What is YOUR idea of true villainy?

Hey guys, I'm working on a couple of different arcs in the Architect and I'm having a hard time figuring out just what it is that makes the average player feel truly villainous. So, I'm asking you guys.

What makes you feel like a villain? Is it puppy-kicking? Bank-robbing? Kidnapping wizards' children to use as leverage in some sinister plot? Where do you draw the line at being villainous and being an abomination? In essence, what kind of story would I have to write to make you, the player, feel dirty just for participating in it? Any examples you have would be welcome.

The Resistance Crusader arcs do a pretty good job of that. Another example would a rival MMO company's take on villainous content. From setting KO'ed cops on fire, stealing souls to power something evil, or mutating college kids into parasitic creatures... that's all dastardly stuff that made me feel really incredibly comic booky evil.

Mothers-in-law.

and

Anything that doesn't involve Co-Operative (Hero and Villain tea time) and also does not involve playing lackey to a signature character or some 2-bit punk (Hardcase, I'm looking at you).

Westin Phipps is a villain, Themari is a villain, the contact that has you round up people to hand over to the vahzilok is a villain. Working for them as a lackey, maybe not so much.

But yeah, poisoning food so children go blind. Destroying books for people in recovery or a half-way house. Feeding humans to zombies. Passing people over to the Devouring Earth to be devoured. That's wicked wicked stuff.

Any of the loyalist content, really - it's got all the classic villain acts of mass-murder, brain-washing, slavery, torture and repression, all wrapped up in a neat "lol-they're-Nazis-but-shhh" package

Yeah, Westin Phipps is a great inspiration to making a truly evil arc. Themari's are also good. Not to mention many of the tip and morality missions. Especially one I mentioned on another thread called "Rich People are Dumb" Considering 'Devs hate Villains,' they do actually get really good content.

Even when the hero wins, he still loses.

My favorite instances of villainy in media is where the villain in the story is convinced that what he is doing is good... when his goal is to save the world, but in the process needs to enslave it, or kill almost everyone, or blow up a city or something. I like villains who have morals so twisted that they can't see their own evil. They actually take one look at the hero of the story and go: "You are an idiot for opposing me, you are dooming the civilization you hope to save with these actions" and mean it.

I think of Ozymandias as a good candidate for this... but I am certain there are others.

However, that doesn't really answer the question posed in the OP, because you are asking about what one considers to be truly disgusting, what makes you feel dirty just having participated as a player character. For that, I would have to say that talk of the 'turning folks over to the Vahzilok' mission is a good example. Also, any villain who requires large amounts of unwilling (extra points if they don't even have knowledge of the circumstances they are in) sacrifices or other use of innocents to gain power to play into the first part of this post. Say a character who has created a device that will decimate a large area of all life, and harness the expelled souls into himself so that he can be immortal, and thus live long enough to rule the world with an iron fist to protect it from itself. The idea that each life will continue to live on and/or be tortured within him as long as he lives is another area for bonus points. More bonus points if the killing of that villain will eradicate the souls within him... even more bonus evil points if there is a visual of the souls that are living inside him (say a face that swims up to the surface of his skin now and again and groans in agony or calls out to loved ones). Wow, I just got a chill. Oh, bonus points if you illicit a chill in people viewing/participating.

While I don't know how in line this will be with what you meant, I've found I always preferred when the villain is JUST reasonable enough that you can understand WHY they did what they did. That makes it even scarier to me, because it can bring you to the realization that you could well be one event (or series of events) away from turning into a monster yourself.

It makes for better characters when you can identify with them, but still see that they've crossed the line (even if where that line is may be a very murky, grey area) and hold them accountable for the wicked, horrible things they have done.

I guess to try and relate that better with the topic, I'd have to put it as "I don't like playing the mindless rampaging destroyer, or the evil-for-evil's-sake mustache twirling schemer.

If I'm going to be evil I want it to be for realistic reasons involving agonizingly difficult choices where I either pick the lesser of two evils, or believe that what I'm doing is on some level morally, ethically, or socially acceptable/required.

I want to play as the man who, faced with the utter destruction of my people, makes a deal with the devil and commits unspeakable acts to save them.

I want to be the one person who sees the real threat to the world and takes whatever measures I deem necessary to end it, regardless of how brutal or criminal those actions may be.

In short, I want to be the villain who DOESN'T see himself as the villain.

(EDIT: ) ^What Mr. 3-7 said.

@Oathbound & @Oathbound Too

One of the best examples of villainy that I can think of is Gary Oldman's character Carnegie in The Book of Eli. He is malicious, greedy, obsessive, and power hungry. He has one of the best villain lines I have heard.

***SPOILERS***

After he has shot the main character Eli in the stomach and taken his bible from him he leans down and asks Eli to "Pray for me."

A sure fire way to make the player feel like an absolute b*****d is have them do something that puts children in harms way, or better yet corrupts them beyond all recognition.

The Torchwood: Children of Earth finale (and indeed the whole series) is a good example.

Scroll for spoiler...                                                                                                                                                                                                       The protagonist Jack Harkness kills his own grandson in order to repel the aliens who used children as narcotics.

----- Union's finest underachiever -----
Farewell CITY of HEROES
The First, the Last, the One.
Union: @ominousvoice2059

kids, the elderly, the infirm and pets are a good start, basically anything that is callously cruel to the helpless as well as evil, that loosens up my heroes from "superman" to "Saw". also betrayal and manipulation. the "best" evils i have seen have been by those who have gotten people to trust them and then set them up to be harmed for their benefit. pretty much my definition of a villain.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

I would tell you to play any of my villainous AE arcs (Search for @FredrikSvanberg), but the AE is currently in a state of buggery (lol) which can cause any or all of my arcs to be unplayable. I recommend "Diamonds Are A Girl's Best Friend" as a villainous arc where the character isn't a flunky, does evil and comes out on top.

On and then there's the arc in my signature which seemed to be popular.

I have to go with the 'manipulation' bit for true evil. You can't be an insidious mastermind if you don't have someone you can trick into doing your evil plans for you Emperor Palpatine style.

Something which is more insane than villainous but still ranks high up in the Big Book 'o Evil IMO is, as someone mentioned, someone being a villain when in their mind they're doing the right thing. I'd say this is improved when said villain goes entirely off the deep end and, suddenly it's not about conquering the world to save it from itself, it's about destroying humanity because you see them as parasites and that wiping them out would be for the best.

There's villainy, which is basically what everyone said, and then there's supervillainy. The difference is performance. I enjoy the latter a lot more.

I personally find that the puppy-kicking kind of evil as expressed by Westin Phipps and Peter Thermai is tasteless and unpleasant. It may be good for an episode of Law & Order: Criminal Intent, but it's not the sort of thing I would want to be associated with, even when we're talking about my villains. Never forget that you have to strike a balance between what constitutes villainy and what people will actually play, speaking of those who don't get off on being evil, at least. To me, this balance is best struck in two ways:

1. Concentrate on the glamorous side of villain - the super science, the amazing power, the impossible achievements, the constant ability to outsmart, outmanoeuvre and downright overpower everyone else. A "cool" villain is one that cannot be stopped, cannot be tricked and who, when he gets serious, can clean house bit time. It's the villain who manages to get what he wants DESPITE all his enemies and all his allies trying to stop them, and who does it in a way that makes it look easy. Evil with class and dignity, as it were.

2. Present a reasonable villain. Hyena-cackling morons who want to eat babies and rip the heads off pretty girls because the voices in their head tell them so are boring. Give me a villain who feels the world is weak and it NEEDS a strong leader, or one who feels that the fight against evil justifies all casualties or, hell, even one who feels that free will is an abomination because it makes order impossible and then we'll talk. As long as the villain has a reason to be evil that I could look at and say: "Well, that's insane, but I can see the logic." Then that's a villain I want to play as.

In general, when making villain content, make sure you make content that people WANT TO PLAY, not content that repulses people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Villainy isn't about what you do, it's how you do it. Stealing something could be villainous, or could be...let's call it "Rogue," since that's what the tip missions call it. But whereas a rogue would show up in a ski mask and tie up the guards, a villain would just shoot them in cold blood, because it's more expedient, and because they don't matter. It's the "what I want is more important than anything" mindset that makes for a good villain.

Now granted, I despise Westin Phipps and I never do his arcs. Being a jerk for the sake of it doesn't make you a good villain, it just makes you a jumped-up schoolyard bully. Now if there was an actual reason to poison those kids and destroy those charitable supplies, other than the flimsy excuse we're given, a good villain wouldn't blink. But doing it "for teh evuls?" No thanks. I dislike a lot of the villain tip missions for the same reason. Most of them have us trashing a bunch of stuff and coming away with nothing, while the Rogue options have us coming away with a pile of loot and a bunch of people owing us.

While many, even the devs, seem to concentrate on sadism or the enjoyment of causing suffering as a qualifier for villainy, that's actually a very rare motivation for those we call 'villains.' Look at the worst dictators and war criminals in real life, they hardly ever do bad things just to hurt people.

The heart of villainy in my mind is a combination of psychopathy, selfishness, and proactivity. They are highly motivated to achieve their own goals, and could care less if someone else has some "nonsense" rules forbidding them from taking a certain route to that goal. If others are hurt in the process, it doesn't really matter, so long as the goal is reached.

Most villains don't hurt the little guy because they're bad people, they hurt the little guy because they don't care. Supervillainy is all about the character having the means to do what they want, and using their power/wits to obtain it. Social boundaries and laws may be considered, but only as far as they can be manipulated towards achieving the end goal. If they become a hindrance they are ignored.

While heroes are driven by a sense of justice, morality, and social responsibility, villains are the opposite. Not because they want the opposite of those, but because they really could care less about any of them. This is where the difference between well written and badly written villains shows up.

Nobody wakes up saying:
"What things can I do today that my social structure frowns upon, thus labeling them as evil? Muah-ha-ha!"

It's more like:
"There's an army and five puppies between me and the ice cream shop. I want ice cream. The army wants to stop me. I have a bomb that can wipe out the army, allowing me to get all the ice cream I want, but it will hit the puppies too." *detonates bomb*