[@NuttsnBolts][@The Elvenqueen][@BrokenPromise][@shylarah][@tsukune]
I'm arguably responding to all of you, but I'm going to keep this only touching on what I consider vital even though I've honestly got a lot more to say now. If I seem a bit incoherent, blame my multitasking -- I just got out of bed recently despite wanting to be up over five hours ago, and there's a lot I need to get done. Rather than pick out and quote various comments from people, I'm just going to give my own perspective on some of the major elements being brought up here. This won't be anywhere near as thorough a reply as it could be, but it'll still be long-ish. Read it at your own discretion -- I probably won't have time to reply again outside of maybe a short answer to a short question.

The only comment I'm going to directly respond to is your comment about the pocket watch, shylarah -- actually, in the case of that example I used (it was an existent example, not a hypothetical), the pocket watch is actually quite significant, but I'm not against misdirecting people either, especially in psychological warfare. With that said, I don't think whether it was important or not is too relevant. Like I said, I like to have a very vivid and realistic image of a character in my mind -- as far as I'm concerned, if the character is wearing a bracelet then I should know about it whether it's a McGuffin or not. In my previous post, I emphasized how I consider a character lifeless if you don't include any accessories they have, because fashion is a realistic form of expression and a viable means of characterization. If you don't like writing details about all your accessories, don't role-play a character who wears them -- that's pretty simply in my eyes, but there's nothing 'wrong' with someone who [i]wants[/i] their character to wear them.

Before I go into my attitude towards the categories of character sheets, I'd like to bring up a part of my background with role-playing that a few people on this site already know from other threads or in PM. My start in play-by-post over ten years ago (as I mentioned, I've been role-playing and storytelling a lot longer, but this is when I got access to the internet and discovered play-by-post existed) was on an 'advanced' role-playing forum which a large number of role-players were unable to survive at or even get accepted into. Not only was the posting expectations roughly five paragraphs, but in terms of character sheets you were expected to provide several paragraphs for appearance; personality; history, and also give a role-playing sample.

Why all of these expectations? In order to [i]prove[/i] the role-player actually had the capabilities to both know the character in detail and to effectively play the character they were presenting realistically -- it's rather irritating seeing someone register as X type of character and then not have the first clue how to play them (the thread on this site involving how to write mental disorders is a great example). Though I have many complaints about that role-playing forum, this particular code of conduct they had is actually something I [i]agreed[/i] with. If I hadn't basically been an 'advanced' role-player from day one, I never would have managed there let alone thrived as I did. This might also explain to you one of the reasons why I don't struggle to post out large amounts of text over a very short period of time while still keeping it well-thought-out.

Nevertheless, this is all subjective and a matter of preference -- not everyone has to expect people to give a lot of details about their character - even if doing so is primarily for the purpose of making the character feel more alive and fleshed out - but it's also not 'wrong' for a GM such as myself to want people to show they have a vivid image of their character in mind and that the person being presented for the role-play isn't just a lifeless stick figure waiting to be moulded by the IC.

Now that this is gotten out of the way, my attitude towards the categories of a character sheet... Since some people seem to cringe at my long-winded (read: detailed) posts, I'm putting my attitudes towards this into a hider -- ignore it if you don't have the time to read.

[hider=Character Sheets]
[u][b]Appearance[/b][/u]

I'm actually one of those GMs who's perfectly fine with people using pictures instead of writing up a large description, even though I myself personally prefer to give a decent amount of written information about what the character's visual details are. I actually write very detailed descriptions about each of the characters in my project - including their outfits - despite the fact that I'm completely capable of [i]drawing[/i] them, and these descriptions of what the characters look like are usually included in their first appearance in the story.

With this in mind, I should point out that I only consider a picture acceptable if it shows everything and gets the details right -- if the picture you post up has blue hair and you don't tell me in the profile that their hair is actually green then I will assume it's blue. I also don't like it when people only put up a face shot of the character and then don't include description about their outfit and accessories -- seriously, if you're not going to take the time to write up a synopsis about your outfit then you should at least use a full body picture, or multiple pictures to emphasize outfit and appearance separately.

This is one of the reasons why I'll only use pictures for characters not related to my own project, generally speaking, since only my own artwork can do my 'Guardian Ascension' characters complete justice -- any other picture is a placeholder at best. When I role-play, if I use a character that isn't from my story I actually use pictures from other media [i]specifically[/i] so I don't end up wanting to use the design for my own project.

Long story short, good role-playing should be realistic. In a more simplistic style of role-play, the character might not have a physical description at all and the only physical information you have to go off of is that the character is 'an elf'. As far as I'm concerned, this does [i]not[/i] translate over into good writing. If people aren't going to take the time to give fleshed out descriptions about their characters then why even bother writing? It makes more sense for them to create a comic book (those who cannot draw can find an artist, so don't counterargument me with this because it's gotten really old), since then the descriptions and character designs are there for everyone to see right off the bat.

If I'm going to role-play with someone, even the smallest detail about their physical appearance is something my character might comment on or could get brought up in their internal dialogue. This is why I emphasized that I'll think you're naked if you don't tell me what you're wearing, and why I'll get rather annoyed if suddenly you reveal you're wearing a necklace that was [i]blatantly not on your character for me to react to seven posts ago[/i]. Truth and realism are in the details.

Like I said previously, the character sheets should - in my eyes - include the 'trademark' outfit/design of the character, including clothes and accessories, how their hairstyle is presented, et cetera. You can then emphasize in the IC during a specific event if they've changed dress code for some reason. If they're not carrying their favourite necklace then mention it in the IC, but I want to know about that favourite necklace in the character sheet. The same applies to a weapon that the character carries constantly -- the IC should be where it's mentioned if they're not armed like usual for some reason.

[u][b]Personality[/b][/u]

This one seems to be a source of a lot of controversy for people, so I'm going to emphasize what I consider to be the most important detail about this section... Why exactly do people assume that having a personality written out in a character sheet prevents the player from 'developing' and 'growing' as the storyline continues? First off, if someone doesn't have an idea of what their character's personality is before the role-play is started, then how exactly is this even a character? Twenty-five year old people are not clean slates -- a human with a history will have a vivid personality with many likes and dislikes, habits, preferences, et cetera.

As far as I'm concerned, the only time it's acceptable for a character to not be written this way is if there's some sort of justification in there characterization for [i]why[/i] they're an empty shell, and they should be [i]portrayed[/i] as such until they develop a personality if this is the case. An example of this would be someone who isn't human, or perhaps they're a tyke bomb (and even these usually have sort of hidden depth, so it's still arguably a cop-out), or maybe they're actually a sociopath and this is why they lack certain emotions -- even sociopaths have defined personalities though.

Once again, there's nothing 'wrong' with people not wanting to write out a character sheet to [i]prove[/i] they have a well-established and fleshed out character in mind, but there's also nothing 'wrong' with a GM such as myself wanting this proof. You have to get special powers accepted into a role-play in order to make sure they fit into the setting and aren't badly defined for it, so the same goes for personality. I think of the personality section of a character sheet as who the person is [i]before[/i] the role-play begins, not who they have to be [i]forever[/i] (even though human beings do usually have certain personality traits that never leave them), and simply not having this information available implies that they're not even a person before the role-play starts. Of course, some people like to work the character out as they go, but this can sometimes create inconsistencies, and it's not 'wrong' for a GM to want to prevent that. Bashing a GM for wanting these details is just juvenile in my eyes.

When all is said and done, I actually write extensive personality sections for each character in my project, to the point that I can basically tell you if one of my characters likes eating bananas (even if this detail isn't in the profile itself). I know every one of my characters as if they were a completely fleshed out and realistic person, and these details are usually something I have out on the table before I even [i]consider[/i] role-playing them. It's fine if people want to work out who a character is as they go - I've done this myself before - but you're not really 'role-playing' if the character isn't a character in my eyes.

[u][b]History[/b][/u]

A lot of what I said about the personality sections applies here in history -- realistic twenty-five year olds have twenty-five years of backstory that has either moulded them into who they are or at least had some sort of impact on them, and an inability to establish a history for your character is usually one of the first mistakes people make when it comes to portraying a character badly. How many role-players can you think of with characters who have tragic backstories but then are completely incapable of writing those characters realistically? How many role-players can think of with characters with really happy backstories but then they act like the world is coming down on them every moment? Plenty of both exist, and neither of them really know how to write. There's exceptions to every rule, but you get my point.

Having someone write out there character's history serves as the foundation that justifies their personality section, and it also happens to prove that the role-player actually understands the setting of the role-play and is capable of creating a character who would realistically exist in such a setting. This prevents people writing characters with Star Wars backstories into a Lord of The Rings setting. Like my fiancé just said over the phone while I'm reading out what I write to her... it's [i]'awkward'[/i]. I've seen so many instances of people trying to bring over a character that simply didn't belong in the world that it's sort of ridiculous. This is made particularly worse in a highly details and extensive setting such as my own main project's, where people need a lot of work to be able to fit a character into the setting without it feeling like a badly written crossover story or fanfiction.

As usual, I'll emphasize that this is all subjective, and there's nothing 'wrong' with a person not wanting to include a history due to not wanting to have their character's story revealed too early, but let's be honest here -- a good role-player isn't going to exploit OOC knowledge about your history in the IC unless it's actually justified in the setting by said character being a psychic; a god; et cetera. Now let's try flipping this the other way around for a moment. What if there [i]is[/i] a lot of psychics and gods waltzing around in the role-play in question? These characters would realistically know your past -- if the backstory's not included in the character sheet, they don't have anything to work with unless you discuss it out for them in the OOC, and a lot of role-playing forums [i]don't have[/i] OOCs. It's simply more realistic to have the profile include this information in the first place, and it also makes the character look less like they were born yesterday (unless they [i]were[/i] -- what a twist).

[b][u]RP Sample[/u][/b]

I'll put this simply -- I consider this a safety net. I won't usually expect people to provide one of these, but I don't think a GM is 'wrong' for expecting one in order to weed out the people who just want to play casual make-believe from the dedicated writers. This is something I'd be more inclined to use with players I've never met before, since someone in my circle wouldn't need to prove themselves to me.[/hider]