General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Sorry Jack. I read your recycled blog posts, here and in the other threads you've started, and this is the first thing that springs to mind:
"Well, hey, I didn't spend all those years playing Dungeons and Dragons and not learn a little something about courage." - X-Files "From Outer Space"
You seem to be hung up on pointing the finger at more modern game mechanics of somehow robbing you of your romantic ideal of heroic play. Scratch that. A romantic ideal of heroism itself. Or a feeling of real magic. As if these are things that can be found in a roleplaying game.
Do you remember that in the 1st edition of the game, the growth of your hero was explicitly tied to how much gold he grabbed? How many things he killed?
However, in more recent game systems, the idea of giving rewards for actions and story are more commonplace than ever. You can play the game without a single combat, deeply roleplaying your character, and still advance him.
Also, as mentioned above, playing a "simple" hero can get kind of boring. One dimensional. I usually play heroes, sometimes "dark" heroes, but I enjoy having background conflicts, moral ambiguity and hard choices presented to my PC. These are often more reflective of similar (though less dramatic) choices I encounter in my day to day life. My RPG experiences today are a far cry from the dungeon extermination expeditions of my youth. If anything, I find these complex characters more interesting than the simple "Kill the dragon, save the village" ilk of heroes that your purple prose brings to mind.
__________________ "Sometimes we buy books because we think we're buying the time to read them." - Warren Zevon
I think society as a whole has drifted from the type of hero in the OP. There seem to be fewer classic heroes in pop culture now. Maybe because those heroes aren't "cool" enough for modern tastes. Maybe heroes of that type are now the "Dudley Doorights" from my youth, the characters that we laugh at because they aren't as advanced and worldly as we are.
I'm sure there are "classic" heroes in recent mass media, but there sure seem to be a lot of Hancocks and Vic Makeys. I see a touch of evil as the new replacement to the tragic flaw of the heroes when I was a kid. Heck, it seems like a lot of the heroes when I was a kid didn't really have any flaw at all, just misfortunes that stretched out the action for the length of the TV show or movie.
Based on these totally unscientific observations, I have come to the conclusion (for myself) that game systems don't dictate the heroic spirit a player can create, but the players themselves tend to create characters for which they have a ready reference. I don't want to play an assassin, but somebody who really digs reading Punisher or playing Assassins Creed might.
Just my opinion, for what it's worth.
__________________ Killing monsters and taking their treasure since 1982.
Rules don't effect what kind of character you wish to play,
I don't think that's true. Different games reward different actions and the resulting play mode will tend to be different.
__________________ "This game requires no gameboard because the action takes place in your imagination..." - Cover of Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rules Set 1.
Because I got from it "Are heroes born of the imagination, or are heroes born out of the numbers that make him up?" And since the first tip-toe into an edition flame war is "there's no fluff in 4E, it's just balanced crunch"... that tells me pretty clearly you're looking for people to debate both sides.
If people wish to debate both sides of the issue, or any side of an issue, then that's good. That's what a debate is for.
As for your point, I'm not really sure we're thinking the same thing about the same subject.
For instance, mechanically I could care less about the differences in 4E from 1E, except in certain respects of personal preference. (But that's more psychological and personal than factual in nature.) Everything has to have mechanics to operate, even games.
As for the so-called Edition Wars I could care less about that either.
In my games we use 4E characters for humanoids, elves, dwarves, that kind of thing, hybrid (one's I developed, not base don 4E) character classes for human characters. I like it that way cause this makes humans and non-humans so very different form one another, and since in my setting they live on different worlds, the alien-ness and differences between humans and non-humans works out great. But those differences are not really germane to what makes a Hero.
For instance one could easily say that both Frodo Baggins and Aragorn are Heroes, but very different kinds of Heroes, (though very much the same in some respects). But numbers and levels and ranks and classes and races and powers and that kind of thing didn't make them heroes. Neither did titles. Frodo was not a Hero because he carried a +3 short sword named Sting, and Aragorn was not a Hero because he was really the King in exile wielding the sword that was remade. He was heroic long before anyone knew he was a King. Frodo was heroic despite Sting, Sam was certainly terrifically heroic despite having no magic at all. Probably more heroic because he had no magic at all. Frodo bore the ring, but Sam bore Frodo. That kind of thing happens all the time in heroic myth. You don't see it exemplified much in modern games though. Heroism has become artificially "attached or linked" to things that have nothing to do with Heroism, and so mask or camouflage those things that do have to do with real heroism. A Hero is not somebody who has actually done anything heroic, he's somebody in game who has reached a certain level,a tier, or has become high enough in rank to warrant a Paragon path. Mechanically speaking. As for speaking about acts of heroism, who knows or cares. The point is he leveled up. That is the real point of heroism, right?
But I personally could care less whether Elves have super-powers, or pluck good bowstrings. Neither one is an avenue to Heroism, they are just tools to use in order to potentially achieve Heroism. Heroism isn't achieved mechanically, but then again it can be deflected or mitigated mechanically. That is one can become lost at sea by watching the waves instead of by reading the compass and following the course that's charted. But the mechanisms aren't really important as long as they are not interfering or diverting attention away from the objective.
Quote:
I think society as a whole has drifted from the type of hero in the OP. There seem to be fewer classic heroes in pop culture now. Maybe because those heroes aren't "cool" enough for modern tastes. Maybe heroes of that type are now the "Dudley Doorights" from my youth, the characters that we laugh at because they aren't as advanced and worldly as we are.
I'm sure there are "classic" heroes in recent mass media, but there sure seem to be a lot of Hancocks and Vic Makeys. I see a touch of evil as the new replacement to the tragic flaw of the heroes when I was a kid. Heck, it seems like a lot of the heroes when I was a kid didn't really have any flaw at all, just misfortunes that stretched out the action for the length of the TV show or movie.
Based on these totally unscientific observations, I have come to the conclusion (for myself) that game systems don't dictate the heroic spirit a player can create, but the players themselves tend to create characters for which they have a ready reference. I don't want to play an assassin, but somebody who really digs reading Punisher or playing Assassins Creed might.
I liked your observations. Not my exact point, but then mine was just a starting point to thinking about Heroism in games. Hell, heroism in real life for that matter.
Quote:
If you found a way to imagine being an Hero before discovering RPGs, and cannot now, that seems like a failure of the imagination.
I didn't say I could not now. I'm saying I don't see it being promoted. I see other, far lesser and less important things being promoted instead.
Quote:
True heros aren't preventable by rules any more than they are by their own shortcomings.
And well said.
Quote:
Indeed.
Always the pragmatist Jas. Always the pragmatist.
Quote:
Where have all the heroes gone
And where are all the gods?
Where's the street-wise Hercules
to fight the rising odds?
That made me laugh. I have the album by the way.
I wrote a poem for this thread, humor-wise, but I haven't had time to type it up yet.
Quote:
Rules don't effect what kind of character you wish to play, he can be a anti-hero, a villain, a thug, a hero, a reluctant hero, etc, etc, etc. With whatever edition you have. It is really that simple.
Indeed.
Quote:
Sorry Umbran, sorry Jack. Got a little carried away there. My apologies.
Makes no difference to me Vay.
It's just words. That was one thing I was saying about Heroism. The difference between words and action.
You can't make a Hero by saying, "Hey, I'm writing into the game a progression chart for an Epic Destiny!"
Oh, you are, are ya? Can I get free super-powers with that too, or do I have to actually do something worthwhile to earn the honor?
There's a difference in life, and even in games, between what we say and what we do.
How we act, now that may or may not be heroic, depending on circumstances. What we say, now that may or may not be true, depending on circumstances, but words are never actions.
But anyways I took no offense.
And wouldn't have even if I had actually read it.
Well gents and dolls, I gotta go cut bait.
Got an old buddy coming in that I haven't seen since his last tour of duty.
And best of all, he's bringing the whole family with him. Haven't seen them in even longer. He's gotta boy in college now. Man, how time flies.
Anywho the wife is back with the vittles.
Later gators, and please carry on if you wanna.
I'm going to go eat and then talk shop awhile.
I'd edit that line out, if I were you. Talk like that can get you in trouble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psion
I don't think that's true. Different games reward different actions and the resulting play mode will tend to be different.
I agree absolutely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack7
For instance one could easily say that both Frodo Baggins and Aragorn are Heroes, but very different kinds of Heroes, (though very much the same in some respects). But numbers and levels and ranks and classes and races and powers and that kind of thing didn't make them heroes. Neither did titles. Frodo was not a Hero because he carried a +3 short sword named Sting, and Aragorn was not a Hero because he was really the King in exile wielding the sword that was remade. He was heroic long before anyone knew he was a King.
Just as a side note......In the novel, Aragorn knew that he was the Heir of Isuldur all of his life. He certainly knew (or hoped) that he was destined to be King before the novel begins.....his becoming King is a condition placed upon his marriage to Arwen. Within Tolkein's world, the blood of Numenor flowing through Aragorn's veins does indeed have quite a bit to do with his being heroic. It doesn't make him infallable, but it certainly pushes him in the right direction.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
An ogre is WotC-D&D is simply more likely to win a fight against level 1 PCs than an ogre was in TSR-D&D, because the scaling is different. What you might accomplish through luck, wit, and gumption in 1e is far too often suicidal in 3e.
I think you're a tad mistaken.
Given a sufficient selection of monsters spread throughout the various power levels, there's always something sitting in that heroic sweet spot. It may not be an ogre, but there's something there. If the DM wants to present encounters that are won by the skin of the teeth, he or she may still do so.
Is it me, or is the "heroic sweet spot" of pushing the PCs to the edge of death and the PCs succeeding through luck, wit and gumption easier to achieve in 4E than it was in any previous edition.
I'm DMing 4E right now and I can manage that in 3 out of every 4 combats without breaking a sweat. I could never manage that running 2E or 3E.
For instance one could easily say that both Frodo Baggins and Aragorn are Heroes, but very different kinds of Heroes, (though very much the same in some respects). But numbers and levels and ranks and classes and races and powers and that kind of thing didn't make them heroes. Neither did titles. Frodo was not a Hero because he carried a +3 short sword named Sting, and Aragorn was not a Hero because he was really the King in exile wielding the sword that was remade. He was heroic long before anyone knew he was a King. Frodo was heroic despite Sting, Sam was certainly terrifically heroic despite having no magic at all. Probably more heroic because he had no magic at all. Frodo bore the ring, but Sam bore Frodo. That kind of thing happens all the time in heroic myth. You don't see it exemplified much in modern games though. Heroism has become artificially "attached or linked" to things that have nothing to do with Heroism, and so mask or camouflage those things that do have to do with real heroism. A Hero is not somebody who has actually done anything heroic, he's somebody in game who has reached a certain level,a tier, or has become high enough in rank to warrant a Paragon path. Mechanically speaking. As for speaking about acts of heroism, who knows or cares. The point is he leveled up. That is the real point of heroism, right?
Here I think is the crux of the problem. You're presenting a straw man argument. No one is actually saying that your level or weapon bonus or Paragon powers has come to mean Hero, except you.
To get these things a player has had to take his character through numerous adventures, most likely of a heroic nature. The numbers on the character's sheet are nothing more than a guideline to show the PC's progress as a result of his heroic actions, not a definition of them. One thing the stats, powers, feats, etc. do show is that heroes are individuals, capable of a wide variety of ways and means to accomplish their heroic endeavors, and not just cookie-cutter white knights in shining armor.
Even if I create a higher level character to join a campaign already in progress, (or replace a character that has died), I still decide what his background is, what his motivations are, and what type of previous adventures allowed him to advance to the point he is at. He has a story. He is presumed to have done heroic things.
Another thing the mechanics do is give a guide to what type of heroic adventures the character can embark upon. You wouldn't have a party of first level scrubs taking on the Lich King in his extra-dimensional stronghold right away. But over the course of a campaign, wherein they do many heroic things, they'll eventually get there. They don't earn their Epic powers and magic items sitting in a warehouse playing gin rummy.
Now, maybe you do know some people that play RPG's with an eye toward nothing more than "what do I get when I level up?" And you know what, it's a game, there's nothing wrong with that. It's a game, with a carrot 'n' stick built into it. You lay the blame on modern RPGs, but it's always been that way.
I think that this is a natural view for people new to role-playing, as they are still learning and getting to experience the untried things that advancing brings. And I think it was even more common in earlier editions, because a much greater percentage of players were new. But even with the players who obsessed over getting their Strength to 18/00, people where still enjoying the exploits of their fictional persona in a fantasy world. They were still having their characters act like heroes. And if a player sticks with roleplaying long enough that he's more comfortable with the mechanics, more attention will typically be paid to the story and their PC's place in it.
So I reject your premise that "hero" has come to mean what's on a character's sheet, or that giggling that "I have Hyper-Cleave!" is somehow mutually exclusive with roleplaying a noble barbarian out to regain his tribe's honor in a heroic campaign.
__________________ "Sometimes we buy books because we think we're buying the time to read them." - Warren Zevon
Heroism hasn't gone anywhere. 4E chars are neither more or less implicitly heroic than 1E characters were. It's all dependent on what you do with them.
If you want some heroism, just go look at the brief examples of adventurers for each race given in chapter 2 of the 4E PHB. You have people like Donaar, a Paladin of Erathis, who wants to create a new Dragonborn civilzation from the ashes of the old. Tordek the Dwarf Fighter, who wants to reclaim and rebuild his ancestral dwarfhold. Varis the Elven Ranger who fights to defend the human town his people have fled to in the face of goblinoid pressures.
Etc, etc.
I don't think the heroism has really gone anywhere except in so far as our society in general is a little more skeptical and burntout than it was in the 80s.
On the one hand, just because I might like to think about character optimization doesn't mean I don't also think about heroism.
On the other, look at all the story hours out there! People are certainly doing a much better job being heroic than they did a decade ago. I can still hear people rant about their characters feats in a comic book shop in between arguments about Spider man, but I can also come here and read story hours by writers both amateur and professional.
Lovely post, though, some very nice illustrations.
The sentiment might be better explained, however, by breaking it up across several posts.
If you are seeing fewer "heroes" today of the type you once saw, that is probably a lot more social trending than edition-based. People are simply more jaded, and more cynical, than they were 20 years ago.
Or maybe it's not even "society" or anything, but you are now 20 years older.
I doubt you'll find many kids that don't like heroes or want to play them. Guys that stand for good, fight overwhelming odds, beat up the bad guys, and all that stuff.
But as a player, after 5, 10, 15 or 20 years, it's "been there, done that". You want something different. Maybe someone conflicted. Maybe you are just tired of being always the hero and doing things because they are right and jumping through the hoops of being good instead of doing just what's convenient. Sometimes you don't want to be the wide-eyed guy believing that there is good in people, they are all worth saving, except the purely bad guys.
I must admit that I still prefer that wide-eyed guy. I want to fight for all that is good and holy. But sometimes its interesting to be someone different. Someone that does things because he wants to achieve a personal goal. Like my Kobold Sorcerer that wanted Kobolds to rise to power. But there is only so much I can take of this, though.
Heroes aren't gone. They are just not the only archetype people enjoy playing. Sometimes you want to try something different. And that is a good thing, because it reminds you what is so special and satisfying about being a hero.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
I'm pretty sure I remember reading "where have the heroes gone?" letters in the Forum section of Dragon magazine, way back in 2nd Edition days. (I never read it in 1st Edition days, but I wouldn't be surprised to find them there, too.)
If you and your players want to portray heroes, D&D will allow you to do that, be it OD&D, BECM D&D, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 3e, 3.5e or 4e. If you or your players don't want to portray heroes, none of those systems will do it for you.
Given a sufficient selection of monsters spread throughout the various power levels, there's always something sitting in that heroic sweet spot. It may not be an ogre, but there's something there. If the DM wants to present encounters that are won by the skin of the teeth, he or she may still do so.
I am not saying that there is nothing there......I have thrown ogres at 1st level PCs.
What I am saying is that, in previous editions to 3.0, there was a range of monsters you probably couldn't take, but that you could survive a few rounds with. That alone pushed players to engage with creatures that would normally be out of their league. An ogre in 3e can be taken by using ranged options by 1st level characters, if they meet him out in the open. I've seen 4th level PCs lose a character to an ogre in melee.
Actually, though, I am a tad mistaken in saying WotC-D&D vs TSR-D&D, because in 4e monster damage ranges take a step back towards 1e, with the same result -- players can consider engaging monsters that prudence would suggest they not engage in 3e. This is one of the things I applaud in 4e.
IMHO and IME, of course. YMMV.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Or maybe it's not even "society" or anything, but you are now 20 years older.
Pick up a Captain America, Batman, or Spiderman comic from 20 years ago, and one from today. Sensibilities have changed. Honestly, considering the maxim "Change is unchanging", it would be surprising had they not.
You can see the same thing in television and film.
(Not James Bond, though.....He held the same ethos in Dr. No that he does in Quantum of Solace!)
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Hi Jack7, am I correct in assuming that for you, one of the prerequisites of heroism is that the hero must be willing to take action when he has no idea what his chances of survival are? This is quite distinct from not knowing whether or not he will survive, by the way - this prerequisite disqualifies a character who knows that he has a 50% chance of death but decides to act anyway from being a hero because he knows (or is able to reasonably guess) what his chances are. I will get to why I make this distinction in a moment.
Now it is true that in real life, heroes very often have no idea what their chances of success or survival actually are. When it comes to works of fiction, however, this may be true for the characters and the observers (whether the readers of a book, or the audience for a play or a movie), but this is often not the case for the author. In many cases, the author has a very good idea not only of the probability, but of the actual outcome of the character's actions.
When it comes to games, the issue is further confused because the player may assume more than one perspective with respect to his character. At the most basic level, he is supposed to be his character, or at least, to identify with him and make decisions as if he was him. However, once the player is experienced enough with the game system and familiar enough with the game rules, it is dificult to avoid a certain author-like perspective on the actual level of danger faced by his character. An experienced player with a 1st-level PC may describe how the character is horrfied by the unnatural animated skeletons advancing towards him, but still manages to summon enough courage to face them in battle even though his every instinct urges him to flee. The player, on the other hand, may know that his character has a good chance of beating the skeletons since they only have a 30% chance of getting through his armor, he has a 50% chance of hitting them on his turn with his attack bonus, he will need about two hits to bring down each skeleton, and he has enough hit points to withstand on average about four hits from his opponents.
However, the point is this: if a fictional character can be upheld as an example of heroism because he doesn't know the odds against him even though the author does, a game character can still be a hero if he is equally ignorant of the odds, even if his player knows what the odds against him actually are.
Now as to why I made the earlier distinction: if game characters can only be heroes if the players do not know the odds, then the solution is to keep the players ignorant of the rules and their characters' abilities except in the most general terms. If game characters can be heroes if they are only uncertain of their chances of success and survival, then the random elements in the game will ensure that anyway, and if you just want them to have poor chances of success and survival, then the solution is to pit them against opponents and challenges that are more dangerous than the system expects them to face. Whichever solution you adopt will depend on what you consider to be the prerequisites of heroism.
I was trying to highlight the irony of your criticizing reliance on "many, many, many words", "and titles, with fancy and clever phrases of nomenclature", in a post that is predominately many, many, many words, with fancy and clever phrases of nomenclature.
I don't think that has anything to do with pragmatism, as the word is usually understood.
The Heroic Impulse: Where Have All the Heroes Gone?
Or maybe the Heroic Impulse is more like numbers. It must be born of levels and ranks and progression charts, and when just the right admixture of powers and feats and spells and classes and races is finally achieved, then Presto-Change-o, magic, and we’ve given birth to heroes again! Yes, numbers is the answer. Definitely that. Or maybe not... Maybe it is the blending of many fancy titles with many obtuse and arcane calculations. Now there, mayhap is real magic.The kind we’ve all been looking for. And if that is the case then we are surely on the cusp of a new age of Aquarius!!!
So knowing all this and more, as surely we all do, I ask you then this one simple question – now that we’ve learned to tame magic with mathematics, and rank with ratio, and achieved boldness with balance, and have the very best alchemical suspension of status and powers and paragons and fate, where are all the Heroes?
And when in God’s name are they finally coming back?
You might have something here. Specifically, with respect to Ranks, Aquarius, and When.
Ranks:
Sometimes with all of the numbers seemingly necessary to role playing, the heroic impulse seems subsumed by the accounting pencil-fu. (Aha, at last another reason to admire accountants, with their pencil-fu). Let us agree that the heroic impulse, even if buried, may surely not be eradicated no matter how many numbers assail it!
Aquarius:
Seriously, though. This is the dawning of the age of aquarius. The heat and light of Leo the lion (or is it the forward-driven Aries the ram?) is said to be replaced anon by the cool shimmer of a new age. There is a tide in the affairs of role playing, which taken at its peak leads on to heroism! But once missed, may never rise again.
When:
...will they come back? Of course! It is as it always has been. Amongst the throngs of average Joe's (and Josephines) they are there. From the sullen masses overburdened by fear, they will arise. First one hand lifts high the olde banner of heroism, and one by one they rally to the cry, to victory.
So, in other words, it is up to you (the player) to make it happen. We live play in a complicated world, and its only getting murkier (with numbers). But as always the hero's role is to send out the beacon of clarity, through brave and selfless acts.
Purity, Body, Flavor 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
