The thing is, "Broody" according to my dictionary means "deeply or seriously thoughtful," which means that technically, they could be brooding about something ridiculously silly, like infinite immortal monkeys typing infinitely at limitless typewriters (and whether or not one of them types out Shakespeare by accident). Granted, "brooding" has a somber, pessimistic connotation, but... I feel like there's room there to make it work. Think of this: why is it that, in this thread, we seem to be talking only about dark characters who are heroes? We all know they could easily be villains--that they often walk the line between "good" and "evil." So what keeps them on the "good" side of that line? My theory: they are actually optimistic (deep down, at least). All those Gothic, dark, broody heroes? Why would they try to save the world/city/people/whatever if they ultimately believed that it was useless anyway? (I think Cloud makes an excellent example, but I acknowledge not everyone here may know who that is.)
Lol I was talking about both heroes and villains, but mostly villains. However a "villain" can't keep on the good side. They're villains. Unless you're talking about heroes there. Well, I'm very sorry to say I feel I can't help you. Your innovative way of thinking about characters goes beyond my reasoning. I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just that I have never explored such complicated facets. I'm one of those outdated persons who think characters shouldn't be that perplexing, that's why I don't add too many "sides" to them.
Me and my writings in a nutshell. If sides and depth come to my characters, it's only what I feel is natural. While I think it's a good idea to know at least a bit about what your writing (or trying to, which why I'm asking these questions) I don't like to be laden down with facts and opinions saying "it has to be this way". I dunno, it's 3:00 AM and I'm rambling, so sorry if this is off topic.
My most infamous RP character, Kelly Jasper Haven, is probably my most abused character to date. Parents died early on (cue tears), she had a vision of it and no one believed her (more tears), love lost time and time again, insert suicidal moments here, an unwanted pregnancy, and so on and so forth. But none of it really sounded all that grim. Completely side-stepping here, but just because you make a character's life grim doesn't mean it will sound grim in the writing. I find that my best grim writing comes when I'm in my own mental slump in life- call it a depression strike or what have you, but it makes the words sound much more realistic than your standard, "Oh, Mummy just died and Daddy's a jerk, woh is me!" tale.
I always believed in the notion that "the road to heaven leads through hell." As such, I try to put my characters through a LOT of stuff to make them "earn" their happy ending. For example, for my first book, the main character's fiance is already dead, and then a malevolent spiritual force impersonates her, tries to get him to kill himself, possesses his best friend and tries to get said best friend to kill him, and then before the end of the story he's beaten bloody, burned almost beyond recognition, stabbed and nearly dies from blood loss. And on top of that, his soul is tainted from the experience, and it changes him. For the next story I'm working on, my main character is trapped in a world of dreams and nightmares - he/she (haven't decided on the gender yet) suffers from severe narcolepsy which is increasingly getting worse, so he/she will have to come to terms with the reality of being trapped and alone in a chaotic and deceptive world, forced to distinguish from memory and reality, fantasy and the waking world. It's not a physical ordeal as much as it is a psychological one.
I find I usually write about characters that have been "abandoned" in some way (by a parent or loved one - particularly an absentee father - I write about this because it's something I relate to, having been there myself)
