I think it would add more nuance to the Moral Scaling System. Should also include Non-Hero IAs and Non-Villain IHs as well.

I wanted to add this on the Moral Agency page, but I didn’t know how to put it there.

Maybe this is something obvious, but I felt the need to explain it just in case.

So, when you list the character’s tragedy or moral agency on their page, you must give an explanation when they are tragic or have impaired agency. You can’t just write “they’re tragic” or “they have moral agency issues”, there needs to be an explanation on why they have a tragic past that affects them or don’t have full moral agency.

But when it comes to characters who don’t have any tragedy or Impaired Agency, it’s a bit more complicated.

The same thing can be said for characters who don’t have any redeeming or corrupting factor.

Now, if the character has a possible mitigating factor to discuss, the page should mention it.

This is especially true for more complex PEs or characters that appear to be made of evil.

But when the character doesn’t have any possible redeeming quality, there’s no need to explain.

In fact, it would be impossible.

When making a page for a cartoonishly evil character, obviously it can’t say “Positive Prevention Free: They lack redeeming qualities”, since it would be redundant.

So the page should just say “Positive Prevention Free”.

If you’re making a page for a normal human being, you can’t explain why they have moral agency, since if there’s nothing hinting they may have impaired agency, there’s nothing to specify.

TLDR: The Moral Prevention Severity sections must always have an explanation for every area, expect when there’s no need for an explanation.

I got the news that a page detailing Magnificent Baddies is under construction right now. If we’re getting that, should we also add pages for the following classes of characters from other scales? This would include the following:

• Pathetic Pinhead

• Excellent Eejit

• Guile Hero

• Love Exalted

• Hate Sink

• Entertainingly Detestable

• Shonen Hero

• Seinen Hero

• Shojo Hero

• Shonen Rival

• Shonen Villain

• Shojo Villain

(NOTE: I did not mention any categories that are exclusive to the Reception Scaling system, including Scrappy, Base-Breaking Character, Ensemble Dark Horse, Main Light Horse, Insanely Cool, and Incredibly Cruel because those require an analysis of how the fan base reacted to the characters, which is completely unrelated to how they were written and much harder to measure because fan bases come in varying sizes.)

I am primarily wondering because a few of these categories are marked as associated with certain moral ranks on the Moral Spectrum page, and a handful of the wikis for these categories also mention moral ranks in their criteria, explaining what categories can and can’t apply.

That new update interesting me, Is it a Rank 5 a good idea which are characters are even less heroic or villainous than Rank 4, Is the new update good?

Are they a part of moral scaling system?

Alright, so, within a couple days, the new ranks are going to be added onto the wiki. The ranks (Rank 5 - and Rank 5 +) will be for characters who are either villains or heroes. These characters are not for neutral characters (Rank 0) who are neither heroes or villains. But, this is for characters who are basic, bog-standard heroes or villains. When these new categories get added to the wiki, there will be major changes to couple pages (especially for both character and franchise/story pages). Later on, there will be more updates to the about pages, as well.

For the time being, an important question is: What would be the name to these type of characters?

I am not sure if Standard Evil and Standard Good would be the best name here. The reason is that a simple school bully who throws a paper ball at someone and name-calls, a character like that could be argued to have done standard evil acts. Is this type of character a villain? No. Are they evil? Yes. Are they doing standard evil acts? Yeah, that is the case here. The same can be said for Standard Good characters. A non-hero character politely holding the door for someone in assistance or helping their neighbor with planting a garden; again: Is it enough to be a hero? No. Is it an act of being good? Yes. Is it just standard good acts? Yeah, pretty much.

The naming should also make it clear the difference between ill-natured and bog-standard villains and good/well-natured and bog-standard heroes.

So, we'll need to decide on the official names for these rankings.

Maybe:

- Standard Villainy / Standard Heroism (just like the naming of the pages)

- Standard Evil Villainy / Standard Good Heroism

Or any other suggestions could work. We just need to decide which names work best for this new rank.

If Ratigan (The Great Mouse Detective) didn't turn feral, would he have been bog-standard? I asked this question on his talk page on the Pure Evil wiki but I didn't get a response.

I got a few questions:

1. Is there an tag where all the most admirable/heinous heroes & villains got too many preventions to PGs/PEs NPGs/NPEs that make them hard to comeby?

2. Is there an Discord for this Wiki like most moral scaling wikis do?

Many characters who have profile here lost their HB/VB status due to being bog-standard. What should we do to their moral ranking page if they cannot be ranked anywhere?

Following the recent changes on Villainous and Heroic Benchmark wikis criteria which bans general standard-failures from their sites, two new moral-ranking wikis were necessary in order to bring bog-standard characters back to their belonging place in the ranking system, because, contrary to popular belief, they do need to be scaled. They are the Standard Good and Standard Evil wikis. If you know of any villain or hero that have been deleted of the former wikis for being bog-standard, you're more than welcome to contribute to those wikis and help them grow.

What would i need for a verse to have Rivaled Moral Standards

Basically, villain who didn't pass baseline won't qualify as VB now

To clarify: Neutral Qualities is qualities that are neither corrupting nor redeeming.

Im new on this wiki

I've only seen four as of now:

• Cotton Cookie (Pure Good)

• Abalone Cookie (Pure Evil)

• Licorice Cookie (Villainous Benchmark)

• Twizzly Gummy Cookie (Villainous Benchmark)