Character test

[Marqsaynt]

This just further cements my unbridled hate for standardized tests.

In the "Original" test Marqsaynt didn't do so bad, high 20s... but, in Illysia's suggested one he skyrocketed into "Kill it dead" territory (guess Xenoart now has some company up there. )

I think the biggest problem is that the questions make way too many assumptions. Just because something falls into one of their categories doesn't mean that a person couldn't come along, take a known "cliche" and turn it on it's head. To be honest, there really aren't too many completely original things a person can do with a character just a lot of old things that can be done in a new way.

As a general rule of thumb, the most "real" characters are those that aren't average. If a character was completely non distinct and plain in every way they wouldn't seem remotely like a real person; even "normal" people aren't average. Unfortunately this test seems to penalize any attempt to make your person more "round" assuming that average, "flat" characters are somehow more realistic...

Maybe this test works sometimes, I don't know... but, I for one am not going to let some goofy test ever dictate how I create a character. (I mean, imagine what type of scores some of the most beloved characters in literature and film would have gotten on this test? *Charles Dickens burns Moby Dick after taking the test* *George Lucas tosses the script for Star Wars in a nearby trashcan after getting a bunch of 117+ scores* )   

[Illysia]

The problem is probably things about Marq that aren't obvious when roleplaying but are there nevertheless. It's probably background stuff  and not personality stuff that is sending the score up. If it wasn't for the De-Suifiers Illysia would have a higher score. And what is this? 

this test seems to penalize any attempt to make your person more "round" assuming that average, "flat" characters are somehow more realistic...

Illysia is plenty unique and realistic, in spite of a certain someone calling her boring. Characters don't have to be dramatic to be realistic. It usually a matter of a character being too unique that is a problem. Not everyone has had their all their relatives and friends die in RL, but it is overly common in RP. It's the dramatic stuff that gets people on these tests. You only need a few things like that per character. Not that it can't be pulled off but most people can't do it successfully. 

[Marqsaynt]

Dramatic, no. Unique, yes.

Illysia is hardly average though, she has a rather unique build (curvy and muscular for her race) and a miner turned poet hardly seems average to me. Could probably think of a few more examples but, I think it's safe to say that Illysia as a character is pretty "round" and not a dull 2d cutout of an individual.

But, I bet a person that had a character with a description like "Bob Enki is average height, average build, and average intelligence. He has never done anything special in his entire life and works as a miner. What you see is what you get... He is also fond of the color white." Would also have a pretty good score on that test. And in my opinion a character like that is somehow worse than a lot of the "cliche" hero/villain types running around... at least in most cases.

You are right about the background stuff though, it did definitely drive the score up a bit. Even though Marq actually had a pretty okay childhood (mostly happy and uneventful), the character creation options I incorporated did drive up the score a bit.

Also, I think maybe I should have left the attractiveness boxes blank since in the PS universe diaboli are supposed to be good looking just inherently so it's not really trying to be different.

Either way, I just hate standardized tests and nothing you can say will ever convince me that it's a better judge of character (pun intended) than a real person.

[Illysia]

Illysia is hardly average though, she has a rather unique build (curvy and muscular for her race) and a miner turned poet hardly seems average to me. Could probably think of a few more examples but, I think it's safe to say that Illysia as a character is pretty "round" and not a dull 2d cutout of an individual.

But most of that is not what Illysia started out as. A lot of that is based on her interactions with other people's characters and the PS environment, not what I original decided for her. You didn't know Illysia in the beginning. She was way different than she is now. But you are right, these tests aren't very good. There are many things that aren't taken into account. That is what Silavur's PS character test is a good idea.

[Marqsaynt]

Muahahaha, it's all of us "Mary Sue" RPers corrupting Illysia's character with our insuppressible Mary-Sueness. 

Yeah, I agree though, will be interesting to see how a PS based test turns out.

[Duraza]

(guess Xenoart now has some company up there. )  

Yay 

Yeah, I agree though, will be interesting to see how a PS based test turns out.

I bet I can fail that one too 

In all seriousness though I really doubt any test could actually tell you whether your character is cliche, unless it had like 500 questions....

[Marqsaynt]

I bet I can fail that one too 

It's not failing! Just going for the high score.

[Hatchnet]

I think the big problem of these test is that they arn't realy ment to be aplied to main or hero characters. I scorded borderline Sue on both tests for Hatchnet and every main charcter from my book collection I tested scored way in the red zone (This includes favorits like Frodo Baggins, Drizzt DoUrden, Connan extra.)

Here is what I use when creating a character http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/868960000 ; even when it's not D&D the tips it holds are extreamly useful.

[Raa]

On the second test I got a 0 for Anarkia.

-pwnz u a11-

 

[SerqFeht]

By reading a lot of character descriptions, I have found that many people write that they are strong, smart, tall, short (in the case of dwarves), and beautiful for their species. There is a distinct lack of ugly, stupid, average height people. I'm guilty of the exaggeration. Most of us are, in some way. If someone goes out and makes a character that is average in all aspects, or even undesirable, it is for role-play reasons.

And 50 is my score. I'm sorry, Serq just can't fly, doesn't keep a book of gothic poetry, and isn't asian. The few things that I could check off because they applied to him were all cliched horribly, such as stong, character flaws, was in love at some point... Serq is just different than the classic RPs, so a classic test didn't work so well. 


*Edit* I wanted to test it again. So I entered Harry Potter, and left the persnal feelings about the character part blank. You all know who Harry Potter is, right? I entered things like, survived calamity, last member of family, leader of resistence group, magical powers...

I got a 114: Irredeemable-Sue. You're going to have to start over, my friend. I know you want to keep writing, but no. Just no.

Sorry, but I just lost all faith in this test.

[Zan]

This just further cements my unbridled hate for standardized tests.

Maybe this test works sometimes, I don't know... but, I for one am not going to let some goofy test ever dictate how I create a character. (I mean, imagine what type of scores some of the most beloved characters in literature and film would have gotten on this test? *Charles Dickens burns Moby Dick after taking the test* *George Lucas tosses the script for Star Wars in a nearby trashcan after getting a bunch of 117+ scores* )   

I didn't put the test out here to control our character creations ... I just submitted them to make us think a bit more on our characters.

As for Mary-Sue's in roleplaying games, they can be enjoyable ... some of the characters like Arnigus, Duraza or Nurahk and my own guys Tyrnal, Thromdir, Zan ... they'd do badly on these tests but if they're being controlled by a good roleplayer that doesn't mean they need to change. Stereotypes can make things fun as long as they are balanced. Overstereotyped stereotypes who are usually revolving around a character being powerful, now those are the ones that I'd rather get rid of.

[Parallo]

Also, it should be noted that Frodo, Moby Dick, etc. are cliched because of the works they are in. They made the cliche. Thats the point. If you put in a famous character it certainly should not recognize him/her as unique. That would be a pretty crappy test.

[Marqsaynt]

For clarification ...

Mary-Sue is a pejorative term that is used for some stereotypical fictional characters. It also means that the characters are usually unrealistic in terms of abilities and general personality. Either they are too black and white or they simply lack flaws/realism.

I didn't put the test out here to control our character creations ... I just submitted them to make us think a bit more on our characters.

As for Mary-Sue's in roleplaying games, they can be enjoyable ... some of the characters like Arnigus, Duraza or Nurahk and my own guys Tyrnal, Thromdir, Zan ... they'd do badly on these tests but if they're being controlled by a good roleplayer that doesn't mean they need to change. Stereotypes can make things fun as long as they are balanced. Overstereotyped stereotypes who are usually revolving around a character being powerful, now those are the ones that I'd rather get rid of.

If Duraza, Nurahk, etc. are so stereotypical than why aren't there dozens and dozens of other characters running around just like them? Seems that the only reason those characters would even be called a "Mary-Sue" is just from what some stupid test says, not from actual experience or reality. To lump them all into some lacking "flaws/realism" category just seems ridiculous.

Personally, I think the individual that wrote the original Mary-Sue test should have just stuck with reading her Gargoyle cartoon fan fiction (the original test was written exclusively for that) and kept her "expert" opinion on making great characters to herself... I know with having the amazing credentials of a couple years reading online fan fiction it'd be hard to do but, sometimes a "professional" just needs to know when not to weigh in with their opinion. [/end mean, sarcastic rant against perfect stranger that is most likely a decent human being and someone that was just trying to help.]

My whole point is this; if anyone says they have developed some rules that will guarantee a great book, screenplay, character, etc., they are completely and totally full of crap. Sure there are guidelines that can help with all of the above but, no rules that are unbreakable, and definitely no paint by number guides (or tests) to great characters/story. 

Can you tell you've stumbled across a bit of a pet peeve of mine? I know you weren't trying to dictate how people make their characters, or anything so sinister... But the whole test just annoys me on a level somewhere between none-seedless watermelon and a Robert Mckee book/lecture.

[Parallo]

Someone really didn't like their result

[Marqsaynt]

Heh, actually I think it was seeing a few other people's characters being called Mary-Sues that pushed me over the edge. Marqsaynt probably does have a healthy dose of Mary Sue in him so, not really anything I didn't already know.

Throw in my general disdain for all standardized tests and the idea of a person promoting some blueprint to great characters and you've got the trifecta for my own personal rant post.