[004]
Tyoria
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
^ What, are you serious? Do they debate it? They debate it \'\'\'AD NAUSEAUM.\'\'\' PayEvilUntoEvil and BlackAndGrayMorality are the two most relevant tropes to a Type IV\'s character -- tropes fundamentally \'\'about\'\' challenging a perspective on morality. Incidentally, [[DeathNote L]] got pulled? The example was worded against him in a ridiculously negative way, but I\'d definitely call L a Type IV. Do people debate L\'s alignment? [[{{Understatement}} Oh yes I suppose they do occasionally...]]
to:
^ What, are you serious, or should that have had a SarcasmMode tag? Do they debate it? They debate it \\\'\\\'\\\'AD NAUSEAUM.\\\'\\\'\\\' PayEvilUntoEvil and BlackAndGrayMorality are the two most relevant tropes to a Type IV\\\'s character -- tropes fundamentally \\\'\\\'about\\\'\\\' challenging a perspective on morality. Incidentally, [[DeathNote L]] got pulled? The example was worded against him in a ridiculously negative way, but I\\\'d definitely call L a Type IV. Do people debate L\\\'s alignment? [[{{Understatement}} Oh yes I suppose they do occasionally...]]
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
^^ For those kind of changes, I would propose bringing it up in the TropeRepairShop. Otherwise, I\'d leave it where it is. The point of Type I is that it\'s \
to:
^^ For those kind of changes, I would propose bringing it up in the TropeRepairShop. Otherwise, I\\\'d leave it where it is. The point of Type I is that it\\\'s \\\"antihero classic\\\", before the word evolved to take on the specific \\\'\\\'moral\\\'\\\' connotations it has now. I don\\\'t think there\\\'s anything wrong with that definition as it stands. From what you\\\'re proposing, it sounds like you\\\'d like to sneak it in between Types II and III. I think for something that large, we might want to bring in more people.
I\\\'d kind of like to bring it up there anyway to talk about Type V which -- I think you misunderstood my disdain for it. Not that I think Type V\\\'s are jolly folk I\\\'d love to spend my days drinking tea with, but the reason I said I had a low opinion of the section is because I think it\\\'s ill-defined and sprawling.
But I honestly don\\\'t have a problem with I except that its placement on a \\\"sliding scale\\\" is pretty damned unintuitive. I proposed earlier we rename it Type 0 and call the others A-D, but didn\\\'t get any traction on that.
I\\\'d kind of like to bring it up there anyway to talk about Type V which -- I think you misunderstood my disdain for it. Not that I think Type V\\\'s are jolly folk I\\\'d love to spend my days drinking tea with, but the reason I said I had a low opinion of the section is because I think it\\\'s ill-defined and sprawling.
But I honestly don\\\'t have a problem with I except that its placement on a \\\"sliding scale\\\" is pretty damned unintuitive. I proposed earlier we rename it Type 0 and call the others A-D, but didn\\\'t get any traction on that.
