Handicapping your characters.

[Nickeris86]

This is one of the biggest issues that I have with my writing, I almost always make my characters to freaking awesome because I always want them to win, and no one wants to read about that. So I usually have to give them some kind of handicap to balance it all out.

these handicaps can be a simple as they are so utterly normal that they have a really hard time dealing with their fantastic surroundings, or as complex as being terminally ill because of their over use of their abilities.

does anyone else find that they have to do the same, and if so what are some of the ways that you have done it?

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

This is one of the biggest issues that I have with my writing, I almost always make my characters to freaking awesome because I always want them to win, and no one wants to read about that. So I usually have to give them some kind of handicap to balance it all out.

these handicaps can be a simple as they are so utterly normal that they have a really hard time dealing with their fantastic surroundings, or as complex as being terminally ill because of their over use of their abilities.

does anyone else find that they have to do the same, and if so what are some of the ways that you have done it?

I'd suggest practice writing a story where a character you care about doesn't win, and learn how to handle that.

[jeno]

I tend to give them internal blocks that hold them back, or an outside reason for them not to be as awesome as they could be. Like one character got burned in the past and has a very 'don't get involved, not my problem' attitude they have to get over before they enter the action. Or another character can't draw excessive amounts of attention to herself because people are looking for her, so she has to be quiet and sneaky and smart.

Both characters have lots of potential of the kickass variety, but they've got hurdles to get through before they can really cut loose.

[Enjorous]

I'd suggest practice writing a story where a character you care about doesn't win, and learn how to handle that.

Not only is that good advice but it's also really really fun to write.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Not only is that good advice but it's also really really fun to write.

I think part of the bigger point I am flailing around here is that it's worth learning to do, and to enjoy, writing things with tones and plots and so forth that are not immediately satisfying to you at an emotional level.  Writing things that the characters find happy endings but that if they were happening to you would not be, for example.

[Snowleopard]

Since my characters mostly tend to be relatively normal - any handicapping is usually mental or emotional.
I have used class as a handicap on occasion which can also lead into mental and/or emotional.

[hatshep2]

When in doubt, double the opposition. What is that saying, "a man is only as good as his enemies?" Your audience will respect your hero more for overcoming tough odds than for being awesome in and off himself. And a few humanizing character flaws that sometimes get in the way won't hurt either. 

[Snowleopard]

When in doubt, double the opposition. What is that saying, "a man is only as good as his enemies?" Your audience will respect your hero more for overcoming tough odds than for being awesome in and off himself. And a few humanizing character flaws that sometimes get in the way won't hurt either. 

I think there's another version of that that says - you can judge a man by his enemies!

[prophet224]

Maybe part of the process should be not 'making them so freaking awesome' to begin with.

A character who can grow is pretty cool. One that can't - eh. Similarly, one of the key interesting things I've learned is: when you get to a point where the character has to make a decision or overcome a problem, think of all the things that come to mind. Write them down. Then throw them out and look for something different. If your readers just go "well of COURSE he's just going to whip out the gun (since he's faster than everyone else) he has secreted up his rear (since he's tougher - or maybe just more disturbed) shoot all five terrorists that are holding hostages in front of them, but shoot them in the head (since he's a better aim, and see: faster), and head home for the day" then they don't need to read the book. You know?

Character flaws are great, but don't make up for a character who is otherwise 'perfect' when it comes to getting the plot done.

[Breandan]

My personal opinion on this sort of connundrum is this- the universe isn't fair. There will be someone who seems damn near perfect, and there are those who seem like their entire lives are one gigantic tragedy or sitcom moment after another. However, the reality is that the perfect people do have flaws, and the cursed do have their good moments. So, there's room to maneuver on this one. Many folks want to see the good guys kick butt without equal, especially those who want inspiration when the real world around them is sorely bereft of such heroes. Others want someone that can empathize with to rise up from mediocrity to become a hero, the Everyman Hero, so to speak. Both work well, in my opinion.

Another thing to bear in mind is that the flaws of superhuman or perfect characters need not be overt, but even when subtle it should be written in such a way that the reader can cognate it early on and not be put off. One of the main criticisms I have encountered from those who have read my works is that some of the races or characters seem superhuman. I have found that the critics missed the flaws they have because they were so subtle in the writing, and went back and fleshed them out a bit more. I agree that you want room for your character to grow, but it need not necessarily be in their niche of expertise. The male protagonist of the first three books in the series I am writing is an experienced and quite powerful warrior, and is of a race that excels at that art. However, he has never had much experience in serious relationships, and thus his growth over the book is emotional and social as he falls in love with the female protagonist. You can find a lot of examples of this in Jim's books, such as Butters. All in all, I think the approach you should take is entirely up to you, as every writer has different styles and every reader has different tastes.

[hatshep2]

Great post, Breandan! I am more of the empathize-with-the-flawed when I write but I really appreciate both styles and find stories with amazingly superhuman heroes a wonderful escape sometimes. 

[Snowleopard]

I like characters that can grow.  If there's no growth - you haven't really gone anywhere in the story.
I read one book years ago - mercifully forgot the name and the author.  But the story took a year and at the end - you had the same types of characters but with different people in the positions so only the names had changed.  I considered it a rip off - hence the forgetting.

[Enjorous]

I'm a fan of handicapping characters with a baseball bat...

wait...that's not handicapping that's hobbling. My bad

[MoSeS]

I think handicapping characters that get too powerful too fast is pretty common practice.
Even characters that are semi-powerful need handicapping sometimes, it's just puts the odds against them and creates some intense drama.

Harry's burnt hand for example handicapped him a little.

In the show Heroes it happened big time because Sylar and Peter were getting way too powerful, so both were stripped down, but I think in Peter's case it may have been a little overkill.

I can probably think of a few more if I tried, but needless to say, handicapping isn't a bad solution, as opposed to making more powerful enemies. I find that if you make a too powerful enemy that it would be harder to trump him later.

For instance in Superman in my mind Doomsday was the end all most powerful nemesis, but of course later they came up with stronger foes but to me he was the one that mattered most.

In Supernatural, I am skeptical about there being a worse enemy than Lucifer, but he didn't really do all that much himself so it's do-able.

And furthermore, in many series there tends to be the "Outsiders" which go above and beyond the powers of good and evil that are the current top dawgs.

[Quantus]

In general I tend toward the world imposing natural handicaps vs personal ones.  This, however, is more due to my long RPG background and personal need for system balance, and well as my aptitude for world-building which far outweighs my somewhat stilted ability with character development.  That being said one thing that has worked for me somewhat it to take the uber-awesome character, and make that the character at the end, then think on what it would to get there.  Its basically coming at it from the other direction.  You think about situation where the character might manage to overcome certain things, and the limitations that lead there will often naturally fall out.   Dont know if that's helpful, or even makes much sense, but it works for me.