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. "
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
You know speaking of DC I feel like I should bring this up again since I was mostly ignored last time I am seriously thinking we should move DC Universe to The DCU as that is currently the title being used for the franchise as a whole everywhere else on the site but here (and with MB)
And the last one for today - remember how Moira and Broderick wanted to reignite a civil war in the middle east? Here's the guy they hired to do it.
Who is Eddie Fyers? What does he do?
Fyers, clearly based more on his Arrow counterpart than his Post-Crisis counterpart, is a sadistic mercenary hired by the Ninth Circle to make this war happen. To do this, Eddie poses as a bartender on the Trans-Pacific Railway, a revolutionary new train that connects America to Asia via oceanic tunnels. Fyers runs into Diggle on the train and recognizes him as a fellow mercenary - after a brief conversation, Fyers stabs and strips him offpage, posing as security for the event and getting close to Amir Mustafa, the man leading the peace charge. At this point, he poisons Mustafa's drink, recognizing and gloating about the fact that in doing so, he's dooming thousands of people to death.
To escape, Fyers then attacks and kills both of the train drivers to stop it, but GA and Black Canary continue chasing him in the tunnels. To escape, Fyers breaks the tunnel glass to flood the area, intending to drown everyone on the train while he escapes - luckily, Diggle woke up and manages to speed the train up so they arrive in Washington before the water gets there. Even better, the other diplomats recognize the assassination for what it was - a False Flag Operation - and are more motivated for peace then ever, so no war breaks out.
Fyers is then one of the Horsemen that Broderick hires to kill Seattle. Fyers' role is the least immediately lethal - he infests hotels with bugs - but it's a critical step in killing the economy of the city, allowing Queen Industries to buy it out and transform it into their rich-man's paradise. Just to top it off, Fyers also spends his time blowing up cars in traffic just to cause as much chaos as he possibly can - he also burns down Henry Fyff's lair so that Broderick can kidnap him and enlist him into "defense development".
He then gets into a final fight with Green Arrow and loses, presumably being incarcerated in some form afterwards.
Any mitigating factors? Freudian Excuse?
None whatsoever - just a psychotic madman who will kill thousands of people just for a paycheck.
Is he heinous enough?
This is where I kinda struggle, but I ultimately think it's a textbook case of "he's acting on orders but is way too sadistic about it". He's not only aware that he's dooming nine countries to war and thus causing thousands of deaths for nothing but money, but he openly gloats about the fact that he's thinning the herd of people, making it clear that a war is something that he also wants to happen - and then, to ensure his escape, he floods a train to attempt to kill everyone on it, including a whole bunch of diplomats - and in the final confrontation with Oliver, he laughs at the fact that you can hear Seattle's "death rattle" after causing at least one explosion in the middle of traffic just to cause chaos, so unlike the other Horsemen who are clearly Only in It for the Money, he's in it both for the money and the chance to kill a bunch of people.
Final verdict?
I think a yep, but what about you?
Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Apr 4th 2022 at 4:02:32 AM
I should point out, Scraggle, in Krogan's writeup, there's one error:
Easily the cruelest boss in the entire franchise, Krogan kills his own minions simply for being uneasy with the way he treats dragons; throws them dozens at a time to die either in active volcanos or at the hands of the Bewilderbeast; and at one point vetoes Viggo's option of a quick execution for a failed minion simply for the pleasure of torturing the mook to death himself.
In the episode in question, "Living on the Edge", the minion's issue wasn't moral. Here's the exchange:
Krogan: Not what you're used to. Is that it? Well, please, do accept my most sincere apologies.
Dragon Hunter: Mm-hmm.
Krogan: Now, if you would be so kind as to tell me why the objection?
Dragon Hunter: Uh, takes the sport out of it. Mm. Seems like cheating, is all.
The minion's objection wasn't because Krogan was being cruel to dragons - it was because the method Krogan was using (capturing a Death Song, using its call to lure them in and trapping them in the Death Song's amber) was unsporting.
Whether that makes it better or worse - you could argue that Krogan killed the Hunter for the sake of a rather petty grievance - is really up to you to decide.
Edited by Nathanoraptor on Apr 4th 2022 at 9:54:16 AM
ACW:
Technically, it's only one guy, so how about...
"kills a minion for complaining" or "kills a minion over a petty grievance"
Edited by Nathanoraptor on Apr 4th 2022 at 10:06:01 AM
Yes to the Rebirth Arrow baddies, especially Moira
Great work, STAR!
I do not see the need to change the write-up unless Scraggle personally wants to, "uneasy" does not = "moral" and I don't get the confusion, here. The minion was indeed uneasy with how Krogan was using the dragons, and he gets killed for it. Simple as that.
No! That is NOT Solid Snake! Stop impersonating him!The reason why I pointed this out is that the EP stated that:
This is worded like it was a moral issue the minion had - when in the actual episode, it's a petty grievance (the minion was simply objecting to a lack of sportsmanship about how Krogan was trapping them).
Even without that, the wording is slightly ambiguous - as well as this, the write-up should emphasise that Krogan killed one of his minions simply for complaining.
Edited by Nathanoraptor on Apr 4th 2022 at 10:57:48 AM
Additionally, "kills one of his own minions simply for complaining" emphasises the disproportionate nature of the act - Krogan threw an axe into someone's head for the sake of a petty grievance.
Being a Bad Boss is a common trend to villains - even in the same series, Viggo isn't a particularly good boss himself - however, killing a minion simply for moaning about how unsportsmanlike the methods are... that's pretty bad.
Edited by Nathanoraptor on Apr 4th 2022 at 11:15:45 AM

Best wishes TellAll. Hope you test negative.
Edited by futuremoviewriter on Apr 4th 2022 at 11:18:22 AM