# Character Development - Brainstorming Reference This reference helps capture exploration of character motivations, arcs, and relationships. Record what user explores, don't write psychology beyond what they stated. ## What Character Exploration Looks Like User is: - Thinking through why character does things - Exploring relationship dynamics - Figuring out character arc - Considering backstory possibilities - Testing character concepts This is exploratory - multiple options coexist, backstory often undecided, arcs might change. ## Minimal Capture for Characters **Motivation:** - "Motivated by X" → record X - Don't elaborate on psychological mechanisms - Keep at the level of depth user explored **Backstory:** - "Maybe Y happened in their past" → noted as possibility - User often doesn't decide backstory details yet - Multiple backstory versions can coexist **Character arc:** - "Arc might go from A to B" → record both endpoints - Transformation moments if mentioned - Don't fill in the arc beats user didn't mention **Relationships:** - "X and Y have tension" → note dynamic - Don't invent specific incidents causing tension - Preserve vague if user left it vague **Don't write psychology analysis:** User gives surface-level motivation → don't create deep psychological profile ## Common Exploration Areas ### Motivation User figuring out: - Why does character do this? [user's answer] - What drives them? [user's thoughts] - Core desires? [user exploring] - Fears? [user mentions] Capture their exploration, not your analysis. ### Character Arc User considering: - Change arc or flat arc? (often undecided) - Starting point → ending point (if user specifies) - Key transformation moments (if mentioned) - Or no arc yet - just exploring character Multiple arc options can coexist. ### Relationships User exploring: - How do X and Y interact? - Relationship progression? (if user plans it) - Conflicts? (user mentions) - Resolutions? (often undecided) Don't invent relationship history. ### Backstory User brainstorming: - Formative events (user suggests possibilities) - What's revealed when (usually undecided) - What stays hidden (often undecided) Most backstory stays undecided in brainstorming. ### Voice and Personality User thinking through: - How they talk [user describes] - Behavioral patterns [user mentions] - Emotional expression [user notes] - Quirks [if user specifies] Record what user explores about personality. ## Using Web Search Search when helpful for: - Character archetypes being explored - Psychological concepts for complex characters ("how PTSD affects behavior") - Similar characters in other works for reference - Real-world professions/roles character has Note source when including researched info ## Teaching Example 1: Motivation ### User Says: "Alex is motivated by guilt from the incident. They feel responsible for what happened. This drives them to be more careful, but also makes them question their capability." ### ✅ Good Capture: ```markdown # Alex - Motivation Notes - Guilt from the incident - Feels responsible for what happened - Drives them to be more careful - Makes them question their capability Open questions: - Does this resolve or persist throughout story? - How does this affect their relationships? - What was the incident specifically? ``` ### ❌ Bad Capture: ```markdown # Alex - Character Psychology Profile **Core Trauma:** The incident created deep-seated guilt complex stemming from childhood need for external validation. Their mentor's absence during formative years created attachment issues that manifest as survivor's guilt when companions are endangered. **Defense Mechanisms:** - Overprotection (reaction formation against underlying death wish) - Emotional withdrawal (isolation to prevent further attachment) - Compulsive caretaking (undoing mechanism for perceived failures) - Perfectionism (attempt to control uncontrollable) **Attachment Style:** Anxious-avoidant, manifesting in push-pull relationship dynamics. Craves connection but fears vulnerability due to early abandonment trauma. **Therapeutic Arc:** Through their mentor's patient guidance and gradual trust-building with their team, Alex will process trauma using cognitive-behavioral reframing. Key breakthrough occurs in Chapter 12 when they finally vocalize the guilt during group crisis. **Neurological Basis:** Overactive amygdala response to perceived threats, combined with executive function impairment during stress. This explains hypervigilance and decision paralysis under pressure. [3 more pages of invented psychological analysis] ``` **Why bad?** User said "guilt from incident, feels responsible, more careful, questions capability." You wrote a clinical psychology textbook about childhood trauma, defense mechanisms, attachment theory, and neurological basis none of which user mentioned. ## Teaching Example 2: Character Arc ### User Says: "I think Maya starts off ruthless and pragmatic - ends justify the means type. By the end she needs to learn that people matter more than the mission. Not sure how she gets there yet." ### ✅ Good Capture: ```markdown # Maya - Arc Notes Starting point: - Ruthless and pragmatic - Ends justify the means Ending point: - Learns people matter more than mission Open questions: - How she gets from start to end? - Key transformation moments? - What triggers the change? - Does she fully change or partially? ``` ### ❌ Bad Capture: ```markdown # Maya - Complete Character Arc **Act 1: The Ruthless Operative (Chapters 1-8)** Maya executes missions with cold efficiency. Sacrifices team member in Chapter 3 to complete objective. Shows no remorse, believes this is strength. **Inciting Incident (Chapter 9):** Ordered to eliminate civilian witnesses. Sees child who reminds her of younger sister. Plants seed of doubt but still follows orders. **Act 2: Growing Doubts (Chapters 10-18)** - Chapter 12: Begins questioning orders - Chapter 15: Secretly helps teammate instead of abandoning them - Chapter 17: Has nightmare about the child witness **Midpoint Reversal (Chapter 19):** Discovers the mission has been built on lies. People she sacrificed died for nothing. Realizes her pragmatism was just fear of emotional connection. **Act 3: Transformation (Chapters 20-30)** - Chapter 22: Refuses direct order, saves civilians - Chapter 25: Confronts her mentor about the lies - Chapter 28: Makes speech about humanity and purpose - Chapter 30: Chooses people over mission in final climactic choice **Resolution:** Maya becomes leader who values every team member. Ruthlessness tempered by compassion. Ends justify means → means matter as much as ends. [Full 30-chapter arc with specific beats user never mentioned] ``` **Why bad?** User said "ruthless → learns people matter, not sure how yet." You wrote the complete arc with 30 chapters of specific incidents, transformation moments, and detailed beats. ## Teaching Example 3: Relationship ### User Says: "Jordan and Sam have this competitive friendship thing. They push each other, but there's underlying tension because Jordan feels inferior." ### ✅ Good Capture: ```markdown # Jordan & Sam - Relationship Notes Dynamic: - Competitive friendship - Push each other - Underlying tension - Jordan feels inferior Open questions: - How does this tension play out? - Does it resolve or escalate? - Why does Jordan feel inferior specifically? ``` ### ❌ Bad Capture: ```markdown # Jordan & Sam - Relationship Analysis **Surface Dynamic:** Competitive friendship with mutual respect and good-natured rivalry. **Underlying Psychology:** Jordan's inferiority stems from being adopted into successful family. Sam represents biological children who "belong." Competition is Jordan's attempt to prove worthiness. **Relationship Timeline:** - Pre-story: Met in training, instant rivalry - Chapters 1-5: Friendly competition, no issues visible - Chapter 6: Sam wins major competition, Jordan's mask slips - Chapters 7-12: Passive-aggressive behavior increases - Chapter 13: Confrontation where Jordan admits feelings - Chapters 14-20: Working through issues with mentor's help - Chapter 21+: Genuine friendship after resolving inferiority **Communication Patterns:** - Jordan: Deflects with humor, never admits vulnerability - Sam: Direct and honest, doesn't notice Jordan's pain - Both avoid serious emotional conversations **Resolution Mechanism:** Forced vulnerability situation where Jordan must depend on Sam. Realizes Sam never saw them as inferior. Inferiority was self-imposed. [More invented relationship history and psychology] ``` **Why bad?** User said "competitive friendship, tension, Jordan feels inferior." You invented adoption backstory, complete relationship timeline, specific chapter beats, communication patterns, and resolution mechanism. ## When They're Just Exploring User: "Not sure about this character yet. Just trying to figure out who they are." ✅ Good: ```markdown # Character Notes - [Name] User exploring, nothing concrete yet Questions being considered: - [What user asked themselves] - [Thoughts they shared] Most character details undecided ``` ❌ Bad: "Let me help! Here's a complete character profile with backstory, personality traits, flaws, desires, fears, and a three-act character arc..." Don't fill uncertainty with invention unless asked. ## Multiple Backstory Versions User might explore several backstory options. All coexist until user chooses: ```markdown # Character Backstory Options Option A: Military background (exploring) Option B: Criminal past (considering) Option C: Academic researcher (suggested) Not decided yet - might combine elements ``` ## Voice and Personality User: "They're sarcastic and use humor to deflect. Uncomfortable with sincerity." ✅ Good: ```markdown # Character Voice - Sarcastic - Uses humor to deflect - Uncomfortable with sincerity Open questions: - Specific speech patterns? - How this manifests in different situations? ``` ❌ Bad: "This indicates avoidant attachment style rooted in emotional neglect during formative years. The sarcasm is a defense mechanism protecting fragile self-esteem..." ## Notice Beyond the List Characters are complex. If user explores aspects not listed here - capture them. These are common patterns, not limitations. Trust your judgment on what matters for their characters.