Is this a problem?
Only if you think so. I suppose other players might get a little bored of it, but that deserves at most an eyeroll and nothing more—it really isn’t any of their business what you’re playing so long as it’s not disruptive. If it was OK once, it’s OK a hundred times.
(Unless you stick to a given concept in a new campaign with a different setting where that concept doesn’t work—yours is fairly unlikely to run into that, at least in any campaign I’d care to join, but other concepts easily could.)
Otherwise, though, if you’re happy to be playing a similar character, then everything’s good! It’s a game, it’s played for fun—you should do what you consider the most fun. If this is still what’s most fun for you, then everything’s great.
If, on the other hand, you wanted to try something different, and meant to go in a different direction, but somehow converged on a similar concept nonetheless, and that is a problem for you, then you might consider it a “problem.” That’s wholly up to you and your judgment and preference.
How do you fix it?
If, per the above, you consider this a problem, the question becomes, how do you avoid falling into the same trap?
Observation: Your description of the similar characters is not that narrow
What you’ve told us about your characters doesn’t necessarily tell us all that much about them—those descriptions could very easily apply to a whole lot of otherwise very different people.
So one thing you could very easily consider is that perhaps, your characters are more different than you realize, or, if they’re not, maybe the real issue is that you haven’t fleshed them out enough, that they’re “just” grumpy gay sluts with anger management issues. By focusing—even if it’s just in your own headcanon, not every campaign is going to devote a lot of time to individual characters’ character development—on what else is going on with them, you may find them to be rather different.
Or if not, maybe you can decide on new characters to split the difference, keep the traits you keep coming back to, but then also devote some thought to what more they have to them. There are lots and lots of pieces to people’s identity; sexuality and emotional tendencies are just two. (Important two, but still.)
Observation: Your characters aren’t that mechanically dissimilar
Elves and half-elves are, kinda obviously, related, and though they can be quite different, they don’t have to be. Likewise, the bard class’s historical origins in D&D are very much “rogue with magic,” so an arcane trickster is pretty similar. Bard and sorcerer have considerable overlap, too, being Charisma-based non-preparing arcane spellcasters. To be clear, you certainly could differentiate these characters, but it’s also pretty easy for them to be pretty similar.
So greater mechanical diversity might push you in new directions. Barbarian, maybe not, considering anger issues are already a theme, but any of the other classes might prompt new behavior.
On the other hand, maybe they wouldn’t—after all, anyone can be angry, or gay, or slutty, as discussed above. The mechanical differences will only help if you lean into them—maybe a cleric is very chaste, or a monk is very zen and chill, or whatever. The cleric class doesn’t mandate chastity (some faiths even disdain it), the monk class doesn’t mandate calmness (though the descriptions tend to suggest strongly), but you can choose to emphasize those things as part of how what being a cleric or monk means to them. Maybe a wizard who is so socially-inept that he wouldn’t know how to flirt if you held a gun to his head, and wouldn’t recognize someone flirting with him if they held up a neon sign. Wizards don’t have to be that hopeless, but if you lean into that particular conception of what it means to be a wizard, then it might help lean away from repeating a similar character.
Real solution: Just make choices consciously
Ultimately, the real answer is, and must be, simply “decide to react differently,” as one excellent article on roleplaying put it (in an entirely different context addressing an entirely separate problem). If you’re aware that you tend to go in one particular direction on characterization, and you want to do something different, just... consciously choose to do something different. Maybe the Wild Magic makes a sorcerer afraid of intimacy, of hurting someone with magic they have limited control over. Maybe the bard is a hippy and has trained themselves to just be accepting of everything. (Or maybe he’s actually just stoned, even.) And so on. And only as much as you actually want to—again, this is only a problem insofar as you’d like to do something else.
Best Answer
Yes, I have encountered this as both a player and GM.
All of your solutions CAN work, but are dependant on the group's reactions and way of doing things. Some groups are technical and a bit meta-gamish--which while I don't personally love meta-gaming, sometimes it's fun for people, and they like the mechanic aspect--as long as everyone KNOWS what you mean when you say Fear Aura DC 15.
That being said, I like to do a combo platter of your solutions. I describe the feeling, THEN have them roll--even if they do meet the DC when I have them roll, I give them a taste of it, and then use the outcome of the roll to PRESCRIBE what they must do. If they complain, I then explain the mechanic.
Here's what it looks like:
GM: "Your heart pounds, mouth going dry, with a feeling of terrible dread. Every nightmare you have ever had seems to have a source, and it's standing there. Roll for fear effect."
::PLAYER: They Roll, even if it's near to hopeless::
GM:"There's no hope, no saving anyone, no way to fight the horror before you, and you find yourself running with all your speed down the passageway!"
Player: "But my guy is a fearless adventurer who would NEVER flee!"
GM: "You did have the chance to roll for it and failed the roll--it's a supernatural fear effect. You run in a very manly fashion though. The effect lasts for 6 rounds. Here's a six sided die, you can use it to keep track of how long you flee.
Other ways I have dealt with this for added flavor is this:
GM: "You have a choice as to how to react to the fear--flee, befriend, or freeze/hide. Befriend means that you throw your weapon away as far as you can and beg for your life, flee means you keep your weapon and run away, and hide/freeze means that you find a place to hide (your pants will need laundering later)."
And, if they miss the roll by 1 or 2, I do give them SOMETHING--
GM: You start to swallow your fear, push it down deep, but just as you try to, the fear seeps in like floodwater under a door, and suddenly, like a flood, it sweeps you away, and you find yourself running down the corridor, away, away from the horrible tide of it."
If I know something about things the character has been uncomfortable with, or afraid of, I throw that in.
With a group committed to roleplay, the flavor is going to be different than with a more hacky-slash group.
Other things that have helped have been pre-game meetings. If there are certain effects that you know could be at issue, you can also talk to the players about fear reactions their characters might have. I will tell them parameters of certain mechanical effects (like they are not allowed to fight effectively or hold a weapon, as part of the effect) and perhaps ask how they would react within the parameters, then use that to inform their reaction--or at the very least set up an expectation, so that within the game, you get seamless roleplay. You can do that really, with all major effects
Sometimes I have even done, of all things, a questionnaire, asking them what kind of person their character responds to most positively for things like charm effects, what they fear for fear effects. With those in hand, before we even start gameplay, I can personalize the effects in my description, so it's tailormade for them.
I do the questionare outside of play. Not within, because that interrupts the flow of things. So with fear, I ask about the person's greatest fears, animals they fear, things that make them uncomfortable...so the flood imagery, I used that for a character whose backstory involved their village being drowned.
With charm, I 've asked, "What makes a person trustworthy in your eyes? Describe people you grew up with and loved--as friends, brothers, sisters, caretakers, lovers..." So if they grew up in a rural area and that's their backstory, I say something along the lines of "Though he's dressed as a merchant, he's got the manner of a country farmer, salt of the earth, like the people back home. There's not many that are honest in these parts, but you know that's he's one who is."
Rage is harder, but I start with "Describe a time when you felt helpless." This one can help with rage or fear. "What makes you angry?" Is more direct. If they answer that their character is a peaceful and has never felt really angry...well--that's an opportunity, actually "You've never felt this way before, red washes over your vision and a clarity of feeling remains, to rend and destroy. It overwhelms you..." In fact, for a mild mannered fellow effects can be even worse BECAUSE they have no experience of rage. The after effects roleplayed well can also be interesting.
And I make it written beforehand. It's only afterwards that I inform them that it will used for effects, and if they say they would not react that way, while the game is going on, I say "everyone has fears/people they instantly trust/a capacity for rage, especially when magic/Eldritch horrors/pheromones are involved. I've personalized it using your backstory and answers. Even a hard bitten loner has buttons." And in game I also let them know about the status effect, so they can roll with it, with the added flavor.
Besides the questionnaire and/or talking to the players directly out of game I also pay attention to the ways in which characters react to things and take notes. So even if they don't write it down, if the character is a lothario and responds well to pretty women in game, I use that for charm. If they are uptight and upright, I use that as well, describing people in a way that is a mirror to their own behavior. If they freak out over something in game, that goes into the fear bank. If they get angry, same deal. I note their reactions and use that as basis. All three of these ways are a way to use player input to inform the mechanics of an effect, which help them to feel like they are part of shaping the story. I will be stealing DrBob's post-it notes of ultimate truth though!! Great answer there!