bad ways to write characters
Feb. 10th, 2006 11:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccaelizabethRamblings on character types, development, and mistakes in writing, below the cut
someone posted something about MarySues, and how the 'too perfect' part on a guy gets called 'hero'.
That isn't what I mean by MarySue at all.
Jonathan in Superstar is a MarySue. Not because he's so perfect at stuff - Riley would be a Sue then (and I don't reckon he is)(except when he and SueWife comes back out of nowhere, but he was for a different purpose then). He's a MarySue because he *eats the other characters*. He isn't just a super skilled demon fighter (like Buffy, Giles, Angel, Spike etc), he is a super skilled demon fighter who rescues Buffy who *suddenly isn't skilled*. MarySues are bad because they eat the other characters.
It is also common for other characters to react to a Sue in the most convenient, rather than most plausible, way. That includes instantly taking a liking to them, but also instantly disliking them, or instantly agreeing with them, or instantly *whatevering* them. Because obviously the story isn't people reacting to the Sue, it is the perfection of the Sue herself.
MarySues don't 'just' turn up and be perfect, they be *more* perfect than everyone else, and they often do it in such a way everyone else looks bad. Dumb, morally wrong, whatever.
Theres a bunch of fics I've read where Xander gets a superpower and also becomes a Sue. Because the people around him are suddenly all about being less-cool-than-Xander, rather than getting on with being Buffy and Willow and all the rest.
A real hero isn't about showing the rest of the world they aren't heroes, or not as much. They're just someone doing a difficult job.
The main problem with a MarySue isn't the character themselves, its what they do to all the other characters in range.
There's also the overlapping problems that I can most easily write down in RPG terms - having one character there who's *way* higher level than everyone around them, or having a character (even a canon character) suddenly develop a skill that would have cost way more XP than they've had time to earn, or the basic 'levelling is not character growth' problem that happens in some long series.
Having one character be at a very high level / worth way more character points than everyone around them makes for very difficult gaming. If the difference is big enough then the stronger character is basically carting around dependents. That usually makes a TV show with a central character, not an ensemble show. Which, for me, is less fun. Though if the high level character has a narrow skill set then you can surround them with specialists who can contribute usefully ie the superstrong character with backup brains, specialised by category (book, computer, science and religion, whatever).
But if your over-powerful, over-priced character is an OC, whatever kind of show they walk into, they are going to twist it into being 'OC the mega hero! And a bunch of guys you've heard of.' Which, usually, not what fanfic readers are there for.
The sudden XP surge problem is usually merely irritating. Its spending the experience points without having had the experiences.
There's a balance between what you have to show of character growth and what you can easily imply.
Pouring more XP into existing skills, routine maintenance, no particular need to write about it. Though it is nice to keep track. 'Buffy knows some martial arts' gradually turning into 'Buffy is kick ass martial artist' is nice growth. But it isn't character development, so it isn't usually foreground stuff.
XP going into new specialisations, not usually that important. What counts as specialisations depends on how granular your game / story world is. If a guy knows one gun, can he pick up everything with a trigger and use it right? Yes? Then its all specialisation. Don't need to show them learning it. But if they suddenly demonstrate the same degree of skill with, say, a longbow, in most systems that needs some explaining.
If it is clearly a new skill - if Buffy has up until now only worked with hand to hand fighting but she needs to use a crossbow - that needs showing.
If its an entirely new skill set, say a barbarian warrior suddenly needing to use the computer, that needs a *lot* of explaining. Computer and sword aren't the same skill in any system I know.
I don't like RPGs with character classes so much, but its a useful thought sometimes - if the Warrior is going to do Mage stuff, that is a much bigger change than picking up a new weapon. So that needs more explaining. And probably needs a reason in terms of character development. Are they learning to do a thing, or be a different kind of person?
Changes are what need showing. Keeping on going only needs implying.
Sometimes canon makes a mess of that. The skill set thing on Stargate irritates me. Everyone in the air force can fly an alien spaceship, apparently. Science only comes in two varieties, Medicine and Everything Else. Its annoying. But they've decided that plot is more important than game mechanics. Fair enough. Just not my favourite kind of game.
The sudden surge of XPs thing is just when you skip too much of the growth, or add a skill without mentioning it until the crucial plot moment.
There's also the subset of 'previously unmentioned professional level of musical talent'. I know a lot of RL people do music in their spare time. I know it can easily not come up in the course of saving the world a lot. But actually rather a lot of people aren't very good at music, can't sing, don't dance, and pretty much just listen. If that. Since musical skill does actually cost XP then finding a character that has bazillions of points in lots of areas essential to the plot just suddenly happens to have quite a lot of points over in this here skill that never has been or would be relevant but hey, pretty!... well, it irritates me.
The 'levelling is not character development' thing means, acquiring a new superpower isn't growing as a character. How you react to acquiring a new power, that's character growth. Is the difference between having a character sheet and roleplaying a character.
Also, shagging new people is not character development. Or, in the case of one series I gave up on, remotely interesting, because people want to see how existing relationships work out, not how many people the author can fit in a bed. Plus, sex with no actual relationship in is kind of... taking screen time away from character, plot, relationship, and the other things I actually like to read about. I mean if I want to read porn, it isn't hard to find.
okay, that all came out long and sort of obvious. And the main reason I'm writing is that my highlighter pen ran out so I can't go highlight school stuff. I should probably just go to bed.
There's a difference between adding a character to a group and writing about a character who happens to meet a group.
There's a very big difference between writing about the canon characters meeting a new person, or a new person meeting the canon characters, and writing about a new person who happens to be surrounded by canon characters, especially if they just so happen to be not quite as good as the new person.
Character development has to show us the changes, let the growth be plausible in terms of time and previously established characteristics, and establish things before they use them.
Reactions, relationships and plots have to grow out of the characters and affect the characters.
Superpowers, saving the world, meeting new people, none of it of itself is character growth. Reacting to it all is.
Of course, some people prefer stories that start with the plot and don't mind pushing the characters around to make the plot happen. Me, I dislike it a lot when I notice the only reason a character did a thing is the author just now decided they would. A good story to my mind is when character + situation = plot, all logically flowing from the setup.
someone posted something about MarySues, and how the 'too perfect' part on a guy gets called 'hero'.
That isn't what I mean by MarySue at all.
Jonathan in Superstar is a MarySue. Not because he's so perfect at stuff - Riley would be a Sue then (and I don't reckon he is)(except when he and SueWife comes back out of nowhere, but he was for a different purpose then). He's a MarySue because he *eats the other characters*. He isn't just a super skilled demon fighter (like Buffy, Giles, Angel, Spike etc), he is a super skilled demon fighter who rescues Buffy who *suddenly isn't skilled*. MarySues are bad because they eat the other characters.
It is also common for other characters to react to a Sue in the most convenient, rather than most plausible, way. That includes instantly taking a liking to them, but also instantly disliking them, or instantly agreeing with them, or instantly *whatevering* them. Because obviously the story isn't people reacting to the Sue, it is the perfection of the Sue herself.
MarySues don't 'just' turn up and be perfect, they be *more* perfect than everyone else, and they often do it in such a way everyone else looks bad. Dumb, morally wrong, whatever.
Theres a bunch of fics I've read where Xander gets a superpower and also becomes a Sue. Because the people around him are suddenly all about being less-cool-than-Xander, rather than getting on with being Buffy and Willow and all the rest.
A real hero isn't about showing the rest of the world they aren't heroes, or not as much. They're just someone doing a difficult job.
The main problem with a MarySue isn't the character themselves, its what they do to all the other characters in range.
There's also the overlapping problems that I can most easily write down in RPG terms - having one character there who's *way* higher level than everyone around them, or having a character (even a canon character) suddenly develop a skill that would have cost way more XP than they've had time to earn, or the basic 'levelling is not character growth' problem that happens in some long series.
Having one character be at a very high level / worth way more character points than everyone around them makes for very difficult gaming. If the difference is big enough then the stronger character is basically carting around dependents. That usually makes a TV show with a central character, not an ensemble show. Which, for me, is less fun. Though if the high level character has a narrow skill set then you can surround them with specialists who can contribute usefully ie the superstrong character with backup brains, specialised by category (book, computer, science and religion, whatever).
But if your over-powerful, over-priced character is an OC, whatever kind of show they walk into, they are going to twist it into being 'OC the mega hero! And a bunch of guys you've heard of.' Which, usually, not what fanfic readers are there for.
The sudden XP surge problem is usually merely irritating. Its spending the experience points without having had the experiences.
There's a balance between what you have to show of character growth and what you can easily imply.
Pouring more XP into existing skills, routine maintenance, no particular need to write about it. Though it is nice to keep track. 'Buffy knows some martial arts' gradually turning into 'Buffy is kick ass martial artist' is nice growth. But it isn't character development, so it isn't usually foreground stuff.
XP going into new specialisations, not usually that important. What counts as specialisations depends on how granular your game / story world is. If a guy knows one gun, can he pick up everything with a trigger and use it right? Yes? Then its all specialisation. Don't need to show them learning it. But if they suddenly demonstrate the same degree of skill with, say, a longbow, in most systems that needs some explaining.
If it is clearly a new skill - if Buffy has up until now only worked with hand to hand fighting but she needs to use a crossbow - that needs showing.
If its an entirely new skill set, say a barbarian warrior suddenly needing to use the computer, that needs a *lot* of explaining. Computer and sword aren't the same skill in any system I know.
I don't like RPGs with character classes so much, but its a useful thought sometimes - if the Warrior is going to do Mage stuff, that is a much bigger change than picking up a new weapon. So that needs more explaining. And probably needs a reason in terms of character development. Are they learning to do a thing, or be a different kind of person?
Changes are what need showing. Keeping on going only needs implying.
Sometimes canon makes a mess of that. The skill set thing on Stargate irritates me. Everyone in the air force can fly an alien spaceship, apparently. Science only comes in two varieties, Medicine and Everything Else. Its annoying. But they've decided that plot is more important than game mechanics. Fair enough. Just not my favourite kind of game.
The sudden surge of XPs thing is just when you skip too much of the growth, or add a skill without mentioning it until the crucial plot moment.
There's also the subset of 'previously unmentioned professional level of musical talent'. I know a lot of RL people do music in their spare time. I know it can easily not come up in the course of saving the world a lot. But actually rather a lot of people aren't very good at music, can't sing, don't dance, and pretty much just listen. If that. Since musical skill does actually cost XP then finding a character that has bazillions of points in lots of areas essential to the plot just suddenly happens to have quite a lot of points over in this here skill that never has been or would be relevant but hey, pretty!... well, it irritates me.
The 'levelling is not character development' thing means, acquiring a new superpower isn't growing as a character. How you react to acquiring a new power, that's character growth. Is the difference between having a character sheet and roleplaying a character.
Also, shagging new people is not character development. Or, in the case of one series I gave up on, remotely interesting, because people want to see how existing relationships work out, not how many people the author can fit in a bed. Plus, sex with no actual relationship in is kind of... taking screen time away from character, plot, relationship, and the other things I actually like to read about. I mean if I want to read porn, it isn't hard to find.
okay, that all came out long and sort of obvious. And the main reason I'm writing is that my highlighter pen ran out so I can't go highlight school stuff. I should probably just go to bed.
There's a difference between adding a character to a group and writing about a character who happens to meet a group.
There's a very big difference between writing about the canon characters meeting a new person, or a new person meeting the canon characters, and writing about a new person who happens to be surrounded by canon characters, especially if they just so happen to be not quite as good as the new person.
Character development has to show us the changes, let the growth be plausible in terms of time and previously established characteristics, and establish things before they use them.
Reactions, relationships and plots have to grow out of the characters and affect the characters.
Superpowers, saving the world, meeting new people, none of it of itself is character growth. Reacting to it all is.
Of course, some people prefer stories that start with the plot and don't mind pushing the characters around to make the plot happen. Me, I dislike it a lot when I notice the only reason a character did a thing is the author just now decided they would. A good story to my mind is when character + situation = plot, all logically flowing from the setup.