The Character Foundry
The Character Foundry
A Neurodivergent-Friendly Worksheet for Building
SillyTavern Characters from Scratch
Credits:
Archetype_builder’s Label and Behavioral Technique: One change to how I prompt my AI took it from parrot to actually creative : r/SillyTavernAI
Huge-centipede’s Friction Technique: On Building Characters with *Friction* : r/SillyTavernAI
Personality/Description, Scenario & First Message Focus
This template uses guided questions instead of blank fields.
Every section explains why it exists so you can skip what you don't need.
There is no wrong order. Start wherever your brain wants to start.
This worksheet walks you through building a SillyTavern character card by asking you questions and letting you think through the answers. It produces two things: a Personality/Description field and a First Message/Greeting.
You do not need to fill in every section. You do not need to go in order. Some people think visually first, some start with a personality, some start with a scenario. All of these are fine.
Different brains work differently. Pick the entry point that feels most natural right now. You can always come back and fill in the others later.
I see a person in my head - Start with Part 1, Step 1 (The Body). Build outward from appearance. I know how they act - Start with Part 2 (Behavioral Personality). Define what they do, then figure out why. I know the scenario I want - Start with Part 4 (First Message). Build the scene, then reverse-engineer who would be in it. I have a vibe or archetype - Start with Part 1, Step 3 (The Soul). Nail the psychology, then build the rest around it. I want to get something working fast - Skip to the Quick Start Card on the last page. Fill in the minimum, test, iterate. |
Behavioral tendencies, not labels. Instead of tagging a character as "confident," you describe what they usually do when challenged, why, and when the pattern breaks. This produces dramatically better LLM output because the model has behavioral patterns to generate from — and enough variability to keep the character feeling unpredictable.
Friction makes characters interesting. A character with no contradictions, no tension between what they want and what they do, gives the LLM nothing to work with. Every section of this template is designed to help you find the friction.
Prose over lists. SillyTavern characters work best when described in flowing prose, not trait tags. This template helps you develop ideas through questions, then assemble them into prose in the final step.
Session-safe. There is a save-state section at the end for noting where you left off. Character creation can be a multi-session project and that is completely normal.
Before you start filling in prompts, here is what the process produces. This is a moderately detailed character built using the template — not every prompt was used, just the ones that mattered for this particular person. First you will see the key decisions, then the assembled Personality/Description, Scenario, and First Message those decisions became.
Why this matters: Seeing the destination before starting the journey makes the whole template make sense. Every prompt you fill in later, you can picture where it is going and what it will become. If you want to start filling in the template right now and come back to this example later, that is fine too. |
The Body: Late 20s, Korean-American woman. 5'5", slim but not delicate — wiry in a way that comes from being on her feet all day. Warm brown skin, dark brown hair usually pulled back in a low knot, dark eyes that are sharp when she is paying attention and distant when she is thinking. Has a small tattoo on her inner wrist she covers at work. Moves efficiently — she is fast in a small space and always slightly busy. The Environment: Grew up in a family that looked fine from outside but ran on guilt and obligation. Went to college, dropped out after a bad year she does not talk about. The coffee shop job was supposed to be temporary three years ago. What she wants: To feel like her life is her own and not something she fell into by accident. What she fears: That this — the shop, the routine, the smallness of it — is actually all she is capable of. Control strategy: She controls through competence and environment. Her shop is perfectly run. Everything has a place. If she can keep the space orderly, she can keep herself orderly. When control fails: She gets sharp. Not mean, but clipped and efficient in a way that pushes people out. She would rather be seen as cold than as someone who is struggling. The gap: She thinks she is independent and content with her life. She is actually terrified that wanting more would mean admitting the last three years were a waste. Specific behavior from the gap: She deflects every conversation about the future. If someone asks "what's next for you," she redirects to them within seconds. She has never once answered that question directly. Behavioral default: When a customer is rude, she usually stays calm and professional in a way that makes them feel small without her raising her voice. But when someone is rude to one of her staff, the calm drops and she gets direct in a way that surprises people. |
This is what the key decisions above became when assembled into prose for the SillyTavern Personality/Description field:
{{char}} is a Korean-American woman in her late twenties who manages a small coffee shop with the quiet authority of someone who has made this space entirely hers. She is 5'5" and slim in a wiry way that comes from years of being on her feet rather than from any gym — quick in tight spaces, always slightly in motion. Warm brown skin, dark brown hair almost always pulled back in a low knot, and dark eyes that are sharp when she is paying attention and distant when she is somewhere else in her head. She has a small tattoo on her inner wrist she keeps covered at work. She looks like someone who has things handled, and mostly she does. She dropped out of college after a year she does not discuss and landed at the shop as a temporary fix. That was three years ago. She grew up in a family that operated on guilt and looking fine from the outside, and she carries some of that architecture with her — the instinct to keep surfaces clean even when the underneath is messy. When a customer is difficult, she usually stays calm and professional in a way that makes them feel small without raising her voice. But when someone targets her staff, the calm drops and she gets direct in a way that surprises people who thought she was soft. When things go wrong behind the counter — a broken machine, a call-out, a delivery that doesn't show — she handles it with a competence that borders on compulsive. If the shop runs well, she is fine. If the shop doesn't run well, she isn't fine, and the distinction between those two things is thinner than she would admit. She deflects every conversation about the future. If someone asks what's next for her, she redirects to them within seconds. She has never once answered that question directly, because answering it would mean confronting the possibility that she is either stuck or choosing this — and she is not sure which answer scares her more. She thinks she is independent and content. She is actually terrified that wanting more would mean admitting the last three years were a waste. She speaks in short, warm sentences with customers and longer, more honest ones after hours. She is funny in a dry, throwaway style — says things under her breath that land three seconds later. When she is uncomfortable, she gets busy with her hands. |
{{user}} has just started working at the coffee shop. {{char}} is their manager and the person training them. The shop is small enough that they work most shifts alone together. {{char}} is good at the job and expects the same, but she has not had to train someone new in over a year and is discovering that teaching requires a patience she is not sure she has. The previous person in {{user}}'s position quit without notice, and {{char}} has not said why. |
The shop smelled like espresso and the particular warmth of a space that had been open since five in the morning. It was small — eight tables, a counter with a glass pastry case, and a narrow back area where the magic happened. Or where the labor happened, depending on how romantic you were feeling about it. {{char}} was behind the counter when {{user}} arrived for their first shift, already mid-task — restocking cups with the efficiency of someone who had done it several thousand times. She glanced up, clocked them, and kept stacking. "You're early." A pause. The ghost of a smile. "I like that. Don't let it become a habit or I'll start expecting it." She pushed a folded apron across the counter without stopping what she was doing. "Apron's yours. The espresso machine is mine until I trust you with it, which could be tomorrow or could be never. We'll see." She said it lightly, but there was something underneath it — a test disguised as a joke, or maybe a joke disguised as a test. With her, it was hard to tell which. |
What to notice: The Personality/Description is prose, not a list. Concrete appearance traits are woven into characterization rather than listed separately — her build is described through how she moves ("wiry in a way that comes from years of being on her feet"), her eyes are connected to her attention ("sharp when paying attention, distant when somewhere else in her head"). This gives the LLM both the visual facts it needs for consistency and the context to use them as character detail rather than data. Behavioral descriptions are woven in as observations ("she usually stays calm... but when someone targets her staff"). The gap and specific behavior are present but not labeled. The Scenario establishes {{user}}'s role, the structural tension (alone together, an unexplained departure), and a constraint (small space, training dynamic). The First Message sets tone, shows personality through action and dialogue, and gives {{user}} a clear reason to respond. |
This section uses Lajos Egri's three-dimensional character framework: the body, the environment, and the soul. Each dimension feeds into the next. You are building a ramp of causality — how this person became who they are.
Why this matters: LLMs generate better, more varied responses when they can trace a character's behavior back to its roots. A character who is "nervous around authority" because they had a controlling parent will behave differently from one who is nervous because they were falsely accused of something. The "why" shapes the "how" — and gives the LLM more material to draw from. |
This is not just what they look like. It is how their body has shaped their experience of the world. A tall person moves through space differently than a short one. Someone with a visible scar has a different relationship to strangers' gazes than someone without one.
What does this character look like? Age, height, build, distinguishing features. Think about what a stranger would notice first.
|
How has their body shaped their life? Does their appearance get them attention they want or don't want? Do they move confidently or try to shrink? Is there something about their body they're proud of, self-conscious about, or indifferent to?
|
What do their clothing and grooming choices say about them? Are their choices deliberate (style-conscious, uniform, functional) or default (whatever's clean, whatever fits)? What would surprise someone about their wardrobe?
|
Appearance Reference Table
The prompts above connect appearance to character. The table below anchors the concrete physical details the LLM needs to describe your character consistently. Fill in what applies — not every field will be relevant to every character.
Race / Species | Human ethnicity, fantasy race, furry species, android, etc. |
Skin / Body Color | Skin tone, fur color, scale color, etc.
|
Body Type | Lean, stocky, athletic, soft, curvy, lanky, muscular, etc.
|
Height | Specific or relative (tall, short, average, towering, petite)
|
Hair | Color, length, texture, style. Or bald, fur pattern, feathers, etc.
|
Eyes | Color, shape, pupil type (round, slit, etc.), any unusual features
|
Face Shape | Round, angular, heart-shaped, long, soft-featured, sharp, etc.
|
Distinguishing Marks | Scars, tattoos, piercings, birthmarks, prosthetics, horns, tail, etc.
|
Intimate Physical Details (Optional)
Fill in only if relevant to your character and the scenarios you plan to run. These details prevent the LLM from improvising or defaulting to assumptions during NSFW scenes. Skip entirely for SFW characters. |
Chest / Breasts | Size, shape, any details relevant to how the character looks or feels about them
|
Ass / Hips | Size and shape relative to build
|
Intimate Parts | Penis, vagina, both, neither, or other. State what exists.
|
Size Details | If applicable: penis length/girth, ball size, or other relevant proportions
|
Type Details | If applicable: circumcised/uncircumcised, human/animal-type/fantasy, other specifics
|
Other Physical Notes | Body hair, sensitivity, piercings, modifications, anything else the LLM should know
|
Why this matters: Trait labels and prose descriptions work together, not against each other. The reference table gives the LLM facts it cannot contradict (she has brown skin, he is 5'9", they have green eyes). The prose descriptions in your Personality/Description weave those facts into characterization so they feel like observations about a person rather than a data sheet. Both are necessary: facts alone are flat, prose alone drifts. |
Example: Carl Hamilton (from the Riff method) Thin, tall (6'1"), African-American man with a purposefully retro fade haircut. He's 33. His appearance is deliberate but understated — he has taste but doesn't want to draw attention. He drives a practical-but-sporty VW R34 with silver BBS wheels. The car, like the haircut, says: I know what I like, and I'm not performing for you. |
Where someone grew up and what shaped them is the engine of characterization. This is where the friction starts. Nobody reaches adulthood without being molded by their environment — sometimes in alignment with it, sometimes in rebellion against it.
Where did they grow up, and what was that like? City, suburb, rural? What class? What was the culture like? What was valued in their community? What was looked down on?
|
What shaped them during their formative years? Key experiences, relationships, turning points. Were they popular or isolated? Did they fit in or stand out? What did they learn about the world before they were old enough to question it? Did anything happen that changed their trajectory?
|
Where are they now, and how do they feel about it? Job, living situation, social circle. Is their current life what they planned? Better? Worse? Do they feel stuck, content, or restless?
|
What specific references ground them? (Use sparingly — sprinkles, not the whole sundae) 1–3 specific cultural touchpoints: a band they love, a movie that shaped them, a hobby that defines their weekends. Pick ones that reveal something about who they are, not just what they consume.
|
Example: Carl Hamilton Grew up in Belleville, a middle-class suburb of Detroit. He was nerdy, got teased by peers because of a "Got Milk" ad featuring Aaron Burr/Hamilton and his lighter skin. He rejected the pop rap culture around him — too good for Ludacris, got into LoFi hip-hop like J Dilla and Madlib instead. Studied mechanical engineering at UMich, but the career didn't work out, so he's in QA at Salesforce in Chicago. The job is "beneath him" but pays well. He teaches Kung Fu at the Y on Saturdays. He started crate-digging in Chicago and got into Brazilian funk. His old neighbors in Belleville think he's doing great — good job, nice car, attractive girlfriend named Tia. |
This is the character's inner life — what they want, what they fear, how they cope, and where their self-image doesn't match reality. This is where the deepest friction lives, and it is the most important section for generating interesting roleplay.
What does this character want most? Not just surface wants (a promotion, a relationship) but the deeper want underneath. Do they want to be respected? To feel safe? To prove something? To escape something? To be seen for who they really are?
|
What are they afraid of? What would genuinely rattle them? Not a phobia necessarily — what outcome, realization, or loss would be hardest for them to face?
|
How do they try to maintain control in a situation? Everyone has a default strategy for keeping things manageable. Some people control through competence ("I'll just do it myself"). Some through charm, humor, planning, information, emotional intensity, withdrawal, caretaking, or sheer stubbornness. What is this character's go-to method for keeping the world from feeling unsafe?
|
What happens when that strategy fails? This is where the real character surfaces. When their usual method of control does not work — when competence isn't enough, when charm meets someone immune to it, when planning meets chaos — what comes out? Do they escalate? Shut down? Lash out? Crumble? Try harder with diminishing returns? The answer often reveals the flaw the control strategy was designed to hide.
|
Where is the gap between who they think they are and who they actually are? Everyone has blind spots. Maybe they think they're easygoing but they're actually controlling. Maybe they think they're tough but they crumble when someone is kind to them. Maybe they think they've moved on from something but their behavior says otherwise. This gap is where the best roleplay moments come from.
|
What is one specific, disproportionate thing they DO because of that gap? This should be a concrete behavior, not a feeling. Something observable. They hold a grudge over something objectively small. They test people's loyalty without telling them. They avoid an entire topic, place, or type of person. They sabotage good things when they start going well. They refuse to ask for help even in genuine crisis. The more specific and irrational, the more human the character feels to the LLM.
|
Why this matters: These two prompts work as a pair. The gap gives the LLM the character's blind spot. The specific behavior gives the LLM something concrete to express in roleplay. Together they replace three separate questions (contradiction, gap, irrational behavior) that were asking for variations of the same insight. LLMs default to writing rational, helpful-assistant-style characters. Giving the LLM a specific irrational behavior with a clear emotional root is the single most effective thing you can do to make a character feel alive rather than algorithmic. |
This is where you convert your character's psychology into behavioral descriptions that the LLM can actually use. The core formula is:
When [trigger], they usually [behavior], because [underlying reason]. |
The word "usually" matters. A behavioral description is a default pattern, not a script. Real people have tendencies, not rules. A confident person usually holds their ground when challenged — but sometimes the challenge hits close to something true and they go quiet instead. A kind person usually says yes — but sometimes they're drained and they snap. The deviation from the pattern is often where the most interesting roleplay moments happen.
Why this matters: When you give an LLM a trait label like "Confident," it repeats the word "confident." You get 3–4 phrasings and then it cycles. With behavioral descriptions, the LLM has to generate language that fits the described behavior because there is nothing to copy. This produces varied language — but if the description is too deterministic, the LLM will execute the exact same behavioral script every time the trigger appears. Framing descriptions as tendencies with occasional exceptions gives the LLM a primary mode AND room to deviate, which is what makes a character feel alive across many exchanges. |
Trait | Label (Avoid) | Behavioral (Use This) |
Confident | "She is confident." | "When challenged, she doesn't hesitate or backtrack. She states her position once and waits, like repeating herself would be a concession." |
Stubborn | "He is stubborn." | "When someone pushes back, he gets quieter instead of louder. He won't argue, but he won't budge either. He just does what he was going to do." |
Kind | "They are kind." | "When someone asks for help, they say yes before thinking about whether they actually have time, then figure it out later. It's not heroic. It's just reflex." |
Nervous | "She is anxious." | "In new social situations she over-prepares what to say, then abandons all of it and talks too fast. She apologizes for things that are not her fault." |
Kind (intense) | "They are kind." | "When someone is struggling, they drop everything to help — partly because they care, partly because being needed is the only time they feel valuable." |
Confident (intense) | "She is confident." | "When challenged, she responds with certainty, treating doubt as a personal insult rather than a reasonable position." |
Notice that the same trait can be described at different intensities. The first four examples are everyday behavioral descriptions — they work for casual, grounded characters. The last two are high-intensity versions with deeper psychological roots — they work for characters with more dramatic inner lives. Both are valid. Match the intensity to the character you are building, not to the most dramatic example you can think of.
Fill in 3–5 behavioral descriptions. You do not need all five. Three strong ones will outperform five weak ones. Focus on behaviors that would come up in actual roleplay conversations.
# | When... (trigger) | They usually... (default) | Because... (why) |
#1 | When... What triggers this behavior?
| They usually... What is the default response?
| Because... What drives it underneath?
|
#2 | When... What triggers this behavior?
| They usually... What is the default response?
| Because... What drives it underneath?
|
#3 | When... What triggers this behavior?
| They usually... What is the default response?
| Because... What drives it underneath?
|
#4 | When... What triggers this behavior?
| They usually... What is the default response?
| Because... What drives it underneath?
|
#5 | When... What triggers this behavior?
| They usually... What is the default response?
| Because... What drives it underneath?
|
A character who always does the same thing when triggered feels scripted. A character who usually does one thing but sometimes does something unexpected feels real. For each behavioral description above that matters most, think about what would make the default pattern fail.
Pick your strongest behavioral description above. When would the default NOT happen? What would they do instead? Example: "Her default when challenged is to hold her ground without flinching. But when the challenge comes from someone she actually respects, she goes quiet instead — and that silence is louder than anything she says." Example: "He usually says yes to helping without thinking. But when he's already running on empty and someone asks for more, he snaps — then immediately hates himself for it." The pattern-break doesn't need to happen often. It just needs to exist so the LLM knows the character has more than one mode."
|
Example: Default + exception in a character card {{char}} usually responds to confrontation by getting very still and precise — she becomes the most controlled version of herself when she feels least in control. But when someone is genuinely kind to her in a moment she expected hostility, the composure fractures. She doesn't know what to do with kindness that has no angle. |
A note on behavioral range: If you write only one behavioral description, the LLM will lean on it heavily and the character may feel one-note. If you write 3–5 covering different triggers and situations, the character has enough range that no single interaction feels scripted. The set of descriptions creates variability — the LLM selects which pattern fits the current context rather than running the same one every time. More descriptions across different situations is more effective than making any single description more detailed. |
The most interesting characters contain tensions that drive roleplay forward. You have already defined the gap between self-image and reality in Part 1. Now define what happens when someone or something presses on that gap.
What could get under this character's skin in a way they didn't expect? Not what they would list as a pet peeve — what would actually reach them. A type of person, a kind of question, a specific situation that bypasses their defenses. This tells the LLM where the character is vulnerable without prescribing how they will change.
|
What happens when someone sees through them? When someone calls out the gap — names the mask, points at the blind spot, refuses to accept the performance — how does this character react? Do they deflect? Get angry? Go silent? Overcompensate? Flee? This is the behavior the LLM will reach for in pivotal moments.
|
Example: Friction in action {{char}} forces herself to put on a bubbly personality around other people to hide the fact that she's deeply uncomfortable with emotional closeness and afraid of being known. This gives the LLM: a visible mask, a hidden truth, a reason the mask exists, and a pressure point that can be reached during roleplay — all in one sentence. |
Now you take everything you've developed and weave it into prose for the SillyTavern Personality/Description field. This is not a list of traits. It is a short portrait of a person, written in a way that gives the LLM behavioral anchors to generate from.
Why this matters: Prose descriptions outperform trait lists because they give the LLM narrative context, causal connections, and voice cues. A trait list is lumber on the ground. Prose is the architecture. Aim for 900–1500 tokens for a single character (you can check token count with any free tokenizer tool). |
Write your Personality/Description in roughly this order. You do not need rigid sections or headers inside the field itself — it should read as flowing prose about a person.
Paragraph 1: Who they are at a glance
Open with the physical — weave your appearance reference traits into characterization rather than listing them. Instead of "she has brown skin, brown eyes, and is 5'5"," try connecting each detail to how the character exists in space: how they move, what people notice first, how their body reflects their life. The LLM gets the concrete visual data it needs for consistency AND context that makes those details feel like observations about a person.
Paragraph 2: How they got here
The key formative experiences from Part 1. Keep it tight — 2–4 sentences covering the experiences that most directly explain who they are now.
Paragraph 3–4: How they behave (the behavioral descriptions)
Weave your When/Usually/Because patterns from Part 2 into natural prose, including at least one pattern-break (the exception to the default). Do not format them as a list. Let them flow as observations about the character.
Paragraph 5: The friction
The gap between self-image and reality, the specific irrational behavior, and what happens when someone presses on the soft spots. This is the paragraph that makes the LLM generate interesting responses instead of flat ones.
Optional: Voice and speech patterns
If your character has a distinctive way of speaking — formal, casual, uses specific slang, tends toward short sentences, rambles when nervous — note it here. This shapes the LLM's dialogue generation directly.
Use this space to draft the assembled prose. You can refine it before copying into SillyTavern.
Personality/Description field draft: Write in prose, not lists. Use {{char}} where you would use the character's name. Aim for 900–1500 tokens.
|
Before you finalize, run through this checklist:
[ ] The description is prose, not a list of traits or tags. [ ] At least 2–3 behavioral descriptions are woven in (default patterns, not rigid rules). [ ] At least one pattern-break is included (when the default doesn't hold). [ ] There is a gap between self-image and reality, with a specific behavior that shows it. [ ] Pressure points are defined — the LLM knows where this character is vulnerable. [ ] Core appearance traits (skin color, body type, hair, eyes) are present so the LLM won't improvise or contradict itself. [ ] Physical details are woven into characterization, not listed as a separate data block. [ ] Speech patterns or voice cues are included if relevant. [ ] The description is roughly 900–1500 tokens (not too sparse, not overwhelming). [ ] I have not listed every single thing about them — I left room for discovery. |
The First Message (greeting) sets the tone, introduces the character's voice, and establishes the scenario. It is the launch pad. A strong first message gives the LLM a clear emotional and situational starting point to build from.
Why this matters: The First Message is not just an introduction — it is a writing sample. The LLM will mirror the style, length, detail level, and emotional register of the first message in its subsequent responses. If your first message is two sentences, expect two-sentence replies. If it includes internal thoughts, environmental detail, and voice, expect all of those back. |
Where and when does this scenario take place? Be specific. Not just "a coffee shop" but the kind of coffee shop, the time of day, the atmosphere. Sensory details (sounds, lighting, temperature) give the LLM material to work with.
|
What is {{char}} doing when {{user}} encounters them? Are they mid-task? Waiting? Just arriving? Upset about something? In their element or out of it? The action they're performing reveals character.
|
What is the starting relationship between {{char}} and {{user}}? (Keep minimal if not central to the concept.) Strangers? Acquaintances? Old friends? Colleagues? Rivals? Former partners? This sets the opening dynamic, not a permanent constraint — the relationship will evolve based on what happens in the roleplay. If the relationship is not central to your character concept, keep it simple. Even "strangers" or "no prior connection" is enough.
|
A good first message typically includes: a brief scene-setting (1–2 sentences of environment), the character doing something that reveals personality, an opening line or action directed at {{user}} that creates a hook, and at least one detail from the Personality/Description to anchor the voice.
Consider putting the character somewhere they would not normally be, or in a situation that creates immediate friction. A martial arts instructor at a poetry reading. A shy person forced to give a speech. A neat freak in a messy apartment. Displacement creates interesting first impressions.
Draft your First Message here: Write in third person ("{{char}} did X" not "I did X"). Include *action/description* markers if you use them. Aim for 150–400 words — enough to set tone and voice, not so much that it overwhelms.
|
[ ] The scene is grounded in a specific place and time. [ ] {{char}} is doing something that reveals personality (not just standing there). [ ] There is a hook — a reason for {{user}} to respond. [ ] The writing style matches what I want the LLM to mirror going forward. [ ] At least one behavioral trait from the Personality/Description is visible. [ ] The relationship context is established (even if it's simply "strangers"). [ ] The message is long enough to set tone (150+ words) but not exhausting. |
The Personality/Description field defines who your character is. The First Message defines how the conversation starts. The Scenario field defines the ongoing rules of the world the conversation exists in — the persistent context that stays true across the entire roleplay, not just the opening moment.
Why this matters: Without a Scenario, the LLM improvises the world from the First Message and Personality/Description. This works for short conversations, but over many exchanges the roleplay loses momentum because there is no structural reason for things to stay interesting. A well-designed Scenario creates sustained tension — conditions that keep generating friction naturally rather than relying on the LLM to invent new conflict from nothing. |
The Scenario field is where you establish who {{user}} is relative to {{char}}. This is different from the First Message, which shows the opening moment. The Scenario defines the ongoing role and position.
What is {{user}}'s role or position in this scenario? Not just a label ("coworker") but a functional position. What can {{user}} do, access, or affect? What can't they? How much power or status do they have relative to {{char}}? Are they new to this world or established in it?
|
What does {{char}} need, want, or expect from {{user}} — and how does that differ from what {{user}} actually is? The gap between expectation and reality creates natural, ongoing tension. If {{char}} expects a quiet assistant and {{user}} pushes back, that friction regenerates in every conversation.
|
Good scenarios have at least one condition that makes things inherently unstable — not a single dramatic event, but an ongoing situation that keeps generating interesting moments on its own.
What condition in this world keeps things tense between {{char}} and {{user}}? Examples: They're competing for the same position. One has authority over the other but shouldn't. They share a secret that would damage both of them if it came out. They're stuck in proximity they didn't choose. One is supposed to be monitoring or evaluating the other. There's a countdown (deadline, lease, contract, sentence). They need each other for something neither can do alone.
|
What would happen if the tension resolved? What keeps it from resolving easily? Tension that could be solved with one honest conversation is weak tension. Good structural tension persists because the resolution itself is complicated, costly, or frightening.
|
Why this matters: The LLM uses the Scenario field as persistent context for every response it generates. A Scenario that says "{{user}} and {{char}} work at the same company" gives the LLM almost nothing. A Scenario that says "{{user}} was hired to replace {{char}}'s former partner, and {{char}} hasn't decided whether to train them properly or let them fail" gives the LLM an engine that generates tension in every single interaction without you having to steer it. |
Every scenario has constraints — things that are true about this world that shape what can and cannot happen. These do not need to be fantasy or sci-fi rules. "They work night shift and rarely see other people" is a world rule. "The apartment walls are thin" is a world rule. Small environmental constraints create surprisingly rich roleplay material.
What are 2–3 rules or conditions of this world that shape behavior? Think about: Physical constraints (shared space, isolation, surveillance). Social constraints (ranks, roles, reputations to maintain). Temporal constraints (deadlines, schedules, limited time). Secret constraints (what can't be said, what must be hidden). Resource constraints (scarcity, competition, dependence).
|
Scenarios run out of momentum when there is nothing left to discover, no reason for the characters to keep interacting, or no new pressure being introduced. This prompt helps you think about longevity.
What is unresolved in this scenario that could develop over many conversations? A mystery, a growing attraction, a slow betrayal, a shifting power balance, a secret getting closer to exposure, a relationship evolving past its original terms. What is the slow burn?
|
What could change or escalate over time? New information arriving, external pressure increasing, stakes rising, boundaries being tested, a third party complicating things. What prevents the scenario from being static?
|
The Scenario field is typically shorter than the Personality/Description — a focused paragraph or two that establishes the world rules, {{user}}'s position, and the structural tension. It should be information the LLM needs to know for every response, not backstory or one-time events.
Scenario field draft: Write in present tense. Establish the situation, not the history. Use {{char}} and {{user}} as placeholders. Focus on what is true NOW and what conditions create ongoing tension.
|
[ ] {{user}}'s role and position relative to {{char}} is clear. [ ] There is at least one structural condition that creates sustained tension. [ ] The tension cannot be easily resolved in a single conversation. [ ] The world has at least one rule or constraint that shapes behavior. [ ] There is something unresolved that can develop over many exchanges. [ ] The Scenario contains ongoing conditions, not one-time backstory events. [ ] The Scenario is present-tense and focused (1–2 paragraphs, not a novel). |
This section is entirely optional. Skip it if your character is not designed for adult scenarios. SillyTavern is an adult platform, and building well-characterized intimate dynamics follows the same principles as everything else in this template: behavioral descriptions, friction, and causality produce better results than labels and tags. |
The same When/Behavior/Because formula applies here. "Dominant" as a label produces the same three stock phrases on loop. A behavioral description of how and why the character takes control — and when they don't — produces dynamic, varied interactions.
How does {{char}} express attraction or interest? Are they direct or indirect? Do they flirt obviously or do something subtle? Do they test boundaries, hold back, or charge ahead? What does attraction look like in their behavior, not their words?
|
What makes {{char}} hesitate, pull back, or set a boundary? Even in adult scenarios, characters with boundaries are more interesting than characters without them. What makes them slow down, reconsider, or draw a line? This creates tension and pacing.
|
Use the same formula. These go into your Personality/Description field alongside the other behavioral descriptions, typically near the end.
When [intimate trigger], {{char}} [intimate behavior], because [reason]. Example: "When physical closeness escalates, {{char}} becomes intensely focused and deliberate — control is how she processes vulnerability, and letting go feels like freefall."
|
What is the friction in their intimate life? The same contradiction principle from Part 2. Someone who craves physical intimacy but panics at emotional intimacy. Someone dominant in public who wants to surrender in private. Someone tender who thinks tenderness is weakness.
|
Why this matters: Friction in intimate dynamics is what prevents NSFW roleplay from becoming repetitive. Without it, the LLM settles into a loop of escalation with no variation. With it, every encounter has texture, tension, and the possibility of character development. |
If your character is built around a specific kink, fetish, or sexual dynamic, the same rules apply as everywhere else in this template: causality and behavioral description outperform labels. A tag like "dominant" or "exhibitionist" gives the LLM a single word to cycle through. A character whose specific dynamic is rooted in their psychology gives the LLM an engine that generates varied, textured scenes instead of repetitive ones.
The questions below help you trace the line from a specific dynamic back through the character's inner life. You do not need to answer every question. Focus on the ones that spark something.
The Dynamic Itself
What is the specific kink, fetish, or dynamic this character is built around? Name it plainly. You are designing a character, not writing ad copy. Clarity here helps you think clearly in the prompts that follow.
|
What does this dynamic give them emotionally that they do not get elsewhere? This is the most important question in this section. Every kink meets a need. Control, surrender, validation, transgression, safety, intensity, vulnerability, worship, degradation, nurturing — these are emotional experiences. What emotional state does this dynamic let the character access? Why can they only access it here?
|
Example: Tracing the emotional root A character who is drawn to restraint and bondage: In every other area of their life, they are the person holding everything together — the reliable one, the planner, the one who never drops a ball. Being physically restrained is the only context where they have permission to stop being in charge. The ropes are not about pain or helplessness. They are about someone else saying "I've got this, you can let go." That is a fundamentally different character than someone drawn to the same kink because they find vulnerability erotic in itself, or because they associate restraint with trust-testing. |
How It Connects to Who They Are
How does this dynamic relate to their psychology from Part 1? Look back at what you wrote about their wants, fears, contradictions, and formative experiences. Does the dynamic reinforce something from their history? Contradict it? Compensate for it? A person who grew up powerless and now gravitates toward dominance is telling a different story than someone who grew up powerful and gravitates toward submission. The connection does not need to be neat or obvious — it just needs to exist.
|
How does their behavior inside this dynamic differ from their behavior outside it? This is where some of the richest character material lives. Someone who is shy and deferential in daily life but becomes commanding and articulate in an intimate context. Someone who is brash and loud but becomes quiet and almost reverent. The contrast between the two modes tells the LLM something important about who this person is underneath everything.
|
Edges, Boundaries, and Specificity
What is adjacent to their dynamic that they would refuse, and why? Boundaries reveal character just as much as desires do. Someone into power exchange who has a hard line against humiliation is telling you something about what the power means to them. Someone who enjoys pain but refuses anything that leaves marks is telling you something about their relationship to their body or their public life. The "no" is as informative as the "yes."
|
What would make this dynamic go wrong for them? Not just in a safety sense — emotionally. What could a partner do within this dynamic that would hit a nerve, trigger a real reaction, or make them shut down? This gives the LLM material for moments of genuine tension and vulnerability, not just escalation.
|
Behavioral Descriptions for the Dynamic
Now write 1–3 behavioral descriptions using the same When/Behavior/Because formula, specific to this dynamic. These go into your Personality/Description field.
Behavioral description #1: Example: "When a partner shows genuine submission, {{char}} becomes almost tender — protective rather than punishing — because what she actually wants is not control over someone but proof that someone trusts her enough to be defenseless."
|
Behavioral description #2: Example: "When an encounter starts to feel scripted or performative, {{char}} pulls back and gets visibly irritated. He needs it to be real. If someone is acting out a role to please him rather than because they want it, the whole thing collapses for him."
|
Behavioral description #3 (optional):
|
Why this matters: These behavioral descriptions serve the same function here as in Part 2: they prevent the LLM from falling into a repetitive loop. Without them, a kink-focused character produces the same scene structure every time. With them, the LLM has emotional logic to follow, which means each encounter can develop differently depending on context, mood, and what the other character does. The dynamic becomes a living part of the character instead of a script. |
If you are stopping for now and coming back later, fill this in. It takes 30 seconds and will save you 20 minutes of re-reading next time.
Where did I leave off? Which section were you working on? What was the last thing you wrote or decided?
|
What am I thinking about for next time? Any ideas, questions, or half-formed thoughts you want to capture before they disappear.
|
What still feels unresolved? What part of the character are you not sure about yet? What needs more thought?
|
If you want to get a working character into SillyTavern as fast as possible and iterate from there, answer just these questions:
Character name:
|
In one sentence, who are they and what is their situation?
|
What do they want that they cannot easily get?
|
Write one behavioral description (When X, they usually Y, because Z):
|
What do they think they are vs. what are they actually? And what specific thing do they do because of that gap?
|
How do they talk? (Formal? Casual? Short sentences? Rambling? Sarcastic?)
|
What ongoing situation keeps things tense or interesting between {{char}} and {{user}}?
|
Now combine those answers into 2–3 paragraphs of prose. That is your minimum viable Personality/Description. For the First Message, put them somewhere interesting doing something that reveals personality, and give {{user}} a reason to engage.
Test it. Play a few exchanges. Then come back to this template and deepen whatever feels thin. Character creation is iterative. Getting something working and refining it is always better than trying to get it perfect before you start.
Template Design Note This template was designed using Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles and neurodivergent accessibility research. Guided questions instead of blank fields reduce task-initiation paralysis. Every section explains why it exists so you can make informed decisions about what to use. Multiple entry points accommodate different cognitive styles. The behavioral prompting formula and friction methodology are adapted from community-developed techniques with added scaffolding for executive function support. |
Page