can an evilutionary biologist be the big bad of a novel

I am trying to create a villain that wants turn humanity into sociopaths. Are there tropes that could help me develop this character besides evilutionary biologist and as far as story goes

Well, why does he want to turn humanity into sociopaths, for starters? What would he gain from doing that? Try thinking of him as a person instead of simply 'the bad guy'.

Also, do not rely on tropes to build a character. The character always comes first.

edited 25th Feb '12 1:35:59 PM by CrystalGlacia

He thinks it would make life easier for people if they had no attachment. This is from feeling outcast as a person.

That's a start. Why is he feeling outcast?

(If you think this is annoying, get used to it- writing and making something seem believable is all about asking yourself 'why'.)

edited 25th Feb '12 1:40:47 PM by CrystalGlacia

I am having difficulty with the weapon he uses

as for your question:

People would not talk to him and maybe they disagreed with his research

What was he researching, and why wouldn't people talk to him?

No, stop. You can figure that out later. If you want to make your villain seem believable, you need to figure him out as a human being. So what if your character has a cool weapon? He can have all the cool toys in the world and it won't matter to your readers if he doesn't seem like a person.

Also, instead of doubleposting, use the little pencil icon next to your posts to edit them.

edited 25th Feb '12 1:48:19 PM by CrystalGlacia

you asked: What was he researching, and why wouldn't people talk to him?

He was researching genetic augmentation using nanotechnology, people thought he was wierd since his research was unconvetional and far ahead of the times. Oh and maybe non surprisingly research into sociopathy.

edited 25th Feb '12 2:02:11 PM by matsuiny2004

Why was he researching that? Why is he interested in it?

I'm not going to walk you through fleshing out this guy. Only you know what you want out of him and your story, and you need to be the one to ask yourself 'why' as you flesh out your characters and ideas. Think about what makes him a person, why he should be a threat, why your heroes want to stop him, and why your readers should care.

I have thought of these. I think readers should care since he wants to turn his whole planets species into sociopaths. This means noone would care about each other. It would destroy civilization and possibly humanities existence since people would only care about what they want or wouldn't be afraid to kill their children. Innovation would only be to better yourself not help other or make life better. This is why my hero wants to stop him and this is why my hero values emotions. My readers shoul care since most people would not want to see that happen.

I don't think not caring about your kid means you will kill it. Kids are delicious free labor. Whiny free labor, but free labor. Not caring about someone emotionally doesn't mean you're gonna just up and kill them. You don't need to feel guilt to be a utilitarian.

Though on account sociopaths can skew a bit impulsive, I can't figure out why having a bunch of impulsive jerks is worth having for anything besides comedic sociopathy...

I've been bullied all through school and I can't comprehend how the solution to being an outcast could possibly be "make everyone a sociopath." Wouldn't that make things worse? If normal human beings are already considered unpleasant, how could making them sociopaths who are even bigger jerks solve anything? Wouldn't that move people who dislike the scientist in question from just complaining he's weird/annoying/stupid/whatever to just punching the scientist in the face (if they dislike him enough anyway)?

edited 25th Feb '12 3:54:15 PM by Kaxen

but what if he just becomes apathetic and stops caring about people. I never said the villains goals were logical either.

edited 25th Feb '12 4:08:02 PM by matsuiny2004

Wouldn't becoming apathetic mean becoming completely detached?

Therefore, wouldn't that mean causing harm becomes irrelevant? I can't see how becoming apathetic would make someone cause harm.

Here's your problem

That immediately set alarm bells ringing. Are you writing from a religious point of view

What I mean by apathetic is misanthropic He begins to hate current humanity. The villain wants to rid himself and humanity of these feelings. To the other poster no that is just the name of a trope my novel is not anti science. I just thought it had some simmilarities to my villain. It is more biology gone wrong than religious. My hero benefits alot from science. The villain is more example of how science should not be used.

Trope name, Evilutionary Biologist.

Oh. Is he planning on killing himself after doing all this mess? Unless he's a doomsday prepper-style person, I can't imagine wanting to buy food from anyone after completing this terrible mad scientist plan. ...then praying I never need surgery or medication to stay alive...

I dunno, I think it undermines anything resembling a good argument of "you shouldn't use science like that" when the "like that" is a completely illogical use in the first place...

Who says it is completed? Beside what does the villain care he is a misanthrope. The point of the story is the value of human emotions. Well i guess that is one point of the story anyway.

edited 25th Feb '12 5:26:21 PM by matsuiny2004

"Misanthrope" doesn't mean "Acts in ways that don't make sense". Writing off illogical behavior with "insanity" is lazy writing.

If you really want to focus on just the value of human morality (not emotions; sociopaths still have emotions), then you don't really need a villain at all.

edited 25th Feb '12 5:48:07 PM by RTaco

well i need to have a villain since i want it to be action adventure. I guess then a more accurate word would be borg like.

edited 25th Feb '12 5:58:00 PM by matsuiny2004

Well, regardless of whether he actually completes the plan or not, I would think, him seeming to be decently intelligent (being an educated scientist), would have an answer to "And then what?" I mean, "I'm going to mess up the world and then laugh my socks off until I meet my maker" gives off a different impression than "I'm going to mess up the world and then... I dunno!"