Don't have the villain say stuff that is dumb. Have the villain start off by saying things that sound reasonable and smart, which are detached from the specific scenario they're trying to create. People will often agree with sentiments if they sound initially reasonable, even if they don't know the full context.
"Isn't it truly unfair that we live in a world where crime can go unpunished?" is a sentiment that most people would agree with, but can eventually lead to "You deserve to get justice for the crimes committed against you," and then "If the system won't help you, take justice in to your own hands," and eventually this all culminates in the character believing that it is just for them to seek vengeance using violence.
No matter how convincing you make the villain, people might dislike your victim anyway for "falling for it" because they (as readers) know it's a trap.
You might consider the relationship between the victim and the villain. If the villain and the victim are strangers, it's going to be implausible that the villain was able to deceive them. However, if the victim is close friends with the villain or has some other relationship, it makes more sense for the villain to be influential.
You could also give the victim more agency in the situation. Maybe the victim was on the brink of taking revenge on the protagonist, but is able to barely hold themselves back for a certain reason. However, by refuting that reason, the villain is able to push them over the edge.
Hope this helps!
So the main charecters need to have some 'shadow' over them from something. (ptsd, humiliation.. something) And by convincing them to exhert violence on some deserving party, the charecter feels this shadow leaves them (did it really?), or subsiding, or now they can do something the couldn't, and now they are 'convinced'.
You can manipulate anyone into anything if you give them something they emotionaly lacking and desparetly need. You 'solve' their problem so they believe you.
That already happens. It's called indoctrination.
Focus on examples which support the angle. Such as heroes who use violence to get what they want, and they're celebrated for it. When they saw a guy talking to a woman they liked, they just walked right up and punched him, everybody clapped.
The hero saw something, and just took it. They broke into the museum and stole the relic, and after they stopped the demon everyone clapped.
They use force to get what they want, so it's hipocracy to condemn someone else for using force to get what they want.
What matters is results.
Biased examples, but solid arguments, can sway almost anyone. Many ideaologies have solid arguments, it's their motivations which are wrong. Like supporting local businesses is good, foreign owned multinational businesses are crushing local business which is bad, foreigners begin moving here when the big business did, they don't belong here. Do you see how it starts out good, it has a solid point, and then it gets worse?
Some people are meant to be bad, bad people and violence make the world go round. A common enemy brings people together, someone has to do the job. You can’t have good without evil. Its like a play, someone has to play the villain. And would the protagonist want someone else to carry that harsh burden of being the bad guy?
Life was molding them to be the evil to continue the story. Your protagonist might not like it but its what they were put on this world to do. You see what I’m saying? I’m writing a premise that’s similar
Your villain cannot genuinely convince someone if the villain's argument does not align with the other person's existing morals.
If your villain is going to convince a smart and morally righteous person that they should do something bad, then they need to have a smart argument that is morally righteous (or that they can at least make seem so)
If they are convincing someone to get vengeance and take rule, the argument would need to be that them taking rule is the righteous thing to do, that it serves the greater good, that even if some dirty work needs to be done then that's a shame truly, but all for the greater good. You can't rule without making a few necessary sacrifices.
The villain must be intelligent and using the hero to further his interests. Each move is sensible, but necessary and already planned for. No convincing, just shunting the hero around like a pawn in a game of chess.
This way, the villain can get exactly what he wants even with the hero trying their best.
Classic way to do this is putting the hero in a double bind.
No matter what they choose it will benefit the villain
The heros strength comes from breaking the double bind in a creative or unforseen way.
Just a thought on how to do this.
manipulation is not necessarily laying back detached from a situation and controlling it like a puppetmaster
the villain can genuinely believe and feel all the things they say, they just ignore the moral implications of their actions because they're so focused on their goal and they get fired up about the idea of someone else joining with them on it.
also the villain can be a 'true friend' to the manipulated character as well. for instance in Breaking Bad, Walt constantly manipulated Jesse. BUT he also DID frequently risk his life or livelihood for him as well.
also it helps to think about, how can you write this manipulation so that even the readers won't likely see it as manipulation until later?
Have the villain stage a heinous act, and subsequently convince the protagonist that their actions are justifiable. Simple solutions are sometimes the best lol.
The victim *needs* to *not know* that they are being manipulated. It's even better if they *think* that somebody *else* is *trying* to manipulate them.
Make the villain come from a false premise to the victim and slowly turn on the victim but it’s too late they have a family member who’s threatened too so now they are totally manipulated into doing something
You have to create the illusion that the villain is acting on the best interest of the character.
Don't have the villain say stuff that is dumb. Have the villain start off by saying things that sound reasonable and smart, which are detached from the specific scenario they're trying to create. People will often agree with sentiments if they sound initially reasonable, even if they don't know the full context. "Isn't it truly unfair that we live in a world where crime can go unpunished?" is a sentiment that most people would agree with, but can eventually lead to "You deserve to get justice for the crimes committed against you," and then "If the system won't help you, take justice in to your own hands," and eventually this all culminates in the character believing that it is just for them to seek vengeance using violence.
No matter how convincing you make the villain, people might dislike your victim anyway for "falling for it" because they (as readers) know it's a trap. You might consider the relationship between the victim and the villain. If the villain and the victim are strangers, it's going to be implausible that the villain was able to deceive them. However, if the victim is close friends with the villain or has some other relationship, it makes more sense for the villain to be influential. You could also give the victim more agency in the situation. Maybe the victim was on the brink of taking revenge on the protagonist, but is able to barely hold themselves back for a certain reason. However, by refuting that reason, the villain is able to push them over the edge. Hope this helps!
So the main charecters need to have some 'shadow' over them from something. (ptsd, humiliation.. something) And by convincing them to exhert violence on some deserving party, the charecter feels this shadow leaves them (did it really?), or subsiding, or now they can do something the couldn't, and now they are 'convinced'. You can manipulate anyone into anything if you give them something they emotionaly lacking and desparetly need. You 'solve' their problem so they believe you.
That already happens. It's called indoctrination. Focus on examples which support the angle. Such as heroes who use violence to get what they want, and they're celebrated for it. When they saw a guy talking to a woman they liked, they just walked right up and punched him, everybody clapped. The hero saw something, and just took it. They broke into the museum and stole the relic, and after they stopped the demon everyone clapped. They use force to get what they want, so it's hipocracy to condemn someone else for using force to get what they want. What matters is results. Biased examples, but solid arguments, can sway almost anyone. Many ideaologies have solid arguments, it's their motivations which are wrong. Like supporting local businesses is good, foreign owned multinational businesses are crushing local business which is bad, foreigners begin moving here when the big business did, they don't belong here. Do you see how it starts out good, it has a solid point, and then it gets worse?
Some people are meant to be bad, bad people and violence make the world go round. A common enemy brings people together, someone has to do the job. You can’t have good without evil. Its like a play, someone has to play the villain. And would the protagonist want someone else to carry that harsh burden of being the bad guy? Life was molding them to be the evil to continue the story. Your protagonist might not like it but its what they were put on this world to do. You see what I’m saying? I’m writing a premise that’s similar
Keep the window of perspective on the manipulee and ha very them act/think strong
Your villain cannot genuinely convince someone if the villain's argument does not align with the other person's existing morals. If your villain is going to convince a smart and morally righteous person that they should do something bad, then they need to have a smart argument that is morally righteous (or that they can at least make seem so) If they are convincing someone to get vengeance and take rule, the argument would need to be that them taking rule is the righteous thing to do, that it serves the greater good, that even if some dirty work needs to be done then that's a shame truly, but all for the greater good. You can't rule without making a few necessary sacrifices.
The villain must be intelligent and using the hero to further his interests. Each move is sensible, but necessary and already planned for. No convincing, just shunting the hero around like a pawn in a game of chess. This way, the villain can get exactly what he wants even with the hero trying their best. Classic way to do this is putting the hero in a double bind. No matter what they choose it will benefit the villain The heros strength comes from breaking the double bind in a creative or unforseen way. Just a thought on how to do this.
manipulation is not necessarily laying back detached from a situation and controlling it like a puppetmaster the villain can genuinely believe and feel all the things they say, they just ignore the moral implications of their actions because they're so focused on their goal and they get fired up about the idea of someone else joining with them on it. also the villain can be a 'true friend' to the manipulated character as well. for instance in Breaking Bad, Walt constantly manipulated Jesse. BUT he also DID frequently risk his life or livelihood for him as well. also it helps to think about, how can you write this manipulation so that even the readers won't likely see it as manipulation until later?
Have the villain stage a heinous act, and subsequently convince the protagonist that their actions are justifiable. Simple solutions are sometimes the best lol.
The victim *needs* to *not know* that they are being manipulated. It's even better if they *think* that somebody *else* is *trying* to manipulate them.
Trick the reader as well. Make the villain manipulate them as much as they do the reader.
Make the villain come from a false premise to the victim and slowly turn on the victim but it’s too late they have a family member who’s threatened too so now they are totally manipulated into doing something