TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Need a bettter explanation, or a split: Lightning Bruiser

Go To

VioletOrange Since: Jul, 2010
#176: Nov 17th 2010 at 1:04:38 PM

[up][up] in a word : everywhere. Look at any build consecrated page, you will see literature example, anime example...

even for video games, it's not restricted in RPG and fighting games 4x can have this, RTS, turn based games, possible with race game like Mario Kart (which isn't itself an example, since there isn't any variation in the ability to hurt between character). And even in RPG and fighting games, your conception is only valuable in the rare case where the ability to travel fast isn't valuable or differentiate between characters.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#177: Nov 17th 2010 at 1:06:29 PM

[up][up][facepalm] That's meant to prove what, exactly? His complaint was that the trope as I described it wasn't applicable to genres of games besides besides RPGs and fighting games. My point was that they don't really have to, because those are the only two genres where Competitive Balance really applies. Yes, you can use the archetypes to cover non-videogame genres too, but the point is that they're used to compare different characters who are presumably roughly similar in terms of fighting prowess (Character Tiers notwithstanding). You can do that for movies or anime or whatever else, but it doesn't work very well with, say, action/adventure games, or platformer games, where instead of having a fairly large cast of roughly-equal characters, you have one PC, a crapton of mooks, and a handful of bosses.

edited 17th Nov '10 1:06:53 PM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#178: Nov 17th 2010 at 1:12:53 PM

But it shows up in any media that has anyone fight. It shows up in anime. It shows up in literature. It shows up in western animation. It shows up in film. It shows up in professional wresting. It is a trope that requires you to compare the character to other characters in their universe, but it's not specifically a gaming trope.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Icalasari Warble from Alberta, Canada Since: Jan, 2001
Warble
#179: Nov 17th 2010 at 5:15:08 PM

Ok, so I was wrong about what a bruiser meant. I still don't like it, but at least it makes sense now that I know a bruiser is both strong and tough...

Anyways, I still think that a lot needs to be redone so there is something covering each kind of build. It would also allow things to be a bit more cut and dry (there would always be cases where it would be iffy, but at the same time...). After all, a tough, fast build trope doesn't seem to exist, nor does one that is defensive and fast, but not strong

And of course with magic builds...

Maybe it's me being OCD over that?

I wonder what a strip tease from a creature made of souls would be like?
troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#180: Nov 17th 2010 at 8:16:54 PM

[up] Go back and read page 4 for the arguments against that plan.

rodneyAnonymous Sophisticated as Hell from empty space Since: Aug, 2010
#181: Nov 17th 2010 at 8:52:39 PM

"My point was that they don't really have to, because those are the only two genres where Competitive Balance really applies"

These tropes involve Competitive Balance, but they are about way more than that. My point was that, while maybe the words come from video games, the archetypes show up in other media. (All other media.)

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.
Tyoria Since: Jul, 2009
#182: Nov 17th 2010 at 10:29:56 PM

I just think that if you want to propose a complete overhaul of Competitive Balance and all its related tropes, it ought to get its own thread instead of going here. Because the whole problem with Lightning Bruiser in the first place wasn't that Competitive Balance isn't exactly mapped out with separate tropes for characters who are whatever combination of speed, strength, defense, or whatever other attributes may prove relevant depending on the setting — but that the second section wasn't clearly enough alluded to from the description (that a medium-or-less-sized person could qualify) and that some of the examples in the second section shouldn't have qualified (because they hit hard, but weren't really tough).

Making radical changes to Stone Wall or other tropes as a result of what's going on in this thread just seems unfair to people who have no idea how tangential the conversation's gotten.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#183: Nov 18th 2010 at 5:45:08 AM

That's a fair observation, though whatever's decided in regards to Competitive Balance is obviously going to have an affect on Lightning Bruiser. In any case, I'll go make a new thread for Competitive Balance and subtropes.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Icalasari Warble from Alberta, Canada Since: Jan, 2001
Warble
#184: Nov 18th 2010 at 10:59:29 PM

Go back and read page 4 for the arguments against that plan.

...Wow I must have been half asleep when reading that page the first time x.x

Still, the argument against that could be: Not all games use a magic component, so isn't Squishy Wizard similar to Glass Cannon like how something that describes a combination of Fragile Speedster and Glass Cannon is apparently similar to Glass Cannon?

Watch as I am made to look like an idiot once more. Me typing late at night is not a good idea >.>

I wonder what a strip tease from a creature made of souls would be like?
troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#185: Nov 18th 2010 at 11:29:25 PM

Uh, what? You lost me.

Squishy Wizard is about the tendency of spellcaster-types to be fragile. It often results in a Glass Cannon, but it also covers other spellcaster-types like The Medic (which is definitely not a Glass Cannon). Generally speaking, Squishy Wizard and Glass Cannon serve very different purposes in the narrative: Glass Cannon is a term used to classify fighters for ease of discussion (and comparison with other archetypes like the Mighty Glacier and so on), whereas Squishy Wizard is more of a trope in the traditional sense because it plays off of the audience's expectations about the wizard archetype—which is more easily identified as a wizard: the man in the full suit of armor carrying the BFS, or the man in the robes with the pointy hat and the simple wooden stick? Works use these traditional "Look, I'm a spellcaster!" cues, and squishiness follows intuitively, because without some sort of magical supplementation, robes and a small stick are obviously ineffective in physical combat. Therefore, Squishy Wizard.

So yeah. Different roles.

I'm not actually even sure if that answers your post at all.

edited 18th Nov '10 11:31:46 PM by troacctid

Icalasari Warble from Alberta, Canada Since: Jan, 2001
Warble
#186: Nov 18th 2010 at 11:33:36 PM

Figured I got something wrong

Although something is odd with Squishy Wizard. One of the lines says that it contrasts with the Medic who is a kind of Squishy Wizard. How do you contrast a character build with a character build that is a sub type of the first character build?

I wonder what a strip tease from a creature made of souls would be like?
troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#187: Nov 18th 2010 at 11:41:12 PM

[up] Just poor phrasing in the description. That section could use some rewriting.

VioletOrange Since: Jul, 2010
#188: Nov 19th 2010 at 1:31:27 PM

Since I don't read any hostile reaction, should we change the sandbox Lightning Bruiser with the main Lightning Bruiser ? Or should we wait the end of the week end ?

Tyoria Since: Jul, 2009
#189: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:44:20 PM

Well, the bad examples (which everyone agreed needed to be gotten rid of) were trimmed already, though there may be a few we didn't get. What hasn't been moved over was the "fourth, unsorted category" idea, which I'm not sure everyone was on board with...

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#190: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:49:31 PM

Can we cut down on the natter while it's still in the sandbox? It's still hard to figure out some of the examples for the commentary on them.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
VioletOrange Since: Jul, 2010
#191: Nov 20th 2010 at 3:39:33 AM

[up][up] Yeah, that last category is really ugly.

I clean the example until the first Pro Wrestling category

major deletions

The Eyeshield section was pure Natter.

  • Gundam SEED, The Freedom (The Justice to some extent, but not quite). It's wicked fast, can fire beams and lasers from its torso piece (a HUGE edge because most other Gundams need to get a gun out, Freedom can fire point blank while locking swords), its got the METEOR for even more firepower, and in Kira's hands it's damn near impossible to hit unless the opponent is extremely skilled.
    • And of course, in Gundam SEED Destiny, after the Freedom is smashed it gets replaced by the bigger, badder Strike Freedom. Good lord!
      • The Freedom's are fast and have tremendous firepower, but they might not count. Their beam sabers and shields are rather standard for their types making it more or a beefier than usual fragile speedster. Destiny is probably a better example. It can move even faster than the Freedom, leaving after images of itself, and it uses a gigantic beam tipped solid sword that can slice ships aparts in a single slash.

  • The Blob from the same universe also applies. He's large to the extreme, but has the speed and agility expected of a physically fit man of his height, a fact that catches many opponents off-guard.

edited 20th Nov '10 3:40:40 AM by VioletOrange

SomeSortOfTroper Since: Jan, 2001
#192: Dec 28th 2010 at 4:40:11 PM

bump because someone found the sandbox page.

Tyoria Since: Jul, 2009
#193: Dec 28th 2010 at 8:49:33 PM

I thought everything was settled on the main page itself? Should we just get rid of the sandbox page?

VioletOrange Since: Jul, 2010
#194: Dec 29th 2010 at 4:30:09 AM

I copy paste the sandbox page into the main one (that last step was missing). It's now good for me, the subject can be closed and the sandbox deleted

ExpiryBot Since: Dec, 1969
#195: Jan 12th 2011 at 11:04:10 AM

This thread expired after 60 days of inactivity.

Add Post

Total posts: 194
Top