What sort of character he was? Any concept behind or anything distinctive about him?It's interesting that you're mentioned Tremere, as the first campaign with the character I've mentioned included the Tremere who had been forced to get rogue due to an accidental sight of what he wasn't supposed to see, which ensured an extra attention from the Pyramid to the party and some poisonous interaction.
I think I'm following where you coming from... D&D, Forgotten Realms, right? While I've found its morality system that connected to the cosmology fascinating, myself prefer to leave these matters aside and think about the fitting alignment (light/darkness, order/chaos) after the fact even if absolutely required. Just about any well-writen character (from any setting), even deliberately amoral, could be easily classified according to this system. If not, it usually means the writer is cheating on readers.
Should add that your take on Malkavians sounds appealing, myself prefer what's called "Dominate Makavians" (save for Dementation instead of Domination) in rulebooks as canonical, i.e. disturbed people who are forced to consider their quirks a part of their personality instead of 4chan unleashed IRL (their attempt in increasing the sales among the certain audience). No "great prank", no "madness network", no rules but only one. The fate of Malkav remains unknown, though it's speculated that he had become the universe itself for a moment, and so his childer had inherited a taste of omniscience through the blood.See nothing wrong with funny lunatics though (no rules, remember?) if done well enough and appropriate for the game.
Myself too. Not that I consider another approach wrong, officially both (starting with alignment / choosing appropriate one afterwards) are correct, according to D&D 3.5 Core Rulebook at least. I don't think there are right and wrong ways of character creation (and writing in general sense).Probably, I just don't know how to use it in proper, but the blue lightsaber refuses to obey me so I still about to play a character that could could be described as "good" or even "without evil leanings". The first paladin that I had tried to create had turned into a blackguard during concept development stage, I think that gives an impression.The concept from topic is, perhaps, is the tamest of my roster, still could be considered evil from the point of view of what is considered morals, but not malevolent by himself.Should add that your take on Malkavians sounds appealing, myself prefer what's called "Dominate Makavians" (save for Dementation instead of Domination) in rulebooks as canonical, i.e. disturbed people who are forced to consider their quirks a part of their personality instead of 4chan unleashed IRL (their attempt in increasing the sales among the certain audience). No "great prank", no "madness network", no rules but only one. The fate of Malkav remains unknown, though it's speculated that he had become the universe itself for a moment, and so his childer had inherited a taste of omniscience through the blood.See nothing wrong with funny lunatics though (no rules, remember?) if done well enough and appropriate for the game.Regarding Hanna herself, I wonder if Emilie Autumn happens to be her prototype/inspiration IRL, a quietly disturbed musician who happens to hear what's not here occasinally and does not use alleged medical help (has a sense of self-preservation, speaking openly). As of her first name, my guess it's a reference to Hannah house.
Never heard of her, which is not surprising as I'm a layman in anything but select areas beyond pop (in broad sense). Thought of EA when you've mentioned a violinist for the reason of her being bitten by the loony toons batshit crazy bug thanks to Bloodlines, no less. She played it a bit too much.As for the different sort, it will fit group playstyle easily if such a character is interested in anything but proving everyone how empty they are. Nor it takes to be crazy to treat the life as an illusion, for that matter.