Sabotaging your own characters usually begins with good intentions.
It starts with protection. You smooth an edge here so the reader won’t flinch. You explain a motivation there so no one gets confused. You add context, sympathy, backstory, and polish until the character feels complete.
Avoid Overcooking
And that’s when the trouble can begin. In trying to avoid writing a book with any two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs, you end up overcooking things. Like Brussel’s sprouts left in the pot too long.
It’s not always easy to see. The structure is behaving itself. The inciting incident is doing its job. The midpoint arrives on schedule. Everything is technically sound, architecturally respectable, and yet you sense that the story is lying there on the page like a well-made corpse. You read it again, slower this time, hoping the problem will reveal itself. And yet, somehow, it doesn’t. The scenes connect. The events escalate. The mechanics hum along dutifully. But there’s no real pulse.
If you find yourself in this kind of place, it’s often nothing wrong with what’s happening. The problem most likely is who it’s happening to.
At this point, many writers return to plot, because plot feels mechanical and therefore fixable. Characters feel personal. But plot is only the delivery system. Characters are the payload. And when the people at the center of your story are mishandled, no amount of structural elegance will save it. The story won’t fail loudly. It will fail politely, competently, and without leaving a bruise.
Writing Only Half a Character
One of the most common character mistakes is only writing half a person. Chuck Palahniuk describes characters as having a head side and a heart side. What they think versus what they feel. Most writers pick one and assume the reader will fill in the rest.
The brilliant detective who can untangle any puzzle but registers human emotion the way a thermostat does. Or the hypersensitive protagonist who feels everything at full volume but never pauses long enough to examine those feelings or act on them. These characters feel underbuilt.
Good fiction shows how messy the overlap is. Take Hamlet. Intellectually, he knows exactly what must be done and he spends most of the play explaining it, to himself and anyone else who’ll listen to his thoughts. Emotionally, he’s paralyzed by grief, disgust, and doubt. What makes him compelling isn’t his thinking or his feeling in isolation, but the friction between them. He thinks faster than he can bear to act and feels too much to trust his own conclusions. The tragedy doesn’t come from ignorance. It comes from contradiction.
Real people behave this way all the time. They can make a decision they intellectually reject and emotionally regret, then defend it anyway. That tension isn’t a flaw in characterization. It’s the characterization.
When you omit either side, the character doesn’t feel mysterious or restrained. They feel unfinished, like a draft that stopped halfway through a sentence.
Making Characters Too Likeable
Another error many of us make is sanding characters down until they’re universally pleasant. Likeability is a branding concern, not a storytelling one. We can tend to soften our characters’ flaws, justify bad behavior, and round off edges until the character becomes inoffensive.
This quietly makes your character less interesting. Interest comes from friction, contradiction, and the occasional indefensible action. Characters worth following often make choices we wouldn’t, then defend them with unsettling logic. If everyone likes your protagonist, no one truly believes in them.
Side Characters Who Don’t Matter
Side characters aren’t there to loiter near the action. When a supporting character exists only to agree, explain, or witness, they’ve become a peripheral player. They appear because the plot needs someone present, not because the story needs them specifically.
A solution here is to remove that side character and give their reason for existence (to explain or witness something) to another, more important character. What’s important is that every character on the page must cost something. Time. Tension. Emotional energy. Narrative pressure. If you can remove a character and nothing collapses, they were never earning their keep. They weren’t supporting the story. They were cluttering it.
Taking Too Long to Characterize
Writers love the slow introduction. Pages of backstory, childhood context, and personality framing before the character is asked to do anything difficult.
Unless your name is Charles Dickens or Leo Tolstoy, or you have a sock drawer full of Pulitzer prizes, I’d suggest you move swiftly in fleshing out any one character.
Readers don’t need a biography to care. They need a decision under pressure. Character reveals itself fastest when something is at stake and the character chooses, especially when the choice is imperfect. If it takes fifty pages to understand who someone is, you waited too long to challenge them.
Forgetting Character Counterbalance
Every strong trait needs a counterweight. Intelligence without blind spots becomes smugness. Confidence without doubt becomes noise. Moral clarity without temptation becomes branding.
Even charm can backfire. The smooth talker who disarms everyone might also talk themselves into a trap. The loyal friend who never questions orders might march straight off a cliff. Talent without a flaw is like a party with no awkward silences—pleasant enough, but utterly forgettable. Let your characters stumble on the very things you’ve trained the reader to admire; it’s the polite chaos that makes them feel real.
Characters should be betrayed by their best qualities at least once. That’s where texture comes from. Without counterbalance, characters don’t feel complex. They feel engineered. Strengths without limits aren’t depth. They’re slogans.
Ghost Characters
Ghost characters are kind of the opposite of meaningless side characters. They perform actions that matter to the plot but have no meaningful relationship with the protagonist. They deliver information, trigger events, and vanish without consequence.
Readers don’t form attachments to ghosts. They don’t resent them, fear them, or mourn them. If an action matters, give it to someone who matters. Emotion can’t be outsourced. If the character doesn’t cost the protagonist something, the moment won’t cost the reader anything either.
Worse still, when you create a ghost character who does something meaningful but has little connection to the main character, you’ve missed an opportunity. An insult to your protagonist in the form of a witty barb is wasted on a waiter. Better to put the disparaging remark in the mouth of someone whose character is better brought to life by it, the villain maybe.
Missing Parallel and Perpendicular Characters
Stories need both parallel and perpendicular characters. Parallel characters reflect the protagonist’s path, showing who they are or who they might become. Perpendicular characters cut across that path, challenging assumptions and forcing friction.
Too many parallels and the story feels self-congratulatory. Too many perpendiculars and it feels hostile without context. You need mirrors and collisions, echoes and resistance. Character dynamics aren’t decoration. They’re how meaning emerges.
Characters Who All Enter the Same Way
If all your characters enter a room the same way, they’ll sound the same within a page. People reveal themselves immediately through habit. Who checks the exits. Who sits without being invited. Who strides into a room. Who minces in. Who fills silence. Who weaponizes it.
These details aren’t flavour. They’re shorthand. When everyone crosses thresholds identically, their individuality evaporates. Uniform entrances produce interchangeable people.
Forgetting Internal Conflict
External conflict without internal struggle is spectacle. Internal struggle without pressure is therapy. Characters should want incompatible things at the same time. Safety and recognition. Love and control. Truth and comfort.
Let them wrestle with themselves like two cats in a paper bag. Let them make choices that would make a bystander wince, or sigh with recognition. The magic isn’t in the grand gestures. It’s in the tiny hypocrisies, the little compromises, the way they talk themselves into doing the wrong thing for what they think is the right reason. That’s where tension hides.
If a character isn’t divided against themselves, their choices feel mechanical. The most interesting conflicts often happen quietly, in the space between what a character wants and what they’re willing to admit.
Confusing Backstory with Motivation
A final mistake many writers commit is confusing backstory with motivation. A tragic past explains why someone is damaged. It doesn’t explain what they’re doing now.
Backstory without forward motion is pain with footnotes. Characters aren’t defined by what happened to them. They’re defined by what they refuse to let happen again. If the past isn’t actively shaping present decisions, it isn’t story. It’s trivia with mood lighting.
Stop Babysitting. Start Watching
Characters aren’t delicate porcelain. They’re stubborn, confused, and occasionally insufferable. They can survive being unlikeable, selfish, or just plain wrong. What they can’t survive is vagueness, inertia, or polite engineering.
If your story feels dead, don’t pile on another plot twist. Inspect your people. Chances are, they’re tripping over one of these mistakes. And like most human missteps, the fix isn’t harder work. It’s simply paying attention and making a subtle change.
This essay is one of a collection of pieces documenting the bedlam involved in writing and self-publishing my ongoing genre fiction series, The Misjudgements of Andy MacKay, available on Amazon.