Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi guys.

I hear the term 'plot armour' chucked around a lot lately, like a curse. Can anyone explain to me exactly what plot armour is. I honestly don't get it. I've read a fair few posts where it seems like children arguing the fact that my faction would smash your faction if it wasn't for plot armour. Most of those seem to be by some inquisition/ SoB avatars but it has come up in other discussions and I'm just curious.

Is plot armour perceived as a failing in world building of 40K or is it just people arguing against the lore they don't like. I know the fluff is contradictory some times but some of the things people cry plot armour at just doesn't seem to make sense. Also does anyone else find the idea of people complaining about plot armour in a fictional game which is either written in a sci-fi book, table top played or role-played a little odd given the setting and fan base.

This is not meant as a flame to people who use the term plot armour, I'm just curious is all?

Plot armor is where something is protected from something else by the writers.

So for example, in 40K the Nids should/could have devoured the whole galaxy by now. However 'plot armor' stops that from happening, even though reasonable logic says otherwise. Thats my understanding of it anyway!

Plot Armor is Plot Armor. To better illustrate plot armor, here are some examples.

1. Chippy the grot is the luckiest grot alive, painting himself blue, he is the only thing in existance to ever survive an exterminatus. And he has been through 16 difference exterminatuses.
2. Steve the space marine is incredibly unlucky, having never hit a target in his life, and never will. To prove his point, he fired a bolter into a bulkhead, point blank, the muzzle touching the cold ceramite, and still missed.

Plot armor is the driving force behind a story. If you want a group to always tell a story of harrowing peril, but always come out on top, that is plot armor. Some of it is acceptable, being within the realm of chance, but even statistically, eventually things must turn for the worse, but doesn't. That is usually what people mean when they gripe about plot armor.

Statistically, 1 marine should not;

1. Have near infinite ammo and invulnerable armor
2. Be able to wipe out whole regiments of Chaos Space Marines on his own.
3. Simultaneously be able to fight a Daemon Prince in hand to hand combat AND fill out his tax forms for the administratum, in 4 minutes 12 seconds.

Plot armour is basically when a character survives things they really should not survive just so that the plot can go on. Or he isn't attacked when he should have been, etc.

A Space Marine killing a large amount of Orks at once is not plot armour in itself. They are very much capable of such a feat.

A Space Marine killing a large amount of Daemon Princes might very well be.

Plot Armour is where, by all logic and situational factors, a character should have died but because they are important to the plot later on, they survive not only against the odds, but against any reasonable stretch of possibility.

For example, Kal Jerico and Scabs are caught in an open plaza when Redemptionists (say, ten, fifteen of them) show up with a grudge. Somehow, despite the fact that neither Kal nor Scabs wear armour, and the Redemptionists are armed with a full array of autoguns and flamers, none of their shots hit and both our questionable heroes escape by running sideways.

By all rights, one of them should have been hit, if not killed, by the Redemptionist shooting filling the entire space with fire and bullets. However, because they're the main characters, they miraculously survive - they have plot armour.

More information here.

The reason it's a problem in 40k is that there are people rooting for every side in any given conflict - so either plot armour has to protect everyone, or one side has to be reduced to faceless mooks.

Another example would be in the Ultramarines movie - The full garrison of Imperial Fists are swept away in seconds by the Black Legion, or whatever they're meant to be, while a squad of ten Ultramarines hold off the entire army.

Plot armour is when a writer bends reality slightly to allow a main character to survive, for example:

Brother Cryptos is a main character in a book. His squad is attacked by Necrons and their rhino is destroyed. However due to a malfunction in their coding Cryptos and his battle brothers survive.

Cryptos was protected by Plot armour

Plot armour extends to all facets of fiction, movies, books, games etc. But is more noticeable in an established setting where many books are set, due to recurring situations.

An example of a movie would be John Mclane in Die hard. He's just a normal guy in tank top with no shoes and yet he takes down several hardened terrorists by himself. In real life one man would struggle to do this, but "plot armour" protects him, because as the protagonist, he needs to survive.

In established fiction, it's easier to draw parallels with similar situations that have different results depending on which side the protagonists sit on. Galaxy in Flames is a good example as it pits marines from the same legion against each other. Despite being similarly matched in skill, armour and weapons, Loken is able to gun down tens of traitorous marines at a time. He fights Kharn who woefully out matches him but DA DAT DA DA!! A Landraider appears out of nowhere and impales Kharn. A one in a million occurence that saves the Protagonist from an enemy that should have kicked his ass.

Plot armour is necessary but becomes a problem when coupled with bad writing. The above example served for a climatic fight between two primary characters without having to kill either of them off. However then look at Battle for the Abyss where we have a handful of Loyalists board the biggest ship in existence, and over come several companies of Word Bearers, who are defeated due to supreme acts of idiocy.

It's like in a James Bond movie where the Villian could just shoot bond in the face but instead divulges his master plan then leaves him in an unguarded room, strapped to a table with a laser slowly movie towards him.

When we read an Ultramarines novel, the main character can't die because he is protected by plot armour. In a novel from the perspective of the Word Bearers, the Ultramarines will be cut down in droves because their plot armour has been removed.

In 40k outside of the Horus Heresy (which is marines on both sides) a common problem is that the Imperium is almost always the Protagonists because it's impossible to write a compelling story from the perspective of the Tyranids. So time and time again Marines and Guardsmen go up against "impossible" odds and then somehow emerge victorious.

A good example of anti-plot armour is Game of Thrones, where seemingly any character can be brutally killed off at a moments notice, and character perspectives change constantly so no single person is the "main" hero or villain.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Ultramarines movie

The movie is lolworthy and should not be mentioned.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor

BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Ultramarines movie

The movie is lolworthy and should not be mentioned.

Not even as an example of 'bad' things?

TiamatRoar wrote:http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor

I already linked that :p

Plot Armor, is where a character or organization is protected from undue harm by the writers due to their perception that the character or organization is pivotal to the ongoing plot but necessary to come out over unsurmountable odds to drive an effective story.

The problem with 40k is that the writers are terrible at knowing when the boundry of Plot Armor turns silly and makes the overall story no longer enjoyable to some.

 Imperious wrote:
Hi guys.

I hear the term 'plot armour' chucked around a lot lately, like a curse. Can anyone explain to me exactly what plot armour is. I honestly don't get it. I've read a fair few posts where it seems like children arguing the fact that my faction would smash your faction if it wasn't for plot armour. Most of those seem to be by some inquisition/ SoB avatars but it has come up in other discussions and I'm just curious.

Is plot armour perceived as a failing in world building of 40K or is it just people arguing against the lore they don't like. I know the fluff is contradictory some times but some of the things people cry plot armour at just doesn't seem to make sense. Also does anyone else find the idea of people complaining about plot armour in a fictional game which is either written in a sci-fi book, table top played or role-played a little odd given the setting and fan base.

This is not meant as a flame to people who use the term plot armour, I'm just curious is all?

Plot armor is, as others put it, a term for when someone or something survives or wins when it otherwise shouldn't. Are you familiar at all with Terry Pratchet? He has a great running gag about million to one odds, and that only when the odds of success reach that high will you actually succeed ( there is a scene where some characters are trying to make a bow shot, and keep making it harder to achieve million to one odds so that they know they will succeed).

Think of say, comic books, where the Joker is in a building that blows up, with him in it. Yet somehow he's back in a few months because he had a secret bomb proof room/falling girder happened to protect him/it was his clone/other. The writer wants him to be around to torment Batman, so he has something occur which goes beyond normal suspension of disbelief to allow his survival/success.

In truth, fiction gets terribly bland without some plot armor. Also, the term tends to be thrown around, as you note, far to much.

 Maniac_nmt wrote:
In truth, fiction gets terribly bland without some plot armor. Also, the term tends to be thrown around, as you note, far to much.

What about those counter-examples ? Which, obviously, include Games of Throne/A Song of Ice and Fire, which is pretty popular.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Maniac_nmt wrote:
In truth, fiction gets terribly bland without some plot armor. Also, the term tends to be thrown around, as you note, far to much.

What about those counter-examples ? Which, obviously, include Games of Throne/A Song of Ice and Fire, which is pretty popular.

except the thing is, even in game of thrones plenty of characters survive instances they should indeed die in. ((and really the number of protagionist deaths is exaggerated. despite being the posterboy for protagionist deaths, Rob Stark was never a point of view character in ASOIAF)

 Imperious wrote:
Most of those seem to be by some inquisition/ SoB avatars but it has come up in other discussions and I'm just curious.

In terms of these two factions, the fanbase is small but passionate even if it seems otherwise on internet forums but then that's true for many more things that 40K. Sometimes people can get a little bit hot under the collar when these factions, who on the one hand are an elite group of warriors and on the other individuals of great power and ability who just also happen to have the absolute authority to do whatever the hell they want, are used to show some other factions to be super awesome. Quite often then we see the Sisters being slaughtered wholesale and Inquisitors as mustache twirling idiots. I suppose you could think of them as the Imperial version of the Avatar of Khaine which, despite being the physical manifestation of the Eldar God of War seems to be every other author's favourite thing for their character to kill just to show how fantasticly uber their character is.

Of course plot armour is responsible here, or as we may also call it, crap writing. The problem comes when a justifiable gripe about plot armour boils over into outright antipathy to other popular factions because the more niche factions have become authors' favourite whipping boys (or girls). A good example of this would be fans of the Sisters of Battle trying to prove that Sisters of Battle can outfight not only a Marine but a Primarch any day of the week. Unfortunately that just swaps the plot armour around and is equally risible. It is easy to understand why this might happen though and if people want to blow of steam in this way then it hurts no-one. Unfortunately it doesn't improve the quality of some of the background material though.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Maniac_nmt wrote:
In truth, fiction gets terribly bland without some plot armor. Also, the term tends to be thrown around, as you note, far to much.

What about those counter-examples ? Which, obviously, include Games of Throne/A Song of Ice and Fire, which is pretty popular.

except the thing is, even in game of thrones plenty of characters survive instances they should indeed die in. ((and really the number of protagionist deaths is exaggerated. despite being the posterboy for protagionist deaths, Rob Stark was never a point of view character in ASOIAF)

Read full metal alchemist (or watch FMA:brotherhood). Everybody can die. It's actually quite entertaining.

Plot armour basically is the fact that characters do not get hurt in fiction unless the plot demands it. Fictional characters often find themselves in dangerous circumstances, but as long as the plot needs them, they will always survive. This is called plot armour.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor
Plot armour is what makes fiction possible, so be grateful for it. Of course, plot armour can also be taken too far.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Plot armour basically is the fact that characters do not get hurt in fiction unless the plot demands it. Fictional characters often find themselves in dangerous circumstances, but as long as the plot needs them, they will always survive. This is called plot armour.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor
Plot armour is what makes fiction possible, so be grateful for it. Of course, plot armour can also be taken too far.

When plot armour is taken too far you get http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LikeYouWouldReallyDoIt, where suspension of disbelief fails in that the audience doesn't believe the heroes are credibly threatened by any of the challenges they face. Plot armour is the degree to which characters' survivability is exaggerated, mind, a Space Marine who walks through a hail of autogun fire from a traitor PDF with nothing more than paint scratches isn't necessarily plot-armoured, but the Guardsman who comes under fire from a dozen Fire Warriors and isn't hit definitely has some.

Specifically in 40K, "plot armor" is when a given character or group survives because it requires another character or group to ignore previously-established capabilities and functions in order for the first group to survive.

For example, it has long been established that Magnus is amongst the most powerful psykers/sorcerers to have ever lived, perhaps second only to the Emperor Himself... and yet he conveniently forgets these things when he attacks the Fang. He could have stepped out of a Warp Gate and imploded Fenris from Ultramar with his mind... but, oops, he forgot he can do these things.... and he keeps forgetting that he's a Space Marine Primarch throughout Battle of the Fang.

This is the Plot Armor that permits the Space Wolves to survive that assault, because of course the Space Wolves can't be killed off.

If you wanted to have a good battle at the Fang, sure, no problems... just don't have the Daemon Primarch show up and then fail to do anything particular cool, and also be bumbling around like he has Alzheimer's. The Battle of the Fang could have been incredible Space Wolf vs Thousand Sons combat action with the Space Wolves proving themselves the better warriors without having Magnus present at all. Then, at least, this crazy deus ex machina would not be required that prevents the Fang from falling. Seriously. Magus could have melted the mountain by thinking about it.

I know it sounds like I hate the Space Wolves, but I don't, really. I'm actually really fond of them in concept... I just don't like the fact that a lot of their victories in the fluff written about them are basically handed to them because of stupid writing tricks like the above. If you want the Wolves to be badass, then let them be badass, don't send them to fight geriatric Alzheimer's patients.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Maniac_nmt wrote:
In truth, fiction gets terribly bland without some plot armor. Also, the term tends to be thrown around, as you note, far to much.

What about those counter-examples ? Which, obviously, include Games of Throne/A Song of Ice and Fire, which is pretty popular.

Game of Thrones is not a counter example, it is a perfect example. Loads of characters survive hopeless odds in it. Mr. Martin just uses plot armor on those who don't normally have it. Sansa Stark, Tyrion, Daenerys , and others all hit points where they should have died if 'plot armor' hadn't saved them. It is not a good example.

Mars Attacks! was an earlier 'no plot armor' series of books (which were a fun series of books, seeing the authors kill off 'untouchables', although they just shifted who was untouchable). It still fell into plot armor, it was just reversed. The people who normally survived died, and those who don't usually make it out survived. It still had characters make the improbable happen.

If characters were never able to do that, fiction would be very boring because you would always know what was going to happen in stories where nothing actually matters anyways.

Even in real life, people achieve the impossible all of the time. They aren't all protected by plot armor.

I'm not saying plot armor is good, it's just far to often that people complain about it, and then often ignore it when dealing with things they like. Some plot armor is necessary, because who wants to read about futile and ultimately not heroic last stands. Would we care about Thermopylae if the Greeks hadn't ultimately been victorious (if the Greeks had lost, no one would remember it as a battle, ergo we remember the heroic last stand, even if they did all die and loose the battle)?

 Psienesis wrote:
Specifically in 40K, "plot armor" is when a given character or group survives because it requires another character or group to ignore previously-established capabilities and functions in order for the first group to survive.

For example, it has long been established that Magnus is amongst the most powerful psykers/sorcerers to have ever lived, perhaps second only to the Emperor Himself... and yet he conveniently forgets these things when he attacks the Fang. He could have stepped out of a Warp Gate and imploded Fenris from Ultramar with his mind... but, oops, he forgot he can do these things.... and he keeps forgetting that he's a Space Marine Primarch throughout Battle of the Fang.

Well if Magnus really could have any planets implode with a snap of a finger... he would have been a really poorly managed character and nobody could have written a good story about him: a malevolent entity with the power to do whatever he wishes and nothing can stop him? Why hasn't (insert all the worst/best scenarios that could happen, but somehow never did). When a character of such caliber is present, there is no other means to write a story other than hand-waving and say "it just doesn't".

I do agree the Wolves can, and should, be given more of a challenge, and only through showers of blood and gore, be forced on the brink of utter failure, face the tests of faith and purposes, and carve a path of victory through their own failures, can their anti-authoritarian characteristics (be it good, or bad, but mostly ambiguous) be shown faithfully.

However, as Tropes Are Not Bad and Tropes are Tools, simply being A. a Mary Sue (albeit a Predominantly Negative Denotation); B. having Incorruptible Pure Pureness (mostly SoBs, Loken to an extent, and the notorious Marty Stu - Grey Knights); C. Reality Warper (Most Tzeentch Greater Daemons, and also Q). doesn't automatically degrade the character or stories in question. It is how such tropes are handled, that determines the outcome.

No one can ever handle a story where your antagonists can destroy anything at will, and virtually unstoppable (i.e. Magnus and Angron), and explain why such powerful entities, who clearly hates their enemies (the Wolves, the Imperium) to the cores, and can destroy the them at will, not done so already?.

And so we have all the arbitrary restrictions, like Daemons needs medium to break through into reality, they are constantly weaken if not empowered by other source of warp power while in material space, they used to have to wait exactly 1001 years before being able to enter real space again, etc. And these arbitrary restrictions, if established well, can be used to strengthen the plot armor without breaking readers' willing suspension of disbelief. If not used, or not used well (like battle of the fang), it can be really crinch-worthy.

thing about plot armor is.... it Happens in real life.

The writer, Captian W.E Johns, who wrote the Biggles books (books about an aviator in the first half of the century. good books if you can find them) once wrote a story set during WW1 where a guy seemingly ramed a WW1 observation ballon, everyone rightly assumed he was dead. however apparently the guy managed to jump out of his plane at the last minute and literally slide down the Observation Ballon's teather.

In the books forward, he openly says "this whole thing was so utterly implausable I never would have just written it into a book, but it apparently happened to a actual WW1 aviator and the story was just so incrediable I had to adapt it"

Ciaphas Cain. This is the best example of it in W40K.

Although on the Nids, it's not really so much plot armor as it is the Worf Affect. The Nids get smashed by everyone, to the point that Maugan Ra killed an entire splinter fleet by himself IIRC.

Just for example, Ciaphas Cain is an example of plot armor. Necron Lords are not an example of plot armor. Plot armor is really just the character either surviving or coming out unscathed from scenarios in which he or she should have been pasted, and anyone else would have died too if in their place.

Yeah, Necron Lords are perfect pro/antagonists in that respect. Because they just infinitely respawn, they don't need plot armour to protect them. Same thing with the Swarmlord.

The reason Sisters/Inquisition players throw the term 'plot armour' around a lot is because we're Worf - the Worf Effect uses a character (or characters) who are established to be absolute badasses getting their arses kicked to show how big a threat the enemy is. Other examples are the ANBU in Naruto (ugh), the Tollan in Stargate, Venom in Spiderman (several times) and Silver Surfer in Marvel Comics.

We get thrown up against things we really should be able to defeat, like Chaos Cultists, and lose, to make the Marines look better. Nowhere is this more egregious than in Blood of Asaheim, where despite being a primarily defensive force, the convent of Sisters have made no tactical preparations to be besieged until the main Space Wolf characters show up and teach them how to dig trenches.

Never mind the fact that in the same book, a garrison of Sisters is wiped out by Chaos Cultists, despite having wargear equal to that of the Marines (and better suited to the battle at hand). The Sisters are commended as having killed 'dozens' of Cultists before dying, while it's taken as a matter of course that a single Wolf will kill hundreds.

Yeah. A garrison force of Sisters with Flamers in prepared defensive positions only managed to kill 'dozens' of cultists before dying, while a single Space Wolf with a bolt pistol and an axe (not even a chainsword! An AXE!) gleefully slaughters his way through an entire army.

The reason Sisters/Inquisition players throw the term 'plot armour' around a lot is because we're Worf - the Worf Effect uses a character (or characters) who are established to be absolute badasses getting their arses kicked to show how big a threat the enemy is. Other examples are the ANBU in Naruto (ugh), the Tollan in Stargate, Venom in Spiderman (several times) and Silver Surfer in Marvel Comics.

Venom is a bad example considering his actual weaknesses are pretty damn bad. I mean a lighter is enough fire to hurt him badly, along with something louder then a drill! It's just nobody seems to exploit it that much.

Yeah. A garrison force of Sisters with Flamers in prepared defensive positions only managed to kill 'dozens' of cultists before dying, while a single Space Wolf with a bolt pistol and an axe (not even a chainsword! An AXE!) gleefully slaughters his way through an entire army.

That book was just so...bad.

No one has mentioned Leman Russ defeating Magnus. Lol psychic attacks bounce off him.

jakejackjake wrote:
No one has mentioned Leman Russ defeating Magnus. Lol psychic attacks bounce off him.

In-universe, all Primarchs are somewhat psychic on different levels, so... ??? ... profit

I was hoping the thread was going to be a list of ridiculous plot armor various races have. I expected ranting and argument but have been disappointed. :(

No one can ever handle a story where your antagonists can destroy anything at will, and virtually unstoppable (i.e. Magnus and Angron), and explain why such powerful entities, who clearly hates their enemies (the Wolves, the Imperium) to the cores, and can destroy the them at will, not done so already?.

You're right, they can't. However, GW/BL seems fond of creating such things, like the Celestial Orrery, and then coming up with, frankly, stupid reasons why they never live up to their potential. In the Orrery's case, it's because it messes with the gravity of the galaxy as a whole, and annoys the Necrons, so they don't use it.

This implies, of course, that they only realized this after they built it, and then did not decide to dismantle it, leaving it around for grins and giggles, so they can impress lesser races with it or something.

There's no logical reason why such a device should exist in the setting.