Villain RPG: A Hero's Tale

[Corfaisus]

Villain RPG: A Hero's Tale
​

Black, White and Gray
​

 
​

In every story and for every protagonist, there must be an antagonist. Whether this force that acts in the contrast of the "hero" is a physical being or simply a mental construct, conflict is what drives a story forward and what brings out true characterization. Now, I want for you to remember that word: characterization, as, in the case of RPGs, your antagonist is typically going to be some Big Bad Evil Guy (BBEG) whose sole desire in this world is to thumb his nose up at you. This thumbing action in most cases is to destroy everything you've ever loved without a second thought, but to leave it so black and white is to do the medium a disservice. Just as was the case with the original Gameboy games, there needs to be some gray thrown in to create a balance between absolutes and bring out the true value of a game. So here we go, the run down of typical villain archetypes and what you should consider when writing for them.


Take over and/or destroy the world because yes:


“But I will be reborn once more. So even as you die, again and again, I shall return. Born again in this endless cycle I have created!” ~ Chaos (FF1)


Bare-bone antagonism through and through; this guy just wants to watch the world burn. We've all seen this multiple times in early JRPGs, the one-dimensional, millenium-sealed, all-powerful demon destined for destruction at the hands of a few kids brandishing pointy sticks. It is because of this that extra attention must be given to justify their actions and personalities thoroughly to combat the cliché and the stigma that comes with it. So what makes for a good example and a not-so-good example of this style of villain?


Let's start with Final Fantasy VI's Kefka. His legacy has been written out simply as a military general turned insane court jester turned all-powerful god, a compilation of events that made for one of the most memorable villains of the time. And while there's nothing inherently wrong with that, something so specific is a bit like lightning in that it can't strike the same place twice, something we found to be the case with Sephiroth (a.k.a Kefka 2.0). Much like Kefka, Sephiroth viewed himself as the judge, jury and executioner of the world as instructed by his "mother", an ancient alien named Jenova. It is shown throughout the events of Final Fantasy VII that while he can be cold and calculating, he also shares a bit of Kefka's wile and insanity, which could be seen as an attempt by Square to both redefine what makes a true villain and also cash in on previous success.


Another similarity between the two is the final form they take being that of a seraph. Once again, nothing wrong with this, but the problem with this villain if written incorrectly is the very unnecessary transformation from man to god as the final battle plays out like any other just with more HP, so you never truly get the feeling that you're confronting a being that could tear the world asunder with a single thought (or a light of judgment or whatever). Instead of simply destroying them in their ultimate form, I believe it would have been more "realistic" to somehow bring them back to mortal man status and then kill them, such as if Kefka was held back by the heroes while some Espers came in to take him down a peg.


Final Fantasy V's Exdeath, on the other hand, I felt rode the line perfectly between existing to destroy but remaining "mortal" thoughout (never gaining a ridiculous amount of power). From the beginning to the end, he's simply a tree taking on the form of a warlock with extensive-yet-limited magical abilities who in the end is devoured by the very power he sought to obtain. His destruction, although mostly akin to the other stories surrounding him, still managed to feel focused and deliberate as, instead of focusing strictly on destroying towns, he sank Ghido's island in an attempt to keep the heroes from seeking his help and also burned down the Forest of Moore, the very place that bore him.


Ignoring the need for change (or at least definition and justifications for actions) results in a style of villain that quickly loses its worth and excitement and, seeing as the antagonist pushes the story forward, damages the overall desire in saving the world in the first place, which is troubling if you consider that there were others inspired by even the most overused villainous deeds who might in turn inspire another, each "generation" losing more and more worth as the cliché stagnates.


Make ends meet/fulfill a promise because yes:


“When did my journey end? I haven't done anything my mother asked. It's just hatred that drives me now... I just... didn't have anything worth


protecting.” ~ Gaspard (Dark Cloud 2)


Sometimes there comes a villain who is pushed onward by its own twisted desires yet whose actions were first inspired by a promise made to someone they cherished or a deep-rooted desire to benefit someone else. This is all fine and dandy, but unless you delve deep into the course of events that led to them razing an entire village out of the blue, any actions they make against the world could easily be misconstrued as falling into the previous villain archetype.


Gaspard of Dark Cloud 2 fits more into this than a hero turned villain as his mother on her deathbed told him to find something worth protecting, this he ends up accomplishing shortly before his own death. True, he did spend most of the game killing and destroying whatever stood in his way, but the added tidbit of his actions being inspired by the loss of his mother adds a thin bonus to an otherwise uninspiring character.


Starts bad, good at end:


“I can't hear the Hymn so well anymore. Pretty soon, I'm gonna to be Sin. Completely. I'm glad you're here now. One thing, though... When it starts, I won't be myself anymore. I won't be able to hold myself back. I'm sorry.” ~ Jecht (FFX)


Dare I say it, but this is potentially one of the most damning villain archetypes if not handled correctly. One must make sure that the seeds that flourish into this person's eventual redemption are planted early and shown throughout the story, though never taking full root until much later. Attempting to have the villain show empathy with the heroes halfway through the final cutscene or moments before their death will most likely come across as unintentionally comedic and plot-breaking.


It's important to show that this villain was once human and perhaps even carefree as a child to show how far they've fallen and give a point of reference as to who they strive to be once more. Star Wars' Darth Vader is pretty much the go-to example of this archetype in that he is shown as this terrifyingly powerful sith lord until mainly around Return of the Jedi when Luke attempts to turn him from the dark side and he denies him heavyheartedly. The finale of this movie sees him finally throwing off his shackles to the emperor but succumbing to his wounds shortly after though not before Luke attempts to save his father from his fate only to be imparted with Anakin's final words that he has already saved him.


Once hero, becomes villain:


"Daddy screamed REAL good, before he DIED!'" ~ Pigma Dengar (Starfox 64)


Typically this sort of villain will end up having some sort of connection to the main hero in a way not always bound by blood. This will typically fall into the territory of a friend, a love interest or a renowned defender of a kingdom. This type of villain is as potentially interesting as one that starts bad yet becomes good, though may come across as more predictable if even one thing doesn't seem right or if the character's dialogue seems forced towards them becoming corrupt. What this archetype relies on is that:


1. The reason behind their corruption is both realistic and effective.
2. The to-be-villain's time spent on friendly terms is explored fully.


I would use Anakin Skywalker from Star Wars episodes 1-3, but that character was so hamfisted and forced I feel using it as an example would be worse than no example at all. In turn I could use Pigma Dengar, but he was always kind of a villainous streaming water. So I'm going back to 1988 with the NES port of Double Dragon because I'm desperate. Jimmy Lee, brother of Billy and the retro gaming's Necron, wants to pound your face in because he's got a crush on your girlfriend.


Possessed puppet:


"When a body is used by another, it can be called nothing but a puppet. This one has served its purpose, and it is useless." ~ Majora's Mask (LoZ:MM)


Much like the hero turned villain archetype, it's important to show who this kind of person was before and what lead them to become a slave of a much higher puppetmaster. Typically, the most effective examples of this come in the form of an innocent, child-like character whose curiosity got the better of them and in turn were forced to commit unspeakably wicked deeds.


Inherent to this style of villain is the need to establish some sort of sympathy to the face behind the mask and seek to free it from its prison, a face I found especially in the Skull Kid of Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask. Fitting this archetype to a T, he starts as a child simply looking for friends but one day happens across a dreaded mask that ends up claiming his body as its shell to pursue its dark ambitions to bring about the destruction of Termina.


Final Statements:


"Ahem... there's SAND on my boots!" ~ Kefka (FFVI)


While it is true that an interesting hero will inherently bring worth to the quest and make things easier to digest, an interesting villain will inspire thoughts beyond the quest and will likely stand out as memorable more-so than any do-gooder. It is with that that I implore everyone to take a good hard look at their "enemies" and ask yourself: am I making full use of this specific character, or could I be doing more to flesh it out and act as an inspiration towards future works. Make a villain you love to hate, and the game world will thank you for it.


And remember, the villain sees itself as the hero of its own story.

 

[PsychicToaster]

I have a magician villain who isn't necessarily a villain in the traditional sense. He's been driven over the edge by the passage of time. Food and drink have not passed his lips. His eyelids have never closed, yet they have seen nothing but an eternal abyss. He has forgotten what the touch of a human hand feels like, the comforting warmth of a fire on the hearth, or even the chill winds of a winter's day. The only voice he has heard is his own, screaming at the walls of the prison he created for himself.


Essentially, he was too cowardly to die when his time came. He trapped himself, body and soul, within an object, in order to escape death. Willingly the man went, believing his brothers would release him before his vessel in the void became permanent. But minutes soon turned to hours, hours to agonizing years. Eventually his mind simply withered away, replaced by madness, a crazed lust to escape this vile prison by any means possible. It consumed him entirely.  


So, it ties in with the story, that eventually the prison object was found, and he began to whisper his insane thoughts into the one who possessed it. Now we've got a second villain, held in thrall by what power the prisoner still holds, obsessed with freeing the captive spirit to the point that he would commit unspeakable, heinous crimes to accomplish it. The overall result is a story that is not just "kill the bad dude who is doing bad dude things", but now you have a sympathetic character, one that is but a shell of who he once was, a villain that you almost feel sorry for, and a villain you revile because before you know the full story, you see him as nothing more than a threat, a cruel and abhorrent man whose hands are stained with the blood of innocent people, and someone who must be stopped.


Something like that, still trying to work this out lol. Keep in mind my game is more of an old school cRPG style game, where the final conflict isn't necessarily about confronting some world-devouring evil, but rather a more local threat, one that could still spiral out of control and wind up becoming a threat on a greater scale. Similar to PoE or Baldur's Gate, the story involves a particular part of a much larger world, and plays a lot like a D&D campaign would. That is not to say the second villain(who is none other than the leader of a particularly devout theocratic city-state) is not a huge problem, but does he endanger the world? No. I think sometimes all a game needs is an enemy right there in the player's backyard, one that is still hell trying to get to and defeat, but one that is a tad bit more reasonable in his goals. World-destroying might be on his to-do list for later, since he does believe that the entity trapped within the artifact he's come into possession of is literally the trapped soul of his god and he's being ordered to free him, but for now it's all about being the best servant to his lord and master that he can be, even if that isn't actually the case. A little false prophecy, if you will. I've always wanted to do something like that, where there is a sort of prophetic element but it winds up being entirely fabricated to motivate a specific character. In this case, it's a bout of insanity mixed with downright lies that get this cleric moving on the warpath.

 

[LuLingqi1]

Ignoring the need for change (or at least definition and justifications for actions) results in a style of villain that quickly loses its worth and excitement and, seeing as the antagonist pushes the story forward, damages the overall desire in saving the world in the first place, which is troubling if you consider that there were others inspired by even the most overused villainous deeds who might in turn inspire another, each "generation" losing more and more worth as the cliché stagnates

I also disagree with this statement on the first type of villain. In fact, I kind of disagree with that ENTIRE section of a villain type. Everywhere else, you speak of backstories, and who/what the villain is and was. Yet somehow, Sepiroth, Kefka, and Exdeath are in this list, where as Skull kid is down below?


Fitting this archetype to a T, he starts as a child simply looking for friends but one day happens across a dreaded mask that ends up claiming his body as its shell to pursue its dark ambitions to bring about the destruction of Termina.


Canon wise, Skull Kid wasn't a child "simply looking for friends". He was a prankster who took delight in the already sometimes cruel pranks he was playing on people. He was a villain in his own right before putting on Majora and becoming further corrupted. And for the sake of it, why perhaps, couldn't Sepiroth fit into the Possessed Puppet archtype, albeit in an obscured light. Why couldn't he fit into Make Ends Meet? 


A villain is memorable by their actions as the villain, as well as the build up, and so on and so forth.


In every story and for every protagonist, there must be an antagonist. Whether this force that acts in the contrast of the "hero" is a physical being or simply a mental construct, conflict is what drives a story forward and what brings out true characterization. Now, I want for you to remember that word: characterization, as, in the case of RPGs, your antagonist is typically going to be some Big Bad Evil Guy (BBEG) whose sole desire in this world is to thumb his nose up at you. This thumbing action in most cases is to destroy everything you've ever loved without a second thought, but to leave it so black and white is to do the medium a disservice. Just as was the case with the original Gameboy games, there needs to be some gray thrown in to create a balance between absolutes and bring out the true value of a game. So here we go, the run down of typical villain archetypes and what you should consider when writing for them.


So, coming into this article, I expected something great. I honestly, was highly disappointed with this and find it to be a disservice to the medium of writing a villain. So here we are... And, well, I implore you to reread your post, and think about a few of your archetypes and said examples, because, I'unno, that entire first area could use some work. 


Your points on Anakin, Darth Vader, and Skull Kid, are somewhat valid, then lead me to ask you: Why didn't you include a separate archetype for the Emperor, or Majora? Where's an archetype for villains like Diablo who would actually fit more into your first archetype than any of the first three.


The Puppet Master. The real Villain. Hell, the Emperor would fit into a second archetype of The Double Agent. Where's that archetype? And then finally, how do any of the changes in background make them any different from   take over and/or destroy the world? Skull kid was going to destroy Termina... Which kind of counts as his world...


There's a lot of fallacies in this that I feel, would put other writers down. You're totally right, there should be some sort of back story to your villain, and it needs to be done right, but that's not the only process to your villain. Look at Albert Wesker. Fool didn't get much of a backstory till later on in the Resident Evil series, and he is super memorable because he was a double agent. And while not a villain, Ada Wong is another example of a character with no back story who is solely remembered due to her actions, and in a light that is far better than a grandiose amount of characters from her series.


PSA: When writing your villain, who they are/were/become matter. What also matters, is what they do.


Do you have a villain that's barely existant, akin to Diablo in Diablo 3? Is he a major part of the story, but not a major player till the final battle, so you fill your game up with countless other villains who all perhaps do things in the name of Diablo or because of Diablo?


Or do you have a villain like Sepiroth who your character has a past with, and who pops in to screw with your characters multiple times? Let's talk about Sepiroth for a moment as well, and the one thing he did, that many players remember, and still till this day mourn. He changed the game. He killed Aerith. And she was gone, for good. There wasn't an optional route, there wasn't multiple things you could do to avoid it. The villain killed a party member, and they were dead for good. Aside from coming back as a ghost like spirit thing, but that is irrelevant.


What is your villain going to do in the span of your game? Is he going to perhaps alter your main character forever via something akin to Darth Vader slicing off Luke's hand? Is the villain going to be someone who ends up actually molding your character, akin to Kreia, who turns out to be Darth Traya, and the "villain" of the game? Is the villain going to mercilessly kill a child infront of your characters, or something like that?


Interaction and action is key. You can have a grandiose set up to why your villain is the villain, with tales of love and loss, or sorrow and then possession, but that wont matter if your villain is lacklustre at actually being a villain.


For example, Majora is an evil mask that literally took control of a prankster and used the prankster as a vessel to destroy an alternate world. Skull Kid was a prankster who's pranks were getting more and more maniacal, who stole from an old man and became possessed by an evil mask, who then stole Link's Horse, and ocarina, left on of his only two friends behind, and then became fully corrupted to the point of summoning a MOON WITH A FACE, to smash into an alternate world.


Another Zelda example, Ganon and Zant. Ganon, like Majora, uses Zant as a pawn. Zant overthrows Hyrule, basically lays waste to everyone but Zelda, and just so on and so forth. 


Anyways, there's my piece on this. Maybe I got too passionate and came across as rude, but I'm just being honest. You shouldn't bring up the writing of a villain, and then only truly focus on what is essentially back story. Especially when most of your examples are of highly memorable villains, who did memorable things, as well as have back stories and set ups. Not to mention, a lot of your archetypes end up falling into the first set. Im done now lol, it's 4 am and I still don't think I've gotten my point across and this is becoming the ramblings of a lunatic, lol.

 

[Kes]

Having gone through several walls of text, I think that some clarification is called for here.


@Corfaisus Would you please summarize precisely what your point for discussion is - ideally in just a couple of short sentences.  At the moment there is so much there that anyone trying to dig for the nugget is going to have an incredibly long job on their hands.  It also feels as though what you have written is not for discussion, but maybe a writing tutorial?  I'm going by such remarks as 

Now, I want for you to remember that word: characterization

or

and what you should consider when writing for them.

 

[Corfaisus]

I wasn't certain where an article on game design would go on this forum/site. The purpose of this writing experiment was to inform the reader on what to consider when writing a villain and why it's important to give reasoning and characterization to their actions and their place in the world. It's easy to write a force of evil, but it's also easy to forget beings that are just that, and when you're sinking hundreds of hours into your dream project, you shouldn't settle for being forgettable.


That's the long short of it, really, with examples thrown in of successful examples of each archtype. It's more less a research paper or a thesis than anything.

Your points on Anakin, Darth Vader, and Skull Kid, are somewhat valid, then lead me to ask you: Why didn't you include a separate archetype for the Emperor, or Majora? Where's an archetype for villains like Diablo who would actually fit more into your first archetype than any of the first three.

This article is essentially a "My Top 10" of villains, in that it's not meant as an absolute say that draws from the entirety of the villains of the medium but ones that I've seen and feel are worthy examples of the archtypes I've covered. If you disagree, you're more than welcome to create your own list with examples, but that doesn't necessarily disqualify my own list.

 

[PsychicToaster]

@LuLingqi1


Diablo in Diablo 3 is a horrible example. That paint-by-numbers storyline was not even worth playing to its conclusion, and every demon lord in that game was a hilarious Saturday morning cartoon villain. Diablo in Diablo 2 is a far better example of a villain you know exists, but is just not quite within reach. You're always two steps behind him, and you witness the terror and destruction he causes as you try to catch up to him. I understand your passion in terms of villain writing, but pick something that isn't patently terrible. I know, it's all subjective, but the general consensus is that Diablo 3 was brimming with god awful, amateur writing and a blase storyline that just left the player feeling betrayed by Blizzard.


All things considered, I don't like writing from an archetype. I find it easier, personally, to let it flow naturally. To define the villain by his or her actions and personality, rather than a predetermined trope. While they'll all fit into an archetype somewhere, choosing one from the beginning of the writing process just limits your potential. Characters in general should never get squeezed into a box, and when there's no room left, some extra personality is jammed in before they're sealed up and shipped. 

 

[Kes]

@Corfaisus 

It's more less a research paper or a thesis than anything.

This is not the place for research papers or thesis.  This is a discussion board, as its title makes clear, and your approach does not facilitate real discussion imo.


Perhaps a blog would be better, as that can be more discursive.

 

[Corfaisus]

@Corfaisus 


This is not the place for research papers or thesis.  This is a discussion board, as its title makes clear, and your approach does not facilitate real discussion imo.


Perhaps a blog would be better, as that can be more discursive.

How do I start a blog? Is it a permission that's granted to me once I've posted X amount of times? And would I be allowed to resubmit it there after it's already taken root here?

 

[Kes]

At the moment I'm not sure what the situation on blogs is, and unfortunately I don't have time to find out as I'm leaving in an hour or so for several days.  Perhaps you could post a query in 'Site Feedback' asking there about having a blog.

 

[LuLingqi1]

@LuLingqi1


Diablo in Diablo 3 is a horrible example. That paint-by-numbers storyline was not even worth playing to its conclusion, and every demon lord in that game was a hilarious Saturday morning cartoon villain. Diablo in Diablo 2 is a far better example of a villain you know exists, but is just not quite within reach. You're always two steps behind him, and you witness the terror and destruction he causes as you try to catch up to him. 

I wouldn't know too much about D2, as I haven't had the money to buy it and I don't think I ever will get it. As for D3, I'm pleasantly content with the storyline. MIND YOU I am playing through it with a 5 year old and an eight year old, haha. xD My niece is a Demon Hunter, I'm a monk, and my nephew is a Wizard. D3 Diablo, versus what I assume to be D2 Diablo, would just be that D3, isn't that much of a villain, as he is, perhaps... An impending doom? He's more like Ganon in LoZ: TP, in a way. So far, if I had to be quite honest, it felt more like Leoric is the villain I'm going to be facing in the end. I know, it's only act one, but I think it's accurate to say this though cause like, my niece and nephew both asked after we killed Leoric - Expert level mind you on our first playthrough - and barely died, but all almost died like four  times "Tino, did we just beat the game?" It made me giggle. 

 

[LuLingqi1]

How do I start a blog? Is it a permission that's granted to me once I've posted X amount of times? And would I be allowed to resubmit it there after it's already taken root here?

I believe it's a premium feature that you pay for. I was going to start a blog on the site for my game, but I was told it would cost cash, haha. I don't have the funds for  that ;-;


Q.Q I MEANT TO EDIT THE ORIGINAL POST. THIS WAS NOT AN INTENTIONAL DOUBLE POST IM SORRY DONT GET MAD AT ME MODERATORS D: