Topic: Into Another Character TF

The bulk update request #12317 is pending approval.

create alias twinning (699) -> character_transformation (68) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur
create alias tf_into_fictional_character (858) -> character_transformation (68)
create implication character_transformation (68) -> transformation (94766)

Reason: I was making a wiki definition and tagging the character_transformation tag until I realized that twinning basically covered it.

The issue I see with the phrase 'twinning' is the implication that more than one character needs to be involved in becoming 'one' character.
Whether that's:

• one character being transformed into the other (example)
• two characters becoming the same unrelated character (example) or
• a split after a solo transformation (example)

Aliasing twinning away to character_transformation could remove this implied 'requirement'.
Alternatively, clone_transformation would be more specific and fits better into the _transformation suffix, and would implicate character_transformation

Additionally, this would clear up the tf_into_fictional_character tag, which just seems like bad phrasing. Pretty much any character transformed into would be fictional.
If it's *really* necessary to tag a tf into a more mainstream character, a tag like cosplay_transformation could be used. (I'm not a fan of that particular phrasing, but it gets my point across.)

Transitive relationships in alias twinning -> character_transformation is due to topic #44142 (alias clone_transformation -> twinning)
Honestly has me thinking the alternate BUR might be better

There is previous discussion on the tag here but seemed better to have something focused since it's more divisive.

I know tf_into_fictional_character is long-winded, but I'd keep it because it's clear and unambiguous that the destination of the transformation is a fictional/copyrighted character. It makes it clear that it can be applied regardless of whether the "before" state was an anonymous/unnamed character, a real-life person, or a different copyrighted character. (Although the current wording of the wiki page suggests that they must start as a "character" creature of some kind, not as something like an inanimate object, or a cloud of smoke, or an ambient school of fish.)

IMO the tags for gender and form changes work well because the tags clearly include both the starting and end points of the transformations: e.g. ftm_transformation, human_to_taur, etc.

In comparison, character_transformation suffers from similar problems to inanimate_transformation and clothing_transformation: without reading the wiki it's unclear whether the first word describes the starting point or the end point of the transformation. You could interpret "character transformation" in four different ways:

1) "It doesn't matter what they end up as, as long as they start as an entity with a character name tag." (As opposed to starting as, say, ambient wildlife, or an inanimate object.)

2) "It doesn't matter what they start as, as long as they end up as something that has a taggable character name."

3) "Both the starting point and ending point must be characters with different taggable names." (i.e. a "named character to named character" TF.)

4) "They can start as a taggable named character, or end as a taggable named character, or both - just as long as there is a change of character identity somewhere." (i.e. it shouldn't be applied to things like a vampire transforming from humanoid to bat form; a witch transforming someone into a frog; a lycanthrope turning from human to wolf; TMNT's human!Splinter becoming rat!Splinter.)

From reading OP's draft of the wiki page, I think the fourth version is what was intended?

chemistrynoisy said:
I know tf_into_fictional_character is long-winded, but I'd keep it because it's clear and unambiguous that the destination of the transformation is a fictional/copyrighted character. It makes it clear that it can be applied regardless of whether the "before" state was an anonymous/unnamed character, a real-life person, or a different copyrighted character. (Although the current wording of the wiki page suggests that they must start as a "character" creature of some kind, not as something like an inanimate object, or a cloud of smoke, or an ambient school of fish.)

IMO the tags for gender and form changes work well because the tags clearly include both the starting and end points of the transformations: e.g. ftm_transformation, human_to_taur, etc.

In comparison, character_transformation suffers from similar problems to inanimate_transformation and clothing_transformation: without reading the wiki it's unclear whether the first word describes the starting point or the end point of the transformation. You could interpret "character transformation" in four different ways:

1) "It doesn't matter what they end up as, as long as they start as an entity with a character name tag." (As opposed to starting as, say, ambient wildlife, or an inanimate object.)

2) "It doesn't matter what they start as, as long as they end up as something that has a taggable character name."

3) "Both the starting point and ending point must be characters with different taggable names." (i.e. a "named character to named character" TF.)

4) "They can start as a taggable named character, or end as a taggable named character, or both - just as long as there is a change of character identity somewhere." (i.e. it shouldn't be applied to things like a vampire transforming from humanoid to bat form; a witch transforming someone into a frog; a lycanthrope turning from human to wolf; TMNT's human!Splinter becoming rat!Splinter.)

From reading OP's draft of the wiki page, I think the fourth version is what was intended?

why would that necessitate the usage of the "fictional character" terminology and/or why ought it? the distinction is odd and confusing when we're talking about a website where everything is a fictional character (or, in rare cases, a fictionalized version of a real person). should a character transforming into, like, a historical figure, for some reason, not be classed similar to the rest?

in my opinion, character_transformation is as comprehensible as the other <trait_category>_transformation tags, like species_transformation and gender_transformation. it's also certainly less confusing than the current tag name.

dba_afish said:
why would that necessitate the usage of the "fictional character" terminology and/or why ought it? the distinction is odd and confusing when we're talking about a website where everything is a fictional character (or, in rare cases, a fictionalized version of a real person). should a character transforming into, like, a historical figure, for some reason, not be classed similar to the rest?

That's true, and when I wrote that post it did occur to me that including the word "fictional" limits the tag in those ways. But I didn't mention it because my post was getting long enough! :p

in my opinion, character_transformation is as comprehensible as the other <trait_category>_transformation tags, like species_transformation and gender_transformation. it's also certainly less confusing than the current tag name.

I see what you mean. I think I was reading the character_transformation tag in a different way from you and the OP. I read it and thought that the tag is flawed because it doesn't specify whether it means "they were a named character and become something else", "they were something and become a named character", or "they were a named character and become a different named character". Whereas you and OP meant it as "the trait that changes is their character" - in which case it covers all those possibilities, so it's fine.

But I do think that the tag's wiki should be worded in a way that makes it very clear that it shouldn't be used for transformations between alter-egos with different names, like Bruce Banner -> Hulk and Sonic the Hedgehog -> Super Sonic.

As for the other aspect of the proposed BUR, about changing the use of the twinning tag:

I definitely wouldn't alias the twinning tag to character_transformation, because there are people who want a dedicated tag to find images of characters becoming duplicates/doppelgangers/clones of other characters, who are present in the same scene. (Often for selfcest-related reasons.)

In my experience, images and stories that are about that kind of TF usually call it "twinning" rather than anything else like "clone transformation". So I disagree with the suggestion in the alternate BUR to alias twinning -> clone_transformation. (Admittedly I haven't done a thorough comparison of how often those tags are used in places like FA, DA, and AO3, but anecdotally, "twinning" is the most common term I've seen used.)

dirtyderg said:
If it's *really* necessary to tag a tf into a more mainstream character, a tag like cosplay_transformation could be used. (I'm not a fan of that particular phrasing, but it gets my point across.)

I really don't like that tag name. To me, "cosplay transformation" sounds like a specific trigger/situation for a transformation: they put on a costume, and get transformed into what that costume represents, like in the old Xanadu stories. So I don't think it's a good name for a broader, more general kind of trait transformation.

dba_afish said:
in my opinion, character_transformation is as comprehensible as the other <trait_category>_transformation tags, like species_transformation and gender_transformation. it's also certainly less confusing than the current tag name.

Difference is, the other trait categories are more definite. You can't really have a character transforming from an ambiguous/non-species to some species, or an ambiguous/non-gendersex to another sex (after all, if you can't tell what they were at at least some basic level, how do you see that there was a change?). Or at least, such instances would be so rare, it's not worth worrying about. Characters, on the other hand, are much more loose. Characters are TYWK, unlike the other traits. You can have ambiguous or non-characters, which makes it unclear whether it's a set trait category (ala foot_transformation; a defined character remaining a defined character, just another one), or a destination (ala cock_transformation; some generic anon to a defined character) or a source (a defined character becoming a generic anon; I don't think we have another tag like this since it's not really possible with other traits, and most TF tags are focused on what they become rather than what they were). I don't think these should be conflated under one tag, as other TF tags don't/shouldn't combine change-between-types and change-into-thing under one tag. It's also easy to read as just "a character transforming", as opposed to an object transforming, without any change in character identity.

This also raises the question of what counts as "a character". Would a calm mild-mannered human transforming into a violent murderous wolf (two separate and conflicting personalities with distinct appearances) be considered a character transformation? What about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (and some depictions do give him inhuman visual attributes)? What about when the one personality starts to overtake the other even in their other form? Since characters are TYWK, this feels like it'd be easy to fall into being a lore tag as it depends on the artist saying the two forms are the same or different character identities, as opposed to tf_into_fictional_character being relatively clear it's about some character visually transforming into some other fictional character, regardless of character identity (e.g. some zoroark character poofing into toothless would be tf_into_fictional_character, but as it's only an illusion and it's still the same zoroark character just with a different appearance, wouldn't be a change in character identity).

watsit said:
Difference is, the other trait categories are more definite. You can't really have a character transforming from an ambiguous/non-species to some species, or an ambiguous/non-gendersex to another sex (after all, if you can't tell what they were at at least some basic level, how do you see that there was a change?). Or at least, such instances would be so rare, it's not worth worrying about. Characters, on the other hand, are much more loose. Characters are TYWK, unlike the other traits. You can have ambiguous or non-characters, which makes it unclear whether it's a set trait category (ala foot_transformation; a defined character remaining a defined character, just another one), or a destination (ala cock_transformation; some generic anon to a defined character) or a source (a defined character becoming a generic anon; I don't think we have another tag like this since it's not really possible with other traits, and most TF tags are focused on what they become rather than what they were). I don't think these should be conflated under one tag, as other TF tags don't/shouldn't combine change-between-types and change-into-thing under one tag. It's also easy to read as just "a character transforming", as opposed to an object transforming, without any change in character identity.

Thanks for putting it so much more eloquently that I did /gen
With that second half, those did pop to mind. There's not really a good way to express defined-to-defined transformation any better than tf_into_fictional_character does, but as previously and frequently mentioned, it's just.. messy phrasing.

watsit said:
This also raises the question of what counts as "a character". Would a calm mild-mannered human transforming into a violent murderous wolf (two separate and conflicting personalities with distinct appearances) be considered a character transformation? What about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (and some depictions do give him inhuman visual attributes)? What about when the one personality starts to overtake the other even in their other form? Since characters are TYWK, this feels like it'd be easy to fall into being a lore tag as it depends on the artist saying the two forms are the same or different character identities, as opposed to tf_into_fictional_character being relatively clear it's about some character visually transforming into some other fictional character, regardless of character identity (e.g. some zoroark character poofing into toothless would be tf_into_fictional_character, but as it's only an illusion and it's still the same zoroark character just with a different appearance, wouldn't be a change in character identity).

I think the best way to define it is as a singular entity, since a physical change to reflect an alternate state of self or personality would be more akin to shapeshifting.

What about this for a different phrasing?
character_assimilation
And a definition describing it as a physical and/or mental change into that of a separate character, whether partial or total.