#villain tips

[crloner]

Character Tips: Villains

I think Villains can be as crazy as they want but people usually don’t write them well. Often times I have to ignore how palpably terrible the villain is written to continue reading. Especially when the villain is meant to be a pure evil villain.

I find that authors believe that making their villain do heinous acts is enough to make them scary, but they forget to make them interesting. Iconic villains are remembered because they are interesting not because of what great horror they caused. So here’s tips from someone who writes and reads on how to make villains interesting and memorable.

Tips

1. What are they not willing to do? Why?

I find it infinitely more interesting when a villain has something their not willing to do or lose. It can be something as basic as love. For example: Homelander from the Boys. He’s not willing to lose his public image and how he looks so he has to stifle himself in order to maintain his image. Homelander is definitely evil but this makes him more interesting. It makes him move through the story in a different way that is more entertaining than it would be if he didn’t care about what people thought about him. So when thinking about your own villain think about what she/he might not do to get to their goals. Why that is?

2. How do they treat people they see as important or even more important?

Think about how your villain interacts with other characters. In my own work, I have a villain who while views humans as lesser than him amongst his own race their is a hierarchy which even he falls into. He resents this so he often hates people associated his own standing that he finds underserving but is overly kind to those he views as worthy of being above him. If their are multiple villains in your story and they know each other how do they interact with each other.

3. They’re human too (Unless they’re a monster than ignore this… but don’t)

What I mean by this is that they have to have a personality to some extent. Whether it be made of more negative traits than positive is entirely up to you. But they have to have some personality. I find a villain more interesting when they feel like they have a distinct personality to them. For example: Azula from Avatar: the Last Airbender. The character has a distinct personality, she’s cunning, a perfectionist, and arrogant. It’s perfectly explainable too. She was a raised in an imperialistic and fascist society within a family that was also abusive and favored cruelty over compassion. Her personality and how it interacts with the other characters is intriguing because of how their personalities clash. I think writers need to understand that they don’t need to make them have a good qualities. It’s okay to write a character that is intrinsically bad. Just makes sure it’s developed.

4. Do they have their own arc?

What I like is when a villain has their own arc where they regress further or they have to adapt to get what they want. Think about it. Your hero has to adapt to the villain so the villain should do the same. Having them go through some kind of arc can be interesting to watch or read so consider if they have an arc. This goes for both human and monster villains.

5. Give them unique relationships outside the MC

I tend to like villains who have multiple relationships with different characters that vary widely. Like if they feel a sense of kinship with one character, admiration, jealousy, or even pity. Think of what your villains individual relationship with other characters might be like because chances are they’ll have varying opinions on your characters.

6. How do they perceive the world?

What is their view on the world? Are they a nihilist, an optimist, or an absurdist? Though it may not be important to the story, the author should know this part because it will partly explain their personality and their reasons for doing things.

That’s all I’m going to write mainly because I’m facing a bout of burn out 😭. If you have other villain tips please comment and share 💕

[the-ellia-west]

How to Make a Villain for Dummies

Sorry Lovelies, this one will be long - But each section will be segmented by a picture if you want to skip through (Go to Badass Baddies for a villain goal tutorial) - Feel free to message me to brainstorm or for help to build up anything writing-related, I can help! I'm also just here to chat

(Admittedly, no matter what you do someone on the internet is going to think it's sexy so don't let it bother you! Unless... you want your baddie to be sexy, then you do you lol)

Anywayyyy, You're here for a new baddie! How do we do that? I'm glad you asked!

There are multiple different types of villains. There's sympathetic ones, Redeemable ones, and then there's the Ultra baddies. We will be walking through the best strategies and tips I have for each one.

Fundamentally you need two things to make them a 'baddie'

They need to have morally wrong actions.

They need to cause some harm whether it is intentional or not.

Misunderstood

First up: The best type morally and the one I'm best at writing. These are your simple Misunderstood baddies. - Either they Did something bad on accident - They are being framed - Or they did something Bad for a good reason (Antihero)

These guys are easy because they technically aren't villains!

We will start with the first two because the Last one is technically something different.

Anyways, your Misunderstood baddies are just heroes who have been mistaken for a villain. Depending on whether they are deceiving the protagonist or just generally misunderstood they will react differently.

If they are deceiving the protagonist then they will act like your average evil villain, but you should give foreshadowing that they are lying

But if they are just generally misunderstood, then depending on their personality, they may cry, plead, accuse someone, give up, ect.

Misunderstood villains who are doing the things they do because they are being forced will probably cry or sound defeated when they speak. They are more likely to plead with the protagonist to save them or believe them, but if they're kind of a dick then they may accuse the Protagonist of being one of their captors

But on the other hand, Misunderstood villains who are framed and trying to make their way out, they will be less likely to be defeated and more likely to fight harder no matter the cost to prove their innocence, they may sound more desperate because they know there is still a chance ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now! Antiheroes!

These guys are kind of misunderstood, kind of hero, kind of baddie.

Basically for those of you who don't know, an Antihero is a character who does bad for a good reason, say killing someone for medication to cure cancer

They can or cannot fit depending on your situation but they're generally pretty moody and Angsty.

Despite not really fitting into any category, they still deserve an honorable mention. If you're planning on writing one Make them have a good goal but be set on doing bad things to Achieve that goal

Sympathetic

Next up we have the tragic or somewhat morally okay ones: our Sympathetic Baddies which I cannot stop making. -Either they have a really Traumatic backstory enough to justify their actions - They have enough morals to justify their actions - Or so many bad things happen to them that it makes them sympathetic

These ones are The Same as Misunderstood but with a bit more dramatic flare and evil mixed in there

The main Thing about a Sympathetic Baddie is that we need a reason we can justify their actions be that 'They have a traumatic backstory' or 'They didn't want to do it' I'll leave that to you

(Skip ahead for 'they looked good while doing it' villains)

Now For sympathetic the main part of their characterization is Evil. They're bad. If you want not really bad, go back to misunderstood.

They must have functionally evil morals and/or actions to fit into this category, but what sets them apart from the other villains on our list is their puppy dog sad backstory/tragic plot points in story.

You need a specific cause to explain 1. Why They're evil 2. Why should we feel bad for them/ maybe like them?

Yes these ones are generally the sexiest

Once you have enough tragedy to throw at them you should make sure they are give of an 'oh poor baby" reaction or a "You're a bitch but I feel bad enough for you that I like you"

The more trauma, the more angst, and the more chance your readers will sympathize with them.

Here's a special section for your "But they looked while doing it" Baddies. Because I know at least some of you want this.

They're horrible

They are assholes

What they've done should be irrideemable

But they're hot (looks or personality)

And that's all that matters

So how do we elicit that response?

You make them cocky bastards, that's how.

- Sarcasm cranked up to as high as we can get it before it gets annoying - Intelligence - Banter - Badass/cool - And by far the most important, Fashion

This villain or antihero (These guys can also technically be heroes) should do or say some pretty shitty things, but they need to have a vibe that makes them likable.

Examples: Adair from Not even Bones - Haymitch from the Hunger games - Zemo from The Avengers

What do they have in common?

Sass

Bad boy personalities

The occasional good deed

Selfishness (On most occasions)

The Occasional good deed can be incredibly often or far between and they usually only do it for personal reasons, but it's still a good deed that they didn't have to do.

(It's also usually a man because men are awesome)

Saved a cat from a tree but only did it to gain a favor from a rich old lady? They could have totally done something else, but you saved that cat!

Regular - Badass (Motives)

After that, We have our Badass Baddies. Not exactly likable but not exactly horrible. You appreciate them as the villain they are and how cool they can be in fight scenes but ehhhh.

These villains can have a variable level of Tragedy, but they must always have a motive. MUST.

Give these bois a reason.

Power? Why do they want power?

Money? Why do they want money?

Come up with a basic motive, then figure out why they have that motive.

For example:

My villain wants power. He wants power because he wants control. He wants control so he can avenge his dead family, and make sure the humans don't do any more stupid shit.

After that workout their plan to achieve that.

My villain's plan is to do this by harvesting the souls of people after building up their power, and transforming humans into creatures he can control.

Then Why is that their plan? Why not something else?

Now, For badass baddies, make sure their actions are unredeemable and make it so that they're completely over their tragic backstory by now. That's what separates them from sympathetic. While sympathetic are still depressed and drowning in misery, these guys are like, I'm gonna do bad shit. Maybe it started with my tragic backstory, but now I'm doing it for me.

Make it so that they're a dick but not so much so that they're hateable. Make them a bad person, but not that happy about it.

Like they're doing it for themselves but it doesn't feel good to them, it feels necessary for their goals

All villains are fundamentally selfish unless you want to make them redeemable. Oh HEY LOOK AT THAT

Redeemable

Redeemable Baddies - These guys are a mix of sympathetic and anything else you want

The only requirements for these guys is that they're selfless enough that they will be or COULD be redeemed.

They have to do good things, and have some morals at least if you want them to be super likable.

But here's where the interesting thing I want to talk about for these guys comes in.

Redeemed vs Potential to be Redeemed

Redeemed is a redeemable villain who becomes a good guy and abandons most if not all of their evil villain tendencies - These guys are standard and I'll talk about them when I get to redemption arcs in a week or two

Now the potential to be redeemed is Sad and Angsty. It's a character who could have been redeemed. But because of the circumstances of the story they weren't. Maybe they fell back into their bad habits, maybe they died, maybe they left the story in some different way, ect.

These have the potential to create really good stories and I personally am a fan of crying my heart out over fictional bitches. So........ yeah

Unredeemable

Unredeemable/Unlikable/Jerk Baddies. These guys are absolute Dicks, and they generally work better for a more minor baddie, but they can also work for a main one. (Idk how to use trigger warning but mentions of some touchy stuff in a list)

The thing that makes these baddies this specific type is that they're dicks. We hate them. We root for them to be tortured or killed. We want them Gone.

So... how do you make one?

You make them do some really awful things, and I mean awful shit. as such in the list below:

Abuse

Rape

Murder

War crimes

Generally Prick attitude

Racism

Child murder

Genocide

Cannibalism

Disembowelment

Horrible accounts of arson

Laughing at puppies getting killed

Well not exactly that last one, but you get my point. These Guys need to be mega Dicks, and they need to enjoy it.

They should have some really dislikable traits in a character, Arrogance, manipulation, a little too much hostility, smugness, ect.

Make them an Unapologetic Asshole

Pure evil

Snakes aren't that bad, but Lastly, we have our ultimate pure evil overlords with no good qualities at all.

Just make them a generally shitty human, then add a few good traits and twist them.

Examples of twisting good traits:

They like clean things? They kill off everything that isn't 'perfect or clean'

Empathetic? They're only empathetic so that they can manipulate you and use you for their own things later

Stuff like that.

If you want to make a pure evil baddie because it's a breath of fresh air from all of the sympathetic baddies out there these days, listen up.

You can either do this Really well, or really poorly.

To do it well you should give them - A good motive - specific character's they're not always a dick to - No spilling the plan to the good guys. Just don't

If they need to monologue, make it about insulting the heroes and hyping themselves up without SPILLING THE PLANS geez guys ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Outro

Now finally, Remember what I said at the very beginning, I'm available to help with anything writing related because I don't have shit to do most of the time.

Anyway, A post on Redemption arcs should be here before the year ends, and Look out for My book sometime!

I love you all, my writers and my weird people who just like reading random writing posts! See you eventually! Put in the comments what else you want me to make guides on! Love you! <3

[rpmemesbyarat]

Unsympathetic Evil Done Right

“You’re not gonna shoot a puppy, are ya Jack?!” “Yeah, in the face, why?” NOTE: NO SPOILERS! SPOILER FREE! A lot has been written about how to make nuanced, noble, and/or sympathetic villains done right. I think I’ve probably written about that too, pretty sure I have. But today I’m going to cover the equal and opposite quandary: How to make a purely evil, unsympathetic villain who knowingly delights in being evil, but not have them be one-note or boring? I think Big Jack Horner in “Puss In Boots: The Last Wish” is a really good example, and he’s from a piece of media that is recent and popular enough that most people will know who he is, he’s not some obscure reference. That said, none of this contains any spoilers for the film, so if you haven’t see it, you’re safe, read on—if you DARE! I think there are a few things that make Jack really work. Firstly, he’s fun to watch while also being scary. He’s both hilarious and threatening, hitting that incredibly difficult sweet spot of being both comedic and a legitimate threat. It’s very difficult for bad guys to be both funny AND scary, since making something funny typically takes away its power to frighten us. But when a bad guy can do both, they become really fun for the audience. You’re not rooting for them, you don’t think they’re good people, but they’re damn entertaining. And yet, we still fear for the protagonist against them. We may logically know that of course the hero will triumph, especially in a children’s movie, but we have to at least wonder HOW that will happen. Jack’s established as a threat from the start, showing a cruel personality very early AND a vast armory of magical items combined with a task force of workers to help him. Even one of the other antagonists treats him with great caution. He’s still not the most dangerous of the lot (Puss in Boots sports THREE antagonistic people or groups) but you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who didn’t find him the funniest, I bet. Part of Jack’s charm is how much fun he himself is having. He’s clearly just enjoying himself immensely up until the very end. He is ENTHUSIASTIC. He is ALL IN. Being a stoic, serious villain absolutely works better for a lot of bad guys, but these are typically for the ones who veer to the “purely scary” side, not the “scary and funny” side. Jack obviously loves what he does, and what he does happens to be being a bastard a lot. His callous disregard for the lives and wellbeing of everyone, including and especially his own men, is also played to the max for black comedy. Another part of his charm is his self-awareness; Jack very much knows he’s awful, and doesn’t try to disguise it in the slightest, nor does he lament it. There’s no scrap of shame at all, and he in fact mocks a character who thought it might be otherwise. Not only does the movie never ask you to feel sorry for him, he never does either. He does have a backstory to explain his motivations, and I like it because it does make it understandable WHY he wants what he does, it just also doesn’t make him sympathetic in the the slightest because it only serves to play up how callow and entitled that he is. You get an explanation that makes sense, but “making sense” for this character also means “emphasizing that much more what an asshole he is” Note that I do think unsympathetic characters can still have very sympathetic backstories and be done well (one of my fave baddies is like that) but that’s another topic, and not Jack. Finally, he’s not the only villain. As mentioned, there’s three antagonistic parties in this film. Of them, Jack’s the only one who could be called evil. One of the others is just doing his job/fulfilling his natural role and that threatens Puss. The other is competing with Puss & Co for the same goal, and is willing to do harm to the heroes to achieve it, but that goal really isn’t any more selfish or unsympathetic than Puss or Kitty’s own goals, and the character is very much a human being, as are her cohorts (though they’re not human, but you get what I mean!) So, Jack is a comically evil bastard who is evil through and through with no excuse, and he’s awesome and fun enough, but he’s also balanced by more nuanced villains who are really less “villains” and more “obstacles to the protagonist in some way” , one a force of nature, the other someone with a goal they can’t achieve without thwarting Puss’s goal. It is definitely hard to pull off in a movie especially because of the limited time, but I think having multiple types of villains in a single work—especially a series, like a comic book or a television show—really helps with pulling each type off that much better. The noble and sympathetic villains can play off and contrast against the complete monsters, and you don’t need to choose between one or the other. In fact, what tends to irritate me most in a series, is when ALL villains are a single type—they’re all super redeemable tragic misunderstood woobies, or they’re all 2D evil cardboard cutouts who eat babies for kicks, etc. People will debate with each other all day about which is more realistic, but I think what’s most realistic AND most interesting for a reader/viewer/consumer is a nice mixed bag of diverse villains. Diverse here meaning diverse personality, diverse motives, diverse ranks on the ‘terrible person’ scale, etc. Again, this isn’t doable in every work. But I think Big Jack type characters can still work well in a solo role as well. Good examples of this abound in the Disney Renaissance films—Scar, Ursula, Gaston, and Jafar are all the perfect combination of hilariously hammy and seriously scary that Jack taps into. This need not be limited to children’s media either, though I think it does work best there. But enjoyable “pure evil” villains in darker, more adult works can still be done, such as Freddie Krueger, some interpretations of various Batman villains, and, rather subtly, Hannibal Lector. The last one isn’t overtly bombastic, he’s not singing big musical numbers about his evil plans or cracking overt jokes every two seconds (though he comes close with his cannibilism puns in the NBC series), but he does have a wry and dry sense of humor, he’s very witty and cultured, and he’s very intelligent. He’s not funny per se, but it can be really interesting to watch him outwit others and pick them apart. While I’ve mostly focused on humor for what makes a baddy fun to watch because that’s the case with Jack Horner, it’s not the ONLY thing that can make them engaging either. Bringing up my point about “unsympathetic characters can have sympathetic backstories” from earlier too, Hannibal does have a tragic tale behind him, but it’s also undeniable he very much enjoys doing what he does for its own sake. Whether he’s truly unsympathetic or absolutely the reverse is probably more down to opinion, unlike Jack and the others, but personally for me he’s in the “just loves being a horrible person” category, and he’s still very interesting both despite and because of that! Some people will tell you that pure evil characters are automatically boring. I don’t think so. I just think most writers don’t put the effort into making them interesting and engaging to watch. And there are MANY ways to do that!

[softer-ua]

Idk why OFA is so damn hard to hide?

Like just say it got progressively stronger as he grew up until it was to dangerous to use without the proper guidance of UA, half the kids in the class has some bad side effects, 2 of them get sick , one has their brain go mushy, the other has an actual demon stuck to them when it’s dark and quirks are only getting more dangerous

Also not being able to use your quirk would probably lead to bullying and doubt you even had one so Bakugo and the leeches make sense

Any dispute is just he said she said, and literally all you have to do to make a lie convincing is tack on something embarrassing to it and don’t fidget too much and maintain neutral eye contact.

I’m not kidding, next time you late throw your hair in a messy bun and look slightly embarrassed while gesture to it while saying you got your hair caught in your seatbelt or on someone’s backpack and try to. Poof lateness forgiven

[that-villainous-human]

Sometimes you need to take a minute for you. Close your eyes and imagine calming things: the ocean at sunset, the smell of roses from your lover's guardian, your enemies dying peacelessly in their sleep, home-baked cookies fresh from the oven

[wolfman1138]

Fellow villains

Ever have that feeling when someone pisses you off and you're like "I WILL BE KING OF THIS WORLD AND WHEN I AM, YOU WILL ROT IN THE DEEPEST DUNGEONS FOR YOUR IGNORANCE!!!"

...but then you're like "They're actually right and they normally are very kind people....so maybe not the DEEPEST one."

How is a villain supposed to deal with that?

[rpmemesbyarat]

A VERY basic rule of writing is to challenge your protagonist. A story is only as good as its antagonist at the end of the day. The antagonist doesn’t need to be a person—it can be a situation, the environment, or the protagonist to themselves—but whatever it is, it has to challenge the protagonist. If a hero just overcomes everything with little or no effort, there’s really no tension or stakes, which makes for a poor story. When I read a book or watch a movie, I know LOGICALLY that the hero is going to survive and win (unless it’s a tragedy) but I need to wonder HOW. Even children’s stories understand this. Let's say I'm writing a story about Little Timmy entering a boat race. He builds the best boat and he wins. That's technically a story, but it's not very gripping, because it has no stakes. There's never a moment I'm really wondering if Little Timmy will win, or how he will pull it off. When I go into watch most movies, I know the good guys are going to survive/triumph unless it's a tragedy. But a good movie makes me wonder, holy shit, how? How can they get through this? That's what keeps me there. I know how it will end, but I'm there to see the journey. So, Little Timmy enters the boat race. But the store is out of materials to build his boat! So he has to hunt through junk heaps to find materials. The time he spends doing this gives him less time to build his boat than the other kids, so he's at a disadavantage. Then on the day of the race, his dog gets sick and he's in a time crunch to get his pup to the vet AND get to the race in time to start. He manages that, and once the race begins, another kid's boat rams into his!  That kid is trying to sink him! See how it gets more exciting when things go wrong for Little Timmy? And in order for these stakes to exist, the antagonist has to be competent. If a master martial artist is attacked by a common street punk, the fight isn’t really interesting or impressive, because the master doesn’t have to do much to win in a second. If the master martial artist has to face another master, then we get to see them struggle, and they’re forced to display their best moves, which is far more impressive. You can certainly have a comical antagonist, but unless you’re actually writing a comedy where the joke is the antagonist constantly failing, they still need to present a threat. Like, Don Karnage in TaleSpin is funny as hell and really ridiculous and I love him, but he also genuinely has the heroes on the ropes a few times. I have to wonder how they’re going to get out of this, and in order for me to have that concern, Don Karnage has to be competent enough to warrant that concern. If he’s weak and stupid and ineffectual altogether, and presents little or no real challenge to the heroes, there’s no concern, no tension, no stakes, and thus no satisfaction when the heroes best him, because it’s not impressive that they did so. If Little Timmy’s boat is never under a threat that seems genuine, I’m not really invested in his win, and it’s not much of a story if he does win. This not only means making your villains competent, it also means letting them get one up on the heroes. Think of the climax scene in any movie or book or show, the big showdown between the hero and villain. The moment of truth. In order to get to that point, the villain has to have gotten a few wins in. How could Will and Hannibal have ever gotten to the cliff scene if Will had bested Hannibal every step of the way from the start? How could A Series of Unfortunate Events have lasted past a single book if everyone believed the Baudelaire children and Count Olaf was successfully captured? This is where a lot of writers mess up; they do a good job building the villain up as being a real threat in theory, but they’re so against letting their darling protagonists so much as struggle or, gasp, LOSE for even just a moment, that in practice The Big Bad is barely an annoyance, no matter how menacing they originally seem. In the Anita Blake series, Marmee Noir, The Mother of All Darkness, is a great example of this. She’s presented as being the originator of both vampires and wereanimals, an ancient pre-human who has been in hibernation for thousands of years, and a being of immense power and terrible intentions. When the characters realize she’s begun to stir, it’s a huge Oh Shit moment, and there’s a lot of buildup over the books about how bad this is. But when Anita is actually up against this supposedly all-power supernatural force, she just. . .absorbs all Marmee’s power and kills her, lickety-split. A great many fans understandably found this terribly disappointing and anti-climactic. Let your bad guys be threatening, and let them make good on at least some of that threat potential before being defeated. Let the villains get some wins in. Which, yes, means letting your protagonist lose sometimes---and have to WORK for their ultimate win, become their best selves to triumph, pull out all the stops and everything they’ve got so that the audience sees what they’re really made of. It makes both your hero AND your villain look cooler to the readers, AND makes for a better story!

[rpmemesbyarat]

Piggybacking of THIS RANT on capable villains, I also think a good rule of thumb is that the more powerful, intelligent, capable, etc your hero is, the more so their antagonist should be. I’m going to be talking about character vs character antagonists here, but this can apply as well to “protagonist vs their own flaws” and “protagonist vs their environment/situation” If your protag is a pretty regular kid, a normal school bully makes for a decent antagonist most of the time. But if the kid is ACTUALLY an incredible fighter, has magical powers, or can call on powerful allies at any time for anything, then that’s no longer the case. Even if the kid is held back from actually using any of these advantages for some reason---they have to keep it a secret, they don’t want their bully to be seriously hurt, etc---the bully really registers to the audience more as an annoyance at that point. Which is why school bullies are indeed usually merely annoyances in media with such a protagonist, while the actual villains are beings far more capable of giving our protag a run for their money. Here’s a few more good examples: Sailor Moon is a Chosen One heroine whose attacks can instantly kill her Monster of the Day opponents, and she has the single most powerful object in the universe, The Silver Crystal, which has allowed her to defeat all her foes. But she’s unable to access its power except in truly dire straits, and the Big Bad of each season is always just on the cusp of what she can survive. It always truly appears to be an effort for her, and even in her day to day fights with normal monsters, she still frequently gets hit, scared, humiliated, and often relies on her friends to soften a monster up before she eliminates it. Her friends also lend her their strength during the Big Bad battles. Luke Skywalker is a prodigy with The Force, another Chosen One, and his pals Han, Leia, and Chewie are all badasses in their own right. They’re still up against a LITERAL Empire, headed by a Big Bad who is also a Force wielder with incredible power PLUS years more experience at wielding it. The men in “Predator” are an elite paramilitary team who are introduced as the epitome of 80s action movie badasses. . . only to find themselves outmatched by the Predator, a far more skilled soldier who possesses advanced technology and the element of surprise. Only one of them survives. How absurd would it have been if instead of the Predator, they’d been facing some regular workplace bully, right?  Now, does this need to go the other way around? Do you have to make your protagonist stronger and smarter and more capable the more you make your antagonist those things? Not necessarily. You certainly can, of course; watching two very evenly matched opponents go at it can be a great dynamic, and a very enjoyable story with a lot of tension and suspense. But the same can apply when the protagonist is seemingly hopelessly outmatched. Frodo and Bilbo are both the humblest of creatures, with no special abilities or chosen lineage, up against a Dark Lord and all his forces, to say nothing of the corruptive influence of The One Ring they must also combat against themselves. They’re far from what most people imagine when they think “typical fantasy hero” and yet are the protagonists from what is widely considered the best fantasy series of all time. So, you can go the Frodo route. Or you can go The Predator route. Or anything in between. Just remember that however badass/powerful/etc you make your hero, the villain has to follow suite. They can equally match the hero, or far outstrip them, but they have to at least match them. Otherwise, what’s the challenge? I’d also note that in all the examples I gave, the hero has friends and allies without whom they couldn’t succeed or even survive, but that’s a rant for another day.