How do you like your villains?

[understatement]

(I finished my reread of OOTS, so)

Especially since the comic is nearing its final arcs, I thought I'd ask how people rank the villains. One of the reasons I really enjoy this story is because how well-rounded both the heroes and villains are -- the Order itself is tight-knit and each of its members fully fleshed out, and the villains encompass a wide range of personalities and motives.

IMO,

Xykon -- I think what makes him really menacing is that he doesn't do the "hands-off Evil Overlord thing"; when something threatens him he's completely willing to take it head-on without any mercy, and the fact that he's an utter psychopath makes him genuinely creepy. He's easily hateable and interesting, and I want him to show up on screen as much as possible before he gets killed like the monster he is.

Redcloak -- I'd say he's a less unique character than Xykon (with the whole troubled past and evil for a good cause) but it also makes him more emotionally compelling. He'd serve as a great Big Bad for any other story. I enjoy where his arc's leading him -- mainly, more ruthless and more evil -- while still keeping him fast on his mental feet, and there's so many questions on what he's going to do next.

High Priest of Hel -- I don't exactly like him, but he's so deliciously nasty and petty while wearing the form of one of the most Good characters that it becomes pretty jarring to read him. In any case, seeing him go was awesome, but reading him at full manipulative level (taunting Roy over Eric) was the cherry on top. Also, it's the only time I've seen a fight between a bald human and a vampire dwarf taken seriously.

Malack -- I really like how civil and sincere he can be while sucking someone's blood out and talking about human harvesting. Gives me the right amount of chills.

Laurin (and Miron, by extension) -- Their time was short but memorable in the comic. Miron's laid-back attitude was fun to read. Laurin's use of her powers, plus her dedication to her daughter, was great.

ABD -- her time was also brief, but exceedingly creepy.

==

The Linear Guild (mainly Nale, Sabine): Your typical minibosses. It was definitely hard to watch Nale die, mainly because of how Elan reacted, and his over-the-top plans were fun to read. Thog has great lines and that's all I can say about him. Since Sabine will be making a future appearance, I'm excited to see how she and the IFFC are going to play out.

Tarquin. I know he's cool, and very much a unique character (servicing for the actual story), but I can't really jibe with how he treats pretty 'human' crimes (slavery, burning people alive, forced marriages, killing his own son) with so casual of an attitude. It gets uncomfortable to read. His evil empire speech was amazing, though, and he was a formidable villain while he lasted.

The IFFC -- they haven't appeared too much. Looking forward to what they have up their sleeves.

Hel -- Why Xykon works but she doesn't: the "hands-off" approach ensures we'll never get to see her act directly against the protagonists, because there's too much of a power difference. She does have a great evil-gloating speech.

Thog -- Same reasons as Tarquin.

Qarr -- he's laughably lame.

Bozzok/Crystal -- They're not especially witty, creepy, or smart like any of the other villains above.

GDGU:

Gin-Jun -- His justifications and him attacking Zhou was horrible (in a good narrative sense, I mean). Coincidentally, I liked this variation of Miko the most.


Kubota -- He's just...there? The way he gets killed was probably his high point.

Tsukiko -- I found her interesting on strip 830.

tldr: Xykon -> Redcloak -> HPoH -> Malack -> Laurin (along with Miron) -> ABD -> Nale -> Sabine -> Tarquin -> IFFC -> Hel -> Thog -> Qarr -> Bozzok -> Crystal -> GDGU -> Kubota -> Tsukiko.

I left out not-Good allies (Belkar, Hilgya) and heroic-ish antagonists (Miko) for simplicity.

[a_flemish_guy]

what's interesting to me about xykon is that while he's completely ruthless to his underlings he also understands what their strengths are compared to him, I can count at least 2 ocassions where he disagreed with redcloack's plans but went ahead with it anyway

he also has a complete lack of scrupules, winning is winning, the methods used are completely irrelevant, he's as likely to choke you as to meteor shower you or have his minions kill you, it's all the same to him

[Celias]

Wait who is ABD?

[Peelee]

Wait who is ABD?

Adult Black Dragon (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0626.html).

[HorizonWalker]

Adult Black Dragon (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0626.html).

Ancient Black Dragon.

Pedantic, yes, but what else are we here for?

[Peelee]

Ancient Black Dragon.

Pedantic, yes, but what else are we here for?

I'd have used the word "correct" in place of "pedantic", really. :smallwink:

[Schroeswald]

I like my villains well-written, and in comedies I like them funny.

[littlebum2002]

I prefer my villains over-easy.

EDIT: Seriously, though, I base my villians mainly on their motives. Sure Xykon is a pretty badass villian, but taking over the world is a pretty boring motive. Redcloak, on the other hand, wants to destroy the status quo to restore balance to the world. He kinda reminds me of Thanos in that regard, and that is my kind of villain. I want someone you secretly root for despite their villainy.

Other than Redcloak, I loved Therkla, Laurin (adventuring so her plumber daughter can have a nice life) and Hel (as Loki put it, she's turning cosmic lemons into divine lemonade).

I'm a little bored by Miko, Kubota, Tarquin and the Linear Guild.

[Fyraltari]

I really enjoyed the dynamic between Durkon*, Durkon and Roy.

The best fights are always the ones that have emotional weight behind them and by and large the vilains and the heroes don't have that much of a connection, Xykon can barely remembers the Order and Roy wants to beat him because A) daddy issues and B) impersonnal end_of-the-world stuff. Redcloak only sees the Order as one group who opposes him among many and the ORder mostly see him as Xykon or the dark One's henchman. The Linear Guild never really hurt the Order and never felt sorry for their own dead. Now, Tarquin and Elan that had weight behind it. And so did the Utterly Dwarfed main arc: Roy had to come to terms with the death of his best friend and fight the monster who defiled his memory, Durkon had to face the parts of psyche and lifes he didn't want to and Durkon* was trying to justify his own existence/cynical outlookover Durkon's own. Good stuff all around.

[Squire Doodad]

More responding to the title and not the thread but:

I like my villains medium well, with barbecue sauce and a side of fries. :smallbiggrin:

[KorvinStarmast]

I like my villains with fava beans and a nice Chianti. When I was young, the villain in Peter Pan was Captain Hook and his doom was to one day be eaten by a large gator or croc.

I'd like to see Xykon eaten by the Snarl.

Xykon is, as big bads go, and as psycho evil villains goes, sufficiently bad and has no redeeming qualities. SoD makes him even less likeable, if that's possible.

Tarqin: for one book, he was a good "villain for this season/episode". (Like John Lithgow in Dexter; great for one season). But we don't need him in another episode/season. Exit stage left.

The Vampire who possessed Durkon. As a character by itself, not worth much. Good tactical plans in the battle near Firmament, though. I enjoyed the book VI, and the late book V transitions once Durkon was killed by Malack. Durkula's sole redeeming quality was killing ZZrdti, but Rich did a good job of playing off the incongruity of Durkon turned undead for many strips. I found that what Rich did with the Exarch turned Vampire to be creative, and enjoyed how he worked that to a conclusion.

Malack: Well written bad guy, I thought. A better second tier villain than any of the Linear Guild.
It's fine that Sabine has a chance to do some more stuff before it's all over, but the LG was always a bit too campy for my taste. (Was glad to see that Hilgya got to return and be a bit more than a joke character).

I like the IFCC as a concept: a true Team Evil with an emphasis on Team, but they've not gotten enough screen time for me to really get a feel for them. Looking forward to seeing more of them in this book.

Unlike some of you, I don't see Miko as a villain. More of a pain in the neck.

Hel: not a villain, just another deity with issues.
They all seem to have issues.

[Mightymosy]

(I finished my reread of OOTS, so)

Especially since the comic is nearing its final arcs, I thought I'd ask how people rank the villains. One of the reasons I really enjoy this story is because how well-rounded both the heroes and villains are -- the Order itself is tight-knit and each of its members fully fleshed out, and the villains encompass a wide range of personalities and motives.

IMO,

Xykon -- I think what makes him really menacing is that he doesn't do the "hands-off Evil Overlord thing"; when something threatens him he's completely willing to take it head-on without any mercy, and the fact that he's an utter psychopath makes him genuinely creepy. He's easily hateable and interesting, and I want him to show up on screen as much as possible before he gets killed like the monster he is.

Redcloak -- I'd say he's a less unique character than Xykon (with the whole troubled past and evil for a good cause) but it also makes him more emotionally compelling. He'd serve as a great Big Bad for any other story. I enjoy where his arc's leading him -- mainly, more ruthless and more evil -- while still keeping him fast on his mental feet, and there's so many questions on what he's going to do next.

High Priest of Hel -- I don't exactly like him, but he's so deliciously nasty and petty while wearing the form of one of the most Good characters that it becomes pretty jarring to read him. In any case, seeing him go was awesome, but reading him at full manipulative level (taunting Roy over Eric) was the cherry on top. Also, it's the only time I've seen a fight between a bald human and a vampire dwarf taken seriously.

Malack -- I really like how civil and sincere he can be while sucking someone's blood out and talking about human harvesting. Gives me the right amount of chills.

Laurin (and Miron, by extension) -- Their time was short but memorable in the comic. Miron's laid-back attitude was fun to read. Laurin's use of her powers, plus her dedication to her daughter, was great.

ABD -- her time was also brief, but exceedingly creepy.

==

The Linear Guild (mainly Nale, Sabine): Your typical minibosses. It was definitely hard to watch Nale die, mainly because of how Elan reacted, and his over-the-top plans were fun to read. Thog has great lines and that's all I can say about him. Since Sabine will be making a future appearance, I'm excited to see how she and the IFFC are going to play out.

Tarquin. I know he's cool, and very much a unique character (servicing for the actual story), but I can't really jibe with how he treats pretty 'human' crimes (slavery, burning people alive, forced marriages, killing his own son) with so casual of an attitude. It gets uncomfortable to read. His evil empire speech was amazing, though, and he was a formidable villain while he lasted.

The IFFC -- they haven't appeared too much. Looking forward to what they have up their sleeves.

Hel -- Why Xykon works but she doesn't: the "hands-off" approach ensures we'll never get to see her act directly against the protagonists, because there's too much of a power difference. She does have a great evil-gloating speech.

Thog -- Same reasons as Tarquin.

Qarr -- he's laughably lame.

Bozzok/Crystal -- They're not especially witty, creepy, or smart like any of the other villains above.

GDGU:

Gin-Jun -- His justifications and him attacking Zhou was horrible (in a good narrative sense, I mean). Coincidentally, I liked this variation of Miko the most.


Kubota -- He's just...there? The way he gets killed was probably his high point.

Tsukiko -- I found her interesting on strip 830.

tldr: Xykon -> Redcloak -> HPoH -> Malack -> Laurin (along with Miron) -> ABD -> Nale -> Sabine -> Tarquin -> IFFC -> Hel -> Thog -> Qarr -> Bozzok -> Crystal -> GDGU -> Kubota -> Tsukiko.

I left out not-Good allies (Belkar, Hilgya) and heroic-ish antagonists (Miko) for simplicity.

Saying this is a fine list would be an understatement.

Let's see.
Agree on Xykon and Redcloak basically 100%.

HpoH was for me the most non-interesting villain in the story so far. Especially the culmination of how he was defeated was emotionally satisfying, but felt contrieved for my taste. Also, he was the just the "evil opposite copy" of a protagonist, or a marionette of a goddess - either way, not interesting. (for a muuuch better character arc with an evil "shadow" character that sits in someone's mind, I'd recommend the "Lasciel" arc from Dresden files. Much more bueno if you ask me. But that's just an aside).

Malack. Definately agree! This was a very fitting antagonist for Durkon, and their struggle moved me much more than the HpoH storyline. Well written, especially the dynamics between Malack and Tarquin as well.

Speaking of which, I like the entire dynamics written for the Vector Legion.
The one exception is with Tarquin. On one hand, he is maybe the best written character in the series (I mean, with the best lines). On the other hand, I don't exactly like that, since this leads to some narrative problems: Tarquin himself says that people like the villain more anyway, and I don't think this is a good thing for a story. Thus, I would have preferred if he had been written less cool, or if the cool protagonists had been written cooler (Roy & Haley: more bad-ass lines please!! :-D ), as a counterbalance. But that's maybe just my taste.
Also, I am not really sure what the Giant wanted to say with that character, and I am not sure if he succeeded with that, if it is what some people suggest.
So, torn on that one.

ABD was an awesome antagonist, well written, and one could feel angry towards her and sad for her at the same time.

Nale and Sabine and Thog were awesome for the comedic part of the comic. And Nale even held up as a more tragic figure later, so over all, well done.
Also, Sabine is my favourite character in the story, so there's that.
Aaaalso, she and Sabine share the best panel in the entire story, so bonus points!

IFCC, yeah, interesting take on devils with a faust bargain, we'll see how that turns out. Similarily with Hel, but that may be over already.

One of my favourite story arcs is the one with Elan andTherkla.
And Kubota was a fitting villain for that one, so I think he was a fitting antagonist as well. Quarr is not super splashy, but I like how he kinda ties multiple story threads together (the Elan/therkla/Kubota one, the V/ABD one and the IFCC one). So, in narrative terms, not a particularily exciting, but a workhorse character?

The guy with the inconsistent spelling was a fitting endboss for Haley, and not much more. But he did that well. Crystal would have been a much better antagonist if the comic had been still more on the comedy side when she and Haley had their fights, but she was still ok.

I actually like Tsuikko more you, I like her more than the thieves' guild enemies or even Kubota and Quarr, or the IFCC, because I can kinda feel for her. On the other hand, she was a little one-dimensional? The way she was murdered was gruesome and tragic, so I felt that more than for the other antagonists.

[Jasdoif]

The one exception is with Tarquin. On one hand, he is maybe the best written character in the series (I mean, with the best lines). On the other hand, I don't exactly like that, since this leads to some narrative problems: Tarquin himself says that people like the villain more anyway, and I don't think this is a good thing for a story. Thus, I would have preferred if he had been written less cool, or if the cool protagonists had been written cooler (Roy & Haley: more bad-ass lines please!! :-D ), as a counterbalance. But that's maybe just my taste.
Also, I am not really sure what the Giant wanted to say with that character, and I am not sure if he succeeded with that, if it is what some people suggest.Sounds like you and the Giant are on the same page, more or less.



...undercutting that so-called "redefinition of evil" is sort of the point. Because it's bull****. It's not a real thing. You can't be a torturing, mass-murdering rapist and then go home and turn your Evil Switch to the "off" position to spend time with your kids. It doesn't work that way. If you are the sort of person that can commit the acts that Tarquin does daily, then that will find its way into every aspect of your existence. It's who you are. This idea that Tarquin was this perfectly rational actor despite being a complete monster at his Day Job is a pipe dream. Tarquin wants you (and Elan) to think that what he does is separate from who he is—that he's a fundamentally decent man who just so happens to murder a bunch of people here and there—because that's how he tricks you into slowly accepting his blatant Evil as a valid life choice that needs to be respected. Which it is not.

Some people want to love the villain without having to face the fact that villains are largely terrible people who do horrific things with deficient reasoning. Not on my watch.



You're absolutely wrong here. For example, there are plenty of cases where children had no idea that their parents had committed atrocities or had helped commit atrocities. The fact of the matter is that, yes, Virginia, people can and do do horrible things and otherwise come across as decent people to those who don't know about their actions. It's astounding that you think otherwise.Purple emphasis mine.

You're arguing against something I didn't say. The "Evil Switch" i'm talking about is not the external facade, it's the internal reality of the person. I don't dispute for one second that people can come across as otherwise decent people. Yes, I concur that it is entirely realistic for people who commit horrible atrocities to seem like good people in other situations. But the key word there is, "seem." Being able to act like a good person some of the time does not make one a good person, it makes one a competent actor. Someone mentally and emotionally capable of intentional deliberate mass murder is still capable of mass murder when hugging their child. They're just not doing it that moment.

Tarquin seemed like a decent person when we met him, that's the entire point. It would have been entirely plausible for Tarquin to have never cracked his facade, to continue acting like a calm and collected person who separated his two lives, but I have no interest in writing that. First, it's boring, and second, it sends a message that you can totally commit atrocities and it's OK, that doesn't make you a bad person as long as you pet a dog afterward. Yes, it makes you a bad person. That is the point. That is the message I am consciously conveying with my story, and if you disagree with it, that's fine, I guess. But I'm not going to take, "You conveyed the message you wanted to convey but I don't like it!" as a criticism that I need to pay attention to.


All this talk in the comic about upsetting traditional narratives, and here you are on the forums complaining about the fact that your audience loves the villain.I'm not complaining that they love the villain as a character, I'm complaining that they love the villain as a person. I want them to love Tarquin as a well-developed element of the fiction that serves his purpose in the story well while raising interesting points about both the way people act in the real world and the way that stories are often constructed these days, and gets off some funny jokes in the process. I don't want them to love him because it's so cool that he can do all these horrible things and still be totally emotionally untouched by it because yeah, doin' evil is awesome and totally should be portrayed as just another lifestyle choice!

And I wasn't really complaining so much as saying I have no interest in making that easy for them. It undercuts the point I am trying to make, which is that evil isn't cool. Which is challenging the traditional narrative—at least the narrative of the last 40 years of pop culture which has told us relentlessly that the character who is more morally questionable is always cooler than the one who is more morally upright.



....You reveal who you really are under stress—stress doesn't magically turn you into someone else unrelated to who you usually are. The fact that you may not have ever known that this is who you were doesn't change anything.

I don't think Tarquin sat around thinking, "Ha ha! I am fooling them into thinking I love my family! I am so clever!" I think he thought that he really loved his family, right up until the point where loving his family conflicted with him being in total control. And then both he and the readers got to see which one of the two really mattered to him.

In other words, when I use the word "facade," I am not referring to a conscious artifice on Tarquin's part. I am referring to the idea that the true core of his being is hidden—possibly even from himself—until the crucible of the story burns it out of him. This is why it was in conflict with comments on this thread about people in real life who segregate their evil actions from the love of family—because in real life, there's no guarantee that such a crucible moment will ever occur.

[CriticalFailure]

I don’t really get why Tarquin is so popular. The evil equivalent to Elan’s narrative knowledge powers is fun and entertaining, but overall Tarquin is just another arrogant evil overlord who thinks he’s smarter than he is. I don’t get why people act like he’s some ultimate chess master because he has that ability and more than they do with Elan.

[Squire Doodad]

I don’t really get why Tarquin is so popular. The evil equivalent to Elan’s narrative knowledge powers is fun and entertaining, but overall Tarquin is just another arrogant evil overlord who thinks he’s smarter than he is. I don’t get why people act like he’s some ultimate chess master because he has that ability and more than they do with Elan.

I imagine because Tarquin is presented as cold and calculating (though in reality he's a side dish, if it wasn't for the fact that he was the main villain of his book) while Elan is actively playing the fool and is a fundamentally childish character. Tarquin is basically "Elan, but with power", and that's surprisingly terrifying in a world that at one point was loosely bound to narrative tropes.

[Fyraltari]

I don’t really get why Tarquin is so popular. The evil equivalent to Elan’s narrative knowledge powers is fun and entertaining, but overall Tarquin is just another arrogant evil overlord who thinks he’s smarter than he is. I don’t get why people act like he’s some ultimate chess master because he has that ability and more than they do with Elan.

Because he does stuff like this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0766.html).
Also because the plan to conquer the Western continent with three empires is a genuinely good and original plan and the narrative (if not the author) credits Tarquin with coming up with it.

[Mariele]

What a great list. I'll add my own ranking, now that you've got me thinking about it, but I'll try to make it short.

Redcloak: Important. Can't be taken out easily, unlike Xykon, because of story purposes, which automatically makes him far more interesting to me. I like that his idea isn't bad and is something the heroes could and should respect--a fair standing for the lesser races--but he's turned it into something horrid.

Xykon: Oh, that wacky Xykon, a complete mockery of all that is good and natural. What a jokester.

Tarquin: What Fyraltari said. I also just think Tarquin was well written, wildly entertaining, and I liked how he fell apart. If he had stayed cool and calculating, he would have been boring. I liked how his insistence on the story going HIS way completely unraveled him.

Kilkil: I don't even know if he counts as a villain, honestly. But he's a mild-mannered kobold and an accountant. I'm just finishing my Accounting degree and I always loved kobolds in DnD settings (fond memories of Deekin and his bad back), so that makes him an automatic winner. I feel represented. :smallredface:

Malack: I still want AU where Durkon and Malack are good buddies that get together on holidays :( He'd be up higher, but his eventual reveal about his, uh... uncomfortably-close-to-reality mass genocide plans really lost him some ground.

Laurin/Miron: They were fun. I enjoyed their interactions and I wish we got to see more of them. :(

Oona: Not sure if Oona and the other hobgoblins should even be listed, but I definitely consider them separate from Redcloak & Xykon's interests, and even just Redcloak's interests. I find her to be endearing. The sort who would give you some hearty soup and talk right over you and ignore anything you said that she didn't agree with while at the same time repeatedly reinforcing her opinions as fact. I have an aunt like that. :P

Gin-Jun: I haven't read it in awhile (only read it once when it came out) but I remember finding him kind of interesting and having realistic motives? Not sure if that still stands. I don't remember anything about him.

Miko: I found her story sad and vaguely compelling. Unfortunately, my enjoyment of it was tainted a lot by a lot of the sexism in the comic at the time. Yuck.

ABD: Made for a good sideplot villain.

IFCC: Who's to say? At least they seem to have something going on.

Linear Guild: So irritating. Could not be out of the comic fast enough. I mostly just mean Nale, Thog, and Sabine, though. Basically every other member of the group was funner. The last time we saw them was by far the best (Yukyuk was fun and Zz'dritz was especially memorable here), and if they hadn't had such irritating previous appearances, they'd be up to at least villain #5 on this list.

and... the rest (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR7qxtgCgY)! Seriously, I really couldn't care less about everyone else, they're all dull as dishwater to me.

[Fyraltari]

Gin-Jun: I haven't read it in awhile (only read it once when it came out) but I remember finding him kind of interesting and having realistic motives? Not sure if that still stands. I don't remember anything about him.


A) Everyone who pings as Evil or is associated with them deserves to die. If we hit innocents accidentally they should use that as a learning experience on the nature of wickedness.
B) Nothing wrong in my life is ever my fault.
C) We let the Crimson Mantle slip through our fingers 20 years ago. 20 years that I have absolutely not spent ressassing that failure temporary setback. Said non-ressassment has had absolutely no ill effect on my psyche.

No opininon on Durkon*?

[understatement]

I actually like Tsuikko more you, I like her more than the thieves' guild enemies or even Kubota and Quarr, or the IFCC, because I can kinda feel for her. On the other hand, she was a little one-dimensional? The way she was murdered was gruesome and tragic, so I felt that more than for the other antagonists.

Villains like Tsukiko (and Kubota, I guess) is where I apply the out-of-sight-out-of-mind principle. Tsukiko doesn't appear in many strips, and she's never appeared in the narrative spotlight before (it's either Team Evil or Haley). Thus, when I read her or remember her it's with a vague feeling of dislike and not much else. She doesn't appear enough to do anything particularly memorable.

Still, I agree with you that her death was...unsettling, to say in the least. Definitely a horrible way to go. Redcloak stole 830 all the way down.


I donÂ’t really get why Tarquin is so popular. The evil equivalent to ElanÂ’s narrative knowledge powers is fun and entertaining, but overall Tarquin is just another arrogant evil overlord who thinks heÂ’s smarter than he is. I donÂ’t get why people act like heÂ’s some ultimate chess master because he has that ability and more than they do with Elan.

Rule of cool, I guess. And he certainly is one of the more unique villains in recent media, although by 936 I felt he had definitely overstayed his welcome. If he does show up in the future, I hope it will be a literal one-panel cameo.

[KorvinStarmast]

Still, I agree with you that her death was...unsettling, to say in the least. Definitely a horrible way to go. Redcloak stole 830 all the way down. One of my more enjoyable Redcloak strips.
The power rivalries among second-in-command sorts in evil cabals is a pretty standard literary device; just read the Black Company (first three books) chronicles - Glen Cook does an interesting job of doing something similar with the second tier of his Team Evil getting after each other and in some cases knocking each other off. Since I found that character, T, very unappealing I was glad to see that we'd not have to have any more T on-screen time once Redcloak cemented his position as Number 2 by disposing of her.

[littlebum2002]

I love that we have so many ideas on what it takes to make a great villain, and they're all correct.



I don’t really get why Tarquin is so popular. The evil equivalent to Elan’s narrative knowledge powers is fun and entertaining, but overall Tarquin is just another arrogant evil overlord who thinks he’s smarter than he is. I don’t get why people act like he’s some ultimate chess master because he has that ability and more than they do with Elan.


Because he does stuff like this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0766.html).
Also because the plan to conquer the Western continent with three empires is a genuinely good and original plan and the narrative (if not the author) credits Tarquin with coming up with it.

Tarquin wasn't my favorite villain, but I did love his idea of unifying the continent, as well as the way he employs the narrative to his advantage. I think Taquin shows that, if Elan had invested more points into his Wisdom and Intelligence scores, he would be nigh unstoppable.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Ok ok ok. THe linear guild is great. The heroes but evil trope/dynamic is overdone and all, but I love it with all of my heart.

Malack is cool too

And Xykon. Xykon is what we all want in a villain, even if we don't want to admit it (Or at least what I want). Stuff moral ambiguity, we want a guy who's evil, and does evil things for the hell of it. There is no questioning intentions, no emotional angst, just pure irredeemable evil and I love it.

[Peat]

Never really thought about it before and my response is kind of "Make me 'like' the villain" (as a character that is). But I guess my checklist would be...

1. Entertaining
2. Credible
3. Some self awareness - don't expect me to go along with them thinking they're completely totally morally in the right and everyone else is wrong (while in their viewpoint). I don't get uncomfortable with how villains act easily unless they're kicking puppies, but this one tends to make me anry.

So...

Xykon & Redcloak - I'm putting them together because I don't think either would be as entertaining without the other. It's a pretty classic crazy man-straight man combo and I'm eager to see the ending of their arc together and who's truly in control. I prefer Xykon as he's got more jokes and it's kind of refreshing to me to see a villain who's straight up openly nasty to everyone (without picking on the sort of targets that makes them too unpalatable as a character), but Redcloak has the more interesting journey.

I think Fyraltari makes an interesting point about about there maybe not being much emotional weight to the fights between them and the OotS and I'm curious to see if that evolves at this point. Although I've also enjoyed their interactions despite the lack of them and in a way, Xykon's complete indifference to the person trying to kill him is fun.

Tsukiko - Never got much of a sense of character from her tbh but she was a good foil to the above - an easy way for Xykon to demonstrate who he was, and a good part of showing Redcloak's motivations and true character.


Nale - My response to his death was Laurin's: Good Riddance. Not that I didn't enjoy his schlocky over the top antics, but as a person he got what was coming and I'm guessing he had enough chances to become something different than to what he was, which is probably the single most intentionally evil villain in the comic other than Xykon. No sense of tragedy there for me.

Thog - Fun comic relief

Sabine - Curious to see what happens without Nale around


Tarquin - My favourite villain. If Rich wanted to show that evil wasn't cool, he arguably needed to scale down Tarquin's ability to get the best lines and look stylish while being a ****. He's entertaining, clever enough to be surprising, and yet watching him reduced to incoherent seething rage at not getting his own way was very satisfying.


... that's about it actually. I don't really have any thoughts on HPoH or Hel.

[ebarde]

Yeah, at times it felt like the comic even acknowledged a bit that Tsukiko was more of a stepping stone than a legitmate threat? She just feels very out of place in the overall story, which undercut a lot of meaningful moments that she happened to be in.

[Mariele]

A) Everyone who pings as Evil or is associated with them deserves to die. If we hit innocents accidentally they should use that as a learning experience on the nature of wickedness.
B) Nothing wrong in my life is ever my fault.
C) We let the Crimson Mantle slip through our fingers 20 years ago. 20 years that I have absolutely not spent ressassing that failure temporary setback. Said non-ressassment has had absolutely no ill effect on my psyche.

No opininon on Durkon*?
I mean, not sure what that spoiler is meant to indicate? A refresher on the character based on your opinion? It's not exactly disproving my reasoning for liking the character (ish), which was mostly just "I remember finding him kind of interesting and having realistic motives?". I'd have to reread the comic, but I'm too busy right not with summer finals in college for that, haha.

No, there was an opinion:
"and... the rest (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR7qxtgCgY)! Seriously, I really couldn't care less about everyone else, they're all dull as dishwater to me."
Durkon* was just blah as heck, couldn't make myself even remotely interested in his character. By far the most interesting he was was in his last page, where he merged with Durkon. :P

[ebarde]

Unlike Tsukiko's death that I really didn't felt anything, I thought Nale's was quite sad. Mostly cause for all Nale's talk about surpassing his father and being a better villain than him, both were extremely similar in a lot of ways. So it's just kinda sad to see him die in the hands of a father that pretty much ruined his life, and that he could never ultimately defy or run away from. Like if he had died any other way I would have said good riddance, but seeing him snap out at his controlling dad only for him to die by his hands just felt a bit too real lol

[Fyraltari]

I mean, not sure what that spoiler is meant to indicate? A refresher on the character based on your opinion? It's not exactly disproving my reasoning for liking the character (ish), which was mostly just "I remember finding him kind of interesting and having realistic motives?". I'd have to reread the comic, but I'm too busy right not with summer finals in college for that, haha.
You said you didn't really remember so I gave you a description, not trying to disprove anything.


No, there was an opinion:
"and... the rest (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR7qxtgCgY)! Seriously, I really couldn't care less about everyone else, they're all dull as dishwater to me."
Durkon* was just blah as heck, couldn't make myself even remotely interested in his character. By far the most interesting he was was in his last page, where he merged with Durkon. :P
Oki-doki.

[Alcore]

Hmmm... no question in the post... but the title does?

I like non evil villains the best. I like it when they only look evil and the 'heroes' looks like bigots in their self righteous justice. Perhaps the villains are good or only good to those they consider family.


==========

For OotS villains i like Xykon. He is reshingly evil for the fun of it. No banal evil to be evil, no philosophical thoughts, no half right/wrong grayness. He's kinda bored, knows he is a villain and is gonna live it up while he can.

[Not]

I have fine tastes. I like it when things are muddled and complicated; the line between good and evil is murky, the true struggles lie not only in one master-villain but in a less obvious set of problems. What compels me the most in fiction is when it mimics real life believably.

In OotS, I like paying attention to how the villains find their way as part of the plot, as a peg in the set of problems the heroes face.

I notice that Xykon and Redcloack make a great duo. Neither would have been as great without the other.

The Ancient/Adult Black Dragon also seems to serve as a subtle yet hilariously important villain. Mostly in it's death... The whole issues resonating from Vaarsuvious's fight with her pop up at unexpected moments, and I think have yet to play a prominent role. One practically small, overlooked encounter might just be the factor that will turn the plot around.

The Linear Guild were funny for their pure existence.
None of the rest are memorable enough to me.

[Scarlet Knight]

Thog. Hands down.

When the author implies that he is so popular that you have to write him out of the strip to keep control....

[ebarde]

I feel that the best villain duos are usually the ones where one is more traditionally evil while the other at least has some sort of reasoning or backstory to justify the bad stuff they do. Mostly cause you get the benefits of a strong unredeemably evil villain that the heroes have no choice but fighting head on, and one that is a tad more complicated and can serve as a wildcard in the story.

[Necris Omega]

Entertaining.

Sympathy can run out, menace has to be undone, and justified (or "justified") generally isn't all that satisfying in the end. "Relatable" has hard limits, and so does competent.

But a villain like Xykon? I don't see Xykon ever failing to satisfy in whatever role he's in. Watching him win, watching him ham it up, watching him lose...? He does it all, and does it well to an extent that really does the captain of Team Evil credit. He has the humor, the punch, the fun, and... well, he doesn't have the heart, though he may well have a collection of those stashed somewhere. In short, he's incredibly effective, fits the comic perfectly, and is, by my reckoning, the best villain in the story.

[Reathin]

While it's by no means an absolute requirement, I tend to prefer my villains to be

1) Absurdly powerful but still in the same general scale of the heroes (ie. (s)he might be the most powerful wizard in the world by a huge margin, but they aren't flat out deities, for instance)

and

2) Polite. Genuinely polite.

You don't have to have both to be a villain that I am interested in, but that combination is usually a surefire thing for me. I like my antagonists with a bit of class to go with the schooling they can dish out.

For OOTS specifically, I don't have a direct favorite more like "tiers".

Like:
Xykon: Exchange "polite" for "funny, but still menacing". Xykon's always a treat on screen.

Redcloak: "Evil for a good cause" may be semi cliche at this point, but I really like how well the Giant plays up his Sunk Cost Fallacy, and the fact that he's done some genuinely awful thing (not just minor evil) in pursuit of his goals. I kinda hope that while he pays for his crimes, his ultimate goal of goblin equality gains some real traction. Maybe in spite of him, rather than because of him, just to drive home the idea that he wasn't justified.

The IFCC: Villains actually getting along as an effective unit is great, and I can't wait to see how their carefully contructed house of cards comes down. They also facilitated Darth V, which is one of my favorite segments in the comic.

Thog: The Giant was right. He IS hard to hate, even as brutal as he is.

Tarquin: Genre savvy, intelligent but not quite as much as he thinks he is, good planning, style for days, Tarquin was great to watch (and, earlier on when he was in control, hit my two points very effectively). His King or Deity speech was one of my favorites (beaten only by Zykon's "There is only power and style, and in a pinch, style can slide" speech in the backstory).

Neutral:
Ancient Black Dragon: Excellent motivation. Doesn't even close to justify her actions.

Durkon*/Durkoff: The vampire spirit was well written, and his plans very smooth. I love/hate his "you are who you are on your worst day" speech, because it's not fully true (even beyond Durkon's epic rebuttal), but it mixes just enough truth in with the Kafka Trap that people often self-impose of "if you deny a painful thing, it must actually be true and you're in denial". That's a bit of sore spot for me.

Hate

Nale: All of my hatred, annoyance, disdain and rage at him, both as a person and as a character, exceed the sum of every other one in the comic combined. I HATED Nale and it was way too personal, really. Like, I considered every moment he was on screen a waste of good ink, from his obnoxious intervention at all the wrong times to his stupid theme. His death at the hands of a more competent villain, when it was such a clear consequence of his own stupidity? I was grinning, ear to ear, for like half an hour, laughing frequently. The ONE moment I actually liked him was his "how's the family" line to Mallik (spelling, sorry). That was a REALLY good line. But thinking of him being disintegrated and blasted away STILL makes me happy.

Hel: In this case, it's purely personal dislike. She's a great character. I just find the "bratty teenager" attitude annoying. Well suited, though. And solid plan.

There's more, but I'm out of time for now, and my keyboard is literally starting to break a bit, so that's enough for now!

[ebarde]

I feel that villains like Tarquin that are sorta very entitled and somewhat childish usually work when everyone around them sorta takes them down a peg. I feel that if after Tarquin lost his cool everyone on both sides didn't started acknowledging that he's a raging manchild at that stage, he would have been a bit annoying to read about.

[kingwrynn]

The Black dragon was the best hands down, narratively anyway. Others were entertaining for sure, but for me that was a completely unexpected plot twist, that made the world feel REAL. Of course the dragon would seek revenge (even though we didn't know about it's existence yet). Vaarsuvius taking the devil's powers and attempting to take out Xykon after brought about a moment of growth and humility similar in magnitude to Belkar's inner struggles during the Paladin's Mark.

To chime in on the discussion of Tarquin, I think how effective he was is understated. Sure he is not a villain of the "let's end the world" variety like Xykon or Vampire-Durkon, and he indulges in evil more for the sake of power and control than for the sake of sheer malevolence, but he is effective and entertaining nonetheless. His primary weapons of "collecting and wielding friends, temporary allies who owe favors, and mercenaries," is the evil equivalent of the good guys winning when they are outmatched through the powers of "scrappy resourcefulness and the power of friendship." It is impressive the way he is a few steps ahead of his opponents, including the party (though it is hard to give him credit there, since the party was somewhat forced to treat him as an ally due to Elan's naivety). The charming villain with sinister motives is a trope that I think he did well with, and such villains are rarely all-powerful. He was more of a bond villain than say Thanos from the Avengers.

While I think many seemed to find the Linear Guild bleh, I think they probably rank #2 on the list of best villains in the comic for me. Showing all the internal strife and recruitment within the LG just served to make them seem weak, not good at planning, not good at executing a plan, motivated by silly trifles...really not good villains in any way....so why do i list them as the second best? They set the bar REALLY low for the party. Even as dumb as they were they managed to use the party to infiltrate the dungeon for the amulet, ambush and separate the party at Tarquin's arena, destroy one of the gates, and plenty of other inconveniences. Sure they mostly always escaped from the LG unscathed, but much of the growth we see of the main characters begins with characters like the LG showing us just how BAD the heroes in oots are at even the basic things when they were low level and were not functioning at all as a cohesive team. By showing the heroes falling into the plots and schemes of these B (or maybe even C or D) list villains, it leaves them SO MUCH room to improve throughout the comics. Compare them scouting the area like a trained group of army rangers (ignoring Durkon) in the current strip to scenes like in #24. Which reminds me, they were also at times pretty entertaining comic relief, which at the time i think the comic was much more focused on than all of these narrative threads. My last point on them, they connected the party to a lot of their future struggles such as Tarquin, the IFCC, and the Hilgya/Kudzu situation.

So to answer how I like my villains, I can appreciate all types, but I very much enjoy a villain that can bring out a big plot twist.

[Goosefarble]

I actually really love Gin-Jun in How the Paladin Got His Scar. He feels like a really grounded villain with clear motives despite his short appearance. His line of "Not another 25 years... not another 25 minutes." sends chills down my spine whenever I read it, and the way he butts heads with O-Chul makes HTPGHS my favourite O-Chul appearance.

[Precure]

Well cooked.

[ebarde]

Honestly I wouldn't really rank the Black Dragon all that high, cause while it was a pretty interesting concept, there just wasn't really enough time to get all that familiar with the character I suppose? Plus she came in a book that was sorta very crowded, with the party all split up and dealing with lots of different things. My favorite badguy is probably Redcloak, although Zz'dtri is probably unwarantedly high for me for some reason.

I just think he's pretty entertaining, he kinda gives me a Soundwave vibe as in a henchmen that doesn't talk much but seems to be fairly competent and loyal. I also kinda wondered what was in it for him when it came to joining the guild, I guess to some extent he wanted the salty runback with V, but he never really questioned Nale's authority which makes me think he had some sort of respect for him.

[Deffers]

Xykon's my fave. And oddly, it's because I don't see him as a one-dimensional character. On the contrary, it's not until Tarquin that I realized just how dynamic I found him.

Tarquin is an excellent villain. I love how his toxicity just slowly seeps into everything and you see him as truly loathsome. I hate him so much. His abusive maneuvering is very authentic.

In contradistinction, despite Xykon's viciousness, there's not really anything in him that makes me hate him with that vigor. In a sense, he's too unempathetic with others to sink as low as someone like Tarquin does-- see how he managed to give Lirian and Dorukan a happy afterlife in his attempts at making them suffer forever.

In my mind, Xykon has a lot of good qualities that aren't Good qualities. He relishes a challenge. He's actually intelligent. He's got a sense of humor. He's unpretentious. He's a remarkably deep thinker. I still think of his "power equals power" speech every now and again. Or the way he tears V's motivations apart during their fight. I don't think he truly respects other people, but he seems to respond well to chutzpah-- until he actually starts losing because of it and gets serious. Every now and then I think I see something a little bit more in him than you'd initially expect. Like when Redcloak talks about how killing a paladin got less satisfying than he remembers and Xykon goes "Yeah, that happens when you get older, sometimes." Or the bit where he faces death with resignation when the ghostly paladins were about to cut him down. There's a certain element to Xykon where he displays an authentically high WIS score combined with such a horrid and irredeemable personality that I think makes him interesting by comparison to everyone else.

I always imagine him being voiced by, like, Harlan Ellison but with some grit. Or maybe a dirtbag comedian type along those same lines. Like if George Carlin were just completely voided of all compassion and handed an artillery battery's worth of firepower.

ABD's one of my faves just because her grief was very much... just incredibly understandable and her viciousness so complete. I actually see them as another High INT High WIS evil character. And the way the escalation between her and V went is also just kinda good to me.
I actually hope we see Nale again. It'd feel like a major loose end since Sabine still exists. But at the same time, his character kinda has a terminus in Tarquin. You can't bring Nale back without centering the conversation on how he moves past Tarquin. Which runs contrary to the ending that Tarquin ended on. I'm interested to see where that goes.

[brian 333]

It's really hard to rank them because each has filled a particular role and if not perfect in that role, then pretty close.

I think I like best how The Giant has used, (and subverted,) tropes in his story as an expose or exploration of the tropes themselves while building a solid story. It's as if we are attending a master level course in Literature: English 303, Villains and Archvilains, Professor Burlew, 3 credits.

[ebarde]

Honestly, I don't really get a whole lot on how not showing Tarquin ever again is the only way they can "beat" him. Tarquin wanted to go down swinging sure, but this isn't really a the only winning move is not to play thing. Unless we get some sort of update on his storyline he's still killing lots of innocent people and being a ruthless tyrant. Yeah he probably doesn't feel good about not getting to face off against Elan, but that doesn't really change that he's still making people suffer and be miserable.

Obviously there's also the whole rebel coalition thing, but even then they don't really have any estabilished way of taking him and his legion down except for a plan we know nothing whatsoever about. I don't think it's a particularly satisfying place to leave his story on, cause any personal victory the heroes got is undercut by him still being able to do evil stuff with very little in terms of an actual opposition.

I just feel that the way to beating a bad guy isn't just giving him a "gotcha" but actually stopping him, ya know?

[understatement]

I do fully believe that we'll see Tarquin defeated, but it'll be a single panel befitting of his ego.

I would also like to mildly revise my opinion after re-reading SOD: I want to see Xykon get devoured by the Snarl. The scene where


he makes Right-Eye burn down his village


was such a kick in the guts. Seriously, Redcloak was so close.

In other words, Xykon is a colossal ****. I like my villains significantly less petty.

[deltamire]

While Xycon is probably the funnest to read out of all the villains, I gotta hand it to Tarquin - it's been a while since an antagonist just stuck with me that much. I think what elevated him for me was the BRITF end-of-book commentary, as it changed him from 'well-written descent into desperation and self-made end' into a genuinely terrifying villain, because Tarquin isn't just a character after that. He's that insidious little voice in the back of your mind that's just so hard to shake off. Almost everyone probably knows, or has met someone like him, which makes him just so compelling and grounded compared to, say, a wisecracking, world-ending lich with more power than patience. However, Xycon is just so matter of fact when it comes to being evil it's almost . . . Admirable? There's no deep tragic motive, there's no complex argument regarding how he's secretly better than the heroes, he's just . . . Having a grand ol' time. It's always a good palette cleanser for a story in which a good portion of the heroes spent the first half of the story being, like, terrible to each other and everyone in a kilometre radius.

I'm looking forward to the next few pages with Redcloak, though. I haven't yet read SOD, but have absorbed enough, protista-style, of his story to understand his motivations. Hopefully his development won't come at a cost of turning Durkon into ground beef.

[ebarde]

I feel like the takeaway here despite of how cheesy it is, is that there's not just one way to be a good villain lol like, I see a bunch of writing advice going "the only good villains are those that believe they are the hero" and ultimately a villain just needs to be whatever the story requires them to be. It's also fairly coherent to our real world that not everyone is super invested in morality and such, and just does bad things cause they don't particularly care enough not to or gain something from it.

[RatElemental]

The only real quality I definitely want in a villain is a reason for them to be a villain. It doesn't need to be a complex tragic backstory, they could just be a greedy jerk who was in the right place at the right time for all their worst qualities to manifest and achieve some high level bad stuff. Luckily, every OotS villain I can think of falls into this category, the ones that don't tend to be in cartoons aimed at children.

[ebarde]

Most of the worst examples of bad guys I've seen are usually on superhero stuff, mostly cause often there isn't a good job of taking fantastical stakes and grounding them with something we can understand. Villains are too often "Destroy the world, for reasons humans can't even comprehend" types, which isn't really fun cause that hardly ever warrants an emotional response. Even in stories about eldritch horrors, I usually find the best ones to be when the antagonist represents something real instead of just vague evilness.

[Angelalex242]

Miko.

They were SO CLOSE to pushing her back to the light, and failed just that little bit in the end. Her story could easily have taken another path.

[Fyraltari]

Miko.

They were SO CLOSE to pushing her back to the light, and failed just that little bit in the end. Her story could easily have taken another path.

The thing is, you can't push people to the light. You can only point the way, they have to lift themselves there. Miko didn't want to do that, she didn't want to even acknowledge she'd stepped out of the light.

[Angelalex242]

She had, what, 24 hours of being out of the light before dying?

There are 5 stages of grief, the first being denial.

She kinda died before she could get through the other 4 stages.

[Peelee]

There are 5 stages of grief, the first being denial.

[citation needed]

Anyway, myths aside, her entire non-prequel life was effectively in denial. It certainly wasn't due to grief. She killed Shojo because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She attacked Hinjo because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She broke out of jail because she was in denial that she was wrong. She destroyed the Gate because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She thought Soon would usher her to the Seven Heavens because she was in denial that she could be wrong.

There was no grief, there was only a massive superiority complex.

[bravelove]

Everyone knows the TRUE best villains are the Demon Cockroaches

[Angelalex242]

[citation needed]

Anyway, myths aside, her entire non-prequel life was effectively in denial. It certainly wasn't due to grief. She killed Shojo because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She attacked Hinjo because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She broke out of jail because she was in denial that she was wrong. She destroyed the Gate because she was in denial that she could be wrong. She thought Soon would usher her to the Seven Heavens because she was in denial that she could be wrong.

There was no grief, there was only a massive superiority complex.

Citation needed? Really? Google it. 5 stages of grief are absolutely a thing.

...but, you are correct, the grief wouldn't have kicked in, if it were a thing, until after she fell. And she was kind of in denial about everything even beforehand.

I suppose it's more accurate to say she was straight up mad. There's a decent chance a good Lawyer would've called her not guilty by reason of insanity. She doesn't ever display a clear grasp of reality.

[Peelee]

Citation needed? Really? Google it. 5 stages of grief are absolutely a thing.

I was hoping that would inspire you to Google it, but if you insist...


The Kübler-Ross model, or the Five Stages of Grief™, postulates a series of emotions experienced by terminally ill patients prior to death, or people who have lost a loved one, wherein the five stages are: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Although commonly referenced in popular media, the existence of these stages has not been empirically demonstrated and the model is not considered helpful in explaining the grieving process. It is considered to be of historical value but outdated in scientific terms and in clinical practice.

[137beth]

I'm doing a reread of Supernormal Step (https://www.supernormalstep.com/), another fantasy webcomic that ended two years ago. The main villain, Kite, is a powerful magic user who enacts his evil scheme because he's bored. I am struck by the contrast between how Kite and Xykon approach their evil schemes, despite having essentially the same motivations.

Before meeting Redcloak,
Xykon had no big plans. He just went around killing people at random.

After meeting Redcloak, Xykon still has trouble creating or following any sort of strategy. By contrast, Kite has a very complicated plan which stretches over a span of 130 years, the details of which confuse all of Kite's top minions. Xykon wants to rule the world, and to have everyone know that he rules the world. Kite, in some ways, secretly already does rule the world: he is secretly in control of many powerful large organizations (he has the magical ability to shapeshift and to appear in more than one place at a time, so even the people who work directly for him don't know who he really is).

And quite unlike Xykon, the end goal of Kite's plan is difficult to discern. Even Kite's top minions seem baffled trying to figure out what he wants to accomplish, as different organizations that he secretly controls end up fighting each other.
Kite's ultimate goal is to destroy the universe, by engineering a scenario in which two extraordinarily powerful magic-users duel each other. Every part of his scheme helps lead two particular magic users down the path to becoming "unbeatable," so that they can eventually fight each other, and the world will end from the contradiction of two "unbeatable" people fighting.

[LadyEowyn]

For my part, I like tragic villains and villains with sympathetic motives. Hence my love for Redcloak (and for V, who isn’t an antagonist but has done horrific things).

For the most part, people are complicated, and conflicts are complicated, and I like villains whose characterization acknowledges that, and stories whose plots acknowledge answers other than “beat up the bad guy”. I also love redemption arcs, and characters having to grapple with what they’ve done wrong. It’s why I’m so happy with where OOTS is going.

If a story’s going to have an out-and-out villain, I like intelligent baddies, the ones who always seem a few steps ahead of the heroes and plots where the heroes have to be clever in their turn in order to win. (I enjoyed the Thrawn Trilogy in old Star Wars EU for that, and even more for the fact that, while the heroes did have to contend with him on a tactical and strategic level, they ultimately beat him by being better people, who treated neutral parties and even their enemies with kindness.) Tarquin’s genre-savvy made him an enjoyable villain in that way, especially with the challenge of how to beat a villain who considers a dramatic defeat to qualify as a victory for him. It was a great plot arc (though the time in the Empire of Blood ran a little long) - very meta.

Redcloak’s smart and intellectual too (and organized); it’s another reason I like him.

I don’t like Xykon very much. He’s neither clever nor thoughtful (despite his claims to the contrary in SOD) - he’s just sadistic, petty, and lazy. He very nearly died against the ghost-martyrs of the Sapphire Guard because he’s ignorant and lazy and attacked them with spells they were resistant to; if he’d used some of his infinite waking hours to do a modicum of research he wouldn’t have had that problem. Still, he can be funny in a crosses-the-line-twice kind of way.

I can and do enjoy media with other types of villains, but I enjoy it for qualities other than the villains (characterization of heroes; plot; setting/worldbuilding; themes).

[Peelee]

For my part, I like tragic villains and villains with sympathetic motives. Hence my love for Redcloak (and for V, who isn’t an antagonist but has done horrific things).

For the most part, people are complicated, and conflicts are complicated, and I like villains whose characterization acknowledges that, and stories whose plots acknowledge answers other than “beat up the bad guy”. I also love redemption arcs, and characters having to grapple with what they’ve done wrong. It’s why I’m so happy with where OOTS is going.

If a story’s going to have an out-and-out villain, I like intelligent baddies, the ones who always seem a few steps ahead of the heroes and plots where the heroes have to be clever in their turn in order to win. (I enjoyed the Thrawn Trilogy in old Star Wars EU for that, and even more for the fact that, while the heroes did have to contend with him on a tactical and strategic level, they ultimately beat him by being better people, who treated neutral parties and even their enemies with kindness.) Tarquin’s genre-savvy made him an enjoyable villain in that way, especially with the challenge of how to beat a villain who considers a dramatic defeat to qualify as a victory for him. It was a great plot arc (though the time in the Empire of Blood ran a little long) - very meta.

Redcloak’s smart and intellectual too (and organized); it’s another reason I like him.

I don’t like Xykon very much. He’s neither clever nor thoughtful (despite his claims to the contrary in SOD) - he’s just sadistic, petty, and lazy. He very nearly died against the ghost-martyrs of the Sapphire Guard because he’s ignorant and lazy and attacked them with spells they were resistant to; if he’d used some of his infinite waking hours to do a modicum of research he wouldn’t have had that problem. Still, he can be funny in a crosses-the-line-twice kind of way.

I can and do enjoy media with other types of villains, but I enjoy it for qualities other than the villains (characterization of heroes; plot; setting/worldbuilding; themes).

As a rather noted not-smart-man, I agree with this, and also like when people write about it, like that blog post you threw up (which was awesome and I will totally read any others you do about OotS, btw).

[LadyEowyn]

As a rather noted not-smart-man, I agree with this, and also like when people write about it, like that blog post you threw up (which was awesome and I will totally read any others you do about OotS, btw).
Aww, thank you!:smallredface:

I may do more posts as we see more of where this plotline is heading.

[Worldsong]

I think my perfect story wouldn't have a villain at all, just two (or more) sides with conflicting goals. And I don't mean that one side commits atrocities which then have to be justified: if you studied both sides you'd see that both are just doing their best to achieve their goals while still sticking to whatever moral code they adhere to.

Sure the story would still focus on one side and they'd end up winning, but any conflicting parties would be adversaries rather than forces of evil.

I guess closest to that is a villain who has an understandable motivation, does not enjoy committing acts of evil and tries to approach their problems with intelligence and reason. You know, like an actual person. Someone you could root for (although their evil deeds might still make that difficult).

Which leads me to Redcloak. Xykon is entertaining but a villain needs to be more than entertaining for me to actually like them. Tarquin managed that by combining wit with cunning and an interesting approach to narrative. Redcloak however still wins because I actually want his core goal to be accomplished and for goblinoids to be treated as being on equal footing with PC Races. I want Redcloak to realize that there's a better way and step onto the road of redemption, even if it is long and arduous.

EDIT: although I also like stories in which the definitions of good and evil are put to the test. Pragmatic characters tend to appeal to me because of that, although they have to be actually pragmatic and not just using pragmatism as a facade to cover their horrific behaviour.

[Peelee]

I think my perfect story wouldn't have a villain at all, just two (or more) sides with conflicting goals.

I say this a lot, but you should check out Stranger Than Fiction.

[Fyraltari]

Or the later Foundation books.

[Peelee]

Or The Blues Brothers.

[Fyraltari]

Or the Latium book, if it ever gets translated into a language you understand.

[brian 333]

Or The Blues Brothers.

I don't know...

Carrie Fisher was evil.

[ebarde]

Tbh, I feel like even with stories with gray morality you still sorta need to have characters that are more or less justifiable. Otherwise you're throwing black and white morality for just one shade of gray morality. Characters often exist in contrast to their enviroment and the rest of the cast, and if everyone sorta exists in the same gray zone, you kinda lose a lot in terms of being able to have a character that is particularly noble or dastardly, cause everyone is sorta equally justifiable.

And looking at most works that people praise for having complex morality, I still can sorta point to a good few characters that are more heroic or villanous than the rest. And those qualities are a lot more noticeable since the people around them operate in a lot more gray areas of morality, while in a black and white world a lot of times those qualities aren't as apreciated since they're a lot more common. If every bad guy sorta has a somewhat fair reason to justify their bad deeds, if someone comes around and just barely tries to save face, the audience tends to hate them a lot more.

[137beth]

As a rather noted not-smart-man, I agree with this, and also like when people write about it, like that blog post you threw up (which was awesome and I will totally read any others you do about OotS, btw).

Where can I see LadyEowyn's blog post?

[LadyEowyn]

Where can I see LadyEowyn's blog post?
Here:
https://warrioreowynofrohan.tumblr.com/post/621642240811581440/taking-a-break-from-the-silmarillion-for-a-minute

[KorvinStarmast]

Here:
https://warrioreowynofrohan.tumblr.com/post/621642240811581440/taking-a-break-from-the-silmarillion-for-a-minute Your critique of decision making in LoTR is incisive and spot on. Well done! :smallsmile:

[137beth]

Here:
https://warrioreowynofrohan.tumblr.com/post/621642240811581440/taking-a-break-from-the-silmarillion-for-a-minute

Thanks a lot!