This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
From YKTTW Working Title: As Judged By The Protagonist
Idler: I think the Pegasus example is unfair. Yes, he's considered a good guy after he helps the protagonists, but he never really did anything that evil to anyone except the protagonists in the first place.
- Ghilz: Which I think fits the trope: The moment Pegasus turns "nice" or "helpful" towards the protagonists, he's a good guy. No one calls him up on the horrible thing he did to them, only his current standing with the heroes matters. Kaiba and Yugi are both quite casual and even friendly with Pegasus in the movie and the later series, and this is the dude that has done horrible things to the both of them and their closest relatives!
VVK: The Harry Potter examples get me thinking... Is this trope about a form of Bad Writing, or does it include examples that are psychologically believable without even making the protagonist a jerk? Everyone has a skewed perspective that emphasizes themselves because they are themselves. People will make judgements based on what they see and more directly realise the effects of slights and kindness towards themselves. They may also make judgements that are really just cover for their irrational emotional reactions that stem from something else than the reasons they're willing to admit. If an author writes a character this way on purpose, they're certainly not agreeing with them. But the description only says the author may well be agreeing. Does that mean this only applies to cases where it's clear the author may be agreeing, or that since it's only "may", it also applies to the cases where the author knows exactly what they're doing and has no delusions that the protagonist is in the right?
Earnest: I'd say it's about both the psychologically believable aspect, and includes the Bad Writing aspect as a common variant.
Jerrik: Moved this here.
- Drow Tales. Just ... Drowtales. It's also a good idea to like cats, and anyone who's ever mean to one is sure to be "bad," regardless of all other circumstances.
It's a bit more complicated than that... we see the story from Ariel's perspective, so Syphile looks like a villain for being abusive towards her. Though she probably doesn't count as evil considering her past and all the politics in the series, she's done way more than simply being mean to cats. I think it should be rewritten, or maybe dropped all together.
Joie De Combat: Removed the following:
- Claire in Baccano is a sadistic lunatic (albeit one who is a Psycho for Hire for other sympathetic characters), and for several episodes of the series, isn't really portrayed all that sympathetically- he's killing evil people, but he's not really presented as having a good motive for doing so. Then, he ends up saving the lives of several heroic characters, and suddenly you have him presented as a more quirky, likable character in the extra episodes (13 and 14) of the series. It's almost an Invoked Trope, as Claire consciously decides to be less psycho, pretty much on a whim.
Claire's morality is fairly consistent through the series, it's just that, for one thing, most of the cast of the series is composed of gangsters and Lovable Rogues to begin with, and for another, Claire is crazy. His murders on the Flying Pussyfoot were all done out of his sense of responsibility as a conductor, because the Lemures, Ladd's group, and Czeslaw were all threatening the safety of the train and its passengers. Meanwhile, he saved Isaac and Miria because they were "good customers," and sided with Chane after learning that she objected to the Lemures' plot. If it weren't for the characteristic degree of overkill that he used, he'd have looked pretty heroic; as it is, it's still more Pay Evil unto Evil than anything else. Meanwhile, he seems more benign in the OVA episodes because he's no longer on the job, as he explains to Czeslaw.
