What you ask is a good question, and you've already got quite a few good answers, opinions and perspectives. As has been said, it varies from game master to game master. There are at least as many different views as there are game masters having them. Yet, there are some things that are usually chalked up to common sense, knowledge of the game or lack thereof notwithstanding. I personally hate the idea that interviews have become one way you stand a good chance of finding a good player. As DiceWrangler said, its not a guarantee by any means, but it does give you a rough ballpark idea. Face to face, you can kind of get a feeling for a person based on tone, attitude, body language and such, but online you don't have those tools available, and its very easy to misinterpret a question, answer, statement, etc when you're reading it from someone you don't know at all. So, if a game master asks for an interview, it most likely means they're trying to weed out the flakes from the people that would actually be decent to play with and get rid of as much drama and nonsense as they can. In addition, I will admit that I am guilty of having a lot of information and being long winded, but I'm obsessive/compulsive and most people need explicit, specific points that can't be summed up in three words. Its not an intention, it just often turns out that way, so I try to put in a disclaimer that I'm overly informative! Personally, I myself ask for applications for the player , the person behind the character. How well you and the others get along with a player is equally important as a character that gels well with the setting, even if its in a sort of juxtaposition. A fantastic character that you've created that's an elven Arcane Archer ranger who specializes in bank shots is useless in a world where elves don't exist. Plus, if you get your mind set on and locked into this wonderful idea you've got for a character, and it simply isn't appropriate to whatever setting you'll be playing in, that's disappointing for you and the game master, which means you not only have to create a new character that does fit, but also that feeling of "Man, I really wanted to play that character" in the back of your mind, so its going to probably eat at you a little, and as a result you won't really be as into the game and the character as you were with your original concept, most likely. Its not a fact written in stone by any means, but it happens quite often, I've noticed. Thus, I personally look at applications from players, not character pitches. The character pitches I wait for until after I get an idea of how well everyone is going to interact, with each other and with me. As far as characters go, once you get accepted into a game, or at least seriously considered and you're at the point where your prospective game master sets you to the task of actually creating a character, there are often several "perfect characters" or people that are first level, but yet have min maxed themselves until they can walk over challenges meant for characters nine levels higher without even falling out of step. I personally detest this sort of character proposal. If you're treating your character as a spreadsheet full of numbers and calculations, then you're not playing a character, you're playing a calculator. Play what you like and have fun with, not what a bunch of calculations and anticipated encounters suggest. To address the "perfect flawless character" thing that is sometimes attempted to be put over onto a game master (these examples are hypothetical and often based on my experience, not necessarily the typical thing you see in any game application forum), there is no such animal. The most perfectly flawless character you can conceive has one major flaw from the very outset that's as visible as the sun in the sky, usually arrogance and a sense of superiority and invincibility. Despite popular belief, in my own well traveled opinion, that's a flaw. Assuming I were to even amusedly allow such a "perfect flawless" concept as it existed in the player's perception anyway, I'd make sure they felt the flaw of that. Flaws are what makes a person or character who and what they are, as much as any merit or advantage. Flaws make great story hooks, and sometimes they even curb that impulse to create that type of character. So, put simply, my advice is to avoid the "perfect character" thing as explicitly as you can and enjoy the enormous roleplaying potential of a character that is as imperfect and flawed as any other individual that exists in the setting. Quirky characters, or overly quirky characters as you phrased it can be a nightmare for some game masters if they're taken too far into "overly quirky" territory. I know they are for me. Everyone wants to be unique and I'm definitely on board with that. A normal degree of quirkiness is fantastic and amazing. I do that myself when I'm participating as a player. I hate stereotypes. But everyone gets in the gear where they go a bit too far sometimes, its human nature for this to happen occasionally. In my own personal experience to do my best to avoid making a character too quirky, I use a couple of techniques to rein this impulse in, and I often suggest it to players I know that will most likely jump over that wall like a kangaroo like I might if I don't catch myself. The first method I like is taking a standard, normal, everyday boring character type, and tweaking just one or two small things about them. Then they're memorable and unique, and not obnoxious and destined for a random blue bolt from the heavens. For example, let's say I'm playing a dwarf fighter. Very straightforward, very generic. Dwarves have certain typical traits that often define a typical dwarf in most people's minds. So, I take my handy dandy little sawed off fighter that really digs being grouchy and scowly, and fascinated with precious metals and gems, and hates elves. So, to make this guy unique, maybe have him take Weapon Specialization in archery instead of in axes, make him cheerful rather than bitchy so he's the optimist of the group, and possibly even have him be best friends with an elf, possibly even a wild or wood elf who also get down with the grouchy bit, instead of your typical cheerful high elf, or even that typical cheerful elf. Just those odd little traits that are most often associated with dwarves. Nothing is crazy, nothing is over the top, and the character is unique and memorable. Down the line, someone will remember the happy go lucky dwarven archer because he's unusual and unique. I took three basic stereotypical dwarven traits, and turned them around a little. No min maxing and no absolutely outrageous convoluted backstory required. The second technique I use is even more introspective. I take any character concept I come up with to play in a game, and look at it as if I'm the game master. I ask myself is this character unusual, or is he just a flaming asshat? Is this a character I would need to invest in Tylenol in order to run a game for them? Is this a character that I would want to strangle the player for, and kick out of the game after half a session? Would the other players and I enjoy playing with this character, or would they disrupt the flow of the game by being too quirky. Other questions like that too. Be extremely critical in your questioning of your own character's viability as a potential character in a game. I find personally that this really shines a light on the stupid spots that need to be fixed. For me, those typically take care of that to kind of pull that impulse control down tight. That usually helps you come up with a character that's not seen as crazy most of the time. When it comes to backstory, my own personal preference is that there be a bit of detail, just enough to get a general sense of who the character is, where they came from (morally and philosophically more so than geographically), and tha type of thing. A page or two usually works, but a bit longer is normally okay with me, where a lot of people prefer shorter. It doesn't have to be long for me personally, just enough backstory to give the game master some useful seeds to weave into the story is great, too much is overkill, and not enough is not really thought out much I wouldn't think. I think of it as explaining who a relative is to a friend who's never met them, which is an odd way to explain it I guess. But the main thing to remember, I believe, is to keep it coherent and concise, to the point, and able to be easily followed without having to backtrack the reading a lot. I prefer characters that feel like people as they exist in the setting, and that are fun to play, but making sure the fun factor jives with everyone else, so there's less disruption of everything as a whole. This just means that the character isn't trying to go north when everybody is going south. Going southeast or southwest is cool, I think. So I think you've got the right idea, because this is supposed to be fun, and its a game. So have fun, but cooperative fun, rather than fun for you and a headache for everybody else, just as you wouldn't enjoy a game that was fun for everybody else, but a headache for you. So again, I think you've got the right idea, so you've already won half the battle. Oh well, I think I got off track and rambled a lot. I hope it all wasn't incoherent, and that at least some of it was relevant to what you wanted to get answers for. Lack of sleep, pounding headache and a lot of distractions and interruptions can play hell with a guy's thoughts. I hope you get at least something useful out of this rambling mess, and good luck. See? I told you I was a bit long winded, so sorry for that.
