Are these Character Tropes?

Character tropes.

Per ATT, Not So Different is being replaced with "Not So Different" Remark which requires in-work characters make the comparison. Questions about replacing them on character pages.

1. Is it still a characterization trope if it is no longer about characterization, but dialog that may or may not be treated as valid in-work
2. If it stays on character pages should it only go under the one making the remark as they're the one the action applies to?

It is not a characterization trope. It should go to the main work page if it is a valid example.

So, is Allegiance Affirmation considered a character or story trope?

I'm guessing this is reaction to that RWBY example? I... honestly don't know which it is, because it's heavily associated with the character who does it.

If a character's name/appearance is a Stealth Pun, would that go on their character sheet or on the main page?

- They have a Punny Name that's a Stealth Pun. The former is a character trope.

This ATT is questioning whether some tropes from The Iron Giant belong to the main or character page.

Posting this here since it seems the most appropriate place to discuss and settle it:

Personally, I feel these "Eureka!" Moment and Sheathe Your Sword examples are story tropes; The Too Dumb to Live, Reasonable Authority Figure and Hate Sink examples are character tropes. And I'm honestly not sure about Kick the Dog and Rage Breaking Point.

Edited by BlackMage43 on Dec 10th 2021 at 10:08:37 AM

Reasonable Authority Figure and Hate Sink, in these examples, are character tropes.

Everything else is a story trope. The character isn't considered Too Dumb to Live for the work so much as someone who dun fucked up once. If the entry played up his overall paranoia as being part of TDTL I could see it being valid, but the work takes place against the backdrop of the Cold War where said paranoia was, if not reasonable, at least fairly common.

The Rage Breaking Point examples come across as less "this is the point Rage Breaking Point of the character" so much as "capable of anger to the point of raising one's voice at someone."

Edited by Larkmarn on Dec 10th 2021 at 2:46:50 PM

I think a way to approach the question is this... Imagine Iron Giant 2 has been announced, it will be released in 2023 and all the main characters in the first movie will reprise their roles.

Will Mansley remain a Hate Sink? Given his asshole character traits... probably. But what if he was Reassigned to Antarctica, had some major character development and his main role in the story is to provide Hogarth with information on the Giant's whereabouts and nothing else? Hate Sink kinda depends on the story doesn't it?

Will Mansley pull a Too Dumb to Live moment? If he only fills the role given in the above example, then probably not. kinda depends on the story doesn't it?

Will General Rogard function as a Reasonable Authority Figure? Given that he is shown to be a heroic and noble personality then probably yes. But if the story is such that military action can't be part of the narrative, then his ability to function as an authority figure is limited or non-existent. kinda depends on the story.

Will the Giant have a Rage Breaking Point moment? If there's a big confrontation scene, then maybe. kinda depends on the story doesn't it?

I could go on, but hopefully the pattern of reasoning I'm using has become clear. If the trope describes an action or role that a character consistently does/plays then it could fit on the character page. If the trope describes an action or role that is tied to specific narrative and only occurs once... then not so much.

Edited by rva98014 on Dec 10th 2021 at 10:53:58 AM

That seems... needless. Like, literally any characterization trope can be reversed by the next movie.

Pacific Rim 2 saw its nerdly scientist character who would put his life on the line for humanity mutate into The Mole for the aliens and is essentially a puppet. Doesn't mean he's not still The Smart Guy, just means that his role changed.

Honestly, your language kinda reaffirms my points. You use "moment" for Too Dumb to Live or Rage Breaking Point. Which I agree, are plot tropes. But for character tropes like Reasonable Authority Figure and Hate Sink, you're saying "will they remain" implying it's what they are, not what they've done at some point.

Edited by Larkmarn on Dec 10th 2021 at 2:09:27 PM

I mean. This Is a Wiki. Everyone gets a say in how everything works. It's sorta how the site works.

He gets just as much as in it as you or I.

Edited by Larkmarn on Dec 10th 2021 at 2:43:30 PM

Are you trying to say that certain people can't have a say? Sounds rather rude to me.

My two cents is that Hate Sink (though it is a supertrope, a subtrope should be used), Too Dumb to Live and Reasonable Authority Figure are most definitely characterization tropes. "Eureka!" Moment and Sheathe Your Sword are definitely not characterization. The others I can see as being situational.

Yeah, action tropes are definitely the gray area here. I've actually had beef with this very thread in the past because nobody could actually come to consensus on the subject, which made every answer you got here different. They're the ones that might've been perfectly valid to delete.

But, like I said at the ATT thread, the arguments against the character tropes are red paint. RVA, I know at ATT you said you wanted to discuss the individual examples, but that's not really how it works when it comes to character trait tropes. All character tropes (those being descriptors) belong on character pages (when such pages exist anyway). That's not something that can really be argued, which is why everyone took such issue with the argument for those tropes specifically- because no matter what scenario you apply that argument to, the result will always be the same, context be damned. People aren't going to want to debate the specific examples because your very reason for deleting them is flawed and against consensus.

Edited by WarJay77 on Dec 10th 2021 at 2:52:26 PM

I agree that Hate Sink, Reasonable Authority Figure and Too Dumb to Live are character tropes. I do not see the argument of potential future installments as compelling. As it stands those tropes refer to character actions.

I certainly agree that character pages don't need to cataloge every single event a character is involved in. But i think declaring each trope to either be a character trope or not is counterproductive. If alice hits one guy in the groin, that's not a character trait. If alice aims for the groin every single time she gets into an argument, then Groin Attack is a pretty reasonable trope to add to her page.

Again, character pages are not just traits

Dude, we know.

Apparantly not jjjj2

Except their post didn't say anything about the other tropes not counting? So you jumped to argue unnecessarily?

So in reviewing this thread, it seems the consensus is that all tropes that define character traits obviously belong on the character page.

Per the Iron Giant discussion, Hate Sink, Reasonable Authority Figure and Too Dumb to Live are agreed to be characterization tropes.

Tropes that deal with a character's actions are still that gray area where story context greatly influences whether it should be included on the character page.

For Iron Giant, action tropes like "Eureka!" Moment, Sheathe Your Sword, or Kick the Dog were considered more story-based and not needing a character page entry.

That seems to cover it. Feedback?

Edited by rva98014 on Dec 11th 2021 at 8:10:29 AM

Yeah, that's it.

"I do not see the argument of potential future installments as compelling. As it stands those tropes refer to character actions." -jjjj2's post