Broken Title: Expy

Deadlock Clock: 14th Sep 2011 11:59:00 PM
Total posts: [93]
1 2 3 4
Teutonic Tomboy T-Girl
Yeah, I do think "inspired by" is the watchword, not "similar to."

One question I've wondered about is, does/should the definition of Expy allow for more than one inspiration? A couple comics-based examples I've wondered about:

The different inspirations above all seem more or less equally plausible, but if they're not narrowed to ONE, does that make the new characters not-Expy?

edited 16th Jun '11 6:49:38 AM by suedenim

I've seen some people declare "Character Y" an expy of "Character X" simply because they have a few traits in common. This is while sometimes ignoring other traits that make the two characters different.
53 32_Footsteps16th Jun 2011 01:03:47 PM from Just north of Arkham , Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Think of the mooks!
[up][up]Neither of those examples would be expies... the first is a Captain Ersatz created via Composite Character. The second is one Captain Ersatz in a standard Power Trio.

Unless we're giving up and merging Captain Ersatz and Expy, considering how often the two are misused.
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.
Teutonic Tomboy T-Girl
That's not how Captain Ersatz works, though. As I understand it, Captain Ersatz is for exact (or damn close) copies.
[up][up][up][up] I don't see why not. I'm not familiar with your examples, but it is possible to get inspired by multiple characters to create a new one, and I don't see any reason why not to.

[up][up][up] And that's another reason why we need to focus on the fact that the inspiration is there, not that they are perfectly the same. For exampe House is a very obvious Holmes expy, and that shouldn't be ignored just because he also happens to be a Doctor Jerk. The inspiration is there, even if the writers played with it, that is almost an expectation of a Expy, that is what makes it different from Captain Ersatz.

[up][up] and [up] And that's also not how Composite Character works either. That is a trope for when the two original characters should, by all rights, appear in an adaptation or sequel, in the same setting, but they are written out and replaced by one new. The only way Jet Dream could be a Composite Character of them, would be if it would take place in a Bond/Blackhawk crossover universe, where you could expect Blackhawk and Pussy Galore to show up, and you would get her instead of them.
[up][up][up][up][up]The Jet Dream example used the word "or" beetween the examples(ok, it actually used "and/or", but...) It is a bad signal...

edited 16th Jun '11 4:59:10 PM by MagBas

Dragon Writer
TRS is a forum, not bumper-cars.
Bump with content, I think reverting back to the old defintion and creating a new trope of "this character is similar to a character in a work by another author" would keep the clutter out and narrow the criteria.
62 Balmung22nd Jun 2011 11:21:49 PM from Omaha, NE, Free American Empire , Relationship Status: GAR for Archer
Break the Chains
The thing is, it would be more in line with how we do things to instead keep Expy how it is and maybe add the old definition as a Sub-Trope, though I don't think we need to do that.
[up][up] Narrowing a criteria isn't always useful. That "clutter" you are talking about is already part of the definition, and it is used consistently for that. There is no reason at all to change it.

There is a reason why the page was expanded, namely that it was used like that anyways.
@#60: Sorry, sorry...

@#50: Really, the inspiration must be blatant. But i guess a character possess the same role than the original character is insufficient- by Word of God, neither Lyra is inspired in Kris, neither Willie is inspired in Marion. Both are "while they are different enough that if you would put them near each other, they wouldn't be that similar" examples.

edited 23rd Jun '11 9:28:59 AM by MagBas

Okay, I've been following this thread the entire time, and I'm confused. Is Expy supposed to be characters written by the same author? I thought that was Star System.

But if that's the definition, I'm still curious what a similar character written by another author would be. The little sister in Nogizaka Haruka no Himitsu by Igarashi Yuusaku looks exactly like Nana of To Love-Ru written by Kentarou Yabuki, complete with Cute Little Fangs. So what would that fall under?

When it was launched, Expy was about characters written by the same author, but it got expanded, because everyone misused it for all authors copying characters, and we made the description fit that usage.
67 shimaspawn23rd Jun 2011 09:10:43 AM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
@64, if you're going to use more than three arrows, put @#of the post you're replying to rather than making people try to figure out how many you're going up. This also helps prevent ninjaing.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
Sorry, already corrected.
69 NoirGrimoir30th Jul 2011 07:02:54 PM from San Diego, CA , Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
Rabid Fujoshi
From what I gather with this, Expy has now become basically Captain Ertaz or really damn close, where the original definition was more like Recycled Character. If that's the case I say merge Captain Ertaz and Expy with Expy as the title (because it's use more and is easier to spell) and then re-trope the original as Recycled Character, or whatever the original intention was.

edited 30th Jul '11 7:03:24 PM by NoirGrimoir

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)
Except expies are their own characters, rather than just carbon copies.
Teutonic Tomboy T-Girl
Yeah - IMO, it's not a particularly complicated distinction:
  • Expy: Character is obviously inspired by Other Character.
  • Captain Ersatz: Character obviously is Other Character, or as much as possible while avoiding a lawsuit by Other Character's owner.

edited 30th Jul '11 8:25:00 PM by suedenim

The Egg-Man
I think the definition of Expy and Captain Ersatz are pretty clear at this point. If we really want a trope for the old definition (and I think it would be useful) I think we ought to make it as a new trope, and then move the appropriate examples from Expy to the new trope.
73 MagBas8th Aug 2011 06:06:28 PM from In my house
  • Expy first paragraph: "Short for "Exported Character", an Expy is a character from one series who is unambiguously and deliberately based on a character in another, older series. A few minor traits such as age and name may change, but there's no doubt that they are almost one and the same. Often seen in different works by the same writer(s) or production team."
  • Captain Ersatz first paragraph: "The character equivalent of a Bland-Name Product."

edited 8th Aug '11 6:06:56 PM by MagBas

74 blackcat11th Sep 2011 05:31:54 AM , Relationship Status: A cockroach, nothing can kill it.
We never go any where without our swords and boas.
Well, it already was clocked. The only thing i guessed by far is put Fighteer's answer in a disclaimer. Other thing i noted: lots of "undeniable" examples(outside Word of God and in-universe lampshading) belong to Captain Ersatz(or have Captain Ersatz level of similarity) or belong to Suspiciously Similar Substitute or belong to one Shadow Archetype(or a subtrope) to a character(if was created after said character), a Distaff Counterpart(off course, it regularly have in-universe lampshading or are Word of God examples) . In other words, lots of "undeniably based" examples already belongs to a sub-trope. Other opinions?

Total posts: 93
1 2 3 4