Tropes and stories you hate


Even in real world hereditary rulers need to do something to deserve their fancy seats.

For example, an English king was decapitated and another deposed after naval disasters, and the plotters were painted as heroes even back then.


Let’s be honest, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The BG novels were awful, the only part I genuinely enjoyed was when the protagonist was on the receiving end of an epic beatdown via dragon, and I’m still unconvinced that the author actually played the games.

Well, I can give it a pass in a high fantasy setting, where things like Gods and Destiny do exist, and so saying “I was chosen by the Gods to rule” might actually be true. But in other contexts… (take the new Black Panther movie, for instance. Was I the only one who, when hearing about how progressive the movie was, kept thinking “are we talking about the one were apparently absolute monarchy is the best political system in our modern world?”)


That is not even absolute monarchy, that is outright tribal. Painting an African state as tribal, how very familiar.:sleeping:

To make things clear, absolute monarchies have sophisticated, systematic ways to determine successors and do not resort to personal combat for that matter.


True, I misspoke. Usually, they have moved past a purely “might makes right” approach.


I was okay with the tribal structure of Wakanda, because the whole point was that the kingdom was a futuristic nation, but a very traditional and non-Western one. As for the trial-by-combat governance, it makes sense for a country that hasn’t really had to deal with a serious governmental crisis or outside interference in centuries. (Remember that T’Challa’s advisors tried to reject both people challenging him.)

And absolute monarchies don’t always have stable systems of succession, even if trial by combat isn’t currently practiced. Case in point, Saudi Arabia (one of the last RL absolute monarchies) faced an internal coup last year.


Technically, that doesn’t mean that Saudi Arabia doesn’t have a stable system. Just that some people aren’t willing to play by the rules, which can happen in any system, no matter how stable. Absolute Monarchy tend to have a clear-cut, simple system of succession, but that doesn’t mean the people living under it will always follow it, especially if they think they can get away with it.


If a system breaks outside of extremely rare circumstances, it isn’t stable, and due to the nature of autocracy, it’s rare that absolute monarchies of any stripe have really stable succession. If the heir is weak, a stronger son will jack the position.


But by that account, no system is stable, because they’re all bound to collapse when the circumstances are right.

Yet the fact that systems monarchies managed to last sometimes thousand of years (of course, with the occasional political drama, because once again, circumstances and human nature) would tend to mean those sort of systems could reasonably be considered as stable, or at least more stable than most alternatives.


Some systems are more stable than others, true. Monarchies tend to be a bit unstable on the individual successor, but highly stable in terms of keeping the system running and the family in power. Democratic systems (modern constitutional monarchies and republics) are as stable as their democratic traditions and their systems of checks and balances.


Simply put, sophistication and maturity in governance is something everyone one should aspire for, regardless of ethnicities.

If Hollywood depicts my country as one who achieves independence with windfall (or skyfall in this case), choosees emperor by kung-fu combat, the entire research and development relies on one of the royalties and pretends to be progressive while doing all of those, I am going to take serious offence.


I’m perpetually annoyed by the Thou Shalt Not Kill trope, when treated as a moral absolute. Yes, it’s admirable that you don’t like killing, Captain Hero. It’s a little less admirable that you’ve had Lord Genocide dead to rights three times and each time you let him go, unrepentant, and each time he goes out and does more genocide. That’s not being heroic; that’s putting your ethical preferences above people’s lives. (No, Lord Genocide doing something stupid to get himself killed as soon as the hero turns his back doesn’t make this better.)

It’s even worse when this isn’t a moral absolute, and the agonized decision to spare Lord Genocide comes after mercilessly mowing down multitudes of his minor minions.


Perhaps in the case of Mao and now mr. Xi the PRC would have been better off choosing the leader by impressive personal display of kung-fu combat skills. :disappointed_relieved:


I for one welcome new Supreme Leader Jackie Chan, whose administration promises to be amusing and filled with family-friendly action.


I really dislike the characters that are edgy and dark just because :woman_shrugging:.

For example, the universe is set in a peaceful manner, positve, etc etc, and then, suddenly, there is a character that is super dark. The reasons for this is, normally, they had a terrible past, but in the setting of the game, it makes no sense.

I guess this could be summarised on bad writing and continuacion within the story :thinking:


Another one I’m not a huge fan of is when fantasy settings have healing magic be purely the purview of the gods and gods granted magic. I get it, dnd did it (and it doesn’t make much sense there either) but you don’t need to be dnd.

In a setting where a wizard can turn their skin to stone or shapeshift their whole body and the bodies of others, no one has figured out how to close a wound magically?


The reason for that is pure gameplay balance if you just can spamming healing bounds each five seconds well forget about any challenge. There wouldn’t be damage at all. Healing is a magic that could by itself destroy the game to


As a matter of fact there is a wacky Hong Kong comic series about this exact thing.:joy:


Something I absolutely hate is when in Stat Trek: The Next Generation, almost every episode starts with ordinary life on the Enterprise, and then there is an emergency or important matter that needs attending to. It is just a bit generic, you know…


Oh, who could forget the protags only surviving/succeeding because the bad guys are conveniently incompetent?


Showing the ending and then cutting back to “X time earlier” is not exciting. It’s stupid

It’s hard to really give a crap when you already know where the story is going to end or what the climax is. It’s not a twist. It’s not clever. It’s just dumb.