(02-22-2017, 10:25 AM)Gegenji Wrote: I think it's more a matter of terminology here. Whether you're following a "stereotype" or an "archetype." I think the terms are both kind of being used interchangeably in this situation, but stereotype has a negative connotation affixed to it due to common modern usage of the word. So I'll stick to using the term archetype instead.
...And then a bunch of other good stuff was said.
Building on this, I'm fond of the saying that "you need to know the rules before you can break them." Nothing, art least of all, is created in a vacuum, and even if you try to actively break from archetypes, you'll still inevitably end up playing into one to some degree. I find starting with an archetype as a rough skeleton is a perfectly acceptable, if not desirable, course. As you put some meat on the bones, you find inspiration and follow ideas to their logical conclusions, and the archetype gets tweaked, added to, and taken away from until eventually it isn't really recognizable. Then, bam, you get a character in the vein of what Gegenji's talking about.
![[Image: GBUL5nO.jpg]](https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/GBUL5nO.jpg)
