Misused: Hero Killer

In practice, as you can see from my wick check and the page itself, examples tend to define "hero" as "any heroic character, whether they would usually have Plot Armor or not."

I'd say "Ignoring Plot Armor" is relative. General Grievous earned his status because up til then Jedi were depicted as more or less Invincible Heroes, but on his first appearance he manages to curbstomp about five of them at once, including a Jedi Master. Even when heroes show up who can put up a decent fight (at least one of whom needed Character Development to do so), he's an Implacable Man who's constantly pulling out new tricks and No Selling all kinds of powerful attacks, the heroes spend most of their time running away from him, and in the end they still lose.

edited 14th Nov '14 6:08:28 AM by Prime32

I don't intend to offend anyone: isn't the Hero Killer he who kills heroes? Can't it be that simple, and isn't anyone else who doesn't kill heroes yet wants to be included as an example simply wishful thinking?

There's no hard-and-fast rule saying "this was plot armor, but this isn't", but the example you use is about as cut and dry an examples as you'll find. Prior to the appearance of Grievous, Jedi were portrayed as essentially invulnerable to anything but another Force user or overwhelming force (using an entire division of troops to take one down, etc). The Grievous shows up and not only takes on Jedi single-handedly, he takes on multiple jedi alone and still wins, without any explanation of how besides "he's just that good". From a Doylist perspective, Grievous ignores Plot Armor.

Can we start drawing conclusions on the image and trope description yet?

I personally always thought of Hero Killers as people (or monsters or what-have-you) who make it their job to kill heroes, and they are quite good at it. Take, for example, General Greivous: he kills Jedi, lots and lots of Jedi, more than anyone else has or is capable of. The heroes the Hero Killer kills don't need to be the central heroes of the story, so much as heroic characters in the narrative. He is The Dreaded to the protagonists because he goes out and kills people just like them, efficiently and reliably. It's not as much about how much of a threat they pose to the main characters with Plot Armor and such, but rather the type of threat.

And what exact type is it?

The type with skills so superior that others have tried and failed to stop him. Much tougher than any Mook you've seen and doesn't need the narrative clout of the Big Bad or his Five Bad Band, he's dangerous to the heroes because he knows just how to kill them and has had lots of practice.

EDIT: For clarity, the trope isn't about anyone who can kill a hero but rather someone who is really really good at it. That's what I mean by type.

edited 17th Nov '14 4:40:23 PM by SignSeeker7

That means the issue is in the name.

That's why I think the core element that needs to be in the trope is the Hero Killer actually kills a named character who is known the heroes. They might be C-List Fodder, someone who was never seen, maybe even introduced for the purpose of being killed, but simply having the heroes be afraid of them is too similar to The Dreaded. It should be something very intimate and personal.

On the the other hand, while Doomsday and Bane didn't technically kill Superman and Batman (one was Only Mostly Dead, the other crippled for a time), when they appear in later stories it evokes the knowledge that they were certainly strong enough to do so. But that's more the exception than the rule.

Good points. The name is an issue only in that it's a bit vague, and can be applied to several different character archetypes and have several different meanings as a result. If we take General Grievous as the embodiment of this trope, the heroes that will fall to the Hero Killer will often fall under Hero of Another Story territory and will typically have a shared skillset that the Hero Killer exploits. In Star Wars Grievous kills Jedi and takes their lightsabers as trophies; if he were an Arthurian character he would kill the Knights of the Round Table; in Star Trek he would dismantle Federation ships one-by-one. The people who are the greatest heroes of that work will know true fear in the face of the Hero Killer.

EDIT: Possible alternate name: Hero Hunter?

edited 19th Nov '14 2:54:05 PM by SignSeeker7

I like that definition, and if changing the name from Hero Killer to Hero Hunter helps clarify things, then I'm on board with that as well.

Hero Hunter is strong, and it captures a huge portion of the Trope's essence. My first concern is its potential to be confused with a bounty hunter over time, or simply he who pursues heroes. Also, a lot of bite leaves with that name - he need not kill a hero to be a Hero Hunter? But that is to say that the hero's ultimate death is not the driver of the trope but the cessation of one of his lives in one form or another. In retrospect, Hero Hunter then still perfectly embodies Grievous: he kills Jedi, but we know that Jedi enter a sort of after-life after that (I don't know the Star Wars mythos very well); so, under supposedly heavy critical thought, Grievous still can hold the title of Hero Hunter with pride - he remains the Trope Codifier. I like this new title, though I'd hate it to be used as an excuse for soft examples to slip onto the main page. Hero Poacher (that's a terrible name, I understand, but, if we're going to change the name from the very obvious killer to something else, I recommend something similar to that title)? The Greivous (if he embodies the trope so well, why not?)? Is the Hero Killer/ Hunter now a subtrope of Knight of Cerebus?

EDIT: I see that he does overlap with Knight of Cerebus already, my mistake.

If we want to change the name, so be it, but I maintain that Hero Killer is still the best name for it, and that those characters that wish they'd killed heroes but didn't ought to suck their thumbs.

edited 20th Nov '14 5:27:35 AM by Az_Tech341

Trope titles are pretty tricky because words have different meanings to different people, and because of variations in individual characters who fit the trope. For some readers Hero Hunter might instill images of bounty hunters like Boba Fett who are tasked with tracking down and subduing heroes, which is certainly not this trope. In my mind "hunter" reminds me of those Victorian gentlemen on the African plains, bagging big game for trophies and prestige; the actions are similar to those of a Hero Killer, though the spirit of those actions might be more malicious depending on the character in question.

If we accept Grievous as a/the Trope Codifier — something that we seem to agree on so far — then calling the trope The Grievous would be an easy fix, at the cost of alienating those unfamiliar with his character or the franchise. We can easily fit an explanation on the trope page, but this still results in people scrolling through character sheets and wondering what it means that a character is a Grievous.

Ultimately, however, I think it was perhaps erroneous of me to suggest an alternate title so soon; it's important that we reach a conclusion regarding the exact definition of the trope before we discuss whether or not renaming is an issue.

I have a question in relation to an example I wanted to add but am reconsidering

So in Hack/Slash, Lynn Jagodinski, the second Samhain, is a serial killer who specifically targets superheroes, superheroes being very uncommon in the setting. More than that, she engineered a bunch of her friends getting powers and becoming heroes just so she (having powers of her own) could then kill them, and she gets them all except for the Final Girl. It's a huge part of her character and she talks about it out loud a couple of times.

She's also definitely feared by the heroes; Cassie and Vlad have basically never fought anyone else with powers anywhere near her level

My concern is twofold

1. The way the comic is written, generally the Slasher-of-the-arc is going to kill some people anyway. Lynn's only different from most of the other villains in the series because of her motivation.

2. There's no Plot Armor here because the comic is written in homage of Slasher movies, so it was never in question that most of the new characters for this arc would die.

I mean as silly as it would be for such a blatant hero killer to not qualify as a Hero Killer (and if there's a greater indictment of, at least, the trope name I can't think of it), it doesn't seem to fit the description given on the page. Which I suppose only goes to illustrate the problem.

edited 20th Nov '14 7:20:49 PM by EponymousKid

This highlights what I believe to be the fundamental problem with the trope description: It places too much emphasis on how other characters react to him, as The Dreaded, and not enough on who the character actually is. It says that he's incredibly skilled, but there needs to be more emphasis on the fact that his reputation was earned by repeatedly beating down other heroes, heroes just as powerful as if not more so than the protagonists, not by luck but by power and skill. This trope isn't just for really powerful enemies, it's for that specific kind of powerful enemy, one with experience and capability. It's not about what other characters think when they hear about him, although that's certainly an aspect of the character; it's about the character itself.

Agreed. Suggesting a name change still sounds like a strange idea, but I understand why you suggest it: the power of the trope needs to stick - all of us here can recognize a certain awe about this one that none of us want to lose. I continually insist that the trope be grounded solidly on the premise that the Trope Codifier is one who scares other protagonists because he has killed members of their group/team/party before. Dragon Ball Z villains fall into this trope uncomfortably because:

1. Goku is actively pursuing a one-on-one conflict with them

2. They are selfishly pursuing something for themselves other than the heroes; the heroes are the secondaries they intend to remove to get what they want.

Yes, they kill heroes, but not with the Be Yourself aspect of it; I don't mean that the Hero Killer needs to know his victims personally, but the essence of his creation is their destruction - it is his literal purpose.

Darth Vader feels iffy because he's Anakin Skywalker - duh. He makes a Face–Heel Turn before he destroys heroes then does a Heel–Face Turn. He disqualifies himself as a codifier because in the beginning and at the end he is worthy of our sympathy - he's simply a hero in turmoil. Though his badass killing spree in the middle makes him - during that set time-frame alone - a Hero Killer, and the most lucrative one in the Star Wars mythos. But, like you said, this isn't about a result, it's about a character and the tangible threat his presence creates for our heroes.

I admit I'm using Grievous as a reference point, but I want to throw some of his positives into this forum and we can take the things we like about him and things we don't like about him to acknowledge what this trope is trying to be.

Grievous isn't the main villain; he behaves like The Dragon of the series.

He always wins. The only exception to this is the failed murder attempt on Ki-Adi Mundi.

He is literally engineered to produce the result of dead Jedi, and he accomplishes this with an amazingly high rate of accuracy.

During his second primary mission - which is to kidnap Palpatine - he kills Jedi anyway.

He has a marvelous, recognizable trademark: you never see him enter the room in which the heroes are hiding, but you will hear his approach because of the sound his mechanical talons make as he progresses towards them. He doesn't mind you hearing it, either.

EDIT: His first words, and the statement I want as the Page Quote: "Jedi: you are surrounded,[and] your army is decimated; make peace with the Force now. For this is your final hour. But know that I - General Grievous - am not completely without mercy: I will grant you a warrior's death. Prepare."

edited 21st Nov '14 6:33:12 AM by Az_Tech341

Hero Hunter could quite possibly work for this but I think Hero Killer trope as in the literal meaning really should have the current trope's name.

Agreed.

I think that quote is perhaps the greatest single verbal embodiment of this trope that can be found and it has my full support.

I think the problem people have had with the name is that it is a little vague and thus open to misinterpretation. But trope names can afford to be a bit vague, as long as the trope itself is very clearly defined. I think we can keep the title Hero Killer, (and personally I'd like to keep it), but first we must rework the page description to better embody the trope. As it is it mostly says "A Dreaded Badass who is a real threat to the heroes," which is really incredibly vague and doesn't capture what makes the character unique.

Maybe it would help to reference Slasher Movie villains?

edited 21st Nov '14 7:26:43 AM by Prime32

Possibly. I think the spirit of that trope is pretty different from this one, but I can see where they might occasionally overlap.

I've taken the liberty of cobbling together a rough draft of a reworked trope description. Feel free to make suggestions, adding improvements or links to other tropes, discuss the finer points; hopefully we can build something that we all agree captures the trope well enough, and then we can discuss the name and the image.

In many works of fiction the main protagonist isn’t the only hero doing good out there. They might be recurring minor characters or part of The Order, and may have little impact on the central narrative, but they are heroes nonetheless, often the greatest warriors in the land, conquering evil without fear.

That is, until the Hero Killer comes along.

Exceptionally powerful, incredibly skilled, the Hero Killer has one purpose, which he pursues ruthlessly: kill the heroes. He will hunt down the greatest knights and he will slaughter them, one after the other. Even the noblest, most powerful heroes will quake in fear at the sound of his name.

What makes him so powerful? Maybe he knows how to exploit heroes' weaknesses. Maybe he was engineered for that very purpose. Maybe he is fuelled by exceptional determination. Regardless, he has earned a reputation for curb-stomping heroes regularly and reliably, often without exception.

Expect a No-Holds-Barred Beatdown and/or Curb-Stomp Battle should his prey be unprepared. Many works will have the heroes train or improve their skills throughout the story, fleeing or avoiding the Hero Killer until such point as the hero is finally ready to face him; even then, they're probably going to need everything they have to stand a chance. If the hero wins the fight, or gives the Hero Killer a run for his money, it may be a Moment Of Awesome.

Commonly The Dreaded. This character usually invokes The Worf Effect and is often a grim reminder that Anyone Can Die. If the work was fairly light-hearted before this guy appeared, then he overlaps with Knight of Cerebus. He is very often the "Goliath" in a David vs. Goliath scenario. If he's very dogged in his pursuit of heroes he overlaps with Implacable Man. In video games, contrast That One Boss, which is when it is the player and not necessarily the characters that has difficulty beating an enemy.

Keep in mind that a character does not necessarily qualify just because they happened to kill one or two heroes; they have to be feared for their ability to do this.

EDIT: Changed "Almost universally The Dreaded" to "Subtrope of The Dreaded."

EDIT: Changed "Subtrope of The Dreaded" to "Will often be The Dreaded" after discussion.

edited 24th Nov '14 12:56:56 PM by SignSeeker7

Keep the name, Hero Hunter is a more specific idea about a villain who actually hunts heroes like its a sport or are charged to as a job. Certainly some overlap, but Sam Gerard from The Fugitive is certainly not a hero killer.

Should we start a ykttw for Hero Hunter then?