Did the bad guys ever share loyalty to one another?

[CeeCee]

POST IN THIS THREAD, NOT THE DOUBLE PLEASEDo you not think the enemies would have been better if they had actually have been close.Hers an example. All the Piraka think they hate each other. One of them, lets say Reidak, gets killed by lets say, Jaller. The Piraka realize they actually do miss him, and Zaktan, being the leader feels some what responsible of his death. The remaing six Piraka (especially Zaktan) are fueled with new hatred for the Toa Inika.I personally think thats a bit better than just "You got a mask we want so we're going to kill you. Oh and we hate you for no reason as well, simply becuase youre on the other side"Do you agree or disagree

Edited August 14, 2012 by Alterego

[Makuta Matata]

Caring isn't really in a Skakdi's nature.

[CeeCee]

Caring isn't really in a Skakdi's nature.

Being evil isnt in a Toa's, if Im right, but there are many that are/were

[WeatherDragon]

Very interesting question. I do not think the Piraka would feel guilt for his death...but I do think they would miss him a little. The Barraki are different. Takadox even cared for Carapar when the latter died at the hands of Tren Krom.

[CeeCee]

Very interesting question. I do not think the Piraka would feel guilt for his death...but I do think they would miss him a little. The Barraki are different. Takadox even cared for Carapar when the latter died at the hands of Tren Krom.

Thats cool. Do you know where I can find that? What book is it?

[WeatherDragon]

It is in The Federation of Fear. A serial on BIONICLEStory.com.

[CeeCee]

It is in The Federation of Fear. A serial on BIONICLEStory.com.

Thanks

[bonesiii]

Well on the one hand, Bionicle was teaching an important moral lesson, that it is the antagonists who tend to turn on each other in real life, when they stop needing each other. It was especially clear with the Piraka and with Teridax's killing of the other Makuta.On the other hand I do like stories that get more into those gray areas, as I tried to do with the local leader in Sticks and Stones (EM story), where they form philosophies that mix evil with loyalty. It does happen in real life too.

[Aderia]

When Makuta Teridax killed two of the Shadowed One's Dark Hunters (Krekka and Nidhiki), that sparked the Dark Hunter/BoM war.Also, Roodaka had that creepy-ish devotion to Teridax where she brewed that master plan of hers to break the Toa seal around him.Those are two examples of antagonists showing loyalty, even if it wasn't exactly the kind we like to think of.

[Master Inika]

The Piraka had no sense of loyalty (to the point of attempting to murder one another at various times) as a result of the selfish Skakdi nature. The Barraki were slightly more allied, but by just a little.The Visorak Horde was also only obeyed their King and Viceroy out of pure fear (while the Viceroy arranged the King's death). In general, this is probably to morally promote the Three Virtues, Unity being one of the most pronounced.Of course, there are rare exceptions. The Shadowed One and Ancient seemed to have a degree of legitimate trust (but not so much; TSO killed Ancient when the latter learned too much).@Aderia: I forgot; Roodaka also did have a true devolution to Teridax. TSO didn't really feel loyal to Nidhiki nor Krekka, though, but he had to show that the murder of a Hunter would not be tolerated, so his organization would not seem weak.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Master Inika

[Makuta Matata]

Caring isn't really in a Skakdi's nature.

Being evil isnt in a Toa's, if Im right, but there are many that are/were

Except, the amount of evil Toa is miniscule. What are the chances that every single Piraka on the team would care for each other? Also, caring and morality are two very different things.

[Aderia]

@Aderia: I forgot; Roodaka also did have a true devolution to Teridax. TSO didn't really feel loyal to Nidhiki nor Krekka, though, but he had to show that the murder of a Hunter would not be tolerated, so his organization would not seem weak.

Touche, about TSO. I suppose it was self-loyalty, if that couts.Also, what about Brutaka? I mean, in Federation of Fear, he was a leader of a team of villians. And with his multiple personality thing with the Antidermis, does that make him loyal to his other personality?

[bonesiii]

Wasn't there something about Gorast being loyal to Teridax? Or was that just The Plan? (Either way, not the smartest choice lol.)

[-Jaller-]

_{When Caper and Kalamph (sorry if that is misspelt) ambushed Jaller and Kongu they got close to killing them if it wern't for Jaller's Hannah Crab. So if the villins worked together there would be more intense fights and a better chance of seeing the villins win.}

[Tahu5181]

POST IN THIS THREAD, NOT THE DOUBLE PLEASEDo you not think the enemies would have been better if they had actually have been close.Hers an example. All the Piraka think they hate each other. One of them, lets say Reidak, gets killed by lets say, Jaller. ThePiraka realize they actually do miss him, and Zaktan, being the leader feels some what responsible of his death. The remaing six Piraka (especially Zaktan) are fueled with new hatred for the Toa Inika.I personally think thats a bit better than just "You got a mask we want so we're going to kill you. Oh and we hate you for no reason as well, simply becuase youre on the other side"Do you agree or disagree

Not all of the enemies were like that. For example, some of the Makuta, or at least Gorast (she's the only one I remember) was devoted to Teridax.I agree with you, though. For the villians that were one-sided, I think it would add more depth, and transform them into more interesting characters.

[CeeCee]

Wasn't there something about Gorast being loyal to Teridax? Or was that just The Plan? (Either way, not the smartest choice lol.)

I think I phrased the tittle wrong. I kind of meant a sort of friend to each other, like the Toa. Maybe like a brotherhood.I dont mean creepy loyalties and devotions

[Master Inika]

Wasn't there something about Gorast being loyal to Teridax? Or was that just The Plan? (Either way, not the smartest choice lol.)

I think I phrased the tittle wrong. I kind of meant a sort of friend to each other, like the Toa. Maybe like a brotherhood.I dont mean creepy loyalties and devotions

That adds a bit of a new facet. Even when the villains are loyal to one another, it's obsessive (like Gorast and Roodaka to Teridax).Come to think of it, both Gorast and Roodaka were only obsessed with Makuta because they thought serving him would bring them power.

[The Lord Of Wednesday]

Mention of TSO is interesting because he seems to want everyone to only be loyal to him out of fear. So it would seem he went for something like that intentionally, seeing as he ordered the Dark Hunters to kill him if he displayed signs of weakness (either that or just one of them). For the Piraka, there must have been something that kept them together at first, seeing as they probably did not expect 12 toa to try and defeat them (if I remember right they seemed surprised about it) though I also would not be surprised if there was some suspision of it. Odds are I would have guess that their alliance would have extended until the mask was right in front of them and then they would kill each other for it, or hoped that they could use each other to get past the defenses.

[bonesiii]

Wasn't there something about Gorast being loyal to Teridax? Or was that just The Plan? (Either way, not the smartest choice lol.)

I think I phrased the tittle wrong. I kind of meant a sort of friend to each other, like the Toa. Maybe like a brotherhood.I dont mean creepy loyalties and devotions

Hm... Perhaps among some of the Makuta. They may have developed friendships prior to purging all light, and maybe some would have survived that ordeal. Though I think they would all necessarily take on creepiness. Moral light would seem to be important to having a true friendship.Various other species are likely to have had that sort of thing, but probably only among minor villains. I'm having trouble thinking of any... Edited August 15, 2012 by bonesiii

[Axilus Prime]

It's natural to hate the other side. If someone fires on you in a war, the default reaction is to hate them and kill them unless there is a REALLY good reason not to.At best the Piraka would be angry because they were down a soldier.

[CeeCee]

It's natural to hate the other side. If someone fires on you in a war, the default reaction is to hate them and kill them unless there is a REALLY good reason not to.At best the Piraka would be angry because they were down a soldier.

Thats not true. Did you ever hear the day the Germans and the British played football in WWI?

[Axilus Prime]

Though those who participated were not the direct combatants, unlike the Inika and Piraka, who were, with a few allies, about the ONLY combatants.

[CeeCee]

Though those who participated were not the direct combatants, unlike the Inika and Piraka, who were, with a few allies, about the ONLY combatants.

Maybe so, but I think there should be a proper reason fleshed out for the story

[Axilus Prime]

The reason is they're selfish. Most villains are.

[CeeCee]

The reason is they're selfish. Most villains are.

But thats what I'm talking about. They shouldn't be completely selfish. I think there should be a line between good and bad, but I dont think that the bad guys should be everything against what the good guys stand for. Its not natural.

[Master Inika]

I think, prior to purging their Light, Mutran and Chirox were real friends.

[Podu]

The reason is they're selfish. Most villains are.

But thats what I'm talking about. They shouldn't be completely selfish. I think there should be a line between good and bad, but I dont think that the bad guys should be everything against what the good guys stand for. Its not natural.

Then we have Roodaka and some Dark Hunters like Mimic. Not every bad guy in the story is selfish/not loyal. Roodaka is (well, kinda) loyal to Makuta, but this is wrong loyalty as it is out of benefits; In Mimic's case, it is blind loyalty to friendship but not selfishness. Actually, BIONICLE has a lot of interesting, "grey" kind of villians. They just don't have enough time to be developed or even put into the spotlight (or even if they do, instantly turned into generic type).

[bonesiii]

I think probably LEGO did not want to show "true friendship" among villains too as it would send a wrong message to kids. We do need to keep in mind the target age. Stories targeted towards teens and adults are more free to explore the gray areas.As for soldiers not hating the other side, most Bionicle villains haven't been soldiers where the ones on the villain side are forced into it. They are seeking out some evil goal themselves, which is very different. There could have been something like that in some of the historical wars in Bionicle perhaps. But we never got to see those in detail. The one war we did had mostly Rahkshi on the enemy side, so no chance of a friendly game of Akilini.

[CeeCee]

I think probably LEGO did not want to show "true friendship" among villains too as it would send a wrong message to kids. We do need to keep in mind the target age. Stories targeted towards teens and adults are more free to explore the gray areas.

Dont get me wrong. I know why they didnt do it, I just think it would have been a nice touch

[Axilus Prime]

Well, those who seek the power by initiative are more likely to be selfish. I actually prefer it when the good guys meet villains they can just kill despite full sentience.I prefer villains that range from the treacherous to the fanatical to the violent to the treacherous fanatically violent to the spastic.

[Ektris]

This is something that I think back on now and wish had been done. Villains with purpose and loyalty would have been pretty interesting. It just, unfortunately, goes against the basic morals that they were trying to impart. The story was never meant to be some deep psychological tale. It was always a children's story. And when it comes to those, "keep it simple" seems like a good motto.~|ET|~

[fishers64]

Also, Roodaka had that creepy-ish devotion to Teridax where she brewed that master plan of hers to break the Toa seal around him.

But Roodaka apparently lost that devotion to Teridax quickly, however. I tend to imagine that scene..."You let those Toa run free with the Matoran, and destroyed my Visorak army. Thanks for getting me out of here, though. Now run along before I put an end to your miserable existence." Teridax just took advantage of said loyalty...Evil is evil is evil. If the only you thing you care about is yourself, you won't be having too many good friendships because you are constantly taking advantage of them to serve your own purposes. Most people don't like being taken advantage of. Bionicle tends to stick to that.

[boston100]

SOme would some wouldent. FOr example hakan would be thrilled if vezok died. But roodaka would cry if makuta died.P.S. I know this has nothing to do with the topic but please be pacient with me:)If you like hero factory avert your eyes.THIS IS NOT SPAM I'm writing this so mayby peaple will see how I see about hero factory.

Edited August 20, 2012 by bonesiii
Saying spam isn't spam doesn't make it not spam. The main problem is that it was simply off-topic here (and a bit flamey). It may be on-topic in LEGO Discussion either as its own topic or a post in an HF topic. PM if you lack a copy. -bonesiii

[The Iron Toa]

Actually, I don't think Roodaka cared that much for Teridax, otherwise she wouldn't have played both sides in the conflict between the Brotherhood and the Dark Hunters.

[Taipu1]

There have been plenty of "friendships" among the villains I think, but their personalities have selfishness at ridiculous levels. An example separate to the ones already stated would be TSO and Ancient (not technically a villain, but playing the part). And they were close friends, but then one major thing came up, and TSO saw Ancient as a potential problem.

But roodaka would cry if makuta died.

I doubt she would, Roodaka had great respect for Teridax as a ruler, but I don't think they were ever friends, and certainly Teridax would not care in the least if she died.

[The Iron Toa]

I think Roodaka actually had a serious condition of what TVTropes calls Chronic Backstabbing Disorder. I think she actually went a little crazy. She's a compulsive traitor, and trying to work for both the Dark Hunters and the Makuta shows a foolishness that doesn't match her previous status as a clever ruler.

[fishers64]

I think Roodaka actually had a serious condition of what TVTropes calls Chronic Backstabbing Disorder. I think she actually went a little crazy. She's a compulsive traitor, and trying to work for both the Dark Hunters and the Makuta shows a foolishness that doesn't match her previous status as a clever ruler.

This clever ruler thought she could brainwash a Toa into doing her bidding and miscalculated Sidorak's influence over the Visorak (and Vakama's influence over them).

[The Iron Toa]

Good point. Maybe she wasn't too wise to begin with. But she must had some ability, to ascend to the position she had.

[Master Inika]

Roodaka certainly has a level of intelligence. She just thought her persuasion would outweigh Vakama's commitment to the Matoran, so arrogant as she was. After being saved by Teridax, she probably did get slightly more insane, but she probably had a compromised mental status before. Think of the Rahaga, if you really look at what she did to them, it's quite demented. She was always insane, but relatively competent nonetheless.

[Klak]

I think you make a good point, but here's my two cents:It would be good if more villains had this as opposed to minor characters.However, when it comes to the Piraka and Teridax (I'm not sure about Roodaka), making them loyal would mess with their archetypes. Why? Well, the Piraka are right what it says on the tin: thieves. Instead of the super-villain type we had in years prior, 2006 tried to establish more "criminal" type villains.The classic image of a thief is of someone who is greedy and is always plotting to betray the others. While it was rather strange to see them constantly forming factions and betraying one another, uniting maybe only when the Inika were nearby, the writers probably wouldn't show how depraved and inconsiderate thieves they were in an efficient way (at least to the target audience) if they didn't work this into the story.As for Teridax, he wouldn't be as effective if we had some sympathy for him. Remember, he's the villain who got his way up until 2010, and even then, he was pretty close to winning in a way. He sees the entire universe as his chess pieces in a massive game that can only end with him winning, and he is willing to do anything for that to be accomplished. He has no regard to life, honor, or morality in any way, and showing him to be a traitor to just about everyone embodies this perfectly.I think Teridax could be comparable to the Joker in that way, since both characters are popular villains whose images would be heavily altered if we worked more and more sympathy into their background. They're both supposed to be completely immoral and evil psychopaths who have zero regard for life unless it benefits them.

Edited August 22, 2012 by KlakWest