Villains

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 52 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4486
    Kate Flournoy
    @kate-flournoy
      • Rank: Chosen One
      • Total Posts: 3976

      What do y’all think? What makes a villain great? I’m not looking for good— I’m looking for great. What do you like to see in a villain? Why do you like to see it? How can you take the villainly qualities you admire in the great villains of literature and apply them to your own work?
      What do you not like to see in a villain, and why? What is your favorite literary villain? What is your least favorite?

      Daeus
      @daeus
        • Rank: Chosen One
        • Total Posts: 4238

        I like the very refined villain. The one you could almost respect or honor. One with great self control, but internal fire. A man who’s morals conflict but who manages not to seem hypocritical by some unexplainable power.

        🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢

        #4499
        Kate Flournoy
        @kate-flournoy
          • Rank: Chosen One
          • Total Posts: 3976

          I’d have to agree. There’s something very specially human about those kinds of villains. It’s like you can almost relate to them— you can look at them, and you can see sometimes that they may at one time, at one point, have had a chance to be good men— and they could have done it, too, if they had only tried a little harder. Sometimes you are almost certain that they can come right in the end, and then you get your heart broken when they cannot break free of who they have become after all. Those are the villains I don’t forget, because you have an emotional attachment to them even if you hate them. You can’t help hoping deep down inside that they are not without hope themselves.
          Now on writing these villains, what are some of the ways we as writers can portray their humanity and their ‘honor’, yet still show beyond a doubt that they are evil and wicked? Because we undoubtedly have to be careful about writing a villain who is half good, half bad (to speak broadly). If we aren’t careful, our readers could get confused about what we are promoting and what we are condemning. It can be difficult— and this, I think, is where the rule ‘show, don’t tell’ is very strongly true.
          ‘(Hey, you over there! Psst! You! Reader! It’s me, the author, talking. I need to tell you something. This villain guy, the one with the impeccable sense of honor and the noble aspirations, is really pretty wicked. I’m just telling you so you know— because you can’t really see it, but you need to know that he is wicked so you don’t get confused. Trust me, this is one seriously evil guy. I’m telling you, and you better believe me, because I’m the author. I know.)’
          Excuse me? If the reader cannot see within the context of the story that the villain is evil, they won’t believe it even if the author constantly breaks in on the story and assures them that it is so. So what do you think?

          Daeus
          @daeus
            • Rank: Chosen One
            • Total Posts: 4238

            I think the major thing is to show that they are inconsistent. Even if they do appear almost honorable, it must be apparent that their morality comes from a false sense of justice which has come forth from their own imagination. There are at least two ways to do this. First, your villain could legitimately think that he is doing the best thing when he is not, or maybe he thought his original actions were justifiable and just didn’t reconsider when he grew more wicked. Secondly, he could truly disregard the law which haunts him in some areas, but hold to it in others. If so, he probably holds to the former ways he had been taught from mere habit, or a sympathy for those times. In either case, the villain was probably formed into the man he became by trauma and trial. Such are not the easy going type who find no problem being consistently evil. He has probably gone through some fire which has at once purified him and brought out his true inner nature.

            🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢

            #4510
            Kate Flournoy
            @kate-flournoy
              • Rank: Chosen One
              • Total Posts: 3976

              Good thoughts. What are some good ways to actually show this in the story, instead of giving it to your reader in so many words?
              Say we have a number one type villain— the one who thought his original actions were justifiable, and did not notice when he slipped farther and farther into evil. We could tell the reader that such was the case, but why not spice it up? Why not show the villain as a very young man, yet unsullied and untried, tempted into some ‘minor’ sin. Let’s be stereotypical for a moment, and say he fell into the wrong company and was persuaded to risk money that was not his in gambling. He only wanted to do it once— it wasn’t such a big deal. Maybe he even did it for the right reasons— maybe his mother was dying of a fatal illness, and there was not money for a doctor. Maybe his father is drowning in debt, and he wants to help him rise above that. And maybe he even wins this first gamble. Okay. That wasn’t so bad, was it? Now the next time he is in need of money, he will turn to that ‘easy’ method of procuring it again. And he will be less cautious in risking what is not his, because he won the first time. But this time he loses, and if he cannot get the money back he’ll end up in terrible trouble from those to whom the money he lost belonged. He must get it back at all costs— and it does cost more than he was ever willing to pay in the beginning. It costs him his name, his conscience, his honor, his honesty, his whole life as he had planned it. It leads into robbery and blackmail and maybe even murder.
              But it began so little— it was so harmless. And now it is too late. The deed is done, and you cannot undo the past. Perhaps you could break away from it, but our villain is too proud for that. He cannot bear the thought of coming humbly begging to be taken back into the fold and forgiven by those he wronged as if they were superior than he— more noble or virtuous. And so he always remembers and is tormented by the knowledge that had he only once not taken that path, he could have lived in honor and security. He could have been the hero of a story— but instead, because of his pride and his stubborn unwillingness to seek forgiveness, he becomes the villain. And he suffocates his conscience into either believing that he did right, or forgetting that he ever did wrong. Not that it does not still torment him— but he tells himself that he is in the right.
              What are your thoughts?

              Daeus
              @daeus
                • Rank: Chosen One
                • Total Posts: 4238

                What a large question. You had a good example of how we might show the decline of a man. The one thing missing though is what happened to him afterwards. We know what brought him to where he is, but we don’t really know where he is. Let us assume though that the conscience which plagued him led him to continue to uphold those noble causes which, wrongly pursued, had led him to destruction. He continues to fight for right (or at least what he thinks is right but is actually a hybrid of right and wrong) though through villainous means and with purely villainous excursions.

                Your method of showing his state will depend somewhat on how greatly you will delve into his past. You may want to writ a Les Mis and turn every minor character into major character who requires extensive chronicling, and this can be good, but there are limits to how much you can do this. You may have to show his past, his character, his struggles through short but highly revealing events. If you took the long route, it would be easy. You would show his inward struggles the way you would your main character’s. If you can’t spare so many chapters on his past, you will have to be more tricky. Events are usually the best way to fashion character and there is no exception here. Let us pursue an example. “Mr. Villain has been outlawed and resides in the ruins of the mountains with his fierce but loyal band of renegades. Along comes a reckless band of aristocrats in gilded carriages. When scouts report to this villain the apparent position of the travelers, his eyes light with ruthless fire. Down swarm the bandits. There is a sharp resistance by the gallant men of the party of whom all are speedily killed by the bandits. Springing into the carriages, the ruffians proceed to cary away all valuables and yank out the annoyingly resistant women, knives to their necks. The villain/captain upon seeing them, orders with unexpected fervor and ferocity that the women be let completely alone, that not even their jewelry be taken. Being fearful, the men obey. Booty taken and carriages flying away like deer in the chase, they proceed back to their mountain recesses. That night, in the captain’s private office chamber of the cave, one of the officers gives his report to the captain. After several minutes of discussion in which the officer notices the captain to be absorbed in his own thoughts, he broaches the question which has been deeply plaguing him on the cause for the captains order. With eyes of fire brighter than that behind him but a face which in all appeared solemn and cynical, the captain replies slowly,’I could not forget my sister. How could I?’ The last sentence seems wrathful and he clenches his fist. After a few moments the intruding officer feels his presence a sacrilege and eagerly retires.” Now then, this would only fill a chapter’s length but we learn a vast amount about the villain even thought there remains an air of mystery which is actually good. And not only that, but we included a fight scene! Dramatic situations are always good opportunities for defining character.

                🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢

                #4512
                Hannah C
                @hannah-c
                  • Rank: Knight in Shining Armor
                  • Total Posts: 362

                  What makes a villain great? I love this question. *rubs hand together*

                  Ok, when you think of a villain do you automatically think of the stereotypical villain covered in filth with a shifty glare and bad breath? Probably most do. I, however, think that truly great villains are the ones that act like everyone else. The ones you would never suspect. The ones that are charming and charismatic and are written so well that you fall in love with them and want to protest with the author that they made a mistake in who they picked as the “bad guy”. I like the villains that have just as winning a smile as any main character ever did. I like the villains that speak with a wistful touch of sadness when they think of their past. I want the villains that are so convincingly real and down to earth that you’re just as surprised as the main character is when they show their true colors.

                  That’s what makes great villains in my opinion.

                  HC

                  #4516
                  Kate Flournoy
                  @kate-flournoy
                    • Rank: Chosen One
                    • Total Posts: 3976

                    A band of trusty renegades! I would give anything for one of those at my beck and call. (Not). Haha!
                    For myself, I have to admit I like my villains to come in all different shapes and sizes and types. I don’t think I have a definitive favorite to either read about or write about— just so long as it is well written, and by that I mean is both realistic and villainly. I like super evil villains as well as Daeus’s conflicted villain and your charming villain, Hannah, because even super evil villains are not wholly and completely without good in them. A good rendition of such a villain will showcase that, even if you utterly hate the villain and hope with everything in you that he dies. One of my favorite literary villains is probably Chauvelin (SHOW-vlan, to use the French pronunciation, and SHAW-ve-lin to use the English) from ‘The Scarlet Pimpernel’. There you have a completely cold-blooded fanatic, blindly and utterly devoted to the Revolution (the French Revolution— historical fiction is the ‘Scarlet Pimpernel’. Oh no! Now I’m starting to speak in reversed sentences!) yet one who is so quiet and calm and in control— and killingly clever. He’s not showy or charming or conflicted— but wholly devoted to his cause, and you have to admire him for that, however grudgingly, and however much you detest the French Revolution.
                    You had a great mini-scene example of how we could show our conflicted villain’s backstory, Daeus. I had one suggestion, though— would he really have told his sub-captain about his sister? How about just ‘I could never forget her‘? I know, I know… I’m nitpicking. Just a quick thought.
                    Hannah, I like your idea of a charming villain. Really I do. The only thing I can think of to caution about for writing that kind of villain is you have to make sure that when he reveals his true colors, he does so in such a way that it is IMMEDIATELY apparent how evil he is, or the reader is going to be in denial because they were so charmed by him to begin with. They won’t want to believe that he is evil. So you need an extreme show of wickedness from him. Maybe have him tell a complete lie that he knows is a lie that ends up sending someone we care about to their death. (A minor character will work fine— so convenient for killing off, poor things). Anyway… my two cents.
                    And what do you guys think about the villain who isn’t really a villain himself, but has someone behind him, driving him on? Macbeth, anyone?

                    Hannah C
                    @hannah-c
                      • Rank: Knight in Shining Armor
                      • Total Posts: 362

                      True, I can see how making it immediately clear that he is evil would work, however, I also think that having your reader in denial is great too. Think of the bad people in the world today, think of the “villains”. Not always can you see past their charming and charismatic facade to the evil underneath. That is how people are deceived. I think that make a really convincing villain in books. A bit of denial is good for the reader.

                      As for making the lie immediately evident and killing off a minor character (love the way you put that lol) I think that is also a excellent plotline. I really love writing stories containing a lot of tragedy and treachery. Call me morbid if you like, you wouldn’t be the first. 😀

                      Both scenarios are very diverse. I guess it would just depend on the way you are writing the story.

                      HC

                      #4522
                      Kate Flournoy
                      @kate-flournoy
                        • Rank: Chosen One
                        • Total Posts: 3976

                        Good points.
                        Morbid?! My dear young lady, you sound like a girl after my own heart!

                        Oh and by the way, Daeus, I thought of a literary villain that fits your category of conflicted, I think. Captain Nemo, from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. Have you read it? He was my favorite character. I know, I’m not supposed to love the villain, but I pitied him so desperately in the end that I couldn’t help it. There was and is no doubt in my mind that he did very wrong things— but you have to wonder what his backstory was, and what drove him to do what he did. If you’ve read it, you’ll remember you never really find out why he was where he was, or why he went around sinking ships and killing thousands of people, except maybe a few vague references to some tragedy, or some terrible thing in his past that called for revenge.

                        Hannah C
                        @hannah-c
                          • Rank: Knight in Shining Armor
                          • Total Posts: 362

                          Why thank you.

                          As to that question you posed above and I forgot to answer in my last post, I would love to read a story with an unwilling villain. Think of the pity that would stir in the readers. Your audience would be able to sympathize with the villains that was seeing controlled by another, more evil, villain.
                          Just imagine a story that mixed the charismatic villain and the unwilling villain. It would be brilliant! Think of the possibilities! Say you took a story with a charismatic boyfriend and an unwilling girlfriend. Say the boyfriend charmingly makes the girlfriend cheat, steal, perhaps even murder, under the lable of “Do this and we can be together.” Its wonderful!

                          HC

                          #4541
                          Ezra Wilkinson
                          @ezra-wilkinson
                            • Rank: Loyal Sidekick
                            • Total Posts: 146

                            Oh, oh, I wrote something on this a while ago. It was all very cool, and so intelecjewel.

                            Because I’m lazy, and on vacation, and want a shower, I will content myself with just copying and pasting what I had written. Naturally, this will be inconvenient for you lot, as I had originally written this to be the first post of a topic I created myself, but I’m sure you’ll be able to decipher it. You’re smart people, right? (Even you Daniel.)

                            “The most important thing about a villain is that he fit your story. If he doesn’t, why bother with him? He’ll seem cheap, and not important. Recently, I watched “The Dark Knight” for the second time. The first time I had seen it, I had hated it (this was also before I was seriously writing). I found it psychotic, creepy, strange, and dark. This time…I loved it. Mainly because of the Joker. The Joker, to me, was the most perfect villain. He fit that story so perfectly…it’s amazing. Why? Well, one thing about the Joker is, he kills. A lot. And he doesn’t care about it. But an interesting thing to note is that he doesn’t do it for fun. There is not a single instance where he kills someone in a way that doesn’t advance his plan. This is very important, considering Batman’s one rule: He won’t kill anyone. He can’t. This presents a /very/ intense clash of ideals. There are multiple instances where the Joker taunts Batman, tells Batman to kill him. End the reign of terror. Because if Batman did that, the Joker would win. His ideal would come out on top. The whole movie presents the moral question about going against one’s beliefs for ‘the greater good’. The Joker is convinced that anyone will do it. His end game is to show the world that their heroes are no different than he is. He is the perfect counter-part to Batman.

                            Now, taking a slight change of direction, I’m going to talk about villain stereotypes. These are not just limited to the monologue a villain gives the hero, the villain hiring bad shots, etc…this is a whole kind of villain type, who is constantly used again and again in different stories, even where he doesn’t belong. The interesting thing about clichés is, they don’t have to be bad. A villain who gives a monologue for instance, can still be an amazing villain, /provided/ that the monologue fits his character. Unfortunately, this is not how most people see this kind of character. Let’s take a look at some pretty popular villains of today: Moriarty from BBC Sherlock. The Master from Doctor Who. Missy from Doctor Who. And Loki from multiple Marvel movies. All of these (with the possible exception of Loki, I will address him in a latter section) are highly similar villains…and, I believe, they shouldn’t be.

                            For one thing, all of these stories (Batman included) are /very/ different from each other. Different plots, different ideals, and different heroes. Let’s look at the Master first.

                            The Master (and at this point I will mention, I am only speaking of NuWho Master. Classic Who is very different) is a very interesting character. He is brilliant, psychotic, and the arch-nemesis of the Doctor. But…he isn’t. Here may be the situation where you disagree with me, which is all well and good, go ahead and do that, but at least listen to my reasoning…though you may find me wrong in this particular instance, you will probably still agree with my point. The Master for one thing treats death as though it is nothing. At face value, this seems like it would be a very good contrary ideal for the Doctor. The Doctor takes death very seriously. But it’s not as simple as that. The Doctor is not /against/ the idea of death, he is against what the Master stands for: the dominion of all. So in his senseless killing, the Master is introducing an ideal that isn’t really addressed. What does this do? It messes with our minds. The Master’s character loses much of its focus on being /better/ than the Doctor, and instead we are focused on his killing. Momentarily. Soon, we snap back to why the Doctor wants to stop his enemy. Where does this leave us? With a villain who is doing stuff for no reason. And not just, for no /personal/ reason, but for no reason to the story. So why should we care about what he’s doing?

                            Now, let’s look at Moriarty (this shall be shorter because I’ve not seen as much Sherlock, and I think you may be getting the idea.) From Season 1, I never really got the feel that Sherlock was against the concept of using whatever methods you want to win. Not the feel I got from the books either for that matter. Sherlock wants to win. He needs to defeat Moriarty’s plans. But Moriarty is actually pretty similar to the Master. He does things, crazy things, he acts insane, he probably is insane, he’s so wild and crazy…and all of this distracts from what the two are fighting over. And then the exact same thing happens. Instead of a villain whose /methods/ we abhor, and look down on, we have a villain whose methods we don’t really care about, who does things that just go right over our heads. Why should I care that he’s a psychopath? Oh, so many villains nowadays are like that, what’s one more? He’s the same as all the rest. Which makes him a cheap villain.

                            I mentioned near the end there that ‘so many villains nowadays are like that’. And I believe it’s true. You see, it’s not that complicated. People see these popular villains, and they think, “That’s cool, I’m going to do it!” (I mean, I’ve almost introduced my villain in my book, and I’m still going through a massive development stage because of this…) And they don’t really think about /why/ they want this villain (or so it seems to me.) You see, there is this swing, I’ve seen it talked about a lot, about avoiding the stereotypical villain…for instance, Sauron. The massive evil, who is not good in any respect, whom no one can relate to. There are two main problems with this kind of thinking: One, avoiding one stereotype like the plague is going to land you into another one. Two, what /kind/ of villain you have doesn’t matter, so long as he fits your story. Let’s take a brief look at Sauron.

                            Sauron is completely and utterly evil. Nothing at all good about him. Evil personified. Unrealistic right? Not so much. If we take a look at some of the ideals we find in Lord of the Rings, we see that it’s not at all unrealistic. What do the Hobbits represent? Peace, courage, freedom, and a perseverance. Could the idea of perfect perseverance be present in a tale that /didn’t/ also have a concept of complete and utter evil? No, I don’t think it could. The ideals that the Hobbits and Fellowship present hinge on the idea that the opposite of them is complete and utter ruin. Making Sauron the perfect villain for that tale.

                            And this is the point. Villains like the Master, and Moriarty…people like them, and try and put them in their own story, and that’s all well and good, do that! Provided that’s the kind of character your story needs. Why do you need a psychopathic killer? Couldn’t a different evil better reflect your hero’s ideal?

                            And now we come to the second thing I want to talk about (as if that wasn’t long enough.) The idea of a villain the reader can relate to. Once again, I shall take the Joker as my example:

                            One reason I loved the Joker is because I did, in a way, feel for him. When you hear his scar story, you understand his…difficulties. You see /why/ he is the way he is. And it forces you to ask yourself, “If I went through those experiences, would I be the same way?” we can understand his character. We can actually more than understand him…in a sense we have to agree with him. Humans…we are basically scum. We will /always/ do the evil thing. And so we understand the Joker’s goal, and he’s /realistic/ to that point. But in comes my favorite part about that: We still hate him. He is downright, without a doubt, the most evil and wicked person you could ever find. And this is shown to be the case (incidentally, this is another issue with the Master/Moriarty/Missy…their psychopathicness is rarely shown to be /evil/ so much as just strange.) And what does this concept of complete and utter evil leave us with? A desire for the story goal to be accomplished. You /want/ the Joker to be taken down. You want him lose, to fall so hard he’ll never get up again.

                            Here we come to another dangerous example: Loki. Looking at Loki’s character, what do we see? Greed, desire for power, murderous thoughts, very bad things. Looking at his external, what do we see? The same thing, /except/ a control to only exercise such things when it suits his need. Is this a good villain? Absolutely! So what’s his issue? His issue is the desire to make him…non-villainous. To make his circumstances excuse his actions. What results from this? Apathy. If your villain is someone whom the reader /wants to win/ well…what’s the point of the story anymore? Why should anyone care?

                            A villain represents what the hero is against. If the villain represents something good, or portrays something bad as something good, what point is the hero? What point do your ideals have in the first place? So, maybe people like him. All well and good. But should people then care? They’d be just as happy if the hero lost as if he won. Suspense in your story…gone! Fear? Gone! Your villain can be someone people relate to, yes, absolutely. But if he’s not against the hero in a very real way…of what point is he?

                            And now, finally, on to my final (and most minor) point. This is something that I do not really have examples for, but I’m sure most people will understand what I’m talking about: Villains who /only/ stand in the hero’s way, but actually aren’t bad people.

                            This one I would not say is as bad as my previous points, because it can be something that is done correctly. (I currently have a plot bunny for a story told three times over, each time from the perspective of a different one of the three main characters, and each character seeing one of the other main characters as the villain.) However, it /is/ bad, when the character is presented as being very evil, when actually he hasn’t /done/ anything, other than have cross purposes with the hero. This is quite irritating for obvious reasons. I can’t hate and detest someone whom hasn’t done anything wrong, no matter how much I’m told to.

                            And that’s about the long and short of it. Or more like just the long of it *surveys long post*. Thank you for your time, may your villains never kill you.”

                            #4545
                            Kate Flournoy
                            @kate-flournoy
                              • Rank: Chosen One
                              • Total Posts: 3976

                              A-men!
                              Wow! That was amazing. I haven’t seen any of the movies or villains you referenced, but all of your points were excellent—thought provoking. Very thought provoking.
                              Wow. You covered everything else I wanted to say. Thanks for writing my post for me! Now we’re out of a discussion. Ugh. I hope I’m wrong. I like this topic.

                              And I don’t think I’m in any danger of being killed by any of my villains, so long as I remember to carry a knife whenever I talk to them. They can be somewhat touchy.

                              Hannah C
                              @hannah-c
                                • Rank: Knight in Shining Armor
                                • Total Posts: 362

                                Wow that was very in-depth. You made a lot of good points, Ezra. However, I think it’s good to remember that not every villain has to look like a villain. Not every villain has to be so intrinsically evil that it is blatantly apparent. Not every villain has to go around burning down houses or selling poisoned candy to children. I think there are two ways to create the not-apparent-villain.

                                1) The Charismatic Villian
                                Yes I’m back on this one again by hear me out. The charismatic villain is the one who remains a smiling and maintains a honey-sweet voice through it all, maybe only showing and outburst of anger or frustration once or twice through the story. I think this adds to the creep factor, to the chills running up and down your spine. Imagine that there is only minutes to your death (you being the hero) and your arch-enemy–perhaps someone maybe you trusted completely at one point in time–is smiling and laughing at his own jokes that were made at your expense. He’s perfectly calm, not at all bothered that in a moment you will pass from this earth. How delicious!

                                2) The Un-Evil Villian
                                You referenced this villain already in a way. This is the villains tat isn’t actually evil but simply opposes whatever it is the protagonist is for. This could be as small as the competition for who wins the first price for best jam at the county fair or as large as a court case battling for a eleven course meal of prime rib! (See the Perfect Protagonist topic for an explanation of that last statement.)

                                Opinions? There Kate, I gave yo something to discuss. 😀 😉

                                HC

                                #4556
                                Kate Flournoy
                                @kate-flournoy
                                  • Rank: Chosen One
                                  • Total Posts: 3976

                                  Thanks!
                                  Okay, I’m back. I wanted to do a more in depth post after Ezra’s post, but I didn’t have time then, and now my computer is about to die, so bear with me if the poor thing kicks the bucket in the middle of this post.
                                  Actually, there was one villain whom you referenced, Ezra, that I am definitely familiar with and have studied in depth. As in depth as comfort and safety would allow, anyway.
                                  Sauron. He’s the dark lord stereotype. And you made a wonderful point about him— he was perfect for the story. To have changed him or made him human (which by the way he is not, nor ever was, if you’ve read the Silmarillion) would have been to sacrifice some of the lovely contrast with the Hobbit symbolism of peace and simplicity etc. So Sauron is perfect for his story. But since most of us aren’t writing about demons or evil demigods as our villains, I think we should strive for the best of both worlds. Yes, absolutely make sure he fits your story and what he does that is evil directly affects both your characters and your plot, but you also should try to make him human— so that your readers can relate to him in some fashion, however much they abhor him. Obviously, if you’re writing a fantasy and your villain is a demon (something you probably shouldn’t do unless you are going for the pure good vs. evil symbolism of it) you can’t make him human— because he’s not. But you see what I mean. At least I hope you do.
                                  Hannah, you’re non evil villain is probably what I would call a plain antagonist. Villain implies evil— cities razed to the ground, millions orphaned and widowed and made homeless, kings tortured and slain, whole lands laid bare and waste as a dragon’s desolation. *Cough* Sorry. I write fantasy, and tend to think on a drastic scale.
                                  I like filling my stories with both villains and antagonists.
                                  Which brings up another point— how many villains should you have in your story?
                                  What a ridiculous question Kate! But I’m glad you asked it, because I have an answer. Max? Ten or so.
                                  Ah… excuse me?
                                  Okay, only two or at the most three major villains— three is stretching it. But a lot of little threatening, spiked, armored, glaring under-villains will make your head cahounas look a lot more impressive and dangerous. Competent generals will improve any commander’s chance of winning— and you want your reader to be scared stiff that your villain(s) are going to win.

                                  *sighs, drops head in hands and shakes it sadly* I fear I am physically unable to write short posts. It must be some kind of disease.

                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
                                >