Do you have trouble remembering the difference between Deathbringer the Adorable and Fluffy the Terrible?
Do you have trouble recognizing when you've written a Zero-Context Example?
Not sure if you really have a Badass Bookworm or just a guy who likes to read?
Well, this is the thread for you. We're here to help you will all the finer points of example writing. If you have any questions, we can answer them. Don't be afraid. We don't bite. We all just want to make the wiki a better place for everyone.
Useful Tips:
- Make sure that the example makes sense to both people who don't know the work AND don't know the trope.
- Wrong: The Mentor: Kevin is this to Bob in the first episode.
- Right: The Mentor: Kevin takes Bob under his wing in the first episode and teaches him the ropes of being a were-chinchilla.
- Never just put the trope title and leave it at that.
- Wrong: Badass Adorable
- Right: Badass Adorable: Xavier, the group's cute little mascot, defeats three raging elephants with both hands tied behind his back using only an uncooked spaghetti noodle.
- When is normally far less important than How.
- A character name is not an explanation.
- Wrong: Full Moon Silhouette: Diana
- Right: Full Moon Silhouette: At the end of her transformation sequence into Moon Princess Misty, Diana is shown flying across the full moon riding a rutabaga.
Other Resources:
For best results, please include why you think an example is iffy in your first post.
Also, many oft-misused tropes/topics have their own threads, such as Surprisingly Realistic Outcome (here
) and Fan-Preferred Couple (here
). Tropers are better able to give feedback on examples you bring up to specific threads. We don't discuss Complete Monster or Magnificent Bastard examples; please don't bring them up.
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Jul 17th 2025 at 8:59:01 PM
As I said, I'm not familiar with it enough to judge. However, I'm going to go with "neither" based on what's written there and what little I do know.
Check out my fanfiction!From WhatAnIdiot.Steven Universe:
- "The Trial"
- A couple major ones for the Diamonds. Rose Quartz, the leader of a galactic rebellion and murderer of Pink Diamond, has been brought to trial.
You'd Expect: For there to be a bit of security. This is a high-profile trial and the accused is being charged with what amounts to regicide.
Instead: The only Gems present to keep the accused in line are the Diamonds themselves, with the accused being able to move around freely. This could be because one Diamond present has the power to lightning poof a Gem, but that still leaves a high risk of the perpetrator escaping should something distract the one/ few guards able to halt them..
As a Result:...which occurs when one Diamond wants to continue the trial when the other wants to kill the accused, creating a distracting argument that (combined with the next point) allows an opportunity for the perpetrator to escape.
Later: The defense lawyer, a Zircon, asks to bring up a Palanquin as evidence. A Palanquin is a walking throne mech that a Diamond uses to move around on other planets.
You'd Expect: That there would be screens of the Palanquin brought up. Zircons have been shown to utilize holograms to conjure up images, as are the Pearls taking notes in the room. Either of these would be sufficient for what the Zircon is asking for.
Instead: The fully operational Palanquin is brought into the trial room as evidence, within running distance from the unrestricted accused. This is the equivalent of bringing a running Mercedes into the trial room of a serial killer.
As A Result: Due to both the ability of movement and the presence of a working vehicle in the vicinity, Steven and Lars are able to get into and start up the Palanquin in an attempt to escape when the two Diamonds capable of stopping them get into an argument with each other.
Right After This: The Diamonds hear the Palanquin moving around and look to see that the criminal (and Lars) are attempting to escape.
You'd Expect: That the Diamonds would stop the attempt. Yellow Diamond in particular could shoot lightning at the Palanquin to damage it and render it inoperable. Yellow Diamond has also been shown to not care much for the perpetrators in question, so she wouldn't worry about potential damage to them. As another option, Blue Diamond could release an emotional wave to incapacitate the drivers, so she wouldn't have to worry about damages or danger to the trial itself.
Instead: They stand there and gawk at it.
As A Result: A person considered to be a galactic criminal and Diamond murderer (and Lars) escapes the trial by running through the wall. Blue Diamond barely has any answers or closure and Yellow Diamond is denied the closure of seeing her sister's murderer die.
- A couple major ones for the Diamonds. Rose Quartz, the leader of a galactic rebellion and murderer of Pink Diamond, has been brought to trial.
For context on the above post, there was an example talking about the episode by another person that was overly caustic, but made some good points (it was removed). I restructured it so that the Idiot moment was more noticeable and removed the caustic bits to try and make it a legitimate example.
Wandering through pages, mainly fixing grammar mistakes. Collects Pokeballs, owns self.Came across this on the My Hero Academia character page for the current antagonist, Gentle, but I'm not convinced it's proper use:
- Then Let Me Be Evil: It's revealed in flashbacks that he wanted to be a hero, but after falling behind in classes, being expelled for using his Quirk in public for a way that hindered a hero's rescue attempt, generally disappointing his family, and being forgotten by his classmates, he decides to give up his dream and become a villain.
My understanding of the trope is 'character is constantly denounced as evil to the point they decide, fine I'll be evil!'
That doesn't seem present here as Gentle's issue was a string of constant failure. He was never shown being called evil or a villain or anything like that.
Agreed, if anything, Gentle's Stealth Mentor aspect make him more of an Anti-Villain at worse.
edited 16th Apr '18 12:13:06 PM by MorningStar1337
From VideoGames.Game Dev Tycoon:
- Broad Strokes:
- How this game's timeline tends to skip over events in gaming history, despite reflecting most of it. The Game Boy, Game Boy Color and Game Boy Advance are all essentially treated as the same console. In addition, a good part of Sega's history is pretty much skipped over with the Sega Saturn being completely non-existent.
- It also lumps in Apple Computers as just another PC maker note , and completely skips over Atari. Also, Godovore goes bankrupt after the C64-expy when in real life Commodore did release another top-selling computer that stayed in market for about a decade before being driven to bankruptcy by an embargo on the CD32 in the US.
- The early-80s computer choices are limited to the PC and the C64 — no hint of the ZX Spectrum or the Amstrad CPC, although both were massive in Europe.
Does this fit the trope or is that Alternate History instead?
I also posted some other examples of this trope a few pages before this one.
Are these Discussed Trope, since they relate to the current situation or In-Universe media or Conversational Troping?
- Scrubs: The characters discuss when characters are driving away in a car, but their conversation doesn't get quieter. Of course, they're in a car, driving away, and they stay loud and clear.
- Stargate SG-1
- In "Orpheus," Carter picks apart the poor planning on the part of the aliens in Signs.
- In "200," she calls Wormhole X-Treme! creator Martin Lloyd on a particularly absurd use of Unrealistic Black Hole. In fact, because the Framing Device for the Troperiffic episode in question is a discussion with him about how the hell he can adapt Wormhole X-Treme! into a feature film (in what Word of God says is a nod to Firefly and its sequel film), there's plenty of other references too, such as Martin explaining that it's okay to skip over how the heroes actually transitioned from one scene to the next so that you can move on with the plot, so long as you give a quick nod to it in the dialogue with them acknowledging how "convenient" their escape had been; he even goes so far as to accurately define the practice out loud as "Hanging a Lantern On It". Heck, the episode as a whole includes so many Affectionate Parodies of other works generated by the team's competing ideas about how he could do it that it's almost harder to find a moment in the episode that doesn't include Conversational Troping. Those are just the most notable examples.
- In one scene from Dead Like Me, George, the viewpoint character for the series, informs her fellows of the roles they play in the ensemble cast. Later in the episode, the oldest and wisest of the troupe casually "breaks trope", much to George's surprise.
- Boone and Locke discuss Red Shirts in the Lost episode "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues".
- In "Some Like It Hoth", Hurley presents his thoughts on Star Wars: "Ewoks suck, dude". This is far from the only Star Wars discussion in the series.
edited 17th Apr '18 1:18:14 PM by Malady
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
- Scrubs is Leaning on the Fourth Wall
- Stargate is Conversational Troping
- Not sure about Dead Like Me
- First Lost example is Conversational Troping; second doesn't fit either trope imo
Am I reading Discussed Trope wrong, or is it saying that all criticism is Discussed?
Of necessity, almost all criticism involves the twilight realm between Conversational Troping and Discussing the trope; as a rule, TV Tropes errs on the side of calling them "discussed", because the trope is directly relevant to the "plot" at hand, except in the Playing With Wiki note"
If so, all these Conversational Troping examples are Discussed Trope, right?
- All over the place in Bakuman。, which is a manga about mangakas making manga and therefore frequently discusses the contents of the fictional mangas inside it.
- Calvin of Calvin and Hobbes frequently discusses the ways his snowmen demonstrate Art Tropes. He and Hobbes also discuss Comic Books, as in this iconic dialogue, which named a trope:
Calvin: Mom doesn't understand comic books. She doesn't realize that comic books deal with serious issues of the day. Today's superheroes face tough moral dilemmas. Comic books aren't just escapist fantasy. They're sophisticated social critiques.
Hobbes: Is Amazon Girl's super power the ability to squeeze that figure into that suit?
Calvin: Nah, they all can do that. - In Girl in the War
Rose feels somewhat paranoid after Colin and Justin are petrified.
Rose: You know how in horror movies the serial killer picks off the heroine's friends one by one until she's the only one who's left? That's how I feel.
Lavender: My, don't we have an inflated sense of self? - In Big Hero 6, when the characters are wondering who the masked villain really is, Fred passes out various Comic Books and points out that the villains are all traditionally Corrupt Corporate Executives, to suggest that Alistair Krei is the Big Bad. He's wrong. It's actually the father-substitute Evil Mentor. But he was supposed to be dead at the time, so it's a reasonable mistake.
- If the Gems were as old as they looked (and acted, possibly), in human years:
- Amethyst: 16-18.
- Pearl: 30+.
- Garnet: Late 30s.
- Peridot: Mid teens.
- Lapis Lazuli: Late teens-early 20s.
- Jasper: Late 30s-Early 40s.
- Bismuth: Early 40s.
- Yellow Diamond and Blue Diamond: 60+.
- Pink Diamond: Young teens.
Admittedly I avoid human AU works, but I've never noticed this in the fandom. From what I've seen, the Crystal Gems are all pinned as 19 at lowest and 35~ at highest, with all being around the same age.
Does Sympathetic Murder Backstory apply if the character's first kill wasn't done out of malice, but it was a Mercy Kill? Can there be overlap? Is the psychological effect of breaking the "kill cherry/taboo" the same as breaking the "murder cherry/taboo"? Can one or the other of the acts be committed after the other, and is the effect/mental burden the same, or does it dissipate? Please list more tropes regarding the taboo, the act of breaking the cherry, and such (I know about It Gets Easier).
In Real Life, humans have an instinctual aversion to killing other humans, and it tends to be a deeply traumatic experience no matter the motivation.
For troping purposes, I'd argue that it should count because Tropes Are Flexible if for no other reason.
Also, the trope description specifically says that Mercy Kills do count, so there's that.
For Sympathetic Murder Backstory, it needs to be something that affects them deeply. If they're relatively fine with it, it doesn't count. Exactly what type of killing it is doesn't matter, as long as it's intentional. Malice doesn't factor into whether it's an example, but it does affect how the trope plays out, since malice isn't exactly a good trait.
Check out my fanfiction!Variants on the phrase "all for one/one for all" appear in the lyrics for a bunch of Van Canto songs. Would it count as a catchphrase for the band?
@Pichu-kun: I'd agree. Most of the fan works I've seen have at least the Crystal Gems at about the same age.
edited 20th Apr '18 6:01:44 PM by Crossover-Enthusiast
Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢Please can you check my examples?
—-
Also, I'm wick-checking for Alternate Continuity and Broad Strokes to ensure how they fit the trope, and now I've got some idea, I want to try and give some of the pages that link to it a bit more depth (some Fan Fic pages come under Broad Strokes, as do Video Game pages) than just "Some of XYZ continuity is discarded, but elements from ABC continuity are retained", although I'm not familiar with the source material of some of the articles.
Is this right, or should it be Innocent Innuendo instead or something?
Lunaverse S 1 E 8 Where There Is Smoke
- Literal Metaphor: Trixie thinks 'a faceful of pink taco' is a euphemism, but it turns out to be literal (Pinkie Pie likes frosting on her tacos).
edited 21st Apr '18 6:45:11 AM by Malady
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576Un Entendre fits better than Innocent Innuendo. It's about Trixie making the mistake, and there's no context for why someone would think that's an euphemism otherwise.
![]()
![]()
Assuming you mean post 5207
, essentially, history is just simplified and slightly tweaked to make it fit the game. It's kind of Like Reality, Unless Noted, but about the noted parts.
I'm not seeing any evidence that Broad Strokes can apply to Real Life, but I also don't see any evidence that it can't. If it can, it does fit.
I wouldn't quite call that Alternate History, since there's no real "what if" or divergence outside the details themselves.
edited 21st Apr '18 10:50:32 AM by AnotherDuck
Check out my fanfiction!The DethroningMoment.The Nostalgia Critic page has many examples that are 'the entire episode', go on tangents, or go out of the way to defend the work reviewed instead of talking about why they didn't like the moment.
Going by the rules list it doesn't seem like those would be valid but I wanted to make sure since other tropers put them there.
edited 21st Apr '18 11:20:18 AM by lalalei2001
The Protomen enhanced my life.Is Daisy from Super Mario Bros But Not Too Black? There's an entry on that page but it's worth noting that the dark skin is a retcon itself (and Sarasaland isn't completely desert themed).
edited 21st Apr '18 12:42:37 PM by Pichu-kun
Seems like it might be Ambiguously Brown?
I really don't understand how this trope is supposed to be used. Is it a character trope? Tropes in Aggregate? Is it about adaptations? Is it about in-universe discrimination? Is it a racial version of Hollywood Homely (YMMV)? See this discussion post
here.
Is this an example? This is from Bleach and concerns the reaction of Giselle (who presents as a woman) to accusations from two characters (Yumichika and Charlotte) that she's biologically male.
There's some question over whether the scenes are played for drama, comedy (or both — Yumichika's are mostly not comedic, but Charlotte is a Large Ham so a lot of his scenes are either comedic or a mixture of comedy and drama).
- Berserk Button: Giselle will sic the zombified Bambietta on anyone who implies that she's actually male.
ValuesDissonance.Literature. These is actually Deliberate Values Dissonance, right, since its modern writing, about the past or counterparts of historical cultures?
- Brown's Pine Ridge Stories: Published in May 2014, one chapter ("A Tragedy and A Miracle"), that takes place in Telfair County, Georgia in 1937, mentions in passing that an elderly woman had to take care of her grandchild... while at work... as a Cafeteria lady at an Elementary School. The lack of any sort of adequate Day Care for young children of working parents would likely strike some readers as odd at the mildest and at worst, especially working single mothers, as appalling.
EDIT:
- Jahnna N. Malcom's Jewel Princess series, published 1997-1999, had a couple of cases. In the first book, Roxanne, the future princess of the Red Mountains, runs away before the coronation because she doesn't want to be a princess—she'll have to move to a place she either hasn't been to or doesn't know well, she prefers running around and climbing trees to remaining indoors, her future kingdom is a desert mountain range unlike her sisters', which are all much more widely populated and idyllic, and she'll have to rule over her people, despite not wanting to rule and having no real experience at it. After running away, she makes some allies, foils an attempt to put an impostor on her throne, and returns to the coronation willingly. OK, fine. Except that Roxanne is about eleven (though she doesn't act like it), and the idea of giving a pre-teen that kind of responsibility, especially since she wasn't prepared for it, is a ridiculous idea.
- Another example comes from the third book. In it Emily, the princess of Greenwood, is a notorious practical joker who has played tricks on everyone while refusing to see that most other people don't think that they're funny. Eventually, when a prank is played on a subject that seriously harms him, the people of Greenwood believe that Emily played it, and one of them says that he's going to talk to her father (the King) about her, because 'when a princess starts harming her own people, it's time for her to stop being a princess'. Again, fine, but like Roxanne, Emily is eleven, and expecting an eleven year old to be responsible and mature on that level is simply ridiculous—not to mention that there was no proof that it was Emily, and she had several witnesses that would have given her an alibi and testified to her non-violent nature if it had come to it.
And ValuesDissonance.Live Action TV:
- Merlin inverts it. By modern standards, Uther is a ruthless tyrant. By general medieval standards, he would be considered rather benevolent.
edited 21st Apr '18 8:33:02 PM by Malady
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576

Well what do you think the Mundus entry should go under.
edited 15th Apr '18 2:50:32 PM by miraculous
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."