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
I think it's less surpassing him in cruelty and more an utter lack of self control. Hoat's no genius, but he's smart enough to know running roughshod over villages at utter indiscriminate random, slaughtering and raping as he will is a very, very stupid idea and is likely to get everyone out for his head. He does, however, allow his men to Rape, Pillage, and Burn as they want within reason, and unlike Rorge, Hoat is a torturer. Rorge doesn't really display the creativity Hoat does there with Hoat's penchant for crippling people, or throwing Brienne and Amory Lorch to the bear.
Really, any of the Brave Companions could qualify on their own in a lighter setting except for Biter and Septon Utt.
- Riku Ousei from Linebarrels of Iron. Most other members of the Katou Organization have at least some redeeming qualities (with Jack Smith being a full-fledged Type IV Anti-Villain), and Big Bad Hisataka Kato himself is an Affably Evil Well-Intentioned Extremist. Ousei, on the other hand, is a slimy little prick who delights in blowing people up from orbit with a Kill Sat just to make a point about his twisted concept of imagination (a bastardized take on his boss' own vision), and he is ready and willing to kill off a couple of innocent bystanders (a young man and his girlfriend who knew nothing of what was going on) just to taunt Koichi and drive him into a rage. And after doing that, he was going to repeat the atrocity, this time targetting Koichi's Unlucky Childhood Friend Risako. A truly despicable snot. Therefore, it makes it a Crowning Moment Of Awesome for Koichi and Satoru when they destroy him and his Kill Sat when he's one second away from killing more people.
Here's a bit of a rewrite. I took out some grave-dancing and some excessive detail about other villains. How's it look?
- Riku Ousei from Linebarrels of Iron. Most other members of the Katou Organization have at least some redeeming qualities. Ousei, on the other hand, is a slimy little prick who delights in blowing people up from orbit with a Kill Sat just to make a point about his twisted concept of imagination (a bastardized take on his boss's own vision), and he is ready and willing to kill off a couple of innocent bystanders (a young man and his girlfriend who knew nothing of what was going on) just to taunt Koichi and drive him into a rage. After doing that, he was going to repeat the atrocity, this time targetting Koichi's Unlucky Childhood Friend Risako.
I think you all described Vargo Hoat well enough, so I'll go straight to the writeup.
- "Lord" Vargo Hoat is the leader of a psychotic mercenary band, whose allows his band to Rape, Pillage, and Burn, and is known for cutting off limbs. He intially works for the Lannisters, until he betrays Harrenhal to the Boltons, and throws Ser Amory Lorch to a bear. When his men bring him Jaime Lanninster and Brienne of Tarth, Vargo cuts off Jaime's right hand. He later tries to rape Brienne of Tarth, and when that fails, throws her to a bear armed with only a blunt tourney sword, only letting her free Steelshanks Walton threatens him with his soldiers.
edited 5th Feb '14 6:22:56 PM by randomtroper89
Plus, the whole 'take a child hostage with intent to erase their soul from existence,' which is a fate I admit gives me the creeps.
I'll vote yea, but just barely. Permit me to expand on Hoat:
- The self-styled "Lord" Vargo Hoat is the leader of psychotic mercenary band, known as The Brave Companions or, more commonly, 'The Bloody Mummers.' A vicious barbarian with no regard for morals or innocent life, Hoat allows his band to Rape, Pillage, and Burn at their discretion. Each man in the group is a monster with sickening crimes to his name, but Hoat allows all of them to indulge their darkest desires as long. Hoat himself has a penchant for maiming victims, having earned the name "Footman" for lopping off the feet of his victims. Hoat initially works for the Lannisters, until he betrays Harrenhal to the Boltons. Once this is done, he has the Lannister commander Ser Amory Lorch to a bear. While Lorch was a child murdering pig of a man, all Hoat cared about was the entertainment. When his men capture Jaime Lannister and Brienne of Tarth, Hoat has Jaime's sword hand chopped off for no rational reason and later tries to rape Brienne himself. When she resists and bites his ear off, he throws her to the bear as well with a useless practice sword. Hoat is feared by all who know him as a vicious lunatic who leads the worst group of beasts posing as men in Westeros, and will kill someone for noticing his speech impediment, for not referring to him as a proper lord, or simply because he thinks it's funny.
edited 5th Feb '14 7:04:32 PM by Lightysnake
I feel like Tarquin from the Order of the Stick qualifies. He's been brought up before, but since then all of his redeeming qualities have been stripped away from him. He seemed to love his sons, Elan and Nale, but it's now apparent that he only values them as ways to continue his legacy. He's a narcissist obsessed with control, and he murdered his own son (Nale) without an ounce of remorse when it was clear that he was no longer playing his game. He then proceeded to attempt to murder his other sons friends/adventuring party (who were in the process of trying to save the world from Xykon, the Big Bad, who he's convinced is just a "sub-boss") in order to force Elan to become the protagonist of Tarquin's story. After they escape, Tarquin teleports onto Elan's airship, breaks Elan's girlfriend's arm, and almost cuts off his son's hand.
In earlier comics, Tarquin gleefully pits two best friends against each other in a gladiatorial arena, runs an tyrannical, 1984-esque shadow empire, and eats raw phoenix liver, which he has to cut out of the (sapient) bird while it is still alive. He's also a serial rapist, forcing women to marry him through torture, and killing one of his prospective brides husbands when she makes the mistake of telling him she's married.
The character is truly heinous by the standards of the story, which makes no attempt to present the character in any positive way. Check. The author has actually stated that Tarquin's purpose is to deconstruct the Affably Evil trope.
The character's terribleness is played seriously at all times, evoking fear, revulsion and hatred from the other characters in the story. Every character who has seen the depths to which he sinks on a regular basis treats him with disgust. Even his remaining son, the naive, innocent Elan, has realized that his idolized father is pure Evil.
They are completely devoid of altruistic qualities. They show no regret for their crimes. He's never done anything for someone else that wasn't really just to benefit himself, and he doesn't have an ounce of remorse for anything he's done, actually taking pride in his depraved actions.
The vote against Tarquin was heavily negative and you haven't brought up any new evidence.
I agree that Tarquin doesn't/didn't love Elan and Nale in any normal sense of the word, and I would not factor that in to his redeeming qualities.
However, his friendship with Malack and to a lesser extent his other team members would count as redeeming- while yes, Tarquin sees them as his subordinates, he "allows" them to insult him and will even admit he's wrong. This is a guy who engages in disproportionate retribution with the slightest provocation, so when he admits to Malack that he was wrong (after Malack angrily calls him out), this really speaks to the genuineness of their friendship.
Although, for the record, I think Tarquin's real/primary reason for killing Nale was because (as Tarquin saw it) Nale had outlived his narrative usefulness. I don't think avenging Malack was anywhere near as significant a motivation.
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiYeah, Tarquin's friendship with his team is a sticking point. Tarquin's egotistical enough to believe he's in charge, but when Malack rather furiously calls Tarquin out for hypocrisy, Tarquin thinks it over, realizes Malack is right and apologies to him before the two happily reminisce about good old days.
Also, Tarquin is okay with Malack turning his Empire into a death-cult slaughter house as long as Malack gives him a nice statue.
And in a twisted way, I believe he sees everything he does as for Elan's own benefit. He did the same for Nale as well, until Nale used up literally every chance he was ever given and had no more place there. Frankly, I've been surprised people call out Tarquin for killing Nale, given Nale has tried to kill Tarquin, constantly placed himself as a hindrance and murdered Tarquin's best friend.
Tarquin's friendship with Malack is probably the most convincing evidence towards him not being a Complete Monster, but I think Tarquin considers Malack a "friend" in the same way Xykon considers Jirix a "friend", just much more tactfully and Lawful Evil-lly. He serves his purpose, he's valuble, he's fun to be around, and he submits to Tarquin's control, but I'm sure that if Malack ever denied Tarquin's authority as Nale did he'd be disposed of as quickly and remorselessly as Nale was. Compare Laurin's reaction to Malack's death to Tarquin's. While Laurin is distraught and horrified, Tarquin maintains his stoic face. The strongest reaction he shows is irritation. And after he kills Nale Malack is forgotten almost immediately. If he really cared about Malack, I feel like he would have had a stronger reaction.
![]()
He does not 'submit' to Tarquin's control. Miron outright tells Tarquin "go screw" when Tarquin implicitly asks him to go down and assist his troops with the order. Laurin tells him she's not interested as well. What happens then? Tarquin angrily tells them they're being impossible. He only get Miron to help him after he calls in a twelve year old favor and Laurin only agrees when he promises her one.
Malack doesn't 'submit' to Tarquin. Malack is his friend, there's a difference. Can you imagine Jirix ever screaming in Xykon's face how furious he is at him? Can you imagine anyone in camp Xykon using the words "stop flapping your flat tooth mouthed" to him? because Malack did to Tarquin.
Tarquin then apologizes and Malack accepts it before they laugh and joke together. And Tarquin's reaction to Malack's death was to clam up and be silent. For someone like tarquin, that's genuine shock. He then drags Nale aside and asks flat out "the hell is your problem?"
I think one has to massively reach to ever reach the conclusion Malack was submissive to Tarquin. Also, it should be noted that part of the reason for Tarquin losing it is Malack's no longer there to rein him in.
edited 5th Feb '14 7:43:05 PM by Lightysnake
Malack's relationship with Tarquin is combined friendship and convenience. Malack enjoys Tarquin's company (and vice versa), plus he intends to take over Tarquin's empire after his death to create a necrocracy. Tarquin, in turn, is aware of this.
There is genuine camaraderie there and that automatically disqualifies CM status.
edited 5th Feb '14 7:55:13 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!""Tarquin considers Malack a "friend" in the same way Xykon considers Jirix a "friend""
This seems rather inaccurate. Xykon has little to nil interaction with Jirix, and the one time he does something "nice" (telling Redcloak to resurect him), it was solely to rub in Redcloak's face the extent to which he'd screwed up.
I can't really see any similarities there with the Tarquin and Malack relationship.
Now if you are talking about Xykon and Redcloak, that is kind of closer (given that they are occasionally chummy in their interactions). However, Xykon and Redcloak really don't feel any affection/friendship toward each other. They get along because they have mutual goals (sort of) and are thus kind of stuck in each other's company, but Redcloak loathes Xykon, and it is ambiguous to what extent Xykon knows Redcloak is traitorous and is screwing with him.
edited 5th Feb '14 8:02:20 PM by Hodor
Edit, edit, edit, edit the wikiGood to know that you see where we're coming from with Almeida, Lighty.
Alright, so that means Almeida is now pretty much confirmed to being in the Complete Monster category right?
edited 5th Feb '14 8:26:53 PM by SpaceCowboy
@21515: Question about Koakuma and Reisen II. You say that they disregard everyone except Patchouli for the sake of her ambition. Does that mean they care about Patchouli? Is the ambition they're helping their own or Patchouli's? In that case, does that mean they're committing all these crimes for Patchouli? Or am I misreading this?
@21516: Fletcher seems serious and sadistic enough to count for a oneshot villain. From the sounds of it, it sounds like he kills two people and attempts to kill two more just because he enjoys it. In fact, it sounds like he goes out of his way to involve more people than necessary, just so he can kill them. I'll vote yes on him.
@21530: Cut them both. I'd like more info on the director before voting yay. For one, I'd like to know if what his name is, how much we see of him, and if he promotes the torture of patients.
@21537: Agree with Findthee Swing counting but cutting Carcer. For Swing, does he really personally come in to torture the guy tied to the chair? I remember that the last we see of him, his headquarters is on fire and he personally kills his Torture Technician rather than save his life. Then he engages Vimes in the fight to the death.
@21554: Both of those sound like they count.
@21556: So long as the memories really detail what's actually happened, I'd be alright with including Almeida.
@21557: According to the page, the reason the killer's... well, killing, is because he's frustrated that his 8-year-old daughter is dying and taking his anger out on women... for some reason. Anyway, looks like he has a loved one so I'd say cut him.
@21563: I'm going to agree with Camberf. Your write-up is really good, but I'm not sure she meets the baseline heinous standard. I'm going to have to vote no.
@21572: While I believe Tarquin is definitely heinous enough, his camaraderie with Malack, and the fact that he held off on killing Nale for so long (I mean seriously, what else was he supposed to do after Nale tried to kill him earlier, murdered his best friend and showed no inclination that he was ever going to not oppose his father?), I'd say he does have barely have some redeeming qualities. So no, he doesn't count.
Sorry for the doublepost, I had a lengthy proposal and I didn't want to clog up my former post.
The talk about Fletcher Nix from Justified reminded me of another oneshot villain I had been considering from The Mentalist. A guy by the name of Cale Sylvan.
Who is Cale Sylvan?
Cale Sylvan appears in the second season episode "Blood Money", and distinguishes himself as a sociopath and a serial killer that just enjoys killing people. He makes his living as a hitman because, in the words of Jane, "If you love what you do, you never work a day in your life."
What has Cale Sylvan done?
Already connected by the police with the "mysterious" deaths of seven people (drowning, hit-and-run, etc.), his most recent victim is a DA, Kelly Flower. Sylvan breaks into her home and murders her, but not before videotaping her begging for her life to keep as a trophy. When Jane assesses he’s a sociopath, the CBI arrange a sting operation and send Agent Van Pelt to act as a buyer interested in procuring his services. Once he agrees to kill her target and shows her the video of him killing Kelly as proof that he can do it, he’s quickly arrested. Yet through the magic of Hollywood Law he gets released. The CBI find him at his Murder House. Inside he’s watching tv, laughing and drinking, and as he’s doing so a man is duct-taped to a table in the kitchen, gagged and screaming for his life. Eventually Sylvan gets up and plans to start cutting the guy up before the police arrest him. Before Sylvan can give any information on who hired him to kill Ms. Flower, he’s sniped from far away. Following his death, we see the CBI excavating his house where eight bodies have already been discovered in the front yard alone.
Is he heinous by the standards of the series?
Yep. Sylvan is a Serial Killer who murdered one woman onscreen, attempted to murder another man, and killed fifteen people in the past (eight bodies of which were discovered at his Murder House). As I’ve said before, most murderers in the show are usually people who’ve either killed because their emotions got the better of them, or killed out of either greed or self-preservation (ie, trying to avoid going to jail). Sylvan is simply a Psycho for Hire who kills because he enjoys it. Also, most of the other killers on the show only have one or two victims while Sylvan has a double-digit body count. It’s especially impressive considering he doesn’t have the resources of Tommy Volker or Red John. He doesn’t have the kinds of connections a Corrupt Corporate Executive or Diabolical Mastermind heading a vast criminal conspiracy would have. In fact, he’s not affiliated with Red John at all. Sylvan's just one man operating alone.
Does he have a Freudian Excuse or any redeeming qualities?
Nope... don’t really have anything else to say. He’s one of the few oneshot characters in the show displayed as nothing more than a sociopath who just likes killing.
Conclusion?
Overall, I'd say yes. He's fairly unique in being on the only Psychos for Hire in the show, and he makes the most of his screentime. He only appears in one episode, doesn’t even last until the episode’s end, but still manages to display a surprisingly large body count. He's also pretty sadistic with his onscreen crimes as well. He videotapes Kelly begging for her life for his own enjoyment, and he cracks jokes to the man tied up in the kitchen just before trying to knife him. Can't really think of a reason for him not to qualify.
Thoughts from anyone else?
edited 5th Feb '14 8:21:59 PM by OccasionalExister

The World Ends With You:
edited 5th Feb '14 5:36:47 PM by BigglesTh9