I realized recently that Nikolas isn't flawed enough.
He's never been perfect, I never wanted him to be so. Such characters are annoying and very boring. Where's the fun if nothing is wrong? But I've struggled as to how Nikolas should be flawed. A recent post on WoW.com gave some interesting insight, that it might help to blame the character's imperfection on one of the common vices: Sloth, Greed, Vanity/Pride, Lust, Gluttony, Wrath or Envy. All present intriguing options, but at the end, I didn't like any of them. So where am I going with this? Well, I had an idea yesterday, one that has stuck and that I kind of like.
Nikolas is, at the beginning of the story, well on his way to becoming jaded.
His upbringing wasn't exactly idyllic- he and his family were driven by war to another land and he saw little of his father who was in the fighting- but it wasn't really hard either. From his pre-teen days, he spent his time training to be a wilderness scout. He spent his years mostly outdoors, which he enjoyed, and didn't have to face the test of actual fighting until he reached adulthood. Even then, he had the teachings of the Light, passed on by his father, to keep him believing in greater things that transcend pain and suffering.
Where his difficulties begin is when he makes choices based on his convictions, only to find those decisions challenged, ridiculed or criticized by those around him. The difficulty grows when one starts to consider the implications of that choice.
Imagine you're walking along the street when you see a man stumble in the middle of a crosswalk. Oncoming traffic has a green light, and a bus is speeding toward the fallen pedestrian. You do the heroic thing and push him out of the way, saving his life. That's a good thing, correct?
What if the man robs a bank later that day? What if he kills someone during that robbery? What if he goes on a crime spree that leaves death and destruction in its wake?
There could be a host of philosophical discussion concerning the rightness or wrongness of your decision to save the pedestrian (is it the act that makes it good or the result and so on), but think only of this: what would you think if those consequences happened? What would that do to your moral center, your sense of good and bad, right and wrong? Add to that criticism from peers about your decision and the results. Maybe once isn't so big you can't brush it off, but what if it happens several times? What then?
That's what Nikolas is going through at the beginning of the story. He tries to do the right thing, but more than once that has led to less-than-pleasant consequences, even life-threatening ones. So for him, is it worth it to continue trying to be the good guy? What if no one around you wants you to be the good guy?
Those are the thoughts I have right now. What do you think? Feel free to share in the comments section.
