979 réponses à ce sujet

[Krytheos]

[quote]Drizzt ORierdan wrote...

[quote]Krytheos wrote...

*so much stuff*

 Thanks, Krytheos! [/quote]

You're welcome.

[Skalish]

Krytheos wrote...

Wrong.  That is not what a mary sue is. Those are some of the indicators of a mary sue.  A mary sue is an author's self-insert character.  It is typically seen in fan fiction although it is not limited to them. Mary Sues serve the purpose of letting the author express fantasies of theirs by having a character that represents them interact with whatever setting takes their fancy.  They are typically uninteresting and don't make for good storytelling for the indicators you listed.  But not always.  They can still be well written.

Conan (From the original Robert E Howard stories) was a mary sue.  However the stories were well written and they are interesting.

Also Mary sues don't have to have all of those indicators.  Many of the more aware/experienced fan fiction authors who know what a mary sue is will often give their self-insert characters flaws and challenges to overcome (since they know that those are what make mary sues, right?) However they are still writing mary sues and the stories are still usually bad.  It is ultimately just the author attempting to express a fantasy of theirs.

Many protagonist in action films or main characters in other media that are supposed to be badasses often have traits that are similar to mary sues. But most of them are not Mary Sues.

I haven't read any drizzt books or witcher books or played the witcher so I can't comment on those characters.  Elminster is a mary sue however.  Most book characters based off the author's player character from a Roleplaying campaign are.  Wesley Crusher is another well known mary sue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_sue Is a good write up on them

http://www.fanfiction.net/  Is a place full of examples of them.  90% of Original Characters at this site are mary sues

Modifié par Skalish, 08 septembre 2010 - 04:28 .

[Saibh]

Skalish wrote...

Krytheos wrote...

Wrong.  That is not what a mary sue is. Those are some of the indicators of a mary sue.  A mary sue is an author's self-insert character.  It is typically seen in fan fiction although it is not limited to them. Mary Sues serve the purpose of letting the author express fantasies of theirs by having a character that represents them interact with whatever setting takes their fancy.  They are typically uninteresting and don't make for good storytelling for the indicators you listed.  But not always.  They can still be well written.

There's no strict definition. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is all about strict definitions, so it's not the best source. Instead, look to TV Tropes, which tells you how fans feel about things, versus the cold facts.

What you're talking about is an Author Avatar.

That used to be the definition, but it has changed. There's no real way to describe it other than everyone believes that character is a Mary Sue.

[Riona45]

Skalish wrote...
I haven't read any drizzt books or witcher books or played the witcher so I can't comment on those characters.  Elminster is a mary sue however.  Most book characters based off the author's player character from a Roleplaying campaign are. 

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not Elminster is a Mary Sue, but he is most definitely NOT Ed Greenwood's D&D PC.  The character was created for a short story before D&D even existed.

Modifié par Riona45, 08 septembre 2010 - 04:58 .

[HighMoon]

Like Bella from the Twilight series? ^ (Not that I read that garbage - no offence to twihards).

[Skalish]

Saibh wrote...

There's no strict definition. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is all about strict definitions, so it's not the best source. Instead, look to TV Tropes, which tells you how fans feel about things, versus the cold facts.

What you're talking about is an Author Avatar.

That used to be the definition, but it has changed. There's no real way to describe it other than everyone believes that character is a Mary Sue.

The Term Mary Sue is still debated as to what it means exactly.  I'm not arguing that point.  However what the poster I quoted defined a Mary Sue to be wasn't what one was.  It was a list of some of the indicators that a character is a Mary Sue.

An author Avator is a different form of a Self-insert than a Mary Sue. Not all forms of Author Inserts are Mary sues.  Just those ones who's purpose is Fantsy/Wish fulfillment.  The Wikipedia article is a decent general write up.  It contradicts itself in parts of the article so shouldn't be taken as true absolute fact but a starting point for learning more about the topic .  There are several fantastic essays on the topic of mary sues linked in the references.  While Tvtropes is an excellent place to have fun and waste some time it is a poor reference(except for a few specific topics).

[Skalish]

Riona45 wrote...

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not Elminster is a Mary Sue, but he is most definitely NOT Ed Greenwood's D&D PC.  The character was created for a short story before D&D even existed.

I'll concede he's not then.  I've never read any of his books that's just what I had been told by people and believed to be true.

[Skalish]

Double post

Modifié par Skalish, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:13 .

[Saibh]

Skalish wrote...

Saibh wrote...

There's no strict definition. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is all about strict definitions, so it's not the best source. Instead, look to TV Tropes, which tells you how fans feel about things, versus the cold facts.

What you're talking about is an Author Avatar.

That used to be the definition, but it has changed. There's no real way to describe it other than everyone believes that character is a Mary Sue.

The Term Mary Sue is still debated as to what it means exactly.  I'm not arguing that point.  However what the poster I quoted defined a Mary Sue to be wasn't what one was.  It was a list of some of the indicators that a character is a Mary Sue.

An author Avator is a different form of a Self-insert than a Mary Sue. Not all forms of Author Inserts are Mary sues.  Just those ones who's purpose is Fantsy/Wish fulfillment.  The Wikipedia article is a decent general write up.  It contradicts itself in parts of the article so shouldn't be taken as true absolute fact but a starting point for learning more about the topic .  There are several fantastic essays on the topic of mary sues linked in the references.  While Tvtropes is an excellent place to have fun and waste some time it is a poor reference(except for a few specific topics).

How is it any more poor than Wikipedia? Each are user-edited, but TV Tropes is less technical. If I had to provide someone with an explanation, I'd point them to TV Tropes. Wikipedia, by it's nature, couldn't explain it properly. It's more of a feeling than a fact.

I'm not saying you should use it as a source for college essays (well, you shouldn't for Wikipedia, either), but for explaining what something like a Mary Sue is? It's excellent. If someone needed to be introduced or explained the phrase, that'd be the place to go.

[Riona45]

Skalish wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not Elminster is a Mary Sue, but he is most definitely NOT Ed Greenwood's D&D PC.  The character was created for a short story before D&D even existed.

I'll concede he's not then.  I've never read any of his books that's just what I had been told by people and believed to be true.

People who read the books and/or setting lore can decide for themselves if Elminster is what they would consider a "Mary Sue."  I'm just pointing out that he actually began life as a story character and not a tabletop PC (in fact, he never really was Ed's gaming PC, except at conventions and such where that's what fans want to see).*

*My "credentials" (FWIW) are that I've been a serious fan of the setting for years and Ed is well known for communicating with his fans and answering these types of questions.

Modifié par Riona45, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:22 .

[wwwwowwww]

Krytheos wrote...





Drizzt is a Marty Sue. Too many books involving too much of his 'awesome' exploitations that have thusly made any good Drow an automatic Drizzt-clone, and thus made the Drow a 'joke' as a race, which is simply unacceptable!

Seriously, though. R.A. Salvatore sold his soul to WotC, and most of Drizzt's exploitations have gotten RIDICULOUS. Seriously ridiculous. Also, I'll be the first to put my neck out there: Drizzt needs to die.

And never be ressurected. Wulfgar should've stayed dead. Not some bullcrap story that brought him back, no. He should have stayed dead. Bruenor Battlehammer, and the two Dwarf brothers with one being a druid, and the gnome Illusionist make far more interestiong characters than Drizzt does now.

Why? Simple. I don't trust R.A. Salvatore to make Drizzt lose, in any future Drizzt book. Simple as that, really. I really cannot trust R.A. Salvatore anymore with any Forgotten Realms book. 

Edit: To clarify: I speak of Do'Urden, not O'Rierdan. Teehee. Sorry about that.

/end rant.

On topic: Lady Hawke and Lord Hawke both look awesome, as always, especially Lady Hawke. Much love.

Why would Drizzt need to lose? As a matter of fact he has lost a couple of times, but fate saved his behind. Dont' hate on him

[Skalish]

Saibh wrote...

How is it any more poor than Wikipedia? Each are user-edited, but TV Tropes is less technical. If I had to provide someone with an explanation, I'd point them to TV Tropes. Wikipedia, by it's nature, couldn't explain it properly. It's more of a feeling than a fact.

I'm not saying you should use it as a source for college essays (well, you shouldn't for Wikipedia, either), but for explaining what something like a Mary Sue is? It's excellent. If someone needed to be introduced or explained the phrase, that'd be the place to go.

Because wikipedia provides references.  Tvtropes allows a user to put anything they want based solely off of their opinion on the matter.  Wikipedia requires a reference.  Wikipedia is still by no means reliable but it is generally a good starting point for a topic you are interested in.

[Saibh]

Skalish wrote...

Saibh wrote...

How is it any more poor than Wikipedia? Each are user-edited, but TV Tropes is less technical. If I had to provide someone with an explanation, I'd point them to TV Tropes. Wikipedia, by it's nature, couldn't explain it properly. It's more of a feeling than a fact.

I'm not saying you should use it as a source for college essays (well, you shouldn't for Wikipedia, either), but for explaining what something like a Mary Sue is? It's excellent. If someone needed to be introduced or explained the phrase, that'd be the place to go.

Because wikipedia provides references.  Tvtropes allows a user to put anything they want based solely off of their opinion on the matter.  Wikipedia requires a reference.  Wikipedia is still by no means reliable but it is generally a good starting point for a topic you are interested in.

Wikipedia doesn't require a reference, per se. They're supposed to be there, but just about anyone can add something without one. Furthermore, they can link to sites that aren't themselves factual.

Besides that, how you do reference a Mary Sue? Common fan agreements? No one has written a book. TV Tropes is superior, in this case.

[namedforthemoon]

Isn't it interesting that Lady Hawke's eyes are blue, instead of brown like her male counterpart? I wonder why that is. Something to do with the story or who her father is, maybe?

[Saibh]

namedforthemoon wrote...

Isn't it interesting that Lady Hawke's eyes are blue, instead of brown like her male counterpart? I wonder why that is. Something to do with the story or who her father is, maybe?

I imagine because the devs thought blue was prettier for a girl. Generally, I think brown looks better on guys than it does on a girls.

[Jarek_Cousland]

I'm REALLLY considering a second playthrough with a femHawke warrior (my first male will be a BAWSE rogue.)



And of course will be a part of my usual many "self-canon" runs. I really liked her default look in the low res ones (I actually dont like default maleHawke) but when I saw the high-res ones I instantly liked her. Both strong and able yet feminine at the same time, I may even use the default one who knows?





femHawke for the win.

[Minxie]

Madame Lanka wrote...

Eudaemonium wrote...

See,
now I've seen the immense hawtness that is Marian Hawke (default name
for default fem!hawke, after all), I really want to hear her voice - or
at least find out whose voice it is. I guess I will always want
MOAR.

English Accent.........Please!

An English accent paired with that face is going to be frakkin hawt. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]
I
hope whoever's doing the voice sounds similar to, say, Kate
Beckinsale's character in the Underworld movies. I think it would suit
default FemHawke perfectly.

[Krytheos]

wwwwowwww wrote...

Krytheos wrote...





Drizzt is a Marty Sue. Too many books involving too much of his 'awesome' exploitations that have thusly made any good Drow an automatic Drizzt-clone, and thus made the Drow a 'joke' as a race, which is simply unacceptable!

Seriously, though. R.A. Salvatore sold his soul to WotC, and most of Drizzt's exploitations have gotten RIDICULOUS. Seriously ridiculous. Also, I'll be the first to put my neck out there: Drizzt needs to die.

And never be ressurected. Wulfgar should've stayed dead. Not some bullcrap story that brought him back, no. He should have stayed dead. Bruenor Battlehammer, and the two Dwarf brothers with one being a druid, and the gnome Illusionist make far more interestiong characters than Drizzt does now.

Why? Simple. I don't trust R.A. Salvatore to make Drizzt lose, in any future Drizzt book. Simple as that, really. I really cannot trust R.A. Salvatore anymore with any Forgotten Realms book. 

Edit: To clarify: I speak of Do'Urden, not O'Rierdan. Teehee. Sorry about that.

/end rant.

On topic: Lady Hawke and Lord Hawke both look awesome, as always, especially Lady Hawke. Much love.

Why would Drizzt need to lose? As a matter of fact he has lost a couple of times, but fate saved his behind. Dont' hate on him

I hate on Drizzt because he does need to lose more often than he has. He has lost, but fate has intervened one too many times. Especially during the fight with Obould Many-Arrows. I'm not saying he should lost everytime; I'm saying he should lose more often than he has in the past. The fight with Obould went -too- well into his favor. -Too- well. Firstly, the Priestess -- I believe she was also a PRIESTESS OF LLOTH to add insult to injury, but I'm uncertain of this; I read the books years ago, so I'm a tiny bit sketchy on SPECIFIC details -- then after losing..Twinkle? Or was it Icingdeath he lost? He lost one of his scimitars, which would have made for a better fight...

...if 'Cutter' or the bloodthirsty blade, or Khazad'hea that cuts through any armor wasn't somehow finding it's way into his possession. There was too much that went right for him at that moment. Even for a favored of..I can't pronounce that Goddess' name, it was too much. And for Lloth to actually favor him as well? No. I'm willing to suspend disbelief sometimes, but that fight, among some others, just went too well for Drizzt.

I'm hating on him not because he's a bad character CONCEPT, but because of the execution of how his character went, and how over the years it just got RIDICULOUS.

[Skalish]

Saibh wrote...

Wikipedia doesn't require a reference, per se. They're supposed to be there, but just about anyone can add something without one. Furthermore, they can link to sites that aren't themselves factual.

Besides that, how you do reference a Mary Sue? Common fan agreements? No one has written a book. TV Tropes is superior, in this case.

People have written essays on the topic.

http://www.merrycoz....ers/MARYSUE.HTM

http://www.ravenswin...ts/mary_sue.htm

http://www.bast-ente...ma/MarySue.html

These are some links from the wikipedia article.  TvTropes just provides Tropers opinions on it.  They are not always wrong but in any topic that has any amount of differing opinions  you will never get much of a balanced or accurate view.  That is why the TvTropes article on Mary Sues say that there is no good definiton.  Because they can't get hundreds of people to agree on one.  This is also one of the problems with wikipedia but they are able to mitigate it some by requiring references.

It is still differing peoples opinions but it at least requires that they put enough thought into it to have published it in some format.  This is going to be my last post on this topic because this has gone a ways off topic.

LadyHawke is looking pretty good though. Hopefully they will release a shot at a different angle so the chin issue can be resolved.

Modifié par Skalish, 08 septembre 2010 - 06:07 .

[Jarek_Cousland]

Eudaemonium wrote...
An English accent paired with that face is going to be frakkin hawt. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]
I
hope whoever's doing the voice sounds similar to, say, Kate
Beckinsale's character in the Underworld movies. I think it would suit
default FemHawke perfectly.

Yea, giving her that sultry smooth british accent paired with that would make me swoon in a way a bioware female char has never done before.


My reaction would be as followed:




In that order.

[Saibh]

Skalish wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Wikipedia doesn't require a reference, per se. They're supposed to be there, but just about anyone can add something without one. Furthermore, they can link to sites that aren't themselves factual.

Besides that, how you do reference a Mary Sue? Common fan agreements? No one has written a book. TV Tropes is superior, in this case.

People have written essays on the topic.

http://www.merrycoz....ers/MARYSUE.HTM

http://www.ravenswin...ts/mary_sue.htm

http://www.bast-ente...ma/MarySue.html

These are some links from the wikipedia article.  TvTropes just provides Tropers opinions on it.  They are not always wrong but in any topic that has any amount of differing opinions  you will never get much of a balanced or accurate view.  That is why the TvTropes article on Mary Sues say that there is no good definiton.  Because they can't get hundreds of people to agree on one.  This is also one of the problems with wikipedia but they are able to mitigate it some by requiring references.

It is still differing peoples opinions but it at least requires that they put enough thought into it to have published it in some format.  This is going to be my last post on this topic because this has gone a ways off topic.

LadyHawke is looking pretty good though. Hopefully they will release a shot at a different angle so the chin issue can be resolved.

But how are those people accurate sources? There's no undeniable proof. They don't have PhD's in Fanfiction. Just because they put a bunch of paragraphs together? It's an opinion, you can't cement it down.

[Anarya]

Well if one of those is the essay that coined the phrase I think it might be valid. I'm too lazy to go look at them, however.

[Krytheos]

Skalish wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Wikipedia doesn't require a reference, per se. They're supposed to be there, but just about anyone can add something without one. Furthermore, they can link to sites that aren't themselves factual.

Besides that, how you do reference a Mary Sue? Common fan agreements? No one has written a book. TV Tropes is superior, in this case.

People have written essays on the topic.

http://www.merrycoz....ers/MARYSUE.HTM

http://www.ravenswin...ts/mary_sue.htm

http://www.bast-ente...ma/MarySue.html

These are some links from the wikipedia article.  TvTropes just provides Tropers opinions on it.  They are not always wrong but in any topic that has any amount of differing opinions  you will never get much of a balanced or accurate view.  That is why the TvTropes article on Mary Sues say that there is no good definiton.  Because they can't get hundreds of people to agree on one.  This is also one of the problems with wikipedia but they are able to mitigate it some by requiring references.

It is still differing peoples opinions but it at least requires that they put enough thought into it to have published it in some format.  This is going to be my last post on this topic because this has gone a ways off topic.

LadyHawke is looking pretty good though. Hopefully they will release a shot at a different angle so the chin issue can be resolved.

In my opinion, references don't actually validate anything that is said. At all. Tropers opinions are references as much as references are cited references. The difference is merely if the reference is professionalized. They're all still opinions on the matter at hand, and while both are good, I will agree with Saibh that TVTropes is superior to Wikipedia in this regard.

Truly, the definition of a Mary Sue is different for each person who thinks of it; it is the same thing as asking what the definition of an RPG is. Both are abstract enough to be different and have differing opinions on it. To disregard in favor of professional opinions is silly, because it is still an opinion, and it will never be a fact. I've learned never to take a professional's opinion over another person's opinion, because neither can be right or wrong in an opinion. You may say a professional has more credibility, but I would counter that a professional's opinion is as noteworthy as a rat eating cheese.

One person may look at that rat and say 'Oh, he's eating cheese.' while another may say 'Oh, look, he's eating parmessian cheese, a wonderful and delicious piece of cheese. He must be a sophisticated rodent!'

One may be professional, and one may be your average person. Both are not necessarily wrong; one simply provides more information that could be useful, or could be useless in the long run. Both types are not necessarily wrong, nor correct, and the rat who is eating the cheese wouldn't care, because it is a delicious meal, but I digress.

On topic: Lady Hawke does look good, especially her blue eyes. Though I find the non-spiky armor bit in the front to be a bit jarring. Seems kind of useless in a real fight. The spikes aren't as useless, but the whole frontal bit of metal armor just seems..pointless, really. Otherwise though she's definitely looking awesome.

[Saibh]

Anarya wrote...

Well if one of those is the essay that coined the phrase I think it might be valid. I'm too lazy to go look at them, however.

It was actually a Star Trek parody fanfiction that coined the phrase. The character's name was Mary Sue and she was the best at everything! /gasp/ So...yeah, since inception there hasn't been a concrete definition.