seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from Israel
seen from Macao SAR China
seen from China
seen from Canada
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from Argentina
seen from China
seen from Poland
seen from Germany
Side characters show depth by disagreeing with your main character.
Allies can want the same goal for different reasons.
Friends can be supportive while still refusing to go along with the MCs bad ideas.
Lovers can beg the MC to stay home where it's safe instead of doing the heroic thing.
Don't surround your MC with yes-men. Agreements and arguments mixed together will make your side characters feel more real.
Isn't it so interesting that when Umbridge is introduced, the point is kind of that evil people come in more forms than just Voldemort's henchmen, and that a racist monster who tortures children can actually fit just fine into the current power structure and still oppose Voldemort? And then Deathly Hallows comes around and it's now, nope, Umbridge is a Death Eater, everyone evil is a Death Eater and Voldemort supporter, you're either with us or against us, and if you're against us it's totally fine for us to use these Unforgivable Curses on you. It's like you can see Rowling's understanding of the world getting worse and more black-and-white in real time.
via reddit (Aug. 2025)
I love when characters are just bad people... for the sake of being bad people
Like, I love super malicious characters where like they have a super complex backstory on how their arm was cut in half by a sea monster, making them want to get their revenge on said sea monster's family as much as the next person
But a character doesn't have to be complex to be a good villain
Let's use a bully character, for example. The Bully character can have two forms: flat and rounded
In the round version of her character, she bullies her sister. They got along most of their childhood, and they had a wonderful time growing up. But as they got to middle school, the Bully got meaner. Her friends slowly shaped her into something she wasn't. Making her act malicious to her sister. She's too far gone. So far gone, in fact, that she doesn't even see anything wrong with what she's doing
But in the flat version of her character... she's just that. A Bully. She likes the thrill, she likes knowing how small she makes others feel. There's nothing deep about her. She's just an asshole with room to grow.
But that's what makes flat character so fun, they can grow with the narrative
Let's say the flat Bully finds out she's one of the last survivors of an extinct tribe. The surviving members of the tribe tell her that she needs to save the rest of them by retrieving an item.
The flat character, though begrudgingly, accepts it
Through the journey, she gets humbled time and time again. She feels so powerless. So small. It's through her journey that she learns from her past mistakes and ultimately becomes a better person in the end
Just because a character starts off flat doesn't mean they're bad. They just need to learn.
Character development should mean that by the end of your 10+ year series in the making, people who've finished the whole thing and then go back to the start should be shocked at how different the characters are at the start. Should be so aware of how much growing the characters are going to go through.
If you have a long-running series but there's no meaningful difference between the characters at the very end vs day 1, that means you've had no character development, which means your characters are as flat as they can possibly get.
Characters can be flat if the world evolves around them because of them, We all know that characters typically should develop in a story. This is why generally speaking, they should start out with flaws that they can develop from. Note the words typically and generally here. These aren’t absolutes. For one thing, a character can develop negatively, becoming worse instead of better, in order to tell the story or make the point that the writer wants to (ex: power corrupts even the best people) Alternatively, they may not develop at all if that better serves the point of the story, whether that point is to praise that (ex: “don’t cave to the world around you, stick to who you are, don’t compromise your principles even when tempted”) or a cautionary tale (ex: “this is what happens to people who fail to change their evil ways/fail to face their fears/don’t listen/etc”) or whatever other point is best illustrated by someone NOT changing. And finally, there’s characters who remain flat, but the story is how the world around them changes BECAUSE of them. For example, Mary Poppins isn’t a story about the titular character learning and growing and changing from her time with the Banks family; instead, the Banks family (and many other characters around them, such as the bankers) change and grow because of her being there. What links all these examples together is, of course, authorial intent. Mary Poppins is static because that’s the idea. But a character who simply is flat or fails to develop because the author is simply poor at what they’re trying to achieve, is not the same thing. Characters are tools. Different jobs require different tools.
Writing Theory: Making your Heroes more Believable and less Flat
One thing that often happens when writing heroes is they often appear more flatter and less developed than they should be. A flat hero leads to an alienated audience who will likely not vibe with the hero. Disclaimer: this is not about the flat character trope itself but characters who do not come to life. The hero can never be flat.
What makes your hero seems flat?
Flat characters are sometimes confused with Mary Sues, they are nearly always perfect with just a hint of imprefection thrown in. That hint sits on the character like a dollop of cream, never truly mixing in with your character. It doesn't effect the character in any way.
They have no complexity. They are very simple when stripped down to their bare bones.
They possess no traits or flaws that are in direct conflict with their outward persona.
They are mostly passive even when in conflict.
There is no development in them from beginning to end, they learn nothing and they pass through the story unblemished.
Combatting Flatness in your Heroes
Heroes must be flawed. They must make bad choices or have some kind of imperfection. And the flaw must impact their choices and they way rhevellook at the world. Heroes are not wholly perfect, no person is. Readers do not like perfect characters, they cannot fathom them or even understand them. For example, Harry Potter is incredibly flawed. He is an ardent procrastinator and can sometimes be quite lazy. During the Triwizard Cup, he does not attempt to work out the clue to the second task until the last minute which leaves him very unready and a little all over the place.
Heroes must have an arc. They have to change throughout the story. They cannot be the same fresh faced dew drop they were before you got your mits on them. They have to grow and change, be affected by the story. For example, Daenerys Targaryen grows from a quiet child bride into a fierce dragon riding Queen campaigning for justice.
Make your Heroes complex. Allow them conflicting traits and attitudes. Complexity lends a believability to your character by allowing them to have inner conflict. For example, Kaz Brekker of Six of Crows is both a ruthless gangster capable of cruelty but is also incredibly vulnerable and insecure.
Make them less stereotypical. Stereotypical characters are the death of any novel for me. Stereotypes make a character flat without the writer even trying. It makes them predictable and bland. The reader knows what your character is about in a few lines. Make them less predictable, allow them to contradict their stereotypes. For example, Liesel Meminger is a child growing up in Nazi Germany, involved in Hitler Youth. We expect her to be the stereotypical Nazi supporter, close minded and prejudiced but instead, she is open minded and accepting to Max, the Jewish refugee in her basement.
Casual reminder that flat characters are sometimes necessary to progress the story.
A Note
It’s okay to have flat and static characters.
And no, I don’t mean you drop a load a boulders on them, or flat Stanley, those are cool too, but I’m talking about a different kind of flat.
I’m talking about characters who don’t have very much personality, they don’t change, they’re not dynamic or well-rounded. They just exist. They’re the NPCs of your story and you need them to flesh out that world.
The baker who gives your hero fresh red bean buns every morning can just be a baker. They don’t need to be anything else because they answer one of the fundamental needs of society. Food and where it comes from. They don’t need an elaborate backstory, they can just exist.
