Ensemble Dark Horse Cleanup

Ugh. Okay, this is the last one. Let's compare Toxtricity from Pokemon to the Doof Warrior from Mad Max Fury Road.

The Doof Warrior is an ensemble darkhorse from his movie that appears for a few minutes during a fight sequence. His entire appeal comes from the fact that he's a badass guitarist playing on a moving vehicle during a fight. That is to say, all "character" is derived from his actions and design, not his personality. He never speaks and we never even learn his name. He's just that crazy guitar guy.

Toxtricity is species bipedal lizards with a punk-rock aesthetic that strum poison sacks on their body like guitar strings. They fight using sound vibrations from this strumming to create sonic booms and electric charges. Many of their animations invoke a rockstar theming (headbanging, shredding, etc). That is to say, their popularity comes from their design and actions, not their personality.

Just saying that this "character standards" you speak of have never been a requirement for E Ds before, so it really seems like your only argument is individual vs species. Which seems unfair because the fan reaction is identical.

Edited by Stage7-4 on Apr 23rd 2020 at 3:25:41 AM

Individuality is pretty much my only standard for what does and doesn't constitute a character (besides, well, actually being alive and not a prop of some sort). So yes, I consider Doof Warrior a character more than Toxtricity based on the individuality aspect.

I'll bow out of the debate here as well. We're going in circles and have both said our piece, so it's best to just let others take over now.

But my argument about The Scrappy still stands and hasn't really been argued against yet, so if someone wants to explain this issue for me please do so.

Edited by WarJay77 on Apr 23rd 2020 at 6:28:52 AM

Well, my opinion on it:

Ensemble Dark Horse is a character trope.

For a character to be defined as a character, you don't need a lot of information. You need a name, a brief description, or an image, along with some evidence that it's a unique character. Nothing else. If literally all you have is, "that crazy guitar guy," then you have enough to define him as a character.

A species, character class, unit type, or other collection of related characters or mobs is not a character. A problem comes where some games treat those as individual characters, or just make no distinction. However, if you can name them, you're naming the individual, which means the generic group is not a character.

I don't think "Pikachu" is a character, but "Ash's Pikachu" is.

I don't know if the Animal Crossing entries have been bought up here before, but I've found an example I have a question about:

• The special Welcome amiibo villagers are all popular due to being references to Nintendo or Sanrio franchises, and players hope they can return in a New Horizons update in spite of the reduced role of amiibo in that game. The Zelda characters, especially Wolf Link, are the most well-liked.

Clearly these were intended to be popular, with them being based on populat existing third-party characters. Does this disqualify them from Ensemble Dark Horse status?

I'm also unsure if the Dark Horse villagers should be listed by type like they are. After all, there are exactly eight types, and more than half of them have examples listed.

So let's reverse this line of thinking: do you think that an audience taking extra unexpected interest in a lesser-advertised SPECIES of creatures in a piece of media is tropeworthy?

And if so, do you think there needs to be an ED-like trope just for species?

Personally I do feel it's noteable but not so noteable that it needs it's own trope.

And I still think we are taking standards for what is or is not a character way too far. Character can be expressed in design and movement, and many ED's are popular simply for their design or actions.

Another point is that for most of these species examples, they might be a collective but do they really have individuals? All Pokemon species have the same personality quirks: Voltorbs being irritable and explosive, Sobble are sensitive and prone to crying, Chansey are nurturing, etc. The fact that they are a group is more a technicality.

And that holds true for most of these species examples still on the ED page. Boos are mischievous but also shy, Rathians are territorial and aggressive, all of them have the same character traits. So I see it as one character, expressed through a bunch of clones.

Edited by Stage7-4 on Apr 25th 2020 at 9:05:22 AM

You can argue for Unexpectedly Popular Species being a trope, just like you can argue for Unexpectedly Popular Item, Unexpectedly Popular Game Mechanic, Unexpectedly Popular Plot, etc.

To me, "not notable enough for its own trope, but notable enough to shoehorn here," means it's not notable enough to trope. Well, Audience Reaction, not a proper trope.

Then let me bring up Animal Crossing again, because (and for , Animal Crossing was discussed here a few pages back), the villager personality types make them all essentially clones of themselves, with the only real difference being species of animal and appearance.

Is the fact that one Lazy villager might a cat while another might be a dog a different enough change to make them separate characters, or is the fact that they otherwise share the same quirks enough to count them as one character, expressed through some clones with slightly more variety than the average Pokemon? I'm asking this because in previous discussion, a handful of us agreed that sorting characters by their personality groups (and then just listing off names) came off more like general examples than proper ED examples, because it was either multiple characters lumped into one example, or an entire group with the same recurring traits listing examples of characters with said traits. Either way it didn't seem to fly.

And this is a serious question. I'm not trying to pull a trick or anything. I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not you think each personality type would qualify as one character, if their slight appearance differences would make them all different characters, or what have you.

My take is that they're all basically the same character personality wise but their different names and appearances do make them individuals enough to potentially pick favorites, just not in the way the Animal Crossing example was doing it (just because it listed so many characters that it seemed less like "the absolute favorites of the fandom" and more just "here's some villagers people don't utterly despise".) It's not the exact same thing as Pokemon because the game treats them all as individuals to a degree, and you can pick specific ones out of the crowd, rather than always have to talk about the entire species as a whole.

Edited by WarJay77 on Apr 25th 2020 at 3:41:24 PM

Many Animal Crossing villagers do look distinct from one another, even when they're the same species. They even have different skills, dream jobs, coffee orders, ect. in different games. They even seem to act mildly different, even when they're the same type. Some are definitely more popular than others, but I'm unsure how distinct all these differences really make them.

Granted, the last one I played was City Folk, so I'm a bit behind.

Requesting a response to this post.

All of those examples are clear misuse, these are indeed major characters.

Darth Vader, seriously? I'm not sure you can find a more main character in the whole franchise.

In the whole franchise, yes. The entry is specifically for A New Hope, and in A New Hope, he's a thug on Tarkin's leash. His role and significance were significantly increased in subsequent films, including the I Am Your Father retcon.

Edited by HighCrate on Apr 26th 2020 at 6:46:28 AM

I would disagree with that sentiment, but I'll leave it at that.

Darth Vader is popular enough to be parodied and copied thousands of times, but started off as a major character. Unless these previous versions are notably different takes on him, while still putting him in the background background, he cannot be a Dark Horse.

For further proof of his significance in the first film, Here's the 1977 theatrical release poster◊. Notice the great big Vader head in the back.

Edited by GoldenCityBird on Apr 26th 2020 at 5:39:35 PM

I am starting to see the "no species" side of things. After all, only the main Legendary Pokémon duos or trios in each generation have active/scripted plot roles. Pokémon are subject to lots of opinions and passion and that deserves to be documented, but yeah, they probably don't fit the definition of "cast members".

And yeah, Animal Crossing villagers are akin to forms of one of eight characters and so it's very difficult to write a substantial ED example about them when the only meaningful distinguishing feature is the character design. "Ankha is really popular because she looks like a mummy pharaoh" may be true, but does that make a good entry? Ankha is otherwise like any other Snooty villager, and any subtle differences felt are all up to how her interactions are generated. With other works, the character usually has a unique personality to discuss on top of their theme. I think there are valid reactions to these characters, but that doesn't necessarily make them tropable. The games don't have much of a narrative to speak of, but they do have defined unique characters who are fair game for ED with the business, visiting, and holiday NPCs.

Edited by 8BrickMario on Apr 26th 2020 at 3:59:26 AM

I threw out Rohan, Vader, and Obi-Wan.

I'm curious if this entry from Victorious is actually an example:

• The guy who yelled "Yeah, Louise!" even before Tori started to sing in the Special Episode "Freak the Freak out", who was considered to be by fans the only "real one" from the audience.

I don't remember him being popular with the fanbase at all. I don't remember him being brought up anywhere or by anyone.

Edited by Bullman on Apr 27th 2020 at 4:08:26 AM

Something I noticed in passing.

On the EnsembleDarkhorse.Web Animation page, the Red Vs Blue entry lists Caboose and Lopez as examples of the trope. Aren't they main cast? Should they be examples?

• Red Vs Blue
  • Caboose, for whom the writers originally had no real plans other than for him to be a catalyst to annoy Church. Once he devolved into The Ditz of the group, he became very popular with the fandom, however, thanks to having some of the most hilarious dialogue in the series.
  • Among the original Blood Gulch Crew, there's Lopez, the Spanish-speaking robotic marine/mechanic that serves as both the Beleaguered Assistant and Only Sane Man on the Red Team. Aside from just how strange he is as a concept, fans love him for his hilariously sarcastic and fatalistic mindset - Amidst all the strangeness of the series (intergalactic intrigue, war and drama, family tragedy, and more), Lopez couldn't care less and despises everyone while trying to avoid becoming just a head again.

Edited by Wyldchyld on May 5th 2020 at 12:24:43 PM

While I don't know the work, I trust your judgement and say they can be cut.

I've seen like 6 episodes of the show so my knowledge is hardly substantial, but I do remember Caboose being a major character at the very least.

Caboose is definitely a main character and appears in every season.

Lopez however is a side character that can go missing for large portions of time (sometimes for whole seasons), and due to the gimmick of always speaking in Spanish when no other characters know Spanish he never really gets to be a part of the plot nor have his own character arcs. He's a reoccurring joke, with the punchline being he's sane but nobody listens.

So definitely cut Caboose but Lopez is minor enough to stay.

Edited by Stage7-4 on May 6th 2020 at 8:51:17 AM

Are Story of Seasons love interests examples? I've seen them listed, even though they're important characters.

Hi everyone,

While reading the Tales of Vesperia page, I stumbled upon the Ensemble Dark Horse entry, which is, I think, an example of Square Peg Round Trope:

"Ensemble Dark Horse: Averted, a possible first for the Tales Series — Yuri Lowell actually is the most popular character in the game, both in Japan and in Western territories. He averts the Kid Hero and Idiot Hero tropes in the best possible ways, which probably helps. He was the first character to dethrone Kratos as the most popular character in the Tales fandom. Still, the game's secondary characters do receive a lot of love...

• Flynn is generally overshadowed by Yuri due to the latter's badassery, but there are people who believe Flynn's ways are better.
• Judith has quite the fandom, male and female alike.
• Raven generally annoys the party, but is one of the most popular characters in the fandom.
• Yeager doesn't get much screen time, but has been voted the most popular villain in the game on the official forums."

Issues are as follow:

• The entry uses the main character (Yuri Lowell) to set up the rest, not so subtly underlining that he is the most popular party member (and thus shouldn't be even mentioned there in the first place).
• Flynn is a guest party member in the original game, and a bona fide party member in the Updated Re-release. He is not a minor character, and doesn't belong there.
• Judith and Raven are both party members. While Judith's impact on the plot is rather nonconsequential (and even then, she still has some importance), Raven's role is anything but minor, being the mole and traitor who inevitably pulls a Heel–Face Turn.
• Yeager is a minor villain alright... Probably the only one who may qualify, honestly, but there is a small problem that I am listing next:
• Most of these examples lack context and are unsufficiently written.

For these reasons, I think the entirety of the Ensemble Dark Horse entry should be axed.

Edited by NonoRobot on May 6th 2020 at 10:51:14 AM

You mean Ensemble Dark Horse entry?