It sounds like you are embellishing the article's definition of "The Heavy". Having a major presence in the story or taking part in the physical action of the story is not required.
Keep it breezy!If it's not a major presence in the work then it's not a heavy role. It's an important secondary role, which isn't the trope.
Check out my fanfiction!Exactly. The term, although only one definition among many, is not one we originated, and implies a major role in the work. Basically, what we have here is the theatrical definition of the term, which contradicts several other common definitions found in various works. Which is why we want to rename it, but not redefine it.
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.We have to redefine it. As is? The "theatrical" definition is the same as the article's.
First line: "The Heavy is the villain whose actions drive the plot."
Laconic: "The villain who does the most stuff in the story."
So if we changed it to "a villain whose actions drive the plot and has an active presence is the story" that would justify having an article on the wiki but nonetheless change the definition.
Keep it breezy!And the second line is "This is a dominant role for an actor, frequently the largest role in a play or movie."
Redefine how?
Check out my fanfiction!Yes, that implies the character usually has a dominate presence but does not make it clear that it is required for the trope to be in use. Simply adding a clause to the first sentence would correct this and be a solution I would be in favor of.
Keep it breezy!Ah, clarifying good. Redefining bad. Sounds like you're suggesting clarifying, and I fully support that. :)
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.Change the second line to, "This is a dominant role for an actor, and one the largest roles, if not the largest role, in a play or movie," or something like that?
edited 17th Apr '13 12:53:31 AM by AnotherDuck
Check out my fanfiction!Yes. This would clarify what the trope is and avoid it from coming off as a near-duplicate of Villains Act, Heroes React.
edited 17th Apr '13 11:33:53 AM by EditorPallMall
Keep it breezy!Did that.
Check out my fanfiction!Is this crowner ready to be called yet? Or is there not enough of a consensus?
None of the ratios are good enough.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.One is at 19:8. Plus, the 2:1 ratio thing is generally only for deciding whether or not to rename or take some other option, not the new name picked.
It wasn't 19 to 8 when I asked, which is why he responded that the ratios weren't good enough. More people voted between his post and yours.
Okay, that ratio is good enough. It's even the name I came up with.
I personally don't think that name is particularly good, though.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.Are we ready to rename?
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.My issue with Plot Driving Villain is that it sounds a LOT like The Villain Makes the Plot.
... which, admittedly, I'm having a bit of an issue distinguishing from this trope in any case.
edited 24th Apr '13 8:09:40 AM by Larkmarn
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.Now that you mention it, that does appear to be a duplicate trope.
Well, that one seems to be about the effect the villain has on the plot more than about "plot-affecting villain".
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanIn the header maybe, but if you look over the examples it's simply a list of proactive villains, which is the same as The Heavy here.
How about make that a trope that only has exceptions?
But enough of that. The two pages are distinct enough to me.
I'm still ready to rename. I'll ask one more time: are we ready?
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.No, we're not ready. We're discussing whether this trope should be merged into the similar-looking trope with the identical examples.
"similar-looking trope with the identical examples. "
Conventionally, the first bit would outweigh the second one, but it's a bit ambiguous here.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThink about it practically. Even if there might be a theoretical difference, if you take two tropes that already attract the same examples and you name one of them Plot Driving Villain, and the other Villain Drives The Plot, then what do you expect is going to happen? No snark intended, just think about it.
Crown Description:
To vote, access the crowner directly.
...and I was wondering why it was listed under Omnipresent Tropes when it isn't omnipresent. Not even every work has heroes and villains, to begin with, and even in works that do I think it's mostly in specific genres in which that's considered a typical convention for their behaviour.
Sorry to distract the conversation, though. That was meant as an aside.
The Revolution Will Not Be Tropeable