RWBY General Discussion

Ressurection without removing wounds/illnesses that kill you is simply not ressurection. Bringing somebody back to life would need to remove the damage that makes them dead.

The "overpopulation" argument against immortality always struck me as silly. Yes, it could be an issue in a world without death. But forcing people to die at a certain age isn't really an ideal solution. What seems more moral to you: Killing thousands of people every day or encouraging people to use birth control?

I really don't think Gods and their powers are limited by location. And I really don't understand the jail example.

Either prisons in Remnant are all highly secured agains the Grimm, or every criminal whose crimes are too serious for community service gets executed instantly.

Edited by Tharkun140 on Apr 16th 2019 at 11:05:06 AM

If the Gods are all powerful, they could just create more resources. In fact, there's no reason for an existent, all-powerful, omnibenevolent deity to create a world with any suffering at all, and the mere existence of evil implies that one or more of those three things are not the case.

@kylotrope: Anyway, when it comes to Ozma's flashback, if we go with the null hypothesis of events being shown in chronological order unless otherwise indicated, the obvious interpretation is that Oz has no memories of an afterlife but doesn't question that presumably because of what he was taught to expect from the afterlife/because he's kinda a derp. In fact the God of Light alludes to Salem's corruption by the pools of Grimm, so this couldn't just be Jinn showing us stuff in non-chronological order, Ozma's offer came after Salem wandering the world for an indeterminate amount of time and attempting suicide via pools of Grimm, so it actually has to involve time fuckery or precognition, which even Jinn isn't capable of for your interpretation to work.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Apr 16th 2019 at 5:31:57 AM

How would you encourage birth control? you just can't force people to take it and what do you do when to many people get pregnant?

What I meant by the jail example if i go to jail am lock up i can't get out but in a world were death does not matter all i have to to is kill my self and get a buddy to ask the gods a bring me back and now i free do do what ever i want.

I mean, they're gods. If they want people to stop having kids, they could just remove the ability for people to have kids easily.

There is no indication that they could do that. They may be "gods", but there are still limits. Otherwise Salem wouldn't have been able to deceive the dark god, which Salem herself observed.

They aren't Abrahamic God in any sense of the word from what I gathered.

light seemed to know pretty quickly that his brother was breaking the rules they agreed to rather quickly so I could be matter of darkness not be aware of situations going on.

Yet Light still wasn't aware of who was leading the Rebellion against them until Salem revealed herself.

Yeah there strong but the show hasn't presented them as All Poweful or anything.

RWBY Amity Arena got an update that added Velvet and her card tells that her semblance is a intelligence type semblance that needs light dust the rarest type to work. [1]

@Tharkun140: One of the things that I like about my soul eating theory is that it nearly explains why the present day conflict between Ozma and Salem sounds suspiciously similar to the creation myth conflict between the Brothers Grimm; if feeding an endless cycle of creation and destruction is the basis of the Gods’ own power and immortality, it could easily be something they-or at least the God of Light-intentionally engineered as an alternative to fighting each other directly when their experiment proved wanting; Ozma’s mission is Unwinnable by Design in this scenario.

While the God of Light’s offer to Ozma starts of benign enough, there are things that make rather suspicious, and once Ozma accepts it takes a turn for the sinister with GoL threatening a second round of xenocide. I strongly suspect there’s an ulterior motive in play, and to me that seems like a pretty good candidate.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Apr 20th 2019 at 12:03:21 PM

The reason I think RWBY should not be troped based on promotional material is because we know that Rooster Teeth does lie with their promotional material. They will deliberately portray something out-of-context and have even been known to airbrush out other characters who may be involved in the scene.

As a result, the promotional material for RWBY definitely doesn't tell us exactly what's going to be happening in the actual volume itself.

That's something specific to RWBY, however.

Excuse the double-post.

I've finished updating the sandbox for the character pages based on feedback from last time. I have also included the second scenario suggested by Fergard Stratoavis. As a result the Sandbox now contains two scenarios.

Suggested Character Pages Revamp

• Scenario 1: The By Geography split (The Kingdoms have now been turned into Continent Pages, with Sanus covering two separate pages (an East and West) to give Vale and Vacuo their own pages).
  • Based on feedback from this thread, I have moved Caroline from the Solitas Page (Atlas Military) to the Anima Page (City of Argus).
  • Originally, I had a combined Sanus page. However, that generated debate over whether we should keep Vale and Vacuo on the same page or pre-emptively split them out. I've opted to split them out to trial the separation but I have kept the sandbox of the combined Sanus page should we decide we prefer that option for now. There should be a link on the index page to the combined Sanus page if you want to make comparisons.
  • Team CVFY currently remains on the Eastern Sanus page (Beacon Academy). I haven't moved them yet because the last conversation left it at 'the show hasn't told us they've moved to Vacuo'. Since we're now troping the novel, we need to decide whether to keep them under Beacon or move them to Western Sanus (Vacuo).
  • Live pages this scenario will get rid of: Kingdoms, Historical, Technology, Other (but see next bullet point)
    • The content of the Other page has not been incorporated into Scenario 1 because we haven't discussed what to do with that page. We could leave it as a separate 'Other Media' page.
    • The content of the Technology page will need to be moved to the main work pages before it's deleted.
• Scenario 2: A By Plot Exposure split (Kingdoms have now been turned into Secondary Characters and Tertiary Characters, with an Other Characters mopping up both the Other Characters live page and any oddities like the Brother Gods and Jinn; also with an Atlas Military page to join the other 'group' pages).
  • Live pages this scenario will get rid of: Kingdoms, Historical, Technology, Other
    • The content of the Technology page will need to be moved to the main work pages before it's deleted.

So, what do people think of these two scenarios? And do people have any other scenarios they want to trial?

Having been the person who put them all together, I do have opinions on both scenarios, but I won't go first. I'll add my thoughts when other people have responded.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 22nd 2019 at 10:05:41 AM

I'd go with the first scenario. Splitting most characters by exposure but then giving separate pages for a few organizations is just too confusing. The first scenatio isn't perfect either, with Western Sanus only getting two folders, but we can keep it that way for the sake of consistency.

Ah, good point. I forgot to add that bullet point into my post. I've added a bullet point on the Sanus split to my previous post.

The original combined Sanus page is still on the sandbox index but I've just raised its profile to make comparisons between it and the split Sanus pages easier.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 22nd 2019 at 10:04:47 AM

About RT lying about the trailers, that’s where the Never Trust a Trailer trope comes in.

It's not like RT trailers are difficult to figure out. They're generally out-of-context shots and lines from the first two or three episodes edited together to make things seem more serious than they are. I don't think I've seen a single one of their trailers play differently from that formula.

I haven't been keeping an eye on the thread, though, so what's this about RT lying on their trailers?

So, I'm not sure why I bother with it, but the Web Original page for DILP lists some RWBY examples which, I believe, we have already agree to be flat-out incorrect:

• Raven clearly cares about Yang, contrary to what the entry states, and cannot be fully classified as a villain. Maybe the entry could work with some rewriting?
• It might be just me, but I fail to remember anyone trying to paint Adam as the good guy, other than as a joke, though there were some people giving him Rooting for the Empire treatment due to hating Yang and/or Blake that much.
• Cordovin just isn't a villain. She might have some fans overlooking her faults, but she cannot fall under this trope due to not being a villanous character.

I don't think DILP needs to be for Villain charachters. Instead it could just be downplaying an Extreme Jerkass or Antagonist charachters traits.

Also, trust me. I've had to deal with a ton of People complaining about how Adams abuse of Blake was Only Informed or Calling Blake and Yang murderers for killing him or even defending Adams actions in volume 3 by saying that he was only hurting Blake as she was now an enemy of the white fang. Or many who have(And still say) he could have had a redemption arc.

Corvodin could be considered a minor villain, She's partially driving the plot as she's preventing the heroes from going to Atlas.

Edited by Kylotrope on Apr 23rd 2019 at 10:53:55 AM

Why would we need to get rid of Historical and Technology pages though? They don't look like that they belong to any particular nation or faction. Also, is it also possible to make separate folders for manga-exclusive, light-novel exclusive or even exclusives for video games and that one Chinese mobile Billi Billi game?

Edited by AceTriad on Apr 24th 2019 at 12:43:13 PM

Well the trope description talks specifically about the villains, so there is that.

Also, it seems like you are misinterpreting people's complaints regarding Adam. Pointing out — correctly, may I add — that his abusiveness wasn't foreshadowed and wasn't shown up until recently is not exactly the same as excusing it. Nor is being angry with the heroes for killing, nor is wishing for the villain to had been written differently. Some people are bummed that Ruby isn't cynical enough or that she hadn't been made a stoic Anti-Hero in the first place, but that doesn't make her Ron the Death Eater.

Edited by Tharkun140 on Apr 24th 2019 at 9:13:07 PM

Oh that's true. And yes people are right to complain about that(I myself have that to a degree) but a good deal of people seem to actually say Adams abusiveness was an Informed Attribute even After Volume 3. Or justifying the stuff he did in volume 3 Because Blake "betrayed" him.

And Blake and Yang killed him in self defense after several times They asked him to just leave

Edited by Kylotrope on Apr 24th 2019 at 1:05:11 AM

Good spot. And the formatting is appalling, so that needs fixing at the very least. Let's see:

• Roman & Neo: Acceptable candidates. Their entry needs rewording because they should be two separate examples.
• Raven: No. It doesn't even accurate summarise the show's depiction of her (Raven has never said she doesn't care about her daughter; Qrow has accused her of that, and all the evidence points to the fact she does care about her daughter), and actively ignores the multi-faceted (by the show's standards) development of her character. It sounds like complaining about people having a different opinion of Raven than a black-and-white 'irredeemable villain' depiction the entry-maker would prefer. If there is a potentially valid example for Raven, this example isn't it. This needs removing, no question. If there is a valid case to be made for Raven, it needs to be rewritten and re-argued from scratch.
• Adam: Well, my understanding is that this type of fan did exist at the beginning of the show, when we knew almost nothing about Adam, but that this kind of attitude has dropped like a stone as we've learned more about him and what he's really about. It also seems to be conflating two completely different issues: whether Adam is the DILP trope because people make him out to be better than he is, and whether the SDC brand means he had the potential for a redemption character story because the brand has the potential to make him a better character than the writers made him (which isn't DILP, it's a 'Waste of Character Potential' trope). I'm in two minds here. There may be a valid example, but it desperately needs a rewrite to salvage it. Kylotrope seems to have familiarity with this, perhaps he could rewrite Adam's entry?
• Caroline: No. Just no. This an entry written by someone who is dismissing nuance and clearly believes that any character opposed to the hero is automatically an irredeemably evil villain and that the hero is incapable of being in the wrong. Caroline isn't a villain. She's actually a 'hero' in her own right. One with character flaws that allow her old feud with Maria to get the better of her. Meanwhile, the heroes are also in the wrong with the decisions they make and the clear entitlement they feel that people should just step aside and let them do whatever they want based on their say-so alone. There's a reason why Ruby apologised to Cordovin at the end of the story-arc, and that's because she knew she'd done wrong. This entry seems to be a Ron the Death Eater candidate and not a DILP candidate.

Cordovin is an excellent example of why 'villain' and 'antagonist' are not the same thing. She is not a villain. Not even close. She's even a likely candidate for Hero of Another Story. But she's an antagonist in this story thanks to her character flaws and her old feud with Maria. Not every antagonist is a villain... and not every villain is an antagonist (see Death Note for examples of all of these).

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 25th 2019 at 1:58:53 PM

"If the Gods are all powerful, they could just create more resources. In fact, there's no reason for an existent, all-powerful, omnibenevolent deity to create a world with any suffering at all, and the mere existence of evil implies that one or more of those three things are not the case. "

they are not reason for a god to create anything actually, is not a necesary requirement at all, in this case the creation it is what it is because it was a compromise of existence between the two brother, is their shared setting as it is.

Frankly I do think some people Tend to White Wash Covordins flaws saying she was "Just doing her job". Yeah the Heroes broke the law by stealing the ship and she had no way of Knowing the Heroes intentions...But Bringing out a Mecha in Response to Them stealing a ship for me is the Equivalent of ordering an Air strike against Car Robbers And outright tries to kill Ruby, a teenager. And we Immediately find out the Mecha is for Emergencies. Plus while she's no irredeemable villain she's a pretty big jerk, but I digress.

For Adam, heres what I'd do for a rewrite.

• Adams handling Has proven rather Contentious, with a good deal of fans thinking he would have Worked better as a Well intentioned Anti-Villain. But Some of these fans take it a step further and try to Whitewash Canon Adams nastiness. Downplaying his Abuse of Blake , justifying his Emotional Manipulation of Blake in his charachter short by saying He wasnt lying to her. And saying he only Vowed to Destroy Blakes life because she "Betrayed the White Fang".

I'm not sure how my Grammar and Such work, so if that goes through then feel free to reword some stuff so it reads smoother. I will say I thought it was important to note at the Begining the distinction between The "They Wasted A Perfectly Good Charachter" Group and the DILP group.

Yes, but jerkass tropes are different to villain tropes or antagonist tropes for a reason.

You have some punctuation and capitalisation problems, but it's not bad. I'd tweak as follows:

• Adam's handling is regarded as contentious due to some fans thinking he would have worked better as a well-intentioned anti-villain. Some of these fans further attempt to whitewash Adam's canonical nastiness. For example, they downplay his abuse of Blake, justifying his emotional manipulation by saying that he wasn't lying to her during his character short and arguing that he only vowed to destroy Blake's life in Volume 3 because she "betrayed the White Fang".

I don't know what others think?

On a personal note, I just have to ask this: are there really fans who think emotional abuse is okay as long as the manipulation doesn't contain direct lies? Not only is that a simplistic understanding of the concept of deceit (twisting the context of the truth is a form of lying, for example), but it doesn't even attempt to understand what the concept of manipulation or emotional abuse even is.

Then again, I suppose a lot of people still don't understand the seriousness or the nature of emotional abuse. (And this ignores that Adam was actually engaging in physical abuse as well.)

Edited by Wyldchyld on Apr 26th 2019 at 6:09:47 PM