| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dennis |
Posted - 27 Jul 2010 : 05:42:15
There already are quite a number of stand-alone series: The Wizards, The Fighters, The Harpers, The Nobles, The Cities, The Dungeons, The Citadels....
What about The Villains?
I think it's interesting and “enlightening” to plunge headfirst to the minds of the greatest villains in the Realms, know what truly make them evil, their childhood, their multi-layered plans, their rise to power, their unfortunate fall, their betrayals, their disappointments, their promise to rise again...
Should there be The Villains series, who do you think must be in them? How many books should comprise the series? Must they be limited only to old villains? New? Or a mix of both? For me, the more books, the better. But 15 is fine with me. Eight old villains, and seven new, published alternately. Here are my picks:
1. Larloch (Richard Lee Byers)
2. A former apprentice of The Simbul (Lynn Abbey)
3. Telamont Tanthul (Paul S. Kemp)
4. A Cormyrean senior wizard (Ed Greenwood)
5. Szass Tam (Jeff Grubb)
6. A Rashemi witch (Clayton Emery)
7. Lallara Mediocros (Richard Lee Byers)
8. A survivor of Halruaa (Elaine Cunningham)
9. Halaster(Steven Schend)
10. A vengeful denizen from the Sea of Fallen Stars (Bruce Cordell)
11. Mephistopheles (Elaine Cunningham)
12. A Red Wizard from the School of Conjuration (Jeff Grubb)
13. Rivalen Tanthul (Troy Denning)
14. A fallen deva (Ed Greenwood)
15. Vhostym (Paul S. Kemp)
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Xnella Moonblade-Thann |
Posted - 28 Dec 2012 : 08:02:29
I see "Doom Patrol" and think of the DC comics team by the same name...sorry if I went off-topic there |
| Dennis |
Posted - 19 Dec 2012 : 13:48:14
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
How about "The Doom Patrol"?
I would add these on my list:
Architects of Doom
Masters of Infamy
The Cowled Emperors of Villainy
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 17 Dec 2012 : 01:15:46
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Many monsters are even considered intelligent- dragons, illithids, beholders to name a few- so why shouldn't they have motives we could understand?
Killing mindless monsters rarely sustains a reader's attention. That's why people tend to 'humanize' the monsters, or at least give them minds to think and 'steer' the protagonist's actions. Alice (from Resident Evil) looks cool fighting a plethora of mindless undead. But among those undead are intelligent creatures that can wreck havoc more devastatingly than their mindless counterparts, and they're what makes the plot appealing. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 21 Nov 2012 : 00:51:48
Well, Erik, I for one can understand that desire. This is speaking from a purely observational point, but it would seem that even an animal can have motivations beyond what we might see as "instinct" or natural behavior. If apes can wage war on each other (and they do- just watch some of Jane Goodall's documentaries) or a domestic pet can show obvious signs of compassion and love, then why not "evil", as well? (Trust me on this, I once had a cat who occassionally did "bad" things just because he COULD.) We've all heard of animals suddenly snapping and attacking for no apparent reason, but can we even be sure that there wasn't a reason? Rationally, we assume that planned mayhem is a purely "human" concept, but how do we explain those moments when we are suddenly swatted from under furniture by a patiently waiting feline? Or the dog who intentionally shreds something he KNOWS is off-limits? Plotting mischief for its own sake doesn't seem to be relegated to humans alone. Which is all the more reason that "monsters" might easily be assumed to have similar motives. Many monsters are even considered intelligent- dragons, illithids, beholders to name a few- so why shouldn't they have motives we could understand? |
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Nov 2012 : 00:10:40
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
It falls a little flat these days to have a supposedly human character who is a full on monster, because we're evolving toward seeing things more in shades of gray, rather than black and white. I think there is some resistance even to seeing "monsters" as creatures--people want to humanize them and understand their motivations, which are fundamentally alien. Which is part of why sometimes, when we see a "monster" done well, it can be really, really scary and jarring.
An orc is a monster, so are beholders, and mutated roaches. Monster is too SHALLOW to capture or describe entities like Sauron, The Dread (Riftwar), Ruin (Mistborn) and dozens of pure evil characters in various settings. These entities are beyond the ken of mortals. That's why defeating them often requires some supernatural aid, in the form of a dollop of knowledge about their nature, or simply pure, raw power. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 20 Nov 2012 : 23:53:43
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on....
I don't like him. Never did. But I could bear with it. He was kinda funny in Expendables and Terminator, though.
I searched it in imdb.com. 1979 and Western. Definitely not my cup of tea. I'll pass.
It's more of a comedy that happens to be set in the Old West, as opposed to being a true Western. I'm not a fan of Westerns, myself, but I enjoyed The Villain.
Really it's more of a live action Wile E. Cyote/ Road Runner cartoon than anything.
You're not just saying that because of hte Acme-esque schemes, are you CoA? LOL! Well, you're certainly not wrong. Of course, if you liked Blazing Saddles(also nominally a western), Dennis- and who DOESN'T?- you might like this one. Granted, it doesn't break teh fourth wall like that one did, but I WILL say that at times it seems like the HORSE is the smartest character of them all. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 20 Nov 2012 : 19:53:14
Here's how I look at it:
There's a distinction to be made between VILLAINS (who are human-ish characters with complex motivations that do enough wrong that they are considered bad guys) and MONSTERS (irredeemably evil/destructive creatures that spread doom and destruction wherever they go). Villains (like Saruman or Grima Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings) are people twisted by circumstance/destiny/psychology to do evil for a purpose (maybe it's for conquest, power, love of family or country, inner character flaws, or because they were corrupted by evil), whereas Monsters (like Sauron or the Nazgul) are creatures that represent the force of evil in the world/universe; they do evil simply because it is their nature. These, as I see it, are the two ends of the spectrum, and fantasy as a genre contains a whole range of characters that fit on the spectrum, and it is famous for relying more on "pure monsters" as representations of evil in the universe. The struggle against these forces is symbolic of the struggle of humans to live in a world that is not always on their side.
It falls a little flat these days to have a supposedly human character who is a full on monster, because we're evolving toward seeing things more in shades of gray, rather than black and white. I think there is some resistance even to seeing "monsters" as creatures--people want to humanize them and understand their motivations, which are fundamentally alien. Which is part of why sometimes, when we see a "monster" done well, it can be really, really scary and jarring.
Cheers |
| Gabrielle_H |
Posted - 20 Nov 2012 : 17:31:21
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Characters that are of shades of gray are generally better than those defined in black and white. However, some authors paint black/evil characters just as effectively. Feist, for instance. While many of his villains tend to blur the line that separates villainy and heroism, some of them are pure evil, too. The mystery that surround them, the pure malice, the sense of hopelessness and pervasive fear they exude, are what make them nearly interesting as their shady counterparts...
I don't mind black/evil, as long as it's three-dimensional black/evil. I don't like "evil for evil's sake" because it just feels gratuitous and flat to me, but I love a character with a pitch black soul if he/she has a justification for it.
Also, even when it's the villain's story, the villain doesn't have to be a sympathetic character. I enjoy reading about a character I love to hate, when it's done well!
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 20 Nov 2012 : 02:37:16
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I love graying my heroes and lightening up my villains. My Shadowbane series might be what you're looking for. 
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Hopefully, if my story makes into the When the Heroes come Home II anthology, you will get yet-another taste of that. Its a flavor I personally enjoy, a lot.
That is a *great* series of anthologies for anyone interested in heroism vs. villiany. The first book (which has a pretty dark story from yours truly) was WHEN THE HERO COMES HOME, and the sequel (which has yet another one, this story darker) was called WHEN THE VILLAIN COMES HOME. It's all about dissecting what makes a hero a hero and what makes a villain a villain.
Cheers
Characters that are of shades of gray are generally better than those defined in black and white. However, some authors paint black/evil characters just as effectively. Feist, for instance. While many of his villains tend to blur the line that separates villainy and heroism, some of them are pure evil, too. The mystery that surround them, the pure malice, the sense of hopelessness and pervasive fear they exude, are what make them nearly interesting as their shady counterparts...
In the Realms, the archdevils probably come close to that category. |
| Chosen of Asmodeus |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 22:29:41
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on....
I don't like him. Never did. But I could bear with it. He was kinda funny in Expendables and Terminator, though.
I searched it in imdb.com. 1979 and Western. Definitely not my cup of tea. I'll pass.
It's more of a comedy that happens to be set in the Old West, as opposed to being a true Western. I'm not a fan of Westerns, myself, but I enjoyed The Villain.
Really it's more of a live action Wile E. Cyote/ Road Runner cartoon than anything. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 19 Nov 2012 : 19:41:46
I love graying my heroes and lightening up my villains. My Shadowbane series might be what you're looking for.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Hopefully, if my story makes into the When the Heroes come Home II anthology, you will get yet-another taste of that. Its a flavor I personally enjoy, a lot.
That is a *great* series of anthologies for anyone interested in heroism vs. villiany. The first book (which has a pretty dark story from yours truly) was WHEN THE HERO COMES HOME, and the sequel (which has yet another one, this story darker) was called WHEN THE VILLAIN COMES HOME. It's all about dissecting what makes a hero a hero and what makes a villain a villain.
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Nov 2012 : 03:48:59
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on....
I don't like him. Never did. But I could bear with it. He was kinda funny in Expendables and Terminator, though.
I searched it in imdb.com. 1979 and Western. Definitely not my cup of tea. I'll pass.
It's more of a comedy that happens to be set in the Old West, as opposed to being a true Western. I'm not a fan of Westerns, myself, but I enjoyed The Villain. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 18 Nov 2012 : 02:06:55
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on....
I don't like him. Never did. But I could bear with it. He was kinda funny in Expendables and Terminator, though.
I searched it in imdb.com. 1979 and Western. Definitely not my cup of tea. I'll pass. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 17 Nov 2012 : 19:42:43
RAS touched upon the 'situational villain' in one of his short stories (the one about the goblin), and we've also seen FR scenarios where good guys and villains teamed-up to accomplish something (The Horde, and the events of Blackstaff, just to name two of the more prominent ones).
FR has never been 'black & white', it has always been shades of grey (before someone got a hold of that expression and turned into a cheesy self-gratification chapbook). Come to think of it, that book would probably make an excellent Realms chapbook. 
Hopefully, if my story makes into the When the Heroes come Home II anthology, you will get yet-another taste of that. Its a flavor I personally enjoy, a lot. |
| Artemas Entreri |
Posted - 17 Nov 2012 : 18:39:26
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So, call me crazy, but I think "villain" is not (or, rather, shouldn't be) a job title, but instead a situational aspect of a character.
What kind of benefits come with that job title? Does it include medical and a 401k?
Those, and as a signing bonus you get an evil-aligned sentient weapon.  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Nov 2012 : 16:07:37
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So, call me crazy, but I think "villain" is not (or, rather, shouldn't be) a job title, but instead a situational aspect of a character.
What kind of benefits come with that job title? Does it include medical and a 401k? |
| Neo2151 |
Posted - 17 Nov 2012 : 08:04:18
So, call me crazy, but I think "villain" is not (or, rather, shouldn't be) a job title, but instead a situational aspect of a character.
Maybe the idea of "hero versus villain" is necessary for short, one-shot 300-400 page books (the type that most FR novels will be) but it's honestly played out, IMO.
What I'd rather see more of is characters who grow and develop in ways that might paint them as a villain some of the time, but not necessarily all of the time.
For example, take Jaime Lannister from the "Song of Ice and Fire" novels. At the beginning of the series he's this awful person who has no problem shoving 8yr old boys from tower windows and you love to hate him. However, by the 4th book you realize you love him and you're rooting for him.
In this regard, I think a series about "villains" could work extremely well. Just keep the focus on "who" they are, instead of "what" they are. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 16 Nov 2012 : 03:47:54
LOL, yup!! That's the one! I first saw it in the theatre when I was three (yes, I'm THAT old...) And came home afterward to tell my grandparents (my mother and I still lived with them) "I love Whiskey!" Grandma went through the roof. She ddin't know I was talking about the horse.... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Nov 2012 : 03:42:18
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on....
I'd forgotten about that! Handsome Stranger -- "I was named after my father." And his seven-shot six-shooters... |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 23:31:28
Dennis, if you like Ah-nold, you should definitely give it a look. Not only was it one of his first starring roles (if not THE first- not sure on that) it's friggin' hilarious! He's so clueless, that you actually ROOT for the bad guy. Especially with the damsel constantly throwing herself at him, and he doesn't even catch on.... |
| Artemas Entreri |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 02:08:28
Lol, I know you are partial to the arcane. I would love to see a properly implemented Villains series though. Some non-mage additions I would list are Artemis Entreri and Fzoul Chembryl
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 01:02:55
I know, right?! You're well aware how partial I am to wizards. But you're correct. Besides, WotC would likely have RAS write about one of his fighter/warrior/rouge villains. |
| Artemas Entreri |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 00:56:38
Too many magic-users on the initial list Dennis. Variety is the spice of life after all. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 00:51:32
Not familiar with that film. Anyway, I think it doesn't really matter who wins in the end. The purpose of the series should be to unveil the secret lives of the Realms' renown villains. Whether it's a tragic or fairy tale ending, it depends, as long the story stays true to the characters' personalities. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 15 Nov 2012 : 00:42:36
How about "The Doom Patrol"? Although, when I hear/read "The Villains", I can't help but think of the very OLD Arnold Schwartzeneager movie called "The Villain". He played the good guy, but oddly, it's the bad guy who wins in the end! Apropos, no? |
| Dennis |
Posted - 14 Nov 2012 : 23:45:03
If this happens, what title would you give it? The Villains is fine, I guess. Though it doesn't really sound attention-grabbing. Lords of Darkness has been used twice already. How about the following...
The Darkness Behind the Masks
The Core of Villainy
The Shapers of Doom
Into the Heart of Darkness
The Lords Immortal |
| Dennis |
Posted - 13 Nov 2012 : 02:03:18
It is possible that a group of Red Wizards led the Saerloonians in attacking Selgaunt, which had been known to be in the tight clutch of the Shadovar. They might even have sent some of the Burning Braziers to help the Saerloonian wizards summon those fire elementals that wrecked havoc to Selgaunt.
Or Mirabeta might have sought the Red Wizards' help as her last resort. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 02 Nov 2011 : 04:22:06
Well said, MT. And I wouldn't count the Zhents out just yet. Manshoon is, after all, the unending (though not undying) archmage, and the roots of the Black Network run deep.
Cheers |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Nov 2011 : 03:05:45
In many of Ed's stories, which portray what is now 'the early realms' (that we know), the two main groups contending for control of Sembia (through its underworld) are the Zhents and the Red Wizards. He has portrayed numerous examples of this (and Paul Kemp touched upon it as well with his Mask-worshipers vs Cyricists).
Now the Zhents are gone, killed by the Netherese, and they have taken over Sembia as well. You think the Red Wizards just stood by while that was happening? I truly think not. Szass Tam does not strike me as the type to "roll over and play dead" (Hmmm... actually... never mind... that might have been a bad way of putting it).
We were not witness to that takeover, since it happened during the lost years between editions, but I would imagine that the Thayans tried very hard to protect their holdings there.
In that scenario, I could see a Red Wizard being hailed as a savior by local folk, as he battles with invading Shades. He is a known threat - has probably been living amongst them in secret for years. Now, he may not be saving a particular settlement for the right reasons, but does it matter?
Ergo, under the right circumstances, even someone like Szass Tam could be the 'good guy' if something worse (by comparison in a specific situation) were to rear it's head. in fact, something like that happened when the Horde invaded Faerûn - the Red Wizards were the protectors of Thay and its people. During that same conflict, Zhents fought alongside Cormyrians and Dalesmen, and Orcs even received medals from King Azoun.
You don't have to make a villain 'good' to make him the main character in a novel, you just need to spin it in such a way that most folks don't realize their underlying motivations. I am sure there are hundreds of instances of this when the Spellplague struck - evil despots turned protectors... it happens, and it makes for great story. When things get really bad, even the bad guys look good by comparison.
In fact, the Plague-years are just the vehicle a Villains series needs to be viable. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 02 Nov 2011 : 02:03:08
Most readers can identify who's the villain even among the so-called "shady" characters. They may not be portrayed in plain black and white, but their actions and intentions would point out whether it's villainy or heroism. |
|
|
