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
With everything laid out, I lean yes on Aerbax and a yes to Black as well.
One for today...
What's the work?
Martial Law is a 1991 film starring Cynthia Rothrock and Chad McQueen as a pair of cops fighting a war against crime with martial arts skills...bodies are turning up, executed with someone's bare hands with our heroes officers Sean and Billie trying to get to the bottom of the affair. And the man at the center of it? Dalton Rhode.
Who is Dalton Rhodes?
A charming, urbane smuggler who handles stolen cars and guns, Rhodes is a vicious killer and expert martial artist who runs illegal tournaments and likes to kill people with his bare hands. In his brutal push to take over the underworld, Rhodes has executed loads of people with his bare hands, and his tournaments have provided an ample number of bodies. Introduced pressuring a few toughs to handle a job for him, Rhodes shows how much he disdains failure by intimidating Sean's troubled criminal brother Michael, taking Michael's partner and killing him rather brutally before him.
Rhodes is then seen at a smuggling deal with cars, proposing a trade with his erstwhile partners: a fight to the death with their best and Rhodes himself. Rhodes wins, he gets the cars for free. He proceeds to toy with the man and execute him with his signature technique: The Dim-Mak Death Touch, a strike to stop/burst the heart.
Rhodes continues to be the worst boss ever while plotting to hijack a major gun shipment. One gang member? To prove loyalty, he orders the man killed by Michael and Sean, who is infiltrating the group...only to turn on them later when they can't. Michael's failure results in Rhodes eventually executing him with the Dim-Mak attack, Rhodes happily discarding and making use of subordinates at usefulness...Sean manages to stay undercover, as Rhodes proceeds to ambush the shipment of guns with his men and massacres the shippers there, stating he so hates loose ends...and then massacres all his own men there as not to split the profits. Sean is able to try to bust him, leading to a fight with Rhodes and his elites in a martial arts fight. Rhodes is taken down by Sean, but gets back up for one last attack....Sean? Uses the Dim-Mak on Rhodes, bursting his heart and finishing him on the spot.
Heinousness?
Worst in film and only major villain. He has enough bodies onscreen, tons in the backstory and in the setting and the end massacres put him well over the baseline to keep.
Mitigating Qualities?
That's a no. He has a few Bait the Dog moments, but Rhodes is a vicious sociopath and Blood Knight who cares only for fighting and profit.
Conclusion?
An easy keeper...second for david Carradine, I believe.
Rhodes. How did the other dude learn the Dim-Mak?
Wait, David Carradine killed by an attack that burst his heart? Sounds familiar.
This has probably been asked before but I don't have time to read all 7386 pages, so, does having standards or Evil Virtues disqualify someone from being a Complete Monster? I would think so, as most people would regard those as redeeming traits.
Xykon has one genuine standard, not fond of necrophilia. That said, doesn't prevents him from counting, as he's more than bad enough.
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)Also if a work has only one villain (who still fits the other criteria for Complete Monster) do you not have to fill out the "Is he worse than other villains" due to there not being any?
to Rhodes.
I see my Selene image proved more contentious than I expected. Not sure what's so "overcomplicated" about it, but no matter. Will this
◊ work better?
Didn't notice the Selene images. But honestly, I prefer the first image. I fail to see why it was voted down. It's easy to understand what's going on...
Abstain for the second image, that said.
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)
to Black, the Skin Taker, Aerbax, and Dalton
I am going to be pretty busy later in the night and tomorrow, so would anyone mind if I started Borderlands 3 discussion now, or should I just wait until tomorrow?

Skintaker and Black sounds like a yes. I'm fine with Aerbax as well with new info.
"Making screw-ups and mistakes was I ever really good at. Because everything I touch went to hell."