Wick cleanup: Sliding Scale Of Anti Heroes

I agree with this Vampire Buddha post that we should just drop the Type [Roman Numeral] idea and focus on the qualities that make an antihero an antihero. This has a few other benefits. Some antiheroes may fall into more than one category under this. That's okay because they don't immediately preclude one another. Your hero is both a Classical Antihero and a Jerkass Antihero? Well, he can be added to both categories.

On a slightly unrelated note, I'd like to propose that Good Is Not Nice get the redirect Jerkass Antihero (or possibly Jerkass Hero). I'd also like to vote that that become the official name for the trope.

edited 30th Oct '11 1:03:25 AM by arks

Fully support dropping "type [variable]" garbage.

It just leads to people citing categories by number on other pages. I'm also all for dropping it.

I propose that we make a separate page for type one anti-heroes. Example rename being "Loser Hero". Making it equal to the Anti-Villain in numerical value.

We already have it: Classical Anti-Hero.

edited 30th Oct '11 2:12:02 AM by MarqFJA

So, to bring this back into focus and find the qualities that make a hero, then see if there are pages which describe Heroes who don't have these features. Let me try to get a start.

Heroes are:

• Morally good/pure/honorable
• Friendly/kind
• Lawful or often bowing to a higher authority (this is more the classic hero)
• Altruistic
• Confident
• Talented
• Smart
• Good looking
• Powerful (this is again more in align with the classic hero)
• Strong/athletic
• Always right
• Always triumphant

There may be more and we may be able to merge a few or drop some as well. That's up for debate. I prefer to have too many categories that we can whittle down.

Anyways, Antiheroes will either drop one or more of these traits, or exaggerate the trait to the point that it becomes a negative quality (again we can debate about that last point).

I'm also assuming the antihero should also be the protagonist.

Antiheroes who are not morally good/pure/honorable

• The Atoner
• Noble Demon
• Byronic Hero
• Heroic Sociopath
• Mr. Vice Guy
• '90s Anti-Hero

Antiheroes who exaggerate goodness/purity/honor

• Honor Before Reason

Antiheroes who are not kind/friendly

• Jerkass Hero (Good Is Not Nice)
• Knight in Sour Armor

Antiheros who are not lawful

• Lovable Rogue
• Vigilante Man

Antiheroes who exaggerate lawfulness

• ???

Antiheroes who are not altruistic

• ??? (I'm sure we have this)

Antiheroes who are not confident

• Classical Antihero

Antiheroes who exaggerate confidence

• Smug Super
• Arrogant Kung-Fu Guy (or it would be if the trope were rewritten to allow heroes. This was a hero archetype in 70s Hong Kong movies)

Antiheroes who are not smart

• Idiot Hero

Antiheroes who are not talented

• ???

Antiheroes who are not powerful

• Arthur Dent
• The Everyman

Antiheroes who are not strong or athletic

• ???

Antiheroes who lose

• Failure Hero

Antiheroes who are wrong (either often or in spectacular ways)

• ???

For examples, I think we should include, the Ur-Example, the Trope Codifier and nothing else. Trying to find Most Triumphant Examples will probably just lead to edit wars.

edited 9th Dec '11 12:29:21 AM by arks

Pragmatic Hero is almost ready to launch. Please let me know if you'd like further changes.

Pragmatic hero can also be type IV, depending. I say launch, but ammend the descriptions.

I'm getting a lot of input, but there's a lot of concerns, and I'm struggling and going to need help to get these completed. Would someone like to take / fix / help me with Pragmatic Hero?

edited 9th Nov '11 9:02:26 AM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

Would it be a good idea to make a trope for the Disney antihero similar to how someone spun Classical Antihero off of the the type I antihero?

edited 7th Dec '11 11:34:40 PM by jate88

What is the "Disney antihero", exactly?

A Type II Anti-Hero. Basically a character who would be an Ideal Hero if they didn't have things like cynicism or vices to push them away from that trope.

I have a problem with the Disney Antihero concept. You say that he's a hero who has vices and cynicism? How is that different from Knight in Sour Armor, Mr. Vice Guy, or Jerkass Hero? Is it to a smaller scale? I think the idea of the Disney Antihero came from the need to make a sliding scale, rather than focusing on the qualities that make an Antihero. An antihero is a hero who lacks heroic traits (or possibly exaggerates certain heroic traits to the point that they get in the way of the hero's job). The page should focus on which traits are being altered, and drop the Type I, Type II nonsense.

On a related note, Sliding Scale of Anti-Villains is just as much of a mess as Sliding Scale Of Antiheroes

edited 8th Dec '11 1:29:17 PM by arks

Maybe it would help if you define hero first.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1295900270003562800&page=6#131

Both the type 1 and type 2 fit that description of antihero.

Is that a protest? All types should fit that definition of antihero, since they are all antiheroes to one degree or another. However, this could lead to less edit warring since under that system, one hero can fit into multiple categories, while the other system suggests that each category is mutually exclusive.

edited 8th Dec '11 3:50:51 PM by arks

Oh, I've been waiting to take a shot at the Sliding Scale of Anti-Villains, but I figured we should wait to see what sort of solution works here first, since this is the more popular and better-established "trope".

edited 8th Dec '11 4:21:00 PM by Ironeye

So here's my proposal:

• Drop the Roman numerals. They serve no purpose.
• Instead define antiheroes along a rubric that looks at the traits of heroes and how different antiheroes go against those traits (traits of heroes to be defined in more detail later)
• Limit to three examples per Subtrope on the page (fewer if there's overlap): Ur-Example, Trope Maker, Trope Codifier.

Anyone have any proposals that are different?

I'm with what seems to be the consensus belief here: make it an index and move all examples onto the new subtropes.

In that case the page is useless. We can just make Antihero the index and completely scrap this page.

It's brought in nearly 5,000 people. That's not useless.

That's what redirects are for.

The first option has an overwhelming lead, so we can't well call in favor of anything else. Merge was soundly defeated. That being said, people may thing differently when they see the new format. Perhaps we can revisit the issue of merging in a few months after we see how the page is doing.

That's pretty much what I'm trying to do:

"Type Zero" => Ideal Hero. As I understand it, the Ideal Hero, who is everything an Anti-Hero is not, has the following characteristics:

• They have few, if any, flaws. An Ideal Hero is often an Escapist Character.
• Physically and mentally, Ideal Heroes are highly capable. They are strong, tough, resiliant, clever, etc. Even if disabled and out of shape, they are still more badass than most other characters. While many Ideal Heroes are not exactly geniuses, they will almost always be cunning enough to trick the Big Bad into underestimating their resourcefulness.
• Emotionally, Ideal Heroes are natural leaders, but they prefer to lead by example. They are bold, courageous, and charismatic. They are optimistic idealists who believe theat Rousseau Was Right and will often be the one to see the good in an Anti-Villain.
• Morally, Ideal Heroes are paragons of society who hold themselves to very high standards of conduct. They would never Poke the Poodle or even jaywalk, let alone Kick the Dog, and they will only Shoot the Dog as an absolute last resort. Nine times out of ten, they will Take a Third Option instead.
• Their intentions are always of equal purity. An Ideal Hero does things because it was the right thing to do. No reward is necessary.

Type I => The Classical Anti-Hero. The Classical Anti-Hero lacks the Pure Awesomeness and confidence of an Ideal Hero. Maybe they started out as an Unlucky Everydude, Lovable Coward, The Slacker, or even a Minion with an F in Evil, and they're going to have to overcome their bad habits and learn to trust themselves. Alternately, this character might have some very real physical or mental flaws which prevent them from rising to the level of badassery required of an Ideal Hero. Examples: Po from Kung Fu Panda, Peter Parker from Spiderman.

Type II => The Knight in Sour Armor. The Knight in Sour Armor lacks the optimistic idealism of the Ideal Hero. They are cynical, and must overcome their cynicism to succeed as an effective hero. Examples: Han Solo from Star Wars, Jim Gordon in The Dark Knight.

Type III => The Pragmatic Hero. The Pragmatic Hero lacks the personal moral high standards of the Ideal Hero. However, their intentions are just as pure. A Pragmatic Hero would never Kick the Dog (unless it's all a sham to fool the Big Bad), but they would Shoot the Dog or Poke the Poodle. Examples: Batman in The Dark Knight, Harry Potter on a bad day.

Type IV => The Unscrupulous Hero. An Unscrupulous Hero lacks the moral character of an Ideal Hero. This is a character who very well might Kick the Dog For the Evulz, but their overall intent is still morally good. Maybe they started out as an Anti-Villain and made a Heel–Face Turn, but haven't fully given up their old ways. Or maybe they are a Heroic Sociopath, but are honestly fighting for the right reasons. Or maybe they're a Knight in Sour Armor whose cynicism is Turned Up To Eleven, beyond the point at which they have any qualms about having an occasional Kick the Dog moment. Examples: Doctor House on a rough day, Jack Sparrow from Pirates Of The Caribbean.

Type V => The Hero in Name Only. A Hero In Name Only lacks the good intentions of the Ideal Hero. They're on the heroes' side, but not for a reason most would consider morally good. Maybe they don't care who wins, they just like killing mooks. Maybe their rival got a job as The Dragon so they joined the other side. Maybe they are the only one who can even comprehend their reasons. Examples: Belkar from Order Of The Stick, Riddick.

edited 8th Dec '11 10:29:04 PM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

That proposal has the same problems as the original page. The Roman numerals are still there, which still means each character will have to fit within one of the tropes and not the others. It's still also judged along one criteria: morality. This doesn't take into account all the branches you can take with an Antihero type character. Also, I'm worried that you can't do this without going into The Same But More or The Same But More Specific territory. Already in those YKTTW, there are people arguing over which character fits in which category.

The biggest change is that you're making subpages for each step. I can only see this moving the edit wars off the main page and onto the subpages. Also, we already have a large list of tropes about how different characters can drop their moral purity and still be considered mostly sympathetic. What's wrong with those.

Here's a fun quote:

Alright. Headache. Why can't a Heroic Sociopath be a Heroic Sociopath, who is an Antihero that lacks the strict moral purity associated with most heroes, end of story?

Speaking of making new tropes, though, do we have a trope for a character that is a hero, but only does heroic acts for personal gain (money, women, food, fame, favors, etc)? If not, we should.

edited 9th Dec '11 12:23:57 AM by arks