Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Reymma
Since: Feb, 2015
18th Apr, 2019 03:31:19 PM
Bat Deduction might fit better, though it's one the player has to make.
Stories don't tell us monsters exist; we knew that already. They show us that monsters can be trademarked and milked for years.
This example has been added to Insane Troll Logic:
The example also got added to Conviction by Contradiction where I believe it definitely would qualify as an example. But I'm not so sure about Insane Troll Logic. Would this qualify or no? Just to add some context to the situation within the game where this happens, Cole is specifically investigating a car crash, and both the person he's talking to and their friend were car crash victims. Cole specifically asks her to describe the passenger who was in the car with her, and she responds by giving the normal general description you would give to a question like that (the passenger's name, what kind of person the passenger is, and how bad the crash has been on her). This is when the player is expected to make Cole accuse her of hiding the fact that the passenger was raped because she didn't mention it. IMO I think it's safe to say that it's a pretty ludicrous leap of logic, but what would it be Insane Troll Logic, specifically?
Edited by BakerGoods