Has anyone else Problems with "Atleast I admit it"-Characters?

[Present 2.0]

To clarify, what I mean, with "Atleast I admit it"-Characters: I mean Characters, who are ready to admit, that what they're doing is just evil. Often in Contrast to Characters, who don't admit it and think, that they're doing the right Thing or are allowed to do that. An Example would be a Villain, who tortures People just for Fun lecturing an Anti-Hero, who thinks, that he tortures only People who deserve it and to get the right results, while secretly also enjoying it.

Okay, I don't really have a Problem with it as a Trope. I've more of a Problem that the Reaction to this Trope is often, that People are impressed by the "Atleast I admit it"-Character, because he is at least honest and no Hypocrite!

I am not impressed, because I see this as just another hypocritical way to pretend, that you are better than other People, who are doing the same despicable Thing. "Atleast I admit it" is just like "Atleast I do it, to do the right Thing" or "Atleast I don't do it to innocent People" just another Way, to convince yourself, that you're still somehow better, because you're more honest or something like that. Only that it is additionally also hypocritical, because you pretend to make no excuses, while using this Line like it is an excuse.

I also find it a little stupid, because the Character is on the inside exactly, what he is on the outside, while pretending to be deep.

[Mith]

I have no problems with such a character if they start there and grow from that starting point. That can be an interesting journey.

The flat characyers that do not change are not interesting though.

[The Aboleth]

It depends on the quality of writing and story-telling, obviously, but I think there can be a certain value in characters who take real responsibility for their actions and are honest about their intentions. A villain who declares "I am oppressing the kingdom because I want to be an oppressive ruler--because I desire power and this is the easiest way to achieve and maintain it!" is at least being honest with himself about his intentions. On the other hand, a villain who declares "I am not oppressing the kingdom--I am taking harsh steps to maintain security because it's what is best to ensure the safety of the citizens!" is likely either using that as an excuse to cover up his actual intentions, or has really deluded himself into believing he is taking the best course of action--a scenario which prevents him from taking any personal responsibility for his crimes.

One of the best lines I've ever heard from a character was in a video game series called "Legacy of Kain." In it, a character called Raziel is seeking out the titular Kain to exact vengeance upon him for his murder (Raziel became an undead soul-sucking wraith when Kain murdered him, and Kain is an immortal vampire, for context). Long story short, Raziel learns throughout the course of his quest that Kain made a decision eons ago that plunged the entire world into a state of decay and stagnation (the world started dying, basically). When Raziel finally confronts Kain face-to-face, he uses that as an excuse for why he wishes to kill Kain--"I need to kill you to restore the world!" Kain sees through this, though, and says:

"Hate me, but do it honestly."

That line always stuck with me. Raziel was hiding his bloodlust and vengeance behind altruistic motives, but Kain knows that when it boiled right down to it Raziel was just angry that Kain had murdered him. It was a powerful moment, because it forced Raziel to come to terms with his motives and choose whether the path he was on was really the one he wanted to take.

So, yes, I do believe there is value in a villain being honest with their desires and motives. There's also value in hiding villainous actions behind "good" intentions--as in most things, the value lies in the quality of the writing/characters.

[Lethologica]

In the Sandman comics, Lucifer gives up Hell and it ultimately winds up in the hands of a pair of un-fallen angels, Remiel and Duma. They resolve to change Hell so that the damned understand that their torment is punishment to reform their souls, rather than the product of malevolence. They think this will make Hell kinder. It has the opposite effect.

Another example is Xykon as a foil to Redcloak, the most direct illustration of which comes in Start of Darkness.

There's nothing about this trope that inherently makes the character performing it necessarily more or less hypocritical, more or less virtuous, more or less deep--that's all in the details. All it is, is the character acting as a foil to the anti-hero, well-intentioned extremist, oppressive government, "for your own good" abuser, or other character who commits evil acts without identifying as evil.

[DomaDoma]

"At least" honesty has a way of creating just enough smugness that one who espouses it (fictional characters included) doesn't consider that he might want to have something better to be honest about. When the author presents it as objectively better, rather than one of many intriguing angles regarding evil, it's quite indigestible. Especially when the thing they are denouncing as less honest is dishonest, or "dishonest" (because the author doesn't believe anything lofty is real), about much lesser crimes.

[2D8HP]

To clarify, what I mean, with "Atleast I admit it"-Characters: I mean Characters, who are ready to admit, that what they're doing is just evil....
While I've encountered men who make such claims IRL, but off the top of my head I can't think of a single fictional example that fits the trope you mentioned.

Who do you have in mind?

[Present 2.0]

You can find examples here (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AtLeastIAdmitIt).

[Reddish Mage]

As the examples above show. “At least I admit it” is a phrase most likely to be spewed by cliche “card-carrying” villains as a justification for their actions. In its most common form, its just a way for the cartoonishly evil villain to make an unconvincing swipe at the hero or the system.

However, being an “honest” evil-doer can be the defining trait of a villain, a redeemable villain or even a protagonist. “At least I admit it” comes in enough flavors that I can’t express feelings towards the trope without narrowing down some. Can you describe what’s getting your goat?

[Sapphire Guard]

Kain is a brilliant example, because it's perfectly in character for him to not be a fan of dishonesty, having had some bad experiences with manipulators. One of my other unrelated favourite moments is when he gets annoyed with being ordered around during the tutorial of one of his games, without breaking character or the fourth wall.

[Morty]

How many examples do we have of characters where it's an actual positive trait, rather than a self-serving platitude?

[Reddish Mage]

How many examples do we have of characters where it's an actual positive trait, rather than a self-serving platitude?

The Wiki article above has several examples: Loki during the "Vote Loki" story uses "At least I admit it" as his presidential campaign slogan. Spike says he's "love's bitch but at least I admit" in Season 3 to call out Buffy and Angel's relationship. Eustass Kid of One Piece likes the phrase. 3 Fingered Jack in "The Mask of Zorro" uses it to call out the villain. All of these expression appear in contexts that make their character seem more authentic and honesty a positive trait.

Lelouch of Code Geas doesn't actually use the phrase but his self-awareness is said to be what seperates him from Suzaku.

Most of the rest of the website's examples are basically paper-thin defenses delivered by true villains or accusations hurled at the hero that simple reveal how warped these villains perceptions of the world is.

[Lethologica]

How many examples do we have of characters where it's an actual positive trait, rather than a self-serving platitude?
For clarification: do you mean characters that genuinely own up to their evil ways and aren't just making excuses, or characters for whom being open about their evil ways is cast as a virtue?

[Aotrs Commander]

To clarify, what I mean, with "Atleast I admit it"-Characters: I mean Characters, who are ready to admit, that what they're doing is just evil. Often in Contrast to Characters, who don't admit it and think, that they're doing the right Thing or are allowed to do that. An Example would be a Villain, who tortures People just for Fun lecturing an Anti-Hero, who thinks, that he tortures only People who deserve it and to get the right results, while secretly also enjoying it.

Okay, I don't really have a Problem with it as a Trope. I've more of a Problem that the Reaction to this Trope is often, that People are impressed by the "Atleast I admit it"-Character, because he is at least honest and no Hypocrite!

I am not impressed, because I see this as just another hypocritical way to pretend, that you are better than other People, who are doing the same despicable Thing. "Atleast I admit it" is just like "Atleast I do it, to do the right Thing" or "Atleast I don't do it to innocent People" just another Way, to convince yourself, that you're still somehow better, because you're more honest or something like. Only that it is additionally also hypocritical, because you pretend to make no excuses, while using this Line like it is an excuse.

I also find it a little stupid, because the Character is on the inside exactly, what he is on the outside, while pretending to be deep.

No.

I basically AM one.

As the inverse is the sort of topic that gets me truly infuriated (I typed up a long, rant response this morning, but thought better about clicking "submit reply" for most of the day), it will suffice to say: basically what The Aboleth said, especially the part about using excuses to avoid taking responsibility for one's own actions.

(Trying to palm off responsibility for one's actions REALLY makes me loose my veneer of affability with extraordinary expediency.)

True Evil is, after all, when you you KNOW what you are doing is wrong, you understand fully the consequences of your actions, that you accept that you are objectively in the wrong by basically all standards - and you do it anyway.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think it's done well in the character of "the Operative" in Serenity. He fully admits to being a monster and understands that the world he is endeavoring to create has no place for someone like him.

[Present 2.0]

No.

I basically AM one.

I don't really understand, to what Parts you're answering with that.

Well, one Example of this Character, that I don't really like, is Xykon, but he's at least funny. But more often, it's not really the Characters, that I find infuriating, but the Fans, who believe these Characters.

[HandofShadows]

I usually don't like "At least I admit it" characters. It's clear that they know they are bad people and don't care. Worse some of them think they are *better* than other people because they admit they are bad.

There are exceptions of course. (Loki is a more a troll these days than a real evil character. A good example of this is that he poisoned his mother Frigga. But it was to save her from being killed. In one page he was pleading for her not to die.) A few characters like Lelouch and the Operative are exceptions because while they know they are doing horrible things it's not for themselves. They do horrible things for what they perceive as a greater good (right or wrong in this belief). Most "At least I admit it" characters don't do that or just pay lip service to the greater good.

[Vinyadan]

There is a difference between "at least I admit it" and "I gave up pretenses, because I like how I am, and you are an idiot for not doing the same, because _______".
I don't like the former much, but the latter can be good to explain the real difference between two villains, and make for a pretty cool dialogue. Possibly a bit better than I wrote it down.

[Aotrs Commander]

I don't really understand, to what Parts you're answering with that.

Evil and upfront about it.

[Lord Raziere]

Evil and upfront about it.

You don't seem evil to me. you just have that usual nerd persona of finding a lot of things idiotic, so you identify with intellect and smart decisions, which our culture somehow associates with supervillains and cackling evilly and having minions and whatnot. though such a persona is fun to pretend to, one admits.

[Vogie]

Most of the time, it's used as the sole amount of character development, and that's terrible. The Obviously Evil guy admits he's obviously evil instead of having a reason, then moonwalks backwards towards their evilness and hits the big red button.

Occasionally it is done well.

Root, from Person of Interest, is a very well-developed character that used this as their "first act" arc, and as a means to grow the other characters.
The Hound, Sandor Clegane, from Game of Thrones uses this argument against the Brotherhood without Banners... However, it's more of a call-out of how ridiculous the situation has gotten in Westeros, both politically & personally, than a big moment for him. He was always a cynic of the feudal system and the privilege it provides, so it's using the trope as an expression of that character, not as a crowning moment. He has plenty of those.

[Rater202]

I don't really understand, to what Parts you're answering with that.

The Commander, or Bleakbane. is one of two things:

1: Someone who is really, really, really dedicated to roleplaying the persona of an evil, Epic Space-Lich of high rank in the military of an Intergalactic/Interdimensional Empire that consists almost entirely of sapient Undead who self identity as Lawful Evil.

2: Actually the above.

People who have met him IRL aren't sure which.

[JDMSJR]

My experience with "At least I admit it" characters hasn't been so much them trying to justify themselves, or go "look how awesome I am" but more them being annoyed by the hypocrisy of another character who is trying to pretend that they are somehow better or more noble than the first character when they are essentially doing the same thing, but just want to think more highly of themselves.

[Aotrs Commander]

My experience with "At least I admit it" characters hasn't been so much them trying to justify themselves, or go "look how awesome I am" but more them being annoyed by the hypocrisy of another character who is trying to pretend that they are somehow better or more noble than the first character when they are essentially doing the same thing, but just want to think more highly of themselves.

Yes. This, basically.

[Reddish Mage]

There is a difference between "at least I admit it" and "I gave up pretenses, because I like how I am, and you are an idiot for not doing the same, because _______".
I don't like the former much, but the latter can be good to explain the real difference between two villains, and make for a pretty cool dialogue.

The latter is actually the most common reason villians respond to accusations of their evil-doing with "at least I admit it." Also, its commonly done in a spurious manner.

The "at least" portion is a thinly-veiled accusation that some hypocrit out there who is supposedly just as rotten as this guy but hides behind some form of legitimacy. Most of the time, its leveled against the hero. Most of the time, the hero is a genuinely great guy who doesn't deserve the accusation.

I picked out the outliers from the TV Tropes page above, the rest of the page is basically cartoonishly-evil villains doing this.

[Sapphire Guard]

I'm not sure the operative qualifies, he's still working on behalf of a greater good cause, he's just admitting that he doesn't deserve to benefit from his actions..

[Keltest]

I'm not sure the operative qualifies, he's still working on behalf of a greater good cause, he's just admitting that he doesn't deserve to benefit from his actions..

I would hardly describe what the Alliance does as a greater good. For them, maybe, but certainly not overall.

[Callos_DeTerran]

There is something to be said for being able to objectively look at your actions and knowing for a fact that what you are doing is morally wrong but you do it anyway. Doesn't matter why you do it, you do it anyway and accept the fact you've done the wrong thing no matter what gains you may get from doing it. It doesn't make the character right or anything, but it does make them honest and being honest is an admirable quality.

By the same token, there's something to be said for the same situation but doing it for 'the right reason' or otherwise justifying the action as something that needed to be done. Because then you create a scenario where you can seriously discuss about if it really was necessary and the character is guilty of it but still a decent person because of their intentions. Or create a scenario where you know the character is deluded but now you have to wonder if the person who did it deserves your pity even as you try to figure out what they deserve as punishment for their actions. What I dislike about that is fans who group together behind such characters and say they did nothing wrong or they were unconditionally right because they 'justified' their actions and believe that justification. That annoys the crap out of me and can ruin how I look at the character in the process.

So if a character is pulling a 'at least I admit it' and are correctly calling out another villain, character, or hero on their bull**** I don't really mind. If they're saying it pretty much to deflect blame away from themselves then I find it annoying.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'm not sure the operative qualifies, he's still working on behalf of a greater good cause, he's just admitting that he doesn't deserve to benefit from his actions..
I don't think why he does what he does matters in this context though. It's more like, Mal is refusing to admit that his kind (criminals and rebels) are bad and have to be stamped out, and Mal says "so me and mine have to die so you and yours can live?" and the Operative says no, he's a monster, there's no place for him there either. He's admitting that he too does not belong in the world they are trying to create.

I think maybe it doesn't qualify if the OP is strictly talking about the villain calling out heroes as hypocrites, because I don't think that's what the Operative is doing here.

[Metahuman1]

You don't seem evil to me. you just have that usual nerd persona of finding a lot of things idiotic, so you identify with intellect and smart decisions, which our culture somehow associates with supervillains and cackling evilly and having minions and whatnot. though such a persona is fun to pretend to, one admits.

Weirdly enough, I'm more or less inclined to agree up to a point. (And that point is the point were it also becomes a matter of being very much subjective.)

[Forum Explorer]

Not really. I mean if a trope is done poorly then that's always bad. But in other times, well the Villain calling someone out is right. Sometimes it's because they aren't as bad as the other party (the 'I may steal gold, but you steal entire lives' example), or because the other party is deluded and they aren't any better.

And that's nice when that happens.

[GloatingSwine]

“No man chooses evil, because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks.”


The villain who is "evil but admits it" is a failure of imagination. It means the author couldn't think of a real motivation for the character.

[Thufir]

The villain who is "evil but admits it" is a failure of imagination. It means the author couldn't think of a real motivation for the character.

The villain's willingness to admit the evilness of their actions has no bearing on their motivation.

[GloatingSwine]

The villain's willingness to admit the evilness of their actions has no bearing on their motivation.

It does.

It means the author couldn't think of a story where the villain is the hero. Because that's the story that's happening in the villain's head.

[Forum Explorer]

It does.

It means the author couldn't think of a story where the villain is the hero. Because that's the story that's happening in the villain's head.

Not in their case. It's not that uncommon to have a villain who knows there are a villain.

For example, Torchwick from RWBY. You finally find out his motivation in the third season, and discover that his whole attitude and philosophy is that he will do anything to survive. Because if there's an army of giant monsters coming, then you want to be on that team. Particularly if that means you get to hide up in a flying battleship while everyone else is on the ground fighting for their lives.

In his own mind, heroes die. So he has no desire to be a hero at all.


So yeah, characters like that. It's not too uncommon of a trait.

[HandofShadows]

I would hardly describe what the Alliance does as a greater good. For them, maybe, but certainly not overall.

In his mind it's the greater good. There are probably things that you think should be done for a greater good and there would be people who would have a very different viewpoint. Say someone thinks something drug/plant extract/etc should be legal because it helps people/cures a disease. Other people will oppose that because they don't think it cures any diseases an or has long term negative effects of society that out ways and benefits of "helping" people. The "Greater Good" can be relative.

[The Aboleth]

The villain who is "evil but admits it" is a failure of imagination. It means the author couldn't think of a real motivation for the character.


It does.

It means the author couldn't think of a story where the villain is the hero. Because that's the story that's happening in the villain's head.

This is simply not true. I refer back again to the character Kain from the Legacy of Kain video game series. Kain is an immortal vampire who wants to rule the world of Nosgoth, to include the brutal subjugation and enslavement of humanity. He readily admits this, and doesn't shy away from the fact that every action he takes--even if those actions are taken against other "bad" people and will result in some amount of "good" being done--is ultimately for his own selfish desires.

Kain isn't a hero, not even in his own head. He knows what he wants to do, and know it'll lead to suffering for many. His honesty is refreshing because he lives in a world where those in power frequently lie, scheme, and manipulate to achieve their ends. Kain wants power no less than they do, but he goes about acquiring it in brutal--but honest--fashion. It's a breathe of fresh air because the writing is superb for his character and the other characters he encounters.

[Gnoman]

Usually, this sort of character (when they are fleshed out), doesn't believe that Good exists. In their mind, everyone is Evil, and are just putting a lying face to the world so that everyone can pretend. The Hero isn't fighting for righteousness or to protect the weak - they're really trying to topple the villain because doing so brings great wealth and power. This sort of character thinks themselves better than others because they are not pretending, and thus not wasting time and effort on this great hypocritical lie.

Done well, this is usually the cause of the character's downfall. He tries to manipulate the Hero by giving them what they really want in a way that they can pretend they were doing the right thing, only for the Hero to reject this because they really are on the side of the angels, which he cannot comprehend.

[GloatingSwine]

This is simply not true. I refer back again to the character Kain from the Legacy of Kain video game series. Kain is an immortal vampire who wants to rule the world of Nosgoth, to include the brutal subjugation and enslavement of humanity. He readily admits this, and doesn't shy away from the fact that every action he takes--even if those actions are taken against other "bad" people and will result in some amount of "good" being done--is ultimately for his own selfish desires.

Kain isn't a hero, not even in his own head. He knows what he wants to do, and know it'll lead to suffering for many. His honesty is refreshing because he lives in a world where those in power frequently lie, scheme, and manipulate to achieve their ends. Kain wants power no less than they do, but he goes about acquiring it in brutal--but honest--fashion. It's a breathe of fresh air because the writing is superb for his character and the other characters he encounters.

You may have missed some of the games.

Kain is the hero in his own mind, he's a tragic hero who is doomed to failure, because he's looking for a third choice between the ruin of the world or its restoration at the expense of his kind (vampires).

But nonetheless, he's desperate to undo the ruin he created by finding a way for the coin to land on its edge.

[Aotrs Commander]

It does.

It means the author couldn't think of a story where the villain is the hero. Because that's the story that's happening in the villain's head.

(I am affable evil enough to say I apologise if the following comes across a bit snippy, but that tacit suggestion there is "those sort of people don't exist;" and I'm RIGHT HERE, dude; so yeah, little bit of trigger issue for me, I'm afraid.)

I am afriad I will have to say I strongly disagree.

It is entirely possible for people to just not have a problem with them being Evil and to have consciously make that decision. That they don't need the universe - or themselves - to see they were morally "right" or their ends justifies their means; just that their goals and desires succeed.

I know, because I freaking DO. Every single day. Every time I look at the people, the world, the universe.

Unless you want to write off my desire to, say, (and heavily censoring myself as usual - which is why Lord Raziere hasn't seen enough beneath the hood to come to the erroneous conclusion I'm not Evil)... deal with the people I... find objectionable, let's say... on a global scale and traumatise entire populations until everyone stops being... objectable or their souls are on permenant fire as ... Heroic? Because I sure as hell don't. The fact that I haven't done that - yet - doesn't make my desire to do so or cheerful willingness to do so any less Evil, after all.

So I will always have infinitely more time for anyone that thinks more like me (after all, don't we all gravitate to those who share our similar world-view?) than any amount of the over-used well-intentioned extremist self-deluded frackwits (who I find simply tiresome and often a dubious justification for "no-one is truly Evil.") (Xykon is much more interesting than Magneto, for example.)

[Lord Raziere]

Oh I agree evil exists.

I just don't believe you specifically are actually evil, Aotrs. it takes a lot more than constantly proclaiming you are to convince me. its just a persona. real evil is never that honest with itself. it NEVER admits that its evil. more often you hear such a thing from people who feel such immense guilt that they conclude they are evil or something. being hammy, cackling "evilly" and having a cool base while wearing a cape are just the aesthetics of evil, the coolness factors that everyone wishes evil DID have so that it would be fun BEING evil but don't actually exist.

I mean sure you could do something ACTUALLY evil to try and prove me wrong but let me guess: "that would be stupid and anti-beneficial to me." would be the response. Unfortunately, you don't need to be evil to give such a response. tons of people have had little imagine spots where'd they contemplated taking over the world out of fury or something, its normal. then they go "eh, probably wouldn't work anyways/probably not a good idea anyways." and then go back to their day. and just because you don't contemplate morality every single second of the day doesn't mean your aren't a good or decent person. its just that a lot of nerds have this thing where they know so much that they get angry at all the things they hear done wrong, because to them, their knowledge and intelligence is NORMAL to them, and hearing such failures is failing at something basic- TO THEM. it might or might not actually be something basic, because they are nerds and tend to have wildly varying standards of knowledge depending on the fields they're interested in.

thus you get a lot of nerds who become convinced that the entire world is failing at basic things and they're the only ones who know anything, thus random imagine spots of taking over the world to correct it to the way they want, thus self-perception of evil, because supervillains think basically the same way. "I'm surrounded by idiots" "am I the ONLY ONE who knows anything here!?" "you'll never understand true genius!" all stock villain lines. supervillains exist in fiction because they are just as escapist for nerds as superheroes are. its just that instead of escaping to a reality where they fix things like a superhero, they escape to a reality where they really are a stylish super genius with a death ray and a robotic army who can take over the world and change whatever they want to their own eccentric crazy desires while everyone is nowhere near as intelligent as them to stop them. its why you so often get weird eccentric villains who proclaim some weird philosophy or gimmick that has nothing to with how evil actually is rather than ones who actually represent a real despicable evil. So that the nerd can escape into having a crazy gimmick supervillain role of their own.

to demonstrate this difference, simply imagine a cat themed supervillain who makes cat themed gadgets and minions and then imagine a serial murderer who tortures his victims before they die because he can.

[Lethologica]

There are various reasons why a character might be self-admittedly evil without a failure of imagination. Just off the top of my head:
1) They may believe that everyone is evil, so there's nothing special about them being evil.
2) They may consider morality negligible compared to winning or otherwise fulfilling their personal goals/desires.
3) They may hate who they are while being too weak to commit to changing themselves for the better.
4) They may actively value transgression.

[The Aboleth]

You may have missed some of the games.

Kain is the hero in his own mind, he's a tragic hero who is doomed to failure, because he's looking for a third choice between the ruin of the world or its restoration at the expense of his kind (vampires).

But nonetheless, he's desperate to undo the ruin he created by finding a way for the coin to land on its edge.

I've played all the games, and stand by what I said. Kain is the central character in his story, but that does not make him a hero (and I believe he would admit this).

That "third choice", in which the coin lands on its edge, is "I (Kain) restore the world so that I may rule it forever with my vampire brethren under me." The "goodness" that would occur by him restoring the world is only a necessary side effect of his ultimately selfish goal.

That Kain's entire life was manipulated in the first place to only (initially) allow two undesirable options does not make his goal for the third any less selfish or evil; more to the point, Kain understands and embraces this. He's evil, he knows he's evil, and he doesn't care because why should he?

[Olinser]

To clarify, what I mean, with "Atleast I admit it"-Characters: I mean Characters, who are ready to admit, that what they're doing is just evil. Often in Contrast to Characters, who don't admit it and think, that they're doing the right Thing or are allowed to do that. An Example would be a Villain, who tortures People just for Fun lecturing an Anti-Hero, who thinks, that he tortures only People who deserve it and to get the right results, while secretly also enjoying it.

Okay, I don't really have a Problem with it as a Trope. I've more of a Problem that the Reaction to this Trope is often, that People are impressed by the "Atleast I admit it"-Character, because he is at least honest and no Hypocrite!

I am not impressed, because I see this as just another hypocritical way to pretend, that you are better than other People, who are doing the same despicable Thing. "Atleast I admit it" is just like "Atleast I do it, to do the right Thing" or "Atleast I don't do it to innocent People" just another Way, to convince yourself, that you're still somehow better, because you're more honest or something like that. Only that it is additionally also hypocritical, because you pretend to make no excuses, while using this Line like it is an excuse.

I also find it a little stupid, because the Character is on the inside exactly, what he is on the outside, while pretending to be deep.

Characters like that are stupid and annoying, because probably 99% of the time they aren't 'admitting' ANYTHING. They're acknowledging that somebody has confronted them with incontrovertible proof of their hypocritical actions, and then they try to act like denying something until it's been proven and then 'admitting' their behavior gives them some kind of moral high ground over other people.

[Aotrs Commander]

Oh I agree evil exists.

I just don't believe you specifically are actually evil, Aotrs. it takes a lot more than constantly proclaiming you are to convince me. its just a persona. real evil is never that honest with itself. it NEVER admits that its evil. more often you hear such a thing from people who feel such immense guilt that they conclude they are evil or something. being hammy, cackling "evilly" and having a cool base while wearing a cape are just the aesthetics of evil, the coolness factors that everyone wishes evil DID have so that it would be fun BEING evil but don't actually exist.

I would have to say I find that to be a line of wishful thinking; that evil is inherently self-destructive and oblivious (and stupid), because the alternative doesn't bear thinking about: that if it wasn't, it might, y'know, WIN.

But I will not rant about the subject further, because - as I say - I am having to censor myself VERY carefully on this ground (re-write and very, very carefully analyse what I post, tone it down to polite levels, delete much of it and so on), lest thresholds of board civility be passed.



Let me put it this way: saying that "evil people don't exist like that" and "you're not evil" to someone who is both that and evil is about the ballpark level of offense as saying transgender people don't exist or something to someone's face1. Now, let me be QUITE clear here: you are all ABSOLUTELY free to snort derisively and roll your eyes, consider I'm being silly or a drama Lich or making mountains out of molehills or that its not a 'real issue' or whatever; nor are you in any way obligated to stop discussing it, nor to give the slightest of fracks about my feelings - I'm FRACKING EVIL, duh, you totally probably shouldn't morally anyway - (and no, I am not being remotely sarcastic in the preceeding sentences, I am geniunely, honestly not, seriously) but, as they say, there is, at least, the reason why I'm having to self-censor rather more than usual in this discourse.
Also, go ask Ponythid about what happened the last time someone said "I don't think you're Evil, you won't shoot me in cold blood just to prove you are." Oh, wait. You can't.



1I mean, there are things that would deeply offend me more (the aspersion that sex will somehow change an individual (i.e. the concept of 'getting laid' as some sort of magical personality cure), the suggestion that I am or ever was human where it mattered, even while alive or that I am a Vampire or something), but it ranks fairly high.

[Lord Raziere]

Yeah, yeah whatever dude. Your a truly evil lich, and I'm a chaotic good catfolk magitech inventor who uses red/blue mana. Whatever you say. :smallbiggrin:

[Keltest]

I feel like Aotrs Commander is being examined far more than is warranted...

[Mato]

Just popping in to offer two cents at the topic question.

Knowing who you really are is an inner enlightenment trope. And being able to admit to what you are can often be used in conjunction with some other things to make it seem like your character is intelligent and a sort of mastermind when it comes to planning. But too many exceptional characters are made by unexceptional people so sometimes they can only rely on the same simple things and easy cop-outs rather than developing their characters. Like saying their character is something instead of having them act like it.

[Present 2.0]

I don't really understand, how you can feel offended, AOTRS?

Either you're just a Poser, who hasn't really done anything, to deserve the description "evil" and in that Case, you've no right to feel offended, because the accusations, that you're not really evil are simply true(Or maybe you're offended exactly because of that).

Or and that is the much more disgusting option, you really are someone, who deserves the description "evil". In that Case, whatever harm anyone else could do by offending you is miniscule in comparison to the harm, that you're inflicting on your fellow human beings by stealing from them, torturing them, raping them, killing them or whatever it is, that you do to them to deserve the description "evil". In that Case, you've no right to feel offended, until you make an effort to cause much less harm to other People yourself, before you're complaining about the harm, that other People do to you by "offending" you.

[2D8HP]

I COLOR="#FFFFFF"]Also, go ask Ponythid about what happened the last time someone said "I don't think you're Evil, you won't shoot me in cold blood just to prove you are." Oh, wait. You can't.[/COLOR..
So what did happen?

And who or what is "Ponythid"?

[Forum Explorer]

1I mean, there are things that would deeply offend me more (the aspersion that sex will somehow change an individual (i.e. the concept of 'getting laid' as some sort of magical personality cure),

It's been a long time since I saw that trope, but it still bothers me a lot.



I don't really understand, how you can feel offended, AOTRS?

Either you're just a Poser, who hasn't really done anything, to deserve the description "evil" and in that Case, you've no right to feel offended, because the accusations, that you're not really evil are simply true(Or maybe you're offended exactly because of that).

Or and that is the much more disgusting option, you really are someone, who deserves the description "evil". In that Case, whatever harm anyone else could do by offending you is miniscule in comparison to the harm, that you're inflicting on your fellow human beings by stealing from them, torturing them, raping them, killing them or whatever it is, that you do to them to deserve the description "evil". In that Case, you've no right to feel offended, until you make an effort to cause much less harm to other People yourself, before you're complaining about the harm, that other People do to you by "offending" you.

It's basically like going up to someone who says they are asexual and saying that's not a real thing.

[Present 2.0]

It's basically like going up to someone who says they are asexual and saying that's not a real thing.

Being Ace isn't about harming others, which is why an ace Person has the right to complain about the harm, that I am doing to them by offending them. Being Evil is about harming others in a much worse way than just offending them, which is why AOTRS has no right to complain about the harm, that others do to him by offending him, because that harm is miniscule in comparison to the harm, that he does to others, if he really deserves the description "evil".

[Frozen_Feet]

*blinks*

Right to complain? Right to be offended?

Since when has anyone evil cared about what you think they have the rights to?

Like, of course evil people get offended. Of course they complain. Especially when the reasons are petty and disproportionate and reveal them to be deeply awful persons. Telling them they "don't have the right" will only make them more offended, and then they'll use it as an excuse to send hatemail to your family, kick your dog, wreck your car or piss on your lawn. :smalltongue:

[2D8HP]

....Telling them they "don't have the right" will only make them more offended, and then they'll use it as an excuse to send hatemail to your family, kick your dog, wreck your car or piss on your lawn. :smalltongue:.
*taking notes*

Good suggestions all, keep 'em coming!

[Friv]

I feel like Aotrs Commander is being examined far more than is warranted...

Aotrs is being examined because everyone else is engaged in a discussion about morality in fiction, and he is engaged in a particularly elaborate roleplay.

For the record, I believe that Aotrs is actually evil to the exact same degree that I believe that he is actually a lich.

On the subject of the Operative, it's the realization that the Alliance is not, in fact, a greater good that causes him to abandon his pursuit of the heroes and let them live (and, implicitly, chooses to end his own life). He was comfortable being a villain if the harm that he caused led to a substantially better world, but not with being a villain if the harm that he caused only made the powerful more powerful. It's a pretty solid character arc.

It seems like there are three real types of evil in the world:

1) People who believe that they are good - either that the evils that they commit aren't evil, or that the evils that they commit are justified by the final results.
2) People who believe that everyone is like them, and that good is an illusion. I knew a guy like this in university, and I could never figure out whether his claims that everyone would be criminals if they thought they could get away with it was bad first year philosophy or a fundamental projection of his own psyche.
3) People who say that good people suffer and evil people prosper, and they don't want to be the ones suffering. These people sometimes actually take pleasure from causing harm, but just as often they're just focusing on themselves.

[Ramza00]

It is well done in Fate Zero.

[Metahuman1]

Yeah, yeah whatever dude. Your a truly evil lich, and I'm a chaotic good catfolk magitech inventor who uses red/blue mana. Whatever you say. :smallbiggrin:

Oh, OH! Can I be a Sune-Touched Were Bear Water Storm Giant BardBalde?!!!!! XD!!!

[HandofShadows]

2) People who believe that everyone is like them, and that good is an illusion. I knew a guy like this in university, and I could never figure out whether his claims that everyone would be criminals if they thought they could get away with it was bad first year philosophy or a fundamental projection of his own psyche.

I would put money on a projection of his own psyche. And I would stay as far away as I could from him. Because if he thinks he could get away with something, he has a good chance of trying it.



3) People who say that good people suffer and evil people prosper, and they don't want to be the ones suffering. These people sometimes actually take pleasure from causing harm, but just as often they're just focusing on themselves.

Evil people suffer as often as good people. Sometimes more.

[2D8HP]

Yeah, yeah whatever dude. Your a truly evil lich, and I'm a chaotic good catfolk magitech inventor who uses red/blue mana. Whatever you say. :smallbiggrin:


Oh, OH! Can I be a Sune-Touched Were Bear Water Storm Giant BardBalde?!!!!! XD!!!


This Forum does have D&D characters posting to it:
Wizards researching a tome of eldrich lore (the academics).

Fighters (the soldiers).

I think there's even a couple of Clerics.


And personally?

"A dungeon is a room or cell in which prisoners are held, especially underground" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon)

For my employer (The City and County of San Francisco, A.K.A. Lankhmar),

I have:

Gone on quests (searched for any remaining intact plumbing under the piers),

Explored ruins (the former Naval base, shipyards, and let's face it most of the rest of the buildings are "well used")

Seeking treasure (look for plumbing fixtures to steal/salvage from the abandoned 6th floor Jail, for use on the 7th floor Jail).

Also, I've encountered monsters (had Sea Lions surface next to me under the piers, one seemed to be the size of a VW Microbus!, plus... well the inmates), crawled through underground tunnels, entered crypts (jobs in the autopsy room!), looted dark passageways (the Jail cell plumbing chases looking for parts to use for the occupied cells), and I'm a Guild member (Plumbers and Steamfitters, Local 38!).

Seems that I'm a dungeon delving Guild Thief (I hope Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser don't slay me :smalleek:)!

[Mith]

This Forum does have D&D characters posting to it:
Wizards researching a tome of eldrich lore (the academics).

Fighters (the soldiers).

I think there's even a couple of Clerics.


And personally?

"A dungeon is a room or cell in which prisoners are held, especially underground" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon)

For my employer (The City and County of San Francisco, A.K.A. Lankhmar),

I have:

Gone on quests (searched for any remaining intact plumbing under the piers),

Explored ruins (the former Naval base, shipyards, and let's face it most of the rest of the buildings are "well used")

Seeking treasure (look for plumbing fixtures to steal/salvage from the abandoned 6th floor Jail, for use on the 7th floor Jail).

Also, I've encountered monsters (had Sea Lions surface next to me under the piers, one seemed to be the size of a VW Microbus!, plus... well the inmates), crawled through underground tunnels, entered crypts (jobs in the autopsy room!), looted dark passageways (the Jail cell plumbing chases looking for parts to use for the occupied cells), and I'm a Guild member (Plumbers and Steamfitters, Local 38!).

Seems that I'm a dungeon delving Guild Thief (I hope Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser don't slay me :smalleek:)!

But have you ever come across a Dragon on a pile of gold?

[2D8HP]

But have you ever come across a Dragon on a pile of gold?.
:frown:

Sadly no.

Only dragonflies lit by golden sunbeams.

[Mith]

.
:frown:

Sadly no.

Only dragonflies lit by golden sunbeams.

So a more Fey experience than a Draconic one. Considering the nature of Dragons, it is most likely for the best.

[2D8HP]

So a more Fey experience than a Draconic one...


My knowledge of the Fey? Given that the "people of peace"' have a history of blighting your cattle, stealing your children, and causing strokes, shouldn't you use protection? Some methods include bells, crosses (particularly ones made of iron), four-leafed clover, knives, open scissors (particularly ones made of steel), and iron horseshoes.

Personally, weariness of the "Fair Folk" is absolutely the reason I bought the heaviest cast-iron pan I could in case of any visits from "the gentry" (and for steak and fried potatoes).

Really you can't by too careful.

[Metahuman1]

This Forum does have D&D characters posting to it:
Wizards researching a tome of eldrich lore (the academics).

Fighters (the soldiers).

I think there's even a couple of Clerics.


And personally?

"A dungeon is a room or cell in which prisoners are held, especially underground" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon)

For my employer (The City and County of San Francisco, A.K.A. Lankhmar),

I have:

Gone on quests (searched for any remaining intact plumbing under the piers),

Explored ruins (the former Naval base, shipyards, and let's face it most of the rest of the buildings are "well used")

Seeking treasure (look for plumbing fixtures to steal/salvage from the abandoned 6th floor Jail, for use on the 7th floor Jail).

Also, I've encountered monsters (had Sea Lions surface next to me under the piers, one seemed to be the size of a VW Microbus!, plus... well the inmates), crawled through underground tunnels, entered crypts (jobs in the autopsy room!), looted dark passageways (the Jail cell plumbing chases looking for parts to use for the occupied cells), and I'm a Guild member (Plumbers and Steamfitters, Local 38!).

Seems that I'm a dungeon delving Guild Thief (I hope Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser don't slay me :smalleek:)!

Quick! Find a DM! We have an awesome sounding D&D party forming!!!! XD!!!!!

[Frosthead]

While I'm not entirely opposed to those kinds of characters, my issue is with those who actually buy into the "at least I admit it"-excuse and believe that they have any sort of moral high ground in their immorality. When a character has committed enough atrocious acts while admitting to those acts being atrocities, the virtue of honesty becomes as significant as spitting in a desert.
It could easily be argued that this same honesty makes them even worse, since they KNOW what they're doing is wrong, yet still choose to do it. At least you could try reasoning with those with good intentions, by appealing to their desire to do the right thing (which obviously doesn't always work in some stories, but my point still stands).

Of course, this is just a worst-case scenario for this kind of character trope, of which I'm sure there are plenty of well-written examples. I generally disapprove the idea of admiring villains for any percieved virtue while ignoring their vileness. Now, liking the villains FOR their vileness... Let's just say that Frollo is one of my favorite Disney villains.

[Frozen_Feet]

2) People who believe that everyone is like them, and that good is an illusion. I knew a guy like this in university, and I could never figure out whether his claims that everyone would be criminals if they thought they could get away with it was bad first year philosophy or a fundamental projection of his own psyche.

Probably both.

Fear of punishment is one of the earlier moral guidelines that develops in humans. Some people never develop beyond that point. Notably, people of antisocial or narcissistic disposition have such a tendency - and as a result, also a tendency for psychological projection which then manifests as expression of beliefs such as the above.

One famous person attributed with views similar to your associate: Charles Manson. I don't know if that's accurate, but it wouldn't be surprising.

[DomaDoma]

It seems like there are three real types of evil in the world:

1) People who believe that they are good - either that the evils that they commit aren't evil, or that the evils that they commit are justified by the final results.
2) People who believe that everyone is like them, and that good is an illusion. I knew a guy like this in university, and I could never figure out whether his claims that everyone would be criminals if they thought they could get away with it was bad first year philosophy or a fundamental projection of his own psyche.
3) People who say that good people suffer and evil people prosper, and they don't want to be the ones suffering. These people sometimes actually take pleasure from causing harm, but just as often they're just focusing on themselves.

Quoted because it deserves enshrinement.

People in case number three (especially when mixed with a dash of case number two) do pretty much do fall under "at least I admit it." You'd think dispensing such valuable free advice would blunt their competitive edge in this cold, cruel world, but no, they're pretty reliably vocal about it, on short acquaintance at that.

This is one case where art is better off not imitating life. The fictional villains who can keep the philosophy contained long enough to pull off a real betrayal make for much better story arcs than the forty-year-old cynic at the water cooler whose desire to be King of the Mountain comes a long second to making sure you know he's got the world figured out.

[Keltest]

Quoted because it deserves enshrinement.

People in case number three (especially when mixed with a dash of case number two) do pretty much do fall under "at least I admit it." You'd think dispensing such valuable free advice would blunt their competitive edge in this cold, cruel world, but no, they're pretty reliably vocal about it, on short acquaintance at that.

This is one case where art is better off not imitating life. The fictional villains who can keep the philosophy contained long enough to pull off a real betrayal make for much better story arcs than the forty-year-old cynic at the water cooler whose desire to be King of the Mountain comes a long second to making sure you know he's got the world figured out.

As far as it goes, I rather suspect that "brutal honesty" is perhaps less a contributing factor to a rise to power than, say, nigh-limitless resources.