pro lurker
can we just mention how lazy it is to use plot armour and if you use it you are a shitty authour
Hide / Show Replies
Tropes Are Not Good. When a trope results in shoddy writing and contrived events in the story, it's perfectly fine to point out that it's an example bad writing.
And yet good stories have been made with Plot Armor, arguably more so than the vast majority of ones that do their damned best to avert it. So it seems then that Plot Armor itself might not be the main issue itself, but rather its presentation and the other tropes that surround it.
So no, "we" cannot just mention how "lazy" it is to use Plot Armor and that using it makes one a "shitty author," as some things just might be necessary to actually make a good story. That accusation/judgement requires more analysis that what has been given withing the trope page.
More over, I feel that in recent times, more and more people are prone to invoking the name of this trope whenever they just don't like a character and want them to die, with increasingly flimsier justifications along the lines of "I don't hate them, but this thing totally should have happened," being bandied about as some commonly accepted fact.
Any character that just happens to avoid dying, even in situations where people commonly do survive, can be labeled as having "Plot Armor" is the accuser squints and turns their head enough. And therein lies the problem.
but maybe somewhere
@blankout Please refrain from cobbling everyone under a single umbrella with that comment, it's both insulting and ignorant on your part. Remember, tropes aren't good or bad, they're simply tools to help you write whatever narrative it is you're going for. You, like everyone else, seem to wrongfully focus on rather using any trope at all instead of focusing on how they're executed.
Edited by MrAwesomeness360
I feel this page goes at the concept of "Plot Armor" in the wrong way. While plot armor can be used as a way to explain why a character survives impossible odds, this type of thing is more closely related to a Deus ex Machina (this is especially true for that Indiana Jones example). Plot armor is more useful (and much more commonly used) as a way to predict the outcome of future unknown events within a story. Such as when a protagonist is put in a life threatening situation, we, as the audience who understand plot armor, know that the protagonist will almost definitely survive. The important thing to understand about plot armor is that it removes suspense and, therefore, tension from fiction.
Hide / Show Replies
"…we, as the audience who understand plot armor…" I'm finding that a bit hard to believe if the audience truly understands what plot armor means given my experience talking to people who constantly misuse it and do not know what it means. More importantly, I feel the audience is focusing on the wrong thing: it shouldn't be so much knowing the protagonist will survive because the narrative demands it so, more so wondering HOW will the protagonist survive his odds.
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Needs Help
, started by David7204 on Nov 28th 2013 at 7:04:46 PM
"GRRM, during a convention, was asked if Dany had a "plot armor" against death, and replied that she was as likely to die as anyone else." Come on now, I feel like we have to look at this with some cynicism. I am to believe Guard #2 about to be stabbed by a faceless assassin has the same odds of survival as Daenerys? She certainly has plot armor in the glaring sense that she needs to survive until she has played her part. She does get hurt occasionally, but in modern TV this happens a lot to people with supposed plot armor.
Edited by KarstenO
Meh, maybe if there were loads of examples, but as it is there're only two. If it grows out of control we can always cut it later.
I agree. Plot Armos simply does not exist in Real Life. The Real Life section should be deleted.
probably beating a dead horse here but there is a theory (forgot the name) that proposes a person can only "observe" (i.e: be alive and conscious) a reality where he/she had lived, even if the chances of survival is miniscule to the extreme. The reasoning behind it is that whenever something of chance occured, a separate reality would be created for each different outcome, but you will only be aware of the one which you would survive the longest.
I believe this was on a Cracked article, as this effectively gives everyone plot armor from their point of view. From your perspective, you would ALWAYS seem to survive no matter how ridiculously stupid the odds were against you.
I agree that this trope doesn't really work in real life, but some things (such as being on the right side of an inequitable system) do work similarly. Should we add useful notes to Analysis.Plot Armor? And... in No Real Life Examples, Please!, how come this is listed as a Sex Trope?
Is there a trope that represents the force that keeps principal characters in the show in ways other than not killing them? For example, in Breaking Bad when Walt begins to cook with Gus, Jessie is initially left out of the deal. The events of the show conspire to bring Jesse and Walt back together again because Jessie is a principal character. Another example would be when a character turns 18 and logically should go off to college or other pursuits, the events of the show conspire to keep that character on the show.
This isn't exactly a reset button. Its not plot armor because nobody is in mortal peril. It can happen in shows where the Status Quo is not always god. What exactly would you call the aura that keeps principal characters always involved in the events of the show somehow, even if something logically would pull them away?
Edited by 142.136.122.18 Hide / Show Replies
Try this question in Lost And Found. That's where the tropers who love this game hang out.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
This section was the subject of an Edit War:
I'm posting it here so the validity of that example can be discussed. Do not re-add it before it has been discussed.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur. Hide / Show Replies
Validity unlikely. Kai Leng never attacks Liara less than other squadmates, and James and Javik share Liara's survival ability. Additionally, for squadmates who can die in other ways, it has to do with their specific choices and isn't based on random attacks that might affect any but arbitrarily avoid Liara.
In "Cowboys vs Aliens" when the hero is running from the army of aliens with explosions going off all around him and he survives because he's a badass.
Edited by Connorses
The first thing I think about when I read this trope is the many scenes in The Lord of the Rings where Frodo's Mithril shirt saved him from orc spears or arrows all throughout the series. In the movie the scene with the ogre was made iconic as his shirt saved him miraculously from certain death. So, I was surprised to see a lack of any entry in the Literature section about such plot armor. Was this intentional? I'm not sure, therefore I'm leaving a response here as opposed to rectifying the problem myself.
Edited by quest
When I think of plot armor, I think of a character implausibly surviving a situation on nothing more than contrived circumstances or 'luck' in story. Straight from the article -
"Note that this is specifically about cases where it's suggested (by way of Informed Ability, generally) that something should happen that would be very bad for the hero - but it tends to fall short as soon as he gets involved, for no given reason besides luck."
But for some of the video game examples, plot armor apparently means 'any character who can't be killed in a game where some characters can be killed.' This isn't right at all. Many of these characters never encounter situations where they survive on 'luck.' Their survival is completely realistic and plausible - they're competent and capable people who can take care of themselves. Their survival, even if it is guaranteed, has nothing to do with plot armor.
With that in mind, I'd like to cut out some examples.
Edited by David7204
I think this might be getting confused lately. The actual page says it's only for incidents where something should happen to the character but doesn't for the plot; however, I'm reading two webcomics involving time travel and weird timelines and I've seen it used for justification that "[character] can't die until [future event] happens".
Am I reading it wrong and both apply, or does that not fall under the trope...?
(...You can just call me Vollie, I suppose.)
I think some characters from Agents of Shield need to be on here