What makes a character forgettable and bad writings?

[Chocolate]

How do you differentiate between a great MC and a terribly thrown together character that just exist?

[cherrystark]

With my new favorite benchmark - Is the character simply allowed to "exist"?

For me, the forgettable characters meet a check list of "requirements" like how a "strong female character" is ALWAYS good at some kind of physical combat, conventionally attractive but is a hot mess, and usually responds to most situations with rude sarcasm. The archetype is generally accepted as "bad" because everything about her can be defined by a few basic characteristics.

"Good" characters are always something else. The world they live in might be messed up but they just exist in it. How do they adapt to the world? How do they adapt to their personal circumstances? I always remember the characters who act like people instead of a list of tropes.

[darthmongoose]

It's hard to describe, and there are always exceptions, but for me, a good protagonist is somebody who makes decisions that drive the story. They don't have to be good decisions, and actually it might be better if they're not good decisions, but you need to sell the audience on the internal logic behind their decisions.

If a character never makes decisions that impact the story, and the story is just a sequence of stuff happening to the protagonist and then they get saved by a sexy stranger, or suddenly some latent magical power protects them and then they faint, or they just kinda hang around saying "I don't want any of this! Nobody understands me!" and people just keep turning up saying "Youuu are the chosen one, protag, here, have a powerful artifact and a position of power!", you'll have what's called a "Passive Protagonist". As with any writing advice, there are exceptions of really popular passive protagonists out there, but generally a passive protagonist isn't great.

If the character only seems to decide to do anything because it's time in the plot for them to do it, but it just doesn't feel like something they'd do based on what we know about them, that tends to create an inconsistent character who's hard to latch onto. This sometimes happens due to either not putting in enough scenes that establish the personality of the character (or cutting scenes that do that for time), or by not planning the story ahead enough. Common examples are when a character suddenly acts like a jerk to their friends with no motivation because it's 2/3 into the story and that's where the "all is lost" Story beat should be where the protagonist loses important things and everyone falls out with them, or when a character suddenly is in love with the romantic lead at the end, but they haven't done anything to establish why, it's just like "well, it's the ending, they have to get the girl/boy".

Generally, when you're thinking about characters, it may feel tempting to write all the details about them like their favourite colour, favourite ice cream etc. But the important thing to focus on is what drives them, how they'd act in various everyday or even strange circumstances, like "do they jump queues?", "What do they do if they see somebody begging for money?", "How would they react if somebody shouted something rude at them in the street?", "If they had a magic wand that could grant one wish, what would they ask for?".

Final piece of advice: The other characters need to all have different opinions or ways of doing things from the protagonist. If the team are all always in 100% agreement, and will react to a problem in an interchangeable way, there's no point in them being there. Having characters who contrast your protagonist, even while being their friend, can really help bring out the unique traits of the protagonist.

[NickRowler]

For me, a character becomes forgettable if there only purpose is to fill a role out of obligation. I notice this happening with a lot of parents in media. If your MC is a kid/teen, it makes sense that they would live with their mom and/or dad. But if the main focus of the story doesn’t involve the parents, sometimes they can be very one note.

This can also happen with the love interest. Someone will make a male MC and go “well I have to have a girl for him to crush on” (vice virsa). Yet there is no effort to develop the love interest as an individual, they are just there. This is why people joke about the Sexy Lamp Test.

In my personal opinion, the MCs that I find the most forgettable are the one’s meant to be self-inserts for the readers. Maybe “Average Joe” to the author may not be very average to every reader. There is nothing wrong with making a character relatable but you should add some unique quirks or flaws to them.

[HGohwell]

It's definitely a interesting question. Part of the thing is, you can follow none of the advice and still get characters who're loved and memorable. Most notably, Jame Bond, especailly older movie Bond, who was barely a character, had no development and was mostly there to be cool and give us a film full of explosions and cool fight scenes. People love him though (despite the books where he definitely has more of a character but is far less enjoyable). Never underestimate the rules of cool and sexy. I think, main characters can get away with this more than side characters, because we're there by their side watching them do things.

I think bad writing is entirely different. Bad writing is things like inconsisten characterisation, motives, forced character development ect. Things like giving a character a motive, but then being so stuck to that motive that it doesn't change and feels out of place within the new situation, but your character sheet said so.