The Appeal of Overpowered Characters - Part 2 - The Meaning of the Fight

 The Appeal of Overpowered Characters - Part 2. The Meaning of the Fight

Last time, I talked about Appeal of an Overpowered Character, starting with the supposed "problem" of an overpowered character in regard to drama and tension, and then moving into the topic of the protagonist as an underdog. I used the series "No Game No Life" as an example of how to use a nominal underdog to create tense and exciting conflict by making the conflict itself the objective instead of the outcome. 

Now you might cry foul at this example.  "No Game No Life" is the exception, you might say. It focuses on literal games that supernaturally force the players to rely on non-violent means.  What if I want to write a story about life-or-death fights between heroes and villains. Surely, I need to use an underdog here, right?

Not necessarily. This is my next example, "One-Punch Man".

  "One-Punch Man" is a superhero story that stars one such superhero, Saitama. He was an ordinary human who gained super-powers by training really hard for several years. Now he is so strong that he can defeat any enemy in just one punch. And that's not all. He is also invulnerable (only getting hurt when it would be funny) and so fast he can't be seen. All this is when he is not even trying hard. 

The series opens with the introduction of a villain and Saitama reducing them to paste with a single punch, who deplores the fact that he ended the fight so quickly. You see, Saitama is what Tvtropes calls a Blood Knight, he enjoys fighting for its own sake, and he calls himself "a hero for fun". By the time the main narrative starts, Saitama has become so strong that no one can challenge him, and so the fights no longer thrill him. 

Unlike "No Game No Life", Saitama's fights are always quick, and his tactics are rarely more creative than "punch it, once". How then, is the narrative compelling? What is the appeal of the fights? 

First of all, it's funny to see a villain hype themselves up only to get splattered in one-punch. For me at least, that didn't get old even after two seasons. Second, Saitama has to find the right person to punch. He doesn't want to fight minions all day; he's only a hero for fun, after all, and that is not fun. Third is the broader context of the fight. 

It is always about more than just the fight. 

This is a series that can have the protagonist say, in the first episode, "having overwhelming power is... pretty boring", and not be boring itself. 

There is always more going on than some singular villain showing up and saying, "I will rule/destroy the world". So, the solution to the conflict is always more complicated than "punch the guy". The first episode has a couple of these to establish the setting and the story's tone, and that's it. Starting with the House of Evolution arc, villains come in groups, and their respective evil plans have to be figured out. Then Saitama can punch them out or help other heroes do so.

Yes, Saitama lives in a superhero society. Being a "hero" can be a profession, and these "heroes" have many different motives. Fame, science experiments, revenge, genuine heroism. Saitama only fights for fun, so he has many foils. The narrative compares him to people like Mumen Rider, a totally normal human with a truly heroic spirit, and to Genos, a cyborg driven by revenge, or the Tank Top brothers, several of whom have a bad case of Tall Poppy Syndrome. How these heroes react to someone like Saitama, who is better than them at defeating villains, and what the civilians think of a "hero for fun" is just as much a part of the series as defeating the villains.

Finally, there is what Saitama himself thinks about heroes and his own heroics. He says that he is just a "hero for fun" and he is always bored because no one can challenge him. He is enduring an existential crisis, because his dream was to become the strongest hero and, now that he is, he struggles with motivation. It is a dramatic character arc in an overall comedic series. 

In this way, the author crafts a story where the protagonist is overpowered/invincible, but can still create exciting fights, meaningful conflict and interesting character development. A character like Saitama can be played for comedy and drama as needed, and fights can end as soon as he shows up. 

There are also conventional fights with other heroes who are not invincible. The invulnerability of Saitama highlights the fragility of these heroes, and so their reason for being heroes is also highlighted. Saitama isn't always around to back them up. No matter how quickly a protagonist can defeat a villain, if they aren't present, it doesn't matter. These fights are all the more tense for it, and the fights do not always end with Saitama showing up to save them either. 

Having an overpowered protagonist doesn't necessarily make everyone else useless. There are other perfectly competent heroes who can defeat monsters, save lives, and otherwise do heroic stuff. Saitama's existence doesn't make them obsolete. Indeed, Saitama's overpoweredness actually inspires some heroes to reach greater heights, like Saitama's own disciple, Genos. 

Having overwhelming power may be pretty boring, but a story about such a character need not be. Keep Saitama's example in mind and you can indeed write an exciting story about an overpowered protagonist.

Click here to read Part 1 - No Need for an Underdog

Click here to read Part 3 - What is Gained

 Brian Wilkerson is an independent novelist, freelance book reviewer, and writing advice blogger. He studied at the University of Minnesota and came away with bachelor's degrees in English Literature and History (Classical Mediterranean Period concentration).

His fantasy series, Journey to Chaos, is currently available on Amazon as an ebook or paperback.

The Appeal of OverPowered Characters - Part 1 - No Need for an Underdog.

Authors out there, you should consider using an overpowered character as your protagonist. 

When I first started writing novels, what was it, twenty years ago now? (My how time flies), I read up on novel-writing advice. I sought it everywhere and I gathered it together. Something I saw a lot was "don't make the characters too powerful", and the similar refrain of "give your characters flaws".  A character, particularly a protagonist, had to be weak, or at least weaker than their enemies. They had to be the underdog. 

The general idea was that if a character was too powerful, then the story wouldn't have any tension. The character would resolve all problems with their over-poweredness.  No tension =  no drama, which supposedly also equals "bad story". Without exception, this advice said, a story with an overpowered protagonist was supposed to be bad. I believed it at the time. I don't anymore. 

 It's not bad advice, but with all writing tips, there are exceptions.

What if you don't want to write an underdog story? What if your goal isn't writing a story fueled by the question "will the protagonist triumph"? It is very possible to do that. Even with a modicum of genre savvy, one can predict that "yes, the protagonist will triumph", even if the situation seems hopeless. Why, I recall watching Mighty Ducks 2 with my class during middle school, and right at the climatic moment, when the gaming-winning move takes place, one of my classmates sarcastically said, "Oh, I thought Iceland was going to win". It was a real buzz kill. I imagine he thought himself clever, but no, he wasn't. The climatic moment was well-crafted from a narrative and thematic perspective, but totally predictable.  

Authors out there, you don't have to struggle with that dilemma. There is no strict need to balance the seesaw of "Oh, this protagonist is so weak and overwhelmed, there's no way they will triumph but, yeah, they totally will, somehow".  It's a thin wire to walk. You either have to build the story around setting up the character as an underdog while also setting up their path to victory in a believable way or choose a failure ending and all that implies (bitter-sweet or tragedy). 

 I will illustrate the exceptions with specific series that I believe best serve to help illustrate. 

To start things off, No Game No Life. This is a light novel series staring a pair of human siblings, Sora and Shiro, who are collectively known as " " (in other words "Blank").  The world they live in operates on the premise of Duels Decide Everything. The One True God of this world (who is also the God of Games) decreed that all violence was forbidden, and therefore disputes would be resolved through games. This is enforced via Supernaturally Binding Contract. Sora and Shiro are the best gamers, and the series is not shy about reminding the reader about their motto, "Blank doesn't lose." 

This is a story with tension. There is a LOT of tension, but the driving question is never, "will Sora and Shiro win". That is because the answer is obviously, "yes, they will". The question is HOW will they do it. That is a much more interesting question. It gets readers involved in the middle parts of the story, which basically IS the story itself. If all the reader cares about is the ending, then the potential of the beginning and middle is never fully realized.  (Incidentally, I wrote a different blog post about this years ago ---> LINK)

(Full disclosure - Technically, the gamer siblings ARE underdogs, because their opponents have supernatural advantages, but the narrative doesn't seriously entertain the idea that they will lose. In fact, Sora gives a speech that is summarized as "The weak are the strongest".)

Authors out there, don't you want to write a story that grips readers with every page? For the event on that page itself to engage their full attention? Not as a percussor to an ending, but the progression to have value and meaning. That is what No Game No Life is all about. One can guess that Sora and Shiro will win, but not the moves they make to get that win. 

That is the appeal of the story. Yes, the protagonist "Blank" will win. The gamer siblings approach every game with the mindset that they will win, and they do. Yet every game is thrilling. 

The author doesn't have to worry about maintaining the illusion that the gamer siblings might lose. The time, energy and words that would otherwise have been devoted to that instead go into the amazing tactics, the funny running gags, the fascinating world-building, and other things far more interesting than protestations of their dire situation. Side characters might worry about their chances, but Sora and Shiro do not, and so the overall narration does not.  

My original idea was to include all the examples in one post, but this one is already too long. I will cover the others in other posts. I can think of four examples right now, so this might be a 5-part series. That would be a first for me. 

Look forward to it!

Update: Part 2 is ready. Click to read The Meaning of the Fight

 Brian Wilkerson is an independent novelist, freelance book reviewer, and writing advice blogger. He studied at the University of Minnesota and came away with bachelor's degrees in English Literature and History (Classical Mediterranean Period concentration).

His fantasy series, Journey to Chaos, is currently available on Amazon as an ebook or paperback.