Simming stereotypes

[Brell]

All over the series, Star Trek has introduced lots of different species, with their own culture and ways. Sometimes, that is so much the case, the species are an stereotype by themselves. Klingons are violent, Vulcans are logical, Ferengi are greedy.

 

Sometimes, some characters have proven to be an exception to those stereotypes, used to show us that any species is at least as varied as human beings are. Vulcans are culturally logical, yes, but as with everything, there are more and less logical Vulcans.

 

The same way the series showed us all this, so do us in our simming reflect this species variations. Some of our characters are the classical stereotype. With personal quirks, of course, and with the personal vision each player might have of that species, but the typical member one might imagine for them. On the other hand, other players make a point of trying to subvert the tropes and offer a surprising twist away from what you would expect.

 

Both are equally good, of course. You might have a character idea in mind that fits exactly with a Klingon, and makes it easy to work and incredibly fun. Subverting the stereotypes takes more work, but can make for a surprising and amazing character.

 

So here comes our question. Do you like to follow the stereotypes, or make a point of subverting them? Or try to not heed what the stereotype says, one way or the other? Discuss in the comments!

This is a new post in our category Simming Questions. Here we will be asking questions about our community, our characters and our writing, and how you interact with it all.

[+ Trellis Vondaryan]

There's very little canon about Vissians, so there's not much to stereotype. I'm happy to build my own character.

[+ Saveron]

I like to take a well known species and work from the canon stuff into the maybes and what-ifs. I also enjoy exploring the different angles only hinted at in the series.

Saveron's behaviour is modelled largely on Spock and Tuvok, but his thinking and philosophies reflect my own theories on what drove Valeris. 

Edited April 11, 2017 by Saveron

[Renos]

I can't really vote on that because the answer doesn't cleanly fit into any category. I have definitely selected species because I like their stereotypes and want to play them that way, like Icavoc. Other times I like to break the rules and make them rebels! (Within reason) Like with making Renos a deviant. It really all depends. When I look for a species I often have a particular concept in mind  - so when I chose the J'naii I already knew I wanted a gender non-binary character.

[Kendra Eberhart]

I think that we ought to be careful how we define a racial stereotype in this context. Maybe I am picking at straws here, but what we are really talking about is concepts deeply ingrained in a particular race and or society. So yes, we expect to see these traits in all examples of said species and when they aren't they the results are either truly amazing or spectacularly awful.  

Personally though I think "stereotypes" are only a bad thing if they are just put there as some shallow expected trope. Racial stereotypes give a lot of room for character development in the sense of why the character agrees with or bucks the trend of a particular stereotype which makes for a much more 3 dimensional character. So in short I always try to build the character I want by keeping said stereotypes in mind. 

On the flip side, this issue also extends to things like how we write the adversarial forces within our stories. I think we all, at one time or another, decided to write the Klingon or Romulan or Cardassian "bad guys" in such a way keeping with certain racial stereotypical traits as a way of making a particular plot point work.