Why Reforming Starlight Glimmer Was A Terrible Idea

[Goat-kun 2,498]

5 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

So more people will like it vhan not? or so iv will send the right message? Or for various reasons.

Does there alwaus have to be a correct conclusion? Can't Starlight be good for some and bad fo others?

We're not talking about our opinions that we have about Starlight. We're talking about our opinions that we have about why Starlight is a bad/good character. At least I am. I don't really care who likes or dislikes Starlight. What I do care about is the good shit, and by shit I mean writing, worldbuilding, characters, lore, design, message, etc.

5 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

Do we? Historicallu, theu tend to end up rather infamous.

And time-ravel wierdness aside, Starlight Glimmer is no mass murderer. Call me when they reform Sombra.

And what happens when they get infamous?

[Latecomer 438]

8 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

We're not talking about our opinions that we have about Starlight. We're talking about our opinions that we have about why Starlight is a bad/good character. At least I am. I don't really care who likes or dislikes Starlight. What I do care about is the good shit, and by shit I mean writing, worldbuilding, characters, lore, design, message, etc.

 

I see.I like those things too. However, I still disagree with the titular premise of this thread, and therefore, ani argument in support of it. (Now if it was called "How Starlight Glimmer was Never Properlu Reformed", that might be a different storu. 

 

10 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

And what happens when they get infamous?

 

Usually reviled throught historu, although with enough distance then can become cool again - like Alexander the Great. 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

17 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

However, I still disagree with the titular premise of this thread, and therefore, ani argument in support of it. (Now if it was called "How Starlight Glimmer was Never Properlu Reformed", that might be a different storu.

Are such statements supposed to impress me? Back it up. If you have anything to show other than blind affection then let's read it.

17 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

Usually reviled throught historu, although with enough distance then can become cool again - like Alexander the Great. 

They get imitators who also crave attention the original had gotten. Now go from mass murderers back to incel terrorists, and then back to Friendcel terrorists. Do you get it now? If they get what they want you'll get more of them. But wait, there's more, and it's a real doozy! You know how Bronies like to proclaim that friendship lessons are applicable in real life. We're talking kids learning socialization ... but then I remember it's the current year and that some adults are probably also included. Anyhow, the unintentional but repeating and oh so present message that you get what you want if you throw a tantrum is morally wrong and I don't care how much of a greater good the Friendship is supposed to be. Nobody is entitled to it.

[Latecomer 438]

1 minute ago, Goat-kun said:

Are such statements supposed to impress me? Back it up. If you have anything to show other than blind affection then let's read it.

 

I don't have ani particualr desire to impress uou - if uou'd rather Starlighv went unreformed, so be it. However as I've said, I found her role in the later seasons compelling, partiularlu her relationships with her little circle of misfits. You seem to think she's' only doing what Twilightt did, or could do - but Twilight had her first friends handed to her on a platter, and none of them were reallu outcasts - nor was she. I also simply enjoy many episdoes she has a role in, like Royal Problem and Student Counsel. It seems pataentlu obvious to me that her existence adds to the show - can uou show how it detracts from it?

 

9 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

Anyhow, the unintentional but repeating and oh so present message that you get what you want if you throw a tantrum is morally wrong and I don't care how much of a greater good the Friendship is supposed to be. Nobody is entitled to it.

 

 

Everu tantrum I ever threw was worsened bi the knowledge that all that waived when I relented was punishmentt and dissatifaction. Working with me to reach a compromise would have resolved things much quicker. And no, not getting what I wanted didn't deter me. 

[ExplosionMare 18,007]

While she definitely falls into that Creator’s Pet archetype, I like her for her own forgiveness towards others and her personality. While I 100 percent agree that she is a little OP, she doesn’t really take enough spotlight for me to hate her. If she was in every single episode aside from being in the intro, then I would get annoyed. Honestly, all of this comes down to everyone’s opinion on Starlight. Personally, she’s my second favorite character despite her crazy flaws (like the mane 6 said, they aren’t flawless, they’re a work in progress).

[Goat-kun 2,498]

1 hour ago, Latecomer said:

I don't have ani particualr desire to impress uou - if uou'd rather Starlighv went unreformed, so be it. However as I've said, I found her role in the later seasons compelling, partiularlu her relationships with her little circle of misfits. You seem to think she's' only doing what Twilightt did, or could do - but Twilight had her first friends handed to her on a platter, and none of them were reallu outcasts - nor was she. I also simply enjoy many episdoes she has a role in, like Royal Problem and Student Counsel. It seems pataentlu obvious to me that her existence adds to the show - can uou show how it detracts from it?

You've said it yourself. There is a lot of bad writing impeding Mane 6. Introducing new characters that do what they do does not fix the problem, it exacerbates it. And as far as misfits are concerned, Villain Trio does a far better job at the misfit business. It would do the show much good if Starlight episodes and arcs were replaced by theirs. It's all about how much you can get out of a character. It is a technical approach from a writing, logistical, and design perspective.

1 hour ago, Latecomer said:

 

Everu tantrum I ever threw was worsened bi the knowledge that all that waived when I relented was punishmentt and dissatifaction. Working with me to reach a compromise would have resolved things much quicker. And no, not getting what I wanted didn't deter me. 

That depends on your goal, mental state, and whether you hurt someone. Could you really hurt a bunch of people to get what you want? If you were just groaning loudly on the floor cause your mom moved a couch a little too far that doesn't really have anything to do with what I was saying.

[Latecomer 438]

42 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

You've said it yourself. There is a lot of bad writing impeding Mane 6. Introducing new characters that do what they do does not fix the problem, it exacerbates it.

But what Starlight does isn't what the Manes do. She has her own role.

43 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

 And as far as misfits are concerned, Villain Trio does a far better job at the misfit business. It would do the show much good if Starlight episodes and arcs were replaced by theirs.

 

OK firstlu, when Starlight was reformed such an idea was far awau - one of them didn't even exist uet. And second, their protagonistic capacity is constrained bi, well, being antagonists - Frenemies was great, but like Slice of Life, it was something that could only be done once.

And plaentu was gov out of Starlight, so wouldn't that counv as a sucess? Unlike the Manes, her episodes didn't reallu decline much.

48 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

That depends on your goal, mental state, and whether you hurt someone. Could you really hurt a bunch of people to get what you want? If you were just groaning loudly on the floor cause your mom moved a couch a little too far that doesn't really have anything to do with what I was saying.

 

Well perhaps a personal analogy wasn't the best idea. But given Twilight wasn't exacttlu beating Starlight anyway, winning her over seems a valid strategu.

 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

21 hours ago, Latecomer said:

But what Starlight does isn't what the Manes do. She has her own role.

See, the right counter argument here would be to claim that Mane 6 don't have similar roles; however, it seems your opinion is that Mane 6 do have so similar roles that you can compare them in a package, and you are only separating Starlight from this role (friendship lessons) cause it suits your narrative of her being different enough. She is similar to Mane 6, and her role is the same. Unfortunately, none of these characters have extra value like worldbuilding opportunities that come with non-pones or a completely novel angle that comes with irredeemable villains.

Quote

OK firstlu, when Starlight was reformed such an idea was far awau - one of them didn't even exist uet. And second, their protagonistic capacity is constrained bi, well, being antagonists - Frenemies was great, but like Slice of Life, it was something that could only be done once.

The best part about non-pones and villains is that they've proven me right. I was advocating for such stuff back when S05 was still fresh out of the oven. Just ask the old Starfoals about Tibia the changeling student Perhaps some of them will manage to remember one of our very first thread battles.

Some of the most popular isekai shows have villains as main characters, and this arrangement is not foreign to western kid-friendly cartoons either. It can not only be done more than once, it can be done more than 26 times.

Quote

And plaentu was gov out of Starlight, so wouldn't that counv as a sucess? Unlike the Manes, her episodes didn't reallu decline much.

Congratulations! You've unintentionally agreed with me Of course this would be the case. She was created as an easy way out of Mane 6 decline. Instead of figuring out what to do with their main characters they introduced new ones instead. And that is why I call her a symptom. It's always easy to start fresh. However, when it comes to characters people have invested into, this is not a wise approach.

Quote

Well perhaps a personal analogy wasn't the best idea. But given Twilight wasn't exacttlu beating Starlight anyway, winning her over seems a valid strategu.

So might makes right, huh? I wonder how terrorists feel about this. For someone who seems to be advocating for old school heroism, you sure do give up quickly when it suits your narrative. Take it away, wizards of old:

Spoiler

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by Goat-kun
t'was an elusive paragraph

[Latecomer 438]

36 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

See, the right counter argument here would be to claim that Mane 6 don't have similar roles; however, it seems your opinion is that Mane 6 do have so similar roles that you can compare them in a package, and you are only separating Starlight from this role (friendship lessons) cause it suits your narrative of her being different enough. She is similar to Mane 6, and her role is the same. Unfortunately, none of these characters have extra value like worldbuilding opportunities that come with non-pones or a completely novel angle that comes with irredeemable villains.

 

If one considers being a pony who learns friendship lessons a role, then yes, I will concede she is one - indeed, they all are.  However, I don't consider tho number of those FIM can support especially limited - it's the Character tipe the show was designed around having a bunch of, each distinct. On the flipside, the role for iredeemable villans in the show is very limited - antagonism only (Frenemies is the marvellous exception which proves the rule). A lot of screen-time as antagonists, perhpas, but theu can't be protagonists. And FIM's non-serilsed nature makes it fairly unsuited for them. 

(I'm also of the opinion the young Six have potential too - I just don't consider it an and/or with Starlight.)

47 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

 

Congratulations! You've unintentionally agreed with me Of course this would be the case. She was created as an easy way out of Mane 6 decline. Instead of figuring out what to do with their main characters they introduced new ones instead. And that is why I call her a symptom. It's always easy to start fresh. However, when it comes to characters people have invested into, this is not a wise approach.

 

But she didn't replace them, and her existence in no way prevents them from being written well. No rule requires them not to add new characters in order to keep up the qualitu of existing ones - and said qualitu arguably declined either before or after her addition aniwau.

49 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

 

So might makes right, huh? 

 

No, that would be if Twilight switched to Starlight's side because she couldn't win. Not the other way round. (Or for thav matter, if Starlight only switched after she was at Twilight's mercy.) 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

19 hours ago, Latecomer said:

If one considers being a pony who learns friendship lessons a role, then yes, I will concede she is one - indeed, they all are.  However, I don't consider tho number of those FIM can support especially limited - it's the Character tipe the show was designed around having a bunch of, each distinct. On the flipside, the role for iredeemable villans in the show is very limited - antagonism only (Frenemies is the marvellous exception which proves the rule). A lot of screen-time as antagonists, perhpas, but theu can't be protagonists. And FIM's non-serilsed nature makes it fairly unsuited for them.

(I'm also of the opinion the young Six have potential too - I just don't consider it an and/or with Starlight.)

Alas, the number of important characters in such a limited show must thus also be limited. One must operate with time, money, and goals as primary driving mechanisms for character creation, and this will me even more important in the future that came a little earlier than expected.

19 hours ago, Latecomer said:

But she didn't replace them, and her existence in no way prevents them from being written well. No rule requires them not to add new characters in order to keep up the qualitu of existing ones - and said qualitu arguably declined either before or after her addition aniwau.

And yet they were not. We're just discussing the etiology and symptoms of this bad writing. Perhaps some preventive measures would be advisable.

19 hours ago, Latecomer said:

No, that would be if Twilight switched to Starlight's side because she couldn't win. Not the other way round. (Or for thav matter, if Starlight only switched after she was at Twilight's mercy.) 

The point stands: power has nothing to do with morality. Well, it corrupts, but that's for another time. Anyhow, are you claiming that power level of your opponent makes them immune to condemnation. That's sometimes true when you are dealing with RL nuclear power like China. The fact is that this is a fictional show, not RL diplomacy. The fact is that friendship lessons are this show's bread and butter. They teach how to behave, not demonstrate how politics work. Just cause you can't act against China openly doesn't mean they are not a completely corrupt system. On the other appendage, the one who holds the pen has control over how Starlight gets treated and what kind of a message that sends to the viewers.

 

Also, Starlight only switched after she was forced to by the fact of her would-be futures. She didn't care if she hurt Twilight or erase her happiness. Even Hitler would stop being Hitler if he saw the future.

[Latecomer 438]

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Alas, the number of important characters in such a limited show must thus also be limited. One must operate with time, money, and goals as primary driving mechanisms for character creation, and this will me even more important in the future that came a little earlier than expected.

However, adding one more character was IMO quite feasible. 

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

And yet they were not. We're just discussing the etiology and symptoms of this bad writing. Perhaps some preventive measures would be advisable.

 

Measures which don't do anithing, howver, should be avoided. Not having Starlight in the show wouldn't have improved the writing of other chracters.

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

 

The point stands: power has nothing to do with morality. Well, it corrupts, but that's for another time. Anyhow, are you claiming that power level of your opponent makes them immune to condemnation. That's sometimes true when you are dealing with RL nuclear power like China. The fact is that this is a fictional show, not RL diplomacy. The fact is that friendship lessons are this show's bread and butter. They teach how to behave, not demonstrate how politics work. Just cause you can't act against China openly doesn't mean they are not a completely corrupt system. On the other appendage, the one who holds the pen has control over how Starlight gets treated and what kind of a message that sends to the viewers.

 

tciBut the show is not teaching kids how to deal with superpowers, but rather, mostlu how to deal with other people in thier lives. For an amicable relavionship to be a preferable result to  victoru in conflict is certainlu a message, buv not necessarily a bad one. Especiallu when the show has other iredeemable villans for contrast.

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Also, Starlight only switched after she was forced to by the fact of her would-be futures. She didn't care if she hurt Twilight or erase her happiness. Even Hitler would stop being Hitler if he saw the future.

 

And now we get back to the alternate thread title "How Starlight Glimmer was Never Properly Reformed", which as I've said, I can't particualrlu contest.

[Goat-kun 2,498]

17 hours ago, Latecomer said:

However, adding one more character was IMO quite feasible. 

Celestia, Luna, Cadence, Shining Armor, CMC, Discord, Sunset, Starlight ... the whole Starlight crew, Changelings, 6 Pillars, students, Cozy, Tirek, Chrysalis. You can reduce that by more than a half and have a better show. This is just baggage for a bomber that doesn't have enough fuel to fly to its goal. Start throwing things out. This is not a rule for FIM. It's a damn good guideline for every piece of entertainment content out there. You can compare it to the introduction of unnecessary characters in Disney Star Wars and how they failed to use the ones they had already created.

17 hours ago, Latecomer said:

Measures which don't do anithing, howver, should be avoided. Not having Starlight in the show wouldn't have improved the writing of other chracters.

Now you have it backwards. Improving the writing of other characters and story arcs in general would inhibit the introduction of Starlight-like characters. There would be no need for such a character and thus any attempt at introduction would be denied in favor of other characters that can do more with less.

17 hours ago, Latecomer said:

tciBut the show is not teaching kids how to deal with superpowers, but rather, mostlu how to deal with other people in thier lives. For an amicable relavionship to be a preferable result to  victoru in conflict is certainlu a message, buv not necessarily a bad one. Especiallu when the show has other iredeemable villans for contrast.

However, Starlight's reasoning is immoral. She only stops when she is forced to do it by seeing the future. She is not convinced by Twilight's arguments. The only thing Twilight does is pull her in. That is not a victory for Twilight's way of thinking. It's a victory for cruel nature of all things. It's like how Corona-chan is making socialists not be socialist for a while In other words, this is not an argument of whether Starlight should be redeemed. It is an argument against Starlight's morality and how the character was only rewarded after she started abusing others. It wasn't even shown that she tried to do things in another less violent manner. If you want to have this kind of thing in a kid show then you have the hero win convincingly due to their resolve and then show mercy to the villain. You don't have the hero give in to their violent bullshit just because they can't win easily. Eye of the tiger and all that. You form a clear message that what Starlight did does not, in any way, result in friendship with Twilight or any other character. Adults can have greater variety cause we should be able to separate right from wrong.

17 hours ago, Latecomer said:

And now we get back to the alternate thread title "How Starlight Glimmer was Never Properly Reformed", which as I've said, I can't particualrlu contest.

Starlight's redemption was shit cause Starlight's way of thinking is shit, and her redemption is the biggest part of her character. That does translate into a shit character cause you can state that a better character would have a better redemption arc. Also, a cash-strapped H-Bro fat cat would be pleased if you told them that the introduction of said character would be able to lead directly into worldbuilding and thus into a lot more new toys.

[Sarperso 24]

My opinion: I think Twilight gave her a second chance because Starlight wouldn't stop, and if she tries to do anything bad, Twilight has princesses and her friends on her back. It was a 50/50 chance, Starlight used the good one.

[Latecomer 438]

5 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Celestia, Luna, Cadence, Shining Armor, CMC, Discord, Sunset, Starlight ... the whole Starlight crew, Changelings, 6 Pillars, students, Cozy, Tirek, Chrysalis. You can reduce that by more than a half and have a better show. This is just baggage for a bomber that doesn't have enough fuel to fly to its goal. Start throwing things out. This is not a rule for FIM. It's a damn good guideline for every piece of entertainment content out there. You can compare it to the introduction of unnecessary characters in Disney Star Wars and how they failed to use the ones they had already created.

 

Guidelines aren't universallu applicable. and it depends what one means bi "better" anyway. Having manu intersting but litvle-developed characters often makes for a stronger fandom, for instance. And I'd sau it also works well for selling tous (even if that side often wasn't well-integrated.) And I simplu diagree the show would be svronger without ani of those. Focused shows can be good, but so can broad tents. 

5 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Now you have it backwards. Improving the writing of other characters and story arcs in general would inhibit the introduction of Starlight-like characters. There would be no need for such a character and thus any attempt at introduction would be denied in favor of other characters that can do more with less.

 

Onlu if, as you suggest above, one values minimalism. Not everyone does.

5 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

However, Starlight's reasoning is immoral. She only stops when she is forced to do it by seeing the future. She is not convinced by Twilight's arguments. The only thing Twilight does is pull her in. That is not a victory for Twilight's way of thinking. It's a victory for cruel nature of all things. It's like how Corona-chan is making socialists not be socialist for a while

 

 

All uou're sauing here is "the Season 5 finale sucks and ruins Starlight's chracter", and I've known that since it aired. I knew she should be redeemed before vhat, and I love her later role - so I just try to pretend the parts that sucked happened differentlu.  

 

 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

6 hours ago, Latecomer said:

Guidelines aren't universallu applicable. and it depends what one means bi "better" anyway. Having manu intersting but litvle-developed characters often makes for a stronger fandom, for instance. And I'd sau it also works well for selling tous (even if that side often wasn't well-integrated.) And I simplu diagree the show would be svronger without ani of those. Focused shows can be good, but so can broad tents. 

A strong fandom would mean stronger sales, if that fandom is also the target audience, and having a ton of active characters means little if you are not a free-to-play competitive game. I'll say it: it's the current year. The age of physical toys that are not meant for toddlers or adults is drawing its last breaths. Moreover, having a ton of characters for physical toys just means you need a lot of background characters and wasting money on character development and voice actors is a bad idea. If you are going quantity over quality, then go all-in, cancel the show, and just have Pony Life kinda stuff online. There is a chance that they will actually do that. Though, they missed their chance for a while. Who knows how the Post-Corona world will look like. If she is the catalyst, then my prognostication about death of toys could be just around the corner.

6 hours ago, Latecomer said:

Onlu if, as you suggest above, one values minimalism. Not everyone does.

Have you checked the comic book industry lately? How about Disney? Corona-chan didn't do this damage. She just decompensate their chronic disease. They thought they could waste money, now look at them.

6 hours ago, Latecomer said:

All uou're sauing here is "the Season 5 finale sucks and ruins Starlight's chracter", and I've known that since it aired. I knew she should be redeemed before vhat, and I love her later role - so I just try to pretend the parts that sucked happened differentlu. 

FIM is dead, and Starfoals shall not interfere in my presence, so why don't we have a little bit of fun? Let us rip Starlight apart and fix her up. If canon Starlight is so bad that you must pretend parts of her aren't true, then we can make it so. I wonder what kind of character shall appear before us. 

Now begin. Cast the first thought.

[Latecomer 438]

43 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

A strong fandom would mean stronger sales, if that fandom is also the target audience, and having a ton of active characters means little if you are not a free-to-play competitive game.

FIM is, isn't it?  And you can buy all the chracters seen on the show. But I also don't think Hasbro has given up on selling tou ponies uet - or that including a multitude of chracters makes the show weaker. Focused minimalism is not an inherently superior approach.

49 minutes ago, Goat-kun said:

FIM is dead, and Starfoals shall not interfere in my presence, so why don't we have a little bit of fun? Let us rip Starlight apart and fix her up. If canon Starlight is so bad that you must pretend parts of her aren't true, then we can make it so. I wonder what kind of character shall appear before us. 

Now begin. Cast the first thought.

 

 

Breaking Starlight down and rebuilding her? Well, for starters I might change her name back to Aurora Glimmer -  make her less of an obvious Twiclone. i would leave her first appearance pretty much the same - her second, on the other hoof I would change completely,

Well, I'm not sure how completely actually - will there still be time travel? - but it would in the end add up to her achieving her goal of mass Equalisation (instead of dropping it to focus on petty revenge) only to find out exactly why it's a terrible idea. Given the whole "cutie mark magic" thing, I'm kind of tempted to make the CMC integral to her redemption - they deserved to save the world once,  and her problems (which will be elaborated on here to make it clear Sunburst was just the beginnig) are right up their wheelhouse.

So going into Season 6 she might have more of a connection with them, but on the flipside, nopony else who knows what she did - which, depending on how the finale goes, could be all Equestria or just the Manes and Our Towners - really likes or trusts her. Helping restore the Crystal Heart helps, but she's still very much an outsider this season, and doesn't really become part of the group even by the end.

One thing which defintly gets attention is her facing the Our Towners, with varying degrees of forgiveness and hopefully a nuanced moral on the subject. Another possiblity might be to merge that with the finale, but I do like her existing band of misfits - and that her world-saving group isn't the same as her friend group.

Season 7 onwards, i'd leave mostly as-is. Perhaps improve her Equestria Girls guest spot, better justify her becoming a counsellor - and if we're in the realm of total freedom, make her and Trixie an explicit couple. (Av least then, we can answer "Why do they put up with each other?" with "Guess she's great in bed".)

Oh, and a last thing - I wouldn't have her just forget about Equalism. Rather, she shouls always show a strong focus on fairness and be one of the most willing to challenge existing social structures. Keeping her a bit of a rebel makes several of her later roles fit better. 

So what do you hink?

 

 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

16 hours ago, Latecomer said:

FIM is, isn't it?  And you can buy all the chracters seen on the show. But I also don't think Hasbro has given up on selling tou ponies uet - or that including a multitude of chracters makes the show weaker. Focused minimalism is not an inherently superior approach.

You misunderstood. In FIM, Brony fans do not necessarily translate into consumers, especially when most products are targeted to little girls and their parents. Moreover, having a lot of characters you can sell changes your approach to advertising. You have not addressed my previous statements. What you would call flexible characters do not need a show with 22 min episodes. Also, whether H-Bro is able to have a certain approach to its IPs isn't dependent on H-Bro but on the market. They can try to ignore everything, but is that wise? Again, go re-read what I have written. And what I am proposing is not minimalism. It's your average corporate strategy of knowing your place and cautiously keeping your ears to the ground. It's why new old school comic creators like EVS and Ya Boi Zack will survive and IDW won't. It's why fans can make better movie content than IP owners themselves. They all have their ears to the ground, listening to the murmurs of the masses. You give fans what they want? No, you give consumers that are your fans what they want.

 

Some big brain dude (or dudette) would then say that what we are doing here is folly. I would be inclined to agree; however, I would add that what H-Bro is doing is the same. They are now trying to cater to both boys and girls with a single show. Right now, as their shit is burning, I will reserve myself the right and write it in all caps: THAT IS JUST STUPID! Have a show for thee and have a show for me, or have no show at all. Ironic, that people who crated Starlight would try to equalize everything in the name of justice.

16 hours ago, Latecomer said:

 

Breaking Starlight down and rebuilding her? Well, for starters I might change her name back to Aurora Glimmer -  make her less of an obvious Twiclone. i would leave her first appearance pretty much the same - her second, on the other hoof I would change completely,

Well, I'm not sure how completely actually - will there still be time travel? - but it would in the end add up to her achieving her goal of mass Equalisation (instead of dropping it to focus on petty revenge) only to find out exactly why it's a terrible idea. Given the whole "cutie mark magic" thing, I'm kind of tempted to make the CMC integral to her redemption - they deserved to save the world once,  and her problems (which will be elaborated on here to make it clear Sunburst was just the beginnig) are right up their wheelhouse.

So going into Season 6 she might have more of a connection with them, but on the flipside, nopony else who knows what she did - which, depending on how the finale goes, could be all Equestria or just the Manes and Our Towners - really likes or trusts her. Helping restore the Crystal Heart helps, but she's still very much an outsider this season, and doesn't really become part of the group even by the end.

One thing which defintly gets attention is her facing the Our Towners, with varying degrees of forgiveness and hopefully a nuanced moral on the subject. Another possiblity might be to merge that with the finale, but I do like her existing band of misfits - and that her world-saving group isn't the same as her friend group.

Season 7 onwards, i'd leave mostly as-is. Perhaps improve her Equestria Girls guest spot, better justify her becoming a counsellor - and if we're in the realm of total freedom, make her and Trixie an explicit couple. (Av least then, we can answer "Why do they put up with each other?" with "Guess she's great in bed".)

Oh, and a last thing - I wouldn't have her just forget about Equalism. Rather, she shouls always show a strong focus on fairness and be one of the most willing to challenge existing social structures. Keeping her a bit of a rebel makes several of her later roles fit better. 

So what do you hink?

Fair enough, but I believe that you still need to address one of the worst parts of her character: her backstory. Her motive for doing what she is doing. Then I'll do my thing.

[Latecomer 438]

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

You misunderstood. In FIM, Brony fans do not necessarily translate into consumers, especially when most products are targeted to little girls and their parents.

 

And the show also is, or at least should be, aimed at them first and bronies second. I feel it's "toubox" stile works well for both. And to claim that both cannot enjoy the same show is to deny vhe entire bronu phenomenon. We loved it without being targeted.

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

Fair enough, but I believe that you still need to address one of the worst parts of her character: her backstory. Her motive for doing what she is doing. Then I'll do my thing.

 

Did I not cover that bi calling for a more elaborated backstoru explaining how she came to hate cutie marks and embrace equalism, as well as more consisvenci in her motivaions in general?

 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

48 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

And the show also is, or at least should be, aimed at them first and bronies second. I feel it's "toubox" stile works well for both. And to claim that both cannot enjoy the same show is to deny vhe entire bronu phenomenon. We loved it without being targeted.

You can't then claim that our fandom has such influence. Little girls, despite popular belief, like tea parties and playing doctor with teddy bears. Anyhow, my argument here is not minimalism but efficiency. More on that at eleven

48 minutes ago, Latecomer said:

Did I not cover that bi calling for a more elaborated backstoru explaining how she came to hate cutie marks and embrace equalism, as well as more consisvenci in her motivaions in general?

You don't have to settle on something. Just give a few options or at least a general direction that such a backstory should take.

[Latecomer 438]

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

You can't then claim that our fandom has such influence. Little girls, despite popular belief, like tea parties and playing doctor with teddy bears. Anyhow, my argument here is not minimalism but efficiency. More on that at eleven

And FIM had a lot of that kind of stuff early on. But theu also enjoy adventures and magic lasers - which it had too.

And effiicencu doesen't just mean using as few chracters as possible - or if it does, then I can't agree.

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

You don't have to settle on something. Just give a few options or at least a general direction that such a backstory should take.

 

 

Well the Sunburst incident would still be in vhere - but there would be other examples of her seeing unfair things happening because of cutie marks - bullying and such as we've seen in Poniville, freidships being destroued and so on.

 

 

 

 

[Windy Breeze 15,175]

I think Starlight Glimmer as a reformed antagonist isn't a bad idea. She had helped Trixie and Thorax against Queen Chrysalis and even befriend Trixie and help Twilight and few characters a few times, I also like to find out Starlight likes kites.

[Evil Pink One 12,986]

The truth it starlight is the only villain they didnt beat.... She herself surrendered...she wasnt evil to begin with...and the power of guilt is the reason she wanted to reform...wo if she was pure evil....that would have been the end of mlp

[Goat-kun 2,498]

20 hours ago, Latecomer said:

And FIM had a lot of that kind of stuff early on. But theu also enjoy adventures and magic lasers - which it had too.

And effiicencu doesen't just mean using as few chracters as possible - or if it does, then I can't agree.

It means, among other things, that one makes right characters for the right job within a show without needlessly bloating one's ensemble.

20 hours ago, Latecomer said:

 

Well the Sunburst incident would still be in vhere - but there would be other examples of her seeing unfair things happening because of cutie marks - bullying and such as we've seen in Poniville, freidships being destroued and so on.

Okay, now can you make this less of a first world problem? Would an army vet sympathize with Starlight? Would a low income family that is barely making the ends meet sympathies with Starlight? Is she having it rough? Is she sick? Some chronic illness in the family? No? Oh, is some Garble Wannabe making your poor plotty-wotty feel less special? [Please read this in Handsome Jack voice]

[Latecomer 438]

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

It means, among other things, that one makes right characters for the right job within a show without needlessly bloating one's ensemble.

 

Okay, now can you make this less of a first world problem? Would an army vet sympathize with Starlight? Would a low income family that is barely making the ends meet sympathies with Starlight? Is she having it rough? Is she sick? Some chronic illness in the family? No? Oh, is some Garble Wannabe making your poor plotty-wotty feel less special? [Please read this in Handsome Jack voice]

 

"Needless" is a highly subjective idea - I can'v think of many FIM chracters which clearly fit it.

And the important simpatihes are of middle-class toy-buing kids, for whom bulluing and losing friends are issues of grave importance. Vets get Pharynx, poor familes probablu should have got something more than Apple money worries. But Starlight's issues need to be about cutie-mark based inequality.

 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

16 hours ago, Latecomer said:

"Needless" is a highly subjective idea - I can'v think of many FIM chracters which clearly fit it.

If it's all subjective, then having Starlight is equal to not having her, but since having her VA costs money, it means having Starlight is worse than not having her since not having her is just as good, but if having or not having Starlight is not equally good, then it cannot possibly be subjective. Come back when you pull your head out of the subjectivity orifice.

16 hours ago, Latecomer said:

And the important simpatihes are of middle-class toy-buing kids, for whom bulluing and losing friends are issues of grave importance. Vets get Pharynx, poor familes probablu should have got something more than Apple money worries. But Starlight's issues need to be about cutie-mark based inequality.

Then let's make it a little girl problem. Let's make Starlight into a prissy  yet personally powerless little earth pony that wants to force all other little pony girls at the tea party to drink the same brand of tea. Also, her daddy has a better carriage than all other daddies. I for one can totally go for this kind of MLP. So primal.