In one of my stories, the protagonist, Terald, describes himself as someone who never stops seeing people as people, no matter what they've done. He gets reluctantly talked into helping to kill a villain who has personally harmed him and people he cares about numerous times, and feels haunted by it. Then he finds the villain in question has survived the attack but has suffered a severe brain injury and can no longer speak or do many things for herself. After being assured by a doctor that she'll never recover, he gladly takes her in and cares for her, feeling lucky that she's no longer a threat without having to be killed. Does he sound like a good guy? What impression do you think he'd make on the reader?
I think a lot of people would find him to be a pushover or an idiot, honestly. Personally, though, I find this sort of hyper-compassion pretty interesting and compelling. It's the kind of character I'm interested in writing myself! I don't know if he's necessarily a good guy - because from my perspective compassion isn't always the best option - but it's the type of motivation that I could sympathize with regardless of his actions.
One good act doesn't make someone a "good" person, but this act of compassion does sound like something someone would do if they had good morals. I mean, taking someone who is injured in isn't something most people would take lightly, especially if you've had bad experiences with this person. I think the reader would probably think well of him, but I don't know what your story is about or the details of the protagonist.
That, or a number of other words that are less kind. It is not a new trope, and is/was popular in literature for a very long time. Unless the MC is getting something tangible (knowledge, etc) it makes no sense to me.
Some might say his actions were abhorrent and that she should be mercy killed to end what is surely an agonizing life. I wouldn't say he's good -- I'd say that him thinking it's good offers a lot of intrigue and room to explore the character, because no interesting character is really ever truly "good."
I like it. That exact moral code is something I've considered a lot as a person and as a writer for my characters. Where the main goal of the protagonist is to eliminate danger rather than eliminate the person that causes the danger, i.e hate the sin not the sinner. I think it's interesting and leads into a whole winding path of contradicting morality, morality is hard and it's hard to argue what's truly good and evil. Forgiveness is both over and underrated. When you have a character like that obviously the characters around them and the reader themselves is going to be skeptical, 'Why should someone who's awful get a chance at life when so many innocent people don't, shouldn't the character expend their energy towards them?' and 'Do you truly care or are you taking care of that person to make you feel better about yourself, maybe even feel powerful over that ex-villain?' and 'People are just people? What about rapists and murderers? Where do we draw the line between victims of circumstance and truly wicked people, is there a line? Is there such thing as a person who wants to be bad rather than forced to be bad through their life events?' That's just a few examples of something a reader/character might wonder about your character, every answer to those questions has a deep consequence. (Btw, I'm not saying I don't somewhat agree with your protagonist, I just put the questions out for devil's advocacy ) Skepticism isn't a bad thing. In fact if you really want to delve deeper into the concept of justice vs. forgiveness then it's good to have then in that critical mindset because it starts them thinking. Good luck with your writing! Hope that helps at all
I think he sounds like an idiot, and he would probably annoy me, personally. I had a boss kind of like that once. A great guy, overall--a nice fellow who did good things for people, mostly--but too damn good-hearted to be a productive member of society, and I hated dealing with him on a lot of things. This guy makes my old boss sound like a man eating shark. I would probably spend every second of every conversation I had with your character thinking of different ways to bring about his ultimate demise.
This sounds like a truly compelling story. He is going to have a lot of contradictions. Part of him is going to want to put her down, the other do what you described. It won't be any easy, straight path for him, and a lot of his friends will think him a fool. Being truly good is the hardest thing in the world. I like it, go for it!
It's an interesting scenario for a story. However, I'm not sure from what you've given us if this IS the story ...man reluctantly kills somebody who deserves to die, finds out the person has just been left a vegetable and didn't die, volunteers to take care of the person. If that's the whole of the story, I think it might not be too compelling. However, if that's the START of the story, and what the story is all about is what actually happens next, then I'm really intrigued. I also wonder about the character's motives. Does he think, somehow, that this makes the attempt to kill the other person all right? Or the eye for the eye has been given, and this is just the end game? Does he forgive himself—or is he doing penance, or what? Or is there something about the handicapped person that touches him in some way, bringing a new (and very interesting) twist into the story?
He sounds like a hypocrite. -Never stops seeing everyone as people, regardless of what they have done. -Agrees to kill a villain because said villain has harmed people. -Takes said villain in out of guilt. Your character is an idiot with no conviction. First, your character is an idiot because if you know you are going to regret it, then why do it? Second, your character is a hypocrite because he clearly believes in the value of people's life but decides to kill someone anyway. Then, he takes the villain like it is going to help fix the things that he did. Finally, he lacks conviction because he can be peer-pressured into doing things against his morals. Then, after it is done, he acts like he committed a heinous crime until he finds out that he actually failed at his job, which he broke his morals for, by the way. So to summarize... your character is indecisive and pretentious..., but that is okay! Most people are like this, just some more extreme than others. Go for it. Ugh, totally not my type of character, though.
It depend on why he tried to kill the villain, the fact he was willing to care for a former enemy after a brain damage say a lot about his character. I would put him in the moral good side of the spectrum. Just for caring for the villain
It could work, but my question is what is the actual conflict? Is there a moment in the story where he finds his beliefs challenged? That's the thing about being human. It's that your beliefs are always challenged.
I think I would take out the 'gladly' and make it more of a conflict for him to do so (this would also depend on what she had done or tried to do). Otherwise there is the risk of readers thinking he is a tad too saintly to connect with... And big life-changing decisions like that are for me simply less interesting if they are as easy as 'gladly' implies.
I think, he takes the invalid into his care - and we are never certain whether he is a carer or the torturer, and our loyalty shifts through the course of the story. Then the horrid crisis of jelly & bones bound [or sim] in the wheelchair flutters an eyelid, raises an arm toward the bedside dagger, and kills off Mister Matron. Dodgy 'people are people' [inanity?] + murder is 'sometimes necessary' - possible grounds for the flawed narrator.
I am inclined to agree with @raine_d . He should struggle with the fact that he was too eager to kill, even the worst person in his eyes, given that he still sees all people as still being people. While you can depict the moment as being a pleasure to him, it would be more plausible to have him mentally struggle with the fact afterwards. Considering he is not exactly the type to enjoy killing or harm in general to other's, instead taking the route of compassion. It would only make sense that it would bother him for what he has done. Right or wrong, it should haunt him to some degree. Even the most evil people are still people, and do not turn into nothing more than targets. They still have feelings, dreams, families, etc. And this should reflect in the aftermath of their death. Though given the nature of your character they would probably outwardly show remorse once the rush of vindication was over, and try to make amends to their family. Dude is going to carry a lot of guilt, as he is not the type to take his actions of inhumanity lightly. It can be kinda fun to write this type of character, as long as you show that they are not proud of becoming the monster they swore to never become. It can also try your emotions, and make it more powerful than a simple good beats evil straight played story. Good luck.
It sounds interesting if it is worked out more. The main question I get is "why is he inable of judgement?" You could build a story behind it, in which you can go many ways. For example, you could make him leaning more towards autism which causes him to be inable to understand human behavior, which makes him inable to view the person as he really is, he just sees a person. This might require the other characters to be a bit more cunning. He could also go the other way around, towards William's Syndrome. It is harder to make a story around that, but it could end up really nice. Basically William's Syndrome makes you like everyone you see. You could also give him a brain injury himself, which could make for an interesting story. Basically if you could find a cause for his morals, he could get more depth.
Now, moral codes have been difficult for me to do before, especially when it comes down to things like this, mostly because I tend to write with a Grey and Grey morality. On one hand I could see this as Terald (nice name BTW) being a little too lenient to the Antagonist, especially if she has done lots of horrible things to him. But on the OTHER hand, I could take this as Terald showing that he is the "bigger" person by not killing the Antagonist. This sort of thing I have seen before, but its usually because the Antagonist has been beaten in combat and the MC spares them out of a "death is too good for you" mindset. So you have definitively given it a new twist!
