Grabbed directly from Kratesis, as seen in an old thread that got lost somewhere.
-- --
There are five primary factors that contribute to the success of a character. There are exceptions, and there are secondary factors, but these five together offer the largest input.
If you want to build a character that interests others these things are what you should look at.
Exaggeration
Traits of successful characters are almost always exaggerated. Virtually without exception! The traits can be physical, or mental, but either way they are exaggerated. Larger than life.
Luke Skywalker isn't just a good pilot, he's a GREAT pilot. Hulk isn't mildly irritable he's ANGRY. Gambler isn't 'self-confident' he's ARROGANT. Longshot isn't just kinda heroic he's a HERO.
This serves to create interest. On a basic level someone that's larger than life in some way is just more interesting. They stand 'above' everyone around them simply by possessing 'more' of a normal trait. Just as the greek gods were exaggerated versions of the greeks, interesting characters are exaggerated versions of regular people.
This sticks strongly in the readers mind. For example you could take any successful character and instantly think of something distinctive about them. Right off the bat, no thinking required.
Characters that lack exaggeration are not memorable. Remember Natalie Portman's character from Episodes 1? Remember anything about her besides her wild hair and cloths? She lacked significant exaggeration. Thus she was boring and forgettable.
This can be taken too far of course, some characters are so exaggerated as to become a parody. Think of Jar Jar Binks. Too much exaggeration is equally bad.
You want to fall between the extremes.
This is why I'm against policies or RP cultures that force everyone to have a RL avatar. It pushes everyone toward the same level of image exaggeration, and the same type of looks. For some characters a RL look is good, and for some its not. All characters DO NOT belong at the same level of visual exaggeration.
Position
Where is your character located in life? That has a lot to do with it. Think about a man who has billions of dollars and is really smart. Think about him going to a party, and getting drunk. Think about him getting into an argument with his friend, breaking stuff and later passing out drunk. Okay. Kinda interesting I guess...
Now think about him getting drunk.. in his suit of power armor, while he parties! Think about him getting into a power armored brawl with his best pal, blasting holes in his billion dollar manson! Then he falls over dead drunk, still wearing his suit of powered armor!
That's a heck of a lot more interesting story.
Batman isn't interesting because he's a rich playboy with a double life. He's interesting because he dresses up like a bat and flights super powered criminals with his array of gadgets and martial arts!
In short what a character DOES is part of that character. You're characters LOCATION and ACTIONS are just as important as their TRAITS and ABILITIES. Everyone focuses on the last two, but forgets the first two.. at their own peril.
The entire superhero genre is built on this. Watchmen is basically a detective story. But toss some costumes in there, and some powers and bam! Way more interesting just like that.
(There is a reversal to this.)
What your character does in each scene is critical because it establishes their location in the world. What you write a character doing is really important. Being aware of this could strengthen a LOT of RPGs.
Believability
Does the reader think your character acts believable? That doesn't mean realistically. The Aliens in Alien weren't realistic, but they were believable! Darth Vader wasn't realistic, but he was believable. Spider Man isn't realistic, but he does behave in a way that's believable.
Mostly this involves consistency. We can believe in even very strange characters so long as they are consistent in their emotional response, and in their actions.
It also ties back to the first element, exaggeration. You've gotta drive it home by exaggerating the same thing every time. Wolverine for example has a very distinctive way of speaking but it has become believable because he speaks in the same way almost all the time.
Look at the characters from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Their strange type of speech was believable because it was consistent Their sometimes extreme emotional reactions were believable because they were consistent. Their frequently poor logic was believable because it was consistent.
In many ways this is the simplest and easiest of all five.
Introduction
Whaaaaaaat? Isn't this part of the story, not the character?
Nope!
Characters and story are not separate A character does not exist in some mystical character realm. Characters ARE what they DO.
You re-create the idea of your character with the very first paragraph of each post. The first paragraph of a RPG post is critical beyond belief. That is make or break time. Whatever you type here sets the tone for the rest of the readers time.
This is going to ESTABLISH your character in the mind of the reader. Whatever you write here is highly influential upon how your character is seen.
I could go on and on and on, because this is one of the number one mistakes I see in RPGs. That said, I don't want anyone to feel like I'm singling them out so I'm going to leave this one here. If you want to talk about it further PM me and I'd be happy to help you.
Empathy
This is the magic bullet. If you create a character that is loved or hated (a character that connects either positively or negatively with the readers emotions) you win.
This is the radioactive spider, the gamma ray explosion, and your parents are dead. This is the stuff. Forge that emotional connection and you win the attention of readers, because at the end of the day that's what everyone is looking for. A connection, either good or bad, with someone.
A villain we love to hate, or a hero we feel connected with. Either one will do.
Not too much to say here, this is mostly tied up in what 'person' you use, the temperature of the viewpoint, and the use of sequels. So its really about the writing technique itself, and thus a subject for another time.
Log in to comment