Is Haley a Mary Sue?

[TheProfessor]

I don't think so. If she is,I don't really care as long as she is interesting.

A real Mary Sue is Micaiah for Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn.

The plot doesn't neccesarily adapt to her needs,and she isn't perfect.

I thought that for a character to be a Mary Sue it also must be uninteresting,and I don't think Haley is unintersesting.

Before people start pulling up Tvtropes,anyone who has been to that site probably knows that there has been a heated debate over what the exact definition of a Mary Sue. There have even been edit wars over it.

So,what's your vote? Mary Sue or not?

[Toofey]

No, most tellingly she screws up from time to time.

[SPoD]

Not even close. She has some pretty severe psychological issues, she loses in combat from time to time, and not everyone loves her or thinks she's awesome. She doesn't fit any definition.

But I'm more curious to ask why you would start a thread about an opinion that you don't possess. Why talk about it if you don't think she is one?

[TheProfessor]

It was brought up in another of my threads (if you notice,I am slowly monopolizing the board), and I don't want it hijacked,so I made this split off topic.

[Giggling Ghast]

When did it become a thing on the Internet to brand any character that is even mildly successful, happy or powerful as a Mary Sue?

No, she is not. Not by any of the rather loose definitions that are attached to that term.

[eggynack]

Not particularly. Her only really useful skills are her bow use and paranoia powers. In addition she's only the third most commonly appearing character and doesn't tend to monopolize the plot. The only real arguement in favor of sueness is that she is Rich's favourite character, but I doubt that that has massively warped the plot.

[Themrys]

Not at all. Where do you get that ridiculous idea from?

Possibly, Haley is The Smurfette. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheSmurfettePrinciple)

The only person who could count as Mary Sue is V - and only if s/he had retained the powers of the soul splice without any drawbacks (among others, without being divorced by Inky) and solved every problem that stood in the way of the OotS for the rest of the story.
That's what a Mary Sue is and does.

[B. Dandelion]

In my opinion the only OOTS character who has come close to Sueness is Tarquin. And I'm not at all sure that's anything textual and not just a reflection of my irritation with his (massive) fandom.

Haley is flawed in ways that directly, negatively, influence the story. The narrative does not consistently bend itself in such a way as to inform you that you MUST like her. The only thing Sue-like about her is that she's female -- and the reason Mary Sue is generally female is that she originated as a fanfic term, and most fanfic is written by girls.

[Souhiro]

The only person who could count as Mary Sue is V - and only if s/he had retained the powers of the soul splice without any drawbacks (among others, without being divorced by Inky) and solved every problem that stood in the way of the OotS for the rest of the story.
That's what a Mary Sue is and does.

Well, As I think, the character that IS a Mary Sue is Redcloak. Sure, he suffered a lot in his past. But MarySues all over the world always had a traumatic past. The plot adjust to him, the rules stretches to him, and many issues that would be troublesome to anybody are just handwaved for him (The Resistance had a hard times gaining food, the captured Azure City don't seem to cultivate, nor fish anything)

[Ancalagon]

Azure City has trade agreements with others. It is also safe to assume they have taken over the farms of the Azurites in the lands around the city. You know, SOMEHOW the Azurites also got food.
That the resistance who cannot show themselves to farm or to buy something in the port have a problem getting food is not surprising.

I think this one here might make no sense to you, but it perfectly makes sense to me.

What other, especially serious, problems got "handwaved away" by/for Redcloak?

[ThePhantasm]

Redcloak isn't a Mary Sue either.

No one in OOTS is a Mary Sue.

Note the definition from Wikipedia:


". . .primarily functioning as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author or reader. Perhaps the single underlying feature of all characters described as "Mary Sues" is that they are too ostentatious for the audience's taste, or that the author seems to favor the character too highly. The author may seem to push how exceptional and wonderful the "Mary Sue" character is on his or her audience, sometimes leading the audience to dislike or even resent the character fairly quickly; such a character could be described as an "author's pet".

This doesn't apply to a single OOTS member.

Tarquin is just a well-written villain who is fun to watch. Not a Mary Sue, unless you think Rich wants to be the tyrant lord of an empire.

Redcloak - same thing.

Haley has flaws and is not pushed as exceptional or wonderful.

I'm almost getting bored just now refuting this. Learn what a Mary Sue is, folks, before spewing out your opinions.

[NegativeFifteen]

What other, especially serious, problems got "handwaved away" by/for Redcloak?

The invasion. There is no way his army should have been able to function that well after being force marched, and his army didn't seem to suffer any moral problems.

[ChrisFortyTwo]

It was always my impression that a Mary Sue was an obvious ploy by the author to "put themself in", but distract from the main characters. It's common in (bad) fan fiction for the Mary Sue to be the author trying to be part of the universe, and turn themselves into a hero while the rest of the main cast is set aside, or needs rescue.

Haley, not so much. First, she's been part of the main cast from the beginning. There's no evidence to think that Rich thinks of himself as a red-headed independent woman in her late 20s, that she takes the spotlight from the main characters. (Not saying that he does or doesn't - but it's clearly not part of the comic strip). She doesn't seems to be powerful enough to regularly save the day against all odds (in fact, in the commentary of DStP, Rich puts her in the lower-powered non-magic group so that there can be tension without the chance of V or Durkon just overwhelming her enemies.

[Phishfood]

Well, As I think, the character that IS a Mary Sue is Redcloak. Sure, he suffered a lot in his past. But MarySues all over the world always had a traumatic past. The plot adjust to him, the rules stretches to him, and many issues that would be troublesome to anybody are just handwaved for him (The Resistance had a hard times gaining food, the captured Azure City don't seem to cultivate, nor fish anything)

Well, we can count on one hand the times we have seen the oots characters eat. Generally only to obey the rule of funny/plot. Heck, rich even devoted a strip to the point that d&d has no rules for peeing.
Bonus strip:
A bonus strip in the first book makes a joke that Elan thought "we weren't tracking [rations]" and it turns out that Belkar has the best food and everyone else suddenly "runs out" of supplies.

Anyhoo, OT:
I think the entire concept of a Mary Sue is damn difficult to apply to a stick figure comic. The very nature of it being a stick figure comic complying (mostly) with DnD rules excludes the concept, in my mind at least.

I also think that Rich has enough sense to avoid such obvious pitfalls in writing. He has shown more skill than some "professional"* writers I could think of.

* Not quite the word I mean, seeing as rich technically is now a professional writer. Veteran doesn't quite cut it either...

[B. Dandelion]

Well, bad guys can be Sues. There is the Villain Sue (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainSue).

But Tarquin's... uh... the whole thing with the wives, that's not especially Sue-ish. With male Sues, the ladies generally cannot get their clothes off fast enough. Even if they're villains. Hell, especially if they're villains. Having to resort to coercion is just unheard of.

Redcloak's major flaw is spinelessness. He is consistently humiliated and emasculated. All the competence in the world doesn't make up for that.

[ThePhantasm]

Well, bad guys can be Sues. There is the Villain Sue (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainSue).

But Tarquin's... uh... the whole thing with the wives, that's not especially Sue-ish. With male Sues, the ladies generally cannot get their clothes off fast enough. Even if they're villains. Hell, especially if they're villains. Having to resort to coercion is just unheard of.

Redcloak's major flaw is spinelessness. He is consistently humiliated and emasculated. All the competence in the world doesn't make up for that.

Exactly. All the characters, even Thor himself, have flaws in this comic. This thread should really just end right here. There is nothing left to discuss.

There aren't Mary Sues in OOTS, period. I hate Mary Sues as much as anyone. But they aren't in OOTS.

[The Pilgrim]

Okay, I'll quote myself:




I quote the wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

A Mary Sue (sometimes just Sue), in fanfiction, is a fictional character with overly idealized and hackneyed mannerisms, lacking noteworthy flaws, and primarily functioning as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author or reader. Perhaps the single underlying feature of all characters described as "Mary Sues" is that they are too ostentatious for the audience's taste, or that the author seems to favor the character too highly. The author may seem to push how exceptional and wonderful the "Mary Sue" character is on his or her audience, sometimes leading the audience to dislike or even resent the character fairly quickly; such a character could be described as an "author's pet".


And now, the other wiki:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue

The prototypical Mary Sue is an original female character in a fanfic who obviously serves as an idealized version of the author mainly for the purpose of Wish Fulfillment. She's exotically beautiful, often having an unusual hair or eye color, and has a similarly cool and exotic name. She's exceptionally talented in an implausibly wide variety of areas, and may possess skills that are rare or nonexistent in the canon setting. She also lacks any realistic, or at least story-relevant, character flaws — either that or her "flaws" are obviously meant to be endearing.

She has an unusual and dramatic Back Story. The canon protagonists are all overwhelmed with admiration for her beauty, wit, courage and other virtues, and are quick to adopt her into their nakama, even characters who are usually antisocial and untrusting; if any character doesn't love her, that character gets an extremely unsympathetic portrayal. She has some sort of especially close relationship to the author's favorite canon character — their love interest, illegitimate child, never-before-mentioned sister, etc. Other than that, the canon characters are quickly reduced to awestruck cheerleaders, watching from the sidelines as Mary Sue outstrips them in their areas of expertise and solves problems that have stymied them for the entire series. (See Common Mary Sue Traits for more detail on any of these cliches.)

In other words, the term "Mary Sue" is generally slapped on a character who is important in the story, possesses unusual physical traits, and has an irrelevantly over-skilled or over-idealized nature.

Basically, this comes from a comment I made in another thread in which I said that Haley was becoming a Mary Sue, in my view. Note that "is leaning towards Mary Sue status" or "is becoming a Mary Sue" doesn't mean "has always been a Mary Sue", "was designed as a Mary Sue", or "is a strong case of Mary Sue-ism".

The reasons I have that perception, are basically:

- She lacks any noteceable flaw by now (overcame her greed and paranoia like 400 strips ago)

- It has been eons since she has screwed up for real, while the rest of the cast (even Roy) keep doing it on a regular basis

Probably the fact that she played in DStP the role of the reasonable character that had to keep under check a Lawful Hippie and a CE-stupid, plus the fact that is now playing the role of the mature caretaker of the dumb blonde, are affecting a lot my views over her.

Or maybe I miss the greedy, paranoid and easy-going rogue she used to be.

[Themrys]

Anyhoo, OT:
I think the entire concept of a Mary Sue is damn difficult to apply to a stick figure comic. The very nature of it being a stick figure comic complying (mostly) with DnD rules excludes the concept, in my mind at least.


It could, without problems, be applied to a stick figure comic. Elan, for example, could be a Mary Sue if all women fell in love with him at first sight - as Therkla did - and of course if his stupidity wouldn't affect the story. The fact that despite his good looks only two women have fallen in love with him and his stupidity has actual negative effects keeps him from being Mary Sue.

Since Rich Burlew apparently doesn't roll dice to decide the outcome of a fight or some of Elan's stupid actions, he could have Elan win each and every fight and only do stupid things when it doesn't harm anyone, or even helps accidentally. Also, all women in the story could be in love with Elan - I don't know whether it is decided by the dice in DnD, but it could be done in the comic, Elan's charisma could be used to justify it.


Obviously, he doesn't, because that would make the story boring and the other main characters superfluous.


@The Pilgrim: Since when did Haley overcome her greed? She intended to steal all the ransom money back after freeing her father, don't forget that.
Besides, not every flawless character is a Mary Sue, unless you count "not powerful enough to overcome any obstacle without effort" as a flaw.

[Prowl]

I'd have to agree, Pilgrim. She didn't used to be a Mary Sue but she sure looks like one now. You wouldn't even recognize the Haley from, say, strip #29 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0029.html), as the same character.


You don't have to go back that far to see the difference, either - in the Miko story arc (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0205.html), "Greedy Haley" is still present. Did requited love make her un-greedy?


It's not just the greedy side that is gone, the silly/playful (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0236.html)side seems to have disappeared as well.

She has now usurped Durkon's role as the straight man and usurped Roy's role as the moral leader. She's less greedy now than Belkar and V. The problem at this point is how do you un-Mary Sue her without undoing all of her character development?

[Themrys]

She has now usurped Durkon's role as the straight man and usurped Roy's role as the moral leader. She's less greedy now than Belkar and V. The problem at this point is how do you un-Mary Sue her without undoing all of her character development?

She's still greedy - there are things more important than money at the moment, that's all. The fact that we now know that there are things that are more important to her than money doesn't make her less greedy.

She did steal from those poor kids who picked Durkon's pocket and then complained they hadn't more money with them - if that isn't greedy, what is?

[G-Man Graves]

Haley isn't, but Elan is. Now before you go off on the whole "G-Man, you're just a hater" thing, let me provide the evidence:

1. He has a whoooooole lot of appearances. Less than Roy, but more than any of the other main characters.
2. He is described as being "likeable", despite his actions, and the reactions of the other characters, painting him as moronic or annoying.
3. The plot often has to revolve around his mistakes, and adjust because of them.

[Themrys]

Haley isn't, but Elan is. Now before you go off on the whole "G-Man, you're just a hater" thing, let me provide the evidence:

1. He has a whoooooole lot of appearances. Less than Roy, but more than any of the other main characters.
2. He is described as being "likeable", despite his actions, and the reactions of the other characters, painting him as moronic or annoying.
3. The plot often has to revolve around his mistakes, and adjust because of them.


I don't think the author intends us to like him, because, if he does, he failed.
Elan is my least favourite OotS member after Belkar.

Also, if Elan truly were a Mary Sue, those who describe him as moronic or annoying would be bad guys. They aren't. We are expected to side with them...or at least I think we are.

I can't imagine that Rich Burlew is not aware of how annoying Elan is.

[Phishfood]

Haley isn't, but Elan is. Now before you go off on the whole "G-Man, you're just a hater" thing, let me provide the evidence:

1. He has a whoooooole lot of appearances. Less than Roy, but more than any of the other main characters.
2. He is described as being "likeable", despite his actions, and the reactions of the other characters, painting him as moronic or annoying.
3. The plot often has to revolve around his mistakes, and adjust because of them.

Well.... you've argued against your own point for #1 - Roy has more appearances.

#2 - he has 18+* charisma. If that much charisma doesn't make you likeable, nothing will

#3 is the strongest argument, however its far from conclusive. Elan's role is to be "the idiot" to Roy/Durkon and heve, even V,'s "straight man". For a while the plot revolved around Haley's "mistake" in leaving the thieves guild.

*too lazy to check the latest stats estimate.

[G-Man Graves]

Well.... you've argued against your own point for #1 - Roy has more appearances.

#2 - he has 18+* charisma. If that much charisma doesn't make you likeable, nothing will


If that 18 charisma makes him likeable, why do the other characters (paticularly Roy) find him aggrevating to the point of "his words crush my soul"? And even then, they are willing to look over the fact that they honestly don't like him all that much when the plot demands it?

As for point one, Roy was dead and alone in heaven for pretty much a whole book. If he was to be in the comic, he had to have entire strips to himself. Elan, meanwhile, is with a member of the party almost all the time (excluding the short bandit camp arc), so surely he shares the screen with the other main characters. Oh, wait, he doesn't? He get's a whole bunch of time shared only with largely insignificant secondary characters and the occasional cool villain? Oh...

[Gnoman]

Every character has a personal storyline in this comic. When that character's storyline is the current focus, that character will be the primary caharcter you see. This does not make them a Mary Sue. Roy's personal storyline was his death, where he sorted out a lot of his personal demons and set out on the right path for the right reasons. V's personal storyline was the Darth V arc, where it learned that there are limits to even the greatest magics, that blindly ignoring this limits made it a horrible person, and that it should try to work as part of a team. Elan's storyline is up now. What he will learn from this, we don't yet know.

[HappyBlanket]

First off: I can't believe somebody actually made a thread proposing a thought not even he believed. Why would you even do that?

Now on the entirely non sequitur argument on Elan. I'll first state that I do believe Elan is one of the more significant members of the party - Nale contributes to most of that. But to say that makes him a Gary Sue is absurd.
@G-Man
...Are you arguing that Elan is likable or not likable? You argue that he is well liked, yet you also argue that Roy dislikes him. What exactly is the problem here? And how can he be a Gary Sue if people find him aggravating?

As for appearances:
Elan does not have a notably large difference between his appearances and the appearances of any other members of the party. He's only a few strips over Haley, and is actually 20 strips under Roy.

And I don't think the plot revolves around Elan's mistakes. Like I said before, most of his focus strips (arcs?) come about because of Nale and the Linear Guild. It's less that Elan gets more attention and more that Nale is a recurring villain.

[Bruendor_Cavescout]

I really think all these people that are quoting definitions of what a Mary Sue is really should go back and read the story that defined the term. Sure, it's a parody, but parody is nothing more than exaggerations of things that were already present in the original body of work. Here's a link (http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dark/1000/marysue.htm) for the story. It's only a few paragraphs long. Read it, come back.

So, what are the criteria for a Mary Sue? In my opinion, the biggest one would be that established characters change how they would act around this person. For example, in the story, Mary Sue rejects going to bed with Kirk with nothing more than "I'm not that type of girl," and Kirk accepts this at face value. C'mon, it's Kirk; he would put the moves on a purple-green sentient vapour cloud if he found out it had breasts. Mary Sues change established characters' behaviors - the heroes love her, the villains usually come to some sort of respect for her. In worst cases, they reform because of her.

Is this evident in Haley? I don't see it. I don't think it's out of character for Tarquin to give her the token respect he does - after all, in his line of thinking, his son has taken her as his concubine, no reason to treat her poorly while he's enjoying this conquest. There's no evidence that Xykon actually remembers her any better than he remembers the rest of the OotS. There's little evidence that Belkar respects her any more than he did previously. If anything, I think there's evidence that she's grown stagnant - her storyline peaked when she got together with Elan, and she hasn't been as interesting. We'll see how that changes now that she's found her father again.

Another big thing for Mary Sues: they can do no wrong. Everything they do is perfect. In the story, Mary Sue ran the Enterprise while all of the senior bridge staff were quarantined in sick bay, and received a ton of awards for it - including one from the alien race in Slaughterhouse Five. (And so it goes.) It's an extension of the first point - everyone respects the Mary Sue, and so they want to give praise to the Mary Sue.

Again, is this Haley? I don't think so, she's fallible. Tarquin defeated her simply by pushing her out of a window. A Mary Sue would never be defeated so easily. Additionally, while Durkon, V and Haley rescued slaves from the Empire of Blood, those same slaves were recaptured and burned alive. If Haley were a Mary Sue, those slaves would have escaped, returned to their loved ones, and told stories about the red-haired savior that freed them from their bondage.

In short, no, she's not. Mary Sues are author proxies that can do no wrong. Haley is fallible and human, even if we haven't seen it recently.

[sims796]

She has now usurped Durkon's role as the straight man and usurped Roy's role as the moral leader. She's less greedy now than Belkar and V. The problem at this point is how do you un-Mary Sue her without undoing all of her character development?

Now, I don't think she's a Mary Sue,but this is an argument I can run with that would convince me otherwise. It doesn't, but it's still a strong argument.
The stuff that Pilgrim said (and that I snipped out of your quote) doesn't work for me. All you've really pointed out is that she had a character growth. For that matter, V isn't the same arrogant elf he was a few comics back. She's still greedy, but now it isn't the focus. She's still untrustworthy, and still uptight about a few things.

The part that I did quote does make some sense. So far, all of her suspicions have been correct. Other than the things that specifically requires a Rogue's thought cycle (the double gambit ploy in the desert, for instance, and her time apart from the group does not count), her wild (yet somewhat legit) suspicion on Tarquin was right on the money, and she's probably right about Malak. This was before she officially found out that Tarquin (and Malak) was a villian by Elan.

Still, it's important to remember that she is second in command for this group, so she will shouw some leadership capabilities.


EDIT: And excellent post by Breu..Bruen...what's his name above me (who ninja'd my epic post of epicness), but I'd like to add on something

While those were perfect examples of what a Mary Sue is, just because a character is flawed doesn't make them -not- a Mary Sue either. It's the magnitude of those flaws that matters. Her getting thrown out of a window isn't a clear case of a flaw, as it was a minor defeat (and not much of a defeat to begin with). Losing a round or two doesn't really make a character unMary Sue-ish.

This is, of course, assuming I have the definition correct. What I am saying may be wrong, but I do believe that I am not, that a couple of minor flaws do not count.

However, you are still right where it counts. She is flawed. She is defeated. She is taken down a peg. She doesn't get her ass kicked every day, but she isn't a clear case of "I'm Haley Starshine, I'm here to save the day! Step aside, 'cause here I am!".

EDIT 2: Elan, technically, is the least flawed out of them all. He's an idiot, sure, but that's more of a quirk than a flaw. That does NOT make him a Mary Sue either. I think it's because we are so used to seeing characters fail time and time again, that a character who can routinely suceed is alien.

EDIT 3:

In short, no, she's not. Mary Sues are author proxies that can do no wrong. Haley is fallible and human, even if we haven't seen it recently.

Last edit, I swear, but I just noticed this little snippet. This is how she is now. We are seeing her as always right and the sane one in the group (in regards to seeing through the baddies ruse) because the plot calls for it. It isn't out of character for her to be this way, and Roy (or even Belkar) could have seen it sooner if they weren't in jail. We're seeing Haley on a winning streak for this point only. And it won't be her only one. But heavily flawed does not mean she's a deep or developed character.

[Themrys]

In my opinion, what most people mean when they say "This is a Mary Sue" is: "This is a character who is so perfect that it makes the story boring and/or other characters useless."

For example, Tom of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" has not a single character flaw and does no wrong in the course of the story. However, this fact doesn't really help him in the long run. He's still a slave. Therefore, I don't consider him a Mary Sue.

Haley may not be very flawed anymore, and maybe that makes her less interesting for some of you, but she still isn't powerful enough to go and defeat Xykon singlehandedly.She comes not even close.
Also, as was already pointed out, no one behaves out of character because of her and so on.

[G-Man Graves]

@G-Man
...Are you arguing that Elan is likable or not likable? You argue that he is well liked, yet you also argue that Roy dislikes him. What exactly is the problem here? And how can he be a Gary Sue if people find him aggravating?



What I'm saying is that the sources are contradictory. One strip, they'll say that Elan is likeable, has such high charisma, blah blah blah, then in another, they act like he's the most irritating idiot on the planet. And whatever they say, he acts in a way that many people, including myself, find irritating and idiotic.

[sims796]

What I'm saying is that the sources are contradictory. One strip, they'll say that Elan is likeable, has such high charisma, blah blah blah, then in another, they act like he's the most irritating idiot on the planet. And whatever they say, he acts in a way that many people, including myself, find irritating and idiotic.

So generally, he has a personality that you either like or don't like, which is fair on both sides.

[MoonCat]

Nowhere near. She has managed to overcome one of her bigger difficulties, which is why she is now being shown more often in trying situations, where she can be allowed to break down without seeming like a cry-baby. But she still has actual flaws, and is not perfect and overpowered.

[HappyBlanket]

What I'm saying is that the sources are contradictory. One strip, they'll say that Elan is likable, has such high charisma, blah blah blah, then in another, they act like he's the most irritating idiot on the planet. And whatever they say, he acts in a way that many people, including myself, find irritating and idiotic.

There's a world of difference between a character saying two contradictory things about another character, and two characters saying two contradictory things.

Back to the point, if Elan is irritating to such a notable number of people, he's not a Sue.

Edit: Calling attention to the link posted by Bruendor. That's a must read.

[Strife Warzeal]

What I'm saying is that the sources are contradictory. One strip, they'll say that Elan is likeable, has such high charisma, blah blah blah, then in another, they act like he's the most irritating idiot on the planet.

So you are saying you have never had a friend you loved to death (in a platonic way) that did something stupid at points in your relationship with that friend and it annoyed you? That is what is basically going on there. I find that really hard to believe you have never known someone like.

[Gift Jeraff]

Characters find Elan extremely annoying yet like him because his heart is canonically* in the right place. Even then, "like" would only be a few steps above tolerate for, say, Roy and Hinjo. I don't think anyone besides Haley, Thog, and Tarquin wants to spend more time than necessary with him.

Plus, they might like him because he saved the day several times. Oh wait, I bet saving the day makes him a Mary Sue. Darn.

1. He has a whoooooole lot of appearances. Less than Roy, but more than any of the other main characters.
It's not much more than Haley. I think the Number of Character Appearances Thread counts "likenesses" such as when Nale impersonated Elan. Plus if you count extra pages plus print-only content, then Haley is #2.

Also, Elan and Haley appearing more than other characters has less to do with "Mary Suedom" and more to do with simply being the second-most important characters. Do Spock and McCoy get Mary Sue points for getting more screen time than everyone besides Kirk?

*Anyone is free to interpret Elan as a jerk intentionally trying to screw over the mission, of course.

[nihil8r]

I really think all these people that are quoting definitions of what a Mary Sue is really should go back and read the story that defined the term [snip]

Another big thing for Mary Sues: they can do no wrong. Everything they do is perfect. [snip] everyone respects the Mary Sue, and so they want to give praise to the Mary Sue.

Again, is this Haley? I don't think so, she's fallible. Tarquin defeated her simply by pushing her out of a window. A Mary Sue would never be defeated so easily. Additionally, while Durkon, V and Haley rescued slaves from the Empire of Blood, those same slaves were recaptured and burned alive. If Haley were a Mary Sue, those slaves would have escaped, returned to their loved ones, and told stories about the red-haired savior that freed them from their bondage.

In short, no, she's not. Mary Sues are author proxies that can do no wrong. Haley is fallible and human, even if we haven't seen it recently.

you couldn't have said it better. i added some bolds and such though to stress the fact that mary sues are unrealistically perfect author proxies with no legitimate flaws, not well-defined and developed characters who just happen to not currently be focusing on their personal growth.

[Sholos]

Since when does red hair qualify as exotic?

[Raven777]

Also, don't forget that tropes are not bad. Some Mary Sues can still be compeling characters if written right. (I'm looking at *you*, Shinji and Warhammer 40,000).

[Messenger]

In short, no, she's not. Mary Sues are author proxies that can do no wrong. Haley is fallible and human, even if we haven't seen it recently.We have seen it recently: she failed to convince her father to escape, to trust Elan and that his viewpoint is screwing him up.

Yes, those aren't character flaws and in fact point to Haley doing the right and noble thing, but she still didn't succeed.

And all of this is my way of saying: Yes, I agree with your answer and your reasoning.

[SPoD]

The invasion. There is no way his army should have been able to function that well after being force marched, and his army didn't seem to suffer any moral problems.

Yeah, you know, you're right. The battle would have been a far more entertaining story if the villain's army had just crumbled from morale problems or sore feet.

Come on. Handwaving away boring minutiae to make a more exciting action scene is NOT the same thing as making someone a Mary Sue. The definition is not, "Person for whom one or two lucky and/or unexpected things happen."

[HappyBlanket]

Also, don't forget that tropes are not bad. Some Mary Sues can still be compeling characters if written right. (I'm looking at *you*, Shinji and Warhammer 40,000).

Watch yourself there. Kinda hard to write badly well That doesn't even make sense. It's syntactically impossible; a whole new level of impossible.

[Dvandemon]

Uh, no, how could she possibly be one? :smallconfused:

[Cisturn]

I think we're all pretty decided that Haley isn't a sue. Though with most of her problems addressed she has become a lot less compelling in this latest arc. Strangely enough though I think Durkon should be mentioned. While the dwarf is my favorite member of the order, I think he shows sue qualities on a character level more than Haley or Elan. Durkon's mature, probably the second most powerful member of the order (when he wants to be), has by far the least character flaws (none if you don't count lawfulness or his phobia to trees), and has even come to terms with his own mortality. Plus the other characters even seem to respect his advice.

Now I know that since Durkon is the least seen member of the order and the plot doesn't revolve around him he cant be a sue. But he still seems to qualify more for it than either Elan or Haley.

[Gnoman]

He's actually shown another crippling character flaw, that of being to afraid of doing the wrong thing to act.

[ericgrau]

The plot infrequently revolves around her and when it did she wasn't getting anywhere until she got help from Belkar. So, I doubt it.

Vaarsuvius is the closest to a Sue, as is any magic in the comic it seems. Especially when subtly altered to the caster's favor, especially but not limited to the saves. Yet Vaarsuvius screws up frequently in the comic.

[ThePhantasm]

Why is this discussion still ongoing? Are there really this many people who don't know what a Sue is?

*facepalm*

[MReav]

While I won't say Redcloak is a full on Mary Sue (or Villain Sue), I have felt that the plot has bent over more for his sake than can be comfortably attributed to drama/humour (the Periodic Table of The Elementals is biggest example).

[Jimorian]

Then there's just the definitional point that Mary Sues only appear in BAD works of fiction. OOTS is not a bad work of fiction, so ipso yadda yadda blah blah.

[Forum Explorer]

While I won't say Redcloak is a full on Mary Sue (or Villain Sue), I have felt that the plot has bent over more for his sake than can be comfortably attributed to drama/humour (the Periodic Table of The Elementals is biggest example).

Really? I thought that was more a one time joke then anything else. I got the impression that those elementals weren't harder to defeat than any other one just slightly different.

[Trazoi]

Then there's just the definitional point that Mary Sues only appear in BAD works of fiction. OOTS is not a bad work of fiction, so ipso yadda yadda blah blah.
That's arguable. I'd say Westley from Princess Bride could be regarded as a total Mary Sue - he's got all the signs - but that's part of what makes it so great.

Edit: Oh yeah, the question: No, Haley isn't a Mary Sue. :smalltongue:

[Jimorian]

That's arguable. I'd say Westley from Princess Bride could be regarded as a total Mary Sue - he's got all the signs - but that's part of what makes it so great.

Edit: Oh yeah, the question: No, Haley isn't a Mary Sue. :smalltongue:

A Mary Sue does NOT mean competent without flaws. It does not even mean VERY competent without flaws. It only applies to characters who are ridiculously over competent and lucky and handsome/pretty and without flaws because the author is incapable of seeing their hero in any other light.

It's exceedingly rare in any kind of published/publishable fiction. And even out of the 800 or so stories I rejected for my old fantasy fiction webzine, the Mary Sue trope cropped up maybe 2 or 3 times.

[Trazoi]

A Mary Sue does NOT mean competent without flaws. It does not even mean VERY competent without flaws. It only applies to characters who are ridiculously over competent and lucky and handsome/pretty and without flaws because the author is incapable of seeing their hero in any other light.
"Ridiculously over competent", "lucky", "handsome" and (arguably) "without flaws" are all terms that describe Westley. The only difference I see is that Westley is a well-written escapist character whereas the typical Mary Sue is oh-so-definitely not.

I guess it depends whether "a character the audience wants to throttle" is a mandatory trait for Sues or not.

[Forum Explorer]

"Ridiculously over competent", "lucky", "handsome" and (arguably) "without flaws" are all terms that describe Westley. The only difference I see is that Westley is a well-written escapist character whereas the typical Mary Sue is oh-so-definitely not.

I guess it depends whether "a character the audience wants to throttle" is a mandatory trait for Sues or not.

Another good way to tell is does the character fit into the world without disrupting the immersion. Westly and Haley do not.

[Trazoi]

Another good way to tell is does the character fit into the world without disrupting the immersion. Westly and Haley do not.
Yes, that's my usual metric for Sues; they warp their universes to the point where they break. And I agree that on that count Westley and Haley fit into their respective worlds just fine. :smallsmile:

[Jimorian]

"Ridiculously over competent", "lucky", "handsome" and (arguably) "without flaws" are all terms that describe Westley. The only difference I see is that Westley is a well-written escapist character whereas the typical Mary Sue is oh-so-definitely not.

Well, there's that whole dieing thing half way through the movie where he literally has to be carried through the rest of the plot by the other characters. :smalltongue:


I guess it depends whether "a character the audience wants to throttle" is a mandatory trait for Sues or not.

That's certainly a part of it, which is why I say that if the story is working, the character can't be a Mary Sue pretty much by definition. A hyper-competent character is simply another tool in the writer's bag, and simply choosing to use one does not create the necessary conditions for Mary Sue-ness. But that's where there's definitely room for debate.

What I primarily object to is the debasement of the term where people use it when ANY form of competency is shown. Unfortunately, the idea gets thrown around so much that a far larger problem I saw in my submission pile was what I called "workshop character flaws". Writers get so afraid of even being accused of putting themselves into the story that they'd simply add a laundry list of problems (and these cycled through trends -- flaws of the week) for the character to have to make them "real". But they were never natural to the character or their situation.

Since this problem is far more common and insidious for writers who are approaching publishability than creating a Mary Sue, I almost always recommend dropping these extraneous flaws and just concentrating on the character as they envision them. If a writer has natural empathy and builds a story organically from the nature of the character, having a Mary Sue crop up is just about never ever going to be a problem.

[Gitman00]

Here (http://www.springhole.net/quizzes/marysue.htm) is a link to a good Mary Sue test. I had to guess at some things since I'm not the author, but by my estimation Haley scores about a 17. Not even close.

[Kish]

The definition of "Mary Sue" I prefer hinges on warping the world, not "being attractive" or "being competent" or "being exotic," all traits which are neutral to positive for protagonists to have (I don't know about you, but I'd really prefer not to be stuck with only stories where the main characters are ugly, stupid, and ordinary)--and avoiding those traits doesn't even work to prevent the character from being a Mary Sue in the maddening world-warping sense, it just means that when the world warps for the character, you're left going, "ugh, that makes absolutely no sense on any level, why?" instead of "ugh, I don't buy that she's able to do that."

That said, Haley is no Mary Sue by any standard.

[grimbold]

she cant be because she has flaws and we have entire story arcs dedicated to these flaws

[Maximum Zersk]

Here (http://www.springhole.net/quizzes/marysue.htm) is a link to a good Mary Sue test. I had to guess at some things since I'm not the author, but by my estimation Haley scores about a 17. Not even close.

Hmm, Mary Sue tests...

I probably wouldn't use them to figure out if the character is a Mary Sue, really.

[Teln]

Ditto (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=181403&highlight=mary+litmus+test). Read that thread for details.

[MReav]

Really? I thought that was more a one time joke then anything else. I got the impression that those elementals weren't harder to defeat than any other one just slightly different.

Three times, and none of them were funny enough for me to warrant suspending my disbelief.

[Kish]

I think the purpose of Redcloak's scientific elementals is to showcase a difference between Redcloak's thought processes and Vaarsuvius'. Redcloak says, "Some of us got passing grades in Chem"; Vaarsuvius says "Does he not know that the classical elements are classics for a reason?"

I don't get how "suspending your disbelief" is involved.

[MReav]

I don't get how "suspending your disbelief" is involved.

I understood the joke, but because I did not find it sufficiently funny (or that funny at all), I will not concede that the rules making a sacrifice for the sake of comedy was worth it, and therefore, Redcloak was given an advantage that I feel was undue.

[Gift Jeraff]

I understood the joke, but because I did not find it sufficiently funny (or that funny at all), I will not concede that the rules making a sacrifice for the sake of comedy was worth it, and therefore, Redcloak was given an advantage that I feel was undue.
Due to the subjective nature of humour, the same can be said for Belkar's reliance on rule of cool/funny, Xykonnot being affected by Prismatic Spray due to the monochrome,and many more.

[Gray Mage]

I understood the joke, but because I did not find it sufficiently funny (or that funny at all), I will not concede that the rules making a sacrifice for the sake of comedy was worth it, and therefore, Redcloak was given an advantage that I feel was undue.

I don't see how the elementals were much of an advantage. Everything they did could have been done by a regular elemental.

Edit: On topic: No, I don't think Haley's a mary sue, nor any other character.

[MReav]

Due to the subjective nature of humour, the same can be said for Belkar's reliance on rule of cool/funny, Xykonnot being affected by Prismatic Spray due to the monochrome,and many more.

True, but Belkar usually manages to be funnier. As for Xykon Xykon was already immune to half the effects listed in Prismatic Spray, and could have item-based resistances for another quarter of them.

[Gift Jeraff]

True, but Belkar usually manages to be funnier.
Once again, subjective. I personally found Redcloak's elementals funnier than the majority of Belkar's antics (and I actually like stabby humour), but I'm not gonna say Belkar has an unfair advantage.

[Kish]

I understood the joke,
There was a joke?

I understand the serious character information about Redcloak involved in his attitude toward the elements. I didn't see a joke. Rich breaks the rules of D&D freely (I'm guessing those are the rules you mean by "the rules").

[Sarco_Phage]

While I won't say Redcloak is a full on Mary Sue (or Villain Sue), I have felt that the plot has bent over more for his sake than can be comfortably attributed to drama/humour (the Periodic Table of The Elementals is biggest example).

I'm gonna stay away from Sue discussion (literally no-one knows what a Mary Sue is anymore, as the word has been completely devalued to the point of meaning whatever we want it to mean at any given time).

I wouldn't call it "bending over for his sake", though. Redcloak and Xykon are the villains. As the villains, they are the reason the plot exists; they act and the heroes react. A villain-centric (so-to-speak) story will center around attempting to prevent the villains from enacting whatever nefarious scheme they are plotting.

This can mean certain things, remember Xykon's mass slaughter of the Sapphire Guard? Remember Redcloak absolutely wrecking Hinjo with a single Disintegrate, but being nearly killed by O-Chul? The apparent statistical discrepancy is what we need to let go of here.

For the most part, the villains exist to create conflict, hence they are exactly as powerful or as competent as they need to be. It only counts as actual bad writing if the competence level drops suddenly or increases sharply whenever something "needs" to happen plot-wise.

Perhaps a good example of this would be Roy taking Xykon out with his bare hands in the start of the comic but being utterly trashed by him during the Azure City invasion. However in this particular case that was possibly more a problem of the comic being in its early stages, with Redcloak and Xykon not as fleshed out yet. So even that doesn't really count.

Also, things happen because they're cool, I suppose.

[MReav]

Okay, I'll try to rephrase things: I have found when the plot has bent over for Redcloak, I have not been sufficiently satisfied with the outcomes (particularly with the periodic table of the Elementals), that I feel the rules taking one for the team for his sake has been more often, not worth it, compared with others.

Goddamn, I didn't think mentioning that I feel Redcloak's contrived outcomes were less satisfying than other people's contrived outcomes would get me grilled by so many people.

[Shpadoinkle]

I'm just posting to say that I've grown to hate the term Mary Sue, because so many people misunderstand what it means and thinks it applies to any character who shows the least bit of competence at all, in any area, or to any character who doesn't have huge, gaping, crippling character flaws.

[Souhiro]

I have found when the plot has bent over for Redcloak, I have not been sufficiently satisfied with the outcomes (particularly with the periodic table of the Elementals), that I feel the rules taking one for the team for his sake has been more often, not worth it, compared with others.

I'm 100% with you. Redcloak IS the bend of rules incarnate.

I mean.. it CHARGED AGAINST MIKO (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/images/caoRiax94LsYgPEfNNu.gif)? With Spells? Did it have heard the words "attack of opportunity" before? Even casting defensively would have been hard, and when suffering so many wounds would have been impossible, but it was able to fend against her, nonetheless. (In the first turn, when Miko attacked Redcloak, it received five smitting attacks, suffering no less than 60 HP! How could it "concentrate" to bypass the damage? and continue it's Harm?)

Redcloak is a Sue. A villain Sue. Is a kid with an allmighty trinket, chosen from it god to do something he would do anyway, and the rules of it world and it's race don't apply to him (Medium Siced Gobbo) Does anyone have put it in the Litmust Test, ever?

[Sholos]

I'm 100% with you. Redcloak IS the bend of rules incarnate.

I mean.. it CHARGED AGAINST MIKO (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/images/caoRiax94LsYgPEfNNu.gif)? With Spells? Did it have heard the words "attack of opportunity" before? Even casting defensively would have been hard, and when suffering so many wounds would have been impossible, but it was able to fend against her, nonetheless. (In the first turn, when Miko attacked Redcloak, it received five smitting attacks, suffering no less than 60 HP! How could it "concentrate" to bypass the damage? and continue it's Harm?)

First off, Redcloak is male, for which the appropriate pronoun is "he", not "it". Second off, I'm not sure you understand how Defensive Casting works. Defensive Casting is a Concentration check with a DC = 15+Spell Level that denies an opponent an Attack of Opportunity. A character at Redcloak's level would have a hard time blowing such a check, and may even not be able to fail. The damage dealt during Miko's round does not affect Redcloak's ability to cast spells. Only damage taken while he cast a spell does that.

Also, I feel the need to point out that Redcloak did not receive 5 Smite Evils in the first round. Heck, Miko can't even do 5/day, unless she's got 20 levels of paladin. Now, it's still quite possible to get up to 60 damage in a single round, but, again, that doesn't impede Redcloak's casting at all.


Redcloak is a Sue. A villain Sue. Is a kid with an allmighty trinket, chosen from it god to do something he would do anyway, and the rules of it world and it's race don't apply to him (Medium Siced Gobbo) Does anyone have put it in the Litmust Test, ever?

No, no he's not. He's a powerful villain that you have to take seriously, but he's certainly not a Sue. He suffers from crippling flaws that often get in the way of his own plans, and he certainly doesn't succeed in everything he tries. Also, every single goblin (or as you put it, "gobbo") is medium sized, so that's not special to Redcloak, and he wasn't "chosen" by the Dark One so much as he happened to be the most senior cleric around to hand the cape to.

As for your last "question", I'm sure someone has put him through a litmus test before, but since most of those are only vaguely specific at best, I wouldn't put much trust in them as a reliable means of discovering a true Mary Sue.

[Irbis]

Characters have flaws? So what? Having a flaw does not-unmake Mary Sue. In fact, the biggest Mary Sues have lots of flaws, usually cancelling each other or not impairing them in any way.

Is Haley author-insert or perfect? Nope. She, however, never suffers any consequences of her actions, she is free to steal, murder, maim and act as rude as he pleases, and she never suffers for it, unlike others. Steal from party? No one minds. Kill? Prison time is for Belkar suckers, not her. Have agreement singed by Celia? Ignore, Roy Durkon Hinjo others are dumb they try to keep their word. Personal loss? Pfft, what's that? And they made her leader? Yeah, totally not Quasi Sue here.

And on top of all this, we're supposed to believe she is not in deep end of alignment pool (if only according to some posters, as Haley itself is nowhere near sure of that), which would have justified her somewhat.

Oh, wait, Haley suffered one loss. Loss of ability to speak for a few strips, which was pretty much played for laughs and ended with another great gain. Loss of family? Being exiled? Twice? Imprisonment? Curse hanging over you and your descendants? Who needs these, winners don't carry serious stuff, losers do.

Yes, if there is one Sue character in the strip, never suffering any setbacks, and having the universe bending backwards for her, it's Haley.

[Trazoi]

Wait, what? Redcloak as a Villain Sue? The goblin who keeps screwing up and getting his nose rubbed into the ground by Xykon time and again? The goblin who at best can hope for a bittersweet pyrrhic victory? :smallconfused:

The only character I'd say gets slightly close to Sue in some areas would be Belkar due to his tendency to slip out of the consequences of his actions. But that isn't pronounced enough for it to matter over the smackdowns he receives and his general unattractiveness to many other characters. IMO there aren't any Sues in Order of the Stick.

Edit: @Irbis: Now that you've listed it, I can see some reasoning behind opinions that Haley being slightly Sueish. In my view though there's not enough for the label to stick, mostly because Haley appears slick enough to avoid the consequences due to her own guile.

[Johkmil]

I think it would be quite obvious that, due to Rich's bending of the DnD rules, there are either no Mary Sues in this comic or that every single important character, villain or even pet are Mary Sues in OotS.
Remember that Suedom is a problem of balancing, not the existence of superpowers, exoticness or nonexistent flaws. If one tweaks the rules of the universe for one character, it could well be a Mary Sue, depending on the story; if one bends the rules of the universe for every character, it is called Fantasy.

[Irbis]

Wait, what? Redcloak as a Villain Sue? The goblin who keeps screwing up and getting his nose rubbed into the ground by Xykon time and again? The goblin who at best can hope for a bittersweet pyrrhic victory? :smallconfused:

This.


Edit: @Irbis: Now that you've listed it, I can see some reasoning behind opinions that Haley being slightly Sueish. In my view though there's not enough for the label to stick, mostly because Haley appears slick enough to avoid the consequences due to her own guile.

Sue-ish? :smallconfused:

Ok, she isn't full-blown one, but she is pretty much the only character that can be labeled as such. Had she been evil, or really slipping consequences through her guile, I would live with this, but as of now, she breaks rules when and whenever she wants, including alignment rules, game rules (Glibness doesn't work like that), law rules, party rules, everything, and somehow is never called on it. Despite doing peaking at worse (IMHO) stuff on Belkar, who is mostly guilty of petty crime, and at at least doesn't pretend he is good.

[theNater]

Ok, she isn't full-blown one, but she is pretty much the only character that can be labeled as such. Had she been evil, or really slipping consequences through her guile, I would live with this, but as of now, she breaks rules when and whenever she wants, including alignment rules, game rules (Glibness doesn't work like that), law rules, party rules, everything, and somehow is never called on it. Despite doing peaking at worse (IMHO) stuff on Belkar, who is mostly guilty of petty crime, and at at least doesn't pretend he is good.
I find it interesting that you bring up alignment, because we know(according to the class and level geekery thread) Haley is Chaotic Good. Obeying the rules on a regular basis would violate the Chaotic part of her alignment. We seem to agree that she hasn't done that, so I'd like to ask: what are the evil things she's done?

In particular, I'm curious as to what she's done that you think is worse than murdering someone who is friendly, helpful, and defenseless in order to take his belongings (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html).

[G-Man Graves]

I find it interesting that you bring up alignment, because we know(according to the class and level geekery thread) Haley is Chaotic Good. Obeying the rules on a regular basis would violate the Chaotic part of her alignment. We seem to agree that she hasn't done that, so I'd like to ask: what are the evil things she's done?

In particular, I'm curious as to what she's done that you think is worse than murdering someone who is friendly, helpful, and defenseless in order to take his belongings (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html).

Butchering a defenseless woman when you knew she would not be able to fight back. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0648.html) The fact that Crystal was evil has no bearing on the fact that it was an evil act.

[Burner28]

Characters have flaws? So what? Having a flaw does not-unmake Mary Sue. In fact, the biggest Mary Sues have lots of flaws, usually cancelling each other or not impairing them in any way.

If it doesn't affect the character negatively then is it really a flaw in the practical sense?


Kill? Prison time is for Belkar suckers, not her

Actually pretty much everyone except for Durkon has tried to escape from jail so it isn't something special to Haley.

[theNater]

Butchering a defenseless woman when you knew she would not be able to fight back. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0648.html) The fact that Crystal was evil has no bearing on the fact that it was an evil act.
One of Crystal's goals is to kill Haley. Killing in self-defense is not an evil act.

There's a reasonable argument that self-defense doesn't count unless the threat is immediate. However, even if you want to make that argument, Haley's murder is still less evil than Belkar's murder. Crystal's evil and her access to the resources necessary to be resurrected are mitigating factors.

[Gnoman]

When there is no law, the only think keeping someone from killing you is your ability to stop them. Taking out Crystal was pragmatic, not evil.

[Poppy Appletree]

I mean.. it CHARGED AGAINST MIKO (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/images/caoRiax94LsYgPEfNNu.gif)?

Why does Redcloak have no visible wounds in that comic? Miko is shown to have taken damage but none is shown on Redcloak after all those attacks. However, given that Miko has floored him by the next comic, I'm guessing that's an art error.

[Johkmil]

One of Crystal's goals is to kill Haley. Killing in self-defense is not an evil act.

There's a reasonable argument that self-defense doesn't count unless the threat is immediate. However, even if you want to make that argument, Haley's murder is still less evil than Belkar's murder. Crystal's evil and her access to the resources necessary to be resurrected are mitigating factors.

This, and also, while killing Crystal is quite obviously an Evil act, it does not mean that Haley is any less Chaotic Good for that. It probably wouldn't even make her Fall if she were a paladin. (Edit: seems like they probably will. I stand corrected.) From an alignment perspective, her Evil act would have been weighted out by her later good acts, such as leading the Azure city rebellion, freeing the slaves in Tarquin's palace and so on.

Evil is not simply Evil. There are grades and nuances. Haley's murder was less Evil than Belkar's murder, which was less Evil than Tarquin's butchering of the escaped slaves, which still was less Evil than Xykon's insane-paladin-on-paladin slaughter. Edit: for contrast, we also have the killings of goblins done by the elven incursion in Gobbotopia. There were innocent teenagers among the goblins killed. Not a Good act at least. I would say that the elves there were more ruthless than Haley ever was.

On topic: Haley Sue? This sounds like another unbased claim from the strange parts of the forums that have to hate some character or other. Haley's Evil! Elan's a drooling idiot manchild! Durkon's a boring, paper-thin stereotype with no character growth! Belkar's a murderer!

If one strategically ignores some parts of the story, every character is a Mary Sue. Belkar slaughters everything that moves without repercussions, Haley does whatever pleases her at the moment, Elan can survive a jump from an airship through a glass window without taking a million d6 damage, Mr. Scruffy disembowels gladiators, O-Chul survives anything, the list is endless. And if one takes in the other side of the story, it becomes clear that none of them are true Mary Sues.

I would say that this comic has had a realistic Mary Sue in Miko. Mary Sue in that she is incredibly powerful, exotic and the obvious fact that any cause of action taken by her must have been approved by her gods and anything in the way of that cause of action must be Evil and therefore to be purged by her blade. Realistic in the fact that she appears as a self-righteous fanatic to anyone else, ultimately as great a danger to her own cause as to Evil.

[hamishspence]

This, and also, while killing Crystal is quite oubviously an Evil act, it does not mean that Haley is any less Chaotic Good for that. It probably wouldn't even make her Fall if she were a paladin. From an alignment perspective, her Evil act would have been weighted out by her later good acts, such as leading the Azure city rebellion, freeing the slaves in Tarquin's palace and so on.


Paladins fall for any Evil act. And she kills Crystal after leading the Azure City rebellion.

that said, Champions of Ruin (D&D 3.5 sourcebook) does say that "even good characters can be driven to evil acts from time to time" (but the repeated use of evil acts is the mark of an evil character).

[G-Man Graves]

One of Crystal's goals is to kill Haley. Killing in self-defense is not an evil act.

There's a reasonable argument that self-defense doesn't count unless the threat is immediate. However, even if you want to make that argument, Haley's murder is still less evil than Belkar's murder. Crystal's evil and her access to the resources necessary to be resurrected are mitigating factors.

When there is no law, the only think keeping someone from killing you is your ability to stop them. Taking out Crystal was pragmatic, not evil.


That was not self defense. That wasn't self defense, it was straight up revenge. At best. The fact that it was "Less evil" does not mean it was not evil. And the argument that it was "self defense" holds even less weight when you remember that Haley went out of her way to go and murder Crystal right after V had told her that they were teleporting away immediately.

[MReav]

I'm 100% with you. Redcloak IS the bend of rules incarnate.

Don't patronize me. That is not what I said, that is not close to what I have said, and I hate your over the top "agreeing" with me.

[Half-Orc Rage]

So basically, any character who 1) is competent, and 2) is disliked by someone can be labeled a Mary Sue by someone on the internet? Why can't people just say they don't like a character and accept that? Why does there have to be this implied criticism of the creator?

You know what Haley seems like to me? A pretty good rogue that got to high levels and has a boyfriend. Maybe she's pretty. That's it. She loses fights and makes mistakes and really isn't super powerful or having people fawn over her.

[theNater]

That was not self defense. That wasn't self defense, it was straight up revenge. At best. The fact that it was "Less evil" does not mean it was not evil. And the argument that it was "self defense" holds even less weight when you remember that Haley went out of her way to go and murder Crystal right after V had told her that they were teleporting away immediately.
To avoid derailing this thread, I will yield that killing Crystal was an evil act for the purpose of this discussion. If you'd like to discuss this particular topic more, one of us can start a new thread; please give me a heads-up if that seems appealing.

However, the post I originally responded to indicated that Haley had committed an act worse than Belkar had, and I'm still looking for that. Haley's act of killing a defenseless victim is, at worst, exactly as evil as Belkar's act of killing a defenseless victim.

[Kish]

Don't patronize me. That is not what I said, that is not close to what I have said, and I hate your over the top "agreeing" with me.
I don't think he's being sarcastic. I think he means it.

[Sholos]

I'd have to say that Haley killing Crystal was Neutral, as Crystal was a constant threat on Haley's life who was not going to give up. A pure Good approach would have been to wait until Crystal was an active threat, but Haley's act certainly wasn't Evil. I think people here are forgetting just what Evil means. Evil means killing someone just because it makes your life easier (or for fun, or other shallow reasons), not because they've threatened your life and have shown to be a not insignificant threat.

[B. Dandelion]

The morality of the Crystal issue is actually not relevant to Haley's Sue-ness one way or the other. What's relevant is whether the same act would have been presented in a greater or less flattering light had it been done by another character. If the Giant thinks it wasn't evil to kill an evil person who would kill you if given the chance and had tried to kill you already, even if that person was at the time helpless and you were on your way out, then Haley not facing repercussions over it is more like Values/Moral Dissonance, it doesn't make her a Sue. On the other hand if the Giant thinks it's okay for Haley (and only Haley) to behave like that...

[Gitman00]

A Mary Sue character is one of two things: an author's idealized version of either himself or his ideal love interest.

There are a lot of common characteristics that Mary Sues tend to have (i.e. beautiful, incorruptible, dark and brooding, powerful, etc.), but none of these is strictly necessary. What defines a Sue is the disconnect between the audience's perception of the character and the author's perception. In other words, the character is described in one way by the narrative or other characters (the way the author wants us to see her), but her actions bespeak a different nature.

For comparison (though I may be opening up a can of worms here), look at Arya from the Inheritance Cycle (first two books anyway; I haven't read the third). Textbook Mary Sue. Exotically beautiful (as we are constantly reminded with over-the-top purple prose), ridiculously strong and skilled, wears black leather despite Elves' veganism, has no apparent angst after being imprisoned and tortured for months; described as ridiculously hot even when unconscious, poisoned and covered in torture wounds, and yet after two books we know next to nothing about her personality. Everyone in-universe thinks she's amazing, yet most of the fans either take pity on her for putting up with Eragon's childish infatuation or think she's a stone-cold bitch. Oh, and did I mention she's hot?

Haley, on the other hand, is shown to be a very realistic, sympathetic character. She's a badass, but that's par for the course in the genre. She's attractive, but other characters don't bend over backwards for her. She puts up a facade of vanity and greed to hide her crippling self-doubt, and hides her main motivation - to ransom her father - out of fear of showing weakness. Most importantly, all of this is acknowledged within the story. She has her day in the limelight, but the main narrative doesn't take a backseat to her side-plots.

Frankly, I don't even know why this is a debate. Haley shows almost none of the hallmarks of a Sue. Rich Burlew is a skilled enough writer to avoid falling into this trap with any of his characters.

[yldenfrei]

A little input in the Haley Killing Crystal OMG Mary Sue issue: She's not proud of what she did. She herself thinks it is not a Good act. She is ashamed to speak of it to Elan and had to resort to flimsy justifications like "Crystal punched an old woman so she's Evil" to make them feel better.

And yes, echoing the sentiments of Character Development != Mary Sue. So even after all that character spotlight and character growth people still expect Haley to froth at the mouth with a mere mention of riches? Keep the old self, and you're accused of being a Cardboard Character. Get some character development and now you're a Mary Sue. It's a Lose-Lose with these folks... :smallannoyed:

[skim172]

It’s important to distinguish between a “Mary Sue” and an “author surrogate.” A Mary-Sue is an idealization of the author or the author’s ideal mate. A Mary-Sue will get unequal description and characterization. Things will inevitably work out in their favor, even in circumstances when that would seem improbable, due to the intervention of the author rescuing their favored creation. A Mary-Sue is not without flaws, but these flaws will ultimately either not hinder their general awesomeness or turn out to be a “hidden strength” (for example, a disfiguring scar on the face that actually just makes them look cooler).

An author surrogate is a character who serves as the representative of the author’s own opinions, personality, ideas, etc. The character may have experiences that mirror elements of the author’s life. This may be intentional or, often, unintentional. Fiction inevitably reflects the author – how they see the world, other people, relationships, etc. So characters will also reflect the author’s own thoughts. In many cases, one or a few characters will mirror the author more than others. Much of the time, it happens unconsciously – a writer simply begins to identify with one character.

So a Mary-Sue is an author surrogate taken to an extreme. It’s a separation by vague degrees. If my character looks like me, acts like me, but has twenty million friends and can play the guitar with his teeth, then that’s obviously a Mary-Sue. But what if my duplicate is a lonely loser working a dead-end job? I might say I'm not favoring him, but you could argue I’m setting him up to be the everyman antihero that all the readers would identify with. And what if I base a character on myself, but because of a deep sense of self-awareness, I create a very well-rounded, dynamic protagonist? So it’s more or less based on opinion. Mary-Sues are usually identified by how ridiculous they end up being.



So no, I don't think there are Mary-Sues in this comic. However, I do believe one of the character is partially an author-surrogate – Roy.

Roy is the straight man to everyone else’s zaniness; the guy frowning and lifting an eyebrow at this bizarre world. He's often a passive observer, the sarcastic commenter. He states the observation we're thinking - sometimes, he talks to us directly. He has no disruptive personality quirks and his flaws are not exaggerative and seem genuine. In a lot of ways, he’s like the reader – an everyday guy who’s been somehow transplanted into this comical landscape and has to make sense of it.

If he is an author-surrogate, then he’s well-written and well-rounded without favoritism. But if there is one character you expect to stand up and make a moral speech, it is Roy. He has flaws and he learns his lessons, but his moral lessons are often a moral declaration, which inevitably must reflect the author's views.

I’d also say he’s an author-surrogate because of his bizarre relationship with his father. I’m not intending to flame here – hear me out. I can accept that Eugene is a miserable, selfish, hateful, horrible person. But I accept this without necessarily having been shown it. The story begins and proceeds with this characterization already assumed. Roy and Eugene have this conflict already in place because Eugene is already a jerk and a bad father. In the same way we don’t get an explanation why Durkon is religious, we don’t get an explanation why Eugene is a wretch. That’s fine – you don’t need an origin story for every psychological trait.

However, one of the central conflicts of the story is wrapped around Eugene and Roy’s contentious relationship. But we are intended to accept that Eugene is a jerk and that the events to prove it have already happened. This suggests to me that these are the circumstances as they stand in the author’s own mind - it's already proven and there's no need to explore it comprehensively. Which would suggest to me that Eugene and Roy, at least partially, represent something meaningful to the author.

I’m not suggesting the author has daddy issues – nothing so trivial. This isn’t a TV movie or Dr. Phil – it’s rarely that simple.

They may represent real people or they may just represent a real conflict. Or nothing in reality at all - just something the author feels very strongly about. Or something else entirely. Maybe the author is making a comment on fatherhood that has no inspiration in reality. Maybe the author is stating that despite others' manipulation and deception, we still must strive to do what's right and not what's satisfying.

The point is, they represent something that is important to the author, either as a source of meaning or a source of tension. Because of this logic, Roy, and perhaps Eugene, are author surrogates - they are important in that they give voice, either verbally or symbolically, to the beliefs of the writer.


(BTW, is there only one writer? Or does Rich Burlew work with a team?)

[Jimorian]

Rich is the sole writer and artist. And as far as I'm concerned, he's proven that he could probably make a living as a "serious" practitioner of either art form.

[skim172]

Rich is the sole writer and artist. And as far as I'm concerned, he's proven that he could probably make a living as a "serious" practitioner of either art form.

Very, very impressive. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Seriously. Writing and drawing a comic like this and producing over one page a week? He could probably take over the world if he put his mind to it.

[Sarco_Phage]

Seriously. Writing and drawing a comic like this and producing over one page a week? He could probably take over the world if he put his mind to it.

I'd actually bet on Andrew Hussie for the whole "take-over-the-world" scheme, since he's both got the dedication of a pit bull and the malevolent mind to match.

[TheProfessor]

Rich Burlew vs Andrew Hussie in an epic duel for the universe FTW!

[Sholos]

I'd put my money on Pete Abrams. Man has produced one comic a day for the past 13 years last August. Well, mostly one-a-day.

[ThePhantasm]

It’s important to distinguish between a “Mary Sue” and an “author surrogate.” [. . .] Roy, and perhaps Eugene, are author surrogates - they are important in that they give voice, either verbally or symbolically, to the beliefs of the writer.

(BTW, is there only one writer? Or does Rich Burlew work with a team?)

(the following is partially, but not entirely, in response to you)

1) Straight man /= author surrogate.

2) You don't know Rich personally. As someone who hates modern literary criticism (i.e. "did Shakespeare really write this" and "was he mad as his mommy") I'd like to remind you all that you have nothing to go on.

3) It is a webcomic.

4) Everyone is using "Mary Sue" incorrectly. Proper definitions have been supplied. In response, those who clearly have no idea what it means have said "well, it can be used for anything nowadays." No it can't. Stop it.

5) This discussion was pointless and should have been over from the get go. There are no Mary Sues in the comic. If there are author surrogates, we don't know who they are.

[skim172]

(the following is partially, but not entirely, in response to you)

1) Straight man /= author surrogate.

2) You don't know Rich personally. As someone who hates modern literary criticism (i.e. "did Shakespeare really write this" and "was he mad as his mommy") I'd like to remind you all that you have nothing to go on.

3) It is a webcomic.

4) Everyone is using "Mary Sue" incorrectly. Proper definitions have been supplied. In response, those who clearly have no idea what it means have said "well, it can be used for anything nowadays." No it can't. Stop it.

5) This discussion was pointless and should have been over from the get go. There are no Mary Sues in the comic. If there are author surrogates, we don't know who they are.

1) An author surrogate has no personality restrictions. However, an author surrogate needs to be taken seriously when they express the author's beliefs. This is difficult if the character is the comic relief. In comedic mediums, an author surrogate is quite often the "straight man." I admit that the term can be used in different ways, so let me replace "straight man" with "comic foil," which I will narrowly define as a character not intended to be humorous who responds and often makes observations about the comedic character or situation.

2) No, I don't know the author, and I can't say I'm stating anything definitive. However, the intent of all artistic media is to express and convey a certain idea, emotion, or belief to the audience. By examining the art, you can gain an understanding of what this item is and the author's own perspective. This is not just the intent of modern literary criticism, but of all literary and artistic criticism, and it's something everyone does, to some extent, consciously or unconsciously, when we view art. Your references to the Shakespeare authorship question and Freudian analysis sound more like revisionism, which isn't exactly what I was going for.

3) Yes, it is.

Assuming you mean that webcomics lack the depth for author expression, I'd say every artwork expresses something, somehow. Even some kid spray-painting a curse word on a wall is a strong, if shallow, expression of anger.

4) Mary Sue, as defined by the wikipedia article linked to very early in this thread: in fan fiction, is a fictional character with overly idealized and hackneyed mannerisms, lacking noteworthy flaws, and primarily functioning as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author or reader. I'd note that the term "Mary Sue" isn't formal academically - it would be considered a form of author surrogacy. However, author surrogacy is not as narrowly defined as Mary Sue, so it is often just more concise to use the term when describing such an over-idealized character.

5) A valid viewpoint - there are academics who would agree with you that attempting to understand an author based on their writing is futile. I personally don't subscribe to that and neither do some of the others who've posted in this thread. We have different opinions and for me, it's interesting to listen to other views, as pointless as you may believe it to be. Let's agree to disagree.


I suppose you could argue that comic foil as I've used above is more accurately an audience surrogate. But I think an author would be likely to identify with such a character as well.

[Kish]

4) Mary Sue, as defined by the wikipedia article linked to very early in this thread: [I]in fan fiction,
By that definition it's impossible for there to be a Mary Sue in OotS, even if a character named Burlew Rich showed up and convinced Belkar, Xykon, and Tarquin to reform by simplistic, implausible moral arguments, because OotS is not fan fiction.

So, clearly, either that definition is utterly useless here or this thread should have been two posts long.

[skim172]

True, but then we'd be getting overly technical. We understand the intent of the original poster - is Haley an over-idealized representation of the author who functions as a wish-fulfillment fantasy. The term "Mary Sue" isn't exactly right because of the context, but I'm sure we know what the original poster means.

Which is why I added "so it is often just more concise to use the term when describing such an over-idealized character." :smallsmile:

[Sarco_Phage]

True, but then we'd be getting overly technical. We understand the intent of the original poster - is Haley an over-idealized representation of the author who functions as a wish-fulfillment fantasy.

Wait

Are we suggesting that Rich Burlew wants to be an attractive redheaded woman with trust issues?

Because I think that's what we're suggesting here, and it's weird.

[Mystic Muse]

Wait

Are we suggesting that Rich Burlew wants to be an attractive redheaded woman with trust issues?

Because I think that's what we're suggesting here, and it's weird.

If that's the weirdest theory you read on this forum, consider yourself lucky.

[Eric Tolle]

Wait

Are we suggesting that Rich Burlew wants to be an attractive redheaded woman with trust issues?

Because I think that's what we're suggesting here, and it's weird.

Yeah, who do we think he is, Robert Heinlein?

[G-Man Graves]

Yeah, who do we think he is, Robert Heinlein?

Ba-dum tish.