Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7,8 (click to see context) from:
In this trope, a villainous character's reasoning for what they do is at least partially, well, [[ShapedLikeItself reasonable]]: that is, they make some good points about their motivations for their actions. However, the mere fact that they can score some rhetorical points, even deliver a BreakingSpeech good enough to cause a HeroicBSOD, '''doesn't excuse what they've done''': at the end of the day, they're still doing bad things and they still need to be stopped.
to:
In this trope, a villainous character's reasoning for what they do is at least partially, well, [[ShapedLikeItself reasonable]]: that is, they make some good points about their motivations for their actions.actions and/or the present situation. However, the mere fact that they can score some rhetorical points, even deliver a BreakingSpeech good enough to cause a HeroicBSOD, '''doesn't excuse what they've done''': at the end of the day, they're still doing bad things and they still need to be stopped.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7,8 (click to see context) from:
In this trope, a villainous character's reasoning for what they do is at least partially, well, [[ShapedLikeItself reasonable]]: that is, they make some good points about their motivations for their actions. However, just because they can score some rhetorical points, even deliver a BreakingSpeech good enough to cause a HeroicBSOD, '''doesn't excuse what they've done''': at the end of the day, they're still doing bad things and they still need to be stopped.
to:
In this trope, a villainous character's reasoning for what they do is at least partially, well, [[ShapedLikeItself reasonable]]: that is, they make some good points about their motivations for their actions. However, just because the mere fact that they can score some rhetorical points, even deliver a BreakingSpeech good enough to cause a HeroicBSOD, '''doesn't excuse what they've done''': at the end of the day, they're still doing bad things and they still need to be stopped.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7,11 (click to see context) from:
[moar {{filler}} needed]
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, StrawmanHasAPoint, and UnintentionallySympathetic among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
May overlap with WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause. Compare to TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately validates the arguments made by a villain or anti-hero, and JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across. Supertrope of FreudianExcuseIsNoExcuse and FreudianExcuseDenial, where it is argued that a character's DarkAndTroubledPast doesn't excuse their current action.
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, StrawmanHasAPoint, and UnintentionallySympathetic among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
May overlap with WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause. Compare to TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately validates the arguments made by a villain or anti-hero, and JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across. Supertrope of FreudianExcuseIsNoExcuse and FreudianExcuseDenial, where it is argued that a character's DarkAndTroubledPast doesn't excuse their current action.
to:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do.
May overlap with WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause. Compare to TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately validates the arguments made by a villain or anti-hero, and JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across.
Supertrope of FreudianExcuseIsNoExcuse and FreudianExcuseDenial, where it is argued that a character's DarkAndTroubledPast doesn't excuse their current
* AntiVillain, where a character possesses a lot of good traits but is still ultimately the villain.
* AtLeastIAdmitIt, where a character admits to their flaws and argues that's better than pretending.
* TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately ''validates'' the arguments made by a character doing terrible things.
* NotSoDifferentRemark, where a character argues that they and another character are more similar than the other character wants to admit.
* JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across (or is habitually rude in general).
* WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
contradictory
Changed line(s) 5,6 (click to see context) from:
Whether good or bad, almost everyone has a reason for the things that they do. That doesn't necessarily mean the reason is a good one, or that their actions and reactions are valid.
to:
Whether good or bad, almost everyone has a reason for the things that they do. That doesn't necessarily mean the reason is a good one, or that their actions and reactions are valid.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,10 (click to see context) from:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, StrawmanHasAPoint, and UnintentionallySympathetic and among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
to:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, StrawmanHasAPoint, and UnintentionallySympathetic and among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,10 (click to see context) from:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, and StrawmanHasAPoint among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
to:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, StrawmanHasAPoint, and StrawmanHasAPoint UnintentionallySympathetic and among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,10 (click to see context) from:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way that the antagonists raises some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, and StrawmanHasAPoint among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
to:
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way way, often via the protagonists' reactions, that the antagonists raises raise some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, and StrawmanHasAPoint among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
!TRS sandbox for VillainHasAPoint. [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16798131930.03564800&page=1 Original thread.
to:
!TRS sandbox for VillainHasAPoint. [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16798131930.03564800&page=1 Original thread.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
!TRS sandbox for VillainHasAPoint. [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16798131930.03564800&page=1 Original thread.
-> ''"A clever argument is not what makes a good or bad person. Anyone can make a clever argument, whether they believe it or not. You see someone being a cruel piece of shit? That's a bad person no matter what they fucking believe, and I've seen some cruel pieces of shit around this thing."''
-->-- '''Ashton Greymoore''', "[[Recap/CriticalRole046NightAtTheLigamentManor Night at the Ligament Manor]]", ''WebVideo/CriticalRole''
Whether good or bad, almost everyone has a reason for the things that they do. That doesn't necessarily mean the reason is a good one, or that their actions and reactions are valid.
[moar {{filler}} needed]
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way that the antagonists raises some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, and StrawmanHasAPoint among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
May overlap with WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause. Compare to TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately validates the arguments made by a villain or anti-hero, and JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across. Supertrope of FreudianExcuseIsNoExcuse and FreudianExcuseDenial, where it is argued that a character's DarkAndTroubledPast doesn't excuse their current action.
-> ''"A clever argument is not what makes a good or bad person. Anyone can make a clever argument, whether they believe it or not. You see someone being a cruel piece of shit? That's a bad person no matter what they fucking believe, and I've seen some cruel pieces of shit around this thing."''
-->-- '''Ashton Greymoore''', "[[Recap/CriticalRole046NightAtTheLigamentManor Night at the Ligament Manor]]", ''WebVideo/CriticalRole''
Whether good or bad, almost everyone has a reason for the things that they do. That doesn't necessarily mean the reason is a good one, or that their actions and reactions are valid.
[moar {{filler}} needed]
For this trope to apply, the work has to directly acknowledge in some way that the antagonists raises some legitimate points about the situation they and the protagonists find themselves in, ''without'' portraying them as ultimately justified in behaving as they do. See AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, InformedWrongness, and StrawmanHasAPoint among others, if you want to [[AudienceReaction argue that]] a character who ''wasn't'' supposed to be justified actually was.
May overlap with WellIntentionedExtremist, where a character commits horrible acts out of what they at least believe is a good cause. Compare to TheExtremistWasRight, where the work ultimately validates the arguments made by a villain or anti-hero, and JerkassHasAPoint for cases where the argument isn't wrong but the character was rude in the way they got it across. Supertrope of FreudianExcuseIsNoExcuse and FreudianExcuseDenial, where it is argued that a character's DarkAndTroubledPast doesn't excuse their current action.
