Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Naming tertiary characters (Patreon)

Published:
2019-07-01 10:10:19
Imported:
2026-06

Poll

Naming tertiary characters

  • Faceless drones for me! No names for bridge crew! 576
  • I need to know who those T-Fed personnel are before they get killed! 860
  • 2019-07-01
  • 1436 votes
{'title': 'Naming tertiary characters', 'choices': [{'text': 'Faceless drones for me! No names for bridge crew!', 'votes': 576}, {'text': 'I need to know who those T-Fed personnel are before they get killed!', 'votes': 860}], 'closes_at': None, 'created_at': datetime.datetime(2019, 7, 1, 10, 10, 19, tzinfo=datetime.timezone.utc), 'description': None, 'allow_multiple': False, 'total_votes': 1436}

Content

Hey everyone!

As I was writing some of the scenes in the latest chapter, it got me thinking about bridge crews. Sometimes I give the minor characters like engineers and tactical officers names, other times I just refer to them by their job title. 

Which do you prefer? 

Is it annoying trying to remember new names, or does it add a bit of colour to "Red shirt #456"?

I honestly don't mind which, I was just curious which the readership prefers.

Tefler

Comments

Alex H.

Names are helpful and some will even be reoccouring.

DemonHunterCole

Honestly, this vote looks like it’s going to be 50/50.

em110905

Names are good, as long as it doesn't make your job of keeping track too hard.

tentaclesforall

I'd say mix and match... Sometimes even if the crew of a ship is only there for a scene or to just to be blown up at the end, adding a name or two can make things just a little bit more visceral. Mostly though, if the crew of a ship is important enough to mention in the first place, maybe a name or two is in order as well.

Ben Kirch

While having Names of the Bridgecrew lends some Background to the Situation, with the Size of the Battles you are orchestrating now, i dont think i could keep up with who is who. Having named TCs hints towards additional storylines or relevance, but considering its already hard to remember the Names of the alien races's Commanders/Hirarchy and their significance to the Story, i think having unnamed Bridgecrew for "Cannon Fodder" is a blessing ;)

Piusa

Even if I wont be able to keep up with all these names I enjoy speaking them out loud and let them roll around my tongue.

Kim Biel-Nielsen

I am really split on this issue - in general i like names - but if they are only “short lived” secondary characters - then their role is most important - but on the other hand naming them shiws a little respect - choices choices choices I hate to many choises

Trimtab

It's a bit of a false choice I fear. Authors need to follow instincts as the decision to name characters is also a decision about how much time on stage they will have, and if you wish to tip off the readers to pay attention to the person. If a named captain says "Come around to heading 325 mark 9" and a pilot answers with one and only line in the whole book "Aye aye Captain", then please don't burden the audience with a name for said pilot. But if you think he may come back in a scene later, and definitely if you'll be having one of your side stories to flesh out and flavor a situation, then let the name generator fly. My point in short: Droping a name on a character has meaning. Do it when it's right. So far you've been handling this quite well I think....

Mark Suter

if you actually called the character red shirt #456 then I would expect the detail to counting of the dance of red shirts #1 through #455.

Mark Suter

On a more serious note: I agree with the earlier comment that the effort naming the character should correspond to the importance of that character. An earlier example about a helmsman responding, I'd be happy for that character be identified only by they role. if that helmsman later turns out to be Hikaru Sulu then it would be okay to introduce their name later and leave it back to their role.

Tefler

I'm torn on the issue myself, which is why I thought I'd run a poll. For example, the various crewmen aboard the Hera... Admiral Dacres is an important secondary character, and so is Commodore Hallister to a lesser degree. The Chief Engineer, Tactical Officer, and Comms Officer are only tertiary characters, so I didn't bother to name them in this scene. I think it makes for more realistic dialogue if the Captain refers to crew as "Lieutenant", or by their surname... but it's not always appropriate. In the example above, Dacres didn't know the crew personally, so he'd only be referring to them by rank (With the Commodore being the one exception).

Kddan

If you need them, I prefer if you focus on their role or perhaps some other attributes or features than names as names tell me little. They are MORE generic if they are just named but not described consistently. And if there are a lot of them, or over a long time I can't keep track of what features are distinct between name1 and name2. I don't know the hair color or build of the Tom group for example. Not too sure who is which sometimes. But that's my fault too.

David Shmilowitz

I prefer names myself. more info is better for me. On a side note, any word from the editors about the final version of 122? It's been over a month now since it first went up.

Jedi Khan

If you want to add a third option, "Does it matter? Just keep writing Tefler!", I'll vote for that. As it is, I'd say just keep on doing what you have been doing. It works and I see no need to change it.

Fallaras

OMG. Names. My head always spins off with it's own thoughts and stories about who they are, what there story was that brought them here, what happens after they vanish (unless they suffer red-shirt retirement) and if maybe we will ever see them again. I'd love for one or two to keep popping up every now and again, not with any more story, but the security staff, and occasional fleet personal that have no real bearing on the story gives the story depth and a wider life.... I.M.H.O anyway.

Carmina.burana123

I think a name is easier to keep track of the character. If a character does an action because of his background let's say ignore an order you should give him a name. If the character only does what his role in the ship is supposed to do then I wouldn't name the character. An engineer fixes, a soldier shoots and a captain flies a ship. However if an engineer jumps into fighter after the pilot of the fighter died only to die in his first fight I think it's worth mentioning his name

Luca Viorel

Having a plethora of named people will make everything more confusing with the reader asking himself all the time " who the hell is this guy and what did he do?". Named NPCs should be quest related and all other are just fodder to fill the world.

Joel San Buenaventura

Named NPCs gives the world diversity. I know its exhausting to come up with names but keep it up tef!

Shazbot

If you need to identify a specific person for a reason (instead of as a group of them) then I'd prefer at least a simple "Jobtitle Lastname" for military types - that seems appropriate and shouldn't wrack your brain too much I imagine. They don't need a full name, family history and personal backstory.

Fallaras

Deffinatly not suggesting that every sentiant being, Moon and building needs a name. That would be overwhelming. But even Hotel got a name and it was wrecked by the end of the scean never to be graced by John and co again. It helps with emersion, I'm more worried about the date of a ship that I have even a single named char on, even if it's just the steward that Jenna got her bottle of wine from, right before it gets shot up... Some ships I know are there only to be smeared bugs on a window, but name it, or a crew member, mention it has fresh plating, or something and I am invested in it's fait far more than the normal window-bugs, even though I'm sure that's where it's about to end up....

Samuel M. Clark

You can use the names of Patreon donators in place of Red Shirt #357.

Cocchi Tech

It depends... sometimes having a name, rank, gender, department/ function is nice and adda to the scene other times just rank & department/ function or just "red shirt #5" is enough

J B

Mix it u- would be my preferred approach . We don’t need EVERY red shirt named, but some names help hide the recurring characters in the noise of life.

Ben C

When you give them names, it makes me wonder if they're going to have an important role...

Hinterlands Man

Such a burden to keep a list of these tertiary characters and their (in)significance, in the off chance you wish to refer to them later on. At this many chapters, you could have a book just of reference for all the things you seem to be tracking. Nameless drones work in the movies (of course, in the movies they have faces)

Megacheez

i like it, it adds a sense of immersion, as in reality they all do have names. however i can understand that needing to keep track is going to add lots of work for you so meybe just add some flavoring here and there . just don't fall in the trap of just naming those that will die anyway, then getting a name will become a tell that that person is going to die, i have seen that happen with another writer before who asked the same question and ended up naming all the people who are going to die anyway to prevent having to keep track of them.

Rat

Didn't vote - author's discretion. A poll shouldn't stop names from being used even if the author thinks it's more realistic to do so, and a poll shouldn't compel the author to use names if it's unnecessary bloat. Like the idea of using Patreon supporters' names, though I'm not sure it'd work with mine.

Bp Hlpt

I'm with what seems to be the major opinion, ie, it depends. If the particular character is never going to be seen again and only has one line, if that, in the scene, then I don't need to know his/her name, with only rare exception even if just for variety or "flavor" in the story. Just rank or function is fine if even that is necessary. For slightly more important characters, then "Rank Last Name" is fine. Getting a full name usually indicates the character will be seen again and/or play a more important role. The same is true about ship names. I don't need to know the name of every cruiser, fighter, and battleship that appears. Bottom line, I think Tefler has adhered to this approach, and I'm very satisfied with the way he has been handling character names in TSM.

Reid Joy

I voted for naming, but honestly just keep doing what you're doing.

Palanova

I prefer to know the crew/civilian names in the story. If it helps, you can try to name them alongside the ship's name they serve on. For example the ship name is refer to a nation, like the Stalingrad Heavy Cruiser, the crew should had russian names. I know the Stalingrad was a bad example, because it was a pirate ship and they already desintegrate it, but still. First when I read the chapters and you named some of the T-FED staff, I though John will recruit them (for example in Ch. 052 the Commander of the Trankaran side TFED base Port Megara:Commander Mary Tavistock ), but after many "disappointment" (6 former sexslave women from the Underworld..) I still prefer to know the names. Some of the movies, series, I disappointing, when the battle ends, and no one remember the fallen soldiers/civilians.

Nibbles

Well Tefler you have done so well with the story so far methinks you should continue as you are but as you asked for votes I voted for naming them.

Malcolm Rickarby

I feel that you enjoy creating your characters and coming up with an appropriate name that feels right for their species so please carry on as you are. I love it just as it is.

Nyx

If you give everyone a name, how can I tell that someone is important to the rest of the story? A name doesn't bring more life into a character, their personality and screen-time does.

mommyderg

I already have trouble remembering the names of many 2nd and some 1st characters so if you start naming the inconsequential ones... Name a few but don't overdo it? Only do it for those we'll see later and have some importance?

Timothy Lucas

I voted for naming. But honestly it's not really necessary unless its someone that's going to be in one of the ( what I call small sub side character/stories ) just my two sense....cause whatever which way you write the story we all know its going to be Fantastic!

tony

i would say giving important secondary characters names is fine if they contribute something to the story, just don't want you to get too bogged down using the local phonebook looking for names to put into the story.......

Rahul Ashar

My vote is to the naming the characters who have any (no matter how small) impact on the story line or they have any sub-story arc for them. Otherwise, naming them Red#1 works too. :):)

Mac of Alden

Tefler you're going to have to be careful here, if you just use rank rather that rank and or name, we will know that this character is only going to be a minor character, were as at the moment we do not know this so have to think how they are going to fit into the story, short and long term, which makes it more exciting, if harder to track for you. I would say use both systems then we don't know which is far better ;) Keep up the good work. This chapter has taken a different path to that which I guessed well done again.

Gotchacoverd

I think if they exist across more then one scene they should be named, otherwise not really necessary.

Hughman

I'll be honest, and say that I do get lost in all the secondary and tertiary characters some times. Especially if it's been a while since they were last "on scene" so to speak. It usually takes me several paragraphs if not half a scene before I can relate "Jill" to "that gal who's exec on the Exceltior" and connect everything up. It's one of the reasons I usually avoid stories with larger casts. If it were me, I'd name just enough of the redshirts to keep the readers guessing. And maybe *not* name a main secondary once in a while too. That way the reader can't get too comfortable with the "they've got a name, I should pay attention to them" convention.

Tom Vrancken

I have read a couple of books, where some of the no-name-characters-of-slight-importance-to-the -flow-of-the-story have remained nameless. In some cases it was damn annoying! "the general", the politician", "the senator"...or even in some cases, where a group of individuals continues to use the same non-branded black SUV all through the whole damn story-line!...for names...I think it's a lot better to have a senator J. F. Chuck, rather than have a mafia-style "the cleaner" or "the father" running around in your tellings! And for brands, why not just say straight out a Chevy Suburban or Lincoln Navigator for f...s sake? You drink a Coke or a Bud, not a "redacted"-soda or eat a "redacted"-burger, so why'd you drive a "redacted"-vehicle? honestly!? Might as well start to call all characters of less importance Dude or Dudette for that matter, since they don't matter in the real scheme... (DON'T start doing that, please!)

althor5

I think they only need a name if they make a contribution to the story later on. Otherwise the story slows down and gets confusing naming throw away characters.

Dave Barrack

The only issue with having a raft of character names come at you is when an author doesn't do any kind of callback. We're not just reading their books, we're probably reading a few novels in between their releases, and keeping the characters straight can be challenging. It doesn't have to be their life story. Anything that helps us remember who they are usually works. So instead of "Hollander walked onto the bridge and took his station." Just put "Hollander, the ship's second in command, walked onto the bridge..." Or "Hollander walked onto the bridge and sat at the XO station, which scanned his biometrics and automatically unlocked for him."

Jeffrey Thomas

If they are going to become part of the story arc, name them. Else do not.

Keigan

Both, names create depth and, in the case of bug smears, emotional appeals. But sometimes you just need to move it along, at which point rank or title works fine. Also what is the most natural way of addressing someone?

PLRus--Founding member of the TSM F5 club.

I feel strongly on both sides of this question so I could't vote. Lots of minor character names do bog down the story, and the suggestion to include a descriptive with the name of a minor character is a great idea However, I get immersed in stories I like, and names just help to pull me in deeper, which I like. I agree about all major characters having a name, but that was not your question. I would say, in a tense situation, or where one is in the near future, naming is important. However, some military commanders on the Bridge address people by their station such as comms or tactical, or weapons. Others would do so by name, It really depends upon the Captain of the ship and their leadership style. If there is a relationship of a personal nature between the Captain or some of the Bridge crew like they have a "I love you" look at each other before they get sucked into space, names are a good idea, their deaths would effect me emotionally at that point.

Cignal

I think it would depend on how they are involved in the story. For instance I would say if the character was to be in that scene only, then no. If it was going to come back later in another scene or another chapter than yes.

Toodles McGhee

What good is a name for a single-scene role? Warrant Officer Jones tells me nothing; "Helmsman" or "Engineer" tells me all I need to know about their background and reason for inclusion.

Matt

Be like Shadwell padding out the rolls of the Witchfinder army. "Sergeant Spoon", "Private Teakettle", etc... :)

Skycrane

Remember in the old star trek the red shirts that always went on away missions almost always ended up dead anyway

Robert Hibbs

A name signals to me that I probably need to remember it for later appearance - my memory does not work that well, especially when we need to wait for the next chapter. And, even with the name, I need a reference to the role the next time they appear. With only a role name, I automatically know that I don't need to remember them. However, I can deal with the names as long as you always indicate their role.

Steve

Just dont pull a David Weber on us where each book requires it's own glossary of names.

Robert Kerr

If the character is going to play a role in the story arc and appear again, then name them. If they are just a bridge crew, leave them nameless. But when they return, even a chapter later, please give us a clue about their role. I can’t remember a minor characters name and role three weeks later, which is you approximate time between posting chapters.

TexanNemesis

To me there was more emotion hearing: lAnvil” begging for help instead of: “pilot HCJ-C-1485”

Youkai-sama

Naming em definitely hurts more. "Man, I might not have know ole Red Shirt #53, but they was people! (His name was Robert Paulson.) T_T

John Jameson

I voted for names, but I agree primarily with those who say to mix it up. Indeed I would say mix it up more! My impression is that you often introduce characters in prose, in the style "Jobtitle Firstname Lastname was having a bad day..." It adds variety to introduce characters by Jobtitle Lastname or Firstname only and/or to introduce their names through dialogue rather than prose (which helps to make a natural choice of which parts of the name to use). For example, a first name is not needed unless the personal relationships of the character are relevant. Names for tertiary characters add colour, immersion and suspense, but too many of them cloud the already challenging task for readers to remember the names of the secondary characters!

T

Either and/or both are really fine. Do it how you do best Tef.

AmnChode

Need a third option... Little bit of both, depending upon how long they last is whether they get a name...

Kyle

I lean towards naming and having a name for an individual death makes it more tragic.

Bimboboipink

Recurring character or ships need a name, random character used to describe a context that would be better for a nameless engineer, like the 29 members of the bridge were sucked out into space.

Steven Allen

Leave non-recurring crew members generic, described by their job profession. Unless they are going to be critical in some fashion to the story, leave the "throw away characters" as generic as you can while still getting the story across.

Brandon Yarberry

Is there an option for 'however you've been doing it'?

BluDraygn

That's a tough one Tefler... I'm going to refrain from voting on this one. For me it's very situational: "Incoming missiles off the starboard bow!" screamed the tactical officer. "Do we have any stars in that area that might be disrupting our readings, Lieutenant?" "Bring us in easy Ensign Harcourt" Each one works just a bit better in it's place than the other two. I think it's more of a "go with your gut" kind of thing. However, I will say that fewer names means fewer opportunities to make a potentially confusing mistake.

MillDrew

I agree, just use them as suggested, the problem with using a full name is that it produces an Easter Egg and the expectation that they will be involved in a latter story plot.

MillDrew

I vaguely remember a rule in mystery story writing that says to remove everything that has no relevance to the story and don't appear to make false promises. I know a lot of us are still wondering about possible interaction between past female acquaintances that may be just easers :)

MillDrew

Teasers … lol :)

John Teeter

I'd say faceless drone if they are in one scene. I have found the minor characters you have named have made the losses more impactful.

Katieclysm

*rank/position* *lastname* seems to be a decent simple way to refer to them without too much detail

commatoes

I say name the officer if they engage in the plot through dialogue or through some action (e.g. giving command orders). Otherwise, I am happy with a nameless "red shirt". If the scene is simply "nod to the assembled bridge crew" there is no real need to go into further detail. I think I have noticed this qualifier in scenes with alien crews. I am working under the assumption that repeatedly generating single use names in alien languages can be pretty tedious. Though, to me, it adds but but its absence does not take anything away. I do not see it as a fault.

Xyzzy

I think i'm more of an in the middle guy. I think 100% faceless drones (for humans anyway... aliens can definitely be different) is probably wrong but at the same time the extreme on the other side would outstay it's welcome. Just the practical effect of having to weave in the introduction of all the names could make the story drag... particularly where there's no point to the name. If it were me, i'd probably be guided by a sort of relaxed version of Chekov's gun, if the name is going to "fire" in some future act then absolutely add the name. If not, does the story flow better if you don't include it? If the cost in story complexity and flow isn't worth the payoff then maybe don't include it. If your instincts really want to include it, maybe try to write down why? Perhaps rough out the scene without it and then try to articulate what's wrong with it.

Bigfoot

I have a question so I'm asking the experts. Why does the black plating on the Prog ships or Prog paragon suit make Alyssa's skin crawl? Why is she the only one affected like this?

Dave2282

You should red shirt all tertiary characters ie: yeoman smith, commodore Jones. Their backstories, lives and deaths have no relevance to the main storyline. 3SM is now a battle between greater and lessor gods with angels and demons as supporting players. The lives of mortal bit players are irrelevant in this context. Who gives a crap about the trials and tribulations of Buckingham’s and Walker’s brood and the fate of the border fleet when round two of the main event is underway.

Evan

We don't really need a tremendous amount of backstory for incidental characters, although some incidental characters may potentially become major ones as the story develops. On the other hand, saying that the {title} was {form of demise} is almost too meaningless to matter, too. So, adding a name (and adjective) to the title adds a bit of gravitas to the situation and makes it distinguishable from other like occurrences. For example, the Master Chief was cut in two vs. the burly Master Chief was cut in two vs. burly Master Chief Smythe was cut in two. The last is best, IMO.

Ken House

I think in the interest of better story telling all characters should be named. If Admiral Jones pops up with no reinforcement to his background everyone is going to know he is doomed already. Having Beth, Anvil, Red Fox and all the other minor characters named gives a deeper sense of loss and more drama overall. It also enhances your storytelling.

Malcolm Clark

Some faceless, some named as required/desired is fine.

Hermit1157

Problems always occur when incidental characters are named. In a long story like this your talking hundreds of names. Then the author is tasked with coming up with lots of distinct names. Heaven forbid he should use the same name again. After years keeping track of minor characters can be problematic for the readers much less the author. Needing a scorecard to keep track of whose who is annoying.

Maurice Steele

To me if they are just going to be killed off in the same scene, then faceless drones are ok with me. If you feel that you have to give them names, then use generic names. I do it all the time for my dnd campaigns

3Phayz (FMS)

Just don't make it awkward when or if you give them names and it should be alright. You know, like, "Dasher and Dancer, and Prancer and Vixen, Comet and Cupid, and Donner and Blitzen, But do you recall, the most famous Redshirt of all?"

Joseppiii

grab a baby name book and throw darts at it

A Human

I'm sorry Tefler if a side character isn't blue with pointy ears I skim the passages about them. The only human characters I want to get to know are the ones who sleep on the Invictus. I know my opinion may be in the minority, but feel fee to create 1 dimensional bridge crew.

Invictus

It's a fine line between an entire crew of faceless red-shirts, and a hundred names that don't matter. If you want an example look at David Weber's Harrington series. Several of the later books have so many names you quit caring entirely.

1 Hand Slapping

name some, don't name others. it gives us something to argue about, if this or that character is significant, you might find someone who hasn't been named for several chapters suddenly becoming a big part of the story, so their lack of name can be misdirection#

MillDrew

If you looking for names, maybe you can use your Patrons. I’m sure if they ”pissed your off”, maybe there’s Kintark just waiting to be beheaded with his name on it! LOL Just Sayin…

MillDrew

Man! ….. I gotta use Spell Check "sigh".

A Human

Hey Tefler, I just read the Maliri Matriarch conference scene from 116 again. Any way we can get a map of where the different Maliri houses are in the Protectorate? It would be nice to have a visual of the houses bordering the Brimorians, Kirrix, and maybe Enshunu.

Erik

Personally I think naming or not helps set the scene. Take warship capt encountering a new type of vessel: "Tactics (or Weapons) please take us to Red Alert and Comms open an all channel Hail." after 15 minutes of terse first contact.. "Lt. Dakta (Tactics) I think it safe to drop us to a Yellow Alert."

Studley Destiny

Naming is nice if they'll be seen several times before being offed or dropping from the story. It their only scene is the one where they die, then its really not worth it.

thomas rodrian

I’m not discordant, so I was wondering if a status has been posted on Discord, or if anyone knows whether Tefler is still stuck in the Mists of Loralar looking for Mael’nerak’s home world if the later, I hope he is homeward bound soon.

Damian Wright

They're all people, even in passing. And just as in real life we don't know that "Bob" is the bus conductor's name, but others do and that is how they know him.

thomas rodrian

In the Battle of Terra notes and Chapter 100, Larn’kelnar and Ailanthia are discussing the battle and he says, “I was thinking that it’s nearly time for a little family reunion...” Larn’kelnar is obviously not talking about his family, he does not know his parentage. He’s also not talking about anyone else on his ship, they are just thralls. Since they were just reviewing the battle, I assume Larn’kelnar is talking about himself and Rahn’hagon, but this means he knew Rahn’hagon location. Why did he wait? If any of the 3smites knows the answer or at least have convinced themselves they know, please tell me why. It seems beyond stupid to leave a potential enemy alive who might attack you.

Arrowglass

I like the way you are doing things...showing names. The action on the Brimorian ship was easier to follow with the competitive bridge officers being named as one example. It might be nice to have a character list somewhere for the whole series if there is anyone who wants to put in the time to create it.

Nick White

I personally like when you name them so I have to wonder if they are cannon fodder or a plot twist to come. But your the writer and its ultimately your call as to what flows if we have to much input it's less your saga and more something your writing to try and make us the readers happy when we are already happy reading " your Saga ".

thomas rodrian

In chapter 122, Tefler wrote: He gave her a quick kiss on the cheek, then stood up. “Alright then... me and Alyssa can handle that.” I’m not sure how to report grammar errors, so maybe one of his editors/proofreaders could point in the right direction. Normally, I ignore all grammar and spelling errors for all stories I read, but today, I am super bored and needed something to do.

Big Dude

Looks like one per month now?

commatoes

Quick observation inspired by a comment thread above. I wonder if there is some reason for the colour of the metals and if that is significant. Colour seems to be very important as Tefler has included references to every fleet's hull colour at many points where it is entirely unnecessary. I wonder about the change in colour from black onyxium to white alyssium and if that is a hint as to why the black metal is the colour that it is. I think the Progen ships were described as black from the beginning and each successive shaping of alyssium does not alter the colour from white. If the black metal is an ultimately refined alloy of Onyxium, have John and Alyssa started on some new and improved line of materials with alyssium? Just a thought.

Tefler

Thanks for the feedback everyone. It was interesting to read your thoughts on the subject. :-)

Chris

Another absolutely amazing chapter, that only leaves me wanting more.

Chris

I guess it is time to start at the beginning and read it again.