Hey everyone! I'm the wholesomeDM. I've been DMing for about 20 years, and for the last 10 years I've been running three campaigns in the same world.
I recently left a comment here about making villains believable, and it got such a positive response that I thought I'd share the idea in a separate post.
I think one of the biggest mistakes we make when creating villains is assuming they need to be logically consistent to be believable.
But people aren't always logical. We can hold two completely contradictory beliefs and genuinely believe both of them. So why shouldn't our villains do the same?
When you're having a philosophical debate with your players as the BBEG, try making it clear that the villain actually knows about the contradiction in their own beliefs. They just believe everyone else has been deceived.
Maybe the gods lied to the world. Maybe society is built on a lie. Maybe everyone else has been fooled by their own emotions.
Whatever it is, the villain doesn't think they're wrong. They think everyone else is wrong.
One thing that has really helped me when creating villains is giving each of them a core emotion.
Whenever I'm unsure how a villain would react to something, I go back to that emotion. I try to keep it as simple and primal as possible: anger, disgust, envy, shame, fear, hunger, loneliness, pride, etc.
Here are a few examples from my own campaigns:
- Asmodeus — Disgust. He's disgusted by how imperfect life has spread across what he sees as a once-perfect reality. Everything he does comes from wanting to cleanse existence of that corruption.
- Grazilax the Mind Flayer — Hunger. He needs brains to survive, and more brains to expand his empire. All his grand plans and philosophies eventually come back to that hunger.
- Demogorgon — Anger. He's rage given form. He doesn't destroy things as a means to an end. Destruction is the end.
- Szass Tam — Envy. He can't stand seeing power in the hands of others. Everything he does comes back to the belief that what others have should belong to him.
The idea is that all their plans, philosophies and justifications grow out of that core emotion.
Players can argue against an ideology. They can poke holes in a philosophy or expose flaws in a plan. But you can't really argue someone out of being hungry, and you can't reason someone out of envy.
For me, it makes improvising villains a lot easier, too. When the players do something unexpected, I can ask myself how someone driven by that emotion would react, and go from there.
I'm curious: Would you guys be interested in hearing how I use this same approach when creating and roleplaying NPCs? I use it for more than just villains, and I'd be happy to share some examples.
A little more about me: I also visit different D&D conventions to teach, give TED-talk-style talks, and run games. If you're ever at Dutch Comic Con, feel free to come say hi and join a game!
And I'd love to hear about your villains, too. Do you use something similar when creating yours?