Usually, if the base character has a signature trait (or combination of traits) and another character also has it, it's a big sign of an Expy (but not a be all and end all)
We can never truly eradicate the coronavirus, but we can suppress its threat like influenza
Big Catch, Sparkle Edition
If it's really blatant, like the orphaned chosen one has a scar and is British and uses magic, then that's obviously a Harry Potter expy (or reference). But expies are intentional and so we can't just look for common traits, we need to be sure it was intended by the creator, and the more blatant it is the better.
Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness
I guess what I'm wondering is how you determine intent without Word of God? It seems to me that in the absence of a clear confirmation, the only thing you can do is compare how similar the characters are to each other.
It was mentioned in a cleanup thread (can't remember which one) that the definitions of both Expy and Captain Ersatz have shifted considerably. It used to be:
- Expy: A creator reuses their own character(s) in a later work.
- Captain Ersatz: A creator bases their character(s) off of another creator's character(s).
But now Expy has basically the same definition as Captain Ersatz but requires Word of God for some reason, while Captain Ersatz doesn't and is also just, like, more Expy than Expy is, or something.
The old definitions were leagues better.
Well according to the Expy Clean Up thread
it doesn't require Word of God:
- Word of God helps a lot with this point, but if the other points are present strongly enough, Word of God is not absolutely required.
I've seen several people talking about starting a trope for creators who reuse their own characters. We could just fix Expy so it reflects its original definition, but at this point that'll be difficult.
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
2014: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1397915013002574000
Character Copy, a Cut and Paste. In fanfic or roleplaying communities, particularly the text based or tabletop varieties, an expy is a character heavily based off of an already established canon character from popular culture or media. The expy will often retain most, if not all of the established character's aesthetics and abilities with only a simple palette swap or small token change to outfit, hairstyle or eye color to differentiate between the two physically. Character histories can also be blatant rip offs of the source material. The term is most often used derisively as a critique against lazy or uncreative players during character generation. Often linked with compulsive Mary-Sueism.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I feel this has the same issue as Never Live It Down where the broader meaning of the title on other parts of the Internet contributes to misuse of the trope.
If we are going to keep Expy as it's currently used, then shouldn't we get rid of Captain Ersatz? They're basically the same trope at this point.
Edited by RustBeard on Sep 20th 2020 at 2:45:26 AM
If "expy" really is a pre-existing term meaning "character based on somebody else's character", then we should either rework Captain Ersatz to be the one about "reusing your own characters" — since that's a perfectly valid trope too — or make it a redirect to Expy and just make a entirely new trope with that definition to replace it. Recycled Character would work fine.
It's rather common in forum roleplay and fanfic communities.
Does this use predate when we created trope? Also, when it's used in roleplaying and fan communities, does it mean any character that is a copy of another? Or is it specifically about a fan character who is based off of a canon character?
Edit: The way I see it is we have two courses of action.
Plan 1
Expy gets reverted to its original definition of being when a creator reuses one of their characters.
Captain Ersatz will basically be used the same way we use Expy now.
Plan 2
Expy now refers to fan characters who are based off of canon characters.
Captain Ersatz refers to any character that's a copy of another character.
A new trope gets created to describe creators reusing their previous characters.
Edited by RustBeard on Sep 20th 2020 at 3:22:43 AM
Don't we have Reused Character Design?
We can never truly eradicate the coronavirus, but we can suppress its threat like influenza
A character can be a copy in more of a written sense, though visual similarities should probably factor in.
As far as Expy vs. Captain Ersatz, the nuance I gathered was that the latter was specifically done to infringe or insult without being similar enough to suffer litigation, while the former was just a very similar character, but I'm not entirely sure where I got that and I've always defaulted to the former in cases of similar characters.
I thought Captain Ersatz means to be The Cameo (i.e a character appears in another work), but they can't use the character's name or exact appearance.
We can never truly eradicate the coronavirus, but we can suppress its threat like influenza
Captain Ersatz is a complete disaster. One thing the Expy cleanup thread made pretty clear to me is that I don't think anyone knows what it is or how it's distinct from Expy.
Edited by nrjxll on Sep 20th 2020 at 11:15:22 AM
At this point people are using Expy and Captain Ersatz interchangeably. That's why I'm saying we need to either get rid of one of them or redefine them.
I stand by what I defined as Captain Ersatz. I thought I saw that in the Trope Distinctions pages.
I'm pretty sure that's Lawyer-Friendly Cameo.
Edit: What I'm getting from this thread is that we've got a bunch of tropes that heavily overlap and we should probably redefine them so they're more clearly distinguished from each other.
Edited by RustBeard on Sep 20th 2020 at 10:25:10 AM
Lost in Space
Or possibly cut, because "character is like another character" is basically Chairs at this point — moreover it relies on external context.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
That's fair. Everything takes inspiration from something else, so singling out characters isn't particularly noteworthy.
But it's when the inspiration is more clearcut that it becomes noteworthy.
Lost in Space
As trivia, maybe, but as a trope? Nope.
Honestly, it feels like laziness to me. Creating a copy of a popular character is easier than being creative and it gets you lots of views from people who are staying in their comfort zone. Still not a trope, though.
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 21st 2020 at 12:25:37 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Whether or not you approve of using a trope is irrelevant. What matters is if you can show the trope represents a narrative pattern. In my opinion, the bigger issue is we have a bunch of tropes that are basically "Character from another work is copied" and people are confused over how they're supposed to be used. Right now we have:
Edit: I think we'll have to get rid of some of these tropes, but I think there are concepts that are tropeworthy. For instance, if a creator reuses one of their characters in another work.
Edited by RustBeard on Sep 21st 2020 at 9:46:09 AM
So as they're defined now, an Expy must be deliberate. Now I've seen it said that Word of God isn't necessary, so long as the similarities are strong enough. To me this a subjective standard. How striking do the similarities need to be before a character can be considered an Expy. Obviously, an orphan who discover they're The Chosen One can't be considered an Expy of Harry Potter. But what if the orphan had a funky scar on their forehead? Would that be similar enough for the character to be considered an Expy.