why do people act like mary sue would be the worst thing to happen to the show?

[FNGRpony 655]

You repeat youself. And your logic is flowed.

If you, let's say, armrestle with somebody, and to win you take steroids (or something, I don't really know that kind of stuff). And now you say, that because steroids helped you to win, they are stronger than humans. Steroids on themselves. That sounds absurd.

 

 

D&D has nothing to do with equestrian lore.

The canon is thar Royal Sisters are deity-like creatures - not just some "mix" - who live for millenia and maintain luminaries. They are not omnipotend, but it doesn't mean that they can be defeated by first best sucker just because he is a "pure" unicorn.

 

 

It is from the same company.

Under the logic "it had nothing to do with equistrain lore"

would i be able to sight star trek stuff based on Aunt Faust?

[Noodles 109]

 

 

t is from the same company.

that's not a good argument. sorry it just isn't.

[FNGRpony 655]

that's not a good argument. sorry it just isn't.

it's something the show might be able to draw from.

 

I'm not requesting it do so.  We have alot of mythical monsters floating around.

we have wizards.

unicorns and pegs are in the monster manual.

Why isn't it a good argument?

[Noodles 109]

same company two totally different products. just cause Hasbro makes it dose not mean they are connected in the way on Lore.

 

I will agree that saying its Not DND was not Relevant as it was simply a reference to how you believe they work.

[#1 Flutterfan 174]

The reason is quite simple.  Because people can theoretically be Batman if they have the right resources.  You really can't be Superman.  You can't be an alien from another planet with super strength and the ability to fly under your own power.  But you can build gadgets and go out in a black cowl and cape to fight crime.  So people relate more to Batman than they do to Superman.

 

 

 

 

Honestly my answer is going to be extremely controversial.  Read at your own risk.  

 

But anyone that's been a DM of a table-top RPG knows this is the truth.  If you don't like it when players God-mod in your RPs, then it probably means you aren't a very good GM/DM, especially if they're doing it and getting away with it.  One of the things good DMs know is that there's always something you can do about God-modders, you can always teach them a lesson without having to make rules against it ahead of time or disallow things.

 

Someone wants to be Superman?  Give every bad guy kryptonite (it's what the comics seem to do anyway).  Someone wants to be immortal?  Throw them into a maze that takes a million years to get out of.  See how able-bodied they are once they do (or if the world is even still there).  You really think Discord, the God of Chaos, can't maze a character (hint: watch Return of Harmony again, because he did this)? 

 

There was someone in one of my D&D settings who was God-modding, and had actually used nearly every single loophole in the rulebooks to get whatever they wanted and eventually became way more powerful than the status quo of that adventure.  I made no rule against this, but the person was becoming extremely cocky and arrogant.  So it got to the point where I had to do something about it.

 

So what I did is when the character was level 17, I sent the party on a campaign where they passed through a dimension door to Krynn (the Dragonlance setting).  Everyone else was around level 13.  Anyway, what ended up happening is the player's character gained two levels (due to some more loopholes he exploited).  So now he was level 19 (and people that have played the Dragonlance setting are seeing the problem building).

 

See in 2nd Edition, when a character got above level 18 in Dragonlance, the Gods of the world literally kicked the character out of the world, because of things that happened in the past between a certain wizard and one of them.  Anyway, he got thrown out of the world (and I rolled this completely legitimately).  And he ended up in Planescape, right in Sigil, in front of the Lady of Pain.  And, the rest is probably too violent to describe on a MLP site.  But suffice it to say, he was humbled quite a bit and I know he learned his lesson from that.

 

The point is, there are always ways to deal with God-modding in campaigns without having to state rules forbidding it.

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I don't see a problem with a character being an Alicorn.  The reason is, Alicorns should be the average of two pony races, not the best.  For instance, Celestia is an Alicorn, but she can't cause a Sonic Rainboom.  And she sure couldn't stop the Ursa Minor, even when it was destroying Ponyville and possibly killing her subjects.  In fact, Chrysalis, a Changeling, managed to defeat her.  And how did she do it?  With the powers of a Unicorn she had under her spell.  This is indirect evidence that Unicorn magic is ultimately stronger than Alicorn magic.

Not "God-mod" as in D&D "God-mod" as in, you roleplay in a forum, and you're fighting and the other person does this:

 

"I run at you and punch you hard in the stomach--you go down and cough blood, as you cough blood you look up and see my fist fly at your face, and it hits you, slamming you against the tree three blocks down. As the splinters hit your back you scream in pain and I run at you fast and knee you in the stomach" as a result, for D&D it's fine--the difference is, on a forum you are taking control in a realm where you have absolutely no power to do so. IE: Each hit is a chance. You surpass that chance and you are a god-modder. IE: You are making your character 'god-like'. But--I'm used to other rules, I suppose--and not D&D rules. I don't like another character controlling mine just as I would never control another person's. 

 

Anyone can be "Superman" in the sense that Superman's always stronger and better than everyone else. but he has to hold himself back to not hurt or kill anyone. He's constantly holding back his true strength (from what I remember, except against Doomsday) as a result of his morality. So--people can't physically be Superman, but people can't physically be Batman either (he's done a lot of unrealistic things).

 

--

 

 

So your suggesting Q wasn't a mary sue just because he wasn't main?

 

Now that is bull shit.

you.. you are suggesting being entertaining disqualifies you from being mary sue and it doesn't.

 

That's just you re writing the rules so you don't have to have the title attached to something you like.

--------------

He's not inherently a Mary Sue because villains are hard to critique as Mary-Sues. How can you tell that he's a Mary Sue? Was he born perfect, or the fact that he's a genetic mutation mixed of all sorts of things, worse than a Chimera, that he has attained perfection and therefore as a result is NOT a Mary-Sue. 

 

Or. Is he a Mary-Sue because Faust created him and he had no backplot therefore he is a Mary-Sue because he is perfect as perfect can be because there is nothing supporting him having the strength?

 

The reason I say, generally, that Mary-Sues can't be villains myself. Isn't because I mean JUST that they can't be villains. But it's because they are villains that it's hard to diagnose them as such. Sephiroth. Total Mary Sue. The boss at the end of Resident Evil 5? Not so much. 

 

Johan Liebert from Naoki Urasawa's Monster? Now--that's hard to say, because there is so much leading up to him BEING less than a Mary sue because of his intelligence--but he is able to outsmart everyone.

 

 

IF you slapped frank castle(the punisher) in bruce waynes shoe for one week gotham would be clean. Sqeekie clean. I mean after you got out all the blood stains.

 

And celestial isn't a mary sue LOL the one time we saw her in a fight she got bitch slapped the hell down, by a race that's suppose to be the rogue class in a straight up head to head fight.

Last i checked i'm assuming that celestail and Luna both got sat the buck down by discord,

and beat him because they had the elements of harmoney.

 

 

1. It's true--if you did that, they would be clean. But there's a reason why Batman doesn't kill and it's not because he's afraid of the villain.

2. PIS-- Plot Induced Stupidity. This is everywhere, it's what makes Goku weaker than he should be (he can't lift a bus, but he can punch through a mountain? "Lifting strength isn't equal to punching strength." Sure--but he should be able to at least lift a bus at super saiyan strength.

3. So your assumption is that since Celestia and Luna aren't Mary Sues--Discord is? I don't think I understand your reference. I say Celestia's more of a Mary Sue--just insofar as we don't see her do shit at all, so, she's gotta be something haha.

[Nomadic 210]

   Now to be fair, Mary Sue characters are a new addition to literature, great writers like William Shakespeare, Alexandre Dumas or Charles Dickens wrote there characters to be as three dimensional and flawed as possible, to connect with the reader, and it works just as well when adapted into the theatre and cinema, and that's why we remember these authors and the books. Perfect one dimensional characters that speak with pure eloquence or does everything with perfect timing will and does loose the audience, even the mistakes the Mary Sue character commits and not have repercussions as a result is equally insalubrious, the audience is smart and will not be as easily fooled by the sanitized jovial puppet, that's why the ponies are memorable for their differences and foible traits each one has, we can see ourselves in each ponies position, that includes the characters from past literature, thus MLP can and will possibly be remembered like the legendary stories of long past.     

 

Define new addition to literature. Whilst I agree the term "Mary Sue" is a relative new term, springing from the Star Trek fandom if I'm not mistaken. It is really not all that new of a concept. For example, take a look at some of the Gothic novels, and I would begin to debate that there are some clear Mary Sue's in them. The fact is that history tends to filter away most of the poorer quality works, and much of what we see now are the stories that have stood against time's ebb. Furthermore, I would submit that Mary Sue's are actually just more easily identifiable within fan-fictions due to the nature of the craft. When working with already pre-existing and beloved Worlds it is rather easy to find oneself falling into common writing traps.

 

Back to the topic, I would like to believe that are many well-defined follies within each of the mane Ponies that they're not Mary-Sue material, yet if they keep pushing the Characters traits they could soon inadvertently fall into this pit of mediocrity.

[They call me Loyalty 1,941]

Because with a mary sue character, would be little and even less to develop about that character, in a show that pretends to show how to grow up as a better person. And with each character showing off a different kind of personality, which one could learn from. One character marysued would mean less lessons to be learned. Less stories to be told. Pesonal growth takes place, mainly, because of a inner conflict happening within a person, as a result of any kind of interaction.

Marysued characters are basically lacking of inner conflicts, because they tend to represent some weird, kind of fake state of perfection, which I think it feels rather wrong, since even though having met some of the most advanced forms of life, through astral travel, I can assure they don't act anyway closer to one of those mary sue characters.

Discord is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a mary sue character. The word "discord" by istelf, means inner conflict. Do you really think that a character that basically needs to throw chaos at other to feel himself alive, is somehow near perfection? Humans look for company, because they're usually lacking something. That "interaction" they need is because something is missing within themselves.

A "perfect" being is mostly a solitary one, which tends to rely on thoughtful observation, and wouldn't ever try to interact to avoid a conflict. Not even wars, because they know that personal growth is achieved by overcoming conflicts. Without conflict, wouldn't be any other way to achieve it. Same way, without death in between, wouldn't be any other way to achieve true life.


I do apologize for my english, since it isn't my first language.

[SBaby 660]

Not "God-mod" as in D&D "God-mod" as in, you roleplay in a forum, and you're fighting and the other person does this:

 

You're missing the point of what I said there.  What I'm saying is that a good DM or GM should know how to deal with God-modding, no matter what medium it happens in.  Otherwise, clever people can find a way to bend the rules and take advantage of the person running the adventure.  This happens all the time.

Edited December 5, 2013 by SBaby

[#1 Flutterfan 174]

You're missing the point of what I said there.  What I'm saying is that a good DM or GM should know how to deal with God-modding, no matter what medium it happens in.  Otherwise, clever people can find a way to bend the rules and take advantage of the person running the adventure.  This happens all the time.

Ah--okay, I misunderstood what you said haha. 

[Koelath 444]

Discord isn't a Mary Sue at all. Try again.

[FNGRpony 655]

Not "God-mod" as in D&D "God-mod" as in, you roleplay in a forum, and you're fighting and the other person does this:

 

"I run at you and punch you hard in the stomach--you go down and cough blood, as you cough blood you look up and see my fist fly at your face, and it hits you, slamming you against the tree three blocks down. As the splinters hit your back you scream in pain and I run at you fast and knee you in the stomach" as a result, for D&D it's fine--the difference is, on a forum you are taking control in a realm where you have absolutely no power to do so. IE: Each hit is a chance. You surpass that chance and you are a god-modder. IE: You are making your character 'god-like'. But--I'm used to other rules, I suppose--and not D&D rules. I don't like another character controlling mine just as I would never control another person's. 

 

Anyone can be "Superman" in the sense that Superman's always stronger and better than everyone else. but he has to hold himself back to not hurt or kill anyone. He's constantly holding back his true strength (from what I remember, except against Doomsday) as a result of his morality. So--people can't physically be Superman, but people can't physically be Batman either (he's done a lot of unrealistic things).

 

--

 

 

He's not inherently a Mary Sue because villains are hard to critique as Mary-Sues. How can you tell that he's a Mary Sue? Was he born perfect, or the fact that he's a genetic mutation mixed of all sorts of things, worse than a Chimera, that he has attained perfection and therefore as a result is NOT a Mary-Sue. 

 

Or. Is he a Mary-Sue because Faust created him and he had no backplot therefore he is a Mary-Sue because he is perfect as perfect can be because there is nothing supporting him having the strength?

 

The reason I say, generally, that Mary-Sues can't be villains myself. Isn't because I mean JUST that they can't be villains. But it's because they are villains that it's hard to diagnose them as such. Sephiroth. Total Mary Sue. The boss at the end of Resident Evil 5? Not so much. 

 

Johan Liebert from Naoki Urasawa's Monster? Now--that's hard to say, because there is so much leading up to him BEING less than a Mary sue because of his intelligence--but he is able to outsmart everyone.

 

 

1. It's true--if you did that, they would be clean. But there's a reason why Batman doesn't kill and it's not because he's afraid of the villain.

2. PIS-- Plot Induced Stupidity. This is everywhere, it's what makes Goku weaker than he should be (he can't lift a bus, but he can punch through a mountain? "Lifting strength isn't equal to punching strength." Sure--but he should be able to at least lift a bus at super saiyan strength.

3. So your assumption is that since Celestia and Luna aren't Mary Sues--Discord is? I don't think I understand your reference. I say Celestia's more of a Mary Sue--just insofar as we don't see her do shit at all, so, she's gotta be something haha.

 

I consider mary sue a matter of power.  Celestial is a matter of speech and presence.

That's what she does.  She's a social animal.

 

IF your telling me that's bs,

 

if i wrote a story about a man who rose up to lead his people based on just speach and presense if you said b.s. I guess our little disgrunteled german art student  from 1940 is a unbelievable character if someone wrote him.  (I make that joke all the time, if someone wrote this as a story before it happened,

people would call it crap, and something that could never happen). 

 

You have a frail, weak figure head completely incapable of doing anything in his own right,

surronding himself by people who can do things for him.

 

Celestail isn't mary sue, she's par for the course.  that's how dictator's role son.

 

 

http://obeygiant.com/images/2011/05/OBEYCELESTIA-500x662.png

Edited December 5, 2013 by FNGRpony

[#1 Flutterfan 174]

I consider mary sue a matter of power.  Celestial is a matter of speech and presence.

That's what she does.  She's a social animal.

 

IF your telling me that's bs,

 

if i wrote a story about a man who rose up to lead his people based on just speach and presense if you said b.s. I guess our little disgrunteled german art student  from 1940 is a unbelievable character if someone wrote him.  (I make that joke all the time, if someone wrote this as a story before it happened,

people would call it crap, and something that could never happen). 

 

You have a frail, weak figure head completely incapable of doing anything in his own right,

surronding himself by people who can do things for him.

 

Celestail isn't mary sue, she's par for the course.  that's how dictator's role son.

 

 

http://obeygiant.com/images/2011/05/OBEYCELESTIA-500x662.png

Let's consider this, then. As a mary-sue, you consider it something of power. What is power?

 

You assume raw strength is power that determines a mary sue--let's discuss this then. Speech  and presence. Johan Liebert from Monster is the best comparison for this--and that is who I shall use. There is a point when the man gets a gun pointed at his head. Multiple times. As a result, you would think the one holding the gun would fire if they dislike the guy so much, right? Well--actually. No. That's not what happens. Why? Speech and presence. 

 

You having the power to choose life and death with the gun in your hand puts you at a disadvantage over a person who is able to present their manner in a calm way. To which, let's say you have Superman in one corner. Has all the power in the world. And you have Celeste; let's say. Celeste can talk her way out of any situation, she's got a silver tongue. Through the years she's built morale up for her friends and she's gathered over a country's worth of people to like her. Superman, let's say has the urge to wipe the country out. He goes to--but she coerces him into NOT doing so. 

 

Who has the power?

[FNGRpony 655]

Let's consider this, then. As a mary-sue, you consider it something of power. What is power?

 

You assume raw strength is power that determines a mary sue--let's discuss this then. Speech  and presence. Johan Liebert from Monster is the best comparison for this--and that is who I shall use. There is a point when the man gets a gun pointed at his head. Multiple times. As a result, you would think the one holding the gun would fire if they dislike the guy so much, right? Well--actually. No. That's not what happens. Why? Speech and presence. 

 

You having the power to choose life and death with the gun in your hand puts you at a disadvantage over a person who is able to present their manner in a calm way. To which, let's say you have Superman in one corner. Has all the power in the world. And you have Celeste; let's say. Celeste can talk her way out of any situation, she's got a silver tongue. Through the years she's built morale up for her friends and she's gathered over a country's worth of people to like her. Superman, let's say has the urge to wipe the country out. He goes to--but she coerces him into NOT doing so. 

 

Who has the power?

 

 

that takes alot finese,

and alot work.  alot of effort goes into said skills.

 

People who have speach and presence make it look effortlessly, i assure you it's not.

Objectively you really can't dismiss a exceedingly silver tungued indivudual unless you completely have no concept of history.

Look at Loki from thor.  It's not hard to suspend disbleief that the cowering, sniveling,  up start knows how to spin a yarn.

 

Why?  Cause maybe we all know someone like that.  There's nothing mary sue about it.

That's reality.

 

and if that's not your reality,

you must be easy pickings.

 

you wouldn't hate them for being unrealistic,

you'd hate them for being to realistic.  to close to home.

 

My correction to you is this,

 

under your example of a mary sue you'd consider george w bush a mary sue.

And while you might have a point about him 

not deserving to be where he is,,

 

he's entirely beleivable because he happened.

 

Check and consequently check mate.

Edited December 5, 2013 by FNGRpony

[#1 Flutterfan 174]

that takes alot finese,

and alot work.  alot of effort goes into said skills.

 

People who have speach and presence make it look effortlessly, i assure you it's not.

Objectively you really can't dismiss a exceedingly silver tungued indivudual unless you completely have no concept of history.

Look at Loki from thor.  It's not hard to suspend disbleief that the cowering, sniveling,  up start knows how to spin a yarn.

 

Why?  Cause maybe we all know someone like that.  There's nothing mary sue about it.

That's reality.

 

and if that's not your reality,

you must be easy pickings.

 

you wouldn't hate them for being unrealistic,

you'd hate them for being to realistic.  to close to home.

You side-stepped the question? You said that Mary-sue is about power. 

 

I mention this--and ask you which is the "real power." 

 

You said it's not mary-sue because...? 

[FNGRpony 655]

You side-stepped the question? You said that Mary-sue is about power. 

 

I mention this--and ask you which is the "real power." 

 

You said it's not mary-sue because...? 

 

 

the power of finese and presense is beleiivable.

As i stated you can find it in history, or hell even recent events.

[#1 Flutterfan 174]

the power of finese and presense is beleiivable.

As i stated you can find it in history, or hell even recent events.

Oh--and as a result, a mary sue must be unbelievable? 

 

Okay--just checking. So there cannot be a believable mary-sue, otherwise, it wouldn't make them a mary-sue?

[FNGRpony 655]

Oh--and as a result, a mary sue must be unbelievable? 

 

Okay--just checking. So there cannot be a believable mary-sue, otherwise, it wouldn't make them a mary-sue?

I think your looking deliberatly for wiggle room to make the term less and less defined and humanly possible.

which yes we are lacking a

universal definition.  

So yeah unbeleivable would be a a theme for mary sue. People talk about mary sue being a uninteresting character, because they succeed un challenged, leaving their audience uninterested.

 

people took that statment and said

screw tommy olivers deinfition!  this is what i think it means.

 

Going by your definition the movie W has a mary sue.  

only it's not un interesting because it's based on something that is true.

 

If someone wrote up george W bush he'd be a terrible character.  the fact he's real makes that story interesting (even if you wanna call that movie mostly head canon).

 

I've been pointing out that their are liked mary sue's, and people get ultra offended at that idea,

 

"No he or she has to suck"

sucking is purely subjective.

Edited December 5, 2013 by FNGRpony

[Noodles 109]

using Oliver's definition even a Likeable Mary Sue would not be good in the long haul. because it would make the story boring. No real threat to the character. Always saying the right thing at the right time would get old fast. No tension after a while gets boring. even in shows that are mostly talking you need a bit of conflict to work threw or its boring.

[Clover Heart 978]

Isn't Twilight already sort of a Mary Sue? I've heard people make this claim, anyway. I think she's flawed enough to make her not Mary Sue (episode: Lesson Zero) but I can see where people would think that.

 

Mary Sues aren't always a bad thing. Look at Harry Potter. Total Gary Stu. But people love the stories and the character. If you're a good enough writer, you can pull off a Mary Sue, even making very likable Mary Sue characters. The reason this is advised against, however, is that most people can't make it work. Either they don't have the skill or they're too emotionally invested in their character to let anything bad happen to him/her.

 

So I agree. Putting in a Mary Sue may not be the worst thing they could do to the show. It's really all about how they go about it, were they to do so. It could go either way, really, and I'd have to see the final product before I wrote it off as "bad' or "ruining the show."

Edited December 13, 2013 by Clover Heart