Thread:Mediawatcher/@comment-4708882-20160426013645/@comment-24469175-20160615105256

So I've spoken how much I don't like redeeming villains and in my idea it's clear that redeemed villains will rarely occur, in those rare occasions how do I do it right and when is it done wrong? I mean just because a villain is remorseful or has a sympathetic backstory, has a loved one, cares for someone, has a good cause, realizes their errors, or is overshadow by a higher evil doesn't make them redeemable, it's a redeeming quality, but there's a difference between having a redeeming quality and actually being redeemable.

A good example of a villain with tons of redeeming qualities and is still not redeemable is | The Master from fallout.

The master was responsible for so many awful things in the series, killing numerous innocents, torturing many people, and expirementing with nuclear equipment to turn everyone into mutants, because he believes it's the only way to survive, when you speak to him he explains his plans and it definitely is a sympathetic intention, but his ways of reaching those intentions would've gotten him nowhere. When this information is revealed to him, he feels awful knowing he did all these horrible things for nothing, and then he tells the main character to leave while he still has hope. Blowing up the facility that he used in order to try to complete his goal. However, this was not a heroic sacrifice, he just let the hero leave peacefully and destroyed the facility once he left. There was no action taken and he died honorably but he wasn't truly redeemed, he was still an irredeemable villain, albeit a very tragic and sympathetic one.

When is it done correctly and when is it done poorly, do you know any other examples like the master?