Generally when making a new character, how much can i base him off of an existing character before it stops being a shout-out and goes into plagiarism territory ?
A pie that used to be a pie but is no long a pie. An "ex-pie". Haha. xDWhat's an 'expie'?
Do you want the character to be recognizable? I think you need to give us more info, here.Generally when making a new character, how much can i base him off of an existing character before it stops being a shout-out and goes into plagiarism territory ?
Generally when making a new character, how much can i base him off of an existing character before it stops being a shout-out and goes into plagiarism territory ?
I thought the same thing. I don't think it's plagiarism, exactly.Slightly off-topic, but I don't think "plagiarism" is the right word for this. Plagiarism is when you try to represent someone else's words as your own. That's different than including their character.
An obvious example is how Gregory House is Sherlock Holmes and Wilson is Watson.
This is one of those things where if it's done well, it's fine. If it's not, then it's not.
According to the Tropes page, I believe it's a character from another series (by the same writer) who is parachuted into the new series. An example would be Lobsang in The Long Earth, by Terry Pratchett and Stephen Baxter, who is obviously an alternate-universe version of the Lobsang character who appears in Terry Pratchett's Diskworld series.I read the TV tropes pages, but I'm still scratching my head.
You mean like an archetypical or trope-y character? Or a derivative or satire type of character? Or a character that has some tropes in a story that lampshades or subverts some of the well-know tropes of the character (or the character's story)?
However, the way the OP is using the term, I wonder if they mean a character from someone else's books who has had their serial numbers filed off. For example, I remember reading about an author who gave Peter Davidson's iteration of Dr Who a cameo in one of her books. He wasn't named, but he was described accurately, and he behaved in a very Doctor-esque fashion while he was on the page. Someone familiar with the character would probably get a chuckle out of it, but the author didn't carry over so much that she couldn't have claimed coincidental similarity if anyone's lawyers came knocking.
And I'm wondering if the OP is asking where that line is. Where does it stop being an homage and start being a rip-off of another person's intellectual property?
An obvious example is how Gregory House is Sherlock Holmes and Wilson is Watson.
This is one of those things where if it's done well, it's fine. If it's not, then it's not.
Ha well I never realized that until now....
To me, House will always be Bertie Wooster* with a major, and I mean major, personality and intellect transplant