Not Counterparts!: Magnificent Bastard

On the discussion for the YKTTW Heroic Schemer many of use came to the conclusion that despite what the pages on the trope say, The Guile Hero IS NOT the heroic counterpart to the Magnificent Bastard, as the GH only encompasses a small part of what it is to be an MB, furthermore some of us don't think MB should be villain-only. Please discuss.

Edited the article title for you. Remember to list only one trope (the main one) when making a TRS discussion.

Off the top of my head, I think the wicks bear out that Magnificent Bastard is de facto not exclusively villainous. I think it's more sensible to expand the definition to match, and then have subtropes for MB heroes and villains, like respectively Guile Hero and something else.

I was always under the impression that Guile Hero was the counterpart to Action Hero. I was also under the impression that Magnificent Bastard was alignment independent.

edited 22nd May '11 7:17:51 PM by Deboss

I think its more sensible to clean up the wicks, if the definition changes, it should change to the original definition, which would be objective and in story only. An enemy you'd rather be friends with.

Oh? Was this a pre-existing term?

Not that I'm aware of, I believe it came from the trope quote on the page.

Anyway, there seems to in general be a lot of confusion surrounding these two tropes. My understanding is that:

• Magnificent Bastard: The Chessmaster + Manipulative Bastard (they usually aren't Trickster-like, despite what the page says) they are charismatic people who are very intelligent and have complex, long term and large scale plans that almost always pan out in the end, even if it takes some Xanatos Speed Chess. They have no problems manipulating people or doing possibly immoral things if it will benefit their plans, but maintain a sense of honor that non the less makes them likeable or sympathetic. Villainous Example: Trez Kushrenada Heroic Example: Miles Vorkosigan
• Guile Hero: The Trickster + very toned down version of Manipulative Bastard. They use their wits and cleverness to make their way, don't have problems with tricking people into doing what they need them to do and rely more on quick thinking and persuasiveness. They don't make long term, large scale plans, and aren't necessarily charismatic, simply believable. They use this as they need it, on a case by case basis. Examples: Odysseus is a good one I'm thinking.

If anything it tends to have more to do with the scale and degree, it seems like to me. Magnificent Bastards have deeply laid plans and are working towards a specific goal which would have massive repercussions, while Guile Heroes take things as they come and usually just want to survive or save the princess or whatever.

edited 26th May '11 8:45:23 PM by NoirGrimoir

Hm, I've always thought of Guile Hero=Non-Action Guy+The Smart Guy+The Hero.

I know what the trope page says, but like you, I think the actual definition is something totally different. Everyone has a different idea of what it's supposed to be. I really think these pages both need rewrites, but Guile Hero most of all, MB might just need some tweaks.

edited 23rd May '11 2:09:58 AM by NoirGrimoir

Here's the earliest description from the Internet Archive:

Yeah, it's not limited to villains.

edited 26th May '11 10:07:19 PM by BigT

Does anyone else support changing the description to be none villain-specific?

Support.

I like that original description. I think I'll write up a new one based more on the original and what's up there already, culling out most of the villain-only based stuff, put it up on a sandbox page and we can go from there. I do kind of wish we had some more feedback, though.

And I changed the main article from Guile Hero to Magnificent Bastard because that's what we seemed to have zeroed in on as the big issue. I think Guile Hero needs some work too, but let's get this straightened out first. We probably need to properly define Magnificent bastard before we define Guile Hero, anyway because I feel that a Heroic MB and a Guile Hero are quite different.

I think one of the most important aspects of the Magnificent Bastard is that the way in which he accomplishes his plans, whether far-reaching or cooked up on the spot, makes us admire him, whether he's a hero or a villain. It's just fun to watch him succeed and leave his opponents scratching their heads until they realize how badly they've been had.

The Guile Hero, on the other hand, always struck me as a bit simpler — a hero who either has to or chooses to use his brain to get the better of the villains.

I'm pretty much in agreement that a character can be a Magnificent Bastard without being villainous. Chief Aramaki from Ghost In The Shell Stand Alone Complex, for example, is more Magnificent Bastard than Guile Hero.

^I very much think you are right about that.

okay, click here > Magnificent Bastard for the sandbox write up.

It still needs some work so feel free to make suggestions or if you want to do minor changes just go ahead and do them. I'm still not entirely certain how much else from the current page should be on there. Honestly a lot of it seemed like superfluous information to me.

edited 29th May '11 3:32:40 AM by NoirGrimoir

Coupla grammar corrections:

"The Magnificent Bastard can be aligned on either side of a conflict."

"...but fell short due to his own arrogance..."

edited 29th May '11 6:27:53 AM by Willbyr

Fixed, and fixed another grammar/spelling error I noticed.

Bumping. I think it looks pretty good, but I'd like some more input before I switch out the descriptions.

Sounds too subjective. "A character who I like to watch doing things. Plans are possibly involved." This kind of vagueness is exactly why we changed it to what it is now.

The only main difference is it's not villain only, magnificent bastard is a YMMV trope, I believe, it's been subjective to begin with. Any parts in particular that you don't like about it? I felt like the old write-up took too long to read and had a whole paragraph basically saying any character, even heroes, which it totally contradicts itself by mentioning both earlier and later that it's villain-only, can be Magnificent bastards. I'm not saying this is perfect, but I am saying the old one isn't that great and I think it needs changed.

I like it. Just found another grammar error: it should be "never loses his cool" rather than "looses."

Also, "When a villainous Manipulative Bastard becomes so over-the-top..." Is that supposed to be Magnificent Bastard or was that intentional?

edited 2nd Jun '11 9:08:10 PM by Ein

Nope, not intentional. See, I knew you guys could help me out. If you look at something too long you only see what you expect to see >.<.

"[...] compare and contrast the Smug Snake, who may once have been a Magnificent Bastard in the making but fell short due to his own arrogance becoming his undoing or otherwise making him unlikeable."

I think it might be better to end the sentence at "arrogance". Otherwise, it's just a run-on sentence. /grammar nazi

Other than that, I think the page looks great. It definitely illustrates what the Magnificent Bastard is without incurring tl;dr.

What about the component tropes, like Manipulative Bastard or The Chessmaster? Could those be good guys too, or do they need a separate trope for a good-guy counterpart?