VILLIANS: HOW DO YOU MAKE THEM UNIQUE?

author=Feldschlacht IV

Yes! Joshua Graham is absolutely one of the most awesome characters I can remember from a video game; his difficulty reconciling his Mormon faith with his current status as leader of the Dead Horses is fascinating. Even more fascinating is how in the past, this former missionary was one of the brutal Legates of the Legion, and how his tarring and being burned alive, was a baptism (as he describes it) and it made him 'born again' in a sense.

To see a character that is supposed to be so gentle, in an odd way, and is trying so hard to atone, but capable (in the past and very much the present) of incredible, deadly, unfettered brutality is mesmerizing. Even his voice feels like a man trying, trying, to maintain control and harmony. I even wonder if his bandages are a narrative symbol of trying to keep himself 'under wraps'.

I also liked the way he was introduced to the player through tales and rumours as a sort of quasi-mythical figure before you meet him in person. He seems deathless, but you learn his survival is due to an indefatigable rage that, as you say, still very much influences how he acts in spite of his wanting to bring some humanity to the world. He has witnessed, committed, and experienced some of the worst the world has to offer.

As for FF VII, I have always found Jenova - an inarticulate, predatory alien - to be quite creepy. Sephiroth then, being the erudite bastard that he is, is how meaning is brought to Jenova's existence and actions. He attributes godhood to her, rather than her actually being a god.

A more recent villain that made a huge impression on me: DA Inquisition's

It was kind of a 'thing' in fantasy for a long time for the world to be an idyllic perfectopia and the villain simply be an elemental force of nature out to ruin it. I'm glad that over time there's been some attempt for villains to be more sophisticated or relatable.

Villains rarely think of themselves as a villain. They're usually fighting for or trying to accomplish something that they believe in, and with a good villain you can see where they're coming from even if you don't agree with it. The world is a complex place. Maybe you thought it was perfectopia but it actually wasn't and the world seriously wronged the villain or those close to him and now he wants revenge or for things to change. Particularly self-aware villains might have realized they're acting in monstrous ways and may feel guilt but push on because they feel their actions are necessary. Maybe the villain arose out of the worst of human instincts; anger, fear, mistrust, ignorance, paranoia. Maybe the villain and his followers think its everyone else who is wrong. The world isn't perfect but the heroes fight to protect it anyway.

Back when I used to review RM games by the busload there was a period where every other game I played had the same scene, where a villain with long hair would burn down a helpless peasant village while yelling 'Yes! Burn! Burn!" Villains who are just in it for the evulz can be fun and are quite effective when done right (Luca Blight, Kefka, etc.) but you have to be really careful when doing this kind of villain because it can come off as hammy or passe really fast.

It's almost as though there's not one single "memorable" villain type, and it depends on the story and the audience!

In the hopes of having some discussion other than a slapfight over “Which Antagonist is Best Antagonist?*”, I'll do an effortpost about different forms of the character type.

Most broadly, the question is one about conflict- the whole “man vs. man,” “man vs. nature,” “man vs. self” setup. (Sometimes also included in the listing of antagonists are “society,” “machine,” “the supernatural,” and “God,” though I'd personally lump those last three in with “nature” or “man,” depending on the story.)

When speaking about traditional RPGs, most of the time your conflict will have to come down to “man vs. man” by necessity of the gameplay: gotta have that Last Boss! (It's possible to take a different approach here, but it requires a lot of tweaking things, and in the end might not really act like an RPG anymore.)

As I said before, the form your antagonist takes will depend a lot on the scope and theme of your game: something that works super well in a traditional heroic fantasy is going to be super weird in a smaller-stakes “normal life” game, and vice versa. Also (and this will be sacrilege to some people) sometimes, your villain's motive doesn't matter so much- the motive is the “why” of things, and in certain settings, you just don't need a why.

The important question with a game villain is “How do I stop them?” 99% of the time, of course, the answer boils down to “Hit them until they stop moving.” So, for a good game villain, you want to make someone the player is cool with beating senseless. This can range from “They're basically animated garbage and it is a personal pleasure to turn them into a smear on the ground,” to “I don't really WANT to, but all other methods have failed, so I guess death/traction it is!”

For this reason, an important thing about your antagonist is what they want, and how they're going about making that happen. This is often what people actually mean when they're complaining about “just evil” or “just crazy” villains: The villain doesn't seem to have any clear goal or priority in their behavior. Since the antagonist is usually the source of conflict, and the conflict the source of the narrative, a villain without an apparent goal often makes the narrative seem disorganized and flimsy. (Note that this doesn't mean the goal needs to be clear during gameplay; as long as the player can glean an idea of what their deal was by the end, it's all good.)

The other important thing- which goes hand-in-hand with the last paragraph- is how they relate to the protag. If the player doesn't get the feeling that the struggle is somehow important to the protag, they're likely to stop caring, too. Why does this character, out of all the things the protag fights, matter to the protag?

SO! That out of the way, here's a list of a few villain types:

the Force of Nature
This isn't usually a villain as much of an antagonist, just because it does not care about the protag at all. The protag registers only as another barrier to its goal. It can't be reasoned with, it doesn't care to converse much/at all, it's just going to do its thing and not stop until it's done.

Along with stopping the catastrophic goal, the conflict here is often one of “I matter,” or, more broadly, “People matter.” The protag is stubbornly asserting their hopes and wishes against an uncaring foe, solely with the belief that their existence counts.

the Complete Asshole
This character does care about the protag, inasmuch as they want them to suffer for some reason. They're happy to talk, but won't change because FUCK YOU, THAT'S WHY. They know they're doing something the protag doesn't like, and they're happy about it. Maybe they have it out for the protag in specific, or maybe they're just unrepentantly sadistic. Either way, there's no empathizing here.

This is a popular and fun character to write, but it's easy to do them badly; as stated earlier, even spiteful sadists have priorities, and won't take just any old opportunity to be evil. They should always be written with their goal(s) in mind.

The conflict here is clear: “Stop the Asshole, or else the suffering will continue.” No inner struggles required. Simple, light, and often satisfying when you curb stomp that smug face.

the Dark Reflection
This one's been fairly popular of late: a villain whose goals or motives are heroic, but whose methods are less so. Often tragic, usually sympathetic, they're generally not too happy that they have to hurt anyone, but whatever their goal is, it's too big and important to set aside.

This character can require a lot of work, since you need to balance “could have been heroic” with “required to do terrible things.” If you mess this up, the character just looks self-absorbed or stupid for missing something obvious.

Done well, this antagonist is a great foil for the protag, functioning as a warning to question themself and their actions. (Which is another caveat for this type- if you're using this villain to show “killing people is bad” then you have to make sure NONE of the cannon fodder the protag fights are people, for example.)


So that's the basic framework of villains; all the rest is simply adding aesthetic elements.


*The answer is always “Whichever one left an impression on the individual,” which has to do with factors you can't possibly control, such as “This was the first story I saw as a kid that had a complex antagonist,” or “I really like this style of antagonist,” or “I really hate whatever is popular right now, so ANYTHING BUT THAT!” Which is why the question is fairly useless from a creator's standpoint.

If you think that's enough of a reason to qualify as "a reason" then I wonder what is even the point of telling people to make sure their villains have a reason for their actions. I can't think of a single example, or even imagine a theoretical one, where the villain's actions have any less purpose than that.

Edit: Other than, like, comedy games where the villain refers to himself as a villain.

No villain at all!
I like forces of nature and games without a clear antagonist. It gets to be more about protagonist, relations and revelations within the party. Ultima VI made the player an accidental villain. There is so many interesting ways to work around classic schemes of an evil dude. It's not necessary and game's focus is not on the villain in 90% of cases.

author=LockeZ
Edit: Other than, like, comedy games where the villain refers to himself as a villain.

author=Liberty
As a writer you have to know that reason even if the player never knows it . . . If you don't know, if they don't have one, then they come off as shallow and empty shells. There's a huge difference between the player not knowing the reason and there not being one 'just cos'. You can feel the difference between the two.

Doc Rocket, if you take nothing else from this topic, please take this. And the big effortpost I made :V

Seems like I got you guys talking, mission accomplished.

And yeah, even though the villains I listed have "reasons", that's not the reason why they are great villains.

(FFVI, FFVII, Star Ocean 2, Valkyrie Profile spoiler warnings.)

Kekfa is great because he just makes it so blatantly obvious that he really doesn't care about innocent people dying. Or maybe he just really enjoys killing. He really just seems like a side character for a while but then suddenly he manages to become super powerful so he can make everyone suffer. And you kind of admire him that he went through with his pure evil personality up to the point where is almost a god.

Sephiroth isn't great because of the mother/father issues. Nobody even cares about that (well, I don't). He is great because he leaves a trail of blood behind him very early on already and feels like the "super scary being that could just kill you in a second, hope I don't make him my enemy" over the whole adventure. And then he summons a meteor that is about to destroy the whole planet and you are like "Welp, guess we have to kill this omnipotent being after all!"
Fighting him at the end makes you so scared of dying.

Cyril is great because he isn't just another side boss, but also goes all like "Now I just have to kill the final boss and then I can destroy everyone all by myself!" and he has very cool battle quotes too like "Well, guess I buy a one-way ticket to hell for your lives.", "What's wrong? Weren't you coming to get me?", "I hope you let me enjoy it some more." and "Try a little harder, before you die."
Not to mention he's the only boss than can render himself completely invincible if he just wants to.

Lezard Valeth is great because his determination is so great, that he accomplished even surviving Ragnarok and becoming an actual god, just so he can date one!

All these villains weren't great because they had a good reasons or a lot of background story to them, they were great because of the way they are shown to the player and due to their unique personalities.

But in any case, my main point was that good reasons are not what make villains great. That doesn't mean there aren't great villains with reasons, though. It just means they were great out of other reasons.