I'm lucky in a sense since I'm really interested in what the companions do after the Doctor leaves. So I tend to take them from a canonpoint when they manage just fine without him. But it would still be nice for the Doctor's player to remember that even if I'm not playing Amy or Rory or River, our characters are still supposed to be friends. So I end up feeling like I'm not actually part of the Who Cast despite playing a Who character.
see, that breaks my heart and not even in an ironic I'm-being-a-sarcastic-dick way. I'm thinking of playing 11 again & I'd kill bitches for ANY active companions, esp ones from previous incarnations. just think of how the dynamics would change/be the same, right?
I play Who characters (well, a companion and a TW character) who are LCWs in two different games and all these people talking about cliquey Who casts make me cry.
Know the feeling, anon. Try to do or start something with the Doctor, and my character gets shoved aside for Rory or River or someone else who can do it better or faster. I don't feel like I'm part of the Who cast. It's frustrating.
Same thing here. The Doctor has a great player, but my canon character has to do something wrong or jump up and down to get his attention. Otherwise, he's in the background doing something for the Doctor. I never feel like I'm part of the Who cast when the Smith season chars are getting multiple tags and I get one.
Are you me? Same problem. Ignored and background unless the Doctor or his present companions need shit. Then you're an idiot until we get what we want. Fuck you.
Re: op
(Anonymous) 2012-10-24 05:27 pm (UTC)(link)Oh well, at least I have good cross canon CR.
op
(Anonymous) 2012-10-25 02:22 am (UTC)(link)ahahahahaha cross canon CR is that a food
Re: op
(Anonymous) 2012-10-27 07:59 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-10-27 03:37 pm (UTC)(link)da
(Anonymous) 2012-10-27 06:25 am (UTC)(link)Working on the cross canon CR thing myself.
+all the Who numbers
(Anonymous) 2012-10-27 07:59 am (UTC)(link)Cross canon CR is my life.
Re: op
(Anonymous) 2012-10-27 08:43 am (UTC)(link)