Sometimes. Although thinking has often gotten me into trouble in my past.
But seriously, a character I create in a party RPG always reflects my basic personality. I mean, I'm not a fighter, a ranger, or a wizard in real life; but the actions I take and the choices I make almost always reflect my personality.
There are variables of course, depending upon the party-based RPG. Take the Mass Effect
games. I'm always Commander Sheppard of course, but I'm also always male, a soldier, and follow a Paragon life path. It's just who I am and how I would react (plus I love sexy, blue-skinned aliens).
In the Dragon Age
games I'm usually a human, though occasionally an elf, with the same caring personality as in the Mass Effect
games. Profession-wise I'm still usually a fighter, although sometimes I'll take the rogue just for the skill sets. It was the same in BG1 & 2
as well as the Pillars of Eternity
games, but in those games I usually took a ranger or archer build, even though my personality and conversation choices were on the compassionate side.
Then there are those party-based RPGs that have no central character, like the Icewindale
games and Solasta
that I'm currently playing. Professions vary a great deal, but the first character I create is "me". Fighter, Ranger, or Rogue (or a variation of those) are always my choices for skill sets. Personality traits aren't as relevant in those games (although they can make a big difference in Solasta), but I still roleplay as a "good guy" even if playing a rogue. I've never been one to play as a spellcaster.
but I always loosely think of myself as the main char, and roleplay as 'chaotic good' if possible.
This exactly for me, and if we're talking D&D games, I'm always Chaotic Good if given a choice (which basically reflects any decisions I make).
Always try and make the party balanced with a little of everything, but I need a security blanket of two melee characters, even if that has to be a hybrid Cleric or something in a party of four. Weird how rote it is now I think of it.
This is me exactly, and I don't really like it, tbh. I wish the standard party size hadn't become 4 characters.
Is it standard now in games apart from Larian ones? Guess I havent played an isometric RPG apart from Divinity OS or a BG type in a long time. 6 has been standard in all the Infinity Engine clones, I think also Pathfinder.
But yes, 6 is nice when you're able to have a couple of fighters couple of ranged/healers then a DPS mage and a buffer/debuffer.
I really miss not being able to create a party of 6 characters, it was much easier to have specialized characters, whereas now with a party of 4 you almost have to hybridize at least a couple of them. I'm sure it must be a combat balance thing. Divinity OS 2, Solasta, and BG3 have gone to the 4 person party and it works well (although I've yet to play the EA version of BG3), but it's also kind of limiting on who you create.