Very good topic here, Silhouete. Here's my thoughts on it....
I don't know why some people think it's so important for their character to be the "strongest" or the "bravest" one of all. It seems so Mary Sue/Gary Stue to me, especially when they describe their characters to be strong and fearless with no flaws whatsoever. I see it all the time in many different roleplays, wether it's in lion prides, wolf packs, or warrior cat clans. I often times see it in Warrior clans. Too often do I see a "big powerful" tom cat with a name that sounds threatening, like "Snakevenom" or "Skullsmasher" or "Deathsentence".
Some don't have the farfetched names, but alot of times I would encounter a Warrior that would have a bio where it would say Strenght: 98% | Speed: 99% | Fighting skills:100% | Agility: 97% | Intelligence: 90%. That's no joke, I actually saw a bio like that once. They claim to be the most perfect warrior and skilled fighter. It really makes the character real dull and Mary Sueish... no real depth, uniquness, or individuality. No one in the world is perfect, and everyone has flaws, fears, and weaknesses! Often times it's the children who play this game that have characters like this. Most kids would think that stronger, smarter, bigger is always the best. "I'm the hero, so I must be the strongest and the bravest, and the best there is! No one can stop me!" Some kids figure that if they have a character who isn't strong, and comes off as weak, they think their character will be pushed around by others, taken as a joke, or not attract the attention of a someone they like (a potential mate). That's just typical child mentality.
Now I have roleplayed with some kids 14 and under and they didn't always play the "big strong" character. There were some that played the timid characters, the goofy clumsy characters, the obidient cub/pup, the philosopher/guide character, the medic characters, the all-bark-and-no-bite characters, or even some nerdy characters. They don't always play the heroic character, but often times the "side-kick" or "supporting" character. They seem to have a good sense of variety.
Many of my characters aren't the strong type, the romantic type that do nothing but seek a mate, or the leaderly type. All my characters have flaws and weaknesses, even if they are the big supernatural characters. Melina for example, she may be a manticore with big claws, teeth, and a venomus scorpion tail.... but that doesn't mean she is an all powerful monster. She doesn't go out to seek a mate, kill everything in sight, or be the strongest monster on Sky's Rim. NO! Her little bio states that she is old and past her prime. She often times states that she's not as young as she used to be when it comes to flying, fighting, and hunting. She's a slow flyer, and is clumsy when she comes in for a landing. Her strength is her wisdom, but she is physically challenged due to old age.
Kojak the bobcat is another example. He's a bobcat with a muscular build and a big round belly. He's somewhat strong, but he has his flaws, fears, and weaknesses too. When I roleplay with my friends in Warrior roleplays and I play as Kojak, he pretty much plays the role of the "supporting character". In other words, he's not the main character that's a leader or the best fighter. He supports the leader and acts as a side-kick, helping the clan, giving them advice about the outside world (their world outside their territory). I really prefer Kojak as being the side-kick character.
When it comes to the whole mate thing, it's not the most important thing in the world of having a mate. None of my characters have mates, and I'm not sad about it either. Some of them had mates in the past, but that kind of stuff didn't happen in roleplay. What I mean is, when I wrote the character bio for them, I put that they had a mate once in the past but somehow they went their seperate ways. There is one character I have that is supposed to be an old widow... and she's going to remain a widow. In her bio, she lost her mate to a pack of wolves. She's sad that he's gone, but she doesn't bring it up or cry about it all the time, or complain about how lonely she feels. Finding a new mate isn't really important to her.
I also don't understand why it is that some people think that playing a "side-kick" role or a "supporting role" is so dull or boring. It may sound dull and boring to them, but it's not. Being the actor, you have to make it interesting. Most of my characters are the side-kick type. They let the leader, or someone else deal with the conflicts while they sit by and watch. I have a shy timid unicorn fox character that does nothing but sit by and help her friends when they need her. She won't fight for them, since she doesn't believe in violence, but she will heal their wounds with her limited magic. Kopper is the same way, except she is just an ordinary fox with no magic.
There is nothing wrong with playing as the "weak/timid character" or the "goofy clown character" or even the "wise retired warrior". There is NO SHAME in playing those roles. Those roles aren't boring at all, if you put some thought into them. I've met many good characters with those kind of personalities, and they were great contributions to the roleplay. Don't always play the Batman, play the Robin every now and then.
