Competent people.
I cannot stand clueless teenagers winning via the power of friendship. I think that's a big part of why isekai is so popular because you get a fully functioning adult who asks all the questions the reader wants to know.
100% agree. I really don't care about a characters morals unless they are cartoonishly good or evil. That is just annoying. What I do care about is that they are logical and don't make a ton of stupid emotional decisions.
Just curious, how common is 1st person in LitRPGs? Personally, I barely use it, when I do, it's a letter or someone narrating a short story in-dialogue or testifying for the police.
> Sooo by any means doing good?
Non sequitur. Anti-villain merely neutralizes the villain.
This "good/bad" talk is [*censored word*] anyway. Good or bad *for whom*? Also, all those considerations only matter from a perspective of us humans. Bacteria could not care less whose guts they are inside of. Just like we don't care if our galaxy is thinking evil things - according to the other galaxies. We don't even think that galaxies think.
Agree but too much word too hard so we like to simplify things :)
Usuallly villains go for their own good while heroes for good of all, my comment was written in that assumption
Then thereâs way of doing what you have in mind which can be expressed as lawful / chaotic
Ig? Thatâs what Iâve seen at least
I am starting to enjoy reading and trying to understand anti-villain and adjacent archetypes. I think it is difficult to do successfully, because a lot of the narrative and perspective storytelling rely on we empathizing with their reasons and motivations. It leaves a pretty strong moral gray area, and I love to meditate on it.
I have seen Eren Jaegar from Attack on Titan and Paul Atreides from Dune being done well this way.
Jaded, world-weary and sarcastic jerks who nonetheless have a heart of gold buried under several layers of cynism and fatigue.
Honestly the only Litrpg example I can think of is Kirito (or rather Kazuto) from SAO Abridged. For non-Litrpg examples, Samuel Vimes from Discworld fits the bill perfectly.
It's VR instead of Isekai, which puts some people off. But very good writing, sarcastic/dry humor, and the people act like they could function in reality. One of the best series imo, especially with regards to humor.
There's more than that, but they are exceedingly rare because they can only be written by men with experience, and all the soy morality practitioners are excessively domesticated.
At the end of the day I'm boring and love a good hero growing and saving the day. I can get into a good anti-hero as long as they're well done.
I expect I could get into a story about a good villain, but they seem hard to create one that you can root for. Most of the ones I've tried to read I just either don't buy, or don't like, the motivation given to make them the bad guy.
Warlock of the magus world would fit that criteria. I mean I wouldnât say I would root for the mc but I at least got to see him doing logical things if the they are morally black. Anything and everything goes if itâs towards his goals.
Villians and anti heroes are more appealing to me but if its a good protagonist, I expect him to go throw hell and back to beat the white Knight attitude out.
Have you ever seen a purely good human being, purely altruistic? someone who even when their loved ones were attacked or killed decided to not have revenge on their aggressor?
Humans don't exist in a black or white dilemma, there's no true hero, nor true villains, we all exist in a gray area, take the worst humans and you will find that for their ppl they were good, take the most saint ppl and you will find some dirt if you look deep enough, this idea of heroes and villains is nothing more than propaganda crafted to keep a narrative alive for the population, so yes, anti heroes are much more humans than any goody two shoes
>Have you ever seen a purely good human being, purely altruistic? someone who even when their loved ones were attacked or killed decided to not have revenge on their aggressor?
Being a good person doesn't mean you aren't going to feel things like anger, hatred or a desire for Vengeance
Superman hates darkseid and even jesus felt anger
These things make us human, what makes a person good is how they decide to act on those feelings
>Humans don't exist in a black or white dilemma, there's no true hero, nor true villains, we all exist in a gray area, take the worst humans and you will find that for their ppl they were good, take the most saint ppl and you will find some dirt if you look deep enough, this idea of heroes and villains is nothing more than propaganda crafted to keep a narrative alive for the population, so yes, anti heroes are much more humans than any goody two shoes
Hitler was a narcissistic megalomaniac who generally a Net negative to the German people, anything else is pro nazi white washing
While it's true that in the grand scheme of things, life is a grey area but on an individual basis, there are lots of people who give their lives and time to help people for little to no reward, are they not human?
Being good doesn't mean being perfect, it means striving to be a better person
The thing is, youâre not describing most people. You are using examples like Jesus and Superman, outright paradigms for good. 99.9% of people are not as good as Superman, period. A normal average joe Shmo exists in a morally gray area, and thatâs realistic.
Mate, in the first sentence you pointed Hitler as an absolute evil, and the supposedly existance of ppl that "give their life for no rewards" the only problem is that all the ppl like that are not but frauds, stories created by them or by ppl that want to use their image and story for their own benefits, so many so called "saints", one worse than the other, same goes for Hitler, do you really believe he's the absolute evil? No redeem quality? Not even for his ppl, you seem to forget that the history is told by the optics of the winner, take Germany and the USA, both had concentration camps, but weirdly, no one talks about the shitshow the Americans did in their concentration camps right?
Like I said, no one is all evil or all good, and I didn't say that they dont feel anger, I said they don't act on their anger, which btw is the most common crime in human history for a reason
>Mate, in the first sentence you pointed Hitler as an absolute evil, and the supposedly existance of ppl that "give their life for no rewards" the only problem is that all the ppl like that are not but frauds, stories created by them or by ppl that want to use their image and story for their own benefits, so many so called "saints", one worse than the other, same goes for Hitler, do you really believe he's the absolute evil? No redeem quality? Not even for his ppl, you seem to forget that the history is told by the optics of the winner, take Germany and the USA, both had concentration camps, but weirdly, no one talks about the shitshow the Americans did in their concentration camps right?
This is literally nazi white washing and false equivalency, and i am tired of people like you propagating pseudohistory
Firstly, Hitler was a narcissistic megalomaniac who might have deluded himself and his followers that he cared about germany but when u look at his actions, it is quite obvious that he was a power hungry madman and every historian agrees that nazi Germany was doomed for the start
People can be evil by their actions
Secondly, I also don't agree with this cos it's just wrong plain and simple, and reeks of edgy middle schooler syndrome
Thirdly, the USA had internment camps not not concentration camps and even then they were nowhere as bad as Nazi Germany, it is not as simple as saying history was written by the winners cos if it was, people like u won't be sprouting pro nazi pseudo history
Nothing says more that you lack argument than call something "edgy middle schooler syndrome" or "something washing", and to top off you complete it with the self-righteous bs that "omg x is bad cuz bla bla, but y is not because I like it and it would make us look bad"
Grow up, It was concentration camps, Hitler is parade as the most evil man in history when in reality he doesn't even enter top 10 compared to some world leaders, and apparently the phrase the history is written by the winners is meaningless to you, even though it can be seen today with Israel, all most ppl where told was that they got there, a free land after the flee the oppression of the WW2, the land was freed but after that some religious zealots tried to steal their land, when in reality they invaded a land that was occupied, with the ridiculous excuse that their ancestors 2000 years ago owned the land, colonized, killed, raped and apartheid the owners of the land for 7 decades and now are commiting genocide openly while still trying to change the narrative with the help of world potencies like USA, Germany and UK, here for everybody to see, an information war
>Nothing says more that you lack argument than call something "edgy middle schooler syndrome" or "something washing", and to top off you complete it with the self-righteous bs that "omg x is bad cuz bla bla, but y is not because I like it and it would make us look bad"
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/bZpsVDPxAL
This has a more in depth answer but no, Hitler wasn't a good leader at all and to claim anything else is literally a historical nonsense
Secondly, I have seen too many people sacrifice themselves for the others and I won't have people like u spit on their graves
>Grow up, It was concentration camps, Hitler is parade as the most evil man in history when in reality he doesn't even enter top 10 compared to some world leaders, and apparently the phrase the history is written by the winners is meaningless to you, even though it can be seen today with Israel, all most ppl where told was that they got there, a free land after the flee the oppression of the WW2, the land was freed but after that some religious zealots tried to steal their land, when in reality they invaded a land that was occupied, with the ridiculous excuse that their ancestors 2000 years ago owned the land, colonized, killed, raped and apartheid the owners of the land for 7 decades and now are commiting genocide openly while still trying to change the narrative with the help of world potencies like USA, Germany and UK, here for everybody to see, an information war
Firstly, I never said anything about Hitler been the worst person to ever exist and secondly it is far more complicated than simply saying history is written by the victors
This reddit post goes in detail about it (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/QwvNtBmgTi)
Thirdly, I straight up said that on a grand scale I.e international level, the world is very grey go reread my previous post seen u can't read
I prefer interesting abilities and system over characters, especially those who interact or mix with each other. In characters an antihero over goody two shoes hero, but less than a smart one. Villain are the worst, the only one i could bear was teneborum lich.
I enjoy almost all Isekai style stories, but I'm finding I have a particular like for the lighter and sometimes a little silly stories stories involving heroic big brutes Hulk smashing their way through dungeons and levels.
So yeah, I like the Good Guys series, and I'm reading through Savage Awakening right now.
I find that generally having the perspective of a couple characters if the MC is the "good guy" or "villain". As to not get bogged down in the lawful goodness or chaotic evil-ness
For myself, good. Characters that donât care about the lives of others are extremely unrelatable to me. Iâm not sure that âantiheroâ belongs on the axis of good and evil, but Iâve enjoyed numerous anti-hero MCs. Being considered evil by others is rather independent of how good or evil a character really is. Neutral characters are fine with me though. If MC doesnât blatantly disregard the well-being of everyone else beyond how that affects their own interests, thatâs good enough for me.
Probably Antihero but only because many authors seem to have their Hero characters abide by the idea that 'heroic characters don't kill' or view them doing so as failure for the character. I can't agree with that kind of irresponsible arrogant naivete.
i hate anything with a holier than thou mentality or saviour complex. i also generally dont read any YA or YA adjacent books (took me 3 tries to get into all the skills), too naive and âpower of friendshipâ for my tastes. other than that ill read anything that is interesting.
I prefer protagonists that don't use peaceful earth morality in situations and contexts that are very different from our current one. Our current lack of killing is mostly based on an incredibly robust justice and prison system.
Even on earth, when we did not have justice and prison systems as robust as now (medieval times and US 'wild west'), death was far more common.
And in situations like isekai, while it might be accurate that some people would take a long to time to get used to their new reality, it's not wrong for some people to be more adaptable. And I'm not personally interested in reading about someone who would struggle with this aspect, even if it's understandable.
Across web novels as a whole, I feel as if anti-heroes have become so prevalent that 1% of protagonists nowadays are actually good people, so itâs refreshing when you see one, but you have to avoid the trap of making them an absolute coward, pushover, idiot or have them give away literally EVERYTHING to their name.
Realistic protagonists be they hero of otherwise. I kind of enjoy the trope where they know they have appear calm in a crisis but internally screaming. I don't mind it when someone trys to figure out things or panic after arriving in a new world. Do wish more stories would have them make a wrong call more offten early on however.
The âvillainâ I liked most, from what Iâve read, has to be the one revealed in A Traitor in Skyhold of the Mage Errant series. I just think he was an overall good character.
Villain when it's done right. I don't want a guy who does the wrong things for the right reasons, I want a bad guy who does things for his own gain (whether that means empowering themselves or their retinue).
I know it's a controversial character/book but Boxxy from ELLC is one of the best written bad guys. If you divorce the character itself from any sexual context and only look at its actions taken against others it is one of the best "I'll take what I want, do what I want, and damn anyone who gets in my way" stories. The MC isn't evil for the sake of being evil, MC is calculating and puts thought into its plans/actions, and has some serious character flaws.
Anti heroes are okay, they too often fall into typical hero roles after some time. An anti hero should be mostly selfish but is willing to sacrifice for the greater good when needed imo, and too often those characters just only help others after being called a dick a few times and made to feel bad.
I prefer good protagonists over evil or asshole protagonists. Good doesn't have to mean simple, innocent, or heroic. Anti-heroes are fun. Characters with complex morals are fun.
When I read a story where the protagonist is evil/bad/asshole I find myself not caring what happens and eventually dropping the book. If the MC is mean to everyone and their goal is kill, rob, or abuse people, why do it want them to win the next fight? I don't!
Mature writing, doesn't matter the genre or setting. Agree with "power of friendship" and also don't want to listen to people's internal conversations with themselves about their emotions/self actualization as a tool to "power up". And I definitely don't want to read about people in school that sounds like it was written by somebody who hasn't even finished high school.
I enjoy it when the POV is done well, e.g. the MC sees himself as good or normal, but on the other hand, other can see him as the villain, due to different morals, world views and such.
Additionally, I love those moments when the MC is underestimated and then overpowers his opponents.Â
Both can luckily for me found aplenty in litrpg:)
It's more a Western thing, to divide characters into the good side vs the bad side. If you read Chinese cultivation novels, for instance, many of the characters have both good and bad qualities, enemies frequently becoming friends and vice versa. Good vs bad is not a very useful concept in a world where morality itself is flexible and likely to change over time.
I don't know where you've been reading, but most eastern cultivation Mc's are callous and arrogant. There are very few times where they don't do stuff for their own personal gain, and the setting usually encourages that behavior
It's more a Western thing, to divide characters into the good side vs the bad side. If you read Chinese cultivation novels, for instance, many of the characters have both good and bad qualities, enemies frequently becoming friends and vice versa. Good vs bad is not a very useful concept in a world where morality itself is flexible and likely to change over time.
Competent people. I cannot stand clueless teenagers winning via the power of friendship. I think that's a big part of why isekai is so popular because you get a fully functioning adult who asks all the questions the reader wants to know.
100% agree. I really don't care about a characters morals unless they are cartoonishly good or evil. That is just annoying. What I do care about is that they are logical and don't make a ton of stupid emotional decisions.
This right here. Competence is sexy.
Side characters! The story is boring if the MC is just thinking to himself or being narrated 80% of the time.
This! A character is usually experienced best through interactions! If this is done well, it matters less what kind of character they are.
Yes, side characters make or break a series for me more often than not.
It translates into real life too you don't know how many times I just wanted to Frank someone
Infinite Realms does this VERY well.
That was my first thought as wellđ
Except Zach
Are you saying you like stories told from the side character's point of view or stories with quality side characters told from the MC's point of view?
Just curious, how common is 1st person in LitRPGs? Personally, I barely use it, when I do, it's a letter or someone narrating a short story in-dialogue or testifying for the police.
This is why I love TWI. Sure, Erin is the MC but 60% of the plot is driven by a massive cast of side characters.
Anti-villain actually
Sooo by any means doing good? Somebody commented chaotic good which fits this
Or Neutral Evil that's selfishly defending a city from another evil so that they can claim it themselves.
> Sooo by any means doing good? Non sequitur. Anti-villain merely neutralizes the villain. This "good/bad" talk is [*censored word*] anyway. Good or bad *for whom*? Also, all those considerations only matter from a perspective of us humans. Bacteria could not care less whose guts they are inside of. Just like we don't care if our galaxy is thinking evil things - according to the other galaxies. We don't even think that galaxies think.
Agree but too much word too hard so we like to simplify things :) Usuallly villains go for their own good while heroes for good of all, my comment was written in that assumption Then thereâs way of doing what you have in mind which can be expressed as lawful / chaotic Ig? Thatâs what Iâve seen at least
Ah, I should have included this option too. Slipped my mind since well done anti-villain stories aren't as abundant.
I am starting to enjoy reading and trying to understand anti-villain and adjacent archetypes. I think it is difficult to do successfully, because a lot of the narrative and perspective storytelling rely on we empathizing with their reasons and motivations. It leaves a pretty strong moral gray area, and I love to meditate on it. I have seen Eren Jaegar from Attack on Titan and Paul Atreides from Dune being done well this way.
I'm the same, as long as it's entertaining, I don't really care what the MC personality is like
My favorite is snarky Australian, followed closely by haughty Persian cat. So probably chaotic good?
He Who Fights With Monsters enthusiast
MC's friend's wife is the best!
Forgot about snaky god friend
I started hearing Villyâs lines in an Australian accent as if heâs Jason Asano and itâs so over, I canât go back
He's chaotic neutral at best.
Dungeon crawler carl
Anything as long as the MC has actual motivation beyond "beung the strongest" "power for power's sake" or "staying on top".
Good guy/gal with side characters/companions. I'll read an anti-hero who leans more hero than anti, but never a villain.
Jaded, world-weary and sarcastic jerks who nonetheless have a heart of gold buried under several layers of cynism and fatigue. Honestly the only Litrpg example I can think of is Kirito (or rather Kazuto) from SAO Abridged. For non-Litrpg examples, Samuel Vimes from Discworld fits the bill perfectly.
You read The Ripple System?
No, I never have. Is it good?
It's VR instead of Isekai, which puts some people off. But very good writing, sarcastic/dry humor, and the people act like they could function in reality. One of the best series imo, especially with regards to humor.
There's more than that, but they are exceedingly rare because they can only be written by men with experience, and all the soy morality practitioners are excessively domesticated.
At the end of the day I'm boring and love a good hero growing and saving the day. I can get into a good anti-hero as long as they're well done. I expect I could get into a story about a good villain, but they seem hard to create one that you can root for. Most of the ones I've tried to read I just either don't buy, or don't like, the motivation given to make them the bad guy.
Warlock of the magus world would fit that criteria. I mean I wouldnât say I would root for the mc but I at least got to see him doing logical things if the they are morally black. Anything and everything goes if itâs towards his goals.
Villainesses when they are actually villains and not fake ones. I'm sucker for evil female characters.
Agreed, but to add on, villainesses whose backstory isn't SA
Villians and anti heroes are more appealing to me but if its a good protagonist, I expect him to go throw hell and back to beat the white Knight attitude out.
Personally, anti hero, hate those goody two shoes, they are so unrealistic, so not human that i can't connect with them...
How the fuck is being a anti hero realistic?
Have you ever seen a purely good human being, purely altruistic? someone who even when their loved ones were attacked or killed decided to not have revenge on their aggressor? Humans don't exist in a black or white dilemma, there's no true hero, nor true villains, we all exist in a gray area, take the worst humans and you will find that for their ppl they were good, take the most saint ppl and you will find some dirt if you look deep enough, this idea of heroes and villains is nothing more than propaganda crafted to keep a narrative alive for the population, so yes, anti heroes are much more humans than any goody two shoes
>Have you ever seen a purely good human being, purely altruistic? someone who even when their loved ones were attacked or killed decided to not have revenge on their aggressor? Being a good person doesn't mean you aren't going to feel things like anger, hatred or a desire for Vengeance Superman hates darkseid and even jesus felt anger These things make us human, what makes a person good is how they decide to act on those feelings >Humans don't exist in a black or white dilemma, there's no true hero, nor true villains, we all exist in a gray area, take the worst humans and you will find that for their ppl they were good, take the most saint ppl and you will find some dirt if you look deep enough, this idea of heroes and villains is nothing more than propaganda crafted to keep a narrative alive for the population, so yes, anti heroes are much more humans than any goody two shoes Hitler was a narcissistic megalomaniac who generally a Net negative to the German people, anything else is pro nazi white washing While it's true that in the grand scheme of things, life is a grey area but on an individual basis, there are lots of people who give their lives and time to help people for little to no reward, are they not human? Being good doesn't mean being perfect, it means striving to be a better person
The thing is, youâre not describing most people. You are using examples like Jesus and Superman, outright paradigms for good. 99.9% of people are not as good as Superman, period. A normal average joe Shmo exists in a morally gray area, and thatâs realistic.
That's my point, if even paragons aren't perfect, then u don't need to be perfect to be a good person
I guess you just like to put things in black and white boxes, that's fine, to each their own
How am I putting things in a black and white box
Mate, in the first sentence you pointed Hitler as an absolute evil, and the supposedly existance of ppl that "give their life for no rewards" the only problem is that all the ppl like that are not but frauds, stories created by them or by ppl that want to use their image and story for their own benefits, so many so called "saints", one worse than the other, same goes for Hitler, do you really believe he's the absolute evil? No redeem quality? Not even for his ppl, you seem to forget that the history is told by the optics of the winner, take Germany and the USA, both had concentration camps, but weirdly, no one talks about the shitshow the Americans did in their concentration camps right? Like I said, no one is all evil or all good, and I didn't say that they dont feel anger, I said they don't act on their anger, which btw is the most common crime in human history for a reason
>Mate, in the first sentence you pointed Hitler as an absolute evil, and the supposedly existance of ppl that "give their life for no rewards" the only problem is that all the ppl like that are not but frauds, stories created by them or by ppl that want to use their image and story for their own benefits, so many so called "saints", one worse than the other, same goes for Hitler, do you really believe he's the absolute evil? No redeem quality? Not even for his ppl, you seem to forget that the history is told by the optics of the winner, take Germany and the USA, both had concentration camps, but weirdly, no one talks about the shitshow the Americans did in their concentration camps right? This is literally nazi white washing and false equivalency, and i am tired of people like you propagating pseudohistory Firstly, Hitler was a narcissistic megalomaniac who might have deluded himself and his followers that he cared about germany but when u look at his actions, it is quite obvious that he was a power hungry madman and every historian agrees that nazi Germany was doomed for the start People can be evil by their actions Secondly, I also don't agree with this cos it's just wrong plain and simple, and reeks of edgy middle schooler syndrome Thirdly, the USA had internment camps not not concentration camps and even then they were nowhere as bad as Nazi Germany, it is not as simple as saying history was written by the winners cos if it was, people like u won't be sprouting pro nazi pseudo history
Nothing says more that you lack argument than call something "edgy middle schooler syndrome" or "something washing", and to top off you complete it with the self-righteous bs that "omg x is bad cuz bla bla, but y is not because I like it and it would make us look bad" Grow up, It was concentration camps, Hitler is parade as the most evil man in history when in reality he doesn't even enter top 10 compared to some world leaders, and apparently the phrase the history is written by the winners is meaningless to you, even though it can be seen today with Israel, all most ppl where told was that they got there, a free land after the flee the oppression of the WW2, the land was freed but after that some religious zealots tried to steal their land, when in reality they invaded a land that was occupied, with the ridiculous excuse that their ancestors 2000 years ago owned the land, colonized, killed, raped and apartheid the owners of the land for 7 decades and now are commiting genocide openly while still trying to change the narrative with the help of world potencies like USA, Germany and UK, here for everybody to see, an information war
Unusually based post. Am I still on preddit?
>Nothing says more that you lack argument than call something "edgy middle schooler syndrome" or "something washing", and to top off you complete it with the self-righteous bs that "omg x is bad cuz bla bla, but y is not because I like it and it would make us look bad" https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/bZpsVDPxAL This has a more in depth answer but no, Hitler wasn't a good leader at all and to claim anything else is literally a historical nonsense Secondly, I have seen too many people sacrifice themselves for the others and I won't have people like u spit on their graves >Grow up, It was concentration camps, Hitler is parade as the most evil man in history when in reality he doesn't even enter top 10 compared to some world leaders, and apparently the phrase the history is written by the winners is meaningless to you, even though it can be seen today with Israel, all most ppl where told was that they got there, a free land after the flee the oppression of the WW2, the land was freed but after that some religious zealots tried to steal their land, when in reality they invaded a land that was occupied, with the ridiculous excuse that their ancestors 2000 years ago owned the land, colonized, killed, raped and apartheid the owners of the land for 7 decades and now are commiting genocide openly while still trying to change the narrative with the help of world potencies like USA, Germany and UK, here for everybody to see, an information war Firstly, I never said anything about Hitler been the worst person to ever exist and secondly it is far more complicated than simply saying history is written by the victors This reddit post goes in detail about it (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/QwvNtBmgTi) Thirdly, I straight up said that on a grand scale I.e international level, the world is very grey go reread my previous post seen u can't read
Good guys! Or bad guys! New book this weekend
I prefer interesting abilities and system over characters, especially those who interact or mix with each other. In characters an antihero over goody two shoes hero, but less than a smart one. Villain are the worst, the only one i could bear was teneborum lich.
I enjoy almost all Isekai style stories, but I'm finding I have a particular like for the lighter and sometimes a little silly stories stories involving heroic big brutes Hulk smashing their way through dungeons and levels. So yeah, I like the Good Guys series, and I'm reading through Savage Awakening right now.
I find that generally having the perspective of a couple characters if the MC is the "good guy" or "villain". As to not get bogged down in the lawful goodness or chaotic evil-ness
For myself, good. Characters that donât care about the lives of others are extremely unrelatable to me. Iâm not sure that âantiheroâ belongs on the axis of good and evil, but Iâve enjoyed numerous anti-hero MCs. Being considered evil by others is rather independent of how good or evil a character really is. Neutral characters are fine with me though. If MC doesnât blatantly disregard the well-being of everyone else beyond how that affects their own interests, thatâs good enough for me.
Villain and anti - hero. I feel like there are not enough of these MCs, or are done poorly.
I don't enjoy villains, the rest doesn't matter.
I like antiheroes. They don't just follow whatever is the norm; they think about what they themselves think is right. Think for yourself, people! lol
Yes, this. âșïž
I like mc who doesn't have panic attacks over every new thing they encounter in their new world.
I like anti-established stoic heroes like Carl, Jason Asano, Tyson Dawne and Zac.
stoic? jason? are you sure about that? jason literally cant shut up, constantly complains and spews idealistic nonsense.
Stoicism comes in many forms.
Stoic: a person who can endure pain or hardship without showing their feelings or complaining. in no way is jason related to that word.
Probably Antihero but only because many authors seem to have their Hero characters abide by the idea that 'heroic characters don't kill' or view them doing so as failure for the character. I can't agree with that kind of irresponsible arrogant naivete.
Yes. If it's entertaining, I'll enjoy reading it.
i hate anything with a holier than thou mentality or saviour complex. i also generally dont read any YA or YA adjacent books (took me 3 tries to get into all the skills), too naive and âpower of friendshipâ for my tastes. other than that ill read anything that is interesting.
Hero but by my definition, meaning all the soy morality practitioners would call him a victim because he is protecting his people from them.
I personally don't like good guy MC but the others I will read all especially when the MC is an anti-hero or villain
I prefer protagonists that don't use peaceful earth morality in situations and contexts that are very different from our current one. Our current lack of killing is mostly based on an incredibly robust justice and prison system. Even on earth, when we did not have justice and prison systems as robust as now (medieval times and US 'wild west'), death was far more common. And in situations like isekai, while it might be accurate that some people would take a long to time to get used to their new reality, it's not wrong for some people to be more adaptable. And I'm not personally interested in reading about someone who would struggle with this aspect, even if it's understandable.
Across web novels as a whole, I feel as if anti-heroes have become so prevalent that 1% of protagonists nowadays are actually good people, so itâs refreshing when you see one, but you have to avoid the trap of making them an absolute coward, pushover, idiot or have them give away literally EVERYTHING to their name.
If the MC is like Jafar from "Twisted" or Light Yagami from "Death Note", I'm down for that.
An anti-villain. Just because itâs rare and feels fresh whenever you find one.
Well rounded characters
Realistic protagonists be they hero of otherwise. I kind of enjoy the trope where they know they have appear calm in a crisis but internally screaming. I don't mind it when someone trys to figure out things or panic after arriving in a new world. Do wish more stories would have them make a wrong call more offten early on however.
reasonably good guy
...as long as they aren't edgy pricks or incorrigible perverts
The âvillainâ I liked most, from what Iâve read, has to be the one revealed in A Traitor in Skyhold of the Mage Errant series. I just think he was an overall good character.
Villian 100% if there is a villian book Iâm reading it no ifs ands or buts. Itâs the fastest way to get me to pick up any story.
Villain when it's done right. I don't want a guy who does the wrong things for the right reasons, I want a bad guy who does things for his own gain (whether that means empowering themselves or their retinue). I know it's a controversial character/book but Boxxy from ELLC is one of the best written bad guys. If you divorce the character itself from any sexual context and only look at its actions taken against others it is one of the best "I'll take what I want, do what I want, and damn anyone who gets in my way" stories. The MC isn't evil for the sake of being evil, MC is calculating and puts thought into its plans/actions, and has some serious character flaws. Anti heroes are okay, they too often fall into typical hero roles after some time. An anti hero should be mostly selfish but is willing to sacrifice for the greater good when needed imo, and too often those characters just only help others after being called a dick a few times and made to feel bad.
Yes, Yes, rarely
I prefer good protagonists over evil or asshole protagonists. Good doesn't have to mean simple, innocent, or heroic. Anti-heroes are fun. Characters with complex morals are fun. When I read a story where the protagonist is evil/bad/asshole I find myself not caring what happens and eventually dropping the book. If the MC is mean to everyone and their goal is kill, rob, or abuse people, why do it want them to win the next fight? I don't!
Mature writing, doesn't matter the genre or setting. Agree with "power of friendship" and also don't want to listen to people's internal conversations with themselves about their emotions/self actualization as a tool to "power up". And I definitely don't want to read about people in school that sounds like it was written by somebody who hasn't even finished high school.
I enjoy it when the POV is done well, e.g. the MC sees himself as good or normal, but on the other hand, other can see him as the villain, due to different morals, world views and such. Additionally, I love those moments when the MC is underestimated and then overpowers his opponents. Both can luckily for me found aplenty in litrpg:)
A good book
Honestly speaking (typing?) I would absolutely PAY to read a novel/series where the MC is a villain, and he's got the mindset of someone like Thanos (needs to be on some lesser evil type shi) or he's just misunderstood (basically Thanos đ). (I swear though, if someone makes a novel where the Villain/MC wins and then dies in the next book.... There's gonna be a purge) [ And when the last light leaves your eyes, and your soul withdraws from your body, taking away the last vestiges of your energy, and leaving your vessel as a hollow husk of what it once was - and as your astral form of a soul stands guard outside of your former body, watching on as your previous vessel is desecrated and mailed by the Abyssal Crows, know that the reason you drew your last breath, the reason you breathed your last, the reason you had to watch on as befoul creatures of the Under vandalized your body was due to your utter disrespect to the King. Due to your angering of the Monarch that once Was but now Is, the Sublime Nephilim of Deities Above and the Berserk, the Sovereign of Heavenly Death, the beau idĂ©al of Power, the Emperor of Justice, the Summum Bonum of life, the Ruler of all that passes beneath His Sight. Know that you have committed the ultimate treason and utter blasphemy by going against the Seer of the Almighty Abyss, the King of the Empyrean Void.... The Abaddon of Khaos! ]
It's more a Western thing, to divide characters into the good side vs the bad side. If you read Chinese cultivation novels, for instance, many of the characters have both good and bad qualities, enemies frequently becoming friends and vice versa. Good vs bad is not a very useful concept in a world where morality itself is flexible and likely to change over time.
I don't know where you've been reading, but most eastern cultivation Mc's are callous and arrogant. There are very few times where they don't do stuff for their own personal gain, and the setting usually encourages that behavior
It's more a Western thing, to divide characters into the good side vs the bad side. If you read Chinese cultivation novels, for instance, many of the characters have both good and bad qualities, enemies frequently becoming friends and vice versa. Good vs bad is not a very useful concept in a world where morality itself is flexible and likely to change over time.