How can I create more believable characters?

[a dreamy walker]

I have a problem: I don't think I can create believable characters as I've got this idea in my head that I have to temporarily think as a character whilst writing, in order to make said character believable.

Has anyone got any ideas or advice on how to make a believable character? (I also have problems giving characters appropriate flaws)

 

[BWFoster78]

First of all, reveal the character to the reader through the characters actions. Don't try to tell us about the character. If you want to say the character is mean, don't write "Joe is mean." Instead, show Joe bullying a young child.

Second, make the character's actions believable.

 

[Butterfly]

I think you first need to get to know them. So just write about them, put them in scenarios, see how they react, how they interact with other characters. It doesn't have to be stuff to use in your actual story. Just explore their backgrounds for a while, make lists of traits, fears, goals, link them to other characters. Ask questions of them, see how they answer.

And read a few blogs to get more ideas of what to try regarding characterisation. A couple for you, there are loads of others out there.

Omnivoracious: She's No Mary Sue: Creating Characters People Care About

This Itch of Writing: Clothes and food and dropping presents

 

[MystiqueRain]

Advice that I can give:

1) Don't make them perfect at everything. For example, most people know an Olympic runner is physically strong with good stamina. However, that doesn't mean they're also good at cooking, drawing, writing, etc. or that they're nice, kind, optimistic, *insert several good traits here*. Just because a person is admired doesn't mean they respect others or treat them the way they want to be treated. Famous actors can be grumpy, pessimistic, irritating, things like that. So pick a few good traits that your character will have, and don't add anything more.

2) Flaws don't have to be fatal flaws. Many fantasy books stress the idea of having a "fatal flaw" for a character, whether it be pride, greed, and others. While this could be a good way to set down why your character does what they do, sometimes fatal flaws aren't believable at all (Superman and kryptonite, choosing a random object to be their weakness). When this happens you choose normal things that perhaps are flaws of yourself or people around you. Perhaps you're a procrastinator and lazy, or maybe you're bossy and likes things done your own way all the time. Choose flaws that are everyday, normal traits that the person sitting right next to you could have.

3) Resist the Mary-Sue temptation. Everyone wants to be a person that can do anything and be perfect at anything. You want to be the most attractive, the smartest, the most athletic, the most creative, the best whatever. Don't fall into this pit when writing characters. Number one, readers can spot one immediately and criticism isn't just light comments for Mary-Sues. Number two, you'll end up trying to project your own perfect image onto the character or end up getting tired of writing perfect this, perfect that, perfect everything. And lastly, they aren't believable. Nobody is perfect.

4) Find relations with real-life. Make a character that people can relate to. Even if they're a king or queen, a peasant or serf, make them have the traits you see in everyday life. Not all kings are regal, royal beings that are above others in every single way and look down upon us as if we were ants. They have their own problems to deal with, their own brains that function. Relations can be easy as well. Maybe your character likes a type of food, say, pizza. Maybe they enjoy a hobby in their free time. Believable characters do things that we normally would do, such as getting annoyed if woken up too early or snapping at people if going through a hard time.

Hope this helps!

 

[ShortHair]

A great way to learn is to watch how others do the same thing. Think of a memorable character from a book or movie. What makes you remember that character? That's not the same thing as what makes you recognize the character, although the two can overlap.

Example: You recognize Darth Vader because he's a tall dark stranger, but you remember him because he's utterly ruthless. The tallness and the darkness help reinforce the ruthlessness. Sort of a one-note player, actually.

A much better example is Frodo Baggins. At first he's much like you or me, even a bit childish. Then he finds out he's inherited a weapon of mass destruction. He has to give up his comfortable existence and dare to save the world. Every time he thinks he's dug into himself as deeply as he can, something even worse happens.

This may not work for everyone, but I think of my characters as ordinary people who find themselves in extraordinary situations. As John Lennon said, "Life is what happens while you're making other plans." Gandalf was going to do some work on the deck, have a beer, and catch a Knicks game. Then he got a call from Saruman, and his weekend went to hell. What would your characters rather be doing? How do they feel about that? Do they handle stress easily? If not, how do they express their discomfort and displeasure? Crafting a story means putting characters into conflict. Stress them out, see how far you can bend them before they break.

 

[Anders Ämting]

3) Resist the Mary-Sue temptation. Everyone wants to be a person that can do anything and be perfect at anything. You want to be the most attractive, the smartest, the most athletic, the most creative, the best whatever. Don't fall into this pit when writing characters. Number one, readers can spot one immediately and criticism isn't just light comments for Mary-Sues. Number two, you'll end up trying to project your own perfect image onto the character or end up getting tired of writing perfect this, perfect that, perfect everything. And lastly, they aren't believable. Nobody is perfect.

I'd just like to jump in here and point out - nay, stress - that "Mary Sue" does not actually mean "best at everything."

A Mary Sue is specifically a blatant wish-fullfillment vehicle for the author. They are generally not perfect but rather idealized, which is not quite the same thing.

Basically, the Mary Sue is treated in the context of the story the way the author wants to be treated in real life. A Mary Sue can have flaws, in fact they may have all character flaws the author has - it's just that everyone Mary Sue interacts with tend to be very understanding and forgiving about them, often to ludicrous levels.

No, Mary Sue isn't a jerk, she's just misunderstood. Mary Sue isn't disproportionally vendictive, she's just giving the bullies what they deserve. Mary Sue isn't a total weirdo with antisocial tendencies, she's delightfully quirky with a rebellious streak. Etc, etc.

A Mary Sue isn't so much good at everything as she is good at anything the author would like to be good at. (Or doesn't like being bad at.) She will own stuff the author would like to own, acts in the way the author would like to act, expresses opinions the author would like to express, and earns the level of respect the author would like his or her actions and opinions to earn. Mary Sue is practically never wrong but more importantly, anyone who disagrees with her exist mainly to prove exactly why Mary Sue is not wrong about that particular issue. Mary Sue is friends and/or in a romantic/sexual relationship with the type of people the author would like to be friends and/or romantically/sexually involved with. And no matter how outrageous she is, everyone likes Mary Sue except for strawmen antagonists who will ultimately be proven wrong and taught a lesson. Even if -or rather especially if- non of these things really make sense and come off as ridiculous and ham-fisted to the readers.

I'm sorry for going off on a rant with this, but it's sort of a pet peeve for me. Because a lot of people misunderstand this and thinks "Mary Sue" just means a character who is good at everything, I often see perfectly decent, well-written characters being accused of Mary Sueness just because they happen to be talented in multiple fields, or sometimes just really good at one thing. It's frustrating, because it means you can't write legitimately impressive characters without someone yelling Mary Sue.

 

[yachtcaptcolby]

One thing that helped me was to only write one character at a time. My novel has several different points of view; I worked with just one at a time, writing all of the scenes that use that character's point-of-view before moving on to a different character and doing the same. That really helped my characters seem like different people--as they should be.

 

[MystiqueRain]

I'm sorry for going off on a rant with this, but it's sort of a pet peeve for me. Because a lot of people misunderstand this and thinks "Mary Sue" just means a character who is good at everything, I often see perfectly decent, well-written characters being accused of Mary Sueness just because they happen to be talented in multiple fields, or sometimes just really good at one thing. It's frustrating, because it means you can't write legitimately impressive characters without someone yelling Mary Sue.

Oh, not that's perfectly understandable. And yes, I do agree, Mary-Sues are most often "idealized" images of who the author wants to be. That's why I talked about projecting your perfect self onto the sheet--what you believe is perfect isn't what others believe is perfect, that sort of thing.

I've faced the same problem as well. One of my characters just happens to have many skills because he's been fending for himself since he was a child (skills that include cooking and things like that). But others think he's "Gary Stu" because he's good at so many things and doesn't have a definite fatal flaw.

So Mary-Sues are perfect in the aspect that whatever they can't do isn't exploited by the author.

 

[The Dark One]

OK...I never sit down and think to myself: how can I make these characters believable? But analysing the way I write them, I can think of a few themes:

- my leading character wants something (or has something) that others want
- may well lose that something for a while
- makes errors or jumps to wrong conclusions early in the story (therefore has setbacks)
- is typically very individual in the way they think/express themselves

But the main thing is that I really immerse myself in the story. I live the story. I become the character as they deal with situations and/or possible situations and eventually that flows out onto the page.

In the end, it's not for me to say whether they're believable, but I believe them.

 

[gavintonks]

sketch the character and make a character sheet
gibe them clothing details personality etc etc etc and then refer to the character through the pov eyes based on your character sheet

 

[CupofJoe]

A great way to learn is to watch how others do the same thing. Think of a memorable character from a book or movie. What makes you remember that character? That's not the same thing as what makes you recognize the character, although the two can overlap.

I learnt a twist on this method... If you want a silent warrior Clint Eastwood style character then watch a couple Clint Eastwood movies and base your character on CW... not everything of course but you have a framework to start with...
You can use 2-3 people to give the mix you need.
I will admit that I have used this method for trial pieces.

 

[Helen]

I have a problem: I don't think I can create believable characters as I've got this idea in my head that I have to temporarily think as a character whilst writing, in order to make said character believable.

Has anyone got any ideas or advice on how to make a believable character? (I also have problems giving characters appropriate flaws)

There's a theory that everything we do, EVERYTHING is status based. Even in the most banal conversations, even to people we don't know who momentarily cross us as we walk along the street, we're trying to convey status based messages.

Now this works in acting, where you're trying to impro believable characters: each individual is always trying to get one over the other in some slight or not so slight way. Even heroes.

 

[wordwalker]

One way: define the core of someone around their goal-- and a second goal.

Show that he has ties or hopes or obligations to something besides the central plot-- if he's trying to make a name as a musician, give him a girl who's only impressed by fighters or a brother who always needs a hand in the vet clinic. And if he spends most of the story busy saving the world, give him something else that he wants to save too, maybe not more than the world but enough to slow down enough to save both, like proving it isn't his father's fault the world is in danger. Real live is all about prioritizing goals, so good characters should have to do some of the same.

And then, keep juggling both goals for him. Keep him hoping he doesn't have to choose between them, at least not permanently, and keep changing which looks more worthy than the other.

 

[gavintonks]

I had a thought people do not create an emotional iq of their character so that when something happens their response is true to their character
you see it often in new pieces where the heroine who has just slaughtered 300 trolls etc gets a fright because someone says boo
the one thing that sets characters apart are the emotions and this goes to the words they will use as well and how they react in a scene