Writing Tropes for Characters and Putting Values Before Vices
Since its release a few weeks back, I’ve been doing my first playthrough of Fire Emblem Engage. As of writing this blog, I’ve finished Chapter 22 and plan on finishing the game by the end of the week, and while opinions can certainly change within that timeframe, I suspect that I’ve met all the characters there are to meet and experienced all the story beats there are to experience short of the game’s climax.
As for how I feel about the game, I can’t help but say it’s a game full of many, many *almost*. Before it came out, I’ll admit that I was *almost* hyped. The story is *almost* pretty good. Some of the characters are *almost* interesting. The really fun gameplay and solid presentation *almost* make up for all the other *almosts*.
But ultimately, *almost* is just another word for *isn’t*, and I’ll admit that Fire Emblem Engage, while not really a bad game, leaves me wishing that there was just a little more to it. Perhaps if the game didn’t come off the heels of Three Houses, I’d be a bit more lenient. In fact, saying the game is a better sequel to Fates than Three Houses is rather accurate since Engage and Three Houses were made by two practically completely separate groups of developers (with Three Houses being more of a Koei Tecmo-led project while Engage was more Intelligent Systems) but that doesn’t really fix the problem, never mind change how I feel
But the point of this blog isn’t to write out some long-winded lamentation about the game’s writing. Instead, I just want to talk about something playing through Engage has brought to my attention through its weakness: the importance of writing characters with a strong foundation.
No non-main character in a Fire Emblem game tends to get more than a single chapter’s worth of spotlight because a) there can be anywhere between 30-50 different playable characters in a single game and b) permadeath being a key part of the franchise’s identity means that said character can potentially be killed off just after they are recruited. To make up for this, Fire Emblem has support conversations, rewarding players for using certain units (together) with little side stories ranging from comic relief shenanigans to more dramatic situations that test the ideals and perspectives of the involved characters. These interactions are what allow Fire Emblem’s characters to be more than just skills and stats attached to pretty anime faces, which means that when they’re done poorly, it can negatively impact the audience’s interest in them.
However, the inverse is also true: when the characters end up falling flat, their supports, while not necessarily poorly-written, tend to come off as hollow and uninteresting. Such is what feels like the case when it comes to a lot of Engage’s cast, unfortunately, as many characters end up being not much else but vessels for one-dimensional tropes and their support conversations spend more time trying to emphasize those aspects than vindicating them.
(Author’s Note: With that being said, I do want to point out that there are a few really good characters and support conversations. I’d especially like to highlight the majority of supports between noble characters, characters who are siblings to each other, and pretty much anything involving Yunaka.)
“Alright, Mr. Criticize-AAA-Companies-From-His-Teeny-Tiny-Blog,” one might ask rather smarmily, “if you’ve got such a problem with how the characters turn out, how do YOU do it?”
Good question, my hypothetical friend. Allow me to elaborate with a simple, improvised motto: values first, vices second.
“Ooookay… what does that even mean?”
It means rather than writing characters around their qualities, you ought to write the qualities around their character. Something a character does or the way they act is only a part of the character, a material vice that should reflect the greater values that drive the character and give them a role and impact on the story. Vices without values to back them are what ultimately leads to shallow, underdeveloped characters.
To help my point, let’s do a writing exercise and pretend we’re writing a character who we want to make a big eater. The first thing we’re gonna have to do is make sure there’s more going on here than just the action itself. For instance, is the big-eating character a gourmand with a culinary focus/history? Is there some dream or ideal they cling to that involves a special diet? Was there a time in their life when they had to go hungry?
On top of that, you have to make sure the trait fits in with the rest of their personality. Does it make sense for the character? Does it synergize well with other aspects of the character? Does it make for good synergy with other characters, regardless of whether they’re aligned or opposed to the quality in question? And most importantly… are you making sure the audience is able to find the value(s) behind the vice?
Ultimately, what divides good characters from gimmick characters ultimately involves making sure their traits are fleshed out, presented effectively, and contribute to what the existence of that character is meant to accomplish. It doesn’t matter whether the character in question is the protagonist or one of many side characters; what matters is making sure your characters are able to click with your audience, even whenthey’re as quirky as can be.