Tropes that need to die

[Hussar]

All tropes need to die. Everything should attempt to be as unique as possible at all times and give a big fat finger to "normal" - whatever that's supposed to be...

Now this I disagree with. Tropes are useful. They give an immediate recognizable hook to the observer. You know what to expect and that can immerse you in the story very quickly.

The problem is when tropes become cliche. Again, tropes are tools.

 

[MoxieFu]

All tropes need to die. Everything should attempt to be as unique as possible at all times and give a big fat finger to "normal" - whatever that's supposed to be...

And herein lies the problem. There's a quote from a book that many people carry with them one day a week and in one place it asks, "Is there nothing new under the sun?" And that book was written THOUSANDS of years ago and attributed to the wisest man who ever lived!

Clichés and stereotypes have been around as long as people have been around. Some of the most fun I have ever had has been playing out a cliché. Even Shakespeare tended to write stories that had already been told before. The point was HOW he told the stories. What makes our games seem unique is how we blend the common elements together.

If you eliminate all tropes then you eliminate over 90% of the game. And where would we be then? Sitting around a table saying,

"What do you want to do tonight?"

"I don't know, what do you want to do tonight"

 

[Neonchameleon]

All tropes need to die. Everything should attempt to be as unique as possible at all times and give a big fat finger to "normal" - whatever that's supposed to be...

If you want to do this, I suggest you read the whole of TV tropes. Remove every trope mentioned there from your game. And then tell me what's left.

Disclaimer: I take no responsibility for any outcome resulting from following my suggestion.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

A new PrCl: Tropey Hunter!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you want to do this, I suggest you read the whole of TV tropes. Remove every trope mentioned there from your game. And then tell me what's left.

Disclaimer: I take no responsibility for any outcome resulting from following my suggestion.

New campaign setting: Sans Tropey!



(puns, love 'em)

 

[Hussar]

Actually, thinking about this, although 16 pages into the thread, it's unlikely this is going to go very far, I finally thought of a trope I would like to see die:

Fantasy worlds that are just Europe with a thin veneer of magic. It does bug me when setting after setting completely ignores very obvious effects that things easily could have. Ignoring domestication of flying mounts, for example. Or imagine what you could do with a domesticated giant beetle - all the strength of a horse, that you can feed offal and doesn't constantly get sick. Or continual light/flame spells. Never mind lighting your city, imagine what a textile mill owner could do with workers that don't have to knock off when the sun goes down.

The list goes on and on.

 

[DragonLancer]

Actually, thinking about this, although 16 pages into the thread, it's unlikely this is going to go very far, I finally thought of a trope I would like to see die:

Fantasy worlds that are just Europe with a thin veneer of magic. It does bug me when setting after setting completely ignores very obvious effects that things easily could have. Ignoring domestication of flying mounts, for example. Or imagine what you could do with a domesticated giant beetle - all the strength of a horse, that you can feed offal and doesn't constantly get sick. Or continual light/flame spells. Never mind lighting your city, imagine what a textile mill owner could do with workers that don't have to knock off when the sun goes down.

The list goes on and on.

I'm glad most settings don't do this. That would make the game too fantastical for me. Although technically the game allows it, keeping the game more medieval with the vaneer of magic is more to my tastes.

 

[Hussar]

I don't know, Dragonlancer. I'm just so tired of stock fantasy worlds that ignore the implications of what's in the world. After thirty years of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms and umpteen other settings which aren't really all that different, it would be refreshing to see a setting that is actually built around the presence of fantasy, rather than simply having fantasy added to it.

 

[billd91]

I don't know, Dragonlancer. I'm just so tired of stock fantasy worlds that ignore the implications of what's in the world. After thirty years of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms and umpteen other settings which aren't really all that different, it would be refreshing to see a setting that is actually built around the presence of fantasy, rather than simply having fantasy added to it.

The implications of magic depend on the assumptions behind it. Medieval European settings with a veneer of magic aren't ignoring the implications of magic, at least not necessarily, if you assume that magic isn't really something every man on the street can learn to use. It may be available to every PC, but PCs are special. The rest of the people in the setting may not be.

It may be refreshing to see a setting built around the presence of fantasy, but they'd also be built with the assumption that magical elements are common and usable by everybody. That would be the point of departure, not the existence of fantasy and magic in the first part.

 

[Thasmodious]

I don't know, Dragonlancer. I'm just so tired of stock fantasy worlds that ignore the implications of what's in the world. After thirty years of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms and umpteen other settings which aren't really all that different, it would be refreshing to see a setting that is actually built around the presence of fantasy, rather than simply having fantasy added to it.

That's what I liked so much about Eberron. It was the first basic D&D setting (as opposed to specialized settings like Dark Sun or Planescape) that imagined a world where its fantasy elements were central to its development.