Help Creating a Fallen Angel Superhero Who Isn't a Gary Stu

[Leliel]

Sorry if this doesn't belong here.

Basically, I have always wanted to create a superhero, but as I don't read comic books, I have a hard time wrapping my head around the tropes of that medium.

However, during a forum game, I got an idea to create a Throne-basically, one of the third-highest tier of Christian angels, the enforcers of justice-who fell and became a demon because he was forced into a sadistic choice and was forced into a villainous action.

Understandably, this has left him rather bitter, but he still wants to be a hero, even one with powers over darkness and demons. So, naturally, he dress up in a costume, gets a cool name-I was thinking Grigorian-and commences kicking evil's rear.

Of course, this has a lot of potential for becoming a Gary Stu-I want him to be a badass, but also genuinely heroic, as he still serves the cause of good and humanity despite being feared for a good reason (he's a demon for crying out loud!)-and a large variety of powers (not flight though-one of the things he lost in his fall was functional wings).

So, how would you create a fallen angel hero who's still a believable and non-annoying character?

And no, the "hero with bad publicity" problem will eventually vanish as his reputation gets around

[JMobius]

I would start by making the Fall mostly justified, on account of some character flaw or other, which remains with the character for quite some time. Being forced into it while still wanting to be a good guy sounds way too angst ridden as is.

[kpenguin]

Pick up a copy of Good Omens. Read it.

But that's just good advice for everybody. :smalltongue:

[Kris Strife]

Play the Disgaea series, particularly 2, 3 and Prinny. Look at Fallen Angel Flonne.

[Gorgondantess]

Pick up a copy of Good Omens. Read it.

But that's just good advice for everybody. :smalltongue:

Pretty much this. Nothing beats Azrael.:smallcool:

[Makensha]

First off, get rid of the sadistic choice. Painfully overused.

For believability, I'd have to hear more about how your heaven system works (are God/Satan equals, what are angels like, are demons fallen angels, how do angels change when they become demons, etc.)

If he is emo, abandon all hope of him being anything but a Gary Stu. Emotionally driven characters with past regrets are interesting to write, not read about (In My Opinion).

[Icewalker]

One possibility is to give him an interesting mental problem due to a slight mindbreak from his fall from grace. This has the potential to be cliche though, and must be done in an original and interesting fashion, but can add a lot if it's well executed.

[snoopy13a]

Do you want some examples of "Gary Stus":
1) Superman
2) Batman
3) Harry Potter
4) Luke Skywalker

and the list goes on and on.

Look, don't worry about what other people think. This is your hero, not theirs. Do whatever you want.

[Helanna]

I would start by making the Fall mostly justified, on account of some character flaw or other, which remains with the character for quite some time. Being forced into it while still wanting to be a good guy sounds way too angst ridden as is.

I'm going to emphasize this.

One of the major signs of a Mary Sue, possibly the most major, is that a character simply has no flaws.

I would definitely have it so that his fall was directly influenced by a flaw in some way or another. It won't be enough to say "He fell through no choice of his own, but look! He still has flaws!" Then you run the risk of saying that he has flaws but never really showing them, still making him a Mary Sue.

. . . Also, what kpenguin said. :smallbiggrin:

Edit: Going to address this:


Look, don't worry about what other people think. This is your hero, not theirs. Do whatever you want.

In its most basic form, this is true. Do what you'll enjoy writing. But if you want to write *well*, definitely try to avoid Mary Sues because generally they really do not make for a good story.

[Darth Mario]

Sounds a little like Hellboy. Hellboy pulls it of by not being that smart (though not exactly dumb, just... simple), being a crappy shot, and having a love for tiny, fluffy, adorable kittens. And a snarky sense of humor.

[comicshorse]

Might check out Peter David's 'FALLEN ANGEL' comic about.... well I'm sure you can guess

[Leliel]

Well, I always intended him to be a bit of an arrogant jerk. A kind jerk, but a jerk nonetheless.

In his opinion, he has every right to be, what with being forced to fall through what he sees as an outdated system of laws and balances that have no place in the modern world.

Of course he thinks that, being a breaker thereof, and I plan to leave it undefined if he's right about this.

As for the cosmology...I literally had this flash of inspiration yesterday.

I'm still working on it!

I was thinking a variation of the New World Of Darkness cosmology in relation to demons and Hell: Most demons, called collectively the Legion, are actually physical representations of humanity's inner darkness and sin-not always evil, but invariably selfish and petty. Some, like Grigorian up above, however, are Lilim-fallen angels who have lost their wings, but gaining great power over things humans fear and the Legion.

[thegurullamen]

Well, okay, but there's the problem that rebelling against the antiquated laws is really effing similar to rebelling against the throne which is what caused perdition in the first place. Or at least it can easily be seen that way. Just saying--you have a hero who seems a step away from casting his lot with evil.

As for the character himself, he's stubborn from before the fall and things probably haven't convinced him to start changing that. Don't make him bullheaded, though. The last thing this character needs is a bottle of whiskey in one hand, a cigarette in the other and a mouthful of complaints against the almighty. 99% of the time, you lose audience sympathy/empathy with self-centered behavior like that. You can only get away with that if you're Clint Eastwood and even then you're getting by in spite of the situation.

He seems guided by logic and context rather than dogma though he has a warped sense of things (maybe he's too easily manipulated through his emotions, ego or virtues or maybe he's an idiot in regard to certain situations), being cast down has probably left him off-kilter, maybe with some excess emotions he never had to deal with. Irrational outbursts of anger and the lower motivations might crop up. (This can prove infinitely more problematic with Hellpowerz!! V1.6) If they do, Gregorin won't Wangst over it--he can assess the situation for what it is and accept that things got out of hand. If they happen a second or third time, consider it a chance to show how extreme Gregorin is in his convictions. Try not to go too Frank Miller on that.

That's the impression I got from what you've read. Feel free to use any of it. And one last thing: be sure to kick the crap out of this guy. Besides being good advice for any writing project, it'll draw in the readers who are sick of fallen angels. Bam. Bigger market share for you.

[Leliel]

True dat.

I never want him to Wangst beyond an occasional pining for flight again, but once again, I want him to be the guy who makes the best of a bad situation-besides, he has free will now.

All in all, I ultimately want him to be more than a little bitter, but also still a genuinely good person who just wants to do the right thing.

EDIT: And that's a lot of good advice, right there. I'll take it.

[Berserk Monk]

Gary who? No idea who you're talking about.

[factotum]

Do you want some examples of "Gary Stus":
1) Superman
2) Batman
3) Harry Potter
4) Luke Skywalker

and the list goes on and on.


The only member of your list who is probably truly a Gary Stu is Superman. All the others have flaws and are most definitely not perfect. Heck, if Luke Skywalker were a Gary Stu he would have personally smacked down the Emperor in his throne room, defeated Darth Vader as well, then blown up the Death Star with the sheer power of his awesomeness, while also getting the girl.

Note that always winning their fights does NOT make someone a Gary Stu--it just makes someone a protagonist, because stories where the bad guys win are rather thin on the ground!

[Leliel]

Gary who? No idea who you're talking about.

Male version of Mary Sue.

Not a lot of difference, but it's there.

[LurkerInPlayground]

Wow. This kind of character is really common.

John Constantine comes to mind. Except he never really was an angel. But the same basic theme applies.

Angels are just minding Creation in the absence of any direct intervention by the Big Boss Upstairs. They're bureaucratic and tradition-bound to a fault.

Demons want to tear down creation, as per usual.

The moral ambiguity actually enters into the equation when it becomes clear that the Angels aren't the good guys. They're powerful, but that doesn't really make them any wiser or necessarily more knowledgeable about the Grand Plan.

A character who is neither an Angel or a Demon is actually thrust into a role where he realizes that the Heaven versus Hell thing is a false dichotomy. One faction is not automatically right because the other one is just so obviously evil. Heaven is composed of intrusive Templar types. Hell is composed of raving psychopaths.

The end result is a bit like noir. The guy in the middle is generally a detective or a trickster trying to stay alive by playing the ends against the middle. He's the human. He can't be pure. Because purity is an abstraction that would be absurd to impose on messy reality.

Diablo 2 plays with this a little bit with their Necromancer class. Necromancers are on Heaven's side in the sense that they're the enemy of an enemy. But they don't like the notion of angels or demons meddling with mortal lives. Demons are just more blatantly destructive.

John Constantine is basically a con-man magician who is infamous for his cosmic trickery.

Preacher comic books has a similar setting.

[Dervag]

The best way I know to shake off the chains of Suedom in a character is to create at least a few situations where the character is clearly and unambiguously wrong, where they goof. You understand why they're doing it, it's not idiotic for them to do it, but for some reason (character defect, failure to think of non-obvious possibilities, whatever) they screw up. And people know they screwed up, and the character has to grit their teeth and pay the price for it.

Obviously, you need to set this up right. The character's screwup can't just be because they're a moron, because being a moron is as good a way to turn off readers as being a Sue. And it can't be something where everyone rushes to forgive them or whatever, either; one of the defining vices of a Sue is that if they do happen to fail they don't wind up having to deal with consequences.

But if you do it right, you've got a character who "can meet with triumph and disaster, and treat those two imposters just the same..." and that really works.

[LurkerInPlayground]

Like John Constantine having killed most his friends by his first forays into magic?

[Athaniar]

Sorry if this doesn't belong here.

Basically, I have always wanted to create a superhero, but as I don't read comic books, I have a hard time wrapping my head around the tropes of that medium.

However, during a forum game, I got an idea to create a Throne-basically, one of the third-highest tier of Christian angels, the enforcers of justice-who fell and became a demon because he was forced into a sadistic choice and was forced into a villainous action.

Understandably, this has left him rather bitter, but he still wants to be a hero, even one with powers over darkness and demons. So, naturally, he dress up in a costume, gets a cool name-I was thinking Grigorian-and commences kicking evil's rear.

Of course, this has a lot of potential for becoming a Gary Stu-I want him to be a badass, but also genuinely heroic, as he still serves the cause of good and humanity despite being feared for a good reason (he's a demon for crying out loud!)-and a large variety of powers (not flight though-one of the things he lost in his fall was functional wings).

So, how would you create a fallen angel hero who's still a believable and non-annoying character?

And no, the "hero with bad publicity" problem will eventually vanish as his reputation gets around
"Grigorian" is derived from the Grigori, I take it? Also, some ideas:

*Angels with wings are such a cliché. Dare to make your angels different.

*Give him a demonic archivillain, like Abaddon or Asmodeus, who tries to corrupt him and/or kill him. Defeating him/her/it can be Grigorian's redemption quest.

*The Four Horsemen are always useful (but please use the correct ones: Conquest, War, Famine, and Death). Involve them somehow.

[Prime32]

What if it turns out he's not really an angel at all, he's just deluded? He could be a man, a demon or something else entirely.

What if he normally looks human, but can go into "angel mode" where he's basically an out-of-control embodiment of wrath? Have you seen what cherubim really look like? *shiver*

[Serpentine]

Well, okay, but there's the problem that rebelling against the antiquated laws is really effing similar to rebelling against the throne which is what caused perdition in the first place. Or at least it can easily be seen that way. Just saying--you have a hero who seems a step away from casting his lot with evil.Would this really be a bad thing for the story? What if he really is going down the path of the original Fallen Angel, and everyone can see it but him? Could be kinda interesting, maybe, if it's everyone else, the people around him, who're holding him back from truly falling, despite himself... I think something like that could also help a lot in avoiding a Gary Stu, because he would be very flawed (even if he does mean well), and the co-stars would play a significant role in supporting and shaping him.

[golentan]

I concur with many of the above posts. It sounds like he's well meaning but proud, and that pride is his fatal flaw. When he starts smiting the guilty, maybe make him too smite happy. He can do things because "They're evil, I need to make them SUFFER!" not realizing that this is almost exactly the motivation behind the hierarchy of hell in many universes. (seriously, can anyone give a different justification for why demons spend eternity tormenting people who should theoretically be spiritually aligned with them?). He refuses to acknowledge any wrongdoing unless it's unambiguous*, but can maybe be brought up short by someone close to him.

*Example scenario:
Character: Burn! Burn!
Support: Umm. Burning down an orphanage is almost NEVER helpful.
Character: You're right! Oh, no, what have I done?!

Disclaimer: This scenario has been exaggerated for literary and comedic effect. No clinical studies have been performed as to the efficaciousness of burning down orphanages. Side effects of burning down orphanages may include nausea, vomiting, headaches, heartburn, hair loss, diarrhea, dry mouth, water retention, painful rectal itch, hallucination, dementia, psychosis, coma, death, halitosis, lung cancer, mental retardation, brain tumors, paralyzation, sleep loss, internal bleeding, internal combustion, a sudden craving to sniff your carpet, an addiction to cocaine, heroin, PCP, speed and Windex, bone weakening, claustrophobia, acne, playing Everquest II, regular PMS, irregular PMS, making babies cry, the inability to use proper english in an online environment, AIDS, an urge to stab your spouse, inability to breathe oxygen, urge to watch the Chinese version of Friends, migraines, diabetes, deafness, and of course, the inability to speak properly.

[Krrth]

If you can, try and find the book Raum (http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/s/carl-sherrell/raum.htm). It's about an angel who fell in the beginning and is now trying to redeem himself.

Also, check out the game In Nomine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Nomine_(role-playing_game)). It should give you some ideas as well.

[Leliel]

Good, good, all very good.


Now, for a progress report:


An idea that just came to me is that the reason the Lilim fell (almost literally, due to the fact that most of their wing mass is burned for the energy to survive in the mortal world) is not that they broke the Celestial Code, but because they refused to admit they were wrong.

Most, like majority of the main antagonists and Grigorian (took the "pride" comment to heart), refuse to allow themselves to think they screwed up, but a few knew they did something very bad and feel ashamed for it, but don't have the moral strength to say it out loud.

The latter is the reason for the two "counterparts" of Grigorian, Leviathan and Belpheron.

Leviathan, the Demon Prince of Envy and Water, is more or less the embodiment of the inferiority complex. Her (yes, "her", I thought it would be interesting for the traditional "bad girl with a crush" to be something other than Lust) main motivation is to prove to herself she's more than a worthless nothing, a belief drilled into her by her emotionally abusive mentor (and don't think he's likable, one bit-I plan on having him having been a real ass, a bit like Grigorian would be like if he didn't care about other people's feelings). Her sin was that she finally exploded at him and killed him in a blind rage, then panicked and ran. Her shadow to the hero is showing what happens if an angel neglects those close to him, as well as allowing bitterness to define you as a person.

Belpheron, Demon Prince of Sloth and Invention, by contrast, is what happens when you can't take any action whatsoever, for fear of failure. A brilliant scholar and inventor, Bel fell because he was confronted by a similar sadistic choice to Grigorian, but was paralyzed and didn't take any choice at all, resulting in a massacre. Rather than own up and face the music, he went the cowardly route and fell because he didn't want to be forced to make a decision like that again-and make another mistake. He, of course, tends to remain out of the way, though more out of a lack of self-confidence than anything else.

[Mx.Silver]

A lot of good ideas kicking around so far. I will to some extent echo the idea of him not having fallen because of being forced into a sadistic choice but rather through a fault of a his own. This doesn't mean a 'sadistic choice' still can't be involved, he may indeed believe that's why he fell, but the his fall could actually because he missed the much better 'third option' in the choice because he was too trigger-happy or concerned about himself or the choice could have been something he 'forced' on himself.
Of course he himself would not be aware of this and would continue to still act in the same ways as before, not realising (or not wanting to realise) that he is in part still keeping himself from being redeemed by not changing and as he becomes a more successful 'hero' his lack of progress on the redemption front may become harder for him to bare. Maybe's he's too keen on smiting evil than trying to pursue less violent options; maybe he's too judgemental; maybe he's lost sight of what he's fighting for, what the larger issue is beyond the battle; maybe he's too afraid of his own failings or weakness to be willing to take the necessary steps; maybe he's too proud to make the necessary sacrifices. There are a lot of choices you can make, and all of them allow for an intersting range of antagonists and allies (beyond those involved in his ordinary fights) regardless of the exact 'levels' of good and evil the various sides in your cosmology represent.

The more general point though on avoiding a Gary Stu type though is to allow for some weaknesses and failings and that these should not be related solely to combat power. Indeed emotional conflicts and difficulties are typically more relateable than physical ones. Losing some fights can also be important, as at these moments a whole other inner side of him may well come to light (maybe fearful, maybe despondant, maybe extremely vangeful).

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Some generic thoughts...

The biggest way to keep a character from being a Gary Stu/Mary Sue? Don't be scared. Take them, beat them, satisfy them and then break them, let them fall. Sometimes it'll be because of their own flaws, but not always. (A Gary Stu with a flaw is just that: a Gary Stu with a flaw. He doesn't magically become a good character) Sometimes it'll genuinely be something outside of his control. But if he's a good character, probably the best response will be to let him take the hit. And not to whine about it.

He's hit, yes, and he got the raw end of the deal, yes, and it wasn't fair, yes. But is he saying anything? No, because he's not interested in something as pitiful as his own existence. He's interested in giving a meaning to that existence.

Really, that's what it boils down to. A Gary Stu's existence has no meaning other than authorial gratification. A good character's existence does have a meaning, and serves a higher purpose in the world. When the character discovers that purpose, that meaning, and actively makes it a part of themselves, that's what brings them into their own.

[JMobius]

Angels are just minding Creation in the absence of any direct intervention by the Big Boss Upstairs. They're bureaucratic and tradition-bound to a fault.

The moral ambiguity actually enters into the equation when it becomes clear that the Angels aren't the good guys. They're powerful, but that doesn't really make them any wiser or necessarily more knowledgeable about the Grand Plan.

Heh. I'd personally advise against this approach. The angels-as-not-really-good-guys subversion is so common by this point its almost my default expectation, and seems quite overdone.

If you want the Fall to have real meaning, then the status as an angel needs to have meaning. If angels as a body aren't really a likable group, nor even necessarily that good, then it can be difficult as a reader to reconcile the sense of loss beyond "aw man, I lost all my cool angel powers." The Angelic Hosts and the Grand Plan can't be patently obviously fallible from the standpoint of a human reader, or it cheapens and undermines a major aspect of the character.

[Green Bean]

Try adding a bit of story between the fall and when he joins the game. When people get something central and important taken away from them, it takes time for them to find their equilibrium. I imagine with angels it would be much more so. Did he try to act extra super goody-goody for a while. Or did he briefly turn bad like the other fallen angels?

As for angst, I find the ideal level of tragic backstory is "stable, unless acted on by an outside force". Limit your angst to when characters and situations remind you of your past. Bringing up your isolation and doubt about making the right choice when you're conversing with other Thrones or fighting Demon Princes is good. Going on about how sad you are when you're fighting your teammate's arch-nemesis is not.

Also, think of subtle ways you can play your backstory without trumpeting it. Telling everyone and their kid sister about your fallen-angeldom would get annoying fast. When you act, don't feel the need to explain your motivation. Perhaps your character is more sympathetic to those looking for redemption, or extra harsh to good guys who look like they're getting out of line? You don't even need to mention why; if you characterize yourself well enough, people will figure it out.

or, the tl;dr version:

1. Talk about your transition from fallen angel to superhero.
2. Angst is okay in the right context. Know the right context.
3. Be subtle about your characterization.

[Jerthanis]

The white-wolf game Demon: The Fallen was all about Fallen Angel superheroes. It was awesome.

Essentially, in it, God mandated Angels to love Humans, and the Angels were confused, for humans were their greatest creation. They were the only things they were able to infuse with a spark of divinity in the whole world... with limitless potential. It became clearer when God mandated that Angels never allow themselves to be seen by humans.

Watching their beloved creations from afar was incredibly difficult for them. Their creations which had limitless potential, essentially too content in paradise to have need to think or grow or build. The Angels who could see the future predicted a great black period coming, and some of the Angels argued that Humankind was never going to be ready for this danger if the Angels continued hiding themselves. So they revealed themselves. God wasn't happy, one third of angels refused to obey. War broke out.

In the war, the Angels uniformly became more sinister and monstrous, indulging in war crimes against each other. Eventually the rebels lost and were cast into Hell, which caused their souls to become tormented. Eventually the prison was partly broken, but they could only really escape the pull of hell by possessing a human with a hole in his or her soul. Either a person on their deathbed, or one who has been so beaten down by life that they're empty of hope. The demons who possessed humans who were essentially normal joe-schmoes were consumed by their Torment and only wished to spread it further, but those who possessed humans with an essential goodness to them, who had lived their lives with respect for others, dignity and love... they were able to push back their torment and remember the angels they once had been.

The game was mostly about fighting against demons who are lost to Torment and maintaining social relationships with the people the human you're possessing once knew in order to continue to stave off your own Torment.

[LurkerInPlayground]

Heh. I'd personally advise against this approach. The angels-as-not-really-good-guys subversion is so common by this point its almost my default expectation, and seems quite overdone.

If you want the Fall to have real meaning, then the status as an angel needs to have meaning. If angels as a body aren't really a likable group, nor even necessarily that good, then it can be difficult as a reader to reconcile the sense of loss beyond "aw man, I lost all my cool angel powers." The Angelic Hosts and the Grand Plan can't be patently obviously fallible from the standpoint of a human reader, or it cheapens and undermines a major aspect of the character.
Oh it works well enough. The "Fall" has plenty of meaning as a simple destruction of naivety and as a shorthand for disillusionment. It works well with the fall-of-man type of stuff. Purity is a Platonic abstraction and its full realization only exists in untenable extremes.

It does nothing to really undermine the main character, since it makes him fallible and sympathizeable in turn. As stated, he just becomes a more noirish hero than a stainless white knight. It's not really a subversion in my opinion. It's just a very modern (i.e. skeptical) take on the same old cosmology.

Is it overdone? Eh. Probably. But Angels arbitrarily being the good guys is also overdone too.

If you want an original twist to either formula, I'm the wrong guy to ask. Firefly is a take on the "sci-fi as a western" concept but with a closer interest and resemblance to American history. Star Wars is a morning serial twist on swords-and-planet fiction . . . with a bit of western. So on and so on.

I don't honestly know what you can do with a Heaven and Hell fiction that hasn't already been done.

[Piedmon_Sama]

My suggestion would be, foremost, to stop worrying about how the character is perceived by an audience, and just worry about consistency. "What was this character's life/upbringing like to this point; how does he see himself; how do (other characters) see him; what ideals does he hold himself up to?" these are relevant questions to keep in mind. "What will the audience think of the character if he says/does this" is definitely not.

I'd also suggest you think less of your setting from an empirical, creator perspective; working out angelic languages and complicated systems of demon-summoning is a fun way to fill an afternoon, but it does not make a story interesting (to me). Characters do. So ask yourself, how did your character(s) see the authority of their Creator, and the Fall, and the growth of the human species; an objective (and dry) history or log of these events can wait for the appendix, if it's needed at all.

But back to my original point: don't worry about trying to provoke a specific reaction from the audience. When a reader feels like he's being manipulated into feeling a certain sense (whether your character is meant to be awesome/intimidating, empathetic, pitiable, etc. these are emotions you're trying to inspire in your reader) it's like seeing the string on a spaceship in an old B-Movie. So just make your character and write him, but make him fully rounded. What does he do for fun? Or, at least, how does he pass time when he's not Superheroing? What does he think about humans? Since he could be millions of years old, how does he view time/life? Maybe he takes such a ridiculously glacial view of time that his human friends have to constantly remind him that if he waits too long, they'll literally age and die under his nose. What was his life in the angelic realm like? If the only noises he's ever heard are the hymns of praise and strums of lyres, the beat of wings and the cries and trumpets of old-timey battle, then the noises of the modern world (cars backing up, guns, loud action movies, sirens) could make him freak out.

Small details like this are what make your character "real," much moreso than the broad strokes of his backstory (although setting up an interesting conflict is also essential). Focus on these elements of his personality, the things that would stand out about him if you were watching this person in real life, and it frankly won't matter if he's ridiculously powerful or if his origin is cliched or not, because he'll seem real and interesting as any person is.

That's all my opinion, of course, you might prioritize other things in your story since what I like certainly isn't the litmus of What's Essential. Regardless, good luck.

[bosssmiley]

Pick up a copy of Good Omens. Read it.

But that's just good advice for everybody. :smalltongue:

RPGs: In Nomine (as Krrth mentioned above)

It's about angels and demons fighting a Cold War on earth. The angels can Fall, the demons can be redeemed. The two sides both have common history, and each side has secret police factions hovering about ensuring the party line from On High/Low is enforced. Oh, and most of the hierarchy are too busy infighting, powermongering, goofing off, or going mad to do their proper jobs.

You also have the old gods (Norse, Egyptian, etc) and the Gregori (Gen, ch.6) lurking about the place plotting and scheming, as well as human sorcerers and lucid dreamers dabbling in things they really were not meant to know.

Ever wonder what It's a Wonderful Life meets The Maltese Falcon would be like? In Nomine

[pita]

If he is emo, abandon all hope of him being anything but a Gary Stu. Emotionally driven characters with past regrets are interesting to write, not read about (In My Opinion).

No no no no!
A Marty Stu is a character who is either:
A. So amazingly stunningly perfect that the reader feels sick. (For example, Edward Cullen)
or
B. Said to be so amazingly stunningly perfect in spite of what he actually is. (For example, Harry Potter)
Fitz Farseer is emotionally driven and he has past regrets, but what makes him special is that when he effs up, everybody around him makes sure to let him know about it. He's not a Marty Stu because he isn't perfect and noone thinks he is, but he also redeems himself. If you actively set out not to write a Marty Stu, you won't.

[Clementx]

The white-wolf game Demon: The Fallen was all about Fallen Angel superheroes. It was awesome.
I second this most strongly. There are numerous personal tales strewn throughout the books, all of which great examples. A superhero is a metaphor for what people desire to be in life. In D:tF, you play an actual, sentient, faith-powered, hell-tainted metaphor that was cut out of Creation.

One of the biggest driving forces of the game was that the rebels Fell because of how they were made. Without the divine soul of humans, they do not have true free will. They are what they are and what is around them, and cannot be contrary to how they are made. This means they were doomed to love humanity more than God and Fall for it.

And on top of it, they could not truly invent anything. Humans invented murder with the gift of sentience they were given, and the Fallen were hopelessly contaminated by the cruelty and fear of humans. Spend endless ages locked in outside of Creation with that fury, only having the tormented whisperings of dead souls who continue to just be failed, stupid monkeys you gave up eternity and tore the world apart to protect...You can see why they became Demons.

By possessing a human body, they receive a second chance. They are forced to keep most of their divine power, and their Torment with it, suppressed because of the imperfect vessel of a body. Flooded with memories and habits of the person they stole the flesh from, they become something different. Something with a chance to be different.

Sorry to gush, but it is just so good and filled with wonderful ideas.

[Mx.Silver]

B. Said to be so amazingly stunningly perfect in spite of what he actually is. (For example, Harry Potter)

Anyone citing Harry Potter as an example of being a Sue-type either
A: Has no idea what a sue type is
or
B: Has never read a Harry Potter book.

Given the fact that the archetype above is entirely dissimilar to the actual character, the display of ignorance suggests the latter.

[golentan]

Yeah, and Cullen falls into type B anyway.

OMG he's so perfect and handsome. And lacks any defining traits other than that and stalking me at all times. And he's killed more people than anyone else in the core cast. But he's a sweety.

And I liked those books. If only the characters had been intelligent, it would have been interesting.

[Solaris]

True dat.

I never want him to Wangst beyond an occasional pining for flight again, but once again, I want him to be the guy who makes the best of a bad situation-besides, he has free will now.

All in all, I ultimately want him to be more than a little bitter, but also still a genuinely good person who just wants to do the right thing.

EDIT: And that's a lot of good advice, right there. I'll take it.

Make him a pilot.

[Omergideon]

As a general statement on writing angels.

I think one of the trickiest aspects of writing a character like an angel is that they become too human. Now they must be relatable fo course, but herein lies our major problem. An angel is, and must be, different to humans. They need to think in a somewhat different way or to look at things from a different perspective to the rest of us in order to avoid being a generic superpowered human. This isn't to say that they cannot understand us, or that they have no empathy but there needs to be something about the human condition that they do not have for them to maintain an otherwordly quality. But I need examples to explain this properly.

It is very common for people to write extremely old/immortal characters in fiction. However it is very rare for them to actually feel old. I mean, to mention Twilight, Edward Cullen is over 100 years old in the books and yet he never feels like there is any age behind his appearance. Similarly, we know from the Lord of the Rings that Arwen is several thousand years old. However she never seems that way in the films. By contrast Elrond in the films feels old. The way he moves, speaks and acts makes him seem like he could be ancient. One of the few good books including immortal characters is David Gemmel's "Echoes of a great song". In it one character who is 800 years old talks about how happy he is to be suprised, because he has literally done everything by then and suprise is the rarest thing of all. This perspective makes him seem older, and shows that an immortal being would think in ways we do not.

So I would say that to be well written the angelic character has to come across as somewhat not human. His prior knowledge alone could colour things. For instance, being an angel he knows (one assumes) that there is a life after death. This will affect how he approaches the subject. A true certainty might mean he is not as saddened when a friend of his dies, or refuses to see death as right for sinful people as it means they are no longer able to be redeemed. The specifics will depend on the cosmology of the story. I think that the movie "City of Angels" starring Nicholas Cage shows this. The angels are all sympathetic, and can be related to. And yet they never seem quite human at any time. It's a difficult tightrope to walk but one that would be needed to really make the character believable as what he is.

[Dervag]

Like John Constantine having killed most his friends by his first forays into magic?Yes, that's an example. Of course, Constantine has tons of such examples. He screws up a lot of things.


If you want the Fall to have real meaning, then the status as an angel needs to have meaning. If angels as a body aren't really a likable group, nor even necessarily that good, then it can be difficult as a reader to reconcile the sense of loss beyond "aw man, I lost all my cool angel powers." The Angelic Hosts and the Grand Plan can't be patently obviously fallible from the standpoint of a human reader, or it cheapens and undermines a major aspect of the character.Yeah. It's interesting (and rare, I think) for someone to write angels as if they really ARE angels. Nobody minds writing demons as utter bastards, but for some reason modern authors are reluctant to portray angels as faithfully to the source material as demons.

[pita]

Anyone citing Harry Potter as an example of being a Sue-type either
A: Has no idea what a sue type is
or
B: Has never read a Harry Potter book.

Given the fact that the archetype above is entirely dissimilar to the actual character, the display of ignorance suggests the latter.
Okay, explain this.
I present:
A. Harry Potter is stupid. He's a complete tool.
B. Harry Potter has, almost every single time he's fought someone, needed help. (I say almost because I vaguely remember him not needing help at the end of book 2 and almost dying) He's nothing more than a whiny teenager who's going through the teenage life, and yet he succeeds on theoretically impossible things vs a villain who is so mindbogglingly stupid he sees something that will give him endless life and he doesn't even know how to use it properly.
C. Everyone around Harry knows how special and awesome he is.
D. I don't like him and everyone else does, so I call him Marty Stu to make myself feel better(paraphrased for your enjoyment). He's not actually a Marty Stu, he's just such an irritating character and so close to the thing that it drives me up the wall, and I seem to be one of the only ones who thinks that (Rich Burlew Is One Of The Onlies Too (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)). If anyone were to open a Harry Potter spoiler discussion I would gladly join in and explain why in more detail, but I hate the spoiler tags so I'm not going to here.

[factotum]

C. Everyone around Harry knows how special and awesome he is.


They know he's special because he's the only person EVER to have survived a death curse from Voldemort. They don't know exactly HOW he's special, they just know he is! It would be like seeing someone walking out of Ground Zero of a nuclear blast--you don't know how the heck he survived that, but you know he's got to be (or at least possess) something special to have done it.

[Mx.Silver]

Okay, explain this.
I present:
A. Harry Potter is stupid. He's a complete tool.
B. Harry Potter has, almost every single time he's fought someone, needed help. (I say almost because I vaguely remember him not needing help at the end of book 2 and almost dying) He's nothing more than a whiny teenager who's going through the teenage life, and yet he succeeds on theoretically impossible things vs a villain who is so mindbogglingly stupid he sees something that will give him endless life and he doesn't even know how to use it properly.
C. Everyone around Harry knows how special and awesome he is.

Except that the entire point of the books is that he isn't particularly special or awesome. He knows he isn't special and dislikes the undue attention his past causes. Aside from a natural talent for broomstick riding and an unusual amount of determination and courage he's really nothing special and he knows it, as does the reader. The unrealistic expectations other people put on him is a persistant obstacle he has to overcome throughout the series.


D. I don't like him and everyone else does, so I call him Marty Stu to make myself feel better(paraphrased for your enjoyment). He's not actually a Marty Stu, he's just such an irritating character and so close to the thing that it drives me up the wall, and I seem to be one of the only ones who thinks that (Rich Burlew Is One Of The Onlies Too (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)).
Rich Burlew also seems to think that Nale is an interesting and entertaining antagonist and that the linear guild should be a recurring element of his comic so...

[Berserk Monk]

Male version of Mary Sue.

Not a lot of difference, but it's there.

Mary what? Still no clue as to the reference you're making.

[Teln]

Mary what? Still no clue as to the reference you're making.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue

[Leliel]

Mary what? Still no clue as to the reference you're making.

A specific type of badly written character in fiction.

Basically, a character whose very presence detract from the rest, to the annoyance of the viewers. That said, it's a bit hard to quantify, but if you read one, you'll know it.

EDIT: OK, it actually ''is'' a bit easier to quantify as a concept than what I implied: it's often said to be a character with "no real flaws", and thus, uninteresting.

That said, it is possible to write a Sue well, but it takes a lot of talent and experience to make the story interesting despite that. As a result, the presence of one is generally an indicator of inferior quality work.

[Mewtarthio]

I maintain that it is impossible to write a Sue well unless your target audience is yourself and no one else. A Mary Sue is basically just a vehicle for the author's fantasies. Any other definition lends itself to quibbling over minor details that really have no effect on the character's inherent Sueness (eg throwing in the occasional minor mistake with no real consequences, or a flaw that doesn't really hinder the character).

If you want to avoid writing a Mary Sue, all you have to do is step back and ask yourself, "Is what happens next happening because that's what follows from the characters, events, and setting, or because that's what makes me feel awesome?"

[Leliel]

I maintain that it is impossible to write a Sue well unless your target audience is yourself and no one else.

Or, you are a DC editor writing Superman.

Then again, he's supposed to be a perfect person.