Is this an example?

Does Growing with the Audience include the case of creating spinoffs from a Fleeting Demographic series that's specifically for the "fled" demographic?

I'd tend to think that a glowing punch would fall under Power Glows. Call it a Justified Example if there's an in-universe explanation for it.

"Persona 3 FES was rated M in Australia, but Persona 3 Portable was rated MA (equivalent of M, and a restricted category)."

This was under Same Content, Different Rating and I don't think this example is valid, because while yes, both are based off the same game both contain different varieties of Updated Re-release content, and P3P has extra content that some countries might believe merit the higher rating. I figured I should check before I removed the example, mostly because while tropes are indeed flexible, how much change is considered "too much" for "same content?"

edited 2nd Jun '17 9:50:28 PM by virgofall

I was fixing the alphabetization on the Mordheim page when I noticed the following example for After the End:

• After the End: A localized example. Mordheim was utterly destroyed by the wyrdstone comet, but the rest of the world is fine. For a given value of "fine".

Is a "localized example" a proper example of this trope as I can't see any mention of such a thing on the trope page?

edited 3rd Jun '17 3:03:42 AM by SebastianGray

The following entries appear on Overwatch:

• Harder Than Hard: Legendary mode ramps the difficulty up to such ridiculous extremes that even highly coordinated teams of pro players have run into trouble beating it. Unless you go in with a strategy already in mind and execute it flawlessly, you have zero chance of survival.^note When the event was over, this difficulty had a win rate of a mere 0.6%. In All Heroes mode, this percentage jumped to a whopping one percent.
• Nintendo Hard: In addition to Normal and Hard difficulties, there's also Expert difficulty, which makes enemies much more durable and deal far more damage. Uncoordinated teams will meet a swift death.

Troper @maj_spoiler reversed the example text of the two entries with the edit reason "Nintendo Hard is supposed to be harder than Harder Than Hard."

I'm looking at the two trope descriptions and I'm not seeing anything to support that assertion. From what I can see, Nintendo Hard is just "stupid hard in the manner of old Nintendo games," and Harder Than Hard is specifically when the hardest difficulty level in a game with multiple difficulty levels is so hard as to be unbalanced, unwinnable, or unfun.

If that's the case, then it seems to me that nothing is preventing a Harder Than Hard mode from also being Nintendo Hard, and in fact, it sort of seems required, which would make Harder Than Hard a Sub-Trope of Nintendo Hard.

If Nintendo Hard is truly just "Harder Than Hard, but harder," then we've got a case of The Same But More and would need to get up into TRS to resolve it.

On the Critical Role page, there's this Anyone Can Die entry (ignore indentation for now):

• Anyone Can Die: Absolutely. Matt has no qualms about killing players, if that's where the dice fall. In fact, all of the original eight members of Vox Machina have died at least once during the campaign, though all but one have been brought back. The best part is that Matt is actually a Nice Guy, so he always feels both really bad about it and really relieved that they lived afterwards.
  Matt: (to Pike) I was so worried you were going to die again!
  Matt: (after Grog's resurrection) Stop dying!
  • There have also been a number of very close calls:
    • Percy and Scanlan nearly died in the Rimefang fight.
    • Percy almost died during a battle against ghosts in Episode 33.
    • Pike was one turn away from having her brain sucked out by a Mindflayer in Episode 13. She also barely survived battles against the Herd of Storms, Clasp assassins in Whitestone, Vorugal, and Raishan.
    • Vax had two close calls with lava in addition to the Briarwoods, two Helmed Horrors, a reincarnated Hotis, Vorugal, Raishan, and the kraken.^note The kraken was a special case in the sense that his body was in danger of being lost permanently.
    • Keyleth had two separate spirits possess her and nearly died both times. She also barely survived the pull of the siphon in the Ziggurat beneath Whitestone, the fateful encounter with Dr. Ripley and her henchmen on the Isle of Glintshore, jumping across a river of lava during the battle with Raishan^note She came up short and fell into the river, the resulting impact against the lava almost killing her instantly with no chance of revival if her HP wasn't high enough to withstand the damage., being repeatedly grappled and knocked out by a kraken and even being swallowed on one occasion, and almost died in the prison of Mentiri in the Nine Hells, her very existence being critical to Vox Machina's escape as she was the only one with Plane Shift.
    • Vex was one hit point away from dying and returning to the next round as Lady Briarwood's zombie, and then almost immediately afterwards, she fell unconscious in a temple where magic didn't work.
    • Grog in many, many different ways.

First, I want to know if Any One Can Die would apply to the show. The show is a D&D campaign, so a lot of stuff is governed by dice rolls as much as the DM/storyteller. While there have been several characters who have been Killed Off for Real (whether thanks to dice rolls or not), only one of the main characters has been killed permanently so far (killed off screen after the actor left the show). That said, there's still the potential that the characters can die permanently, depending on the circumstances.

I also want to know if all the stuff after the first line should even be there. Not sure if the near deaths should be listed under the trope or not.

edited 3rd Jun '17 11:32:35 AM by supergod

Near deaths don't count. I can't address the others, since I don't know the work.

Got rid of the near deaths list.

As for the other part, I guess I'm asking if potential for permanent death is enough to count, even if only one primary character was Killed Off for Real (off screen).

I think they can't really be called Killed Off for Real if a character didn't actually die. Applying Killed Off for Real to potential deaths is like including Back from the Dead when there's only potential resurrection. There also has to be a Death Is Cheap element for the trope to count in the first place. Though that one seems to be covered if everyone's been resurrected at least once.

edited 3rd Jun '17 12:25:51 PM by sgamer82

I meant if Any One Can Die can apply if only one main character is Killed Off for Real. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

My mistake. Odds are higher I misread, actually.

Hm, I think Anyone Can Die can only really count when there's no real way to resurrect them. It's not really Anyone Can Die if Anyone Can Also Be Brought Back To Life.

From the trope itself:

edited 3rd Jun '17 12:34:08 PM by sgamer82

Seems like a good start for a Death Is Cheap example.

Regarding Anyone Can Die, I don't think it should be applicable to games as far as the game mechanics go. That's essentially nothing more than, "in this game, you can die", which is true for any game where failing means death. Characters in games who die in the story is one thing, but game mechanics would specifically have to be written in a way that characters cannot die for the trope to even be relevant. Critical Role falls under game mechanics, since it's not a written story in that regard.

This Fridge Horror entry in Bunsen Is a Beast:

• Remember when the teacher stated that if Bunsen failed to fit into society, monster and humans will continue to fight each other over dominance? that's how the monsters in Undertale ended up inside Mt. Ebott long before Frisk fell down there, they lost the battle with the humans and sealed them inside the mountain; in short: this show could a prequel to the game and Amanda could end up victorious, making Bunsen fail his mission and lose his friendship with Mikey.
  • ...However, if you play the Pacifist Route, then maybe Mikey and Bunsen would be reunited once more.
  • Except this show is clearly not in the same continuity so.....

Not only does it have Natter, it also involves a work that has nothing to do with the show. Should I nuke it?

Destroy it with extreme prejudice. Fridge Horror is mostly fanwanking anyway, but I think if we're going to draw a line anywhere, it's got to be at making stuff up about unrelated works.

I missed that part in the article in your first quote. Several secondary and minor characters have died permanently with no chance of being brought back (or brought back easily), some due to dice rolls and some just as part of the narrative, but I wouldn't say deaths to named characters happen with any real regularity. Looks like it might not fit the trope.

The only main character to die permanently so far was killed outside of gameplay, but I get what you're saying about PCs potentially dying due to game design not being the same as characters dying for narrative purposes.

So, it looks like there's no one in favor of keeping it.

That's WMG stuff at best, so seconding that you should cut it.

edited 4th Jun '17 6:36:25 AM by supergod

and It has been purged.

Would Meryn Trant qualify as a Hate Sink? He beats, punches and strips Sansa on Joffrey's orders (the former two actions multiple times) without question, abusing his status and oaths as excuses for the cruel actions he performs, which involves leaving Sansa to the mercy of a murderous, cannibalistic, rape-happy mob. Then it turns out he's a pedophile and actually likes to beat young girls, which throws his beating of Sansa into an even worse light. In short, he's the embodiment of everything a knight, especially a knight of the Kingsguard, should not be. Just want to be sure before I add it.

edited 4th Jun '17 2:18:03 PM by k410ren

I think so. The audience is supposed to feel nothing but disdain for the character. I don't remember him having any sympathetic traits.

Found this on the Attitude Era page. I'm far from an expert on pro-wrestling, but I'm familiar enough with it and the online fanbase to know that the Attitude Era (1997-2001) is often considered to be one of the best periods in the WWF by, both, regular fans and many of the more hardcore ones. So having a Hype Backlash entry seems reasonable, but the entry below seems to be just straight up complaining, with generalizations about the fanbases (both, the "smart marks" and casual fans), and it goes off on several tangents. It doesn't really seem to be about being disappointed by a hyped up product, but is rather just a list of what a so-called smark (hardcore fan) considers bad about it. Then again, I'm not sure what a good Hype Backlash entry is supposed to look like either.

The entry in question:

• Hype Backlash: While the impact on wrestling history cannot be overstated, Smart Marks find the Attitude Era to be overrated for several reasons.
  1. If you overlook the memorable characters and promos, the actual wrestling in that era wasn't all that memorable (and smarks are known for preferring athleticism over showmanship). The Ruthless Aggression Era (circa 2002-mid 2008) is considered to be superior in that respect.
  2. A lot of what they did belongs in the 90's. The violence and chaos of the attitude era attracted all different sorts of horny teens and adults, who came to see T&A. When WWE started to focus on technical wrestling and storytelling, most of these people left the fanbase. The assumption is that if WWE immediately went back to MA then all their problems would be over. Attitude Era crowds aren't coming back either, those fans have largely gone over to MMA. (If anything, PG probably stops Vince from running with his stranger ideas!)
  3. Bra & panties matches. Fans of the Attitude Era and years afterwards couldn't give a crap about a 15-20 minute wrestling match between any of the Divas. They wanted pseudo-stripping, or in Kitty's and Kelly Kelly's case, full-on stripping. Obviously that's not the case anymore, and you can't fault Johnny Ace for giving the people what they wanted. But even today, you'll see hundreds of posts about wanting to use Bayley's ass as a pillow or Eva Marie's wardrobe malfunction (which is probably WWE's most-viewed women's segment on Youtube!).
     Still, while there were a lot of terrible angles, fans might prefer it to generically-boring stuff. It's all about making people care and believe.
  • Also claims that it was especially revolutionary, as it largely ripped from ECW as mentioned on the main tab, which in itself was ECW ripping from Big Japan, who ripped from FMW, who ripped from WWC&CWA, etc. Most of the "good" stuff is remembered too, rather than the "bad" stuff. Many will talk about how religiously they watched wrestling during the "Attitude Era" but can't recall Mark Henry's Brother–Sister Incest angle even on the offer of money.

Opinions? At the very least it could stand to be trimmed a little, but that's probably best left to someone who more closely follows WWE.

edited 4th Jun '17 2:21:04 PM by supergod

Apologies for the poor image quality, but sometimes, when her gauntlet gun fires, the Dust ammo creates fire explosions around her fists that look like this:

(Note: in this image, her opponent is at a distance, so she's only punching air; the punching action activates the bullets.)

That's why the Elemental Punch has been troped, but it's bullets (presumably made with Fire Dust) that are creating the effects, not her.

edited 4th Jun '17 3:33:05 PM by Wyldchyld

Most of that is just about the wrestling, not the actual Hype Backlash. If anything, it describes a little bit about how the fanbase has changed over the years, but that's not what Hype Backlash is about. The example describes nothing of the hype.

Not an Elemental Punch, and I don't really care for shoehorning it because it sort of looks like it.

Removed the Hype Backlash entry and left a link to this thread in case anyone wants to discuss it.

This example from Characters.Kira Kira Precure A La Mode seems dubious.

• Oh, Crap!: In Episode 16, when he accidentally outs himself as Julio to Cure Macaron, he flips out during their battle and loses his cool. By the end of the episode, he's so pissed that he follows Ichika to her house and shows the most aggression he's ever felt towards them.

Is that really an example of Oh, Crap!? An example of Villainous Breakdown under the same folder has similar information, but the two tropes are vastly different AFAIK.

Could possibly fit, although the last sentence isn't part of the Oh, Crap! reaction. Would benefit from a better description of how he flips out.

Thanks for the response.