turtles
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Author Topic: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.  (Read 3795 times)

Offline Tate

I'm sure we all know the definitions by now, but I will do my best to post them up now, in case someone isn't sure. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure what else to call a personal character, so feel free to give a common name, if you know of one.

Original character- This is a fan made character. It's a character made to fit in to a storyline of an already existing, usually mainstream, story. Said stories can be anime, movies, cartoons, books, comics, or, in some cases, historical fiction. These characters are not part of the cannon storyline.

Examples:
http://minjii.deviantart.com/art/Miri-Character-Sheet-61910365 A character made by the artist to insert themself or their ideas in to the pokemon world.
http://fayh.deviantart.com/art/Original-Character-Ryuka-32557781 A character made to be inserted in to Kingdom Hearts fanfiction

Personal characters- These are characters that are completely original to the artist in that it is for their own storyline, and was not made to fit in to another's cannon storyline. While they may be inspired by other's characters, they are not made to be inserted in a cannon world.

Examples:
http://www.furcartzone.com/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=4539 My own Tachs, of course. Created to be used in a storyline in a dream I frequent.
http://spamthefox.deviantart.com/art/Matching-is-for-sissys-64501362 A character made by a close friend merely for the purpose of using in art.



Now, what I want to discuss and hear opinions on is this: What is 'better', in your mind, and why. Do you consider Original Characters to actually be unoriginal? Do you think they're better, in any way? Do you more respect people who make their own characters?

What are the legal advantages and disadvantages? Can you really copyright a fan made character, when a lot of their details are based off of copyrighted material? Does a Personal character's not being based on such materials make them in any way 'better', in that you do not have to worry about being sued (say, for writing them in to the copyrighted story without the author's consent, despite putting up a disclaimer?)?

Is there any way, in this day and age, with so many ideas already used, to really have a truly original character, in the personal character sense?

Edit: Another thing to perhaps discuss. What do you think of when characters are basically just made in to furres? Say, if I just took Sailor Moon's design, and kept it exactly the same, but for she was then a cat woman?



Please note that this is for serious discussion, only. One line posts will be disreguarded and possibly even deleted, as they will be considered spam. Personal attacks and trolling is not allowed.

Quote from: Narnia
Just an FYI for future reference. When you attack the person making the post, and not the content of the post itself you have lost the debate.

This goes for any posters, too.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 02:17:03 PM by Tachs »

 
        

Offline Mala

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #1: May 26, 2008, 02:34:24 PM»
In my opinion, not one or the other is better.

In your example of pokemon, one could create a unique character, an interesting background, alluring personality, and a eye-appealing design. All with just the idea of pokemon. They might not follow the plotline of the show/game, and come up with a completely different story to send their character through.

Of course, with one person making a great character like that, there are several more making copies of main characters.

And with personal characters, you could do the exact same as a original character, but without the main idea behind it. Of course, most ideas have been used time and time before, so it wouldn't be a 100% never-been-used plot.

Offline Sync

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #2: May 26, 2008, 02:40:58 PM»
In my opinion, not one or the other is better.

In your example of pokemon, one could create a unique character, an interesting background, alluring personality, and a eye-appealing design. All with just the idea of pokemon. They might not follow the plotline of the show/game, and come up with a completely different story to send their character through.

Of course, with one person making a great character like that, there are several more making copies of main characters.

And with personal characters, you could do the exact same as a original character, but without the main idea behind it. Of course, most ideas have been used time and time before, so it wouldn't be a 100% never-been-used plot.
yeah i agree with this.

as for humans into furries, no those aren't yours at all. still sailor moon or whatever.

Offline Cameil

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #3: May 26, 2008, 04:35:57 PM»
In my opinion neither are better. It depends on the character, not what they were designed for.

You could have an incredible and unique character and use them in a fanfic or an anime based dream and compare it to a bland, cliché vampire character that was made for the sole purpose of art.
At the same time you could have an off the shelf, practically a cannon character wannabe running around and compare it to so spectacular Vampire with an interesting and original design. You cannot really judge the character based on weather they are original or personal.

Also, turning characters into furres or any other creature tend to tick me off. If you are going to use someone else’s character design then at least have the respect to leave it as is or create your own character.  The character was designed to look one way, so leave it looking that way.  Idk, just my opinion.

Edit: Spelling >.<;;
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 04:40:15 PM by Cameil »

Offline Azula

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #4: May 26, 2008, 04:42:45 PM»
Also, turning characters into furres or any other creature tend to tick me off. If you are going to use someone else’s character design then at least have the respect to leave it as is or create your own character.  The character was designed to look one way, so leave it looking that way.  Idk, just my opinion.

i have gotten sooo much shit about this because god forbid i took sweeney todd and mrs. lovett and turned them into furries. i am leaving them as is i just, you know, stuck a dog's head onto sweeney and a cat's head on mrs. lovett. and if someone doesn't like that, well sucks for them, because they're my alts and i can do what i please with them, and also, they can try and buy the alts off me and fix it. and i really think this should apply to all the human-turned-furres characters. because really, it's the same fucking character, but just fixed to fit the whole anthropomorphic theme in furcadia.

edit because i don't feel like making a new post, and to agree with clint:

it might help to take notice that personal characters are from your own creation to be put in your own world, so to speak. whereas original characters are people made up to fit in someone else's world.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 05:18:20 PM by Worm »

Offline Booker

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #5: May 26, 2008, 05:09:33 PM»
here's a change in opinion- I think personal characters are better. I DO think 'original' characters are unoriginal, because, hey, you want to have a pokemon trainer? well guess what, not only have plenty of people beaten you to it, but chances are someone's already come up with the same idea for a character. this goes for naruto and whatever other popular fandoms there are. anything 'original' you can think of to throw on your trainer or ninja or pokemon has already been thought up of, I'm sure. not only that, but there are so many mary sues it's unbearable. they all have the same characteristics and personalities- I've never seen an actual 'original' character that hasn't been done before. even if you make a character that IS original, you're surrounded by sues anyway. I don't really like the fact that people make these characters and insert them into stories with I don't really like the idea of having all my characters based off of someone else's idea. BUT I will agree that yeah, making these characters is entertaining as long as they're.. somehwhat original, I guess.

but you know what? the same goes for personal characters, technically. it's very hard to make something original these days, but it's still quite possible. you have to be creative in order to think up something, but it can be easy. the looks don't necessarily have to be original- I think it's more the character's personality that's important. for instance, my character clint. he's an anthropomorphic feline, just like tons of people out there, but does that necessarily make him unoriginal? i don't think so, because he's got his own story line. I'm just going to cut this short, because I think my point is clear.

worm pretty much took the words out of my mouth because I'm slow and didn't type this fast enough, but yeah, it's cool if some characters are changed to fit furcadia and all it's creepy little anthro animals running around. why should that be a problem? I personally don't care what people do to the characters species wise if they're just trying to shove them in with furries, but for the love of god try to leave their personalities and wardrobe alone.

this is really long.

Offline Hugo

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #6: May 28, 2008, 08:38:48 AM»
There is no better or worse category, the quality comes in when you look at the actual character.

ie: A shitty god-moding half dragon vampire princess character versus a fully-explained well-constructed KH character.

There's good and horrible from each.

Offline sarragh

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #7: May 28, 2008, 09:54:39 AM»
Neither are better. My 'Original' characters sometimes end up in the world of Xmen or some other shit, and some of my xmen/othershit characters end up as 'originals'. I don't, personally, believe that sticking your original character into someone else's idea/setting/storyline automatically makes it a crock of shit.

If that were true, consecutively roleplaying in someone's original-themed dream/web site could be argued as unoriginal. No, it's not. It's taking a premade and thought out setting and inserting your own values, ideas, and opinions into it through your character.

But I do argee with clint and hugo ( and lovely tina ). there are obvious rip-offs and "mary sues" and plain unbelievable characters, and they're just bollocks.

Offline Sapphirus

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #8: July 03, 2008, 02:25:39 PM»
Nice Topic to post up Tachs :D

As for Characters, I believe I took some sources out to develop mine, such as my lifetime fan of Sonic the hedgehog and such, so I created my main OC with spikey blue hair Anime-looking, because technically, it's not always easy to create a full-fledged original character that has no looks or assets like another character out in the world.

Though mine is called a mary-sue, which I could care less about, it's a character I took time to develop, with some sources to build her. I'd put my character in the Personal category rather than Fanmade.

I've seen a lot of Original/Personal characters that have some similarities to another, or cartoon character/s I watched, but with different worls and personalities. So basically, aslong as you created the character, with a whole different uniqness and style, then there's nothing wrong with creating characters with some similarities to another, some people are bad with drawing hair, etc, so they get a sort of reference off another popular one and alternate it into another look to keep it away from copying.

Fanmade, is a whole different thing, that's something people need to wein away if they're making them are personal characters they'll use for a long time.

I've seen Sweeney Todd looking rip-offs and the most, Sonic-related ones. It's very crazy, and most of us all know, Sonic-characters aren't considered "original".

Offline Hugo

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #9: July 04, 2008, 12:00:01 PM»
Art can be a determining factor for a lot of OCs also. For example yes, the sonic characters, more often than not people trace screenshots and simply recolor sonic or give him a hat.

If you're unoriginal, it shows. If you're original, it shows.

As for making characters into furries: .. I don't like it much. Yeah, I said it. But I'm not much into furries anyway so whatever I guess. But the worst is when a portrait or piece of art looks completely normal and human but then has ears edited poorly into it. That's just the feng shui of the art though, putting random body parts in there crashes it.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2008, 12:02:04 PM by Hugo »

Offline Ean

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #10: July 04, 2008, 12:07:44 PM»
I have a question, prolly a stupid one but meh, I ask some of the most simplistic question that I could prolly answer myself...

But Aka=original?

Offline Hugo

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #11: July 04, 2008, 12:36:08 PM»
Aka? Aka means Also Known As.

Offline Ean

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #12: July 04, 2008, 04:32:15 PM»
Aka? Aka means Also Known As.

Lol I know that... Akarui Kurai, Aka for short. :/ I guess I am just to used to the Aka thing being a nickname deal. Theres pictures in my gallery... http://www.furcartzone.com/index.php?action=gallery;su=user;cat=742;u=338

Offline LSD

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #13: July 25, 2008, 04:41:05 PM»
i just wish that everyone would treat canons as equals rather than a disease.

example: i have anakin skywalker and have been banned/booted from all known star wars rp dreams simply for having the name, it doesn't matter what sort of continuity i play him in, nor the quality of my roleplay (which, believe it or not, far outweighs my ooc skillz) - skywalkers just 'aren't allowed.' frankly i think it's absolute bull shit. you can have a canon character and still play them however you want to.

Offline Zim

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #14: July 25, 2008, 04:56:22 PM»
i just wish that everyone would treat canons as equals rather than a disease.

example: i have anakin skywalker and have been banned/booted from all known star wars rp dreams simply for having the name, it doesn't matter what sort of continuity i play him in, nor the quality of my roleplay (which, believe it or not, far outweighs my ooc skillz) - skywalkers just 'aren't allowed.' frankly i think it's absolute bull shit. you can have a canon character and still play them however you want to.


That's actually the reason I created Milliways.

I was tired of people not being able to use certain alts in dreams just because they're "canon." People are far too uptight about that.


Back on-topic, though...

I don't see either as "better," unless the character is a raging off-balance Mary Sue / Marty Stu. A character from any fandom can be just as good as a fully original character, as long as you give them the right balance of strengths and weaknesses (unless it's for something other than RP, like a story). I have "canon-based" characters that are more well-developed and have a deeper story than some of my fully original.

IMO, complaining about canon-based characters just makes people look elitist. Some canon-based have more creativity than most originals have in their pinky finger.

Judge the character itself, not whether or not it was made for a fandom.

</two cents>

Offline Lovedoll

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #15: July 27, 2008, 01:05:01 PM»
Most of it tl;dr, so excuse me if this came up before.



... A fanmade character is still your own, original creation. How should it be any better or less than any other original character you made?

If I have a Pokemon persona or character I'm merely designing my character into a world that exists. Whether I use trinkets from that world to add onto my character doesn't make it any less mine or original. I'm the one who gives my character her personality. I'm only using a setting that was made by another person to put the character in.

So I don't see why this is even a discussion. There's no difference in that sense.

The only reason when it's a rip-off is... when it's a rip-off. Plain as that. If I turn a Sonic character rainbow and claim it my own, then no, of course it's not an original character. But I wouldn't call it a fan character either, because I didn't design it or come up with my own ideas.


If that makes sense.

Erde

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #16: August 10, 2008, 07:24:31 AM»
I'm solid with fanmade characters in those terms. They're useful in RP pertaining to the game/movie/show/etc. It's when people use an already created character, or do a whole 'son/daughter of __.' that bothers me.

I don't really prefer fanmade or pure original over one another, since in ways they are both original characters. It's just the background and the story that is changed, and one is more unique than the other (which may or may not be a good thing).

Offline Skink

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #17: August 22, 2008, 02:58:34 PM»
A good character is still a good character no matter what reason it was created for. A bad character is still a bad character no matter how you look at it.

Offline Nny

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #18: August 23, 2008, 12:59:19 AM»
Quote
It's when people use an already created character, or do a whole 'son/daughter of __.' that bothers me.

I get your point with the whole "son/daughter of" thing, but uh... what's so bad about roleplaying in a dream as an already created character? I don't get what is so bad about that. If you have a Star Wars character alt, what's so bad about roleplaying them in a Star Wars dream? Same thing goes for me. If there was a JTHM dream, I'd find it a bit odd if I was told "You can't rp here because you're a character from the comic!!!" It wouldn't make sense.


Anyway.
To me, there's no problem in having a fan-based character. It's no better or worse than having a personal character.

Offline Tycho

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #19: September 02, 2008, 01:10:15 PM»
I only disagree when someone says it's harder and more time/creativity consuming to draw canon characters than it is to draw and come up with original characters.

*headshake* I can't tell you how much time and creative effort has gone into all of my original characters. Months. Years? And every day a new aspect of their personality or life is uncovered or introduced.

You can't say the same thing about canon characters. :/ They aren't YOURS, you can't develop them or make them this or that or be creative with them. When you start giving them new personality aspects and start drawing them in things outside of their comfort zone -- MAKING it their comfort zone -- they cease to be canon characters, and thus are some horrendous mutation of the two.

I wish I had saved it, I made a dA journal highlighting the very comment I mentioned in my first para about this :/ It was all entirely relevant and I wish I still had it XD



BY THE WAYYYYYY this is all referring to people drawing/RPing as already existing characters, ie Ash, Roxas, Freakazoid, whatever. NOT characters made to fit into a canon universe. :E SORRY~
« Last Edit: September 02, 2008, 01:11:46 PM by Rooke »

Offline Electric Guitar

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #20: September 25, 2008, 09:01:11 PM»
I give props for those who create origional non-cliche characters. Its hard to do. However, fan-made characters can be just as good. I myself have a few. It really just depends on the character.

Offline Heimdall

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #21: October 06, 2008, 08:40:12 AM»
Quote
If you have a Star Wars character alt, what's so bad about roleplaying them in a Star Wars dream?

The issues are thus:

1. Can you RP the canon character well enough consistently? It's not your creation--you're being held to standards that aren't your own, kinda.
2. Even if the dream is canon, is it in the same time period/setting? It could be a few generations before or after the character in question, or just that the canon character just doesn't fit there.
3. Characters like Luke and Sonic were made to be on the center stage most of the time, which often doesn't go well in RP. They may be in positions of power and could potentially do things to your continuity that the Rah doesn't want done.
4. How do you balance the powers of an already-existing character? They may be really strong and that's fine for whatever book/show/movie they came from, but it may not translate well into RP.
5. Many times people wanting to play canon characters... aren't the best RPers. You get "[email protected] [email protected]" and "Sonic teh Blue Hedgie" running amok. :p NOT TO SAY they're all like that of course! I'm just saying I can sort of see how people got to be so prejudiced. ;p
6. A lot of times, dream owners want players in their dream (who represent the dream) to be creative as possible. You don't have as much creative wriggle room with a canon character.
7. How well do you know the character? You may say "'my' Luke Skywalker is 35" and you RP him living in this dream (let's say it's Coruscant). When Luke was 35 in the canon, was he really living on Coruscant? It doesn't sound like a big deal, but maybe in the canon that was setting up some big important future event, or something like that. It really can be difficult keeping to canon sometimes. Ignore this if you have a version of the character that you do whatever you want to--so that the "future selves" of the you-canon character and the canon-canon character would be different.

I've seen some Harry Potter dreams that had special, more rigorous applications for people wanting to play canon characters. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. Personally, I think that most canon characters are fine only A) if they fit the setting and B) if they're played very true to the character and C) if I trust the player a LOT. These are just the general ideas I think people have when they don't allow canon characters. c:

Offline Tycho

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #22: October 22, 2008, 03:35:47 AM»
Quote from: VORPALMUSE
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you take the words right out of my mouth

Offline Greek

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #23: November 16, 2008, 12:54:15 PM»
Bah, imo. I think fully devolped original characters are more better then fanbased characters.
  You know, like from a popular show, there's going to be a million of the same design.
</two cents>

Offline PapierEraseur

Re: 'Original' (fanmade) characters versus personal characters.
«Reply #24: January 26, 2009, 03:55:14 PM»
I believe both are fine, but need to stay in their respective worlds (or worlds where they are permitted) Just because a world is from a show or movie doesn't make it a bad thing, which is why I don't complain about sonic/naruto rpcs.

However, original characters from original stories need to stay away from characters that come from copyrighted things. ESPECIALLY if they're a canon character from that story. Or even worse, if the existence of the character and continuity is already defined! (example, character talks about star wars movies in a modern day roleplay, and then a Star Wars character has IC interaction with them.)

As for characters like KH originals interacting with normal characters, my personal preferences go the same way, unless the KH character is willing to claim that they are in another world where some of their powers MAY not work or they may have to face consequences based on their attire or the fact that they are an outsider.
Not all have to be treated this way, this is just an example.

And just to throw it out there, this isn't a personal hate for characters from things like that, I just feel that they often bend the laws of nature and rules of the world with their existence alone, like a sci-fi character that wanders into a roleplay based on the Harlem Renaissance for no good reason.