[@TheWindel]

[quote][color=gray]Explosions aren't exactly heroic either, yet he's learning to be a hero.[/color][/quote]
Yes, I mentioned Bakugo. But here’s the thing about that character, he’s often remarked as “unheroic” and a lot of why he’s the way he is and how he [i]thinks[/i] is brought up contextually throughout the story. If someone is to make a Bakugo-type character they need to be clear on their characters philosophy, explaining that philosophy contextually, and showing with confidence how that can be developed in the long-term. My basis as a GM, especially since I am accepting people as they come and I have a gigantic pool of interest is that I need to see these things and see these things consistently. I just won’t accept vague.  

[quote][color=gray]Eurthermore, this section of the CS skeleton made no mention that this had to be relating back to the character's backstory;[/color][/quote]
The conceptualization section is meant as a loose way for the author to show me how their thoughts on character development, characterization, character philosophy, and other things fit into their character concept. To explain influences, if they want, but most of all to show the general path of progression they want to deal with. This could include a variety of things. Something like “I want my character to be able to make brains bleed” is on the level that would require greater explanation and context: on why it exists and where it will go as a dynamic. Essentially, I need to see the contextual relevance and make sure it is consistent with the concept at large.

[quote][color=gray]it is something I won't budge on but instead can be worked with in flexibility.[/color][/quote]
I am honestly not quite sure how something can not be budged on yet can be worked with in flexibility. Such assertions seem contradictory.