Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Jammer87 wrote:
I tend to play the characters who are the most interesting to me. I like to think things are on a spectrum and less binary. To that point rarely are these things ever so easy or clear cut. Generally, the so-called ‘villain’ sees themselves as the hero of the story, and it’s our perspective that decides who gets the laurel wreath and who gets the horns. From their view, they’re making the hard choices, doing what ‘must be done,’ or reclaiming what’s rightfully theirs. From ours, they’re the cackling bad guy twirling the mustache. Heroes and villains aren’t objective facts—they’re just the side of the story you happen to believe.

Where does Ming the Merciless fall in that? Or Emperor Palpatine? Or David Lo Pan?

Sometimes bad guys are bad for the power. Or (refer to the Joker), evil for the laughs.

It would be boring if ALL the bad guys were like that... but it gets boring if every bad guy AND good guy are morally grey as well.

Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.

Doesn't the Joker have a movie that goes over his slide into becoming the Joker? Was he evil from that start of that movie?

 Jammer87 wrote:
Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.

Doesn't the Joker have a movie that goes over his slide into becoming the Joker? Was he evil from that start of that movie?

What?
The Batman movie from 1989? Yeah, he was evil to start with.

ccs wrote:

 Jammer87 wrote:
Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.

Doesn't the Joker have a movie that goes over his slide into becoming the Joker? Was he evil from that start of that movie?

What?
The Batman movie from 1989? Yeah, he was evil to start with.

People love to hang everything on the 1989 Burton movie with the whole ‘failed comic, dead wife, acid bath’ thing, but the Joker’s been around since 1940 and his story has never been that simple. He’s had more retcons and reboots than most characters have had issues—sometimes he’s the tragic clown brought low by bad luck and mental illness, sometimes he’s just pure chaos with no reason at all. That’s kind of the point: rarely are these stories clean-cut tales of ‘hero vs. villain.’ The villain almost always sees themselves as the hero, and it’s our perception that draws the line. With Joker, whether you view him as a broken man crushed by circumstance or just a lunatic who likes the punchline written in blood depends entirely on which version of the story you’re reading. 85 years of existence as a villain..

 Jammer87 wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Jammer87 wrote:
Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.

Doesn't the Joker have a movie that goes over his slide into becoming the Joker? Was he evil from that start of that movie?

What?
The Batman movie from 1989? Yeah, he was evil to start with.

People love to hang everything on the 1989 Burton movie with the whole ‘failed comic, dead wife, acid bath’ thing, but the Joker’s been around since 1940 and his story has never been that simple. He’s had more retcons and reboots than most characters have had issues—sometimes he’s the tragic clown brought low by bad luck and mental illness, sometimes he’s just pure chaos with no reason at all. That’s kind of the point: rarely are these stories clean-cut tales of ‘hero vs. villain.’ The villain almost always sees themselves as the hero, and it’s our perception that draws the line. With Joker, whether you view him as a broken man crushed by circumstance or just a lunatic who likes the punchline written in blood depends entirely on which version of the story you’re reading. 85 years of existence as a villain..

Hey, you're the one who asked if there was a movie where he was evil from the start....

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
What if the game offers a moral system that essentially says: "Don't Get Caught."

How will most players, in your opinion act, without the good/evil axis in the game?

Probably depends heavily on the group, more than anything else. Consider the 'murderhobo' stereotype in D&D, groups of nominally good PCs who go around invading the homes of sapient creatures with the express purpose of killing them and stealing their belongings.

I'm attempting to legitimize a group of murder hobos by giving them a government sanction.

It's like herding chickens so far. I was told it could be done. But it's a lot harder than I thought.

Literally my current campaign. Of course, the whole party (so far) is Chaotic.

I would've assumed you to be the virtuous and chaste bastion of Lawful Goodness.

To be honest, I've had an (almost) all Paladin campaign (5 Paladins of varying faiths and Cleric/Inquisitor).

The best way I can describe it is imagine you dumped a squad of Black Templars into D&D. There was a whole lotta intolerance going on.

 Jammer87 wrote:
Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.

Doesn't the Joker have a movie that goes over his slide into becoming the Joker? Was he evil from that start of that movie?

The Joker has a bunch of different origin stories, all of them mutually exclusive.

In the 1989 Batman movie, before he became the Joker, he was an overly-ambitious gangster who was having an affair with his capo's mistress and had been the one to shoot Bruce Wayne's parents. In the 2019 Joker movie, he was suffering from severe mental illness and abuse, and help was overwhelmingly denied by an uncaring society. I'm pretty certain there have been several in other comics, cartoons, and movies as well. And given the nature of the Joker, I can absolutely see him believing each and every one of them is true in the moment he told them.

 Jammer87 wrote:
Well... I love a good argument.

From Ming’s perspective, he rules a fractured empire of squabbling planets, each with its own petty ambitions. To him, mercy is weakness, and weakness invites chaos. He sees himself as the only force capable of maintaining order across the cosmos. Raised in a culture where betrayal is common and loyalty is rare, Ming learned early that fear is more reliable than love. His cruelty isn’t random—it’s a survival mechanism. To him “I bring unity. I bring peace. The cost is high, but chaos costs more.”

Palpatine isn’t just a Sith Lord—he’s a political visionary who believes democracy is inherently flawed. From his view, the Republic is bloated, inefficient, and doomed to collapse under its own weight. Say what you will about the destruction of the Jedi it was coming based on their rigid orthodoxy that stifled innovation and bred resentment. Also the Jedi claim to be peacekeepers, not soldiers? Yet they serve as generals in the Clone Wars, enforcing Republic policy with lightsabers.

Lo Pan is less a villain and more a prisoner of time. Cursed to exist without form, he’s spent centuries trying to reclaim his humanity. His actions are cruel, yes—but they’re driven by desperation and a twisted sense of justice.
?

No villain thinks they are the villain. There are a lot of psychological reasons for this.

That does not mean that their actions are not villainous. This is why the road to damnation is paved with good intentions.

Are people taking Palpatine's lies as some kind of sympathetic backstory? The dude manufactures every problem as a way to acquire more wealth and power for himself. He at no point improves anything and leaves little beyond death and ruin behind. Whatever motivations he claims are manipulations to get what he wants.

Also, fwiw, the Joker KNOWS he's a villain. He's not deluded or even trying to accomplish anything. He just enjoys hurting people and whatever inciting incident you want to ascribe to his past in no way excuses his present actions.