I find it kinda odd how people talk about writing “flawed” characters like the flaws are an afterthought
Like “cool cool we’ve got this perfect hero now to just sprinkle on some Irritability and Trust Issues then microwave for 6 minutes on high until Done”
But I’ve personally found it feels a lot more useful to just… think of the flaws as the Good Traits except bad this time
The protagonist is loyal? Maybe that means they have a hard time recognizing toxic relationships and are easily manipulated by those they want to trust
The hero is compassionate? Maybe they work too hard and overextend themselves trying to help people and then they refuse to ask for help when they need it themselves for fear of burdening others
They’re dedicated to their ideals? Maybe they’re also too stubborn to know when to quit and they have trouble apologizing for their mistakes
If they’re creative, they can also be flighty. If they’re confident, they can be arrogant. If they’re brave, they might be reckless. If they’re smart, they could be condescending. Protective can become controlling, and someone who’s carefree could very well also be emotionally distant
In my opinion, the best “flaws” aren’t just added on afterwards. The best flaws are baked in deep, ‘cause they’re really just virtues turned upside down
So the other day, I was thinking about the classic alignment chart, and how it doesn’t really do much for me personally since it’s more about how characters interact with systems rather than how they interact with other people
I had a minute, so I figured I’d throw something together that DID suit my needs!
(Note: This chart regards a character’s intent rather than the outcome of their actions—and for sake of clarity, here are the definitions I’m working with:
Good: concerned with the well-being the collective, often at expense of the self
Evil: concerned with the well-being of the self, often at the expense of the collective
Kind: concerned with the emotional responses of others
Cruel: unconcerned with the emotional responses of others)
I like conceptualizing things this way, cause sometimes Bad People behave with ‘good’ or ‘kind’ intentions, and sometimes Good People do things that seem ‘evil’ or ‘cruel’
Also this gives me a way to compare/contrast characters who get lumped together under the other system
something kinda annoying about the wlw community on here that i’ve noticed is when someone who is like a lesbian icon does something wrong none of y’all wanna call them on it or even discuss it just bc they’re a gay girl/are important to gay girls. like i know you guys saw me reblogging that link about hayley kiyoko being racist yet like only one or two people reblogged it. kate mckinnon is a transphobe and i’ve heard that gillian anderson is as well (if anyone has a link to this please send it to me) yet y’all still worship these individuals bc you don’t want to admit that someone you love can do something bad. like if we’re not gonna be critical of people creating content for our community then what’s the point of having a community at all??
When you save hank in that tower from the deviant, Connor will run up to Hank, push that cop next to him away, and you can actually see him IN PAIN as he gets shot
Whats also cute is that -as everyone may know alrdy- androids dont die instantly unless you shoot them in the head. Connor didn’t die instantly at this point when he was getting shot and fell on top of Hank.
I like to think that when he fell on top of him he could feel Hank’s heartbeat, and that meant to him that he lives, and that he successfully saved him. And it actually looks like Connor was smiling when Hank turned him around. Connor might’ve died with the thought that he saved Hank, which made him happy, and thats why he smiled before dying.