Forum

[Jack7]

"The opposite of every great idea is another great idea."
- Niels Bohr

While the literal truth of the above statement can be debated, not every purposeful attempt to escape the past will lead to a shallow future. Different does not necessarily mean invalid or inferior.

I guess it depends upon what exactly Bohr (one of my favorite scientists by the way) meant by great, and by opposite. An idea can be great, and still be wrong, and an idea can imply opposition to another idea in theory, and yet still be compatible in function. That's why I said I have no argument against innovation. But then again not every innovation is an improvement, and certainly no innovation is ever perfect.

It's just part of his "things were better back when . . ." series. From what I gather, the gist in this case is basically "I don't know the history of X, therefore it has none."

History was exactly what I was discussing, or one of the things I was discussing. And inherent in your response is the implied attitude of, "because things are as they are now they neither warrant nor deserve improvement." That I am saying only the past is good. I am in fact saying the opposite, that I am not afraid of what was good about the past, merely because the present is as it is.

Sometimes the best kind of improvement is to overcome the limitations of the past, and sometimes the best kind of improvement is to return to achievements of the past. But no system, no state, no condition, at any point in time is so perfect or so flawless that it should not or cannot be open to critique and improvement.

Also, anyone who suggests that cartoons and superheroes aren't mythology needs to get smacked in the face with a Joseph Campbell book or something.

True enough, but then again you're not suggesting every cartoon and every super power is mythic are you? Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon and sometimes a super power is just silly. The Hero with a Thousand Faces does not mean that every face in a thousand is heroic. Indeed very few are heroic. The Hero is the extraordinary individual. People do not make myth about the candlestick maker (though he may be a fine and very good fellow), or even the politician (though he may be extremely powerful), they make myth abut he hero. So therefore it is important to know the difference between the good man, the powerful man, and the heroic man (though ideally a man may be all three, and probably should be).

Come join Ars Magica. You want it, you really want it...

You're not the first to suggest that to me. I'm going to look into it.

Whereas an Eladrin may feystep away in 4e, a character with Strong Fearie Blood (Sidhe) in Ars Magica would have faerie-eyes allowing him to see into the world of faerie hidden behind the mundane world everyone else sees; while a wizard in 4e might seek to purchase residium, a wizard in Ars Magica will seek to purchase the white hare born on the first year's eve, to make use of the magical power of this auspicious date. Ars Magica is built with the myth woven in, which is a huge advantage. It's built into the setting and supplements, too,...

I hear ya.

That said, there is nothing wrong with invented fantasy. When done right, it's great. I really like stock tropes that have no substantial real-myth roots, like the 'kingdom ruled by a lich and his undead armies' or 'demons from beyond that invade our world'. There is a lot of great things about invented fantasy too. The best of all worlds is combining both.

I concur.

For the myths to be of value, the characters and their adventures have to eventually interface with said myths, and that usually means playing on the same field as the mythic characters.

If you have to arm-wrestle Hercules, you're going to have to have superpowers to do it.

Honestly - character growth and advancement is one of the major draws of a game. If you play a game long enough, they will grow to be far beyond mortal men. So, no matter what the campaign background, you have to deal with the issue.

I think you've put your finger in something really important here. I could answer in any number of involved and complicated ways, but I think the best response is to say that of course one has to have power. You have to have power to make things happen in the world, in a game world, or in the real world. If you are powerless then you are powerless to change things. But myth (not in all cases, for some myths are cautionary tales about what not to become) is for the most part not about power, but about using power to purpose. Applying power to some end far exceeding yourself.

That's one of the reasons myth slumbers in so many games these days. Everyone has power, few have purpose.