Quirks, Non Quirks & general silliness .

[coronatiger]

As a GM, I may veto quirks that I'm reasonably certain will never come up in play in a meaningful way (like the Koalas). And I won't go out of my way to make one PC's quirk relevant (like creating a bunch of NPCs named Emma/Malcolm). If it fits the theme of the PC perfectly, I'll allow one completely irrelevant quirk, because it fleshes out the character, as Xakaz put it.

I broadly categorize quirks either as role playing quirks (affects how the player role plays the character) or rules quirks (affects stats or die rolls).

A role playing quirk shouldn't come up (or be brought up) too frequently, because I feel that disrupts the flow of the game.

I prefer it if my players have at least a couple of role playing quirks, but I won't enforce this unless some of the suggested quirks are obviously out-of-character.

I don't mind some quirks being silly in an otherwise "serious" campaign, as long as they don't become too pervasive.

In the current campaign where I'm a player, my character has the following quirks:

• Dislikes being alone
• Enjoys heights
• Loves fondling their girlfriend when they think nobody's watching (the girlfriend is an always-present Ally)
• Prefers finer inns
• Sashays when they walk

I don't think I've ever played any weirder quirks than these.

By the way, having a fantasy-setting character not truly believing in magic would qualify them for Mundane Background. To the annoyance of a mage I played earlier, such people can't supply FP for spells...