Comedic or Serious?

[ThisAdamGuy]

I'm busy making notes for a superhero litrpg I want to write in the near future, but there's one really important part that I can't decide on: should it be comedic or fully serious?

The basic idea is, there's a disease going around that's giving people superpowers and driving them insane, resulting in an army of superheroes using their powers to stop disasters and fight villains that don't exist. The main character has a device that lets him stay sane while keeping his powers, and he uses it to "level up" his powers while siphoning them out of other heroes.

I can see this going one of two ways: either a grim, almost apocalyptic story that accurately depicts what it would be like if millions of superpowered psychopaths were running around doing whatever they wanted, or a comedy that treats them more like brightly dressed cartoon characters, "What ho! Tis my arch nemesis, Old Lady Woman! Taste my wrath as I unleash a volcano on this crowded city street, you fiend! The day is saved!"

I'm kinda leaning toward the second option. It'd be similar in tone to my Henry Rider series, where it's silly and sarcastic 90% of the time but can still pull out some emotional gut punches when they're needed (I mean, hopefully...) But I don't know if that would appeal to a wide enough audience to get it any attention.

What do you guys think would work better?

 

[Empress_Omnii]

Make it clear how dark it is, but keep the protagonists comedic. Keep a contract between the dark insanity and the sarcastic protagonists (maybe who uses comedy to cope with the pain?)
Use these superheroes trying to fight crime, or trying to save themselves before it's to late and they lose themselves forever for grim aspects. But don't let them keep the protagonist down, keep him "happy" show the reader glimpses into how much pain they are truly feeling. Then have them break eventually... lots of options of what you can do here.
But having a cheerful character, attempting to cope with a grim world, only to end up breaking before they can reach the conclusion is great. It will allow you to show the darkest aspects, without the character needing to remain happy. Break down the protagonist, little by little, until you have an empty shell to view the truth of your world.
Then you can either fix him, have him go through the same insanity as the heroes (especially now that he is strong) and slowly regain his broken mind and understand not only the suffering he caused, but that felt bythe heroes he dealt with in the past.
Or something else entirely, I just like psychological novels...

 

[Tempokai]

You can write both types simultaneously. Tag "Comedic Undertone" exists for a reason. You need to use subtext for it, however. It can be terrifying for the characters inside the story, but for us readers it's comedic, because we have another context.

 

[reysucks]

I'm busy making notes for a superhero litrpg I want to write in the near future, but there's one really important part that I can't decide on: should it be comedic or fully serious?

The basic idea is, there's a disease going around that's giving people superpowers and driving them insane, resulting in an army of superheroes using their powers to stop disasters and fight villains that don't exist. The main character has a device that lets him stay sane while keeping his powers, and he uses it to "level up" his powers while siphoning them out of other heroes.

I can see this going one of two ways: either a grim, almost apocalyptic story that accurately depicts what it would be like if millions of superpowered psychopaths were running around doing whatever they wanted, or a comedy that treats them more like brightly dressed cartoon characters, "What ho! Tis my arch nemesis, Old Lady Woman! Taste my wrath as I unleash a volcano on this crowded city street, you fiend! The day is saved!"

I'm kinda leaning toward the second option. It'd be similar in tone to my Henry Rider series, where it's silly and sarcastic 90% of the time but can still pull out some emotional gut punches when they're needed (I mean, hopefully...) But I don't know if that would appeal to a wide enough audience to get it any attention.

What do you guys think would work better?

During traumatic situations people tend to crack jokes

 

[CharlesEBrown]

As someone who has dealt with superheroes for a while - the CONCEPT is inherently silly. People in outfits inspired by circus performers going out and doing or stopping crimes? Pure comedy. Some of the earlier superheroes (Plastic Man, the "Marvel Family"/Shazam, etc.) outright embraced this, while others went full pulp hero (Batman, except he never intentionally left a trail of dead bodies, unlike most pulp heroes!). Most struck a balance (Superman, Captain America) - but even there it was impossible to escape the inherent silliness of the core concept. Batman got a sidekick (who was a literal circus performer), Superman and Cap have faced their share of flat-out silly villains (and there was that whole Silver Age thing that just got utterly ridiculous with Superman's powers rivalling those of literal gods ... a level he's gotten back up to in recent years, but still hasn't moved entire solar systems with (very big) chains...)
So never step fully away from the silliness unless you're doing something like the old Mutant X series or something where the heroes don't use costumes (but usually have more militant uniforms), most of the villains don't either (and if they do, there's a functional use for the costume, like a device in the mask that boosts or creates their powers), and the general populace views them as either an urban legend or "just part of the landscape."
If you embrace the silliness, you have far more options, from Plastic Man, Deadpool or She-Hulk at the "the comedy comes from them breaking the fourth wall - and sometimes fighting silly villains" side of the scale, or the more "realistic" material of the X-Men or Spider-Man or the Superman books from Post-Crisis until shortly after 2000 when the power began escalating again where the comedy is incidental or due to the main character using humor as a weapon
My personal preference is more like the seventies "bronze age" from Marvel and immediate Post-Crisis (mid 80s to early 90s) from DC where there was a lot of really silly stuff going on, but the stories themselves were usually serious, with real stakes and mostly plausible (even when ridiculous) characters - which is kind of like the style you use in the flying reindeer stories, actually.

 

[ThisAdamGuy]

Or something else entirely

I was thinking more along the lines of One Piece. Funny when it can be, serious when it has to be.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I was thinking more along the lines of One Piece. Funny when it can be, serious when it has to be.
View attachment 33976

From what little I've seen of One Piece (part of two different episodes), that is pretty close to the Bronze Age Marvel/post-Crisis DC era (when writers and artists seemed to be moving freely between the brands and "cross-pollinating" - until a few jumped ship to create "Image")

 

[2wordsperminute]

You could always make the characters and setting inherently ridiculous but never call attention to it, treating it as if it was 100% serious. Might even make it funnier.

 

[Empress_Omnii]

I was thinking more along the lines of One Piece.

I understand, but also don't think One Piece has strong enough dark themes. Like Luffy has been serious like what... five times over twenty-five years of releasing.
I think I get what you mean, but as a shonen. One Piece fails to be critical of its own themes most of the time, for example, with the Hobi Hobi no mi.
Still, if that is what you want to write. I just recommend you use a smarter protagonist than Luffy.

 

[John_Owl]

here's the key, my friend: Writing is like cooking. You can't cook with only one flavor. If everything is sweet with no hint of salty, umami, bitter or sour, it'll get old REALLY fast. You need a mix of the lot of them. Not all in one dish, obviously, but a little sweet and spicy in one dish, then the side dish being umami and sweet? That'd tie them in.

My point is, you shouldn't make it 100% serious nor 100% comedic. If you choose to focus on serious, have a few jokes and a few other comedic spots to balance it. If you choose to focus on comedy, ensure you can have a few serious moments here or there. It'll enhance it. Like adding salt to a sweet dish - salty and sweet are usually opposing, but in the right moderation, a little salty can enhance the sweet- not making it MORE sweet, mind you, but just enhancing the QUALITY of sweet, if that makes sense.