Combine: Anti-Villain and Not-So-Bad-Guys.

With Anti-Villain taking the top spot of course, because to Hell with the other's page title. Anywhoo, they both appear to serve the same purpose beyond maybe some minor semantics, so I say they should be joined as one in holy matrimony.

Wait, what? "Not-so-bad-guys"? That's terrible.

I dunno. Anti-villain seems like someone who does bad things in the hope to achieve good. No-So-Bad Guys seems more focused on the less "evil" villains who might help out the hero every now and then, like Catwoman. The two pages could obviously use some fleshing out, but I don't think they're intended to cover the same concept.

Not-So-Bad? Jesus. that's a horrible name. I feel like they're different enough, but Not-So-Bad guys should be changed to Misunderstood Villains or something...

Not So Bad Guys is a terrible terrible name,This sort of thing is where the wiki inclusion gets blurry for me. To me this idea is a trope, and if my understanding of how GB wants this run is correct those don't belong in the wiki.

I get what you are getting at, but I don't think Catwoman is a "Not So bad guy". She has her comic book series for one, if anything she is a pretty classic example of an anti-hero.

What the Not So Bad Guy page seems to intend to be covering is villains (say like Golbez from Final Fantasy IV), who appear to be evil but are actually using unorthodox means to try to achieve the greater good.

I don't see why the anti-villain page doesn't cover that adequately, from a player perspective they still generally serve as antagonists to the player character for the most part.

I feel like I understand the difference in the pages. They are technically two different things. The real question is, do they need to be two separate pages or can we do some sort of merger. I definitely agree with the sentiment that Anti-Villain has the less terrible name.

I think the idea may be a Not-So-Bad-Guy could still end up being the villain? like it's more characteristic than plot relevant?

given as Slag said it is honestly more of a trope, and the page is probably only so popular because people like to cling to that stuff, i could stand to see someone just go through and find which characters attached to it are more anti-villains and then delete the page.

@slag: With Catwoman I was thinking mainly about her portrayal in Arkham City, which would be her biggest video game appearance recently. Outside of rescuing Batman once to pay him back for rescuing her, she's mostly just interested in enriching herself. She clearly doesn't have good intentions, not is she particularly heroic.

Like others have said, I believe they're two different things. The problem is "Not-So-Bad" is a terrible, subjective name. I think the concept itself is somewhat objective, but can possibly be defined.

Such as characters that feel that their villainous means justify their possibly beneficial ends

This should be anti-hero. Anti-villain would be Villain doing benevolent things to justify their malevolent ends. To simplify it a bit more:

Anti-Heroes (such as Wolverine and V in V for Vendetta) are selfish and in some cases use borderline-villainous actions as a means to justify heroic ends.

Anti-Villains (such as Lex Luthor, Lawler in Arrow) (Think fictional corrupt military officials or politicians) use heroic means to attain villainous ends (such as megalomaniacal goals in Luthor's case).

@marino said:

Aha, alritey then. I guess the task at hand then is to more clearly clarify the two pages to further separate them. And to also change the 'NSBG' page's name to something a little less likely to destroy brain cells.

You're totally right, I messed up on my deck description! If anything what I've been writing on the Anti-Villain page is more suitable for the 'NSBG' page.