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
Palpatine.
bobg and Scraggle, please put your
writeups
on the Drafts page (this is gonna be a busy weekend
; already I have 20 including your entries ).
Incidentally, before I submit this week's batch, still need more opinions on what to do with Mick Taylor's entry. It's 2-1 so far in favor of moving him to other media.
The Vampire Diaries is done, and I've added the CSI entries to the folder at Complete Monster Drafts.
edited 31st May '16 3:17:32 AM by ACW
![]()
"The Magnificent Bastard is what happens when you combine The Chessmaster, The Trickster, and the Manipulative Bastard: bold, charismatic, independent, audacious and genius. Capturing the audience with their charisma, incredible intellect, mastery of manipulation, and boldness of action, this character is a show-stealer, demanding your reverence at every turn."
In short, that's a magnificent bastard. Johan is a bit of a deconstruction of this trope. He has a bunch of moments of awesome, but due to the series's treatment of his actions, he also come off as scary. Personally, I don't dislike it, as it allows the audience to never forget that while he's awesome, he's still a monster.
EDIT: I've checked the heinous standard of the fic. So the write-up for Falla Cii will as soon as I can write it.
edited 31st May '16 3:43:05 AM by MiraiYuji
I have a question about a CM sandbox page, namely, Sandbox/CompleteMonsterYMMVPages.
I read its description over a few times and I still can't understand what exactly is it for. It looks like a dumping ground for undiscussed unauthorized CM entries, but I thought that the way this thread deals with them is to have a quick discussion, delete the original unauthorized entry, and have someone do an effortpost and do an official one, and there is no need to save them there.
edited 31st May '16 4:00:48 AM by Wuz
Protagonist C Ms are pretty rare, right? The only ones I know of are Griffin, Patrick Bateman, Light Yagami, Lou Bloom and Not Important.
There is no beginning. There is no end. There is only... Hooty.
There's also The Witch's House (kind of), Wolfram (more or less), Bill Williamson, and I'm sure others. Not including comics where CMs can get their own stories. Also, Palpatine's the main character—more or less—in Darth Plagueis, and of course Tarkin and Darth Bane.
EDIT: Forgot Fantômas.
edited 31st May '16 5:47:45 AM by ACW
I'm still relatively new here, so I'm not sure what the rules regarding creepypasta examples are. I've done a bit of looking, and consensus seems to be that they are acceptable as long as they aren't completely over-the-top in "edginess" (the most recent proposal I could find was of a couple who were so evil that it ended up being pure Narm).
Anyway, with that in mind, I think I may have found an example from a story called "The Very Bad Man at the Chainlink Fence
." Now, this is one of those creepypastas with rape and abuse elements. However, in my personal opinion, this is one of those rare stories that does it well. It's not done purely for shock value like most, and it's handled in a relatively mature manner.
The character I'm proposing, ironically, is not the titular "bad man." It's the mother of the main character, Alexis. Spoiler warning: This is part of a big twist in the story. Read ahead at your own risk.
Now, onto the effortpost.
Who is this character? What do they do?
The narrator, Alexis', mother. The story starts off when Alexis is in fourth grade. She sees a strange man staring at her from a chainlink fence while she plays outside at recess. Eventually, she goes over to this man and speaks to him. Everyone freaks out, and Alexis' mother later explains to her that this man is her ex-husband, Edgar. She claims that Edgar is a "very bad man" who had hit her, and had tried to hit Alexis when she was a baby, so her mother divorced him and got a restraining order.
Naturally, Alexis gets curious and keeps asking questions about Edgar. Her mother eventually has her go see a child psychologist who hypnotises her and brings out a supposedly repressed memory of Edgar raping her when she was about three. They go to court, and Edgar gets convicted and sent to jail.
Alexis is extremely traumatized for years by all of this. She regularly has panic attacks, has recurrent nightmares, and is unable to have any meaningful relationships with men.
Years later, when Alexis is an adult, she happens to be browsing the internet at work when she comes across a news article about a child psychologist being convicted for implanting false memories. This psychologist is the same one she went to see.
As it turns out, Edgar never did rape her, or hit her mother. Her mother had simply divorced him and got the restraining order because she'd grown to hate him and wanted him out of her life, and didn't want him to be able to see Alexis at all. When Alexis began to ask questions, she bribed the psychologist to implant the false rape memory in order to get Edgar put in prison and be rid of him once and for all. Alexis is remorseful and attempts to get her father exonerated, and to apologize to him. Unfortunately, she finds that he'd been murdered in prison about two years into his sentence because other inmates don't like pedophiles.
Are their actions heinous by the story's standards?
Unlike many other creepypasta antagonists, she is written more realistically. She doesn't directly kill anybody, but she is responsible for traumatizing her own daughter, ruining the life of her ex-husband (who did nothing wrong), and getting him killed. She does it all for her own selfish reasons.
Any Freudian Excuse or redeeming qualities?
Alexis states that she has many fond memories of her mother throughout her childhood.
However, I'd still say that she doesn't have any redeeming qualities.
She was perfectly content to have her daughter traumatized with false memories and get her ex-husband wrongfully convicted and murdered in prison just because she no longer wanted to be in a relationship with him and wanted to be completely rid of him. Additionally, she doesn't really show any genuine remorse at all. When Alexis first confronts her about it, she can't even do anything but sputter. Later, as Alexis takes her and the psychologist to court, she attempts to deny her role entirely before finally giving up and admitting it. She breaks down crying, but this is not treated as a sympathetic moment, nor is it suggested that these are tears of remorse. While the story doesn't outright state it, it's likely that she's crying mainly because she got exposed.
Final Verdict?
While she isn't an overpowered teenage serial killer or an eldritch abomination, I'd say that she manages to be quite vile in spite of her limited rap sheet. To summarize, she has a psychologist hypnotize her daughter and give her false traumatic memories, which causes said daughter years of mental anguish; she also has her ex husband wrongfully convicted of pedophilia (which gets him murdered in prison), just because she wants nothing to do with him. That makes her pretty low in my opinion.
edited 31st May '16 7:24:16 AM by rosewood47
Hmm, I don't really count Villain Episodes but I forgot about Witch's House. Didn't know Bill was considered the protagonist of Rampage and I never intend to watch those to find out. Fantomas and Wolfram are new to me though, so that's nice (for a given definition of "nice"
).
![]()
See, I'm not too sure. Even if she didn't intend for her husband to get killed, there's still the Mind Rape of her own child.
edited 31st May '16 7:18:47 AM by ACW
That's not the issue, as him dying in prison is a foreseeable outcome.
But one death/life ruining and one mental trauma...that's a terrible person, but I don't believe it's a CM. And I do feel bad about this because this is one of only two Creepypastas whose descriptions didn't actively offend/anger me.
edited 31st May '16 7:24:33 AM by Lightysnake
![]()
![]()
We may just have to disagree on that. It's not your usual villainy, but it's a more...personal kind.
If that's the case, we may have to re-litigate Daniel Patterson.
edited 31st May '16 7:26:51 AM by ACW
Actually, having just read Daniel Patterson's entry... I'm not so sure he qualifies. He has one murder, and lied to his daughter. That doesn't sound any worse than Barkis or Eric Westcott, both of whom were voted down for not surpassing the baseline standard.
Why so serious?The Dating Game was just Squidward's Suicide without the "lost episode" premise. It drags, and drags until the last part when it basically becomes the literature equivalent of Ultra Super Death Gore Fest Chainsawer 3000. Pen Pal wasn't bad, though, and that has a CM according to the page.
Pen Pal was also actually published as a novel. I haven't read it, but I have a feeling the quality is far above the ones on the page, most of which I did read when they were proposed.
The lot of them are entirely without value and made by hacks who have no idea what makes writing good or horror scary. Sonic X? Mr. Bear? The Alice Killer? The Blood Keeper? beware the Good Samaritan? Patient 88? Jeff the Killer? Utter dreck. The kind of stuff that makes Eli Roth look like John Carpenter on his best day. It's not that Dating game drags necessarily...it's just that it's bad and written by someone who honestly comes off as as a sleazy jackass.
edited 31st May '16 7:48:11 AM by Lightysnake
Daniel Patterson also perpetrated an extremely cruel and elaborate "Scooby-Doo" Hoax to try to force his wife to commit suicide. The only reason he kills her personally is out of rage that he failed to break her. He's literally the only villain on the show to do something like that.
the creepypasta mom, bc of the heinous standard.
On a related note, that story is very close to many instances in the 80s where psychologists used leading techniques and hypnosis to get children to accuse day care leaders of running Satanic sex cults, so I'm not entirely sure this creepy pasta isn't based on a real instance. That makes me even leerier.

I honestly have no idea how to label a character like that, what the hell is a magnificent bastard? Johan, while I do like him just comes as a sociopath, I don't necessarily consider him magnificent.
Also they generally come off as heavily contrived to me, not that it can't happen in real life.
edited 31st May '16 12:57:57 AM by Mediawatcher