One of my Pathfinder characters, Bentithan Flinteye. He’s an evil, but pragmatic, Aasimar psychic warrior, who considers his actions to be for the “greater good”. He’ll use this to justify a lot of things to himself and others, but make no mistake he’s evil and ultimately just wants more power for himself; after all, wouldn’t he be able to do more good with that power? There would be plenty of people who’d think he’s right.

Oh BOY. So I’m currently playing an automaton character in a Strength of Thousands campaign (pf2e), and I’m playing her very much like a stereotypical robot: no emotion, strongly rational, all that good stuff. One thing that I’ve made core to the character is her ability to learn and grow, but I don’t like the idea that a lack of emotion is a flaw that needs to be overcome. So, my philosophy is “make her become emotionally intelligent, not emotional”.

Sadly, I think with the way I play her, people would anthropomorphize her hard.

My Eladrin Paladin would definitely get interpreted as a himbo, when he’s actually quite intelligent, just a very impulsive thrillseeker. He knows full well every most of the time he walks into a trap, and he delights in it.

My halfling wizard. He’s just a silly little guy with a monkey on his shoulder (which is also his dead brother). Don’t mind that time he dropped a psionic nuke on a hex of the continent map as a distraction. Totally Chaotic Good.

Mine is an entire faction. No, the rebels aren’t the good guys, the leaders are baddies. Theres just a lot of propaganda and in-universe nice people fall victim to it, including the protag. There is no high ground.

My players THINK my kobolds have an elaborate and well-developed society but actually eee he’s just a lil guy omg lookit how cute he is