Should not be subjective New Crowner 2/20/2012: Villain Decay

Thing is, the description is so focused on viewers that it probably has to be rewritten from the ground up.

It does need some massaging. Too much text, too little thrust. I think the tips section is pretty cool, though.

Adding a new name: Villain Jobbing, term comes from wrestling and serial television.

If we're redefining this trope, can we at least decide on a clear definition before we do the rename?

We are not redefining it. The definition is objective, the name isn't.

Downvoted Villain Threat Decay since it still has the problematic "Decay" bit in.

Not so much "trying to redefine it" as "didn't understand the definition in the first place." A lot of the people on this thread seem to think the trope is about a villain becoming less powerful over time. It isn't. A villain can stay the same power, or even become much more powerful, and still be going through Villain Decay.

Has someone worked on the description? My personal feelings are that the stuff about how to avoid Villain Decay should either leave or be moved to analysis.

I don't think "decay" was ever an issue. Decay does not mean subjective, if someone thinks it does they are wrong and should be corrected.

"In most shows, Failure Is the Only Option for the Villains, because success would mean that the villains conquer the world, kill all the good guys, and otherwise do things that make future episodes impossible. Inevitably, the viewers start to wonder why the heroes act concerned about an enemy that they've beaten six times already."

The trope is subjective because it's about how the audience perceives the villain. It's never been about how the villain is seen in-universe.

On the subject of "redefining" the original poster was basically saying the audience's opinion was irrelevant, this should be referencing only objective instances. So in a way, we are, but I don't think to redefinition is hard, just cut out all that viewer focus. Trope wiki, not audience reaction wiki.

Voted for Diminishing Villain Threat.

The OP didn't understand the trope. Nothing in the description says that this is about a villain becoming less threatening to other characters. It actually says the exact opposite.

If you want to go around getting rid of audience reaction tropes, that's up to you. But you're arguing for a cut, not a rename.

edited 20th Mar '12 10:38:41 PM by abk0100

I think that the "Are Audience Reactions something we should have on the wiki?" topic should be taken to Wiki Talk. It's a thing that comes up in every other TRS thread.

Did you even read it?

That's not "Is a not subjective page" that's "should not be a subjective page". Yes we are changing it. No we are not cutting the page, we are repairing it and yes, I think a rename is unneeded. People think that "decay" is the problem. No the problem is that people can't keep their opinion to themselves. If whether or not a villain becomes less of a threat is what is important, not how the audience reacts to it. That's why Took a Level in Badass and Adrenaline Makeover are don't have subjective banner. Characters change, characters develop. I think we even have a page about it.

There's a difference between repairing something, and tearing it down and putting something new in it's place. You're talking about excluding almost everything that this page is supposed to be about.

At least we agree that a rename doesn't make sense, though probably for completely different reasons.

Maybe we should just construct a new trope from scratch that describes that the in-universe threat of a villain diminishing, and somehow keep the current trope.

Currently, I think this trope is too indistinct from Badass Decay. Maybe we should just merge the two.

edited 22nd Mar '12 11:44:55 AM by WaxingName

I would love it if somehow just YKTTW'd "Villain gets weaker" as a trope, and then we could figure out what to do with Villain Decay once that gets launched.

Badass Decay can just as easily apply to a hero, so I don't think there should be any confusion between that and this trope.

I don't think there's anything wrong with this trope or its name. I think we just need to clean up the description. Lines like "Most writers will try to stop this decline in menace" do make this trope sound like a bad thing when it's really just Character Development and can sometimes add to a villain's appeal.

Zapped a lot of natter in one edit. Hope it's not too late for the page.

Calling crowner in favor of Diminishing Villain Threat

We have a consensus to rename and a new name chosen. Let's see some action here.

Okay, so we have a consensus to rename, but we need to resolve the issue of the trope's definition. I stand by the position to make the trope more have an in-universe perspective where the show has an actual scale by which we can measure how far the villain falls in threat level.

the new name directly conflicts with the current description so, yeah, we should resolve that.

Can't we split off the in-universe examples as a separate trope?

edited 7th May '12 6:15:56 PM by abk0100

"The process by which a villain who is extremely scary on first appearance becomes a joke after a few more appearances."

Don't see the conflict.

What's unfitting about it?

edited 8th May '12 12:57:17 PM by troacctid

However, that line should be cleaned up to a more fitting line to the new trope name. I also don't think the line "Most writers will try to stop this declie in menace" should be there either because the threat of a villain diminishing is commonly intentional.