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.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openDoes Solas from Dragon Age: Inquisition count as a Greater Scope villain for the first 2 games? Videogame
For Elven characters, the evil god Fen'Harel is considered the evil god of their religion and culture, and part of the reason they suffer in the present, as they are a slave race to humans. But in Dragon Age: Inquisition, in the DLC Tresspasser, we learn that one of our companions, a mysterious elf named Solas, is really Fen'Harel himself, and that the gods of the Elves are mages so powerful, it might be safe to call them gods. We also learn that the only reason he sided with us, was to get the Eluvians so that he could use them to destroy modern Thedes and bring back a civilization he destroyed when he rebelled against his fellow mages. Solas claims he rebelled for a good cause, but in the end, he caused more harm then help as he separated Thedes from the Fade, robbing the Elves of their power, killing thousands of his own people, many of them innocents, and being the cause of the plights of the modern elves that we see in all three games. Does this qualigy him as a Greater Scope Villain? I say yes. What about you?
openPossible Character-centric Entry Pimping? Videogame
This has been a thing that bugged me for a while, but does anyone else feel that a lot of the entries under Lunafreya's folder on the Final Fantasy XV - Other Allies page come off as shoehorning? Especially considering that while she's a divisive Base-Breaking Character rather than The Scrappy, the part where she's considered to be a Flat Character with minimal screentime is largely unanimous and the divide comes down to whether she was always a shallow and uninteresting character or whether she was originally a rounder character whose depth was all cut out of the game. Hence most of the entries (which were made before the novel that finally fleshes her out was released) come on the back of what appears to be Fan Wank extrapolations rather than supported by the primary text of the game, considering she has so little dialogue, even less interacting with others.
A few of them come from the Kingsglaive movie, which is where the bulk of her screentime and character depth come from, but is also known for being basically a different character from her in-game portrayal. But others seem to be attempting to spin something meaningful out of offhand comments from the flatter in-game depiction that don't actually manifest meaningfully into tropes. I personally don't remember a lot of these entries from when I played it, and at best some of these even appear to be the result of the rather chaotic and inconsistent promotion for the game that often contradicted itself.
Edited by AlleyOopopenCyberJudas trope page Videogame
Should there be a separate work page for Cyber Judas instead of grouping the sequel’s works along with Shadow President on the page?
(I don’t really know how else to add to this, I’d make the work page myself but I’m not entirely familiar with Cyber Judas aside from watching Joel’s gameplay of it.)
openReadding of a non-character trope Videogame
I took down Ambiguous Situation entries in Characters.Kingdom Hearts Supporting Originals (and a few other non-character trope entries), but Sir Adamus readded one and without leaving an edit reason (under the Subject X folder, to be exact)
.
Just thought I'd bring it up here as I didn't want to risk an Edit War even if there's no issue with taking down non-character tropes from character pages itself.
openNSFW warnings? Videogame
Would it be okay to add warnings for links that could be potentially NSFW but nothing explicit?
I would like to add an example to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate under Hilarious in Hindsight that involves a link to deviantart (You can already tell where this is going) and the link contains some....fetish art. Would it be ok to add a warning for any readers who might click the link as it could squick people if they're not prepared or into it?
Side note the picture itself is fine but the users page contains some racy art so would it be appropriate to post a link with a warning, just the image itself (which I'm hesitant as it doesnt give the creator credit), no link at all, or just axe the example altogether?
openOkage Title Videogame
The page for Okage is incorrectly titled. The real title is Okage: Shadow King, you can even see it on the poster in the page itself. Requesting approval to move everything to the proper namespace.
Edited by DelphineTheDelphoxopenHaving formatting problems Videogame
Hello! Today I was attempting to edit the Fan works/Danganronpa page to add the fanfiction "ronpa and friends" to the crossovers folder and I seem to have messed up the formatting somehow? There is not a page on here for it yet so that may be the problem? If anyone could help me fix it or direct me to where I could learn how to fix it myself that would be very helpful. Sorry about the mess, I am still trying to figure out how this works.
openCustom Title misuse Videogame
Okay, I'm perplexed... the page for the fangame VideoGame.Fredbear And Friends has a custom title that turns it to "Fazbear and Friends". This is a misuse of the system; the work page itself seems to confirm the title is Fazbear and Friends, so I don't know why it was put in a different Wiki Word in the first place.
Before moving it, though, I noticed the page has lots of wicks, and there's also a WebAnimation.Fazbear And Friends page already existing.
Anybody has an idea how this situation came to be?
openUnreliable WhatCouldHaveBeen Videogame
Trivia.Fallout New Vegas has two What Could Have Been entries that I can't find any sources supporting. While early demos do show the Strip as all one zone, I can't find anything saying this was the case for Freeside, though there are some Dummied Out Freeside NPCs like beggars and pickpockets.
- The Mysterious Stranger would have teleported in and instantly killed you if you tried to target the Lonesome Drifter in VATS.
- The New Vegas Strip and Freeside used to be whole zones by themselves. Early showcases of the game showed of the whole Strip, and it is also rendered that way in the intro cinematic. Freeside itself was a single massive zone, including a number of no-name generic NPCs and the Mormon Fort having open gates. Both instances were "sectioned off" due to the Xbox 360 and Play Station 3 not having the necessary processing power to render all the NPCs running around the Strip and Freeside without some serious slowdown or even game crashes. The Strip just had two gaudy scrap metal gates separating it into three zones. Freeside, however, got hit harder: fences/gates made from junked buses, the Mormon Fort was made its own zone, and NPCs were cut to reduce the memory problems. Appropriately, there are a pair of mods that convert the Strip and Freeside to their early open area builds.
openMedieval II: Total War Videogame
So, I have checked the Characters page for Medieval II: Total War, and much of the descriptions are copied from the game itself. Feels like plagiarism, though it needs thorough investigation.
openThe Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild headscratchers page Videogame
I found this absolute wall of text on Headscratchers.The Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild. Placed in a folder because it's long:
- I haven't found what's supposed to claim this but I see talk of how Zelda's father, who is explicitly mentioned to have the title of "King", isn't of Hylia's bloodline. As Hylia's incarnation is always Princess Zelda that would indicate that her kin should be the side of the family with the literal divine right of kings. So unless there's something important here I'm missing how in the world did Zelda's mother, who was of Hylia's blood which was why losing her was so crippling to this incarnation of Zelda and assumedly the naturally born crown princess/Queen of Hyrule, get outranked by some schmuck she married and who does this glorified Prince Consort think he is to declare himself King while acting as Zelda's regent until she comes of age to rule on her own? "King" as a title can't belong to anyone not of the direct ruling bloodline after all, as in a Kingdom it outranks its sister title of "Queen", since consorts/spouses aren't permitted to have titles higher than the actual ruler's. On a similar note if being protected by a religiously powered matriarch is so fundamental to Hyrule in the first place (And as the local deities of worship that can be confirmed to exist are almost all female) why is it a Kingdom instead of a Queendom in the first place?
- You're looking way too far into this. The simplified way that the royalty in this game works is the same one that has been portrayed not just in other Zelda games, but across most realms of media and fiction in general - the idea of Prince-consorts as opposed to true kingship seems almost strictly limited to the real world. And that's even if the thing about Rhoam being from outside the line is true.
- Original poster here: This is the headscratchers page, no need to be so rudely dismissive about answering since this is where fridge logic is meant to be put and nothing is considered "too far" as long as you can see how the question came up. Why comment if you aren't actually addressing the question being posed in the first place for that matter and instead just attacking someone for asking it? Most other Zelda games just plain don't talk about the royal family beyond Zelda herself so there's no need to question if her father has the right to be called king, as their competence isn't in question and neither is her own (Unlike here where her father outright tells her that her people think she's the "Heir to Nothing" like an abusive asshole and encourages the only heir to the throne to act more like a priestess than a studious princess) so the fact this game did want to go into royal politics for a change doesn't make me out of line. And just because mainstream media doesn't like to do it's research most works that do want to make royal politics a major plot point, like Zelda tried here, do go into this sort of thing plenty often. Only part I'd grant would be "too deep" is the notion of a patriarchy existing in a world where the major religious and cultural foundations are primarily presented as female-focused with confirmable magical existences, and that contradiction has always been a part of the game's setting. And as I said in the first line I don't know if it's true so the least you could have done was find what could confirm or deny it, as obviously that's my main concern here.
- First of all, let me apologize for coming off as rude, since that wasn't my intention. It just seemed like you were getting a bit too...upset, if I may, about something that's been a common part of royalty's portrayal throughout most of popular culture. Having nearly completed the main story and collected all of the memories, I've yet to come across anything indicating that King Rhoam was from outside the line, but even if he was, what I meant with my earlier response was that, in the game's universe, he would probably still be considered a genuine "king", as opposed to prince-consort, because that's how it typically works in fiction. So his line to Zelda about her inheritance probably wouldn't be seen as that level of disrespectful, in-universe - I didn't want you to get that worked up about it, and I'm sorry if it came out wrong.
- OP again: Alright, it just rubbed me wrong that it didn't seem like any other questions got that sort of treatment without any meaningful expansion/explanation on anything added to it even though this one isn't the only one with parts that can be difficult to check by the nature of the game, like the timeline debates, or one based on honest confusion. But with monarchies hardly being a fictional concept as Great Britian's royal family is easily one of the most well known existing monarchies to date (regardless of how vital it is for their current system of government) and seeing it used as an excuse for sexism's a Pet Peeve trope of mine as well... you'd figure people should know or at least infer by now as despite easily being the world's best known monarchy it openly has no King at present and hasn't in ages (with the Queen's husband indeed only ever having the title of "Prince") that not all Kingdoms need a King to function you know? Though his telling his daughter to her face that the people she knows should be looking to her for future guidance have no faith in her like that in such brutal phrasing was still an awful parenting move on his part considering it couldn't help her with anything and just further hurt her self esteem all because she tried to act like princess in her situation should.
- For all we know, both of Zelda's parents might be descended from Hylia's line. An awful lot of time has passed since the Skyward Sword era, and unless the line of Hyrule enforces a strictly one-child-per-generation rule, it's bound to have branched out countless times. Rhoam may be the de-facto king, and married to a member of a cadet branch. Apparently being a woman is a requirement for the powers of the blood of Hylia to fully manifest, so only his wife was taught the procedures.
- I can find no mention that he isn't a descendant. I think we can assume, as with European nobility, a lot of inbreeding was happening. The King probably married a distant cousin who happened to be a priestess. This sort of thing happened all the time to keep blood-lines "pure", and that's before we add in descended from Gods into the mix to have some sort of actual reason to do it. Of course this then raises further questions; if there is a large body of nobility all tangentially related to each other then losing Zelda's mother shouldn't have been the death blow to her teachings the King and Zelda believe it to be.
- Because she's smart enough to know that ruling the kingdom is nothing like sitting on the throne and ordering minions around while gloating in their ego on their high title; The Good King or Queen takes care of their people and make their place safe. After all, she holds the Triforce of Wisdom. So she brushed all her responsibilities as a ruler to her husband even though it means he'll get the glory and status in the process.
- Issue with that would be that the title of "King" couldn't be given to him under any circumstances barring him overthrowing his wife if she was the by blood rights ruling party because that's not how royal titles work period and it is factually wrong to depict them as such and was the core point of my initial complaint/confusion. In order to be King, Rhoam would have to have more royal blood than the Queen does in the first place, so you missed the point about how having the title "King" over "Prince" or "Regent" isn't possible if she was the primary and acknowledged descendant of Hylia instead of him, which is why the focus of most attempts to make sense of this are instead focusing on looking into where his blood right is called into question. Also with the implications that holding the Triforce of Wisdom wouldn't obviously make her best qualified for and the one who would be actually preforming the duties you are at the same time suggesting she delegates away to the man who would still be required to have a lower title than her own by basic law and common sense sounds incredibly confusing at best and overtly sexist at worst as why wouldn't she want her subjects to know who exactly in HER country deserved their respect exactly and by whos authority they lived under?
- One thing I'd like to note is that Rhoam very closely resembles Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule from The Wind Waker (who, by the way, also seemed to possess mystical, divine powers - did anything every say that Hylia's powers only went to the females?), as well as various other Hyrulean kings across the series, just with a longer beard and hair and a pointier nose. The resemblance suggests that they're related through more than just marriage.
- As a common thread seems to be that whatever helped make the idea that Rhoam wasn't Hylia's descendant seems to have been a rumor more than an actual in game claim or a particularly hard to find diary entry so thanks everybody for helping clear that up! Being a Daphnes Expy does make him being at least one of Wind Waker Zelda's descendants does seem very likely (or something similar if this can't connect with that timeline at all) instead of Nintendo just dropping the ball where their research or world building was concerned and falling into harmful/sexist traps regarding royal politics just when they decided to try and go that extra mile for this series. At the very least Zelda's lack of spiritual connection could easily be attributed to just taking after him too much as, even though him being a guy made it a less important issue, he certainly seems less attuned with his bloodline's magic or their piece of the Triforce than Daphnes was and provide a reason for how if her mother was less "pure"/directly connected to Hylia she was supposed to have been in charge of this area of Zelda's teachings.
- As I understand your remarks, you've basically made three distinct arguments: (1) A man cannot become a king by marrying a queen; (2) A king always outranks a queen; and (3) All monarchies operate according to uniform rules of heredity. All three are historically false. Argument (1) is false because there exist two different ways of becoming king by marrying a queen: the king jure uxoris ("by right of [his] wife"), who becomes king in fact as well as name by marrying an heiress or a queen regnant; although these men did not wholly displace their wives, they did acquire the right to rule on their wives' behalves by what English law would later call coverture, the woman's property being automatically administered by her husband. There are a number of examples of kings jure uxoris in the Medieval period: Fulk, Count of Anjou, as king of Jerusalem via Melisende, daughter and heiress of King Baldwin II; Conrad, Marquis of Montferrat, and Aimery, King of Cyprus, as kings of Jerusalem via Queen Isabella I; John of Brienne (later emperor of Constantinople) as king of Jerusalem via Queen Mary (Isabella I's daughter by Conrad); Emperor Frederick II as king of Jerusalem via Queen Isabella II (Mary I's daughter by John); Philip IV, King of France, as King Philip I of Navarre via Queen Joan I; Emperor Sigismund as king of Hungary via Queen Mary; and Albert V, Duke of Austria, as king of Hungary via Elizabeth of Luxemburg, daughter and heiress of Emperor Sigismund. Kingship jure uxoris more or less died out by the time of the Renaissance and the Early Modern Period. Around this time we see the rise of the king consort, as women were accepted as queens regnant suo jure; their husbands might be granted the title of king. The existence of the king consort simultaneously demonstrates that both arguments (1) and (2) are false. Examples of kings consort include Philip IV of Burgundy as King Philip I of Castile via Queen Juana I; Philip of Spain, King of Naples (later Philip II of Spain), as king of England via Queen Mary I (Philip's father, Emperor Charles V, had donated his kingship of Naples to Philip in 1554 as a wedding gift, so that the Spanish prince would be equal in rank to his fiancée, Queen Mary, at the time of their wedding); Francis II of France as king of Scots via Queen Mary; Henry Stuart, Lord Dudley, as king of Scots via the same Queen Mary; Infante Pedro of Portugal as King Peter III of Portugal via Queen Mary I; Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha-Koháry as King Ferdinand II of Portugal via Queen Mary II; and Francisco, Duque de Cádiz, as king of Spain via Queen Isabella II. There are also a handful of cases in which a queen regnant shared her authority with her husband as co-ruler without being legally displaced by him, such as Prince Louis of Taranto as king of Naples via Queen Joanna I; Philip, Count of Évreaux, as King Philip III of Navarre via Queen Joan II; Jogaila, Grand Duke of Lithuania, as King Władysław II of Poland via Queen Jadwiga; Ferdinand II of Aragon as King Ferdinand V of Castile via Queen Isabella I; and William III, Prince of Orange, as King William III of England via Queen Mary II. Władysław and William continued to reign after their wives died. Argument (3) is false because each monarchy operates on its own individual rules. In England (and by extension, the modern UK), male-preference primogeniture meant that a female could inherit the crown if there was no male with a superior claim (e.g., Mary I, Anne, Victoria, Elizabeth II), and also that the line of succession can pass through a female dynast (e.g., the current Prince of Wales and his sons). In France, however, the legal fiction of Salic law forbade a woman from inheriting the crown and also forbade the line of succession from passing through female dynasts (i.e., if a king's daughter had a son, he would have no rights of succession through his mother). In the Holy Roman Empire, Poland, Bohemia, and Hungary, the crown became elective (although in many cases, election was merely a formality). In Wallachia, any male with royal blood was eligible to succeed, even if he were illegitimate. In the Ottoman Empire, any male of the dynasty could become sultan through a rather vague process of dynastic consensus, resulting in uncles succeeding their nephews on occasion. Furthermore, all of these rules operated only so long as it was advantageous to the most influential and most powerful that they operate. When these rules were inconvenient, people could and did flout them. The Norman Invasion (1066), the Anarchy (1135-1154), the Hundred Years' War (1337-1453), the Wars of the Roses (1455-1487), the War of the Castilian Succession (1475-1479), the War of the Burgundian Succession (1477-1482), the War of the Portuguese Succession (1580-1583), the War of the Spanish Succession (1702-1715), the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1748), the '45 Rebellion (1745), the War of the Bavarian Succession (1778-1779), and the Carlist Wars (1833-1840, 1846-1849, 1872-1876) — to name only a few prominent examples — were all results of disputes over succession.This is to say nothing of civil wars or usurpations of monarchs already ruling. Of course, all of this is moot because (A) there is no evidence whatsoever that King Rhoam Bosphoramus Hyrule is not king suo jure, and (B) we know very little about how the House of Hyrule determines succession. As far as point (A) is concerned, Rhoam bears a physical resemblance to the King of Hyrule (AL), the King of Hyrule (LP), King Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule (WW), King Daltus and King Gustaf (MC), and the deuterocanonical King Harkinian (LZ animated series and comic series, but less so his appearances in FE and WG), and, like Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule, appears to use Hyrule as a cognomen or surname. All of this circumstantially suggests that he should be interpreted as exactly what he appears to be. With respect to point (B), we know only that the royal family apparently practices male-preference primogeniture during the Golden Age in the Downfall timeline (the Prince of Hyrule and the Princess Zelda in AL), and that it is possible for a princess to be "queen-in-waiting" (TP trading cards and Prima guides). Presumably this means she is the legal ruler in reginam promovenda, pending some the completion of some ceremony or other condition before coronation as queen, and we further assume that this is the case of other princesses whom we might otherwise expect to have acceded as queens (the Princess Zelda in the Adult era of OT, Tetra in WW and PH, the Princess Zelda in ST, and the Princess Zelda in BW, although it is also possible that some of these princesses could be regents pending the arrival of another dynast with a superior claim to succession). We simply don't know how the crown is passed, and there's certainly no reason to assume that the English rules of succession apply.
- The short version of the above is: "Yes, a man can become a king by marrying a queen. No, this does not automatically mean he rules instead of her. No, there's no reason to assume that King Rhoam shouldn't be king."
- The issues with the above come from saying we have no reason to assume Rhoam isn't the by-blood king when we really do, which is what lead to the king debate. If he married into the royal family taking his wife's surname in a case like this would most likely be the expected practice, so his name doesn't seem to prove much of anything here. Looking like kings of the past could also be just as indicative of him coming from one of the supposed side families as he is lacking in the royal family's ability to use Hylia's magic which seems a lot more important for this than appearances. Hylia's bloodline being central to why "Princess Zelda" is always a princess (As opposed to just having the prophecy say a descendant of Hylia is needed to seal Ganon) seems to indicate their connection to this Goddess is why they are the ruling family, a lot like the legends about the Japanese ruling family being descendant of the Goddess Amaterasu in a variation of the divine right of kings, so it seems like decent reasoning to assume he's more likely to have married into the family than his wife did. Had Hylia's power come from a "side family" it seems odd he wouldn't have had any other alternatives for Zelda's teacher after the Queen died, as mentioned above, when if the power was kept within the direct royal family this element of the story makes more sense. Also it's unclear if Hylia's power really is gender locked since no other goddesses power in this series seems to be restricted in this way, as two of the three holders of the Golden Goddesses' triforce are male, and since Wind Waker's king was adept at least at general magic, given how he animated the King of Red Lions and created the Pirate's Charm, Rhoam completely lacking in this area sticks out more as an oddity.
- In point of fact, no, we really don't have any reason to assume that Rhoam is not king suo jure. There is no evidence saying this. There is no reason to assume this. Your suggestion that he might have adopted his wife's name — which has no precedent in history that I am aware of (the closest being the examples of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine and the surname Mountbatten-Windsor, neither of which support your argument) — is both begging the question and a violation of Ockham's razor. There is no reason to assume that his surname "Hyrule" means anything other than his dynastic kingship of Hyrule, so you are positing complexity without need in order to explain why he has it. Your talk about his apparent lack of magic powers is irrelevant; of the eight kings of Hyrule we know of (Harkinian, AL, LP, OT, Daphnes, Daltus, Gustaf, and Rhoam), precisely one of them (Daphnes) has displayed magical abilities without use of the Triforce — and there is absolutely no indication that his magic has anything to do with Hylia, given that it is possible for Hyrulians to learn magic via study (AL) or to use it via talismans (LP, OT) — , so there is no reason to believe that magic has any strong correlation to Hylian kingship. If anything, the ability to use magic makes Daphnes the odd man out.
- I would also like to point out that Hyrule was both founded by a woman and named after a goddess. It's very likely that despite being called a 'kingdom', it is very likely that queens were the higher ranking royalty, especially considering that only women could inherit Hylia's power.
- You mean they used the wrong word and use of "kingdom" has become a case of The Artifact as the series has gone on? Since there is already a word for this concept in English, as pointed out in the question that led to this. A queendom would be a realm controlled by a queen first and foremost, much the same way kingdoms are for kings which is why ruling queens in a kingdom are technically considered "queen regent" when "regent" is a title for someone serving in the place of the "proper" ruling party.
- You're mistaken. A ruling queen in a kingdom is called a "queen regnant," to make clear that she is reigning in her own right and is not a queen consort, a woman who has the title of queen because she is married to a king; it is possible for one woman to be both a queen regnant and a queen consort (e.g., Isabella the Catholic, Mary of England, Maria Theresia). "Queen regent" refers either to a queen consort who exercises royal authority in a kingdom on behalf of her husband the king (who is absent or incapacitated) or to a queen dowager (wife of a previous king who is now dead) who exercises royal authority in a kingdom on behalf of her son the king or her daughter the queen regnant (who is absent, incapacitated, or has not reached his or her majority).
- Is it really that hard to believe that a fictional kingdom just has a different hierarchy/titles/rules for succession? There's never been much but practically everything we've ever heard about the Hylian royal court across all games doesn't jive with historical monarchies. At this point it's more ridiculous to try and shoehorn the Hyrule family into our understanding of real-world royalty than it is to just start theorizing how their monarchy works from scratch.
- That's what I was going to say, but I'm gonna rehash anyway. First of all it's not like this is the first time we've had a Hylian King; Daphnes from WW and OoT's King, for instance, and there's no evidence for or against them being of Hylia's blood. Secondly, as the above says, it's a fictional world and applying real world conventions to it without any proof of it is kind of silly. Hyrule could easily be a "a Prince/Princess has to get married and they become King and Queen" sort of Kingdom. TBH I didn't even read all of the real world examples and arguments because bottom line... this is not the real world. There are flying tree people, giant bird people, giant fish people, ROCK people, flying dragons, and that's not even getting into monsters and Gods and such. It's not the real world, bottom line.
- Hyrule is a fictional kingdom so it likely follows different rules. Since the power of the bloodline only appears to manifest in the women of the royal family it's possible that succession is matriarchal (and the powers might even been seen as the right to rule, remember Rhoam's line about "heir to nothing"). Also remember that Hyrule fell on the day Zelda went to the Spring of Wisdom, which was her 17th birthday and the day she was seen as an adult in Hyrule (No one under the age of 17 is allowed there) so Rhoam could have been Zelda's regent. Now Rhoam could easily also be a descendant of Hylia, see above about the Royal family branching out and intermarrying with other noble families (this might even be a requirement of the royal spouse to keep the bloodline and powers as strong as possible), but since he's not a female of the line he doesn't know how to access the special powers.
- Technically speaking, we also have no reason to assume that Hylia's power doesn't manifest in male members of the royal line; as previously noted, Daphnes displayed magical talent that was never implied to be not his own (when recounting how Ganondorf overtook Hyrule, he does say "My power alone could not stop the fiend"), and the king from Adventure of Link also knew enough to hide the Triforce of Courage so well. Neither of those contradict anything we're told in this game, either, because even if Rhoam can access the divine magic of his line, he's established as being such a stickler for tradition that he would still see the duty to harness it as falling to Zelda, if he even knows that he could do it just as well himself.
- Age of Calamity contains some details that shed a bit more light on things. Rhoam's main weapon in that game is a Royal Claymore, which is explicitly stated to be the type of weapon issued to the royal family's personal guards. This strongly implies that Rhoam served in the Royal Guard, and may have even been one of Zelda's mother's bodyguards prior to their marriage (in real-world history, it wasn't unusual for younger sons in noble families to enter the military, where their rank would put them on the fast track to promotion—Hyrule's nobility might do something similar). While not an outright confirmation, this suggests that Zelda's mother was the direct heir and Rhoam married into the throne. If the sealing power is a sign of the right to rule, as mentioned above, Rhoam may fall victim to the opposite side of the coin: he can't use it because he's King by marriage, not a direct member of the royal line. If it's accepted in-universe that Zelda is the only one who can wield it as long as she's alive and has no children, this would also explain why no one else with Hylian blood is trying to unlock the sealing power in her stead.
- There's still his resemblance to previous Hylian kings, though, particularly Daphnes in The Wind Waker, who seemed to be a direct heir since he possessed the requisite powers. And Rhoam is already a king by the time of Age of Calamity when he's using the Royal Claymour. Being so adept with it doesn't mean he must have had a past as a royal guard; he could've been born a royal who chose to use it as a weapon.
Is there anything we should do about this? I've briefly touched upon this in the Headscratchers cleanup thread
but even with a possible conclusion I still have no idea what to do.
openExtremely small "Referenced By" page Videogame
So I recently discovered this 'Referenced By' subpage for the Halo franchise that appears on every single game's subpage bar as a redirect. It was created in February of this year by darkemyst and has only been edited three times since, with the last edit being in May of this year.
It also only has six examples and not all of them even seem to be valid, which has me thinking it should be cut. To list all the examples and my thoughts on them:
- Aldnoah.Zero: The Hypergate looks very similar to the African portal that leads to the Ark from Halo 3.
- This entry provides two image links on the page itself, one of which is broken and just redirects to the main page of Bungie's website (and they don't even own the Halo franchise anymore). I found a working image and frankly the similarities seem fairly superficial, though I suppose the argument could be made that it's a reference: Hypergate (Aldnoah)
◊, Gate at Voi (Halo)
◊
- This entry provides two image links on the page itself, one of which is broken and just redirects to the main page of Bungie's website (and they don't even own the Halo franchise anymore). I found a working image and frankly the similarities seem fairly superficial, though I suppose the argument could be made that it's a reference: Hypergate (Aldnoah)
- Guardians of the Galaxy: Peter's laser pistols bear more than a passing resemblance to the Covenant Plasma Rifle from Halo: Combat Evolved, or also the laser pistols from The Black Hole (1979).
- The Expanse: While at first glance the Ring's design is reminiscent of a lifeless Halo, Manéo Jung-Espinoza's attempt at flying through it reveals that it actually operates more like the Supergates built by the Ori.
- Both of these entries openly admit that the similarities are vague and limited enough that it could be a reference to something else entirely, which makes them invalid IMO.
- Marathon: The Eternal Level name "These Caves Can't Be a Natural Formation" is a line from Halo: Combat Evolved
- The Marathon series pre-dates the Halo franchise which made me seriously scratch my head at this. I had to dig through our page on the former to find out that this is apparently a reference to a fan-made total conversion mod called Marathon: Eternal that was released after Halo. Not sure if that's valid.
- Quake: The Blaster in Quake IV can fire either single, extremely weak shots or more powerful charged shots in a manner similar to the Plasma Pistol.
- This is an extremely basic and generic gameplay mechanic that many, many shooters have adopted for many, many weapons throughout gaming history. Edit history shows that it was also in the above category of "the entry outright admits it could be referencing something else" until the last edit on May 10th 2021 - specifically, pointing out that it's equally similar to the "Dispersion Pistol" from Unreal I.
- Minilife TV: In "Spirit in the Sky", Master Chief's helmet is one of the items in Chris's swag pile.
- This is possibly the only inarguably valid entry on the page and it's for a LEGO stop-motion web series sitcom I've never heard of.
open How to create a constant link in character page? Videogame
I created a separate character page for Claire Redfield in Resident Evil (because it's an abomination that Ada Wong would have one but not her), but I'm wondering whether I need to go through each individual character page in the series and manually generate the link to the page itself or if there's a way to easily index it somewhere?
resolved Rewriting Walkthrough Mode Page Videogame
Here's the summary of Walkthrough Mode:
For example, let's say Alice adds the Puppy Stomper 3000 to That One Boss. Bob follows this up by stating, "Actually, the Puppy Stomper isn't tough if you have the Ring of Puppy Protection, which only requires you to do X, Y and Z." Then Clara comes by and adds, "To be fair, you need Sven in your party to use the Ring of Puppy Protection. It's easier to use the Stick of Puppy Protection, which only requires you to bring the Ring of Puppy Protection to the Ring Transumation Fairy in Scary Town."
Using the example from the above paragraph, here's what it looks like on a page.
- That One Boss: Puppy Stomper 3000 is hard because of blah blah.
- Actually, the Puppy Stomper isn't tough if you have the Ring of Puppy Protection, which only requires you to do X, Y and Z.
- To be fair, you need Sven in your party to use the Ring of Puppy Protection. It's easier to use the Stick of Puppy Protection, which only requires you to bring the Ring of Puppy Protection to the Ring Transumation Fairy in Scary Town.
- Actually, the Puppy Stomper isn't tough if you have the Ring of Puppy Protection, which only requires you to do X, Y and Z.
The first two paragraphs basically describe a videogame mechanics-themed version of Thread Mode, which... editors shouldn't do either, but if all the page has to say is "don't thread mode about game mechanics", it probably doesn't need to exist — just point to Thread Mode instead.
To my understanding, what Walkthrough Mode should tell readers is that they should avoid cluttering examples with numbers, niche mechanics, and long-winded guides that are only tangentially relevant to how there is an example of a trope — this is suggested to me by that last paragraph. Here's a version I think could work, which emphasizes that:
For example, let's say Alice lists the Puppy Stompertron as an example of That One Boss, engaging in Walkthrough Mode to do so:
- That One Boss: The Puppy Stompertron appears at the end of the Puppy Factory and presents a massive roadblock to the player. It's got a massive 70,000 HP health bar (by the end of the factory, you'll be dealing 300 DPS at best), has immunity to Bleed, Stun, Dizzy, Confuse, and Love, and all of its attacks are That One Attack. Puppy Squishing deals 10,000 damage and can only be survived with the Anti-Ten Thousand Medal from the Numbers Swamp, Puppy Flamethrowing is supposed to deal only 40 damage to the player once but a bug with the level geometry can cause the flames to deal 400 damage if the player's standing on the many hills around the arena, and the Dog Food Ingester will heal it back to full unless the player has done the sidequest to obtain Dog Food Poison, which is easily missable at the start of the game. The only thing that can make this easy is the Puppy Stompertron Control Device to cut its HP in half, which is only available to builds that use the Dagger of Air Vent Entry, a 37 Charisma build to take it from the Puppy Factory Foreman (you can't go with any other level of Charisma, he starts liking you too much if you do), or a glitched maximum Speed character to clip through the northeast locked door and access the room where it's stored.
As you can see, this entry is hard to read because it's loaded with tangents on whole-game strategies and numbers that mean nothing to an outsider, when all that's needed is to explain how the Puppy Stompertron boss is harder than the rest of the game. Let's see an example that does just that:
- That One Boss: The Puppy Stompertron appears at the end of the Puppy Factory and presents a massive roadblock to the player. It has massive HP for that point at the game, immunity to many of the useful status effects, and all of its attacks are That One Attack — dealing massive damage or healing itself to full. The only ways to get past it painlessly involve highly-specific strategies and/or exploiting glitches, neither of which are available to every character class.
This entry is much more succinct in stating why the Puppy Stompertron is an example of That One Boss: it has high stats, immunity to statuses, powerful attacks, and the mechanics to make it easier aren't universally applicable. By cutting out details, the example becomes easier to read and digestible, yet the non-Walkthrough Mode entry still manages to communicate key points on why the Puppy Stompertron is this trope.
As a side bonus, when talking about games that are receiving post-launch updates, avoiding exact numbers gives a degree of futureproofing. In many games, if a change needs to be made, the numbers are usually first to be adjusted, so if the Puppy Stompertron ever has its HP or damage values changed this way, the example doesn't suddenly need an update to correct those parts.
While it is understandable why Walkthrough Mode happens, wiki articles are not walkthroughs for how to beat That One Boss or That One Level. Trope examples should be generic enough that those who aren't familiar with the game can understand them, and shouldn't be cluttered with something like the exact attack strength of a weapon or helpful asides about which two of the three Superbosses can be affected by the Game-Breaker. This isn't to say that you shouldn't list your example with little to no information, which is the opposite problem; you just need to explain why your example is that of the trope in question in a way that's digestible to the average reader.
See also Word Cruft, another writing element that makes examples bloated and indigestible by adding too many unnecessary words.
Does this look good to use on the page?
Edited by PyhrrousopenMedium question for an example. Videogame
I want to add this example to either Multi-Disc Work or its Video Games subpage. However, I'm not sure whether it could fall under "Music" (which is on a folder in the trope's main page) or "Video Games", since while the source work is a video game, the disc work in itself is a soundtrack release (which is quite common for popular video games).
- Hotline Miami:
- In 2017, game publisher Devolver Digital and record label Laced Records teamed up to release a pair of official albums for the soundtracks of the first and second games (respectively) on vinyl, with each album consisting of three LPs and featuring original artwork from El Huervo, one of the soundtracks' artists.
- The 2022 reissue album made for the first game's tenth anniversary has eight LPs (two more than the first two albums combined) alongside Feelies like a disc slipmat, art prints and stickers.
Should I put on "Music", "Video Games" or the "Other" folder?
Edited by Inky100openMetagaming tropes in CCG pages Videogame
Hi, everyone.
Just today I was taking a glance at the Marvel Snap page, and an issue that has frequently popped up in my searches through this site's CCG pages came to my attention.
Metagaming tropes (or using tropes for metagaming). Now, I'm personally a person that loves playing meta decks and the aspect of competition, but I have always felt that this kind of entries doesn't belong in most main work pages (barring stuff like Smogon which main point is the competitive aspect). After a few months working on the Character pages for Yu-Gi-Oh, I found out that these tropes led themselves to constant shoehorning, general examples (like putting Achilles' Heel for every kind of a weakness a deck has) and overly specific entries that are more akin to walkthrough mode. To not mention the fact that the metagame constantly evolves, which means that the entries suffer from a lot from Examples Are Not Recent syndrome, and a few years down the line the entries become outdated.
Inserting a few examples to prove my point (from Hearthstone, the Marvel Snap page itself, and then Yu-Gi-Oh).
- Attack! Attack! Attack!: The general strategy of an aggro deck or a rush deck is to hit the enemy hero relentlessly with charge minions and spells, pausing only to get rid of any Taunt minions that get in the way. The Hunter is particularly good at this, as his hero power lets him keep shooting the enemy hero for 2 damage and can't be mitigated by taunts. The Warlock Zoo Deck is pretty much this taken to the extreme: it consist mostly of cheap creatures, small buffs, and a lot of burst damage. Abusing the Warlock card draw hero power, this deck usually forgoes all non-essential board control and just seeks to absolutely steamroll opponents with tons of small, annoying, efficient minions and burst damage before they can control the board, stabilize and restore Health.
- Exaggerated by the popular (and also much-despised) 'Face Hunter' deck, a deck so mindlessly aggressive (even Zoo Warlock uses its rush advantage to secure board control) that a bot could play it and is regularly able to secure a turn 5 or 6 kill by simply ignoring EVEYRTHING except the opponent. EVERYTHING GOES TO THE FACE!
- Difficult, but Awesome: As explained under All or Nothing, Galactus is normally a very risky card to play, given that he downsizes the game to a single location and he only brings a Power of 3 to win said location. However, if you can get extra Energy (from Psilocke, Electro or locations) and play Galactus early, on a location where your opponent is weaker, you can dominate the game by playing strong cards in subsequent turns. This is still a pretty risky move, since your opponent can have stronger cards in their hands, but it can also totally surprise them. Not to mention, you get to see Galactus' world-destroying animation, which is pure Awesome.
- Achilles' Heel: Some cards have deliberate weaknesses to keep things interesting and keep them from becoming too powerful:
- The Earthbound Immortals
are all very strong, unable to be attacked, and can attack the opponent directly. But, they automatically destroy themselves if there's no Field Spell card on the field. Also, there can only be one Earthbound Immortal on the field.
- Cloudians
must remain in Attack Position or they will destroy themselves.
- In the metagame, this trope is present through deck match-ups and side decking. The most prominent example of this trope the in the competitive scene are, perhaps, the Dark World cards— A deck that is extremely fast, powerful, and can utterly wreck the first duel of the match. However, after said first duel, side in Consecrated Light
or Shadow-Imprisoning Mirror
and watch as they struggle against it.
- Pendulum Summoning is a very powerful summoning type, allowing you to summon multiple high-level monsters at once. However, Pendulum Cards can easily be gotten rid of with backrow removal cards like Twin Twisters and Cosmic Cyclone, cards that nearly every deck runs in some capacity. In addition, cards that immediately destroy or negate summons, such as Bottomless Trap Hole and Solemn Warning, shut it down hard as, thanks to the wording, it destroys/negates all the monsters summoned this way, since they were treated as one summon, which results in you losing a lot of your best cards in a single move as a result. Also, Pendulum Monsters whose Summons got negated and destroyed this way go to the Graveyard instead of back into the Extra Deck so they cannot be easily reclaimed.
- Any archetype that relies on specific spell cards (Gishki, Shaddoll, Masked HEROs, just to name a few) will struggle if said spell is negated by Cursed Seal of the Forbidden Spell
.
- The Earthbound Immortals
I bring this up because pages like Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft have a massive number of metagaming entries, and I would like to open up this issue to debate for the community. To know if it's actually perceived as a problem or I'm just overblowing this situation.
Edited by Edgar81539openAn example that really irks me, I want to correct it but I dont know the thread. Videogame
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SurprisinglyHappyEnding
- Final Fantasy VI seems like it's well on its way some kind of tragic or heavily bittersweet ending after Kefka destroys the world, but whether it gets that way is entirely up to the actions of the player, as any party deaths, as well as the death of Cid, are entirely preventable, with the only hero who's unaccounted for being Banon, and once the party defeats Kefka the ending goes out of its way to show that the "World of Ruin" is on its way to recovery.
This entry completely glosses over the extinction of an entire race of magical beings. The only survivor is the main character Terra who only survived because she's half human. I wanted to add this fact but If I did then it wouldnt be the trope or at least it would argue with itself which is a nono.
Edited by wingedcatgirlopenHandling Spoiler-y Tropes Videogame
So, myself and Umbrellas Were Awesome are disagreeing about including tropes that could spoil a part of a work by their very inclusion as examples (ie. by having the trope listed as such, it spoils part of the work).
However, Umbrellas wants to add the trope Boss Subtitles to the characters page for the three. By the nature of that trope, listing it as an example that they have — even if the text after is entirely spoiled out — it would inherently spoil that those characters are boss fights, which the Splatoon pages have otherwise spoilered out.
The reason they cite is that it's because they remember that "being at least slightly spoiled is kind of inherant to the process, and one shouldn't delete or comment out entries simply out of a desire to avoid spoiling literally everything", as listed in their edit reason. Which I agree with, but that the Splatoon 3 pages otherwise always treat the identity of the bosses as a spoiler makes this seem to me like it's just inconsistent.
What would be the correct way to treat that trope in this case? I did consult the spoiler policy, but it doesn't clarify for these kinds of situations where the inclusion of a trope causes a spoiler itself.
openMetal Gear Rising Revengeance's Meme page Videogame
So, I think there is apparently the fact about the Memes page of Metal Gear. However, there seems to be also a separate Memes page of Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, despite the fact that the former also happens to include Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance itself.
This includes some memes similar between the both or significantly different ones, and some that are not included in one page or the other.
My guess is probably it'll have to be merged (either in MGRR's own page and note in the main Metal Gear's page that a separate page exists for it, or cut the separate page and put them all in the franchise's meme page), but considering how much the meta went with the game itself rather than the entire franchise, I'm in favor of merging them all into giving Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance it's own separate page of memes from the rest of Metal Gear.
The page in question was first created in Jan 22nd 2023
, by GRD.
I need suggestions and opinions for further help. Thank you.
Edited by JustNormalMusicLover

I've remade the Half-Quake entry over in Video Games, due to the entry I made before that being way too-run on and inconsisntent. I want to make sure I'm avoiding word-cruft and overly emotionally-charged content. Here's the entry I made so that way if there's any errors I've made, either regarding typos or not following the Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment, it'll be here and not in some awkward place.