PC taxonomy

One I did was "joke character who ended up being very serious."

From the title I thought this was going to be about personal computers and upon opening the image I was very confused for a second.
No, I don't look at what community the post is from when I'm scrolling all.

Where does the "ridiculous minmaxed character to game the mechanics" fit in? We had a miner/scribe once.
- I think that'd fall into #8, biggest explosions

Also missing from the list is the horny bugger. It doesn't matter who or what it is, if it's near them, they'll try to seduce it

MORE FLAWS
MORE

2: Conall. I played a loud and boisterous bard with bagpipes specifically because I intended on drinking a lot of whisky and not bothering putting on an accent other than my natural one during the one shot
3: Kairi. Paladin who was built to make everyone around her as invincible as she was.
5: Pech. I played a Pathfinder 2e one shot as a fairy barbarian that I specced into being able to carry a human-sized greatsword. He was more functional than I expected him to be
6: I swear the amount of kenku I play is not a furry thing I swear
8: Morgan. This one was Lancer rather than D&D, but look up the Death's Head frame from Lancer and you will immediately understand why I picked it when I wanted to be able to simply point at a thing and decide that I did not want it to be there any more
12: Absolutely the mischief-making rabbitfolk rogue who once opened a locked door by throwing a bag of spices over a rhino to annoy it and dodging aside when it charged him
15: Whistle. Whistle is a monk who grew up under a villain and had his world view shattered when an adventuring party took said villain down. He now travels with his new friends earnestly attempting to un-learn his awful ways. He is visually an emaciated scruffy kenku wearing rags

I always do “every non-combat skill, useless in combat”, which is absolutely infuriating with beginner DMs because all they prepared is combat encounters and I have nothing to do 😭
Look, if I wanted to fight, I’d go play a video game. I’m here for the part video games cannot give me, and that’s talking to a real person and coming up with rube-goldberg solutions to solve problems without shedding blood 😆
- You are aware that most of DnDs mechanics are focused on simulating fights? If you do not like that, you are maybe playing the wrong system. Beyond that, how are you totally useless in combat? All classes get combat-abilities in one way or another and are designed to be at least moderately useful.
  
  The answer is simple : I don’t play DnD. Mostly Naheulbeuk (where the fights are hilarious so I don’t mind) and call of Cthulhu (where fighting often just kills you immediately anyway)
- Being useless in combat is a personal choice that can absolutely be avoided without hampering your ability to be a skillmonkey. You won’t be obliterating the enemy en masse, but that’s what the casters are for.
  Play a Thief rogue and have a blast with fast hands when initiative is rolled, or be almost any bard and hand out bardic inspiration while you stand as a mild speedbump of meat between the wizard and the enemy.
  Or maybe chat with your DM about game expectations prior to playing? I know it’s an impossible ask for the internet at large.
  
  Chat with the whole party. Some of them might not be happy with you avoiding all the combat.
  
  The problem is that while combat focused PC have armour, high initiative, multiple attack per round, and don't fail their roll. You're like acting at the end of the round, once when other PC do it 3 times, fail your attack and as soon as you get hit you're unconscious. The cool part of putting the big combat at the end of the session is that you can take a nap, and have the GM waking you up at 5 combat is over, let's give the XP and the first train homes leaves in 30 minutes
  
  True in pathfinder, not so true in DnD 5ed
- One of the reasons I despair D&D is the most popular RPG. It's almost all combat, and not even great combat at that.
  
  I don't hate D&D, but I did notice how much harder combat gets from DM's side to prepare, and also how much more bored of it the players are. My players started doing everythign to spend more sessions on their own shenanigans, character moments, roleplay and NPC interactions. The thing is we love our campaign and characters, but are too high level to switch systems. So we're taking break to play short Mage: the Ascension campaign.
  I am now learnign two different new systems, Mage and WFRP, pray for me.
- My personal favorite aspect with respect to combat is, "I look around, what objects and furniture are in the room?" Then proceed to use that stuff in combat. Long rug? I'll attempt to trip the opponent by pulling it up. Chandelier? Yeah I'll throw a hand axe and try to break that chain. Some DMs thrive off of it, some are put off.
  
  Ooh, or my other trope: be a cleric with heavy armor and a shield. On your first turn in combat, walk out in front of everyone, cast Shield of Faith, and take the Dodge action. As a free action, yell "come at me, fucknuts!" If you can pick up the Shield spell, you're mostly invulnerable, and it's pretty much viable at level 1.
  
  Have you tried PBTA games, because the whole consequences things really push that kind of play
  
  You are my favourite kind of player.

Awful little creature reporting for duty
- Awful little creatures make the most fun characters by far regardless of game or setting.
  
  Every party needs one, just to keep the party moving. When the entire party is busy hemming and hawing about how to best approach an encounter, they often need a Leroy Jenkins to just axe-chop the door apart and start taking heads.
  The real issue is that oftentimes, the heads belonged to the hostages that the party was there to rescue. If the awful little creature had actually paid attention at all, they would have known that. But they were grabbing their fifth beer when that part was explained, (and they wouldn’t have listened to it anyways), so they had no idea who was inside the room.
- Sure but what's your TTRPG character?
  
  Dead. cackles
- My sister always picked those lol just troublemaking groblins
- I've taken more damage from party members trying to get me under control than from the enemy. Now they keep me on a leash.

Missing:
god-like magical being, masquerading as Just Some Dude (closely related: The Super-Powered Self-Insert)
Most boring, generic build available in the system, played ironically ("His name is Hugh M. N. Fi-Thor")
- Oh! My first dm assigned me the god-like magical being role! It started as a group campaign and ended up being just me and her husband, and I was super new to it, so she wrote out a whole thing that my character was unaware of, and the entire story became finding out about this.
  My own backstory probably sucked, but my character was a fire genasi mix who was trained as a mage blade. She was purple with white eyes due to badly botching her familiar summoning spell, so she ended up with a thievy purple monkey (incapable of following directions, unless I critted the roll) instead of the phoenix she was aiming for.
  The dm snuck a giant gem into my inventory thanks to that sneaky thieving monkey (which caused a lot of problems, as you can imagine of a familiar that doesn’t obey fucking anything.) it ended up being an artifact from her ancestors, and unlocking the secrets of it brought out my latent goddessness.
  So that was a blast.
  Thanks for bringing up those memories! It was so long ago now..
  
  DM assigned specialness is different and often really fun.
  I've played a few "mystery backstory" games those are really fun, especially the one where we had to figure out even our class
- one time my buddy was running a game of Monster of the Week and I came up with the most mundane character possible: a Wisconsin corn farmer named Pete Faber, competing with angels, demons, and the miscellaneous supernatural
  
  Sounds like he could be the next Ash Williams who works on over in housewares at S-Mart!

Whatever lets me create the biggest explosions

I think there's also a pair:
Takes the setting and theme very seriously. Reads the lore. Knows the details. Can tell you why the Lancea Sanctum and Invictus are traditionally allies
Absolutely does not take the setting and theme seriously. Wants to play Barney the Dinosaur in your game of Vampire, and Punisher in your game about running a bakery.
I'm old and tired and generally am super tired of "wacky" ideas like the second one there. I feel like I've come full circle. As a youth, I thought like "let's play vampires and struggle with humanity!" was cool . Then there was a bit where i wanted to flip it- "let's play vampires but like go to theme parks and don't do anything sad or deep!". Now I'm back around to wanting to just play the theme as intended.
This is especially true if it comes up after session 0. Like, if you want to do a D&D game about running a BBQ shop, fine. Let's do it. Let's kill, cook, and sell some weird monster parts. But please don't derail the whole game on session 3 when you insist on going back to town to cook the monster meat when it was clearly a random encounter and everyone else wants to continue the dungeon dive pitched in session 0.

Missing
The didn't listen when the GM talked about Theme and mood and end up with a character who doesn't fit with the party/canpaign
The traitor, you know the Scorpion/Tremere who will betray the party at every possible occasion and stab any PC showing their back
-The hero, who feel like their main character
The anti hero, in general their player use all the possible flaws (and therefore built a strong character) A one eyed, alcoholic single parent with a deadly enemy, but they can shoot a coin at 1000m, so feels like they'll have again to do the job rather than staying home.
And many more
- The didn’t listen when the GM talked about Theme and mood and end up with a character who doesn’t fit with the party/canpaign
  Hah, for a second I thought this was my own post because I wrote something very similar here. But yes, this is one that bugs me.

5 is always fun. Especially when I accidentally become 1

Haha, yeah, the fact that I played almost exclusively women and my few masculine characters still often had more feminine features and mannerisms was totally just to challenge myself. Never a subconscious exploration of my deepest desires.
Says the now VERY out and proud about it transwoman.

I can't play with my friend because we play the same guy.
Both rogue. Both street tough types rather than the shadowy assassin type. Both used to end up taking a couple of levels of either Bard or fighter and ended up with a swashbuckler. No strength, all dex and cha.
We did play together a few times and would swap out which one of us got to play that guy. The other always played a very angry wizard. Just grumpy as shit. Good at a lot of things, but preferred to either fireball or magic missile his way out of situations. Talking to NPCs? I think I've got potions brewing. Must be off!
Before we played together we played the same MUD separately. Yep, same character. We ran into each other from time to time.
In high school we played at the same place but a couple of years apart. I started going when he left for the Navy. The guy who DM'ed there said my character reminded me of that guy a lot.
I want to play BG3 with him remotely and both play swashbucklers.
- Play identical twins.
  
  Separated at birth. Completely oblivious to their similarity.
  
  Me and my best friend played halfling twin brawlers one time who would use each other as improvised weapons and crawl in big guys Shadow if the Colossus style. It was the most fun thing ever, but the DM turned out to be the “if someone doesn’t lose a limb during every encounter I have failed” kind of DM so it didn’t last long.
- Have you ever thought about taking him on a trip to El Dorado?

One of my favorites that I ever played was a character I where I rolled my stats first and ended up getting a -3 modifier even with mulligan rolls. Every other stat was anywhere from decent to fuckin ballin'. I sat and thought about it for a minute: what stat would be fun, interesting, and challenging to have as a -3? STR would suck, INT and CHA would be anything from really annoying to insufferable or ablist to play (every VERY low int character ever in D&D podcasts is extremely cringe to listen to), so that leaves WIS and DEX. I chose DEX and said that it was because my human fighter was a war veteran with an Above Knee Amputation from the war. From there, I arrived at him using pole arms because they help him to steady himself on his peg leg outside of combat, and that he's deeply uncomfortable with magic, since magic cost him his leg and many comrades in war.
It led to one of my all time favorite moments in an RP where he and the paladin were dining in a Giant's great hall, having a disagreement about how to proceed, when the Paladin cast a spell on him (I can't remember which, I want to say it was silence or Zone of Truth, but it can't be because it specifically targeted him). My character stared him down, slugged down the rest of the drink, then flipped the table and commenced to trying to murder the paladin. It was a pretty nuts PvP fight, since we both ended up successfully avoiding the party members who were trying to restrain us, landed a few solid blows on each other, and it only ended when the Giants had had enough of our shit.
- I ran a game where one of my PCs played a character with high Int and Cha and like 6 Wis. He played it very well as a character who was too clever by far but consistently made poor choices counting on his wits and charm to see him through.
- Oh shit I've done the same thing with the same modifier for the same reason! We used a "roll 3 6x3d6 arrays and pick one" method and the one with 5 Dex was the only interesting one of the three, so I made him a former shipwright whose leg got fucked up when a mast collapsed on it
  I think he passed one dex save in his entire career

Also missing: pure random-roll character who makes no sense and contributes nothing other than needing to be rescued a lot.
- And the corollary, overbuilt min-max character based solely on researching the meta for hours but only rolls good at things they're not built to do
- I actually like point-buy systems where you get better at what you actually use (like in Morrowind).
  I start at average values in everything and see where the story takes my character.
- That's actually an intentional mechanic in Monster of the Week. The Mundane gets bonus XP by wandering off on their own and pushing the plot forward by needing to be rescued a la Xander.

"Okay, tell us about your character."
"Hm? Oh... human fighter."
"That's it?"
"Mm-hm."
- "What do they look like?"
  "Middle sliders on the character creator."
  "Any motivations?"
  "Do quests to earn money."
  "How about a backstory?"
  "Did quests and earned money."

6 sessions in and no one has identified/mentioned the person my character is based on, probably because I'm not good enough at doing a Rodney Dangerfield voice
- No respect. I tell ya!

Number 1: my barbarian idea was just "funny Russian man with pet bear", who dual weilds a hammer and sickle. I chose totem barbarian with a bear totem, and little did I realize that would make me practically invincible
- I did the accidental 5 to 1 pipeline. Which is pretty easy to do in DCC. I just rolled some amazing stats for a fighter, went "ok I'll be our muscles" and picked up an extremely powerful cursed sword.
  The GM decided to buff the curse and actually make the demon inside it the main BBEG of the campaign after I took my first swing with it and one shot what was supposed to be a tough mini-boss for our party.

I've done a few of these, but I once did a #5/#10 combo. I made a character years ago whose only purpose was to blow people's heads off with a .44 Magnum. He had virtually no other relevant skills. It was a GURPS/Car Wars mash-up, the former for roleplay and the latter for vehicular combat since we were in the Car Wars universe. I wasn't much use for anything until the shooting started.
RIP Jerry "Magnum" Carrost: you were a terrible character, but you were fun.

I've done too many of these. I tend to fall on 1 often though.

I feel like there should be a “6(b). Definitely my fursona”
- or "literally my fursona"

haha that's cool and I'm not a furry

One of my favorite characters I've ever had fits perfectly into #15. She was a tiny goblin that was on a quest to collect as many skulls as possible and had a sheep that she won in a contest as her steed. (She was about 2.5 feet tall and the rest of the party was human-sized or larger, so I had to roll endurance checks to keep up with them sometimes if we were traveling a long distance.)

Can you guess what is the basic flaw for me in AD&D, which eventually led me to walk away from it? How the game builds up expectations for the player.
The average person just flips open a player's book, a monster manual or some other tome on the game lore and instantly the person thinks their character will be, from the start, like the model characters they're reading upon, which they never will or even can be, as the game does not permit it, in my understanding and experience.
As a player, it was extremely frustrating to handle DMs that expected a newbie mage/ranger/fighter/whatever to take risks as if they were seasoned veterans and had high capabilities from the start. That is nonsense.
No class in AD&D is (or was; I speak from years of distance) capable of great feats from the get go, as the way the characters are built forces a level 0/1 into basically discarding any capabilities a trained individual into a specific profession would already have. It would be better to just say the characters are slightly above average commoners.
As a DM, I was quick to get fed up with players that wanted to pull stunts that would be barely feaseable to high level characters/professionals, regardless me going through the basics as I did above.
People are idiots but the game was set up by morons and others just tried to build on top of it to improve it, with mixed results at best.

Definitely not my fursona
Does D&D even have any official furry races outside turning a monster into a PC or the two bird-type people? 🤔
I know Pathfinder has Kitsune. But it's only "definitely not my fursona" because, afaik, there is no dog people race 🤣
- Not counting Tabaxi, Leonins, Shifters, Minotaurs, Satyrs, Harengons, Loxodons, Giffs, and potentially Bugbears? No, I don't think so. Because Yuan-ti, Lizardfolks, Dragonborns, Tortles, Kobolds, Locathahs and Grungs count as scalies. And I think Aarakocras, Kenkus and Owlins count as feathery.
  Wait, how are we handling druids? Cause they can be any race...
- Does D&D even have any official furry races
  Centaur
  Hadozee
  Harengon
  Leonin
  Minotaur
  Satyr
  Tabaxi
  And that's just the ones with fur, there's plenty for the scalies too
  
  Do centaurs count as furry? Centaurs are half-regular-person and half-regular-bestiality, and furries always seemed like a bit more of a blend.
- Can I interest you in hearing the gospel of the Shoony?
  
  you can always be an awakened animal or take the beastkin versatile heritage too

I have done all of these except 13

Funny enough, come to think of it, I don't think any of my PCs have fit into this.