Alright, so in TRS Badass Gay came up for discussion and it was agreed that there appears to big problem with the Badass X tropes in general, which needs to be sorted out until something can be ruled on for Badass Gay.
Here's a courtesy link: TRS page
. And Badass page with its subtropes. You can also visit the sandbox page here.
Noted Problems include:
- Tropes are just listings of characters people thing are badass who happen to have a certain trait. (The Badass + Trait Problem)
- Badass X as a naming scheme is actually very vague and doesn't give a lot of insight into what the character trope actually is, assuming it is a trope.
- Badass X as a naming scheme proliferates the use of Badass + Trait 'tropes'.
Suggested things to do include:
- Make it a requirement that a badass character trope means a character is "badass because of a trait", or "badass in spite of a trait".
- Renaming away from the Badass X naming scheme as much as possible.
- Cut, redefine or re-purpose things that are just Badass + trait.
There are also a lot of tropes that seem to be valid character-types, but have the naming scheme 'Badass X', when there's more to the trope than that. There are also a lot of prop or event or whatever tropes that need to be gone through as well.
Edited by Berrenta on May 15th 2020 at 7:39:14 AM
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I still think that 2 isn't a meaningfully distinct trope - particularly if you also have 3 for the examples that do bring in gender stuff.
I think it's a useful distinction. "I know self-defense" and "I contribute to the heroic adventurer party" are several degrees different from each other and from "I lead soldiers in battle". It's not just the level of skill but also the committment to the "badass" aspect in relation to the "princess" aspect and also the degree of professionalism/responsibilities and expectations.
Yeah that is the distinction I think is pretty important, for both prince and princess but far more for princess.
Allow me to clarify: I think that distinction is meaningful, but I don't think a Distaff Counterpart to Warrior Prince is.
I took a look at Warrior Prince and its definition is pretty sparse. It's basically "warriors who are princes". It starts out with the same premise as Royals Who Actually Do Something, talks about how it is Truth in Television, and compares it to other Prince tropes. There's nothing here that is inherent to this trope alone. If Warrior Princess is not distinct enough from Warrior Prince then Warrior Prince is not distinct enough from Royals Who Actually Do Something.
If we keep one then we must keep the other, and to keep either one, then we must flesh them both out so they are distinct from Royals Who Actually Do Something.
I've always understood Warrior Prince to be something along the lines of "a prince who leads his nation's armies in war". The point I've been arguing is that I don't see why "a princess who leads her nation's armies in war" needs to be a separate trope from it.
Note that, again, the definition I'm seeing for Badass Princess would be something else entirely.
edited 21st Dec '15 10:48:04 AM by nrjxll
That's exactly what I'm talking about when I say that Warrior Prince is not distinct enough from Royals Who Actually Do Something. "Royal leads armies in battle" vs "prince leads armies in battle" it's The Same But More Specific.
Royals Who Actually Do Something as written does not mean 'General King' or anything like that.
Right now it just means any royalty which do more than just be stereotypical sit on your ass royalty and actually follow the responsibility of the position that last part is explained. extremely badly I might add, with unneeded French in like the 5th paragraph and such when it is the heart of the trope.
'Responsibility of the position' could be anything from making sure to take care of subjects to actually fighting and anything in between.
A Rebellious Princess is not Royals Who Actually Do Something even though they might be leading an army against the kingdom or kicking ass in someone's RPG party.
edited 21st Dec '15 8:29:20 PM by Memers
It seems like 'a royal leading a nation's armies in war' should in fact be gender neutral whether it's called Warrior Prince or something like Commander King. 'A princess who can surprisingly fight' is different.
This.
And yes, Royals Who Actually Do Something is much broader than Warrior Prince.
Yes, I realized that after my post. However, still think Warrior Prince needs some beefing up so that it can stand on its own. If we can do that then that will aid the discussion of Badass Princess.
Moving wicks for Like A Badass Out Of Hell is nearly complete. As expected, most are for Escaped from Hell, followed by Hell Has New Management, and then the rest of these tropes. Some stuff was just plain misuse.
Here's a beginning draft on the possible So You Want To Get Out Of Hell Just for Fun page. Finally, what should we do with the main Like A Badass Out Of Hell page? Considering the number of inbounds, cutting is off the table, so our options seem to be either disambiguating for the new tropes or redirecting it to Escaped from Hell since that seems to be the main use. (I'm personally in favor of the second option.)
edited 25th Dec '15 3:54:37 AM by Morgenthaler
You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
Your Just for Fun page sounds perfect; concise, funny, clear. How about we redirect Like A Badass Out Of Hell to it instead of Escaped from Hell?
A redirect from a main page to a just for fun page is bad, IMO its best to direct everything to a main page then the Just for Fun page can be mentioned on the main page.
The Other Troper
Actually the way the page is written comes across as an index even more than a Just for Fun page. It provides a list of tropes for escaping from hell, and laconics for how they do it.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.
Is this sandbox page for subtropes still needed?
You've got roaming bands of armed, aggressive, tyrannical plumbers coming to your door, saying "Use our service, or else!"
Since it pertains to this thread, there's a YKTTW for Badass Bisexual and a huge discussion about its relation to Badass Gay.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
... Badass Gay has this line: "Note that gay romance or a gay/bi identity is enough for this trope - it doesn't have to be both." Seems like Badass Bisexual is superfluous as a separate trope.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
I don't see the point of either of those tropes, just labeling anything Badass X doesn't really work as a trope. Now if it was Badass Flamboyant Gay then I could see that.
Made a crowner so we can resolve the leftover stuff for Like A Badass Out Of Hell.
How sweet it is
Getting it switched in.
And done.
edited 3rd Jan '16 8:20:09 AM by Berrenta
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report
So on the subject earlier on the whole Warrior Princess, Warrior Prince, Royals Who Actually Do Something yada since the repair shop is now back open mind if I make a thread there about it?
Something like
Royals Who Actually Do Something is currently literal, Royals who do not sit on their ass and are actively helping the kingdom in some way. And other tropes currently use it as 'General King' where the royalty is actively involved in the military, leading campaigns, conquering other kingdoms and such.
I propose we split the two Royals Who Actually Do Something for those active in the betterment of their kingdom and General King for those military campaign types.
As well as make a distinction between the military Warrior Prince and Badass Princess / Warrior Princess who fight for their future kingdom in that trope vs those princess and princesses who just know how to fight like say Prince Vegeta.
Rebellious Princess would be the opposite of Royals Who Actually Do Something as well as Errant Royalty (assuming that exists)
Is that alright?
edited 3rd Jan '16 4:07:14 PM by Memers
Eh, I'm not sure I see the problem with Royals Who Actually Do Something, though I can agree that Warrior Prince needs to make it more obvious that it's a subtrope referring to royals who specifically act as military leaders.
The Other Troper
Since this thread already covers those, it would just eat up thread space there (since this wasn't the first time TRS got backlogged if I remember correctly). Plus what made you think we weren't still discussing those?
Are badass trope examples still allowed on work pages, or should the examples be moved to another relevant trope? Are they being left alone for now until the rest of the badass index has been addressed?
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.