#that feeling when you have to explain your alien homebrew logic to normal people

[justatalkingface]

The Dabi Benchmark of Insanity: A Helpful Guide

What is it? Why won't I shut up about it whenever I talk about villains?

Yeah; this is largely a reference post, for the people who haven't seen this term before... which makes sense, since I made it the fuck up awhile ago and then never really clarified it again, even though I kept using it. I do that a lot whenever I feel the need, but I think this is the only term I've kept using consistently, and I usually explain what I mean in those posts when I make something up, so the DBI is a bit of an anomaly in that sense. I like to think it's self explanatory, really, so it probably doesn't need explanation, but... eh. I talk a lot. One more post won't hurt.

Fundamentally, the DBI is the idea that there's a... limit to how crazy a character can be and still be sympathetic; after a certain point, it doesn't matter how bad their backstory was, no one is going to like the guy eating babies. Authors can (and often do) try to make a truly fucked up character sympathetic anyways, but once they pass that point the response generally isn't sympathy but, 'JFC, can this guy shut up about how we should all like The Masked Baby-Eater already? That guy's an asshole'.

I say 'crazy' for a reason, BTW. The sheer factual amount of evil deeds a character does only has a limited effect on how readers will consider them; how the character is presented, and how they act as they do these deeds effect that reception as well. An easy example is how in something like Gundam, a character who does something objectively horrible (kill someone, start a war, etc etc), but because of how they're developed, and way they act as they do it, we will still sympathize with them. Meanwhile, if there's a school story, a character who is just rude and cruel can be absolutely loathed, by everyone, even if what they did can't possibly be compared to the Gundam character.

It's not that you can't make a good character if you go beyond this point, it's the opposite really: there's plenty of good, memorable characters who are festering shitholes devoid of positive character traits, but we're not expected to find them sympathetic, just really cool or iconic in some way. Making them sympathetic imposes limits on how out there that character can be.

I call it the 'Dabi' benchmark because I feel like Dabi is the perfect example of an edge case, a person who is horrific and broken, but you can still just feel for him why he's like this. It's core to his fundamental design as a character, from his traumatic backstory, to how he's broken and scarred and barely held together by his sheer will, so that while he's an objectively terrible person, cruel, sadistic, who kills easily and wants only to destroy, the reason he's like that is something intrinsically understandable and thus easy to sympathize with.

(Of course, the problem with Dabi is that, as MHA went on, Hori kept changing Endeavour to try and make him sympathetic, while at times intentionally making Dabi seem more at fault for his situation to mitigate Endeavour's blame, which damaged Dabi's characterization on a fundamental level and makes him less sympathetic... but that's not Dabi's fault, that's inconsistent writing)

At the same time, though, I must repeat that he is a terrible human being who does horrible things, and which puts him at that very edge of sympathy, only being accepted by people by how good his backstory is, how fucked up yet human is motivations ultimately are. If his actions had pushed beyond that point, if, for example, instead of just killing people he cold bloodedly tortured them for no real reason, his reception would have been less positive than it was.

In short? The farther a character goes past the Dabi Benchmark of Insanity, that is to say, the more a character is crazier than Dabi, the more people are going to look at you like you're crazy when you try to make them seem sympathetic to the audience.