Watch Patreon Exclusive Videos FOR FREE Here: www.patreon.com/rowanjcoleman

They can seem annoying if written poorly but characters like Jadzia are proof of the opposite

Jadzia’s competence in multiple fields worked well because it frequently reminded us of the symbiosis of two organisms that made her, and the centuries of experience she inherited as a consequence of it. And it was always fun to watch people who didn’t know her well be astonished by her abilities.

Mark Watney in The Martian is another great example of a good well writen hyper-competent character. He is incredibly smart, personable and liked by his crewmates. But the tension in his story comes from overcoming the dire situations the author puts him in again and again. You never doubt he is going to survive, it would be a terrible story if he didn't, the fun comes from having him work out how to survive.

Star Trek tells a lot of stories where the protagonists have the advantage. The Enterprise meets a lot of aliens that are much less advanced and they have the power to do whatever they want. But the conflicts are rooted in ethics and the ideals that the characters try to uphold. Sure, the Enterprise can get out of a lot situations by just taking what they want from a weaker alien but they choose not to because it's against their principles and laws. They must use their technology wisely, solve problems through diplomacy rather than force, and know when not to use their power over others.

I've often heard that my favorite writers for Superman, Morrison included first ask, "What can I challenge him with that he can't just punch or throw into the sun?" It's why there's so many good Superman stories that feature moral, ethical and/or emotional conflicts.

Here's why it works: Jadzia is hyper-competent but she is also *deeply flawed* in other ways. She also has a ton of reasons for her vast experience, having lived so many lives. I think my favorite hyper competent character in sci-fi is Carter from Stargate, who is clearly hyper competent but is also such a work aholic she pretty much obliterated her own social life outside of work and has actual weaknesses, and she never runs around lecturing people she's the best, she just does things that people are impressed by.

I think the best definition of when overcompence becomes a problem is when the story and the verisimilitude/internal consistency of the fictional world bend backwards to accomodate a character showing off. Many fictional characters are potentially overcompentent. Hell the entire point of Starfleet is to pick the best of the best, no matter if you can speaks 86 languages, make a brain transplant or knock out a klingon with a single punch, potentially any Starfleet officier is hypercompetent.

Love the segue, Comment section yep I think you hit the nail on the head. The thing that makes Dax work for me is she has a reason, 8 lifetimes of knowledge is going to make you more relaxed, she knows from the past host that there's no point in sweating the small stuff.

I love that you kept showing Sharpe in your examples. I just discovered that old series a year ago and it's one of my favorites.

_Doctor Who_ has lasted 60 years while focusing on a character some might argue is the most hyper-competent being in the entire universe. Doesn’t stop the Doctor being witty, charming, annoying, fallible, vulnerable, and interesting to watch.

Always nice to hear someone that understands the whole point of Superman as a character!

I like this take. I especially like that clip from the interview about Superman. I was thinking about Don Draper during most of this, because he is a very compelling character and certainly very flawed. But not only do certain watchers of the show completely ignore all of his flaws, calling him the "coolest guy ever" and so on, most of his struggles are also emotional rather than external. He sets _himself_ external goals, trying to get a certain client, to sell a particular project he's gotten himself invested in. But the actual plot focuses on his relationships - with his coworkers, with his wives, with his children. He regularly hurts these relationships for the sake of his work, and it's presented as a tragedy rather than a huge success. He is also arguably hypercompetent in his specific field, always coming-up with something when it's most-needed. But where he is remarkably incompetent is, again, his relationships with other actual human people. Any time he has a wee monologue about what drew him to advertising, it's actually a psychological confession of one of his failings.

That's why "Superman For All Seasons" by Loeb and Sale is one of the best Superman comics of all time. It's got nothing to do with any of his superpowers.

This was a great video.. and I spat my peppermint tea over my keyboard at the end.... but that part made me think. I think The Mary Sue trope gets thrown around a lot these days, but I think that is more down to how current writers write "strong female characters" I don't want to talk about Michael Burnham, so I'll use Tilly for an example.. She could be a very complex and sympathetic character. But because the writers are trying to push the idea that all you have to do is be your best self and you'll succeed. Her Idiosyncrasies are something to embrace, something that make her strong.. where as when you look at the Barclay character, who is very similar to Tilly in a lot of ways, his character shines when he learns to overcome his idiosyncratic tendencies.. and we see his character develop and grow in spite of them.. the world simply doesnt get out of his way because he embraces his personality flaws.. A lot of shows and movies seem to take this approach when writing their Female characters... Jadzia is a bit of an enigma at the start of the show, but that's clearly because the writers weren't sure what to do with her character.. At the start there was some confusion to where the line between Dax and Jadzia was.. they worked that out by the episode "Dax" which I think is still quite early in season 1. I still don't think that Jadzia is as Hypercompetent as say Seven of nine or Data.. She just has a wealth of experience to draw on. I don't think that she is ever portrayed to be that one character to save the day every episode. I liked her character in the show because they were able to do things with the character that you wouldn't normally see a 20 something year old woman doing.. at the time it felt different and fresh.. It was a shame they let Terry Farrell go.

Larry Niven, world renowned Sci-Fi Author, has most of his characters being super-competent.. and his books sell like few others can.

Thank you for the heart attack at the end Mr. Coleman. Great video as always!

I think there is a big difference between being hypercompetent and perfect. Dax had knowledge and abilities that made her extremely skilled in many areas but she wasn't perfect, she made mistakes like anyone else. But we didn't see deep flaws because she had already worked to overcome them. A Mary Sue is perfect and that is why people hate her - even when she screws up, it isn't believable and she usually ends up coming out on top. Personally I think that "major flaw to overcome " idea is just used out of laziness because while we all have flaws, most of us don't have a major one that impacts everything we do everyday. It can make an interesting story but isn't that realistic to me where as I can see someone like Dax as being more realistic - is very good at her work because she put in the effort and because of her mindset, she applies that elsewhere and becomes good in other areas. We see that with people often.

it isn't about "competency" or lack thereof but about humanizing qualities and struggle because no matter how good (at whatever) a character is they're going to run into someone better or a situation they cannot overcome neatly and if they don't then they're not quality character. It's not about "being good at everything" but about struggling to win against whatever odds are stacked against you.

Whenever someone uses any form of the term "Mary Sue" seriously as a part of critique or analysis, I often get the impression that they're basing their impression of the character or story off of some arbitrary list or guide rather than actually engaging with the work itself. It not just creates a very lazy and narrow perspective to examine and enjoy stories, but also double standards where to explain the exception is like going through more flaming hoops than at a 3 ring circus. The approach that I find works better isn't "how overpowered is this character", but rather "how does this character work in the context of the story". It basically encourages actually engaging with the material without having to rely on surface level observations, and better understanding the story, characters, themes, and even picking up when where the actual shortcomings are.

“Yes, that’s really the segue” 💯

I just stumbled across this channel and it’s a Thanksgiving miracle. Started your Star Trek series and loving it. So very excited to watch more.

I was actually very much looking forward to hearing your take on where Rey falls into all this. Kinda disappointed now. 😢

I think it really comes down to two points: conflict and verisimilitude. It's highly unsatisfying if a hyper-competent character swoops in and solves the conflict easily. A character could be a literal god among men who is good at every conceivable skill and still be interesting to watch as long as there is some kind of difficulty, some critical question that the audience can't answer until the story is done. The entire story of One Punch Man is about a guy who got so powerful that nothing could ever possibly make him struggle, but yet it's still fun to watch because often the story isn't about if Saitama can win the fight: we keep coming back to the story because of the humor and the conflicts of the side characters... and Saitama's perpetual struggle to get any kind of recognition for the things he does. Second is Verisimilitude: have you given the audience a reason to believe that a character can do what he or she does. Dax's skills are explained by her symbiote. Superman's power comes from his alien genetics. One of the reasons that people struggle to see characters like Rey from Star Wars as anything but a Mary Sue is because she hasn't given us that verisimilitude yet. We haven't been given a good enough reason to think she can do the things she does. She hadn't "earned" it yet, as silly as it sounds.

Its one reason I love A Song of Ice and Fire - we get to see the viewpoints of many different characters. Others see Jon Snow as a fearless master swordsman, but when we see his thoughts he's a scared boy barely holding it together. Which is one of the failings of the tv show - after season two, Jon never seems to ever show any sign of weakness and becomes a cold force of nature.

This video is proof of why people need to read more than one chapter in a book, or even just one book. One rule doesn't mean there are not other rules to guide that may require expansion on the earlier rules, that's why books are long. For those who only use 8 minute or less videos on youtube, they are bound to run into contradictory issues that don't make sense without a greater context a lot.

Rowan, thank you for this. Amusingly, I actually encountered a bit of the kind of bizarre negative reaction that you mentioned in my own massive "BattleTech: Operation Lancaster" project (that I spent five years developing), with a couple of people actually complaining that some of the characters were too competent... In an elite military unit that was gathered specifically for their skills and abilities. Was so strange. And it wasn't even as though they were without personal flaws or internal conflicts. Nearly all had their own personal traumas and quirks. But anyway, thank you for this. It helped to reinforce that I'd done the right thing. And that Star Wars comment at the end. Oh, man, it's a good thing nobody else was in the house when I watched this. I probably would've given them a hell of a scare with how loud and hard that made me laugh. Well played, Rowan. Well played.

I wonder if the competency of characters at least in the US is going up because people are feeling more and more helpless about the state of things as time goes on. This leads to making characters who can break through all obstacles to make things right.

It really doesn't matter how competent somebody is, there's always an upper limit for how many problems they can solve and how fast they can solve them. It is going to become annoying though if every problem Superman faces is mental when his strength is physical and there's another character around like Mr. Fantastic where his strength's are mental but is only given strength problems in every story they take part in. Though, like you said in the video you can break mental problems down into sub categories that can more interesting. Why or how someone should think about how to live their life is relatable. Healthy ways to diminish dark impulses or even turn them towards something positive without just suppressing them till they rip you a part is useful as well.

The segue is amazing! Thanks Squarespace for supporting my favourite podcasts and youtube channels for more than 15 years now!

Having a hyper-competent character as part of an ensemble really helps with tension. Often they will be instrumental to most of the solutions on the journey, but when the problem is such that even they lose hope, the audience shares that fear so much more. When used well they won't solve every problem, in fact they may create more problems from hubris, complacency, or not being able to convince everyone their crazy idea is right.

AUGH! Thanks for the thanks!! Also both Matthew and I (Colin) are amazed you pronounced our last name right

Great video, succinct and well put together.

Star Trek seems like it gets a pass for some of these character decisions, just because some officers are supposed to be the best-of-the-best coming out of their academy. It makes sense that they'd have multiple specialties, just as people do now in their particular field. I have some problems with Jadzia but they're mostly acting quirks rather than writing problems lol.

Entirely well put. You seem to express (almost) my opinions, only with more eloquence and precision. This is why I follow your channel.

The SquareSpace segue was A+. Well done.

Great insight Rowan and something I've never really put a lot of thought into. PS: That star wars lightsaber clip at the end is extremely loud, lol. Nearly jumped out of my seat :D

LOL @ 1:19 I was like WEIRRRRRD *eyroll* and Rowan then said “yes that’s really Segway” 😂😂😂

As a beloved character once said: "You can do everything right and still lose.". Just because you're hyper-competent doesn't mean you will always win, or that things are easy. Anyways, great video!

One of the best ad segways ive ever seen

I think David Gemmell's Druss the Legend deserves a mention in this context, he's another character who will always do the right thing thanks to his Iron Code and you know will (nearly) always win because he dies in the very first book he appears in. Yet his stories are always interesting and that's quite often because his code and indestructibility are often in conflict with wht you might term "the greater good". He does after all save the life of the Nadir youth whose army will eventually kill him. Sharpe's problem is his massive chippiness I'd say Hornblower is a better example of the Ultra Competent trope in this time period. As to the Rey issue... I don't actually dislike her as a character but I think that the problems with how she fits in to the last trilogy can be elucidated by contrasting her with Jadzia Dax. Firstly there's the problem with her being good at everything right from the start without adequately explaining it (even as Palpatine's progeny) . On the other hand we are told that Jadzia was very, very clever but lacking a bit in experience and confidence while Dax provided the wisdom and experience that produced confidence. This lead to a very well rounded and good at most things whole. Secondly nobody writing for DS9 felt the need to diminish any other characters to make Dax look good. The opposite in fact - for example, Worf gets to be something other than a punching bag when she's around. So Rey herself is likeable and sympathetic but the decisions made for those around her are what make her look bad. She can still be a strong character without having Luke Skywalker becoming a useless moral coward. As an aside my favourite genre book of the last year or so is Miles Cameron's "Artefact Space", it's probably not the "best" book I've read (some of the editing and continuity is a bit wobbly for a start) in that time but it remains my favourite because the main character falls into the hyper-competent and likeable slots and is consequently a pleasure to spend time with.

I think "it depends" is the only acceptable answer here. For instance, I can easily argue that Dax doesn't count towards the "don't write your characters..." statement because she's not the main character. In how many shows do you have the highly wise and experienced bad asses? Your other examples like James Bond or Conan is also excused because they operate largely alone, they're movies are in the action genre, and there wasn't a previous established situation/character(s) which were shown to struggle. FWIW I didn't mind Rey being a bad ass at all up until she was revealed to have the sacred blood of the like 2 or 3 families that are important in the whole galaxy. A nobody, no matter the gender, rising up and being good at everything was a great message I thought.

Was not expecting a Sharpe reference here. A few scenes from it came across my recemendations a few months ago and it looked good. Guess I'll need to bump it up my watchlist a few notches.

Love Jadzia and the Trill so much

Excellent video. Watching this made me think of the term "Competence Porn" from John Rodgers, a creator on Leverage. That's a show that is an example of not a singular hypercompetent character. But instead it's about a team of people who are all the best-at-what-they-do. So now we have gruop that can eventually do anything, while each character has their own issues while still being The Best. On the whole I much prefer characters, both heroes and villains, who show that they know what they are doing. Rather then us being told that "therrre..great", but never displaying any of those qualities.

Read anything by E.E. "Doc" Smith, loaded with hyper-competent characters, but still exciting, because the hyper-competence leads them into over the top situations.

Love your vid. I would join patreon but money. YT is easier for me to manage somehow. continue the great work and may the force be with you!

Competence in a story must be earned. Dax had lived several lifetimes in various genders, professions, etc. She wasn't a Mary Sue because she didn't spontaneously just know how to do things. She also wasn't a know-it-all.

The great pulp era relied on hypercompetent characters like Doc Savage and Flash Gordon. Maybe those were simpler, but grand adventure doesn't need mopey complex antiheroes. In another vein, shows like Leverage have hypercompetent characters who always win the day, but there are bumps and bruises, setbacks and stumbles along the way. That's OK, it's good to see how these things are overcome rather than overwrought.

hypercompetent characters can be very iconic, like xena, who has the joke she can do everything but cook haha. likew she has clear flaws gabrelle fits in, kim possible, ok ron is more likable but she too is, due being an overachiever really needing ron. who got the variety of soft skills and variety there. that show did it so well. ivanova and dax are also very very human. like she can run for a time run the station but is really glad when shariden comes. hell even kate lockley is, really showing vunerability and show she means well. which is a flaw. Her gettoing off the wrong foot, is a flaw. Hell batmain is best when he is put in out of his wheelchair situations. Cause it makes him human. and he, has alfred. yeah either have a goofd partner that shows they need people still and that they are human and suck at things or are , just human struggle. i recommand guardian of the spirit. too. so good too

Judzia is basically a Star Trek Time Lord. Of course it works. Her hundreds of years and multiple life times makes that explanation work

3:02 "the common complaint is that they are unrealistic, but this is fiction" I fully agree with you and this is such a bugbear for me. If I wanted realism, I wouldn't be watching fiction FFS. One of the major reasons for immersing oneself in fiction is to escape how painful and annoying reality can get, especially nowadays. Indeed, I try to remind myself of Jor-El's words in Superman The Movie, "They can be a great people, Kal-El. They wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way."

I dunno if he counts per se, since it's not a character failing to be more restrained and less social, but I think of Sherlock Holmes as a likeable hypercompetant character, and I think what makes a difference thre is multiple adaptations have shown him practising a variety of skills, which makes his abilities feel more earned and dynamic than simply plopping him in front of us magically able to do whatever is needed. I think that was a really great humanising touch they put into Elementary that certain other adaptations lacked and Holmes sometimes feels more uh, like a fictional character, ironically.

Good to see Sharpe make a cameo in this video, next target for a retrospective perhaps?

It may be dark but I really like the portrayal of superman on the new tv show. theres a bit about bullying and his kids get bullied and clark not superman goes to "talk" with the father of the bullies and I really like the added depth and dichotomy. much how batmans costume is bruce. I like the Clarks costume is superman. in the same vain. the boyscout is an effort and not core. but thats just my opinon

i feel like context is important. Especially in the case of Jadzia. She is both an alien and has the equivalent of several lifetimes of experience

Another character that comes to mind from this is Gojo from Jujutsu Kaisen, being the strongest character in many regards it might seem like he'd be a dull character. But it's because of that strength and how others view him for it, whether it be jealousy, fear, or encouragement, makes the story more engaging as a result

Great take!

It's like any trope; whether it's good or bad is all in the execution. And it's really easy to write a hypercompetent character who's also hyperannoying.

There's also the biggest conflict hypercompetant good characters face, they can't be everywhere and they often feel the need to use their skills, there are so many problems all happening at once and they have to decide which ones will get their time and attention. When superman decides to help in one situation he has to do so knowing that somewhere else, someone else needs his help, people die because he can't get to them in time, how does someone even start to prioritise those kinds of things without going mad or growing cold?

And this is why it is so difficult to define with great precision what is a "Mary Sue". I may not be able to describe it perfectly, but I know it when I see it.

Smart video, well done! An extreme version of this example in anime would be One Punch Man, who can win any fight with a single punch. It is his daily turmoil that is his real struggle. The only reason the end of every fight is important to the story is to see how he ends up landing that one punch, and how funny, or how insane it plays out. Cheers Rowan, love your work!

your segue-way to your sponsor had me in stitches

Dax made sense in the context of the rules set by the Star Trek universe, she had the experience of many life times. This was a double edged sword, as it was also the course of many story conflicts

Yeah I agree, like any trope it's a hammock vs the diving board For me it's almost always an opportunity to dig deeper and go existential with it and explore so maybe the legacy of the character may be problematic or something like ennui could set etc A simple example is Metroman from Megamind, I thought that was a great plot and character beat

Another excellent video. Bringing Grant Morrison is always a plus.

That last bit's gonna deafen some headphone users. That hurt.

Agreed. It is entertainment. One other factor of a HC character, they're aspirational. They set a guide for personal development. Naturally I'm not going to fly like Superman, or fight like Batman, but some of their skills and values can be related to. This was the whole idea behind comics and storytelling in the first place.

Address Rey from Star Wars!!! 🤣 Love this channel! This is a great analysis and definitely something I'd show a writing class. Whatever university did not hire you, they missed out.

I'm working on a novel that is, essentially, the arrival of humans on the world all of my stories take place on. Here I have to figure out how to do a lot of characters who may be considered hyper-competent, it is good to see that the character type is still enjoyed. Also thanks for the list in video and in the comments, reminds me of all the great characters of the type in the past. Though, I must say, I felt *slightly* attacked at the beginning, the part about a game system.. I'm making a game system to help me balance everything in interesting ways lmffao.

Surely it's a measure of the ensemble, rather than the individual in isolation? Jadzia works in the context of the ensemble of Starfleet officers - most all of whom are exceptional in some way... Ah, right, yes you said that as I was typing this. That said, I'll reiterate the point that criticising a character in isolation of the context in which they serve is not ideal, no. Also, hypercompetent characters may be useful to serve as a foil or antagonist for another character. Y'know character mirrors and shadows, that kind of functional storytelling stuff.

That segway 😂 Flawless

Good video essay. Sherlock Holmes and Perry Mason also come to mind as hyper competent characters. And yes, Lt Columbo, who deftly disguises his competence in battles with opponents who are always undone by their arrogance.

As with everything, it depends on the kind of story you’re trying to tell. Applying a star trek solution to a babylon 5 problem is generally Mary Sue..applying a B5 solution to a Star Trek problem is just gonna piss people off. The “they have to have a flaw” thing is *generally* a good idea, but it frequently comes across as a token. Such as Sherlock Holmes’ drug addiction, which is rarely referenced even elliptically, and forgotten about for years at a time. I can’t think of a single story where it actually plays a plot-relevant point, so why have it? Samantha Carter is a hypercompetent character in Stargate. She’s a badass, arguably the smartest person alive, friendly, occasionally funny, respected, respectful. Yeah, she’s a bit of a science nun, but that seems to be a personal preference, not her being scared of relationships or other hangups. Rodney McKay is probably as smart, certainly as qualified, but is just a shambling mass of neuroses and obnoxiousness. Carter works perfectly for SG1 because SG1 is primarily about fixing problems. McCay works perfectly in SGA because SGA is basically about how each solution brings about its own problems, and McKay is *part* of the problem. But he’s annoying in SG1, and carter just didn’t work in SGA. I don’t really believe in universals in writing. There are probably no “always do this,” or “never do that” limitations, and people who insist there are *generally* aren’t great writers

Jadzia is like an entire crew of people and she is able to use all of their strengths.

I think whats so implausible about actual bad Mary Sues is not their abilities per se, but how the stories treats their strengths and (token) weaknesses. Discovery is easily the most egregious example with Burnham ticking practically every box on the list of what not to do with a character. Yeah, Im sticking my hand into that can of worms. She is frequently abrasive, arrogant and insubordinate. Those arent her weaknesses by the way, those are just consequences of her strengths, such as being inexplicably intelligent to the point where she gets into a secret project and on day one utterly overtakes the guy who came up with it and worked on it for months if not years on getting it to work. So she ends up being condescending as fuck with her "I could help more if I knew what I was working on!" attitude. Even with that handicap she was still better at the best and the brightest who were already working on the project. The scene was ultimately inconsequential in the big picture, it could easily have been rewritten to make her skill far less excessive. Heck, keep her unlikeable if youre so married to the idea. But as it is Burnham is clearly abrasive and arrogant because she constantly is surrounded by relative idiots. And insubordinate because her COs are all clearly incompetent. *Yet, inexplicably, people instantly like her and kick her up the officers stairs.* So clearly she is just too smart for her own good. Its like being in a job interview and youre being asked for your weaknesses, and you just say "Im too perfect. And Im always surrounded by idiots who dont want my great advice.", you see the problem. Jadzia is never that type of person, even if she isnt humility personified either. But when she gets arrogant, like during all those tests before the wedding, thinking she can throw consequences into the wind, she gets consequences and has to scramble to get things back on track. How does Michael Burnham deal with the negative consequences of those three weaknesses? She doesnt. Because there are no negative consequences for her. The closest she got was one time almost being imprisoned, but that got undone by Lorca recruiting her, so the worst of that was dealing with an annoying roommate. And the other was getting a stern talking to by an Admiral and...crying like a 5 year old who got spanked so badly he got a broken arm. Or something. All her arrogant gambles pay off. The universe literally conspires to make even her dumbest ideas somehow work out. And Gawd, did she have some dumb ideas over the seasons. The show just doesnt acknowledge it. And naturally, Burnham never ends up in any particular conflict that doesnt play to her strengths. Which is everything except interpersonal relations. Every conflict is just a straight up good guys vs bad guys thing or a science thing, and shes obviously perfect in both, so she wins those situations in stride. Not once did she have a true fish out of water problem that actually challenged her. *tldr* Its not hypercompetence thats the problem. Its narcissistic writers writing down their wet fever dream of being perfect and getting admired for everything they do by the idiots that surround them. Except the real world, the real viewers, see through the narcissistic bullshit and are turned off.

Have you considered making a Continuum retrospective?

The worst thing about B5 and DS9 was their best character leaving the show ironically due to similar behind the scenes issues. I liked Ezri and Lochley too but the shows weren't the same without Jadzia and Ivonova.

Good stuff.

There have been so many highly competent characters that have had fantastic arcs and storylines: Delenn - Babylon 5 President Barlett - The West Wing Daniel Jackson - Stargate SG-1 Spock - Star Trek Vision - Avengers Will McAvoy - The Newsroom The 10th Doctor and many other Doctor's - Doctor Who Many companions in Doctor Who (Sarah Jane Smith, Martha Jones, Romana, etc..) You can do people who are smart and capable and still have conflict for them if you write it well.

I hope you don't mind me making an observation which I've made several times now and it's regarding your argument of how people feel towards hypercompetent characters versus the reason they exist with regards to the story. Plus, this is also reflected in - I don't recall which of your essays this concerns exactly - you making the point that while a lot of people might feel disappointed by some movie or tv show, their stories are actually very well developed. To this I'd like to say that to me (whatever that means) it feels like you sometimes seem to be focused so strongly on just the facts contained within a story that you're actually kind of missing looking at the emotional aspect of how a story is created and perceived. You know: How things aside from the facts, namely pacing, acting, a sensitivity for subtly vs. pathos, camera work, music and so on, are at least as important to how characters and their arcs "work" for an audience - stuff that has little to do with the logic of drama. Getting back to the video at hand, I know hypercompetent characters can be important and must not be compared to reality as such. But also, I believe connecting to a character who feels like-like to be crucial to the development of the actual story, which is why disregarding the desire for a less artificial, maybe even high-brow approach to storytelling feels a bit like missing a point to me. Not that I assume you'll completely disagree with this! It's just a tendency I though was noteworthy. Anyways... just something I wanted to get off my chest as I actually enjoy your insight and your videos quite a lot. :)

I would actually love to hear your take on Rey from _Star Wars_ but I understand.

Worf: The Master Poker Player. After showing his legendary poker skill in "The Emissary," he worked together with Section 31 to ensure that he would loose terribly each and every time thereafter. Furthermore, he lost so bad that he was able to force both Data and Geordi to ridicule him with malice.

I actually always got the sense that the DS9 writers considered writing Jadzia in that mold of a hypercompetent character with a deep personal flaw, but could never quite settle on what they wanted that flaw to actually be. When we first see her interact with the rest of the main cast, Jazdia's personality is actually pretty different from how she comes to be written for much of the show. She's a lot stiffer, almost Vulcan-like, and her interests are far more centered on her work than any social life. I'm probably projecting a bit too much here, but it almost feels like they're hinting at a Spock/Data style discovery (or in this case, rediscovery) of her Jadzia side as an arc. Of course, by the time her marriage comes around the writing has gone hard the other way, framing her deepest flaw as her being so independently minded that she'll self sabotage just to maintain that sense of independence. In a round about way I think it actually cements the point in this video because these attributes honestly felt kinda unnaturally jammed in her character, or least they did to me, and Jadzia always came off as most genuine when they wrote her as just straight hypercompetent

Do you have a channel on Nebula. I can't seem to find you there ?

Funny bit about Rey 🤣 - Glad you left it out.

I always liked Dax.

Don't underestimate giving your hypercompetant character a good foil. I think writers had more fun writing work hard/party hard Dax when bouncing her off of perpetual stick in mud Worf.

What music do you use?

The only reason I started watching Steven Universe is because of Garnet, who is super good at everything and a badass even compared to the other Gems.

On the face of it, stories are about characters trying to achieve things that they care about, and find difficult to achieve. So long as you have that, why should it matter if they are greatly more able than the average member of the audience? Or even any member of the audience?

I think the problem is about approaching perfection, and it's elimination of failure. On SOME level, the protagonist must fail, both to learn from the pain of loss, and to overcome an obstacle. I think failing to fail is the most extreme failure, and people so gifted that they never fail, fail to learn vital lessons. A Mary-Sue who is so perfect that they even fail to fail is like a universe with light and no darkness, utterly meaningless outside of a contrast. MAYBE you could still make that into something compelling, but I suspect at some point it gets too abstract for anyone to relate to. It sounds more like philosophical [self-manipulation]. I think another alternative would be to use these characters as mentors or guides to more flawed characters who can be the protagonist.

Samantha Carter from SG1 is the single best "hypercompetent" female character ever created in scifi. Humble, bold, realistic, noble, tough, sweet, and a mind that can shred atoms.

Jadzia Dax had good reasons to be competent. She had lifetimes of experiences as men and women, young and old, scientist, warrior, pilot, engineer, and enough wisdom to not take offense. And she wasn't central to the entire story, but a highly valued member of the team who can't be everywhere but fits in where needed. That's good character design and development. You rarely get that nowadays - though they came adequately close with Number One.

It's funny that I couldn't remember a lot about Jadzia.

Hell yeah!

Hypercompetency , now that's soldiering!

I hate how people define character by their flaws first and foremost if not their only thing.

For any anime watchers out there, a good example would be Re: Zero's Reinhardt; picked him over the protagonist, Subaru because the points are much clearer. Reinhardt can pretty much do anything if he so wills it, we're talking learning a field of expertise in the span of seconds, adapting to attacks that cannot be observed, and quite literally immortality― ―He has everything that should make a character unstoppable, But he cannot be in two places at once, the very same issues the protagonist struggled against in the show's second airing. Reinhardt is almighty and by all means cannot be stopped by any single foe we've seen so far, but it doesn't take a wold-ending threat to defeat him, it only takes one person attacking Point A which could be a place that has a loved one, or defend Point B which could be the very nation and people he swore to protect. Or a scale of attack so massive that he's helpless against it. Reinhardt proves that you could be the most competent person in a story, and still have limits. The physical limit of not being able to be in two places at once, that's both an external and internal conflict and I just think that's so cool! (Mostly writing this for myself so I can affirm to myself, the effectiveness and limits of writing techniques―not definitively of course―but more like what I can say with my own words and thoughts)

A good example of a hypercomptant character in a story is Aang from Avatar, the Last Airbender. He is a massively skilled bender, catching on fast with any new techniques. He falters in other, non adventuring areas where bending can't help or when multiple things need to be done at various places. Skilled as he is, Aang can only be in one place at a time and can be overwhelmed.