Writing long visual novels/Avoiding "Mary Sues"

[Mammon]

Fun fact: I've already composed 80+ tracks over the past 5 months in preparation for this VN. 40 of which did make it to the music folder, and I anticipate removing most of what remains. Taking into account the fact that it usually takes me somewhere between 12 and 18 hours to compose one song, I can't begin to count the hours I've already directed toward this project of mine. I'm not a fantastic composer, so I took the iterative approach to improving my abilities even a little. Though I've wasted so many hours on songs that I'll never use in the hopes of salvaging something of the lot, I'm almost happy with about 3 of them.

So long story short, I certainly understand your words on time. More than anything (this post took approx. 1.2 hours to write).

Exactly, and I read the post in about 1-2 minutes. So a game that takes 3-5 hours to play (and I think 100.000 words actually takes a bit longer still), that's a whole lot of hours even without rewrites and wondering what to write. And the music, wow. I already took way longer than most with choosing all the music in my game, but to have about 80 songs made yourself... You must either love to make music or have some real neurotic dedication.

I don't really know my composing and my range of adapting music begins and ends with cutting off empty seconds from the beginning and ending, so ignore my idea if it's stupid, but what if you would combine some of the songs? There ought to be sudden parts that are good in songs that are not so great over average, as long as you haven't released them you can always toss them together into fewer but better songs. I personally like a song with multiple good elements to them over a song that relies on one good element, even if the singular element is better.

And if you don't use the songs yourself, you could start a Creative Commons thread for them or upload them to a site like Freemusicarchive so others might use them. Find those poor orphan songs a new home.

Not at all. What is this method that you speak of? I don't think I've heard of it before, but if I interpret your words correctly it may be another good rule of thumb for me. I take it that you mean if a character does not cause some sort of conflict in the story, then he or she is in danger of being categorized as a "Mary Sue"? A synonym for flaw is "shortcoming", so it would have to cause a struggle somewhere down the line if it truly is a weakness of the character in question. Otherwise, if no one is affected by it, then it would not be viewed as a flaw at all. That is my interpretation, though I could easily be wrong about this.

I'm very early in the works of character development. I feel it's at that point where you know how your characters would behave and react in a given situation but you're now working out the "whys" behind each of their traits to round them out.

I'm about to get reaaallly preachy about May Sues, so feel free to skip to the bottom line if you don't want that.

I don't know about the technique he mentioned, but you should always wonder with a character whether they can, should and deserve to do something. A Mary Sue is not someone without flaw or who does everything amazingly. While these are the most associated with Mary Sue, more importantly is whether the readers feel like he/she should(n't) be this 'amazing'

Can: You made a character and gave them certain powers. If it's a Mary Sue, they probably have a rediculous power that's way too overpowered or convenient. Doesn't mean it'll be a bad character if they're too powerful (One Punch!!!!), but it probably will in most circumstances. Although being campy seems to be a good way to solve it, or make sure that the character isn't used every time to resolve a conflict at the last minute like some Ex Machina.

Should: Even if the power is strictly speaking at the same level as others, one that works too perfectly in every situation or which seems to work/get a boost whenever it has to, will feel just as OP. If the story seems to bend the powers of the opponent or the circumstances to allow the mary Sue to win, it will also still be an OP power.

Deserve: But most importantly, Your character has a certain power, does it deserve to work? Part of the story's appeal is that the conflict actually feels real, if Mary Sue's power works to solve this problem even though the reader feels it shouldn't or that it's rather obvious that the power will work, this conflict is nonexistent and any attempt by the writer to convey it will seem pitiful. Victory is something the protagonist needs to work for, if they don't deserve it the reader won't be pleased.


A second way to determine whether a character is Mary Sue is the Mary Sue triangle. I tend to use three well-known (and for some reason liked) characters to explain the three corner stones of this triangle: Superman, Batman and Jotaru Joestar. While these three are actually really popular, they would normally be disliked for being Mary Sue. Always try to see if your character bears some resemblance with these guys.

Superman: Too OP, his powers are actually unlimited, so any conflict seems pointless. See the Can argument.

Batman: Just because the character has flaws, doesn't mean they're not Mary Sue. An anti-Sue, who is 'amazing' despite having obvious flaws can be even more annoying than a regular Mary Sue. Batman is a grumpy man who refuses to take orders but commands pretty much everyone, works alone but always puts his nose into other people's bussiness, keeps his problems to himself but refuses others this right, and seems to know and be able of anything despite being being a mortal man amongst godlike beings. And yet the other characters keep praising and respecting him, that's Anti-Sue.

Jotaru Joestar (and friends) is a guy who seems to be on the writer's moral good side regardless of his actions and the rest of the world is twisted to ensure this. Any side character looks despicable and arrogantly moronic to ensure you'll enjoy Jojo being a jerk to them, all the enemies are either hideously misformed, or pretty but arrogant cowards, and all the women seem to love him regardless of his behaviour. Even if the character themselves is normal or realistic, if the rest of the world is warped to make them look better, it can still be a Mary Sue.


The best way to solve a Mary Sue is to either spread out the awesomeness over the entire character cast, add an antagonist whose actually awesome as well or just to be sure to keep all the other characters respectable as well.

Bottomline, ignore everything I just said. The best way to see if your character is Mary Sue, is to have someone proofread your script and try not to create a wish-fulfillment character writing your story.

[NialGrenville]

*Interjecting against Mary Sues
*Seeing a great cast of characters on your game.
You are well versed my friend. I must give endowment where it is due. Given your analysis of both Bat-Man and Superman you do not have up-to-date character lists.

Take for instance: Meliodas, from the Seven Deadly Sins. While Ban is clearly superior, literally undying, Meliodas contains more power than him. (While I do not want to make a argument over that anime. He is the closest one to an Anti-Sue I know.)

The most recent Mary-of-the-Sue: Rey, from Star Wars Episode 7. While the movie is by no means bad, her character is. I will find and link a coherent list of what she can do v. past SW Protagonists. (Once again, no need for an argument. She is just a Mary-Sue.)

*Back on point

They are so easy to make, it is hard to avoid. Mammon is correct in saying "The best way to see if your character is Mary Sue, is to have someone proofread your script and try not to create a wish-fulfillment character writing your story."

[Sonomi]

... You must either love to make music or have some real neurotic dedication.

Back then, I had the idea in my head that this would be a VN about music and relationships. If you look at VNs like Kira Kira, it's successor Dear Drops, or indie novel Rock Robin, that's the gist of things. But I'm not using a school setting, because most of the main characters are going to be in their twenties, and at most the rock band aspects will likely be a hobbyist backdrop to the character's daily lives, jobs, and personal struggles. Because I don't delude myself into thinking I can rewrite Dear Drops-quality music or story paths.

I still want to follow this path. So I've since burdened myself with the task of trying to write good songs that sound like "real rock" or "real pop" should sound like. I don't know. I have several physical instruments, but I'm composing primarily on the computer because I'm almost never at home (my laptop tends to go wherever I go).

In short, it's a mix between liking music and trying desperately to have others like the stuff I make. I might make a separate thread about music later on, because I could speak at length on the subject if I'm not careful (sorry). I hope I will be forgiven for this slight digression from writing.

At least I've divulged somewhat the idea of what this VN is going to be about. I forgot to mention it earlier. If anyone has experience writing for music-oriented novels, I'd love to hear opinions and advice as well.

I don't really know my composing and my range of adapting music begins and ends with cutting off empty seconds from the beginning and ending, so ignore my idea if it's stupid, but what if you would combine some of the songs? There ought to be sudden parts that are good in songs that are not so great over average, as long as you haven't released them you can always toss them together into fewer but better songs. I personally like a song with multiple good elements to them over a song that relies on one good element, even if the singular element is better.

And if you don't use the songs yourself, you could start a Creative Commons thread for them or upload them to a site like Freemusicarchive so others might use them. Find those poor orphan songs a new home.

That thought never occurred to me. Maybe it's because I've had this narrow mindset of compose-export-repeat that I viewed each song as a single unit. There are portions of certain songs that I wish I'd used in a different way, so splitting them apart might open up a wave of new possibilities.

As far as Creative Commons is concerned, I'd love to do that. I saw the section earlier, but I hadn't investigated how it should be used yet. Though I can't say I can offer much in the way of production quality music that you would expect, that solution is far better to me than what I was going to do with them. I cringe at the thought of deleting hours of my life.

I'm about to get reaaallly preachy about May Sues, so feel free to skip to the bottom line if you don't want that.

I don't know about the technique he mentioned, but you should always wonder with a character whether they can, should and deserve to do something. A Mary Sue is not someone without flaw or who does everything amazingly. While these are the most associated with Mary Sue, more importantly is whether the readers feel like he/she should(n't) be this 'amazing'
...
A second way to determine whether a character is Mary Sue is the Mary Sue triangle. I tend to use three well-known (and for some reason liked) characters to explain the three corner stones of this triangle: Superman, Batman and Jotaru Joestar. While these three are actually really popular, they would normally be disliked for being Mary Sue. Always try to see if your character bears some resemblance with these guys.
...
The best way to solve a Mary Sue is to either spread out the awesomeness over the entire character cast, add an antagonist whose actually awesome as well or just to be sure to keep all the other characters respectable as well.

Bottomline, ignore everything I just said. The best way to see if your character is Mary Sue, is to have someone proofread your script and try not to create a wish-fulfillment character writing your story.

Wow. Thank you for answering my question. I read your post in its entirety. I was beginning to wonder what approach I should take to writing rounded, actually flawed, but with-redeeming-qualities types of characters. Steins;Gate has quite of few of these, which is the reason why I ended up having this sense of understanding for even the characters I initially disliked by the time I finished reading it. I can't explain why without using copious spoiler tags, but the heart of the matter is expectation. The writer, I feel, did a good job of presenting a specific side of characters at the beginning of the story, but the reader wouldn't understand their behavior until about the middle, and towards the end many of the aforementioned characters would actually change in subtle yet significant ways. Well, that's how I think it goes. There are plenty of people who argue otherwise. That's just Sci Fi for you.

Back on your "Mary Sue checklist", as I dub it, I'd do well follow it to the word. Being a little familiar with those characters aids in my understanding of the end that you're getting at here. The vague ideas that I had on the matter are certainly more lucid after your explanation.

There's another ideology that I've been [somewhat] using in making my cast. I read that it's good to also have a "FOIL system" in play when creating characters. Not of the mathematical sort, but stemming from the idea of highlighting contrasts between different people or situations. I read that for each character, there should be an "opposite" or "contradictory" character to establish a sense of balance in the story—my take, from providing different viewpoints on a given situation to adding diversity in the way characters approach whatever problem they're facing.

I hope plenty of others who've also had the same questions as I will benefit from your analysis of what defines a character who has depth.

@NialGrenville
I believe most of what I said in the second half of this post also addresses your reply (admittedly, I was not aware of it until I was finishing writing this one).

My appreciation is beyond words. I most certainly have several new [literary?] tools at my disposal.

[NialGrenville]

Yes, it would be literary.

Can I give you a hint? I once wrote Mary-Sues. Let me tell you what you feel after a while.

Monotony, or constant excitement.

If you feel either one of these. Please consult your nearest literary physician immediately, and ask him about the dangers of Maryisms. If you have ran into any other problems with feelings of depression, anxiety, or guilt. Ask them about Fountain of Expies disease.

[Parataxis]

I have always been a fan of the "does this character cause conflict" method of Mary Sue prevention. (But perhaps that's for another thread.)

Not at all. What is this method that you speak of? I don't think I've heard of it before, but if I interpret your words correctly it may be another good rule of thumb for me. I take it that you mean if a character does not cause some sort of conflict in the story, then he or she is in danger of being categorized as a "Mary Sue"? A synonym for flaw is "shortcoming", so it would have to cause a struggle somewhere down the line if it truly is a weakness of the character in question. Otherwise, if no one is affected by it, then it would not be viewed as a flaw at all. That is my interpretation, though I could easily be wrong about this.

I'm very early in the works of character development. I feel it's at that point where you know how your characters would behave and react in a given situation but you're now working out the "whys" behind each of their traits to round them out.

You actually mostly hit the nail on the head. I am still going to answer this question in a bit more detail, though it seems the conversation has quite moved along. I am, unfortunately, going to do some contradicting of Mammon's post I am afraid. I guess you could say these are alternate takes on how to avoid the same type of bad writing, but their underlying theories on why the writing is bad are a little different.

Basically the underlying theory of Conflict-based Mary Sue prevention is that the Mary Sue problem in not a character problem, it is a plot problem. That what most writers call a Mary Sue is just a symptom of a convenient plot. The thinking goes like this. Writer thinks "I have written myself into a corner. I need a way to get my characters out of this jam! I know, this would be easy to solve if some one could X let's give Mary Sue just the right level of X to get things done." This is not inherently a bad thing, characters manifesting previously unknown skills in a jam can be an excellent way to surprise your audience with an unexpected solution to the problem. It works precisely once. Because after this happens two or three times, it will become very clear to the audience that any problem that arises can be solved by a wild card and there are no real stakes in the story at all. If there are no stakes, there is no conflict and without a conflict your story is boring. But the problem is not with Mary Sue's talents, it's that they are always exactly the right talents at the right time to solve whatever problem is presented.

This explains why there can be good and fulfilling Superman stories, despite the character's "Mary Sueishness". Superman can be a compelling character as long as he's up against a foe who's equally matched, or even better, against a problem that his powers are unable to solve. (This is why his most compelling adversary is the unpowered Lex Luthor, a problem that cannot be defeated by punching) Villains are also held to very different standards of Mary-Sueness for precisely this reason: Increasing your villain's number of skills or talents only increases the potential conflict and stakes since the heroes' powers seem comparably weak and small.

So what does this mean for character creation? Well it means a couple of things, but the basic one is context is everything: any trait can flip between asset and liability to the character depending on the circumstances. Always look at your characters in the context of the story they are in. Like you mentioned, "flaws" that do not cause conflict for your characters are not really flaws... but they could be flaws in a different story. Bella Swan in Twilight can have her clumsiness come off as a cute tacked-on "flaw", but in Katniss Everdeen such a trait would probably have deadly consequences. More generally, this comes around to the idea that a trait that is helpful to one character in a given circumstance might be a liability to even that same character in different circumstances. A character who is stubborn to a fault might also have the determination to never give up. A character who is kind and generous might let themselves be taken advantage of. A character who has good instincts might refuse to listen to other points of view. By viewing these traits holistically and looking for the ways in which each trait you give a character and engineering your story such that those traits both create and solve problems for your character, you create a dynamic "Mary Sue" resistant environment.

Let's go back to Phoebe for a moment. Phoebe's underlying character traits are Honesty, and an Extreme Valuing of her Team's Well Being as well as a Problem Solving Mindset. As a team leader, these are basically exactly the Cocktail you want: she's cool under fire, logical, she tells it like it is and she works hard to make sure each of her teammates succeed. So then, How does it all go wrong?
Well, Phoebe is willing to sacrifice her relationship with a person in order to ensure their own emotional well being--say by telling them things that they don't want to hear that they nevertheless need to hear. Looking at it logically, telling some one a truth that in the short run will make them hate you but might, in the long run, work out for the best is generally a better option than hiding something that might in the long run, unexpectedly blow up in your face. You see how this strategy could cause some drama in a story but ultimately its a pretty temporary conflict and we've seen all sorts of examples in media of situations that would have just been solved if some one just did that in the first place.
But what happens when Phoebe burns the bridge with a person before she actually gets through to them? The person is now not speaking to her, but they still haven't taken the information to heart in a way that will let them heal. If Phoebe really believes that what she said is something that they needed to hear, she won't lie to them afterwards, and she won't apologize, she'd stick to her guns. After all, honesty is paramount. In fact, she might get frustrated at the person who is just outright deluding themselves from the truth, they might become, in her mind, an antagonist to their own emotional well being. But then again, what if she's just wrong? What if her understanding of the situation is limited, or incorrect? She's only human after all, what she said could've just made the problem worse. Or, maybe straightforward honesty wasn't what the person needed at all. What if instead of being confronted with a truth, they needed some one to listen to them? Needed understanding and support as they worked through the answer for themselves? What if, after letting some one burn their bridges Phoebe loses their advice, when she needs it most? Phoebe's valuing of other people's happiness over what they think of her seems admirable in a vacuum, but in the actual situation she finds herself in, it does a great deal more harm than good.

To Summarize Phoebe is an excellent captain, with good leadership skills... right up until she's not. And that's where conflict is born. Always find the situations for which your characters are not prepared, where their traits are a disadvantage. Whether Phoebe is a Mary Sue is not a matter of what Phoebe's powers are, or whether she deserves her position, just the natural, inherent ways that character traits give birth to character conflicts and whether you capitalize on those opportunities to make your story as dynamic as possible.

[NialGrenville]

I must say. Literary perspectives are nearly the same. Just like artistic perspectives are. Skilled, unskilled; anime, cartoon; tropes, no tropes.

Finally the last point:
*Insisting Mary-Sue is not a character issue.

This is true, but not completely. Characters are Mary-Sue because their personalities appeal to every situation they are in. Meliodas, once again, He can trigger a super special move and instant kill anything by blinking out its life force. Then he can, whilst in danger, become a demon possessed master of darkness. Completely healing him, and removing all danger- since he does not receive wounds while in the form. This is a Mary-Sue scenario. Him being charming, having all girls like him, being "cute," and being oblivious to his powers (this is not true forever, but for a long period of time). that is a character Mary-Sue.

*Addressing Parataxis again
I hope this was a look into the true ideas of a Mary-Sue. It is not necessarily a bad thing to have one. Just not everyone likes them. You have to face facts. Tropes are not for everyone. You can still write whatever you want. I never intend to hurt your desire to write what you wish.

[Zelan]

You say Super-Man is not Mary-Sue? I must ask, what have you seen of Super-Man? It has been established that he has no limit. Therefore, no one can beat him. He is a god in the comics. That is not even a joke.

*Accusing Super-Man of not being Mary-Sue.
*Denying that he is over powered.
*Absolute ignorance of a true Mary-Sue
*When DC even admitted to SM being a MS

I must say. Literary perspectives are nearly the same. Just like artistic perspectives are. Skilled, unskilled; anime, cartoon; tropes, no tropes.

Denying the existence of Mary-Sues just says you like Mary-Sues. It is not a problem, but it is not always loved by everyone. Especially me and Mammon.

Finally the last point:
*Insisting Mary-Sue is not a character issue.

This is true, but not completely. Characters are Mary-Sue because their personalities appeal to every situation they are in. Meliodas, once again, He can trigger a super special move and instant kill anything by blinking out its life force. Then he can, whilst in danger, become a demon possessed master of darkness. Completely healing him, and removing all danger- since he does not receive wounds while in the form. This is a Mary-Sue scenario. Him being charming, having all girls like him, being "cute," and being oblivious to his powers (this is not true forever, but for a long period of time). that is a character Mary-Sue.

*Addressing Parataxis again
I hope this was a look into the true ideas of a Mary-Sue, and like I have previously stated. It is not necessarily a bad thing to have one. Just not everyone likes them. You have to face facts. Tropes are not for everyone. You can still write whatever you want. I never intend to hurt your desire to write what you wish.

Niall, I think you've misunderstood Parataxis' point.

This explains why there can be good and fulfilling Superman stories, despite the character's "Mary Sueishness". Superman can be a compelling character as long as he's up against a foe who's equally matched, or even better, against a problem that his powers are unable to solve. (This is why his most compelling adversary is the unpowered Lex Luthor, a problem that cannot be defeated by punching) Villains are also held to very different standards of Mary-Sueness for precisely this reason: Increasing your villain's number of skills or talents only increases the potential conflict and stakes since the heroes' powers seem comparably weak and small.

Parataxis didn't say that Superman wasn't a Mary Sue, just that he was still a "compelling character."

[NialGrenville]

Ah! I appreciate the correction. I do apologize.

I may have let my feelings get the best of me there. I try not too.

He does have a fair point, so I will take back some of my comments.

Thank you once again Zelan, and I apologize for hijacking this thread.

[Mammon]

Given your analysis of both Bat-Man and Superman you do not have up-to-date character lists.

I tried to take two characters that pretty much everyone knew. Unfortunately I can't say anything about Meliodas as I haven't seen that anime. Same for Rey, I haven't watched the new Star Wars movie yet because I'm not such a big SW-fan to begin with. But I have heard that she is indeed the kind of character that happens to be able to do pretty much everyhing because plot and 'The force!'. She would not succeed the 'should' factor.

still want to follow this path. So I've since burdened myself with the task of trying to write good songs that sound like "real rock" or "real pop" should sound like. I don't know. I have several physical instruments, but I'm composing primarily on the computer because I'm almost never at home (my laptop tends to go wherever I go).

In short, it's a mix between liking music and trying desperately to have others like the stuff I make. I might make a separate thread about music later on, because I could speak at length on the subject if I'm not careful (sorry). I hope I will be forgiven for this slight digression from writing.

I think feedback from others is also the best solution here, ask them whether they feel and appreciate it the same as you do. I can only assume the composer's involvement can colour their opinion just as much as any other creator. And don't worry too much about going off topic as long as there's still also writing involved, this thread already went off writing long Visual novels. BTW you might want to include 'Mary Sues' into the title of the thread somehow.

As far as Creative Commons is concerned, I'd love to do that. I saw the section earlier, but I hadn't investigated how it should be used yet. Though I can't say I can offer much in the way of production quality music that you would expect, that solution is far better to me than what I was going to do with them. I cringe at the thought of deleting hours of my life.

Just make a thread in the Creative Commons section and give a link to whatever site you uploaded your songs onto. And regarding quality? Just take a look at the massive amount of quote unquote 'Music' Kosta uploaded. I know I shouldn't talk badly about someone's work without constructive critism and there are some people that might like this, but...

Back on your "Mary Sue checklist", as I dub it, I'd do well follow it to the word. Being a little familiar with those characters aids in my understanding of the end that you're getting at here. The vague ideas that I had on the matter are certainly more lucid after your explanation.

I am, unfortunately, going to do some contradicting of Mammon's post I am afraid.

Don't consider my explanation to be an absolute on Mary Sues, I merely gave some thoughts that you wouldn't get when googling Mary Sue. Its only natural that many people would have different definitions for such a character. And the FOIL system is indeed a very good system as well, both to keep balance and to solve a Mary Sue problem. I personally don't like most Batman stories, but I love those with Joker in it. He's the absolute opposite force that evens things out to the point of almost deconstructing itself, despite being a much greater Mary Sue on his own merit. Same goes for Superman vs Lex Luthor as Parataxis already mentioned. And some stories like 'Gods among us Year 1' can completely circumvent or perfectly work with the Mary Sue problems of both these characters. The problem lies with (lazy) stories/reboots that don't.

Don't really have anything else of Parataxis to quote upon, that's all pretty much correct and spot-on as far as I'm concerned.

This is true, but not completely. Characters are Mary-Sue because their personalities appeal to every situation they are in. Meliodas, once again, He can trigger a super special move and instant kill anything by blinking out its life force. Then he can, whilst in danger, become a demon possessed master of darkness. Completely healing him, and removing all danger- since he does not receive wounds while in the form. This is a Mary-Sue scenario. Him being charming, having all girls like him, being "cute," and being oblivious to his powers (this is not true forever, but for a long period of time). that is a character Mary-Sue.

That does sound OP, but it also leaves open a way to save the character. Sorry if this is not the case because I'm not familiar with the character, but if he doesn't know of his own powers he won't be solving any problems immediately. It's really up to the writer's ability whether it's actually Mary Sue then. Other ways to solve it would be aware and campy about the OP factor (Last I heard, One punch man was quite popular ).

Ah! I appreciate the correction. I do apologize.

I didn't mind most of the things you wrote, I really needed to keep myself from ranting about Superman and Heighjacking the thread myself. It's just that it would be too much about a singular character and a very understandable part of Mary Sue

[Mammon]

Considering we're throwing in examples, might as well explain how I prevented Richard, the protagonist from my story, to be Mary Sue:

Richard is intelligent, cunning and manipulative. The very idea of the story is that he actually understands a bit how the Yandere thinks and what consequences his actions have. This would make him incredibly overpowered for the situation: He does not only know what to say to prevent her from killing him, he also knows what not to do. Or in other words: Tell the Yandere you'll stay and don't talk to other women. You should never run away from her, or tell her that she's crazy and that you'll never love her. If you do, she'll try to stab you. If you act suspiciously, she'll follow you around.

So with the actual conflict of the plot, he would have little to no problem handling things and would therefore be considered a Mary Sue. How I solved this:
1) Richard is smart, but not as smart as he himself thinks. And he thinks of his intelligence quite highly, only for this to be 'subtly' proven wrong a few times.
2) Most characters don't really like him, or don't think much of him. He never really gets a lot of praise from anyone but himself, much less the feeling that the rest of the cast worships him or treats him better than he should like some Mary Sue.
3) I actually intended the audience to dislike Richard a bit at first, only to start rooting for him once his life was actually in danger. I apparently failed to do so according to the first few reviews because they liked Richard, but a writer who's aware of the reader disliking a character and acting upon it (by giving those readers some satisfaction seeing the character fail) does help against the Mary Sue problem. It prevent the 'wish fulfillment' aspect of the Mary Sue.
4) Richard's OP power of understanding Yandere doesn't kick in until it's too late and in a situation where he can't resolve it due to circumstances that are already out of control. (Real spoiler below!)

The yandere already kidnapped her previous Sempai, who's traumatised and badly hurt when Richard finds him, both preventing Richard from just pretending his nose is bleeding when he finds out she's a yandere and gets confronted with max. level yandere right from the start. Not to mention, there is now another problematic character involved.

[Sonomi]

@Parataxis

Thanks for sharing another perspective on the topic. I'm glad to see that I was on the right track with my initial assumption. So there are multiple ways to view the same trait in a given situation, and that's the secret per se to rounding a character (in essence, making an effort to write situations in which their traits can both help and hurt them).

My sentences really aren't making much sense anymore, but I did grasp what you were saying.

@Mammon

Since you brought it up...

I read your VN because I got curious about checking out the writing style of a developer that I happen to be discussing [at this point] character development with. If something needs to be tagged, I will correct it.

I'm going to mention one thing here because this discussion seems to have moved toward individual character tropes and characterization as opposed to structure or overarching plot. (Which is fine)

I don't know if you intended to do this, but it seems that you may have added a redeeming quality to the MC through his distinctive diction, or personality (consistent in both spoken word and monologues). I'm going to be honest and say that while I didn't hate him, he did make me extremely uncomfortable at times. At the same time, I noticed that some of his monologues were so out there, or unexpected, that it provided something akin to comedic effect. I don't know what the proper term for this is. It's when you defy a reader's expectations of a character. I think this type of character is someone we would identify in the "Genre Savvy" trope.

What I'm trying to say is, it seems like it's also possible to make a character who would otherwise be unrelatable to certain readers more sympathetic through means outside of conflict and individual flaws. In other terms, you might think of it as "meta" development or something that connects via the fourth wall as opposed to scenes that happen in the story itself. What do you all think on this point?

Edit:
This is mundane; however, I've reached 500 words. I think I'm finally making progress.

[NialGrenville]

*Thinking he wasn't supposed to be meta
*Thinks about labeling a genre savvy character

Most people in Yandere games are constructed metas. Even the Yand themselves. However, if this was an error on his part. Then he does have a few cringe-worthy events.

I have always known Yandere games, stories, and the like to be five-dimensional characters. Similar to Freddy, the character from elfen lied (forgot her name. 2 spooky 4 me), and even
the Watch Dog's characters.

Like I said. Intentional would be funny, unintentional would be cringe.

So I see where you are coming from.

*Returned too late to edit*
*Mammon has answered my questions*

[Mammon]

I read your VN because I got curious about checking out the writing style of a developer that I happen to be discussing [at this point] character development with. If something needs to be tagged, I will correct it.

I'm going to mention one thing here because this discussion seems to have moved toward individual character tropes and characterization as opposed to structure or overarching plot. (Which is fine)

Well, I hope you'll let me know what you thought of P&Y once you're done and feel free to critisize (#honest critique). And if you feel like you want to change the topic of conversation back to the Original topic or a different one, go for it. As the thread-creator you've got near-admin levels of authority here and I'll try to help you enforce it. (Maybe not enforce, but I couldn't think of a less harsh word for controlling it.)

And off course, feel free to discuss my motivation, thoughts or process behind any of my character with me. It'll be a learning experience for me too.

I don't know if you intended to do this, but it seems that you may have added a redeeming quality to the MC through his distinctive diction, or personality (consistent in both spoken word and monologues). I'm going to be honest and say that while I didn't hate him, he did make me extremely uncomfortable at times. At the same time, I noticed that some of his monologues were so out there, or unexpected, that it provided something akin to comedic effect. I don't know what the proper term for this is. It's when you defy a reader's expectations of a character. I think this type of character is someone we would identify in the "Genre Savvy" trope.

What I'm trying to say is, it seems like it's also possible to make a character who would otherwise be unrelatable to certain readers more sympathetic through means outside of conflict and individual flaws. In other terms, you might think of it as "meta" development or something that connects via the fourth wall as opposed to scenes that happen in the story itself. What do you all think on this point?

That's what I meant with the reviewers liking Richard against my expectations. I wanted him to be enjoyable and funny enough to keep the people reading the story, but I never really intended for people to be rooting for him in the beginning. The 'uncomfortable feeling' you described was my initial purpose, and it would have been much more concrete if the scene where Richard is groping Vanessa in the train hadn't been scrapped. Unfortunately that scene was too 18+ for me to keep it in while keeping the 16+ rating. Too bad, I actually liked that scene better than what I replaced it with.

But people relating to Richard? That was never really my intention. I didn't even relate to him (I'm almost the exact opposite of him and not in the 'I wish I were...' variant.). I think the best way to describe this with a character that the others know would be: The protagonist of 'House of cards'(Sorry, I don't remember his name). I don't think any of us can relate much to a member of congress leading his staff, commanding people around and manipulating crowds for a living, and he's not really a very likeable person at times. However, his Deadpool moments of suddenly talking to the audience and the timing with which he does this make him more likeable.

This is mundane; however, I've reached 500 words. I think I'm finally making progress.

Not mundane at all, the first sentence is the hardest one! Even though it's not true, a writer will always feel like that first sentence has to be as good as the entire story, it has to be perfect. And you will be looking at an empty screen with nothing to go on until you write that sentence.

*Thinking he wasn't supposed to be meta
*Thinks about labeling a genre savvy character

Richard wasn't supposed to be meta yet. He gets much more meta around the end, but the monologues in the beginning are indeed not yet supposed to be meta except for the first scene. And I'm not familiar with the term genre savvy character either.

Edit: Googled it. Come to think of it, I'm actually quite prone to making my characters genre savvy. Hell, one of my favourite characters has the very power of being genre savvy, though I'm not planning to put him in a story any time soon.