I completely agree here.Moskher Heszche wrote:4. Darlok II. A new villain takes up the mantle, with a small amount of GM-intervention, ala what they seemed to be trying to do with Trystan Gravstyn. However, this villain should be, like Darlok, able to appeal to characters across the spectrum, even as their means are somewhat questionable. Also, unlike Darlok, it should be easier to defeat him, while hard enough to make people think twice about going toe-to-toe with him. Also, I think that, unlike Trystan, it should be a villain that already has a history and connections, so it doesn't seem disruptive.
My only problem is this: I have a character in the coming who may be fit for it, but I a) don't "powergame", nor b) would have any in-game "power" to boot, nor c) have this character activated and at my disposal yet, and likewise d) don't feel like playing this game at the time being BECAUSE this character has not been activated yet.
Furthering the thought, why must it be a single person? A cell of independantly operating figures can be much more powerful if coordinated correctly on an OOC-basis (thus making it possible for even conlflicting types of villains to somehow work together). An "axis of evil", if you feel so inclined.
I think this idea you've proposed deserves a thread of its own, dubbed "villains", or so.
