The Biggest Problem with League Lore: Villains

ModCaptainMårvelous··21 votes·6,362 views

I want to discuss a problem I have with league lore and something I feel is overall problematic with how Riot writes things. The biggest problem USED to be the overarching lack of retcons but instead, I want to focus on what I feel is more painful: The lack of villains. Please note that some of this will be personal opinion. Mostly on categorizing who I consider a hero/villain/etc. so don't get TOO mad at me if I consider your favorite champ to be a bit mean.

#Part 1: Actual Villain Count.

For this rundown, I'm going to be focusing mostly on regions that have gotten recent lore updates (Bilgewater-to-Demacia). Some (Ionia etc.) haven't had large scale updates while others (Freljord) might not be canon anymore. We're also going to allow for "recent" champions or champions who recently got lore (Darius for example). So while Ionia hasn't had a large scale update, it doesn't take a genius to know that Kayn's a bit of a bad dude.

So let's divide the groups:

##"Good" Guys. These characters are predominantly good and are recognized in-world as "good" people. Maybe not outright heroes but champions who are predominantly viewed as good. (Ornn would go here but no icon yet.)

Anivia Jax Blitzcrank Caitlyn Ekko Galio Ivern Janna JarvanIV Garen Jayce Lux Nami Nasus Orianna Poppy Rakan Quinn Shyvana Taliyah Taric Vi MonkeyKing Xayah Zac

##Neutral Nelsons These are champions who are a bit of a mix. Maybe they do bad but for good reasons. Maybe they've done some bad things but WANT to do good. Maybe they just don't give a shit and live as they live. Either way, these are characters who aren't outright good or bad.

Ahri AurelionSol Azir Bard Darius Diana Ezreal Fiora Gnar Graves Illaoi Kalista Leona LeeSin Kindred Kled Lucian Maokai MissFortune Pantheon Rammus Rengar Ryze Shen Skarner TwistedFate Varus Vayne Viktor Yasuo Yorick Sivir

##Bad Bastards These are champions who are outright evil. They display little-to-no care about doing the right thing or commit pretty shitty acts on a constant basis. Sometimes for an earnest goal, sometimes for their own gain. These are guys who are just jerks.

Aatrox Camille Cassiopeia DrMundo Draven Elise Gangplank Hecarim Jhin Jinx KaynKarthus Mordekaiser Singed Thresh Sion TahmKench Urgot Veigar Volibear Warwick Renekton Xerath

As an additional disclaimer, I know that some of these are open to argumentation or interpertation. Maybe you sympathize more with Camille and think she should be at least neutral. Maybe you think Sion's more of a tragic figure than any villain. Maybe you think Jayce is a bastard and not a hero at all. Either way, there is a predominant skew to characters who are good and/or do good things. Even among the neutral characters, a lot of them are just good people who do shitty things (Yorick, for example) in the name of getting their hands dirty so others don't have to.

#Part 2: Why this is a problem.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/19/Sinister_Six.jpg (Alex Ross is a god-tier artist)

A predominant idea of heroes and good guys is that they're often the minority. They're the one upstanding guy vs. a ton of bad hombres. It's why we like seeing heroes be successful; they're overcoming odds. With league, we don't really get that nor is it super apparent in lore situations. Take Camille for example; She's an incredibly skilled, powerful woman who shadowruns all of Piltover and Zaun...but then you realize the deck is stacked against her in terms of heroes. Sure, she might be outright more powerful than any ONE hero but this feels more like a dungeon boss than a threat.

One of the arguments people will likely bring up is "That's not good writing though". That villains have to have some redeeming qualities. While this is fair, the idea is that they're still bad guys with pretty heinous plans. Let's use Viktor for example. On paper, Viktor does some terrible things and fucks with peoples bodies to the point that they're more machine than human...yet he does so in the name of progress. Hell, his lore has him as more of a tragic figure than any villain. Any act of villainy in Viktor's lore is a case of debateable (but not outright bad) ethics or silly misunderstanding.

But perhaps the greatest flaw that we encounter is that nobody really wants their main to be the bad guy. Sure, some people do, but when it comes down to a neutral character? People often argue that they're not actually all that bad. Hell, how many of you looked at my villain list and went "Bullshit! <champion> isn't a villain!" or that I'm wrong in some regard? Sure, you'll find people who wholeheartedly embrace that their champion main is actually a dastardly, bastardly monster but most champions fall under a neutral or grey area that people will argue about.

A compelling villain is just as important in a story as a hero, even if the villain is sometimes a concept or a force of nature. But if there are no villains, the story starts to crumble.

#Part 3: Fixing this.

Pertaining to what I said above, Riot has actually taken some steps to make some characters more villainous. Demacia, for example (While I consider them good), holds some very backwards ideas about the world outside. Lux is emotionally broken because she realizes her magic is a sin in Demacia, rather than an amazing gift to be honed via talent. This can't always be successful though. Volibear's lore change to a demigod/god of storm and being treated as a battle-hungry monster is a divisive topic among friends of mine. I personally think it's awesome (THOUSAND SCAR BEAST YEAAAAAAAAAH) while others lament that Volibear lost his wise and sophisticated nature in favor of grumble reeee angry bear noises.

What I think might be a better solution is to power up the villains and depower our heroes. That's not to say that we can't have a heroic character who can go toe-to-toe with Aurelion Sol but maybe we need more evil characters. More void beings who are on-par with Sol and seen as gods. Maybe we need more villanous figures. Maybe some neutral heroes become less defendable. As an addition, it's also possible to write villainous characters as having masses. Swain, for example, could be seen as a wicked mastermind with an entire nation under his thrall. Sure, he himself is decently strong but the real threat is that Noxus is at his beck and call.

Buff villains and nerf heroes.

#Part 4: Conclusion.

League/Riot is aiming to create a dark fantasy world, from the feel of it. A world of moral greys and questionable politics on both sides. The quality is up for contest and I'm sure we have people feeling both positives and negatives about the new lore, but the goal is quite clear. Yet even in the darkest and most morally grey fantasy, there are certain villains. Villains who can't be redeemed. Villains who we know from day one need to be put out to pasture and removed if there's ever hope for unity and peace.

League needs more of that, in my opinion, otherwise we're going to hit a brick wall where we see the likes of Bard, Aurelion Sol, Ornn, Targon's Aspects, Anivia, Janna, Demacia, Piltover, some of Zaun, some of Bilgewater, some of Noxus and more all holding down Kog'maw's daddy and kicking the everloving shit out of him while Kog sobs in the background.

114 Comments

Beyond Legends20 votes

I think your confusing the term protagnist and antagonist with heros and villans. The current problem with league lore right is that their is alot of color story who potray as protagonist or main focus of the story.

Currently their really isn't alot of stories where champions are put into the main antaginost role, as bloodline is only so far where we have Xerath as a main antogonist of that story.

Hence I don't think there is neccasrry to buff anyone really. Katarina can easily be a protagagonist with Garen or Jarvan set up as an antagonist.

ModCaptainMårvelous6 votes

That would probably be a better term than what I'm using, yeah. Good point my dude.

Wind2349 votes

(As a story nerd in general, I love talking about stuff like this. :3)

Disclaimer: I didn't read every single comment, so I might repeat something already said. If I do, I apologize ahead of time!

Firstly, I agree with a prior post that said that the terms "protagonist" and "antagonist" are likely the terms you're looking for here. Heroes and villains are typically the ones we use most, but the protagonist is always the characters who POV is being used. Something important to note is that EVERYONE is the protagonist of their own stories; they're not going to believe they're doing the wrong thing. In fact, a good villain needs to believe they're doing the RIGHT thing, or that they're at least justified in what they're doing.

There's actually quite a number of champions in the game who I would consider antagonistic, or even anti-heroic. Honestly, I'm a little surprised you consider Xayah and Rakan pure good guys - to me, they come across as anti-heroes, fighting for a cause they think is noble, though will likely result in the destruction of Ionia's human society. There's probably a few champions who are going to have a problem with that. What's important for a good story is the conflict that drives it. So long as there are two opposing forces who have conflicting goals or methods, then you have plenty of potential. Moral alignment actually doesn't matter much in some cases.

I notice how you say you want to "buff villains" and "nerf heroes," but I'd like to point to the story "Shadow and Fortune," where the Harrowing attacked Bilgewater after Miss Fortune deposed of Gangplank. There were two villains in that story - Hecarim and Thresh. And Thresh was a BAD motherfucker in that story. Lucian did NOT stand a chance against him, and he only lived because Senna saved him. Hecarim wasn't exactly pulling any punched, either, and it took Illaoi calling upon her god to get rid of him - not even kill him, just make him go away. In that story, we saw these two being as bad as we'd imagine they be, and defeating them was not treated as an easy task.

I think we need more stories like that in order to illustrate how powerful some champions are lore-wise. We haven't had a lot of interaction between opposing champions in lore like that before, so seeing more of it might help ease what you think the issue is. As for champions who are too dangerous to allow to exist...I think we already have quite a number of those. Just because a character is morally gray doesn't mean that they're forgivable. Understanding a motive isn't the same as letting them off the hook. To list some champs that I think would be too dangerous to live: Urgot, Singed, Xerath, Renekton, Gangplank, Elise, most of the Void monsters and undead champions just to name a few. Some of them are certainly sympathetic (I think Renekton is the most tragic one here), but that doesn't change that they are a threat, and I can easily see all of them meeting their end eventually.

So honestly, I don't think there's a problem with League having an "uneven" balance in terms of heroic or villainous characters. I think it's just that we haven't seen them in conflict with each other that much yet, so we have no clue how deeply these conflicts can run. My only potential problem is that I'm not sure how willing Riot would be to kill off a champion in the lore itself. That'd certainly add to the stories, but at the same time, no one would want to see their favorite champion be gone for good, at least story-wise.

AbiwonKenabi2 votes

I agree with a lot of what you said, particularly about seeing more Champions interact. Ever since that giant retcon some years ago, most stories have been pretty isolated from one another, aside from the occasional Champion that would almost certainly be in another Champion's story (like Garen/Lux or Darius/Draven). Shadow and Fortune is the big exception, and it's arguably the most entertaining. Seeing Champions play off of one another is not only exciting, but also gives us insight into their character and abilities. I hope to see more of this in the future.

Agreed on Xayah and Rakan as well. Xayah comes off as pretty racist, violent and generally unfair towards humans and towards pretty much anyone of a different political viewpoint. While her cause can be viewed as good, her actions don't bode well for Ionians. I mean, she's "the Rebel" and she's rebelling against Ionia, who until recently had a pretty decent track record for "good deeds to bad deeds". (Even Zed has been made somewhat more reasonable, Syndra and Jhin being the worst of the worst) Rakan would follow her because that's just kinda what he does.

As a side note, I hope to see some conflict between these two, as Rakan seems way to chill for such a hateful movement. I would be interested to see if there's a situation where he'd put his foot down against a heinous enough action, or if he really would follow Xayah to the ends of the earth. I don't necessarily want their relationship to end, just be tested. Am I mean for wanting that? D:

Wind2342 votes

Xayah is an interesting character because her cause is noble from one person's view point, but completely selfish from another. She isn't wrong for being worried about magical being misused, and vastaya do have a right to worry about their own well-being, but Xayah is extreme in that she doesn't quite care who she has to sacrifice to get her end result. Wanting to see her relationship with Rakan tested isn't a bad thing at all; in fact, I'd be sorely disappointed if that DIDN'T happen. Adversity is the best way to foster character development, and no one likes a flat character.

Darrosh Jewfist4 votes

I don't know if the issue really is villain count. I think a bigger issue is (1) stakes and (2) relationships.

(1) Stakes - most of the League champions are neigh invulnerable or presented as, well, legendary. That's great and all but in every single color story I can remember, the champions are presented as indestructible tools of usually cocky destruction. Whether it's Quinn wiping out a Noxian raid party or Ornn slaughtering Ursine... there's no drama if these champions are literal gods.

I find the most interesting champions the ones closest to humans like Lux (who is a magic user in a magic-hating kingdom). The rest of the champions are just god-like uber beings or loners who do their own thing. Which leads to the next problem...

(2) Relationships - most of the champions don't care two shits about any other champion except for 1 or 2 of 'em. Ornn just hates Volibear. Rakan and Xayah have a thing for each other. Kayn has a thing for Zed. They're all basically in their own isolated bubble.

Like Veigar is fucking insane little wizard but what shits would he give about any specific Freljord/Shurima/Ionian/Bilgewater/Demacian/Noxian/Piltover/Zaunite champ?

ModCaptainMårvelous4 votes

Your first point I agree with, albeit it varies character-by-character. Graves/TF/Caitlyn/Garen/etc. aren't really superbeings, they're just capable people. I think so long as Riot uses their stories sparringly for godlike beings (Ornn, Volibear, Asol, etc) it's fine. We've just had a bit of an influx recently of SUPER GOD SUPER SAYAIN tier characters. Ornn, Bard, Tahm, kindred, Ivern, Illaoi are all recent characters. (Or well relatively recent)

As for your second point, I actually disagree. Relationships aren't necessarily 1v1 but 1v1 is the absolute core. It also vastly depends on the character. As an example, take Bilgewater:

Gangplank hates everyone except Illaoi. That said, most of Bilgewater gives him a begrudging respect. Illaoi is 'friends" with everyone but is predominantly concerned about anyone who doesn't really "progress" or "move on" MF hates GP but she's not above using others as her pawns like TF or Graves. There's also her non-champion-friend whose name is slipping my mind. Graves and TF are rivals enemies BFFS now and don't really like GP. I also think they'd have some negative things to say about MF. Naut is Bilgewater but who kinda teters the lines of "mysterious guardian" and "creepy ghost beneath the waves".

The bigger problem is that we often don't see these champions interacting. As per your example, the best story for me in recent memory was the Lux and Galio tale. It showed compassion between two champions, put fears and resolutions for both and had them both grow as characters. Even if it was minor growth, we got to see two heroes interact. Most champ stories are just COOL DUDE DOES A COOL THING AND EVERYONE IS ALL "HOLY SHIT HE'S SO COOL GO BUY HIM NOW FOR 5.99 RP IN STORES NOW."

Beyond Legends2 votes

But that's the point of a color story though....like the whole point of a color story is a literatury teaser for a champion. It's suppose to be colorfuly worded advertisment showing casing how cool the champion is so you might be intrested in buying him. I mean do you really wanted a advertise a champion by showing him/her getting their shit kicked in?

It's like complaining about an ad being an ad...

ModCaptainMårvelous4 votes

Not quite.

A color story is a flavor story, an insight into who they are and what they do. It doesn't necessarily have to be them kicking ass and taking names. As an example, Ornn's recent teaser is a collection of fables of him. Some are cool, sure, but the last one (and the one that hits home the hardest) is Ornn losing his people and becoming emotionally broken because of it. You can argue that hey it's building him up but the core of the story is that Ornn is a pained, tragic figure who is admitted great but also burned by events of the past.

As another example, Xayah/Rakan's story is them helping out some vastaya and leading to the pains that happen when there's disagreement. Sure, they do some cool things, but the story isn't exactly "Rakan and Xayah kick ass and take names", it's about them as characters. A poorly written color story is more about how cool someone is and how amazing they are at everything. A great color story provides insight and isn't just boasting about how cool and strong the champion is.

There's also the fact that color stories aren't advertisements. Champion spotlights are advertisements. (To the point where Riot has gotten in hot water in the past when spotlights were purposefully altered to show how "cool and amazing" an earnestly crappy champion was.)

Beyond Legends1 votes

But Ornn teaser story isn't his color story, Voice from the hearth is

The color story here is the one that you get when you finish their bio. That story has a formulas or standard to it showing them being cool interesting moment. I mean both xayah and rakkan both follow this formulas with them basicly taking down the guards and rescuing.

Perhaps ad is the wrong word but the color story serve more of hook. It's suppose to be an intresting introduction to character so you might be intrested in reading their other stories. I mean go through the universe and check, most bio/story rito writes follows this model.

ModCaptainMårvelous4 votes

They're both color stories. It's all part of the background and "color" provided to a champion. I'd consider Ekko's short story, his comic -and- the short teaser video made for him all part of Ekko's color stories. (As an aside, Ekko's teaser showing him being beaten down but learning with each rewind is a fantastic point where a champion gets the shit kicked out of them while still making the champion interesting.)

While there may be interesting moments, I'd hardly call it an ad. It's basic story structure to have climaxes, resolutions, etc. Sometimes the climax is just someone being interrogated and spilling the beans (Vi's color story). Sometimes the climax is someone watching their sibling die (Camille). And sometimes it's the heartwrenching moment when an old flame is killed before their eyes (Darius).

Point is, if you boil it down, sure. it could be an "ad" to interest you in the character. But really, I don't think it's fair to say that anything meant to interest you in a character is for the explicit reason of selling you something.

Beyond Legends2 votes

I think we're having a differenc of definition here. What I define as color story as the first story you read after you finish reading bio. (I shall refer these as teaser story now for clarity)

You see most LU and new champion come with two pair of text minimum. One Bio and one teaser story. The teaser story usually very similiar in styling with other teaser story which usually involving champion doing something very cool or leaving of on a cliff hanger ending. This is intentional on riots parts for most likely stylze reason.

The reason why alot of story riot has right now has so much of these teaser story with their standarlize formula(just go through these story and check for yourself).

I think you want more event story from each LU such as Camille long ass journey in mudering her brother, bloodline and child Lux bonding moment with galio. I agree with you on wanting more of thesr story but I more wish Riot hurrying up on standardlization and rebuilding of the entier league first. We still have atleast have champion roaster without a proper Bio, not to mention 4 major faction (3 hopefully in a few days) that needs an update along with the idependent/missed champions that needs mordernization. Hopefully we can finish foundation laying mid august so riot can beginning tying up alot of loos ties

ModCaptainMårvelous3 votes

I can completely agree to that. In terms of what Riot has left of lore updates/retcons, I think they have Void, Noxus, Ionia, some scattered areas (Kumunga Jungles for example) and maybe some rough Freljord work? I'm pretty hopeful with you that we get the retcons finished so we can have some semblance of story progression.

I'll concede that yeah, sure, the color stories can feel a bit advertise-y but I don't think they're nearly as bad as it could come off. Either way, I'm all for less teasers of a "greater story" and more of said greater story.

Darrosh Jewfist2 votes

Well, a color story is supposed to be insights into a champion. I really doubt reading a champion's lore has deterred anyone from actually buying the champion given how barren the S and A boards is. It's supposed to generate interest in the lore fandom of League.

You also have a problem with false equivalency and choices.

I mean do you really wanted a advertise a champion by showing him/her getting their shit kicked in?

You can show a champion be vulnerable which can be interesting. They don't necessarily have to get their shit kicked in. CaptainMarvelous makes a good example with Ornn being hurt with the lost of the Hearth-Blood. There are ways to show off a Champion instead of always just having them kick-ass-and-take-names like so many color stories end up being.

Brutusness3 votes

I think you may have forgotten Lissandra. She's basically the Night King, easily a candidate for the Big bad of League not just because she wants to bring the apocalypse but for the amount of lies and deceit she sowed.

MZ Steven YZ3 votes

But But where are all the void champion... Chogath Khazix Malzahar KogMaw RekSai Velkoz why they are not list in the bad guy list (not you Kassadin you belong in the museum good guy list)

WinTheWarOnPants3 votes

I don't want to straw man, but are you saying you want what exactly? Villians? like old time villains that are evil.... because... uh... EVIL!!!? There is good reason why they have fallen out of style and that's because they are just bad design. There are no villains in the real world. Only people. Everone does both good and bad things, but some do more bad than good and visa versa. Hitler is pretty well known as a genuine piece of shit, but even he wasn't an "evil villain" like WW2 propaganda and some people will tell you. He was a person just like you or me. I'm without a doubt sure that he thought he was the "good guy" because everyone does. No sits there in a ridiculously large chair petting some exotic animal thinking about "evil" things they can do. Saying that Hitler was simply "evil" is just ignorant. He did horrendous and evil things, but only because he justified it in his head in some way. If you ever had the chance to talk to him or read his mind, you would probably be able to relate and understand why he did what he did. When it comes to making good "villains" you have to make them relatable. I think when you say characters are "gray" you are confusing "reason" with "action". Hitler was not morally gray. He was about as bad as you can get. It doesn't matter if he thought that he was saving the world or some other seemingly righteous action. What he DID is what matters and what he DID was BAD. It's the same with Viktor or Velkoz just because they think the things they do are good doesn't matter one bit. If they do something bad(like murder or something), it's still bad. Also, trying to put characters in a box of (good)(bad) is horrible for a narrative. Just because someone is a good or bad person(generally) doesn't mean that they can't do something bad or good. Take Cassiopeia for example. She was a back stabbing bitch that did a horrible thing, but she didn't do it because she was "evil". She thought it was the right thing to do (in her head) for her country and loved ones. That's also why when she does a good thing by hunting down a murderer it doesn't contradict her character. Diana was by all means a good person and was without a doubt a victim, but she was abused and twisted into a "bad" person. An example of good villain design vs bad is "Sleeping beauty 1959" vs "Maleficent 2014" In the original animated movie Maleficent is an "Evil" witch(she even calls herself this). Even her name means "one who causes evil". She is the "evil witch", the "villian" who is evil because she IS. In the 2014 movie she driven to the edge by the pain and heartbreak after she was betrayed by the one she loved most. She did the same bad thing(cursing aurora) she did in the original movie, but Maleficent from the 2014 movie is a character that could actually exist(not including all the fairy/witch stuff) which makes her a FAR better character than the original "i'm evil just because" Maleficent.

TL;DR: I might be misunderstanding your point, but if think league needs Villians that have no motivation outside of being "evil" i couldn't possibly disagree more. Good characters are relatable. You might not agree with their values, but you should be able to understand why they hold their values. Or just watch this Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyDx5nG7koA

ModCaptainMårvelous1 votes

If you scroll up a bit, you'll see that one of the major and good points someone brought up is that "antagonist" would work better than villain in terms of what I'm trying to say.

Now, I'm not saying we bad for the sake of bad. As an example, I'd consider Camille a bad guy/antagonist. Despite this, her goal isn't necessarily a wicked one. She's someone who does insanely heinous things and kills on a fairly frequent basis all for the sake of her goal. She might have a relate able goal but she's still a villainous/antagonistic figure.

What I'm more so saying is that there aren't many of those in lore. League take the idea of "Everyone is a hero in their own story" thing to insane heights. It gets to the point where almost every character has major redeeming qualities. To use your example: Cass uses people, takes advantage of them, leaves people to die and lies, cheats, steals, etc....but because she did 1-2 good things in her story, it redeems her as a character and you can have guys like you're doing in your post going "She's actually not bad ok she's more of an anti-hero".

I'm also not saying we ONLY need villains who are saturday morning cartoon villains. We can have a few, sure, but that's not the only type we need. I'm asking that we get more villains who you can understand but not agree with in the slightest. A villain like Urgot who does heinous, despicable things albeit for a greater good (In his own mind) for Zaun. A villain like Gangplank who murders and tortures people to keep the city of Bilgewater in line. A villain like Camille who sets a balance between Zaun and Piltover.

TL;DR: Antagonist would be a better term, but the overall criticism is that there aren't many league characters who are outright villainous or characters who are hard to defend. Almost every character has a large point where someone can argue for how good they are and that they're not "actually" a bad guy but actually a super good hero who just does some questionable things. And yes, not everyone needs to be a villain, but we need more than a tiny faction of really questionable characters. (Well that or we buff those who are so that it's not a 10-0 match-up against a Horde of heroes.)

WinTheWarOnPants2 votes

Antagonist doesn't really work since it depends on perspective. The antagonist to Diana is Leona, but the antagonist to Leona is Diana.

Now, I'm not saying we bad for the sake of bad. As an example, I'd consider Camille a bad guy/antagonist. Despite this, her goal isn't necessarily a wicked one. She's someone who does insanely heinous things and kills on a fairly frequent basis all for the sake of her goal. She might have a relate able goal but she's still a villainous/antagonistic figure.

I agree.

What I'm more so saying is that there aren't many of those in lore. League take the idea of "Everyone is a hero in their own story" thing to insane heights. It gets to the point where almost every character has major redeeming qualities. To use your example: Cass uses people, takes advantage of them, leaves people to die and lies, cheats, steals, etc....but because she did 1-2 good things in her story, it redeems her as a character and you can have guys like you're doing in your post going "She's actually not bad ok she's more of an anti-hero".

But they are though. You may be a mass murderer, but in your eyes you're the hero. That's just the way it works and that's fine. How does cass doing 1-2 good deeds(i'm sure she has done many more than that throughout her life) "redeem" her? It doesn't. She can't take back what she has already done. No one can.

you can have guys like you're doing in your post going "She's actually not bad ok she's more of an anti-hero".

I never said that. The example i made was that if you put a character in a box called "evil" then they are incapable of doing good things also, which makes them feel REAL. But lets say i did say that. What does it matter? just because i'm delusional about who Cass is has nothing to do with her. It's my own nonsense belief and you should never dilute a character to the 1 dimensional cliche of "evil" or "villian" just because some people might twist their own perception of reality.

I'm asking that we get more villains who you can understand but not agree with in the slightest. A villain like Urgot who does heinous, despicable things albeit for a greater good (In his own mind) for Zaun. A villain like Gangplank who murders and tortures people to keep the city of Bilgewater in line. A villain like Camille who sets a balance between Zaun and Piltover.

We are saying the same thing lol But i think your are mistaken by thinking that a character doing one seemingly good deed or showing compassion in some way undoes all the horrible things they did or will do. Urgot is still a murdering psychopath even if her saved some stray kitten on time. Saving a kitten just means he's a murderous psychopath that likes kittens. Gangplank is a BAD dude, but he doesn't think so. It doesn't make him "good", it just gives you an understanding of how he thinks and why he behaves the way he does, which is a GOOD lol thing. Just because you can sympathize with a character doesn't somehow undo all the bad they have done, it just makes them more real. Everyone has some redeeming quality regardless of how horrible of a person they are. No one is pure evil. The people who say otherwise are bigots that want an easy way to justify their hate for some group or individual.

ModCaptainMårvelous1 votes

Ah, ok, I get what's happening.

So what I'm referring to isn't my own thoughts/viewpoints or you specifically but rather my experience in this thread and seeing the responses. I've had people (as I joked in my main post) arguing with me over who goes where on the D&D alignment spectrum. That's not to say I or they are right but what I talked about is just an example of what's going on since I've made this thread and seen responses. And really, most league villains/antagonists fall under the umbrella of being more understandable than despicable. At least that's been my experience in lore. Then again, I can't really "fully" commit to this idea until I have a general idea of where everyone falls on the psuedo-spectrum.

WinTheWarOnPants1 votes

Yeah, now that you elaborated more it seems like we have a very similar opinion. We both want "bad" guys with real and understandable motives, but you think that some of the champs like Darius? are getting too easy to sympathize with? I can very much understand your problem if this is the case. I personally like the added humanity and it makes me actually start to like Darius as a character(i used to hate everything about him and thought he was too cliche "badguy"), but unlike some people i can separate my sympathy/understanding for a character from their actions. I really felt for darius in the last comic and honestly feel bad for the guy and his circumstances, but that doesn't make him a "good" guy in my eyes. He is still a horrible person that has done horrible things for noxus. The added depth just puts more weight on his past decisions and makes him a much better character IMO.

The problem i have is when characters break character and do things that contradict their established personality. There are 2 champs that come to mind. Vayne and Leona. When vayne killed her mentor, it completely surprised me, but not in a good way. It didn't make ANY sense that she would do such a thing and especially in the way she did it, based on how character was portrayed up to that point. Leona is the exact same way, but goes from bad to good. Her personality pulls a full 180 in an INSTANT. No conflict/denial over discovering her ENTIRE LIFE has been a lie and she has been a piece of shit all this time... just "oh that's interesting... guess i better go apologies to Diana hur dur".

AbiwonKenabi1 votes

Agree about Leona, disagree about Vayne. I think that moment was meant to show what kinds of lines Vayne would or wouldn't cross. She WOULD kill someone she cares about if she knew they were a creature born of dark magic. She WOULDN'T use dark magic (like her teacher does) to further her goal (unlike someone like Yorick). I'll grant you it could have been better executed and my feeling is a rewrite could have helped.

WinTheWarOnPants1 votes

The reason it doesn't make any sense in my eyes, is why she hates dark magic/monsters in the first place. She hate them because "they"(possible BAEEvelynn ;) lol) killed her family. Her hate/determination to kill anything that has to do with dark magic is already a bit of a stretch. It's kinda hard to believe that 5 mins of trauma could fuel her with enough hate to last 5+ years(idk how long it's been). With that being said Vayne "loved Frey like a mother". Frey became the family that she lost, which was the entire justification for her hatred. Yet she had absolutely no conflict about killing Frey aka doing the EXACT thing that the demon had done to her and set her crusade in motion. I don't care who you are you don't kill the person you love most in this world without hesitation. You could say "but she is a cold blooded killer that doesn't feel anything", but the fact that she felt "love" debunks that. Idk at the very least, it's just too edgy and nonsensical for me.

Valaran Nara2 votes

{quoted}

The reason it doesn't make any sense in my eyes, is why she hates dark magic/monsters in the first place. She hate them because "they"(possible BAEEvelynn ;) lol) killed her family. Her hate/determination to kill anything that has to do with dark magic is already a bit of a stretch. It's kinda hard to believe that 5 mins of trauma could fuel her with enough hate to last 5+ years(idk how long it's been). With that being said Vayne "loved Frey like a mother". Frey became the family that she lost, which was the entire justification for her hatred. Yet she had absolutely no conflict about killing Frey aka doing the EXACT thing that the demon had done to her and set her crusade in motion.

You do realize Vayne was in denial about her feelings for Frey, right? Like, Frey felt like a mother to Vayne, and it scared her. It scared her BAD. She didn't want to lose family again. She dedicated her whole purpose and being into killing the dark magicks. Letting a familial bond like that grow would hurt her cause. Even from the beginning as a child, Vayne was showcased as someone who has unlimited determination and WILL get what she wants done. The moment Frey revealed herself as a user of dark magic wasn't a tragedy to Vayne. It was release. Hearing Frey's confession freed Vayne's heart. It freed her mind. She no longer had to live in fear of her. Of that bond that started to grow. Of that feeling she wanted to banish away. Now that Frey is one of them, there's only one thing to do. Kill her.

It's still fucked up to the highest extreme. But remember that it wasn't FULLY out of left field. She did have mixed feelings, and killing Frey cause she was a user of darkness was a VERY convenient way of solving the problems she was having with her feelings.

WinTheWarOnPants1 votes

"For the first time since their partnership began, she felt worried for Frey".... "Whatever affection she had felt for Frey evaporated upon discovering her true nature. A tear formed in Frey's eye as she collapsed, but Vayne didn't notice - whatever warmth the two had shared died with Frey."

At the very least, it's bad writing. People don't do that. You don't go from loving someone and just "evaporate"bleh feelings you've built over years. Especially not for such a stupid reason. The person who killed her family was a demon, but that doesn't justify complete and unwavering hate for all things "black magic" without exception. If she was so god damn good at "evaporating"bleh her emotions then she wouldn't be so god damn driven in the first place!

I was never a big fan of vayne before since she was just kinda dull, but her new lore is horrendously bad IMO.

Valaran Nara2 votes

{quoted}

"Whatever affection she had felt for Frey evaporated upon discovering her true nature. A tear formed in Frey's eye as she collapsed, but Vayne didn't notice - whatever warmth the two had shared died with Frey."

At the very least, it's bad writing. People don't do that. You don't go from loving someone and just "evaporate"bleh feelings you've built over years. Especially not for such a stupid reason. The person who killed her family was a demon, but that doesn't justify complete and unwavering hate for all things "black magic" without exception. If she was so god damn good at "evaporating"bleh her emotions then she wouldn't be so god damn driven in the first place!

I was never a big fan of vayne before since she was just kinda dull, but her new lore is horrendously bad IMO.

You say this like she's meant to be redeemable. Think of actual serial killers who made it on the news. Sure, one or two may have had bad upbringings, but there are still some who just VEERED in that direction almost unprovoked. The problem is that we expect her to process human emotions the same as everyone else. She legit went through such a traumatic experience that I doubt she has the same sense of rationality that most others would. There are plenty of times when you expect something of another person because it's "obvious" or it "just makes sense", but then it goes completely left field. That is what happened with Frey and Vayne. If it ended like everyone wanted, then Vayne would remain "tragic" and "Oh, I hope she's able to put to rest her nightmares from that night." We aren't worried about her shaking off her nightmares. We're worried about her BECOMING the nightmare.

Remember, Vayne and Lucy had similar events happen to them, but they both took it into two completely different directions. Both want revenge, but one went extremist. Also, keep in mind that given current events on the news, it's not TOO hard to believe how irrational and illogical people can get nowadays.

Q Ren2 votes

Khazix Velkoz KogMaw Chogath RekSai Malzahar Nocturne Kassadin , I could probably find more but seriously the void is full of pure evil.

Jeddy0172 votes

Is it really right count Rek'sai as pure evil though? Isn't she's more like a wild beast/animal? At least that's what I assumed based on everything I know about her. Obviously with the Void, most things are still up in the air, so I might be wrong.

Stars Shaper2 votes

I think Void creatures can be considered pure evil as they invade dimensions just to feed upon them. It's not their need to feed to make theme vil but the fact that they will end up devouring entire universes.

Like viruses, they are bad but what they do is just multiplicating.

GreenLore5 votes

Well is a lion bad for killing an antelope? After all the lion does it just to feed upon the antelope.

The void creatures feed upon others because of their instincts. Sure some of them are evil(like cho'gath and Kha'zix),but kog'maw is just eating things because he is hungry,like any animal would do in such a situation. And the same goes for Rek'sai

GreenLore12 votes

Uhm Kassadin is a good guy who tries to stop the void and Nocturne isn't from the void...

Q Ren1 votes

{quoted}

Uhm Kassadin is a good guy who tries to stop the void and Nocturne isn't from the void...

never said nocturne is from the void, I just put him in there as well because he's a villain

GreenLore1 votes

You said "the void is full of pure evil",which would imply that Nocturne has something to do with the void(especially after you listed all the void champs),so thats a bit confusing.

And my point about Kassadin still stands,he is actually a rather good guy.

Korios1 votes

I mean, there is a Void Nocture skin ....

GreenLore1 votes

Yeah,but also a void Fizz or a void Illaoi(not to mention that skins aren't canon anyway)

Korios1 votes

I said it as a joke... but yes these skins in my headcannon share the same non-canon universe with blackfrost Anivia, battlecast, mecha, super galaxy etc

Iota Theta3 votes

Agreed on all but one (technically 2 since Noc isn't truly void). Kassadin may have ties to the void, but he's supposed to be the opposite of Malzahar, in that he is using the Voidy powers to fight the Void itself. He is one of the few that truly feels outmatched and outnumbered, because even if you count the Mount Targon Aspects, it's still currently 4 vs the entire Void.

Chromatic Eagle2 votes

Idk how you see Camille as evil. Even Sion. He may not be a nice guy, but we don't know enough about his former life. We also don't know Volibear's side of the story.

Kloqdq2 votes

I think one of the biggest issues with League and it's story is we cannot find a true progression to the events in Runeterra. Yes we can have characters develop and find their place but we cannot reach an end goal. That's the problem.

In league it is very clear that in a traditional story sense, everything is building to the Void conflict. The Void is without a doubt the greatest threat to all of Runeterra and every other conflict is just minor in comparison. However, we will never truly get a resolution to the Void conflict. This is because the champions needing to exist in lore for them to technically exist in the game. What we can assume is every champion in lore is currently alive - evident when GP was announced as dead in lore and was removed from the game for a bit. So if a champion deads or is dead in lore, they are technically dead in the game.

This possesses an issue as we cannot truly find a solution to many of the conflicts because to be in the game, champions need to be alive. We cannot kill the Void creatures or we would have to remove from the game. Now there is a solution from this problem. Lore and Game are just disconnected. This is very clearly indeed as Riot removed the old lore connection of Champions and Summoners. This all comes down to Lore cannot actually do anything with the characters. They all have a sense of plot armor that prevents them from ever being killed or facing a fate that removes them from the lore. They must always come back and their current status effects their in game existents.

It's also important to note we cannot please too ends of the story at the same time. We can't kill GP to satisfy MF without harming GP's narrative. If we really wanted to solve the problem.

We need a force that exists outside the game. The Ruined King is a good example. He isn't a champion but a force that exists outside the game. What he can do isn't bound by the champions. This is what is really important to understand is Champions can only be affected so much. Outside characters can live, dead, win, lose, be happy, be sad, and ADAPT to what the story needs. Champions cannot in the same way because of their existence within the game. Characters in lore however aren't chained.

What this all means basically is; let's make lore and characters that exist sololy away from the Champions and merely have them be minor characters that are involved. Like how Yasuo is just a mentor to Tayliah and isn't the focus. He is just there and if he wasn't a champion, we could affect him however we like and develop the Protagonist as we want. That is what League needs to really develop it's lore.

ModKnightsKemplar2 votes

League seems to be creating some groups of villains. It's kind of like Marvel's Avengers right now, in that way. In the first movie, we had the big bad Loki fighting all our favorite heroes; round 2 was with Ultron and minions, iirc.

So we have the Void (noticeably absent from your list).

We have Lissandra (also absent) who is set up as a major villain.

We have the Shadow Isles, which you did include many champs from.

With those, I don't feel like we're short on antagonists. I see it as more of a Marvel situation (many heroes, couple of supervillains) as opposed to a DC kind of thing (one hero, many villains). Not a perfect analogy, I know, but it's how I've seen them. Batman has his many foes, X-men have Apocalypse and Magneto. That's just how I think of it, of course, but imo both work.

ADepressedLeona1 votes

the Darkin are pretty bad dudes who probably need to be dealt with

ModCaptainMårvelous3 votes

True but there are only five of them. They're also questionable in strength if (canonically) a guy like Kayn who is a bit of a normal dude can kill one.

Son of Ur1 votes

Well well well. The day has arrived when a an esteemed Warden would use homophobic slurs. "Neutral Nancies".

Nancy- an effeminate or homosexual man. I guess Ahri is a feminine man or homosexual man according to our esteemed warden.

I for one (and I am being serious) condemn anti-homosexual rhetoric. After all, this is a symptom of hate and ignorance.

ModCaptainMårvelous2 votes

Huh, interesting. I actually had no idea.

Considering it's offensive to you, I'll be sure to change it. Thanks for teaching me something!

Stars Shaper1 votes

Some short replies on the issues brought up:

I do think Camille should be switched with Pantheon. She does what is good for Piltover general health while Pantheon isn't seen as a good guy even when commanding Aurelion Sol to close the Void fissure (and that's the only "good" thing he did we know). It's probably my bias talking though.

I think the number isn't an issue as long as Neutral Nelsons can be found to party in equal numbers with the good and the bad guys. Having a high number of bad guys vs a small number fo good guys usually leads the bad ones teaming up against a single hero just to be screwed up because the hero is the hero, removing then a good bunch of power and credibility form the bad guys that end up in "Saturday morning villains".

Also, I think the issue with LoL is to give every villain a reedeming quality. It's like there is no real villain because every1 has his reasons to be as he is (see the Viktor case). I think that a really cool and well defined character is Mordekaiser, he is a pure villain, he was a conqueror who got the entirety of valoran, got killed in a rebellion and resuscitated as an even more evil guy that wants to get back his domain. This is what I call a villain, and I even play him a lot because of this reason even if I am good guy at the heart that always played the Paladin role.

ModCaptainMårvelous2 votes

Yeah, a lot of this is personal opinion on all sides. Which is fine. Protag/antag problems are bound to be something that goes heavily based on what you feel.

As for teaming up, I don't think it's a big a problem as you might think. One point is goals, as Mordekaiser and Cho'gath (while both villainous characters) aren't going to share the same desires and/or end-goal. The other thing is that sometimes, more villains makes for better stakes. Stacking the odds and what-not. The last part is that league is a place with several regions, areas, etc. Lissandra might be an antagonist but it's not likely that she'll pop her head into Bilgewater and start trying to ice-age all the pirates.

Seekêr1 votes

As video game lore more closely begins to resemble reality, villains will be replaced by antiheroes.

This is it makes the lore more meaningful and engaging, in reality there is no hero and villain, black and white, Good or bad. The world is a beautiful hue of grey.

Your nightmare could be my dream

WOOOOOOOOHOOOOOO1 votes

There are definitely villains in the world, and there are definitely people who are good. Saying that everything is grey is disingenuous.

Seekêr1 votes

Untrue. These ideas are subjective. There is no definition of villain, for example. "a person who stands as a threat to society" would make villains a legitimate label.

reality is more complicated than black and white labels.

This way of thinking and labeling is what blocks most people from achieving self actualization, or if you're Buddhist, enlightenment.

WOOOOOOOOHOOOOOO1 votes

Nazis, Conquistadors, Isis, Westboro Baptist Church, North Korean Dictatorship, serial killers

All real life villains.

More from Story, Art, & Sound

More by CaptainMårvelous