Writing How does a moral antagonist (3D) end up as a dark mirror of the protagonist?

GlassRose

Kaleidoscope of Harmonious Contradiction
Joined
Apr 20, 2021
Messages
402
Points
133
I know, and I'm not confusing anything. You should read whom I replied to, and read my reply.

Yes, Zuko can be seemed villainous at the beginning, kept chasing Aang for what he believed that'll earn him Ozai's recognition. But overtime, that erodes as Iroh tempered him to become a better man until his defiance against his father turned him over, earning a redemption.

And that invalidates his position as an antagonist
Except it really doesn't? For books 1 and 2, he is definitively an antagonist. Just because he later becomes an ally doesn't invalidate the fact that he was an antagonist to begin with.
 

Golden_Hyde

break all tropes
Joined
Jul 17, 2024
Messages
304
Points
78
Except it really doesn't? For books 1 and 2, he is definitively an antagonist. Just because he later becomes an ally doesn't invalidate the fact that he was an antagonist to begin with.
see, this is where you misunderstood his character. He's NOT an antagonist. He's what is best described as a deuteragonist. Ozai IS an antagonist, even though in the first two book he was sitting in the background. And you're literally skipping over Azula, which is another antagonistic character that sided more with Ozai.

EDIT: okay, he was an antagonist for the first two book, but at best he an apparent antagonist, not a real one. His antagonism as you believed slowly fell apart in book 3 and collapsed completely in book 4, which in classical literature, for an antagonist, it shouldn't happen
 
Last edited:

CharlesEBrown

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2024
Messages
4,569
Points
158
see, this is where you misunderstood his character. He's NOT an antagonist. He's what is best described as a deuteragonist. Ozai IS an antagonist, even though in the first two book he was sitting in the background. And you're literally skipping over Azula, which is another antagonistic character that sided more with Ozai.

EDIT: okay, he was an antagonist for the first two book, but at best he an apparent antagonist, not a real one. His antagonism as you believed slowly fell apart in book 3 and collapsed completely in book 4, which in classical literature, for an antagonist, it shouldn't happen
That's like saying Darth Vader is not an antagonist in Star Wars because he eventually kills the Emperor (at least temporarily... ugh).
No, he WAS the antagonist. He changes over time, and becomes a dueteragonist eventually but starts as the main antagonist, both from the descriptions above and the two episodes of the live action series I saw.
 

Golden_Hyde

break all tropes
Joined
Jul 17, 2024
Messages
304
Points
78
That's like saying Darth Vader is not an antagonist in Star Wars because he eventually kills the Emperor (at least temporarily... ugh).
No, he WAS the antagonist. He changes over time, and becomes a dueteragonist eventually but starts as the main antagonist, both from the descriptions above and the two episodes of the live action series I saw.
anyways, it's relatively hard (in my honest opinion) for me to apprehend that an antagonist can crumble under their own ideologies they held for so long, but I guess it does possible under very specific circumstances (and not being written sloppily just to get along with the "vibes" and shit)

Anyways, what @Eldoria said
So, what do you think is a worth ending for a moral antagonist who acts as a dark mirror for the protagonist?
I don't know anything about a worth ending for it, but if I were here making an ending with such characters, I'd let the moral antagonist win, but the cost would be everything else. And no, it's not Thanos=level of cliffhanger winning.
 

RavenWulfgar

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2025
Messages
37
Points
18
Worth Ending for the Moral Antagonist as the Dark Mirror of the Protagonist

One-dimensional antagonists are shallow characters, usually evil for evil's sake. For some authors, a 1D antagonist can be well-written, especially when the antagonist falls or loses, the blow feels satisfying. Moreover, readers tend to like evil villains who are defeated by the protagonist decisively (who doesn't like seeing an evil villain punished? Whether in fiction or real life, it's the same).

But what about a 3D antagonist, a character who opposes the protagonist who has a complex and human personality? Perhaps they are evil but have legitimate motives. Or they are heroes in their own version or for the group they defend.

Thanos could be considered a balancer of the cosmos by wiping out half the universe's population. Magneto could be considered a hero to oppressed mutants. And Pain (Nagato Uzumaki) is a dark mirror for Naruto, who desires peace through collective pain as opposed to peace through empathy (which Naruto strives for).

They are concrete representations of what would happen if the protagonist fell down the path of darkness? We understand their reasons for extreme actions, although that doesn't necessarily justify them.

And maybe... if we were in their shoes, we might have done the same. That's why I call them dark mirrors for the protagonist.

As such, their endings are less relevant, with crushing defeats or ignominious deaths like those of evil villains. I even still sympathize with Nagato's death after over a decade.

So, what do you think is a worth ending for a moral antagonist who acts as a dark mirror for the protagonist?
I honestly believe you would love The Nocturneverse because a villain was recently revealed. I can't say more than that because it does give it away and I just posted that part today but one takeaway from it all was that my protagonist is walking away from the experience changed and I think the realization is setting in that he is in way over his head. A dark mirror for a protagonist is great and it's one of those things you'd benefit from by reading Jung's work on The Shadow, which is what Pain is to Naruto and Magneo is to Xavier but the thing that you must understand is that the most interesting villains do have a code, sometimes they're right even if their methods are wrong but the most important thing, the hero walks away changed. The hero sees that he or she must adapt in order to be effective at dealing with the evil they face. Likewise, when Jung talks about integrating the Shadow, it's less about saying "I'm capable of great harm." and then doing it from a standpoint of nihilism (The Shadow Unchecked) and more about saying, "I acknowledge that I am capable of great harm. I know I can do terrible things and perhaps they have a place but I choose to conduct myself by these standards. Once these are exhausted then I am permitting myself to do those terrible things to protect myself or my family or those around me."
 

laccoff_mawning

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2022
Messages
488
Points
133
I don't see why we would necessarily treat them any different than a 'non-moral' antagonist. Every villain is just in their own eyes, so I don't see why a more relatable one would deserve it's own special category of villainy.

The only difference is that you, as an author, are more likely to consider the reformation of said character due to personal attachment. However, your options are still the same; you can choose to reform a 'non-moral' antagonist in the same way as a 'moral' antagonist. (Whatever 'moral' means in this nonsense, since 'moral' clearly doesn't actually mean moral here.)

If we take 'moral' to actually mean moral in this case, then the protagonist must be a villain. In which case, the moral victory is more important than the protagonist's victory, so the antagonist should win. In this case, it's the protagonist that should be treated as the villain, and the story is just his side of the events.
 

CinnaSloth

Sinful Sloth
Joined
Nov 20, 2024
Messages
522
Points
108
Worth Ending for the Moral Antagonist as the Dark Mirror of the Protagonist

One-dimensional antagonists are shallow characters, usually evil for evil's sake. For some authors, a 1D antagonist can be well-written, especially when the antagonist falls or loses, the blow feels satisfying. Moreover, readers tend to like evil villains who are defeated by the protagonist decisively (who doesn't like seeing an evil villain punished? Whether in fiction or real life, it's the same).

But what about a 3D antagonist, a character who opposes the protagonist who has a complex and human personality? Perhaps they are evil but have legitimate motives. Or they are heroes in their own version or for the group they defend.

Thanos could be considered a balancer of the cosmos by wiping out half the universe's population. Magneto could be considered a hero to oppressed mutants. And Pain (Nagato Uzumaki) is a dark mirror for Naruto, who desires peace through collective pain as opposed to peace through empathy (which Naruto strives for).

They are concrete representations of what would happen if the protagonist fell down the path of darkness? We understand their reasons for extreme actions, although that doesn't necessarily justify them.

And maybe... if we were in their shoes, we might have done the same. That's why I call them dark mirrors for the protagonist.

As such, their endings are less relevant, with crushing defeats or ignominious deaths like those of evil villains. I even still sympathize with Nagato's death after over a decade.

So, what do you think is a worth ending for a moral antagonist who acts as a dark mirror for the protagonist?

I'm currently writing a story offline. I don't know if this will make sense, or if it even applies here.. I'll let you be the judge.

4 characters from different backgrounds meet up together in the city.
through certain circumstances, they end up forming a group, and they become friends. close friends. two even become more so.
they all came to this city to find themselves, learn how they each fit within this world. they help each other, and carry each other. they love each other like family. more than half the story they're doing things together. they're having fun. they're growing as people.
but as time continues, and they're learning more, and more, about themselves, and what they want out of life; goals, expectations, needs, and obsessions. they slowly start drifting apart, while, at the same time, try their damnedest to stay friends.
Sad thing is- Their goals, and aspirations, are clashing. They aren't trying to get in each other's ways, they're friends, they're trying to be there for one another. but the more they try to all stay together, they begin fighting, and arguing, and unintentionally betraying one another. until one of them gets hurt. -because that's the way it happens; That's the way it always happens. They didn't mean to; It just happened.
Try as they might to mend relationships, everything just becomes more and more grey.
Someone's hurt, and they villainize the the one who did it for pushing things too far.
Things go right for one person as things for the others get worse, and they become jealous.
One of the others gets bad news, and becomes bitter, feeling left behind.
The two who were dating break up.
Things escalate until each of them just becomes the villain of another's story.
they fight, and argue, and complain, and- Things escalate even more
Something happens, something bad. and it can't be undone.
It's the last straw that drives them to separation.
Each end up feeling more lost than ever before, angry, bitter, sad, and alone.
They end up feeling trapped in the midst of what they were running away from in the first place; The entire reason they went to the city to begin with, coming back to haunt them. There is no escape.
They become the villains of book 2.

They're all protagonists that slowly devolve into antagonists in each others stories.

At first you root for them, you like them, you enjoy them being on screen, and somewhere within the chapters, it begins to twist and wrench at your gut until you look down, and see the knife they put there. It's not immediate. it's not something that just happens. None of them are bad. none of them want bad things. nobody intentionally tries to destroy one another. but somewhere, they just did.. and.. it happens again, and again.. and again.. and as you start to see the knives in your chest, and in your back. You have to ask, "A-are you.. doing this on purpose??" They say no, but.. you don't believe them. you just can't. You see them holding another knife, and you just sit and stare, and-
how do you walk away from that being okay? ..I don't think you do.. I don't think anyone does. I don't think it's possible.
-so in my story, they don't.. They just... don't.
 

CharlesEBrown

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2024
Messages
4,569
Points
158
Except for the "more than friends" bit (and needing to add in that one member dies and another gets screwed out of his position in the group, to be replaced by a virtual stranger), that sounds like a condensed history of The Beatles...
 

CinnaSloth

Sinful Sloth
Joined
Nov 20, 2024
Messages
522
Points
108
Except for the "more than friends" bit (and needing to add in that one member dies and another gets screwed out of his position in the group, to be replaced by a virtual stranger), that sounds like a condensed history of The Beatles...

does it? I don't know anything about the beatles, except something about crossing the road, and a yellow boat?
 

CharlesEBrown

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2024
Messages
4,569
Points
158
does it? I don't know anything about the beatles, except something about crossing the road, and a yellow boat?
They were credited with a lot of musical innovations that they were the first band to get wide success with, but were usually the second or third band to attempt. Use of Indian instruments (the Kinks beat them by a whole album, and at least two other, less-successful bands also tried the same thing) among them. They also had an undeserved reputation as the "good boys" of rock (as opposed to the other "bannermen" of the British Invasion, the Rolling Stones).
And the "boat" was a submarine (green, for some reason, in the French translation of the song), that apparently was used to visit an Octopus's Garden (in the shade).
 

CinnaSloth

Sinful Sloth
Joined
Nov 20, 2024
Messages
522
Points
108
They were credited with a lot of musical innovations that they were the first band to get wide success with, but were usually the second or third band to attempt. Use of Indian instruments (the Kinks beat them by a whole album, and at least two other, less-successful bands also tried the same thing) among them. They also had an undeserved reputation as the "good boys" of rock (as opposed to the other "bannermen" of the British Invasion, the Rolling Stones).
And the "boat" was a submarine (green, for some reason, in the French translation of the song), that apparently was used to visit an Octopus's Garden (in the shade).

See, I know of the rolling stones. they did Gimme shelter, and painting black. or.. that might have been someone else... uh.. brb.. (checking my spotify lol) "Paint it, Black"..
Was Queen, and Journey around the same era? I like those two.

"The yellow-green submarine went to an octopus garden"? "in the shade"? lmao. and this was music? They got big off that?? ?
Wasn't that like a huge song? what was their biggest song? man.. music was weird, huh. lol (not that music now is any better)

Oh but... back to topic. How are Beatles like my story? I assumed you were talking about mine. (just, order of posts with no quote)
 

CharlesEBrown

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2024
Messages
4,569
Points
158
Their first big hit was, I believe, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" - they got "big" being the warm-up band for a guy named Tommy Sheridan, but then got sent to Germany without him (and without Pete Best who messed up his passport application and was replaced by Richard Starkey, who was "gently advised" to change his name to Ringo Starr, as their drummer). They had a lot of big hits, but no clue what their biggest was. Queen came out about a year before The Beatles had their epic breakup (around '72 or so), and Journey was a few years later ('75 I think, though I first heard of them in '78 or '79).

And the Beagling Bugle Boys (original band name IIRC) were four guys who came together in Liverpool - two of them had known each other before (Stu Sutliffe and Paul McCartney IIRC), while Paul and John Lennon shared a class together. They formed a band that wasn't going much of anywhere, when Stu got into a fight with one of the British punk rock gangs (don't recall if it was The Mods or the Rockers - the gang Roger Daltry of The Who had left almost exactly a year earlier to form his band). They found Pete Best doing session work at a bar, were discovered by Sheridan, and then had the passport mess that led to Ringo joining, and made history at a place called The Rathskellar when they slipped a few original songs into their collection of covers of American songs (including one John Lennon STOLE a harmonica from a pawn shop because he felt it needed one and they barely had enough money to eat). They got along incredibly well for about six years, but then things started to fray, especially when band members got married and spouses didn't get along, or didn't like them touring, it devolved into chaos (brilliantly parodied in "All You Need Is Cash - the History of the Ruttles" - almost beat-by-beat a riff on "The Compleat Beatles" movie but a little shorter and a LOT funnier) and a flood of lawsuits.
They seemed to be finally talking to each other again when Lennon was murdered, ending any reunion hopes.
And if you want some bizarre trivia:
1. There are two correct answers to both "Who is the youngest" and "who is the oldest" Beatle - and Ringo Starr is in both, as the first born but last to join. George Harrison is chronologically younger, but he proposed at least two of the four or five names they performed under, was older than Paul, and was the only Beatle other than Paul to perform with them under all of their different names.

2. Paul McCartney did a lot of session work for various studios both before and after the band broke up. He often shows up on liner notes using the last name of an uncle of his, so as "Paul Ramone" - which inspired a punk band in the 80s to take that as their name, The Ramones.
 
Last edited:
Top