If Guys Smash, Girls Shoot doesn't usually have the Archer Archetype then the line at the bottom of the second paragraph is completely misleading, "This also has the benefit of keeping the delicate female safely out of the bone-crunching melee." It should say how that doesn't produce this archetype most of the time.
edited 16th Jan '13 2:05:03 PM by lexicon
I believe that's a holdover from the original page and shouldn't be in any future drafts. I don't think they're particularly linked. There are an awful lot of male archer characters that fit this mold.
edited 16th Jan '13 2:09:18 PM by Arha
So what I'm getting is that the common archetype is skilled, confident, comfortable in the wilderness, and used to working alone. They're some variety of anti-social, be it fiery and brash, cold and detached, or just not good at obeying authority. They are best at fighting at a distance, so they keep their enemies at a distance. They're graceful and wear little or no armor, and are not as strong as the melee fighters.
The stealthiness and ranger-ness are just side things that may show up, but not part of the trope's core.
Is that right?
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Petting Zoo Person
Certainly sounds right to me.
I must be cruel, but to be kind That bad may begin, and worse be left behind
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Sounds fine to me.
Who watches the watchmen?
The little to no armour things is a frequently, not an always and it's more likely if they're female. The male version tends to wear more armor.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
I dunno about that Shima. If they are anything like Robin Hood they wear little if any armor as well.
Casual google check of Male Archer characters is showing little to no armor with a strong trend towards leather and chain when armor is worn. Basically light or no armor.
There are maybe about three or four where they wore something closer to plate or heavier looking armors.
A lot of the backgrounds are of course the woodsy variety. The male archers show a strong leaning towards Robin Hood/Ranger of the Woods type charactrs.
edited 16th Jan '13 6:13:47 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
Hence it's frequently, but not always. Male archers have about a 1 in 10 chance of ending up in heavy armor. Females about a 1 in 100. It's not an always. Just a normally.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
I would say it is much lower than 1 in 10. Again the majority even at a casual glance were more like Rangers and Robin Hood. Outside of leather or no armor, chain or even light scale chest only pieces are very common in the depictions. You know light armor.
Even screen caps from games where players can choose what gear they have on their character are showing a strong tendency towards the lighter armor and gear. Of course that is because the gear that has the look also has the stats that boost the archer as a ranger/Robin Hood type reenforcing the perception further.
There were two out of multiple dozens of characters depicted in Full Coverage type armors. For the Heavy Armor most were just a heavy looking torso piece.
Nearly every kind of dedicated archer character I can think of that is not just someone using the bow fits just like that for the male. Both the Male and Female have a very strong trend towards light to no armor.
Who watches the watchmen?
Shall we take out the Guys Smash, Girls Shoot link or change it somehow?
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
I think that bit has become discredited in general.
Women fill a multitude of roles now and have moved onto increasingly varied depictions.
edited 16th Jan '13 7:29:49 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
I've got several examples in my mind of the archetype with heavy armour, but in most cases they're from works where heavier armor is more standard. Most fantasy characters in general are pretty lightly armored. Chain mail isn't really light armor by the way. It's pretty damn heavy.
Yeah, Guys Smash, Girls Shoot is becoming out dated.
edited 16th Jan '13 7:18:58 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Shima; Your splitting hairs with me. Chain maile may have heft but it is still considered a light armor. When you start labelling armor as light, medium, heavy it is also a direct reference to how much it protects you.
Shima: Care to share your examples? If anything I am curious.
edited 16th Jan '13 7:35:31 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
Off the top of my head Ronin Warriors is one. Everyone in that wears plate. Even the archer. There are others but while I can picture the characters in my head the names are eluding me. Let me poke around and see if I can find them.
I do SCA stuff. Chain weighs about 80 lbs and is very protective. Almost as much so as plate. It's considered heavy armor.
Unless it's made by elves. Elves make their own rules.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Chain weighs about 30lbs for the average hauberk. There are a few varieties of hauberk armors though. You wearing just a Hauberk or you wearing the full maille kit with coif and chausses, and mitons? 80lbs for just the Hauberk is a bit much.
Most of the archers are just wearing the short sleeve short wwaist hauberk.
Great historians and everyone else don't consider chain heavy armor.
edited 16th Jan '13 8:11:40 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
I've seen a lot of discussions between people who research armor about just how accurate various weight reconstructions for ancient armor are, and according to some of them, many reconstructions are too heavy.
But anyway, instead of saying "heavy armor" or "light armor" how about just figure out what kind of armor seems to show up the most?
edited 16th Jan '13 8:14:23 PM by ArcadesSabboth
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Cloth, Leather, and mail shirts seem to be the most common with Cloth and Leather making the most appearances.
Who watches the watchmen?
It's also relevant what kind of armor you don't see them in—archers aren't going to wear a full suit of plate armor (cuz it hampers drawing and firing), and they aren't going to wear a full helm (cuz it hampers aiming).
edited 16th Jan '13 9:14:03 PM by troacctid
Rhymes with "Protracted."
Depends on if the work is historical or fantasy. In fantasy, you see impractical armor. In historical works, the archer wears heavy armor and full helmets both in western and asian works. It's all based on if they're going for realism or what they actually wore.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Even the majority of straight up fantasy works put archers in little or no armor though.
Though sometimes what they put them in is really weird looking.
Who watches the watchmen?
I think you are getting bogged down in a People Sit On Chairs debate. Of course archers mostly wear light armor, because archers in a military context are not supposed to go near the enemy and don't need heavy armor. Armor is expensive and heavy and so, no matter how exactly you define "light" and "heavy" armor, archers are bound to be lighter armoured than fighters that specialize in close combat.
The same goes for the Merry Men of Sherwood, because they probably can't even afford armor, and hunter types have no use for armor to begin with.
From reading the page, the only trope I can see here is the archer that dwells in the forest as hunter, outlaw, ranger or wood-Elf and is an expert at hunting, tracking, stealth, and surviving in the wild in general. The root of the trope is that people that live by hunting are (imagined to be) excellent archers (in the forest/wilderness, you can't grow food or go to the supermarket).
This means that much of the description ("independent and used to working alone, practical, a little haughty and arrogant and not the best at following orders especially from those they don't respect") is irrelevant rubble.
"Stealthy and graceful" is important but "tends to fight at a distance" is cruft (where else would you expect an archer to fight?)
"As a result, they're often portrayed as vulnerable up close" - make that "As a result, they're often vulnerable up close".
edited 17th Jan '13 1:58:51 AM by LordGro
Let's just say and leave it at that.
In uffish thought
Another person supportive of the current sandbox version. It's more structured than the current, and explains the two contrasting archetypes.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
I like the sandbox.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Lord Gro: Like Legolas anywhere and everywhere :P Also more then a few archers are not above using daggers and swords.
I gotta say I honestly like the Sandbox as well. Works pretty well I would think. Covers everything nicely.
edited 17th Jan '13 8:08:45 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
Crown Description:
"The Archer" is frequently mistaken to mean "archer." Actually, the trope is about a specific character type common among archers.
Okay, I made a second description attempt and dropped the original to the bottom of the sandbox in case we still need it for whatever. Does this look better to you?