One of my goals with making my two main MLP OC's was to make a sympathetic, yet punishable antagonist done right that the audience/readers/viewers want to see be redeemed while at the same time punished in order to teach the lesson that just because someone is sympathetic or noble doesn't mean they're free from punishment when they do something wrong or irredeemable either.

I tend to lead too far towards the "punishable" end rather than the "sympathetic" one, since I usually give too much punishment to my characters regardless of their actions and circumstances. This is in order to avoid the usual "Easily Forgiven" trope that the canon show tends to use a lot for most of its antagonists.

How do I accomplish my intended goal with characters like these?

Make their actions forgivable. Don't have them commit a mass genocide and then write off their actions with a sob story. Or make the villain young (under 18) so readers feel like they still have a chance to redeem themselves before they completely fall off the deep end. Or just make their actions really understandable given the circumstances so readers can't be too mad at the antagonist. (Random note: It's kinda funny. I didn't realize whie writing but I just described characteristics fitting the main character in a story I'm writing lol)

7534948

Well, motive and desire are a good place to start, but the best way is to make them likable from an audience perspective but hated in universe.

What would it take for you to absolutely hate a villain?

There are many people in history who could be called terrible villains. Men who led armies of radicals to exterminate people without any remorse, women who had a lustful desire to hear the screams of their dying victims, and the faceless killers who will only be known by their actions and not their names. There are many people on Earth that could be deemed as terrible villains, but is the same true for fiction?

A long time ago, I came across a tweet that gave a list of things a villain would have to do to be absolutely hated. The poster basically said that there were fictional characters who could commit genocide, murder, and even destroy planets and they’d still be their, “Little love muffin,” but also said that if they were a racist, homophobe, or a rapist that they would absolutely hate the villain.

So to be clear, genocide, murder (And not like good guys kill bad guys, I mean like stabbing a guy on the subway for no reason murder), and other atrocities are okay for fictional villains, but being racist, homophobic, or a rapist aren’t? Now clearly, everything I listed is horrible, evil, and cruel, and doing any of this in real life is terrible and would make someone a monster, but we’re talking about fictional villains here.

For this example, lets use two villains that I don’t like that much. Those being Iron Man and the original Ant-Man. “But wait,” I hear you say, “those two are heroes.”

Well, yes, but for this I’m focusing on the love and hate fans feel towards them for their actions. Let’s review. Tony Stark, billionaire, playboy, and an alcoholic who sold weapons of mass destruction that killed thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people in war including people who weren’t involved in the conflict and were just enjoying a family meal when a bomb suddenly dropped on their laps. He did all of this before he was Iron Man and he tried to make amends for his past sins through his heroic actions, and no matter how much he screws up, (Ripping holes in space and time, becoming a dictator, killing other heroes and supporting the genocide of an entire alternate reality version of Earth by sacrificing Dr. Strange) he’s still given chances to be seen as a hero in the eyes of fans.

Now lets look at the original Ant-Man, Hank Pym who is most remembered for hitting his wife and inventing Pym particles. Also, depending on the continuity, he invented a super intelligence that went a-wall and tried to exterminate all of humanity more times than I filed my taxes. Hank Pym has his own body count as well, and has killed entire planets when he fused with Ultron later on, but what makes him unforgivable compared to Tony? The most memorable moment everyone points to when calling him a bad guy is when he hit his wife after she disagreed that sending a robot to attack the Avengers so that he could defeat the robot was a bad idea. In a single comic panel, Hank Pym went from a hero that could be redeemed into a monster that would be hated by millions of fans. But why?

Yes, domestic abuse is terrible in real life, but compared to everything else mentioned (Ie: extermination of planets, the deaths of millions of innocents, and so on) it’s not that large of an offense. So why is hitting your wife in fiction a worse sin than the other things mentioned? Well, I think I found the answer. Maybe? Probably not, people are too fickle to point to only one reason for the whole of opinions, but I’ll try anyway.

I think what makes things like domestic abuse, racism, homophobia, and rape worse than murder and genocide in fiction is a connection to the characters being affected.

I think the Joker said it best when he spoke to Harvey Dent in the Dark Knight movie.

“You know... You know what I've noticed? Nobody panics when things go ‘according to plan.’ Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, because it's all ‘part of the plan.’ But when I say that one little old mayor will die, well then everyone loses their minds.”

The “little old mayor” in this quote is a representation of someone the audience knows on a personal level. A “Truckload of soldiers” are faceless characters to the reader, similar to the planets full of life or the countries full of innocents that blow up. The reader doesn’t really care that much because they don’t have a connection with an entire planet of faceless no-ones. But, they do know the old lady who reminds them of their grandma, and the protagonist’s friend who they spent a lot of time reading about, and they especially know about the nice female superhero who loves her husband and does her best to protect the innocent.

Because the audience had an attachment to his wife, it hurt his character even more than if he would have just blown up a building of office workers, because the reader doesn’t know about them. I guarantee, if Tony Stark struck Pepper Potts that he would have crossed the line to being an irredeemable monster.

So, the first step is to leave their victims faceless. In Star Wars, the main villain is Darth Vader. He's a murderer who helped wipe out an entire planet, his daughter's planet. Granted, the Admiral gave the order, but most people associate that crime with Vader's already long list. To the audience, it's easy to forget about that crime because we don't know anyone from the planet, they're the truckload of soldiers. But, to Padmea, those were her people, her friends, her family. In the extended continuity, it states that she never forgave her father the way Luke did, which is reasonable considering her planet blew up.

When it comes to redeeming villains, remember that redemption in the audience's eyes may not mean the same for the characters that have to share a page with them.

7534953
Thanks. Also, what main character?

One solution is to make them genuinely misguided.
It's one thing to kill a bunch of people, it's another to believe doing so will make things better or even help the people they're killing. The battle the Mane 6 have with them a mix between trying to reason with them and forcibly preventing them from continuing.
It's scarier if they believe they're doing good. Because that means they'll never stop.
But at the same time, you can't really call them evil. Their concepts of what is good and evil are warped.
Like Starlight Glimmer only a bit more close-to-home.

7535032

the main character in a story I'm writing

It's not any known character.

7536269
Oh.

7536269
Can I see the story where your main character is introduced in?

7622325
Uh, well it's not done.

7622699
Oh.