Mary Sue litmus test

Tell us about your character, and what his/her/its final score is. If it's part of some Unpublished Work, please link to it. The test is here.

Anyway, I ran one of my major characters through the test. He's a whimsical stoner working and living at a small PMC (400-500 members) with no orginization. With that many people on board, you don't really need one. He came out with a score of 19. A few things were kinda iffy- his personality and looks check with some of the questions, but he has good excuses. A few others were halfway.

By the way, the setting's hard sci-fi with a healthy dose of Applied Phlebotinum and Black Boxes to justify the more fantastic tech.

Edit: I just ran Lelouche against the test. The final score: 90. Maybe I was being a bit trigger-happy, but damn. A score like that can not be excused.

Edit 2: This should probably be moved to Writer's Block.

edited 19th Jun '09 5:11:30 AM by JBridge

We already had a thread (or two?) about this... the same test was linked to there, among others. I didn't like this one.

There it is.

edited 19th Jun '09 5:38:25 AM by Fawriel

Ah. Thanks. Thread closed, I guess.

edited 19th Jun '09 6:11:44 AM by JBridge

Noo! Don't move it to writer's block! I don't check that forum often!

Haha, I'm trying this on Kiddy Grade's Éclair.

Do situations that would render most people completely gross and icky (EG, battling, getting tortured, going for days without bathing or washing) have no discernable effect on your character's attractiveness?

Haha, hell no. After getting plastered by bricks, stones, eggs, tomatoes, and other things, and feeling really down, her look scares small children. Seriously.

Does he/she convince others that his/her way of thinking is right?

No. Definitely not.

Does your character get away with things that other people would get into serious trouble for under the same circumstances? (Like openly defying his/her superiors.)

She's getting a ton of points from the "defying authority" category. :P

However, the answer to this question is a resounding NO.

Does your character always have money to spend on frivolities or whatever he/she really wants or needs at the time?

She does, but she actually doesn't have the time to enjoy it.

But as for the following question, it is quite obvious that she holds a job and gets paid for it.

Have an exceptionally beautiful singing voice?

Heck yes. She even has a characteristic music track. And that track is actually really touching.

Does your character possess unusual healing powers?

Yes.

Strong enough to save a character from mortal injury and/or death?

YES.

Does your character posess power that can take out entire cities/legions of soldiers/general all-around-evil?

Oh, been there done that. It's just that her opponents are also this powerful.

Does your character end up in a tight spot and discover that he/she has really cool powers that were dormant and/or unknown before?

Actually, no in the case of Éclair. However, unfortunately, it applies to Lumière.

Does your character succeed at virtually everything he/she tries?

Definitely not. She's also not invincible against the authorities, either.

Does your character ever single-handedly take out more armed forces (EG, security guards, soldiers) than you can count on one hand using his/her kick-butt skills?

Isn't this the same as a previous question?

Does your character angst about something that he/she did in the past?

This actually applies to Lumi again, and not quite Éclair, though I can justify it.

Does anyone who doesn't like or respect your character by the end of the story end up beaten up, humiliated, and/or dead?

Well, such are the consequences of having a small cast. Though I guess there is at least one character who doesn't end up in any of these states (well, not much).

Total: 74.

Well, for one thing I didn't write the series myself, so I can only guess. There are some questions that ask if I feel a certain way. And I can only speak for myself.

Also, a good lot of the characteristics apply to other characters in the plot as well, and Éclair gets a darn lot of abuse from many people (and is the instrument of various conspiracies) along the way, so she in no way actually controls the plot. (Except in the last episode, where she saves everyone, or something like that.)

Moved to Writer's Block. Sorry, GMH. It goes where it goes.

That's why it disappeared! NOOOO Ooooo

Also, I should try Arc soon.

Michael Jason West, the nephew of dr Herbert West. Score: FIVE. He's a detective, yes. In late 1920s, yes. Deadpan Snarker, yes. Donning a Really Badass Longcoat when the weather allows, yes (it's 1920, so he can't do what I often do and wear the coat over only a T-shirt). But you don't even have a clue how hard it is to write it in 1st person and make him follow the clues to a reasonable, logical and completely wrong conclusion. It's his schtick of sorts.

Bjorn Westlander, Retriever Agent for the Haern Royal College of Magic. Score: TWENTY THREE. The catch being, test doesn't include some subversions that make sense in context. The worst offense is his name - and here's the first subversion, I made it up for an old D&D character of mine and then, desperate because my usual nickname was constantly being rejected during email account registration, I went with "Bjorn". So, subversion, reversion or whatever. Second, Bjorn is multiclassing, although it's justified - he failed his magic exam by losing control over a harmless spell (and still rarely casts the simple ones he knows with no ill effects), isn't a good fighter (rather good, but not exceptional) and is pretty limited in the rogue tricks department. Third, he knows healing spells, which is pretty unusual for anyone not being a divine spellcaster, but the spells don't exactly work like they should (most important thing: they're painful. Even more so if used on others). Fourth: magical elven sword. Magical mostly because it's pretty much maintenance-free and well-balanced. And a heavy armored gauntlet that doubles as a buckler and mana filter. Pretty useful and still owned because nobody in the College considered them significant. Also, in the story, his lover gets killed... But she gets better - amnesiac, brainwashed, obsessed and fitted with a magical failsafe, but at least 75% alive.

Got a score of 21 for my character.

I got a 17 for the main character of my fanfic, and a 4 for a not-as-major character. I always get relatively low scores on these sorts of things. Perhaps I haven't developed them enough, or maybe it's just because they're mortal.

edited 21st Jun '09 4:33:59 PM by OrangeAipom

My near Author Avatar Miijhal came out with an 16, although this doesn't take into account her various issues.

My Heroic Sociopath Eddy Marshall is also a 16. Once more, not taking into account that I made him to be a completely unlikable psychopath who manipulates others to satisfy his massive ego, and who does the right thing in the wrong way for the wrong reasons.

It's too dependant on judgement of what constitutes 'normal' IMHO. I got a 66 with Nekssa the insane marilith, retook it defining anything that might be normal for a Cute Monster Girl in my Crapsack World RPG setting as 'normal', and got a 7....

• here is an alternate version.
• this is my favorite though.

edited 19th Jun '09 10:27:52 PM by Frodo Goofball CoTV

That test always bothered me because it doesn't recognize either nuance or subversion. Many things are a lot more complex than "yes" or "no" and have sort of a "well, if I tilt my head a bit, maybe" quality to them (for example, the character I ran through adopts an alias because she thinks of herself as "too ordinary". What name counts, then?). There are also plenty of questions where I know what plot framework they're referring to, but the phrasing might include things that are actually very different in practice. It also bugs me that they decide using only one viewpoint for the narrative is an automatic point without mentioning that for it to count, the author also has to obviously lack any concept of the other characters' viewpoints. It could also use a mention about one of the biggest Mary Sue indicators: the author telling the reader to like the character through subjective and/or loaded terminology and comparisons. Still, at least it isn't a blatantly sexist test like some of the others I've seen (one actually assigned 6 points to characters simply for being female).

Also, Fan Character question 40: "If you create your own 'arc,' storyline, or plot event..." Um... isn't that sort of what you're doing in the first place? Clarification required.

Oh, by the way, Trapped in Another World is an automatic 10 points. One only hopes it's a glitch, but whatever. +10 it is.

Anyway, running my (hopefully) deconstructive Anti-Hero Emily Tennenbaum through this test originally netted a score of 37 a few hours prior, but this recent rundown now has her at 25. The score changed mostly because I decided to drop some of the "tilt your head to see" points. Along with Trapped in Another World being verboten, it also kind of bothers me that they give points for the actual, genuine flaws of Antisocial Personality Disorder and inability to form healthy relationships (what they really mean to say is "...and yet this doesn't stop the other characters from liking him/her?"), but I'm not going to drop the point just because I don't agree with the test.

Here are some telling remarks: I think of her as very, very far from being a role model (by intentional design, too). In essence, she's a creepy, obsessive fanfic writer (the type that test is railing against, for that matter) that gets to actually partake in her favorite fiction series, but as a supporting character when she views herself as protagonist. She's not a very nice person, obsesses over things, thinks of people on a very shallow level, and is just not the sort of person you'd rely upon. She's treated realistically, with societal politeness and obligation being about the only reason she's really tolerated. She actually has to struggle to have any importance in a given scene and the villains (such that they can even remember her) only see her as just some brutish pawn not even worth talking about.

I did give her Character Shield and Hollywood Healing (mostly because who wants a fast paced story to end abruptly or spend a few weeks in the hospital?), but as actual, quantitative abilities that don't overpower the story. She has a limited, uncontrollable precognitive ability that (after a period where some invisible hand of sorts guides her towards the canon characters) only comes up if she's going to be killed. Since she's not a particularly good combatant, it comes up a lot and only through its virtue does she stay alive. In essence, showing all the pointless ways she should have died, but didn't because this is supposed to be at least something of a fun story. She's also a peak level athlete, but it's a setting that goes Beyond the Impossible and she isn't anywhere close to the level of ability of the other characters.

Of course, given that Mary Sue means a lot of things to a lot of people, she probably fits quite a few definitions anyway.

I can see why the "trapped in another world" rates ten points, personally. It means that you've shoehorned a character from one world into one that they weren't designed for unless you're doing a 'fish out of water' plot, and very few fanfic writers use that plot.

A lot of these tests suffer when they're used on original characters. Tropes that are overused in fanfic can work fine in ordinary fiction, and vice versa.

As far as I've seen, none of them are really designed to be used on original canon characters, because most of the people who write them subscribe fairly completely to the definition of Mary Sue that requires it to be a non-canon character.

So Made Of Meat doesn't need to worry about her characters being Sues, according to these litmus tests, because she's creating her own world to go with them; they're canon characters.

My Characters got quite high scores.

edited 20th Jun '09 6:14:29 AM by Border Prince

Has anyone tried running the sparklepires through one of these?

"______ carries an unusual weapon, wears a strange piece of jewelry, or otherwise displays a unique possession on her person."

Shouldn't all cartoon characters have something like this? Even if it's just a silly hat.

"_____ appears to die but later turns out not to be dead after all."

This is going to get checked a lot. Death Is Cheap in my universe. Fatal injuries are a source of humor.

"_____ has been responsible for the death of a friend, lover, or family member."

Does killing them count as being responsible for their death?

"______ is a hybrid of two or more species."

I guess I'll check it, but as a clarification question, does this automatically equal "special" in a world where on of the gimmicks is that humanity is so crossbred with other species that practically everyone is a hybrid? Finding a pure human is much more rare. We're talking about a place where you can walk down the street with a pair of huge moth antennae growing out of your head and the most you'll get is an insensitive remark.

It said that I don't care enough about Sabin. It's true! I'm trying to distance myself from him, even though I feel I shouldn't. He's an extremely grumpy, slightly unattractive, illegitimately pregnant scientist in a steampunk world. I've barely developed his physical appearance or love life. (even though his love life is, obviously, a big part of his character) It's because I don't want him to seem a fangirlish Author Appeal character, like 90% of the pregnant male OCs on deviantART. But, in that, I've driven a wall between us. Oh, Sabin, kiss and make up?

edited 20th Jun '09 3:10:05 AM by Made of Meat

@Meat:

It's a comparative thing.

True

Yes

Depends how it's done. I'd say it's comparative, but this is not always true.

Average people have little things, like turquoise rims on their eyelids, cat eyes, strange ears, odd hair color, stuff like that. Above average may have a little bit of residual power or extra body parts like wing studs or claws. Most importantly, it's hardly ever explained. Spider has these weird clusters of.. are those tentacles? on her head. What is she? Who cares.

"A character who is dismissive of some trauma in ____'s past has that trauma subsequently happen to him/her."

What if the character is severely messed up and made them suffer the trauma, and it isn't treated as a good thing? (at best, it's schadenfreude)

"She may have sometimes thought that she was special, or destined for greater things, but probably dismissed the idea as a fantasy. She's got no emotional scars to speak of."

I sort of snickered when I read this. This was after taking the test as a sadistic, flippant Cosmic Horror zombie nurse Villain Protagonist. Just because she wasn't raped, abused or tortured doesn't mean she's emotionally healthy. She's regularly murdered (and deserves it, most of the time) or gets in horrible, fatal, gorny accidents. She was in a hospital when it blew up, watched her brother become a drug addict (Played for Laughs) and walked in on the first man she'd ever loved eating the panties off a medical intern.

edited 20th Jun '09 3:28:00 AM by Made of Meat

I guess I'll check it, but as a clarification question, does this automatically equal "special" in a world where on of the gimmicks is that humanity is so crossbred with other species that practically everyone is a hybrid?

It doesn't count. If nearly everybody in the setting could shoot laser-beams from their eyes, read really fast, and sing "Blue Suede Shoes", it doesn't qualify. It says so in the beginning!

Oh, and I got a 40, a 19, and a 18.

Speaking of which, does this qualify if said character serves as someone who takes sly winks and jabs at things?

edited 20th Jun '09 6:26:06 AM by krrackknut

Please ignore the double post.

edited 20th Jun '09 6:16:50 AM by krrackknut

Really? I don't see that anywhere. Point it out, please.

Oh, sorry. I thought we were talking about the one at Spring Hole.Net. I'm sorry, but ya'll look alike!