I'm sorry, but what does implacable mean? Because I keep getting the feeling of "not being able to be placed anywhere" even though I know that probably isn't it. I mean, why not just call this trope "The Relentless" or something? Or "The Unrelenting".
Edited by TheArchitectWriterXIII Hide / Show Replies
Implacable comes from the term "placate", which means "to make someone less angry/hostile". Thus, an implacable man cannot be made less angry/hostile and will keep coming despite everything that happens. The rest is self-explanatory.
Is there a trope for when the Implacable Man is more than one individual, like an army? For example, the Covenant in the Halo series most often seems to fit this trope pretty well, since almost every battle with them ends with the heroes simply blowing up whatever the Covenant wanted, and any direct battle with them quickly turns in favor of the Covenant. However, they are not just one individual. Would they be a offshoot of this trope, or something else instead?
Hide / Show Replies
The covenant are a Badass Army, individual covenant soldiers are not implacable men, as Master Chief clearly demonstrates.
So... What's the diff between this and The Juggernaut, again? If you check the discussion for that article, you'll see that people seem to agree that the difference is pretty damn murky.
Edited by GentlemensDame883 Hide / Show Replies
The Implacable Man will not stop until he is dead. The Juggnernaut is physically unstobbable, and frequently superstrong as well.
To illustrate, suppose that a Determinator, an Implacable Man and The Juggernaut are all faced with the problem of killing a man in the tope room of a house filled with dozens of guards. The Determinator will enter the house, climb the stairs and fight all the guards, ignoring what are obvious wounds until he has accomplished his objective. The Implacable Man will do much the same, save that he will at no point show that he has been injured or is in pain; basically he's a Determinator without the How Much More Can He Take? thing in effect. The Juggernaut, will probably just go through the house as though it wasn't there, and collapse the entire thing, then walk away unscathed.
Does that clear it up? Sorry about the lengthy explanation, but I was just reading an argument involving all three and was trying to think about the differences.
Ambar Son of Deshar
Your description for what the Implacable Man and The Juggernaut would do isn't very clearly different. Could you elaborate better? And if successfully, place it on the Canonical List of Subtle Trope Distinctions?
Edited by SomeGuy See you in the discussion pages.
The Juggernaut is simply this trope taken Up To Eleven, complete with a 'not stoppable'-superpower, stubborn as a donkey mindset, and a comical disregard for the real situation around him. One might claim one is perceived more as 'a force of nature' rather than a character, but whom can be reasoned with (or at least talked at), where the other can not be reasoned with at all, and must be stopped with Rasputinian Death. Which one is which is hard to tell at this stage as Determinator, Implacable Man and The Juggernaut seem to have an miss-attributing-example exchange going on. I motion that somebody who isn't me cleans all three up , starting [[Determinator]] (For clairety: who does feel pain but Heroic Willpower himself to overcome it). After that we can see what is left and if there are any real need to differentiate bewteen the two remaining.
Edited by TheGrimSleeper
As noted in the Real Life section, humans are this, by comparison to other animals. So what does it say that one of our monster archetypes is something that's even better at it than we are?
Edited by 63.155.134.11