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
A total has-been.
Since I'm the one who raised the Giovanni question, I naturally vote ![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_down_emoticon_3571.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
for him. For Nina, it's a ![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
.
As for Hunter J, I'd personally say she counts since a Pokemon bounty hunter who tortures Pokemon in order to sell them on the black market for money, is completely cold and heartless, willing to sacrifice her own crew, and attempting to murder the Kid Hero was something more heinous than what was seen in the show at that point (not counting the Iron Mask Marauder who was in a movie before her, and Kodai who was in a movie after her). The problem is that she should be even more questioned with the "heinous standard compared to Cyrus" thing than Ghetsis was, seeing as she's actually in a story that features Cyrus and his Omnicidal Maniac plan.
Generally I focus on how heinous they are for their 'tier' so to speak. It sounds like Hunter J could qualify though.
Giovanni...usually I don't take the way others treat them into account too much, as we can get Love Martyr Psycho Supporter characters from all walks (and look at the Joker in The Dark Knight whose minions worship the ground he walks on)...in this case though...I'm on the fence with Giovanni, but I'm leaning towards cut.
As far as comics go, we generally have to treat the Batman comics as relatively self contained. However, it should be noted the Joker only achieves less because he has less to work with. In stories like Emperor Joker when he's given more power, he's capable of being a universal level threat.
A common example Ambar is fond of is from Gundam00: Ali Al-Saachez and his boss Ribbons Almark. Ribbons' atrocities are on a much greater scale than Ali's, bbut Ali is such a savage beast who commits so many crimes, that you can see if he had Ribbons' level of authority and power, he'd be just as vile
I'm sorry, btw, I forgot to say: I give my go ahead for the CSI and Cold Case examples
edited 12th Apr '13 11:30:25 AM by Lightysnake
A total has-been.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Exactly. Unlike Joker's minions or Death Eaters, no one in Team Rocket is really insane or any more evil than Giovanni himself. The only one who was, the Iron Mask Marauder, was flat out planning to be The Starscream. Others like the main trio, Butch and Cassidy, Domino, Wendy, Dr. Zager, etc. all stick with Giovanni and as far as I know he only ever treated Jessie, James, and Meowth badly due to his intolerance for their constant failure and ineptitude. Giovanni also has small Pet the Dog moments with his Persian, like in "The Evolution Solution" and the first episode of "Best Wishes." The one time he was ever harsh with it (telling it "Be quiet!" in "Mewtwo Returns") was meant to show how obsessive and on edge he was during the situation.
I can also understand what you mean with Joker. One could argue that Ghetsis is so thoroughly sociopathic, selfish and depraved that he has the capacity to do serious evil like become leader of Cipher or something. But the fact that he doesn't ever actually go there and these are all just fan theories are what ultimately keeps him out of the trope, IMO. He's arguably the most evil villain in the main games, but his actions don't quite go beyond the pale like examples of Complete Monster from other series do.
The other example I'm fond of for demonstrating the tier issue is Bask Om and Yazan Gable from Zeta Gundam who have a similar vibe to Ali and Ribbons, but with an even starker difference in level of power. Bask's the General Ripper and field commander of an entire paramilitary force, who organises colony gassings and mass murder. Yazan's a low ranking fighter jockey, who wouldn't recognise The Laws And Customs Of War if they bit him in the ass. Comparing the two would be pointless, since Yazan's lack of rank stops him from committing atrocities of the same calibre as Bask's. What matters is that each one is as bad as possible for what power they have.
With that in mind, the question for these Pokemon examples becomes, is J as bad as can be for the level of power that he/she possesses?
EDIT: I've requested a lock for the Gundam subpage. The next series won't be out for a year or two and there seems to be a general consensus on examples, so I'd say we lock it while the locking is good.
edited 12th Apr '13 11:50:55 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar
@ Ambar Sonof Deshar: Say, can you point me to the post(s) that discuss Complete Monster examples in the In Death series? I would very much like to look them over. 
You'll have to search for it, unfortunately. Just type 'In Death Complete Monster' to the search bar
A total has-been.
I could definitely get on board with that logic, and would say that J was indeed the worst she could possibly be from day one she appeared and just got worse from there.
The thing that kind of troubles me, though, is that the same could be argued for Gh...that guy who failed the heinous standard compared to Cyrus. In the first game with him it's possible to say that he's not as bad as he could be in his position as the Big Bad because he isn't always openly evil. But he kind of needed to fake being well-intentioned and benevolent in order for his evil plan to work. He wanted to manipulate people's hearts and minds to "control" them, in his words. And seeing as his position was leader of a group created out of "a convenient lie" he told, he ran with that in the best (worst?) way possible. That it involved abusing and using his own foster son (specifically because he knew damn well he was a bad man and needed a pure person to be 'the hero', to be used as his pawn), and then attempting to "eliminate" the hero who stands in his way (in perspective, Giovanni or Cyrus never imply death threats: they use words like "crush" rather than "eliminate"), is the cherry on top. In the sequel, he's in a new position in which obfucating self righteousness is no longer required, so he orders his team to terrorize the region outright, tortures a Pokemon in order to make it freeze over the entire region and endanger many lives, and yet again tries to eliminate the Kid Hero, this time through freezing. Considering no other villain in the main game series has tried to have a Pokemon attack a trainer directly without even a proper battle, that's being about as bad as possible for the position this guy is in. And that's to say nothing of his shameless selfishness and outright sadistic cruelty. Or how he rejects forgiveness and redemption when it's offered to him on a platter by someone he'd hurt, but was willing to let go in spite of everything.
The problem, though, is that even if he has the capacity, we don't see him take that to an even grander scale like we see with Emperor Joker, or even get the totally clear sense of it like with Yazan Gable. And there are two further things that prevented his inclusion: the ol' "is it truly heinous by standards of the story?" question, and the Offscreen Villainy policy. The clear verdict seems to be that he failed these. So while the character I've described is clearly a monster, he's not quite "complete" enough to qualify for the Trope. Do I have this right?
I know we shouldn't discuss him since he's been disqualified, but I felt like sharing my thought on the matter. 
edited 12th Apr '13 12:34:12 PM by AnewMan
So... can anyone else who has seen Blacula give me there opinons on Dracula from the intro?
Also, I was wondering, if offscreen villainy does not count towards this trope, does that mean that offscreen kindness does not count against it?
jjj
I wear no mask.
@Ambar: Damn you and your perfectly reasonable arguments
! Then again, it's not like I'm trying to pick a fight with you... So Szuriel is the most likely divine/semi-divine being in-setting to qualify? Damn, with how horrible gods like Zon-Kuthon, Urgathoa and Lamashtu are (note the "one for each evil alignment" choice), not to mention many of the myriad other archfiends, she must be freakin' hardcore; gonna have to read the 3rd Book of the Damned to scope her out. Don't worry about Nightripper, I'll only bring him back if more damning info comes out later.
In Death: 44 books!? Yowie, not surprising few people here read them... Dennis Rockman seems like he's a potential fit, though. Anyone else can chime in?
Pokemon (Wait a minute, the site automatically adds an accent on the "e", but when you type the accent it screws up the linking? WTF?): Giovanni, a CM? I'm a bit skeptical about this one; then again my knowledge of the franchise is pretty damn sketchy beyond the first 2-3 seasons; it was a bit too static and childish for me (I'm 33, which means I was already out of high school and in college when the show first aired in Canada). That said, it is true that not acting Stupid Evil, and to Know When to Fold 'Em, are not disqualifiers in and of themselves. On the fence. As for the other villains with CM potential, my only knowledge is from TV Tropes.
Nina: Eeeehh, still thinks she counts given Lighty and Ambar's arguments and the few times I watched episodes featuring her post-Face–Heel Turn. If it was a Nick I'd vote for him too. Keep.
Locking the Gundam page is a good idea if there's both consensus and no more material to scope for the time being.
As for offscreen kindness... hmm, that's a thorny one. My guess is it actually depends on the trustworthyness of the source and what that kindness entails. As an example, the Ageha Squad in Eureka Seven cry and claim Big Bad Confirmed CM Dewey Novak was kind to them, but 1- As they were raised from a very young age to be Child Soldiers utterly loyal to him, everything they say about him is suspect due to their skewed perspective; and 2- Everything we see about him points out to that dubious "kindness" being nothing more than his standard Manipulative Bastard MO; 3- The whole situation just gives off a really creepy pedo vibe. In other words, I'd say it's a case-by-case basis. My experience is that even if this could disallow otherwise worthy examples in a few cases, it's better than potentially opening the floodgates to a tidal wave of bad examples (which will happen if we loosen our criteria, trust me).
edited 12th Apr '13 2:34:54 PM by Paireon
I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me.
A total has-been.
@Offscreen Kindness: That's something I've been wondering since the days of Hopper's ellimination due to one comment about a promise to his mother. Sure, you could say that actually keeping that promise shows kindness, but he was esentially saying to his brother "I would love to kill you and would, but I'm bound to that damned promise to my late mother, so I can't. But I can abuse you in every other way, so shut up!". It was all off-screen interpretation as to whether or not there was any love for his mother or brother involved in that promise. It could've very well been that breaking a grasshopper promise would cause a revolt, which wouldn't be out of character since we later see that Hopper is doing everything to prevent such a revolt from the ants from happening.
I'm of the opinion that while Offscreen Villainy and Offscreen Kindness should both be advised against, there are cases where we should examine them carefully. In the case of Offscreen Villainy, it should be asked "Is this villainy so unambiguously heinous and the results of it shown so clearly that it doesn't matter that it was offscreen?" In the case of Offscreen Kindness, we should ask "Is it really kindness, and is it adequate? Does it really fly in the face of the amount of worse villainy this character has done?"
I vote that offscreen kindness should be taken into account, as should Word of God statements that the character isn't pure evil. In legal terms, it's like how judges are able to set aside "guilty" verdicts but not "not guilty" ones.
the thing is? Hopper holds to the promise. We see the direct evidence of it, whereas in the case of Dewey Novak, we've seen what his 'kindness' really means.
Keep in mind that when Hopper gets enraged enough to physically assault his brother, his brother screams "remember Ma!" and Hopper punches another grasshopper to get his anger out. He doesn't kill him, or even physically harm him despite Molt being an idiot who humiliates him in front of the crew.
We have to treat this on a case by case basis.
edited 12th Apr '13 2:44:14 PM by Lightysnake
"In distress", my ass.
(Wait a minute, the site automatically adds an accent on the "e", but when you type the accent it screws up the linking? WTF?)
The accented "e" is a different character than the un-accented one, which is what HTTP uses. The auto-accent is courtesy of a custom title set up for "pokemon".
All your safe space are belong to Trump
Unofficial Wiki Curator for Complete Monster
Not sure how I feel about that...
As for tiers, that's why I favor keeping Gary Matheson from Twenty Four. Not a terrorist, but stands out among civilians.
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts
Also, as a guy who has seen Blacula...
Yes on Dracula. Absolutely. Not only is he involved in the slave trade in addition to being an evil bloodsucker, he proves himself far more heinous than the titular vampire right away and his crimes are just nasty
@Paireon
The evil deities in Pathfinder are a bad lot, and I'm not sure any of them stand out that much from the others. That said, if one of them was going to, it would be Szuriel. She's what happens when a Physical God adopts the mentality of an archetypal Psycho for Hire. She hires out her daemons as mercenaries to mortals, demon lords, archdevils, and anybody else who will hire them, with the intent of ensuring that every campaign ends in societal collapse, ethnic cleansing, and even full scale genocide. In her role as Horseman of War she personifies War Is Hell, and represents shellshock, social breakdown, scorched earth campaigns, and war crimes. She inevitably backstabs anyone who hires her, is worshipped by Sociopathic Soldiers and Colonel Kilgores the world over, and is probably the most active of the evil deities, including her fellow Horsemen, when it comes to spreading human misery.
She also has a fairly respectable bodycount from her mortal life. An exocommunicated paladin, Szuriel became a conquering empress who had every member of her former faith crucified, then went on a megalomaniacal spree. After being killed by an assassin, she made her way to Abbadon and murdered her way into her current position. If any of the archfiends was going to qualify, I think it would have to be her.
@11413
I echo lightysnake's thoughts here.
edited 12th Apr '13 4:49:33 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
I wear no mask.
Yes, plus Hopper keeping that promise is a case of Even Bad Men Love Their Mamas, which is an auto-disqualifier.
Also, regarding Szuriel: Holy shit, THAT bad? I can see what you mean. Her mortal life and use of Klingon Promotion to become one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse kinda cements her status for me. Also, LOL @being a stealthy way to justify using daemons like classic Planescape yugoloths.
edited 12th Apr '13 4:25:37 PM by Paireon
I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me.
A total has-been.
Actually, there's nothing really indicated Hopper loved his mother. What it did show was, as Lightysnake pointed out, that he at least respected his mother's dying wishes enough to not only not kill his brother, but not even seriously hurt him when reminded of the promise (he hurts another grasshopper instead). As slim as it is, that's some honor and decency shown from him.
Though I am wondering if someone's going to bring up the Dewey was right logic from the sequel series as an argument against Dewey Novak's inclusion. 
edited 12th Apr '13 4:34:52 PM by AnewMan
I wear no mask.
Wait what? A sequel series has implications that DEWEY FUCKING NOWAK was right to do all the atrocious shit he did!!?? Please tell me that's just Fan Wank by idiots who put the guy in leather pants...
A total has-been.
Unfortunately, it's true. Well, it doesn't suggest his actions were right: it suggests the logic behind everything he did was right, which would turn him from a Knight Templar into a Well-Intentioned Extremist. The YMMV from Eureka Seven AO puts "Dewey Was Right" as a Memetic Mutation for this reason:
Due to several revelations and themes which only seem to reaffirm the antagonist from the original series' belief that Humanity and the scub coral really cannot co-exist.
Knights Templar can stay you know.
I wear no mask.
I just read the Eureka Seven AO pages ...Fuck you, Japan. Fuck you. You just took one of your series that had the most beautiful, amazing themes and aesops and you fucking RAPED it. This is even worse than redeeming Nakago or Louis L. Bridgette. Or the retardedly misogynistic clustercrapfuck Tite Kubo did with Unohana recently.
Yeah, I mad. I mad as Hell.
Makes me wish I was my avatar and gave the asshats behind that decision a little visit.
edited 12th Apr '13 5:29:45 PM by Paireon
I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me.
Yeah, the thing is...the sequel series fucking up the original series message doesn't change how evil and wrong Dewey's actions were and how wrong he was in the short term
A total has-been.
Knights Templar can stay you know.
I know they can. But a Well-Intentioned Extremist cannot. In the original series, Dewey was a Knight Templar. And a Complete Monster.
Yes, I acknowledge that the sequel series is fucking awful and that it shouldn't change Dewey's status in the original series. I was just bringing it up just in case. But now I'm sorry I did. Poor Paireon.
edited 12th Apr '13 5:33:16 PM by AnewMan
After reading the above about Nina, I vote her even more![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]")
now.
CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts