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
Yes to the last two candidates.
Edited by GeorgieEnkoom on Oct 23rd 2019 at 2:01:53 PM
J’m’arrête pas tant qu’j’vois pas des lignes sur les moniteurs (Not stoppin 'til I see Flatlines)One more candidate before the second from Reign... from another Batman spin-off, and my first from the New 52! This one comes from Batwing, an early launch title from the New 52, and featured (initially) David Zavimbe, a former child soldier in Africa turned superhero. Tied in his backstory is the ruthless General Ayo Keita.
Who is General Keita? What has he done?
General Keita is an African warlord and leader of the "Army of the Dawn," a group of child soldiers Keita has turned into vicious killing machines. With the creed of "honor them all in blood!" Keita regularly leads his forces to raid villages, which follows an established protocol of "take any able-bodied men and boys and slaughter the rest," building his army while leaving a trail of blood and slaughter behind him.
Keita takes a particular interest in two boys—David Zavimbe, and his brother Isaac—two proficient child soldiers called the "Dragonflies" for their combat ability. Keita hears they're sparing villages of women and children and decides to condition them into proper killers. We see a flashback of Keita cruelly forcing David and Isaac, in the aftermath of a total massacre he's orchestrated, to burn a pleading, helpless man alive. Keita hits his lowest moment when he takes David and Isaac on a mission to kill his enemy, Okuru, and finds Okuru has surrounded himself in a compound full of innocent orphan children.
Without missing a beat, Keita orders the compound and every single orphan blown sky-high just to kill Okuru. When the Zavimbes finally resist, Keita beats Isaac to a bloody pulp before attempting to kill him, throwing him off a cliff (Isaac survives but goes nuts) before ordering David killed as well since he's "no good." David escapes and captures Keita while the insane general's asleep, leaving him tied up outside Okuru's camp and attracting their notice with a gunshot, with no pretty fate in store for him..
Any mitigating factors?
Okay, so New 52, the heinous standard's pretty fierce—there's reference to a lot of atrocity in David's old homeland—but Keita I think stands out for the visceral, realistic awfulness of what he's doing. The Rape, Pillage, and Burn aspects of his character are already an impressive boost; add in a willingness to hurt kids to the level he does? Keita stands out, easily, despite being relegated to the backstory.
Conclusion?
Keep him.
Thoughts?
Edited by Scraggle on Oct 23rd 2019 at 6:42:31 AM
Now, one...
What's the work?
Saint Sinner is a movie based off the works by Clive Barker, with the name of the comic that has no relationship whatsoever to this...Tomas is a monk in 1815, who, with his brother, accidentally unseals a Sealed Evil in a Can: the succubi sisters Munkar and Nakir, wh then use the local...magic Catholic time travel device (?!?!) to travel to the 21s century...Tomas, to redeem himself, heads to stop them, meeting police detective Rachel Dessler who slowly begins to realize something is wrong.
Now, of the sisters...let's talk Munkar.
Who is Munkar?
The older (by far) of the two, Munkar is an ancient succubus from before the time of man, and a sadistic glutton who is responsible, as is said, for the destruction of cities and civilizations. Arriving in 20th century New York, Munkar has herself and Nakir disguised as prostitutes, killing several men for convenience and to feed on their blood (an agonizing process)...Tomas, naturally, isn't exactly believed about life sucking she-demons posing as prostitutes, while Munkar uses Nakir to lure men in and feeds by cutting open the back of their necks, extracting some necessary bones or tubes and feeding on the blood, leaving her victims as husks. Tomas finds them with their latest victim, using the magic dagger of St. Nicodemus against them, prompting Munkar to sneer Tomas is no saint, and only a saint can stop them.
The two escape and continue slaughtering their merry way through the city, though Munkar is incensed to find Nakir is pregnant from one victim, deciding to feed her Tomas, who manages to escape...when one of Nakir's marks shows her how to drive to help them get around easier, Munkar soon grows bored of him and slits his throat just to shut him up and to find Dessler, takes a cop, tortures him for information and drains him dry with Nakir before capturing Dessler's boss and using him as a hostage while painfully feeding off him...Dessler shoots him in a mercy kill, and Munkar, fiding herself feeding off a dead man, is nearly killed, to Nakir's horror.
Recovering, Munkar sends Tomas a dark dream where she has him raped by Nakir to corrupt him, but Tomas resists, and after tracking them down, Munkar captures Dessler to allegedly feed to Nakir's child...succubus kids? Born as monstrous creatures that are ravenously hungry and will eat their mothers (and aunts) if not given someone else....except Munkar has no intention of saving Nakir, and plots to turn Dessler into a succubus and her new sister, leading to an insinuation she once did the same to Nakir...Tomas arrives as Nakir's child is snacking on her, which soon attacks Munkar, who kills it and then mortally wounds Tomas. When Nakir attacks her in revenge for her betrayal, Munkar tries to flat out murder her...giving Tomas and Dessler an opening to impale them on Nicodemus's dagger and seal them away, allowing Tomas to return to the past, where he collapses and dies redeemed, Dessler later finding his grave stating "A Saint does not know he is so", with the final scene being Tomas awakening in what is presumably heaven.
Heinousness?
Pretty bad. Munkar's not just a predator. She kills several people out of pique, not just to feed, having Tomas raped in his dream by her sister, and is apparently the one who turns others into succubi...in addition, she enjoys the pain of her victims and clearly gets off on it. With a decent count, I say yea.
Mitigating Qualities?
Now, no agency concerns are ascribed to her, but one main thing? Nakir is genuinely devoted to Munkar and loves her. When Munkar is a hostage, Nakir takes her own and threatens to kill him if "one drop of Munkar's blood is shed" and when Munkar is nearly killed, Nakir panics, abandons fighting the heroes and begs Munkar to tell her how to save her...problem is Munkar does not seem to return the affection. When Nakir is pregnant, Munkar slut shames the living fuck out of her, only getting sweet with her again when Nakir starts arguing back...the movie is (surprisingly) subtle about it, but Nakir's ignorance of numerous succubi traits, Munkar's clear dominance in their relationship and Munkar planning to turn Dessler hints strongly that Nakir used to be human...when Nakir is left to die, begging for her sister to help her, Mukar icily responds "I envy you. But you are of no use to me anymore. I need a partner to lure in prey and you, Nakir, are spent. Before she starts calling Dessler "sister" as well.
Conclusion?
A yep

I love a ton of things to do, so I should probably get my final Doom Patrol tv series candidate out of the way.
Who is she?
Martha Patterson is a cultist of the Decreator, an evil deity who will unmake reality itself. She and Todd Patterson had a child, Elliot, unto which they tatooed the Book whose words would summon the Decreator. Martha and Todd kept up the façade by filling Elliot's mind with the promise he'd be the world's saviour, but when the moment comes Todd feels extreme guilt towards his son's fate and tells him that everything is a lie and he needs to run.
Martha, naturally, kills her husband and drops all pretense of love for her son, yelling at him and chasing after him. When he takes refuge in the Doom Patrol's mansion, Martha sends cultists to go after him and read him, resulting in the Decreator's momentary victory and soon the death of Elliot.
In the proccess Martha becomes an archon, sitting in a throne besides her still dead husband. She explains her motivations to Cliff and Jane, noting herself to be a power hungry nihilist comfortable with the death of all things for the temporary control of Nurnheim, and mocks them, deconstructing them and their insecurities to torment them.
When the combined efforts of Mr. Nobody and Jane result in a cult meant to counter the Decreator, Martha angrily attacks the heroes, hoping to kill them in a fit of spite. Thankfully, she dies with the destruction of Nurnheim.
Heinousness
More evil than the rest of the villains aside from the Bureau of Normalcy and Kate's Father, and like the latter notable for parental abuse that leads to the unceremonious death of her son.
Mitigating Qualities
Nope! Bitch's just a psycho cultist fully aware of her actions, power hungry, genocidal and with no love for her son let alone her husband, resulting in their deaths.
Results
?
Edited by Keshali on Oct 23rd 2019 at 4:57:09 AM