Monster Fan Works Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

02:07:04 AM Feb 3rd 2014
All proposals or requests for removals should go to the Complete Monster Clean up thread set up for that very purpose. Requests to add characters on the discussion page will get ignored.

All examples on YMMV pages that get added without going through the clean up thread will get deleted.
12:25:19 AM Nov 27th 2011
I am trying to decide whether Ho-oh from Poké Wars fits or not. He was originally listed but I removed him after some analysis. After yet more analysis (and more chapters released by Cornova), I feel that he does fit.

  • The character must personally commit actions that are truly heinous by the standards of the story, which makes no attempt to gloss these over or present them in a positive light. Offstage Villainy doesn't count; the story has to show the actions, not imply them. Actions that become inconsequential through Negative Continuity don't count either. A Complete Monster is implied to have crossed the Moral Event Horizon either during the story or long before it, but a character can cross the Moral Event Horizon without necessarily being a Complete Monster.

  • The character's terribleness must be played seriously at all times, evoking fear, revulsion and/or hatred from the other characters in the story. If there are other villains around who aren't this trope, they are afraid of/dislike this person, too — Even Evil Has Standards, after all (and in particularly disturbing stories with particularly evil villains, even lesser Complete Monsters may fear such a character). If they're Played for Laughs, the character is usually just Evilly Affable at worst, but can still be one if done right. If the character is not taken seriously at all, they fail to qualify.

  • There is no adequate justification or Freudian Excuse to balance out the misdeeds. That is to say, while there may be a sad backstory present, it must in no way be able to excuse the heinous evil deeds the character commits.

  • Characters that fit this trope must be completely devoid of altruistic qualities. By the same token, they must show no regret for their crimes regardless of how horrible they may be. It is more fitting for the CM to enjoy the devastation created by their actions but complete indifference toward it will suffice.

  • Most importantly, the character must have no chance of redemption, at least not without being considered a Karma Houdini. The only way the story could come to anything resembling a Happy Ending is a Karmic Death, a Fate Worse Than Death or at the very least removal from the story. A Heel–Face Turn, even of the Redemption Equals Death variety, is out of the question, and nobody would believe it if it happened.

1.) Maybe. Quite a bit of the Legendaries (especially Lugia) think that what Ho-oh is doing is horrendous. Quite a bit of Ho-oh's actions are shown and he is clearly shown to have crossed the Moral Event Horizon. But then again, a few Legendaries agree with what he is doing.

2.) Holy shit, yes! Ho-oh's actions are never played for laughs.

3.) Yes. Ho-oh saw and experienced the negative side of humanity but really, genocide as a punishment?

4.) Ho-Oh plain doesn't give a shit about the extreme devestion that his genocide causes. If I recall, one of Regigigas calls him out on it after the battle with him destroys all of Snowpoint Temple.

By the time he gets to that point, it seems like he abandoned his "utopian dream" and just plain wants to slaughter all of humanity, not caring if he has to kill other pokčmon or ruin the environment to do it.

5.) Yes.


4 clear examples out of 5 with one debatable one.

Any opinions?
09:48:50 AM Nov 28th 2011
Ayup, sounds like a good candidate for the post. Point one is mostly about a character being clearly visible as doing horrible actions (i.e., they're not just second-hand rumours), which Ho-oh seems to be. Put 'im up.
07:21:52 PM Nov 28th 2010
edited by ProgenyExMachina
Re: first example on the page (Forward). I actually went back and reread the arc to be sure, and she still strikes me as more of a Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds, which is one of the tropes potholed in the main page as those that can never cross over. I checked through the forum thread and cannot find anything addressing whether or not there is a point at which any and all Freudian Excuse is completely nullified, especially ones that led to insanity which in turn led to evil; I think this point should be more clearly guidelined, or if there is none, then the example should be stricken.

(I probably missed plenty of similar examples; I just happened to glance over here because it was in the recent edits list, but haven't fully read through the subpages in a long while.)

I do acknowledge my odd propensity for Alternate Character Interpretation, so if I'm seeing something nobody else is, just let me know and I'll shut my trap. ^^;
08:14:20 AM Jan 13th 2011
You may have a good point. The character in question is very much a morally gray individual. There's been some disagreement among the reviewers about her, as she is both insane and a young child, but there's also an indication that said character knows exactly what she's doing. This example is definitely a YMMV, but that's why this trope is a YMMV trope in the first place.
07:57:53 AM Sep 12th 2010
edited by NolanJBurke
Aw, fuckkit. This thing is a self-plugger's Nirvana. I vote for deleting it. Anyone agree?
08:11:09 AM Sep 12th 2010
What proof do you have of this page being a "self-plugger's Nirvana"?
01:50:24 AM Jan 3rd 2011
Or you could, just, y'know, clean up the page.
06:23:02 AM Sep 3rd 2010
edited by NolanJBurke
Okay, let's just be honest for a minute here: isn't this page just asking to be drowned by people plugging their fanfics? I'd say it's pretty obvious half the examples here have been added by the fanfic's own author as it is.
01:53:12 AM Jan 3rd 2011
edited by Zaptech
I fail to see why this is a bad thing. TV Tropes doesn't care if someone is plugging their own work, so long as the trope in question where the work is being plugged is relevant. There issue here shouldn't be "Is someone plugging their work?" and be more "Is the character being presented as a Complete Monster actually a Complete Monster?"
Collapse/Expand Topics