Ask The Tropers

I believe its being misused since AST is more used for narrative purposes. Like how in the Comics they had Hal Jordan aka Green Lantern turn evil. A later story would revealed he was being possessed by a entity called Parallax.

I'm... unfamiliar with that limitation on AST.

Noting that the entire entry has been cut claiming that "Considering this is one of the main point of criticising toward the series, with never-ending Flame War, how's that a saving throw?" which is nonsensical. Whether the throw works or not is immaterial.

I voiced my opinion on the discussion page about the original entry... my issue was that I was unsure if there was criticism of the work's lack of diversity was something that was around. I've heard of praise for introducing diversity, but I didn't know if it was proactive (thus not a saving throw) or reactive (thus a throw).

But yeah, the example-indentation breaking natter that claims that "black people existing on the same continent as white people breaks my suspension of disbelief" is incredibly dumb.

I originally removed it because I disagreed with it being considered an AST given that much of the "criticism" of the game seemed to be minor and not worth giving weight to.

Also, as far as I know, the game and show have different writers. That would mean that at least in terms of making an AST, that wouldn't fit the show if people are talking about the game. Maybe thats being too restrictive but I don't think it fits as a AST because that implies that the lack of diverse characters in the games was something that major that it warranted fixing in the show, which seems like an entry being based on a Vocal Minority.

Course I don't think this is a hill to die on, but merely my take on it.

Noting that upon looking at the page, AST is chronically misused since going strictly from the page, it's supposed to be "a plot development proved unpopular. The writers undid it."

I've often seen the throw as being not a plot development but a basic premise, the existence of a character, and incredibly frequently seen it used as rectifying bad game mechanics.

^ I mean, not necessarily something major but whether it was a vocal minority or not, if it was something that it was criticized for and then they cater to it, it's still a saving throw (though as stated above, since it's not plot-relevant, might not qualify under the literal interpretation of the page).

As a general statement, I think the definition of Author's Saving Throw got seriously watered down a while back. There's an entire MCU subpage with examples that border on the trivial.

I don't even see how they are an example of Author's Saving Throw when the series and the game are made by totally distinct groups. There's 0 overlap between both production beyond them paying the author of the books to license his work.

I was thinking we need some tropes to cover the scenarios AST is being misused for.

First, how about AST has to be in-canon to what it’s fixing?

Now, while this is an unambiguous Edit War by Dratewka, based on this thread it does seem like the pull was Right for the Wrong Reasons. The two arguments used in each pull were respectively "it was appeasing a Vocal Minority" and "the throw didn't work and everyone hates it anyway."

But it seems cutable for at least one of the other reasons listed (not plot/character relevant, different creative team, different canon).

Am I wrong?

Well, I'd argue against different creative teams being an issue, since they're working from the same source material, and how other adaptations are received are going to inform how they adapt it ("this adaptation was criticised for X", ergo "this adaptation made sure to do X better"). I don't see any reason why they shouldn't make the "saving throw" even if they didn't provoke the mage casting fireball. It's a bit of a Ship Of Theseus issue, but then you could make the same argument about a creative team with high turnover.

I'd also personally say that the diversity of the cast is part of worldbuilding, which is very much a matter of plot (albeit one that most people don't notice unless it's done badly).

The other adaptation in question is in a different media entirely.

Like, if this was based on criticism to the Hexer tv series (The first TV adaptation of the Witcher), I'd give it slack.

Also that this was done in response to the criticism is speculation at best. Unless someone finds actual Word of God that "Yeah we saw this in the game and that's how we decided to cast", the entire entry is speculative.

I agree with Bisected on this the adaptations being different media is irrelevant. There's no reason that criticism about a work in one medium wouldn't extend to works in a different medium.

Also, I don't agree with making yet another trope beholden to the rare "Word of God" requirement. That comes across as an unnecessary requirement which obfuscates this specific example.

^ I take issue with this because unless there is no evidence supporting that yes, the creators saw the criticism of the game and responded with more "diverse" casting, the entry is not based in facts. The producers of the show are making an adaptation of the books, and while yes there are inspirations from the game, they are different teams.

The entry is invalid anyway because AST is about story changes. Casting choices have no bearing on the story in this case.

Yeah, as much as I personally might like it, I have never seen substantial criticism for the books to be not diverse enough.

Unless we have like any proof that this was a response to an actual criticism from the game or book that the writers were aware of. I don't think its an example.