Suggestions: Complex Characters, Villains and Npc's

[HeedlessHorseman]

I am in favor of unapologetically evil antagonists. As well as the obviously crazy ones. I find them much more entertaining than ones with some justification.

 

I am tired of the fallen hero archetype. As well as enemies who escape just as you would kill them. And ones who are constantly just outside of the player's grasp.

 

Finally, I do not want the game structured around the antagonist. I want it structured around the protagonist. Ideally the main antagonist (if there is one) will be determined by the player's actions.

[Gibbscape_Torment]

Am bored of sensitive nuanced villains, in fact sympathetic 'explained' villains are a dominant paradigm.

 

Let's have some good, old fashioned nasty bastards. Criminals, dictators, sadists to put to the sword.

 

God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars.

[Darkpriest]

Am bored of sensitive nuanced villains, in fact sympathetic 'explained' villains are a dominant paradigm.

 

Let's have some good, old fashioned nasty bastards. Criminals, dictators, sadists to put to the sword.

 

God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars.

 

I won't agree... Usually what drives to be a villain is usually power, greed, revenge... - some just have their agenda fairly simple. It's not always the goal or reason that makes a villain great... It's THE PERSONALITY... Still the morality can be black and white, and not make the villain pale and unimaginative.

 

Wasn't main BG2 villains agenda a simple revenge?

 

(I might be overusing this, but it is a great example of 80s art) - check this episode of RoS. While the motives can be fairly simple the personality of the sheriff is just great.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wha5YXUj-uo&feature=relmfu

[Gibbscape_Torment]

Am bored of sensitive nuanced villains, in fact sympathetic 'explained' villains are a dominant paradigm.

 

Let's have some good, old fashioned nasty bastards. Criminals, dictators, sadists to put to the sword.

 

God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars.

 

I won't agree... Usually what drives to be a villain is usually power, greed, revenge... - some just have their agenda fairly simple. It's not always the goal or reason that makes a villain great... It's THE PERSONALITY... Still the morality can be black and white, and not make the villain pale and unimaginative.

 

Wasn't main BG2 villains agenda a simple revenge?

 

 

Yes it was. And when Bioware tried to deviate from this bland character motivation, we got Loghain. A character i believe to be far better in every way.

 

That's not to say revenge can't be done well, it just hasn't been done without the usual mustache twirling and kitten kicking tropes in games.

[AGX-17]

Creating complex and intriguing characters is always a challenging task. However, when it succeeds such characters can become an intricate part of the people who experienced them and be a sole reason to revisit a game. What kind of interesting characters would you like to meet in the game?

 

Personally, I like it when there is more to a villain than “buahahah im evil”. Often writers try to give villains a certain amount of debt, but many times this is done through having something evil done to the villain back in the days to justify his pure evelness now.

 

What I would like to see was a “villain” with good intentions. A character who you might get a few chances to fight together with in the beginning, a man you could come to respect – he might even save your party once. Then in the later game to have an event where you find yourself on opposing sides. Not because your old friend has turned evil, but because you have different goals and agendas, neither which can be perceived as good or evil – just different. I’d like to see an ending scene with such a character, where he and his men are beaten and he looks your character in the eyes and tell hims that unless he kills him, he will continue to oppose what you are doing, because it in his wiews is the just thing to do. Would you kill an old friend who has noble intentions or would let him god in the knowledge he might end up costing you finishing your end goal?

 

So... what you're basically saying here is that you're not in any way familiar with the work of any of the writers at Obsidian.

[Darkpriest]

Am bored of sensitive nuanced villains, in fact sympathetic 'explained' villains are a dominant paradigm.

 

Let's have some good, old fashioned nasty bastards. Criminals, dictators, sadists to put to the sword.

 

God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars.

 

I won't agree... Usually what drives to be a villain is usually power, greed, revenge... - some just have their agenda fairly simple. It's not always the goal or reason that makes a villain great... It's THE PERSONALITY... Still the morality can be black and white, and not make the villain pale and unimaginative.

 

Wasn't main BG2 villains agenda a simple revenge?

 

 

Yes it was. And when Bioware tried to deviate from this bland character motivation, we got Loghain. A character i believe to be far better in every way.

 

That's not to say revenge can't be done well, it just hasn't been done without the usual mustache twirling and kitten kicking tropes in games.

 

I find Loghain's actions stupid, but each to his own.

Saving country by sacrificing a bulk of own forces and a king at the best strategical place to hold of invasion of darkpsawn and then as a result getting into strategically and politically horrible situation? That hardly fits a character, which is supposed to be smart, pragmatic and a good military leader...

 

 

I preferred Jon Irenicus' actions, as they fitted him better given his agenda, thus I find that character more coherent and in the end result better. Loghain had the potential but they screwed him badly by bad scenario.

[Gibbscape_Torment]

Ther is far, far, far more to it than what you have just described. The army wpuld have been desecrated by the Darkspawn, and Loghain had other motives. He was a very flawed character (as a character, not flawed in his character concept or execution).

 

Nevertheless there are so many elements to Loghain and his actions that talking about it here would surely engulf the thread. If you wish to find out more about Loghain, you should pop your head into the Loghain thread on the BSN. It's the only place I'd call a safe haven in that wretched hive.

[jezz555]

I don't like "evil" villains without any motivation than "kill, kill, KILL" (or plain egoism) for me it is not good storytelling. In Switzerland we say that only americans write such stories, because there everything is seen a bit more black and white (I think it is not entirely true though)

 

That's a wrong post.

 

First off, nobody in switzerland says this. Secondly, it's an ignorant statemnt. Third, this statement doesn't represent swiss lit at all.

 

 

Dürrenmatt is a number 1 priority in teaching lit in switzerland. He was a big advocator of the worst possible ending. Von Zahnd is exactly such a villian.

 

(Reason: Zeitgeist (explained at several points, especially in regards to the physicists), and other factors, including giving contrast with the absurdity and paradox)

 

Also, such villians are no indicator of bad writing itself depending on how they were written or justified and work in regardes to the themes/narrative. In modern literature, yes. But that's the result of various other factors.

 

I sort of see what he is saying though. I think because American fiction is probably influenced, at least to a point, by biblical morality, which encourages a very black-and-white view of things as opposed to Europe where things are more secular, moral ambiguity becomes more common, just look at warhammer 40k vs starcraft. I can't speak to switzerland specifically because I'm not all that familiar with swiss fiction, but in American vs. European fiction, I do think his point is pretty justified.