Why destroy the world?
- Thread starter Technomage333
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Shrinking down the level of destruction would definitely simplify a lot of things but the basic motivation is still there and I still don't know what it should be. Why would you destroy a country? The reavers thing never even occurred to me before this, gonna have play with that for a while and see what comes out.Altorin said:
well, if it's just a matter of destroying a country, it opens up some political matters. They may wish to take over the land for themselves, subjugate the citizens. The villain might just hate the country and wish to see it burn. If you shrink the world destruction down to country destruction, you don't have to factor in the "Going Down With the Ship" scenario that most worldly end of the world villains have to eventually deal with.Technomage333 said:
Oh, and if you watch the Nostalgia Critic, you know you have to add an "OF COURSE!" statement when someone questions the villain's motives for destroying the world.
It's just gotta be done
But couldn't you just sort of wrap that up as "The villain is batshit crazy"? I see where you're coming from, though.jasoncyrus said:On the contrary, a good writer can give shape and reason to that mindless violence also. example: you have a city of hostages. you need to interrogate the hero/force him to do something or you start killing people. you COULD kill them one by one, but you're impatient and kill whole city blocks at a time because you are bored and want it done NOW.runtheplacered said:
theres reason behind all senseless killings
... so your telling me you NEVER played any of the baulders gate games? there are some great reasons to destroy the world in there.
dont make it a "im going to do this because the writers made me the villian, and so.. yeah, get me my puppy juice while i blow up the world" make the character sympathetic and not a 2d cliche sack of crap. the only place i have EVER seen a 'just because' villian work was the movie the dark knight, and even that was only because it was magnificently written and acted. if you plan to do that, ask yourself "do i think im that good of a writer?"
dont make it a "im going to do this because the writers made me the villian, and so.. yeah, get me my puppy juice while i blow up the world" make the character sympathetic and not a 2d cliche sack of crap. the only place i have EVER seen a 'just because' villian work was the movie the dark knight, and even that was only because it was magnificently written and acted. if you plan to do that, ask yourself "do i think im that good of a writer?"
You could always go the route where the villain is trying to save HIS world, it just might come at the cost of yours. Both hero and villain have the same goal, and some of your heroes could be sympathetic or just go totally righteous indignation on him. Do your heroes protect their world and doom his, or do they let him have what he needs to save his people? On the off chance it doesn't destroy your world, it could still change it forever...
yeah, those generally dont work in a serious story, setting a building on fire to set a building on fire just isnt really a good motivation, at the VERY least you have to say "because fire is pretty" or "because some guy i hate is inside" or even "the architecture is hideous" and even those are extremely flimsy motivations.Altorin said:
nice.. that would need a lot more elaboration then that, but that's an interesting idea.Batadon said:
I like good villains. Characters who, in their own story, would be a noble hero.
One such villain, although not a single entity, are the robots from I, Robot (the book moreso then the movie).
The 3 laws of robotics lead to only one outcome, the robots taking away our freedom to protect us from ourselves. The movie showed that the only way it could, but in the book, a robot would be unable to shoot, or otherwise attack a human, even if somehow it thought it was fulfilling the laws.
that's one possible idea..
I had a villain in one story that was involved in a sort of "world domination game" with several other characters.
At the end of this game, the winner got to rebuild the world to their specifications. That's another idea that might be interesting for a game.
in my case they were wizards trying to build a magical city, and if they control the city and are the last wizard surviving, they win the game.. that might be a motivation.
I had a villain in one story that was involved in a sort of "world domination game" with several other characters.
At the end of this game, the winner got to rebuild the world to their specifications. That's another idea that might be interesting for a game.
in my case they were wizards trying to build a magical city, and if they control the city and are the last wizard surviving, they win the game.. that might be a motivation.
How about this: The villian believes that this group of people he wants to destroy are the ones who are evil and that he is the hero or good guy. The villian is convinced that this group (whoever you are making them) are ruining the world somehow and is desparate to stop them. Maybe he doesn't even really want to kill them but has tried all sorts of other ways to stop them and is using destroying them as a last resort. I've always found the villians who believe they are the one who is doing the right thing and everyone else is evil to be the most interesting ones.
