Between the two ANS who has the best character?

[The Alkdorian Empire]

In this thread. You will judge between the two above nations who has the best characters. I recommend as you decide why did you pick them, and why is their character better than the other person's character? What stands out with that character that makes them the superior candidate to earn your favoritism? Begin.


Since there is no nation above me. Decide between me and Sky Reavers on who has the better character.

[The Lordship of Trokondas]

Honestly, not sure how to decide this type of thing, but I guess I'll go with Shawn because, while both he and Ferrios both have unique and interesting aesthetics and personalities, I just personally find Shawn's more appealing- big is cooler than bold to me, I guess? But both of them are just so shamelessly fun, I still find myself mostly liking both... just Shawn that slight bit more, I think.
(For me, I guess I'll put Euphrosyne on the table?)

[Wochaystein]

Honestly, not sure how to decide this type of thing, but I guess I'll go with Shawn because, while both he and Ferrios both have unique and interesting aesthetics and personalities, I just personally find Shawn's more appealing- big is cooler than bold to me, I guess? But both of them are just so shamelessly fun, I still find myself mostly liking both... just Shawn that slight bit more, I think.
(For me, I guess I'll put Euphrosyne on the table?)

Euphrosyne in my opinion. Both characters are well-written and developed, but it was harder to pull off with Euphrosyne, especially with an Isaurian theme that is less-used in NS.

[FenexOrg]

I apologize, but TLoT’s characters are too well developed and must be awarded the crown of best character.

[Surrealist Patagonia]

Whoever is Wochaystein's character. They're one of the most well developed characters I've ever seen on NS. Every quote he uttered has weight behind him and his actions carry strength....

Anyway, Sven is the better character. I dig the rebellion against God thing and has a more fleshed out character.

[Valentine Z]

I'm gonna have to go with Konrad out of the two, sorry! >,<

For mine, ahh... pick one.

[Stanier]

Fuck, uh. Damn, shit. Uh - GODDAMN IT...!

Okay, let's be reasonable and - fuck!

Difficult decision really, but I'm gonna go with Konrad on this one, don't get me wrong, I love Val's work, but - uh, a man can only take so much optimism.

Kako vs Clarissa? NANI?!

[The Alkdorian Empire]

I haven’t experienced Kako enough to fully know her character beyond her factbook. If you understand what I’m getting at it. So it’s Clarissa for the win.

BN, feel free to pick of any my three characters when deciding whom has the better character.

[Zeffar]

/bump
/skipme

[Koinonia Poleis]

No offense intended, but Kako is a much better character compared to any of the three. For the sake of argument, I am going to use the most complete character, Ferrios.

Both Kako and Ferrios can be considered 'edgy' characters. While Kako isn't cartoonishly cruel or evil, her backstory is almost cartoonishly sad. Similarly, Ferrios lives in a very bizarre situation. However, where the two characters differ is how they differ in how they deal with their situation. Kako is the most realistically human of the two. While Ferrios appears to be guided by nothing but a strong, yet unfounded, sense of narcissism and nationalism, Kako's affected by her situation in a much, much more complex way. Now while complexity isn't always good - sometimes it's good to have a "simple" character, I simply prefer Kako's complexity over Ferrios' oversimplicity. She's gone through hell and, rather than let's say - walking off without a hinge, she becomes greatly traumatized by it. But it isn't to a point where it is just insulting to people who have gone through actual trauma either.

And for the record, it's not that I don't like evil characters. Characters like Narcy and Konrad are some of my favorite on this site. It's just Ferrios' isn't as well-written and rounded as Kako in my opinion. If I could sum it up, Kako feels more like a person than Ferrios. Ferrios just feels like a stock-issue Cartoon Network Villain during the 2000s

BN: Pls do Lycophon of Thebes

[Airceltria]

After reading the two I will have to say that Lycophon of Thebes would have to win. Ferros is an interesting character and I'm not saying he is bad, not at all. But I found the story of the old general and politicians a bit more interesting since his felt almost like a historical fiction story even if it was short.

I know my leader will lose to Lycophon and I'm fine with it because the AN put a lot of effort to his page.

[Zeffar]

Lycophon of Thebes. It his profile reads like a well-documented archive that has managers to survive the travels of time and years to present its next readers with a enlightening tale of one of the leaders of Ancient Greece from start to finish.

[Las Palmeras]

I enjoy Alexandria a bit more than I do Charles. Though the former is a bit Mary-Sue-ish at times and the former is a bit more complex of a character, or at least more broody and with a bigger potential in future conflicts and shenanigans, I've interacted with Airceltria's character more often than with Charles of Zeffar...who also seems like a satellite around Vonstein currently, or a voice of reason, depending on how ya wanna look at things.

I'll throw my big guns with Montse/Tepka.

[Baizou]

Hm, so the choice is between Emperor Charles and Tepka Tajique. My choice will be... Tepka!

There's one part of it that is me tending to always like "ice-cold, tightly-controlled-childhood, foisted with lots of expectations" characters, and Tepka fits a lot of that. Meanwhile, while there's some intriguing stuff to Charles's character, I don't go for "last of their kind" as much. Also, while Tepka's got some very questionable beliefs going on, she hasn't put it into practice the way Charles has put his beliefs into practice, what with the indoctrinated-clone-army and bloodthirsty imperial expansion. I also must prominently raise an eyebrow at the way Charles apparently conflates self-harm with transness. While fictional characters may well have their own beliefs and values, it can at times cause a hit to my feelings toward that character, depending on how it's handled. And finally, there may be some element of being a little more familiar with Tepka than Charles, which I realize is not entirely fair!

For my character, how about Miya?

[Surrealist Patagonia]

I'm going to keep this fairly brief. What I value first in a character is how thematically unique they are. Tepka's got that going for her as a neko maid from an once prestigious family who is now involved in some top secret agent shit while also playing a character in some Disney-esque story. Miya's identity as a trans is also unique. I seldom see trans women on NS and she is good in humanizing trans women on NS.

But at the end of the day, Tepka's got an unique life story as a spy and lover of a foreigner like Charles where there are high stakes involved. Miya could do with some characterization while maintaining the importance of her being a trans character. I feel like she's born for politics while Tepka's story is engaging. There's really no bad concept and I feel like she could be a much more rounded character.

Let's take for example, Daryush Hosseinzadeh from Persagonian Republic. Concept-wise, he is the most boring type of NS character (a liberal MT politician) but he is an ass-kisser who will weasel his way through power by any means necessary. He has a fairly noble goal as a rat (though that goal is both idealistic and self-serving) and there are worse people out there like Islamists for readers to cheer for him to succeed. Not saying that Miya should have the added flaw of being a child killer but she's got to have some bits of human flaw to make her a rounded character.

I lied about this being brief, turns out I am more interested in talking about characters than worlds.

---

BN: Eh, do Lawrence Montgomery of South Cape

[Zitravgrad]

I'm going to be the brief one over here, if neither of you mind.

Both Miya and Montgomery are the products of their settings as well as the representation of certain concepts in my opinion:

Miya's biography speaks about the internal conflict of a person who is religious, but also in the LGBT community -- certainly something I do not see too often as most users prefer to walk around it. While brief, her bio isn't just some word salad listing her political duties and achievements. Also, it is an interesting sight to see a transgender character who is transgender because they are, rather than as a token character to appeal to the audience.

Meanwhile, Montgomery's biography has the merit of being slightly longer. He stands for hope, optimism and determination to do what is right, which makes him a foil to Konrad and the madness in Puerto Soleil, as well as a bunch of weirdos surrounding him who paint the picture of a rather bleak and chaotic world.

By saying that they are products of their settings, I mean that it will become unfair to judge Miya for having a more mundane life because she exists in a relatively normal and peaceful setting. Nonetheless, it is this setting that makes Montgomery's story open-ended and thus leaves a thought that lingers...

I choose Montgomery but it is not the ultimate ruling on the quality and depth of either character.

BN: It's perhaps fairer to put up a side character against another side character. This is Dr. Sergey Pashkov.

[The Near Islands]

Alriiiight, Sergey and Montgomery.

Sergey is a depressing man. Like, that tends to be a theme within Zitravgrad, but even ignoring context Sergey just makes me sad. The fact that this hit came from the head-nurse of the secret service makes it even worse, because this man - despite his depressing backstory -, isn't exactly the most relevant character in the Zitraverse. His backstory, I think, works with his character, as due to both his job and history he is stressed, obsessed with the well-being of himself and others, manipulative, etc. Also, the fact he's both figuratively and literally a fuckin snake is cool too. Though, I guess almost everyone in the Zitraverse is a snake in some way or form, and I'd honestly say he's one of the better ones in terms of morality. My only problem with him is that his age is too high for his appearance. Not like that's a worldbuilding problem, I'm just jealous (I'm only 29 and I am already getting gray hairs).

Lawrence Montgomery is pretty cool too. He seems to be a genuinely good person, a thing so rare on this site, and while the South Cape has become kinda a meme for being "Wholesome Chungus 100", I'd say even on his own he's a nice change of pace from the angry God-Kings and Sarcastic presidents. I also find it nice that, unlike many of the Socialists on this site, he makes the rest of us look good doesn't ramble on and on about how some generic MT democracy is the evilest thing in existence because they allow mom-and-pop stores to exist. But rambling aside, I just like Lawrence. Morality aside, Lawernce also makes sense as a character. He is an idealist, sure, but it's because of that idealism that he must make sacrifices that he certainly regrets. He isn't some Stalin/Hitler who wants to forge a perfect world without regard to the human costs, he is a man who wants to protect his own from the horrors abroad, feeling genuine regret and grief when they suffer and/or die, which is more than you can say for most leaders even on NS.

In the end, it's hard to choose between the two. However, I am slightly more inclined towards Sergey simply because he is a bit more fleshed out than Lawernce.

Do this guy. ik Zitrav is a much better character builder than I am, I did this so the thread wouldn't die