Pet Peeve Tropes and how to deconstruct them

[EngineGear]

For me, it's "If You Kill Him, You'll Be Just Like Him". I have a plot point in my story where the heroes capture the villain instead of killing him. Their reason: they're still rookie adventurers attending school. Killing him without permission would severely bite them in the ass later.

 

[ConansWitchBaby]

Do it quietly behind the shed.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

I never understood the whole "I can't kill this very evil person because it would make me just like them" thing. The person is evil. You are not. Though it's not like you will become evil by killing them. There is a huge difference between removing a threat permanently and ending the lives of innocent people. Had Batman killed the Joker, he would be in the right and probably would have prevented a lot of innocent deaths by doing so. However, he doesn't, and look what happens over and over again. I can understand if there are certain legalities that prevent the character from killing them but there are always ways around those. For example, if someone attacks you with a dangerous weapon you have the right to defend yourself and take their life if needed depending on where in the world you live. Some places do not have laws like this but a lot of them do.

 

[Zirrboy]

I never understood the whole "I can't kill this very evil person because it would make me just like them" thing. The person is evil. You are not. Though it's not like you will become evil by killing them. There is a huge difference between removing a threat permanently and ending the lives of innocent people. Had Batman killed the Joker, he would be in the right and probably would have prevented a lot of innocent deaths by doing so. However, he doesn't, and look what happens over and over again. I can understand if there are certain legalities that prevent the character from killing them but there are always ways around those. For example, if someone attacks you with a dangerous weapon you have the right to defend yourself and take their life if needed depending on where in the world you live. Some places do not have laws like this but a lot of them do.

With Batman it seems to be more of an emotional thing.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

With Batman it seems to be more of an emotional thing.

True. He did have a bunch of trauma but he's so smart that he should have figured this out a lot sooner. He could have had Alfred take out the Joker if he didn't want to. That butler wouldn't even think twice. He's taken out people with a shotgun just for trespassing and apologized while doing so for "Not showing the same niceties that master Bruce would." Alfred v Joker would be amazing and I have no doubt that Alfred would end his life without a second thought and he would do so in the middle of the Jokers monologue just to rub salt in the wound.

 

[SailusGebel]

I never understood the whole "I can't kill this very evil person because it would make me just like them" thing. The person is evil. You are not. Though it's not like you will become evil by killing them. There is a huge difference between removing a threat permanently and ending the lives of innocent people. Had Batman killed the Joker, he would be in the right and probably would have prevented a lot of innocent deaths by doing so. However, he doesn't, and look what happens over and over again. I can understand if there are certain legalities that prevent the character from killing them but there are always ways around those. For example, if someone attacks you with a dangerous weapon you have the right to defend yourself and take their life if needed depending on where in the world you live. Some places do not have laws like this but a lot of them do.

It's the same logic that applies to alcoholics. Why are some alcoholics on their way to sobriety stop drinking at all? Like, would one shot of whiskey or a glass of beer once a week ruin them so much? Yes, cause they can't drink responsibly, they won't stop. Same here. Will you be able to stop killing, or will you rely on killing more and more?

But most likely, it's because of a rating system, like PG and shit. You can't tell a little kid that killing evil people is okay because you will lose profit.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

It's the same logic that applies to alcoholics. Why are some alcoholics on their way to sobriety stop drinking at all? Like, would one shot of whiskey or a glass of beer once a week ruin them so much? Yes, cause they can't drink responsibly, they won't stop. Same here. Will you be able to stop killing, or will you rely on killing more and more?

But most likely, it's because of a rating system, like PG and shit. You can't tell a little kid that killing evil people is okay because you will lose profit.

I can understand that logic a bit.

 

[Florestes]

For me, it's "If You Kill Him, You'll Be Just Like Him". I have a plot point in my story where the heroes capture the villain instead of killing him. Their reason: they're still rookie adventurers attending school. Killing him without permission would severely bite them in the ass later.

There is no option to cripple the villain? He is obviously evil and dangerous, so cut of all his limbs or something.
There! Problem solved. Villain is both alive and neutralised, simply a limbless thing awaiting judgement by whatever authority you throw it to.
They blame you? It was either him or you! Get the public on your side, and suggest that they are secretly on the villain's side! Smash their public persona!

 

[Paul_Tromba]

There is no option to cripple the villain? He is obviously evil and dangerous, so cut of all his limbs or something.
There! Problem solved. Villain is both alive and neutralised, simply a limbless thing awaiting judgement by whatever authority you throw it to.
They blame you? It was either him or you! Get the public on your side, and suggest that they are secretly on the villain's side! Smash their public persona!

There could be some kind of medical center that removes the limbs of prisoners and keeps them in stasis so that they can be reattached later.

 

[GreatBlueDane]

My personal interpretation of that "If You Kill Him, You Become Him" trope is that the Heroes are not killing the villain because it's not their job. If the story were in a war setting and the villain is on the opposing side of the war, then by all means kill him. Otherwise, if they kill him they might have to deal with the years of the trauma of taking another person's life (even if they were terrible) and potential repercussions from the justice system. In addition, if the heroes want to maintain fairness they have to bring the villain before a court of law where they can be properly punished. If the law says the villain should be executed then so be it.

I don't think it would be a good idea to leave the lives of villains in the hands of just one or two people.

 

[Florestes]

There could be some kind of medical center that removes the limbs of prisoners and keeps them in stasis so that they can be reattached later.

Now THAT is a bit more horrifying. A whole institution build around limb modification of prisoners. Officially treating them like spare parts for a piece of equipment.
I'm imagining the 40K universe.

 

[greyblob]

Had Batman killed the Joker, he would be in the right and probably would have prevented a lot of innocent deaths by doing so.

batman can't kill the joker because he's addicted to that clownbussy. this guiltly pleasure is why whenever he sees him they fight

 

[Paul_Tromba]

batman can't kill the joker because he's addicted to that clownbussy. this guiltly pleasure is why whenever he sees him they fight

 

[Zirrboy]

Now THAT is a bit more horrifying. A whole institution build around limb modification of prisoners. Officially treating them like spare parts for a piece of equipment.
I'm imagining the 40K universe.

Bringing the passive form back into Godrick the Grafted

Also patchwork girl

 

[longer]

batman can't kill the joker because he's addicted to that clownbussy. this guiltly pleasure is why whenever he sees him they fight

No batman needs joker around to help him understand modern "humor"

 

[greyblob]

No batman needs joker around to help him understand modern "humor"

-1

 

[BenJepheneT]

No batman needs joker around to help him understand modern "humor"

>Impact font
>The Dark Knight interrogation scene
>one full minute of someone's awful Heath Ledger joker impersonation
>the unfunniest meme you'd ever bear eyes and ears on

Every time.

Go back to baneposting chief that's a winning formula this ain't it

 

[T.K._Paradox]

>Impact font
>The Dark Knight interrogation scene
>one full minute of someone's awful Heath Ledger joker impersonation
>the unfunniest meme you'd ever bear eyes and ears on

Every time.

Go back to baneposting chief that's a winning formula this ain't it

"I was raised by the darkness, groomed by it!" -- Bane to his childhood trauma counselor.

 

[CarburetorThompson]

I hate characters meeting by coincidence. Especially in a large city setting. I watched a show recently where pretty much every major plot point without fail was driven forward by two or more characters accidentally meeting by coincidence, I can ignore it if it’s a one off thing, but after the 11th time I just lose faith in humanity.

 

[greyblob]

"I was raised by the darkness, groomed by it!" -- Bane to his childhood trauma counselor.

you're a big guy