Is this an example?

Can a character qualify for Walking Armory if all of their weapons are Natural Weapons, and they have a lot more of those than your average Natural Weapon-bearing creature?

Hypothetical example: An arthropod-based centauromorph creature that has a Teeth Filled Maw with which it readily bites anything within reach, mantis-style arms as its main weapon, each of its walking legs is lined with short spines along its length and ends with sharp claws that it can and will use in a fight, its dorsal side is covered long bristles that it can shoot with lethal effect (tarantulas can do this, though it's not usually lethal even to their usual enemies), its abdomen ends with a long sting-tipped tail with sharp spines on its sides, it can spit acid or "fart" it like some species of ants, and its Alien Blood is poisonous/corrosive/diseased.

edited 20th Aug '16 8:28:16 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Reposting from the previous page:

Could someone take a look at these examples from Shadowhunters:

• Action Girl: Isabelle, who combines a Femme Fatale aesthetic with being a highly skilled warrior.
• All Myths Are True: Stated verbatim by Jace. The series indeed has vampires, warlocks, werewolves, and countless demons.
• Ambiguously Bi: Clary is in a Love Triangle between Jace and Simon, and tells Isabelle that "with a body like [her]s, anything's [her] colour."
• I Owe You My Life: Clary rescues Meliorn from being held captive from the Shadowhunters in "Rise Up", creating a life debt. Meliorn repays her in "This World Inverted" by opening a portal for her so that they can be on even terms again.
• Vapor Wear: Many of Isabelle's outfits are designed to create this effect, with CleavageWindows, Absolute Cleavage, Side Boob and bare backs.

Do you have a non-hypothetical example, or do you have another purpose for asking?

I'd also call coincidence on that.

Check out my fanfiction!

Well, Walking Armory does mention a couple of actual examples from Animorphs:

We might also find similar examples under Attack Animal and/or Human Weapon. The Tyranids from Warhammer40000 and the Zerg from Starcraft, both of whom exclusively use Organic Technology and are very big on genetic modification of their creatures, tend to weaponize as much of their combat-type creatures' bodies as possible.

edited 21st Aug '16 12:44:08 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

I think the first is a shoehorn. By the same (or at least very similar) reasoning you could fit a hedgehog. Or a knight with spikes all over the armour.

The second doesn't give enough context.

In theory, such an example could probably fit, but I'd say it has to include many different types of weapons. Either that, or not at all.

Check out my fanfiction!

American Murder Song is a project about a series of Murder Ballads set in 1816. With that said. I have a question regarding one of the characters. The character, Mary, has a song explaining her backstory. In it, she's depicted as a twelve-year-old girl who clearly doesn't want to marry her cousin Clayton. When her father tries to convince her otherwise, she kicks him down a ladder, killing him. The lines "Mary cried, but when he didn't answer/Red feet, red paws to the door" implies that she didn't mean to kill him, but has decided to go into a self-imposed exile rather than face the fact that he's dead. Someone even asked in the comments section "Was it really murder if he fell? I mean, can you really blame her? She was twelve!" Nonetheless, Mary is shown amongst the killers in both the "Pretty Lavinia" music video and the "Curse 1" video, implying that we're supposed to root against her. Does that mean that at least one person finds her Unintentionally Sympathetic, or is Mary being subject to Alternative Character Interpretation?

I think that's reading too much into the intentions and using a strictly black and white perception of it, where there are heroes who're supposed to be sympathetic and villains we're supposed to hate 100%, with nothing in between.

Check out my fanfiction!

Ah, I see what you're saying.

Its been 2 days, could someone take a look at the examples I posted above x7.

Yeah, yeah.

• The first on is spot-on.
• The second one is described well enough to fit.
• The third is unclear, I can't tell without knowing the context.
• The fourth one is, again, described well enough to fit.
• The fifth... who the fuck came up with a name as unintuitive as "Vapor Wear"?!

"what the complete, unabridged, 4k ultra HD fuck with bonus features" - Mark Von Lewis

Reposted from previous page.

I would like an evaluation on this description, please.

Guilt Complex: A woman who worked for a craftsman accidentally spilled coffee on some important papers of his. In retaliation, he nailed a mask to her face and locked it with a special key to ensure that the mask would never come off. The woman blamed herself entirely for the incident, justifying her boss's actions and berating herself for her perceived carelessness.

This is referencing Twisted Metal: Black, and the woman goes by the name of Dollface.

Can you check this, please?

• Good Bad Bugs: In-universe, Nene discovers a couple while Beta Testing Fairies Story 3, including:
  • Ice weapons inexplicably dealing high damage to a Frost Giant.
  • The ability to prevent Sophia's scripted death by moving her into a corner of the map and killing the enemies as they approach (this sort-of breaks the game, as enemies are continously spawned until she dies).

Scientia et Libertas | Per Aspera ad Astra Nova

Could someone take a look at these examples from Ink-Stain Adaptation:

• The animated adaptation of Batman: The Killing Joke has been accused by fans of doing immense damage to Batgirl's character. The writers claim that the film's prologue was intended to flesh out Batgirl's character. But to many fans, it destroyed her character as she acts nothing like her animated or comic counterparts. Instead of the strong, intelligent, independent woman she normally is, the film portrays her as an arrogant, reckless, thrill-seeking Stalker with a Crush who pines after Batman, irrationally attacks a man arguing with his girlfriend, and ends up having sex with Batman on the rooftop in the film's most infamous scene. To many, she comes off as completely unlikable and thus, not many felt sorry for her when the Joker cripples her.

• The made-for-TV Joe Oriolo Felix The Cat series tends to be considered this by fans of the Silent Era Felix the Cat, mainly for being the most well known and longest supported incarnation of the character, despite many fans considering the TV cartoons inferior to the Silent cartoons due to their more childish tone and stories and very cheap animation. Joe Oriolo's Felix is also a nice, fun loving guy, but compared to how wild and rascally Felix was portrayed in his original cartoons, the Oriolo Felix comes off as very milquetoast protagonist in contrast, and thus hardly any different than a standard Mickey Mouse style character (which is ironic, considering Felix is older than Mickey and was a major influence on the original Mickey Mouse cartoons). Making matters worse is that the Oriolo Felix is rarely the one who drives the plots in his own cartoons, which are usually instigated by The Professor and Rock Bottom instead. It got to the extent that many of the staff on The Twisted Tales of Felix the Cat openly voiced their displeasure with the Oriolo Felix and pushed for the show to use the more wild tone of the original cartoons and make Felix as rascally as before, and to also abandon the characters and tone of the TV cartoons, which was met with resistance from then-owner of Felix, Don Oriolo (the son of Joe Oriolo), who caved in their demands in the first season, but also forced them to include certain elements from his dad's Felix, such as the Magic Bag of Tricks. And then Don forced a retool on the second season of the show to make it more in line with his dad's Felix cartoons, a move that did not sit well with the staff and prompted a Writer Revolt with episodes like Attack of the Robot Rat (a mean-spirited parody of the Joe Oriolo Felix formula) and Phoney Felix (which is a Stealth Parody of the shows Retool).
  • It bears noting that it wasn't Joe Oriolo's fault that the series got so heavily watered down. For starters, Trans-Lux, his distributor, gave the orders that the made-for-TV Felix cartoons were to be aimed exclusively at kids and that Felix always had to defeat Professor and Rock Bottom in each episode, and the kid aimed direction wasn't anything new to the Felix series either—the long running comic books had already gone down the kid friendly fantasy driven direction years before Joe Oriolo inherited the series. And In the late 50's and 60's, TV censors and parent groups were very strict on what kind of content could or couldn't be included in cartoons. The idea of a kids cartoon with grayer morality and starring an Anti-Hero cat with vices like drinking and womanizing would have been unthinkable at the time.

• The 2015 Fantastic Four reboot. Where do we start? The 2005 films, while not stellar films by any means, had a bit of Narm Charm to them, more closely resembled the comics, and are seen by some as either So Okay, It's Average or So Bad, It's Good. This film, by contrast, has been universally despised by fans and critics alike and is widely seen as the absolute worst film adaptation of the characters to date, especially with its portrayal of Doctor Doom. The film is so bad that it has now displaced Howard the Duck as the low point for Marvel movies. Now, 20th Century Fox must either pump out another Fantastic Four film within ten years or risk having the rights to the characters revert back to Marvel.

From the Ink-Stain Adaptation trope description: "An adaptation to a long running franchise which irrevocably colors the public's perception of the franchise as a whole." (Emphasis mine.)

I would argue that it's impossible to know whether a franchise's perception has been irevocably altered without a certain amount of critical distance, at least a few years and/or until another entry comes out so that public reaction to it can be observed. For that reason alone, I'd argue that the Killing Joke and Fantastic Four entries should be cut.

Also, I would like someone to look me square in the eye and try to tell me with a straight face that one bad Batgirl story in one animated film that didn't even get a wide theatrical release is enough to irrevocably color the public's perception of the entire Batman franchise. That ought to be good for a laugh.

edited 25th Aug '16 11:47:54 PM by HighCrate

I've been reading through the articles for Extra Eyes and Eyes Do Not Belong There, and I'm getting the impression from both their descriptions and the latter's examples that all examples of the former — even ones where the additional eyes are located on the forehead right above the "normal" pair — are automatically examples of the latter by definition. Is this impression wrong, or is the problem with the descriptions and examples themselves?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

The other Ink-Stain Adaptation entry (Felix The Cat) is also bad... the trope is about public perceptions, not behind the scenes drama.

On a different note, you know how some people emphasize the dangerous nature of some animals by comparing them to other, more familiar animals, e.g. "Orcas are the wolves of the seas" or "orcas are as threatening to great white sharks as the latter are to their prey"? Would such comparisons count as Discussed Trope examples of applicable tropes (Savage Wolves and Threatening Shark in the aforementioned example)?

edited 26th Aug '16 2:42:52 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

I think that while in theory it could count, it's just so minor (too tangental) it's probably not worth listing, if it counts at all.

Check out my fanfiction!

Too tangential? What do you mean?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

It's an indirect reference because it don't actually discuss it as a trope, and it doesn't state why the comparison is made other than it just being one example where the comparison fits. The first in your example lacks any sort of context about what traits are actually being compared, so there's nothing about the trope there, and the latter is just a generic comparison would fit just about any predator and prey, so it being a shark is only relevant because it's the prey in one case and the predator in the other.

Check out my fanfiction!

Could some one take a look at these examples from YMMV.Jupiter Ascending:

• Hollywood Homely: Jupiter is a curious case. She's meant to be pretty in-universe - as Caine is instantly attracted to her, and Titus comments on her beauty. However a lot of fans have trouble believing that someone as beautiful as Mila Kunis would be stuck working as a cleaning lady. According to Word of God, she's too lazy to try and improve her life.

• The Un-Twist: Balem is revealed as his mother's murder in a way that suggests it was supposed to be a dramatic twist. Given that he's established from the beginning to be determined to own the Earth, he's the only obvious culprit from the moment Kalique reveals their mother was murdered.

You do have a point. FWIW, I was simplifying things because I assumed it would be obvious why the comparison is being made; wolves are known for being efficient pack hunters that can take down prey much bigger than any individual wolf, while great white sharks are infamous (perhaps too much) for aggression, propensity to eat anything remotely resembling food, and — more relevantly — being apex predators that are have little to no natural competitors or threats, and being nigh-unstoppable once they begin attack potential prey (partly because the smell of blood can easily drive them into a frenzy). If those traits (and any other similar ones) are referenced in the course of the comparison, then would that be sufficient?

edited 27th Aug '16 3:41:03 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

If you assume it's obvious, you're doing the same as if you're adding a trope to a list without adding any context to it. If you don't have context to what you discuss, you're not discussing it. You're just mentioning it in passing. There's no mention of it being a trope. There's no mention of it appearing in fiction. The comparison isn't about the trope. It's about the real life animal.

Check out my fanfiction!

Well, obviously if I was writing an actual example, I'd give it proper context.

The thing is, those two tropes in particular are born from real-life perceptions about the animals in question, and thus you're far more likely to have Joe Average phrasing those comparisons as if the tropes were true IRL (i.e. "they're like sharks, and sharks are unstoppable killing machines!") than for him to refer to the tropes while knowing that they're just tropes that may or may not have some truth to them (i.e. "they're like movie sharks, which act like unstoppable killing machines").

edited 27th Aug '16 4:14:46 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.