Posted in

#1876 by myopius
2019-12-10 at 03:43
@1872/skorpiondeath Nice link, that's an awesome chart.

@1874/rampaa: Very true, there's major differences between cultures. A small set of traits can't possibly resolve all the occasional contradictions, and I agree with the way you approached the traits by first thinking in terms of the Japanese system (because traits need to be intuitive with respect to their most common uses cases). When it comes to trait description, I didn't meant to sound too critical since we can always tweak these later.

In any case, I'm happy that you and others think my proposed solution/re-name could work. Basically all I wanted was to suggest we shift away from the idea of an "absolute grade" (counted from 1 onward for all years of mandatory education) because there are differences in the way years are grouped in the school systems of some of the most popular cultural settings on VNDB.

Any further differences between systems can be handled on a case-by-case basis, I think. The system used in Turkey and Hungary with 8 years of elementary school is an interesting case. A trait for Senior Elementary School Student could be considered. As for how the school year traits would work, hmm, if the description doesn't suffice for unusual cases, it'd certainly be possible to add Seventh and Eighth to the [x] Year Elementary School Student traits and maybe even make the pair subtraits of Middle School Student. @1875/warfoki The fact junior elementary and senior elementary take place in the same institutions isn't a problem, since many schools in Japan also have different sections (I think some are called elevator schools?) and VNDB doesn't distinguish them. Trait-wise, I'd also lean toward just calling the first 3 years of a 6-year high school "middle school".
#1877 by zakashi
2019-12-10 at 04:01
If we're going to be that strict then we were going to have to review A LOT of these "school" traits, there are several VNs with the magic school setting which none of the existing systems apply, but even then we add the "high school student" trait to them, just because they're usually a bunch 16 year olds with school uniforms.Last modified on 2019-12-10 at 04:16
#1878 by zakashi
2019-12-10 at 04:18
Hm, maybe i complicated it too much?
#1879 by savagetiger
2019-12-12 at 22:29
High Heels Shoes should be either 'high heeled shoes' or just 'high heel shoes'. Same for High Heels Boots.
And the sandal trait should just be a child trait of high heels rather than the specific shoe trait.
#1880 by skorpiondeath
2019-12-12 at 23:05
@savagetiger: done
#1881 by saeryen
2019-12-19 at 15:19
So I finally made “Dog Person” to compliment the much debated “Cat Person.”

I also think “Animal Lover” should be a child trait of “Nature Lover” rather than an alias, and parent to Dog/Cat Person, since there are many characters who are fond of animals but meh on plants.
#1882 by rampaa
2019-12-28 at 18:53
French Kiss has been denied. But we do have a tag for it already: French Kiss. I don't see one of them can be useful while the other one is not.

Sex with Protoganist Only has been rejected and called useless but allow me to disagree. It is quite useful when a character has quite risque traits but she has only ever sex with the protagonists. Let me give a concrete example. Look at Ramius Dreissen and tell me whether or not she has sex with others. The actual answer is no. But one cannot be sure of that because of the traits like Group Sex, Sex with Monsters and Sex with Tentacles (Consensual) (the monster is the protagonist). Think of it like Not Sexually Involved, we surely don't use this trait for every character possible but it IS useful to mark heroine-looking gals that don't have any sex scenes. Likewise, Sex with Protoganist Only does not need to be used for 90% of characters to be useful. It can be used to clarify muddy cases and that would be plenty useful on itself. So I beg for reconsideration for this trait.

Also, how do I go about pestering Yorhel about Male/Female? Any tips?Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 18:55
#1883 by yorhel
2019-12-28 at 18:55
Also, how do I go about pestering Yorhel about Male? Any tips?
It's already on my shortish-term todo list. It'll come anywhere within the next 10 years!
#1884 by beliar
2019-12-28 at 19:17
But we do have a tag for it already: French Kiss.
So, apparently we do. Colour me surprised... And the only question I have is: WHY!!??? Why do we need such a tag?!

Frankly, if I had a completely free reign on the DB and wouldn't care one bit about people opinions, I would scrub the tag too and would forget it even existed. Sadly I like reading about history, and I know how king Charles I ended up, hence some restraint on my part, peasants.

What you said regarding Sex with Protoganist Only made it even worse and less likely for me to ever consider it for reinstatement. Using a trait for some arbitrary cases, just because they might confuse some poor people and not using it in other cases where it's clear that a heroine only cares for the protagonists cock... Who would even decide when the trait should be used and when it shouldn't? Would you like to create a legislative body to take care of such problems?

Trait either applies wholesale or it doesn't - the aforementioned trait Not Sexually Involved should even apply in all all-ages novels too. That's how all inclusive it is. Hence if Sex with Protoganist Only is approved it should be applied to every boring moeblob, or the trait shouldn't exist at all.

Ultimately, if you do not agree with me, may his holiness Warfoki takes pity on your soul. Mayhap if you sacrifice your younger and totally virgin sister on his altar, he will decide to ignore me and revert my decisions regarding those two traits. One can always hope :-)
#1885 by rampaa
2019-12-28 at 19:20
I certainly do disagree with you. We do not need to limit its usage. That was not what I've implied at all. I just said it can be useful even if it's not used for 90% of the DB, which is a fact. There's no harm in its under-usage or over-usage as long as it can clarify some cases, which it certainly can. Just like Not Sexually Involved.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 19:21
#1886 by shining17
2019-12-28 at 19:26
Whoops, dropped something, tehehe.



#1887 by beliar
2019-12-28 at 19:40
@shining17: What are you asking here? In that thread Warfoki said he sees the tag (this is a trait thread though) as harmless and is not gonna delete it. Am I missing something?
#1888 by rampaa
2019-12-28 at 20:02
It's pestering time, yet again! ( :( )

@Yorhel: I have been told to pester you about Has Route(s) and Romanceable.

@Warfoki: Please have a look at #1882.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 20:02
#1889 by yorhel
2019-12-28 at 20:05
@Yorhel: I have been told to pester you about Has Route(s) and Romanceable.
Last time it was discussed all I saw was vague definitions that nobody agreed on...
#1890 by warfoki
2019-12-28 at 20:42
Okay, lemme see...


So Sex with Protoganist Only: We already have Sex with Others for this. If it's not there, then she either only has sex with the protagonist, or the taggers went by the exhentai gallery and didn't use that trait because your typical male faceless protagonist is next to impossible to distinguish from other blokes in H-scenes. And Sex with Protagonist Only is kinda the default, so this trait would be applicable to overwhelming majority of the characters.

With all of that being said, I have to admit that we aren't terribly consistent with the entire "too widely applicable" rule. We don't have a Japanese trait for that reason, but we have Pale, when that's equally the default and widely used. Hell, it's arguably even more applicable than Japanese, since there are a TON of VNs playing out in fantasy lands and whatnot where the characters have Japanese sounding names, but are not in fact Japanese. Most of these characters are still white though. For this reason I have been considering axing this entire "too applicable" standard for denying traits for quite a while now, since, well, it's just inconsistent as fuck in all honesty. With that out of the picture, your trait would be approvable, since its usage is not subjective and its definition is pretty damn crystal clear. I leave it denied for the moment, but I'll get back to these "denied because it would be too widely used" tags and traits in the forseeable future.

French Kiss: Beliar's overly dramatic reaction aside I can actually see a point of this. Here's why: a lot of eroges, especially moeges very quickly skip over kissing scenes and they especially don't go into french kissing territory. So VNs where characters are kissing are dime in a dozen, VNs with french kissing are surprisingly more rare. This was the reasoning why the french kiss tag got approved.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 20:45
#1891 by beliar
2019-12-28 at 20:45
@rampaa: Regarding "Fake Name", we already have a trait Secret Identity. It even has an alias "Secret Alias". Imho, I'll simply move "Fake Name" as another alias to that one and delete your proposition...

@ yorhel: And if we cannot even agree what is a heroine, how can we even approve traits that would be used to denote them...? And yes, all the heroine tags are currently used mostly incorrectly, as any female character with a considerable presence in the Vn is currently tagged as a heroine.

My proposal is to have a box(es) that can be ticked near where the current main/side denominators are hosted on the character page.

The first box can be named "Hero(ine)" with an explanation that the character has a dedicated route or a route branch that results in specific ending(s) with them. In case of harem Vns, all the characters that eventually end up in a harem should be considered hero(ines). For linear VNs, this applies to character(s) the protagonist ends up with in the end. My only problem is that the explanation might be too long, but making it too short wouldn't be idiot proof.

There could potentially be the second box that can only be ticked if the first box is ticked too. Name it something, like "Romanceable" with an explanation, that the hero(ine)'s relationship with the protagonist is of a romantic/sexual nature. That's because friendship routes are a thing, and a hero(ine) does not necessarily end up being romantic with the protagonist (though it's a very rare thing). I simply thought of it because of Ayumi Ryo.
#1892 by saeryen
2019-12-28 at 20:53
The "other route romance" traits weren't supposed to refer to infidelity. I created it with Koi Ninja ~Ai to Yokubou no Heian Ranbu~ in mind.

Yoshitsune x Shizuka is endgame unless you choose his route, than it's Yoshitsune x MC.

The idea was that if MC is romancing a particular hero(ine), then another hero(ine) who is NOT being romanced by MC romances a different character.
#1893 by warfoki
2019-12-28 at 20:55
My only problem is that the explanation might be too long, but making it too short wouldn't be idiot proof.

Trust me: idiots don't read descriptions, short or long. If I'd have to name one thing I've learned from tag modding here, it is exactly this.

Honestly, I'd scratch the Heroine checkbox idea.

Instead we could have 2 checkboxes or traits if Yorhel doesn't want to add more checkboxes:

- Has Own Route
- Part of Harem Route

A lot more clearer than trying to fix the messy VNDB definition of Heroine / Hero.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 21:05
#1894 by beliar
2019-12-28 at 20:59
@saeryen: That means I completely misunderstood those traits, which is a problem, as other people might also misunderstand your short description. It needs to be changed and clarified. I'm not sure how yet.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 21:00
#1895 by rampaa
2019-12-28 at 21:00
@Warfoki: Regarding Sex with Protoganist Only, I think people would not use Sex with Others when only Sex with Monsters applies (and protagonist is not the monster) most of the time. So I really think having Sex with Protoganist Only would greatly help to clarify some stuff. It, IMO, differs from traits like Pale where they are just there for the sake of it. This trait can actually be used for clarification and it can erase users' doubts about a character. It's quite similar to Not Sexually Involved in that regard.

@Beliar: What I had in my mind was something like Kuroyukihime. You don't necessarily need to lead a double life in secrecy to use a fake name all the time. But I guess if the description of Secret Identity can be relaxed a little bit, Fake Name would work as an alias just fine.Last modified on 2019-12-28 at 21:03
#1896 by warfoki
2019-12-28 at 21:08

Oh, so it's like 11eyes -Resona Forma- where Hirohara Yukiko and Tajima Takahisa become a couple if you don't go on her route, but when you do, the guy concedes and wishes you the best of luck and no cheating is involved.

Well, a trait for this could be useful, but not in the form you have proposed them. First of all, we do not make distinctions between heroines and heroes in traits. And the description was very easily misunderstandable to boot.

Rampaa: Hmm, you have a point there. Infidelity and Sex With Others are not really used in context of having sex with monsters, nor do I really want to start encouraging that, since the traits weren't really made for that. Fine, I'll go and restore it now.
#1897 by beliar
2019-12-28 at 21:32
@rampaa: You know what, on the other hand I don't want to relax the Secret Identity trait. i believe it should be all about the identity. Rather, I think I will transfer it's alias "Secret Alias" to Fake Name and approve it. After all, you don't have to be some sort of spy to have a fake name. Hell, a book writer can have a fake name.
#1898 by rampaa
2019-12-29 at 10:33
Group Sex should be made non-applicable.
#1899 by silence
2019-12-29 at 13:04
Is Sex with Protagonist Only only consider sex that we can see during the story or ever? Could you please make the description clear?
Because someone may think, that Kohaku had no sex with Akiha's father.

Also, I think this trait is stupid, as we have to mark most of non-nukige characters with it.
#1900 by beliar
2019-12-29 at 13:25
I also think the trait is stupid, but Warfoki must have seen some merit to it.... I'll let him to clarify the description. :-)Last modified on 2019-12-29 at 13:26