Advice related to the MS litmus test.

The problem I run into on the MS litmus tests is that they are overly general. One question I usually see is "Does your character have a companion animel?" If you say yes, it is a point towards being a Sue. But if i apply this to Sword & Shield, so does half the cast, so it is part of the world and not something that makes the character ubber super special.

I am a nobody. Nobody is perfect. Therefore, I am perfect.

That's why proper tests only make it worth a point if it's unusual within the world.

Doesn't have to be "most common" to not be unusual.

edited 14th Sep '11 1:49:43 PM by jewelleddragon

And that's where characters like my werewolf and possibly the OP's black-sclera'd character have difficulties.

Whatever race they're from may not be the "most common"/human/human-analogue but it may be common enough in-story that it doesn't jar too much. But at least 8 points of mine came from being a "typical werewolf" as described in my 'verse.

But do you check "yes" because the character has an attribute that makes it - gods forfend - different from human or do you not check the box because "fuck it, all werewolves can do that and I already checked "is your character non-human?"?

Give me a break... I tried this test again with a character I know isn't a sue, followed all the advices, and got a 32.

It's BS. The test just punishes any character that's mildly interesting.

The character is named Blacklawn (not his real name, more like a codename. His real name cannot be translated, and he's an alien from another universe). He is not attractive by any human standards. He looks like a floating crest-like thing with three glowing dots for eyes and several tentacles.

He has many abilities, but that's justified by the fact that he's actually composed by 6 different minds (the story's Big Bad has a device which allows him to make clusters of minds). He was originally evil, but became good as the villain's grasp over his minds became weaker. He isn't even among the most powerful characters in the story.

His main mind had a somewhat troubled past due to the fact that the person who raised him betrayed him at some point in exchange for political powers. He had many other disappointments, but, other than that, his life was pretty boring and he had a rather nihilistic view on existence (that changes later), and that's why he was susceptible to mind control in the first place. The other minds that compose him either lost great part of their memories or were already equally weak to mind control.

I know it's an unusual character, but would you call it a Mary Sue?

edited 14th Sep '11 3:25:54 PM by Teraus

"You cannot judge a system if your judgement is determined by the system."

He could be written as one. It's all in the execution.

Also, that test looks like it's specifically for fanfiction or roleplaying.

edited 14th Sep '11 4:09:36 PM by MrAHR

Read my stories!

Last time I read a zombie story, I put the story down and proceeded to laugh for a good five minutes after the revelation. Even though the story was in the process of being published, so it's not like the execution was bad. Just because some things are normal in world doesn't mean they're not jarring.

For example, I dare someone to write a story about vampires without getting immediately lumped together with Twilight, or a story with flight and energy flinging without getting lumped together with Dragon Ball Z. I know it's awful that these kinds of associations happen, but at the very least, a Mary Sue litmus test makes you aware that some of your themes are going to turn people off because those commonly used themes have certain connotations and associations outside the work.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

There are sections that are for original fiction only and RPG only, and sections for all. It can be used for anything and improper use like mixing your sections could inflate the score dramatically. Questions are weighted, though I mainly noticed that in the De-Suifiers section.

I ran through my main characters. They both scored in 0-16. One of them is a Nanoha-styled flight mage who underwent Combat Cyborg conversion and thus able to blow up buildings and fly just a little short of hypersonic; the other one has a day job wearing a suit of power armor and fighting biomechanoids whose brains have rolled snake-eyes. But they've had normal (relatively) childhoods; they are but one of at least several and often more; Samuel in particular hit 11 of the De-Suifiers, while K-11-2 hit a lot fewer things on the list in general.

I'm not sure how you're scoring yourself, so I can't say what exactly why you get it so high. But if I can run through Samuel through that and still get a 15 I think you might be using it wrong. (I was honestly surprised, K-11-2 scored higher than Samuel at 16.)

edited 14th Sep '11 4:40:34 PM by Night

Nous restons ici.

I put Sherlock Holmes into one of these tests once.

He failed.

Beowulf would probably also fail.

The thing is that protagonists of a story should be unique and stand out. I'm going to assume that most people here and writing Swords & Sorcery or Sci-fi (though if this isn't the case feel free to correct me) and so the heroes should give us some reason to think we should be following him. There's nothing wrong with the hero having a unique sword and awesome wings and whatever that make him super-special-awesome.

What matters is the context. If he's a member of the hated race of Dark Elves and no one bats an at him in the story then they're a sue. The fact is I've read fantastic stories where the point is that the main character is the most competent character on Earth. I've seen terrible stories where the protagonist is an incompetent legal retard.

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

Again - what tests are you all using? I intend to try some experiments (as in, running famous fictional protagonists through like the previous poster did), and I'd like links to the tests in question.

The one I referenced upthread, which is also the best one I've ever found beforehand, is linked a ways above; its domain name is springhole.com or some such.

Shinigan (Naruto fanfic)

I think part of what the creators of these tests forget is that a protaganist must be special in some way (most of the time) for there to be a story about them. If I were going to write a story about a day in my life, it would be mind numbingly dull. Even a story about an Every Man character has to give us a reason to read.

I am a nobody. Nobody is perfect. Therefore, I am perfect.

A protagonist doesn't need to be "interesting" to create an interesting story. You going about your normal day might be dull, but you fighting a dragon wouldn't. In fact, you fighting a dragon would be more interesting than a super-powered invulnerable vampire ninja fighting a dragon— because you don't have superpowers *

, fighting it would be a bigger challenge.

I agree Mary Sue tests are not perfect, or even good, and you should take them with a grain of salt. However, a character with interesting qualities is not necessarily interesting, and a character without interesting qualities isn't necessarily dull.

Moral of the thread: Context is everything.

Thanks for the all fish!

A protagonist doesn't need to have super special powers or any super unique birthmarks, that's true, but he does have to be interesting even if it's just his reactions that are what make him so.

My point is that giving someone superpowers or making them unique in some way is not a 'sue trait'. It's a staple of heroic fiction.

edited 14th Sep '11 7:07:36 PM by Malkavian

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

There are degrees of special. And one does not actually have to be special themselves, merely exposed to special events. Eventually they've built up a reserve of skills for dealing with special events so they're called for them.

Even using special is probably bad. It's enough to be one of hundreds, thousands, even millions. So long as you are different and new to the reader.

edited 14th Sep '11 7:08:15 PM by Night

Nous restons ici.

If this character is no different than thousands or millions or other people why should I care about him?

There needs to be something that establishes a character as worth giving a shit about.

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

They are unique because the events are happening to them, not the other million people in the world. You don't need any "special" quality beyond that— other than not dying, maybe, otherwise it'd make for a dull story.

Thanks for the all fish!

That's the events and not the character. If there's nothing notable or interesting about the way a character reacts to a fantastic situation then you've made shit character.

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

Malkavian's post (58) sums up how I feel about the tests. They (deliberately, and I can see why) don't allow justification of the traits (or some people would be ticking the "Justified" box beside each of the traits, whether the trait is justified or not) and they will class a perfectly serviceable protagonist as a Sue despite the fact that the story covers everything nicely and the character does not break Willing Suspension of Disbelief for that story.

If the character is from a hated race (in story), then I'd expect to see the character have to work hard to convince others that (s)he (and maybe even the race in general) is not as bad as everyone thinks. If that's done and done convincingly, I'll accept it.

If, however, the other characters all go "Hey ho, there's a Dark Elf wandering through our village carrying an improbably big sword" and get on with what they're doing or, worse, go out of their way to help said Dark Elf, I'd be calling foul. Or "Mary-Sue".

If other characters' reactions to the character are appropriate to their beliefs, culture, sexual orientation, prejudices etc, even a highly competent or OTT character can avoid being a Mary-Sue. Whether it's a person with black sclera, a werewolf or a "black" man in 1950s USA.

edited 14th Sep '11 7:30:54 PM by Wolf1066

^^The Things They Carried, Pride And Prejudice, Romeo And Juliet, and basically everything that is not fantasy or sci-fi would like to have a word with you.

Anyway, I still think y'all are missing a point that litmus tests make: even if you can justify some sue trait in story, you're probably just rehashing a story or a theme that's already been done to death.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

The characters themselves have unique personalities and things that make striking people though.

When I say 'something that makes them interesting' I don't just mean magic powers.

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

I don't think anyone is arguing that lifeless dolls make good characters, and I don't think any litmus test pushes that agenda either.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

Not intentionally, no. However, I've met plenty of people who worked so hard to 'avoid creating a sue' and ended up with bland and generic characters you couldn't even call people.

"Everyone wants an answer, don't they?... I hate things with answers." — Grant Morrison

Whenever someone accuses me of being unoriginal, I ask them if their work takes place on a planet with an oxy-nitrogen atmosphere. (Outside of a sci-fi context, of course.)*

Shinigan (Naruto fanfic)

Like I said way back at the beginning, I personally think the tests on average are very likely to create something like an Anti-Sue, more so then they would some personality-less character.

One could equally argue that every theme has been "done to death" in that case.

If we must avoid a having a character who's lived through hardships because it's a "Sueish Trait" and "done to death", then surely we must also avoid SF, Fantasy, Crime fiction, Romance and so on.

There is nothing new under the sun - including saying "there is nothing new under the sun" - and what makes a story unique is the way the writer handles the same stuff that so many others have handled but in a different way.

I don't pick up a book and go "Oh, fuck, not another character with weird-coloured eyes, that's so old and corny, what a fucking Mary-Sue". Not unless there's no reason for the weird-coloured eyes outside of "'coz it's cooooooooool".

edited 14th Sep '11 7:48:58 PM by Wolf1066