Characterization

One way to view the 12 spokes in the Groovelet Portable Mythology is with differing characterizations.

Let's look at each of these in a lot more detail:

Oth

Thinking inside the box.

While, ultimately, Oth is motivated by a desire to help others, their utter inflexibility and focus on rules and regulations ends up making it difficult for them to do so.

What they've found, however, is that their respect for the rules and the value of hard work have allowed them to become moderately successful, and they are willing to lord their tiny scrap of power over others with impunity.

Well suited to roles in law enforcement and middle management.

The Dramatic Question

They want to help, but they are bound by their rigid adherence to norms and laws.

Can they be convinced to loosen up and do the right thing even if it involves breaking a rule?

Design Notes

Oth's resistance to change can make them a bad choice of protagonist because they won't do anything unprompted. This also can make them a wonderful comedy protagonist because watching the world slam into this unyielding rock can be very funny, and sometimes, improbably, the rock wins.

Oth is great in stories about moral dilemmas or systemic issues, because they can serve as an easy object lesson in how "rules" or "laws" are not a cheat code to perfect morality - many legal things are heinous, many illegal things are laudable, and Oth is utterly unable to come to terms with this complex truth.

Similar Characters in Media:

• Dwight Schrute (The Office) - Initially little more than a rule-following kiss-ass, nine seasons of development started to bake Dwight into a more fleshed out and well-rounded character with an agricultural background and a strong but often misguided sense of right and wrong.
• Inspector Javert (Les Misérables) - A police inspector and one of the best-known "lawful is not always good" archetypes of all time. When he finally realizes that the law and morality are not one-and-the-same he has so much trouble reconciling this that he commits suicide¹.
• Hank Hill (King of the Hill) - the conflict between Hank's rigid traditionalism and the evolving social mores of the fictitious town of Arlen, Texas often drives the show's comedy.
• Arthur Dent (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) - what Arthur wants is simplicity, predictability, and a universe that makes orderly sense to him. What he gets is not that.
• Hermes Conrad (Futurama) - His job is simply "bureaucrat" and he akes obvious, distinct pleasure in procedure for its own sake.

Contrasting Opposites

Oth and Path exist on opposite ends of the law + order / freedom + anarchy spectrum.

Oth believes firmly in rules and regulations, and in following a structured path to a goal, whereas Path chafes at laws or being told what to do and prefers a more improvisational approach.

Cystam

Pay attention to me!

They want nothing more than to be the center of the attention at all times.

They're narcissistic, intensely people-pleasing, but not necessarily out of a genuine desire to help - out of a desire to continue to be the center of attention. Cystam would give generously to charity, but only if someone was watching.

Lacking any kind of concrete or permanent moral anchor, they instead are willing to take on any philosophy so long as someone who is a true believer is in earshot.

Well suited to politics, sales, C-level business, and of course - acting.

The Dramatic Question

They want, more than anything, to be loved, but they lack the emotional intelligence and kindness to be the kind of person that can be loved, instead settling for just being paid attention to.

Who are they, under the show that they put on? Can they learn to be the kind of person who can step out of the spotlight and meet someone else's needs?

Design Notes

Cystam's performative morality is a fun thread to pull on. How much of our personalities are performed rather than real expressions of our own true selves?

Can pretending to care turn into the real thing?

Similar Characters in Media

• Zapp Brannigan (Futurama) - intended as a jab at Star Trek's Captain Kirk, Zapp Brannigan is space legendary for being bold, brash, and heroic, and utterly fails to live up to the hype. He's much more occupied with the business of seeming heroic than being heroic.
• Michael Scott (The Office) - Michael Scott craves human connection and family, but is unable to grasp these things because of his pomposity and immaturity.
• Brett Hand (Inside Job) - Hired for a role he is utterly unqualified for because of his generic, pleasing face and congenial tone, he finds a comfortable equilibrium by sanding off the rough edges of his unpalatable colleagues until they can work together.
• Frasier Crane (Frasier) - Pompous, overstuffed, and self important, they believe themselves to be a wise mentor archetype, but they're much more often an easily enraged buffoon.

Contrasting Opposites

Cystam and Curopal exist on opposite ends of the public / private spectrum:

Cystam is loud and draws attention to themselves while Curopal prefers to disappear into the background.

Kiro

We can do it!

This bundle of optimism, determination, and energy can't help but move the plot forward with their fresh, ill-concieved ideas.

Naive but boisterous, their plans, while definitely well-intentioned, often fail and create enormous and long-lasting problems. What's worse is that they are so optimistic that they won't stop at simple failure: they'll just keep on trying.

At best, a more experienced and thoughtful character will be inspired by the failure and enact some real and lasting change.

The Dramatic Question

Their unflagging desire to help and do good seems inexhaustible, but nobody could stay upbeat for so long. Can they stay persistent in the wake of setback after setback?

Does their boundless optimism make them emotionally brittle when they do fail?

Has their unflagging drive to achieve their goal blinded them to a more important truth?

Design Notes

Kiro is a story starter - even if they're not the protagonist, (although they are often the protagonist) their role is to act as an agent of change, to get the engine of the story running.

Because the loop of "almost-clever idea" to "embarrassing failure" to "returning to the status quo, having learned a lesson" is such a well-worn comedic structure, a Kiro archetype often drives the plot in comedy.

Outside of a pure comedy universe, the Kiro can be a vital component of a story because the story simply requires a heart - someone who believes, unwaveringly, that positive change is possible, that people are good and worth fighting for.

Similar Characters in Media

• Leslie Knope (Parks & Recreation), Janine Teagues (Abbott Elementary) and J.D. (Scrubs) - this sitcom character's infectious enthusiasm and poor planning gets them in over their head.
• Steven Universe (Steven Universe) - both the naive driver of a number of plotlines and the optimistic heart at the center of the show, Steven resolves a number of heated situations with kindness and healing rather than violence.
• Jayce & Viktor (Arcane) - their optimism that technological development can improve peoples' lives may or may not bring about an apocalypse.

Contrasting Opposites

Kiro and Blit exist on opposite ends of the optimistic / pessimistic spectrum:

Kiro is bold but naive and easy to get fired up, but may be easily discouraged, whereas Blit is pessimistic, realistic, and resilient.

Stacks

That is a terrible idea, and here's why.

Nerd alert. Especially in magical or fantastical settings, sometimes we just need someone who can explain things.

Stacks isn't just a fountain of information, though, they're a guide - someone with some experience and wisdom.

Unfortunately, that experience also breeds a certain healthy skepticism and cynicism about what's possible.

Their experience can resolve as pompousness or self-importance, which is fun to skewer - they don't always know everything, but they're willing to pretend.

What they don't have is a lot of impetus to do things. Without someone around to prod them, Stacks is happy just dealing with the status quo - they've found a pleasant enough niche and they intend to dig in and stay there.

Often, keeping a character this experienced around can be detrimental to the plot, which unfortunately can mean a high mortality rate for Stacks' in media.

The Dramatic Question

They are capable, and want to help, but their pragmatism makes them unwilling to put their neck on the line. Can they be convinced to risk it all?

Can they accept that there are some things that simply cannot be known?

Can they, for once, survive to the third act?

Design Notes

It's often important to limit the amount of Stacks in the story.

Stories are more vibrant and exciting when they're not bogged down in loads of exposition from a character who isn't predisposed to action. That's what I am, and nobody would read a story about me.

Stacks can be great in the early half of the story to contextualize confusing events - "why, that's the kind of power that you only see in The Lightbringer once per generation!" - but many creative writing guides will warn you about overreliance on exposition.

Few people are going to want to engage with a 30 minute long exploration on the ethics of wormhole travel when the wormhole is right there, waiting to be explored. Have a Kiro or a Mersenne push right on past the warning signs and keep the story moving.

These creative writing guides are wrong. Exposition is the best, I'm going to write 100 more pages of just raw lore and you can't stop me, creative writing guides.

Similar Characters in Media

• Obi Wan Kenobi (Star Wars) - there's a call to action that Luke recieves - a hologram begging him for help - but without Obi Wan to explain to Luke what a Jedi is and how they need to proceed, this story can't really go anywhere and Star Wars ends early, with Luke confused and getting melted on Tattooine.
• Dr. Cox (Scrubs), Barbara Howard (Abbott Elementary) - this cynical, competent long-standing employee is so jaded by their own struggles to do any kind of a good job that they mostly rain on our protagonist's parade when they try to accomplish anything new. Ultimately good-hearted, they can be compelled to help by watching the protagonist try and fail a few too many times.
• Basil Exposition (Austin Powers) - see, the joke is they put "exposition" right in his name and his entire role in the story is to explain the plot and stakes to Austin and periodically move the plot along with instructions.

Contrasting Opposites

Stacks and Audient exist on opposite ends of the thinking / believing spectrum:

Stacks catalogues and processes real data and comes to careful, reasoned conclusions whereas Audient believes intuitively without needing much in the way of evidence.

Mersenne

Thinking so far outside the box that you could file a missing persons report with the police for the box.

Mersenne is interested in stirring something up, and they don't much care what it is so long as it is interesting.

Their motivation isn't power, wealth, or riches - they simply can not stand still.

There's a good chance that they are utterly brilliant. Or mad. It's hard to tell - whatever game they're playing, they haven't bothered to explain it, so it's not clear whether they're playing 5-dimensional chess or if they're trying to win at poker with a five of clubs, a six of hearts, a Get out of Jail Free card, and a Subway "Eat Fresh" gift card.

They almost seem like a force of nature.

The Dramatic Question

Whose side are they on, anyways? What are they trying to accomplish?

Why did they think this would be a good idea?

Design Notes

In the same way that Kiro can be counted upon to come up with a good but naive idea and optimism to drive the plot forward, Mersenne can be counted upon to do anything to make the plot do... anything.

You're sitting and staring at a blank page, trapped. Fuck. Okay, your Mersenne character walks in trying to balance six pounds of loose oranges in their arms. Some of them roll away. What? Okay, now we have something to dig in to. Where did those oranges come from? Why did they grab six pounds?

Similar Characters in Media

In other "Similar Characters in Media" sub-sections I've tried to keep the lists short and tight and edited, trying to keep the characters distinct and explain why I included them.

In this sub-section you're just getting a laundry list.

• Janitor (Scrubs)
• Janitor (Abbott Elementary)
• Cosmo Kramer (Seinfeld)
• Joker (Assorted Batman)
• Dr. Strangelove (Dr. Strangelove)
• Professor Farnsworth (Futurama)
• Tracy Jordan (30 Rock)
• Beetlejuice (Beetlejuice)
• Gamzee (Homestuck)
• Vi (Arcane)
• Doc Brown (Back to the Future)
• Kefka (Final Fantasy VI)
• Jack Sparrow (Pirates of the Caribbean)

Contrasting Opposites

Mersenne and Misk exist on opposite ends of the acting / planning spectrum:

Misk is prepared for anything, Mersenne doesn't plan at all.

World

This hurts me more than it hurts you.

Aggressive, domineering, and in charge, World is fond of saying single words authoritatively:

Focused. Intense. Proud. Stoic. Authoritarian. Unyielding. Ironclad.

They are idealistic, driven, and trying to make the world a better place - perhaps they started as a starry-eyed dreamer like Kiro. Unlike Kiro, they are ruthless. Willing to accomplish their goals at any cost may make them the villain, but it works.

Heavy is the head that wears the crown, and these characters are often lonely and isolated.

The world won't just become a better place on its own: it must be forced.

The Dramatic Question

Can World finally accept that there is a human cost that is too much even for them to bear in order to chase their dreams of a better world?

Design Notes

It's important to separate the ideas of "antagonist" and "villain", even though they are often one and the same.

An antagonist can be any person, character or force that opposes the protagonist - any character in the Groovelet pantheon can be an antagonist or a protagonist, and often a good choice for an antagonist is one from the opposite side of the wheel as the character they're opposing - an anarchic Path might be antagonized by a rigid Oth, their fight being one defined in terms of freedom vs. security.

What World represents, however, is a sympathetic villain character, a well-intentioned extremist who will go too far in their pursuit of their goals. This can also make for an interesting and vibrant protagonist, making them a compelling anti-hero.

It's common for World archetypes to be honorable and trustworthy, to have many good qualities despite their ruthlessness. They're a sympathetic villain - if only they weren't so entrenched in their own viewpoint.

Similar Characters in Media

• Silco (Arcane¹) - once a revolutionary hoping to build a better life for the people of Zaun, he crosses the moral event horizon a number of times in his quest for independence. With the goal firmly at hand, he finally reaches a breaking point when he is presented with a simple-seeming cost too high for even him to bear.
• Ozymandias (The Watchmen) - depending on your point of view, he saves the entire world from collapsing into a horrendous third World War by killing every last person in Manhattan, or he just kills every last person in Manhattan and doesn't affect the outcome of the situation much at all. Either way he's both willing to do this and haunted by his own decision.
• Joel (The Last of Us) - As he starts to develop a relationship with the precious cargo he's expected to ferry across the post-apocalyptic United States - a teenage girl - he is faced with the terrible cost of his quest to save humanity from a deadly plague.
• Ellie (The Last of Us 2) - Utterly consumed by a desire for revenge, she is unable to come to terms with the terrible human cost of her actions.
• Lord Ruler (Mistborn) - Whoops it turns out that all of their Evil Overlord schtick was borne out of a series of misguided attempts to save the world from a greater evil.

Contrasting Opposites

World and Zariel exist on opposite ends of the agency spectrum:

World is constantly moving themselves towards their own clear and unambiguous vision of an ideal world, whereas Zariel's motivations are hazy and enigmatic, and they operate only at the behest of a third party.

Path

I'm in as long as you're feeding me.

A competent, mercenary, go-with-the-flow type who's mostly along for the ride because there might be a free lunch involved.

Their goal is to get paid, leave, and disappear once more to their solitude.

Their desire for freedom borders on the anarchic - they're the sort who might shout "I don't live by society's rules" after being asked to wash their hands in a public bathroom.

The Dramatic Question

What happened that made them want to separate themselves from society like this?

Are they loyal to anyone?

Their desire for freedom and independence separates them from the events of the story. Will they commit to a cause or leave everyone in the lurch?

Design Notes

The most common Path arc is their journey from outsider to insider - this loner once again becoming part of a crew and letting themselves be tied down.

Their emotional detachment from the rest of the cast of the story allows them to provide a unique external perspective - if, for example, everyone's cooperating in a world where cooperation is rare, Path can draw attention to how unusual that is.

Similar Characters in Media

• Lightning McQueen (Cars) - A great exploration of the "outsider to insider" arc, Lightning is forced by a plot contrivance to come to a small town and introspect about how his selfish lone-wolf attitude and singular focus on his goals won't lead him to happiness.
• Spike Spiegel (Cowboy Bebop) - Distant and haunted, his mysterious and oft-alluded-to grim backstory leave him nothing more than a leaf on the wind and keep him from embracing the unique found-family right in front of him. He dies unable to shake the ghosts of his past.
• Han Solo (Star Wars) - Only reluctantly helps because he is massively in debt, eventually discovers that there is something worth fighting for outside of his own self interest.

Curopal

You first. No really, I insist.

Obsequeious. Sneaky. Polite. Cold. Calculating.

Curopal is a white glove with a hidden knife - polite, efficient, and ready to stab you in the back the moment you're not looking.

They've devised a plan where no matter what happens: they come out on top. On top of that, nobody even knows that they're involved.

They take no risks, place no bets, do not expose themselves or their intentions, and somehow still win.

They're not terribly powerful, even - in direct confrontation they'd be as harmless as a baby kitten¹ - their strength is in their ability to put the knife in at exactly the right moment.

The Dramatic Question

Can they be trusted?

No - okay, then, if it is in their best interest, then can they be trusted?

Still no? Good instinct.

How will they twist the situation to their own advantage?

Design Notes

An interesting subversion of the Curopal archetype is when they've actually been working for the "good guys" the entire time. Sometimes a character can be utterly despicable and people will still root for them because they're able to achieve something positive.

Curopal characters are often information brokers, they can also be useful at delivering crucial but hidden information.

The most obvious use of a Curopal in a story is in a dramatic, surprising twist!

They might be more impactful, however, if the audience knows about them well in advance.

As Alfred Hitchcock famously laid out in an interview:

Let us suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, “Boom!” There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it… In these conditions this same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the secret.

In the first case, we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed.”

Why have surprise when you could have intrigue?

Similar Characters in Media

• Varys (Game of Thrones) - an information broker and spymaster, despite his lack of formal or martial power he regards himself as a representitive of the people of King's Landing and attempts to operate on their behalf.
• Ex-P.F.C. Wintergreen (Catch 22) - oddly influential in the world of Catch 22, Wintergreen is a mail clerk who's gained power by virtue of a man-in-the-middle attack on the bureaucracy of the military: he can reroute and forge orders, making him the most powerful man in the Air Force.
• Cypher (The Matrix) - sick of the abysmal living conditions in the rebellion, he switches teams and offers to work for the machines. This betrayal kills off most of the peripheral allies and teammates of the cast, leaving just a handful of main characters (Neo, Trinity, and Morpheus) for the big finale.

Blit

I couldn't have stopped you from going on this ridiculous mission, so I'm here to try to keep you alive for as long as is reasonably possible, which won't be long.

Blit is a black hole of cynicism.

There is no plan they can't poke a hole in, no parade that they can't rain on.

That cynicism is an armor: deep inside, Blit is creative, expressive, emotional, a side of them that must be kept on tight lock to protect it. Blit is resilient and clear-eyed.

They've been through hell and what's come out the other side is someone who can weather any storm.

Blit's cynicism also calls for a kind of true courage. They can look danger in the eye, understand the full gravity of the situation, know that things are likely to go very badly, and then, face it anyways.

The Dramatic Question

What have they been through that made them like this?

What are they really like, inside that armor?

What's the thing or person who can get past their defenses and see them for who they are?

Design Notes

One of the most obvious reasons to have this character around is that people tend to believe cynical characters, more. It grounds the danger of a situation when someone points out that the most obvious outcome in a fight between a giant and a small boy with a sling is "the giant will absolutely wreck that boy".

Without C-3PO, nobody would know that the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately three thousand seven hundred and twenty to one - and thus, successfully navigating the asteroid field would be a lot less impressive or interesting.

Similar Characters in Media

• The Hound (Game of Thrones) - for such a hardened pragmatist, The Hound sure seems to find himself doing the right thing more often than not.
• April Ludgate (Parks and Recreation) - an an intentional and comedic subversion, when we go to examine April's home life to discover why she's such a relentless sourpuss, we discover happy, ebullient parents who love her dearly. She's not damaged at all, she's just like this because she wants to be.
• C-3PO (Star Wars) - comic and expository, C-3PO contextualizes and grounds the danger of a lot of scenes he's in - while also being humorously dour about his lack of control over the situation.

Audient

I'm not sure why I know this but I know this.

Faith. This character has big beliefs, strongly held, maybe even in opposition with reality itself. Audient has an unusual, almost alien perspective on things, and they often see meaning or purpose where others see coincidence.

They represent apotheosis. If Stacks is responsible for knowing things, Audient is the character most likely to have a direct, intuitive grasp of truth beyond logic or reason.

The "lethal joke character" of the party, they don't really seem to make much sense or act very effectively, until it all comes together and they turn into a literal god in the third act.

The Dramatic Question

What is their core belief? What's the absurd thing that they believe that sits at the center of all of their incomprehensible decision making?

Are their beliefs sane? Do they work? Are they internally consistent? Do they need to be? And most importantly of all: are they right?

Design Notes

As a bit of a Stacks myself I struggle badly with Audient characters. This was quite possibly the hardest of the twelve to write. Faith? Vile.

However - if it turns out that Audient was right all along - as is common in stories - then their mysterious actions provide a sense of unfolding mystery, allowing the audience to look back and reframe their delusion as brilliance. Satisfying!

Similar Characters in Media

• Morpheus (The Matrix) - the whole plot of the movie rests on the shoulders of his dogmatic belief that Neo is The One.
• The Oracle (The Matrix) - a literal prophetess who speaks in codes and riddles.
• River Tam (Firefly) - enigmatic and operating on a different wavelength from the rest of the cast, but easily the most dangerous of the lot.
• Dale Gribble (King of the Hill) - is a comedic example of an character whose big beliefs and defiance of reality are almost always entirely wrong, played up for laughs.

Misk

Finally, a chance to use my degree in underwater semiotics.

This Jack of All Trades provides a lot of utility and wears a lot of hats. Their strength lies not in their focus but in their versatility.

Chatting with Misk, you'll quickly discover that they spent a few months as a river-boat captain, one time they met the King, and that they can juggle professionally.

Their home is filled with curios and souveneirs. They've tried everything.

There are a few ways for this to go: sometimes a Misk will seem obscenely overqualified and well prepared for the task at hand. This is a good opportunity to have them fail miserably, establishing the gravity of the situation and putting the ball back in the court of our intrepid heroes.

Sometimes a Misk will seem to have a completely inadequate, abstract, or useless set of abilities and equipment for the task at hand. This is a good opportunity to have each and every one of those abilities pay off.

Dramatic Question

What are they looking for that they have been unable to find?

How will their useful, practical plans and preparations backfire?

How will their useless, impractical tools and skills unexpectedly pay off?

Design Notes

One of the biggest roles of Misk in a story is just to move the story along whenever a skill is required. Need a lock picked? Need a fact about ants? Need someone who can do close-up-magic? If a deus ex machina is needed to move the plot forward, instead that's an opportunity for Misk to have the right skill, ability, or item to intervene.

Just make sure to jump backwards into the plot and make sure that that skill, ability, or item is brought up at least twice beforehand.

There's a moment that's common in Wes Anderson films (borrowed from many storytelling traditions before that): the inventory. Early in the film, a character might show off various and sundry objects they have packed to accomplish a task. The dramatic promise being made here is that you will see each of these objects again, in the story.

The more unlikely the skill is to be useful, the funnier and more satisfying it is when it finally becomes useful: the one character only knows toaster repair and suddenly the aliens are revealed to be slices of bread. Finally: my time to shine.

Similar Characters in Media

• Worf (Star Trek: The Next Generation) - as a security officer, he's strong, prepared, and the perfect combination of skills required to solve most problems. As a result, he often gets tossed aside handily by a villain to demonstrate that this problem is different.
• Wile E. Coyote - his overpreparation: comedic. His failure: inevitable.

Zariel

...

Zariel is a tough one to characterize because Zariel's archetype is the one of the player character.

Often a silent protagonist, a blank slate, a neutral-feeling template for the player to project their own identity atop - they resist characterization because there's not much of a character left, there.

Sometimes they're good, sometimes evil. Sometimes competent, sometimes confused. Sometimes they roll backwards into a standing leap, push their face into the corner of the room, jump in a way that's frame perfect, and teleport directly to a confrontation with god.

They are the most powerful part of the story: the viewpoint that makes it real: without a viewpoint there can be no story, without a reader none of the book's characters mean anything.

However, not all situations call for a remote-controlled viewpoint character like this: it certainly doesn't make sense in a play.

Zariel in either sense is a character whose power is unlimited and whose motivations are utterly opaque.

In situations where the player isn't pulling the strings, Zariel becomes terrifying, an AI run amok, a clockwork entity with unclear goals and motivations, a character filled with demons all scrabbling for the controls, powerful one moment, confused the next, inevitable and unpredictable.

Dramatic Question

Who is pulling their strings? Are they aware that they are being controlled?

If they're controlled, can they break free?

If they do, who are they, under all of that?

Design Notes

Path is an outsider, but still rooted in the setting that they sit outside of.

Zariel is an outsider in a much broader sense: they are the character most connected to the outside of the story itself.

While "player character" was the initial idea for the role, here, in a non-interactive story Zariel might instead represent the narrator, or a character capable of comprehending or even breaking the fourth wall. If any character is likely to get uncomfortably metatextual it's Zariel.

As the player character, metatextual elements sneak in constantly because of the constant conflict between the non-diegetic game interface (menus, UI, save/load) and the universe of the game itself.

The player, the reader, the audience is an outsider in this world, the only thing in the entire story that is not of the world. They are both 100% in control of it (literally they are the "animating force" that makes the story exist: no reader means no story) and 100% unable to meaningfully affect the outcome (while the story may branch, every detail of the story as written was already set in stone before the player came along).¹

Similar Characters in Media

• Frisk / Chara (Undertale) - this one is a fun exploration of the topic because the player and the meat-puppet they're inhabiting are explicitly different characters. This is explored further in the sequel (side-quel?) Deltarune.
• Flowey (Undertale) - a main character from the point of view of anybody who is not the main character is a kind of unstoppable, eternal cosmic horror.
• Gordon Freeman (Half Life), Link (The Legend of Zeldo), Mario (Various Mario) - this silent, neutral protagonist doesn't contribute much to the story on their own - most emotions are projected on to them or acted around them as they navigate the game world with a series of huphs, hoophs, wa-hoos and yips.
• Doc Scratch (Homestuck) - a proxy-narrator and an omniscient fourth-wall breaker, he's presented as something readers don't encounter very often: not an un-reliable narrator (Doc Scratch himself would point out that he is 100% reliable) but a narrator actively working at odds with the goals of the readers and the characters within.

A Dire Warning

Hopefully, reading the Characterization and Story Cycle lenses, you'll understand the thematic overlap between these characters and the parts of the story they're meant to mirror: Stacks, for example, represents both a mentor-style character, and a phase in the story where the protagonist is gathering skills and allies after being dropped into a strange new world.

You can take this too literally¹ and write an honestly pretty unreadable story² where twelve different characters show up at equal intervals throughout a story, perform their single function, and then disappear forever. This would be... a mess, and I highly recommend against it. For one thing: a fairly good bit of writing advice is not to introduce new characters at all after the first act.

You probably don't need all twelve characters to be prominent, or even present in your story - you probably don't even need them to be twelve separate characters, as more complex individual characters could have traits from multiple different archetypes. Characters can even exhibit character growth (ew) and evolve from one archetype to another.

A Blit+Path (pessimistic but hopeful cowboy) could evolve into a Kiro+Mersenne (an optimistic, unpredictable hero), that's character development!

Look at where you're struggling in story development, and only introduce characters if they solve problems

Is the story too moored in the mundane and nothing much is happening? Drop in a Kiro or a Mersenne to agitate the plot a bit, or have a World show up and provide focused, concrete antagonism.

Is the story hard-to-follow and unclear? A Stacks might take this opportunity to explain.³

Tables