One Hundred Fantasy Clichés That Really Need To Rest In Peace

#83: The Genocide Route

  In the popular video game Undertale, the player can take one of two routes based on their actions during the events of the plot.  Once a route is chosen, the consequences are hard to erase, even if you restart the game for a different outcome.  No matter what, your decisions will still be represented in the game even when you try to erase the old data.  This makes the choice all the more important.  The first path, the Pacifist Route, is where the player can show complete mercy on the monsters they encounter throughout their travels.  Although experience points are impossible, making levels further off in the game much harder, the heartwarming storyline that follows from this choice is one to be savored.  You can repair relations betweens monsters and humans with your own bare hands, meeting a cast of unforgettable characters along the way.  The journey outweighs becoming stronger in the game.  Then there is the other aforementioned path, known as the Genocide Route.  Like the title suggests, this path has you kill all of the monsters you encounter.  Although you are able to gain experience points and get better over time with each fight, there is a high price to pay.  All of the characters, even the ones you get attached to, will have to die in order for you to go forward in the game.  No one except you gains anything but pain and chaos.  These monster characters are so lovable in the case of Undertale that more people find themselves enjoying the strategy based Pacifist Route more than the combat related Genocide Route.  Subtly through this distinction in both routes, Undertale teaches the player a strong lesson about the consequences of one's actions.  Once you kill someone, regardless of their morality, you will in some shape or form have blood on your hands.  Unless the character is a true threat to the world, killing should be avoided at all costs.  This morality tale not only should be given to more video games out there, but for stories in the fantasy genre as well.

  How many times in recent fantasy books has the main character decided to spare the life of the main villain?  To answer that question with warts and all, it is not that many.  Almost always to resolve the plot, the hero must kill the villain.  Harry Potter ended with the death of Voldemort, who died at the hero's hands.  There is no excuse for any of the hideous actions Voldemort has done, especially with the massacring of many powerful wizards and regular humans.  However, could there have been a way to instead contain the character somewhere he could never fully revive himself or escape to cause harm ever again?  There is additionally the Warriors book series, where almost every single major storyline ends with the death of the main villain.  This is especially true for Scourge, a character in the first arc of the series that under different circumstances could have possibly been spared.  Like Voldemort, his actions are also inexcusable.  He has viciously killed many cats and brutally took out Tigerstar in a way that made even the main hero Firestar completely horrified.  The series has shown in various examples that a fate worse than death is exile or being completely outcasted by everyone around you.  Would completely outcasting Scourge from the forest and his own street gang inspired Clan have been a better choice than killing him?  These two characters, among many others, from this train of thought brings up this question in most potential writers.  Is the Genocide Route truly something that needs to be explored plot after plot?

  While there are exceptions, I say the Genocide Route is an overused playing card that should only be used in the worst case scenario.  If it is self defense or the villain has no way to be stopped from harming other civilians, then this ace in the hole is the way to go.  In all other cases, as an inspiring writer myself, I feel the Pacifist Route is the prime choice if your deck of playing cards are positioned correctly.  The lesson of mercy is a strong one, which despite the small chance of becoming a cliché upon itself can strength a story.  It also makes your main character look more human in the eyes of your audience.  An average person if in the same position would go for the Pacifist Route if their deck of cards were positioned correctly.

  A great example of this is surprisingly from a series I criticized in the past; the Nightshade series.  In the past, I criticized the book for being a Twilight copycat that had one of the most unsettling love triangles I have ever seen.  Despite this, the series does have a strong point in its third installment Bloodrose.  The wolf tribe Calla leads end up defeating the main villain, Bosque Mar with a device known as the Elemental Cross.  This decision leaves the character trapped in another dimension, with the tribe deciding to make the ultimate sacrifice to seal the door shut forever by turning into their spirit animal for all entirety; wolves.  The decision shows the characters to not be selfish to just kill Bosque Mar to stay human as well as shows what they are willing to sacrifice to truly bring peace.  A well written bittersweet end to Calla's story, it brings in the use of the Pacifist Route and makes the story stand out as more than just a Twilight copycat.  If I am giving the Nightshade series some type of credit, it is the strong original usage of the Pacifist Route.

  If a series I deemed cliché can flawlessly play the Pacifist Route card, why can't anybody else?  By considering a second set of actions for the main character to take, the possibilities are endless for the stories you can weave.  Painting outside of the lines will make your story pop out more to the audience.  Mercy in a literary sense can be stronger than death.