The old description for the trope (before my recent edit) seems to come across more about complaining about the hero sparing the villain at all (and a little too specifically about a falling death). The original point of the trope isn't about the Hero not killing the villain out of Joker Immunity or a misapplication of Thou Shalt Not Kill, but rather the fact that the villain is now helpless before the hero. It's literally a matter of the type of person the hero is. Is he the kind of person who would kill a helpless (or unarmed if it's a matter of honor) man? Now when it's done wrong, that's when the writers fail to apply it universally. Sparing the villain after the battle when you killed Mooks (or The Dragon) during it is not a misuse of the trope in and of itself. Now if the hero spared the villain after blowing up the enemy barracks, then you did something wrong.
We don't need editorializing of any sort in trope articles.
I think the main problem is that its not clear atm if its just a list of uses of a stock phrase or instances of a trope about a specific kind of moral dilemma. The description is also rambling and pretty hostile so it needs rewritten at the very least. Is this better:
The heroine has finally subdued the hordes of evil, thwarted the Doomsday plot, and subdued the big bad in one final showdown. But the villain couldn't make things simple and die in battle. Now he's helpless at the heroine's feet andů the heroine pauses to consider what sort of person it would make her if she chooses to kill the villain versus sparing him. On the one hand, the villain may have proven himself a Complete Monster or done the hero great harm personally. But on the other, the average hero tends to take a dim view of killing the helpless. This could easily turn into a Jumping Off the Slippery Slope situation. Sometimes Being Good Sucks. Contrast with Kill Him Already. Compare with Save the Villain and Sword over Head. Anti Heroes are exempt from all four. Compare/Contrast Strike Me Down with All of Your Hatred. A subtrope of He Who Fights Monsters and Moral Dilemma. See If You Taunt Him, You Will Be Just Like Him for when the stakes involved in this situation are notably lower.
I wouldn't use Complete Monster in there, as per the cleanup effort that's going on. But otherwise, that's a much-improved description, although few things wouldn't be.
The main page is indeed hostile to this idea. The rewrite is more focused on the moral delimma: killing a helpless person vs sparing a villain.
AXTUCE MUN AXTE INCALAgreed that Star Valkyrie's writeup is an improvement over the current article.
A Wizard boyChanged the description. Anything I missed?
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 9
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.