Badass tropes - now on: Action Girl

A while ago I considered that we may have to just turn this into a "fan speak" term without any proper meaning, and I still think that's an option.

The King Solomon's solution, eh? I guess we can always keep it in mind as a final backup plan.

Meanwhile, I'm still in the process of a wick check.

edited 29th Aug '15 6:01:48 PM by Rjinswand

I think that kind of defeats the purpose of what we're doing here though. Does that mean every character trope with Badass in the title is valid? Actually, maybe it'd be every badass trope? I don't know.

edited 29th Aug '15 6:27:16 PM by Arha

If it happens, we could just rename each sub trope to something more indicative.

That sounds like even more work. I don't see why we would want to do that.

Sorry if I missed everything, but how about Badasses from Cooking Duel kind of media?

My example would include Yukihira Souma (cooking), Every Statesman in Koizumi (mahjong), ERB Combatants (rap battle), or even Top Gear Trio and the Stig.

They don't fight physically, and when they do fight in their terms, most of them are presented as Badass as any action hero.

Would their setting invalidate them as Badass under the 'kick ass physically' and 'toughness' criteria?

edited 29th Aug '15 10:52:36 PM by NoxCaelis

"That sounds like even more work."

We were going to work on the sub tropes anyway. We're just working on the main super trope so we know what direction to come from.

edited 30th Aug '15 1:16:40 AM by DragonQuestZ

So here's a wick check of more or less the first half of the letter "E":

• 137 uses: ZCE / context-less potholes. (not a precise number, the actual amount might be ~25% higher or lower)
• 40 uses: Character is able to defeat significantly more powerful and/or more numerous foes.
• 23 uses: Character is very very powerful, or is considered the best fighter among their peers.
• 16 uses: Character is a competent fighter.
• 8 uses: Character has a formidable image and reputation.
• 7 uses: Character is resilient, keeps on truckin' despite suffering pain or other hardships.
• 6 uses: Character defeats foes with ease, and shows it.
• 6 uses: Character does something considered near impossible, which doesn't involve fighting.
• 5 uses: Character is brave and ballsy. (again, the number might possibly be higher)
• 3 uses: Character shows feats of sheer willpower strength.
• 3 uses: Character uses a ridiculous or improbable combat maneuver in battle.
• 20 uses: Other / "cool" / misuse. Highlights include having mad skillz in roller derby and being a talented rapper.

Is a wick check of the second half of "E" necessary?

edited 30th Aug '15 4:41:48 AM by Rjinswand

As your wick checks have shown, rj, a reputation as a Badass does a badass make. Surely some wicks lead to character pages with little or no context because the character is introduced and treated like a badass even if there's no evidence. Of course, this reputation is part of being formidable, and it should be noted that this may not come from fighting skill but things like recklessness, sometimes even without ability, or doing stuff that looks awesome. You see someone do Le Parkour, you're going to think they're badass, but they're not fighting anyone. So a combination of got balls with the ability to justify their ballsiness (but often still someone who is humble) might contribute to a definition.

are any of the elements of SoYouWantTo.Write A Badass worth consideration, too?

I think that might be a bit too broad. "Character who is respected in-universe" sounds cool, but in practice that means 90% characters in fiction (basically, everyone except the various Glass Joes). It'd be easier to pinpoint character who aren't respected in-universe.

And that, e.g., would leave out the hypothetical unpopular hero, who is unnoticed or despised by the masses, but does some great feats and saves the day regardless.

That page is okay as Just for Fun, but I can't see it as serious advice. "A true Badass doesn't talk much"? Spider-Man would have a word (or a thousand) with you. "A true Badass never needs to advertise and never goes looking for trouble"? Batman. Just Batman. "A true Badass never has a matched pair of anything"? What.

edited 30th Aug '15 12:00:46 PM by Rjinswand

well not only that, but noting that not every badass has to fight at all would be useful

That's why I typically worded the definition as "the guy you want by your side in a fight." 99% of the time that means good at fighting, but it also includes the cripple who can stand up to an army, and excludes the wizard who could blow up the army if he wasn't crying alone in the corner.

Still, I'm more than happy to take "good at fighting" as a compromise.

edited 30th Aug '15 2:18:56 PM by Discar

That is precisely why "good at fighting" can't be the only criteria. Now matter how good the character is at fighting, unless they have the mental strength (ballsy) to confront danger and the physical strength (toughness) to withstand the danger, they're not going to fight.

"Good at fighting" should be definintely be an essential part of the criteria but not the only one because of Glass Joe and "fighting" has to be more than "punching someone in the face" because that excludes any setting or story where hand-to-hand is not common, including war stories or any other story that involves soldiers.

Based on my analysis of the trope's use in wicks, here's my try at its definition:

A character who does a feat that's considered beyond the capabilities of their power level. Possible types/subtropes:

• Defeats a significantly more numerous enemy, or at least holds them at bay.
  • E.g. One-Man Army.
• Defeats a significantly more powerful enemy, or at least holds them at bay.
  • E.g. David vs. Goliath.
• Can keep up with people of a much higher power level.
  • E.g. Badass Normal.
• Toughing it through pain and hardships that would break a lesser man/woman, and still continuing their mission.
  • E.g. Made of Iron.
• Does some other feat that would be considered impossible for someone of their power level.

• Someone who "got balls". Yes, the aforementioned feats require balls, but that's not the main focus here. Though "Got Balls" would most likely be a Missing Supertrope to Badass.
• Someone who "got willpower". Similar to balls.
• Someone who's stoic or jokey in the face of danger. While some Badasses are like that, it's not necessary. It may another subtrope of "Got Balls", thus a sister trope to Badass.
• Someone who has a formidable reputation; admired by their allies and feared by their enemies. While it's a common result of being a Badass, it's not a necessary qualifier for being a Badass. A Badass could be completely unknown, or despised, or underestimated. A Badass is a Badass because of what the Badass does, not because of how other people feel about the Badass.
• Someone who's considered "the greatest fighter" or "the best martial artist" of their setting. This seems to be an entirely different trope, don't know if we have it already or not.
• Someone who's very very very powerful. I'm not even sure it's tropeable.
• Someone who has permastubble, wears a leather jacket, drives a motorcycle, swears a lot, gets laid easily, never talks much but always has a sarcastic one-liner on hand. Judging a Badass by appearance is shallow, one should look at the true nature of the Badass. Again, a Badass is a Badass because of what the Badass does, not how the Badass looks.

Thoughts?

edited 31st Aug '15 8:24:05 AM by Rjinswand

I think it would be helpful if you actually provided information about the wicks you were checking so we could actually see what you were talking about and whether you were actually doing random samples.

I... just did. Look earlier in the thread: the comic book and video games example pages, and half the letter "E".

This definition is based on the most common use of Badass: "character defeats significantly more powerful or numerous enemies", with a couple close meanings (e.g. "resilient" and "improbable feat") merged into it.

UPD: Misunderstood your post. I could do that, but it would take much, much, much more time. But I can, if that's what everyone wants.

And yes, I've been doing a random sample. I just blatantly checked every single wick from "Ea-" to "En-".

edited 31st Aug '15 8:28:35 AM by Rjinswand

I think "A character who does a feat that's considered beyond the capabilities of their power level" is too close to Beyond the Impossible. Treating Beyond the Impossible as similar to badass is caused its rampant misuse. I had to purge thousands of wicks to get it under control, and someone recently tried to write the entire page under Badass/Rule of Cool. Incidentally, they treated Badass like Rule of Cool, which is another problem with this trope.

On another note, Arha, you're being disrespectful. There is a more polite way to present your opinions and concerns.

Beyond the Impossible seems to be a subtrope, or a sister trope.

• Beyond the Impossible: Character does something that's impossible in this universe, period.
• Badass: Character does something that's almost impossible for the average person of their power level.^note (e.g., it's not completely impossible for one non-superpowered man to defeat a whole army... but it's almost impossible)

edited 31st Aug '15 8:34:45 AM by Rjinswand

No, no it's not. There is a strict line between the impossible and the improbable or the extremly difficult.

Further more, Beyond the Impossible has nothing to do with "fighting" (though there may be a fighting example) nor with "toughness" "formidable reputation" or anything else we have been discussing.

Okay. I guess I'm being vague and also kind of irritable. What I mean is, if you check, say, the character page for Batman you should note that you checked that page and then give some brief detail about that example. With what you've done so far we can't really verify what work you've done. For all we know, you mistook people listing feats as support for people thinking the trope means something else or any number of other mistakes, skipped NCE examples, checked twenty different Batman subpages (not allowed in a wick check) or any other number of issues with an accurate assessment of the information you've collected.

That's reasonable.

As I've said, I can do this, it would just take a lot more time (since I'd have to explain each example instead of just count them). I did it the quick way so I could weigh in on the discussion with my 2 cents.

So I'll do it the long way, just promise you guys will wait for my wick check before making some ultimate decision here, okay?

edited 31st Aug '15 12:56:29 PM by Rjinswand

Uh huh, just do the wick check properly as noted and we can take it into account. Just remember to pick a random selection, not just comic books or the letter E or whatever.

Now I'm confused. How is the letter "E" not a random selection? I thought checking all wicks alphabetically would be the best way to show absence of biased pick-and-choosing?

edited 1st Sep '15 3:24:05 AM by Rjinswand