Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-25266931-20161112032800/@comment-25266931-20161113072328

Maybe it's used so often because it's not just what people like to relate to but also because it's seen as humble. Just like people like to make characters who forgive their enemies and don't kill. Maybe this trait of a hero who has power but is always reluctant to use it or has trouble marching into battle even if they're a superhuman is just something to remind people that he or she didn't transcended beyond something they (the audience) can attain. It might be that people like to picture themselves along side these heroes almost as kindred spirits. And you can't really do that if the chosen one or hero makes decision that would make you shit yourself.

It reminds me of a time a magazine was coming up with their idea of the perfect RPG. And they admitted that the lead always has to be mostly bland while side characters and co-stars can be more "out there". This was the PSM magazine, and their theory was that if the lead hero was too quirky or cool then one or two people might like them but others wouldn't. Some people might find them cool, some might not, some might even get insecure because they know they could never be like them. So better to play it safe and stick to crowd-pleasing traits in a hero. Personality traits that were tried and true and are traits shared by the majority of people playing the game so they could just mentally paste themselves over the character. The lead is the one you see the most so the magazine believed they should basically be YOU in the game, even if they had their own name. I don't like that, but people seem to eat that up. Bon apetit.

Chosen Ones discovering they are destined to slay some ultimate evil is too scary for most people. Super powers and prophecies of guaranteed victory or not, they would never want to do it. So they make the chosen hero of the story mimic that. So the audience won't feel alone. So they won't feel guilty for being scared. There's not just a disconnect when a character acts differently from the viewer, there can also be a level of disappointment. And dare I type it? Shame?

EXAMPLE: Imagine a viewer watching their favorite show, then a bombshell of a plot point is drop on the chosen hero. He can only save one person. The viewer thinks "save the lover, she's a girl with big boobs!" But the hero says "I'll save the older elderly woman, she takes care of a bunch of kids and that will save more lives by saving her." So now the viewer has to live with that thought that they were being shallow. Writers want characters and viewers to be of one mind. So that whatever is happening on screen syncs up with whatever emotional response is the desired effect the writer wants the viewer to have. If the common idea is that a hero wants a humble life devoid of conflict and bemoans going into battle, then that's what you get. If the the common sentiment is to put family first and abandon a task to pick your own loved ones over the world, then that's what you get.

How many times have we seen the "love conquers all" idea that one lover has to pick between their soul mate and the world and they are willing to let the world burn rather than live in that world without their soul mate. Over time that has been used in both the hero camp and the villain camp. But it gain popularity for one reason, people think that way. And as long as people want to see characters that act like them instead of like completely different (maybe even abnormal) people, then we will continue to get stories where characters only make decision that the majority of the general public would make. The socially acceptable responses to big life and death choices.