As I'm writing/outlining/fleshing out y MC, I realized that she doesn't actually "save the day." Her initial motivations are to 1) discover who she is/where she came from (once she gets close to that...), 2) seek revenge on the person who killed her mother (but to do that she has to....), 3) get control of her magical abilities that are slowly killing her. these 3 motivations lead her to the villain and in a final confrontation with him, just when she's about to kill him, she stops herself and someone else kills him. Spoiler: More Details my MC is from a group of desert dwelling mystics that have the ability to see the dead in order to see the past (there's another group of mystics who can see the future by tasting the blood of the living). She doesn't know this because she was adopted and grew up without the knowledge that mystics existed. but she's been able to see the spirit of this dead woman that keeps showing her flashbacks of her life and how she died. this spirit gets more and more dangerous as it starts to possess her. my MC meets a mystic who explains everything to her and sends her on her quest to find the desert mystics to figure out how to end the possession. the mystic also gives her a written prophecy that she's seen long ago that said "the [villain] will be killed by his child." in her travels, she discovers that the spirit is her mother, and the spirit of her mother wants her to kill the person who essentially killed her. So now she believes more than ever that she must kill this guy. Through all of this, the spirit is slowly taking control of her, that by the time she meets the villain, the spirt takes control and tries to kill him but my MC regains control, and another character kills the villain. Part of me thinks this is dumb because the "hero" doesn't really "save the day"..... Luke defeated Vader, Harry defeated Voldemort. Heroes Journeys have to have a hero(?). though she does end up finding her biological family and does learn about her abilities, she doesn't do the big thing: kill the bad guy/avenge dead mom. but then the other part of me is like, if she hadn't have gone on her journey, she wouldn't have found the person who would come to kill the villain and put an end to his rising power. and the bad guy died anyway, so mom gets her peace? i haven't written anything since the new year started, so i'm jumping back in and now i'm over thinking things!!
Your MC has powers that she doesn't know she has. She finds out because there is a spirit who is possessing her through the powers, and it turns out to be her mother. Stuff happens and the MC doesn't kill the villain like her mother's spirit wanted, but that is because the MC has broken the possession from something negative (powers are killing her) and so she is now free. It sounds like your MC is a cog rather than the wheel, meaning that she is too passive to be a hero. She has broken the possession, but she still needs to actively acknowledge the situation. How has her world changed now that she knows who she is? What does it mean to her that she has these powers? She needs to do something to signify she accepts the situation and possibly also accept the responsibility that comes with her powers. So far, it sounds like she didn't kill the villain because she was trying to save herself from her mother's spirit possessing hers, which is fair, but not strictly heroic, unless in the midst of things she chooses not to kill the villain. Otherwise something else has to happen afterwards to make it a hero story.
(Spoiler...Luke didn't defeat Vader...shh...Vader turned good...Pal(something) killed Vader...hero failed to complete primary quest?...did SW no harm at the box office)
There's a variation of this, called the 'If You Kill Him, You Will Be Just Like Him' trope (I'm not using the term trope disparagingly here). I had forgotten about it, but the movie Road House ends almost exactly like yours, the hero refuses, and then someone else (actually several) finish the job for him. As mentioned, 'Return of the Jedi' is listed too, as Luke refused to kill Vader. As much as I like Star Wars, I still don't know if Vader died from contact with Emperor Palpatine's force lightning, or his voluntary removal of his mask to see Luke, but I digress. I don't think it's a bad trope, as long as there is some logical motivation for the hero not to do it. In your scenario, it sounds like she was just trying to regain control of her body, so it wasn't necessarily because she didn't want to kill. You could include some other motivation though if that doesn't seem like a good reason. Off the top of my head, and this may be cliche, it could be that the villain is defeated, knowing he is going to die, and he goads her to do it, because he knows that with her power, she can see the past through the dead, and once he's dead, she can see it through him and he can say something like "Do it, I'd love to show you how I killed your mom" and then she hesitates, and someone does the deed for her to save her the pain. This probably doesn't fit how the clairvoyance works in your worldbuilding, and it sounds like the daughter already witnessed her mom's death (but maybe not the vivid first person POV the villain wants to show her).
The way you described it, I wouldn't say the question is whether your MC kills the villain but rather if it leads to any character growth for her. There are probably a lot of writing theories that have a different take on this, but I'd say that in order for your protagonist to "Save the day", it'd be beneficial to define what this "day" means to her. If the story can be read as "the MC doesn't own anything to the world and, therefore, she grows to realize she doesn't need to save it", I think it's fine. In a story like that, "the world" could symbolize an abusive parent that one does not need to visit if they don't feel like it. For characters like Luke Skywalker or Harry Potter "the world" is usually "the friends we made along the way". Some stories completely ignore this aspect of the story and "the day" just comes down to an excuse that justifies punching people. I'm not a fan of this approach, but even then your MC doesn't need to be the one to do the honors - she should just be one of the people that do the punching. Some old Super Sentais had the main characters just protect the civilians while the villains were slowly thinning their own ranks by systematically betraying each other. The heroes still had their arcs that reached a conclusion, even if the day kind of saves itself by the end. Also, I think there is a huge difference between "saving the day" and "defeating the villain". Some other guy can deliver the finishing blow, but what if the villain already put his/her master plan in motion and the MC has to, like, stop a rocket or something? If your story is about the MC regaining control over her life, the fact she doesn't kill the villain might be a pivotal point of her journey, without stopping her from saving the day. Maybe the villain is working on behalf of a different spirit, the other character kills the villain and then that spirit tries to possess the villain-killer? The world is still in danger, but since the MC was able to sever her connection with the mom-spirit, she could be the only one able to quickly teach the same thing to the villain-killer and therefore still save the day without killing the villain herself?
Luke still “saves the day” in the sense that he’s responsible for Vader’s redemption. Directly saving the day isn’t really necessary as long as the protagonist plays an active role in the climax. Ideally, they make a critical decision and take charge of their fate. But it doesn’t have have to be a good decision. MASSIVE Spoilers for The Traitor Baru Cormorant: Spoiler One of the best books I read last year sees the MC do pretty much the opposite of saving the day. In The Traitor Baru Cormorant, the titular character betrays the rebellion she masterminded and the woman she loves, all to expand her power and influence in the empire that colonized her homeland. But as she watches the execution of her lover, Baru decides that softening the occupation of her homeland isn’t enough anymore. The book ends with her making a poignant promise to herself: It might be best to steer clear of the possession angle, so your MC chooses not to kill the villain of her own free will rather than as a consequence of resisting possession. Could this plot work with the spirit as a sort of “devil on your shoulder”? Just nudging the MC toward her goals? Maybe possession is something she could do later, but right now the spirit is only building influence. How the climax unfolds really depends on what theme you’re going for, but I could envision a scenario where your MC is about to kill the villain and realizes she’s become little more than an instrument of her mother’s wrath and is on the verge of ceasing to be her own person. Her goals and desires and dreams have been almost completely replaced by her mother’s. Perhaps that’s actually how possession works in-universe: some spirit pushing you to be more and more like it until you are it. This might actually work as a reason why the MC chooses not to kill the villain. She realizes she’s so close to being totally subsumed into her mother, and killing the villain would push her over the edge.
Plent of stories have heroes who don't directly beat the main villain, and there's no reason yours should be any different. However, your main character must make decisions that both show her character and drive the plot forward. In LOTR, Frodo doesn't directly confront the big bad and challenge him to a sword fight, but his actions nonetheless led to Sauron's downfall. He chose to enter Mordor and journey to Mount Doom. Frodo did all this despite the psychological and physical toll the ring placed on him, showing the characteristic resolve and strength that define his character. Even though Frodo fails and its Gollum who actually leads to the ring getting destroyed, the audience doesn't mind because Frodo is still making active decisions within the scene. The climax scenario you describe needs to accomplish a few things. Her decision to resist the spirit must somehow contribute to the defeat of the villain. She might even fail and become possessed. However, as long as it made clear to the audience that she's choosing to resist and that resistance buys enough time for the heroes to win, she will still be a compelling character. There should also be some kind of temptation for your main character to let herself be possessed. Having the spirit be her dead mother presents a unique lure for the MC that you could leverage. Finding closure with one's deceased parents is a well-worn trope, but it could be used well here. She may even decide to give up that potential for closure for the greater good.
Vader is clearly the protagonist of Star Wars and saves the day by facing up to the story's truth and killing the antagonist (as he should have done the minute he heard him talking in a croaky voice and saw him shooting lightning bolts out his pinkies). But in the phrase, "saving the day," it's entirely up to the writer and the character what the "day" is and what "saving" it means. Sophocles' Oedipus might be a good hero to look at for this - at the end of the day his dad is still dead, and his mum is still his wife, and he's also ripped his own eyes out - but he has saved the day by revealing the power of the gods over the audience, and by sacrificing whatever it took to place truth above falsehood.
I thought of something else as well. Even if the MC doesn't kill the villain by chance (because someone else's did, like the prophecy predicted, and only then she understands the meaning of the prophecy), if in the process of getting rid of the possession she realizes that the possession itself has taken the shape of her own fears (perhaps of having been abandoned, or a metaphorical representation of another kind of fear, where maybe it is the fear that repressed her powers--ok now I am just making stuff up ) , so she chooses to fight her own fears, forgetting about the villain, and then wins them, I would say that also is heroic. just a question: the prophecy has the function to make the MC not the one who kills the villain, but is that its only function?
You're right that the phrase can mean a lot, but I don't know if it can be distorted quite enough to mean that. Applying the term "saving the day" to Classical tragedy seems basically opposed to the raison-d'etre of tragedy in the first place. In the immediate terms of the story, Oedipus emphatically does not save the day and that is what makes him a tragic hero. He is demonstrative of certain truths about the gods and so forth, sure, but whose day does he save? Not his own, not the days of those near him. Does he save the audience's day? Not really, and that's extratextual anyway. I think "saving the day" must be confined to the incidents of plot to retain any meaning. Admittedly it's been a while since I read the play.
Maybe by the end she's learned something important, probably about herself, and now it's no longer important to kill the bad guy or save the day or whatever. Turns out her arc was character growth. Could be difficult though if it's set up from the beginning as a 'hero saves the day' type story.
So much good feedback and suggestions here! I want to respond to everyone (talking about things helps me see things i've missed and draw inspiration), but im at risk of rambling and drawing my responses out into giant paragraphs (also... apologies for the Luke/Vader mistake ) prophecy is misdirection... as she learns about the spirit, she first finds out who the spirit is (her mom) and then finds out through the spirits flashbacks that the villain is her bio dad. So then she believes her mission is not only to get revenge for her mom, but to fulfil the prophecy, which is to kill her dad. When she meets him toward the climax, its under the guise of a serving woman and she initially thinks "i found my dad, maybe he's not bad anymore" but he is terrible. the guy that finally kills the villain turns out to be the villain's son (MC's half brother that she met in her travels who was also on his way to see the villain, but under more positive circumstances, and he only shot the villain to stop him from trying to kill the MC). My MC was always kind of clingy to the spirit. it showed up when she was a child and she thought she'd made her up in her loneliness and that she was just an imaginary friend that didnt go away. My character has "mommy" and "daddy" issues: she has an adoptive father that, until the events of the story, always believed he was her real father. when she finds out he isnt, theres a betrayal there and a hatred. so the more she runs away from her adoptive dad, the more she clings to the spirit of her mom, because at least she still has 1 parent. her desert kin try to exercise the spirit from her, but my MC runs away, choosing to hold on to her mom despite her mom no longer being "mom" and more of a vengeful spirit that doesnt care about her. her adoptive dad, who has raised her her entire life and still very much loves her, has been tracking her the entire WIP and finally find her in the end during the faceoff with villain. i've played around with the idea that the reason why she doesnt kill the villain is because A) she chooses her adoptive dad over her mom, B) she finally sees that her "mom" is no longer there anymore but has fully become a vengeful spirit, C) that killing the villain wont bring her mom back and D) her mom's spirit had been with her since she was a child (before it became corrupted) and so its time to finally let her go (exercised).
Not having read the entire thread, I have to say I like the twist of the 'hero' not taking care of the villain herself. Whether she is the 'hero' or not, she is your main character. She is still the driving force of the story and, so it sounds, the one responsible for getting the right people in place do to what she either could not do, or would not do. I've had a similar idea from time to time, about have an instigator character who just thinks he/she is the main character. I'd say no idea is a bad idea, it all depends on how you carry it through.
In the first Iron Man movie, when he realized that terrorists were using his weapons against innocent villagers, he flew to a Middle Eastern village where they were active. If I remember right he used little precision missiles to destroy their weapons (his weapons)*, and then stepped away and let the villagers demolish them. He didn't have a personal stake in that particular conflict, but they all did, since they had lost friends, family, children etc and had had their peaceful way of life threatened by these thugs. It would have been a bit too much for him to kill them all, since they didn't do anything to him personally. But the villagers did have very strong personal motivation to kill them. * Or did he kill a bunch of them and then let the villagers demolish the leader? I don't remember which. But either way, he allowed them to satisfy their very real bloodlust for these goons. His own motivations weren't so bloodthirsty.
In the first Rocky movie, Rocky loses- but that was never the victory he needed. His heroism lay elsewhere. I’m repeating what others have said, but it’s just another great example of a successful story where the hero doesn’t “save the day” in the usual sense.
I want to make a distinction, to be added to my first post in this thread. It seems to me that "hero saves the day" is closer to a trope, whereas the hero's journey engulfs story/character arcs. I posted responses more from the point of view of the hero's journey (especially in my second post), because to me it leaves more room for play, and ultimately it gives clear instructions on what makes a hero and how to make one. Instead, "the hero saves the day" (a trope) is a bit more narrow-focused on what makes a hero, where the hero doesn't need to grow or change but needs to act consciously as a hero for others at the time she saves the day. If you want to center your story on "the hero saves the day", it seems to me there is a need for there to be a hero before she saves the day, meaning that you need to make your MC a hero before she saves the day by not killing the villain (it sounds like that is your saving the day turning point in your novel, or else something else needs to happen). However, I am speaking from personal understanding on "the hero saves the day" vs. the hero's journey, I am not fully sure I get those right.
I suppose I have one big concern here: If your MC choosing not to seek vengeance and not to kill the villain is a key turning point in her character arc and role in the story...then having someone else kill the villain could easily feel like a cop-out. Killing is bad and you should stick to your morals and not kill for vengeance's sake...but it's totally cool when this guy does it. The villain definitely needed to die, and now it's not your protagonist's problem anymore. She doesn't have to deal with the fallout of not killing the villain or find another way to subdue him. If this isn't her key character moment, then what is? What is she doing that makes this battle the climax to your protagonist's personal story? I don't know enough about your story to know if this is actually a problem, just be aware that it's a potential one.
MC needs to defeat the villain, but not necessarily kill him, especially if the MC gets a little "revenge isn't worth it" advice along the way.
