Useless characters

Ok so for fun

Which was the most useless character in Mahabharata who presence/absence would have made little to no difference

This is among the characters mentioned in bit details

In the vast and complex epic of our Mahakavya Mahabharat, the concept of a "useless" character can be subjective, as each character contributes to the narrative in some way. But still I feel that Chitrangad had not much importance in the epic, he doesn't contribute much to the plot except of being the elder son of Satyavati and Shantanu.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Ok so for fun

Which was the most useless character in Mahabharata who presence/absence would have made little to no difference

This is among the characters mentioned in bit details

Ambika and Ambalika were useless characters

Originally posted by: CID-fan-394

Ambika and Ambalika were useless characters

To vote karo na us option ko

1. Satyavati's two sons. I don't even remember their names. They're that much unimportant. One lesson they taught to mankind was not all children of kings are worthy enough for the throne. This is important in today's world too. For example, A good doctor's son/daughter may not necessarily be a good doctor too.

2. Ambika and Ambalika. The only big thing they did was giving birth to Dhritarashtra and Pandu respectively.

3. 98 children of Dhritarashtra.

4. Most of the children of the Pandavas

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

To vote karo na us option ko

Oh this is a poll thread? I hadn't noticed that

Originally posted by: Life_Is_Dutiful

1. Satyavati's two sons. I don't even remember their names. They're that much unimportant. One lesson they taught to mankind was not all children of kings are worthy enough for the throne. This is important in today's world too. For example, A good doctor's son/daughter may not necessarily be a good doctor too.

2. Ambika and Ambalika. The only big thing they did was giving birth to Dhritarashtra and Pandu respectively.

3. 98 children of Dhritarashtra.

4. Most of the children of the Pandavas

I don't think Vikarna (third Kaurava) can be called useless

He was the only one to openly support Draupadi that angered Karna to disrobe Draupadi. If not for that probably things might not have escalated so much

P.S. I deliberately didn't put Kaurava/Pandava/Karna children in the option because except for their names and their heroics in war we know very little of them. They were there because they existed

Originally posted by: Quantum-Dot

In the vast and complex epic of our Mahakavya Mahabharat, the concept of a "useless" character can be subjective, as each character contributes to the narrative in some way. But still I feel that Chitrangad had not much importance in the epic, he doesn't contribute much to the plot except of being the elder son of Satyavati and Shantanu.

I feel the same too

But Mahabharat was a Itihas so whosoever existed had to be mentioned irrespective of their importance in main set of events but for us we could check who contributed more in our area of interest

Could you explain your rationale for putting the options you did in the poll? For instance, I'm not sure how Nakul could be deemed irrelevant..

Originally posted by: Thorn.Princess

Could you explain your rationale for putting the options you did in the poll? For instance, I'm not sure how Nakul could be deemed irrelevant..

I don't think he had much of an individual contribution. He is mostly mentioned along with Sahdev and he is the one who did most things among them.

I don't think his absence would have made much difference.

Again here the characters mentioned are those who are responsible to do something not the ones who just happened to be there since they were