Do readers hate flawed MC? Because they seem to be. But when the MC is OP they garner hate as well, I'm confused, should the MC start as weak or OP? Reviewers often say stuff like everything is handed down unto the MC, well thats what the OP stuff is for. But when the MC is weak the reviewer say like he got thick plot armor, or he's useless, or beta or some stuff like that. Or I think the writing is just bad.
Do readers hate flawed or weak MC?
It's your book to be honest, why care too much about it? And yes, some of us hate weak MC, but if you have one-star review because of it, I suggest you to just stick to your plot because pulling out a plot changer out of nowhere won't make anything better.
Either can be good if they are well written. Do what you like better and make sure that you have a consistent and logical character. I think a character needs to have a strong design, but they do not need to be physically strong.
Also, your plot should line up with how they are built. A story about fighting with a weak MC might be boring. However, a story about a weak MC that is a medic, journalist, genius, or something like that might be interesting. Think of it like a video game. If you are a healer, don’t try to do damage! If you are a damage dealing character, don’t try to heal! Make them make logical decisions.
@CacackleLasson #415856 in my opinion op MC has nothing to do with it, but the MC personality, history and interaction of characters has a lot to do with it.
CacackleLasson I like a relatable mc but if it's too relatedable it'll be a boring story. Shrugzies
CacackleLasson I think readers don't hate flawed MC but the character who has no development. You can ignore such comments if you have just started the novel since it takes time to do the character development. However, you have written more than hundred chapters and the MC has no development and doesn't learn from their mistakes is kinda boring I say. I am not saying as an author but as a reader. Weak MC is fine, no one is strong, however character development is important. And if you have negative comments, not spams but the actual comments which says that MC is too weak or something little descriptive, try to fix them if this does not mess with your plotline. Trust me, sometimes negative comments can save your story and can give you brilliant ideas. Some comments are not just negative but critical. So try to think about such comments as well and if you think what you are writing is right, then you don't need to change anything since it's your book. You choose what to write, but just try to understand some comments as well.
CacackleLasson It depends on how they are portrayed. If they're flawed without purpose, they might come across as inconsistent and without growth.
The way to keep them developing is having them work towards a goal they're passionate to achieve.
- Edited
If by flawed you mean the author is a bad writter then yes.
You need your character to have a reason for his actions and have consequences in and out. Like if he starts killing lizards then cats and dogs and that kind of thing and slowly works his way up to killing a person then becoming a cerial killer all the while having the psychological effects of that thats good writting.
If your character lives and was born and raised in a eye for an eye bloody world then yes thats also normal.
If your character is some guy in a normal world kills then whatever doesn't see any consequences then goes back to normal your writing is shit.
Consistency and character development are more important than OP vs weak... which rarely means much because plot usually dictates what happens to a character, not the other way around. (And being OP doesn't mean a character isn't flawed.)
I never understood labeling every male lead who doesn't have physical relations with nearly every female entity a beta. 
What kind of Freudian mentality is that?
In my opinion, a Gary Stu is terrible, but some people want to escape reality through the eyes of your characters, and... that is predominantly what sells here... But most will agree that a flawed character is an interesting character, which makes for good writing. So ask yourself: Who are you writing for? Why do you write?
Then look at your reviews. Is it descriptive, constructive feedback or is it a genre hater? Are they why you write?
Maybe leave an author's note at the end of the latest chapter to ask for feedback in the comments. Anyone who has read that far is hooked for some reason or another and a couple should be able to articulate some feedback.
I always like a good OP MC. Unless it’s very badly written, I usually enjoy them. That doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate a flawed MC. That leaves room for improvement and character development. As long as they don’t stay trash, it’ll be good. I’m not so good with drama though and as if their flaws aren’t extremely glaring, I would enjoy it. I never like stupid MCs though.
Just providing another viewpoint.
Depends on what you mean by weak. I have no problem with an MC who lacks strength and struggles to get stronger, it's more interesting than a Gary Stu who instantly crushes everything in front of him, but I am not a fan of whiny or cowardly MCs unless they grow out of it.
I've never had anyone take major issue with the flaws on my MCs. In fact, I've even gotten a positive review because of said flaws for one of them.
For myself as a reader, I have a bit of a guilty pleasure for beta MCs. At least I don't think it's all that popular given comments I've seen across many mediums. For me, I guess I just like to see a guy being a little weak and insecure, and somehow work past it.
Flawed characters are not an issue if there's character growth planned. I don't like anti-heros permanently flawed, especially if I can't relate to these flaws (an addict, a very stupid MC, a dense MC that has no awareness/desire for the opposite sex ect..)
The only flaws I can't deal with at all are author flaws: Basically when a character do very stupid things he/she shouldn't do under the premise that he/she is supposed to be smart. It's bad writing. When many readers can spot obvious mistakes like that there's an issue.
If a character acts out of character (for example a shy guy that suddenly acts bold, or a bad guy suddenly being nice, an aloof cold virgin girl falling in love with the MC at first sight (almost every harem) ect.. ), it's bad writing too.
Now, I think every author even the best writers do mistakes like this once in a while. As long as they're able to take the criticisms to improve it's fine. After all, all the original novels here are first draft.
Had this recently happen to myself. Had a reader comment about dropping my book because they felt he was being too much of a cuck, when in fact the situation I wrote him into forced him to compromise. My failure in that instance was not clearly defining the situation, though to myself I think the setup that a gang of thugs has the mc's friends and loved ones under sword and outnumbered him like ten to one pretty much implies a smart mc shouldn't risk their lives.
What I didn't write was the massive physical difference between the races involved, my mc is a kobold, a special one to be sure but at that point of my book that specialty makes him about as strong as a normal human. His foes at the time were big beefy orcs. I often take for granted that my reader base is more knowledgeable than they probably are in D&D racial hierarchies and stereotypes.
- Edited
Yes. I am 100% sure that readers like OP MC without any weakness. They don't like realistic or flaw MCs.
Those books with OP MCs always have alot of collections. And the story will become a face slapping because the OP MCs can do all sorts of unrealistic things and readers will call it realistic and logical.
But when you write a realistic MC with a logical plot, many of the readers will comment that it is not logical. Stupid, dense, naive, all sorts of crazy words are used.
I have experienced it myself:X
- Edited
If it's just one reader you can probably ignore him/her, especially if the other comments are rather positive.
However, always remember that only 1-10% of a reader base is active in the comment section. For one comment like this there's 10-100 readers that share the same view. If you can improve this scene to make it clearer don't hesitate. Yet, you can't satisfy everyone. If that's the fact that the MC is not the perfect OP alpha male he/she was looking for, there's not much you can do.
I think most fantasy webnovel readers know the difference between goblins, kobolds and orcs, but it is still better to redefine them and have your own take about this to refresh the concept. In some anime/novels, orcs look like fallen elves with dark skin and bestial attributes(Lord of the Rings) , while in some others they look like pigs(japanese animes mostly), or grotesque bipedal monster. Same for goblins. They're generally small, green and ugly with pointy ears, but you can find stories where goblins can actually look handsome and beautiful, barely smaller than a normal human with similar physical traits except for the greenish skin.
So, if you haven't clearly explained these differences from the start, it is indeed advised to do it.
Avidfan :( that seems sad and its kinda discouraging to write a good character now adays, no wonder most isekai protagonists are very forgettable.
Yes:( Somehow japanese like MCs are looked down upon while Dragonball MCs are look up upon.
It is very difficult to write a MC with personality and personality will mean having a weakness or quirky traits.
Many of the readers have a 8 year old mentality and trying to escape from reality.
CacackleLasson no. that makes them humane! Too perfect MC is not exist . too good to be true and unrealistic.