Suggestion: Cool But Inefficient

this

The Triple-Bladed Sword from The Sword and the Sorcerer and the Gun Sword from Final Fantasy VIII.

The gunsword has always struck me as just plain dumb. The first suggestion seems to fit the theme better for me. An alternate suggestion is the Zwill Crossblade from Final Fantasy XII (if it's Wikia-bit, it's from here◊.

Chainsaw sword?◊ I think it adds to show the impractical thing in action.

edited 26th Jul '16 8:55:04 AM by Morgenthaler

Kinda prefer the triple-bladed sword out of those.

I'll also go for the triple-bladed sword.

Same here.

Question: Must the inefficiency be pointed out in-universe? Haven't seen The Sword and the Sorcerer but the 3 blader properly worked there just fine.

Well, I don't think it's required per se, but that's a concern I have with weapons that look impractical, but aren't depicted as such. Many suggestions I see above are borderline JAFAAC.

It would indeed be a bonus if the item in question was actually inefficient in the work, rather than just looking like it from a real-world point of view.

Also, I think it takes very close inspection of that image to see it's a 3-bladed sword. It looked like a BFS to me at first.

I'm pretty sure that the inefficiency not being pointed out is part of the trope.

Because otherwise this is just Awesome, but Impractical.

While we are it, I believe the image on Awesome, but Impractical is not depicting the trope right. It also looks like an example of Cool, but Inefficient. To be Awesome, but Impractical it must prove to have a real advantage (while flawed) which the huge rifle doesn't have. Gonna open a new thread to find a replacement there.

... honestly, I'm beginning to think that these need to go to the TRS. The distinction is there, but suuuuuuuuuuuper fine and not indicative by the names.

I'm starting to think we'll need a TRS thread for these... reading the descriptions, the playing with and other subpages, and the canonical list of trope distinctions, the only distinction I can identify is that Cool, but Inefficient is for a weapon that is awesome but is totally useless and Awesome, but Impractical is a weapon that is awesome but less useful than you might think. Which is just The Same But More.

edited 28th Jul '16 2:22:37 PM by Morgenthaler

Yeah, the trope names are too similar and the descriptions on both pages are themselves examples of Cool, but Inefficient.

So I think Cool, but Inefficient is "cool weapon is portrayed as effective In-Universe, and yet a more mundane weapon would be more effective." Awesome, but Impractical is "cool weapon has major drawbacks" which seems vaguely distinct, but suuuuuuuper fine (basically Cool, but Inefficient is a subjective version of Awesome, but Impractical) and the names don't demonstrate the difference. At all.

Cool, but Inefficient is something that seems cool, but isn't really any better than more mundane stuff.

Awesome, but Impractical is something that actually is good, but carries some downsides that makes it less good than something more practical in the grand scheme of things.

Probably a ton of misuse on both of them.

Clock is set. Crowner?

I'd rather vote to shelve this until Cool, but Inefficient and Awesome, but Impractical can be sorted out in TRS.

yepp

I'm good with that.

And done.