Unclear Description: Magnificent Bastard

Hi folks,

I recently started a cleanup thread to combat the misuse of the Magnificent Bastard trope and we've been weeding out what we see as poor examples while doing so. We have, however, run into the issue of examples being re-added for "purely heroic" characters. While this is technically part of the definition on the trope page, it really doesn't make any sense. I can see such a character locking down the Magnificent part but without any moral scruples, there's no way they can also be a Bastard. I don't think the trope needs to be renamed or anything but I think it would be a good idea to take out the "purely heroic" bit. I'm fine with an Anti-Villain or a darker Anti-Hero being added but I don't see the sense in a wholly good person being on the trope.

Thoughts?

Guile Hero already exists for heroic characters and, as written, is essentially the Good Counterpart to MB. Listing heroes—as opposed to antiheroes—under MB is a pretty clear case of Trope Decay, as well as evidence of the "badge of honour" status the trope has wrongfully gathered over the years, as people try to shoehorn a character, any character, into qualifying.

It's called Magnificent Bastard for a reason. The Trope Codifier (and indirect namer) is Lionel Luthor. It's not built for heroic characters, and most of the description goes against a hero counting. It's a villain trope, first and foremost, and while an antihero could qualify (since antiheroes can utilize most villainous tropes) and straight up, on-solid-moral-ground hero, cannot. Either that one line is wrong, or the rest of the trope description is, and I lean towards the one line.

I also think that one line should be cut as it does not fit with the rest of the description.

Perhaps replaced with a for heroic examples see Guile Hero

Third'd

Yeah. Guile Hero is so underused.

Watch me destroying my country

Again, the trope is Ideal Hero.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

No, it's not. Ideal Hero has a specific meaning that goes well beyond "morally good." This is not a trope for the morally good. It is, by its own description, a trope for the morally dubious, ie, antiheroes and worse. Kindly stop demanding that we misuse another trope.

Agreeing with Ambar here.There'sa reason it's 'bastard'

Alrighty, so we all seem to be in agreement here on what to do.

Can I start or request a poll be opened to chop that bit of the sentence?

Siding with the camp that wants to tighten the description.

You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"

Agreeing with the above who want to tighten the description and remove the pure heroic part.

"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."

You're demanding that we misuse Heroes (because that trope describes Anti-Hero characters) instead. You can't say that triangles are excluded and say that right-angle triangles are included.

Ideal Hero accurately describes which characters should be excluded on the basis of morality because they are characters without moral flaws.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

You don't get to lecture other people on trope meanings while misusing them yourself and misquoting the other posters. An Ideal Hero may have "no moral flaws," but we're not talking about excluding characters with "no moral flaws" we're talking about excluding characters who "lack significant moral flaws." That covers a lot more than Ideal Hero, which you'd know if you weren't so busy trying to insist we "really mean" Ideal Hero and attempting to shoehorn and/or misinterpret our replies to mean that.

We're not talking about Ideal Hero. Ideal Hero is irrelevant to this conversation. We are arguing that all but the blackest of antiheroes and on are excluded from the trope by virtue of the rest of the description, and are voting to axe the one line that tries to imply differently.

Samaritan, c’mon, man. We’ve had to deal with these interpretations only you take of specific words or out of context chunks of quote from us since day one. Please, if you want something done work with us but cease with these observations (accurate or not) that don’t further our purpose.

edited 24th May '18 3:33:27 PM by 43110

To use a fairly obvious example: Iron Man is not an Ideal Hero. He's an alcoholic jackass who treats everyone around him like garbage. He still falls under Guile Hero, not this trope, because he is not bad enough for it.

So stop harping on Ideal Hero. It's got nothing to do with the conversation.

Watch me destroying my country

I thought it sounded like Samaritan said "straight up, on-solid-moral-ground hero" is what an Ideal Hero is, not what a Magnificent Bastard is.

An MB is a villain or a hero with some villainous traits.

edited 25th May '18 6:50:30 PM by AnotherDuck

Check out my fanfiction!

With a lot of villainous traits. There's a whole lot of characters who fall outside of Ideal Hero but do not hit the benchmark of nastiness for this trope.

So uh since most of us are in agreement that the line about purely heroic examples needs to be cut,what do we do. Do we ask the mods to do it

"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."

Get in touch with the mods I would presume.

I can handle that later today

Does that desire also include that Anti-Hero characters cannot qualify for this trope?

In addition, I think this description needs some tightening. It's fairly long and describing a trope as a combination of several different tropes sounds like a bad idea.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

I think an Anti-Hero could probably qualify, but it would have to be one on the darker and meaner end of the spectrum, almost to the point of Villain Protagonist.

Check out my fanfiction!

I agree with Duck here, I have no problems listing a darker Anti-Hero provide they utilize villainous tropes, such as Manipulative Bastard to the point I'm sold on the fact they're not a good person such that I'm inclined to feel they're a Bastard, just like how they're Magnificent.

We've all stated several times that darker antiheroes can fit here—antiheroes can and do utilize most villainous tropes and this is not an exception.