Guild Wars 2

I made this thread to point out there there are 3 types of villains. In GW2, only the first 2 types were used on a consistent bases. The 3rd one (the best type in my opinion) is seriously lacking.

1) Ancient and Powerful Villains: Beings that are ancient and powerful. They are simply purely evil and beyond any kind of reasoning. Their followers are usually worshippers, corrupted/brainwashed by them or people who are too scared of their power to resist. This is the most boring type of villain.

Example:
http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Elder_Beings

2) Greedy and Power Hungry Villains: These people wants money and power for themselves. They will kill anyone to achieve those aims. They are very simple to understand and usually enjoy doing the evil laugh. Their followers are usually after their money and power, or are too scaried to resist them. This is the classic “evil for the sake of being evil.”, which makes them fairly boring.

Example:
http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/M._Bison

3) Anti-Villains: These people fights for their version of self-righteousness. They often view themselves as good guys, or even heroes. They usually have some sort of respect for their foes. They might have followers who follows their point of view. This is by far the most interesting type of villains because they have a philosophy.

Example:
http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Nagato/Pain

As you can see, type 1 villains are the Elder Dragons. Type 2 villains are the likes of Scarlet. Type 3 villains, as of today, doesn’t exist at all in GW2. It is my hope that we will see more, much more, type 3 villains in the future.

This is a must read:
http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Villain

“Evolution Of Villainy
In the early days of media portrayal of villains (during the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries) it was common for a villain to be portrayed as the archetypal “cackling madman” with little to no redeeming qualities. However, as audiences and society in general, matured villains became a less superficial in nature and the idea of villainy was evolved. It became popular for a villain to share similar qualities to a hero. This gave birth to the anti-hero and anti-villain as well as the tragic villain. In fact in modern times many writers are encouraged to steer away from outright villainous individuals and instead are inclined to create antagonists that are more three-dimensional so as to serve a wider audience. It is worth noting many villains in cartoons and children’s media however retain the stereotypical villain. This is due to children’s shows and cartoons being geared toward younger individuals who are unable to fully understand deeper, more philosophical concepts associated with anti-heroes and tragic villains."

Type 3 Villain = Canach.

I would argue that Scarlet would view herself as type 3. She is fighting to destroy the world as it is and create a world where she (and by default, all sylvari) would not be constrained to either follow the pale tree’s visions or the nightmare’s visions but freely determine their own destiny.

BilboBaggins.5620:

I would argue that Scarlet would view herself as type 3. She is fighting to destroy the world as it is and create a world where she (and by default, all sylvari) would not be constrained to either follow the pale tree’s visions or the nightmare’s visions but freely determine their own destiny.

Where did you get this things about Scarlet? Afaik there is almost nothing known about her motives, and very little is know about her background besides what was presented in short story.

I would add Faolain to the list of type 3 villains as well. She believes she is championing the true meaning of being sylvari by rejecting all the human- and Ventari-inspired morality. By rejecting common morality, she comes off as a monstrous villain to us, but she still believes she is doing the right thing. (Although there are some type 1 villainy traits in her, to the extent that the Nightmare Court sometimes appears to act from blind fervor.)

Faolain and Scarlet are not so different at all, except of course that Scarlet is insane to the point of psychosis, while Faolain seems far more rational in her cruelty, with an obsession with Caithe appearing to be her only genuine mental instability.

Interestingly, if you look at the dredge, they could (as a group) also count as type 3 villains. They have a strong ideology of freedom fighting, and ending the oppression of their people by the dwarves (and by extension, all the other races that once associated with dwarves).

To add a few more villains to the list:

- Gaheron Baelfire: Type 2.
- Kudu: Type 2 (although the Inquest have the potential to produce type 3 villains)
- Mai Trin: Type 2.
- Caudecus: Type 2.

I think those categories aren’t quite sufficient. I mean, the Joker for example, wouldn’t really fall in to any of them. He’s nihilistic so he doesn’t care for money or power in and of themselves. Due to that same nihilism, he also doesn’t really believe he’s doing “the right thing”, he just does it b/c he likes/feels like it/it amuses him. So he’s also no anti-villain.

@kRiza krimos: I agree with BilboBaggins (lol I just said that). Scarlet, though psychotic and lacking morals since her trip through the Eternal Alchemy, is doing what she believes is best for Tyria in the long run. She’s not after power for the sake of power, but rather for the sake of the world. That’s my take on her story.

I agree with Jornophelanthas (could that be longer? lol) regarding Faolain. She (and all the Nightmare Court really) believe their manifesto is serving the greater good. They view the Mother Tree and Ventari’s teachings as a veil over the eyes of Sylvari and their goal is to open everyone’s eyes to the truth. That sounds like a good goal to me. It’s a matter of perception which is good and which is evil.

Many of the lesser creatures we encounter in the world (Ogres, Centaurs, Dredge) aren’t necessarily good or evil, just another faction that is driven by self-preservation. Human vs. centaur “war” isn’t a good vs. evil anymore than Human vs. Charr. Both want to survive, both want land, etc.

The Type I villain (ie – dragons) are boring in the sense that there’s no depth to their drive or goals. What should be interesting about them is the sheer power and magnificence they bring. Evil dragon, got it. Pretty straight forward. But let’s stand in awe for a moment over the incredible power they have, their size, flight, corruption, minions. What makes them interesting isn’t a fantastic story, but a terrific magnitude of godliness.

A special type of villain embodies all those 3 types.

See: http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Ares_%28God_of_War%29

Ancient being. Check!
Power hungry. Check!
Anti-villains. He despise Athena’s version of war. Check!

Sound familiar?
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Balthazar

Seras.5702:

@kRiza krimos: I agree with BilboBaggins (lol I just said that). Scarlet, though psychotic and lacking morals since her trip through the Eternal Alchemy, is doing what she believes is best for Tyria in the long run. She’s not after power for the sake of power, but rather for the sake of the world. That’s my take on her story.

Disagree. At most, she’s doing what she thinks is best for herself. There’s no altruism in this, self-deluded or otherwise. She’s rebelling against mommy and trying to take the rest of the world down with her so she can remake it how she wants it instead.

What exactly she’s changing and how she’s accomplishing that change by just attacking everyone, we have no actual idea as she shares no specifics in-game or in that short story. But she’s doing it for herself.

Alleluia.1320:

Disagree…. <snip>

Valid point, but I think her motives derive from her 1) being incredibly smart and arrogant 2) having journeyed through the Eternal Alchemy believes she knows what’s best for the world more than anyone else.

Being arrogant doesn’t necessarily make you wrong. Or evil. Crazy people do bad things all the time because they don’t know any better. Not that she doesn’t understand that killing is morally wrong. Just that she’s above it. Her goals are loftier than those of anyone else, and thus the killing is justified.

“Die die die die die die die die die” = incredibly insane without any remorse for what she’s doing. Her motives denote that rather than doing it cuz she likes it (pure evil) she is doing it as a means to an end (not gonna say altruistic but rather for a greater “good”).

I made similar rant few days ago

sAdam.5876:

Every story needs heroes. We like them, or at least we are told we should like them, because they are good or just because they are heroes (I’m looking at you Trehern and Kormir). But story need also villains. They got it harder, because to be compelling they actually need to be interesting. And that’s a point where GW2 is seriously lacking. We have Dragons, but they are just forces of nature. Tsunami given shape of dragon. Bandits and other factions evil for the sake of being evil are boring. Centaurs are like xenophobic indians(native americans) without any redemption values. Only interesting antagonists so far (in my humble opinion) were Dredge and Canach. First got quite tragic backstory being slaves for Stone Summits. It’s kind of understandable that they overreact on any attempt of outside influence. Canach is extremist with a cause. He got his own twisted agenda, but he is more force of self-serving and moral gray area than force of evil like Scarlet. Now what I think about Scarlet. For me she is copy-paste Duella Dent. For those unfamiliar with DC comics imagine steam-punk dressed female Joker. Like it was pointed out in other topic, she is villain sue.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/speech/Is-Scarlet-a-Villain-Sue-Merged

And villain sue is usually boring and lazy design.
So to sum up, I believe GW2 needs more interesting, multidimensional villains for it’s stories. It can only help.

kRiza krimos.1637:

BilboBaggins.5620:

I would argue that Scarlet would view herself as type 3. She is fighting to destroy the world as it is and create a world where she (and by default, all sylvari) would not be constrained to either follow the pale tree’s visions or the nightmare’s visions but freely determine their own destiny.

Where did you get this things about Scarlet? Afaik there is almost nothing known about her motives, and very little is know about her background besides what was presented in short story.

You can usually tell a type 2 villain by how they disrespect their foes. And they usually love doing evil laughs. Scarlet clearly have zero respect for her enemies, and she loves to tease and evil laugh at them.

http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Evil_Laugh

Type 1: You are weak and I am strong. So you die. Its that simple.

Type 2: Wahahahahah I am going to kill you for money and to test out my new warmachines. That will further strengthen my evil army. Its all about me, myself and I.

Type 3: To tell you the truth, I didn’t want to kill you. But your sacrifice is required for a better tomorrow for everyone. I will make sure you are well remembered by everyone afterwards.

sAdam.5876:

I made similar rant few days ago

sAdam.5876:

Every story needs heroes. We like them, or at least we are told we should like them, because they are good or just because they are heroes (I’m looking at you Trehern and Kormir). But story need also villains. They got it harder, because to be compelling they actually need to be interesting. And that’s a point where GW2 is seriously lacking. We have Dragons, but they are just forces of nature. Tsunami given shape of dragon. Bandits and other factions evil for the sake of being evil are boring. Centaurs are like xenophobic indians(native americans) without any redemption values. Only interesting antagonists so far (in my humble opinion) were Dredge and Canach. First got quite tragic backstory being slaves for Stone Summits. It’s kind of understandable that they overreact on any attempt of outside influence. Canach is extremist with a cause. He got his own twisted agenda, but he is more force of self-serving and moral gray area than force of evil like Scarlet. Now what I think about Scarlet. For me she is copy-paste Duella Dent. For those unfamiliar with DC comics imagine steam-punk dressed female Joker. Like it was pointed out in other topic, she is villain sue.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/speech/Is-Scarlet-a-Villain-Sue-Merged

And villain sue is usually boring and lazy design.
So to sum up, I believe GW2 needs more interesting, multidimensional villains for it’s stories. It can only help.

Great post. I had always thought that it is the villains, not the heroes, that drives the story forward.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilIsCool

“There is a reason actors fight for the chance to play the bad guy. The lines are great, the costumes are awesome, the songs are spectacular, the villains often look much sexier than the heroes, and they don’t have to spend the whole shoot pretending they are nicer than anyone they’ve ever met.

Plus, there are all those wonderful toys!

Why is all that true? Why does the bad guy get all the cool stuff? The more interesting the bad guy, the more interesting the story. It really is that simple. You don’t have a story unless you have conflict. The bad guy in most cases is the conflict: The Villain Makes the Plot."

For example, I had hoped that that Aetherblades were some war orphans left behind by some mistakes made by the queen or the Pact. An army of sky pirate driven by hate and pain against Tyria. What can be more cool than that?

Then we got Scarlet, who just wants power and show the world who is boss. T_T

For example:

“6 years ago in 1319, Mai Trin and Horrik were a pair of cheerful teenage friends in the village of Amber. They were both child prodigies and as a pair were set to become great engineers for mankind. That was when Zhaitan awoke and his undead minions overran their village. In order to preserve her forces, Queen Jennah made the hard decision to retreat her army back into fortresses and abandoned the small towns and country side.

Amber was one such abandoned village. In their haste to retreat, the army left behind many civilians to their own fate. Mai Trin and Horrik both survived, but they lost their whole family. Their group of villagers saved whoever they could, but many died right in front of their eyes.

Fighting with the undead weeded out the weak, and only the strong survived. The surviving villagers soon form a pirate group called the Aetherblades, with Mai Trin and Horrik designing weapons for the group. They rely on robbery and salvaging to survive, and have a great distrust on any authority, specially Queen Jennah who betrayed them."

Quote:

“Your so called peace, so-called kingdom, was build the the corpses of our helpless family and friends, who trusted you with their lives, which you betrayed.”

“I know we will win. Because we suffered more than you!”

We have plenty of groups in type 3 (Inquest, Nightmare Court, Separatists) but we don’t have enough interesting individuals is the problem. Canach would fit that description perfectly, but the game hasn’t told his story clearly enough for most players.

I think another problem is that no matter how deep the villians are, no matter how altruistic or evil or driven…we never get the full story. Anet keeps going for the surprise and, as a result, the full story doesn’t get told. What CHIPS wrote about Mai Trin and Horrik might actually be partially true (personal backstory, not the history of the Aetherblades part) but we’d never know because that kind of stuff doesn’t make into the game. In fact, we had to read a short story outside of the game on the web to know Scarlet’s backstory. Shouldn’t that be in a snazzy cut-scene briefing before we venture out to meet the coming invasions? Did no hero raise his/her hand and say “why the ef is this crazy broad doing all this?”

Alleluia.1320:

I think those categories aren’t quite sufficient. I mean, the Joker for example, wouldn’t really fall in to any of them. He’s nihilistic so he doesn’t care for money or power in and of themselves. Due to that same nihilism, he also doesn’t really believe he’s doing “the right thing”, he just does it b/c he likes/feels like it/it amuses him. So he’s also no anti-villain.

Surely this list isn’t complete, but it gives us a good idea of what should we hope to get as villains in a game with such potential as GW2. +1 to OP, and I hope that the right eyes read this sometime.

And, about the Joker, you are right. Let’s add a new category:

4) The Joker and joker-alikes. You know this guy simply deserves his own category!

kRiza krimos.1637:

BilboBaggins.5620:

I would argue that Scarlet would view herself as type 3. She is fighting to destroy the world as it is and create a world where she (and by default, all sylvari) would not be constrained to either follow the pale tree’s visions or the nightmare’s visions but freely determine their own destiny.

Where did you get this things about Scarlet? Afaik there is almost nothing known about her motives, and very little is know about her background besides what was presented in short story.

I got my info from the short story posted on the website:
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/short-story-what-scarlet-saw/

From what I gather most characters are very archetypal, one dimensional cliche characters. The villains are a pretty glaring offense.

Still not interesting enough. Lord of the Rings apart of orks and Uruk-hai got Sauron, Saruman and many other minor villains. Hell, Sauron as a giant eye was more interesting character than most villains in GW2.
One question. Minister Caudecus, is he villainous character or just political adversary of Queen? I think he can become interesting anti-villain/hero.

Zaxares.5419:

Type 3 Villain = Canach.

Was going to say this.

Although ArenaNet did a rather poor job of showing this in-game, from a forum post we learn that he is more or less an anti-villain. He views himself as a hero of the people, trying to protect the weak, while being chased across the continent by assassins hired by the Consortium, even went and raided a few Molten Facilities (how he got the gloves). In Southsun, he’s trying to “save” the people (or so he claims) and destroy the Consortium’s opressionistic acts on the refugees, but in doing so he puts all the refugees at risk (and knowingly so), even sets up some of the refugees as scapegoats.

Jornophelanthas.1475:

I would add Faolain to the list of type 3 villains as well. She believes she is championing the true meaning of being sylvari by rejecting all the human- and Ventari-inspired morality. By rejecting common morality, she comes off as a monstrous villain to us, but she still believes she is doing the right thing. (Although there are some type 1 villainy traits in her, to the extent that the Nightmare Court sometimes appears to act from blind fervor.)

I disagree. Faolain’s a villain of vanity – her only shown goal is simply to draw Caithe into the Nightmare. She herself shows no interest in leading the sylvari to be “their true selves” – the Nightmare Court claims such, and Cadeyrn certainly was attempting such (at first), though over time they seem to have changed.

Cadeyrn started as a Type 3, but devolved into Type 2.

Faolain was always Type 2, more or less. Just a very unique version of it.