The Role Of The Bad Guy [Antag Discussion]

The role of the bad guy; Well it really been my department with both Hagokumo Masada and Eric Zarathos really for some years it been Hagokumo. He's been my main antagonist with destruction and framing Eric for a long time as his original name Kade Hiroshima. When Akemi was around, Hagokumo was causing destruction around Karakura. He's been my main bad guy for a long while still finally the murderer was finally defeated by Yuudeshi clan leader.

He'd returned for a long time being dead, Hagokumo caused some more problems and then finally defeated.

Eric Zarathos is my vengeful mad demon.....the demon loves violence but his memories of his past are lost and gone. The mad one has been my new antagonist

Sid Iramasha been thrown in the fray as well....

JJ wrote:

[color=blue]This is actually a topic that's felt really relevant to me as of late, and I've gotten some ideas of my own to share about them. The one character I have who I can firmly say is an antagonist, is the Doctor. Why do I say this? Because he opposes society, and most of the time, that's what defines a villain or antagonist. It can change depending on the protagonists viewpoint, but as the site's 'protagonist' is human society, that makes the Doctor one of the absolute parallel.

Yar, I could see how you'd view him as an antag with that. Although, I'd like to chime in with the whole human society and say the PH Verse is more broad than that in my opinion. Since it's comprised of K-World, Sugiura Realm, Demon World, The Living Realm and Soul Society. In K-World, he'd actually be a protag as most consider themselves fighting for a righteous cause. Whereas anyone fighting against that could actually be an antag in K-World. So it's kind of funny how that works.

The Antagonist is doing what they believe is Right.

Yarp, that quote right there is what makes a believable antag for myself. It's that in their mind? They are honestly doing the correct thing. Which is why when I end up RPing people like Kin, I have to really solidify his reasoning for the whole cause of K-World and his goals. It's also why I ended up making Rose a Neutral, although others could view her as an antag based on some more brutal actions she's taken in her past.

The Antagonist is human too.

Sing: (Un) I'm an Iramasha
Mana: (Un) I'm a demon
Ender: I'm stuck in hell.

Jokes aside

This is what makes an antagonist, well, an antagonist. If the antagonist has no motivation for what their doing (Ragyo...) then they come off as weak and not very effective.

I don't understand where you believe Ragyo had no motivation. As to me? She tried to have a world filled with life fibers, wanted to feed them to the planet and eventually become one with them in a perfect world. However, shit happened and she realized that her goal may not have been met. Given the writers were obviously not going to make a 2nd season, I can see why she just ended up killing herself and letting time pass in order for the next generation of life fibers to attempt to finish the job.

Now, with that aside, I care about motivation as well, but it's also about how you can pull off a character. In theory? Everyone should be able to fly a plane based on the instructions given to you off of a information packet. In practice? Oh boy, there is a good chance you won't be able to land or fly that sucker without burning everything in the process.

The same analogy applies to antags. It may sound good on paper, but it takes a certain art to effectively convey these thoughts in thread. It's why we even have try-outs for canon characters in general. Sure, everyone knows the formula to someone like Aizen, but can they effectively play out his style?

Also, just now, I had a passing thought that a truly good antag can even take a rather cliched ideal, grow it, develop it and put a new twist on it. It's all about how you rock it, more or less. Some people are born with deformities, but they learn how to be comfortable with themselves and rock what they have to the best of their ability. The same thing can apply to a character troop/archtype you happen to apply to your creation. You can give a cliche angle, but depending on how you rock that angle, it can become pretty interesting.

This comes as a bit of a contrast of Frost's belief of an antagonist.

Oh no, that's not it at all. That's just a belief for my antagoist and really major ones who are aiming for that sort of commanding presence. My words may have came out wrong, but my intent was for people just shooting for big-time villains. Of course you can go about that in whatever way you choose, as I don't believe there is some sort of standard for antag's, that just works with me as my wording is very strong in my post. Dai has said to me before in the past and I've just stuck with it.

Although, on a personal life, you are my opposite in some ways. If you remember that conversation we had on skype, you were more passive about your strength when growing up; whereas I was more aggressive and on the offense. I think that whole factor even plays in the way we write. As I usually aim for major changes in progression with the threads I'm in, even with protags/neutral; so I'm often the type to initiate something where I see you more as the type to just go along with the flow until something critical occurs where you need to strike.

So I just feel that commanding influence of my personality can be easily redirected into a pulsating aura for my antags, yanno?

The Doctor is not commanding, he believes himself to be at the bottom of the social chain. In addition, most of his skillset is devoted to running away.. quite a bit different than putting up a good fight.

For one of my own secondary villains, Mecha Neo, he doesn't have that traditional commanding aura I referenced when it came to big-time Aizen/Juda Bach type villains. A lot of his powerset is mainly used towards defending, offering support and being a pillar others that are considered his allies can stand upon.

After being given a second chance by K-World after being freed from Ender's control, Mecha Neo just considers them his family and his way of ensuring this family stands is to be the anchor that keeps them in place within the depths of the Copper Cross command post.

So don't get me wrong on the whole commanding aura thing; that's just something I feel more comfortable and easy RPing.

An Antagonist must be able to interact with the Protagonists

When it comes to that quote, that depends on how clear-cut the story is to the audience. When it comes to role play? They should be able to interact with the protag/neutral/antag and anyone else they come into contact with. Otherwise, it proves to be a drab experience for all if they just sit like a fly on the wall.

Traditionally, an antagonist is attempting to accomplish a goal that goes against that of the Protagonist, this is conflict and is the entire point of a story.

A simpler way to view an antagonist is a person making dicey choices as the story goes along. I'm not saying that's all there is to an antag, but think of a place in your life where you could have been described as an antagonist. Imagine you are five years old, your parents are overly stressed and they are trying to save something sweet to eat for later to calm their nerves. They give you a warning not to touch what is in the fridge, but you make the conscious choice to go ahead anyway and eat all the ice cream; much to your parents distaste.

In that instance? You can be described as an antagonist based on the fact that you are causing grief to another, making a chaotic choice and thus causing conflict to your parents whom have to confront you on that matter. However, on the flip side, the antag in this scenario may have had a relatable reason for doing so. Such as using food as a comfort or escape to deal with a lot of tension in the household from his mother and father fighting over fiances; especially if there were even sort of shouting matches involved.

Thus, treating most characters like this can end up in interesting scenario's. As, since Shadin is a chaotic neutral, he questioned for a few moments if the actions he took in the Australian War were antagonist in nature or not; despite leading a relatively protagonist-esqe lifestyle in his earlier years. His intent was justifiable enough in his mind, but the result was questionable.

So to me, that isn't all there is to an antag, but I always like to think of the perception of one like that. It's all about the choices you make, how others perceive them and where it goes from there to add some sort of interest to the story.

Antagonists are needed for the site, but if they don't interact with their protagonists, lack a foundation that one can relate to, and fail to show that they share aspects of humanity... then they simply will not deliver the same impact that they need to to fulfill their role

Nah, I think that's for any character really. If a character doesn't interact with their surroundings, has a lack of back story and is never used -- then they won't ever have an impact. I've seen some characters lack a sense of humanity, and I've found those sorts of character usually send chills down my spines because of it. Of course I can enjoy a humane villain, but I can also take much interest one who lacks these traits -- IF PLAYED CORRECTLY.

Just imagining someone discarding their humanity in the pursuit of a worthwhile and reliable goal would be pretty tense to watch. People do it all the time in the real world. You have to lose parts of yourself, for instance, to go aimlessly killing any person in your way. That progression into a monstrous shell of a human is something chilling. All you have to do is look at the killers in the Middle East; like those in the Taliban even. To straight-up be-head someone on camera for a belief, discarding your human emotion, is pretty tense stuff.

So to conclude: IT'S ALL ABOUT DELIVERY WITH ME. Do you have what it takes to really deliver that character's persona, background and motives to the forefront or not? It's what makes Kenpachi Zaraki interesting; given he is of the BERSERK arch-type.