How to avoid meeting Mary Sue

[Tonstad39]

<p>


Mary sues, Gary sues arguably the most petty form of godmodding. A Mary/Gary sue describes a character who is too perfect and/or overpowered. Roleplays, like any other text is supposed to convey the human condition in some way shape or form. let's face it, it's easy to fantasize about a girl in a high school RP who is popular, talented and gets her partner out of any given situation or a demigod in a fantasy RP to with powers so incredible that it kills anyone who fights him. As humans we are imperfect, but it's just so hard to write a character who IS perfect, but how exactly do we fight such an urge? Imma give you some ideas 1. If your character is supposed to be popular and/or famous, have them abuse her popularity for their whims. Makes a good villain Y'know. 2. If your character is smart/intelligent, have them be scared of public speaking so they're in some way insecure about his advice. 3. If your character is supposed to be powerful, try to have it so that moves/tasks take a while to concentrate energy for or that it's physically draining when power is used. I hope I've helped


</p>

 

[Ammokkx]

I don't think this short guide is going to reach anyone that makes characters like that, though. I also feel this is a bit too... simple. There's a lot more ways you can write a flaw to a boon, and I don't think you've demonstrated that well enough in this short guide.


In the case of the first point, for example, you could also just as well give the character a fear of losing their popularity. Or reveal down the line their popularity is derived from something material, not their actual personality and they have no actual friends.


I feel if this guide is going to help people avoid the gary's and the mary's, it's going to need a bit more refinement. And maybe also some way to make people that are guilty of this notice it.


EDIT: I honest to god thought, on first glance, this was going to be a guide on how to spot players that had mary sues and how to avoid them. No joke.

 

[Idea]

I don't think this short guide is going to reach anyone that makes characters like that, though. I also feel this is a bit too... simple. There's a lot more ways you can write a flaw to a boon, and I don't think you've demonstrated that well enough in this short guide.
In the case of the first point, for example, you could also just as well give the character a fear of losing their popularity. Or reveal down the line their popularity is derived from something material, not their actual personality and they have no actual friends.


I feel if this guide is going to help people avoid the gary's and the mary's, it's going to need a bit more refinement. And maybe also some way to make people that are guilty of this notice it.


EDIT: I honest to god thought, on first glance, this was going to be a guide on how to spot players that had mary sues and how to avoid them. No joke.

Thought that too, by the way

Mary sues, Gary sues arguably the most petty form of godmodding.
A Mary/Gary sue describes a character who is too perfect and/or overpowered. Roleplays, like any other text is supposed to convey the human condition in some way shape or form.


let's face it, it's easy to fantasize about a girl in a high school RP who is popular, talented and gets her partner out of any given situation or a demigod in a fantasy RP to with powers so incredible that it kills anyone who fights him. As humans we are imperfect, but it's just so hard to write a character who IS perfect, but how exactly do we fight such an urge?


Imma give you some ideas


1. If your character is supposed to be popular and/or famous, have them abuse her popularity for their whims. Makes a good villain Y'know.


2. If your character is smart/intelligent, have them be scared of public speaking so they're in some way insecure about his advice.


3. If your character is supposed to be powerful, try to have it so that moves/tasks take a while to concentrate energy for or that it's physically draining when power is used.


I hope I've helped

Note: To me a Mary Sue is only when a character's personality is flawless or they are capable of solving any problem too easily. I will write the rest on that mindset. However, the things I will write also apply to the definition you've given:


@Tonstad39 , without wanting to sound prententious, the solutions you offered here are a little naive. I am not saying that because it won't reach anyone who makes the mistake: there is no guarantee of that, and besides, this kind of things are attempts and one more step towards actually reaching those people and helping them improve. They don't have to be one-time miracle solutions.


What I am saying though is that you offered three solutions to very, very, veeeery specific problems. I would consider myself lucky if the Mary Sues you described were anywhere close to all the Mary Sues that can be found. If nothing else, the easier ones to repair are the more obvious ones. The real problem, and the problem which a GM can't just kick off with ease is what I like to call "a fake flaw Mary Sue".


There are two types of these: one of them is the ones were they can have the flaws , but they don't act them out in RP. For example, a Mary Sue who is given the flaw of public speeches ,but in RP they just start off picking up a microphone and telling everyone about he proof of the incoming catastrophe.


The second type is the Mary Sue with outright fake flaws. For example people who are "too nice". Being "too nice" isn't a flaw because the problems aren't caused by you, but by however is exploring your kindness. Another case would be " the characters a coward and shy but will stand up for his beliefs and for this she cares about". This is fake because in every situation that matters, they have a 180 shift.


And to Those who read this and think "wait, those aren't Mary Sues!" You probably just found out why these are so much more dangerous than the obvious ones: Mary Sues are like the weeds on an RP. The more obvious and bigger ones could cause more damage but they are easy to identify and will generally be plucked out right away. But the hidden ones will stay there and gradually choke the RP to death, while you watch confused and helpless.

 

[Ammokkx]

Note: To me a Mary Sue is only when a character's personality is flawless or they are capable of solving any problem too easily. I will write the rest on that mindset. However, the things I will write also apply to the definition you've given:


@Tonstad39 , without wanting to sound prententious, the solutions you offered here are a little naive. I am not saying that because it won't reach anyone who makes the mistake: there is no guarantee of that, and besides, this kind of things are attempts and one more step towards actually reaching those people and helping them improve. They don't have to be one-time miracle solutions.


What I am saying though is that you offered three solutions to very, very, veeeery specific problems. I would consider myself lucky if the Mary Sues you described were anywhere close to all the Mary Sues that can be found. If nothing else, the easier ones to repair are the more obvious ones. The real problem, and the problem which a GM can't just kick off with ease is what I like to call "a fake flaw Mary Sue".


There are two types of these: one of them is the ones were they can have the flaws , but they don't act them out in RP. For example, a Mary Sue who is given the flaw of public speeches ,but in RP they just start off picking up a microphone and telling everyone about he proof of the incoming catastrophe.


The second type is the Mary Sue with outright fake flaws. For example people who are "too nice". Being "too nice" isn't a flaw because the problems aren't caused by you, but by however is exploring your kindness. Another case would be " the characters a coward and shy but will stand up for his beliefs and for this she cares about". This is fake because in every situation that matters, they have a 180 shift.


And to Those who read this and think "wait, those aren't Mary Sues!" You probably just found out why these are so much more dangerous than the obvious ones: Mary Sues are like the weeds on an RP. The more obvious and bigger ones could cause more damage but they are easy to identify and will generally be plucked out right away. But the hidden ones will stay there and gradually choke the RP to death, while you watch confused and helpless.

Damn, after that first argument we had about character sheets I didn't think we were going to agree on something.


This is basically both a more detailed version of what I tried to say, and a straight step-up from what I tried to convey.

 

[Idea]

Damn, after that first argument we had about character sheets I didn't think we were going to agree on something.
This is basically both a more detailed version of what I tried to say, and a straight step-up from what I tried to convey.

I am one of those people taht just has a knack for being argumentative and for having an opinion on everything. You probably already got this, but I hate leaving things on a "everyone gets an opinion" basis only.


Anyway, I thank you for your compliments and hope we agree on more things in the future!

 

[Mishka]

Another case would be " the characters a coward and shy but will stand up for his beliefs and for this she cares about". This is fake because in every situation that matters, they have a 180 shift.

In an effort to battle this, I have seen GMs and site owners basically put a ban on the word "sometimes" in the personality section. That way someone can't say "my character is very naive sometimes, but they know when someone is trying to trick them". I think it's pretty effective when it comes to assuring consistently played characters.

 

[Tonstad39]

Basically I was too simple for a tutorial and should have opened it up to other solutions. I thought it was too simple myself before posting, but at the same time I dodn't want to bore readers with details and seas of paragraphs, now I know that readers crave as many intimate details as possible.

 

[call me rae]

Well I think the thing to remember with any kind of character is this ...


1. make sure they fit the roleplay


2. make sure they allow for the story to progress as is intended in the plot.


3. take constructive criticism into consideration.


If you can check all these three things than your most likely fine.


To be honest I think people give Mary Sue's a bad rap. Hell literally every comic book character ever made and a good many of the protagonists in YA or anime are all one form of abominable Mary Sue or another. Does that necessarily make them all horrible characters? No.


Any character can be good or bad. It's all in the execution. So when you make a character remember those three tips.


Ask yourself - does this character fit in with the rest of the characters in the rp OR with the rp setting in general?


Did I have to ask the GM to make adjustments specifically so my character could fit? If the answer is yes than you probably need to look at your character pitch again.


Second ask yourself - does this character contribute to the over-all plot or progression of the story?


Did I make this character just to "win" the roleplay or "be the hero" - ie. fix the problem of the roleplay? If the answer to either of those questions is yes than again take a look at your character pitch.


Last but not least don't be afraid to listen to people when they give constructive criticism. No one character is perfect and sometimes other people will see a flaw in your character you weren't even aware was there.

 

[Idea]

In an effort to battle this, I have seen GMs and site owners basically put a ban on the word "sometimes" in personality section. That way someone can't say "my character is very naive sometimes, but they know when someone is trying to trick them". I think it's pretty effective when it comes to assuring consistently played characters.

That seems like an idea, I agree. I think it's fine as long as the person makes a clear statement about what could trigger one reaction or the other. For example, if the character has a soft side for flowers, they could become very kind and patient around flowers. But if they saw flowers getting destroyed they could be even worse than usual.


Just leaving it in the air is what I object. Of course, soemtimes players may feel like the GM is playing favorites, so I suppose a more general ban like the one you mentioned is a somewhat functional solution.

 

[Idea]

Basically I was too simple for a tutorial and should have opened it up to other solutions. I thought it was too simple myself before posting, but at the same time I dodn't want to bore readers with details and seas of paragraphs, now I know that readers crave as many intimate details as possible.

Meh, I know what you mean. I always make mine gigantic and I get like 0 comments (except the one time I made the whole thing in sarcasm, hehe...).

 

[Tonstad39]

Thought that too, by the way
Note: To me a Mary Sue is only when a character's personality is flawless or they are capable of solving any problem too easily. I will write the rest on that mindset. However, the things I will write also apply to the definition you've given:


@Tonstad39 , without wanting to sound prententious, the solutions you offered here are a little naive. I am not saying that because it won't reach anyone who makes the mistake: there is no guarantee of that, and besides, this kind of things are attempts and one more step towards actually reaching those people and helping them improve. They don't have to be one-time miracle solutions.


What I am saying though is that you offered three solutions to very, very, veeeery specific problems. I would consider myself lucky if the Mary Sues you described were anywhere close to all the Mary Sues that can be found. If nothing else, the easier ones to repair are the more obvious ones. The real problem, and the problem which a GM can't just kick off with ease is what I like to call "a fake flaw Mary Sue".


There are two types of these: one of them is the ones were they can have the flaws , but they don't act them out in RP. For example, a Mary Sue who is given the flaw of public speeches ,but in RP they just start off picking up a microphone and telling everyone about he proof of the incoming catastrophe.


The second type is the Mary Sue with outright fake flaws. For example people who are "too nice". Being "too nice" isn't a flaw because the problems aren't caused by you, but by however is exploring your kindness. Another case would be " the characters a coward and shy but will stand up for his beliefs and for this she cares about". This is fake because in every situation that matters, they have a 180 shift.


And to Those who read this and think "wait, those aren't Mary Sues!" You probably just found out why these are so much more dangerous than the obvious ones: Mary Sues are like the weeds on an RP. The more obvious and bigger ones could cause more damage but they are easy to identify and will generally be plucked out right away. But the hidden ones will stay there and gradually choke the RP to death, while you watch confused and helpless.

The 180 shift that you talk about (in my oppinion at least) isn't Mary sue, that is just inconsistant character design

Meh, I know what you mean. I always make mine gigantic and I get like 0 comments (except the one time I made the whole thing in sarcasm, hehe...).

yeah, your writing a roleplay not a book to get published!

 

[Tonstad39]

I'm a casual RPer, what's a "GM" it'll help me understand the post much better

 

[Idea]

Well I think the thing to remember with any kind of character is this ...
1. make sure they fit the roleplay


2. make sure they allow for the story to progress as is intended in the plot.


3. take constructive criticism into consideration.


If you can check all these three things than your most likely fine.


To be honest I think people give Mary Sue's a bad rap. Hell literally every comic book character ever made and a good many of the protagonists in YA or anime are all one form of abominable Mary Sue or another. Does that necessarily make them all horrible characters? No.


Any character can be good or bad. It's all in the execution. So when you make a character remember those three tips.


Ask yourself - does this character fit in with the rest of the characters in the rp OR with the rp setting in general?


Did I have to ask the GM to make adjustments specifically so my character could fit? If the answer is yes than you probably need to look at your character pitch again.


Second ask yourself - does this character contribute to the over-all plot or progression of the story?


Did I make this character just to "win" the roleplay or "be the hero" - ie. fix the problem of the roleplay? If the answer to either of those questions is yes than again take a look at your character pitch.


Last but not least don't be afraid to listen to people when they give constructive criticism. No one character is perfect and sometimes other people will see a flaw in your character you weren't even aware was there.

If I any, I would like to turn the question around: is a horrible character unplayable?


I am sure your own experience can back this up, but but great characters can be roleplayed horribly and the opposite is also true. There is no direct correlation between good characters and good execution and the only relation there is is one of likelihood, but I'll get there later. for now, what I'm trying to point is just because soemthing can be executed right , that has no impact on it's own quality.


So, what does? My answer would be whether or not the character promotes ease of roleplaying it (in general , not specific players), and whether or not they promote the development and growth of not just themselves, but the plot, world and other characters around them.


That said, are Mary Sues horrible characters? Yes. Can they be executed right? Yes, though usually by making them cease to be Mary Sues in one way or the other.


And here is where the probability relation thing comes in: while a good character and good execution are not necessarily related, it is more likely that a player that makes a better character will also have put more thought into it, and thus will be more invested in the Roleplay. If they are more invested, then they will most likely provide a better execution and quite likely even a better roleplaying experience and partnership.


As you yourself said, there is nothing wrong with constructive criticism, and while some just complain and complain, Others will actually try to provide the fixing points or even some alternatives for solutions. Thus, yeah Mary Sues are given a hard time, but they are bad characters by definition. They are the point of the iceberg of a bigger problem, but in the end, pointing out every single issue would be useless if not impossible. And thus, Mary Sues, being what they are get this special, representative attention.

 

[Idea]

The 180 shift that you talk about (in my oppinion at least) isn't Mary sue, that is just inconsistant character design
yeah, your writing a roleplay not a book to get published!

I mentioned the 180 shift in the context of it being used to turn a flaw nonexistent alright at the point where it actually matters. Thus in pratice the fake wouldn't be a flaw at all, which would make it a Mary Sue.


I wasn't writing a Roleplay, I was writing a tutorial. And I often present somewhat controversial or at least uncommon ideas , so I really need to explain myself in quite some detail. I also believe taht teaching a man who to fish is Better than just giving them a fish. Giving people my thought process and explaining each of the steps is soemthing I think helpful should the people who read it come to face unexpected circumstances where the knowledge there can be applied but using the thought process and not the immediate conclusions.

 

[Idea]

I'm a casual RPer, what's a "GM" it'll help me understand the post much better

@nerdyfangirl or @Grey I think one of you could help me explain? I' m afraid I'll word it wrong

 

[call me rae]

@Idea I am unsure what your trying to say. I wasn't arguing with anyone about quality I was just offering some tips on how to make sure your character is at least on the right track to being a good addition to the story.

 

[call me rae]

I'm a casual RPer, what's a "GM" it'll help me understand the post much better

A GM is the person who runs the thread. It means Game Master and my understanding is the term came from D&D.


So when people say - The GM does this or that - all they're saying is that the person who runs the roleplay did this or that.

 

[Idea]

@Idea I am unsure what your trying to say. I wasn't arguing with anyone about quality I was just offering some tips on how to make sure your character is at least on the right track to being a good addition to the story.

I know, but you know me (or I hope you have some vague idea by now)... If I see soemthing I believe to be just wrong, whoever's stating it or for whatever purpose, I will say something about it. And of course, explain why I disagree.

 

[Idea]

A GM is the person who runs the thread. It means Game Master and my understanding is the term came from D&D.
So when people say - The GM does this or that - all they're saying is that the person who runs the roleplay did this or that.

Thanks for the help mate

 

[call me rae]

I know, but you know me (or I hope you have some vague idea by now)... If I see soemthing I believe to be just wrong, whoever's stating it or for whatever purpose, I will say something about it. And of course, explain why I disagree.

I guess I'm still not understanding what you thought was wrong exactly. Like the way you worded it sounded like you agreed but it started out like you disagreed so I was just unclear in general where you were going with that.


Because really all I was saying is - just make sure your character fits the story, contributes to the plot, and don't be afraid to accept other people's advice if they see something wrong.


I was unclear exactly what you were disagreeing with in that.

 

[Idea]

I guess I'm still not understanding what you thought was wrong exactly. Like the way you worded it sounded like you agreed but it started out like you disagreed so I was just unclear in general where you were going with that.
Because really all I was saying is - just make sure your character fits the story, contributes to the plot, and don't be afraid to accept other people's advice if they see something wrong.


I was unclear exactly what you were disagreeing with in that.

I wasn't disagreeing with your general message, just a statement you made amidst that message (I can't make a specific quote for it right now, sorry...), the one were you said that Mary Sues were having "a bad rap" and we're not necessarily horrible characters. With that last part I disagreed vehemently and explained why.

 

[call me rae]

I wasn't disagreeing with your general message, just a statement you made amidst that message (I can't make a specific quote for it right now, sorry...), the one were you said that Mary Sues were having "a bad rap" and we're not necessarily horrible characters. With that last part I disagreed vehemently and explained why.

Ah to clarify I meant that the execution is what makes a character wrong. And Mary Sue's are typically bad because of the way they are executed. You could take the individual formula for most ( not all but most ) and give it to someone who knows how to play that style of character correctly and you would get at least a decent character out of it.


To use an example - Superman.


He is and always was a Mary Sue. The people who created him blatantly admitted that.


But does that mean he's a poor character ( in comics or rps ) not necessarily.


But you have to know how to play him well to avoid falling into the pitfall of making him this god-being special snowflake monstrosity.


Hence in his case it's in the execution not necessarily in the character.


Now to clarify I'm not talking about every Mary Sue character or even trope. Some are genuinely just badly written and no amount of effort in the execution is going to change that. But that could be true of literally any kind of character not just a Mary Sue.


My issue is more or less that people think all characters that fall under a Mary Sue trope are inherently bad.


Ex. the "perfect flawless character whom everyone loves"


That is a poorly developed character and a definite Mary Sue. But if you execute her right she can be loads of fun.


I typically do this by the simple fact of making the character egocentric and semi-delusional about their many attributes.


Does that make the character less annoying - not really.


But it does at least make it more realistic and playable. Because it's less like I'm asking everyone to treat this flawless creation like a gift from god. And more like I'm asking them to be in on the joke I'm playing at my character's expense.


Now that's obviously just one specific example from someone who has been roleplaying for a long time.


And even then it's a tricky thing to get right. I mean if you can avoid making your characters too broad or stereotypical it's probably better.


But I'm just saying for the people who happen to like the broad or stereotypical type of character. There is a a way to do these characters at least semi-well as long as you work at it.

 

[Idea]

Ah to clarify I meant that the execution is what makes a character wrong. And Mary Sue's are typically bad because of the way they are executed. You could take the individual formula for most ( not all but most ) and give it to someone who knows how to play that style of character correctly and you would get at least a decent character out of it.
To use an example - Superman.


He is and always was a Mary Sue. The people who created him blatantly admitted that.


But does that mean he's a poor character ( in comics or rps ) not necessarily.


But you have to know how to play him well to avoid falling into the pitfall of making him this god-being special snowflake monstrosity.


Hence in his case it's in the execution not necessarily in the character.


Now to clarify I'm not talking about every Mary Sue character or even trope. Some are genuinely just badly written and no amount of effort in the execution is going to change that. But that could be true of literally any kind of character not just a Mary Sue.


My issue is more or less that people think all characters that fall under a Mary Sue trope are inherently bad.


Ex. the "perfect flawless character whom everyone loves"


That is a poorly developed character and a definite Mary Sue. But if you execute her right she can be loads of fun.


I typically do this by the simple fact of making the character egocentric and semi-delusional about their many attributes.


Does that make the character less annoying - not really.


But it does at least make it more realistic and playable. Because it's less like I'm asking everyone to treat this flawless creation like a gift from god. And more like I'm asking them to be in on the joke I'm playing at my character's expense.


Now that's obviously just one specific example from someone who has been roleplaying for a long time.


And even then it's a tricky thing to get right. I mean if you can avoid making your characters too broad or stereotypically it's probably better.


But I'm just saying for the people who happen to like the broad or stereotypical type of character. There is a a way to do these characters at least semi-well as long as you work at it.

Well, that was an aspect I was also disagreeing on- I believe I made this point several times, but execution and character quality don't correspond to one another because their variation is not equivalent. If one character is better constructed than another that doesn't imply necessarily that the character will be better executed.


Hence, I conceded that any character , better or worse, is playable, as they can be better or worse executed. However, regardless of how well or poorly, a bad character is a bad character and a good one is a good one. Then I gave the criteria that I think is better fit to determine whether a character is good or bad.

 

[call me rae]

Well, that was an aspect I was also disagreeing on- I believe I made this point several times, but execution and character quality don't correspond to one another because their variation is not equivalent. If one character is better constructed than another that doesn't imply necessarily that the character will be better executed.
Hence, I conceded that any character , better or worse, is playable, as they can be better or worse executed. However, regardless of how well or poorly, a bad character is a bad character and a good one is a good one. Then I gave the criteria that I think is better fit to determine whether a character is good or bad.

And I think the problem is that you argued semantics so much in your reply that I didn't really understand anything other than you were trying to maybe explain something about execution. But it was kind of muddled together to be honest.


If you could perhaps give a specific example of what you consider to be a bad character?

 

[Idea]

And I think the problem is that you argued semantics so much in your reply that I didn't really understand anything other than you were trying to maybe explain something about execution. But it was kind of muddled together to be honest.
If you could perhaps give a specific example of what you consider to be a bad character?

Hmmmm....well, if I were to give an example that represented the peak of what I consider bad, that would be the "isolationist kindhearted badass" type of character.


It's a type of character characterized by having a personality that just hammers you about how misunderstood and how kind they are, but have this impossibly isolationist attitude and demeanor, then on top of all exclaims how they are actually the smartest, most powerful person on the planet. Usually come with the classical over dramatic background .


This, of course, will look like an exaggerated example (not that I haven't seen it), but I think it should be helpful in understanding where I stand.


Right away, you see that this character kills all standard forms of conflict, having no it's one room for growth forcing contrivencies on the plot and other characters. They have no bridge to interact with anyone else , and in fact are repellent of such interaction. They can easily kill the plot by solving more or less any problems with ease, stealing the spotlight in any scene, and then preventing anyone from coming close.


Functionally speaking, these characters are a complete disgrace. I am sure there are people who could pull off eve this type of character if they set their minds to it. But it's a really high bar these characters set right from the getgo and odds are, most will not be able to pull it off, especially if you clearly made this type of character without self-awareness regarding what you're getting into.


That to me is what a bad character is. It's a character that by itself makes your experience and RPing them properly without killing he RP much more complicated. It's a character that sets the bar of skill and effort necessary to accomplish even a decent presence in RP with that character too high for most to reach.


Clearer now?