On Writing and Worldbuilding, Volume I

by Timothy Hickson

‘Black’ antagonists critical to the author’s vision

Tolkien believed that all things begin good and only become corrupted and evil, a pattern we see all throughout the Bible.

Summary

Having both of them after the same thing changes them into active characters rather than passive ones.

an opponent only becomes necessary when they harm the hero in a way no other character has before,

Placing that moment at the end allows the author to build tension around whether it will happen.

Placing that moment at the start confronts the hero with the grave threat of their opponent, demands a darker tone, and often means the narrative is about deali...

by making the rivalry ideological, it integrates their struggle with both theme and the character development of both the protagonist and antagonist.

making the opponent the foil for the hero can narrow the dramatic focus of the narrative.

However, this can lead to cliché moments, and there are other unique ways to approach developing your antagonist.

‘black’ antagonists can work without a reflective dynamic with the protagonist, but they have to serve another purpose in the vision of the author to be compelling.

PART VII FINAL BATTLES

the final battle takes place at the climax of the story, pitting your protagonists against the antagonists in some combative form with the consequences of that battle determining the outcome of your story.

Primary and secondary conflicts

The secondary conflict is usually the visual confrontation between your protagonists and antagonists—the

The primary conflict is the internal battle closely related to character or theme, involving a struggle or change within the characters that helps to determine the outcome of the final battle.

How to use primary and secondary conflicts

Weakness. This is simply a character flaw.

Psychological need. This is something that only affects the protagonist and must be fulfilled within themselves for them to live a better life.

Moral need. This is something that affects those around the protagonist and must be changed within themselves for them to live a better life.

New course of action

have them take a new course of action that they could not have taken before.

Losing the primary or secondary conflict?

having a protagonist lose their secondary conflict in the final battle is one way to do it. This often manifests in the infamous ‘redemption equals death’ trope where the character wins their primary conflict, but does so only in sacrificing themselves.

having that character succeed in their secondary conflict but only at the cost of them losing their primary conflict can be an effective way to have them turn evil or switch allegiances.

‘Final’ battles

this one-last-stand tends to be an attempt to hurt the heroes more personally.

the ‘last stand’ can be a powerful moment for the author to put the protagonists in a more vulnerable position and reveal what the stakes truly are.

Summary

giving your final battle primary and secondary conflicts makes for a multidimensional climax to your story.

primary conflicts are most effective when they arise out of the moral and psychological needs that have been explored

this should manifest in the characters taking action in a way they could not do

it can also be interesting to have the characters lose either the primary or secondary conflicts, or both.

there are plenty of ways to subvert the typical final battle that make for an interesting or unique story—whether

PART VIII THE CHOSEN ONE

Supporting characters

if the chosen one is the only person in the world who can resolve the central point of tension in the story, then the place of your supporting characters in the climax becomes uncertain.

Individual dramatic threads

By building other conflicts around supporting characters earlier in the narrative that do not arise from the ‘chosen-ness’ of the chosen one,

These threads can relate to the chosen one’s, but should not be dependent on it for existence and resolution.

Many chosen ones

Destiny quests

but it can be criticised because it does not necessarily add anything to the narrative.

it can undermine dramatic tension by making it so that when the heroes do succeed, the reader does not feel it is because the characters fought for it, but because they were the chosen one.

Actively wishing to halt destiny

Having chosen ones actively oppose their chosen-ness complicates that central point of tension. It can give it layers, facilitating an interesting thematic exploration of free will.

it can still feel stale because it often also makes the story morally simple for the aforementioned reasons and still undermines dramatic tension by making the protagonist’s achievements feel less their own.

What is the fallout of avoiding destiny? How does being the chosen one change a character’s life? What happens when destiny has a mind of its own? Perhaps the prophecy can change or destiny will pick a new chosen one when opposed. Are the forces of fate and destiny inherently driven to serve the good of your characters and world? A story where fate actively works against the main characters would be fascinating.

The antagonist as the chosen one

Morally ambiguous destinies