Writing Tips and Reviews

Writing Villains

Villains nowadays are more complicated and have interesting aspects to them. So what's the worst type of villain? One that's uninteresting and feels disappointing.

Having a villain be mysterious throughout their time in the story isn't bad, it's only bad when the delivery of their final development is worth less than the mystery the writer built up.

Despite belief, characters can still develop even after they're dead, side stories and documents of who they were continue to build who they were as a person. Many characters have this, a character who was hated by another can become loved after realizing true motives.

Think of Lelouch vi Britannia from Code Geass. During and after his death are the moment when his development end. Many of the characters figure out what he was aiming for and forgave him, he became a man hated by the world so that it could move on after he died. The aftermath of his death is where his development ends, not when he died. Villains can become loved and turn into an anti hero when the characters learn their true motive or learn how they became that way.

So, what counts as a disappointment? I'd say, it's when a villain is built up and turns out to be nothing. Stories and such can say whatever, but if the delivery comes off as pathetic, the tension is weakened and the character becomes a joke. Unless this is intentional, it's bad writing. A villain can say things like they're going kill another character or that they've destroyed worlds, but if they have nothing to back up their claims, such as even trying to fight the character, their words become empty.

This is a problem in many role plays and with the dark edgy Mary Sue types. They have a big talk, but when it comes to actually doing it, they're cowards or can't live up to expectations. Words don't mean anything if there's no action behind it, that's obvious, so if a villain constantly brags about themselves and is shown to be nothing, they don't remain a threat, they become a joke.

However, this can be worked with. A villain who's name has been distorted by the people while, in reality, being a normal person, isn't the same as having the character brag about themselves and turn out to be a joke. Dhaos from Tales of Phantasia faces this problem. He was called the demon king for so long and for what? All he wanted was to save his world. Look at Lelouch, his actions, accident or not, made the world see him as a villain, so he became one. He became the monster the world saw him as. 

Who someone is in reality can change the perspective of the characters and readers. If they're meant to have this change, if it's meant to be part of their development, it's executed well. They're not a disappointment because their development makes sense. It's not a dark edgy Mary Sue bragging about how they love to kill people and have burned down three cities but is later revealed they can't even hold a gun. If the character development was that they were keeping up an image, I'd have no problems. But it's not that. It's being dark and edgy for the sake of being dark and edgy. And that's not good.

Villains bragging about how they're immortal and invincible so can't be hurt, then brag about how they've stabbed and shot themselves a hundred times a days and how they're going kill the other character, becomes tedious and boring. They're not good, they're pathetic and on a writing stand point, not a real character, only the power fantasy of a kid who can't write. Again, words mean nothing when nothing back them up. You can keep up the "I'm going to kill you," but if you sit there for three hours only bragging about it and sucking on your thumb, I'm not going take you seriously.

It's a major disappointment to see a villain be built up to be a massive threat only to be a whiny little kid who cries and complains when the world doesn't revolve around them. Villains who throw tantrums like they're two years old and is just a little brat isn't a good villain, it's a whiny little kid. You can't build up a character to have the same feel as a demon king, just to show that they're a whiny little kid who doesn't deserve the title. Add on the inability to have this make any sense and you've got a disappointment of a villain. A baby sucking on their thumb is not a villain in the slightest.

I believe any idea can work. A villain built up then shown to be just a kid can be worked with. But if you put no effort into working with the execution, you get a joke of a villain that's not even worth being defeated. Villains that pose a threat shouldn't be revealed to be some kid with a big mouth. There is no threat with nothing to back it up. "Villains" like that can look scary at first, then get laughed at after seeing how pathetic they are. Unless they do something, they're not a villain.

Don't call a character a villain if they're too incompetent to be anything but a whiny entitled child who doesn't deserve to be called anything less than a side character.  Characters should not be feared of who they are is a joke. You can write a character to be feared, but if all they have is a plastic knife in their hand, then you've failed, especially if they're only going to stand there and brag about how they're the most amazing thing to ever exist.

Real villains have a presence. Salem from RWBY is a good example. Her design, her behavior, her motivation, her backstory, all make her who she is and make her a good villain. She's not some whiny kid who wants to destroy the world because her sister said something mean to her.

Mithos from Tales of Symphonia, he's an example of a child who is a good villain. He cares for his kind and wants to see a world where racism is the thing of the past. He feels betrayed when his former allies turn on him. He becomes infuriated when the world he wants to change refuses to change. He's a threat. But not just that, he's a little brother, he's a friend, he's a character who will do anything to accomplish his goals.

Villains have motives, they have a backstory that compels them to fight, they have something they want, if they are a child, they're more than a child character. They're not whiny and brag about themselves. If they do, they have traits that balance that so they don't become annoying.

Characters in general should not only have one trait that defines them. I hate characters where the only feature the have is that they're gay, or, they're not white. America stop, you're ruining good writing. Things like these can be incorporated, but a character should not be defined as that one trait.

A villain should not be a dark edgy Mary Sue who brags about themselves instead of, well I don't know, being a threat, being a real character, or, doing something that makes the people see them as a villain. Remember Salem? She wasn't even considered a villain, timeline wise, until she and Oz had their falling out, she wanted to stay hidden from the world. If a character is isolated and does nothing to the outside world, they can't be considered anything until they step out and do something. 

Salem was called a witch, but, she's the first person to live out in the forest with special abilities to be called a witch. That's just what happens, Harvest Moon Animal Parade, Vivi does the same and she's not a villain. She's actually really cute. A villain in this sense, would be if the witch made actions against the people.

Villains aren't boring, they aren't jokes, they aren't pathetic, they aren't a character readers will make fun of later or forget existed. This is what I try to avoid with the villains of my series. They aren't kids that are all talk no walk. Dark and edgy doesn't not immediately mean a villain. Anti heroes are the same way, you can't call a character an anti hero if they're just dark and edgy. They need to do something to earn that title.