Should I, and how should I develop a "filler character"?
TL;DR
How should I (if at all) develop the personality, character trait, character development and motivation of a character in a core trio whose role in the story is (thus far) only to be a mechanical supplement in combat?
Context
I'm writing something that superficially resemble a fantasy fiction loosely centered around a core trio of character, including:
- A very naive and well-meaning young woman as the protagonist
- A mature, mild-tempered woman with knowledge of existential disillusionment, betrayal and suffering, acting as a foil to the protagonist's innocence and childishness
- A young man, friend and secret admirer of the protagonist, and the problematic character
The problem is that while I fantasized the story in my head, I only saw the third character, call him "B", as a sort of mechanical addition to the party the same way a video-game character might be a supplement to a team in terms of game-play.
I wonder if I should take the effort to flesh out such a character, give him complex backstory and diverse motivations, or leave him as is--a mere pawn in the bigger game, following the protagonist allow her quest for no other reason than that I dictated him to want to do so.
In the event that you do think I should elaborate on B, the problematic character, I'd like to hear general guidelines for how I might proceed, and any particular examples you might think of.
Extra Context
The core-trio of adventurers going on a long quest to find and bring solace to an ailing demigod.
There are a number of twists/central features here:
1 - Contrast between protagonist and the world:
The protagonist, named C, is deliberately designed to be an extremely naive and excessively benevolent young woman, who is too trusting and well-meaning for the world around her--a cynical, treacherous place full of selfish and morally unscrupulous people as well as those with ex-machina motives to kill/enslave her in order to absorb her magic power.
2 - Divine Intervention:
I mentioned demigods earlier, for all intents and purposes, they are just normal people with lots of magical power, which is bound by the physical laws in the fictional universe. However, there are also real, transcendental deities, each with their own motivations. The following are some examples of how this is done:
The trio are sent on their main quest in the beginning due to the manipulation of a goddess named N, who wants to see if the trio can alleviate the demigod, which N has feelings for, from his suffering. Eventually, another similar deity named L will motivate another character to seek out the same demigod and relief the latter by killing him.
3 - Loss of Innocence:
It's predictable, but throughout the story, the main trio will be mentally wore down by the things they witness and are subjected to, anywhere from visions of eldritch horror to physical abuse suffered under their enemies.
Additionally, as the story progresses, the trio will begin to draw more and more attention to itself, sending increasingly numerous and dangerous foes its way, and the party find themselves relying more and more unscrupulous means to victory, slowly desensitized to their own cruelty and find themselves pulled further and further away from what they are used to.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/31890. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
3 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Any character present throughout the story should have some sort of good reason to be there, especially a character like you describe that will clearly be risking their life and conscience in escalating battle and wrong-doing. Why don't they quit? What do they stand to gain that is so important to them? At some point, it becomes implausible to continue saying "they just want treasure".
I'd expand on your young man. Ditch the "secret admirer" aspect, ditch his shyness or innocence, even give him a previous girlfriend. Have him declare his love. Your MC pretends he is not serious, and she is naive, and just wants to be friends. He is heartbroke, but your demigod promises him if he does not go on the quest, he will never gain his heart's desire. THAT'S why he goes, he thinks it is the only way. Then after he risks his life to save the MC, gets injured and brought back to health by her, then he does it AGAIN, and she eventually realizes she is in love with him and tells him so. Consummated love is a powerful reason for him to stay by her side until the bitter end, and that is his story arc, from rejected suitor to beloved mate. It can end in happily ever after, or his death to save the MC, either way.
I think you have to give him some depth, if he is going to be present throughout the story, just for plausibility.
0 comment threads
Generally, trios work because a trio follows an Id-Ego-Superego dynamic. Two better display it, I'll swap out characters for two famous fictional trios: Repsectively, this can be the McCoy(Bones)-Kirk-Spock dynamic OR the Ron-Harry-Hermione dynamic.
The Id (Bones, Ron) is the emotional and intuitive member of the team. They are generally more knowledgeable in society matters and how society will react to events (street smarts). There skills will rely on manuvering complexities of politics and while not an academic sort (That isn't to say that Bones isn't smart, because he'll remind you he's a doctor), they are the more passionate and caring than their opposite number, the Super-ego, and generally are anti-rule and look at society through the lense of the common people.
The Super-Ego (Spock, Hermione) is the more logical and more calculating of the trio. They are book smart as opposed to street smart and understand the theories and sciences of their universe better than the either two. They tend to approach society by the understanding of the rules and authority, rather than the people bound by those (Consider Herminoe who appeals that a proper society that abhors classist notions would not have House Elves, as opposed to Ron, who says, "Yeah, but that's not what people do."). The Super-Ego will typically have a better tactical knowledge and can get frustrated when people do not listen to logic and reason, even if it's in their best interest.
The Ego (Kirk, Harry) is typically the hero in the simplest use (though variants exist), and will represent the balance between the Id and Super-Ego. They typically are good at listening to both sides of the argument and can find a way to phrase the raw passion in a way that the Super-ego can understand and vice versa. This allows them the fluidity to understand both sides to have validity but see the flaw in both pure implementations. As the hero, this typically results in the decisions that win the day, combining the best of the other solutions to cover the base.
In this situation, a good balance is that if side character one is the skeptic towards basic human decency, then your other guy must balance this with "Our enemies are not inhumans" and that there is a line that we cannot cross. Another option is that he is the eternal optimist and believes in the people, not necessarily the society. In the original Fruedian origin, the Super-Ego is the person who understands the systems of society (not so much general logic, but society logic, rules, and laws.). The Id understands the society culture (the way people act inside of prespective laws... what they say versus what they do.)
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/31931. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
At the core of every character is a desire. They want something. They are where they are, they do what they do, because they believe that it is leading them to what they desire. They also have a set of values and beliefs that shape how they are willing to behave in order to achieve their desire -- the boundaries they will not cross even to achieve their desire.
For the main character, the story leads to a confrontation between their values and their desire and a fundamental moment of decision where some choice, some sacrifice must be made that changes or reveals their character.
All the secondary and tertiary characters have the same arc. Their arcs may not be worked out fully in the course of the story, but they have them. To make them convincing as a character (and not have them act as simply a convenient plot device) you have to identify their values and their desire and make sure that their actions are consistent with their values and their desire. This does not have to be done in any great detail, and their arc does not have to be fully worked out, but for them to read as real, these basics need to be in place and need to be handled consistently.
Once you understand their values and their desire, you have them, and the reader has them, and everything around them makes sense.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads