Markup View

Author: Xandriel

Feb 4th 2012 at 1:41:19 PM

The thing is, for the completely ruthless and practical characters, we already have TheSpock and TheUnfettered. So is the main difference between those tropes and this one the fact that the character isn't completely heartless, and will suffer a lot of angst for their actions? Sort of like a heroic version of NecessarilyEvil?

The fact that they will look for alternate solutions seems to mean that they do have some sort of sense of morality (even though they tend to push their conscience aside a lot), hence why they are considered heroic. But could somebody who will go out of their way to look for other solutions really be described as entirely pragmatic? Especially if it means their goal is less likely to succeed?

Consider these two scenarios. 1) Alice and Bob are survivors in a ZombieApocalypse. Alice gets infected, so Bob regretfully shoots her, then has a HeroicBSOD. 2) Carl and Danielle are survivors in a ZombieApocalypse. Carl gets infected, so Danielle restrains him and tries to find a cure, even though she knows there's a chance he'll escape. Sure enough, he breaks free and goes on a rampage. Danielle goes after him and, knowing she has no other choice, shoots him, then breaks down. In those two situations, Bob and Danielle are both pragmatic to an extent, but Bob seems like he'd fit this trope better. Danielle at least has something of an idealistic side.

The main thing I'm concerned about is the flanderisation potential. I can think of a few idealistic heroes who have the occasional ShootTheDog moment, but don't make a habit of it. So ShootTheDog alone does not automatically equal this trope. Maybe you should save this for the really ruthless yet angsty characters?