What steps do you take when writing antagonists?

[skyfarron]

I base them on people I knew, give them exactly what they always wanted, make them suffer their natural consequences, and watch the character fail spectacularly. Usually works, cause in real life everything's the same but they pay their way out of the consequences. So it's a karmic tale where they can't do that.

[315Art]

That's a good question, in my story I've more than one antagonist, it changes for every story arc, so it depends.
I usually start with the story I want to write, then find the right motivations behind the antagonist's actions and find what triggers the troubles to the main characters, the aesthetic (usually) comes in a second moment.

Music also helps, one of the antagonist's development I'm writing is loosely based on the lyrics of a song I like.

[kitschensyngk]

Some antagonists never learn their lesson in the end.

Some antagonists never change their ways.

Some antagonists don't deserve a happy ending.

Some do, I'm sure, but those type of stories often rub me the wrong way, since they're not always true to life.

By all means, flesh out their backstories, make proper characters of them. But some bad guys are more entertaining when they're not turned into good guys at the end.

[nathanKmcwilliams]

I try to make my antagonists bigger than life and grandiose to the max. They're all driven and powerful, but also often off the edge to their own detriment. Usually their overconfidence or mental instability is their downfall.

[Jenny-Toons]

By all means, flesh out their backstories, make proper characters of them. But some bad guys are more entertaining when they're not turned into good guys at the end.

-Chef's Kiss-

Yes. I do love to make a lot of my antagonists irredeemable. That doesn't mean you might not feel for them, and I do have limits on what they will and won't do. But like, in the end, a lot of them will not be redeemed.

I also like making my antagonists emotional. I love a good cartoon villain that's "evil for evil's sake", but I also love seeing them have people they love and have a glorious villain breakdown when they're in trouble. The chaos that emerges is high class. Added bonus if the antagonist is able to lure the protagonist to their side (or at least be successful in making them think of their perspective).

[RyzaCobalion]

For me is making my antagonist believable both as a character and as a person. Though their actions are irredeemable to the protagonist's point of view. But when you look at the antagonist's point of view on why they're like you can understand how and why they're like this. Like what @Jenny-Toons said it's always fun to make antagonists be like the cartoon villain for making them EVIL for evil sake and enjoyment of watching them fall to the main character but there's something about watching the Antagonist's action and their viewpoint on how they view the world around, the people they interact with, and how they view protagonist point of view.

For my antagonists, they view the mc and the group he's with are the real villains as they're pretty much the ones responsible for their life. But they wouldn't know that exactly since they don't know each other personally.

[PKLucky]

I try to make my antagonists have some logical reasons behind their actions, even if their reasons are petty.

[Kuma]

Main antagonists need to be a dark reflection (Not literal) of the protagonists and have to be tied to the theme and emotional core of the story. If they aren't they lose weight and gravitas. Personality, appearance, and power sets are secondary when it comes to creating them.

They have to be treated as the protagonist of their own stories, running in a mirrored parallel to the protagonist's

[tapiyokastudios]

Word, brutha. Took the words right outa me

[azzy-m]

Basically my rules for antagonists are:

• If they aren't a one-dimensional, "you-re-meant-to-absolutely-despise-them-regardless" charcater, see the world through their perspective. What steps do they need to take to reach their goal? What will they do with the information they have right now? Do they believe they are doing the right thing, or doing things because they needed to be done? Basically approach them the way you write a protagonist.

• If they are a one-dimensional, "you-re-meant-to-absolutely-despise-them-regardless" antagonist, write them as the absolute worst.

[LinQ]

If I can't imagine them dramatically bursting into Frank Sinatra's "My Way" at the end of the story, then I didn't do my job!

Is this a TFS reference?

[LinQ]

I like to give my antagonists almost relatable hopes and dreams. But they take it too far, they're insane and extremely powerful. I'm a big fan of the "this antagonist has a sad backstory which turned them evil" kind of thing but I also like antagonists who have a train of thought that naturally leads them to chaos.

[Kaydreamer]

The biggest question I find I need to answer for my antagonists is the question of why. Why are they doing what they're doing? Usually that narrows down to three potential paths.

• They think it's necessary/for the greater good.
• They're simply selfish and amoral.
• They've been corrupted scrios. (Obviously, this one is specific to my fantasy universe.)

Often it's a combination of these. For one of my primary antagonists, it's all three. For the other, it's only the first one. The motivating factor for my antagonist will impact how I write them, and the kinds of things they are/are not willing to do to achieve their goals.

[BOMB]

The bad guy is never just a bad guy. They're people who do bad things for questionable, debatable reasons. If bad guy is just evil to be evil...he/she is probably boring. Your bad guy should have enough layers that they could have their own story. That's how I see it, but honestly, I rarely have "bad guys" in my stories. I like to explore stories where society or ideas are what the main character has to face.

[AmysGames]

My general rule when writing antagonists is to make them believable. Figure out why they think they're in the right—or in some cases, why they've decided it's okay to be bad. This often (though not always) involves making them sympathetic in some way, like maybe they're lashing out because of injustices they've faced in the past.

That being said, it can really depend on the needs of the story! Sometimes you need characters who are shallow, characters whose motives don't quite make sense, and characters who kick puppies just for fun. If a sympathetic backstory feels forced and contrived, it might just hurt the story more than it helps.

[Eliteone]

There are usually two types of antagonists. One that you want to create as a righteous one. You give that antagonist a sad back story that works as the basis of his actions in the future. So the readers feel that even though what he is doing is wrong, is somewhat right from his perspective. The other type of antagonist is evil by nature. You don't have to justify his nature. He is pure evil and his actions are completely unpredictable. Both types of antagonists are fun to write. The first is good for the story while the second one is fun to write. The examples for the first type can be Pain, Itachi, Katakuri, Kira and Dio, Hisoka, Orochimaru for the second type.

[chestnutriceeee]

Since I write a story from an antagonist’s point of view, the one excellent step I took was to stop thinking of the character as an antagonist. If you wish to write a truly believable antagonist, simply thinking of them as evil characters ends up making them petty and shallow, even if you try your best to avoid it.

Your antagonist has a goal, create a set of principles (Any principles work! an antagonist can be a nice guy to others! Heck, if they don’t have courtesy and regard for others then it makes 0 sense for them to be alive for long and carry out their evil schemes without getting the whole damn world against themselves!) for them and try helping them achieve that goal. Make it believable and realistic.

It might seem too hasslesome to do, especially if your antagonists are evil fellas that are fated to be slain by the protagonist. But if your antagonists just leave the story as an evil guy without ever dropping a message to the reader or the characters or your lore, then what was even the point of having that antagonist? To give out examples, major antagonists like Thanos from Marvel or Joker from DC left an enormous impact on their respective worlds. From an anime-ish standpoint, Lelouch from Code Geass and Light from Death Note flip the world over for the better before they die.

A good antagonist could never be explained by the words “evil character.” If my antagonist is ever simply an evil character with no one thinking that they were more than simply evil, then I feel I have committed an actual crime when it comes to writing characters.

[darthmongoose]

For me, there are a few factors that make a good antagonist, but the main two are:

• They present a problem that your hero cannot overcome in the position or state they are in at the start of the story. The hero will need to gain some combination of character development, power or allies to beat the villain.
• They need make an impression. Through some combination of design or style, personality, way of speaking, actions or humour, a good villain immediately makes a home in your mind.

I had a bulletpoint earlier that said "they need motivations that make sense, even if it's only through their twisted logic", but then realised... actually maybe that isn't a requirement. Maleficent is one of my favourite Disney villains, like every time she turned up in Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2 I was like "YESSSS! Maleficent!" and honestly, ignoring the live action movie that retcons her motivation to something coherent, her motivation has largely always been "They will regret not inviting me to the baby shower!!!" But it works!
Like... coherent motivation can be helpful, and it's certainly a factor I love about Thanos or Killmonger and think make them some of the stronger Marvel movie villains... but when I think about it, sometimes "motiveless malignity" to use a term a famous Shakespeare critic once coined to describe Iago in Othello, can work too. Cruella is a villain who I definitely preferred just being an awful rich person who loves fashion and doesn't care about people or animals so sees no reason anyone or even any laws should stop her from having a coat made from the fur of a hundred puppies, to like... somebody who got rich by being a girlboss and whose mum was killed by Dalmatians seeking recognition in the Fashion world.

So after some thinking, I feel like so long as the villain is somebody the hero can't overcome, even if it's for internal reasons (like Mother Gothel in Tangled), and so long as they are fascinating to watch or read, even if their plan is as ropey as "Take over the world -> ????? -> Profit?" you can still make them really compelling.

[TAMAnnoying]

I’m reading other peoples post and realizing that when it comes to antagonist my bullet points are as such

The rules:
-There are no rules
-if all else fails make them hot

I really can’t find myself sticking with one rule to rule them all some people say that the villian needs to be the opposite of the protagonist- but in some stories they’re the same person with same goals that go about it differently. Some people say that the villian has to make sense- and we’re I agree with that on most occasions, I feel like some villains and obstacles don’t have to inherently make sense so long as they are consistent

I think for me a villian is a lot like making a protagonist where anything goes but above all you gotta just redraft and make sure that your world is consistent with the characters that exist within it.

[Azifri]

For me an antagonist is a protagonist whose story isn't told from their perspective.

In other words, same as for any other character, their story should make sense if I were to write the story from their point of view.