Discussion Characters / RWBYSalemsFaction

Salem doesn't have any confirmed second-in-command. She just has a bunch of lieutenants whom she uses and discards as she sees fit.

She even Tyrian is just another disposable underling despite his loyalty.

If it happens, we can. It hasn't happened yet, however.

Hypocrite requires the narrative to tell us a character is being hypocritical. It may not need another character to openly say the words, but the narrative needs to clearly be using some method to make it clear the character is one. The narrative never portrays Watts as a hypocrite for calling Cinder out on her failures.

Also, some of the tropes on this page such as Entitled Bastard, Never My Fault and Revenge Myopia are sub-tropes of Hypocrite which are already listed, so listing the Super-Trope as well is not allowed. crazysamaritan did mention it recently in this ATT.

That's not what Unwitting Pawn is for. The trope is for someone who accidentally furthers a villain's plans. Watts' fate had nothing to do with furthering Cinder's goals. It was just a petty act of revenge.

I was just asking that’s all. Besides I always as before adding the trope in.

That trope is about evil welcoming defectors regardless of the trouble it brings their side. There's only one potential case we know of for Salem, and he's not so much a defector as forced into being a mole. He's a Trapped in Villainy and Regretful Traitor example, as a result. I'm not sure a villain forcing someone to work for them is the same thing.

I've asked on the Is This An Example? thread here.

Pretty sure Watts counts too. The guy was a part of the Atlas research team dedicated towards peace and his major motivation is the destruction of the institution he was with.

We don't know the circumstances of his recruitment by Salem. We know he hated Ironwood, was jealous of Pietro, and faked his death. We have no idea how his association Salem factors in — was it before or after he faked his death? Did he fake his death to join Salem, or did he fake his death to pursue his revenge and it's only later on that he encountered Salem and joined her cause?

We have no way of knowing if Watts is an example.

Defection and betrayal aren't constrained by time. Even if a decade passed and he laid low, he was still on one side and turned to those he tried to create devices to stop in a ploy to destroy those he was once aligned with.

The issue isn't time, it's whether the trope is in play or not, and we don't know if it is.

The Is This An Example? thread suggests that Evil Welcomes Defectors does not cover characters who are forced to work for a villain, so what Salem did to Leo won't be the trope. So, there's no way to confirm the trope is in play for anyone else. Not at current, anyway.

Probably because, at the time, her "breakout" was based on Death Battle, so being a breakout based on villainy was a bit too vague, and Breakout Character made more sense at the time.

Now we have the novel, where she's co-protagonist with Roman, it's definitely worth revisiting that. My suggestion would be to do an update, removing BC and replacing it with a BV entry that's been written specifically for the replacement trope.

Do you mean based that Blaz Blue crossover? She wasn't on Death Battle.

Anyway I'll give it a rewrite

Okay how about this

• Breakout Villain: Neo was originally designed off of a genderbent cosplay of Roman and was just Roman's sidekick. However her design and the Curb-Stomp Battle she delivered to Yang quickly made her very popular in the fandom. After disappearing for several volumes she returned with a larger role in the story and appearing in BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle as the only character on on Team RWBY to appear, as well as being the protagonist of her own expanded universe novel.

Yeah, Blaz Blue crossover is what I meant, thanks.

That rewrite seems fine to me.

If that's the case, the Achilles' Heel entry should have been deleted much sooner, as it was there for, what from what I can see, years despite the trope being a physical weakness and not exploiting someone's non-physical flaws. Likewise, Flaw Exploitation should also be removed, as if it's not exposing a flaw as much as it seems like unexpected circumstances happen to her, so it wouldn't be applicable. I agree my wording was not the best, but it seems that neo's folder needed a bit of touching up

There's quite a lot that does. There's actually a RWBY clean-up thread over in Short-Term Projects for anyone who wants to clean anything up.

No, the trope is for Hulk expies, and provides a bullet point list of different ways in which that expy can function. Almost all of the suggestions are inappropriate to Hazel. He is not an expy of the Hulk, and has only superficial overlaps with him at best.

I think the general consensus before the subject veered of topic was 'Yes she fits'.

Edited: misunderstood your post. I didn't realise you were talking about the forum.

We're not having a discussion right now. We're discussing whether we've got enough information yet to have the discussion.

The previous discussion proposed waiting until the end of Volume 8.

Since Volume 8 has ended, new discussion begun here.

The only subordinates who carry reputations among the heroes for being killers are Cinder and Tyrian.

To clarify, Kick the Dog is when a villain goes out of their way to hurt someone/something just because they can. Not because it serves them.

So yes, its a Kick the Dog? Thought so, wanted a 2nd opinion first

The purpose of the trope is to make sure the audience isn't feeling too sympathetic towards the character, so they make them do something pointlessly evil to emphasise that the character isn't a good person. That isn't what's happening here.

He doesn't say it in so many words, but he basically indicates that his thinking is that if they get Penny to open the Vault then self-destruct, the Winter Maiden's power will disappear from their list of problems because their enemies won't have access to it any more and so won't be able to continuing using it against them. The fact that it also gives him revenge against both Ironwood and Pietro in the process is the icing on the cake. As far as he's concerned, it's win-win for both him and Salem. That's why Cinder flips out — because it's not a win for her, prompting him to point out that he doesn't work for her.

We already know from Volume 5 that Watts' understanding of the Maidens is that they're nothing more than a means to an end for Salem — she's only interested in them for the purpose of gaining access to the Vault; after that, they are of no further use to her. So, his decision to kill the Winter Maiden so her powers go somewhere else and stop being an immediate problem for them right after opening the Vault fits in with his Volume 5 claim. He doesn't care about Cinder's desires, he's only interested in his own desires and Salem's.

It's not Kick the Dog, but it may be an example of Evil Is Petty wrapped up in a disguise of pragmatism.

Psychic-Assisted Suicide won't apply because he sarcastically points out he can't telekinetically make Penny do whatever he wants, which pretty much rules out trying to fit him into a mystic-based trope. He implanted a virus in her. So it's computer code that is trying to make her self-terminate. I'm sure there's a trope that'll fit this somewhere. I'm not sure off the top of my head which trope that would be beyond Murder by Suicide. It might be worth asking if there is anything that covers a sentient Robot Girl being hacked with a virus that tries to make her kill herself. It's like there needs to be a Hacker Assisted Suicide sister trope to Psychic-Assisted Suicide.

As what Fighteer pointed out here a few years ago:

However, since Watts's actions in making Penny kill herself did have some meaning behind them, that example doesn’t count after all.

I felt "Excuse Is No Excuse" would be a better name for this as the concept can be and oft is applied to other excuses like Cynicism Catalyst. Thoughts on that?

For now, it seems like its used for all excuses not just childhood, not sure if Tropes Are Flexible or shoehorning.

That would be hypocrite misuse. It doesn't matter what we, the audience, think. The trope has to be handled in-universe. Nothing in the narrative or other characters dialogue allows his speech to be troped as hypocrite, he's therefore not Hypocrite Has a Point either.

I'm not sure that's what was going on. We have to remember that he was facing his death right there and then. If you notice, when he decided to rant back he deliberately took his hands off her, so that the only thing stopping him from falling was her.

I think he completely believed he was going to die, so he decided to make sure he told her exactly what he thought of her before he died. Then she dumped him back on the roof instead of dropping him — he was a little surprised initially, and then slumped with relief. That's not Bullying the Dragon — that's trying to get the last word before you're killed, which is probably Defiant to the End, or something similar.

One thing that might be relevant is an in-universe case of Hope Spot, possibly? He thought he was going to die, so let rip. To his surprise, she didn't kill him and instead took on board what he said. What he didn't know was that she'd just delayed killing him until after she had used him. So... possibly a Hope Spot because his life wasn't spared, it was just that his death was delayed — and, this time, her method was much worse than the one she'd almost used previously (burning him alive as the city falls).

I wouldn't say she killed off Watts to cover her tracks to Salem. Just say "but also kill off Watts". We're guessing about her motive for killing Watts. It could be to cover her tracks, or to get revenge for his rant, or a mixture of both (knowing her, it's probably both), but we're just guessing. You don't need that to make your point, so I'd just leave it out.

I think we can wait until details are confirmed by the DVD Commentary or one of the CRWBY members.

Would it be alright if I added the entry with the edit, then we can change it accordingly once they confirm the exact reason?

Agreed, add it and then we won't forget to put it back, maybe add an invisible (2 percent signs) note to edit later?

Don't add it commented out. Add it with the edit. Entries get updated all the time when more accurate information comes out later, so just edit later on when we know more.

To reiterate, the Karmic Death description is "No matter how evil the villains are, the good guys can't just kill them: heroes are supposed to be better than that... So, the writers arrange for the villain to die in a manner that is completely his own fault. Or, at least, obviously not the hero's."

However, given that we can only speculate what Cinder did to Watts at this point, maybe the upcoming DVD Commentary for the Volume 8 Blu-ray release might shed some light on the situation.

It's more that we're speculating her motive that's the issue.

It might be worth asking on the Is This An Example? thread. You'll probably get more responses.

We have a couple of sandboxes up in the air about revamping the page. I think we're just trying to build a consensus on the layout on the RWBY Forum, if you (or anyone else, for that matter) want to join in with thoughts about layout, feel free.

RWBY Forum thread with Current Sandboxes

That's not what it looked like to me. He stopped struggling and deliberately released his hold, letting her drop him if she chose. It looked like he'd accepted that there was nothing he could do to stop her killing him, so he was going to tell her exactly what he thought of her while he still had the chance. When she reels him back in and drops him off the rooftop he slumps and groans with relief, indicating that he really did think he was a goner.

His downfall appears to have been that he appears to have not expected Cinder to betray him on a mission they were working together on.

Other people may want to weigh in on this, but that's my take on his behaviour

Ignore me, that was a discussion about Cinder and Freudian Excuse.

Yes, I think you're right. Yang does appear to be trying to deconstruct Freudian Excuse. The key here, however, is that Yang thinks that Salem is engaging in all this death and destruction because something bad happened to her once, but Hazel and Emerald have just found out that Salem's actual reason is apparently because she's trying to trigger her immortality's Curse Escape Clause. So, while Yang is deconstructing Freudian Excuse, it hasn't occurred to her that Salem might be motivated by more than one excuse.

We have no way to compare Hazel's relationship with Emerald to a relationship we've never seen and know barely anything about.

All we can say is that he's protective of Emerald and trope that relationship in its own right.

I've raised the question on the RWBY forum thread to see if people want to discuss reorganising the page, especially regarding the Hound. It was originally on the Grimm page (under the Unusual Grimm section). A single troper decided to move it to Salem's inner circle without seeking any kind of consensus for the move. So, whether it should be on the page at all is debatable.

The post is here.

If the embedded link doesn't work, copy and paste the following:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13639868050A17401700&page=2800#comment-69996

But what about Mercury He should be on Salem’s inner circle now that he no longer works for Cinder.

No, I think that trope is about how things seem to inevitably end up that way. Salem's convinced her subordinates she's out to create a new world order, but we don't know the exact form that will take, only that it won't involve the current structures. We can guess from what Mercury said in V6 that it'll probably be based on what her plan was during Jinn's flashback and which made Ozma turn against her (so she's the dark queen of a single, global 'kingdom' (cue preferred term here)).

This is more like a 'Fake Motive' trope.

That's a good question, actually. I think, given the current headers we have on the page, the answer has to be yes. The big 'but' you can probably feel coming is that I'm wondering if that potentially turns the folder itself into a spoiler by virtue of its location on the page.

Given that we're now in Volume 8, and very far removed from the Beacon Arc, I'm wondering if the headers themselves are the problem, especially given that someone has moved The Hound to this page without discussion, which really affects the layout of the page in terms of Salem's circle — the Hound is closer to her than what's currently defined as the 'inner circle', for instance while Cinder can't really be called 'inner circle' right now considering how dicey her situation is.

What page The Hound belongs on is a separate discussion, but I'm wondering if it should be split into 'Recruited by Salem' and 'Recruited by Cinder', that protects changes in who takes orders from whom, into a statement of how they entered Salem's employ in the first place. (I'd envisage The Hound being isolated from both groups and placed directly underneath Salem, since it's... different.)

That's just a thought though. I feel like the page needs a bit of a reorganisation.

I mean, we already have at the top of the page a warning that spoilers for the first seven volumes are unmarked, have Ilia listed with the former members of the White Fang on their page, and have Qrow shown on the Friends and Allies page despite being this mysterious character in the initial two volumes.

Trying to be conscious of people who haven't watched the series yet is kind of a moot point since they are already going onto a page with unmarked spoilers for most of the series with tropes that by their very nature spoil details of the series. Salem's existence in itself is a spoiler for the end of Volume 3.

It's probably better to trope based on what the current status quo is rather than by what the original status quo was. If need be, instead of calling it Salem's "Inner Circle", change it to Salem's "Enforcers", move Tock into it, and keep the section for the other's as "Cinder's Subordinates".

Well, I was just thinking that the folders act as a line of defence for people who end up on the page by accident. The warnings there and all these closed folders. I'm not going to object to moving the folder on those grounds, I just thought it would be fair to mention it.

I'd leave Tock in a separate section since we don't know (from the show itself) how she fitted into Salem's way of doing things back when she was alive, but I do think 'Past Members' should be changed to 'Other Members'. Again, though, it's not something I'm going to debate if people disagree with that.

I'd say that if no-one has any objections, you may as well move the folder. The question will then be what to do with the Hound. That was moved from the Grimm page to this one without discussion or edit reason. The question is, does the Hound stay put (Inner Circle section), get moved to another location on this page (such as placing it under Salem's folder, before the Inner Circle section), or does it get moved back to the Grimm page?

It may be intelligent but Salem is very obviously treating it as a pet, at least for now, so I'm really not sure it belongs on this page. At the same time, it's very different to the other Grimm in terms of intelligence and speech, so I can see the argument for treating it more like a character than a Grimm.

Wyldchyld already discussed that, with the hierarchy of Salem's faction such as it is, no one individual qualifies as The Dragon. All of Salem's main operatives have skills and assets that make them equally useful to her plans.

I know that, but I’m asking if they’re being set up as one or perhaps in the future of the series she has a secret dragon and that her followers don’t know about it. Salem will only use that secret dragon as a trump card in the final battle theoretically speaking of course.

Well, Mercury and Roman have been troped under Badass Normal, so the three characters should probably be treated the same way. That said, I'm not sure they should be because they all have Aura. And we know that ordinary humans don't always have an unlocked Aura or know how to use their Aura if it is unlocked. As a result, Aura-using fighters probably are not Badass Normal, even if they've never unlocked their Semblance.

Do you know of a link to the panel the information came from? I know about the information being passed around, I'm just curious about the panel itself.

Sadly it was in the form of a livestream on Rooster Teeth's home website, and there's no way to access it. I myself got the information second-hand from the wiki.

I'd say trope him as Badass Normal for now. It may be that we need to double-check whether Aura-using, but Semblance-lacking characters actually count, but until someone gets around to doing that, it doesn't make sense to exclude Watts when others in the same boat have been troped this way.

I think so.

No, I don't think she would be. If Tragic Villain was a YMMV trope where the audience sympathises with her back-story, I wouldn't say anything, but it's an objective trope. The trope requires the villain to know what they're doing is evil, but they feel they have to do it anyway. We don't actually know right now if Salem regards what she does as evil.

What we do know, however, is that Salem is a Never My Fault character who has only existed for as long as she has because she's refused to accept any part of the blame for ending up in the situation she's in. So far, the implication is that she's only as dangerous to the world as she currently is because she made a choice to be — she wasn't always a threat to the whole of humanity, after all, not even after she fell in the Pools of Grimm. A Tragic Villain has no choice.

So, I'd have to say that she's not the trope.

I think image changes have to be discussed on the Image Pickin' forum.

Motion to change Tyrian's character image to this one? (https://66.media.tumblr.com/ecff35ec85e56fdc60a55652574f2ac7/c3bd48c2737d36e9-83/s500x750/966a4a245f006f6856dfb1185e72f0278e22ad9e.png) I feel it both fits his character and doesn't borrow too much from the wiki. Plus most of the other faction members plus Salem's image have been updated to their post Volume 4 look, so I feel that it makes sense. What do you all think?

No, Salem doesn't have a 'second-in-command'. She just has a group of key subordinates. Cinder is The Heavy instead.

But you think she might have one in the future?

It doesn't look like it at the moment, but who knows? None of know what will happen in the story's future.

I feel like Cinder is being built up as one for Salem. We will see when vol 8 or future volumes come out.

I think the 'Past Members' title is poorly named. Tock's there because she's an historical character who died long before the show's first episode. She was originally in the 'historical' section of the World of Remnant page got put in that section because we have no idea how she fits into Salem's hierarchy (due to having been dead for decades and only introduced to us in a short flashback).

The section is really an 'Other Members' section rather than a 'dead characters' section. It should probably be renamed.

I'm also leery about a folder's location spoiling something for anyone new solely because of formatting. At the moment, they have to actually open his folder and actively read it to find out what happened to him. If his folder is moved, that tells anyone who so much as glances at the page. (It's another reason why I think the 'Past Members' title isn't a good one.)

That's just my thoughts on the matter, however. It'll be interesting to see what other people think.

Salem's group isn't really cohesive for tropes to apply universally to that group. When something does apply 'across the group' it's usually because Salem is imposing her will and her rules on the rest of them, and that's almost always a Salem-specific trope, not a group trope.

Not every Character Page will have 'In General' folders, it's not always relevant.

She does have a substantial amount of tropes to her name, and she’s pretty big character to the show overall. Personally I think it’s a good idea, but I’d leave that up to the admins since I don’t know what qualifies for getting an individual page.

I've just removed an awful lot of trope misuse from her section, and that was just with a casual flick through her folder. I'm therefore wondering how much more misuse is there.

It might be worth asking on the RWBY forum, too. When it comes to page reorganisations, I've found that's the best place to get enough responses to build a consensus.

Fair enough, and where would I find the forum page?

Nevermind, I seem to have found it.

Fria wouldn't count. The trope only applies where the audience knows how badass the character is, but another character underestimates them. Fria is on her death bed, she's set up to both the characters and the audience to be vulnerable due to how close to death she is; her dying burst of power is therefore supposed to take everyone by surprise. Everyone in-universe was taken aback by her power, not just Cinder.

She only underestimated Raven until she learned Raven was the Spring Maiden. That's again a reveal for both Cinder and the audience, so that's not this trope. Since Beacon, Cinder hasn't underestimated Ruby's eyes (she's clearly afraid of them), so that doesn't count either.

Okay. Wanted to avoid trope misuse. Thank you!

Okay, a new thing I thought of adding but want to double check, this time under Cinder's Hypocrite trope. She admonishes Neo for wanting to take down Ruby, telling her that she's only allowed to get what she wants after they get what Cinder need. But then Cinder dumps the Lamp hunting responsibilities on Neo so she can get the Winter Maiden's powers, which aren't essential to winning back Salem's good graces, and something Cinder only wants. Is this justified example?

Hypocrite is an in-universe trope. The story itself needs to make it clear to us that the character is being hypocritcal. It's not something the audience can just decide is in effect.

Besides, it is Cinder's job to gain the Maiden powers for Salem, she just isn't supposed to be scuppering Salem's plans to do it. If there's a way she can get both, Salem isn't going to have a problem with that as far as we know. We already knew that Cinder would likely go after both the Relic and the Maiden because it's what she did in Vale, too. That time they got one of the two (the Maiden power but not the Relic). This time, it was the other way around.

Understood. Thank you.

No. Salem doesn't have a Dragon. Cinder was The Heavy for the first three volumes, but that's as close to a 'Dragon' role as she gets.

Hard to say. Watt and Tyrian work well together and don't constantly throw insults at each other, but I don't really think it qualifies as a friendship. There's a good chance that Tyrian would carve up the good doctor if Salem commanded it. Or just for kicks.

Yeah, the only friendship relationships we've really seen on the villains' side is Mercury and Emerald (which people could debate), and Neo and Roman (which is confirmed). Everyone else is working together for Salem, but it's hard to know if there are any friendships involved.

My other question about the trope would be the way it's description is laid out: it talks only about the Big Bad and The Dragon. The question is whether the trope genuinely covers other types of villain (in which case a description clean-up might be needed) or whether there's some trope decay going on (in which case, Watts and Tyrian wouldn't count even if they were friends).

A lot of Cinder's character traits seem to stem around her mentality and ability to think (her sadism/ego, planning to take down Beacon, sanity slippage and what not). But she’s also seriously unstable and fragile if someone bruises her ego. I feel like it’d be more along the lines of SmugSnake, but I think the two entires should be fused and rewritten, since they both bring up good points that could be compiled in one entry.

I agree with fusing the entries. It's just a question of which trope. :)

We know almost nothing about it. We don't even know for certain that it is a transplant and not the original parasite Grimm (that she used to steal the Maiden power) gradually transforming her body, given that the 'purpose' of the arm appears to be exactly what the parasite Grimm's purpose was (absorbing Maiden powers).

It certainly does look like the Grimm is gradually taking over her body and possibly even her mind (given that her 'starve' speech in V7 has echoes of her V3 flashback episode where she says 'it' burns like hunger, her increasingly extreme desperation to steal Maiden powers may be part of this). We also saw her breathe fire in the final episode of V7 after her arm had regrown, so we may see more solid evidence of what trope is in play in V8.

The question then would be... is it a backfire? It might be for Cinder, but what if it's what Salem intended all along? We'd have at least two tropes at work if that's the case.

We're just speculating right now. We can see something is happening, but it's not yet clear exactly which trope(s) is/are in play.

I understand. I just figured it'd be good to ask just in case future evidence suggests it's that trope. Thank you for the reply.

Plus, it could be both of your suggestions: the Grimm arm could be reacting to the Grimm parasite.

I don't see why not. Go for it.

The 'innocence' to a Psychopathic Manchild isn't a true 'innocence' it's the dissonance between what is associated with a child and what is the reality of a psychopath who meets this trope. All of the Types listed for this trope are covered by this, but they don't all use the word 'innocence'. It might have been easier for me to use 'child-like', perhaps, given that this is a core part of the trope — but 'innocence' is only one of several words they use to describe the dissonance. However, I think that may have caused similar confusion in the edit reason.

That child-like 'innocence' is present in Tyrian in the way he behaves. There's a sort of child-like 'purity' to his behaviour that helps make him as creepy as he is.

Cinder's a different situation. When she falls apart in Volume 7, it's portrayed as desperation and she talks in terms of hunger and starvation. That's a call-back to Volume 3 and her flashback episode where she obtains the first half of the Fall Maiden's powers. She tells someone (almost certainly Salem) that it burns like hunger and that she likes it. The psychopathic part of the trope is definitely there. It's the 'manchild' part that I think is problematic (at least, for now) because of the Volume 7 implications that her Grimm fusion is taking control of her.

It's speculation, so we can't trope it at all.

I'm not sure if she counts but I think that I would be a good idea to go down the list of traits listed on the trope page.

• 1: Possibly. We don't know the specifics behind her getting the others to aid her, Cinder and Hazel were likely promised power and to see Ozpin ruined respectively, Tyrian sees her a savior so no there, Watt's we don't know enough about to say, and Lionheart was intimidated into helping.
• 2: She did rebel against the gods but she wasn't anything angelic or divine at the time, she was a normal human. She could use magic, but was seemingly a power anybody could have at the time.
• 3: It doesn't seem that she acted as The Corruptor to Tyrian or Cinder, we don't know enough about Watts to say anything about him, and Lionheart was intimidated into helping her. She may have manipulated Hazel, since he's the least malevolent out of the group, by promising to ruin Ozpin but we can't say for sure if that's the case. Her plan does hinge on exploiting humanity by making them hate each other so that may count in a sense.
• 4: She was seemingly benevolent when she and Ozma posed as gods so she wasn't a God of Evil then. Tyrian calls her a "divine savior" so he doesn't think she's evil. Either way she isn't a god in the literal sense.
• 5: She commands the Grimm which we're specifically made to destroy things by the god of destruction but they technically aren't demons.
• 6: She doesn't look like the devil.

Thoughts?

I do see the problem that a lot of things about her are related to Satanic imagery, but not quite there: Grimm are monstrous, but technically not demons, she lives in an area of darkness, but it's not exactly fire-and-brimstone, she was originally powerful, but not angelic, though becoming immortal did make her the most powerful being in the world besides the god brothers.

Personally, I think the revelation that she led a rebellion against her creators and got cast down for it makes her qualify, that's arguably the most important aspect of the trope. She's an eternal source of evil that predates the current human species and her presence is the main source of suffering and division in the world, making humans unworthy in the eyes of their gods should Judgement Day arrive.

I'm leaning towards no if only because the trope page is pretty specific about them being angelic or divine when they revolted.

That doesn't seem that critical, as there are examples of normal humans on the trope page. Salem and the first iteration of humans could also be considered "divine" in that they had magical powers bestowed by gods while later humans didn't, in addition to her immortality.

The problem is that she does meet some of the criteria, and the trope unhelpfully indicates that an archetype doesn't have to meet all the criteria while not being at all clear on what ballpark to aim for in meeting enough criteria to count.

One of the biggest issues with Salem is that her very appearance doesn't fit the typical appearance of a Satanic Archetype — but, again, that doesn't seem to be an absolute requirement even though the trope implies that it should be (and even uses an image that further implies that it should be). So, taking papyru's advice and going through each of the traits in turn, I'll comment below.

In short (since the below is quite long): she definitely meets one trait (tempter), she overlaps three other traits which becomes debatable due to possible shoehorning (Bargains with a twist, Fallen Angel, and ruler of demons), and she does not meet the remaining two traits (God of Evil and looking the part).

• A tendency for entering bargains intending to help the other person in the short-term, but screwing them over in the long-term. (Linked tropes: Deal with the Devil, Disproportionate Retribution.)
  • We know Salem has a reputation for killing people she has no further use for (see Leo and Raven). We know she prefers to find a way to make people useful to her instead of defaulting to killing them (see her advice to Cinder). We know she threatens failure or incompetence with death (Hazel, Cinder), but does give the opportunity for second chances (Tyrian, Cinder). We know she helps the people who serve her to achieve their goals — or at least claims to be doing that (Ozma, Cinder, her V6 lecture to Hazel and company).
  • However, what we don't know is how genuine her 'tit-for-tat' actually is, whether the benefits given to these people are only short-term, and whether she plans to screw them over in the long-run.
  • In short: superficially, she appears to meet this option, but only if we make assumptions about future plot. We don't know for certain this trait applies.
• A fallen angel who rebels against the creator's will and may or may not want to supplant them. If angels aren't relevant to the setting, the character is a member of another group who are either divine, otherworldly or just have abilities that others don't. (Linked tropes: Fallen Angel.)
  • Salem's initial quest was to restore the life of her dead lover. How she went about it got her into trouble with the gods, who punished her with immortality. She descended into bitterness and anger, then realised only with hindsight that she'd actually managed to manipulate the gods which meant they were falliable and not all-powerful. That's when she turned against the gods and convinced a portion of humanity to rise up against their creators. She was punished further for this transgression.
  • Her magical abilities were completely ordinary for the human race she was born into. The second form of humanity that now exists is 'broken' and cannot use the gifts the original humans once possessed. So, while Salem's origin does not fit this trait, her current ability set is quite different to modern humans.
  • In short, this is a hard trait to qualify where Salem is concerned, because her transgression against the gods was initially accidental and only became this trope after what she felt (and indeed what a good portion of the fandom has also felt) was a disproportionate punishment for her crime, and her current 'otherworldly' status is something that happened to her rather than being innate to her. I'm therefore not sure if this trait genuinely applies. It feels like a shoehorn at the moment.
• A tempter who guides decent people towards indecent things. (Linked tropes: The Corrupter, Evil Mentor, Toxic Friend Syndrome.)
  • When she decided to form an army against the gods, she went around the kingdoms telling the rulers a lie about how she stole immortality from the gods and making people believe the gods were hoarding this gift from humanity, making humans cruelly suffer the deaths of loved ones instead of being free from death.
  • She encouraged Ozma to become a fake god as a way of achieving the divine mission he'd been given to unite humanity. Ozma went along with it because he was in love with Salem and it meant they'd have a life together, but he became increasingly uncomfortable with it. Salem was fairly honest about the direction in which she wanted to head — take over the world, kill humans who didn't believe they were gods.... and then eventually to wipe out humanity and replace them with their own descendants.
  • While she encourages her modern-day subordinates to follow her to realise their dreams, and tells them they can only achieve their desires through her and no other way, we don't fully understand what the desires of her subordinates are yet, and therefore we don't really understand what they've been promised and what hold she has over them. As a result, we don't know if she has corrupted decent people to do indecent things. The only two people we know were definitely good people guided by her towards terrible things were Ozma (who turned against her before he went too far down the road) and Leo (who had the Fatal Flaw of cowardice, which she was able to manipulate). The only two subordinates we have back story on (Mercury and Emerald) were already morally dubious people before they met Cinder or Salem (Mercury murdered his own father — we don't know why — and became Cinder's hired assassin; Emerald was a thief, who was 'saved' from destitution by Cinder).
  • In short, she definitely meets this trait — how completely, we don't yet know, but this is definitely her main calling card.
• A God of Evil. (Linked tropes: God of Evil.)
  • This trope does not apply to the show at all. No character, not even the God of Darkness, fits this trope.
• A ruler of demons. (Linked tropes: Demon Lords and Archdevils)
  • Salem has obtained the ability to control Grimm, but is not their ruler. A character has, in-universe, described her as their 'master', but this is something she gained by what's happened to her rather it being an innate ability of hers.
• Something that looks the part. (Linked tropes: Big Red Devil.)
  • This trait does not apply, and the trope doesn't apply to any character in the show either.

I say we hold off until we figure out if she meets the first trait or not. I don't feel comfortable listing her as one unless she definitely meets at least 2 completely.

That's fair, I'm okay with keeping it off the page until we learn more.

I do think it's important to note that she's been worshipped as a god before, which is related to #4 even if it's only an act, and the part of #2 about trying to supplant the true gods, since replacing them in Remnant was her explicit intent when Ozma returned. There's also more to the trope than just that list of requirements, such as being physically attractive before being corrupted, being quite literally cast down into darkness, existing before modern humans, and directly opposing the will of the Go L. Lucifer's fall has so many variations and interpretations, there's a lot of parallels to be drawn.

Her point to Ozma when he returned was to suggest stepping into the void. The gods had left the world and she was suggesting humanity's disunity was because the world was godless, something they could fix if they gave humanity 'gods' to believe in. So, she wasn't supplanting the true gods, she stepping into the void they left behind. There's also ambiguity here as to whether or not she was genuinely trying to help Ozma achieve his desire of uniting humanity as opposed to manipulating for nefarious purposes.

There's a lot we don't know about Salem's motives.

Satanic Archetype was added yet again, reviving this discussion.

• Satanic Archetype: An ancient being created by the gods who valued personal freedom over obedience, used deception to get her way and was punished by the gods for her treachery, only to turn to manipulating humans and corrupting them as an act of defiance against the gods. In present day she seeks to destroy humanity's hope and provoke conflict (i.e. "sin") to force the gods to destroy their own creation.

An edit by ElementalMacaroon, who then re-added it after deletion and triggered an Edit War.

Keep it off the page. Until Salem's true plans come to light and the motivations of her inner circle actually become known, she isn't able to fulfill the criteria without guesswork as Wyldchyld pointed out.

Hi everyone, it looks like other people have already addressed the points that I meant to make. However, I thought I should drop in and apologize for my behavior earlier. I have reviewed the site policy and now realize that I should handle situations like this though discussion, not by editing and tacking on an explanation in the "editing reason" field.

I have to admit that I did forget about this discussion, otherwise I would have referenced that in my edit reason.

I will just point out this: when I said that the latest entry was misleading because (among other things) Salem wasn't created by the gods, I was talking about the villain role she plays in the story. I did expect the reaction to be 'but the gods created humanity', but that's not the point that's relevant to the trope, and it's not the reason why the entry is so misleadingly written. All of humanity was created by the gods, but Salem's role as the story's primary villain has been shaped by her personal choices in life.

Other reasons why the entry is misleading: the show hasn't claimed 'obedience' is a thing, it only stated that her conflict with the gods began because she defied a rule that even the gods are supposed to obey; she wasn't punished for 'treachery', she was punished for arrogance and refusal to understand the importance of life and death (there are two ways her immortality can end; the second is based on gaining this understanding); the entry claims we know her end-game — we don't. The original entry was by far the more accurate summary of Salem's history and role in the show.

Now, there are a couple of hints that the gods may have some kind of hidden agenda that has made pawns of both Salem and Ozma (and there's certainly significant parts of the fandom that believe the gods will be the true final villains in some way), but we can only trope on the basis of what the show has currently shown us, and not on what we speculate (for example, the theory that her true end-game is to bring about the first method by which her immortality can end). There's still an awful lot we don't know about Salem and her situation (including why the 'no resurrection' rule exists in the first place). If there's one thing that was absolutely clear from Jinn's story, it's that Jinn did not tell us the whole story.

Someone added this trope yet again, but it was a borderline Zero-Context Example that relied heavily on things not required by the trope (wearing black and controlling the Grimm).

There's been no new information about Salem since this discussion in December 2018, so I've removed the entry and referred back to this discussion in the edit reason. It's worth noting that the original entry from December 2018 remains the best write-up we've had to date, it's just the level of Speculative Troping about her and her subordinates that is the big problem for now.

• Satanic Archetype: It's a little subtle; She rebelled and attempted to deceive the Gods, and was then cursed with immortality. Her color motif is black and can command the Creatures of Grimm, while also possessing dark powers.

You provided a source that was both recent and official. The person who changed it back cited something from many years ago. As far as I'm concerned, your source is the one we should go with. I fine with her name being listed as Neo Politan.

Agreed. Newer sources trump older ones.

The only official canon source is Chibi (1 word). In addition to the already-cited Monty's Facebook: The Rooster Teeth store and Combat Ready (which, by the way, released after AA if you're going by the "newest source" rule) also have it as one word.

I have reverted to Neopolitan on those grounds.

(Just wait for her to release in BBTAG, then this argument will become MUCH worse...)

^ As two otherwise identical versions of the BBTAG trailer were released (one with it spelled each way), its can't be used as evidence. This leaves us deferring to either the store or Combat Ready.

If you want to make a change that's already been discussed on the discussion page, it's better to bring it up here than revert a consensus change unilaterally.

All first-party sources use Neopolitan. Her name is Neopolitan. It's that simple.

If it was really that simple, then there wouldn't be a recent edit war in the history regarding the subject. I personally don't care which one is actually used.

As it stands, the current version - which lists both spellings - is probably the best compromise for both sides of the argument.

A bit late to the party, but after Neo debuted in Amity Arena, the CRWBY revealed that Politan is actually her surname. Therefore, it should be changed to Neo Politan.

That source is what was being debated. Anyway, they seem to have found a compromise, so that seems the best way forward.

^^ The "Politan is her surname" claim does not come from CRWBY.

We're very close to a resolution anyway; ten days from now, we're guaranteed an answer.

Per the companion book, it is in fact Neopolitan as I've been saying all along.

It's not her Semblance. Watch the scene again, then look closely at her arm when she raises it to create the obsidian glass. It's glowing, or more specifically, her clothing is glowing. Cinder was using Dust infused Clothing, and has done so before. Go back to Volume 2 and watch her fight with Ruby, and you'll notice her legs from the knee down and her right forearm are both glowing red, or even further back to the very first episode, when Cinder was fighting Glynda and Ruby, something other than her eye was glowing, and it was the patterns on her clothes. All her clothes have Orange/Fire dust sewn into them, and we even see her sewing her own clothes after Mercury fought Pyrrha. Ironwood and Ruby are even used by the writers to tell us that it is not her semblance, as Ruby says she doesn't think it was, and then Ironwood says it was likely Dust Infused Clothing.

What she's doing is just super heating the dirt and sand to create Glass, best evident during her fight with Ruby at Beacon Tower, where she pulls out a canister and sprays it out, only to then have it materialize as Glass. Glass is typically made by super heating small sediments like sand or limestone after putting them in a mold, she's doing the same, just without the mold.

Even if its just her using Dust, which I'm not entirely convinced of, it's still earth and rock manipulation, and something no one else seems to be doing, which is distinct enough that it would fit under Dishing Out Dirt.

At the very least, her tendency to melt and reshape glass would count as that sort of power.

I don't mind the entry of Dishing Out Dirt, I just mind it being mistakenly labeled as her Semblance. I got into a lot of heat with several other fans over mistaking it for her Semblance, and I'm eager to not repeat that mistake. As such, until its officially confirmed to be her semblance, it should be treated as speculatory.

If anything, it should be treated similarly to Qrow's Bird Transformation. When he first did it, everyone and their mother assumed it was his Semblance, but then it was revealed his Semblance was Bad Luck and the Bird Transformation was something else, and everyone looked foolish. So even if it looks like a Semblance, unless its confirmed, it will not be treated as such.

I've got no problem with there being a Dishing Out Dirt entry, and with that entry describing what she does without referring to Semblances.

It seems like a fair solution for now until we learn more.

Sounds good. I'll do a rewrite.

How's this?

• Dishing Out Dirt: Cinder has demonstrated the ability to shape and forge molten sand and dirt into glass weapons and telekinetically manipulate glass projectiles. During her fight with Amber in Volume 3, she turned molten dirt into obsidian projectiles, and in several other scenes she is shown shaping glass into swords, a bow and arrows, a spear, and a knife. Most of the time these glass objects are molten in some manner, with Cinder heating and melting and then reshaping them into a new weapon, although she is also shown breaking solid glass apart and reshaping it, such as when shatters an arrow mid-flight to avoid Pyrrha's shield and reforges it with no loss of momentum.

I agree that it should be listed on the page, but calling it her semblance would not be right. The writers have never confirmed that to be true and Ironwood even said that such a thing can be accomplished using Dust. Obviously there must have been a misunderstanding but Cinder's semblance has not been revealed, at least not yet. If we wait long enough though I do believe that we will eventually learn what it is.

Since no one seems to have an issue with the example as written, I'll go ahead and add it back.

I don't have a problem with it.

Her Layer is also a dark Purple crystal, with whitish bone chairs, so Dark Is Evil could be used too.

That appears to be an unknown Dust type as it exists in the ground in the landscape around. As far as we know, Dust is neither good nor evil. And, for now, the darkest crystal we've seen has been associated with Mistral (the floating islands of Lake Matsu) and Weiss (Black = Gravity Dust). So, again, dark crystals aren't associated solely with villainy.

Evli Makes You Monstous is appropriate in this particular case when you consider the fact she could have gotten Atlas tech arms and become a Cyborg like Yang, Mercury, and General Ironwood, instead she chose the arm of a monster.

I wouldn't call it a Badass Transplant because it gives her both a pro and a con at the same time, so it's not significantly more badass than the rest of her.

I could have sworn there was some kind of 'monster limb' trope somewhere that deals with limbs that aren't artificial or human, but which are 'other'. I can't find anything though.

I would say we shouldn't necessarily assume it's a transplant, however. We don't know that it was for certain as opposed to the Grimm inside her creating and growing it.

She'd need to be openly mistreating all her subordinates, and we haven't seen her do that. In fact, the only one we've seen her mistreat has been Leo, and we know he's only an ally through fear coercion, so this exception makes sense for the image she appears to portray in-universe. She doesn't fit the trope for now.

But Salem's Kill all Humans' trope says that once someone is no longer useful to her, she kills them. That's a Bad Boss

Most of what people have been referring to have been people who don't really classify as people she's the boss of. While the fans naturally assume that her subordinates are included in the clause, the subordinates don't act like they think they are, so we have to wait and see if we're proven right in the long run. For now, she appears to have set relationships with each subordinate that doesn't amount to this trope.

Good Scars, Evil Scars would probably work. Cinder's scars have been designed to mar her appearance, they're not being played for attractiveness, and have now been used as a trigger for some of her most For the Evulz behaviour to date, given how she reacted to Jaune nicking the mask.

I'd hold off on Scars Are Forever, however. She hasn't had them long enough, we don't know where the creators are going with those scars.

Agreed. The example needs to show examples of people truly fearing her. So far, only Raven and Leo are scared of her. The Dreaded is feared by everyone.

Okay. I forgot this thread. I was re-reading the trope earlier. The sheer size and scale of the trope, and the fact it has to apply to the single entity that is far beyond any other threat level in the story, means the only possible contender for the trope is Salem. I've therefore scrubbed all the other examples that were dotted around - Yang (to the nightclub), Qrow (to Mercury & co), Raven (to Neo), several individual Grimm for individual scenes (the Seers, the Nuckelavee, the Dragon, etc.), and so on. They all have examples that are extremely localised or limited in effect, or are different tropes entirely.

I rewrote the entry on the trope page before I remembered this discussion. The rewrite is as follows. My question is, is this enough, or should we hold off for a while longer?

• The Dreaded: Salem is a dark and dangerous humanoid who possesses mastery over the Grimm, monsters that are instinctively attracted to negative emotions such as fear, panic, hate and grief, and which are attempting to hunt humanity into extinction. Although the Grimm dominate the world, her existence is not public knowledge. Her arch-enemy, Ozpin, is so convinced the world will descend into panic and chaos - empowering the Grimm and therefore Salem - if they knew, that he has created a global conspiracy network that functions at the highest echelons of power, to both search for a way to defeat her and prevent her existence from being public knowledge. Of those that know, Qrow describes her creations as fear itself, Ironwood is obsessively building an army he hopes can obliterate her, and Raven has abandoned Ozpin's cause to disappear into the wilds of Anima because she's so convinced Salem is unstoppable. Leo, Haven Academy's headmaster and Ozpin's oldest ally, is so terrified of Salem that she is able to secretly turn him into a mole for her side simply by implying the continued existence of Haven and Mistral depends on his co-operation.

When was is it revealed that Sacrifice was Cinder's theme? The troper said it was in episode 7 of this volume, but nothing in that episode suggests that. Cinder had only a screentime of a few seconds. Hardly enough time to confirm that. Even the wiki doesn't mention any kind of confirmation regarding the song. If anything the last few episodes suggest that it may have been Raven's theme.

It is a major revelation because the song indicates that Cinder's motives are overthrowing Ozpin due to viewing him as tyrannical. This is much more understandable than the common fan representation of Cinder as "just wanting power" (something which doesn't match her actions in V3 where she did everything she could to make Ozpin and Ironwood look bad to the public and destroy their order)

Yes, Divide also calls him out, but that's because Salem has the same good intentions of overthrowing Ozpin for his crimes. People don't want to accept this because "she looks spooky and uses Grimm as part of her plan", and because her plan involves dividing everyone in order to defeat Ozpin. A lot of fans think she's an Omnicidal Maniac or something simply because of aesthetics and her use of Grimm, while how she treats her human allies and the fact she has gone out of her way to prevent unnecessary deaths easily show that she isn't some sort of black-hearted monster. If you listen to the directors' commentary, Miles and Kerry talk about how people expected her to be a psychotic genocidal maniac, but that this wasn't their intention, and their goal was to portray her as morally gray, caring, and motherly towards her allies.

It's not a "theory", it's outright confirmed. You are simply in denial.

The Raven thing is complete fanon. The song plays during Cinder's re-entrance scene (12:40 is the timestamp in the episode), not any of Raven's scenes. In fact, it makes very, very little sense for it to be Raven's. Raven doesn't have major ethical issues with Ozpin like Cinder (Sacrifice's singer) does, she just cares that Oz chose her for his war when she didn't intend to fight in it. The song's singer was also "born an angel, heaven sent" and says they fell from grace, something that doesn't fit Raven at all (Raven joined Beacon seeking to become a better bandit, and never once deviated from that path according to her).

The only reason people believe this is because of the fandom bias against Cinder (a lot of people hate her and refuse to take even close to a deeper look at her) and because a popular youtuber endorsed the fanon idea. If you look at his comment section, tons of people debunked it. Funny enough, the same youtuber made a video about Divide where he talks about how Salem/Cinder are the ones in the right and Ozpin the one in the wrong.

As for the RWBY Wikia, that's because it's run by an admin team with a massive bias against Cinder and Salem who refuse to even consider the image songs despite both Miles and Jeff confirming it contains canon information. Said admin team have actually followed me to other wikis which they don't run to vandalize information about Cinder which I put on them. They also wish to push their own headcanons about Salem being an Omnicidal Maniac based on a single line from Raven (IE not the most reliable source) which refers to her wanting to divide people.

So, at best the song describes her motive. The existence of a motive does not justify anything, show good intentions, or create an anti-hero.

Motives are what make someone a Well-Intentioned Extremist, which is what Cinder is.

"It doesn't show good intentions"

Do you even know what intentions are? They're your goals. That's what motives are. Your reasoning for doing something is your motives. Motive = intentions.

Get your head out of the sand.

No. There is a difference between having intentions and being well-intentioned. There is no Villain Has a Point here, only a vendetta against Ozpin that may or may not be justified. Getting rid of Ozpin makes the world a better place for her in the same way a successful heist makes the world a better place for the thief.

...but her reasons for overthrowing Ozpin are that she views him as tyrannical and hates how he censors human history, lies to the people, and sets up a system which leads people to their deaths for a cause they don't even understand. These are ethical issues. She is fighting because she believes what she's doing is the right thing.

You're clearly trying to work backwards to justify what you already believe here.

Yes, but (assuming that the song is Cinder talking to Ozpin, which I do believe) nothing in the song says that removing Ozpin would be for the good of humanity. It would just be for the good of her, for the reasons you are aware of. Any benefits towards anyone else are incidental, and likely inconsequential to her.

"Show them gods and deities, blind and keep the people on their knees. Pierce the sky, escape your fate, the more you try the more you'll just breed hate."

"What if all the plans you made were not worth the price they paid? Even with the lives you stole, wtill no closer to your goal."

Hey look, she's criticizing him for how he treats "the people" in general, and the hunter system. She's raising ethical problems with Ozpin, not just saying he was mean to her.

Also When it Falls:

"Maybe it's the pool of blood the innocents will lay in, when in the end you've failed to save them? Their dying eyes are wide and white like snow, and now they know the cost of trusting you's obliteration"

"They play the part of allies, claiming peace their only goal, but once the fight for power starts they'll eat each other whole. Their iron gloves point fingers, they'll wage a war of blame, and mankind will wilt in pain"

Basically saying that the Ozluminati are really, really bad for mankind in general.

"It was you who ended their lives, made them to dig their own graves, with your dark, sick, cruel design, convinced them their world could be saved."

"Have you no shame signing them up for your war? Train them to fight what they can't beat, your sins are what they'll pay for. Sacrifice them for your needs, slaughter is coming, the end drawing near, you'll regret your deeds"

Basically says the entire hunter system is a lie in service of an unachievable goal which results in needless death.

Final point here, an antagonist who calls their enemies "sick", "cruel", and says they'll "regret their deeds", refers to them as having "iron gloves", and talks about them "keeping the people on their knees" clearly believes themselves to be in the moral right and their enemy in the moral wrong. That's generally what a Well-Intentioned Extremist is, someone who does their actions for morally justifiable or understandable reasons.

So basically your proof is non-existent and just a possible interpretation. That plays during Cinder's re-entrance is not proof. This isn't the first time the theme of someone played in the scene of another person. For example Dr. Merlot's Lusus Naturae also played when Salem entered room. Many of the things stated in the song could easily interpreted in other ways or as the words of Raven for example. We also know Cinder's motivation. She wants to be powerful and feared.

You said that Miles and Jeff confirmed it, but I don't see any proof for that either.

Also Ozpin and Cinder didn't know each other personally. Otherwise he would have recognized her face, when she entered his school as a student. Sacrifice implies that knoe each other and worked together. And even if the song was from Cinder's perspective, her being a an Anti-Villain or a Well-Intentioned Extremist isn't really implied in the lyrics. They are more like someone being vengeful.

"This isn't the first time the theme of someone played in the scene of another person. For example Dr. Merlot's Lusus Naturae also played when Salem entered room."

It didn't, it played for the Grimm, because the song is used as a general Grimm theme.

"We also know Cinder's motivation. She wants to be powerful and feared."

Oh geez, this again. Nice reductionism. Cinder does not “just want power”. If she “just wanted power”, why would she put so much effort into making Ozpin look bad and humilating him publicly? Why would she destroy Beacon and work with a group looking to destroy the Hunter Academies? Why would she put so much effort into framing Ironwood for her attack and telling everyone that he was a tyrannical dictator? That claim simply does not line up with her actions whatsoever. Obtaining the Fall Maiden’s power was merely one step in her plan to defeat Ozpin, and it allowed her to kill Ozpin’s current host body. It is a means to an end, nothing more.

"You said that Miles and Jeff confirmed it, but I don't see any proof for that either."

I said Miles and Jeff confirmed the songs are canon, which they did. Jeff's confirmation is in an article entitled “RWBY Composer Jeff Williams on His Creative Process”.

"Also Ozpin and Cinder didn't know each other personally. Otherwise he would have recognized her face, when she entered his school as a student. Sacrifice implies that knoe each other and worked together."

No, them not knowing each other personally does not mean that Cinder can't have ethical problems with his system. The song doesn't imply that, it states Cinder once worked as part of the system and is now fighting against it.

"And even if the song was from Cinder's perspective, her being a an Anti-Villain or a Well-Intentioned Extremist isn't really implied in the lyrics. They are more like someone being vengeful."

I already went over this:

"Show them gods and deities, blind and keep the people on their knees. Pierce the sky, escape your fate, the more you try the more you'll just breed hate."

"What if all the plans you made were not worth the price they paid? Even with the lives you stole, wtill no closer to your goal."

These are moral judgements. So is what she said about him during her speech, which as you can see, she genuinely believes as she has genuine anger on her face when she's giving it.

"Many of the things stated in the song could easily interpreted in other ways or as the words of Raven for example."

How? I have explained why the song makes zero sense for her given her backstory and statements. Stop denying.

Jeff also stated that several songs are just general and not for anyone in particular, like Cold or Not to fall in Love with you. Unless there is something explicit, like the lyrics playing during some major action of Cinder, then there is no confirmation. And Lusus Naturae did play when Salem entered the room. So if there are other examples, then this might as well. Not to mention that Sacrifice played while Cinder was before Salem's camp, so it might as well be for something else.

Cinder's plan was to create as much negativity as possible for the Grimm to attack. Her speech was for that sole purpose. And again, her own inner monologue stated that she craves power, that she wants to dominate and be feared. Those are some of her core motivations.

The song does imply familiarity between the singer and the recipient. And your explanation doesn't hold that much water for why it can't be Raven. You assume "born an angel, heavens sent" is describing the singer, but it doesn't have to be. It could easily describe the recipient. In Ozpin's case he would literally heaven sent. Or it could describe someone who could be pure. Like Summer Rose. The line "falls from grace are never elegant" and "the moon watches sadly the roses die" , would reinforce these two possibilities. Raven's sentiment for abandoning Ozpin is quite well reflected in the lyrics. She didn't want to be part of his games, she didn't want to be sacrifice for him.

And while these lyrics are moral judgements, nothing implies that the singer wants to make things better. The song is simply a "The Reason You Suck" Speech. It doesn't imply any kind of desire for change or to make a better world. It is simply someone not wanting to be a pawn, being fed up, trying to be free and telling the recipient he will fail. All of these fit Raven as well and imo much better.

But anyway, the point is. It is not confirmed at all that Sacrifice is Cinder's theme and nothing states that would paint her as a Well-Intentioned Extremist.

>Jeff also stated that several songs are just general and not for anyone in particular, like Cold or Not to fall in Love with you.

Yes, and Sacrifice is not one of those songs.

>Unless there is something explicit, like the lyrics playing during some major action of Cinder, then there is no confirmation.

The song has played. It was an instrumental, but it's Sacrifice. It's in V 5 E 7. I don't know what else you want.

>Not to mention that Sacrifice played while Cinder was before Salem's camp, so it might as well be for something else.

It was outside Raven's camp, but the song played for Cinder's re-entrance, not for anything involving Raven.

>Cinder's plan was to create as much negativity as possible for the Grimm to attack. Her speech was for that sole purpose.

But the genuine anger on her face indicates that it shows what she really believes. The speech was also in order to make the people hate Ozpin and Ironwood, since a major part of the attack was framing Ironwood for it so everyone would hate him.

>And again, her own inner monologue stated that she craves power, that she wants to dominate and be feared. Those are some of her core motivations.

They are a means to an end. If you think they are the end in and of themselves, they do not match her actions in V3.

>You assume "born an angel, heavens sent" is describing the singer, but it doesn't have to be. It could easily describe the recipient.

"Falls from grace are never elegant" implies some sort of defection from a faction and a realignment of purpose. Ozpin didn't defect from his own faction.

>Raven's sentiment for abandoning Ozpin is quite well reflected in the lyrics.

No, it's not. She doesn't share any of the ethical judgements. And I repeat, the song has never played for her, but it has played for Cinder. In fact, the intro of the song uses Cinder's leitmotif which has been used since V2.

>It doesn't imply any kind of desire for change or to make a better world.

Why does Cinder judge Ozpin for how terrible his system is? Why does When it Falls talk about the fall of his cabal? Why does Divide talk about how he's going to pay for his crimes? I mentioned those two songs too. Cinder's actions show she is fighting to defeat Ozpin to build a better world without him or his cabal.

>All of these fit Raven as well and imo much better.

Raven isn't driven by any ideology unlike Cinder though. She just raids for her tribe.

>It is not confirmed at all that Sacrifice is Cinder's theme

Alex Abraham referred to it as "Cinder's theme", the song opens with Cinder's leitmotif, it has literally played for a scene of Cinder. You can't keep on sticking your head in the sand and pretending that the facts aren't what they are

>nothing states that would paint her as a Well-Intentioned Extremist.

Except everything I have told you.

Stop denying facts to suit your dislike of Cinder and love of Raven.

I am willing to agree that Sacrifice is probably Cinder's theme, but I do not think it says what you think it does.

I've already explained that you're in the wrong here. It's very clear Cinder believes what she's doing is in the right, even if you disagree with her. That is the definition of Well-Intentioned Extremist.

By the way, Steam, even if I think what you're saying is stupid, and don't agree with you in the slightest, you seem like a nice guy who can argue well. I can't really say the same for Bander.

Yep, this is definitely going in circles here. I will simply post the question in the forum board for a final consensus.

If you want me to continue the discussion there, I can. Just be warned that I find arguing with you incredibly stressful because of your refusal to read anything I tell you...

Cinder is currently listed as a Complete Monster, a decision that was made by consensus on the CM clean-up thread. She can't be an Anti-Villain or a Well-Intentioned Extremist if she's a Complete Monster.

Edit: nvm. I can see this has already been dealt with in the RWBY forum thread.

That does seem to be a painfully bureaucratic reason.

Well more like "if they've reached this decision, they've already ruled out her being an Anti-Villain or a Well-Intentioned Extremist."

Meaning the conversation has already been hashed out and handled by some of the most attentive tropers on the site. Some rando going "but you're wrong!" is pretty much irrelevant.

Edit: Oh, wait, nevermind this entry. This is an argument over Draco in Leather Pants nonsense.

Look man, as much as i agree with you about Cinder these two entries don't belong here.

First of all you said that "she believes what she's doing is right which makes her Well-Intentioned Extremist" Sorry but that's not true. Well-Intentioned Extremist has LEGITIMATELY noble goals, someone who merely believes he's a good guy is Knight Templar. Secondly the speech you're refering to is about 60% Bastardly Speech, intended to create chaos and divide Vale, i wouldn't take much in at at face value. Thirdly even if the song is canon this doesn't make clear WHO is it refering to, and i have yet to see any evidence that it's about Cindy. In fact i'm far more convinced that it's about Raven.

So right now these two entries are out.

Soarel brings up this same stuff over on the wiki with no real hard evidence to support his claims that can't be easily refuted.

Such as the songs Sacrifice, which hasn't been confirmed by Jeff or RT who it is about, it could very well be about Raven instead. He has tried to use Divide is some fashion despite that it is pretty much Salem mocking Ozpin for standing against her.

Uses Cinder's speech even though it's filled with lies, such as using Yang and Pyrrha's matches, matches that she manipulated.

He ignores or the death and destruction that Salem and her associates have caused and claims its for a greater good. That Ozpin is the bad guy for keeping secrets despite it being shown that he has been protecting humanity. Thinks he also controls the world even though the Vale council could easily remove him as headmaster if they wanted to.

Seems to think that starting a war between Mistral and Atlas and all the death it would cause is necessary for the greater good even though the world and everyone in it was doing just fine for the last eighty years. The only real issue being Faunus rights.

Really what this is is that Soarel has an oppression with Cinder that he needs to make her look like the good guy in the story and damn anything that says otherwise.

The Brute was originally removed on the reasoning that Hazel's fighting capabilities have not been shown and his general behaviour, philosophy and dialogue doesn't make his personality fit the trope. However trope page itself explains that the character type is only usually a violent Dumb Muscle but not always — as it's foremost the Evil Counterpart to The Big Guy — and that exceptions or variations exist. Tropes Are Flexible and do not always fit only one very specific mold.

His fighting strenght hasn't been directly shown yet apart from Vol 5 opening where he does a Barehanded Blade Block/Punch Catch with Nora's hammer and tanks Ren's slashes with just his arms, but going by that showing the "big strong guy on the villain side" image is there or at the very least it's being played up with him.

I've seen plenty of works with intelligent examples of The Brute. The trope describes an entire role that The Brute plays in the work, to other villains and to The Hero. While it does indeed look like Hazel's going to be physically very powerful, he (and even what little we've seen so far of his role) has just about nothing else in common with the trope right now.

Not every powerhouse villain turns out to be The Brute. While he's got potential, he's not a guarantee. I just think it's premature troping for now.

As far as rank and role go, he is part of the Big Bad's immediate subordinates and does go around making sure her orders are carried out (granted, that last part is also what the others do if Salem tells them so), but he hasn't come face to face with the main characters yet (however, if the opening is again indicative of anything, a confrontation seems likely).

But if we are just wanting to be absolutely sure about him, I'm alright with waiting out until it becomes more clear what his place in the story is.

If it does need to go on later, it'll probably have a nicer example to go with it.

I suspect that he will eventually count, but we haven't seen enough of him in the show proper to be certain yet.

Right now he looks more like villainous Gentle Giant than The Brute.

As far as i've noticed Hazel's attitude is different than Salem's. when Salem opposed Cinder's idea to kill Ruby she said that keeping others alive lets them be usefull in the future. Hazel when showing disgust over Sienna's death said "No one had to die", not " we needed her". The way it was shown it seemes that what he was against was needless killing rather than wating potentially useful tool.

As for the Edit War, sorry my bad. I didn't realize that example was being edit-warred, example was written under Pragmatic Evil and clearly didn't fit given that Hazel had no reason that we know of to keep Sienna alive, so i moved it to EEHS where it seemed proper. My mistake for not looking at the history.

I've bumped this to the top of the page because it's still being Edit Warred over.