During the investigation of recent hollers in the Complete Monster thread, it's become apparent to the staff that an insular, unfriendly culture has evolved in the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard threads that is causing problems.
Specific issues include:
- Overzealous hollers on tropers who come into the threads without being familiar with all the rules and traditions of the tropes. And when they are familiar with said rules and traditions, they get accused (with little evidence) of being ban evaders.
- A few tropers in the thread habitually engage in snotty, impolite mini-modding. There are also regular complaints about excessive, offtopic "socializing" posts.
- Many many thread regulars barely post/edit anywhere else, making the threads look like they are divorced from the rest of TV Tropes.
- Following that, there are often complaints about the threads and their regulars violating wiki rules, such as on indexing, crosswicking, example context and example categorization. Some folks are working on resolving the issues, but...
- Often moderator action against thread regulars leads to a lot of participants suddenly showing up in the moderation threads to protest and speak on their behalf, like a clique.
It is not a super high level problem, but it has been going on for years and we cannot ignore it any longer. There will be a thread in Wiki Talk
to discuss the problem; in the meantime there is a moratorium on further Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard example discussion until we have gotten this sorted out.
Update: The new threads have been made and can be found here:
Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List before suggesting any new entries for this trope.
IMPORTANT: To avoid a holler to the mods, please see here for the earliest date a work can be discussed, (usually two weeks from the US release), as well as who's reserved discussion.
When voting, you must specify the candidate(s). No blanket votes (i.e. "![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
to everyone I missed").
No plagiarism: It's fair to source things, but an effortpost must be your own work and not lifted wholesale from another source.
We don't care what other sites think about a character being a Complete Monster. We judge this trope by our own criteria. Repeatedly attempting to bring up other sites will earn a suspension.
What is the Work
Here you briefly describe the work in question and explain any important setting details. Don't assume that everyone is familiar with the work in question.
Who is the Candidate and What have they Done?
This will be the main portion of the Effort Post. Here you list all of the crimes committed by the candidate. For candidates with longer rap sheets, keep the list to their most important and heinous crimes, we don't need to hear about every time they decide to do something minor or petty.
Do they have any Mitigating Factors or Freudian Excuse?
Here you discuss any potential redeeming or sympathetic features the character has, the character's Freudian Excuse if they have one, as well as any other potential mitigating factors like Offscreen Villainy or questions of moral agency. Try to present these as objectively as possible by presenting any evidence that may support or refute the mitigating factors.
Do they meet the Heinousness Standard?
Here you compare the actions of the Candidate to other character actions in the story in order to determine if they stand out or not. Remember that all characters, not just other villains, contribute to the Heinousness Standard
Final Verdict?
Simply state whether or not you think the character counts or not.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:14:10 AM
This used to be on the YMMV page for We Need to Talk About Kevin:
- Complete Monster: Played With; Whether or not Kevin actually is one of these is what the entire book/film is all about. Adding to the ambiguity is that everything is told from Eva's perspective, who skips through time to specific notable moments in Kevin's childhood, giving her the main responsibility of his characterization and the opportunity to perform some Manipulative Editing in either direction. She herself is not only reeling from the trauma, but is terribly unsure as to what degree she ever mattered in what Kevin turned out to be.
- The film, since it inevitably doesn't contain the level of insight into Eva's thoughts that the book permitted, and also leaves out several other characters who noticed something wrong with Kevin when he was a baby, seems to end up putting more of the blame on Eva.
I know that this is one trope that can't be played with, subverted, inverted, etc. but does Kevin actually count? I haven't seen the movie or read the book so I don't know.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yeah, but while he's responsible, it can go one or two ways - either he'd know or found out they'd become killers themselves and is careless or pleased about it, in which case the following blood is especially on his hands, or he didn't know until he returned to the Freddy's at which point he probably didn't have time to accept responsibility.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:12:54 PM by Beast
"It's like...a cliff, and if I do it, I'm just gonna...fall." "I think we're already falling."
Lizzid people!
Pretty much one of the problems that FNAF has is that it's rather vague in its lore. This does lead to several speculation.
I think motive has to count for something in terms of heinousness, the killer seemingly killed a bunch of children for fun, while the animatronics are killing security guards because they want to get revenge on the man who murdered them. I think the killer's M.O is more heinous by tint of who he kills.
Let's look at Batman the Animated Series, Mr. Freeze said he would willing to kill everyone at Goth Corp to get revenge for what happened to his wife, meanwhile Joker tries to commit mass murder for a laugh. I think Joker's motives easily make him worse then Freeze.
I don't think the problem is the heinous standard, I think the killer is the most heinous character in the series, the big question is, does he have enough defined personality to count.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:30:03 PM by Overlord
Lizzid people!
He is practically almost seen with that default smile on his face, especially when he's around dead children. He's also shown laughing at the ghost of the children when he hid in the Springtrap suit, because he assumed that he was safe.
Another problem is that he never speaks,or physically appears (technically), nor do we get any insights into his mind. So, it'd be really hard to say that he has a personality.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:34:02 PM by AustinDR
@36564
Kevin was voted a cut. Quite a while ago actually. That should be removed.
@ Overlord: Here is what little we know about the killer's personality:
He is obviously evil and ruthless (killing at least five children and letting an innocent man take the fall), and highly sadistic (going by the Slasher Smile he almost always has). At the same time, he is surprisingly cowardly (going by how he reacts when the ghosts of his victims seek their revenge). Lastly, he was smart enough, and patient enough, to wait until the pizzeria closed before returning to destroy the evidence.
I will let the rest of you decide if that's enough.
jjj
Lizzid people!
It sounds like it is. So it's outright stated that he set another person up for a fall?
edited 5th Mar '15 4:37:28 PM by AustinDR
Okay a tentative ![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
to the killer.
As promised, he's an effortpost on Sol.
Who is Sol?
Sol is a loner/rogue cat who does not belong to any clan. His backstory revealed that he wanted to join SkyClan, but I'll get to that later. He was a former kittypet, but because he was rejected (for a pretty poor reason, might I add) by SkyClan he decides to take revenge on the Clans. He's supposedly "Affably Evil" but calling him Affably Evil is like calling Light Yagami affable, which is not at all. He's also a really sore loser. His manipulative skills WOULD make him a Magnificent Bastard if he wasn't so damn smug.
What has he done?
Well if we want to talk about what Sol has done, we have to go back to a few years before the Power of Three arc where he was in SkyClan. His first callous act was to purposely attempt to drown Leafstar's kits, be a jackass to the daylight (kittypet/house cats) warriors, attempt to rescue the kits just so he'd be seen as a hero which all culminated in his exile from SkyClan. Before going to the Clans, he meets up with a group of strays who he quickly manipulates into fighting dogs which gets many of them killed. Then he finds the Clans by the lake and meets our three protagonists. He offers to tell them about the prophecy, but he's lying through his teeth. Then he claims to have made the sun disappear just so he can make ShadowClan into atheists and make them no longer a Clan. After ShadowClan gets their faith back, they kick him out and Sol starts several wars between the Clans and even manipulates Lionblaze into helping him escape making him a Karma Houdini. He returns in the later books to start more wars of extermination all just because he couldn't be a warrior of SkyClan.
Is he heinous by the standards of the story?
I think so. He's got plenty of cats he indirectly murdered without even lifting a claw similar to Matt Engarde, and he's really good at manipulating any cat to do whatever he wants For the Evulz.
Does he have a Freudian Excuse or any mitigating qualities?
Nope. Unless you count "I wasn't recognized as a hero, so I'm going to cause mass genocide among the clans!" as an excuse, he gets none of the sort. Or even an Alas, Poor Villain death. He just runs off, free as a bird.
Conclusion?
I think he qualifies. If you realize his supposed "Affably Evil" attitude is just a facade, and he's not the least bit remorseful for what he's done, he's an easy keep. Unlike other supposed Affably Evil characters, he's quick to drop the affable attitude when it looks like cats aren't listening and blames others for his mistakes.
Also, a big no to the killer and not just because I don't like FNAF.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:42:24 PM by Klavice
Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
@Bobg: I agree with everything you're saying, and I would vote for Purple Guy. But we know virtually nothing about the guy other than that he murdered five children for no reason, which indirectly led to all the bad stuff happening in the trilogy (Phone Guy's death, The Bite of '87, terrorizing other security guards and traumatizing them for life, etc.) Purple Guy doesn't even officially appear until the third game; he only shows up in the second by sheer luck of getting those mini-games. Not once did I get the chance to see them; I only found out about those mini-games by watching Let's Play videos on You Tube.
So yes, he qualifies, but it feels very off-screenish (again, with the exception of him controlling Spring Trap). Hell, Dr. Money got scratched simply because we never once saw him committing any of the heinous deeds he performed onscreen, nor did we see Dr. Money himself. Even though he's responsible for infecting the entire planet with a virus and wiping out most of humanity to fuel his own greed. So I don't know if Purple Guy should be added or not.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:42:48 PM by Tyk5919
I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.
@ Austin: No, newspaper clippings state that the killer was arrested, but the killer is clearly shown in the minigames to NOT have been arrested, and in fact returned to the pizzeria to destroy the evidence, and to have been killed. This means that the police arrested the wrong person. It's not known if it was just a mistake on the part of the police or if the killer framed him, but either way, he allowed that person to be convicted when he could have turned himself in. So when someone was blamed for the killings and arrested, he let that person be convicted to cover his own ass.
jjj
Lizzid people!
I am aware of that.
I'm giving the killer from Five Nights at Freddy's a ![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_down_emoticon_3571.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
. He's the most heinous person and his crimes are onscreen but he has no personality. We know nothing about his motives.
@ Austin: So what do you think? He is the most henouess character in the series (at least 5 child murders, possibly 11 and he let an innocent man get convicted of his crimes), he has no redeemng features that we know of, and his motive seems to have been "it was fun". We do not see his actons themselves, but we do see newspaper clippings detailing the evens, and we see the ghosts of the five children confronting him. if bruises are sufficient evidence a character has been assaulted, ghosts would logically be sufficant evidence that they were killed. As for personality, he almost always has a Slasher Smile on his face, he was smart enough to return to destroy the evidence, he was shown to be a Dirty Coward when confronted by the ghosts of his victims, and he laughed and taunted them when he thought he was safe from them.
edited 5th Mar '15 5:25:19 PM by bobg
jjj
Lizzid people!
I don't know. Maybe?
What does everyone think of Sol? He has the bodycount, he has no mitigating factors, and he's a Smug Snake. Read my last post on the previous page for information.
Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.
I wouldn't put too much stock into the Slasher Smile he has. We only ever see Purple Man in the 8-bit minigames so facial expressions aren't exactly going to convey well there, and we can't rule out that the minigames are coloured by someone's perspective.
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
Ugh. Sol sounds like one of those villains I wouldn't Love to Hate. >__>
Like One-Eye, not as bad as Tigerstar, but I'm giving him a .
on the Killer. I'd let it slide elsewhere, but we can't accept a character who's actual character is based entirely on speculation. When you don't even know who the character actually is, that's a sign you should probably wait before voting, and seeing as Five Nights has all but been explicitly confirmed to have ended, the Killer doesn't and may never count in his current state.
edited 5th Mar '15 5:57:40 PM by Scraggle
To be fair, I wouldn't expect any villain to be "as bad as Tigerstar" at least in that universe. Not even Brokenstar or Scourge. That's mainly because Tigerstar's crimes extend post-mortem, whereas Scourge's stop after he's killed. Brokenstar is the same, but Brokenstar didn't lead a nazi-esque regime of cats to kill all halfClan cats.
However, Sol is not only monstrous in that he's extremely apathetic towards any cat that's not him, but he's also extremely lazy, and orders most of his deeds. Also, what I didn't say is that he's mindraped Jayfeather a couple of times when he tried to probe his mind for answers about the prophecy of Three.
edited 5th Mar '15 6:01:15 PM by Klavice
Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.
Lizzid people!
for the Killer then.
On Sol. He doesn't stack with the characters who are already on the list. Seriously, he not only doesn't match Tigerstar, he doesn't match Brokenstar or Scourge. I also love how you've listed turning people into atheists as some sort of heinous crime.
edited 5th Mar '15 6:18:27 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
@Ambar: Any reason why? If we're cutting examples for not being the most heinous villain in the series, then we might as well cut Mokuren for not being as heinous as Kouran Mori, or [[Franchise/Naruto Hidan]] for not having Orochimaru's bodycount for example. Or Higuchi for not being as heinous as Light.
Sol acts on his own, is affiliated with no one but himself and is willing to betray anyone he wants just to seize power.
You said no to Dickson as well. Any reason why?
edited 5th Mar '15 6:22:06 PM by Klavice
Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.
edited 5th Mar '15 4:15:49 PM by Shaoken