. Of course the subject matter people may find triggering is highly personal and wide-ranging, as is a person's response to trigger. People are still responsible for their own actions and words when triggered, but by placing trigger warnings on the most common triggering topics — abuse, violence, sexual situations, racism — we can help each other and ourselves.

If you are a person who has survived abuse or who has an eating disorder or whatever, and you don’t need trigger warnings, GREAT. I’m honestly happy for you. Skip over them. But they take literally five seconds of your time, and they do actually help a lot of people. I think that’s a worthy thing. We have begun to require this out of our players out of respect and love, and I hope you all can understand where we are coming from with that.

<3

Okay. I had a thought just now. Just as a note, I understand that this may possibly be unfair to members who don't adhere to this trope pattern. Plus, it's not really a long-term solution. It wouldn't work well if the site grew more.

Maybe when a person breaks out of the current, popular tropes, they could get like a custom title for a week? It would be a silly reward, and not have anything to do with actual character creation, but maybe knowing that you'll be acknowledged in that way for other people to see could provide some incentive for other members.

Like I said, it's a very superficial suggestion.

Another idea is branching off of the suggestion from earlier in the thread. The suggestion involved picking volunteered profiles and then effectively tearing them apart to show the public what's good and what's bad. Maybe instead of that, which takes a lot of time and effort, it could be simpler.

My idea is, for the next few months, have a "Profile of the Month" award. Again, it doesn't have much to do with the actual character creation process (and it won't stop the people who are dead-set on creating an orphaned character or whatever) but it could give members more of a reason to break away from the current trends.

Unlike the previous suggestion, it doesn't have to be much. Simply a link to the profile, and a couple sentences as to why it was chosen. And, like I said, it doesn't have to be the time-consuming, super in-depth analysis of the profile. Just a small list of things like 1) good spelling and grammar, 2) good writing style, and, most importantly, 3) how the member found ways to break away from the trope pattern and still create an interesting character.

The other suggestion I gave is much less related to actually creating a character, but this second suggestion may let members (the ones who care to read the Member and potential Profile of the Month threads) see that they can make a noteworthy character that doesn't involve these popular tropes.

Plus, it wouldn't take too much time. Just pick a deviating profile that you remember had few problems going through the acceptance process and didn't involve many/any of the usual tropes.

Just my two cents.

I think that, to break out of the tropes, we need to take things into consideration things that we might not have before. Does Republic City have a group of Waterbending Firefighters? Are there different social groups? What other kinds of shops could we have? It's not far reaching to say that RC might have had businesses similar to that of our history here on Earth in that parallel time period, so we need to think beyond the things we've seen in the show. A toy shop owner or an aforementioned firefighter, for example, might not lead spectacular lives, but the people playing them could make them interesting enough to make a non-canon impact. Making a character that's a pure trope interesting is easy; making a mundane character interesting is a true challenge.

@sashu - regardless of whether or not it "helps" people, I do like offering a profile of the month award. Obviously, I'd have to talk to the rest of the staff, but I'm not opposed to it. That said, I agree that it wouldn't be a solution, but likely a good incentive.

@mizu - I am not sure about the firefighters; I'd like to avoid making anything canon-impacting (which a city-ordained group would be). A volunteer brigade might not be bad until we know for sure. :] Aside from that, yes, that is why I suggested people look up turn of the century / 1920's history to see what available jobs there are. I suggested a few things based on what we've seen in the show — factory works, telephone operators, reporters, photographers, and so on. There are also likely hairdressers / barbers and whatnot — it's not a difficult thing if you do some research! :]

—-

But as a whole, I think that we need to come up with a more permanent solution; I like Sashu's idea as a reward, but I think we need something a bit more comprehensive to encourage — and help — people with profiles.

Joychi, I apologize because I am not sure I am understanding you. I do not feel that anyone is suggesting anywhere that people make profiles for characters that are basically "NPCs". And actually, about that, sometimes wonderful characters come from NPCs! Kami's character Hoshi was originally *my* NPC for my character Jin Ho. I asked her to make the profile and now Hoshi has truly taken on a life of her own and is a great character, not just an NPC. I'm sure that is not the only example of that, it's just the one off the top of my head.

I feel like I am not following your idea as far as how you are seeing tropes... again we are not saying no one should use tropes ever, we're just saying we're only seeing the same ones and it's getting to be where so many characters are so alike that it's become unrealistic. Our population isn't as varied as we would hope for, basically. If I am not understanding you (which I am pretty sure I am not getting it, I'm sorry) please tell me in a different way, perhaps?

I disagree with the idea of having more experienced members helping new members because I think that that is completely avoiding a huge part of the problem: the experienced members themselves. Many of these bad profiles are not coming from new people. They are coming from experienced members. I really hate to see this devolve into a discussion that points fingers at new members as the problem because that is not the case at all. Some of our new members have made profiles that are miles better than many made by old members. So I don't think member review or sponsoring is the answer. Does that make sense?

About peer review:

I know it was mentioned before, earlier, somewhere. I think someone was talking about a mentor or buddy system where their peers could help them out and give a second viewpoint. However, it would be hard to find mentors for everyone, especially the more experienced/veteran members. I'm not making assumptions, but some people who have made countless (approved) profiles may not be very happy to be forced to share. Also, any mentor members would have to learn exactly what the moderators/admins want in a profile. Otherwise, mistakes could slip through the cracks and the tropes are returned to.

Plus, it wouldn't be a long-term solution. And then there's the confusion: do you need to have a non-mod read your profile? Is it one or the other or both? What if they disagree on the same point? Who's supposed to read it first?

Kami:

I feel like the only problem with trying to convince people that they can move from these common patterns is the fact that they may not wish to (as stated many times before lol) or they believe that enough people have already broken away that they don't have to. Especially with older members, such as me, who already have an assortment of characters that aren't orphaned and/or traumatized and/or scarred by battle or abuse, and may feel as if they're allowed (if not obligated) to create one. (Disclaimer! I personally don't actually have a desire to do so.)

It's just hard to think of a way that convinces members that they can do other things with their characters, and then motivate them to continue using said character. To be honest, it would be very difficult without putting on a cap - and that's the worst-case scenario. These common tropes can be easy for some to imitate, even for writers who haven't gone through such backgrounds as poverty or abuse. So I guess the Profile of the Month could help show them the way, but it may not help motivate them to want to play such a character.

As for using other tropes (such as depression not cause by death in the family or mental trauma, or fatal illnesses), I think that maybe there could be suggestions put in the FAQs page. There's a big list of what you can't have, but no example list of what you could have. Maybe it could include vague things like "Having a disability that does not provide any benefits" to more specifics like "Being a trash-collector", "Being so poor that you can't afford food and are starving" or "Being a child". I know it's kind of silly, but maybe it could give some people inspiration other than orphan or thief.

It may also be helpful to provide a link to the Mary Sue Litmus test, where people can weigh the results of their tropes. Again, it's not like the tropes shown on that list are bad, but it can let people see that their ideas aren't rare or unique, and when it adds up, people see that directly reflected in the numerical results. However, it can also provide some suggestions: maybe a person picks up skills quickly, but they're horribly forgetful. Maybe they can't remember why they're so hot-tempered and hasty.

Again, more random suggestions and opinions.

EDIT: from the link I posted ^above^, I found a Character Interest Generator that may be helpful to some people. It can easily be tweaked (say, from Rock'n'Roll to Swing music, or Ancient Rome to Air Nomads) and picked and chosen from. Maybe it could help, but it still depends on the person.

@ Joychi: I'm not really sure I understand 100%. Going by what I *do* understand, though, I really don't think peer reviews will work. We would have to train members what staff look for in profiles, which is the same issue we're trying to avoid by not adding more staff members! Also, as Sashu pointed out, it would create confusion — things will fall through the cracks, and if members aren't 100% on the same page with the staff, then you're going to get occasions where a member will say a profile is fine when it's not. It's just a huge headache, and one that I quite frankly do not want to have to deal with.

It's not a bad idea, per se, but I don't think it's one that would work on TARP. This problem involves not just new members, but old/returning members as well, so how do we suss out which members should and shouldn't help out? I foresee a lot of confusion and hurt feelings with a system like this on this forum, so I do not think it is a viable solution. (also, please don't use white. I'm not sure why you change your text colour with every post, BUT please avoid using white because it is incredibly difficult to read! I know Zombi and I, at the very least, have poor vision — and I'm sure others do too. Please be considerate!)

——-

@sashu: Great links! You and Airi posted some good ones (Airi did so in another thread), so I will be sure to include them somehow. I don't think, though, that putting "what you can have" is going to help; the problem with lists — as I have said prior, I think — is that people tend to think "if it's not on the list, then..." which, while obviously isn't the case, is the most common response. While I would LOVE to just hope everyone is mature & responsible, unfortunately we have to be prepared for the worst-case scenario that they aren't.

——-

How do people feel about a profile guide? I didn't want to have more "required reading", because, quite frankly, it's already extremely long, but at this point I'm not seeing a lot of other options aside from more caps. New & returning members alike, how do you feel about how easy it is, currently to read the [rulesfaq] , and how opposed would you be to have to read something else before posting a profile?

Haha, okay. It's just a suggestion, and I agree, it seems like people would want to stick to the list and only to the list, since they're sure it's allowed.

---

For the guide. Maybe if you didn't post it in the Rules&FAQ itself. I personally didn't take an issue with the current layout and amount of rules. A lot are self-explanatory, and at least you don't have to keep going back a page and then clicking another rules link and then going back a page and on and on. I would say that how it is now, with two columns split down the middle, it feels kind of cluttered, especially with the small text. Okay, re-looking through the page, it's not that cluttered to my eyes. Then again, I'm used to it. New members my not be. Plus, with the shortness of the page itself, the "Jump" links are unnecessary and really easy to just overlook and ignore.

Aside from the actual Rules & FAQ page, I think putting a profile guide on the Pending Character Profiles board would be a good stepping stone. A guide wouldn't be considered rules or faqs. A link might be nice under FAQ #6, Creating a Character. The whole guide wouldn't be there, but maybe you could be like "What should I look for in creating an Original Character?" and then direct them to the Pending Profiles Board. That way it isn't as immediate as the other set of rules, and each member can check it on their own time.

As for the actual guide itself, it would be nice to have an example before an official one is put up, just to see what it would be like and what it would include. Too short and material might not be covered. Too long - even as long as the original post of the thread - could make it easier to skip over important information or intimidate/bore members into not reading it at all. It would be hard to enforce that as a set-in-stone rule, but it would be less of a strain on the reading amount if members take it one step at a time: first get used to the Rules, etc., and then, once the member is ready to start forming a character or create another character, move on to the guide.

Overall, I think a profile guide would be helpful, whether required reading or not. It may also be useful, while greeting new members in the Introductions board, to link not only to the Rules, etc., but also to this guide, after explaining that it should be read before you post your profile. Does that make sense?

EDITED for clarity

Thanks for the feedback re: Rules & FAQ page. I figured this new style would be easier to follow than the old (which required a heck of a lot of clicking — at least, this way, you can click on what you want to click, you know? Good point about the 'jump' links, I will likely take out the ones for the Rules & FAQ and leave in Warning Levels/Plot. (And the back to top at the bottom, as if you expand the AtLA epilogue bar it gets lengthy).

Yeah, I wasn't planning on putting it into the rules page, and I do like your idea of linking to it in the FAQ. That is pretty spiffy. The only thing I can see that might be difficult with that is people might not think they need "help" with a character, and therefore would not read the link. I could, potentially, get away with rewording it so that it would be more like "What does TARP expect out of profiles"... thoughts?

As far to the guide itself, I would likely cover what I covered in the OP, though likely a little more comprehensive & professional.