Would a character displaying the opposite of one of their characteristics break immersion?
The main character, while playing an MMO, was teleported to another world in her avatar along with all of the NPC's in her guild. As her reaction, she sent scouts around the area in order to discover a settlement or something similar. As a result, her scouts found a slave camp. So far she has been really worried about accidentally having her guild declare war on a kingdom. However she is currently considering attacking the slave camp in order to free the slaves. I am afraid that rather than writing a rational character I am reflecting my belief as a writer on to the character.
My question is: Would a character who displays the opposite of one of their characteristics due to the moral code they are used to cause the immersion to break?
As a side note the main character doesn't know whether slavery is something that is used in this world or not.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/35748. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
2 answers
Even a generally rational character might have issues that cause them to snap and act irrationally. For example, in Star Trek TOS, in the episode with the Horta, Spock (the epitome of rationality) is all rational and "Captain, we must preserve life, we must attempt to figure out what the creature's motivations are", right until he thinks Kirk might be in danger. Then, suddenly, it's "Jim, shoot it before it attacks you!"
However, you would have to have a good answer for why slavery is the issue that causes your character to snap.
The irrational act would also have to be an emotional act, done in the spur of the moment, and something the character would chastise themselves for later, once they've had time to calm down and return to their regular way of thinking. @Amadeus gives a very good answer regarding what the rational thought process should have been.
0 comment threads
It may cause the immersion to break.
The rational response is, how do I know they are slaves?
How do I know if I "free" them I am not sentencing them to certain death? Perhaps in this place, it will be assumed the slaves revolted and the penalty for that is always horrific death no matter what the cost to the slavers, to prevent any other slaves from considering revolting.
How can I be certain the slaves would rather be left alone: As non-slaves they will have no food, no protection, no community, and will be ostracized by both owners and other slaves.
The rational response is to admit I don't know the culture and may be doing more harm than good, so I better NOT declare war on a kingdom before I know enough to be reasonably certain I am doing somebody good, not doing them harm.
The rational response is then, if I don't have the time to find out IF these slaves wish to be free, then I should mind my own business and not assume I know what is best for them.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads