Why is it so hard to create a villain?

[K. Taylor]

Coming up with an original Big Bad is so hard for me. If I manage to come up with anything, it just feels "been there, done that".

What do you do to come up with the Big Evil for your heroes to defeat?

My 2 MCs have been thought up and sketched out, but I can't start writing until I have the reason they meet - coming together against the bad guy......it's hella frustrating, as I love these two in my head and can't wait to see them interact.

Are there any original ideas for villains left in the world?

ETA: It's what the villain's going to do that's so evil that I have a hard time with. Once I know the "evil plot", then I can justify motives. And personality isn't that hard, either. I need the objective.

[Tallent]

Aren't villains supposed to be clieche?

Yes, every story has been told. You have to find a different, more interesting way to tell them.

[Sage]

Aren't villains supposed to be clieche?Not really.

How'd you come up with your heroes?

If there's a certain "been there, done that" type of villain that fits your story/protags, use him or her. Just put as much effort into thoroughly sketching the villain out as you did the heroes. The heroes, believe it or not, probably have several "been there, done that" elements themselves.

[wannawrite]

Because people always want to humanize them. Give them motivation. Tell a back story. Nobody is comfortable anymore with evil for evil's sake. They have to explain WHY the poor sap went bad.

Back in the day, bad guys were bad guys, and we were all fine with that. We didn't care whether or not they had been breast fed, or if their father spanked them too much. They were bad, that was it, and the good guy got to save the day.

Simplistic, you say? Well, it worked.

[DeleyanLee]

I create villains by thinking in terms of two story-related things.

1. The villain and the hero are two sides of the same moral coin. What moral issues are at play in the conflict? Think about how your hero(es) represent "Good" and how the villain(s) can protray the "Evil". Since you get to define both terms in the scope of the book, it's not as hard as it sounds.

2. If the moral codes were switched, then the villain would become the hero--thus, in their own mind, they're doing the right thing according to their own moral code.

Don't know if that helps you, but it helps me come up with villains who are unique to my story, which is all I need.

[K. Taylor]

Male is a blind vampire that was turned just before he could take vows as a monk, so he tries not to kill people. Female is a mortal paladin working for a secret order for all things good and saving the world.

It's a fantasy adventure romance story.

I can write the character of the villain once I know what he is. It's the what he/she is going to do that needs to be stopped that's so hard.

[Sage]

Sure, bad guys can still be evil for evil's sake. Just have them be more than that. Just like your good guys can be good for good's sake. But I don't want to read about an underdeveloped character in either case.

[RichardB]

The hero and the villain are both exceptional people with opposing goals. The difference is that the reader identifies with the hero, and the villain may resort to immoral acts to achieve his goals.

Therefore, a realistic villain is simply an exceptional person who is willing to do bad things to achieve his ends. Who wakes up and says, "I'm going to be evil today?" So if you think you can create a hero but not a villain, just create a hero and then allow that character to break whatever rules he wants in order to win.

[AceTachyon]

Male is a blind vampire that was turned just before he could take vows as a monk, so he tries not to kill people. Female is a mortal paladin working for a secret order for all things good and saving the world.
Can the villain be the nemesis of either of these two characters? Brings them together with a similar goal.

Maybe the Vampire Lord/Lady who turned the male MC and is planning on opening a hellgate or somesuch to reclaim his/her rightful domain/kingdom/what have you. Female MC is sent to stop him/her.

[CACTUSWENDY]

If your mind was really twisted enough....this would be no problem. I really don't know what to tell ya. Like has already been said....find something with a twist and give it a few more turns. I wish you success.

[FOTSGreg]

Hmmm, Maybe it would be worthwhile to keep in mind that most villains don't really consider themselves to be either villains or evil. They have goals that they want to achieve, but their moral objectivism in regards to how to reach those goals is not in line with what the rest of the world considers "good". They don't see their methods as "evil", simply necessary.

[K. Taylor]

Can the villain be the nemesis of either of these two characters?
Possible. I already have a little on his sire, too, but I'd originally had him kill her in the past. Can easily change that.

Thanks.

[dempsey]

Aren't villains supposed to be clieche?

No. Christ, no.

The hero and the villain are both exceptional people with opposing goals. The difference is that the reader identifies with the hero, and the villain may resort to immoral acts to achieve his goals.

This.

When you start villain creation thinking "I need someone to do something evil so my good guy can do good" you're on the wrong track.

[Rebekah7]

You can create your own moral code for the villain. I have an unused demon character (as in he's not currently in any WIP), and I gave him a specific moral code that I created for demons, that is a part of their culture. It's sort of a modified sociopath, where they feel it's perfectly ok and acceptable to hurt others for their own ends or pleasure, but they will do anything for their immediate family. The villain doesn't have to have the same moral code as everyone else, but it should be developed. That makes them even more frightening than just some guy who twirls his mustache and cackles at inappropriate times.

[K_Woods]

Male is a blind vampire that was turned just before he could take vows as a monk, so he tries not to kill people. Female is a mortal paladin working for a secret order for all things good and saving the world.

They fight crime?

It's a fantasy adventure romance story.

Awwwww.

2. If the moral codes were switched, then the villain would become the hero--thus, in their own mind, they're doing the right thing according to their own moral code.
The hero and the villain are both exceptional people with opposing goals. The difference is that the reader identifies with the hero, and the villain may resort to immoral acts to achieve his goals.

Therefore, a realistic villain is simply an exceptional person who is willing to do bad things to achieve his ends. Who wakes up and says, "I'm going to be evil today?" So if you think you can create a hero but not a villain, just create a hero and then allow that character to break whatever rules he wants in order to win.

I just finished listening to a podcast novel called Death by Cliche that played with all of those ideas and then some. The villain of the piece is your stock fantasy Evil Overlord out to destroy the world, until he becomes self aware and starts asking questions. (No, he wasn't before; I'm trying to avoid spoilers.) It's a darkly comic fantasy piece.

Tangentially, there is a place for villains who wake up and say "I'm going to be evil today" -- comedy.

K. Taylor, there are still plenty of ways to make your Big Bad, well, bad while retaining plausible motivations. (See Elantris for a good example.) The question comes down to friction. What makes the (angry) sparks fly when your heroes and villain come into contact? How is your world set up to create such friction? Are they from different nations? Religions that don't get along? Is the villain a robber baron preying upon the hero and his friends? Did the hero accidentally run over the villain's pet dog with a cart as an irresponsible youth, leaving a deep-seated grudge that has festered to this day?

Oookay, maybe not the last one.

[Paichka]

Why not look at famous baddies throughout history, and see what motivated THEM?

Vampires automatically made me think of Vlad Tepes, who did all sorts of amazingly evil things while generally being a thorn in the side of the Ottoman empire. Maybe YOUR big bad has a hatred of the good guys -- and maybe it's a legitimate hatred. Maybe they destroyed his family because they (in combating evil) knew what he was going to become...but they didn't realize their actions would make him what he was. As Ben Wade said in 3:10 to Yuma, "Even bad men love their mommas."

Anyhoo, so your bad guy starts accumulating power to get his revenge...and that power twists him, and he starts doing evil things for evil's sake, not just for revenge. Or something.

[Dale Emery]

Male is a blind vampire that was turned just before he could take vows as a monk, so he tries not to kill people. Female is a mortal paladin working for a secret order for all things good and saving the world.

What's the history of the secret order? What specifically have they saved the world from in the past? Who specifically have they vanquished in the past? Who might bear a grudge about any of that?

What does the vampire want most in the world? What does the paladin want most in the world? What do they together want most in the world? What event would most interfere with their goals?

Who might be upset that the MMC did not complete his vows? Who might be upset that a promising monk-in-training is now a vampire (and therefore, according to their way of thinking, evil)?

Dale

[SPMiller]

They fight crime?lolololol

[dempsey]

Vampires automatically made me think of Vlad Tepes, who did all sorts of amazingly evil things while generally being a thorn in the side of the Ottoman empire.

Fun fact: Vlad Tepes is celebrated as a hero by the Romanians. (sauce (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/631524/Vlad-III))

[STKlingaman]

My main villain is one of three
heads of government, he manipulates &
intimidates to get what he wants.

I think evil stems from two veins;
someone with power (or someone who
wants it), who then wants more and is
willing to do anything to get it, and someone
who grows into just plain old evil.

Only the level of vile evilness, and
how and to whom the person acts
out their evil ways is in question.

Start with Money and Power, or some
deep childhood trauma that festered
into hate and resentment.

[dempsey]

Start with Money and Power, or some deep childhood trauma that festered into hate and resentment.

This is a common perception and ignores the powerful tool that is moral relativism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism).

Also, IMHO, it's a bit simplistic.

[RavenCorinnCarluk]

The first idea that came to me when reading the description of your characters was the leader of her sect. He's perhaps so deadset on fighting evil that he no longer sees things in shades of gray, and he's ordering his paladins to kill in the name of their order on flimsier and flimsier pretexts, and with less and less evidence. And she meets the male MC when she's visiting the previous leader, trying to figure out if she should rebel or not.

Kind of a Torquemada type, but with perhaps less power since they're a secret sect.

[Sage]

The first idea that came to me when reading the description of your characters was the leader of her sect. He's perhaps so deadset on fighting evil that he no longer sees things in shades of gray, and he's ordering his paladins to kill in the name of their order on flimsier and flimsier pretexts, and with less and less evidence. And she meets the male MC when she's visiting the previous leader, trying to figure out if she should rebel or not.

Kind of a Torquemada type, but with perhaps less power since they're a secret sect.
:) My first thought was one of the monks gone rogue (probably whoever was closest to the vamp MC before he was turned), having found a darker power to believe in and using it to bring about evil or chaos or whatever needs to be stopped.

But I like yours.

[Euan H.]

How to create a villain:

Step 1) Read this: If I ever become the Evil Overlord (http://www.sff.net/Paradise/overlord.html#overlord)

Step 2) Read these: psychopathy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy)and antisocial personality disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder) and malignant narcissism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism) and Eichmann and the banality of evil (http://www.iep.utm.edu/a/arendt.htm#H6).

Step 3) Frappe.

[Ruv Draba]

What do you do to come up with the Big Evil for your heroes to defeat?

[...]

Are there any original ideas for villains left in the world?

ETA: It's what the villain's going to do that's so evil that I have a hard time with. Once I know the "evil plot", then I can justify motives. And personality isn't that hard, either. I need the objective.
Villains are easier than you might realise, K.T. A very quick way is to take a hero and change its motivation from idealistic to selfish; change its compassion to perversity; make its history a bit shady, a bit wounded and you're pretty much there. E.g.:

Empathic psychiatrist becomes Hannibal Lecter -- a guy who eats his patients.
Carnival clown becomes The Joker -- a guy who kills in parody
Tireless faithful robotic servant becomes The Terminator -- a robot who faithfully and tirelessly tries to kill you.
Sexy one-night stand seductress becomes the gal from Fatal Attraction.
Devoted literary fan becomes the evil biatch from Misery.
Smart, faithful dog becomes Cujo.
Beloved car becomes Christine.
Shy psi prodigy becomes Carrie.
Diligent, humble monks become the cenobites from Hellraiser.
Exotic old-world nobleman becomes Dracula.A few villains aren't created that way. The monsters from Alien, or Freddy Kruger from A Nightmare on Elm St, or Jason from Friday the 13th, are just created from nightmares. Jaws required exaggeration but not perversification. But if you just want a memorable villain quickly, pick a kind of hero that people don't write about much and then pervert it.

You can make antiheroes in the reverse way too -- take a villain and give it just enough idealism to make it respectable and enough suffering to make it sympathetic.

My WIP has a villain made from a perverted choirboy archetype, and an antihero made from a villainous social-worker whom I brought back to anti-herodom with an idealistic motive and an eating disorder. :)

[archerjoe]

My villian is simply an asshole. He steals, takes advantage of women with low self-esteem, flicks cigarette butts at stray cats, sells dope to kids, cheats on girlfriends, etc. I try not to go overboard as to make him cartoonish.

[Dale Emery]

Amplify something that you think is good. Amplify it until it becomes harmful.

A related idea: Monomania about anything, even about something good, becomes destructive. Amplify someone's desire for something good until it becomes "at all costs."

Dale

[dgiharris]

Coming up with an original Big Bad is so hard for me. If I manage to come up with anything, it just feels "been there, done that".

What do you do to come up with the Big Evil for your heroes to defeat?

My 2 MCs have been thought up and sketched out, but I can't start writing until I have the reason they meet - coming together against the bad guy......it's hella frustrating, as I love these two in my head and can't wait to see them interact.

Are there any original ideas for villains left in the world?

ETA: It's what the villain's going to do that's so evil that I have a hard time with. Once I know the "evil plot", then I can justify motives. And personality isn't that hard, either. I need the objective.

To answer your question "Why is it so hard..."

I think becuase in our society, we don't think of evil people or bad people as fully developed. We tend to simplify them, throw them into nice neat little boxes.

In order to have a real villian IMHO, they need to be 3-d, flushed out, have a 'logic' behind their motives that isn't just some flat "I'm evil ,bwahawhawha"

Also,

I would be less worried about having a 'unique' villian and be more worried about have a solid story. Unique doesn't always translate into good.

But if your villian is 'real' and 3-d, he will be unique because we are all unique. We are all special unique snowflakes :)

Mel...

[K. Taylor]

more worried about have a solid story - Yep, that's why I'm trying to think of the Evil Objective before I get started, as the threat is essential to the plot.

I'm less worried about creating the character of the villain, and more worried about giving them something to do. I can give anyone a personality.

[K. Taylor]

What's the history of the secret order? What specifically have they saved the world from in the past? Who specifically have they vanquished in the past? Who might bear a grudge about any of that?

What does the vampire want most in the world? What does the paladin want most in the world? What do they together want most in the world? What event would most interfere with their goals?

Who might be upset that the MMC did not complete his vows? Who might be upset that a promising monk-in-training is now a vampire (and therefore, according to their way of thinking, evil)?

Good questions, Dale. Thank you.

[bettielee]

I've always seen villains as misunderstood heroes. They have had things happen to them; they merely react to what happened as best they can. Sometimes the heroes are the epic jerks - I mean Rand in The Wheel of Time pulls some very anti-hero moves, but he is the hero of the story. Sometimes, he's as bad as the bad guys; but because he is trying to STOP the world as we know it from falling into darkness, he is the hero.

Some people think of Castro as a hero, you know. It's all perspective.

[K. Taylor]

Villains are easier than you might realise, K.T. A very quick way is to take a hero and change its motivation from idealistic to selfish; change its compassion to perversity; make its history a bit shady, a bit wounded and you're pretty much there.
.........

A few villains aren't created that way. The monsters from Alien, or Freddy Kruger from A Nightmare on Elm St, or Jason from Friday the 13th, are just created from nightmares. Jaws required exaggeration but not perversification. But if you just want a memorable villain quickly, pick a kind of hero that people don't write about much and then pervert it.

You can make antiheroes in the reverse way too -- take a villain and give it just enough idealism to make it respectable and enough suffering to make it sympathetic.

My WIP has a villain made from a perverted choirboy archetype, and an antihero made from a villainous social-worker whom I brought back to anti-herodom with an idealistic motive and an eating disorder.

Thanks, Ruv. Yeah, I've been trying to decide between nightmare and character, certainly.

[zornhau]

Coming up with an original Big Bad is so hard for me. If I manage to come up with anything, it just feels "been there, done that".

What do you do to come up with the Big Evil for your heroes to defeat?

My 2 MCs have been thought up and sketched out, but I can't start writing until I have the reason they meet - coming together against the bad guy......it's hella frustrating, as I love these two in my head and can't wait to see them interact.

Are there any original ideas for villains left in the world?

ETA: It's what the villain's going to do that's so evil that I have a hard time with. Once I know the "evil plot", then I can justify motives. And personality isn't that hard, either. I need the objective.

I too had a problem with this, especially because I don't really believe in evil. These books helped:

The Psychology of Military Incompetance - essentially why generals do stupid, selfish, or luddite things that destroy careers and get people killed. You can extend this to non military examples.

Liberal Facism - You can either read this as a scary insight into the right-wing mindset of the person who wrote it, or an scary insight into the way the left tends to want to force people to do things "for their own good". Or both.

Without Conscience - more than you ever wanted to know about Psychopaths.

War of the world - a good readable account of one of the worst centuries in human history.
You might also want to look to historical prototypes of evil in action: crusaders, witchburners, Nazis, and most Byzantine politicians.

[Maraxus]

Male is a blind vampire that was turned just before he could take vows as a monk, so he tries not to kill people. Female is a mortal paladin working for a secret order for all things good and saving the world.
That vampire had luck. If the cleric had had a few more levels, he would have destroyed that vampire instead of just turning him. ;)

...Anyway...

So why isn't the male main character the evil? He's a vampire. Everybody wants to kill him. Even the holy sun itself wants to kill him. He has to be afrait of virtually anyone, even the weakest boy can throw a bottle of holy water that creatly damages the vampire. He must defent himself. But given that he can't maneuver overland during the day he is in a serious tactical disadvantage. He has to defent himself preemptively!!
And he has to eat. And there is really no reason to think it's more evil to eat humans then pigs and cows. He is just a natural predator, not evil. Humans are evil, most don't even have the guts to kill their food themselves.
;)

Well, the real evil could be a vampire, too ...



Generally speaking about motivations: There really is only world domination and world destruction. Any villain who thinks otherwise just does not think on a big enough scale.

Oh and a nice link for more information how fun it is to be evil:
http://evil-guide.tripod.com/index.html
That side is about as old as the internet but still funny.

[AceTachyon]

A few villains aren't created that way. The monsters from Alien, or Freddy Kruger from A Nightmare on Elm St, or Jason from Friday the 13th, are just created from nightmares.
I'll give you the critters from Alien but I thought Kruger started off as a serial killer who targeted kids, according to the first movie. The neighborhood parents banded together, chased him into an abandoned factory (or was it and old boiler room) and burned him to death. Then he came back as a nightmare figure.

Or do you mean that the standard serial killer bad guy is a creation from nightmare?

[RavenCorinnCarluk]

Of course, "Dr Horrible's Sing-along-blog" should also be referenced. I LOVE his character.

"The world is wrong, and I just need to rule it."

He's bad, but only because he realizes how much he needs to just take over and control things, and understands that's not how good guys do it. He's just not deluded enough to say he's doing it "for the overall good". He's doing it for himself.

[Ruv Draba]

do you mean that the standard serial killer bad guy is a creation from nightmare?I mean that the specific characters of the alien from Aliens, the shark from Jaws, Freddy and Jason are created from human nightmare -- a pastiche of human fears refined to spook us out. Whereas the character of Lecter say, is a creation of perversifying something familiar and trusted -- which also works.

The motivating question was 'are there any more original villains'? I think that the answer depends on what sort you create: nightmare or perverse hero.

It's hard to come up with original nightmares because human fears are so familiar. There's no great difference between Sauron and Darth Vader. Like Jason and Freddy, they're all the bogieman who lives under the bed.

If you want to go with a bogieman-under-the-bed villain then I feel that you're better off putting the familiar into an original context (e.g. Sauron in his stone wasteland, Darth Vader in his battlestar, Freddy in his basement, or Jason in his abandoned campsite). Then just play with props.

Alternatively, if you want the villain itself to be original (psychologically, socially and not just physically different), don't go for a nightmare. Rather, go for a perverted hero -- there are new kinds of heroes appearing all the time, and many ways to pervert them.

If you want to tell them apart, bogieman villains need a suitable setting; perverse heroes fit in almost any setting. You can't put Darth Vader on a picnic or in a kid's party without humour. Lecter however, fits in both places just fine.

[C.bronco]

I either think of someone I don't like, or someone who believes something that I think is way, way off base.

It's really, really fun making the people I don't like the villians (insert evil laugh here), especially because if there is no physical similarity, they would never recognize themselves for their awful traits.

[Matera the Mad]

Some of the worst evil is small and insidious.

[Nivarion]

I find the best way to make a villain is take all of the traits of the heroes and flip on of them to its extreme opposite, preferably on that will make an unreconciable problem.

Take the main villain of my WIP for example. I have a breed of demon that when killed has a "Phoenix" effect where they create an exact duplicate of the person that killed them. This "Twin" or "Clone" has an unstoppable driving need to kill the original. My villain fails and fails and it drives him to the point of doing anything to get rid of the drive. he butchers my MC's friends and is always trying to get in his way. But he has the exact same traits in everything else but that drive makes him do somethings that my MC could never do.

Now to your story.

Paladins and monks both fought on the side of god or whatever you have in your world. their traits were;
Devoted: They would do whatever was required of them by their diety
Faithful: Then knew their deity would reword them for their devotion. and knew their deity exists.
Concerned for others: speaks for self.
Worships a good diety: again, speaks for self.

Now a good villain for these guys;
Devoted: He will do whatever his god requires him to do, and isn't going to stop.
Faitful: he knows his god exists, and that he will reward him for his devotion.
Concerned for others: He wants to bring them the word and rule of his diety.
Worships an evil diety: This is your confilct.


He could be doing anything from trying to rid the world of the "Lost" that aren't part of his gods fold, by quite litterally getting rid of them. He could be trying to open a gate to let his god out of the prison the 'evil' gods of your heroes put him in.

Its your world, now make a villain that is as strong and wise as your hero with some small difference. The line between good and evil is soooo small and fragile, that it is easily crossed.

I'll give you the critters from Alien but I thought Kruger started off as a serial killer who targeted kids, according to the first movie. The neighborhood parents banded together, chased him into an abandoned factory (or was it and old boiler room) and burned him to death. Then he came back as a nightmare figure.

Or do you mean that the standard serial killer bad guy is a creation from nightmare?

they threw torches through the window of his house. The house got restored but his "ghost" decided to hang out for a while.

[Maraxus]

I don't like that bottom-up construction (first some bits and the characters and then work them together into a story).

The best characters are created by the story. And that includes villains.

You allready have a five word summary: "a fantasy adventure romance story"

And probably have a few bits of the rest of the story, too. But work into a one page summary of the story, too. Let me speculate a bit:






The female paladin is not the hero of songs and tales. She is a cold headhunter for the temple of "God of Protection, Good and War but not necessarily honor."
This job creates enemies naturally, this time in the form of a demon worshipper of sorts. She slays him, but did not realise that he has allready summoned a powerful demon. As she's away, the demon brings his worshipper back from the dead - a procress that has some advantaces and a horrible price (sounds totally evil, don't you think?). Well evil guy later destrory the whole temple but either She-Paladin escapes or he can't yet face her because the memory of his own death is still too shocking.

Anyway, the fight goes on, Paladin tries to get him, fails for some time and finally totally looses his track. Another temple has more jobs for her. One is a vampire, about to create a clan (Male main character's headvampire).

At that time at the vampire clan: The Head has 3 young vampires. He has mental dominance over them and forces them into a bloody evil contest: Find the best food for the master. Measured are pureness of the victim, stealthyness of extraction and overall style. Male Main however does not have the intention of winning. When he visits the temple he realises that the holy place does not hurt him but keeps the masters voice out. An old friend and temple-guard needs to play victim and they both arm themself with holy water and (the temple guard only) a holy symbol.

Back at the vampire den it does not take long before the fight breaks out. The other victims (a whore and a little girl in a white nightdress) are of no help and as the head vampire stops Main, they realise that this might have been a bad plan. In bursts female Paladin - in fact she had been hiding for a few hours now, her originally plan being to wait untill dawn but given the opportunity she changes it. Now the fight looks more even and is decided when another student realises that his master's mind is busy enough with Main Male. Because having someone who can control your every move is bad, he pushs him into the wounded temple guard who can shove his last flasks into the monster's mouth.
But said vampire also has an escape plan. He mentally dominates the girl into furiousely throwing herself into the paladin's sword (to the suprise of the Main Male, who does not (yet?) have such skills - btw another case of totally evil, isn't it?) and runs for it.

Well, the last student vampire is quickly dispatched (only there because I liked 3 more and maybe will have some use in the fine description of the scene later) and the Paladin decides to leave the "good" vampire alive for now.

And that's where the story really starts. The two hunt the escaped vampire, getting to know each other better, getting to hate (She shows him what he lost, a connection to a good deity, she is supposed to hate him by job definition) and desire each other (opposite genders in life and death situations - it often ends sexy).

Then her nemisis reappears and declares that he used the time only to grow more powerful and overcome that stupid post-death-trauma. Now there is a big 3-way fight but the heroes are not into the real problem untill escaped vampire decides that the demonist could totally kill both problems if he was a vampire on top of that, creating the über-villain. :)


That was only an example, of course, I guess that the probability of you writing something into that direction just dropped, now that someone else came up with it. ;) But that way, I would start getting the idea of the characters. And now I can fine design them.

Grot Fang.
Former Half Ork, now Vampire.
Like most people of orkish heritage, Grot's usual aproach to solving problems is slashing sharp metal into the problem's face (something usual). In contrast to most of his kin, however he is quite methodically and intelligent in working towards this solution (something unusual). He can have some fierce, impulsive tempers but he knows that, considers it a personal flaw and often meditates to get more controlled (transforming hot irascibility into cold thirst for vengeance) (heroic trait with a twist). He likes having become undead because he never liked days anyway and feels the patience, of someone who is not aging, growing fast. He shows a lot of signs of a sociopath, not the cruel sadistic evil laughter kind of guy, he just does not care a bit for other people (his kind of evil).
He does not take it personal, that the heros want him dead, he wants that dead, too, and probably could not understand that the others are so emotional about that kiling each other stuff. He is a pefectionist, he considers himself superior and has high standards (he is quite a badass, so he somewhat has a point). Thus, personal setbacks are a weak point and confronted with his failure, his primitive, angry side will likely shine through the reserved, controlled outer shell (and a weakness. Not neccessarily the weakness that will have him killed at the end).

[K. Taylor]

Well, I use "paladin" because the definition is a "champion or knight for a cause". She's not like what the term has come to mean from gaming, for instance.

I already have the bios for her and the vampire and written some test dialogue sequences to get their voices nailed down, as well as a couple secondary characters. Since the story is a romance, the primary objective is getting them together for a happy (enough) ending. Stopping the evil is just part of that goal, so as long as that part doesn't come out lame, I'll be happy. My experience is with contemporary fiction, so the story is set in modern times, just with the monsters and demons and magic and stuff. ;)

[Maraxus]

It's Vampire romance. One of the lovers is a (part-time) monster. This can end in "Evil wins" and "everybody loses". And overall, there does not have to be a big evil. Either character can be evil - or both. The world can be a faceless evil (She has to protect him from the other nameless vampire hunters or something).

You have a very special main character. Blind, vampire, mostly pacifist. I can hardly believe that this works. And then you want to find a way to get him into specific situations - I don't believe that works. You should just let the story evolve - mostly cronologically.

Modern times are especially tough for vampires. At least for the interesting kind of. They are easily identified and then some 3-letter-organisations will take care of them.
You kill someone and a bunch of policemen is chasing you. Once anywhere a vampire is found, weeks later every public camera will have an infrared addon and there will be an automated check for people with no body temperature and thus vampires couldn't even life in big cities anymore. And it's just getting easier in a world where the government employs wizards!

I'd really go back with the story - if only 20 years - or go forwart into a near future, where worldwide economic crisis has brought polices and governments to a state of mostly powerlessness (like 10 years or something? ;)).


Anyway, that is the kind of speculation you should do. Just write the story (or better: a rough script) and see who happens to naturally become the enemy. A headhunter? Some cooperation? Or will it be personal, like a rejected lover, who begrudges their love? (Or all that mixed together)

[UndeadDM]

The best villains are perverse heroes in their own stories. (I'd also argue tat some characters, like Jason and Jaws, are not villains at all, but metaphors for the dark aspects of nature, but that's a different conversation).

Darth Vader -- possibly the best movie villain ever -- is the tragic guardian of a lost art, a fallen knight who still tries to convince himself that if he just gets a little more power, then finally the galaxy will be at peace. This can be seen from Revenge of the Sith on, but is most present when he tries to corrupt Luke: Darth Vader: There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you.
[pauses]
Darth Vader: Luke, you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy.And there is it in red, the delusion that allows Vader to function, that belief that somehow if he just cracks enough skulls, he can bring peace and order to the galaxy.

Villains who are evil for the sake of being evil only belong in parody and comedy (Lord Dungledore on Krod Mandoon And The Flaming Sword of Fire comes to mind), so the key to creating a memorable villain is to infuse them with a sense of moral purpose. Give them a noble goal, but then allow them to use "by any means necessary" and "ends justifies the means" thinking and set them lose on the world. As long as their moral purpose brings them into conflict with the ideals of the hero, you've got drama to drive your story.

[Dommo]

I just hate that villains lose in so much literature. Real life says otherwise, and I think it's more interesting to see the villain win, or at least succeed in most of their goals. That's why I liked the comic "Watchmen" because in the end the villain, succeeded and by doing so, even as horrible as it was, saved the world.

Sometimes it takes a villain to truly do the things that need to be done.

[Maraxus]

UndeadDM: And what with Professor Moriarty, the original supervillain?
I don't know the books but it looks like he is really only into power and riches.

What about Lex Luther? And what about the Joker?
Or the first vampire villain: Dracula. Do not mistake his bit of Mina for anything romantic, he just wanted to hurt Mr. Harker with that.
Lo Pan (Totally kickas villain) and General Zod (the Dragon meets the Brute) - simple, evil. Simply evil.

Or to take a classic book: Sauron is definitly not trying to enslave Middle Earth "for the greater good". He is simply evil and probably knows it.

[Zachariah]

Sauron is definitly not trying to enslave Middle Earth "for the greater good". He is simply evil and probably knows it.

Don't make me go all Noam Chomsky (http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2003/04/22fellowship.html) on your ass.

I'm trying very hard in my WIP to make an entire organisation the bad guy, but all the people who are part of it are quite sympathetic. Or at least, not villainous. Well, slightly.

Ah, who am I kidding? They're a bunch of power-hungry megalomaniacs. But only because of the institution they are in. None of them, at least, see themselves as bad.

[SilverBirch]

I had a hard time with my antagonist, too. Reworking him into a three-dimensional character became one of my main goals for the second draft. The other one was figuring out exactly what his Evil Plot (TM) was and refining it (especially since plots are my downfall). So I can completely sympathize with your frustrations.

Honestly, I came up with the basics of the evil/plot connection in my story by pure necessity: what needs to be done to serve the MC's plotline? Have the antagonist do it. But - and this is what I'd missed in my first draft - what good reason, to his thinking, does the antagonist have for doing what he did?

For example, my antagonist murders my MC's royal father, frames the MC, and steals the throne. MC spends rest of novel trying to clear her name and regain her claim to the throne. Standard stuff, I know. But in my antagonist's mind, the former king was a horrible ruler who was damaging the city and harming the people. The antagonist honestly believed he was morally and ethically right for the whole murdering and usurping part.

Hope this helps, or at least makes sense. If it doesn't, just re-read what Euan H, FOTSGreg, and Richard B said ;)

[Cassiopeia]

I have absolutely no trouble coming up with a villain. I've had plenty of startling examples in my own life and all of them have come with their own little twist.

And that's the entire point really. People are people and we share common characteristics...it's the twists of our personality that make us unique.

Ask yourself, if you were to let go of all your societal rules you've adhered to, what would you do. Get into the mind of someone who sets aside those rules and rationalizes doing it or as a sociopath, has no feeling of what's wrong or right and doesn't care. Apathy is typically one of a really bad guy's attributes. They don't care so they do whatever they want to whomever they want and walk away without remorse or regret.

[Cassiopeia]

I just hate that villains lose in so much literature. Real life says otherwise, and I think it's more interesting to see the villain win, or at least succeed in most of their goals. That's why I liked the comic "Watchmen" because in the end the villain, succeeded and by doing so, even as horrible as it was, saved the world.

Sometimes it takes a villain to truly do the things that need to be done.The unwilling hero is rarely a true scenario in my experience. If they do anything to help someone else, it is to save themselves. And I've yet to see a situation outside of fiction where someone was saved by the selfishness of another person. That's just wrapping it up nice, putting a pretty bow on it so it can be dealt with easier.

[UndeadDM]

UndeadDM: And what with Professor Moriarty, the original supervillain?

Oh I'm sorry, I thought this was the 21st Century. Seriously, when was the last time Moriarty was actually a popular villain? Personally, I've always found Moriarty rather one-note and boring.

What about Lex Luther?

The better interpretations of the character present him as someone who is seeking power not just for his own ego, but because he believes he can make the world a better place. In several alternate timelines where SUperman does not exist, Luthor is a savior figure who delivers mankind into a golden age. A destiny that is only derail by his inability to accept this alien usuper as the "Super Man."

The other interpretation tend to be silly and inappropriate for adults ("Superman made me lose my hair, thus I will conquer the world!" = Eat your heart out, Frued.)

And what about the Joker?

A noble seeker of the truth who only really wants to teach the world to laugh.

Or the first vampire villain: Dracula. Do not mistake his bit of Mina for anything romantic, he just wanted to hurt Mr. Harker with that.

Boring, unless you're talking Lugosi's interpretation of the character which infuses him with both sensuality and melonchaly, giving the character memorable death.

(I can't be the only one who thinks Stroker's Dracula is highly overrated, can I?)

Lo Pan (Totally kickas villain) and General Zod (the Dragon meets the Brute) - simple, evil. Simply evil.

Lo Pan isn't simply evil. He's a devout and pious man who merely wants to lift an ancient curse so that he can restore his Empire. Neither is Zod for that matter, no more than Julius Ceaser was "simply evil." Just because teh writers didn't make

But more to the point, sure, they're cool -- mostly because they get GREAT lines -- but are you really going to argue that they're superior to Darth Vader? I realize this is all subjective, but come on. There is a reason why Star Wars is a cultural landmark.

Or to take a classic book: Sauron is definitly not trying to enslave Middle Earth "for the greater good". He is simply evil and probably knows it.

Sauron is not a particularly memorable or interesting villain for exactly the reasons you mention. Hell, in the movies he's basically a special effect. He's barely even a character, and far more a plot device.

[Wark]

Confession: I skipped most of that above.

I don't have trouble creating villians. They are good people who believe wrong things. The most dangerous are those who think they are protecting something they love.

My good guys know they are bound by fate to a book. Time has already been laid out. Nothing can change. Free will shaped time, but the end, as the beginning, have always been.

My bad guys fight the good guys to try to change the future. They believe they can do this, even though they have a copy of the book, showing them when their attacks succeed and when they fail.

Specific bad gal loves her mother who was taken by the good guys as she was trying to commit suicide. This daughter fights the good guy team, but will also hurt her mother because she feels her mother must have been brainwashed. And, since one of the good guys will become very powerful after they are augmented with prosthetic body parts, she decides that shouldn't happen, and chops her into pieces, but that is why she gets rebuilt into a...I prefer the term Enhanced American. [But she's Canadian]

Now I'll go read some of that and see how off base I am with my response.

[jodiodi]

I wrote a series of works with a villain who was just ... born bad. He had no redeeming qualities. Raped, tortured and killed just for fun. He was immortal and couldn't be killed unless something like beheading or dismembering occurred.

I loved him. He was a great character and had no remorse for anything he did and believed everyone was born to serve him and his desires. His final fate was perfect for him and left the room for him to return eventually, return even worse.

Villains are fun to write. I like them much better than the hero/heroine.

[Cassiopeia]

I agree jodiodi.

I love writing from my villains POV. He's far more interesting than I'll ever be. :D

yes this means I secretly wish I could do bad things. ;)

[ChaosTitan]

For me, the best villains are the ones who are compliments to the hero--their opposite half. They possess traits the hero does not (or varying degrees of them). Lex Luthor was a great villain for Supeman, because he was the brains to Supes' brawn.

In my books (and in the best books I've read lately) the villain's goals are in opposition to the hero. Or, if not in direct opposition, their methods for reaching the goal are not in line. At the moment, I'm not fond of "evil for the sake of being evil" villains, because they are difficult to make interesting. I don't write them.

I almost think villains are easy. It's creating a layered, sympathetic hero that's hard. :)

[Ruv Draba]

Sauron is definitly not trying to enslave Middle Earth "for the greater good". He is simply evil and probably knows it.Actually, he was once a most trusted lieutenant and now just follows in the footsteps of his master. (This fact and other Middle Earth geekery can be found here (http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/s/sauron.html)).

[Paichka]

You know, I actually found Darth Vader to be kind of a weenie once I knew his whole backstory. That may have just been because Hayden Christenson overdid the wangst, but seriously. I kept waiting for Yoda to turn him over his knee and give him a good paddling for being such a bratty little jedi.

My favorite villains are one of two types -- I love the villain-as-force-of-nature, where the big bad in the story is just this wicked thing that's nearly unstoppable, that you can't reason with, that's just a force of destruction. Like the zombies in the remake of Dawn of the Dead, or The Nothing in Neverending Story, or the Spider in It. They all seem to rise from the Creator/Destroyer dynamic. Love it. There's something so horrific about an evil that mindless.

My other favorite villain is the guy who could've been a great man except he went completely off the reservation somewhere along the way. The person whose greatness was twisted/tricked into doing evil, so that even while they're doing bad things, you as the reader/viewer are feeling sorry for them even as you hate them. Like Lex Luthor, or Captain Picard when he got assimilated, or yes, Darth Vader. (Even if he was a weenie.)

[Nivarion]

Are you sure that your story even needs a villain?

Because a paladin and a vampire don't really have to get along.

In my current WIP which would be a "High Fantasy sword and dagger" thing, I don't have one at all. One of my 'heroes' doesn't get a message, since it gets buried in other stuff, and ends up sending an army after the other hero since she thinks that the other guy is a bad guy, when what really happened was that a few of her soldiers got in a drunken tavern fight with him and got killed for it. All she got was the "Got killed by" part.

Good and evil is oftentimes just about perspective. Its also oftentimes about who wins. If George Washington had lost and the US had never become its own nation, Washington would be a filthy terrorist leader of a rebelion in the 1770's that the government under the insightful King George put down.

[K. Taylor]

Um, yeah. It's a romance between the two characters. My vampire is more a guy that happens to be a vamp and never wanted to be, then a traditional evil demon. And the paladin's not so uptight that she can't work with him.

[Maraxus]

Ah, so the story idea goes into the direction of:
The Organisation behind the Paladin (Church Special Services or whatever) tells her: "Go, get supervillan X and work together with that vampire over there." And then they start working together and fall in love and that part you basicly allready have in your mind and now you want to know who X might be.

Well the question is, who X can be to make the organisation think, a blind vampire would be of any help to the Paladin? Since the clieche case of former mentor/student/companion does not work with a pacifictig monk, I guess it has to be a vampire that has some connection to the blind one. And if you then make his motivations: Drinking Blood because it tastes good and not getting killed, I don't think anyone will call that lame.

... Oh my, you could make the villain a female vampire. And what the church did not say Pali: She was not only the one that bit him but also ... You guess it? ;)

[Freelancer]

To create a good villain; there are two elements what you should keep in front of your eyes. Never make him stupid and don't ever give him the ultimate cliche goal; destroy the world (Imagine as he is accomplishing it and he is ruling over a pile of ashes. Now, that would be fun. :) ).

My personal advise; make the villain to tricky, but also try go give real reasons to his actions and a real background. So, don't make him to a sensless killer if you don't have to, don't make him to someone who is killing the closest minion, because he brought the bad news or because he failed. It's just stupid and cliche.

Oh, and the most important element. Evil is just a matter of point of view. If he is evil in the story, from his eyes he is still the good guy and your main character is the bad one. The villain should be evil only from the eyes of your main character and the moral values of your world.

[Euan H.]

Evil is just a matter of point of view. If he is evil in the story, from his eyes he is still the good guy and your main character is the bad one. The villain should be evil only from the eyes of your main character and the moral values of your world.
Not always. Sociopaths lack a sense of good and evil; so they don't see themselves as 'good' guys in this sense. They're simply acting to take what they want. And there is a tape of a meeting of Hitler and other high ranking members of the Nazi party discussing the final solution in which what they're saying seems to imply that they know what they're doing in horrific and evil, but they simply don't care.

[Freelancer]

Sociopaths, psychopaths are acting, because they're feeling the necessity of it as they're intending to do something, which is good in THEIR eyes. The other example what you mentioned is the same as they acted as THEY believed right, but that doesn't mean automatically they were right. But in their eyes, they were the good guys, and the people that against they've figured out the final solution were the bad ones. This is the essence. Evil, really matter which one, is usually acting on the way as HE is believing he is right. So, it's still a matter of point of view, nothing more. You must handle evil on this way, understand the other side, get yourself into his POV to understand what motivates him, what drives him, what leads him, regardless do you like what you're going to see, or even if it's going to terrify you. Without that, you will create a cliche evil without any acceptable background, without any real motivations, any real goal. Evil is good in their very own eyes, they believe they're acting good and the other side is the evil one, which is acting bad.

Imagine yourself into the place of a lonely sociopath. You have your own world, where you're alone and everyone against you, everyone hates you. In the reality everyone is intending to help you, but in your world, in your moral values, they're the enemy, because you feel they're evil. And that will force you to do something against them, which is the only logical and good step against your enemies, which is the worst step in the eyes of those ones whose are living in the real world and not in the closed, lonely world of the sociopath.

[Euan H.]

Sociopaths, psychopaths are acting, because they're feeling the necessity of it as they're intending to do something,
Not really. It could be simply an a momentary desire to do something nasty. One of the diagnostic features of psychopathy is poor impulse control. They don't have to feel it's necessary, nor that it's a good thing, simply that it's something they want to do. In "normal" people, these impulses get checked by conscience (or by parents in the case of children), but in a psychopath, there's nothing to stop them acting out these impulses. Watch young children playing together, and watch
the cruel and hurtful things they sometimes do. Why? Not because they think it's the right thing to do, but simply because they felt like doing it at that time. There's a horror story whose title and author escape me (may be Bradbury), but the basic premise was a small boy being given very strong telekinetic powers, and what he does with them. The consequences were . . . unpleasant.

The other example what you mentioned is the same as they acted as THEY believed right, but that doesn't mean automatically they were right.
No. The whole point is that they knew what they were doing was wrong. And they still did it. Why? Because they didn't care.

You might also want to read the link I posted earlier about the banality of evil. People very often do evil things knowing that they are evil, but simply not caring enough about it.

So, it's still a matter of point of view, nothing more. You must handle evil on this way, understand the other side, get yourself into his POV to understand what motivates him, what drives him, what leads him, regardless do you like what you're going to see, or even if it's going to terrify you.
And this is (with respect) what you're not doing (IMO) with many evil people. Yes, some people do evil things because they believe they are the right thing to do.

Others (and I'd argue, the majority) do them simply because they don't care enough about the people who are harmed. Just doing their job. Just obeying orders. Who cares really? (They're only XXXX.)

Sociopaths/Psychopaths do evil and horrible things to people (often) simply because they want to. They have an impluse to act, and they act on it. People like this are not ruled by moral compasses, and they don't according to their ideas of 'good' and 'evil'. They act according to 'I want" or 'I don't want'. You might want to have a look at The Mask of Sanity (http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sanity_1.PdF)for an idea of how sociopaths think. It's really an eyeopener, and not at all how the movies portray people.

[Freelancer]

The whole point is that they knew what they were doing was wrong. And they still did it. Why? Because they didn't care.
It's not that easy as you imagine. The world is not that simple and human psychology is even harder.

Well. We have few sociopath in our country. We're calling them politicans (Some of them are literally sociopaths.). And they're working on the way as I described. They believe they've right, they believe they can do anything, they believe they're doing everything good. While it's not true. And that's the effect because of their moral values, they don't care; is it really good what they're doing or not. If you believe what you're doing is good and others, similar to you are also supporting you (Or the voices in your mind if you're a sociopath), from that moment you're not going to care what others are saying, because in your eyes, you'll be the good guy.

The sociopaths are doing what they're doing because in their world, what they're doing is always good and right and from that they're not caring with the consequences anymore. It's the same what you written. For those whose don't have any sort of moral values, you can't explain what the difference between good and evil is. In their eyes, everything what they're doing is good. It's just like the animals. Killing other being is a mortal sin in our eyes. But some animals are killing each other, because it's in their nature and because with their moral values, it's fair and authorized. So, is it good or bad? In our eyes, it's bad that two tiger killed each other, in their eyes... well, one of them served justice. That's how the world works.

So, if you don't mind, while you have some good point, I'm still supporting my approach... if you don't want to or can't understand the other side, what is in his mind, why he is doing what he is doing, you don't know what motivates him, you simply can't write a good, realistic villain at all.

[Euan H.]

The first and most striking difference is this: In all the orthodox psychoses, in addition to the criteria just mentioned, or to some of these criteria, there is a more or less obvious alteration of reasoning processes or of some other demonstrable personality feature. In the psychopath this is not seen. The observer is confronted with a convincing mask of sanity. All the outward features of this mask are intact; it cannot be displaced or penetrated by questions directed toward deeper personality levels. The examiner never hits upon the chaos sometimes found on searching beneath the outer surface of a paranoid schizophrenic. The thought processes retain their normal aspect under psychiatric investigations and in technical tests designed to bring out obscure evidence of derangement. Examination reveals not merely an ordinary two-dimensional mask but what seems to be a solid and substantial structural image of the sane and rational personality. He might then be thought of, in the full literal sense, as an example of what Trélat meant to designate by his expressive term, la folie lucide. Furthermore, this personality structure in all theoretical situations functions in a manner apparently identical with that of normal, sane functioning. Logical thought processes may be seen in perfect operation no matter how they are stimulated or treated under experimental conditions. Furthermore, the observer finds verbal and facial expressions, tones of voice, and all the other signs we have come to regard as implying conviction and emotion and the normal experiencing of life as we know it ourselves and as we assume it to be in others. All judgments of value and emotional appraisals are sane and appropriate when the Psychopath is tested in verbal examinations.

Only very slowly and by a complex estimation or judgment based on multitudinous small impressions does the conviction come upon us that, despite these intact rational processes, these normal emotional affirmations, and their consistent application in all directions, we are dealing here not with a complete man at all but with something that suggests a subtly constructed reflex machine which can mimic the human personality perfectly. This smoothly operating psychic apparatus reproduces consistently not only specimens of good human reasoning but also appropriate simulations of normal human emotion in response to nearly all the varied stimuli of life. So perfect is this reproduction of a whole and normal man that no one who examines him in a clinical setting can point out in scientific or objective terms why, or how, he is not real. And yet we eventually come to know or feel we know that reality, in the sense of full, healthy experiencing of life, is not here.'

That's from The Mask of Sanity, and there's all you need for a really horrific villain right there, IMO. A true psychopath (well, following this conception, anyway) is a truly alien being, someone who is hollow at the core, someone who wears a mask to conceal, not their own lunacy, but the void inside themselves.

Mmm. There's your villain. Taaasty.

[Zachariah]

The baddie from Koontz's From the Corner of His Eye is a fair approximation of this.

[Freelancer]

Euan H. Thanks for this long quote. I believe I'm going to read this book. It's grabbed my attention. It will be a good study. I understand now what you wanted to say from your view. Thanks again. :)

[Nivarion]

To create a good villain; there are two elements what you should keep in front of your eyes. Never make him stupid and don't ever give him the ultimate cliche goal; destroy the world (Imagine as he is accomplishing it and he is ruling over a pile of ashes. Now, that would be fun. :) ).

My personal advise; make the villain to tricky, but also try go give real reasons to his actions and a real background. So, don't make him to a sensless killer if you don't have to, don't make him to someone who is killing the closest minion, because he brought the bad news or because he failed. It's just stupid and cliche.

Oh, and the most important element. Evil is just a matter of point of view. If he is evil in the story, from his eyes he is still the good guy and your main character is the bad one. The villain should be evil only from the eyes of your main character and the moral values of your world.


you know, my first villain had that goal. And she nearly did it too.

She didn't have any really good reason to do it. She just hated everyone and everything. Wanted to watch it all burn and had the power to make it. Although i think i may have twisted it by making the good guy who savagely kills her with a rock her brother. No attempt to save her. Just bashes her head in at the end of a magic fight. so... was he really a good guy?

It's obvious why it's a cliche, destroying the world. You have a strong unfeeling villain, and an obvious conflict with the good guys. they are also obviously stronger than the good guy.

but hey as always, if your going to do it do it well and do it new. its all cliche in the end.

[DavidZahir]

I'm actually rather proud of my own villains. Generally, I take one of three directions:

Villain as Protagonist - Quite simply, treat them as a hero, from their particular point of view. It just happens that their viewpoint is one the main character (and presumably the audience) will hate. This can actually be liberating. Imagine a quietly lonely man who longs to feel kinship with others--and finds such in the ideology of National Socialism. Or someone trying to do the best job they possibly can protecting others, which leads them to torturing and killing suspected criminals. Or a thousand variations of same. O'Brian from 1984 is an example of same, as is Hannibal Lecter.

Villain as Force. Trickier, and fundamentally limited in use, but sometimes extremely effective. The villain simply goes after his or her goals (usually horrific) with total focus and ruthlessness. Examples would be The Borg from Star Trek or maybe Keyser Soze from The Usual Suspects.

Villain as Comedy Relief. Simply, an entertainingly incompetent (but oftimes still dangerous) bad guy. Not a mastermind, although they may think they are, but someone who'll fail at their plots. Like Harmony on Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Trelane on Star Trek.

[Danjreid]

I spent a VERY LONG time trying to come up with a villain for the novel I'm currently writing. It was damned hard - but mainly because the story was so incomplete.

I spent time delving into the backstory and worldbuilding and eventually I developed the universe to such a state that I didn't create a villain, but he jumped out of the world and said "hey there author, this world you created just pissed me off something rotten and I'm going to tear it down."

It was shocking and wonderful at the same time. Once the world was in place and its history was well-crafted, villains started appearing on their own. I knew why people would be driven to do evil things in this world.

I've even got (for later works in the same world) force-of-nature type villains - who appear to only be out for destruction - but actually have complex backstories as to why they behave as they do. All because of one change I made to the history of the world.

So my advice is; if you are having trouble finding a villain, spend time worldbuilding. The moment a conflict starts to build within the history of your story is the moment you will be wondering which villain to chose, instead of how to find one.

Heck, I'd say whenever you are having writing troubles, spend it writing backstory. It keeps you writing and it might end up revealing what was missing that kept you from finding where your story goes next.

[Kaiser-Kun]

I think my villain is pretty complicated, and at the same time, very simple...

Dashat is not really from this planet, but a member of an ancient alien race. He came as "the first Strike", meaning that he is the scout for the arrival of his people. He was created with a single purpose: Prepare the planet for their arrival. As he infiltrates the people from the Planet Eddeil, he discovers that the best method for weakening them is to instigate war among them. Thus, he lives centuries among the people from this planet, once working openly as the leader of a rebellion, but mostly behind the scenes.

I find it that he has the most powerful reason to be the "villain": He exists for that purpose. Things such as cruelty or forgiveness are not a part of his nature, which makes him a very dangerous foe, for he cannot be reached with pleas or discussion. He's just a force of nature, like a tsunami or a hurricane.

[ccv707]

What's so hard about making a villain? They can be just as flawed as your heroes. People have insecurities, fears, and neuroses. Write your villain just like you would write your hero, except the villain will perceive his/her/its evil actions from a different perspective.

In truth, there is very little separating real life "bad guys" from real life "good guys". Never forget, one person's hero is another's villain.

[ccv707]

Sociopaths, psychopaths are acting, because they're feeling the necessity of it as they're intending to do something, which is good in THEIR eyes.

I understand what you're trying to say, but technically speaking, a sociopath doesn't understand--or is perceive a better word?--the difference between good and evil, in terms of moral grounds. It's an antisocial disorder, the inability to function within social norms.

[Cyia]

I understand what you're trying to say, but technically speaking, a sociopath doesn't understand--or is perceive a better word?--the difference between good and evil, in terms of moral grounds. It's an antisocial disorder, the inability to function within social norms.


The best line I ever heard in a TV show about psycho vs. sociopaths was from a man whose character was a definite sociopath. One of the hero characters got a glimpse of his handiwork while the villain was holding him at gunpoint (showing off his handiwork, actually) and called him a "sick psycho". The villain got this weird look on his face like the hero had slapped him and said:

"Hey! I am not a psycho. A psycho can't tell the difference between right and wrong - they're crazy. I know the difference, I just don't care."


FWIW -- I think Heath Ledger's Joker in the Dark Knight was a perfect example of a sociopath done well. Too often writers try and insert a spark of humanity into socios or to give them some identifying quality that will make the audience feel sorry for them and have hope for their redemption, but either tactic takes away from the power of a character who sees nothing morally wrong with his actions. (or even morally right) They are what they are and that's all that they are - which is why they're so terrifying.

This is why I think Joker is the quintessential villain (followed closely by Moriarty). He's Batman, turned 180 degrees. He's what Batman would become if there wasn't a line he refused to cross. He's just as smart, just as focused and just as damaged - he's just a funhouse mirror version of the hero. That's what makes a great villain to me. He's a hero who erased the lines between right and wrong.

[Salis]

Personally I'm more inclined to there being no archvillain. Maybe this kind of horribly reductionist/practical thinking doesn't belong in fantasy, but I like the tinge of reality. In life, no one is the ultimate villain. There are many, many people, with contradicting needs & interests. Sometimes, they kill each other. Sometimes, people prove themselves to be so contradictory to our interests that they become our archvillain, but I don't think, as a concept, they're needed.

Hell, look at the whole genre of anti-hero characters (Elric comes to mind). You could say that an anti-hero is a villain whose viewpoint is made so sympathetic that they cease to be a villain.

No one is heroic.

But of course, that is completely anathema to heroic fantasy.

[Euan H.]

FWIW -- I think Heath Ledger's Joker in the Dark Knight was a perfect example of a sociopath done well.
Yes, he was a tremendous villain. When we first heard about the scars, I thought, oh dear, another story about a bad childhood. But then he told the story again, and it was completely different. Nice. How did he get the scars? Who knows. Who cares? And everything he says is a lie. Neato. That movie rocked.

[Fokker Aeroplanbau]

Ah, read up on George Wallace speeches - if you want a solid villain, one who was a 'good guy' to so many people, but so evil to many others, then he's your man. Really, no joke, read up on his speeches and read the transcripts; life will flow from your fingertips if you do. He's just one of those foils that is so easy to replicate, but so timeless (yet unknown) it'll be awesome.

[lovesaphira]

i honestly don't care what's been done. Villains are sort of easy for me because they're usually my fave characters. I have in mind what i like about villains and I use that to flesh out my own big bad. Its fun :D

[MargueriteMing]

ETA: It's what the villain's going to do that's so evil that I have a hard time with. Once I know the "evil plot", then I can justify motives. And personality isn't that hard, either. I need the objective.


Well, objectives fall into two classes:

1) self-serving. Your villian wants something, generally material, but could be a political objective, or the undoing of someone he has a grudge against, or just Making a Point.

2) mayhem. The villian just plain enjoys hurting others and being destructive. It's simple gratification of a destructive urge that is pleasurable when satisfied.

[glutton]

My good guys know they are bound by fate to a book. Time has already been laid out. Nothing can change. Free will shaped time, but the end, as the beginning, have always been.

My bad guys fight the good guys to try to change the future. They believe they can do this, even though they have a copy of the book, showing them when their attacks succeed and when they fail.


That's... interesting. So if they have a copy of the book, what if they choose not to attack at a time when the book says they will, will the book change? Or are they unable to make that choice?

I would probably hate this story and be rooting for the bad guys all the way, BTW (no offense).

[MargueriteMing]

It's not that easy as you imagine. The world is not that simple and human psychology is even harder.

Well. We have few sociopath in our country. We're calling them politicans (Some of them are literally sociopaths.). And they're working on the way as I described. They believe they've right, they believe they can do anything, they believe they're doing everything good. While it's not true. And that's the effect because of their moral values, they don't care; is it really good what they're doing or not. If you believe what you're doing is good and others, similar to you are also supporting you (Or the voices in your mind if you're a sociopath), from that moment you're not going to care what others are saying, because in your eyes, you'll be the good guy.




Sociopaths don't believe they are good. They believe what they are doing is in their own best interest. You don't both think you are good, and not care if you are good or not, it doesn't make sense.

[MargueriteMing]

Euan H. Thanks for this long quote. I believe I'm going to read this book. It's grabbed my attention. It will be a good study. I understand now what you wanted to say from your view. Thanks again. :)

Be prepared to pay $75/lb for it on amazon.

[Cyia]

Sociopaths don't operate on logic in a way that sounds logical to a person without sociopathic tendencies.

[PortableHal]

Evil is easy.

I love to write the bad guys. It's the good guys that struggle to hold my interest.

[Ardelie]

I just model them after my family members