Tips To Write Better Royalty, Nobility, & Other Upper-

Class & Important Characters

You may have seen this one before: a young woman gets roped into attending an
upper-class party of some kind. She hates the dress. She can’t stand the chit-chat
that goes on between the guests. And she looks upon her father, Lord Westmoore,
with disdain and contempt for attempting to flatter and get on the good side of a
more influential and more powerful lord.

Our heroine hates the whole noble scene. She’d rather be off on a DARING
ADVENTURE with a sword and a horse and all that. Just as she’s about to lose all faith
in humanity, the prince sidles up to her and confesses that he finds these events
boring, too. And that’s how we know he’s a good guy - he’s not like all those other
shallow and insipid nobles who have nothing better to do than sample hors d'oeuvres
and play boring lawn games.

What’s more, we’re supposed to agree with her and all of her opinions and choices up
to this point.

Problem is, scenarios like these are typically built up on a lot of stereotypes and
misunderstandings of just what being nobility or upper class entails.

Table of Contents
 There’s often a lot of responsibility that goes with the status and title.
 The high life is their comfort zone.
 People in upper class positions have ways to justify inequality.
 Let’s talk about clothes and thrones for a minute.
 They’re people, and people have differing personalities, opinions, interests,
and views.

There’s often a lot of responsibility that goes with the status and title.

One problem that plagues a lot of fiction where characters of status and title are
concerned is that their actual responsibilities get overlooked. The way they’re
presented, they come off as jockeying for power and status simply because it’s what
these types of people do, as if it’s some sort of voluntary ego-stroking exercise. While
this can certainly happen, to make it appear as though that’s all it’s about is to paint
a highly inaccurate picture.

1
Maybe Lord Westmoore isn’t just being some kind of sad little suckup just to climb the
social ladder. Maybe he needs to gain favor with Lord Galvan so that Lord Galvan will
lend help when the pirates come to raid the coastal towns of his fiefdom, or maybe
he needs money to fund the restoration of a library. Or maybe he’s gambled himself
into debt and is trying to find a way to pay off those debts and avoid putting himself
and his whole family into destitution.

In certain stories involving high-status protagonists, focus is put on how special or

important the protagonist is because of xir social status and/or title, while focus upon
or even any regard to the protagonist’s actual responsibility and capability to uphold
that responsibility in relation to the rest of society/the country/whatever is
practically nonexistent. There might be much fuss made over how other people of
title and status might try to use the protagonist to further their own agendas (which is
definitely a very realistic issue that any neophyte to politics could face), but even
while this is going on, the character’s actual responsibilities will be minimized in
favor of pursuing and fulfilling personal goals.

Sometimes the works will focus on the character’s powers and utterly ignore the
actual mundane responsibilities that go with the title/status the character has.
In Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon, we never see Neo-Queen Serenity doing anything that
actually relates to the responsibilities of being a monarch. We see that she can be
incredibly powerful and is capable of personally defending the Earth against its
enemies with her power, but that’s not the same. Compare Princess Celestia, who is
both depicted as extremely powerful and as having to contend with the more
mundane and tedious aspects of rulership.

In other stories, characters may be shown blowing off responsibilities to do as they

please whenever they feel like it, with little or no repercussions resulting. It's as if
these responsibilities are just hobbies for stuffy old fuddy-duddies, and not something
that have to be tended to keep the company/fiefdom/kingdom/whatever operating.
Whazzis, a meeting to determine how much funding to spend on the school lunch
program? BORRRRING! I'm gonna sneak out and dance with my peasant girlfriend
instead! Oh, you say there's a meeting to determine how much money we're going to
spend on paying the guards? Pfffft, who cares about making sure the people who
protect the company/kingdom can feed their families? I wanna have an ADVENTURE!

None of these scenarios are good if you want people to really buy that your character
deserves xir status or title. Could your protagonist, for example, settle a property or
territory dispute? What would your protagonist do if the party that was clearly in the
wrong threatened to launch an attack that would kill thousands of innocent people if
things didn’t work in xir favor? How will your protagonist deal with the inevitable
situation where there is no “right” answer and no matter what xe chooses, someone
who doesn’t deserve it is going to get shafted? Is xe going to make the tough decisions
when others are looking to xir for guidance or direction, or is xe going to duck out and
shirk them all the time?
2
And speaking of leadership, here’s really inconvenient aspect to it: you might have
your own ideas about how things ought to be run, but you only get to further them if
you can get enough people to agree with what you want to do - otherwise, you’re
very likely to find yourself deposed. How will your character deal with this?

The high life is their comfort zone.

Whatever we grow up with is what tends to make us feel most comfortable and most
at home, even if we do have some complaints about it. Most people who write about
royalty come from middle or lower-class backgrounds, so that’s what makes them feel
safe and at home. Thus, it seems reasonable (if only on a subconscious level) that
that’s what their upper crust protagonists might yearn for.

It can make sense for an upper class character to yearn for a lower class lifestyle if xe
has a perception that lower class people have more freedom in life and/or lead
generally more fulfilling lives. But, as the expression goes, the grass is always greener
on the other side of the fence. Restrictive as the upper class lifestyle may be, it still
comes with a lot of conveniences and niceties that are very easy to miss when they’re
gone - and this doesn’t just mean being able to afford a new pair of Manolos (or
whatever equivalent exists in the universe) or have your servants pamper you with a
massage whenever the whim strikes. Depending on, it can mean the difference
between having food that actually tastes good and having food that’s merely edible -
or even having enough food. A princess who loves reading would have far easier
access to new books than a lower-class woman who has to work three jobs just to live
and barely has time enough for a few hours to herself at home, let alone to go to the
local library (which is probably pretty small and piddling compared to a royal library).

While someone who grew up in a dilapidated home with a messy, weedy yard might
find such conditions comforting and homey, someone accustomed to living in
relatively clean and neat living conditions would likely find such conditions off-
putting, and even disgusting. A tiny apartment might seem cramped and stifling after
being used to a roomy palace.

After living like this for awhile, those borrrrring socials might not seem so bad after
all. Even if conditions away from the high life aren’t that bad, other places won’t
quite feel like home used to feel - and then there are those pesky feelings of
nostalgia and homesickness that would inevitably pop up.

3
People in upper class positions have ways to justify inequality.

The Just World Fallacy is a powerful thing. A long-held view in Europe was that those
of high blood were inherently made of better stuff than the lower classes - they were
more noble, more intelligent, and granted with the natural ability to rule and govern -
that’s why they were nobility and royalty in the first place, after all. It was in their
blood - and divinely ordained, even!

And of course, because the peasants lacked the nice things the nobility had - eg,
access to education, the means to learn what language and mannerisms were
considered genteel, access to hygiene and medical treatment that would help curb
things like disfiguring infections, of course they seemed like degenerate creatures in
comparison.

In the US, the wealthy 1% frequently justify having more wealth than the 99% with the
belief that they worked hard for it, while the poor are just lazy and shiftless. (Never
mind that any number of them were born into privilege and were given their
relatively cushy positions with paid vacations by virtue of knowing the right people
moreso than their actual skill and talent, while any number of poor people work long
hours on multiple jobs just to put food on the table.)

Of course, not every upper class person needs to see the world this way, particularly
if they have empathetic/sympathetic personalities and have had personal experience
with others. (Though, if they don’t have much experience dealing with people of
lower classes, their sympathy may come off as a bit condescending.)

Let’s talk about clothes and thrones for a minute.

I’ve run into some people who seem to think that the outfits you see royalty and
nobility wearing in their portraits is indicative of what they wore on a day-to-day
basis. In fact, what you see in those pictures are people all dolled up in their finest.
Their day-to-day clothes would have been much simpler. Check it for yourself -
compare this portrait of Queen Victoria with this one.

These galleries of the Romanov family will give you some idea of what they wore on a
daily basis (and did for fun!).

Also, crowns and tiaras are not a part of normal daywear, and are generally reserved
for special and ceremonial occasions. In the real world, Princess Peach would only
wear her trademark gown, gloves, and tiara combo to formal events.

4
And before you write your character griping and grumbling about corsets, please read
these:
Yesterday's Thimble: Exploring The Myths of Corsets
Everything You Know About Corsets Is False
Steam Ingenious: Corset Myths

Now, onto thrones and throne rooms - a lot of people I’ve run into have the
impression that monarchs spend pretty much the whole day sitting on the throne,
which just ain’t so. Throne rooms may be used for formal ceremonies (eg,
coronations, bestowing honors or awards), or for meeting important visitors, or
holding council in - and the monarch will have many responsibilities and interests that
sitting on a throne isn't exactly condusive to carrying out. Throne rooms are not for
casually milling around in, let alone for standing/sitting around and looking pretty in.

They’re people, and people have differing personalities, opinions,

interests, and views.

Name any type of interest you can think of, and someone of rank/status has probably
had it. Every virtue, vice, and quirk that you can think of in any other person,
someone of the upper class can have. Don't be afraid to give them to your upper class
characters. Any number of real royals, nobles, and other upper crust people have had
hobbies, opinions, or behaved in ways that would have made the stereotypical “prim
and proper” folks roll over.

You did see that picture of Princess Anastasia smoking while her father, y’know, Czar
Nicholas, watched, didn’t you?

5
 Basic Tips To Write Better Abuse Victims & Abuse
Situations

Abuse is a horrible fact of life, and it takes many forms. Unfortunately, it's often
misunderstood and handled badly in fiction. This page contains potentially-triggering
material, so be warned.

Abuse often starts out small and gradually gets bigger.

If abusers started off new relationships at their prime levels of nastiness, they'd drive
away just about everyone at first go. But by starting small, they can progressively
desensitize victims to physical and/or emotional abuse - and by the time they're in
full swing, the victim will have so much invested in the relationship that cutting loose
will be difficult - if not next to impossible.

In some cases, the abuse escalates because the abuser discovers that xe can exert
control over the other person and find that xe enjoys doing so. The abuser's behavior
will worsen as xe finds that xe can get away with more and more, while the abused
person may be too frightened for xir own safety or too afraid of the consequences of
making waves (starting a fight, "ruining" the relationship, etc.) to speak up.

Victims are often reluctant to leave because they have a lot invested into
their abusive situations.

Leaving the abuser/abusers could mean leaving behind friends, family, and even
children. Depending on how much and how long the victim has been in the situation,
it could mean leaving behind xir entire life. They may have nowhere else to go and no
way to get out, particularly if the abuser has taken control of the victim's finances
and/or isolated xir from contact with others.

If the abuse comes from a cult/religious group, the victim may believe that leaving
the group would mean losing salvation (or whatever metaphysical prize the group
offers).

Some victims fail to leave because they think the abuse is normal.
6
Those who have grown up in abusive environments may see abusive behavior as
perfectly fair and normal. Depending on the level of isolation the abused people
experienced, it may have never even occurred to them that there could be any other
way to do things.

Brainwashing is half the game (at least).

From abusive spouses to abusive religions, brainwashing plays a huge role in abuse.
Abusers frequently wear down peoples' sense of worth and make them believe that
they are utterly helpless without the gracious care of the abuser/abusers. ("You think
anyone would want you? Without me, you'd be dead in a gutter!" or, "You wouldn't last
a week out there in the world!") If the abuse has religious overtones, the victim may
have been taught that leaving would be a mortal sin. ("What God hath joined
together, let no man put asunder!") Also, abusers may put victims through guilt-trips,
making them believe that they would be horrible and ungrateful people for ever
leaving. ("How could you even think of doing something like that to me, after all I've
done to you?")

Another brainwashing technique some abusers employ is to use double-binds on the

victim - IE, no matter what choice the victim makes or what answer xe gives, xe will
always be "wrong." This results in the victim never trusting xir own judgement
for anything because xe comes to expect that no matter what choice is made, it's
always going to be the wrong choice.

Similarly, some abusers will play head-games with their victims by pointing out
nonexistant faults and mistakes. If this goes on long enough, the victim may start to
question xir own sanity and competance until xe no longer trusts xirself. This
technique is known as gaslighting.

Many victims rationalize abusive behavior away.

Abusers often have their kind and affectionate moments, or may even be pleasant to
be around most of the time. Because of this, victims often rationalize that their
abusers are worth staying with. After all, if xe wasreally so bad, would xe have spent
all that money on that romantic evening for two? And what about the way xe makes
you laugh...? It can be very difficult for someone to come to realize that just because
a person is nice some of the time doesn't actually mean that person has a heart of
gold that can be brought out with patient love and care.

7
Victims may also rationalize the abuser's behavior by deciding that it was their own
fault - if they were just nicer, more understanding, and just did what they were told,
then the abuser would start behaving. (Which of course, is actually counterproductive
because the victim is essentially rewarding the abuser's bad behavior.)

Victims may also rationalize abusive behavior by deciding that the abuse is acceptable
because the abuser just does it out of love for the victim - and in some cases, the
abuser believes the same thing. ("It's okay if I forbid her from seeing her old
boyfriends because I love her so much, I couldn't bear the thoughts of someone taking
her away from me!") Unfortunately for the abuser, intent does not not matter - abuse
is abuse, period.

Abusers often believe that their behavior is inconsequential to their

victims... or even necessary.

When they say things like these...

 "It wasn't that bad."

 "You're too sensitive!"
 "You think I'm bad? You've never met a real abuser!"
 "I'm only doing this for your own good!"
 "No, I'm not letting you do this. You're in no condition to make that kind of
decision right now!"
 "I have to hit you. It's the only way you'll learn!"

They often mean them. They genuinely think it's the victim that's the problem, not
themselves. (And that's why they can't be fixed with any amount of hugs and cuddles.)

Victims are frequently blamed by the abuser's friends and family.

They just know the abuser is a great person and would never do anything like that, so
it must be the victim's fault - the victim must have done something to provoke the
abuser, or wasn't doing xir spousal duties, or just wasn't Godly enough.

Nothing will fix the victim's trauma overnight.

Recovery takes time, and plenty of it - and for some, recovery is never complete.
Contrary to what some seem to think, a dose of good lovin' isn't going to make it all
better. In fact, if the abuse involved physical contact in any way, then making

8
physical contact with the victim is actually likely to make it worse as there's a good
chance it will trigger a full-blown panic attack, or even a dysthemic state.

Furthermore, when a person is triggered by something that reminds them of the abuse
in question, that person is snapped back to the despair, hopelessness, and fear xe felt
when the actual abuse was going on. Sometimes it can be overcome in time, but it
takes time... and it rarely goes away completely.

The escape is only the beginning.

Depending on the situation, the victim may have to deal with any of the following,
plus more:

 Fighting court battles over custody, property, etc.

 Dealing with PTSD/trauma-related issues and anxieties, which include worrying
that the abuser/abusers will come to further harm the victim, or that the
victim will be similarly harmed by other people xe meets.
 Dealing with friends/relatives who think the victim should go back to the
abuser/abusive group.
 Protecting xirself from the abuser/abusers.
 Coping with the loss of friends and relatives (particularly if the person escaped
from a cult).

9
 Basic Tips To Create Better Characters With Tragic &
Traumatic Backstories

Table of Contents
 First, ask yourself why you're giving your character a tragic or traumatic
backstory.
 Ask yourself how much trauma/tragedy your character actually needs.
 The character's angst over the trauma/tragedy should not become a plot-
consuming blackhole, and should be kept in perspective compared to other
characters' troubles.
 Remember, not everything your character does should be explicitly or overtly
tied to the trauma/tragedy.
 The trauma/tragedy should make sense in-universe.
 People who've gone through trauma don't generally tell people they've only just
met all about it.
 Read up on what real people who have experienced similar problems have gone
through, if you can.

First, ask yourself why you're giving your character a tragic or traumatic
backstory.

Are you giving your character this backstory to build up/explain what kind of person
your character is now? Or are you doing it mainly to make readers or other characters
feel sorry for your character, or to make your character seem more badass/tough for
having survived the ordeal? Or are you doing it mainly to give your character a reason
to run away from home and/or have nobody to be attached to so xe can go hang out
with the cool characters with nothing to pull xir away? The first one is a legitimate
reason to give your character a tragic/traumatic backstory. The rest are spurious at
best.

Even worse, trauma/tragedy often is used as little more than a device to give an
intended love interest a reason to want to lavish care and affection on xir. Now,
there's nothing wrong with a character receiving comfort after getting through a
hardship, or during/after a post-traumatic stress disorder episode, or even after the
character simply tells another character of xir less-than-happy past. That's perfectly
fine. But this should not be the end goal of the trauma, nor should the snuggles end
up curing the issue, particularly if your character is supposed to have PTSD - post-
10
traumatic stress disorder is not something that can be 'cured' or counseled away by a
few snuggles and hugs. While it can be lessened over time (and it can take a very long
time), real-life treatment for PTSD works toward helping a sufferer live and cope with
the symptoms they've developed for that very reason.

Benjamin Linus from Lost is a good example of a tragic/traumatic backstory used to

good effect. Linus's mother died giving birth to him, which his father blamed him for,
which lead to his father abusing him. Denied parental love and approval as a child,
Linus still craved it into adulthood. His need for approval became a motivational force
behind many of his actions, which he did in an attempt to win the love and approval
of a surrogate parental figure, even to the detriment of others.

Kira Nerys from Star Trek: Deep Space 9 is another good example - the hardships Kira
faced growing up during the Cardassian occupation of her homeworld of Bajor as well
as the ones faced when she was a member of the Bajoran Resistance forged her into
the tough, determined, decisive, pragmatic, and prickly woman she was for most of
the show - the woman who had to learn to stop fighting and to start trusting and
letting others in.

While the effects of the bad things characters in the Harry Potter series go through
are not always made explicitly clear, a look into each and every character will show
that everything they have gone through has affected them somehow. Harry's
treatment at the hands of the Dursleys created a child who has no innate respect for
adults, let alone authority figures - Harry's respect must be earned; it's never given
freely and unconditionally. On the other hand, Percy Weasley, whose family was
mocked and scorned by other purebloods due to Arthur Weasley's fascination with
Muggle things, tries desperately to distance himself from his family's reputation by
associating himself with "respectable" figures.

Ask yourself how much trauma/tragedy your character actually needs.

Stop and ask yourself: how much hardship is actually necessary to explain why your
character is in the situation xe is now and/or to explain why your character thinks,
feels, acts, etc. the way xe does now? Is it reallynecessary that every other student at
school bully and torment your character, or could you achieve the same thing with
just a few particularly ornery students? Does your character need to have been
chained up and beaten every night on top of being isolated and forbidden from
associating with peers? Do your character's parents absolutely have to tell xir that
they wished xe's never been born to leave your character with a damaged self-image,
or could more subtle jabs like "I wish you were more like your sister!" or "What, do
you want me to give you a medal or something?" achieve the effect you want?

11
Also, something to remember is that smaller and more subtle forms of trauma and
abuse actually have the potential to have a much bigger emotional impact on your
audience than extreme ones. Because the extreme ones are so rare in real life,
they're going to be beyond the ken of the vast majority of your audience.
However, many people have dealt with smaller forms of abuse and trauma, so they'll
find characters with less-extreme experiences easier to connect to.

So, ask yourself how much trauma/tragedy is strictly necessary for the character and
plot and don't go too far beyond that, and you'll probably do all right - and you might
even end up with a far more powerful and compelling backstory for it.

The character's angst over the trauma/tragedy should not become a plot-
consuming blackhole, and should be kept in perspective compared to
other characters' troubles.

Although it varies from person to person, people generally have a limited capacity to
care about your character's angst - and this capacity can go down quickly when there's
an otherwise-engaging plot going on or when pressing situations are pushed aside to
focus on your character's angst - eg, when the villain about to fire the mega-cannon of
doom. Similarly, if the plot and/or other characters treat your character having a
flashback to a traumatic incident as more important than another character's child
going missing or xir house burning down with everything xe owned inside it, audiences
are more likely to perceive your character's angst as wangst and/or feel like your
story is running on Protagonist Centered Morality - and you don't want that.

Dragging out a character's angst for too long can also make people perceive your
character as wangsty, especially if the character seems to want to do nothing but
wallow in xir misery rather than trying to do something about or move past the pain.
Again, how long is too long is subjective, but if your character goes on for ages
without doing anything (at the very least trying to move on or learning to cope),
people will eventually get fed up sooner or later, particularly if it seems to be
preventing the plot from moving on.

Also, always keep in mind that whatever awful event your character has suffered, it's
probably not a one-of-a-kind experience. Getting bullied, losing loved ones, and even
ending up in the hands of despicably abusive and exploitative people happens to all
kinds of people. Yes, it's horrible - but if you play up your character's pain as one-of-
a-kind or as if it's deeper and more profound than anyone else's pain (especially the
pain of those who should be equally, if not even more affected by the event) you're
going to make your character seem self-centered, or worse - make yourself seem self-

12
centered because it's clear that you think your pet character's problems are the most
important thing in the universe.

Likewise, it's just as unlikely and unrealistic that your character's pain is some special
brand of pain that could only be understood by one special individual out there.
Characters who go around convinced that only one person in the entire world could
possibly understand their pain and help them through their personal crises... well, at
best they look short-sighted and delusional, and at worst they look like creepy
stalkers.

Remember, not everything your character does should be explicitly or

overtly tied to the trauma/tragedy.

While a character's tragic/traumatic past may have helped to forge who xe is now,
real people aren't going to constantly be doing things that relate to the
trauma/tragedy, and they're certainly not going to be thinking about it all of the
time. Batman wouldn't be Batman without the death of his parents, but he also has a
life wherein he does things that don't relate to his parents' deaths. Kira Nerys may
have been forged by the hardships she faced on Bajor, but by and large she was
mainly focused on the present, as well as her own spirituality.

The trauma/tragedy should make sense in-universe.

Does the tragic or traumatic backstory make sense in the context of the universe? For
example, one next-genHarry Potter OC I encountered was bullied because her parents
were "evil" and pretty much everyone at Hogwarts knew it. Furthermore, the
character had to live with her evil parents during the summers and work in their
store. This is a perfect example of trying to have your angst cake and eat it, too - if it
was that well-known that her parents were that evil, why were they still walking free?
It would have been far more plausible for the parents to have been in prison (which
would give the students reason to be wary of the OC, but she wouldn't be able to live
with her parents), or for them to have successfully covered up their crimes (in which
case she'd have to live with her parents, but wouldn't have to endure the bullying to
that degree).

The above doesn't just apply to Harry Potter fan characters, either - the same basic
concept would be equally nonsensical in any universe wherein the story was set in a
place with a functional law enforcement and justice system. Whatever the universe
you're writing for, stop and ask yourself: is that the way the world really works?
13
Another character who was supposed to have been abused by her father claimed that
her father had essentially paid off protective services to stop them from doing
anything about her abuse. Precisely why thatwouldn't work is covered in Tips To Write
Better & More Believable Coverups.

Does your character's past rely on certain characters behaving out-of-character, or

showing abusive tendencies that were never even hinted at in canon? For example,
let's say a character is the child of Fluttershy from My Little Pony. Based on what
we've seen from her character, it would be plausible that Fluttershy might actually
lose her temper and shout at her children occasionally (though she'd feel pretty bad
about it afterward). On the other hand, Fluttershy punishing a child by locking xir in
the basement and denying xir food would be pretty far-fetched. Applejack might be
the parent who thinks she always knows better than her children, but it's unlikely
she'd use physical violence. Twilight Sparkle might be the distant parent who gets
wrapped up in her work while pushing her own child a bit too hard to succeed
academically, but probably wouldn't verbally belittle her child. Indeed, if you want to
create tension between your character and xir parents, it's very possible to create
realistic and plausible reasons for it without going into full-bore physical abuse.

Similarly, keep the tragedy proportionate to the universe. Your character's parents
dying and xir being sent to a vermin-infested orphanage which burned down forcing
xir to go to a workhouse where everyone hated xir and the workman abused xir until
xe grew up and fell in love with someone who died of TB might fit into something
written by Lemony Snicket or Victor Hugo, but would most probably be overdoing it in
stories set in more lighthearted universes.

People who've gone through trauma don't generally tell people they've
only just met all about it.

A common scenario in fiction is that days or even minutes after the characters meet
each other, at least one of them is sharing the intimate details of xir horrible and
traumatic past. In real life, most people tend not to be so free about sharing things
like these, particularly if they're accustomed to keeping their true thoughts and
feelings to themselves, and/or if there is perceived shame or stigma attached to the
subject matter of the secret.

Depending on the person, it can take months or even years before they're ready to
start talking about their experiences, and even then only with people they have come
to trust over this period of time. And if a person has learned to be distrustful or that
it's not acceptable to talk about one's feelings and traumas (eg, because it would just

14
unnecessarily burden others) or that talking about them would bring shame and even
ostracism, don't count on them to start talking anytime soon.

Read up on what real people who have experienced similar problems have
gone through, if you can.

There are many people who have gone through traumatic/tragic situations who have
put their stories online, or have spoken about them in interviews and such. A search
for "(type of traumatic event) survivor stories" will often bring up results.

15
 Character Development Questions

A series of questions to help all you writers and roleplayers develop better characters.
This list is short compared to some lists, but in general it's supposed to be the type of
questions you don't see every day, but that you really should answer.

 If your character had superpowers, how would xe use them for others? For
xirself?

 How does your character behave when insulted? When threatened?

 What job does your character want right now?

 When does your character think that violence is justified or deserved?

 Which common rules of etiquette or morality does your character disagree

with?

 What behavior/behaviors does your character have that xe most like to change
or lose?

 Which personality traits does your character have that xe like to change or
lose?

 Which personal rule/rules does your character have difficulty following?

 Which personality trait/traits in other people annoy your character the most?

 Which personality trait or fault would your character refuse to accept in a

romantic partner?

 If your character could spend a weekend anywhere, where would it be?

 Which facts about xirself does your character feel are the most important?

 Which facts about xirself does your character prefer to keep hidden?

 What lie is your character most likely to tell?

 What do other characters most frequently complain about concerning your

character's personality and/or behavior? Does your character agree or disagree?

16
 What are your character's religious/eschatological views? How seriously does xe
take them? Do they differ from those of most people in your character's
culture, and if so, how?

 What are your character's views and positions on issues considered

controversial within xir culture/region?

 What events in your character's life lead xir to having the ethics and views xe
has today?

 Which beliefs or views is your character irrationally attached to and will defend
against all observations and logic?

 What would it take you make your character question or re-evaluate xir core
values and beliefs?

 What does your character's ideal world look like? Would xe really be happy
living in it?

 What actions has your character taken that xe regrets or questions? Does xe
have any justification for them, and if so, what?

 What sort of people believe or would believe that your character is a hero?
What sort of people believe or would believe your character is a villain?

 How far would your character go to realize xir dreams and ambitions? At what
point(s) would your character draw a line?

 Assuming your character does not work alone all of the time, how does xe try
to get others to work or cooperate with xir?

 Where are your character's grandparents? Where are xir second cousins, third,
and fourth consins on both xir mother and father's side of the family? How does
your character feel about them? How do they feel about your character?

17
 Character Creation & Development Theory
(Or, How To Make Characters 101!)

I came to realize that with everything I'd written on characterization and creating
characters, I had nothing that covered the basic process of character creation and
development, nor the basic structure of what makes a complete character - in short,
basic character creation and development theory. So, here are the general processes I
used to develop and create well-rounded characters.

The Character Creation & Development Process

This flowchart depicts how the character creation and development process usually
works for me. Basically, it's an ongoing cycle of development, testing, and refinement
that doesn't end until the story does.

18
The Anatomy Of A Complete Character

Generally, I divide the basic structure of a complete character into five points:

19
 1. Your character’s psyche - xir personality, attitude, ambitions, hopes, and fears,
as well as why your character thinks and feels the way xe does now (which
would include your character's history, upbringing, and all that).
2. The challenges your character will have to overcome, and the flaws or
difficulties that will set xir at odds with others.
3. What makes your character desirable to have around and why others would
choose to associate with your character excluding your character’s special
powers, talents, or physical appearance. What your character is without being
in a position of power or having supermagical powers.
4. Your character’s talents and skills, and how xe uses them.
5. Your character’s physical appearance.

Now, let's liken all that to a vehicle.

The first item, your character’s psyche, would be analogous to the engine. If an
engine is missing crucial parts, it’s not going to run. If your character has vast holes in
xir psyche, xe’s going to be virtually unplayable because all you can really do is
default to “stall and idle until someone with a better engine takes mercy and tows me
somewhere.” Stalling occasionally is okay and can add dramatic potential, but who is
going to want a vehicle that has to be towed even to the grocery store?

Two would be analogous to a car’s flaws. Pretty much vehicle has its weak points,
either through design flaws or wear and tear. In-universe, this is okay because flaws
add dramatic potential and challenge for your character - a race car suddenly starts
smoking in the middle of a race? That’s dramatic and suspenseful. Of course, you
don’t want your character to be so flawed that xe’s basically a lemon - nobody’s going
to watch a race car that can’t even get past the starting line.

Three would be analogous to the interior. People probably aren’t going to want to
drive or ride inside a car that smells like cat urine and has springs poking out of the
seats unless they’re really desperate and/or have no other alternative, and the
minute they have an opportunity they'll probably try to find a replacement. On the
other hand, a clean and comfortable interior might make someone willing to overlook
the fact that the car is painted a horrible shade of green, or doesn't accelerate quite
as fast as some other cars. (Now, this is mainly important if your character is
supposed to be a hero, or at least a sort-of hero. If your character is a villain, then
being a generally despicable person all around may be appropriate.)

Four would be analogous to the wheels, suspension, and steering system. Without
these being functional, a car is useless because even if the engine is in perfect
working order, it still can’t go anywhere. Of course, your character's talents don't
have to be exceptional if the story doesn't call for it - you don't need a mountain-
worthy suspension system to get you to the grocery store, or a Formula 1 race car's
speed to take a cross-country trip. Your character just needs the skills and gumption
to get something of dramatic value done, whether it's the determination to keep
20
looking for a lost loved one or the skill to hack into the evil overlord's computer
systems to shut down the doomsday device.

Lastly, your character’s appearance is analogous to the car’s body. It’s definitely a
good thing to have, but at the end of the day spots of paint or even huge chunks can
be missing from it and everything else will still run. In other words, we don't need to
know how many hairs your character sports on xir left big toe. On the other hand, a
car with a gorgeous paint job and perfect detailing is going to be useless if the engine
and wheels/suspension/steering don’t work.

Just like vehicles, characters can and should be tweaked and modified if something
isn't working out. Don't get too attached to your character being one specific way,
especially early on in development, because you'lloften find that something you
initially thought of won't work out as well as you'd hoped.

I strongly recommend that during the early stages of development you priorities the
items in the order which they appear on the list - worry about your character's history
and motives before skills before appearance. That said, if you're working on history
and motives and something comes to mind for your character's looks or skillset, go
ahead and write it out or toy around with it for awhile. There is no "correct" order so
long as you end up with a well-developed character in the end.

We can take all this and sum it up in an acronym - POSTA: Psyche/Personality,

Obstacles, Sociability, Talents/Tools/Toys, and Appearance, summed up and
explained in the below image:

21
22
 On Giving Your Characters Flaws & Weaknesses
Today it's pretty common knowledge that part of creating a well-rounded, non-
overpowered character involves giving the character flaws and weaknesses. However,
many people are still unclear on how to do it properly.

Far too many people treat adding flaws and weaknesses their characters as a way to
earn points they can use to purchase "cool" things like talents, skills, and powers. For
example, giving the a brilliant biochemist a shellfish allergy and a cranky disposition
gives one enough points to essentially "earn" the right to give the character the ability
to read minds, too. But this is not how flaws and weaknesses are supposed to work,
and if you treat them thus it's probably going to backfire on you.

Flaws and weaknesses only count when they make it harder for the protagonist to
realize xir goals and ambitions. For our brilliant biochemist, a cranky disposition and
shellfish allergies wouldn't count as flaws and weaknesses until they actually
created problems for the character. Perhaps that bad attitude resulted in xir losing
out on a contract that would have allowed xir to realize a project xe'd been wanting
to complete for years. Maybe the shellfish allergy resulted in a trip to the hospital
that caused the character to miss out on a big breakthrough. (This is why being
clumsy doesn't count as a flaw for Bella Swan - she doesn't have to work to make
Edward notice her in a good way despite being clumsy; in fact, it's just the opposite -
he finds her clumsiness endearing.)

It must also be noted that there are several ways that flaws can potentially make
people detest a character, and if your character is supposed to be sympathetic you
must take them into account.

First, if your character's "flaws" don't actually cause problems or have consequences
for your character when they should (EG, a character with a temper who frequently
shouts at people yet never truly angers, hurts, nor drives away anyone who matters,
or never faces disciplinary action when others would), people will find the story
implausible and character to be writer-spoiled.

Secondly, if your character has no traits that people can sympathize with, relate to,
or find appealing or admirable in some way, they'll simply find your character
repugnant and repulsive. Potentially, flaws can be relatable - almost anyone who's
ever worked in customer service will feel sympathy for a character who loses xir
temper over a fussy customer with an entitlement complex. That said, someone who
can't relate to the struggle of trying to stay calm while dealing with someone who
apparently won't be pleased probably won't be affected thus. However, if the
character shows other, more positive traits like being funny, caring, or passionate
about a good cause, even people who can't relate to that particular flaw can still find
reasons to care about and root for that character.
23
But beware: If the flaw is sufficiently repugnant and impossible to overlook, it may
not matter what other positive traits the character has. For example, if someone
who torments other people in genuinely hurtful ways for fun (especially people who
have done nothing especially horrible themselves), or seriously hurts people over
petty grievances and sees nothing wrong with it, or has an extremely bigoted or
hateful view of a certain demographic, it may not matter how many good or
admirable traits your character has otherwise. If you have a character like this, then
either roll with the fact that your character probably isn't really that sympathetic and
write accordingly, or alter/develop your character so that these flaws aren't so
massive.

Remember: One of the worst things you can do is try to make excuses for your
character's flaws, especially these flaws end up hurting other people. It's one thing
to explain them or show that they're the result of some hardship or wrong committed
against the character in times past, but if your character's rash and reckless behavior
that came about because xe was ignored by xir father as a child ends up getting
people injured or killed as an adult, don't expect audiences to overlook it and let your
character off the hook just because Daddy was a jerk. Likewise, if your character
ends up hurting or killing people because xe has an uncontrollable dangerous
superpower, the fact that your character didn't mean to hurt anyone shouldn't be used
as an excuse for your character to wander around populated areas freely. Indeed,
wandering around in a populated area knowing full well that someone could get hurt
or killed if one's powers went off would be criminally negligent behavior, and if
someone actually got killed then the character would be guilty of negligent homicide.

Also, any trait that can cause your character difficulty and get xir into trouble is a
potential flaw. Flaws and weaknesses need not come from traits that are inherently
negative. They can even stem from "good" traits - after all, too much of a good thing
can be a verybad thing indeed. Maybe your character's unbreakable loyalty to xir
friends leads xir to steal from a needy person because a friend claimed xe needed the
money. Maybe your character's "strong sense of justice" leads xir to take out vigilante
justice on someone who wasn't really that bad, or was even innocent. Maybe your
character works so hard to make everyone happy that xe ends up making nobody
happy while wearing xirself down into a frazzle in the process.

So, in summary: Flaws and weaknesses only count if they actually work against your
character and genuinely make xir life harder, and any trait or characteristic that
works against your character can potentially be a flaw or weakness. Never make
excuses for your character's flaws if they end up hurting other people, and be aware
that if your character's flaws hurt other people and no genuine change in behavior for
the better ever comes about, your character risks becoming an unsympathetic figure
very fast.

24
 Reasons Your Character Might Be Boring

This article explores some extremely common reasons that characters end up turning
out bland and uninteresting. If you're concerned that you might end up with a boring
character, read on!

Table of Contents
 Your character can't or won't do anything that progresses the plot.
 Your character has no interests, passions, opinions, or emotions to speak of.
 Your character is too much like another character people have seen before.
 Your character is never challenged or thrown for a loop.
 Your character never changes and develops.
 So, in summary...

Your character can't or won't do anything that progresses the plot.

Characters who have the motivation and drive to actually do things make things
happen and thus push the plot forward are more interesting to watch than characters
who sit around on their duffs and wait for plot to happen to them. While your
character needn't necessarily blow up the house to generate interest (and probably
shouldn't, if you're in a roleplay and don't have agreement from the GM and/or
players!), a character who does nothing but sit on the sofa and shoot smirks at people
and/or mope around and feel sad until a love interest comes around is a boring
character indeed. What's more, extremely passive roleplay characters can benigh
impossible to interact with, causing many a potential roleplay to fizzle and die before
it's even begun.

Your character has no interests, passions, opinions, or emotions to speak

of.

Interests and passions give your character things to do and to talk about with other
characters, which can help foster plot and relationship progression. It can even be
something completely trivial - as long as it can get the characters talking and
bonding, it's all good.

25
Furthermore, not only does giving your characters interests and passions make them
look more interesting, but it also makes them look more three-dimensional. For this
purpose, even a brief exchange on an elevator or a discussion over lunch can do quite
a bit for your character.

Also, three things are important to note:

1. Having interests and passions that allow your character to do and talk about things
unrelated to immediate responsibilities is pretty important - how many people want
to hang out with someone who does or talks aboutnothing but work- or school-related
topics? Normally, we describe these people as having sticks up their butts.

2. Simply saying your character is passionately interested in something isn't enough -

you have to show it! If your character who is supposedly deeply interested in
mythology doesn't actually ever talk about or do anything related to mythology in any
meaningful sense, then it doesn't count. Likewise, saying that your character is
passionate about helping people doesn't count unless you actually show the character
doing something related to that passion - EG, organizing or participating in charity
work, actively trying to invent something to help people cut their power bills,
studying for a medical degree, etc.

3. Love interests/potential love interests do not count as passions/interests.

Characters who have no real interests, hobbies, or passions outside of the people they
crush on or fall in love with are boring and shallow love interests/prospects, plain and
simple.

Showing a character's emotional reactions is important as those who react to nigh

everything with nothing but vague disinterest or a "meh, whatever" attitude tend to
be boring - part of the fun of watching a character is seeing how that character will
react to various scenarios. A reaction with some actual emotion or passion behind it is
a lot more interesting than someone who treats everything going on as if it's no more
exciting than watching paint dry. And furthermore, if they don't care what's going on,
why should anyone else? It can be very hard to get caught up and invested in what's
going if the protagonist we're watching isn't even invested.

Your character is too much like another character people have seen
before.

Whether your character is too similar to someone else's character or to another one of
your own characters, as long as people feel like they're getting a rehash of someone
they've seen before they aren't going to be particularly interested because they're
already been there and done that. An OC who essentially amounts to a sex-swapped

26
version of a popular character won't generate much interest because people have
already seen this character before in a different body and story. An OC who is nigh-
identical to countless other OCs out there will suffer the same problem. If your new
RP character is pretty much indistinguishable from the last five characters you played
except for a few backstory and appearance details, there won't be much to get
peoples' interests piqued. Basically, new characters need to have trait combinations
that don't make them feel like knockoffs of familiar characters.

And while we're here, deliberately trying to make your character the opposite of a
character people have seen before isn't a particularly good way to evade this. Newbie
character creators opt for trying to make their OCs the opposite of a familiar
character in some way (EG, if a canon character is perky and cheerful, they might
create bitter and broody OCs) so often that there's nothing particularly novel or
interesting about them. So when creating an OC, avoid simply just going for the
opposite traits of some canon character or another. (Of course, it's fine if your
character ends up with some traits that are the opposite of what a canon character
has during the course of development - just avoid using opposite traits as a starting
point or basis for your character.)

Your character is never challenged or thrown for a loop.

Once people realize that your character will easily succeed at pretty much
everything, they'll soon lose interest because there's nothing to keep them in any
suspense anymore - they already have a pretty good idea how things will play out as
soon as anything that looks like conflict starts. To keep people hooked, you need
honest to goodness suspense - and that means that the audience won't be sure how or
even if your character will succeed and/or survive. (And this is why flaws and
weaknesses are important - they can be used to create complications that will create
uncertainty in the outcome of the story.)

Likewise, if your character continually wins and overcomes challenges in more or less
the same manner over and over, resolutions that should have been interesting and
satisfying to watch risk becoming dull. Simply giving an old technique or strategy a
power boost or a new look isn't a big help here, either - you're still doing the same
thing over, just on a larger scale and/or with different visual effects. New challenges
should put your characters into situations where they have to find new strategies and
solutions rather than simply doing the exact same thing they did last time, only bigger
and flashier.

27
Your character never changes and develops.

A character who stays exactly the same - in exactly the same mindset with the same
thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and opinions forever - will sooner or later grow boring to
watch. Once it gets to the point where keeping the character the same means that
you have to start recycling old plots because your character's current personality and
views won't allow for your character to do anything that hasn't been done before, it's
either time to end the story, to get rid of the character, or to start allowing character
development.

Stop and think: do you like all of the same things, and only the same things you liked
five years ago? Are your opinions and views on things exactly the same as they were
ten years ago? What about the people around you - are they all exactly the same as
they were in the past? Probably not. People discover new things that catches their
attention while they grow tired of old things. They experience and learn things that
make them change their minds and attitudes over time, whether for better or worse.

Also, not only can a static character become boring, but a static character can break
peoples' willing suspensions of disbelief if they can't believe that it's realistically
possible for the character to experience something like that without being affected in
some way or learning something from it.

So, in summary...

 Characters who are active tend to be more interesting to watch than

characters who are passive. Make your character do things and make conscious,
deliberate decisions that drive the story and set dramatic events into motion at
least part of the time.
 Give your character interests, passions, and opinions - and make sure that they
aren't all limited to or used only for things required by work or school
responsibilities.
 Characters who are essentially another character with a few minor details
changed probably won't be very interesting - since they are, after all, another
character with a few minor details changed. (Worried about your character
being too much like another? Check out Borrowing & Sharing Ideas In Fiction -
When It's Okay, & When It Isn't.)
 Give your character challenges that will be genuinely difficult to overcome -
and give your character challenges that will require fighting smarter, not
harder.

28
 If a lack of character development is keeping you from doing new things with
your story, it's time to end the story, get rid of the character, or give the
character development.

29
 Describing Your Character: Tips & Advice

They say first impressions are the most important, and with characters that is
definitely true. The way you describe your characters for the first time can make or
break peoples' impressions of your characters and your story. So, here are some tips
and advice on describing your characters in-story.

Table of Contents
 Give out appropriate amounts of detail
 Remember: perspective can change everything.
 Handle first-person self-descriptions carefully.
 Don’t be bossy with your descriptions.

Give out appropriate amounts of detail

Generally speaking, people want to have some idea of what your characters look like -
they don't want to go through a story with so little detail that your character might as
well be a stick figure. On the other hand, they don't want to be piled under with
pointless detail that gets in the way of the story.

A good way to describe a character for the first time is to go with the types of details
one would notice upon your first look at a similar person in real life. Details such as
hair color, hair texture, skin color, height, and build are appropriate, as well as a
basic assessment of the person’s apparent mood or attitude. A general (but not highly
detailed) assessment of the character’s state of wardrobe is fine, too. Any other truly
striking features (eg, a long nose, especially large eyes, a missing leg, etc.) are
appropriate to describe at this point. It's also a good idea to mention your character's
age, apparent age, or to describe something that allows readers to infer the
character's general age range if the character's age can't easily be inferred already.

Details that hold personal relevance to the observer are appropriate to describe in
more detail than otherwise. For example, if the person being described is wearing a
band shirt and the person observing that character is a fan of the band, then it’s
appropriate to specify the name of the band. If the observer is someone who isn’t
especially interested in music, then it’s more appropriate to simply describe it as a
“band shirt.”

30
At this point, people should generally not notice tiny things like, say, a ring of silver
around the irises of someone’s eyes, or all of the detailing on someone’s clothes, or a
special symbol upon a piece of jewelry. These are details that would be noticed only
with close inspection, or at a later point after the person has already taken in all of
the obvious and blatant details.

Remember, if you go into too much detail too early, you risk driving audiences off for
two reasons. First, not everyone will have the patience to sit and wade through many
paragraphs of detail (that may or may not even be relevant to the story) to get to the
juicier bits. Secondly, if a writer goes into too much detail at first go, it’s often a sign
that the character is a writer’s pet, which is an immediate turnoff for many people.

A good rule of thumb is that if it isn’t going to become relevant in a narrative way
within the next two or three chapters, or if it’s not a way to infer an aspect of the
character’s identity, or isn’t used to shape an impression of what kind of person the
character is, then the audience doesn’t need to know the specifics.

So, something like this?

The woman had flawless porcelain skin with just the faintest sprinkling of freckles
across her delicate nose. She had a tiny dark mole accentuated the dimple that
formed every time she smiled with her plump lips. She had sapphire blue eyes with a
golden ring around the irises, and her hair hung in ebony sheets that caught the
moonlight. She wore a black dress that hugged her hips, which were accentuated by
the sash around her waist, which was black silk embroidered with golden paisleys.
She wore black heels with three straps on each shoe, each held fast with a heart-
shaped clasp. Around her slender neck was a golden pendant in the shape of two
entwined roses, each blossom set with a tiny pink pearl in the center, and from her
ears hung pink pearl drop earrings. Her long, slender hands were accentuated with a
golden leaf-shaped ring - an heirloom from her grandmother.

...Well, the audience probably doesn’t care that much, and depending upon the
situation the description could come off as downright pretentious. What difference
does the type of shoe she’s wearing make? Are we really supposed to be sold on this
character because her eyes are sapphire blue and gold rather than just blue? How
many people actually look that closely into someone’s eyes at first meet to pick up on
details like that?

Compare with:

The woman was fair-skinned with a slender frame, with straight black hair that came
down to the small of her back. She wore a simple, but elegant dress along with a
gold-embroidered sash about her waist and a tasteful amount of gold jewelry. She
greeted him with a warm smile, blue eyes twinkling.

31
Or:

She greeted him with a dimpled smile and twinkling blue eyes, pale cheeks reddened
from the cold. She wore an elegant black dress with a gold-embroidered sash about
the waist, matching heels, and simple jewelry that indicated wealth without being
ostentatious. Her long, dark hair was left loose.

These give us everything we need to know at first glance, and don’t sound half as
pretentious to boot. Any further details, providing they’re actually relevant to the
story, can be explored at further depth as necessary.

Remember: perspective can change everything.

If you are describing a character from a specific character’s point of view, remember:
different people can see the same person in vastly different ways, and even in ways
that seem completely contradictory with each other. Rudy might perceive Ollie as
cute and charming, but Tricia might perceive Ollie as sickeningly ingratiating. Trevor
might find an insect-like alien terrifying, but Pamela might be completely fascinated.

For a hypothetical scenario, let’s say we have a 15-year-old goth boy with streaked
hair. Here’s the same boy described from the perspectives of a few different
characters:

He looked like one of those Goffik try-hards, one of those kids who decided to rebel
against their middle class mom and dad by replacing their entire wardrobe with
overpriced Hot Topic attire. He wore enough makeup and had his hair so brightly-
colored that he might’ve passed as a circus performer.

Here was a guy who knew how to dress himself. His black jeans were artistically torn
up and the blue and white streaks in his hair matched the pins on his black denim
jacket and the laces on his black Converse. He knew how to apply his makeup, too -
the dark lipstick and eyeliner against the white foundation really brought his
features into contrast.

The new boy was a fan of goth fashion, I guess. He was all dressed up like Dracula’s
punk son or something and pretty much made himself up to look like a corpse. If it
wasn’t for all the makeup he’d layered on, he might’ve been pretty cute.

(For the curious, the first observer is an older goth who thinks that the youngster is
essentially a poser and rebel-without-a-cause. The second is a young person who is
impressed by the way he dresses, and the third is a young person who is not impressed
by the way he dresses.)

32
Handle first-person self-descriptions carefully.

Letting the audience know what the protagonist of a first-person story looks like is
often tricky business. Just as with third-person descriptions, you need to be careful
not to give out too much detail, particularly details that aren’t relevant at the
moment.

However your character describes xirself will reflect upon xir personality. If your
character begins by describing xirself in beautiful or attractive terms and then goes to
list xir awesome and exceptional skills, xe can quickly start sounding conceited and
arrogant. For example:

I stand 5’4 with a petite figure with just the right amount of curves. I have tanned
skin, emerald-green eyes, and full lips. My golden-blond hair falls in ringlets down
my back. I’m exceptionally skilled at playing the piano, and my grandmother says
that I could go on to play professionally. I also speak French fluently, and I’m well-
practiced in martial arts.

Imagine if this was a real person describing xirself to you - that person would probably
sound like a braggart!

Following up an infodump of cool traits with the character’s flaws doesn’t make xir
sound like any less of a braggart - it just makes the character sound like a braggart
who suddenly realized what xe sounds like, and is now desperately trying to
backpedal to avoid sounding like one.

As with any other description, don’t infodump people with what makes your character
special. Pace that stuff out, revealing it as it becomes relevant. And remember, show
- don’t tell. The character’s grandmother could remind her that she needs to take
piano lessons and tell the character that she could play professionally if she wanted,
for example.

Likewise, if your character continually describes xirself in flattering terms like so:

He stared directly into my silver-gray eyes...

I twirled my curly chestnut hair around my finger…

I shook my shapely hips...

33
...That character will come off as being awfully concerned with making sure the
audience knows just how sooper-speshul and prettyful xe is, and therefore come off
as conceited and vain. Likewise, characters who have to make sure the audience
knows the precise details of their outfit (either through text descriptions or linked-to
Polyvore images or such) can come off the same way.

Don’t be bossy with your descriptions.

I’ve said it before, and it bears repeating: being told what to think about a character
gets annoying fast. It doesn’t matter whether your character is supposed to look
beautiful, adorable, ugly, or terrifying - if you describe your character’s looks and
then tell the audience how they should feel about the character, you can come off as
pretentious or conceited. Instead, try to describe a few things about your character
that the audience might find beautiful, adorable, ugly, terrifying, or whatever you
want the character to be and let audiences draw their own conclusions.

Consider this:

The man turned and looked at her with a wide, creepy smile and an insane look in his
eyes. He was terrifying!

Eh, are wide smiles inherently creepy? I don’t think so, and simply saying that a wide
smile is creepy isn't going to convince me. And what does “insane” even mean,
anyway? (Hint: not what a lot of people think it means.) Let’s try this instead:

The man turned toward her with a smile that stretched out farther than any smile
ought to have, and he stared at her like a starving man looking at a hunk of meat.

...Now we’re talking. That right there evokes the Uncanny Valley effect, which is
where the creepiness reallylies, and the metaphor lets us know that he’s looking at
her in a predatory sort of way. That’s creepy.

Let’s make another example:

She looked at him with adorable brown eyes, her mouth pulled up into the cutest
little smile.

First, this could potentially make readers with a low tolerance for contrived or forced
cuteness want to gag. Secondly, if the audience doesn’t already agree that the
character is adorable (and they might very well not), they’re going to find this all the
more annoying. On the other hand:

34
She looked at him with wide brown eyes, an excited, yet somewhat nervous smile on
her face.

This describes a few behaviors that people might find cute, but doesn’t insist that the
character is unequivocally cute. With no concrete values placed upon the character’s
actions, the audience is free to think what it wants about the character.

If you’re in a roleplay and you try to force a perspective of your character onto
someone else’s character (ie, describing the other person’s character as finding yours
cute, attractive, intimidating, etc.), you’re powerplaying because you’re choosing
actions for the person’s character that the person didn’t consent to. Don’t do this.

35
So You Want To Have A Powerful Or Talented Character
Who Probably Won't Be Perceived As A Mary Sue?

Many, many, many times I've seen people complain that they can't write or play
powerful characters without these characters being labelled as Mary Sues. I really
have only one thing to say to this: it's probably either because your
characters are Mary Sues, or because you're presenting your character the wrong way.
Sure it's not the former? Okay, then let's get on to how you can present your character
so people probably won't grab the torches and pitchforks.

This article is largely intended for fan characters, though most of it applies to other
character types as well.

Table of Contents
 Start by describing what makes your character tick, not what makes xir special.
 Remove irrelevant specialness.
 Give your character's talents, skills, or powers a cost.
 Let your character earn respect.
 Respect/love/friendship does not have to be earned via badassery or sheer
strength/power/skill.
 In the story, show what makes your character average.
 Don't make your character a vacuum person.
 Give your OC/fan character xir own place to live (and a job).

Start by describing what makes your character tick, not what makes xir
special.

When you begin your character profile/pitch, leave out your character's appearances,
superpowers, and canon connections as long as you possibly can. Instead, start off
with and emphasize your character's personality, ambitions, dreams, ideals, career,
and vulnerabilities. Basically, all the things that drive and motivate your character. In
short, if you took away all of your character's toys and goodies, who would xe be?

If you have a well-developed character, you should be able to describe xir without
mentioning xir powers, abilities, or canon connections quite easily. Here's an example
based on one of my own OCs (who is the daughter of two canon characters) - she's an
36
intelligent, but socially-awkward young woman who works for her father's company as
an accountant. Her current pet project and hobby is a tabletop RPG she's developing,
which most people would probably find frustratingly fussy about details.

It also helps to write practical descriptions that relate your character to the world xe
lives in, rather than the laundry list descriptions that are so very common these days.
For more on doing this, see Common, Yet Terrible Character Descriptors - And How To
Fix Them (And Write Better Descriptions In General).

Remove irrelevant specialness.

I've seen way too many "not-Sues" who have special/unique features for pretty much
no other reason than the author found it appealing and decided to toss it in there.
Something that's common in far too many characters I've seen are strangely-colored
eyes or the presence of cat ears and a tail that have pretty much no relevance to
anything. At least one OC superhero I've seen had cat ears and a tail, the reason given
that her abusive father experimented on her as a teenager. The character must have
cat powers, right? Nope. Her powers have absolutely nothing to do with cats, and the
story of how she acquired her catliness has absolutely nothing to do with anything at
all.

Compare with, for example, the Marvel-verse - if I see a character with an unusual
appearance, I can usually trust that there's a character-defining story attached to it
somehow - EG, Doc Samson received his green hair in the incident that gave him the
powers that changed the course of his life. Storm has white hair because she is a
mutant, a fact which has essentially defined her life since a young teen.

Give your character's talents, skills, or powers a cost.

The cost can be anything - it can be something your character has to give up or pay
upfront (whether willingly or not), undesirable consequences, unpleasant
responsibilities, a lot of time and effort put into honing the power or talent, or any
combination thereof. It doesn't necessarily have to be huge or dire; just reasonably
proportionate. Here are a few examples:

 Christopher Nolan's Bruce Wayne spends years learning martial arts, and has to
put time and effort into building his bat-equipment. He doesn't simply go from
Bruce Wayne, playboy to Batman, masked vigilante overnight.

37
  In My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, Twilight Sparkle isn't immediately able
to fly very well after becoming an alicorn (a winged unicorn), but must practice
at it. There are a lot of pratfalls along the way. Furthermore, becoming an
alicorn was part of her promotion to a position that entails a lot of
responsibility.
 In the same series, Rarity is an excellent fashion designer and tailor, but it's
often shown that her job can be difficult and stressful.
 Buffy Summers may have superhuman strength and reflexes, but she still needs
to train to keep up with the vampires and demons. Also, both training and
slaying frequently take up time she'd rather be spending doing something more
fun - eg, dating or socializing with friends.
 In Captain America: The First Avenger, Steve Rogers was only able to become
Captain America after doggedly applying at every recruitment station he could
find, and then facing bootcamp while still being small, skinny, and sickly.
 Elsa in Frozen has ice powers strong enough to make a castle from... but at the
same time are uncontrollable and dangerous enough to force her to distance
herself from her family and kingdom.

And make sure that you show it. Let people see your character have to turn down fun
things in the name of responsibility, or get stressed out over deadlines, or struggle to
learn a skill or master a power, and so on.

Let your character earn respect.

In far too many cases, characters just start out as members of the main characters'
clique and/or the best friend/lover of whichever character the writer/player likes
best. Don't do this. Instead, let your character start out as an acquaintance or
stranger, someone the main characters do not know well. The players/readers will (if
your character is written well) be able to bond with the new character as the other
characters do - which means that by the time they are friends, the players/readers
will genuinely care about your character.

Respect/love/friendship does not have to be earned via badassery or

sheer strength/power/skill.

38
No, not saying your character should be a useless lump. But many people try to
present or use their character's powers/skills as essentially the sole or main reason
their character should bond with or be respected by other characters.

Powers and skills could explain why the characters might interact professionally - but
they do not alone explain why two characters would become best friends or lovers.
For that, your characters need to have compatible personalities, proper bonding
experiences, and generally have done a lot of things together that don't have anything
to do with being superheroes or whatever it is they are.

In one roleplay, a powered character I had became friends with a few canon
characters due to circumstances that had nothing to do with his superpowers at all -
some of the characters had been turned into young children, and he babysat and
played with them until the effect could be reversed. Next thing you know, said
character was getting invited to parties.

Finally, a lot of people seem to think their characters can earn the respect of other
characters or become their best friends by insulting them. This is completely
backward. In reality, you earn the right to insult someone bybecoming best friends.
And by that point, you understand that there are some lines you do not cross and that
you don't start jabbing your best friend in xir vulnerable spots.

On the subject of creating a believable relationship between two characters, check

out Tips to Write & Roleplay Believable Successful Long-Term Relationships. And if
you ever intend or aspire for your character to be respected as a leader, check out On
Writing & Roleplaying Characters Who Are Good Leader Material.

In the story, show what makes your character average.

Even if your character is some kind of superpowered genius from another dimension,
take some time to figure out and show what makes your character not so different
from any average person you might meet. This can include things like awkward
character flaws, virtually useless hobbies, finding xirself in an awkward or
embarrassing position because xe's clueless about what's being discussed or doesn't
really know what's going on, or connecting to other people not as a Super Special
Someone, but simply as an aquaintance or friend.

Don't make your character a vacuum person.

39
"Vacuum people" is a term I use to refer to characters who have essentially no social
or familial connections at all, aside from the obligatory abusive/dead/disappeared
parent/parental figure/s, and possibly canon characters they're supposed to know. In
essence, these characters live in a social vacuum. To prevent vacuum people, next
time you create a character, try to come up with the names and basic personalities of
at leastthree of the following:

 Someone your character knows from a place xe shops or gets food.

 Someone your character regularly talks to at work/school.
 A non-immediate relative your character (eg, cousin, grandparent) that your
character could contact if xe wanted.
 A former lover/love interest who is not dead or an enemy of some kind.
 Someone your character knew since/during childhood who is still alive today
that your character still has positive feelings about.
 Someone your character talks to over the Internet.
 Someone xe knows from a public venue/space (eg, library, swimming pool,
park).
 A service person your character hires.
 A neighbor your character talks to.

Note that your character should stay in contact with at least some of these people
after meeting the canon characters. In practice, this can take the form of mentioning
a joke their friend at the coffee shop told them, or asking somebody what sort of
advice they should give xir online friend.

Obviously not all of these will apply - eg, no Internet acquaintances if there is no
Internet in the setting - but there's no reason you can't work out, at a minimum, three
of these items for any given setting. Also, these characters should all have different
opinions about your character - some positive, some negative. Don't make other
peoples' views of your character entirely polarized - IE, they either love or hate xir.
Mix it up a little - give people (even the same people) reasons to feel both
positively and negatively toward your character. Make some characters who, while
they know your character to some degree, really have no strong opinion on xir either
way.

Give your OC/fan character xir own place to live (and a job).

Living with canon characters is a pretty big red flag of Mary Sue-dom. For the vast
majority of fan characters I see, there's no reason in the world why their stories
couldn't reworked slightly so they have their own place to stay. Seriously, get your
character xir own digs. There are bajillions of reasons for your characters to have
40
contact with the canon characters that don't include actually living with them. Here
are a few suggestions:

 Your character was hired as a consultant.

 Your character is a regular employee of another character's.
 Your character was commissioned or contracted to do a job. (EG, auditing,
home repair or remodeling, server migration, tailoring, catering...)
 Your character works at a venue one or more of the characters frequent.
 Your character is delivering (or is) a plot hook.

(If a normal dayjob is good enough for Spider-Man, Superman, and Buffy Summers, it's
good enough for your character.)

At all costs, avoid the "my character had nowhere else to go so they let xir stay with
them" route. (Mind you, if you're in a roleplay and a player character is willing to let
yours stay, that's fine, because you gave the other players the choice of whether or
not to let your character live with them.)

41
 Writing Character Profiles & Bios - Tips & Advice

Character profiles serve two very important purposes: One is to give people who are
unfamiliar with your character a general overview of what kind of person your
character is and what xe's all about. The other is to have something for you and
potentially other people to refer back to so you can keep the facts about your
character straight. Read on for tips to make profiles that give people what they need
to know about a character while avoiding going utterly overboard on detail.

Note - this is not an article about developing your characters - if that's what you're
looking for, take a look at:
Character Creation & Development Theory (Or, How To Make Characters 101!)
Building Better Backstories - Tips & Ideas

Table of Contents
 What your character's profile needs
 What to put into a history/bio
 Watch out for these pitfalls
 So in short...

What your character's profile needs

What you should put into your character's profile can depend on different things, such
as what kind of world your character belongs in. Generally, if it's a trait or quality
that is likely to be important to the plot or that will affect your character's daily life
in a significant way, it's probably worth mentioning.

What you should put into your character's profile also depends upon who you're
writing it for. If you're writing the profile for your own personal reference, feel free
to put anything and everything on it you feel is relevant to your character or that
might become relevant at some point. But if you're writing it primarily to let other
people know about your character, you need to stop and ask yourself what other
people would need to know, what might be mildly interesting but not really necessary
to know, and what's just cruft. For example, people generally need to have a basic
idea of what your character looks like, but they probably don't need to know the
exact shape of your character's ears. Knowing your character's favorite types of music
and food is mildly interesting but probably not really necessary, and pretty much
nobody needs to nor is really itching to know your character's favorite gemstone,
42
preferred brand of lipstick, or shoe size. A good rule to go by is that if it doesn't help
readers form a general image of your character in their minds and most likely won't
have any bearing on the plot or have any real effect on your character's everyday life,
you don't need to mention it.

Also, a profile written with other people in mind will need to be more than a simple
list of statistics, quirks, and preferences, particularly where your character's
personality and history are concerned. Trying to boil a character's personality down to
a few key traits cannot convey the nuances and complexities that a real person can
have, and that your character should have. So rather than write something like
"irritable, hates obnoxious people," it's better to describe how your character is prone
to acting in certain situations - eg, "Alessandra easily loses her temper around loud
and unruly people and almost never hesitates to chew them out."

And speaking of your character's history...

What to put into a history/bio

Your character's bio should primarily focus on on events and details that lead your
character up to being the person xe is today. Go for the things that had a big impact
upon your character, whether positively or negatively, and continue to impact your
character up to the start of the story or roleplay. Remember, it’s notwhat happened
that that's important; it’s why that event changed your character’s life and made xir
who xe is now.

If you are writing a profile for a new roleplaying character, creating and writing down
each and every detail of your character's history, personality, and preferences is not
only unnecessary, but inadvisable for three reasons:

1. You'll most likely end up with a monstrously long profile that many people
won't have the time or patience to sit through and read. (Remember: Almost
nobody thinks your character is as interesting as you do.)
2. It will give other players little to nothing new to discover and learn about your
character during the course of the game if they have read your profile, which
means there will be nothing to surprise or intrigue the other players with. And
because they already know everything, other players will have less reason to
have their characters talk to and thus potentially bond with your character.
3. If your character's backstory and personality are so detailed and specific that
there is no room for improvisation, you risk ending up with something

43
 unplayable and useless if you find that your character isn't gelling into the story
and you have no wiggle room to add anything to the backstory that would help.

You also need to ask yourself if your character's bio will include any concepts that
might be unfamiliar or ambiguous to the target audience. For example, if you're
writing a Harry Potter fanfiction and describe your character as a "witch," you can
count on people to know what you mean without any extra explanation. But if you're
writing a bio for a character who lives in an original universe or a universe in which
the rules and boundaries of witches have not yet been set, they'll be relying on you to
inform them of what being a witch entails.

Watch out for these pitfalls

One thing to avoid putting in your profile are Captain Obvious statements or facts -
for example, many profiles state that the character dislikes "rude people."
But nobody likes being treated rudely or seeing others treated in a way they perceive
as unfair, so this really isn't worthy of being pointed out on a profile. On the other
hand, if your character reacted in an unusual or dramatic way around people xe
perceived as rude or had an unusual/dramatic incident that lead xir to have a special
dislike of rude people, that might be worth pointing out and describing.

Also, try to avoid vague or subjective statements like "my character likes having fun"
or "my character is fun to be around." First, everyone likes having fun. Secondly, what
one person considers "fun" might be boring or obnoxious to someone else. In either
case, this doesn't really say anything useful about your character. A better way to go
about this would be describing what your character does for fun or things your
character does that might be considered fun. (See also: Common, Yet Terrible
Character Descriptors - And How To Fix Them (And Write Better Descriptions In
General).)

If you're trying to describe an OC, try to avoid describing your character in ways that
compare xir to a canon character. By comparing your character to a canon character,
you are defining your character by someone else's identity, thus robbing your
character of xir own identity in the process. A well-developed OC can stand on xir
own without needing an established character to lend xir credibility.

Likewise, don't describe your OC in terms of how xe's cooler, stronger, or more
talented than a canon character. Not only do you have the same problem as above,
but being stronger or more talented does not equal being a better character.
Badassery isn't a contest, especially in the realm of fiction - if the characters had no
weaknesses or vices to struggle against, or if they could do anything and everything

44
they wanted or needed to do without breaking a sweat, there would be little dramatic
tension and the story would be boring to watch or read. Plus, almost nobody likes a
one-upper, power gamer, ormunchkin.

So in short...

 Describe your character's appearance enough to give people a general idea of

what xe looks like.
 Mention traits and characteristics that will be important in the plot or affect
your character's daily life. Don't worry about those that won't.
 Give practical examples when it comes to your character's personality, rather
than simple lists of traits and stats.
 Give a general overview of the main events that made your character who xe is
today while leaving enough room for improvisation in the future.
 Don't try to make your character look cooler or more badass by describing how
your character is cooler, better, or more powerful than so-and-so.

45
 Building Better Backstories - Tips & Ideas

Table of Contents
 Constructing and building the backstory - what for and how.
 Don’t forget to make reality checks!
 Don't be a copycat.
 Shortcuts and conveniences: be sparse and stingy about them.

Constructing and building the backstory - what for and how.

The primary purpose of a backstory is to set up and explain who your character is now
and why your character is that way. Why is your character afraid or uncomfortable
around this? What drives and motivates your character to do that?

If your character’s backstory is presented in such a way that it seems like you’re
deliberately trying to set your character up as an object of admiration or respect
and/or as an object of pity, people may be turned off. While a good and engaging
backstory can and should evoke emotional responses, you should try not to impose
opinions of your characters on other people - simply write what happened, and let the
audience decide for themselves what to think about your character.

If you have a build or persona in mind for your character, you can potentially infer a
lot of background from that. For example, if your character is a scientist who works
for a respected company, you can infer that your character attended college and
earned the necessary degrees. This leads to the question of how your character paid
for college - did xe have the means to pay for it xirself? Did xe earn scholarships? Did
xe take out a student loan? If your character is a great martial artist, it can be
inferred that xe put a lot of time and effort into practicing, and quite possibly had a
good teacher. If your character is a Formula 1 racecar driver, it can be inferred that
xe’s spent a lot of time on the track honing xir skills. (And I do emphasize a lot,
because it’s a lifestyle, not a weekend hobby.)

You can also infer background from your character’s views and beliefs - nobody’s
views and beliefs arise in a vacuum, after all. People typically share a large part of
their views and beliefs with those who raised them. If your character’s views do differ
drastically, it shouldn’t be for no reason. Perhaps xe met someone who offered them
a new perspective xe they found compelling enough to change their minds. Perhaps
46
xe's inclined to critically examine things or look for loopholes or exceptions and found
that what they’d been taught didn’t really hold up. Perhaps later beliefs they were
taught conflicted with older ones and xe realized this - eg, perhaps early on they
were taught to “love everyone” at first and were only later exposed to the
xenophobic views of xir culture, and realized that the latter was incompatible with
the former. (And if your character believed and saw things differently than everyone
else, this may have lead to strain and tensions between xir and others and/or may
have lead to your character learning to keep xir mouth shut to avoid negative
consequences.)

Remember, it isn’t necessary for your character’s initial backstory to have each and
every part of your character’s past laid out in detail. As you progress through writing
or playing your character, you can come up with further details as they become
relevant. However, you’ll have to be careful not to contradict your character’s
previously-revealed history or characterization. For example, if Peter is unable to
free himself after getting tied up in one episode but a few episodes later we find out
that he’s an escape master because he used to be a spy, then that’s potentially a
pretty big inconsistency. If we find out that he was keeping it a secret for security
reasons all along that could potentially work - but if he had little to lose and
everything to gain by escaping in the earlier episode (eg, there was nobody around
whom it would matter if they saw him escape, and his life was in danger), then him
simply trying to keep it a secret doesn't really solve anything and ends up creating
another problem instead.

Don’t forget to make reality checks!

One thing you’ll want to do is consider the tone of the universe you’re creating your
character for and ask yourself how things generally work in that universe. How are
things set up, or how are they likely to be set up? How do people react, or how would
they be likely to react to certain scenarios in this universe? Also, are the characters in
your character’s backstory acting how real people might behave or consistently with
prior characterization, or are they acting in forced and contrived ways?

In general, there are a lot of elements commonly used in the backstories of teens and
young adults that don’t hold up once subjected to a little scrutiny and common sense,
or would realistically lead to complications and consequences that are never
acknowledged or satisfactorily dealt with.

Many people have characters who were born in the US in the late 20th or early 21st
century end up in orphanages. However, orphanages are all but gone in the US - the
foster care system is mainly used instead. And then, children who are adopted out

47
aren't adopted out to just anyone. (99% of the characters I see adopting children in
fiction would be flat-out denied in the real world.)

Many Marvel Cinematic Universe OCs are raised on SHIELD bases not by any kind of
parental figure, but by agents and handlers. (For the unfamiliar, SHIELD is an
intergovernmental organization dedicated to keeping the world safe from the types of
weird dangers you’d see in a superhero universe.) Not only is this unrealistic from a
real-world perspective, it’s also unrealistic from an in-universe perspective:
SHIELD did have an orphan who was a potential target on their hands at least once
(Skye), and they had her raised in a series of foster homes while keeping a close
watch on her. Likewise, SHIELD giving mysterious orphans and foundlings over to the
Avengers to raise makes no sense, as they (and any similar organization) would
absolutely not be handing over orphans and foundlings, no matter how strange and
mysterious, over to a group of people who frequently engage in life-threatening
activities, have intensely time-consuming responsibilities, and/or are prone to
emotional instability.

In Stargate SG-1, there were a few cases where the SGC (a top secret airforce
operation) had to deal with children in need of homes or care. In one instance a child
was adopted by one of the characters who actually worked there, and this character
was responsible and stable and had a job that wouldn’t (normally) require her to be
away from home for days or weeks on end. In another instance a child who was
actually a clone of someone else was given to someone else to raise with a cover
story. Both of these are plausible enough.

Some stories I’ve read have people kidnapping random children for illegal
experiments or training programs. In the real world, particularly in countries with
developed and functioning legal systems, this would be a highly risky move. Missing
children (especially pretty white girls in the Western world, which incidentally a lot of
these characters are) tend to draw a lot of attention. By targeting children, these
groups would potentially turn a lot of investigative attention their way, thereby
risking the entire operation. (And keeping such a large program under covers
indefinitely would be next to impossible.)

Some people have tried to handwave these things by saying that the character’s
parents just don’t care. Aside from this making little sense (the characters are usually
shown to have relatively comfortable lives beforehand, which doesn’t jive with the
“uncaring parent” excuse), this ignores the fact that siblings, friends, peers,
teachers, etc. would likely also notice the character’s disappearance, and that a
mysterious disappearance like that might lead to the parents being investigated for
murder, even if the parents attempted to explain the disappearance away by claiming
that the child ran away or went to live with a relative.

Backstories for OCs often rely on one or more canon characters acting extremely out-
of-character, even to the point of doing a complete 180 from canon characterization.
48
Kind and responsible characters may be cruel and neglectful, or cold and distant
characters may be warm and affectionate. Equally bad, a trait (or even
aperceived trait) of a canon character might be exaggerated to an extreme. If you’re
creating an OC and including canon characters in your character’s backstory, stop and
critically and objectively review the characters’ behavior: do they really seem the
type to act that way? Are those particular traits really that pronounced - or are they
even there at all? Or have you simply been projecting yourself or your own biases onto
the characters while ignoring everything that doesn’t fit? (See also: Telling Story
Canon From Personal Bias, Erroneous Memories, & Fanwank.)

Also, if you're thinking about having character who is unusually accomplished for xir
age, don't just throw in low numbers out of nowhere: certain positions require certain
degrees and/or a minimum amount of experience to hold, and no matter how smart
or gifted a person is the number of years it takes to earn those degrees or the amount
of experience required isn't going to change. And then there's the simple fact that
ageism is a thing - people do discriminate against people they perceive as being too
young to be competent at something. This means that even if your
character was some sort of genius prodigy, the character would realistically be often
treated in a patronizing and condescending manner at best, and at worst not taken as
seriously as someone older.

Don’t be a copycat.

Don’t copy huge chunks of backstory from other characters, particularly where the
circumstances were highly rare or exceptional, or where they fairly well mirror
another character’s backstory improbably closely. It’s one thing for a Hogwarts
student to have had her immediate family killed by Voldemort (or more likely, on
Voldemort’s orders), but for a family member to have saved her via sacrifice and for
her to be sent to live with abusive relatives is another.

Also, don’t try to essentially make a mashup of other characters’ backstories, either,
because invariably it’s pretty obvious that you couldn’t be bothered to think outside
of the box and instead just lifted everything from characters you’re already familiar
with.

That said, there’s nothing wrong with a character sharing some elements with other
characters, particularly where they’re exceptionally common (eg, most people go to
public school) or where they’re practically a prerequisite (EG, in an organization that
favors hiring people with no family ties, it's reasonable that there would be a lot of
orphans among them).

49
Shortcuts and conveniences: be sparse and stingy about them.

Depending on where you want your character to be in the story or roleplay, it may be
tempting to hand out shortcuts and conveniences to your character - eg, exceptional
gifts or talents from an early age, or being noticed and picked up out of relative
obscurity by someone with clout.

Not all shortcuts are bad, but always keep in mind that the more shortcuts you give
your character and the bigger they are, the less credible your character will be,
especially if these shortcuts contradict previously-established canon rules and
procedures. It’s one thing to make your character a prodigy who was able to attend
college at age sixteen and got picked up to work at a prestigious company at twenty-
three, but attending college at age ten and working at fifteen is absurd. An eleven-
year-old with a gift for music being able to play the guitar extremely well after years
of practice is believable, but an ordinary (even if extremely gifted) eleven-year-old
being able to play like a pro after only playing a guitar for a month is not.

Now, in some universes there are things that could plausibly explain someone learning
to expertly play the guitar in a short while - eg, supernatural powers, superhuman
forces, etc. In that case, have at it but - you need to be ready and willing to accept
the potential consequences and complications that would come with it and adjust
your character’s psyche and history accordingly. You don’t want to end up using it
just to handwave the presence of your character’s skill, nor do you want to end up
using it to give your character a smooth and effortless ride to power and prestige.

The fewer discounts or free handouts your character gets, the better - make your
character work, suffer, and even make sacrifices for xir goodies and achievements.

50
 Changing Alignments, Allegiances, & Loyalties More
Believably

So, you want to write about a villain who stops being so villainous, and perhaps even
becomes a hero? Or do you want to write about a hero who becomes more of a "dark"
hero, or even an outright villain? Or a character who just plain switches sides? This is
a subject that is often handled badly, with the character progression coming off as
forced and contrived. So, here are some tips that should help you write a more
plausible shift, whether you're writing an OC for a roleplay or fanfiction or a character
for an original work.

Table of Contents
 First, don't think in terms of "good/evil deep inside."
 Foreshadow!
 Don't have it happen all at once.
 Leaving one's current group does not mean allying with its rivals by default.
 If your character had an antagonistic relationship with the people xe's
defecting to, xe should have to earn their trust.
 After the switch, your character should have doubts and "off" moments, or
moments of cognitive dissonance when appropriate.

First, don't think in terms of "good/evil deep inside."

If you're thinking in terms like "good/evil deep down inside," stop right now. There's a
grain of truth to this, but for the most part it's much more complex, and people
usually change allegiances or become better or worse people for more complicated
reasons.

First, there are some people who put on a "good" front to get what they want and
drop that front as soon as they actually have it. There are also people who on their
own would be fairly decent people, but end up with bad crowds that they end up
doing awful things to fit in with or even to simply avoid complete ostracism or
punishment from the group.

However, many people see certain "evil" characters like some kind of Tootsie-Roll Pop
with a gooey center of good covered with a hard shell of evil, or particular "good"
characters as being sourballs covered in a thin sweet coating waiting to be cracked.
51
In reality, people are more like mixed bags of candy with the good and the bad all
jumbled up together. The warlord who orders the extermination of an entire race
may very well donate to and personally visit a children's hospital out of genuine
compassion. The man who stays up all night with his sick daughter fretting over her
may also believe that women should essentially stay barefoot and pregnant in the
kitchen. There is nothing contradictory or strange about this; this is simply how real
people often work.

A character who started out as "good" before going down a bad road probably had
these bad aspects all along, but situations and circumstances forced or encouraged
them to the surface. Perhaps a person had slight paranoid tendencies that were
reinforced to the point where the person thinks that everyone is out to get xir, and
now needs a reality check to see that it isn't the case. Perhaps someone who started
out as "evil" and is heading toward a better path is doing so because xe saw a way to
use xir less-destructive or harmful skills for self-gain or to work toward a pre-existing
goal or ideal.

Foreshadow!

Long before your character starts to re-evaluate xir life and make the switch, show
some foreshadowing. For example, show your character or having problems or
questioning xir own methods or views, or the methods and views of the people xe's
with. If your character is a villain who is supposed to become a hero, have a few
moments where we get to see your character's better qualities in action. If your
character is a hero who is supposed to become a villain, show off aspects of your
character's personality that would lend to villainy.

For example, a villain might stop to question whether the extreme measures xe's been
taking have been reallynecessary - maybe a doomsday device just seems
a little overboard, or maybe punishing the underlings by whipping them for a failure
that was realistically beyond their control strikes the character as absurdly cruel.
Maybe xe goes out of xir way to do something nice or decent. Maybe xe just shows
indications of just wanting to leave and get out of that situation.

Maybe a hero goes a little overboard - eg, uses more violence than necessary. Or
maybe xe complains that the protagonists are "too nice" and that they'll never get
anything accomplished this way. Or maybe xe starts displaying a generally bitter and
jaded attitude. In general, just something that will hint toward the sort of person xe
will end up becoming.

52
Don't have it happen all at once.

People's whole worldviews and moral values don't radically, let alone diametrically
change overnight. It's a gradual process that takes place over a period of time. Even
the most intensive thought reform techniques take time - and the longer a person has
held to a specific worldview/moral value system and the more emotionally invested in
it xe is, the longer it will take.

Every belief system is supported by a number of beliefs. Taking out just one - or even
a few - of these beliefs is not enough to make the worldview topple. For example,
let's say that someone believes that xe was destined to "cleanse" the world of the
impure (whatever that means) and sets off to do just that. Realistically, if this person
learned that the prophecy was fabricated just two months before xe was born, xe'd
very likely just keep going if xe genuinely believed the world needed cleansed
anyway. If this person met a few people who proved that the world wasn't as "impure"
as all that, the person would likely rationalize that most of the world was still impure
anyway, and thus xir plan is still justified. During this time the person's convictions
may be weakening, but the person won't actually change much of anything until a
critical number of beliefs have been challenged and destroyed.

Many stories (especially superhero and creepypasta stories) have characters who don't
seem to be especially awful people when they're first introduced - they're perhaps a
little troubled or frustrated, but there's nothing to suggest that they'd go on a killing
spree or try to blow up a planet. But then something happens that prompts the
character to snap and lash out violently. The moral dam apparently breached, the
character goes on to gleefully wreak all kinds of chaos and destruction. But as
discussed in further detail in Things About Death, Dying, & Murder Writers Need To
Know, peoples' moral centers don't just totally shut down because they've been forced
or cornered into performing something they would have ordinarily considered wrong
or detestable - they'd be much more likely to feel guilt and regret over the action.
See How Good People & Well-Intentioned Groups Can Go Bad for some examples of
how people can more realistically be brought to commit actions they might have
considered wrong before.

Leaving one's current group does not mean allying with its rivals by
default.

53
It happens rather often that people assume that because a character leaves their
current group because they've strayed from being a proper hero or villain, they should
join up with their rivals by default. But this isn't how things work out - leaving any
particular group doesn't automatically make you a member of another group or that
you must join them by default; it only means you're no longer a member of the group
you left.

A lot of people overlook the fact that under realistic circumstances, these characters
would more likely look for a group that's closer to their own ideals, or try to start up a
new group, or even simply go neutral. Remember: people want to remain true to
themselves. They aren't going to join up with a person or group who defies their core
morals and beliefs unless they are very, very desperate.

If they are going to join a rival group, they need a valid reason. Maybe they've
genuinely come to believe in the ideals held by their former rivals, or maybe they
believe that their former rivals will be better at helping them achieve their long-term
goals. Maybe they're mainly concerned with looking out for themselves and have been
offered a nice cushy position their former enemies in exchange for assistance.

If your character had an antagonistic relationship with the people xe's

defecting to, xe should have to earn their trust.

It frequently happens that once a character defects to another side after causing
devastating harm to that side and people that individuals on this side care about, xe'll
be forgiven and trusted completely - never mind the possibility that the character is
defecting to undermine the opposition and that the reasons the character gave for
defecting may have been completely fabricated. Even worse, if someone doesn't trust
the defector or harbors any misgivings toward xir at all, the defector will be
unequivocally treated as the victim.

Unless you want the side your character is joining to come off as naive or gullible (and
ask yourself - is it really plausible for the characters to have gotten as far as they
have up to this point if they are?) this should be avoided.

Conversely, do keep in mind that if your character's new allies or associates suspect
the character of underhanded activities under nonsensical circumstances - eg,
suspecting someone of poisoning a sandwich when that person would have absolutely
nothing of value to gain by poisoning the recipient - the new allies/associates will
most likely come off as downright paranoid.

54
After the switch, your character should have doubts and "off" moments,
or moments of cognitive dissonance when appropriate.

The conscious decision to change one's life is only the beginning. Longtime habits and
strongly-held convictions don't just vanish in a puff of smoke. Realistically, your
character would have to deal with second thoughts, doubts, and relapses or near-
relapses in at least some behaviors and habits (particularly the deeply-ingrained
ones), especially during times of stress or uncertainty. Your character might even
need a bit of a break to pull xirself back together mentally and/or reassure xirself
that xe's made the right choice after all. Also, a character who is suddenly faced with
doing actions that xe wouldn't have considered doing or would have considered taboo
before should experience and have to deal with cognitive dissonance - for example,
someone who'd have never hurt anyone intentionally before won't be able to shrug
that off in an instant, and may even experience huge amounts of guilt, doubt, and
remorse the first time xe does; and on the flip side of the coin, someone who was told
that dancing was a horrible, horrible sin would likely have to spend some time getting
past the mental blocks that kind of conditioning would instill before truly feeling
comfortable cutting a rug.

Also, a person who switches sides will most likely miss the good experiences xe had on
the other side now and then, as the positive emotions associated with those memories
aren't just going to magically fade away - and when one is feeling lost and lonely, it's
hard not to think back on the times when one felt like one had a place and was looked
after, even if it wasn't all sunshine and roses. And if your character had any sort of
positive feelings or emotional attachments whatsoever toward anyone,
xe certainly shouldn't be ready and willing to torture and kill them right off the bat.

55
 Things About Death, Dying, & Murder Writers Need To
Know

Planning to write a murder mystery or horror story? Have a creepypasta formulating in

your noodle? Here's an examination of some problems, inaccuracies, and gross
oversights that crop up rather frequently in these stories.

Table of Contents
 People aren't so easy to kill as some seem to think.
 People who don't know what they're doing are probably going to botch
something.
 Dead bodies are not easy to make vanish.
 Killing someone for the first time does not awaken an insatiable bloodlust.
 People do not suddenly commit mass murder because they "snap" and "go
insane."

People aren't so easy to kill as some seem to think.

If many stories by amateur writers on the Internet are to be believed, stabbing

someone with a chef's knife is no different than sticking a butter knife through a block
of Spam - one jab and the knife goes in easy as you please, and voila! Instant corpse!
In one story I read, a victim was stabbed from the back with a pocketknife and
dropped dead in a matter of moments.

In real life, killing is nowhere near as simple as fiction often makes it out to be for a
multitude of reasons. For one, the heart is pretty well-protected by the ribs and
sternum from the front. Likewise, the lungs are protected by the ribs. From the back,
you've got the ribs, scapulae, and spine to contend with - and the human spine, for all
its flaws, is still extremely tough.

Go and pick up a chef's knife and try to stab or cut through a frozen steak. Appreciate
how difficult that is. Human bone is even harder to cut through. Better yet, next time
you have a beef or pork roast with a bone in it around, take a knife and try to cut
through it. It'll be pretty much impossible, unless you find a joint. What's more, even
cutting through a bone with a tool designed specifically for cutting bone can take
several minutes of hard, nonstop work.

56
Now, add to that the fact that most people aren't simply going to hold still and let you
stab them. No, theywon't hold still and keep quiet because they "know that struggling
would only make it worse" or some nonsense - that would take an incredible amount
of willpower and resolve that people simply don't have. Plus, holding still while a
sadistic killer tortures you means you almost certainly will die, but if you fight back
then you at least have a chance.

In the face of an assailant, most people are going to defend themselves, even fight
back if they can. (They'll also be amped up on adrenaline, so they'll be a lot stronger
than they look.) Because they'll be defending themselves, most of the blows actually
landed on them are going to be defensive wounds, and therefore superficial. Unless
the assailant gets lucky and nicks the jugular or if the victim has a blood-clotting
disorder, these wounds won't bleed enough to put the person in any real danger
before coagulation starts. Also, the blood that gets on the knife as a result of the
contact will make the knife slippery and thus harder to handle. One consequence of a
slippery knife with no handguard to speak of is that the wielder ends up cutting xir
own hands and fingers a lot as the knife slips around in the hand.

Now, let's assume that our assailant actually manages to get the knife plunged in.
That knife won't pull out easily at all - it'll be stuck pretty firmly, and the deeper the
knife goes in, the harder it'll be to pull back out. And as long as it's there it'll help
block some of the bleeding.

In many a story, an assailant uses the ever-overused chef's knife to slice someone's
throat, and the victim dies in a matter of seconds with very little struggle. In reality,
if the assailant was successful in the attack (and remember, people don't usually keep
their kitchen knives in the best shape), xe'd still be dealing with a thrashing, gurgling
victim for several minutes... and what's more, things would get messy. An adult
human body between 150-160 pounds will hold about 4.5-7 quarts of blood, which is a
bit over a gallon. Now imagine how much mess taking even a quart of a dark,
difficult-to-clean liquid and slinging it around a room would make - for a cleanup that
would pass casual visual inspection, that's going to be hours of effort, and what's
more, a complete cleanup may simply be impossible due to things that would be
difficult or conspicuous to remove and dispose of (eg, carpeting, drapes, or furniture)
getting stained, or blood getting into nooks and crannies that are easily overlooked or
simply can't be cleaned out.

Now, how about injuries to the brain? Weeeeell... fact of the matter is, no injury that
doesn't ameliorate the base of the brain is going to be immediately fatal. It takes
about four minutes of oxygen deprivation (longer, if the body's cold) before brain cells
start to die, and if it's not the brain stem what's deprived of oxygen one way or
another, the result is going to be a brain-damaged, rather than dead victim. Plus
you've got the skull in the way, and it's a pretty hard piece of bone, particularly in the
front. Try whacking or stabbing a coconut with a knife sometime and see how easily
the knife goes through - then, remember that the human skull is evenharder.
57
People who don't know what they're doing are probably going to botch
something.

A would-be murderer who doesn't really know what xe's doing would not have the
knowledge and possibly not even the physical skill to hit where xe'd need to to make a
quick and easy kill, which means that landing a truly mortal blow would be more a
matter of luck than skill.

The average person is hardly at peak physical condition, doesn't have the training or
practice to be coordinated enough to easily land a critical hit, and knows very little
about combat outside of what xe's seen in the movies. While this person might be able
to overpower someone at a significant size and/or strength disadvantage, if the
assailant and the victim are on equal physical footing xe'll likely find xirself in a
struggle against the intended victim, and an assailant with a
distinct disadvantage compared to the intended victim is very likely to end up badly-
off indeed.

Now, assuming the intended victim didn't successfully fight back or run away and the
attacker got lucky enough to seriously wound the victim, an inexperienced or
unskilled attacker may still fail to hit anything that would ensure a certain quick
death. As a result, the victim might take a lot longer to die than anticipated, and
might very well survive long enough to get help after being left for dead.

Remember the aforementioned pocketknife victim? In the real world, she'd have stood
a good chance of survival if she'd been given prompt medical attention. What her
assailant took for "death" probably would have simply been a loss of consciousness
from the injury and shock of it all.

Dead bodies are not easy to make vanish.

In one story I read, the narrating character oh-so-casually handwaved away the
disposal of a couple of dead bodies in five words: "I disposed of the bodies." Described
thus, it makes it seem as if getting rid of a few corpses is no harder than washing the
dishes. In fact, getting rid of bodies is a monumentally difficult and time-consuming
task.

First, if we're talking about more or less average-sized adults, we're talking 150-200+
pounds of dead, lumpy weight to move around. For reference, imagine a large bag of
58
dog food and multiply that weight three or four times, and imagine that said weight
has four extremities that flop around uncooperatively when you're trying to move it -
that is, if rigor mortis hasn't set in yet. If it has, you're dealing with something that
can be pretty hard to move through doors, let alone stuff into a car or trunk for
transport.

Decaying bodies create a smell that's very difficult to miss. If you've ever smelled a
small dead animal, perhaps something hit by the car, bear in mind how small the
thing you smelled was, and try to imagine how much scent something as large as a
human body would put off. A dead body hidden in an attic, basement, shallow grave,
or anywhere that people would get anywhere near and doesn't have an airtight seal
would probably be noticed by people and animals. A body simply dumped out in the
woods or the desert would be an easy find for police dogs. Hunters and hikers
(especially if they have dogs with them) could stumble upon them as well.

Digging a hole by hand to bury a body in would mean hours of intense labor, even with
relatively soft soil. If the body isn't buried deep enough (eg, about six feet), the smell
of decomposing tissues will catch the attention of dogs and other scavengers, who will
come and dig it up to get at it. Furthermore, burying a body will leave a large patch
of obviously-disturbed soil for potentially years to come, and if investigators looking
for a missing person came upon such a patch, they'd likely dig it up to see what had
been buried.

When it comes to burning a body, you're dealing with something that's already about
80% water. While an accelerant like gasoline might help, it would still take a good
long while to burn the body. Also, it would send off a very dark and very smelly plume
of smoke into the air, and the fire won't get hot enough to destroy the bones.

Chopping it up and feeding it to the dogs isn't a breeze, either - processing that much
meat will take time and create a huge mess (especially if optimal tools aren't
available). Dogs can only eat so much at once, and feeding them too much rich food
in one meal can simply cause them to vomit it back up.

Dumping a body into water isn't without its problems - depending on where the body
is dumped, it might just wash back up where people can find it, if it ever really gets
washed out at all. Furthermore, decomposition will create gases in the body that will
cause it to float to the surface if it hasn't been weighted down.

Putting a body into a steel barrel and filling it with sulfuric acid is a surefire way to
destroy the body, but nowadays the sales of strong acids are closely monitored due to
the fact that they can be used to create explosives. Furthermore, sulfuric acid
presents a health risk to the user, as it can create dangerous fumes and cause third-
degree burns to the skin. Boiling a body in lye can also work, but there you have the
problem offinding somewhere to boil the body, and the whole process takes several
hours.
59
Trying to brush off a body never being found by simply saying that the police just
don't care or don't have the resources to look for someone doesn't really work, either.
There's nothing to stop friends and family from organizing a search effort of their
own, and some places even have organized volunteer search parties. Also, if people
have the money, they can hire private detectives.

Killing someone for the first time does not awaken an insatiable
bloodlust.

For someone to find killing addictive or feel a compulsion to kill, there'd have to be
something seriously wrong with that person already. Odds are good that such a person
would exhibit disturbing behaviors long before actually killing a human victim, such as
torturing and killing small animals since childhood, displaying callous disregard or
apathy toward the safety and welfare of others, willfully destroying property, or
inordinate obsession with gruesome and violent fantasies.

If someone with a normal moral conscience killed or nearly killed someone either
accidentally or intentionally (such as in self-defense), xe would be much more likely
to go into shock once it sunk in what xe'd done, and then afterward end up a teary,
traumatized mess in need of a lot of therapy. Furthermore, the person would feel
guilt and remorse that would never entirely go away - killing or severely hurting
another human being is a stain that can never be fully erased from one's conscience.
And the same even goes for people with minor violent tendencies who lash out and
kill after being pushed too far - once the reality of what they've done sinks in, they're
probably going to be more shocked and horrified than anything, particularly if the
victim was someone they didn't feel deserved death of all things and/or had they any
reason to feel they'd just committed a grievous wrong.

The only way for an otherwise-normal person not to feel any twinge of guilt or regret
afterward would be to have no positive emotions about the victim whatsoever while
viewing xir as subhuman or inhuman, and/or feel that the death was utterly justified
or deserved, or to be a master of compartmentalization and rationalization. And even
then, an insatiable bloodlust is not going to develop.

In any case, if the killer (or almost-killer) is going to develop any long-term mental
issues from what happened, the complete shutdown of one's sense of morality or
conscience and/or a compulsion to kill is not it. If anything, one possible consequence
is that the person would be unable to handle or even be around a weapon without
experiencing severe negative reactions, EG, panic attacks, dissociation, or becoming
violently ill. Someone who has gone through the experience of feeling the guilt and
remorse of wrongfully taking or nearly a human life will remember that pain and guilt

60
in any situation that looks like it could potentially lead to the same thing happening
again, and so that person will most likely be anything but eager to have a repeat of
that experience.

People do not suddenly commit mass murder because they "snap" and "go
insane."

It can certainly look this way to outsiders, but let's face it - how many people plotting
mass murder are going to talk about their plans and show off the guns to the
neighbors? That would just be a great way to get caught. In real cases where an
ordinary person apparently "snaps" and suddenly goes on a murder rampage,
subsequent investigations inevitably find that the person had been planning the
murder for days to months, possibly even fantasizing over committing such an action
for even longer - friends of Moncton shooter Justin Bourque reported that the young
man shared his revenge fantasies with them, though they thought nothing of it at the
time.

And as covered in On Writing Mentally Ill & Insane Characters, traumatic or high-stress
events can cause atemporary bout of psychosis in an otherwise mentally-healthy
person, but if the person had no violent tendencies or inclinations to begin with it's
not likely they'd suddenly develop.

So, in summary...

Invariably, most of grisly and gruesome elements found in murder mysteries and
horror stories are much more complicated and difficult than many people give them
credit for, or are just plain wrong:

 People aren't simply walking hunks of Spam that you can stick a knife into with
ease, but are living beings with survival instincts and a body plan that protects
many vital areas.
 There is a lot of mess associated with killing, and there is nothing simple or
easy about the cleanup afterward.
 People don't snap and "go insane" and suddenly kill people, nor does being
forced into a violent act cause the same.

61
62
 Why "Purity" Is An Overrated Character Trait

Many stories feature characters who are supposed to be "pure" for one reason or
another, and their purity is intended to be the sole or near-sole reason the characters
should be perceived as good or worthy. But very often, the "purity" of these
characters isn't really all it's cracked up to be - in reality, their "pure" qualities would
at best be neutral and at worst harmful to themselves or others. So, this article is
going to look at some of the ways characters are supposed to be "pure" in fiction and
examine the potential problems and downsides to them.

Unfamiliarity with "bad" things: This would ultimately be harmful to the "pure"
person, as xe would have no experience with negative and unpleasant things to help
xir cope when (not if) something bad when it does happen. Also, a person who is pure
in this sense is likely to make some very bad decisions, as xe'll lack the experience
and knowledge to recognize the red flags leading up to to something potentially
wrong or disastrous or know enough to read the fine print, literally or figuratively.
Also, being unexposed to bad behavior doesn't prevent a person from behaving badly -
young children tend to figure out how to lie and hit all on their own.

Inability to cope with "bad" things: A liability for most of the same reasons as above -
being unable to emotionally handle bad things in life leaves a person in dire straits
indeed. In fact, this is what usually happens in stories with these characters. But
rather than having the character make an effort at learning to cope, it usually ends
up with the character having a big strong protective love interest to cuddle and kiss
the emotional trauma away (until it happens again). In reality, people who need and
use people thus are emotional vampires and anyone who had to put that much effort
into maintaining someone else's emotional state would sooner or later end up a
drained emotional mess xirself.

Lack of "negative" emotions: "Negative" emotions aren't necessarily bad. Wanting to

have nice things (the basis of greed) isn't a problem until one treats others unfairly to
get them. Feeling a visceral reaction against something you don't like (hate and
anger) is Nature's way of telling you you're dealing with a threat, and this isn't a
problem until one does things like refusing to consider that the hate/anger may be
unfounded and irrational, or that one's reactions to the subject of hate/anger are
unfair and overblown. On the other hand, hate and anger can motivate someone to
try to do something that is a genuine problem - if you feel angry about the fact that
someone got wronged, you're more likely to try and set it right than otherwise. It's not
the absence/presence of "negative" emotions that make one's character, but rather
how one deals with them.

63
Some characters actually have the ability to wipe out or erase negative emotions from
people, which is often used to neutralize or even redeem enemies. But when you
think about it, this would realistically likely only be a temporary fix - it does nothing
to teach the affected person how to deal with future negative emotions in a healthy
way. Neither does it necessarily address the root of the problem - if the person
behaved destructively out of anger built up from being treated inconsiderately, you'd
likely just see the same scenario play out again eventually if people continued to
treat that person the same as before.

Having "pure" intentions: Just because one has good intentions in what one does
doesn't mean that the outcome will be desirable or that the methods are just. One
could act on the "pure" desire to make a loved one safe and happy, but end up making
that person feel smothered and stifled instead. One could have a "pure" desire to
govern a country justly and fairly, but still lack the skills/knowledge necessary to
create a system of laws and governance that actually works, resulting in the country
being no better off than when a tyrant was in charge. One could have a "pure"
intention to keep a country/city safe and end up chasing/punishing scapegoats and
people who were never a real threat in the first place, or creating laws/programs that
don't really work or create worse problems in the long run.

Moral purity: A recipe for disaster for multiple reasons. First, different people have
different ideas of what constitutes "moral" behavior, and so many (if not most) people
will find your character coming up morally short in a few areas. Secondly, many
people will find the whole thing pretentious and presumptuous, particularly if you
character's "moral" behavior involves chastising or lecturing people on relatively trivial
matters (EG, slight rudeness), or for things they think aren't really that character's
business (EG, how a casual acquaintance should be parenting a teenager), or for being
preemptively snarky or violent to a "bad" character who hasn't evendone anything bad
yet (which basically makes the "moral" character a bully).

Sexual purity: AKA virginity. This is a neutral trait; it has no bearing on how kind,
caring, responsible, and competent a character is, which are traits that matter.

Purity of beauty: Again, this has no bearing on whether a character is a good person
or not, so vaunting a character up over the "purity" of xir good looks comes off as
shallow and pretentious. Plus, physical beauty is largely subjective.

Of course, these traits on their own don't make a character bad or even a bad person
necessarily - perfectly good characters and good people can be beautiful, chaste,
adhere to moral codes, etc. But they don't really make your character an especially
good or worthy person, either.

64
 Phlebotinum-Development Questions

"Phlebotinum" is a term for any object or substances that does something within the
story. It can be anything - a magical sword, a potion, a plasma rifle, or superpowers.
However, many writers end up not thinking the implications of their phlebotinum
through properly, which can create any number of plotholes and awkward scenarios as
the story goes on. This list of questions is intended to help you think things through
early on, thereby avoiding potential plotholes in the future.

 What sort of plots could it resolve instantly in the future? How will you prevent
it from being able to resolve these plots, if you plan to do them?

 How might people use it to amuse themselves?

 How might people use it for monetary gain?

 How might people use it in an intimate manner?

 How might people use it for ordinary, everyday tasks and problems? How useful
is it compared to more conventional means?

 If it's not already a weapon, how might it be weaponized?

 What could make it less effective? Stop it from working entirely? Make it
completely backfire/misfire?

 How do people gain access to it?

 How easily can it be accessed and used?

 Who can access/use it most readily? Why?

 How difficult is it to use or master?

 Who, if anyone, thinks people should be restricted from accessing/using it?

Why?

 Who, if anyone, would be restricted from accessing/using it? Why?

 Who would try to hoard/stockpile it? Why?

 If it's typically non-lethal, how might it be used to kill someone?

 If it's typically lethal, how might it be used in a non-lethal way?

65
 Does it have any short-term side-effects? What about long-term ones?

66
 So You Want To Have An Attractive Character?

Whether you're trying to write a lead for a bodice-ripper or roleplay a sexy Cassanova,
here are some pointers and advice to make your characters more appealing and more
shippable to others.

Table of Contents
 It's not all about the looks.
 Don't tell the audience what to do or think.
 Don't act desperate or entitled.

It's not all about the looks.

Perhaps one of the biggest mistakes people make is trying to have their characters’
attractiveness ride on their looks. Many character intros will describe someone who is
(at least, in the author’s mind) the very pinnacle of physical beauty or sex appeal,
and expect readers or players to find their character desirable. But thing is, physical
appearance ain’t all that. Edward Cullen was supposed to be the most gorgeous thing
that ever brooded on two legs, but a lot of people simply found him weird and creepy
rather than attractive.

There are many other important factors in attractiveness that people overlook -
particularly, personality and the way the character behaves. Here are some non-
physical factors that can affect someone's attractiveness and sex appeal:

Does this character look like the kind of person you could have a good time with?
Some indicators of this might be...

 Displaying social confidence, genuineness, and self-assuredness - EG, smiling,

laughing, and making jokes.
 Showing a genuine interest in something the other person finds fun.
 Showing genuine willingness to try things that the other person is into.
 Looking like the kind of person who could take or introduce the other to fun
adventures.
 Looking like the kind of person that the other person would feel comfortable
being xirself around.

67
Does this character look like someone who would support the other person in
fulfilling xir dreams and goals?

 Someone interested in having children might find someone who seems good
with kids more attractive than otherwise.
 Someone who wanted to see the world might be more attracted to someone
who showed an adventurous personality.

Someone who enjoys learning and values knowledge might be more attracted
to someone who does the same.

Does this character look like the kind of person who could see to xir physical and
emotional needs? For example...

 Being willing to listen to a person's fears and anxieties without being

judgmental or condescending.
 Being willing to give help and assistance without being judgmental or
condescending.
 Giving compliments and praise where due.
 Showing willingness and ability to meet material needs - EG, being willing and
able to fix things around the house or to get or prepare food.

On the other hand, there are indicators of stormy weather ahead that might put
someone off no matter how physically attractive xe was:

 Constant or near-constant melancholy - this can indicate someone who will only
be depressing or a drag to be around.
 Unwillingness to try anything other people are into - it's hard to have fun with
someone who constantly reacts to things other people enjoy with apathy
and/or derision.
 Ribbing or teasing, particularly where the ribbing or teasing is mean-spirited
and/or hits something that the recipient of the teasing is sensitive or sore
about, and is not something that the recipient can laugh along with - this can
indicate an emotional abuser.
 Someone who is only happy in the presence of a significant other - this
indicates an emotional vampire.
 Cold, contemptuous, or spiteful behavior in general.
 Dishonesty and/or evasiveness when answering questions that shouldn't be a big
deal to answer - like, where you are when you're not at the restaurant you
were supposed to meet your significant other at thirty minutes ago. This can
indicate someone who is doing something legally or morally questionable
and/or just doesn't really care about the other person's feelings.
 Being short-tempered, finicky, picky, or hyper-sensitive over minor issues.
Feeling like one has to constantly tip-toe around a person to avoid setting xir

68
 off is incredibly stressful. Also, if such minor things merit such a major
reaction, what's an actual major issue going to do?
 Unwillingness to be useful, helpful, or considerate - almost nobody likes a
millstone.

Don't tell the audience what to do or think.

Looks are subjective - different people find different looks more attractive than
others. It’s pretty annoying to have someone describe a character in precise detail
and then be told that their character is unequivocally beautiful, cute, handsome, or
whatever. How ‘bout just describe the character, and let the other players or the
audience decide for themselves whether or not the character has these qualities?
Alternatively, give a less-precise description and say that the character is pleasant to
look at, or attractive by conventional standards, or whatever seems most appropriate,
and let the other party fill in the blanks themselves.

(Also, telling people that their roleplaying characters find yours attractive, cute, or
sexy is a form ofpowerplaying, a roleplaying faux pas.)

Don't act desperate or entitled.

Desperation or a sense of entitlement is a huge attraction-killer, both in real life and

from the point of fiction. If you constantly point out that your character is attractive
and/or act like everyone and/or their characters should find your character sexy,
people are going to catch on and be put off. (And the less likeable a character’s
personality is, the more irritating being told how gorgeous and graceful a character is
becomes.)

And remember - in RP land, nobody owes you a ship. This is more meta advice than
actual character advice, but if you go into a roleplay acting like people owe you a
ship, other players may recognize that you’re likely to be the roleplaying equivalent
of Overly Attached Girlfriend and avoid you and/or your character accordingly.

And on this track, if it becomes obvious that you are playing a self-insertion and that
you are looking for an ego-boost or personal wish-fulfillment fantasy via an RP ship,
savvy players will avoid shipping with you, as doing so can lead to an incredibly
unhealthy situation for you and them. (Playing like this can mess with your head and

69
the head of those who ship with you in very bad ways as real emotions become
attached to and tangled up in fictional scenarios.)

70
Common, Yet Terrible Character Descriptors - And How
To Fix Them
(And Write Better Descriptions In General)

When asked to describe their characters or when writing their character profiles,
many people tend to use the same over-generalized descriptors over and over. The
result tends to be what I call a "Forer profile" - it's so vague that it can fit any number
of characters - all of whom are wildly different - equally well. And when the same
character description could fit a sneaky trickster as it could a determined soldier as it
could a grad student opening a florist's shop, that's a problem. So, I'm going to outline
how to give more and better information on your character to give people a better
idea of what sort of person they're reading about.

Table of Contents
 Useless Description Example 1: "My character loves
animals/books/movies/music/whatever."
 Useless Description Example 2: "My character is fun to be around/My character
loves having fun."
 Useless Description Example 3: "My character is loyal to xir friends and would
do anything for them.
 Useless Description Example 4: "My character has a temper."
 Useless Description Example 5: "My character is unique/different from the
others because..."
 Useless Description Example 6: "My character is mysterious..."
 In short, it's not about what your character IS. It's what your character DOES.

Useless Description Example 1: "My character loves

animals/books/movies/music/whatever."

For the sake of simplicity, we'll go with "animals" for most of this particular section.
Question is, what do you mean by "animals," and how does your character relate to
them? Does your character like cats and dogs? Cobras and tarantulas? Does your

71
character keep pets, or does xe have to admire them from afar? Instead of saying that
your character "loves animals," try to describe how your character relates to or
interacts with animals, and you'll convey far more information about your character.
For example, you could write "my character spoils his cat." This tells us three things
about your character - 1. he's likely a cat person, 2. he owns a cat, and 3. he pays a
lot of attention to it.

Here are other examples of useful statements:

 "My character volunteers at the animal shelter."

 "My character is taking horseback riding lessons."
 "My character watches birds while hiking."
 "My character's room is decorated in assorted wildlife posters."
 "My character frequently watches Animal Planet."
 "My character owns dozens of books about spiders."
 "My character is a member of the Wildlife Conservation Society."

All of the above statements are only a few words longer than "my character loves
animals," but contain hugeamounts of information in comparison. From a statement
such as "my character watches birds while hiking," we can induct that the character is
particularly fond of birds, enjoys being outside, and has an active lifestyle. "Owns
dozens of books about spiders" not only informs us that the character is passionately
interested in spiders, but is also that xe probably enjoys reading.

Don't say your character loves flowers - say that your character raises a flower garden
or plans to become a florist. Don't say that your character listens to music - say that
your character enjoys classic rock and folk music. Don't say your character likes
reading - say that your character enjoys reading history and fantasy fiction. And so on
and so forth.

Useless Description Example 2: "My character is fun to be around/My

character loves having fun."

Fun is entirely subjective. What I find fun, you may not find fun and vice-versa. Plus,
pretty much everyonelikes to have fun in some form of another. Saying your character
likes to have fun is sort of like saying that your character wears clothes and sits on
chairs. What we need to know is what your character finds fun, or why people might
perceive your character as fun. For example:

 "My character loves jamming to the Beatles."

 "My character loves traveling to new places."

72
  "My character likes to experiment in the kitchen."
 "My character likes playing volleyball."
 "My character loves to do her friends' hair."
 "My character likes to watch comedy shows with other people."
 "My character enjoys playing tabletop RPGs."

Useless Description Example 3: "My character is loyal to xir friends and

would do anything for them."

People frequently use this descriptor (or a variation thereof) as a rather cheap
shorthand to say that their character is a good person. However, loyalty and self-
sacrificial tendencies a good person do not make.Someone can be loyal to people who
do horrible things to others, or their sacrifices might actually cause more harm than
good. If you've ever said that your character is loyal and would do anything for xir
friends, ask yourself:

 Would your character pass up on a job interview to pick up a friend with a flat
tire if it meant losing out on the job altogether, thereby having no money
paying the rent, thereby resulting in homelessness?
 Would your character sell the vehicle xe had spent years saving up for to pay
off a friend's gambling debt - for the third time?
 Would your character go so far in covering for a friend's crime that xe would
accept a punishment that would mean separation, even alienation from other
friends and family members for years to come, possibly the rest of xir life?
 Would your character get up at two in the morning and haul ass to drive three
states over to pick up the friend who was evicted from xir home for drug use,
leaving behind a six-month-old baby sick with the flu to do so?
 Would your character sell a 14-year-old child into slavery to a sadist in order to
save an old friend?

If you answered 'yes' to any of these, then your character is at best probably not very
bright, and at worst an outright villain. If you answered "but my character wouldn't be
friends with a gambler/addict!" - think again. Good friends can and do fall into bad
situations. Just because someone wasn't a gambler or addicted to a substance when
you met xir, doesn't mean xe won't be later on.

The following are more likely to be useful - and true-to-life:

 "My character is usually eager to help xir friends when xe can."

 "My character volunteers for charity work when possible."

73
  "My character has looked after xir friends when they were ill."

Useless Description Example 4: "My character has a temper."

This one can also take the form of statements like "my character is usually calm and
caring, but can become angry and aggressive if irritated too much" or "usually kind
and loving, but can also be very angry if something sets xir off."

News flash: Everyone is like this, so this statement says absolutely nothing about your
character at all.Everyone has a temper to a certain degree. Setting it off is all about
finding the person's hot button or buttons. Some people are just more sensitive or
have more buttons than others. Question is, what sets your character off? Here are
some examples:

 "My character is insecure about xir height and becomes upset when someone
points it out insensitively."
 "My character quickly loses xir temper when people leave messes behind."
 "My character is easily irritated by people invading xir personal space."
 "My character quickly becomes irritated when other people behave in a childish
or irresponsible manner."
 "My character is afraid of germs, and feels personally disrespected when people
leave things like dirty laundry or dishes around."

Useless Description Example 5: "My character is unique/different from the

others because..."

Nine times out of ten, characters described as unique or different actually isn't that
different at all. For example, one Harry Potter OC I saw was described as being
"different from other students" because she mouthed off at teachers.
Precisely which students it makes her different from is a mystery - in pretty much
any Harry Potter roleplay, a certain number of characters who mouth off to teachers
are practically a prerequisite. In canon, Harry snarked at teachers all the time. Just
describe what your character does and leave it at that. If your character really is
unique, it will stand for itself in the story or roleplay.

74
Useless Description Example 6: "My character is mysterious."

This descriptor is frequently used to try to generate intrigue around the character,
but more often than not it ends up being unhelpfully vague. On its own, "mysterious"
can mean a lot of things. So instead of describing your character as "mysterious" and
leaving it at that, ask yourself what could potentially make your character mysterious
and describe that instead. For example:

 "Little is known about xir past, and xe has so far been unwilling to talk about
it."
 "My character tends to be very private and quiet about xir business."
 "My character has shared very little about xirself with others."
 "Xe does not have a clear memory of what happened, and so far investigations
have yielded very little information."

In short, it's not about what your character IS. It's what your character
DOES.

That's basically the whole thing in a nutshell. Don't describe what (you think) your
character is - describe what your character actually DOES in xir world. Compare:

"My character loves fashion and listening to music."

"My character likes to sew her own clothes and do her friends' hair. She has a large
collection of music, which includes artists like Enya, the Temptations, and Lady
Gaga."

The first statement is incredibly vague and doesn't actually give any useful
information. The second tells us that we're looking at a creative, sociable gal who has
a wide variety of musical tastes.

Something that can be particularly effective are practical, rather than abstract
descriptions. Practical descriptions don't work in every case, but I find they work
excellently for throwing around ideas or pitching a new character. Basically, I will
describe what I can see the character doing under various circumstances. Here's one
of my practical descriptions:

"I can see somebody possibly coming to this character to commission a weapon or
something. They enter his house, and a coffee-bot rolls up and offers coffee. The
'bot doesn't have a face precisely, but its design evokes cute googly eyes. After a bit,
75
Martin calls the characters over. He tinkers with something or stares at his lappy for
at least thirty seconds before swiviling around on his chair. Then he looks at the
characters with his fingers steepeled, his index fingers just touching his chin... and
he's wearing his grease-stained underwear."

I could have just said "my character is an inventor who tends to get too wrapped up in
his work at times," but that wouldn't have been as informative - or fun! - to read.

76
 On Showing vs. Telling

If you've heard "show, don't tell!" but aren't sure just what it means in terms of
writing, then this article's for you. If you haven't heard of showing vs. telling at all,
then this article is also very much for you. We're going to look at what showing vs.
telling is, why showing is often preferable to telling, and then, why you shouldn'tshow
instead of tell in some cases.

Table of Contents
 What showing and telling are.
 Why you might show, rather than tell.
 Showing over telling is often good, but..!
 So, in summary:

What showing and telling are.

In essence, telling is giving a conclusive statement or description of something in your

story, be it a place, person, or situation. On the other hand, showing involves
describing facts and qualities that can be used to logically infer what you're trying to
convey about something. Here are some examples:

Telling: Miki was a very messy artist.

Showing: Miki's hair had been pulled into a saggy bun from which flyaway strands
stuck out in all directions. Her shirt was mussed and wrinkled, and her hands were
splattered and smudged with paint.

Telling: The cat got angry.

Showing: The cat's ears pulled back against its head, its back arched, and it growled.

Telling: It was a beautiful spring day in the village.

Showing: A gentle breeze carried the scent of apple blossoms across the sun-warmed
village.

77
Why you might show, rather than tell.

To build up atmosphere. Imagining things that would stimulate the senses in real life
causes the mind to respond with emotions and feelings associated with the real thing.
You can say that the tavern is repulsively filthy, but they probably won't feel truly
repulsed until you show them the grime caked onto the furniture and the dog hair
floating in the soup and give them a whiff of the acrid scent of too many filthy bodies
crammed into a tiny place and the odor of rotting meat coming from somewhere in
the back.

To make the audience really believe in what's supposed to be going on. For
example, you can say that your villain is evil and you can even have characters talk
about the awful things your villain does, but nothing will really convince an audience
of a villain's awfulness like showing the villain doing something horrendous will.
Likewise, it's easier to believe in a character's passion for some hobby or interest if
you actually show the character behaving passionately over this hobby or interest
rather than just saying the character is passionate about it.

To give people the a chance to figure things out for themselves. Putting the facts
and details together and figuring things out for oneself can be very gratifying for
people. Plus, if you're running a roleplay where players are supposed to figure things
out and solve problems for themselves, showing rather than telling is often vital.

To let people make up their own minds. Many people tend to chafe if they feel like
a writer or game master is trying to force their perceptions, particularly if they don't
agree with the writer or GM's view on things. For example, if one says that a city is
the most beautiful city ever built and then ascribes qualities to it that are subjective
(not everyone is going to favor the same elements in design and architecture), then
many won't be able to agree that the city is the most beautiful ever and may get
annoyed at the insistence that it is. But if one just describes the city and lets people
think of it what they will, this problem is averted.

Showing over telling is often good, but..!

You may have heard some people say "show, don't tell!" as if it's something you should
or must always to do write a good story, but this simply isn't true. If you're writing
about something that doesn't build up atmosphere nor shows off something important
to the plot, the "show, don't tell" rule can be ignored - and probably should be to
avoid bogging a story down with needless detail.

78
Let's say that someone is trying to write a scene where the protagonists are discussing
their plans for storming the enemy's stronghold, and this scene is intended to build up
to the story's climax. The writer decides to throw in that a character grabs a piece of
fruit from the fruit bowl while discussing plans. In this case, the action of eating the
fruit is trivial to what's going on and lavishing too much attention on it would detract
from the suspense and anticipation that the scene was supposed to be building up. So
in this case, "Cally picked an apple out of the bowl and took a bite" would be
preferable to "Cally wrapped her spidery fingers around a glossy red apple, lifted it to
her mouth, and sunk her teeth into the crisp flesh."

There's also no need to show things that are completely mundane and familiar to
audiences unless you're writing from the perspective of someone who is unfamiliar
with them. Zorban from Planet Glormoth might pick up "a round, red, glistening fruit
that tapers gently to the bottom," but Lucy from Louisiana should just pick up "a shiny
red apple."

So in summary:

 Telling is giving people a conclusive statement or description of

something. Showing is giving people facts and details they can use to draw that
conclusion themselves - or even draw their own conclusions with, if it's
something subjective.
 Showing can be used to make places seem more vivid and real, make people
really believe the things you're trying to convey about your world and
characters, and let people think for themselves and make their own
conclusions.
 Showing is good in many cases, but it's not always appropriate. If it's not really
important to the atmosphere or plot, you can safely get away with telling
rather than showing. If it would just detract from things that are important to
the plot if you showed it, you probably should just tell it instead.

79
 Basic Tips To Write Better Geniuses, Scientists, &
Intellectuals

Know what science actually is.

This is one of the most important steps. Science is a method of discovery, not a
philosophy or a belief system. It does not nor has it ever claimed to have all the
answers - rather, it's a method used to find the answers.

If you actually know what the scientific method is and how it works, the concept of
"harmonizing science and magic" sounds about as exciting and revolutionary as
harmonizing spiral binders and poetry. There's nothing "opposite" about them in any
sense, and spiral binders are a good way to keep your poetry organized. Likewise, the
scientific method would be a good way to figure out how magic worked.

If magic existed as depicted in most fantasy stories, there would be a branch of

science dedicated to figuring out just how and why it worked. Scientists would not
deny its existance simply because they had no explanation for it yet - they would
spend years, even lifetimes working on figuring it out. An actual scientist would not
see something magical and think, "That's impossible because the laws of science say
so!" Xe would be thinking, "Well, that looks like magic, but everything we always
thought was magic turned out not to be, so this probably isn't magic, either. What's
really going on here?"

To get a basic idea of what the scientific method is and what it entails, go here.

Know how logic actually works.

When people try to imagine a "logical" character, they very often think of someone
like Spock who does completely ridiculous and even ultimately detrimental things in
the name of logic - EG, fail to take important factors such as other peoples' emotional
states into account when making decisions. "Logic" in and of itself does not state half
the things people often say it does. For example, logic does not in itself "dictate" that
fairies don't exist. However, it does dictate that just because many people believe in
fairies doesn't make them any more likely to be real, because we know large numbers
of people believe things that aren't real or true all the time.

80
To get a better grasp on what this logic thing is all about, I recommend you head
over here.

Don't have them know everything about everything.

You know the Reed Richardsian geniuns who can engineer an aeroplane at breakfast,
sequence a genome at lunch, and examine ice cores at dinner? Or the Don't do that.
Every scientific body of knowledge takes a lot of time and dedication to learn in-
depth, and and there simply aren't enough hours in the day to get to know them all
thus. Anyone hoping to pull off something truly innovative or do something
particularly remarkable in xir chosen field will need to have in-depth knowledge, and
what's more, will have to spend considerable time keeping abreast of the latest
discoveries and developments in order to remain relevant in it. Then there's the fact
that they just might not be all that interested in other branches of science - a marine
biologist just might not care all that much about astrophysics or the chemistry behind
making a perfect beer. And they might actually prefer to actually have time to spend
time with friends and family or go on vacations and whathaveyou.

Let your character be wrong before finding the solution.

In an early episode of CSI, a character looked at Gil Grissom - a genius by any

definition - and made a jab about him being wrong about something. Grissom looked
at the character and calmly responded, "I'm often wrong. It's how I get to right."

Even the smartest and most educated of people have to go through a lot of trial-and-
error when it comes to solving tricky problems, often in part because they don't
initially have all of the facts. In fact, the main purpose of a scientific experiment is to
weed out the things that don't work so that one can ultimately find out what does.

Don't make (all of) them dry and dull.

Smart people and scientists come in every personality type there is. Sure, there are
those who couldn't crack a joke if their lives depended on it, but on the other hand
there are people like Neil DeGrasse Tyson who can make death by black hole
absolutely hilarious, or the playful Adam Savage best known for his role
onMythbusters.
81
Don't use big or obscure words where they don't belong, unless your
character is supposed to be pompous or pretentious.

If you're combing the thesaurus for no other reason than you think a character needs
big words to use to look smart, you're doing it wrong. Generally, intelligent and
educated folks choose large words over smaller words when they are more precise and
descriptive than the latter. If you're going to use a large word, ask yourself whether it
actually helps to clarify what the person is saying, or whether it just muddles it. Also,
if your character is ready to volley an insult, don't flip through the medical dictionary
to find the Latin word for 'butt' - just use 'ass.'

Remember that scientists and intellectuals do appreciate the beauty of

the world and the universe.

A popular misconception is that these type of folks fail to see the wonder in a flower
or a rainbow. The truth is, they do - and they're so impressed and captivated by what
they see that they want to learn more about it. Learning what makes rainbows shine
and flowers blossom only adds to their appreciation. Not investigating or researching
them makes about as much sense as putting birthday or Christmas presents up on a
shelf forever just to go on wondering what's in them.

Remember that real scientists and intellectuals often enjoy

entertainment with bad science.

When it comes to science fiction that plays it fast and loose with science, Doctor
Who probably takes the cake. But guess who fanboys about Doctor Who on his blog?
NASA astronomer Phil Plait, that's who. The man even built a snow dalek in the winter
of '09. Neil Degrasse Tyson stated that if the director doesn't care whether the movie
is scientifically accurate, then he doesn't care. He also described the
movie Armageddon as fun, even though the asteroids did have really good aim.

82
Remember that they enjoy the same things as everyone else.

Michio Kaku enjoys ice-skating. Phil Plait posts pictures of his cat. While most of them
will enjoy doing things that challenge the noodle a bit more than average, many of
their interests and likes won't be much different from anyone else's.

Remember, the name of the game is curiosity.

The type of people who become scientists and intellectuals are highly curious folks.
They poke, prod, explore, and ask questions (and hopefully, have the social skills to
know when doing so would be inappropriate). Because their ever-hungry brains are
almost always looking for something to graze on, they tend to observe and analyze
what's going on around them. This doesn't mean making observations on the level of
Sherlock Holmes, but they will tend to notice more things than the average person,
particularly if these things relate to their interests somehow.

83
 Protagonist-Centered Morality: What It Is, And How
You Can Avoid It

Are you trying to write a story with protagonists who are supposed to be perceived as
(at least mostly) good or heroic by your audiences? Are they supposed to be in
opposition to characters who are supposed to be perceived as villainous and evil?
Then one thing you'll want to try to minimize is protagonist-centered moralitybecause
left unchecked, it can potentially make people see your characters exactly
the opposite of how you intended!

Table of Contents
 What Protagonist-Centered Morality Is
 What Protagonist-Centered Morality Can Look Like
 Ways To Spot & Avoid Protagonist-Centered Morality
 In summary...

What Protagonist-Centered Morality Is

In works with protagonist-centered morality, the merit and value of characters,

actions, choices, and so forth will be judged largely on how they affect the
protagonists and how the protagonists feel about it:

 Whether you're good or bad will depend on whether you help or hinder these
protagonists (no matterwhat they're demanding from you!) and/or whether
you're on the "right" side (regardless of what you actually do!).
 The protagonists always deserve what they want, no matter who might be
inconvenienced or even endangered for it. They deserve it more than anyone
else, too – no matter how innocuous or reasonable the competition's
motivations actually are.
 Anyone who disagrees with the protagonists will be portrayed as wrong, even
evil, no matter what positions they take – and in some works, the protagonists
will end up taking the exact opposite position from what they took earlier, and
be completely right again.
84
This isn't simply about having flawed or short-sighted protagonists – in such works,
other characters (including characters from outside of your protagonists'
clique/crew/group) will be able to disagree or disapprove without constantly being
vilified or depicted as unfair, contemptuous, haughty, arrogant, presumptuous,
bullyish, bratty, whiny, disrespectful, and so forth; and their opinions will sometimes
change the protagonists' minds and make them consider new perspectives.
Protagonists might sometimes get bitter when things don't go their way, but the
stories won't treat these instances as grave injustices.

What Protagonist-Centered Morality Can Look Like

In a story that focuses on a group of lab technicians, new technician Tessa comes
along and notices that the lab is filled with safety hazards – bottles of dangerous
chemicals set where they could easily be knocked over, lighting is extremely dim,
scientists are wearing watches and long loose hair while neglecting to wear proper
protective equipment, etc. Tessa points this out and tries to get them to correct
these problems for the sake of their work and for the sake of their own safety. Rather
than it being acknowledged that these scientists are skating on thin ice, the story
treats Tessa as a jackbooted killjoy – and when she finally leaves, everyone breathes a
collective sigh of relief and goes back to merrily violating safety protocols as before.

In real life, safety protocols like these don't exist to squash people's fun – they exist to
protect the health and lives of the workers, the projects they're working on, and the
equipment they use (which the owners of the lab might not have the budget to fix or
replace if something happens to it). Someone like Tessa would beabsolutely
correct telling these people that they needed to straighten up their act, and any
employer would be well within their rights to fire them all.

Howell, the leader of a small task force, has been behaving increasingly
strangely. His orders make less and less sense, and often as not his tactics end in
disaster and loss. He's been disappearing for hours on end without saying a word
beforehand. When questioned, he becomes defensive to the point of hostility and
refuses to explain himself, pulling rank to shut his subordinates up. The few who
remain loyal to Howell tell the others that they should have more faith in him
because he always has a plan and things always work out in the end.

Finally, things do ultimately work out for the task force – but it's despite Howell's
orders and actions rather than because of him, because their victory was ultimately
decided by a lucky break that nobody could have seen coming (whoda thunk that the
guy Howell insulted back in Chapter 3 would come along with a truck full of weapons
just in the nick of time?!). At the end of the day, Howell is once again lauded as a
hero and those who criticized him have to admit that they were wrong.
85
Now for the reality check: Any leader you win despite of, rather than because of, is
the opposite of what a leader should be. Secondly, there are many, many reasons why
a leader should never be given eternal implicit trust - wielding too much power for
too long can go to one's head, stress can impair one's judgment, and certain medical
conditions can impair one's judgment or even cause a significant shift in personality,
so any sudden erratic behavior or drop in performance should not be left
unscrutinized. And what's more, a leader being held above scrutiny or reproach is a
surefire sign that the leader, if not the whole group, is corrupt.

Cay works for an agency that tackles supernatural threats, and has been trying to
hunt down and stop a mage whose activities are killing a lot of people. But when
Cay's sister Agatha falls seriously ill, Cay drops everything to go and see her - without
so much as clearing it with the boss and making sure the case gets picked up by
someone else who can handle it. When Cay returns to the job a week later, the boss
does not give a reprimand, but instead allows the agent to return to work as if
nothing happened. Anyone who expresses disapproval over Cay's behavior is depicted
as cold and insensitive.

Now, wanting to visit one's ill sister is understandable - but Cay's choices have ensured
that even more people die by delaying the mage's capture, and thus, chose to
sacrifice these people and put their family and friends through unimaginable grief for
Agatha's sake. What's more, it's not going to reflect well on the agency, either -
whoever is giving the agency its funding probably won't be pleased to learn that
agents are being allowed to fritter their time away on personal matters while people
die because dangerous criminals are going uncaught. Realistically, this could also end
up in the agency having its funding cut, a lot of its employees being fired, or the
whole thing being shut down altogether in favor of a program that stands a better
chance of getting the job done.

Tabitha joins a team of superheroes. On her first mission, she loses control of her
powers and destroys an art gallery, injuring several people inside. The team chalks it
up to bad luck and lets her have another try. However, on her next mission she makes
a mistake that brings down an entire house. Third mission, Tabitha's powers wonk
out again, enabling the villain to escape from her capture. Similar happens on the
fourth and fifth missions.

At this point, a member of the team suggests that Tabitha be removed from active
duty until she can gain better control. Tabitha immediately says that this isn't fair
because she didn't intentionally cause these mishaps. Finally, the group consults with
their boss, who ultimately rules that because Tabitha didn't mean to do it, she can
remain an active member.

The purpose of a team is to get a job done - in this case, protecting the innocent and
preventing destruction. If Tabitha's presence isn't stopping more hurt and destruction
than it's causing, then she needs taken off the team, period. Her intentions are
86
completely irrelevant – what matters is whether she can do the job. Plus, if Tabitha
heads out into the field knowing that there are high odds her powers will hurt
someone or damage their stuff, then she is at fault for the harm she causes because
she knew it would probably happen and didn't try to prevent it. At this point, she has
about the same moral standing as someone who drives a vehicle or operates heavy
machinery while under the influence.

Hayden's group has been fighting a cruel enemy faction for some time now. The
faction is eager to resort to torture and exceptionally cruel methods of execution,
which has been used to establish just how evil the enemy is. When Hayden's friend
Emily is captured by the enemy, Hayden goes to Reed, who defected from the enemy
long ago but still knows how to get around in their territory. Reed refuses to help,
citing that if he's caught, his entire family could be hunted down and painfully
executed by the faction's agents in retaliation – and he's got precedent to think this
might happen.

Hayden calls him a coward, then threatens to tie him up and leave him on the
enemy's borders with a sign over his chest reading 'traitor,' where the enemy will find
him and take him off for whatever punishment they deem fit to give him… if the wild
animals don't eat him first.

None of Hayden's friends or allies ever remark on the cruelty of this, let alone point
out that this course of action is just as horrible as anything they condemn the enemy
for or that it's unfair to risk Reed's entire family just for one person. Neither does
Hayden ever have to confront and face the fact that the course the group is taking is
no different from what the enemy might do, and that they might not have the moral
high ground after all. In fact, the entire story goes on depicting Hayden's group in a
favorable light despite them getting up to similar shenanigans throughout.

Done correctly, an arc where the protagonists start behaving just as badly as the
enemy can be amazing. But to be done correctly, tough questions have to be asked
and harsh truths have to be faced. Protagonists and other characters whose opinions
matter have to acknowledge that lines have been crossed, and the fact that they have
crossed these lines should trouble them. Otherwise, people may start questioning just
why the protagonists should be considered the "good" guys, and subsequently, why
they should even care whether or not they win.

Ways To Spot & Avoid Protagonist-Centered Morality

87
Ask yourself what makes the protagonists and the antagonists so different from
each other. Do the protagonists really and truly show more regard to the welfare,
freedom, dignity, and safety of other people than the antagonists do? Or do they
perhaps talk about how they do, but their actual choices and actions are little
different from those of the antagonists? Do you basically have an "us versus them"
situation, with the banners they stand under being the only functional difference
between them? If so, why exactly should we see your characters as better people?

Ask yourself how far the story values the wants and needs of the protagonists
above the needs and welfare of others. Do the protagonists readily endanger the
lives of others to save the life of one of their own, and A: those others didn't willingly
choose to endanger themselves for this person, and B: there's nothing bigger at stake
to justify this kind of trade-off? Do they have a firm "we'll never abandon one of our
own!" policy – to the point where they'll readily endanger, hurt, or kill others to see it
through, up to and including bystanders and those who pose no immediate threat? Do
the protagonists act as some kind of great injustice or insult when people don't want
to set aside their dreams or passions or to rearrange their lives to do what the
protagonists want? And is this type of behavior never treated as a problem in the
story?

Or are your protagonists really only "good" by comparison? When you make a list of
what makes your protagonists better people than the antagonists, are you mainly
listing off bad things that they don't do, or reasons that they're not as bad as the
villains? (EG, "they might lock up people with strange powers up, but at least they
don't vivisect them!", "they might steal from random people wherever they go, but at
least they don't carpet bomb entire towns!", or "they might lie to their love interests a
lot, but at least they don't hit them!") This doesn't make your characters look
particularly good or heroic – if anything, it mainly makes them look like slightly less
evil villains, but still villains nonetheless.

Ask yourself: Are characters judged as deserving or undeserving based on what

they are or who they're with moreso than what they actually do? For example, is
the fact that someone is a law-abiding citizen of the empire (who hasn't actually done
anything to harm the protagonists) while your characters are outlaws who "believe in
freedom and justice" (or similar) seen as justification enough to steal from, rough up,
lie to, threaten, sabotage, manipulate, or even kill this person? Or do your
protagonists easily and readily do this kind of thing to just about anyone who isn't in
their group (or an ally of their group), and it's never shown to be unfair or cruel? And
on the flip side of the coin, is it treated as wrong or awful whenever a member of the
empire or someone who isn't part of the protagonists' group treats them thus? If so,
you probably have protagonist-centered morality going on.

Watch out for the "I have reasons; they have excuses!" trap. You've probably been
on the butt end of this mentality in real life – for example, if your mom leaves the
peanut butter out on the counter, then the fact that she was tired and distracted
88
means that she can't be blamed, but if you have the same reason for leaving the milk
out, you're just making excuses for your slobby behavior. If your boss snaps out at
you, he might bring up the fact that he's stressed out as a reason why he can't be held
accountable – but if you snap out for the same reason and then bring it up, well,
you're just making excuses for being disrespectful and insolent. And so on.

Take a good, hard look at your story and ask yourself if you're applying the same
"logic" to your protagonists' actions versus the antagonists' actions. Do any of your
protagonists and antagonists come from comparable circumstances? Do any of them
have similar motivations or dreams? And are their methods of getting what they're
after actually very similar? If so, do the protagonists' backgrounds and/or motivations
somehow justify the methods they use, but the antagonists are not likewise justified?
If that's the case, you've probably fallen into this trap.

Put yourself into the shoes of other characters. Imagine for the moment that you
and one of your close friends were injured in the art gallery that Tabitha destroyed,
and what's more, several of you and your friend's creations were completely
obliterated. Would you want this person out there knowing that she's likely to do
something similar again? Do the same thing with your own characters – pretend that
you're one of the random citizens affected by their actions, or that you're your
character's boss (and you don't have infinite money to pay your character for doing a
bad job!), or that you're on the side of the antagonists. How would you, in these
positions, view the protagonists and what they're doing? What would you do in this
position? Looking at the situation from this perspective, are their actions really that
horrible or hard to understand?

Remember that, unless they have some kind of special skill, people can't read
minds or mystically sense someone's intentions. So for all a tavern keeper knows,
some girl coming in late at night claiming to be theChosen One might be the real
thing… but more likely, she's a scam artist trying to cheat someone into giving her the
star treatment or someone who has completely deluded herself. And so the tavern
keeper has no compelling reason to treat her to the very best of everything for free at
personal cost, let alone drop and leave everything behind to follow after her. And on
the flip side, your protagonists probably can't just look at people and "know" when
they're up to no good or when they're just broken little birds who are only doing bad
things because they need love and attention.

If in doubt, remember these guidelines. They might not apply to each and every
situation 100%, but they can still help you gauge out the potential morality of your
characters' actions and behaviors.

 The right to swing your fist ends where someone else's nose begins. In general,
you have the right to do as you please up until the point that you're hurting
someone else by doing it. At this point, others are well within their rights to
make you stop.
89
  The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. It's not just about you
and what you want - the needs of others must be weighed in when making
decisions.
 You can tell more about people's characters by how they treat their inferiors,
rather than their equals.Long story short, someone who typically treats
inferiors with contempt, derision, and insensitivity andpulls rank to silence
them is not a great person - that person is a bully.
 Even genocidal xenophobes usually treat their own well. So your protagonists
being helpful and caring to their friends, kin, teammates, allies, etc. might not
say as much about their goodness as you think it does. How they regard and
treat those who aren't like or with them will say far more.

In summary...

You might have a problem with protagonist-centered morality if any of the

following happen and are not acknowledged as problems in-story:

 Your story has massive double-standards for the protagonists and antagonists.
Things that were considered wrong/unforgivable when other characters do
them are suddenly okay/forgivable when the protagonists do them, and it's not
because they've been driven to desperate measures in a high-stakes scenario
and are using them as a last resort.
 Characters who do not allow the protagonists to do whatever they please are
painted as unfair, even tyrannical, no matter what their motivations are.
Characters who do not give of themselves and their belongings freely are
painted as selfish and callous, even if they have good reasons not to.
 Protagonists somehow have the "right" to treat others and their opinions with
contempt or disdain simply because they're the captains/rulers/chosen
ones/whatever.
 Characters are judged as "good" or "bad" based on what they are more often
than they're judged based on what they actually do.

The biggest keys to fixing the problem:

 Put yourself into the shoes of the other characters, look at things from their
perspectives, and remember where their welfares, wants, and reasons might
matter, too.
 Compare your protagonists to the antagonists, and ask yourself whether the
protagonists are really that much better - or if they're basically doing the same
exact thing but for a different side. Or alternatively, are they really only "good"
by comparison?
90
91
 "Is This A Good Idea For My Story/Setting/Character?"
How To Answer This For Yourself!

People ask these types of questions every day - but they're not always so simple for
others to answer. People don't always have the time to analyze your ideas in-depth,
and they don't have the benefit of being inside your brain to understand and analyze
your idea in its full and complete context. So sometimes, the best way to figure it out
is to... ask yourself!

While you might still need to ask others some questions afterward, starting the
process by asking yourself the right questions can save you and others a lot of time
and energy. So let's go!

How will your target audience likely react to it? Think about the type of people you
intend to reach with your work. Are you trying to write a story for children? They
probably won't appreciate a multilayered plot about a corrupt oil company. Are you
trying to reach an older audience looking for something fairly suspenseful and serious?
They'd very likely be annoyed by a bungling/cowardly sidekick-type character. Did the
work originally gain a lot of fans because people enjoyed the way the characters
played off of each other? You'll probably lose these people if you shift the focus to
fast-paced action instead. Try to make your creation the kind of thing your intended
audience will probably like.

Does it fit the setting? In a setting where supernatural creatures typically range from
a hassle to deal with to downright deadly, a cheerful magical fairy who grants free
wishes with no strings attached popping out of nowhere would most likely seem
jarring. In a world where everyone who has been affected by strange mutagen have
all ended up with bizarre, even creepy features, someone else ending up with angelic
wings and cat ears would feel out-of-place. In a lighthearted series set in a small town
where most characters are mostly friendly and the more unpleasant members of
society rarely get up to any serious trouble, a sadistic serial killer suddenly thrown
into the mix would probably be overdoing it. Unless you're deliberately trying to
create a dissonant atmosphere your idea should jive with the general setting you're
working with.

Does it fit with the way real people act and react? There are far, far too many
examples to go into full detail here. Minorities are not hive minds. Taking digs at
things people are sensitive or passionate about is how you make people hate you, not
92
love you. Same goes for being presumptuous and bossy. Normal parents do not sit by
and twiddle their thumbs if they believe their children are at risk. The
government does not cover things up for being mildly unusual. Just because someone
is evil in one specific way does not mean that person will be evil in every conceivable
way. No competent leader would knowingly send a bungler on a high-stakes mission if
there was any other choice. Killing someone for the first time doesn't flip a moral
switch that turns one into a compulsive killer. Unless you have a deliberate reason for
people to be acting strangely, try to keep close to how people would act in reality.

Does it involve an extreme or excessive element in some way that isn't strictly
necessary? Be honest. Does the story you're trying to tell require that your character
be The Only X In The Known World? Does your character really have to be The Most
Gifted Y Of Our Times? Is it really necessary for your protagonist to be the Actual
Undisputed Most Gorgeous Person At School, rather than simply being reasonably
attractive? Is it absolutely essential for some reason for your character to have
personally witnessed an assassin brutally murder the entire family? If you can tone
something down a few shades and still have it work out, you probably should.

Does it add depth or nuance to the setting or to a character? Will it help the
audience better understand or appreciate something relevant to the story? Will it help
make a character's actions or choices make sense to the audience? Will it show why
the something relevant to the plot, be it a person, place, institution, etc. is the way
it is now? Will it show us something important about the way a culture lives, thinks,
etc.? If so, it might be a good idea.

Will it open up new plot potential? Will it provide or lead up to new places to see
and new things to discover? Will it lead up to meeting characters who will become
important to the plot? Will it open up or create new opportunities for the characters
to end up in dramatic scenarios that you haven't done already? If it fits into the tone
and style of the work and opens up new plot potential, it's probably not a bad idea.

Or will it close off potential plots more than it opens? This is something
you really have to watch out for - some elements might open up a few potential plot
threads at the cost of closing many more of them off. Granting a protagonist godlike
powers might make it possible for the character to finally take down other super-
powerful characters, but without putting careful thought into it you run the risk of
making it impossible to challenge the protagonist enough to make a dramatic storyline
later on. Anything you're considering adding in, try to make sure that it doesn't
destroy large swaths of plot potential before you're ready to end the story or retire
the character.

Or might it have any other implications or logical consequences that might be

unwanted or troublesome?For example, if people realize that your bad guys are
killing so many people that there shouldn't even be a sustainable population left by
now, they may lose the ability to suspend their disbelief. Someone inventing a cure
93
for any illness that could easily be made with a few things one could pick up in town
would have some pretty big consequences for the healthcare industry and its workers
- would you be willing to sort that all out and figure out how things settle? If 10% of
the whole population spontaneously develops superpowers, that's going to be one in
ten people. Now consider how many people are in your school or workplace, and just
how many people 10% would turn out to be - are you sure you'd want that many
supers running around? If your idea would have implications or logical consequences
that might take the setting or plot in an unwanted or troublesome direction, you
should probably adjust it.

Or does it add needless complexity to an already-busy storyline? Another trap to be

aware of. If you create so much complexity or get so much going on at once that you
have to downplay or shelf arcs and plot threads that were a main focus before, you
may have a problem. If people are interested in seeing what you've already got going
on play out and resolve, they're going to end up frustrated and disappointed when
they realize that you're not going to give them what they want anytime soon. Note
that if your ideas pass the other criteria in this article, you can keep them in reserve
for later use.

Does it pass a "why didn't anyone just..." test? Ask yourself a few questions, as they
apply to your work: Are there any simple actions that someone in the story could have
taken that would have averted a whole lot of pain and suffering? If so, why weren't
these actions taken? Is it really that likely that nobody got curious or suspicious
enough to start poking around or call the cops? Why hasn't anyone done anything
about the issues considered to be major problems in the setting already? If you cannot
provide reasonable answers to these questions, your idea probably isn't very good.

Has it been done often before? If so, are you willing to put in the extra effort it'll
take to make it new again? Go onto any site you might put your work on and do a
search for similar stories or characters. Do you see many of them using the same
concept/concepts as what you're considering? If so, are you willing to look through
them and figure out for yourself to figure out how they've all been done so you can
figure out how to do something different with it? People need new experiences to be
interested and entertained.

Have you let it simmer? New ideas can seem awesome when initially conceived, but
if you let them rest for awhile and examine them later on, you'll often find they aren't
quite as good as you thought they were. Write your ideas down, let them rest for a
few days, then come and look them over again and see if they hold up. This goes
extra if your idea came from a dream - something can seem like utter genius when
you first wake up, but give it just a few hours and you'll often find that they seem
utterly absurd. If you find your ideas don't sound quite as good as they did earlier, ask
yourself what you might change, remove, or add to improve them.

94
Before you go, don't forget - your final product does not have to be 100%
"perfect." It's all too easy to get caught up in an endless loop of fretting over whether
each and every little thing is absolutely perfect. But the truth is that no work is
entirely and objectively perfect, and that's okay. What you should do is strive to make
a good product and try not to get too emotionally attached to it. Then, if it does
badly, try to learn from your mistakes and do better in the future. There's always
tomorrow to try again and make a fresh start!

95
 On Writing Mentally Ill & Insane Characters

You can't go through an archive of fiction on the Internet or a collection of roleplaying

profiles for long without finding a character who is supposed to be mentally ill, or
"insane," or something. However, many of these characters are based in huge
misunderstandings and misconceptions about how such things work, and some of these
misconceptions are harmful to real people with mental problems. So, here are some
things to know and do when it comes to trying to write such a character yourself.

Table of Contents
 Know what it means to be psychotic, insane, and mentally ill.
 Some common myths and misconceptions addressed.
 Things that need to be avoided.
 Research, research, RESEARCH!

Know what it means to be psychotic, insane, and mentally ill.

First, the term "psychotic" refers to someone who has a severely warped perception of
reality due to an underlying disorder. It is not to be confused with the term
"psychopathic," which means something else entirely. Someone who is psychotic may
experience delusional beliefs (eg, that the government has bugged xir house, or that
xe has a special mental connection to a celebrity, or that aliens are plotting to kidnap
xir), or may experience hallucinations. Being psychotic does not necessarily mean a
person will commit violent action - someone who is a pacifist, for example, isn’t likely
to go shooting people just because a voice in xir head told xir to.

"Insane" is a legal term today. To quote Law.com, "insanity" is:

n. mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy
from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to
uncontrollable impulsive behavior.

To be considered mentally ill, one must have mental problems so severe that they
disrupt a person's life to the point that the person's physical wellbeing or the
wellbeing of others is at risk if the person is left untreated - for example, such as if
the person cannot function in everyday life or cannot properly care for xirself and/or
dependents. (Actual violence need not be involved - the person simply needs to be
incapable of taking necessary and/or appropriate actions to care for
xirself/dependents.) You can believe you're the reincarnation of Queen Titania, paint
96
every room in your house pink, and have a voice in your head claiming to be Elvis
Presley who bugs you about housework, but as long as you can function in society
without posing an actual risk to anyone, you don't qualify as mentally ill.

Now, society is full of people who will label people insane or crazy at the drop of a
hat. Mutter under your breath to memorize something? SCHIZO! A little too energetic
and enthusiastic? CRAY-CRAY! Rock yourself or twiddle your hands to calm yourself
down? PSYCHO! A little too interested in a specific subject? NUTCASE! See the world
in a somewhat different light from everyone else and have opinions that aren't quite
mainstream? INSANE!

Sure, these issues can potentially indicate an underlying illness, but are not proof in
and of themselves. If people who exhibit them otherwise have no trouble functioning,
let alone show any further symptoms that could indicate a genuine mental illness,
then people are wrong (and cruel, if they use the terms in a derogatory or dismissive
sense) in labeling them thus. If they don't actually have any other issues, then they
can probably be accurately described as quirky, eccentric, strange,
offbeat, or odd. Insane, mad, crazy, and all those are would most likely be
misnomers. And while we're at it, characters who act "random" aren't insane or
"crazy," either - being "random" is simply a form of goofing off.

As an example of a character who might be considered insane by the average but

probably actually isn't, let's look at Dr. Finkelstein in The Nightmare Before
Christmas. Fans occasionally refer to him as "the mad scientist." However, there's no
in-universe justification to assume he is "mad." He is narcissistic and controlling, yes.
But given that he is respected by other members of his community - including the
kind-hearted Jack Skellington - we can infer that Dr. Finkelstein doesn't do anything
too far out of his culture's boundaries and norms. For all appearances, Dr. Finkelstein
is not insane.

Some common myths and misconceptions addressed.

MOST MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE ARE NOT VIOLENT. The scant few who do harm others
do not generally do sonot because their mental illness magically erased their morals
and ability to feel empathy, but because of a strong underlying delusion, compulsion,
and/or lack of self-control. Potentially, a person who believed that xir child was
possessed by demons due to psychosis might kill that child if xe believed it was the
only way to get rid of the demons. But again, remember: most mentally ill people are
no more violent than anyone else.

97
Also, a person does not simply snap and go into a state of permanent insanity or
psychosis after a single traumatic event. Temporary bouts of psychosis
are occasionally known to occur in otherwise mentally healthy people after traumatic
or massively stressful events, but those who suffer them recover in under a month.
Certain drugs and medications can also trigger psychotic episodes.

Trauma and stress can potentially worsen the symptoms of a pre-existing mental
condition or trigger an episode associated with that condition, or make it harder for a
person to cope with the symptoms of a mental condition. Long-term stress and abuse
are associated with certain mental disorders. However, a person exposed to a single
episode of stress or trauma isn’t going to develop that disorder out of the blue
overnight.

Also, contrary to what some people think, not all delusional belief means mental
illness, psychosis, or insanity. In psychology, a delusional belief is a belief that the
one holding it clings to regardless of facts shown to the contrary. Colloquially, a
delusion is any false belief a person holds. While psychosis can create delusional
beliefs, not all delusional beliefs come from psychosis. If John taught from birth that
the world was a giant cabbage, that humanity was descended from aphids, and that
anyone who said otherwise was part of an evil conspiracy to lead people away from
the truth, he could hardly be considered psychotic for believing thus. People in
general are often reluctant and find it difficult to let go of beliefs that they find
soothing, or that give them a sense of place in the world, or have held for a long
time, or have deep personal investments in; if they resist convincing otherwise due to
this, they cannot be described as psychotic, insane, or mentally ill for it.

Things that need to be avoided.

The pretty little "mad" waif. You know, the characters who sit around in pretty frilly
dresses, sip tea (or blood), and make pretty little babble at people (or stuffed
animals). These characters inevitably make mental illness look pretty and romantic.

The "mad" prophet/prophetess. The characters who through nigh-incomprehensible

babble deliver prophecies and wisdom. This perpetuates the myth that there is
something magical or mystical about mental illness.

The perfect innocent who snaps, goes "insane," and goes on a murder
rampage. For reasons mentioned earlier, this is bollocks. Plus, it reinforces the
misconception that mental illness or insanity automatically means violent behavior.

98
Characters who do bad things simply because they’re mentally ill. Mental illness
isn’t a magic switch that flips a person’s morality topsy-turvy or turns it off entirely.
While mental illness can in some cases contribute to a person’s harmful or destructive
behaviors, there is still always an underlying motivation behind the person’s actions.

Characters whose coolness, awesomeness, or badassery is supposed to derive from

their "insanity" or "madness." This is a form of romanticizing mental illness, so please
avoid doing this. It's fine if your character's awesomeness or coolness comes from
being an offbeat eccentric, but to link it to actual insanity or mental illness is not
okay.

Characters for whom being "insane" or "crazy" is pretty much all the character is
about. People with mental illnesses are people with hopes, dreams, fears, ambitions,
hobbies, passions, etc. Characters who are supposed to have severe mental issues
need to be three-dimensional people as much as any other type of character does.

Anything that implies that being "insane" is something that people do simply to be
irritating, difficult, different, or rebellious. Because it's not. It's the result of a
mental illness. It's not something that one can simply up and decide to be or not to
be.

Anything that implies that anyone with with strange or unconventional ideas,
opinions, or habits must be "insane." As explored above, a person can believe or do
things that would be considered pretty strange by the majority of the populace
without actually being mentally ill.

(Note that for the last two, it's one thing if characters in the story believe thus. But if
the rest of the story agrees with these characters and shows their views to be
absolutely true... then you've got an issue.)

Research, research, RESEARCH!

What you see in TV and books is often wrong, and what the population at large
believes is often wrong. For example, many people think of schizophrenia as a mental
illness that causes multiple personalities, when in fact it causes psychosis and can
dampen a person’s ability to feel emotion. Bipolar disorder doesn’t cause an instant
shift in mood, but rather its effects happen over a period of time.

Likewise, the terminology to refer to the mentally ill has changed over the years -
while using "mad" or "crazy" would have been considered perfectly professional in
times past, today the terms are considered by many to be insensitive and hurtful due

99
to their long history of being used in derogatory and dismissive fashions. So it's
important that you know which terms would be appropriate to use in your work
depending on the time period and setting you're writing.

Whatever mental condition you’re planning to write, do the research. Read books,
medical websites, blogs, etc. - anything you can find. Make sure you look into sources
where people who have the condition are writing. Don’t limit yourself to one source,
either - read as much as you can.

100
 On Writing Misfits, Loners, & Malcontents

Are you planning to write about someone who lives on the fringes of society, whether
willingly or unwillingly? Thinking about writing a socially outcast hero or a disaffected
anti-hero? Or anyone else who, for whatever reason, is mostly alone and/or unhappy
with society at large? Here are some things to consider and keep in mind.

Table of Contents
 A judgmental misfit/loner/malcontent is an unlikeable
misfit/loner/malcontent.
 Be aware that your character may not be as different as you think.
 Humblebragging and wangst - be aware of them.
 Moving in with a gang of other outcasts does not necessarily mean acceptance.

A judgmental misfit/loner/malcontent is an unlikeable

misfit/loner/malcontent.

It isn’t uncommon to see these sorts of characters generalize everyone else rather
harshly. For example, introverted sorts of characters (often as not thinly-veiled
projections of their creators) generalize characters who are more extroverted (or at
the very least interested in partying, clothes, and makeup) as shallow and brainless.
Sometimes they’ll describe other characters as being shallow or brainless for
obsessing over some popular guy. (Never mind that they’re just as obsessed with some
introverted poet at school or some tragic villain from popular fiction, often as not.)

If your character makes sweeping generalizations and assumptions about characters

xe’s barely (if ever) talked to, xe will look petty and judgmental, if not even more
shallow than the very people xe’s judging. And hey, if you want your character to
look petty and judgmental, then keep on trucking.

If not, it’s time for a reality check: intelligence and a love for fashion and parties
aren’t mutually exclusive. That pretty blond with glossy lips might be studying to
become a marine biologist and read Elizabeth Barrett Browning at home. That girl
shaking her hips at the football captain might be an aspiring astrophysicist. And quite
frankly, being a bookish introvert doesn’t necessarily make one deeper or more
intellectual, either: sitting around and reading ship fic or writing self-insert fics while
waiting for the perfect dreamboat to come and sweep one off xir feet does not make
one deep or smart, let alone “superior” to someone who loves partying.
101
And on the other side of the coin, many extroverts perceive "nerds" as being so
engrossed in their own private worlds that they're utterly disconnected from the real
world. In reality, that shy nerd who plays Dungeons & Dragons on the weekend might
very well be studying to become an engineer in the hopes creating better water
purification systems to bring clean drinking water to impoverished areas. Having a
busy social life doesn't necessarily make one a better person than someone who
doesn't - many people who are frequently alone are alone of their own choice, simply
preferring to keep company with a smaller amount of people and for less time than
extroverts.

Another issue with many a misfit protagonist is how often they claim not to care
about those in outgroups (eg, preps, popular students, etc...), yet spend quite an
inordinate amount of time complaining about them. If they’re complaining about
someone, then they do care in some fashion - a negative one. If they really didn’t
care at all, then they wouldn’t spent a lot of time talking about them, and when/if
they they did their descriptions would be fairly neutral and apathetic. Compare with
something you truly don’t care about… say, for example, the chemical makeup of the
soil beneath a post office in a tiny town five thousand miles from where you live. How
much time do you spend telling people how much you don’t care about the chemical
makeup of the soil beneath a post office in a tiny town five thousand miles from
where you live? Exactly. A character who genuinely didn’t care would most likely have
other things on xir mind.

Be aware that your character may not be as different as you think.

Contrary to what some people might think, having only perhaps three or four close
friends out of an entire school does not make someone strange or an outcast - in fact,
it makes you pretty normal. People who appear to be friends with everyone are in the
minority, and even then, they probably only have a few people that they would
consider themselves close to.

To some degree, just about everyone feels like a misfit or dissatisfied with their lot in
life somehow because no matter where or who you are there’s always someone more
popular, better-looking, more talented, etc. than you. Almost everyone gets hung up
to some degree at the thoughts of having to perform in public. Almost everyone
worries about embarrassing themselves in front of a new acquaintance. If you’re using
these feelings as you’ve experienced them as a basis for your character, remember:
they’re actually pretty normal. To notexperience feelings of doubt and inadequacy in
some area to some degree is abnormal.

Likewise, having some interest or quirk that isn’t shared by the general population is
normal. So is seeing some aspect of life differently from the way everyone else seems
to see it. So is having some sort of disorder or physical condition. While these sorts of
102
things can certainly set people at odds with society, especially if society isn’t very
accepting of certain individual quirks and issues, there is nothing abnormal
about havingquirks and issues of some kind.

Many times I’ve come across people treating their introverted bookworms or artists as
if they’re one-in-a-billion special snowflakes. In the real world, such a person might
be strange or unusual in a small population, but in the big picture - in a world of
seven billion people - introverted artists and bookworms aren’t really rare at all.
Had Twilight taken place in a world with more realistic demographics, Edward
wouldn’t have had to wait almost a century to find someone like Bella - there’d be
girls with her general set of looks and personality all over in every time.
Bella might be something of an odd duck in a tiny town like Forks, but in a major city
like Phoenix she’d have to look no further than her school’s book club to find others
like her.

As horrible as teasing and bullying can be, it’s unlikely that your character would be
the only recipient of it, let alone that your character’s bullying experience would
somehow be uniquely more horrible than absolutely anyone else’s. And the same goes
for any awful experience - even if it was awful to go through, and even if it did leave
awful mental or physical scars, your character probably did not have a one-of-a-kind
experience.

Having parents or caregivers who don't really seem to understand you in some way
(and don't seem to want to put in a genuine effort to try to understand you)
is very normal. So are parents/caregivers who are apathetic or disapproving of things
that you're passionate about. (For the record, most parents like this do genuinely care
about the welfare of their children, and will usually react to protect their child should
they perceive their child is in any real danger. But because parents are imperfect
human beings, they may fail to recognize some real threats and/or misidentify certain
things as threats, and/or take inappropriate or misguided action to fix perceived
problems. And because children are also imperfect human beings, their parents may
correctly identify threats that they themselves miss.) Basically, because people by
nature have differences in tastes, opinions, and viewpoints, pretty much everyone is
guaranteed to havesomething or other that will become a point of contention with
their parents.

Every so often, I see people and/or characters talking about how they’re so different
or weird because they fall in love with villains. First, it’s not as “weird” as people
might think: consider that many villains display attractive traits such as confidence
and charisma. They also flout society’s rules and norms, which is an alluring and
tantalizing trait to a teen or young adult looking to find xir own way in life or at the
very least feeling dissatisfied with the boring ol’ same ol’ at home. Many villains are
also shown to be highly intelligent, which again, is an attractive trait. Add to that the
fact that villains are often depicted with more delicate aesthetics - which teens and
young adults tend to find more appealing than a bulkier look. Today’s villains create a
103
perfect storm of attractiveness for this age group, so young people can hardly be
called “weird” for finding them attractive.

Nor can people in this age group finding such characters attractive be considered
especially rare: you can’t go anywhere there’s Harry Potter fanfiction without
tripping over a fic shipping Draco with some writer stand-in or other, and the people
on roleplaying sites looking to ship their characters with Loki vastly outnumber those
looking to ship them with Thor.

Humblebragging and wangst - be aware of them.

Humblebragging entails attempting to use deprecation to brag about something that

by all rights actually is pretty awesome, and you and everyone else knows it - eg,
“Ugh, I just spat my Chateau Margaux on my Manolos laughing at Tony Stark’s joke!
Can you believe my rotten luck?” ...Yes, you’re sipping expensive wine and wearing
designer shoes while having a good time with a rich celebrity superhero. Life is
clearly so hard for you. Let us gather the tiniest of fiddles and serenade you with the
songs of our sympathies.

Angst becomes wangst when the angst seems disproportionately large compared to
the issue causing the character distress, or when the character is so focused on xir
own problems that xe brushes off or ignores worse and bigger problems - eg, the
world is about to be shattered by an incoming asteroid, but Magical Girl Tammy can’t
get her act together to stop it because she’s still obsessing over her significant other
breaking up with her… two months ago.

Both of these will make a character look self-centered and arrogant. If that's what
you're going for, then this can be the ticket to really make a detestable brat of a
character. If you want your character to remain sympathetic, you need to be aware of
these potentially making your character look like an awful person. Let's take a look at
a couple of examples of wangsty humblebraggers, and how what they say can
presented so that they’re actually sympathetic instead.

“Sometimes I wish I wasn’t so beautiful. Ever since I can remember, my mom’s been
pushing me into modeling and into beauty pageants, and I hate it! She makes me
wear designer clothes all the time instead of what I want to wear, and the judges are
next to impossible to please.”

Phrased like this, it makes the character look rather petty and self-absorbed, simply
wanting more out of what’s already a fairly privileged life. On the other hand, if you
put it like this...

104
“Ever since I can remember, my mom’s been pressuring me to enter beauty contests.
I don’t like them, but I don’t want to hurt her by letting her down because it’s so
important to her. I don’t think she realizes how stressful it can be to be constantly
compared to other girls by total strangers and told that I’m not going to make the
cut because of things I can’t control. Sometimes I think things would be better if I
hadn’t inherited my mom’s looks.”

Now the character is no longer whining about things that are actually kind of
awesome, but is complaining about things that anyone would find hard, such as being
used as another person’s egomobile, and having to put up with disappointment and
rejection.

“I just went and bought myself a BMW. Yeah, only problem is that it’s not really the
one I wanted. Why couldn’t I have gotten an M6 instead? That’s a real car!”

Once again, this is an example of a character wanting more out of a privileged life
and whining about something that’s actually pretty awesome. How many of us get to
drive around BMWs, let alone can afford to just go out and buy one? Now compare
with...

“Yes, my car might have the name, but what they don’t tell you is that the features
they advertise are only available on the models that are outside my price range. I
bought it on impulse without thinking it through and ended up blowing a lot of
money on something halfway, but it’s too late to take it back to the dealership
now.”

Unlike the previous example, which sounded like the whining of a spoiled brat, this
example identifies the source of the problem, and acknowledges that the protagonist
is partly to blame. It also establishes a sense of actual loss: the character is no longer
simply whining about having to drive a BMW, but is instead having to deal with the
consequences of a poorly thought-out decision that resulted in spending a lot of hard-
earned money on something that didn’t have everything he wanted, and is now stuck
with.

Moving in with a gang of other outcasts does not necessarily mean

acceptance.

It isn’t uncommon to see a character who was perceived as a freak or weirdo in part
because of having some sort of strange powers or something move in with with a

105
whole gang of oddballs and find sudden intimate acceptance from nearly all of them
regardless of… well, everything.

A character with magical powers that made xir an outcast before would probably not
likely find xirself instantly accepted by a group of other magically-gifted people if the
character had a detestable personality or generally went around bullying, badgering,
bothering, and bossing the others around. If anything, xe’d soon find xirself alone and
outcast again because nobody would want to be around xir if they could reasonably
avoid it.

Furthermore, if a group has been together long enough to become tightly-knit,

someone who comes in practically out of nowhere and starts shaking things up would
soon be resented - and the most disruptive that person is, the more resentment xe’s
going to create. Things might settle down depending on how the person behaves - if
the new person can be considerate of the others in the group then things can turn out
fine. However, if the newbie continues to act presumptuously or inconsiderately or
even puts the group in danger, then xe can soon expect to find xirself just as alone as
ever, possibly even getting the boot before long.

106
 Hazards & Liabilities In Hair, Costume, & Wardrobe

This is basically a list of things to keep in mind when designing a character who is
likely to be in dangerous situations - eg, in combat, around machinery, or in
laboratories - on a regular basis. Note that this is not intended to be taking as a list of
"things you action hero should never wear, period!" but as a general list of guidelines
of things you might want to avoid if creating a plausible wardrobe for your character,
or injuries and difficulties your character might realistically encounter if xe wore
these kinds of things.

Clothes in General

 Belts can easily get snagged and hooked on things.

 Capes and scarves offer no strategic advantages when worn, and there are too
many ways they can get caught in everything from elevators to your enemy's
fist.
 Corsets, while they won't (or shouldn't) restrict breathing enough to be a
problem for casual wear, can restrict breathing enough to be a problem in
combat or any intense activity that would require heavy breathing.
 Gloves in general are good for protecting the hands - but are a potential
hazard around some machines as they can get stuck in moving parts, resulting
in lost fingers or arms.
 Lace will tear.
 Overly-loose clothing, tassels, laces, and pretty much anything that dangles
or flaps around can get caught in things or hands.
 Falling on steel buttons hurts.
 Pantyhose will run, no exceptions. (On the other hand, fishnet stockings might
tear, but they won't run.)
 Regular jeans are not good for those in possession of testicles. Legs apart at 30
degrees, and... ouch. Jeans in general will restrict movement - the tighter they
are, the worse it will be.
 String bikini/spaghetti straps easily snap. (Straps can work - provided they're
at least two inches wide and reinforced.)
 Thongs and underwire bras will cut into the wearer's skin.
 Skintight clothing, contrary to belief that it'll act like a second skin and thus
be especially good for movement, will actually restrict movement unless made
of a stretchy material. However, these kinds of materials tend not to be
durable.

Textiles & Materials

107
  Leather, vinyl, latex, and velvet are very hot to wear. Vinyl, latex, and
plastic can chafe the skin (especially around the breasts), as well as promote
yeast infections. Furthermore, leather, vinyl, and plastic tends to creak when
the wearer moves around in them, making them a bad choice if being quiet is
an issue.
 Spandex/Lycra/elastane is very prone to taking damage - and being so close to
your skin, will only rip and tear more as you move in it. A few nicks here and
there, and your would-be superhero would be in xir skivvies. See: what
happened to Gillian Cooke's bobsled suit at the World Championship in
Switzerland.
 Acetate and acrylics will ignite if exposed to flame, and will not self-
extinguish if removed. The melted material can stick to the skin - which means
that when you're being treated for your injuries, the medics are going to have
to cut away the skin the material has fused to.
 Polyester, nylon, and olefin will usually self-extinguish if removed from
flame, but it will melt onto the skin.
 Cotton and linen will burn like paper (admittedly, better than getting dripped
on).
 Wool will burn (slowly) if exposed to flame, but it will self-extinguish if
removed from it. It's better at keeping one warm and dry in cold weather than
polyester, but in warm environments its insulating properties can become a
drawback.
 Silk burns very easily and won't self-extinguish if removed from flame.
 Metal on bare skin is problematic because:
o The wearer will be spilling out of it every time xe so much as twitches.
o It will heat up under the sun (or when exposed to any other heat
source).
o It will get cold when it's cold.
 Mail on bare skin, aside from the other problems metal poses, can chafe the
skin (particularly in areas around the breasts and groin, if used there), as well
as snag and pull on body hairs.

Armor & Combat Wear

 Anything leaves the abdomen and torso uncovered leaves vital organs open
to injury. Any bare skin is open to unnecessary scrapes and cuts.

Hair & Beards

108
Long, loose hair can be caught in things, sometimes with fatal results. (Several years
back in my area, a neighbor girl died when her long braid was caught in the rear tire
of a four-wheeler, and her neck broke.) Others been scalped by long hair caught in
moving parts. Similarly, long hair makes for excellent grabbing material in combat.
(Alexander the Great knew what he was doing when he made his men shave.) Also,
hair is flammable.

Headgear

 Gambit's headgear may look cool in the X-Men comics, but in reality it would
hinder movement and cause a sweat rash.
 Masks, that time-honored tradition of superheroes, can cause unnecessary
sweating.
 Hair and horns on helmets provide additional grabbing points for the enemy.

Footwear

 High heels are a huge liability. First, there's the simple fact that they force the
wearer into an unnatural posture, which throws off one's balance. Secondly,
they make the wearer more unstable period, which can result in sprains and/or
broken bones when a fall occurs. And of course, there's the simple fact that
you can't run in them, the inevitable massive foot pain that will follow, and the
fact that heels are prone to breaking.
 Crocs and flip-flops fall off extremely easily.
 Anything that doesn't support your ankles is less than ideal if you're fighting.
Proper combat boots FTW.

Jewelry

 Piercings can get ripped out of the flesh.

 Metal of any kind becomes a hazard when working near heated materials, heat
sources, or electricity. For example, a metal finger ring, if heated or
electrified, will cause serious injury.
 Rings, bracelets, and watches can catch and hold dangerous chemicals to the
skin, or provide harbors for bacteria.
109
  Necklaces, bracelets, watches, rings, etc. can get caught in machinery,
potentially resulting in lost fingers and arms. Furthermore, bits of broken
jewelry can cause damage to equipment and create possible fire hazards. And
if that wasn't bad enough, bits of jewelry can be ejected from machines at
lethal speeds.
 Also, if you punch someone while wearing a heavy ring, you'll likely break
your finger.

Makeup

When you do strenuous physical activity for any longer than few minutes, you sweat.
Unless you have really good sweatproof makeup, your foundation and whatnot will
start getting into your eyes as soon as you start sweating - and it will sting and render
you effectively blind.

Hand & Custom-Made Gear

Anything custom-made and/or made by hand will invariably end up being more
expensive than something off the rack, and depending on the types of materials will
used and the amount of detailing gone into it, the cost can go up pretty high. If the
outfit needs repaired or replaced often (eg, because it belongs to a superhero or
vigilante who frequently wears it in combat), that's going to be even more money
spent. If your character has to pay for xir own outfits and isn't relatively wealthy, this
could easily become painful to the wallet in a hurry. What's more, if your character
makes and fixes xir own outfits, it'll not only cost money, but also time.

110
 Things Writers Get Wrong About Bladed Weapons

Whether in sword 'n sorcery fantasies, slasher horror stories, or even in stories set in
the ordinary, modern world, bladed weapons turn up a lot... and there are a lot of
mistakes made. Here are a few of them addressed so you can avoid making these
mistakes yourself.

Table of Contents
 "This fancy/wicked-looking sword/dagger/knife would be a GREAT weapon!"
 You can cut through anything in one blow so long as your blade is sharp enough.
 Throwing knives are an effective way to kill someone.
 Other misconceptions addressed.

"This fancy/wicked-looking sword/dagger/knife would be a GREAT

weapon!"

A weapon that has an especially ornate or fancy design is probably designed for
ceremonial, formal, or decorative use rather than combat use. (And depending on
what it's going to be used for, it may not even be sharpened - EG, the athame.)
Bladed weapons used in combat were often badly damaged, and would need to be
extensively repaired, reforged, or even replaced afterward, as any object that
encounters an object of equal or near-equal hardness with enough force will dent,
deform, or even break.

Even if cosmetic modifications (EG, engravings, gold filigree, jeweling) didn't

adversely affect the function of a bladed weapon, there's still a risk of it being lost,
damaged, destroyed, captured in battle, or even stolen by unscrupulous subordinates
or rivals - thus making the pretty additions a waste of money. While some functional
bladed weapons were fancied up, many of them survived to be placed into museums
nowadays simply because they weren't used in battle, instead being reserved for
ceremonial or dress purposes.

The cheap (EG, ten dollars or so) knives and swords that you can pick up at weapons
shows or at the mall are designed to be decorations, not weapons. Once subjected to
any kind of stress or strain, they'll quickly start falling apart. Even just waving one of
the cheaply-made swords around can be enough to break it.

111
Likewise, most reproduction weapons are designed to look pretty rather than to be
used in actual combat - subject them to any real stress, and the blades will dull,
bend, and break before long. What's more, most fantasy weapons are designed for
visual appeal more than actual functionality, so even if they were well-crafted, most
would still make inferior weapons.

If you do an image search for "demon sword," you'll see a lot of swords with serrated
edges. Serrated edges are really only useful for sawing through something, whereas
swords are supposed to be for slicing and/or stabbing. Likewise, these fantasy swords
are frequently designed with barbs or "teeth" facing back toward the handle. The only
thing this would do is make the sword harder to pull out of anything it had been
stabbed into, which in turn would mean that its wielder would end up wasting
valuable time and energy in battle. Likewise, it isn't uncommon for fantasy swords to
have other toothy protrusions from the side of the blade or other drastic changes in
width (the Force Stealer from Final Fantasy VII being a pretty good example of both),
which would only make stabbing needlessly difficult.

Many fantasy weapons have poky and pointy ornamentation in the handle area, which
could potentially hurt the wielder. Many are also lacking guards between the blade
and handle, which would mean that the wielder's hands would likely get cut while
using it. Very often, fantasy weapons have features that make them looknasty (eg,
split or forked blades, or spines along the back of the blade), but in reality wouldn't
actually make them any more effective.

So basically, most of the nifty-looking weapons you see out there, particularly the
fantasy weapons, are pretty much worthless.

You can cut through anything in one blow so long as your blade is sharp
enough.
Sharpness is good, but it can only take you so far. Let's say the sharp side of your
sword comes down to the width of a single atom. (This is actually impossible, but
we'll use it for the sake of our thought exercise.) You give a big ol' rock a big ol'
thwack with your sword and... yeah, maybe your single-atom edge can make a nice
little scratch, but that will be about all it can do because the rest of your blade
(which is considerably wider than a single atom) probably can't push the atoms
comprising the rock aside as it goes down, and there's probably not enough strength
behind the blow to simply shatter the rock.
The same would also go for wood and bone - it doesn't matter howsharp your blade is:
if the material you're trying to cut doesn't have enough give that the rest of your
blade can fit through the cut it creates, it's not going to cut any further than the
surface. And what's more, if you hit as hard as you can and the the object it's hitting

112
has a little give (EG, wood or bone) the blade will probably just get stuck. If it has no
give (EG, stone), at best it'll bounce or glance off and at worst bend or break.

On the chance that you're dealing with a superstrong person with an unbreakable
sword who delivers a perfectly-aimed blow, an object with no give would probably
break asunder due to the force of the blow... which likely could have been achieved
with something no sharper than a chisel, anyway.

Throwing knives are an effective way to kill someone.

Nope. First, unless a knife is designed for throwing, you don't want to throw it - it's
not designed to have the right weight distribution for throwing. If you go throwing a
knife not designed for throwing, odds are you'll just be tossing away your weapon for
nothing, and what's more, your enemy can potentially pick it up and use it against
you.

Secondly, it takes a lot of practice to be able to hit something even with an actual
throwing knife - newbies and novices will find themselves hitting things with the
handle or even the broad side of the knife often as not.

Thirdly, even if you are well-practiced, the odds of hitting anything vital (let alone
anything that would get you an instant kill like in the movies) are slim to none.
Because of its small size and light weight, a thrown knife doesn't have a lot of kinetic
force behind it, let alone enough to bury itself in to the hilt. If the knife hit a bone
(and the human body is full of them) or a tough piece of clothing, it could simply
deflect or glance off. Sure, throwing knives might make an impressive show in the
Cold Steel knife demonstrations when thrown into melons, pop bottles, and
Tupperware, but none of these have the same resistance as human bone. Even in the
wooden sticking targets, the blades rarely go in very deep, and these are knives
thrown by martial arts professionals. And finally, hitting anything as small as the eye,
neck, or face in general of a moving target while under pressure and combat stress is
nigh impossible.

In fact, throwing knives aren't really designed for killing at all. Their intended
purpose is to distract or slow someone down. Nowadays, they're mostly used for sport
or performance entertainment.

Other misconceptions addressed.

113
Chef's knives are good stabbing weapons. Not really. Chef's knives are designed for
chopping and slicing, which means that the weight of the knife is distributed so that
most of the force ends up focused on the bottom of the blade, not the tip. Plus they
lack guards between the handle and blade, so anyone who uses a chef knife as a
weapon will probably get cut, especially if blood gets on the handle and makes it
slippery. Basically, anyone trying to stab someone with a chef's knife would have it
working against xir the whole way.

Sleeping with a bare knife under one's pillow is a good idea. Unless the knife is
sheathed or the blade folds or retracts into the handle, someone with a knife stashed
under a pillow risks getting cut if xe puts xir hands under the pillow while asleep or
wakes up in a panic and goes grabbing for it wildly.

Katanas are invincible swords of infinite awesome. Katanas are all right what
they're designed for, but like any other weapon they have their limitations and
drawbacks. For more information, see Hype... As Ancient An Art As Sword Making.

Scythes make awesome weapons. Scythes are farming tools designed for cutting
down hay and the like, not thick objects like the human body. Furthermore, they're
designed so that the force is focused on the bottom of the blade and not the tip, so it
would make a pretty bad stabbing weapon. Now, the scythe did inspire an actual
weapon - the war scythe - but its blade is positioned so that it faces parallel to the
handle, not perpendicular to it.

The sai is a type of dagger/knife. Nope. They have blunt tips and dull sides.

114
 Mary Sue Subtypes

Descriptions of various subtypes of Mary Sues. Note that in practice, the types can and
usually do overlap.

Table of Contents
 Angsty Sue
 Anti-Sue
 Beacon Sue
 Better-Than-You Sue
 Canon Sue
 Copycat Sue
 Flawed-But-Not-Really Sue
 Ideology Sue
 Jerk Sue
 Multiverse Kitchen Sink Sue
 Possession Sue
 Relationship Sue
 Victim Sue
 The Hood Ornament (not actually a type of Sue, but often mistaken for one)

Angsty Sue

Good characters don't have to be cheerful and happy all of the time - what makes an
Angsty Sue a Sue is that the character's angst is treated as the Most Important Thing In
The Plot, even when it shouldn't be ("oh my gosh, the meteor's about to hit the Earth!
We have to do something!" "BUT WAUGH MY DADDY ISSUES COME AND COMFORT ME!"),
and/or is hideously contrived or nonsensical - eg, frequently angsting over the death
of someone xe would have been too young to remember, or angsting over something
relatively trivial. Sometimes, canon characters will be completely derailed so Angsty
Sue has something to angst over - EG, a character who in canon is one of the nicest,
friendliest, most accepting people you could ever hope to meet will call xir a freak
and trip xir down the stairs out of spite.

Pages of interest if you're looking to avoid writing an Angsty Sue:

Basic Tips To Create Better Characters With Tragic & Traumatic Backstories
Basic Tips To Write Better Abuse Victims & Abuse Situations
115
Anti-Sue

A character created to skirt being a Mary Sue by having pretty much none or even the
exact opposite of your standard Mary Sue traits. The general result is a character who
is horrifically boring and bland (think along the lines of Bella Swan) or is nonsensical
in other ways - eg, a clumsy FBI agent being assigned to field work despite the
massive liability xe would be, or someone with a horrible temper and massive violent
streak being assigned as a noble's personal attendant.

Beacon Sue

The Beacon Sue apparently puts out a signal detectable by whatever characters xe
deems important, as these characters will be drawn to and inordinately fascinated by
the character despite having no real reason to interact with xir at all. Here are a few
potential Beacon Sue scenarios:

 Canon supervillain Greenwing is terrorizing a group of civilians while the rest of

his villainous team is off stealing money or diamonds or whatever the
MacGuffin of the day is. Suddenly, he spots Hattie, a young woman with fire
powers (though she's not using them right now), and goes out of his way to grab
her and drag her along with him. Now, Greenwing has never been established
to have any ability to tell if someone has superpowers, and there is no
advantage to be gained by taking a hostage. To him, Hattieshould be just
another face in the crowd.
 New student Alyssa comes to her first day at school. Even though there are
hundreds of students, she is immediately noticed by any number of cute
boys, especially her Intended Love Interest. Students go out of their way to
show her around and be friendly to her, above and beyond what they would do
for any other student. Basically, when it goes beyond "hey look, new student!"
to "ALL HAIL THE NEW STUDENT!"
 Pretty much any time secondary and tertiary characters start acting like
this (specifically, item 17) for no other real reason than the author wants xir
character to be at the center of attention. (In reality, people who act like this
generally aren't up to much good.)

116
Better-Than-You Sue

The character who has to be better at most, if not all of the cool things the canon
characters do. Is Tom a great cook? Then BTY Sue is a certified chef. Is Susie a crack
hacker? Then BTY Sue once hacked the Pentagon. Does Ricky love old cars? Then so
does BTY Sue - and in fact, BTY Sue knows everything there is to know about old cars!

There's nothing wrong with sharing skills or interests with some of the canon
characters. The problem comes in when the character is pretty much a one-person
team, or when it's completely implausible for the character to have all of these traits,
or when it's blatantly obvious that the sole reason the character has these traits is to
gain the admiration of the canon characters.

Canon Sue

A term referring to non-fan character Sues. Characters often considered to be Canon

Sues include Eragon, Buck Williams, Rayford Steele, Bella Swan, Edward Cullen, Drizzt
do'Urden, John Galt, and Wesley Crusher.

Copycat Sue

A character who is basically a copy of another character, usually with a few token
details changed. Copycatsfrequently take the form of a close relative (eg, sibling or
child) of a canon character, or as an unrelated genderswap of the canon character.
Usually, Copycat Sues can be summed up as "my favorite character, only better/more
like me."

Let's invent a hypothetical Copycat Sue - we'll call this character Jessie. Jessie's
parents were killed by Voldemort, was left with a Significant Scar, was given to an
abusive Muggle family to raise, was the subject of an important prophecy, and joined
the Quidditch team after going to Hogwarts.

Now sure, it's not unreasonable to think that Voldemort may have orphaned more
children than Harry. And in-universe, we have a character who exhibits a lot of
similarities to Harry - Neville Longbottom. Let's compare the two: Both lost their
parents to Voldemort (though Neville's were driven insane rather than killed), both
live with unpleasant relatives (though Neville's grandmother clearly does love him),
both were the potential subjects of the same prophecy, and both are in Gryffindor.
117
Aside from that, the two characters couldn't be more different. The difference
between Neville and Jessie is that Neville sounds like someone who reasonably
belongs in the Harry Potter universe, whereas Jessie sounds like someone did a
search-and-replace on Harry's biography.

Flawed-But-Not-Really Sue

A character who has a few token flaws, but said flaws never actually work against the
character, nor does the character have to struggle to get over them. A few examples:

 The character is clumsy... but all of xir accidents are cute and endearing.
 The character is socially awkward... but xir love interest only finds it cute and
endearing, or can somehow see past all that at their first meeting and instantly
falls in love with xir anyway.
 The character has a temper and/or a sharp tongue... but never irritates, hurts,
or drives away anyone who actually matters and/or who can genuinely
retaliate.

If you're concerned about avoiding this type of Sue, see:

On Giving Your Characters Flaws & Weaknesses

Ideology Sue

There are characters who happen to believe in the same ideologies and beliefs as
their writers... and then there are Ideology Sues, who exist to show off the perceived
righteousness and superiority of the writer's belief systems. With an Ideology Sue, it
soon becomes clear that the character's primary purpose is to preach to you and/or to
act out the writer's fantasies of converting people to xir belief system while punishing
those who disagree.

Those who don't agree with the Ideology Sue already will frequently be horrifically
ignorant of xir beliefs, or may even be be willfully wrong. ("Yes, I know Santa exists,
but when he didn't bring me the toy I really wanted for Christmas I swore vengeance
and have since gone teaching children that Santa isn't real!") The Ideology Sue's
opponents will also have weak and easily-destroyed arguments (basically, straw men),
while the Sue's arguments will be portrayed as self-evident and nigh-indestructible.

118
People will often be converted to the Sue's ideology with ridiculous ease, even to the
point of discarding beliefs held for their entire lives in a matter of minutes. Those
who resist conversion will frequently end up punished somehow - eg, humiliated,
physically harmed, or even killed.

The Ideology Sue will often be favored with massive double standards. EG, if someone
harms or even slightly inconveniences someone who agrees with the Ideology Sue,
then it's treated as a horrible and repugnant act, but the lives and welfare of those
who don't agree with the Sue will be treated with callous disregard. In the world of an
Ideology Sue, people only have value if they have already been converted, or are
potential converts, or if they are are a stepping-stone to reach other potential
converts. Anyone who is none of these is treated as disposable.

Jerk Sue

A character who is rude or even cruel to other characters and is expected to be

sympathized with or even admired for behaving this way.

Of course, characters can be jerks without being Jerk Sues - what makes the Sue is
the fact that the character's behavior is never treated or shown to be a problem in-
universe. Some examples of potential Jerk Sue situations:

 Jeff rides his motorcycle into Caroline's house, drinks her beer, and breaks a
decorative vase her boyfriend made for her. When Caroline's boyfriend comes
in and discovers what Jeff is doing, he gets angry. But Caroline's already fallen
in love with Jeff's smoldering good looks despite the tire tracks, empty beer
cans, and ruined gift from a loved one, so when Jeff punches out her boyfriend
she thinks that Jeff is the COOLEST THING EVAR and joins him on his
motorcycle to ride off into the sunset with him.
 John plays a prank on Mindy that ends up ruining one of her favorite shirts.
Mindy retaliates by attacking John with her awesome martial arts skills, which
results in a broken arm, a lost tooth, and a concussion. Mindy doesn't face any
negative consequences for her actions (in fact, everyone may
actually supporther), nor is it ever acknowledged that her reaction was
completely out of proportion to John's misdeed.
 Kay and Carla are in what's supposed to be a romantic relationship - but Kay
continuously treats Carla with contempt and spite, insulting and belittling her
on a regular basis. Kay's behavior is never treated or acknowledged as
problematic; in fact, their romance is supposed to be the Greatest Thing Ever.

119
The fairytale The Blue Light is a good example of a Jerk Sue - the protagonist kidnaps
the princess, forces her to work as a maid for him, and after he's put on trial and
sentenced to death for what he's done he uses his magical macguffin to kill the judge
who sentenced him. He only spares the king when he gives him the kingdom and his
daughter to marry.

Pages of interest if you're looking to avoid writing a Jerk Sue:

Basic Tips To Write Better (And More Likeable) Badasses
Tips to Write & Roleplay Believable Successful Long-Term Relationships

Multiverse Kitchen Sink Sue

A character whose toys and goodies are clearly lifted from other universes without
any regard to whether or not they make any sense at all in the universe the character
is in, nor with any attempt made to nativize the character's goodies to that universe.
The result and problem is that huge chunks of the character will run completely
contrary to the universe xe is in, resulting in a nonsensical mess. Potential examples
include:

 A character who belongs to an angel species (IE, a biological, living, breathing,

pooping creature) being portrayed as a legitimate angel in a universe where
angels are established to exist not as biological beings, but as aetheric ones.
(The character's creator could legitimately nativize the character by recreating
xir as an aetheric angel, or - depending on the universe - reinterpreting the
character as a member of a species that happens to have wings.)
 A character who has a wand from the Harry Potter universe, a sonic
screwdriver from the Doctor Who universe, runs around with a dozen Pokeballs
hanging from xir belt, and isn't supposed to be some kind of meta fan avatar.

Possession Sue

To put it simply, a Possession Sue occurs when a writer completely rips out a canon
character's personality and replaces it with xir own personality (or the personality the
writer wishes xe had). Reasons for this include writing or playing a self-insert that will
be slightly less likely to be recognized as such, or rewriting the story so it goes how
the writer thinks it should go.

120
Relationship Sue

A form of Sue that is created for the sole purpose putting into a relationship with
another character, be that relationship romantic or platonic. Of course, not all fan
characters and OCs that have relationships with canon characters are Relationship
Sues - it's important to draw a distinction.

In the case of a Relationship Sue, canon characters will begin acting very out-of-
character. Any flaws or vices that the Intended Relationship Partner had that might
put xir and the Sue at odds with each other will magically vanish - EG, a longtime
thief may give up a life of crime because the Sue is Just That Speshul. Canon
characters who were close to or showed romantic interest in the IRP may either be
strangely complacent with their former crush/partner/friend's new relationship, or
may be vilified to make the new relationship seem more reasonable. Sometimes
canon love interests or friends will simply be killed off, with the Sue's IRP
experiencing little to no grief and ready to jump into the sack or be BFFs with the
new character in a matter of days - or even minutes. Sometimes canon characters will
be derailed so the Sue has someone to be romantically rescued from - EG, a boorish
flirt may be derailed to a full-on misogynist would-be rapist so the character has
someone to be rescued from.

Characters involved with a Relationship Sue will be way too willing to neglect or give
up anything and everything from friends to hobbies to jobs. EG, a superhero who
vowed to protect the world will realize that all xe really wants is to settle down and
have a family. Meanwhile, the Sue xirself won't have any family, friends, or
obligations that could in any way interfere with or complicate the relationship - or if
xe does, xe will be willing to drop them all for the love interest.

The characters may realize they are Meant To Be or something similar in a ridiculously
short amount of time, or realize they are truly in love just days or even moments
after meeting each other. That the characters are clearly just infatuated with each
other is never addressed, as for a Relationship Sue infatuation is confused and
conflated with true love.

Some Relationship Sues may try to circumvent the "fall deeply in love with/become
BFFs two minutes after meeting" problem with a retconned history with the canon
character - the Sue may turn out to be an old flame or buddy or even a past-life
spouse or lover - but what will make the Sue still a Sue is that it won't be
handledwell. The canon character will still be too willing to drop xir current partner,
friends, or lifestyle for the old flame/friend, and other characters may still be OOC.

121
In short, what makes a Relationship Sue a Sue is that the relationship becomes the
single most important thing in the universe to the characters involved (even when it
really shouldn't), and/or the universe itself visibly twists and bends to accommodate
it.

Pages of interest if you're looking to avoid writing a Romantic Sue:

Basic Tips To Write Healthy Relationships
Tips to Write & Roleplay Believable Successful Long-Term Relationships
Tips To End Canon Ships Better & More Believably

Victim Sue

Very similar to (and often overlaps with) the Angsty Sue, the Victim Sue is
characterized by xir state of perpetual victimhood,which is usually brought about by
absurd and/or contrived circumstances.

It's reasonable to feel sympathetic toward a character who had an abusive parent or
partner, but it gets pretty hard to care about someone who is continually victimized
because xe refuses to try to do anything about or prevent the problem, or when it
becomes obvious that the writer is simply forcing the character into horrible
situations to try to make the readers or other players feel sorry for xir and shower xir
with sympathy.

Just as with the Angsty Sue, characters around the Victim Sue may be derailed so xe
has reason to be a victim - eg, a canon character who was shown to generally be a
kind and caring person may physically abuse the Victim Sue.

Pages of interest if you're looking to avoid writing a Victim Sue:

Basic Tips To Create Better Characters With Tragic & Traumatic Backstories
Basic Tips To Write Better Abuse Victims & Abuse Situations

The Hood Ornament (not actually a type of Sue, but often mistaken for
one)

The Hood Ornament is not actually a type of Mary Sue, but is often mistaken for one
so here it is. Like the hood ornament of a car, this character is usually nice to look at,

122
but rather than actually drive anything in the story, xe is merely pushed around by
the plot. As protagonists, they tend to be very boring to watch.

Remember, some Mary Sues can be Hood Ornaments (eg, Bella Swan), but not all hood
ornaments are Mary Sues. If you have a character that you are not sure whether is a
Mary Sue or a Hood Ornament or both, seeWhat Is A Mary Sue?.

123
 On Writing & Roleplaying Characters Who Are Good
Leader Material

If you're looking to write or play a character who is supposed to be perceived as a

good leader, here's a list of qualities that a good leader needs to have. It doesn't
matter whether your character is a monarch, a general, a scout leader, or even in
charge of a school group project. It doesn't matter whether your character is trying to
stop an alien invasion or trying to manage a store through the holiday season. The
qualities that a good leader needs are universal, and so no matter what your
character is doing, any and all of these will most likely apply:

Recognizes own flaws and shortcomings: Nobody is perfect or knows everything, and
someone who is good leadership material will recognize this and won't try to act
otherwise. Xe will recognize that there are subjects and scenarios that xe doesn't
know enough about to make immediate judgment calls on, and will seek advice from
those who know more about it. Xe will also recognize when xe has become
compromised to the point that xe is no longer capable of carrying out xir
responsibilities as a leader, and will appoint someone to assist or even take over if
necessary.

Keeps a cool head when things get tense: Managing any crisis or problem requires
keeping calm so that one can think clearly and rationally. Furthermore, subordinates
take the behavior of their superiors as indicators of how things are going - if they see
that their leader is calm and confident, they can take confidence that things stand a
good chance of working out well. But if they see that their leader has lost control of a
situation or has no hope of success, they'll take it to mean that things are very bleak
indeed and lose morale.

Knows that respect must continually be earned, rather than given implicitly and
unconditionally: A good leader knows that people shouldn't respect xir simply
because xe's been appointed to a position of rank/authority, but because xe can be
trusted to capably handle problems as they come. This means recognizing that xe
can't expect to stay respected if xir track record shows little more than failures and
near-failures and/or makes a habit of treating people with scorn, contempt, and
callousness.

Knows how to prioritize: A good leader needs to be able to take stock of a situation
and figure out which issues are the biggest and most important at the moment, and
which issues are relatively trivial and can wait until later. A good leader also needs to
be able to figure which kinds of things need to have rules and regulations on them to
keep things moving smoothly, and which things are trivial enough that regulating
them would be more effort than it was worth.
124
Thinks and plans ahead: While it's impossible to predict with 100% accuracy how any
situation or scenario could possibly go wrong or end up more complicated than
expected, a good leader will try to prepare for some of the more obvious ways things
might go sour - which includes having resources on hand or a backup plan to deal with
reasonably expected complications, and leaving plans flexible enough that they can
be adjusted on the fly if need be.

Is able and willing to recognize flaws and mistakes in the system, and correct them
to the best of xir ability: A good leader needs to be able to appreciate the difference
between a problem with the people and a problem with the system, and thus
recognize when when current rules and protocols aren't actually working (or are even
causing harm!) and try to fix the system as much as possible.

Owns up to mistakes: A good leader doesn't try to rationalize away mistakes, blame
someone else for them, or deny them, but instead owns up to them, tries to make
reparations, and tries do better in the future. And if a subordinate chosen or assigned
by the leader does something wrong, then the leader accepts at least partial
responsibility and does xir best to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Can get the right people assigned to the right jobs: This means having the skills to
figure out the best options to assign to which tasks and who to promote to which
positions. It also means being impartial in one's choices, picking those who seem best
suited for jobs and tasks rather than assigning friends and family.

Can appreciate and see to the emotional needs of subordinates:It's important to

recognize that subordinates need and deserve encouragement for their work and
achievements. It's also important be able to recognize when someone has been
pushed too far and needs a break for xir own mental well-being, and to recognize that
belittling and insulting subordinates can wear down on their morale. A good leader is
also able to recognize that people who work in areas that aren't considered glamorous
or interesting also need and deserve recognition for their work to keep morale up,
and will see to it that they get it.

Can take decisive action - even when it's not easy: Sometimes there will be
scenarios where a decision must be made, and there is no "right" decision - someone
somewhere is going to lose out, somehow. But even so, these decisions must be
made, and a good leader must be able to make them. There will also be times when
someone that the leader is fond of will mess up and will require disciplinary action -
and the leader needs to be able to see that appropriate action is taken.

Remembers that the end doesn't justify the means: This means recognizing that one
should not abuse people or resources to reach one's goal, even if it is a high and noble
one. It also means trying the least-harmful and least-damaging solution possible in
any given situation first.

125
Makes decisions and actions that directly lead to getting the job done: No matter
how kind-hearted or well-intentioned your leader is (as explored in Why "Purity" Is An
Overrated Character Trait, intentions do not on their own a good leader make), if the
only reason your character's plans end up working out is because of lucky coincidences
or deus ex machinas, your character is not a qualified leader - just someone who just
happened to get really lucky.

126
 Basic Tips To Write Better (And More Likeable)
Badasses

Yet another character type that is often poorly-written by amateurs, many badass
characters end up becoming completely unlikeable or even despicable. Here are a few
tips to keep these characters from going this route.

Your character needs to be more than tough and talented.

Strong, sexy, smart, skilled, and sassy are all great character traits, but on their own
they're going to leave you with a character who is at best forgettable, and at worst
completely unlikeable. You build a good badass the same way you build any other
character type - by creating a complex, three-dimensional, nuanced character with
believable emotions, fears, hopes, vulnerabilities, hobbies, quirks, etc. Don't create a
badass who happens to be human; create a human who happens to be badass. (Or if
not human, replace "human" with whatever species your character is.)

Stop and ask yourself: if you took away the skills and talents that make your character
badass, do you think anyone would care about or want to associate with your
character? If the answer is "no" or "probably not," it's most likely time to rethink your
character, or plan for some in-story character development for xir.

Don't create an unstoppable kickass machine.

Characters who are so awesome and unflappable that there's no doubt they'll win are
boring to watch - people already know how it's going to end. Get some tension in
there - put your character in real danger. Let xir genuinely worry. Put the character
in a situation xe cannot overcome alone. Badassery isn't always about having the
ability to overcome a major obstacle; sometimes it's about having the courage and
willpower to face that obstacle. Phil Coulson wasn't badass for blowing a hole through
Loki's chest; he was badass for standing up to him knowing he was probably going to
die. When Buffy defeated the big bads of each season, it wasn't satisfying to watch
because she could take them out by flexing her pinkie - it was satisfying because she
had to face and overcome challenges, obstacles, and even losses first.
127
Be careful that your character doesn't become an amoral/self-centered
jerkass.

Many would-be badasses become completely unlikeable because, well, they do

whatever they want regardless of how other people might feel about it. In many
cases, it's pretty obvious that their writers think the characters can and should get
away with it because the characters are (supposedly) just that cool. The trouble is,
when a character intimidates, tongue-lashes, or beats up pretty much anyone and
everyone who is at most mildly annoying or merely inconveniencing, that character
isn't a badass, but a bully. Moreover, it tends to make these characters look incredibly
insecure and entitled.

Smirks are not shortcuts to cool.

All too often people treat smirks as a shortcut to say that their characters are cool
and badass, which they shouldn't - the character's actions (eg, their ability to handle
crises calmly and effectively, even if they're terrified inside) should demonstrate that.

While a smirk here and there is okay, if your character smirks every other paragraph,
xe's going to look like an arrogant and smug jerk. There are plenty of other facial
expressions out there; don't be afraid to use them, too.

Ask yourself how you'd feel if a complete stranger treated you and people
you care about the way your character treats people in the story.

Because that's how a lot of readers will feel when they read how your character treats
xir supposed friends or strangers.

128
Simple Tips To Put Yourself In The Shoes Of Characters
Who Aren't You

Putting yourself into the shoes of your characters who aren't supposed to be you (or at
least aren't based on you) is an extremely important part of writing a story, whether
this story be a full-length novel or the backstory of an RP character. Otherwise, you
run the risk of ending up with these characters feeling contrived and two-
dimensional. Plus, it's also a great way to help keep protagonist-centered
morality from overrunning the story - once you connect to your secondary and tertiary
characters, you tend to start to thinking twice about having your protagonists exploit
or bully them.

So if you're having trouble putting yourself into the shoes of characters who aren't
supposed to be you or based on you, try out these techniques. They might just help!

Put a little piece of yourself into every character you write. Give each of your
characters at least one of your own traits, be it a desire, preference, flaw, or
whathaveyou - and this includes your antagonists and villains! Maybe one of your
characters is easily annoyed by something that annoys you. Maybe another character
shares a hobby of yours. Another character might be interested in the same music
that you are.

Let's say that your main character is an elf, and your villain is a jerk who hates elves.
Give your villain a crush on someone who is totally your type, and suddenly it'll be
much easier to connect with him. Once you connect with him, you'll find yourself
wanting to ask why he feels the way he does. Then you can ask yourself what might
make you hate elves in a hypothetical scenario, and how you can apply that to your
villain. Done correctly, you'll end up with a villain who has a real motive, rather than
a two-dimensional mustache twirler.

Look for where there might be parallels between how you feel and how your
characters feel. For example, if you're writing a character who is supposed to be
passionate about something that you're not, try to think of something you do feel
passionately about. Maybe it's a series you love, maybe it's creating art, or maybe it's
a cause you advocate for or something else you believe in with all of your heart.
Whatever it is, think about how it makes you feel - then, presume your character
feels very similarly about the thing you're not passionate about.

For example, are you trying to write about a food critic, but have no particular
interest in that kind of thing yourself? Then assume that the food critic might feel
about bad food the same way you might feel about a disappointing turn of events in a
story you love. Are you trying to write about a person who loves designing and
129
building machines? Have your character get the same kind of satisfaction from it that
you get from creating a good character, writing a good story, or worldbuilding. How
do you feel when people tell you that something you believe in deeply is wrong or
ignorant? That likely won't be too far off from what your characters should feel when
others tell them the same.

Replace the the unusual and strange with the known and familiar. This is mostly a
thought exercise to do - you don't have to do this for your actual story. Simply doing
this in your head for awhile can be enough.

Are you using the word "pack" in your story? Replace it with "family." How about
"palace guards?" Call them "security guards" instead. Do you have "healers?" Call them
"doctors." How about "healing potions?" Refer to them as "medications," "balms," or
whatever contemporary real-world term would be the most appropriate.

You can take it a step farther and switch out actual people, objects, and even
settings, too. Do you have "city guards?" Imagine that they're simply police officers.
Imagine your fantasy armies in something closer to real-life tactical gear rather than
some kind of fantastic armor and weaponry. Do you have a character in a fantasy
world planning to kill someone with a dagger? Imagine the whole thing playing out in a
world like ours and replace the dagger with a small pistol.

Again, the real-world alternatives and analogs don't have to be used in the final
product, but by simply switching them out in your head for awhile you might be able
to identify with the characters' worlds and experiences a little more, as well as
develop a sense of how they might regard these things.

Read, listen to, or talk to people who disagree with you and force yourself to hear
them out without arguing. This one can be a challenge - it will try your patience and
you might come away feeling very angry. However, by doing this you can gain a much
better understanding of where these people are coming from and how and why they
feel the way they do. Once you gain this understanding, you'll be able to write
characters who hold the same views with much more authenticity, even if you
disagree with them.

With practice, putting yourself into the shoes of these characters should get
easier. So even if it seems difficult or time-consuming at first, keep at it! The
rewards of having characters who come across as having real motives and emotions is
so, so worth it!

130
On Writing Sympathetic Morally-Ambiguous Characters

Let’s face it: real life doesn’t neatly sort itself into tidy little good and bad/right and
wrong piles for our convenience and ease of mind. Very often we have to face
situations that force us to consider our values and what we really believe and why we
believe them, or force us to pick what we can only hope is the lesser of two evils. If
what we write is to accurately reflect reality, then this this fact cannot be ignored.
Morally-ambiguous characters can offer a chance to explore situations and issues that
don’t have clear-cut answers… and sometimes, they’re just a refreshing change from
straight-and-narrow characters.

On the downside, morally ambiguous characters who aren’t handed well can quickly
become obnoxious and even repugnant. So, here are some things to keep in mind to
help keep them relatively sympathetic and believable to audiences.

First, your morally-ambiguous characters need not, and probably should not
continuously angst and bellyache over each and every less-than-spotless action. For
example, things such as stealing an item of power from someone who would mainly
have used it to cause harm to others even if it did rightly belong to that person or
breaking a few ribs on a security guard whose only crime is doing xir job might not
bother the character’s conscience too much. A “gray” hero who felt guilty and
remorseful over every questionable action taken would in reality suffer a mental
breakdown due to the cognitive dissonance at some point, or quickly learn to start
rationalizing and justifying the actions so that they no longer weighed in on xir
conscience.

However, the character should have to grapple over major decisions where the
implications of each choice are understood by the character. For example, is it worth
sacrificing the lives of several innocent people to save the life of one man on the
verge of a medical breakthrough that could save more people… but only because he
exploited other researchers and stole their work? Which would be the worse evil:
forcing your only daughter into a loveless marriage, or letting the people in your
kingdom face starvation or slaughter because you couldn’t otherwise secure the
alliance you needed to gain assistance to avert these crises?

Even if there are no “right” choices in these scenarios, they should still present
difficulty, and even haunt the character into the future depending upon how things
go. If your character never has doubts or second thoughts over anything, xe will look
utterly self-centered and heartless, which does not make for a sympathetic character.

Do not try to force the audience’s perception of your character, nor coerce the
audience into taking your character’s side with justifications for your character’s
131
actions while showing that those who opposed your character’s actions are clearly in
the wrong. If the audience doesn’t feel too positively about a character’s actions
already, trying to force them to like the character again will mainly make them hate
the character more.

A character’s moral ambiguity should never be treated as a license to do whatever xe

wants without consequences or censure, nor should you start thinking of it as a reason
your character is better or superior to others. Let other characters get genuinely
angry with them upon occasion, especially the ones who end up shafted by your
character. Let it be shown that these characters actually have legitimate reasons to
be angry, and that they aren’t simply being self-centered whiners because they aren’t
willingly and ungrudgingly giving of themselves and theirs. Let there be repercussions
to your character’s actions.

If your character comes out of each and every situation smelling like a rose as far as
anyone who matters is concerned, you don't really have a morally-ambiguous
character. Instead, you either have a character who never really had to make a
sufficiently dramatic decision to be considered morally-ambiguous in the first place,
or you have a character whose actions are above reproach for the simple fact that
it’s this character doing them. Either way, you’re doing it wrong.

Long story short, a sympathetic morally-ambiguous character needs to break rules and
make decisions that others might never agree with, but at the same time retain xir
humanity. It must be shown in-universe that the character’s actions will not be well-
received by all (including people whose opinions matter), and if appropriate, there
should be negative consequences for the character.

132
Plotting, Conniving, & Manipulating - What It Isn't, And
What It Is

Plotters, connivers, and manipulators are a popular character archetype, showing up

as villains and heroes alike. The recent Doctors. Loki. Batman. Rumplestiltskin.
They're absolutely amazing to see when they're done right... but unfortunately, many
people don't do them right, often due to misconceptions of how the process actually
works. So, here's a go-over over how they don't realistically work compared to how
they do.

Plotting & Conniving

In Fictionland, long-term plots and plans are often portrayed like games of chess
where at least one player is able to plot twenty moves ahead and thereby corner their
opponent into a checkmate.

In Realityland, long-term planning does not work this way. (And neither does chess.)
Where fiction would have you believe that pulling this kind of thing off is akin to
constructing and setting off a precision machine that will go off perfectly if you just
construct it carefully enough and make sure nobody steps in to throw a gear in the
wrenches, in reality it’s more like herding cats. In the real world, variables change
every minute. Forces you couldn’t have possibly foreseen come into play right at the
worst times. People don’t always act how you think they should act.
Here’s an example plot: an evil usurper kills off the royal family save for a sole infant
heir, whom the wise court wizard secrets away to be raised by an ally. When the child
is of age, xe’ll overthrow the evil usurper in an epic battle and peace will reign, yay!
Just one wee tiny problem: there are countless things that could go wrong in this
scenario. The child could die or at the very least become severely disabled from
illness, an accident, or a natural disaster. Xe might have not have the mental
faculties or skills it takes to be a ruler, or might even be a worse ruler than the one
they’re trying to overthrow. When it finally comes time to instate the one true heir as
king/queen/whatever, a good chunk of the heir’s supporters could be knocked off
their feet by an inconveniently-timed flu. Even something as simple as bad weather
could turn a decisive victory into a crushing defeat.
Let’s say a conniver wants to stop a treaty between the Redlanders and the
Bluelanders from happening. This conniver knows that Redlander Jessie is an utterly
annoying person who has to show off pictures of her pet poodle to everyone she
meets, and Bluelander Peter is an avid dog-hater. If Jessie talks to Peter, she’ll put
Peter into a bad mood, and if Peter’s in a bad mood he won’t be able to make a

133
convincing case to sign the treaty. So the conniver plans to get Jessie on the board of
delegates months in advance and carefully arranges things so that Peter and Jessie’s
hotel rooms and schedules are arranged so that they’ll definitely run into each other
at lunch, where Jessie will engage Peter in conversation because she’s been seated
right next to him and has been told that he adores dogs.
In Fictionland, this would go off without a hitch and the conniver would be presented
as such a genius for having so cleverly set this all up. In Realityland, your conniver
would be very lucky if it all went down so easily. Jessie might actually be so
determined to make this whole thing work that she doesn’t talk about her poodle at
all. She might end up with a case of food poisoning and spend the day in her hotel
room puking her guts out. Peter might not make it to lunch on time due to a traffic
delay, leaving no room for poodle talk by the time he does get there. A recent death
of someone he cared about might make him too distraught to get properly angry. Any
one of a number of things could go wrong.
The longer and more complicated a plan is, the more things can go wrong with it. The
mark of an effective conniver or plotter isn’t setting precision-calibrated plans into
motion months or even years before the payoff and having them work out precisely as
planned. It’s not even working out each and every potential setback coming and
planning for every contingency. It’s the ability to adapt to unexpected twists and
setbacks as they come and take advantage of whatever resources are on hand at the
moment.
A character that takes outrageous gambles for immense payouts with outrageously
long odds does not look like an excellent planner. Xe looks like someone who foolishly
staked everything onto outrageous odds and at best got lucky, or at worst like
someone whose author simply couldn’t have fail.
When you’re coming up with plans for your conniver/planner, ask yourself: if someone
died, was killed, succeeded where they were “supposed” to fail, or failed where they
were “supposed” to succeed, would it completely and utterly wreck your character’s
plans? If so, BAD PLAN. TRY AGAIN.
Here are more plausible examples of conniving plots:
A wealthy, but corrupt lord has been worried for some time that his corruption might
come to light. One night, his property and stables are burned down by peasants
discontent over poor labor practices. He fears that investigations might reveal the
peasants’ motivations and thereby uncover his corruption, but he also sees an
opportunity to cover it up forever. The lord quickly goes to the other nobles and plays
himself up as an innocent victim, describing the damage and devastation in vivid
detail that shocks the other nobles. Then he insinuates that if action is not taken,
they may face the same fate. As a result, the nobles are sufficiently unsettled enough
that they immediately side with him in repressing an apparent peasant uprising,
rather than looking into the situation in more depth. In their panic, they pass laws
that allow them to bypass due process in the name of protecting the stability of the
kingdom - which allows the lord to quickly dispose of anyone who might reveal his
corruption.
A feared, famous, and dangerous vampire attempts to kill a vampire hunter, but fails
and is forced to flee the country. When he returns centuries later, he discovers that
134
his vast fortune is gone and that he has no significance to anyone anymore except as a
scary story told to children. But rather than wallow in his loss, he realizes that he
essentially has a fresh start: he can fly under the radar and possibly pin the
responsibility for whichever evil plans he plans to carry out on vampires that are more
feared and more visible in the community than he is. He then proceeds to stake the
heart of his highly-respected rival using the method preferred by the vampire hunter
who defeated him earlier, thereby implicating the vampire hunter’s descendants. All
the vampire has to do now is sit back and watch events unfold.

Not to say that your character can't work toward a long-term goal - but a series of
mini-plots that all eventually add up to the final goal work rather better than a single
long-term plot.

Manipulation

In Fictionland, a character can watch a person for five minutes and instantly know
everything there is worth knowing about that person, up to and including which
buttons they can push to make the character do exactly what they want. In
Realityland, to really effectively manipulate a person, the manipulator needs to know
their targets from several angles, including:

 Their baseline personalities, which is essentially how a person behaves without

strong external factors affecting their mood or judgment. Let’s say you meet
someone who comes off as angry and bitter - at first meeting, you can’t know
if you are dealing with someone who is always this way, or whether you’re
dealing with someone who is in a bad mood because xir dog just died. Someone
who comes off as particularly happy and chipper may have just won a
tournament and may be less exuberant most of the time.
 Their driving motivations and how strong those motivations are. If you know
what a person wants in life or admires, it’s easier to offer them a proverbial
carrot to lead them on. For example, someone with a strong sense of curiosity
and wonder can often be swayed or tempted with knowledge and answers to
their questions.
 Their fears and worries. Sometimes people can be swayed by appealing to the
things they want to avoid, or things they fear. A manipulative person who
knows xir boyfriend or girlfriend is dependent on them may throw a hissy fit
about how they’ve had enough and they’re going to leave now, which will
prompt the boyfriend/girlfriend to give into xir demands. Also, appealing to
fears isn’t always about threateningpeople with unwanted consequences, but
also by offering them ways to avoid unwanted consequences. Someone terrified

135
 that a loved one might die of an illness is more likely to spend money on a
sham treatment than someone who isn’t.

This one should go without saying, but since some people out there have apparently
missed it: if your character tells one of xir targets that xe is a master manipulator,
then your character fails at being a master manipulator. Part of the game is keeping
the target unaware that xe is being manipulated in the first place.

Now, it isn’t at all hopeless for a manipulator who doesn’t know the target intimately
- quite the contrary! A person whom the manipulator does not know well can still be
manipulated by appealing to baser and therefore more ubiquitous instincts, desires,
and fears. Advertisements do this all the time.

Many commercials play to our desire to belong or be ‘part of the crowd’ by depicting
consumers of the product as fun and exciting people who are generally surrounded by
other fun and exciting people. You are being subconsciously told that if you buy this
product, you will belong to a group of fun and exciting people, too.

Rick Perry’s infamous “Strong” ad shows the Texas governor casually walking beside a
forested riverbank in jeans, a big-buckled belt, a button-down shirt, and a brown
canvas coat - a wardrobe that tells the rural, conservative voters he was reaching for
that “I am one of you!” while suggesting down-home simplicity and honesty. And
surely a simple, honest man wouldn’t be lying about students not being allowed to
pray in schools...

Sarah Palin’s pro-natural gas campaign advertisement for her 2006 run as governor of
Alaska depicted her sitting in a chair with her daughter Piper, which sends multiple
messages to viewers - that Sarah Palin is motherly and caring, and that natural gas
somehow equates to family together-time.

(Bringing up children in general is an extremely effective manipulation tactic - hence

Palin’s use of her daughter Piper and Perry’s kvetching about kids being unable to
pray in schools. Put kids into the picture, and parental instincts start bypassing the
logic circuits.)

The best and most effective manipulations are those that leave the targets feeling
like the winners. This is why advertisers emphasize how much money consumers will
save when they buy their products - even though the consumer may not have even
needed the product in the first place, xe is focusing on the money xe didn’t spend
rather than the money xe did.

Of course, mass manipulation techniques won’t work on everyone - if they ever really
work at all. Obviously, Rick Perry didn’t get elected president, and if the votes on the
YouTube version of his “Strong” video are any indication, his campaign platform
didn’t go well at all.
136
As for other modes of manipulation, you could write an entire book on them. As it is,
Orange Paper's Propaganda & Debate Techniques and The Cult Test are pretty good
resources on manipulation, particularly the darker and shadier side of it.

137
 Assassins: Tips & Guidelines To Write & Play Them
More Believably

When people imagine assassins, they often envision sleek, seductive figures armed
with pretty little stabby blades or some other kind of special super weapon. Sensuous
scenes are called to mind - eg, a black-clad assassin creeping into the room of a
sleeping prince to stab him in his sleep. But the reality is, these fantastic images are
just that - fantasy. Real and realistic assassinations and assassins are typically
anything butglamorous and sexy, and in general, they wouldn’t work very much at all
like people tend to imagine.

Clothes: Any decent assassin is going to want to blend in. This doesn’t mean wearing
sleek black catsuits, but rather clothes that someone with legitimate business in the
area might be wearing. If your assassin might have to make a quick getaway, xe’ll
want clothes that are easy to run in, too. (And before anyone asks, no - catsuits are
not all the better for sneaking through air ducts in, because air ducts are horrible for
sneaking through.)

Unique/rare weapons: Unique/rare weapons are generally easier to trace and more
difficult to replace, service, or find ammo for. If an assassin is going to use a gun, a
generic or common model of gun is a better choice than some super high-end model
that only exists in limited quantities.

Seduction as a tactic: This is plausible in a world where DNA testing does not yet
exist. But in one where it does, any assassin who makes prolonged physical contact
with xir target is most likely going to leave DNA evidence all over the body for
investigators to find - and the longer and more intimate the contact is, the more DNA
will be left behind.

Mentality: Anyone who could making killing people a profession and not suffer some
kind of long-term mental trauma as a result would have to lack ability to feel
sympathy, empathy, and remorse, and/or feel verystrongly that xe is doing the right
thing and that the targets deserve or need to be killed. In the real world, this would
equate to people who are psychopaths/sociopaths and those who are easily able to
dehumanize others in their minds.

What most mercenary assassins get hired for: Contrary to belief that mercenary
assassins will get hired to take out politicians and other big-wigs, most of them are
hired to bump off people like spouses and bosses for four-figure payments.

Any obvious murder will most likely prompt an investigation. And that could mean
trouble for the assassin and/or xir employers. The more important and prominent the
138
target was, the more effort will be put into finding the killer. This could potentially
mean that the best way to kill a target would be to make it look like an accident.

Is your character fighting to look pretty, or is your character fighting to

win? If your assassin is going to get into physical combat, you need to ask yourself
this. The character who fights to look pretty uses pretty little knives and daggers as
primary weapons and dances around with graceful gymnastics. The character who
fights to win uses whatever weapon is most suited for the job right now and fights
dirty - hair-pulling, eye-gouging, biting, groin-hitting, etc. The character who fights to
look pretty has loose flowing hair. The character who fights to win won’t make it so
easy to be grabbed by the opponent. The character who fights to look pretty wears
tight leather outfits and/or clothes that wouldn’t look out of place on an exotic
dancer. The character who fights to win wears clothes that afford reasonable
protection and mobility.

A competent assassin will try to avoid getting into a fight in the first place. An
actual, physical fight should be the assassin's last resort, not the first.

Training a child up from infancy or early childhood to be “the perfect

assassin/killer/soldier” may sound good on paper, but in reality it would not be a
very smart move at all. First, you’d be looking at spending time and money on
training someone for something-teen years before actually getting a payoff on one’s
investment. On the other hand, you could get results a lot faster and with a lot fewer
resources by simply starting out with adults or near-adults.

Trying to start a child early in order to desensitize xir to death and violence is a
crapshoot, too: there are good odds that child would simply end up traumatized with
PTSD or PTSD-like symptoms, which would make xir unsuitable as a soldier or killer. If
the child ends up being a sociopath, then you’re not much better off because
sociopaths don’t make good soldiers. Yes, you can probably count on them to throw
themselves into causing trouble with glee… including at home, in the barracks, or
even when left unsupervised in the field with nothing else to take their boredom out
on.

Finally, how many kids actually end up being everything their parents wanted them to
be? How often does training up a child to be a perfect anything actually work?
Training a kid up to be a perfect assassin would be no different.

Children-as-assassins make little sense, either. While children can be trained to be

strong and capable in their own right, they will still always lack the potential
strength, motor control, focus, and decision-making skills of an adult. Thus there are
virtually no scenarios that would justify sending a child out to kill someone as
opposed to a properly-trained adult.

139
Assassin ≠ spy. While the techniques of spies and assassins could overlap at some
points and someone couldpotentially have the skills to be both a spy and an assassin,
spies and assassins serve two different goals. See Spies: A Few Things Writers &
Roleplayers Should Know About Them for more information.

140
 So You Wanna Mix Science And Magic?

Every now and then I see someone declare how in their story, they're going to mix
science and magic. Often as not they carry on about it as if it's some grand new thing
nobody's ever thought to try before, or as if they're breaking some gigantic taboo. But
perhaps the most glaring issue is that they have next to no idea how either one works,
and the way the writer presents it makes next to no sense at all.

Do you mean mixing magic and the scientific method?

As has been explored here and here, science is a method for testing the world around
us to figure out how it works and why it works that way. It is not a thing you fire from
a fancy aperture device. Science allowed us to produce rocket launchers and MP3
players, but rocket launchers and MP3 players are not in and of themselves "science."

The character who mixed magic and the scientific method would spend long hours
doing things like testing potions and taking careful notes of the results. Let's say a
botched potion made a guy pregnant. - the scientific mage would have to perform
dozens of experiments just to work out what went on when Jim drank that potion. Did
the potion work because it just makes dudes pregnant, or does it actually do
something else such as make subconscious desires manifest? Did the turkey sandwich
Jim ate at lunch that day have any effect at all? Does this potion do the same thing
for other species, or does it only work on human/orc hybrids like Jim?

Or maybe you mean magical technology?

You're not exactly breaking new ground here. Our ancestors mixed magic and
technology when they started putting charms on their weapons to ensure good hunts
or survival in battle. All tools are forms of technology, not just those that run on
electricity - a candle is no less technology than a fluorescent lightbulb.

You're not even breaking new ground if you limit yourself to electronic technology.
Some folks out there use electronic goodies for divination - eg, try to divine answers
from other forces by randomly shuffling their MP3 players or visiting random
webpages. Some place charms on their laptops so they crash less. The "magic vs.
technology" trope is almost nonexistant outside of fiction.

141
Do you mean technology powered by magic?

Then just say so, because that actually says something informative about what you're
doing. Bear in mind, this does raise a few questions - what is magic? Is it some kind of
wispy substance permeating the universe that can just be tapped into? Or is magic the
act of using said substance? Or do you define 'magic' as something else? Whatever it is,
make sure you've worked out just what magic is supposed to be.

And while we're at it, magical wizard tools are still technology.

A wand in Harry Potter may not have moving parts nor run on electricity, but it's still
a tool that does a job, and what's more said tool was produced through technical
know-how - in short, the very definition of technology. Wand-maker Ollivander is even
strongly implied to have used actual science to create the best wands - he spent many
years experimenting to determine what materials made for the best wands. A magic
talisman that creates a protective shield qualifies as technology. A rug enchanted to
fly qualifies as technology. It's not how something works that makes it technology; it's
the simple fact that it does work.

142
 Things Your Fantasy Or Science Fiction Story Needs

Writing a fantasy or science fiction story isn't a license to let plotholes,

contradictions, sloppy worldbuilding, and poor characterization go unchecked. This
article goes over three major things that are important to factor into any fantasy or
sci-fi story - and why they're important.

Table of Contents
 Internal Consistency
 Reasonably Solid Logistics
 Good, Well-Developed Characters

Internal Consistency

The great strength of the speculative fiction genres - fantasy, science fiction, etc - is
that they do not need to conform to the known rules of the real world. You can do
anything you want - you can write about sentient plants that feed on gamma
radiation, people who morph into unicorns, and purple space mushrooms that sing
under the light of the full moon.

Here’s the thing, though - you need to make a world that your audience can
temporarily believe, and nothing snaps a person’s suspension of disbelief and jolts
them out of a story quite like that unmagical moment when they realize that
something in the story isn’t adding up. That beloved character you killed off in the
second installment? If readers remember that another character was saved from an
equally-bad injury in the first installment, and there’s nothing to explain why they
couldn’t save the second character in the same way, they’re just going to get
frustrated and angry. (And there’s nothing like senseless character deaths to infuriate
your audience.)

It also works the other way around - if the healer couldn’t save a character from a
deadly sting in the first installment because healing magic doesn’t work on venom,
and then in the second installment the same healer saves a character from a deadly
sting with no explanation as to why this suddenly works now, fans’ suspension of
disbelief will snap as they realize that you, the writer, can’t keep your stuff straight.

In particularly bad cases, you may end up with inconsistencies that undermine the
fundamental integrity of your story’s universe. Charmed is a prime example of a
143
tangled mess of a universe that could rarely keep anything straight longer than one
episode, and not infrequently did the drama point of one episode completely
contradict the drama point of another episode. One of the main premises of the show
is that the three lead characters are witches who must use their magic to fight the
forces of evil… while keeping their powers hidden from the population at large.

In one episode, the characters were exposed as witches, and the chaos that erupted
from the public learning about the existence of witches and magic culminated in one
of the characters being fatally shot. The problem was only resolved once time was
reversed and the characters were able to change the course of events so that
exposure never happened.

Flash forward a few seasons later, where we find out about the existence of a group
of beings known as the Cleaners. Their purpose is to “clean up” exposures by re-
writing peoples’ memories and if necessary, erase exposure risks from reality
altogether. The Cleaners are supposed to have existed all along - in which case, the
former episode should have gone down very differently. At one point the Cleaners
erased someone who was convinced the characters were doing something illegal that
needed exposing… never mind that another character who was doing the exact same
thing in the first two seasons was left untouched. The result was that a lot of fans
were left angry and confused.

The show also undermined its own moral messages. One episode featured a child with
the ability to magically start fires, and the main characters had to protect the child
from evil forces that wanted to use the child for their own purposes. It’s stated in this
episode that his powers aren’t inherently evil; it’s what you choose to do with them
that matters. Unfortunately, all of this goes down the drain when at another point
fire powers are depicted as being evil period, with some of the characters realizing
that another character was evil becauseshe had fire powers.

By its end, the series was a jumbled mess that couldn’t keep anything straight or
coherent for longer than an episode or two, leaving a lot of frustrated fans in its
wake.

Your fantasy world does not always need to follow the rules of the real world, but
it does need to follow its own rules. Now, it can be difficult to keep everything in a
universe straight, particularly when multiple writers are involved. To avoid this,
create a notebook, computer document, or even a wiki to write down what you’ve
come up with so far. Whenever you plan to use a particular element, you can refer
back to what you wrote to avoid inconsistency. Also, check out Phlebotinum-
Development Questionsfor a series of questions you should ask yourself about any new
gadget, spell, superpower, or whathaveyou from the getgo so you can avoid writing
yourself into a corner later.

144
Reasonably Solid Logistics

In a nutshell, logistics concerns the flow and management of resources, be it food,

equipment, personnel, livestock, money, time, or information. In many stories, it’s
quite clear that the writer hasn’t thought out just how all of these things are
managed. And just as inconsistency and contradictions can snap someone’s suspension
of disbelief, so can things that just plain don’t add up.

Peter Parker’s costume in the 2002 Spider-Man film is a simple example. Peter is
established to be a poor high school student - which means that he has neither a lot
of time nor a lot of money on his hands. Yet he manages to create a spiffy costume
that would have required a lot of time, a lot of money (according to IMDb, the
costumes were created at up to $100,000 each), and the skill of a very experienced
tailor to create. Even assuming that his spider bite somehow conferred upon him
super-tailoring skills, we can presume that a poor teenage boy living with a widowed
aunt would have something more pressing to spend $100,000 on.

Another example is the way horses are treated in some fantasy works - like some sort
of pre-industrial vehicles that just require a little fuel (food and water) and a little
maintenance to keep running. In reality, horses require a lot of food, plenty of rest
(especially if they’ve been worked hard), medical care, socialization, grooming, and
even playtime. Horses are also prey animals, which means that they tend to be on the
cautious/fearful side when it comes to dealing with potential danger. Horses can also
suffer mental trauma, and even post traumatic stress disorder.

The Twilight series is another example of failed logistics. Stephenie Meyer explains
the Cullen family’s wealth through having Alice Cullen use her psychic powers to
predict the stock market. In reality, Alice’s shenanigans would attract attention from
authorities because anyone that successful at the stock market is very likely to be
engaging in insider trading. The investigations that would results from this would
create an exposure risk for the Cullens. As explored in Common Plotholes In Vampire
Fiction and Tips & Ideas To Write More Believable Masquerades, there is simply no
way to rationalize how the Cullen family has avoided landing themselves in hot water
from human authorities, and subsequently, the Volturi.

Good, Well-Developed Characters

145
Characters are the heart and soul of of your story, and good characters will make up
for multitudes of flaws or perceived flaws. As an example of what a difference good
characters can make, let’s look at the My Little Pony franchise. In the older cartoons,
the characters were fairly flat, little more than simple caricatures comprised of what
writers thought would appeal to girls. These cartoons were never really popular
among anyone outside of target demographic, and by and large are forgotten today.
But then came along My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic with Lauren Faust’s cast of
dynamic, well-rounded characters - and suddenly, a franchise that was previously
considered to be for little girls became popular among young adults of both genders
as well.

Just go to a site like Tumblr sometime and plug the name of a popular show or movie
into the search box. Notice how many of the posts are character-related. And before
any of you go “eeew, it’s just fangirls lusting over the popular hottie” - stop right
there. Yes, it may be true that some of them are teenage girls having fantasies over
the hottie du jour - but they’re also customers enjoying a product that someone has
successfully sold to them at least in part because of the characters.

As for the ones that people find sexy - stop and look these characters over. Even
though the popular characters may be attractive, they’re also usually dynamic and
multifaceted. If it were just about the looks (or even that girls just like bad boys),
then Iron Man 3’s Aldrich Killian should easily have as many fans as Loki, but he
doesn’t. If it were just about the looks, then Iron Man 3’s Eric Savin should be more
popular than Phil Coulson - and it’s doubtful that many people would argue that Clark
Gregg is objectively better-looking than James Badge Dale. (If you look closely, you'll
often find that the characters people go wild over exhibit certain behavioral
characteristics.)

Now, your audience doesn’t necessarily have to like your villains (The Hunger
Games does quite fine with the despicable President Snow), but it’s imperative that
your audience cares about at least some of your protagonists. Remember, if your
audience doesn’t like your protagonists, then they don't have any reason to care what
happens to them, and therefore have no reason to follow your characters on their
adventures in the first place. Think about the characters you like - stop and ask
yourself what made you like them. What made you care about what happened to
these characters?

Remember, no work is utterly flawless - but there's nothing to distract people from
these flaws like good characters. When in doubt, make good characters. For tips and
guides on improving your characters, head on over to Characterization & Character
Creation.

146
 Things You Need To Do In Your Science Fiction Or
Fantasy Story

Following up Things Your Fantasy Or Science Fiction Story Needs, when you're writing
science fiction or fantasy, there are a few things you need to do with your settings
and characters to make a good, solid work.

Table of Contents
 Be clear on what you're talking about
 Remember what is going to be novel and what is going to be mundane to your
characters
 Use your extraordinary elements to create extraordinary adventures.
 So, in summary...

Be clear on what you're talking about

In one story I read, a major hullabaloo was made over the fact that the protagonist
was a witch - this made her Really Super Important somehow. But because the story
never explained or shown what a witch even was or did, I had no real way to
understand just why everyone was making such a fuss over the character, let alone
what was at stake for her and those around her as a consequence of her witchiness.
From where I sat, she was basically special because the Story Said So, which made it
very frustrating to read.

Many times, it seems that the authors of assorted Internet fiction have read or
watched perhaps one or two stories containing a particular magical creature and
simply assume that that's the way they universally or traditionally work, and so they
figure that dropping the name of the creature will be enough for people to know what
they're talking about without further explanation. But it just ain't so.

Out of all of the stories I can think of that involve witches, there isn't a one of them
where they work the exact same way as in another work. What they can do, how they
do it, and how powerful they potentially are differ significantly. In some works they
may be ordinary humans who learned a skill; in other works they may have been
blessed with a gift or have an inborn ability that others don't. In some stories witches
can easily turn someone into a frog with a snap of their fingers; in others, magically

147
lighting something as simple as a campfire may take a great deal of effort. Sometimes
witches need special tools or ingredients to work their magic; sometimes they don't.

If there's one thing you can count on in fiction you read, it's that the fantastic
creatures will differ from a universal or traditional standard somehow. There's
nothing wrong with this, because quite frankly, a lot of traditional creatures don't
make for very good drama, and following universal standards to the last detail easily
results in a story that feels old and stale simply because there are only so many types
of stories you can do if you follow all of those standards.

Whatever fantastic or supernatural element you are using, be it ghosts, aliens,

vampires, fae, centaurs, mermaids, sirens, or even magic itself, you have to show
people what they they are or mean in your story, or else you run the risk of leaving
people clueless or with the wrong idea entirely. Simply dropping a name and
expecting them to be clear on what you're talking about just doesn't work when there
are so many differences between the way these things work in different works of
fiction and even in traditional folklore. So whatever you do, make sure that you give
people enough information that they can understand how the fantastic elements work
in your world.

Remember what is going to be novel and what is going to be mundane to

your characters

Whatever people are accustomed to and experience on a daily or near-daily basis is

what they will perceive as normal and ordinary. If your character has grown up in a
world where magic is a daily fact of life, it's not going to seem like anything especially
wondrous and special. A spell to light a candle isn't going to be any more exciting or
interesting to xir than a butane lighter is to you, nor is using a magical communication
mirror going to seem any more remarkable than you would find using Skype with a
webcam, and going to a magical school wouldn't be seen as any more exciting or
interesting to xir than going to a regular middle or high school would seem to you.

On the other hand, if someone grew up in an environment where finding new

information meant digging it up in a library, running around for hours trying to find
the right person to ask, doing the research yourself, or summoning a spirit in a ritual
that could potentially take awhile or even go horribly wrong if done improperly, that
person might find an Internet search engine with which xe can easily and instantly
find new information to be something utterly amazing and novel. A scholarly mage
who long had nothing to write notes with but paper and ink might find a modern word
processor to be a marvel, even a miracle.

148
If your character had spent a long time in an environment where running into alien
races was a relatively regular occurrence, meeting an alien wouldn't seem any more
remarkable to xir than running into someone from another country on the Internet
seems to you. And while a city of sparkling golden spires may invoke awe and gawking
for the first few visits, after awhile the novelty will wear off and by the fiftieth visit
you probably won't be gawking much, if at all. Meanwhile, natives of the city wouldn't
be doing any gawking at all - to them, it's just as mundane and unremarkable as your
local neighborhood is to you. While your eye might be drawn by the strange alien
fashions around you, to the aliens they're just as ordinary as jeans and t-shirts are to
you.

However, if your character is supposed to be an alien from a highly advanced

civilization lost on Earth, that alien might find xirself almost helpless. Sure, maybe
the computer systems in its spaceship can plot a course between planets, but that
doesn't mean the alien would know how to use a laptop or smartphone any more than
the average early 21st century American would know how to operate an ENIAC or
Commodore PET. Maybe the alien has some kind of advanced kitchen appliances that
can assemble a meal in a matter of minutes, but that doesn't mean xe'll have the first
idea how to use a toaster any more than the average college student would know how
to get the temperature right and cook in a Medieval oven. And in general, many, if
not most of the things that you take for granted might seem pretty strange and
interesting

Similarly, if your character is an ordinary human transported to an alien or magical

world and doesn't react to the shiny new things by gawking and staring in awe at least
a little bit, that's pretty unrealistic, too. Such characters are pretty obviously written
by writers who themselves have become numb to the wonders of the fantastic worlds
their characters are supposed to have just entered, and are failing to take into
account that their characters should still feel a lot more awe and wonder.

Use your extraordinary elements to create extraordinary adventures.

Whether you're writing a story about a mermaid coming to land and attending a
human high school, a human entering the realm of the fae and falling in love with
one, an alien trying to blend in on Earth, or someone just trying to survive in a post-
apocalyptic future, ask yourself: what kind of adventures and shenanigans can happen
directly because and only because of the fantastic elements in your story? How might
characters with access to fantastic phlebotinums try to solve their problems, as
opposed to characters who only have access or ordinary and mundane ones? How
might fantastic characters solve their problems when only mundane elements are
around?

149
If your mermaid in highschool doesn't do anything or be involved in anything that
couldn't happen to anyhighschool student in the exact same way, people who picked
up your story looking for an honest-to-goodness mermaid adventure are going to be
very disappointed when they realize that your story is essentially interchangeable
with any number of other highschool dramas except perhaps for the fact that your
character really likes going to the beach alone. If your protagonist does nothing that a
human protagonist couldn't do and gets into no adventures or trouble that could only
happen because your protagonist is a mermaid, then why are you writing about a
mermaid in the first place?

Likewise, if nothing in your story would really change if you made your vampire love
interest human all along, then there's no point to having a vampire love interest. If
your crew of space explorers don't do or experience anything that couldn't happen or
happen that way if they weren't exploring space and fantastic alien worlds, then they
might as well be ordinary humans living on Earth. While your basic plot premise and
characters should be able to hold up even if there are no fantastic elements involved
(EG, "three friends must stop an evil would-be tyrant despite incompetent and corrupt
politicians" or "a group of unlikely companions with criminal histories must band
together to stop a threat" are solid enough premises for any type of story), your
fantastic elements must be more than mere set pieces and costumes or else there is
no point to having them.

(A caveat - the plot where two lovers are forbidden or discouraged from being
together because of enmity between their kinds or because the masquerade must be
upheld is very frequently used, so used on its own is rather likely to create a story
that feels stale and old.)

So, in summary...

 Your story needs to make it clear how the fantastic elements you're using work
in your story or setting rather than just assuming that people will immediately
know exactly what you mean. Because these things typically work very
differently in different works of fiction and folklore, if you fail to show them
how they're supposed to work in your story, you risk leaving people clueless or
with the wrong idea.
 If your character would be familiar with something, it shouldn't seem especially
strange or curious to xir, even if it's strange or curious to you. If your
character wouldn't be familiar with something, it shouldseem strange and
curious to xir, even if it's completely boring and ordinary to you.

150
 You need to use your fantastic elements to create plots and scenarios that
couldn't happen or happen the same way if the fantastic elements weren't
there - otherwise, they're just gimmicks and serve no purpose.

151
 Keeping Magic From Taking Over Your Story

First, see Phlebotinum-Development Questions. This will help you work out from the
very start what your magic could potentially do in the story.

Ask yourself what problems you don’t want magic to be able to solve, then think up
reasons why it can’t be used for that. For example, let’s say we don’t want magic to
be able to bring people back from the dead. There are plenty of possible
explanations; here are a few suggestions:

 Reviving from actual death is simply impossible. You can save someone from
mortal injury, but once they’ve crossed the line to actual death, it’s a done
deal.
 Magically bringing someone back from the dead is really, really, really hard.
Like, you have a better chance of getting eaten by a shark and winning the
lottery on the same day as you have performing a successful resurrection spell.
 You could bring them back to life, but odds are you won’t like what you get -
maybe they’ll be angry at you, or maybe they’ll come back in a monstrous
form.

I play a certain Marvel (movie-verse) sorcerer pretty frequently. Since I don’t want
him to be able to solve all of his problems magically or be casting spells right and left,
I’ve come up with some rules and limitations to keep him under control.

 All spells take a certain amount of concentration to perform - if something

breaks his concentration or if he’s too tired or upset to focus, he can’t cast
properly.
 The bigger or more dramatic the spell’s effects are, the longer it generally
takes to perform them. This means that someone might be able to interrupt (or
even injure!) him before he finishes.

Some spells require components that are extremely difficult to obtain.

 Transforming someone into something else requires him to make physical

contact with the target after at least a minute of magical buildup, OR somehow
get the target to ingest a potion.
 A rule of thumb I keep to is that if it can be done with ordinary household
appliances, it’s easier and/or more practical to do with ordinary household
appliances.
 Another rule I emphasize is that learning magic takes time and effort.
Hypothetically, anyone could try to learn magic, but if they're a mutant with a

152
 certain set of powers or inventor geniuses they'd probably be better off honing
their natural abilities and/or sticking with what they're already good at.

Magic can also have a physical cost - using it might be tiring. Learning new spells
might take significant time and practice. Some works of fiction have a possibility of a
magical backlash (particularly if magic is used “improperly” per the rules of the
universe), or magic comes at a great personal cost. Not only do these provide good
reasons for your characters not to use magic willy-nilly; they’re also good mechanisms
for providing dramatic potential - eg, a character uses magic improperly or frivolously
and has to face the consequences.

Circumstances and conditions can also make the use of magic impractical or even
impossible. Perhaps a spell only works on a certain day or when the moon is at a
certain phase. Perhaps too many people crowded in an area disrupt the flow of magic.

Another thing I've found effective at curbing the overuse in magic is to make people
outside the circle of protagonists react realistically toward it. EG, if one of your
protagonists can magically scry into the villains' lair, then the villains should
eventually figure out a way to block it. Their solution doesn't have to be "magical" per
se - it might be electromagnetic, even - but it sets things up so that magical solutions
aren't fix-all solutions.

That said, when it comes to RPGs, I don’t like tying magic up in so many rules and
potential consequences that players feel punished for using it. I’m all for setting caps
and limitations on what it can and can’t do - but it’s my philosophy that at the end of
the day, it should still be fun to use and have rewarding outcomes.

153
 Tips For Describing & Summarizing Your Story &
Pitching Your Plot Ideas

When you summarize or describe your story or plots to people, it's important to do so
in an engaging and comprehensive manner. Unfortunately, many people I've
encountered fail to do this - their descriptions or summaries are nigh-
incomprehensible, or they ramble on about all of the wrong aspects of the story, or
they're completely unprepared to handle themselves when the inevitable plothole-
spotting starts happening. Hopefully, these tips should help you avoid these problems.

Table of Contents
 Story or Sandbox?
 Concision & Precision Are Your Friends
 Your Description/Summary Should Make Sense Without In-Story Context
 Watch and check the hype
 Be Prepared To Answer Questions

Story or Sandbox?

When someone starts telling me that their fantasy world is inhabited by elves,
dragons, demons, etc., I start spacing out. It’s not that these elements are bad - it’s
that they’re the wrong point of focus for a story pitch. When a person begins by
describing what is in their fantasy story rather than who, it tells me that the author is
more focused on creating a sandbox to play around in rather than creating a good
story for the enjoyment of others.

Sandboxes do have their place - tabletop RPGs are essentially sandboxes. But
remember, you’re not pitching an RPG setting - you’re pitching a story. Instead
of what and where, you need to focus more on who and why.

Concision & Precision Are Your Friends

If you’re ever planning on selling your story or having complete strangers read it, you
need to remember is that the average person is only going to spend perhaps half a
154
minute reading your summary or blurb, and if you’re very lucky, that might get them
to spend about a minute more reading an excerpt from your story that may or may
not be randomly selected to get a feel for your style of writing. The average adult
reads about 250-300 words per minute, which means that you’ve got around 125-150
words to grab a person’s attention. This means that you need to get as much useful
information jam-packed into these few words as possible. (For the record, this
paragraph - this sentence included - is 131 words long.)

On a site like fanfiction.net, you’ll find yourself even more limited - you have a 384
character limit in which to write something that will entice people to click your link.
Some sites give you even less - 150-200 words isn’t uncommon. (This paragraph,
incidentally, is 294 characters long.)

In real-time conversation, if you spent too long droning or rambling on about your
story and/or focus on the wrong details, your target is going to lose interest.

You should be able to put your initial description into a few short lines, and those
lines need to say something. For example, saying “my story is about a girl who must
defeat an evil queen and falls in love with an elf” doesn’t really tell us anything about
the characters at all. On the other hand, “my story is about a peg-legged baker who
must overcome a past shame to overthrow a queen who rules with an iron fist and
falls in love with a cynical elven blacksmith” gives us a lot more information.

To help train yourself into the habit of writing short descriptions, you can use
this word counter or thischaracter counter.

Your Description/Summary Should Make Sense Without In-Story Context

Consider the following statement: “Theresa must find the Laxamanica to stop the
Grizbor from taking over Paratrila!”

It's next to worthless as a summary because it's almost completely devoid of

information because you, the reader, have no idea what a Laximanica is, who/what
the Grizbor is/are, and for all you know Paratrila could just as easily be a one-horse
farming town as it could be an underground dwarf kingdom.

However, phrasing it as “Theresa must find a magical weapon to stop an invasion of

insectoid aliens from taking over her world” communicates the premise of the story in
an effective manner.

155
Use real-world terms as much as possible and avoid any description that refers to
something that only exists in the universe you’re talking about. Essentially, at this
point it’s your job to translate and interpret your world into terms that people who
have heard absolutely nothing about it with it can easily understand. When you
describe your world, put yourself in the shoes of someone who’s completely
unfamiliar with it. Go with what makes sense from that perspective.

Watch and check the hype

If you hype up your story as really awesome, epic, or the best or greatest anything,
you're just setting yourself up for a fall. Those who are more cynical and jaded will
see you as arrogant and overconfident and will be put off from you and your story.
Those who do fall for the hype will feel let down and possibly even betrayed if the
story doesn't live up to their expectations, and as a result will feel more negatively
about the story than they would have if you hadn't tried to hype it up so much. Just
tell people what your story is about and leave it at that.

Be Prepared To Answer Questions

Lots of questions. Tough questions. Lots of tough questions. Any time you share an
idea with other people - and particularly if you ask for their opinions on it - you’re
going to find them asking questions you never realized needed to be answered and
pointing out flaws you never realized needed to be accounted for.

At this point, many people will completely shoot themselves in the foot. For example,
a common response to critical questions is “it’s fantasy; it doesn’t have to be
realistic!” That is technically true - but fantasy still has to be believable. If they’re
asking these questions or pointing out these flaws, then it’s because they don’t find it
believable - and that means you have a problem to fix.

Another foot-shooting response is “you’d just have to read it to understand.” People

don’t want to read it to understand; they want to understand so they can decide
whether they want to read it.

If you’re not ready to answer questions and account for plotholes, you’re not ready to
share your story.

156
157
 Plot & Story Development Questions

A series of questions to ask yourself about your story and its plot, based on things I
see in stories and story premises that haven't been thought out very well.

 Why should audiences be interested in watching what your protagonists do? Are
you trying to take your audience on an adventure, or are you just writing out a
log of all the things you wish you could do or what you wish your life could be
like? The latter is often fun to write, but not often fun to read.

 Why should audiences care about your protagonists, or what happens to your
protagonists?

 What experience does your story offer audiences that they probably haven’t
already experienced in a similar story?

 What are the main obstacles to be faced? What makes them legitimate
challenges or threats?

 Why should audiences care whether the protagonists succeed or not? What's at
stake? What would happen if they fail?

 What motivates the main characters into taking on these challenges?

 What will the protagonists lose or have to give up to see their goals through?
What hard choices will they have to make?

 If your story is set in a fantasy world, what makes the conflicts in your world
familiar and identifiable to people like us, who don’t live in your fantasy world?

 What unexpected complications will arise that will make things more difficult
than the protagonists anticipated? How will they adapt?

 What events will prompt the characters change and develop over the course of
the story? How will they change?

 How will the events of the story change the status quo of the protagonists’
world forever? Will all of these changes be good?

 Where will your protagonists be at the end of the story? What will they be
doing? How satisfied will they all be with their situations?

 What will your protagonists have learned by the end of the story? How will their
perspectives and opinions changed?
158
 Are there any scenes or passages you could remove from the story, and still
have the story make perfect sense and still have the audience know everything
they need to know? If so, prune them off.

 Are there any characters you could remove and still have the story work? Could
you combine the roles of multiple characters and still tell the story just as
effectively? If so, do it.

159
 Stuff You Should Cut From Your Story

Not without reason did Arthur Quiller-Couch tell aspiring writers to "murder your
darlings." What's fun to write (or even roleplay) isn't necessarily fun to read. Many
stories I've encountered contain far too much fluff and stuffing that needs trimmed
down. Here are a few things that really need edited out of your stories, if they
contain them.

Scenes that don’t tell or show something we don’t already know.

For example, Kelly and her friend go to the party thrown by Hot Football Captain
Ricky. They have a great time. Maybe there's a little drama, but the status quo is back
to normal when they return home. And that’s pretty much all that happens - we don’t
learn anything new about the characters, we don’t make any discoveries that will
progress the plot or be important to the plot later, or what we do learn was already
covered earlier. In other words, this scene is completely useless to the story - nothing
of value would be lost if it were taken out, so take it out.

Scenes containing only dead end details and no plot progression or

character development.

Kelly goes to the salon and has a chat with her hairdresser. We learn that Kelly and
the hairdresser both loveWicked and Audis and Pomeranian puppies. And none of
these will ever be important to the plot, nor does anything happen in this whole scene
that will impact the rest of the plot at all.

A few elements that aren't going to become major plot points are all right - but whole
scenes that contain nothing but dead-end details add nothing to the story, and should
therefore be removed.

Infodump Scenes

160
An infodump scene exists for no other reason than to provide information to the
reader. For example, in old films a new protagonist might be introduced to the
audience via two otherwise-irrelevant characters talking about the protagonist. At the
core, this is a Show, Don’t Tell issue - we should have been allowed to observe the
character and see these traits in action for ourselves. Work whatever it is you want to
tell the audience into the story itself.

Your opinions, “author’s notes,” personal messages, etc.

Under no circumstances do these things belong nestled into the story itself. None.
Nada. Never. Do not pause the story to include a parenthesized message that you own
a shirt just like the one your protagonist is wearing. Do not include mid-story
shoutouts to your buddies. Do NOT include in-story notes on how you feel about a
certain character or situation. If you feel you absolutely must include this stuff, save
it for the end of the chapter.

Anything you'd skip over in someone else's story.

Consider all of the books you've read: how many times have you started a book and
considered skipping ahead to see if it gets better after a slow or boring start? How
many times have you given up? Any delay, especially if it's focused on superfluous
details or if it basically amounts to a scenic detour, is a chance that the audience will
lose patience, get bored, and find something more interesting to do.

Basically, if you wouldn't want to sit through it in something you're reading, don't try
to make anyone else sit through it. If you believe there are details in these scenes
that people need to know in these scenes, stop and list them. Ask yourself how you
might convey this information in a more dynamic manner to the audience, and see if
you can do that instead.

161
 Things About Skills, Talents, & Knowledge Writers
Need To Know

When writing a character who is supposed to be particularly good at something, it's

important to include an element of realism about it lest your character end up feeling
too good to be true. Plus, applying realistic principles to fictional skills (EG, magic or
some form of fantastic engineering) can make them feel more "real" to audiences, as
anyone who has ever worked hard to learn something will be able to identify with the
hard work that goes into learning your fantastic ones. Plus, applying realistic
principles to fantastic skills is a good way to set things up to help prevent characters
with fantastic skills from becoming OP.

So, if you're looking to create skilled or smart characters who feel real and balance
well into the setting, read on!

Table of Contents
 It takes considerable time to become and remain proficient in ANY legitimate
skill or area of knowledge.
 There's a lot more to becoming famous than simply being good.
 Most skills require having other skills to get the most out of them.
 All the skill and knowledge in the world won't do you any good in an
organization or group if you essentially amount to a thorn or millstone.
 There are no intellectual shortcuts for physical skills.
 Things are usually done way they are for good reasons.
 To recap!

It takes considerable time to become and remain proficient

in ANY legitimate skill or area of knowledge.

Any skill that looks badass or produces awe-inspiring results and any area of
knowledge that has people who refer to themselves as experts in represents a
considerable investment of time and effort. How long it takes can depend on what it
is, but in any case you can be confident that you don't master it or come to intimately
know its finer points after a mere few weeks of practice or study. (And yes, this goes
even for people who are naturally gifted.)

162
Take a few martial arts classes and you'll likely be much better off than someone who
hasn't taken them at all, but you're still not going to be some kind of Bruce Lee - if
you want to do that, you're going to have to make martial arts a lifestyle and stick to
it.

You can spend a few days or even weeks reading up on a religion or philosophy and
come away with a fairly decent overview of how it works, but there will yet be vast
fathoms of nuance, complexity, and sophistication of ideas that will take much, much
longer to understand and appreciate - years, potentially. (This is why works
attempting to address or involve religion written by lifelong atheists often come off as
incredibly shallow and ignorant to people of faith.)

What's more, skills require continuous practice or else those who use them will lose
their edge - without it, muscles will atrophy, mental skills will dull, and finer points
will be forgotten. Also, many knowledge-based jobs also require constant learning
just to stay current in them - for example, a hacker who falls out of the game for a
few years will likely need to spend some time re-learning a few forgotten details as
well as catching up on advances in programming and computer security before being
ready to hack some uber-secure database like a whiz again.

In some cases, things can move ahead of you even while you are learning - college
students often graduate to find that the skills they just learned are already too
obsolete to get them the cutting edge jobs they thought they'd get with them, which
means that they'll either have to settle for something less or tackle yet another
learning curve.

It likewise behooves scientists to keep up with the latest discoveries made by their
peers, as they'll potentially be able to use that knowledge to improve and refine their
own experiments as well as avoid wasting their time on "discovering" things their
peers have known about for some time already.

So bottom line - anything your character is supposed to be really good at should

represent an incredible amount of dedication, possibly even sacrifice. (The time you
spend polishing up your awesome skill/area of knowledge is time you don't have to
spend on recreation, socialization, or learning/practicing other skills.) Practice
and/or learning must be continuous to stay at the top. (This is also why it doesn't
really work to have someone who is a master/expert at all of the things - any time
spent mastering something else, especially something totally unrelated, is time that
proficiency in what the person is already good at will be decaying and not being put
to use paying the rent/taking over the world/whatever.)

163
There's a lot more to becoming famous than simply being good.

For every celebrity in the field you see reaping the benefits of fame, there are
hundreds, if not thousands more in the same field who are struggling in obscurity -
and it's not because they're any less skilled, either.

So why aren't they famous? There are a lot of reasons. Sometimes they didn't luck out
in getting noticed by the right person at the right time. Sometimes they didn't seize
the right opportunities or make themselves visible before someone else beat them to
it. In some industries, such as entertainment and modeling, many are passed over
simply because they don't fit whatever style or image they're looking for. And then
there's the fact that any organization/industry/whathaveyou only needs so many
people on board, and that number will always, always be a teeny, tiny fraction of the
total pool of potentials. And as they say, it's not what you know, but who you know -
people will take on those whom they already know about before they go rooting
around in East Podunk in the hopes that they might find what they're looking for.

So no, your characters simply existing and being qualified for a glamorous or
prestigious position are not on their own enough to actually them get there, as there
are many, many factors that affects those sorts of odds. And it's especially unlikely
they'd ever be chosen for these positions if they never took any real effort to get
themselves noticed in a positive way. Contrary to what a lot of fiction would have you
think, being noticed isn't about drudging away until one magical day someone
somewhere notices you and gives you a ride to stardom - it's about getting out there
and and making yourself noticed.

Most skills require having other skills to get the most out of them.

Whatever skills you might be thinking about giving your characters, there are probably
a lot of other skills they'd also need to have in order to make good use of their
primary skills. Let's look at a few examples.

You might have perfect aim or the ability to call lightning from the sky, but without
the ability to keep your head together under high pressure, work with others as a
team, and get from Point A to Point B without running out of breath and/or tripping
over your own feet, you're going to be useless on the battlefield.

You might have a beautiful voice with perfect pitch, but if you're going to succeed as
a stage performer, you'll need the ability to entertain people while you're out there -
which at the very least means also being able to hold a commanding presence and
having the stamina to sing for an extended period of time. Unless you have people

164
who do it for you, you'll also have to be able to write lyrics, compose music, and put
together a decent outfit. Even if your singing voice is great, standing like a shy little
stick behind a microphone in an ugly outfit is going to make for a very boring
performance that won't hold people's attention for long.

If you're going to be a successful hunter, you need to be able to do a lot more than
creep along silently with your weapon. You'll need to be able to maintain your
weapon and use it safely. You'll need the stamina and patience to be out for hours,
even days looking for a kill. You'll also need the knowledge and the stomach to field
dress (read: remove the organs from) your kills, watch for potential hazards (EG,
dangerous terrain, plants, animals, and weather) along your way and know what to do
if you encounter them, and what to do if you or someone with you gets hurt. And
depending on where you're hunting, you'll need the navigation skills to avoid getting
lost.

So whatever skills you're thinking about giving your characters - stop and think:
what else would they need to know and be able to do in order to get where you want
them to be with them?

All the skill and knowledge in the world won't do you any good in an
organization or group if you essentially amount to a thorn or millstone.

People aren't hired and kept on for what they might do, but for what
they actually do. No matter how skillful or knowledgeable you might be, it won't
make one iota of difference if you can't actually do what you're supposed to do when
you're supposed to do it, or if you generally make things so unpleasant or difficult for
others thatthey can't do what they're supposed to do.

Are you a brilliant mechanical engineer who can whip up a robosuit practically in your
sleep? Good for you, but if you're constantly insulting or demeaning your co-workers
and putting off the work your employers give you, don't expect to stay employed for
long.

Are you capable of writing detailed stories with perfect punctuation and grammar?
That's well and good, but those skills aren't going to keep you in a roleplay group if
you can't be relatively civil out of the game, portray a character who contributes to
the story rather than perpetually parks on the sofa or stays slunk off in a corner
somewhere, and roll with unexpected plot turns instead of getting upset when things
don't go as you planned. In fact, a lot of people are more likely to take the person
whose writing isn't perfect but can still contribute to a good story with a sense of fun
and fair play over the "literate" player who can't or won't.

165
Are you a badass martial artist who can take on a dozen mooks at a go? Cool beans,
but if you keep blowing off your teammates' plans to go and do whatever you think
needs done (particularly if you undermine or complicate the plans they agreed upon)
you're quickly going to find yourself off the team.

And no, things like "but I meant well!" or "it's not my fault that everyone else is so
annoying/unfair/uncooperative/inconsiderate/touchy!" aren't going to cut it at the
end of the day, because ultimately, only one thing really matters: whether the people
you're working with/for feel like they're getting their time/money's worth out of you.

So think carefully about your character: even if your character is technically talented
and has a lot of great potential, does your character's actual performance merit
keeping your characters around, or might the others actually be better-off finding
someone who might be slightly less talented but actually puts in the effort to do the
job properly and without making things needlessly difficult for others?

There are no intellectual shortcuts for physical skills.

Some people try to fast-track their characters to awesome physical skillage by giving
them some kind of genius intellect that lets them simply logic out how something is
done, thus enabling them to nail whatever they're trying to do without any real
practice beforehand.

Here's the thing, though: these logical skills aren't going to build up the muscle
necessary to carry out the actions, nor are they going to make up for a lack of hand-
eye coordination. Even if you can calculate the trajectory of a bullet fired from the
pistol you're holding with perfect accuracy, it won't do you any good if you can't
actually hold it steady or accurately enough to hit your target. That's something you'll
only get through actual physical practice. (And once you have the physical part down,
you don't need to perform complex equations to aim your pistol accurately because
your subconscious mind is already doing those calculations for you far faster than your
conscious mind ever could.)

Likewise, you might be able to remember a face perfectly, but it doesn't mean you'll
be able to draw it perfectly. It takes physical practice to develop the fine motor skills
needed to hold a pencil steady and to apply just the right amount of pressure to get
the level of shading or line thickness you want.

So yeah, no matter how good at math and logic your characters are, realistically
they'd still need to put in the physical grinding to develop their physical skills.

166
Things are usually done way they are for good reasons.

While any discipline or area of knowledge will have its share of brain bugs (IE, ideas
that have latched into one's consciousness that one simply assumes are true even
though they have no basis in fact), it's important to note that unless the whole thing is
based on some sort of pseudoscience, most things are done, taught, or believed the
way they are for very good reasons.

For example, making each and every NPC in a video game fully unique can sound like
a great idea to someone who has never worked on a video game, but those who have
any serious experience designing or even modding games will immediately appreciate
that such an undertaking means a bigger, more stressful workload (as it'll require
a lot more graphics, coding, and testing/debugging), more money spent to develop
the game (which they might not even have), possibly having to push the release date
back, and then potentially ending up with a game that takes a lot longer to load and
may not even perform well on systems that can't properly handle the extra graphics
and coding. So depending on what limitations developers are working with, this
actually might not be such a great idea.

Also, while exceptions do exist, by and large any "shocking" new perspective or
"groundbreaking" technique that a newbie thinks of has been proposed by a thousand
other newbies - and rejected for very good reasons. (What's more, there
are very good odds that the oldbies are sick to death of hearing it, and many of them
won't hold back when telling the fifty bazillionth newbie where to shove it.)

For example, Egyptologists don't fail to consider the possibility that the pyramids
were built by aliens or Atlanteans simply because nobody's brought the possibility up
to them yet or because they're stuck on some kind of anti-alien/Atlantean paradigm.
They do so because there is no evidence that they did and plenty of evidence that
they didn't. (And no, they probably wouldn't cover it up if they did find evidence.)

Similarly, those who try to design functional weapons haven't failed to create a
gunblade simply because they haven't thought of it yet, but rather because it would
make a horrible weapon. (Pretty much any design you can think of that combines
weapons and/or gadgets, especially antiquated ones, probably wouldn't be very
functional.)

So yes, even though there might be some that things people do, teach, or believe that
have no good reason behind them, there's usually a good reason behind most of it.

167
To recap!

 All skills and areas of knowledge require a substantial amount of time to learn
and master (even if you have natural talent for it!), and must be continually
practiced/updated lest your skills decay or your knowledge falls behind.
 There's much more to becoming famous than simply being good at something -
there's a lot of luck and deliberate effort involved.
 Most skills are next to useless without a complement of secondary skills to back
them up - EG, even if you have perfect aim, you'll never make it as a woodland
hunter if you can't navigate the forest.
 No matter how skilled you are, you can still expect to get the boot if you're
more trouble that you're worth - EG, you don't actually do your job and/or your
actions are disruptive to a functional working environment.
 You can't become an instant expert at a physical skill by analyzing it with math
or logic. You still need actual physical practice to get there.
 Though exceptions exist, for the most part things are done, taught, and
believed the way they are for good reasons. Most ideas that newbies think
could have some sort of revolutionary impact have been proposed many times
already, and have been rejected for good reasons.

168
 Building Better Backstories - Tips & Ideas

Table of Contents
 Constructing and building the backstory - what for and how.
 Don’t forget to make reality checks!
 Don't be a copycat.
 Shortcuts and conveniences: be sparse and stingy about them.

Constructing and building the backstory - what for and how.

The primary purpose of a backstory is to set up and explain who your character is now
and why your character is that way. Why is your character afraid or uncomfortable
around this? What drives and motivates your character to do that?

If your character’s backstory is presented in such a way that it seems like you’re
deliberately trying to set your character up as an object of admiration or respect
and/or as an object of pity, people may be turned off. While a good and engaging
backstory can and should evoke emotional responses, you should try not to impose
opinions of your characters on other people - simply write what happened, and let the
audience decide for themselves what to think about your character.

If you have a build or persona in mind for your character, you can potentially infer a
lot of background from that. For example, if your character is a scientist who works
for a respected company, you can infer that your character attended college and
earned the necessary degrees. This leads to the question of how your character paid
for college - did xe have the means to pay for it xirself? Did xe earn scholarships? Did
xe take out a student loan? If your character is a great martial artist, it can be
inferred that xe put a lot of time and effort into practicing, and quite possibly had a
good teacher. If your character is a Formula 1 racecar driver, it can be inferred that
xe’s spent a lot of time on the track honing xir skills. (And I do emphasize a lot,
because it’s a lifestyle, not a weekend hobby.)

You can also infer background from your character’s views and beliefs - nobody’s
views and beliefs arise in a vacuum, after all. People typically share a large part of
their views and beliefs with those who raised them. If your character’s views do differ
drastically, it shouldn’t be for no reason. Perhaps xe met someone who offered them
a new perspective xe they found compelling enough to change their minds. Perhaps
169
xe's inclined to critically examine things or look for loopholes or exceptions and found
that what they’d been taught didn’t really hold up. Perhaps later beliefs they were
taught conflicted with older ones and xe realized this - eg, perhaps early on they
were taught to “love everyone” at first and were only later exposed to the
xenophobic views of xir culture, and realized that the latter was incompatible with
the former. (And if your character believed and saw things differently than everyone
else, this may have lead to strain and tensions between xir and others and/or may
have lead to your character learning to keep xir mouth shut to avoid negative
consequences.)

Remember, it isn’t necessary for your character’s initial backstory to have each and
every part of your character’s past laid out in detail. As you progress through writing
or playing your character, you can come up with further details as they become
relevant. However, you’ll have to be careful not to contradict your character’s
previously-revealed history or characterization. For example, if Peter is unable to
free himself after getting tied up in one episode but a few episodes later we find out
that he’s an escape master because he used to be a spy, then that’s potentially a
pretty big inconsistency. If we find out that he was keeping it a secret for security
reasons all along that could potentially work - but if he had little to lose and
everything to gain by escaping in the earlier episode (eg, there was nobody around
whom it would matter if they saw him escape, and his life was in danger), then him
simply trying to keep it a secret doesn't really solve anything and ends up creating
another problem instead.

Don’t forget to make reality checks!

One thing you’ll want to do is consider the tone of the universe you’re creating your
character for and ask yourself how things generally work in that universe. How are
things set up, or how are they likely to be set up? How do people react, or how would
they be likely to react to certain scenarios in this universe? Also, are the characters in
your character’s backstory acting how real people might behave or consistently with
prior characterization, or are they acting in forced and contrived ways?

In general, there are a lot of elements commonly used in the backstories of teens and
young adults that don’t hold up once subjected to a little scrutiny and common sense,
or would realistically lead to complications and consequences that are never
acknowledged or satisfactorily dealt with.

Many people have characters who were born in the US in the late 20th or early 21st
century end up in orphanages. However, orphanages are all but gone in the US - the
foster care system is mainly used instead. And then, children who are adopted out

170
aren't adopted out to just anyone. (99% of the characters I see adopting children in
fiction would be flat-out denied in the real world.)

Many Marvel Cinematic Universe OCs are raised on SHIELD bases not by any kind of
parental figure, but by agents and handlers. (For the unfamiliar, SHIELD is an
intergovernmental organization dedicated to keeping the world safe from the types of
weird dangers you’d see in a superhero universe.) Not only is this unrealistic from a
real-world perspective, it’s also unrealistic from an in-universe perspective:
SHIELD did have an orphan who was a potential target on their hands at least once
(Skye), and they had her raised in a series of foster homes while keeping a close
watch on her. Likewise, SHIELD giving mysterious orphans and foundlings over to the
Avengers to raise makes no sense, as they (and any similar organization) would
absolutely not be handing over orphans and foundlings, no matter how strange and
mysterious, over to a group of people who frequently engage in life-threatening
activities, have intensely time-consuming responsibilities, and/or are prone to
emotional instability.

In Stargate SG-1, there were a few cases where the SGC (a top secret airforce
operation) had to deal with children in need of homes or care. In one instance a child
was adopted by one of the characters who actually worked there, and this character
was responsible and stable and had a job that wouldn’t (normally) require her to be
away from home for days or weeks on end. In another instance a child who was
actually a clone of someone else was given to someone else to raise with a cover
story. Both of these are plausible enough.

Some stories I’ve read have people kidnapping random children for illegal
experiments or training programs. In the real world, particularly in countries with
developed and functioning legal systems, this would be a highly risky move. Missing
children (especially pretty white girls in the Western world, which incidentally a lot of
these characters are) tend to draw a lot of attention. By targeting children, these
groups would potentially turn a lot of investigative attention their way, thereby
risking the entire operation. (And keeping such a large program under covers
indefinitely would be next to impossible.)

Some people have tried to handwave these things by saying that the character’s
parents just don’t care. Aside from this making little sense (the characters are usually
shown to have relatively comfortable lives beforehand, which doesn’t jive with the
“uncaring parent” excuse), this ignores the fact that siblings, friends, peers,
teachers, etc. would likely also notice the character’s disappearance, and that a
mysterious disappearance like that might lead to the parents being investigated for
murder, even if the parents attempted to explain the disappearance away by claiming
that the child ran away or went to live with a relative.

Backstories for OCs often rely on one or more canon characters acting extremely out-
of-character, even to the point of doing a complete 180 from canon characterization.
171
Kind and responsible characters may be cruel and neglectful, or cold and distant
characters may be warm and affectionate. Equally bad, a trait (or even
aperceived trait) of a canon character might be exaggerated to an extreme. If you’re
creating an OC and including canon characters in your character’s backstory, stop and
critically and objectively review the characters’ behavior: do they really seem the
type to act that way? Are those particular traits really that pronounced - or are they
even there at all? Or have you simply been projecting yourself or your own biases onto
the characters while ignoring everything that doesn’t fit? (See also: Telling Story
Canon From Personal Bias, Erroneous Memories, & Fanwank.)

Also, if you're thinking about having character who is unusually accomplished for xir
age, don't just throw in low numbers out of nowhere: certain positions require certain
degrees and/or a minimum amount of experience to hold, and no matter how smart
or gifted a person is the number of years it takes to earn those degrees or the amount
of experience required isn't going to change. And then there's the simple fact that
ageism is a thing - people do discriminate against people they perceive as being too
young to be competent at something. This means that even if your
character was some sort of genius prodigy, the character would realistically be often
treated in a patronizing and condescending manner at best, and at worst not taken as
seriously as someone older.

Don’t be a copycat.

Don’t copy huge chunks of backstory from other characters, particularly where the
circumstances were highly rare or exceptional, or where they fairly well mirror
another character’s backstory improbably closely. It’s one thing for a Hogwarts
student to have had her immediate family killed by Voldemort (or more likely, on
Voldemort’s orders), but for a family member to have saved her via sacrifice and for
her to be sent to live with abusive relatives is another.

Also, don’t try to essentially make a mashup of other characters’ backstories, either,
because invariably it’s pretty obvious that you couldn’t be bothered to think outside
of the box and instead just lifted everything from characters you’re already familiar
with.

That said, there’s nothing wrong with a character sharing some elements with other
characters, particularly where they’re exceptionally common (eg, most people go to
public school) or where they’re practically a prerequisite (EG, in an organization that
favors hiring people with no family ties, it's reasonable that there would be a lot of
orphans among them).

172
Shortcuts and conveniences: be sparse and stingy about them.

Depending on where you want your character to be in the story or roleplay, it may be
tempting to hand out shortcuts and conveniences to your character - eg, exceptional
gifts or talents from an early age, or being noticed and picked up out of relative
obscurity by someone with clout.

Not all shortcuts are bad, but always keep in mind that the more shortcuts you give
your character and the bigger they are, the less credible your character will be,
especially if these shortcuts contradict previously-established canon rules and
procedures. It’s one thing to make your character a prodigy who was able to attend
college at age sixteen and got picked up to work at a prestigious company at twenty-
three, but attending college at age ten and working at fifteen is absurd. An eleven-
year-old with a gift for music being able to play the guitar extremely well after years
of practice is believable, but an ordinary (even if extremely gifted) eleven-year-old
being able to play like a pro after only playing a guitar for a month is not.

Now, in some universes there are things that could plausibly explain someone learning
to expertly play the guitar in a short while - eg, supernatural powers, superhuman
forces, etc. In that case, have at it but - you need to be ready and willing to accept
the potential consequences and complications that would come with it and adjust
your character’s psyche and history accordingly. You don’t want to end up using it
just to handwave the presence of your character’s skill, nor do you want to end up
using it to give your character a smooth and effortless ride to power and prestige.

The fewer discounts or free handouts your character gets, the better - make your
character work, suffer, and even make sacrifices for xir goodies and achievements.

173
Spies: A Few Things Writers & Roleplayers Should Know
About Them

Spies are pretty popular characters both in fiction and in roleplays, but there's quite a
bit of confusion on what spies are supposed to do and exactly how they might go
about doing it. So here's a basic look into that.

Table of Contents
 Spies and assassins are not the same thing.
 The techniques and tools are often less exciting and glamorous than Fictionland
portrays.
 Many of the skills that fictional spies have aren't actually necessary for real
spies, and real spies require skills that fiction often overlooks.
 The most effective spies are the ones you never knew were there until it's too
late.
 Other things competent spies will do:

Spies and assassins are not the same thing.

Many people treat spies and assassins as if they're one and the same thing. In fact,
spies and assassins perform different functions, even if assassins must occasionally
rely on subterfuge to see their goals met. Where assassins are hired to kill people,
spies are hired to collect and relay information to someone else. That's it. A spy who
killed someone would be at even greater risk for being discovered and arrested, as
investigations of the murder might lead up to the spy. Even if investigators only
discover that the spy committed the murder and didn't find out about the spying, the
spy's employers might not easily be able to get someone else inside.

While it might be tempting to justify a spy doubling as an assassin by saying that the
spy needs to be able to get rid of of people who get too suspicious or nosy, mysterious
disappearances and dead bodies are about as suspicious as it gets, especially if they
have connections to highly sensitive things. That, along with the subsequent
investigation and increased attention, would only put the spy into an even more
awkward position. So while a spy could hypothetically also be an assassin, it probably
wouldn't be all that helpful or useful in the long run.

174
The techniques and tools are often less exciting and glamorous than
Fictionland portrays.
Rather than climb twenty stories up a building with suction cups and stick a listening
device onto an office window, or slip through an air vent wearing a catsuit to listen in
on a conversation, a real spy is more likely to slip a recording device into the office
while dressed as, if not actually employed as a custodian. (Also, while we're here, a
stealthy climb through an air vent - assuming that for some freakish reason the air
vent is consistently large enough to fit through - is impossible, and a sustained climb
up a glass building without being noticed on the way up is highly improbable.)

While fictional spy gadgets are often top-of-the-line, sometimes custom-made tools
that can do almost anything you can think of, real spy gadgets tend to be fairly simple
off-the-shelf affairs with fairly simple functions - video and audio recording devices,
listening devices, cellular jammers, and the like. Of course, your universe may justify
something more fantastic - but, you might consider taking a look at Creating Plausibly
Functional & Useful Tools, Gadgets, & Weapons For Fiction and ask yourself whether
your fantastic gadgets really are justified, or whether you'd be reinventing the wheel
or using something pointlessly complicated.

Many of the skills that fictional spies have aren't actually necessary for
real spies, and real spies require skills that fiction often overlooks.

Many people seem to think that having exceptional fighting skill is part and partial to
the spy package, likely due to so many fictional spies being crack shots and martial
arts masters. Likewise, there's a perception that spies all need to be attractive and
suave. But as the point of a spy is to collect and relay information, these aren't
necessarily that important. Skills that are important include:

 Inspiring trust and confidence. A spy needs to appear to be the kind of person
that one could trust with sensitive information, with means behaving in a
responsible and trustworthy manner, or generally appearing to be the kind of
person one could open up to. (On the other hand, being snarly, contrary, and
obstinate with the people one is trying to get information from would be
counterproductive and wouldn't get the spy very far at all.)
 Being able to keep secrets. This not only means having the ability to keep
one's mouth shut, but also being able to keep one's activities from being
noticed and one's spy-related stuff from being found.

175
  Being able to avoid drawing attention to oneself. One of the best ways to
avoid being found out is to make oneself uninteresting or innocuous enough
that nobody starts looking one's way very much in the first place Thus, a dumpy
middle-aged woman who could potentially be a much more effective spy than
an attractive young coquette.
 Self-control. Related to the above, a spy will have to be able to stay out of
trouble in order to avoid attracting needless attention. Plus, a spy may have to
play nice with someone who is really obnoxious for a fairly long time in order
to gain access to desired information.
 Having a lot of patience. It can take months, even years to get the
information that one is after; a spy needs to have the patience necessary to
see a long-term job like that through.

The most effective spies are the ones you never knew were there until it's
too late.

Optimally, those being spied upon will never know a spy has been in their presence
until it's impossible or at least very difficult for them to retaliate. Otherwise, the
discovery of a spy may put the hiring party in a lot of hot water. For example, a
company that's been discovered to have been sending spies out to competitors will
likely face legal repercussion. If one country's spies are found in another country,
then the spied-upon country will lose trust in the spying country (if it was there to
begin with), and may withdraw or withhold any alliance or support it had or had
considered giving, or may even see it as reason to take aggressive action against the
spying country.

Even if those spied on can't immediately figure out exactly who is spying on them, as
soon as they realizesomeone is spying on them they'll start trying to figure out who
and will take whatever measures they can to tighten security, thus making the spy's
job harder. So, good spies should do whatever possible to make sure that whoever
they're spying on has no reason to suspect a spy in the first place.

Other things competent spies will do:

 Avoid claiming to be things they can't play out. For example, a spy who
claims to be a medical doctor while lacking the knowledge a real medical
doctor would have risks exposure if someone starts asking too many questions
176
 relating to the medical field, or asks the spy for assistance in a medical
emergency.
 Keep false identities simple. The simpler and less detailed an identity is, the
easier it is for the spy to remember and the harder it is for others to falsify.
 Volunteer no more information than necessary. When people receive simple
and vague (yet plausible) answers to their questions, they'll generally fill in the
blank spots themselves with whatever makes sense to them, and simple
answers are easier for the spy to keep straight. On the other hand, a more
complicated answer is more likely to have a factual error that can be caught,
and will be harder for the spy to remember the particulars of.

177
Tips To Write Better Royalty, Nobility, & Other Upper-Class & Important Characters ................................ 1

Basic Tips To Write Better Abuse Victims & Abuse Situations ..................................................................... 6

Basic Tips To Create Better Characters With Tragic & Traumatic Backstories ........................................... 10

Character Development Questions............................................................................................................. 16

Character Creation & Development Theory (Or, How To Make Characters 101!) ..................................... 18

On Giving Your Characters Flaws & Weaknesses........................................................................................ 23

Reasons Your Character Might Be Boring ................................................................................................... 25

Describing Your Character: Tips & Advice................................................................................................... 30

So You Want To Have A Powerful Or Talented Character Who Probably Won't Be Perceived As A Mary
Sue? ............................................................................................................................................................. 36

Writing Character Profiles & Bios - Tips & Advice ...................................................................................... 42

Building Better Backstories - Tips & Ideas .................................................................................................. 46

Changing Alignments, Allegiances, & Loyalties More Believably ............................................................... 51

Things About Death, Dying, & Murder Writers Need To Know .................................................................. 56

Why "Purity" Is An Overrated Character Trait ............................................................................................ 63

Phlebotinum-Development Questions ....................................................................................................... 65

So You Want To Have An Attractive Character? ......................................................................................... 67

Common, Yet Terrible Character Descriptors - And How To Fix Them (And Write Better Descriptions In
General) ...................................................................................................................................................... 71

On Showing vs. Telling ................................................................................................................................ 77

Basic Tips To Write Better Geniuses, Scientists, & Intellectuals ................................................................. 80

Protagonist-Centered Morality: What It Is, And How You Can Avoid It ..................................................... 84

"Is This A Good Idea For My Story/Setting/Character?" ............................................................................. 92

How To Answer This For Yourself! .............................................................................................................. 92

178
On Writing Mentally Ill & Insane Characters .............................................................................................. 96

On Writing Misfits, Loners, & Malcontents .............................................................................................. 101

Hazards & Liabilities In Hair, Costume, & Wardrobe ................................................................................ 107

Things Writers Get Wrong About Bladed Weapons ................................................................................. 111

Mary Sue Subtypes ................................................................................................................................... 115

On Writing & Roleplaying Characters Who Are Good Leader Material.................................................... 124

Basic Tips To Write Better (And More Likeable) Badasses ....................................................................... 127

Simple Tips To Put Yourself In The Shoes Of Characters Who Aren't You ................................................ 129

On Writing Sympathetic Morally-Ambiguous Characters......................................................................... 131

Plotting, Conniving, & Manipulating - What It Isn't, And What It Is ......................................................... 133

Assassins: Tips & Guidelines To Write & Play Them More Believably ...................................................... 138

So You Wanna Mix Science And Magic? ................................................................................................... 141

Things Your Fantasy Or Science Fiction Story Needs ................................................................................ 143

Things You Need To Do In Your Science Fiction Or Fantasy Story ............................................................ 147

Keeping Magic From Taking Over Your Story ........................................................................................... 152

Tips For Describing & Summarizing Your Story & Pitching Your Plot Ideas .............................................. 154

Plot & Story Development Questions ....................................................................................................... 158

Stuff You Should Cut From Your Story ...................................................................................................... 160

Things About Skills, Talents, & Knowledge Writers Need To Know .......................................................... 162

Building Better Backstories - Tips & Ideas ................................................................................................ 169

Spies: A Few Things Writers & Roleplayers Should Know About Them.................................................... 174

179