Character vs plot driven stories:Which do you prefer?

[Carabas]

I never read "House of M". But, many of the complaints I have seen/heard are people crying about how it was not in continuity. "Secret Wars" was amazing.

House Of Meh was 1 issue of setting up the plot (what shall we do about Wanda's exponentially growing, out-of-control powers?), then 6 issues of alternate universe fun that was not actually remotely relevant to the plot, and then the final issue, that briefly touched on the plot and then deus-ex-machinaed the plot away by having Wanda disapear.

[InformationGeek]

I prefer a combination of both, but if I have to, mostly character-driven. As good as a plot is or however smart you think you are with dishing out your grand ideas, it matters very little if I don't get invested in the characters and what's happening to them. It's why Hickman's Avengers is so awful. He wrote a team book where the team is an after thought to him exposing and exposition puking his ideas out onto paper.

Also, the opposite of a problem where its all character and barely any story? The new She-Hulk series and the first volume of Bendis' Spider-Man (Miles Morales) book come to mind.

[dragonmp93]

Obviously, the idea has to be competently handled.

Millar was not qualified to write a comic that was supposed to be a riff on US politics. Millar did not even understand how US political associations work, such as the distinctions between public and private center. (Though, given how well he did with the moral hazard in "Red Son", I can see why Marvel thought he would be a good fit for "Civil War".) The question regulating supers is a good starting point. But, it was done badly.

I never read "House of M". But, many of the complaints I have seen/heard are people crying about how it was not in continuity. "Secret Wars" was amazing.

You have never visited the X-men board, right ?.

[Immortal Weapon]

Character driven. I like it when conflicts are born out of the characters. Plot driven stories make characters feel interchangeable and rely on set pieces to deliver it's biggest moments. That's fine but I can't get invested if I don't care about the characters.

[CentralPower]

From what I saw (in flipping through), the main point of "House of M" was the altered timeline. The Scarlet Witch stuff was a framing sequence.

My only question is why has nobody smothered Wanda with a pillow yet, especially after it was discussed. But, at this point, I am pretty sure we are supposed to have forgotten about at least some of the times that she has flipped out and tried to kill everybody.

[dragonmp93]

From what I saw (in flipping through), the main point of "House of M" was the altered timeline. The Scarlet Witch stuff was a framing sequence.

My only question is why has nobody smothered Wanda with a pillow yet, especially after it was discussed. But, at this point, I am pretty sure we are supposed to have forgotten about at least some of the times that she has flipped out and tried to kill everybody.

Well, the Captain Hydra told to the X-men that: "We(The Avengers)deal with our own". God knows what he meant by that.

[Ianbarreilles]

Well, the Captain Hydra told to the X-men that: "We(The Avengers)deal with our own". God knows what he meant by that.

That was before Kobik altered his past history and memories for the most part Steve Rogers the real Steve Rogers is quite accepting to mutants as shown in uncanny avengers but as shown in the civil war ii tie in he's not going to compromise the integrity of the team by putting the concerns of mutants above humans.

Okay that wasn't the best example since he's a hydra agent in the civil war ii tie ins but you probably know what I mean.

I think what Steve meant with that statement was he can't put the concerns of mutants above the humans.

[dragonmp93]

That was before Kobik altered his past historyand memories for the most part Steve Rogers the real Steve Rogers is quite accepting to mutants as shown in uncanny avengers but as shown in the civil war ii tie in he's not going to compromise the integrity of the team by putting the concerns of mutants above humans.

Well, when he disbanded the Uncanny Avengers, he didnt sound that different from what could be seen in AvX.

[Ianbarreilles]

Well, when he disbanded the Uncanny Avengers, he didnt sound that different from what could be seen in AvX.

As I pointed out when I re-edited my comment that during civil war ii he's a hydra agent but the point remains quite the same in that Steve Rogers can't put the the concerns of mutants above humans during civil war ii he kinda had a right to lose it on the other members of the team and to disband the unity squad since deadpool lied to him but at the same time it makes sense why he disbanded the team and kinda attacked deadpool it's because he probably wants to ensure the mutants are at their most vulnerable when he takes over the world that's why I've pointed out that regardless of if Steve targets the mutants or not they have to face Steve and hydra when they try and take over the world.

[dragonmp93]

As I pointed out when I re-edited my comment that during civil war ii he's a hydra agent but the point remains quite the same in that Steve Rogers can't put the the concerns of mutants above humans during civil war ii he kinda had a right to lose it on the other members of the team and to disband the unity squad since deadpool lied to him but at the same time it makes sense why he disbanded the team and kinda attacked deadpool it's because he probably wants to ensure the mutants are at their most vulnerable when he takes over the world that's why I've pointed out that regardless of if Steve targets the mutants or not they have to face Steve and hydra when they try and take over the world.

I was talking about when the X-men wanted to Scarlet Witch to pay for M-day during the Children's Crusade; and that was his response, that the X-men should stand down and that "We(The Avengers)deal with our own".

[Carabas]

From what I saw (in flipping through), the main point of "House of M" was the altered timeline. The Scarlet Witch stuff was a framing sequence.

My only question is why has nobody smothered Wanda with a pillow yet, especially after it was discussed. But, at this point, I am pretty sure we are supposed to have forgotten about at least some of the times that she has flipped out and tried to kill everybody.

The point of House Of M was vastly reducing the number of Mutants in the MCU, one of the three genies Quesada wanted to put back into the bottle.
And when you actually read the story, the entire altered timeline was just besides the point, a diversion from the plot that took over three quarters of the story.
In #1 they lay introduce the main conflict, then there's six issues of nothing, and then in #8 they fail to resolve the main conflict. Rob Liefeld can't write something this bad.

[Ianbarreilles]

I was talking about when the X-men wanted to Scarlet Witch to pay for M-day during the Children's Crusade; and that was his response, that the X-men should stand down and that "We(The Avengers)deal with our own".

It was probably a reference he was making to scarlet witches role in avengers disassembled which led to Scott Lang being killed by jack of hearts and their mansion getting destroyed and she-hulking out and ripping vision in half and Hawkeye sacrificing himself to stop a supposed kree invasion among other things that happened.

Basically Steve was most likely making the case that Wanda deserves a second chance and since she was under possession that she deserves a second chance at being an avenger or even hero at least that's how I interpret it even vision didn't forgive Wanda so easily as shown in the zero issue of avx.

[Fordel]

Characterization every time. Every single time. Your story is absolutely nothing if you don't draw me in to the struggles and triumphs of your characters. That investment into the characters, that buy in, that part that makes me give a crap about them, that's what makes any story, comics, movies, books... that's what everyone is here for.

Without characters you might as well be writing a role-playing sourcebook or a wiki page instead. Interesting on a intellectual level, but no emotional investment.

[JKtheMac]

I think this is a much misunderstood area of writing. For a start this is in a marvel Comic thread, and the vast majority of stories in superhero comics are action focused. Even those stories where the focus is on the character, the actual driving force of the story is still likely to be action. That pretty much defines superhero comics as plot driven, and that makes this question problematic.

Notably the key element to a plot driven story is "What does the protagonist want". To the layman that sounds like a character driven story. The main, active character wants something external, we spend some time understanding that character and why he wants it, he meets an external obstacle that presents a challenge to this goal which he has to overcome in order to get to the goal. So if this character wants love, and the obstacle is a rival to that character for the affections of another, and the hero wins out and gets a love match, is that a character driven story? Not necessarily, indeed very often not because we rarely find character driven stories in genre fiction. The story is unlikely to be about the protagonist's ability to love or be ambivalent about the love match being resolved for example. The main driver is usually external conflict not internal conflict.

Even stories where the core of the story is about internal conflict, a superhero comic will often fall back on the genre tropes to tell the story, so something like The Vision which is one of the rare exceptions, has many instances where external forces are set up as obstacles to the otherwise internal conflict in that story.

Then you have stories that like to mix both internal and external conflict, like the classic Wolverine mini. Although pretty good, they often become muddled because they suggest a dramatic fiction style story but rarely address the dramatic premise satisfactorily. So in Wolverine we get plenty of agonising about his beast like nature, but essentially the action story gets prioritised at the key moments and risks undermining the man v beast story. These stories are using the trappings of character driven stories, but ultimately remain plot driven.

So where does that leave us? Since the success of The Vision, do we want to see every book from here on out focusing on the inner conflicts of the protagonist and how they have an effect on their day to day job? Probably not. We are mostly fine with the surface level, 'The Rhino is attacking the police station but I must get Aunt May her meds' kind of internal conflict, a surface level exploration of character to make the heroes feel identifiable. We rightly regard the Wolverine mini as a classic, while acknowledging that Old-Man Logan had a little more dramatic character in the mix.

[CentralPower]

The point of House Of M was vastly reducing the number of Mutants in the MCU, one of the three genies Quesada wanted to put back into the bottle.
And when you actually read the story, the entire altered timeline was just besides the point, a diversion from the plot that took over three quarters of the story.

Reducing the number of mutants was the editorial result. Nobody buying comics at Barnes and Noble (or Borders at the time) cares about that. The bulk of "House of M" was the altered timeline. That was book-ended by the first issue (Wanda proving she is an over-powered lunatic by altering the world) and the last issue (Wanda cleaning up one of her messes and making another one). If the altered timeline stuff reads well (which Bendis tends to), then non-comic fans are not likely to complain.


I am going to use "Secret Invasion" (which I did read, and recently flipped through). The tag-line was "Who do you trust?", which fit with the high concept paranoia and uncertainty. The uncertainty even spread to readers at the time, because people were flipping out and wondering if Bendis was going to use a skrull-reveal to undo some of the bigger changes at Marvel. (The end result was that Marvel nudged a few b-listers back in to place and brought a d-lister or two back from the dead.)

It was not great comics. There were not big plot twists. The faceoff in the Savage Land was probably the most significant scene, which was Marvel telling people to get over the 80s. (Sadly, most fans missed that.)

But, "Secret Invasion" was readable enough.