AOSS
New Member
I've had some standard knowledge about this part of storytelling, but I want to see other people's point of views on this topic.
Literature What do you think makes a great Protagonist and Antagonist?
- Thread starter AOSS
- Start date
AOSS
New Member
To me, The best protagonists are the ones that have all the disadvantages but still come on top in the end. I could add way more context, but I'm too lazy.
catharsis.
revelling in release
The best protagonists are flawed protagonists.
My favorite moments of development are when the hero fucks up. And it's on them. Not some outside influence, not some scapegoat villain. It's truly, no matter what, at the fault of the hero. They messed up, and they see the consequences of it, and they grow from it.
If a character never makes a mistake and owns up to it/is never shown the reality of their action's consequences, that's boring and I don't like your character (unless they're Jesus or something).
My favorite moments of development are when the hero fucks up. And it's on them. Not some outside influence, not some scapegoat villain. It's truly, no matter what, at the fault of the hero. They messed up, and they see the consequences of it, and they grow from it.
If a character never makes a mistake and owns up to it/is never shown the reality of their action's consequences, that's boring and I don't like your character (unless they're Jesus or something).
I think the best protagonists are flawed. They're selfish, greedy, irritable, and they come out on top by using their flaws to grow. And the best antagonists have backstories and motivations. Good motivations and backstories. No unreasonable biases like Voldemort's 'EWWWW MUGGLES!' (He is cool though).
Kaidu
the freebird.
Best protagonists are the believable ones. They would have reasons and ends, weak and strong points. They would have their own personality and their own past. Dreams and such. This also goes for antagonist.
Emotional Enigma
Empathetic Empress
Flaws and the propensity to empathize
Malphaestus
Touched by the Apocalypse
Unlike many fiction writers, I believe that an ideal character has to be disassociated from the person reading it. To be their own entity, and not carry some sort of characteristic that immediately grants them favour from the reader, artificially making them 'better.'
This is hard, of course. Perhaps even impossible objectively, on the macro-scale. But I find it applies to me, anyway. As for what comes after, the typical 'hero of a thousand faces' process.
This is hard, of course. Perhaps even impossible objectively, on the macro-scale. But I find it applies to me, anyway. As for what comes after, the typical 'hero of a thousand faces' process.
Crocmon
Pop-punk n' space magic. Not always in that order.
It REALLY depends on the kind of story, to me. In DnD, I'm an absolute sucker for villains that just are evil. If they aren't evil, antagonists that don't have some tragic backstory that makes them antagonists is wildly engaging to me. Gimme Lorne Malvo, and how he just does whatever the Hell he wants. Or, give me Thrawn: he's an antagonist but he isn't constantly evil. Thrawn is just doing what he has to do in order to get a leg up on the protagonists.
As far as protagonists go, I believe they should be whole people in themselves. The idea that a reader needs to put themselves in their shoes is somewhat silly to me, because a reader is going to do it no matter what happens. The author should not be going out of their way to make that happen at the cost of the character's integrity. As well, characters shouldn't have absolutely catastrophic failures all the time.
However, each side has to match. You wouldn't put Admiral Thrawn against a group of plucky teenagers unless you want all of their victories to feel hollow; a character with the levels of intensity Thrawn brings around should not be dealing with protagonists who genuinely employ the Power of Friendship unless you want the story to be almost comical in how the Power of Friendship trumps a character who seeks to "rip apart this Rebellion piece by piece" and has the intellect to do so with horrifying efficiency.
As far as protagonists go, I believe they should be whole people in themselves. The idea that a reader needs to put themselves in their shoes is somewhat silly to me, because a reader is going to do it no matter what happens. The author should not be going out of their way to make that happen at the cost of the character's integrity. As well, characters shouldn't have absolutely catastrophic failures all the time.
However, each side has to match. You wouldn't put Admiral Thrawn against a group of plucky teenagers unless you want all of their victories to feel hollow; a character with the levels of intensity Thrawn brings around should not be dealing with protagonists who genuinely employ the Power of Friendship unless you want the story to be almost comical in how the Power of Friendship trumps a character who seeks to "rip apart this Rebellion piece by piece" and has the intellect to do so with horrifying efficiency.
XtaticSoda
Procrastination Demon
Personally I enjoy the characters who are not black and white. Maybe they were villains in the past. Maybe everyone things they are the villain. They do what they know needs to be done and make the hard choices despite what it does to their image. Willing to turn the entire world against themselves in order to save it.
As for villains. I love villains who have hero crushes. Everything they do, evil or good, is only done to be reunited with the hero. To challenge them again, fight them one more time. Two beings who may have no other equals in the world. What enjoyment can there be in conquering the weak? In defeating the them? Where is the challenge, the thrill? No. It is you, only you who has made me feel. Such feelings as I have never known. I want more. I need more, and you will give it to me. My enemy, my friend. Let me feel alive!
As for villains. I love villains who have hero crushes. Everything they do, evil or good, is only done to be reunited with the hero. To challenge them again, fight them one more time. Two beings who may have no other equals in the world. What enjoyment can there be in conquering the weak? In defeating the them? Where is the challenge, the thrill? No. It is you, only you who has made me feel. Such feelings as I have never known. I want more. I need more, and you will give it to me. My enemy, my friend. Let me feel alive!
Mitsui
trying to get back into things after moving
good villains should be evil until the end, they can't just say that they did everything to keep their family safe right before dying or something, it kind of defeats the purpose of them being evil before. good protagonists shouldn't win every fight by sheer luck or "the power of friendship", they should have some losses too, the great thing about losing is that they will train to get stronger and evolve themselves as a character
