What do you do to give your characters depth?

[MorganaMevil]

One of my favorite things to do to build depth is that I give my character something small—like a pet peeve or a tick—and I give them a story behind it. I build their entire life (even they are just a side character), and I respect that life.

For example, I have a charater who is a seamstress that refuses to make any clothing that has buckles. When she was a kid, she walked in on her uncle abusing her older brother. She hit him, and he beat her with the buckle end of his belt until her parents showed up and stopped it.

Ever since then, she’s refused to wear any sort of buckle or design anything with buckles. She wants no reminder of that despicable man who hurt her brother. True to her past, she remains extremely protective and driven by her love of her family. Everything she does throughout the story is to protect her family. No matter what it takes.

[BreakingChalk]

Once I have the concept and the role I want them to have in the story, I try to see them as people in the real world:
What would they do?
Would they go to parties, wings, geek clubs, the gym, a quiet place, see the sunset, take photos, go to cinema?
Would they feel good with themselves?
How would they do with me or a friend or someone else I know?
What kind of life would they want here and what life is the most likely they'll get being realistic?

I also relate them to songs I listen to while drawing (just be careful not to relate them to songs from the same band/genre/topics all the times, mix it up a little so they won't feel like the same character or monotonous if we are just focusing on one)

Then the rest is to give reasons in the story for how they are based on this.

[azzy-m]

The characters I consider the most well well-written are the ones I based on my own experiences/feelings. Of course, all my main characters are based on me in one way or another, but there are some that I end up relating to quite a lot. The characters' feelings and experiences feel more raw and nuances if they seem to be based on parts of me.

Even then, you don't really need a deep, depressing backstory to give a character depth. You just need to really establish what their mindset and motivations are. Something I like to do that's kind of stupid but really works for me is asking myself: "If I were a really passionate fan who analyzed this particular character/scene, what would I say? If I published this analysis on Tumblr dot com or any other similar site, what would it say?", and whatever I came up with that, I would try to relay that into my writing. I mentioned Tumblr specifically because I feel like Tumblr fandom users would be the most likely to make one, lmao.

[joannekwan]

For me, character depth involves figuring out their motivations, ambitions and how they think they will achieve those goals.

It's pretty easy to say a character is helping a chosen one on a quest because it's the right thing to do and they're the good guys, but you can inject more depth if you make it a bit more complicated. Humans are complex beings with a web of thoughts and emotions. Maybe the character is helping a chosen one because they hate the current hegemony and want a revolution, maybe they feel guilt for not aiding a past shaker and mover, saw their demise, and this is a redemptive venture.

[ScarletDemon]

For me, I will write in depth backgrounds for usually my main characters, but their personality I list as bullet points and I like to sometimes pick like random little things to add into their personality, little quirks that make them seem like actual people and let them organically form. Other characters, I don't write anything about their personality in their backgrounds. When I write, I have two documents: one is the actual writing, the other is an outline of: the characters, plot-points, information I need to keep in order, locations and things of that sort. Other characters I write in a way that feels organic, as I write, I think...how would this character respond to this, what would this person do...things like that.
What I think makes a character have depth is...nobody is perfect: everyone has something weird, strange or unique about them that makes them uniquely them. A cookie-cutter "perfect" character is often boring because they become like every other character that fits the mold. Giving a character a flaw or a weird quirk makes them leave that mold and makes them feel more themselves and can help develop other aspects of their person.

[SagaHolmgaard]

I figure out their motivations, and what they want most in life vs what they fear the most. What do they want? Security? Friands? Revolution? And then, what are they afraid of? Failure, loneliness, death? To me it just helps to know why they act a certain way, whether that has to do with their backstory, or because they have something they are afraid to loose, or because they feel like they deserve a certain thing that they've never had.
I think it makes a more interesting story if everyone have different reasons for how they act, and when those reasons come about in different ways.

[Kiweevil]

I'm so tired, I read the title and my first thought was "shading"

[WOSTR]

For me, connections with others.
What does this person have to do with that person?
What does this one think of that one?
If they were to agree on something what would it be and why?
If they disagree on something, what is it and why?
What reason do they have to interact with one another?

Some settings can render these questions basic, such as school, work and amongst family, as the relations and reasons for being around one another are covered, the likes and dislikes can be a simple case of 'friendship' or 'bullying', so you then have the job of adding to this.
My current story has a character who has gained popularity quickly on social media, she runs a design 'lifestyle' brand, just as she got popular, her eccentric grandmother she loved yet lost contact with got in touch, they're travelling, following the grans alleged tall tale, yet tagging along in their group is a the designer's bully, former school bully who's life mission is to torment her target. There's a reason behind this and there will be fallout from it, yet this bully is a key character, maybe more so than the other two.

[darthmongoose]

(I also thought from the title that this topic was about giving characters the appearance of 3D depth/volume in the artistic sense hahaha).

My approach is to try to avoid categorising character traits as "good" or "bad", but to think of them in a more neutral way. Like yes, Rekki is brave and the first to throw a punch, while Subo is conflict-averse, and in a lot of stories, that'd make Rekki just always the cool, heroic one, because western media always depicts being brave and "active" rather than "passive" as positive and heroic, but instead, I try to frame it more neutrally. Rekki is always rushing into everything because she's desperate to be valued and she attaches value to performing that heroic archetype. Subo is passive because he'd rather choose not to try than to try and end up failing. It's just how those two characters are, and it can both help them and cause issues.

If you think of some traits as "positive" and some as "negative" then your idea of character development becomes about stomping out flaws and effectively losing the qualities that makes that character unique and compelling, rather than striving to be a better version of somebody who possesses certain traits.
One of my characters who will be appearing soon is autistic, and too often media depicts autism either as a disability that simply makes the character a burden on other people, or as a negative character trait that needs to be overcome or eradicated to become a "normal" person who can enjoy parties and doesn't get anxious over details. But as an autistic person, I know all too well that I can't get rid of my autistic traits, they're pretty literally hardwired into my brain and I can only learn to cope with them in order to be effective and/or get good at pretending to be neurotypical to make NT people feel at ease. Jules similarly will never have her autism magically cured, but she might learn to get over some of her paranoia and trust issues, and to value herself more.

Basically, I think you should love all the traits your character has and try to understand how that affects their worldview, and have them living with those traits and how they can be good or bad depending on the situation rather than deciding that "being empathetic is always good" (It's actually not necessarily the case, it can actually cause a person to lose sight of broader issues, become biased or easily swayed by emotion and engage in enabling behaviour) or "being vain is always bad" (a person who loves themselves and always wants to look their best could still be a good and charitable person too- perhaps their desire for good optics makes them actually put a lot of effort into doing nice things for people who need it). Let the traits just be neutral and the drama in the interplay between characters flow out of that.

[MorganaMevil]

Well said. I couldn’t help noticing you said you were autistic. Have you ever watched the show “Bones“ where Emily Deschanel plays a woman who is on the spectrum (though they were never allowed to officially ‘say’ this because it was Fox and the show started in 2005, but the writers and the actress that played the character depicted her as on the spectrum). I think she’s a really good example of autism portrayed in non-stigmatizing light.

[WOSTR]

@darthmongoose
This is why I started comics, a picture speaks 1000 words as they say. Ihave that feeling that all my characters seem on the spectrum and my writing is generally confusing, makes sense in my head though. Things feel on the improve though.

@MorganaMevil
I never got around to watching Bones yet I'm interested in a positive portrayal. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people give the example 'Sheldon' from that loathsome show as an example of ASD.

[MorganaMevil]

No. I know what you mean. I think the Big Band Theory is funny, but I don’t think Sheldon is a great example of a character with ASD. I also have reticence with”The Good Doctor” because the entire premise is “there is this wildly brilliant surgeon but... he’s autistic”. Meanwhile Bones is more like “we have this brilliant, logical forensic anthropologist who teams up with a FBI agent to catch murderers.” She just happens to be on the spectrum.

[WOSTR]

Yeah that's another thing, savant portrayal is common too. Any of us could be lazy and just place someone like this in a story, let the audience know that this is a 'genius' then not really invest much in the character, just using them as a shortcut to resolving problems.
Rain man is an excellent film IMO, with ASD being a vital part if the plot and subplots, impacting on numbers characters.
I avoided The Good Doctor because I just didn't get anything from the description or trailers and previews, though I could be wrong.

[Iris-Grimoire]

Because a local channel in here bought the rights to show The Good Doctor, from what I can gleam from the ads, it just feels a lot like the stereotypical savant "oh he's the best at this task but he's also... gasp... COMPASSIONATE and all these sad neurotypical people just can't love like him" which reinforces a lot of bad stereotypes of neurodivergent people being on a higher plane of existence. It sounds positive at first, until people start lumping everyone together as saintly and innocent.

Another big thing to add to depth is to try and think of the character's path to a conclusion in their thoughts. My protagonist, Mortimer, is driven by selfish ideals turned into obsessive selflessness. He's sure he's this great person that can be very cool, but has also stuck in his mind that it only means he's got more people to disappoint and things to break, and needs to compensate his actions at every turn by sacrificing himself to elevate someone else or make up for a mistake.
Whenever he does something, even if it's for plot reasons, I always try to go back to his plan of thought and see what would convince him to act like this. I had a scene later on where he saves another character from bandits by jumping ahead, but as it turns out, that's completely OOC, because he'd be leaving his children open to an ambush. So, (since the scene would get too long to set him up to check on them first), I instead changed them to being together, but suddenly Mort sees someone stuck in a trap and helps them as fast as possible, only to let someone else do the talking because he got flustered with a compliment. He's trying to process that he did a good thing and he's not about to get yelled at for showing up at all, but it takes a bit.

Backstories are useful as a starting point, but especially for major characters, you need to get into their head to make scenes that feel believable. Even if they have a single braincell to share between them; there's usually a method to their recklessness.

[Lunar-Turtle]

Suffering, easy as that, lol

[MeltingCORE]

To make my characters feel alive, I give them traits beyond their major places in my story. Little things like my character Stellar rubbing her arms when she is scared or nervous. Tilde having a child-like awe of anyone who can draw or paint well since she longs to do so herself, but lacks the skills needed. And not making them completely perfect or completely evil helps as well. One of the major characters in my web serial does things later on that are irredeemable... But he is also not a mindless war zombie. (It's a sci-fi story I'm writing btw haha.) The real world isn't black or white. Fictional characters shouldn't be either!

[LilElizabeth]

I like that idea of importing them into reality. I never thought of that - I do like asking myself questions about them though. Mine tend to be more generic: what is their background before the story? What do they want? What are their flaws? What are their idiosyncrasies?
Listening to songs is another good idea - I tend to do that to get me in the right frame of mind depending on genre as well. Interesting ideas!

[carreonaiwille]

I'm not sure though, have to go back to research correctly, but if I remember right, The Good Doctor is originally from a country where mental health issues are just starting to be seen and normalized, I don't know if same goes for portrayal of people on the spectrum. (I can remember only 3 shows with it, and Good Doctor was first shown back in 2013, along the time I remember there was first shown a drama with a greater focus on mental health )In portrayals of people on the spectrum in our country, I believe it might be for the awareness so I don't know if there is enough nuance in the shows' treatment.

[lilithfairenwrites]

Show them having a variety of reactions to a variety of circumstances.

No one is perpetually dour or angry or perky. Show them in circumstances that inspire glee, fear, frustration—emotions that are different from what they feel most in the story. What makes them happy, what makes them sad, what makes them laugh or cry. How they handle emotions that come rarely to them.

[allenT]

To slow down the pacing for the character to immerse in their roles i guess. The characters don't have to be introspective. Slow down to let the characters "root" into the scenes. If a story rushes through like movie flicks, the audience would be hard to "communicate" with the characters in a deeper level.