So I was in the mood to write up things for this game, but am not in the mood to work on the script. So instead, I’m making a sort of pseudo-essay, pseudo-rant about how to do characters.

You see, characterization is about the details and nuances. This is a problem with fanworks that spans all fandoms, not just Undertale, and that is many people tend not to pick up on these particular nuances, and simplify characters to certain core traits in a phenomenon TV Tropes labels as “Flanderization.”

When you’re thinking of a character, I like to start with the core traits and go outwards. Think of their defining features first, and then branch out into other things. Their likes and dislikes, how they get along with certain types of people, their speech patterns, quirks, habits, etc. All that stuff real people have, and how they became that way.

But to shift the subject, Undertale is a short game, and not only that, it is very much an unfocused one. Each of the characters gets their time in the spotlight and then they are immediately taken out of it to be given to the next character, and thus do not really get any proper arcs. Sure they get moments of development, but the only one who could be said to have something of a full arc would be Alphys.

I will make a controversial statement here by saying this, but Sans and Papyrus are the two weakest characters because of it. Papyrus is only highlighted in Snowdin and remains out of focus for the rest of the game, while Sans has a few moments here and there but mostly is the comic relief unless you go Genocide, in which he gets his moment to shine.

This is not due to bad writing, more a different approach to writing entirely. Toby Fox was creating an experience much more based around the humor and meta-commentary than putting all that much focus on the narrative, since as many people have observed, the plot is all sort of just shoved in at the end. This is fine, and I still do like Undertale. I wouldn’t be making this if I didn’t. But I can still call it out on its flaws.

This is because, essentially, the game plays out with characters each reacting to events rather than being effected by them. When they are not initiating, they are reacting. the amount of events that impact the characters’ personalities are very few.

This is not the case for Fallen Souls.

The characters receive a constant presence and development throughout from the moment they are introduced until the end of the game. To use an example, let’s take the first character introduced in FS.

Frisk.

Frisk in this is a character with an actual personality and many different dialogue options. They are generally serious, have a tendency to take their convictions to extremes, and something of a hero complex, but are generally altruistic, polite, and overall a good person. And ultimately, depending on whatever route you take, Frisk will change. Whether they will fall further and further into delusions, or rise above them and act selflessly to save monsters rather than just for self-fulfillment is ultimately up to the player.

Either way, Frisk has an arc throughout each of the routes, one of which I won’t spoil, since that would ruin the fun of it. But the point is, I took a great deal of effort to map out how each choice and each event affects them across the many routes, and ultimately, I feel like that payed off in the long run and will make for a more fulfilling experience.

So the moral of the story folks?

Have the events effect that characters, rather than the characters simply reacting to them.