[003]
LiaMerez
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not [[SisterTrope sister tropes]], but I still don\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from DnD BUT it can be argued [=DnD=] was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrExample. Not by a long stretch.
to:
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not [[SisterTrope sister tropes]], but I still don\\\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\\\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from [=DnD=] BUT it can be argued [=DnD=] was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrExample. Not by a long stretch.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not [[SisterTrope sister tropes]], but I still don\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from DnD BUT it can be argued [=DnD=] was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrTrope. Not by a long stretch.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \'\'individually\'\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the [[CharacterizationTrope characterization tropes]] are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\'t define, they characterize. That\'s an important difference.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \'\'individually\'\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the [[CharacterizationTrope characterization tropes]] are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\'t define, they characterize. That\'s an important difference.
to:
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not [[SisterTrope sister tropes]], but I still don\\\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\\\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from DnD BUT it can be argued [=DnD=] was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrExample. Not by a long stretch.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \\\'\\\'individually\\\'\\\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the CharacterizationTropes are meant to represent each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality traits. They don\\\'t define, they characterize. That\\\'s an important difference.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \\\'\\\'individually\\\'\\\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the CharacterizationTropes are meant to represent each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality traits. They don\\\'t define, they characterize. That\\\'s an important difference.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not SisterTropes, but I still don\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from DnD BUT it can be argued DnD was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrTrope. Not by a long stretch.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \'\'individually\'\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the characterization tropes are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\'t define, they characterize. That\'s an important difference.
So, getting back to the point. Character alignments are descriptors of patterns (storytelling patterns) characters follow and, as tropes, they can be PlayedWith extensively. If you combine the fact they have other sister tropes outside the nine-pronged classification of DnD + they can be downplayed, zigzagged, etc., then we\'ve got enough flavors to characterize each individual character and their complexity.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \'\'individually\'\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the characterization tropes are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\'t define, they characterize. That\'s an important difference.
So, getting back to the point. Character alignments are descriptors of patterns (storytelling patterns) characters follow and, as tropes, they can be PlayedWith extensively. If you combine the fact they have other sister tropes outside the nine-pronged classification of DnD + they can be downplayed, zigzagged, etc., then we\'ve got enough flavors to characterize each individual character and their complexity.
to:
Okay, so CharacterAlignment tropes are not [[SisterTrope sister tropes]], but I still don\\\'t see the problem. They are mutually exclusive, but they do have sister tropes with, well, other tropes out there. And those sister tropes are the ones who give the alignments their flavor. Much like every other trope in existence. Let\\\'s not forget tropes are storytelling devices created, most of the time, unintentionally. These ones might have stemmed from DnD BUT it can be argued [=DnD=] was the TropeNamer or the TropeCodifier, but not the UrTrope. Not by a long stretch.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \\\'\\\'individually\\\'\\\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the [[CharacterizationTrope characterization tropes]] are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\\\'t define, they characterize. That\\\'s an important difference.
So, getting back to the point. Character alignments are descriptors of patterns (storytelling patterns) characters follow and, as tropes, they can be PlayedWith extensively. If you combine the fact they have other sister tropes outside the nine-pronged classification of [=DnD=] + they can be downplayed, zigzagged, etc., then we\\\'ve got enough flavors to characterize each individual character and their complexity.
The point with tropes, IMO, is that they are not meant to \\\'\\\'individually\\\'\\\' reduce complex beings such as most fictional characters to a singular concept. Do you think the [[CharacterizationTrope characterization tropes]] are meant to be each one a complex person? They are not personalities, they are personality tropes. They don\\\'t define, they characterize. That\\\'s an important difference.
So, getting back to the point. Character alignments are descriptors of patterns (storytelling patterns) characters follow and, as tropes, they can be PlayedWith extensively. If you combine the fact they have other sister tropes outside the nine-pronged classification of [=DnD=] + they can be downplayed, zigzagged, etc., then we\\\'ve got enough flavors to characterize each individual character and their complexity.
