The Heroic Impulse: Where Have All the Heroes Gone?

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by Fifth Element

But...then how will we decide what level magic-user Gandalf is?

Roll d%. has the same effect as the arguments anyway

[Gentlegamer]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

That empowers me to be heroic, to try things knowing I have a bit of a safety net for failure beyond "4d6".

You're not a hero if you have a safety net . . .

[FireLance]

Originally Posted by Gentlegamer

You're not a hero if you have a safety net . . .

So, being a hero means you can't have a plan B if plan A doesn't work out? Or that you can't try your best to maximize your chances of survival in the event that plan A fails, so that you can activate plan B?

Which definition of hero are you using anyway? Extraordinary ability? Morality? Courage? The willingness to take risks and sacrifice oneself for others? IMO, none of the above precludes the use of a safety net if it is feasible to have one.

[Fifth Element]

Originally Posted by nightwyrm

I think we're confusing two different definition of hero here. There's the ancient definition where hero simply means superhuman. If you've read some ancient myths, a lot of "heroes" aren't very "heroic" in the modern sense.

Indeed. This is what I meant by heroic in my post.

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Well, what is heroism? Who are heroes?

In ancient times, in 66 AD, during the Roman's siege of the city of Jerusalem--

Jewish defenders had cut down the Roman carrying the legion's sacred Eagle. As he fell, and the eagle was falling to the ground, a lone Roman Centurion, shouted a curse, and charged the throng of Jewish warriors, steadily swarming into the gap in the walls where the fighting had been hot. The Roman Centurion managed to grab the Eagle standard, and with a few companions fighting around him, raised it high. The Centurion's bold defiance inspired the ranks of Roman soldiers that had retreated from the renewed Jewish attack at the walls, and they answered his call with savage screams of their own, as they pressed the ferocious counterattack.

The Roman Centurion died from his wounds--but his scorn of his comrades' reluctance and flagging vigor, and his ferocious courage in regaining the Eagle Standard, so inspired the Roman soldiers around him into fighting in a great frenzy, that after several hours, resulted in a Roman victory.

The Romans held the gap in the wall, and the Jewish counterattack had failed.

All because of the words and actions of one man--that heroic Roman Centurion.

The Crusades:

During the early siege of a fortress outside Antioch, a group of some 300 Knight Templars were parleying with the encircled Muslim Armies. The Muslim commander stated the obvious facts; the lack of food, water, and supplies. The knights would die needlessly. They could surrender with honor.

The 300 Knight Templars saw a vision of angels gathered around them; the leader of the templars exclaimed to his companions that God's Angels were with them, and they should never surrender. Dying with glory was better than surrendering.

With that proclamation, the Knight Templars charged the thousands and thousands of Muslim troops gathered around the fortress. The Knight Templars fought to the last man, and all died in the savage fighting that endured for three days. The Muslims were victorious.

However, the Knight Templar's heroic last stand and defense of this fortress north of the city of Antioch gave the defenders of Antioch precious time to prepare, and gain reinforcements. They knew the Knight Templars had sacrificed themselves so they might live on in Antioch.

When the Muslim Army did reach the walls of Antioch a week later, the city was ready. During this season of war, the city of Antioch remained in Christian hands. The Muslim strategy of gaining Antioch was defeated...

because of the heroic sacrifice and fierce, proud courage of the Knight Templars at the northern fortress.

During World War II, a United States Navy submarine was on long-range patrol in the Pacific, against the Japanese. The American submarine was equipped with *Magic*--the top-secret coding machine that allowed the U.S. to intercept and read Imperial Japanese Naval Code. The American sub was chased down by Japanese convoy escorts--fast destroyers--and depth-charged repeatedly through the deep hours of the night, in a running battle as the ships of the convoy burned around them, slowly sinking, leaving patches of burning oil to light up the dark night.

The American submarine was damaged beyond repair, and Commander Mush Morton ordered his men into the life-boats, and to abandon ship. When every U.S. Naval crewman was safely aboard the lifeboats, Morton gave them a broef speech, and remained on the bridge.

Commander "Mush" Morton was remaining onboard the submarine, and as the submarine slowly sank into the dark waters of the Pacific, he was going to destroy the Magic machine, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Japanese. Commander "Mush" Morton saluted his men, and closed the top-hatch of the submarine, as the submarine sank beneath the waves.

A brief explosion soon followed, and the submarine was gone.

Commander "Mush" Morton heroically took care of his men in the final hours of his life, and personally chose to die, in the effort to keep top-secret knowledge from the Japanese. This brave American sailor was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for his selfless act of courage under fire; his devotion to the welfare of his men; and his heroic sacrifice in service to the United States of America.

In the game, sometimes on a smaller scale, of course, the players often have accomplished some similar heroics. One lone paladin stays behind to cover the party's retreat, and faces the horde of beastmen alone...giving his companions time to escape.

The group's flying wizard flies into the mouth of the dragon, and breaks his wizard staff of power, causing an explosion to kill the dragon, even as he himself dies from the great fire...

A village's children have been carried off into the night by a band of Orcs. The group stands in the gap. It is they that mount up, and go after the Orcs, tracking them for days and days, and making a brave midnight assault to rescue the village children. Even as members of the group fall fighting the hordes of savage orcs, the party's druid gathers up the children and leads them to safety....all the while, the rest of the party if figting and dying, but knowing they are purposely enraging the Orcs, making attacks, and raising hell and confusion, keeping the Orcs' attention on them, rather than their druid companion, and the escaping children...

Where are the heroes?

They are here, my friends. At different times, at different places, oftentimes unsuspecting or unforeseen, they arise to inspire, and stand for what is right and good.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[DandD]

None of them failed, by your example. However, the unforgivable dices might decide that you fail, and die. So, you're not even rescuing the child, you drown with it. That's funny if you're into black humor, but there was nothing heroic at it.

[FireLance]

Originally Posted by DandD

None of them failed, by your example. However, the unforgivable dices might decide that you fail, and die. So, you're not even rescuing the child, you drown with it. That's funny if you're into black humor, but there was nothing heroic at it.

Your post and SHARK's raise two more questions about what it means to be a hero:

1. Do you need to die to be a hero?
2. Do you need to succeed to be a hero?

If the Romans did not hold the gap in the wall, and lost the battle, and the Roman Centurion did not die, but was knocked unconscious and evacuated by his comrades, would his actions have been any less heroic?

[Lizard]

Originally Posted by DEFCON 1

It's basically Jack7's attempt at starting another "4E sucks" thread like what happend in his "Where Has All The Magic Gone?" thread.

4E uses math, and therefore the supposition is you can't have Heroes because they no longer a part of the imagination, they are just a conglomeration of statistics.

Now of course, the supposition is false... but that's not stopping him from attempting to get the "discussion" going again.

Pretty sure that 99.99% of all RPGs use Math. 4e uses less than many...

[SHARK]

Originally Posted by FireLance

Your post and SHARK's raise two more questions about what it means to be a hero:

1. Do you need to die to be a hero?
2. Do you need to succeed to be a hero?

If the Romans did not hold the gap in the wall, and lost the battle, and the Roman Centurion did not die, but was knocked unconscious and evacuated by his comrades, would his actions have been any less heroic?

Greetings!

Well, my friend, I wrote that out though to show some historical examples of *heroism*--as well as some examples of *heroism* in my D&D campaigns. Aimed of course, at answering the question--"Where did all the heroes go?"--I'm not thinking thinking they've gone anywhere. There around, both in real history--as well as mythology--and also in D&D games, like the examples I described.

Do they have to die? Well, no, of course not. Though many heroes do die.

Had they failed, or if something more mundane stopped them, would they be heroes?

Well, I think at its essential foundation, a *Hero* must accomplish something extraordinary, beyond what is expected of the common man, or something that is highly selfless, in the face of danger and personal sacrifice. Otherwise, what's really heroic about them, then? Certainly, having noble intentions is good--but something noble and heroic must actually be *accomplished*--whether they survive or not isn't necessary--for all to proclaim them as *heroic* far and wide.

Just some thoughts though.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[billd91]

Originally Posted by FireLance

1. Do you need to die to be a hero?
2. Do you need to succeed to be a hero?

If the Romans did not hold the gap in the wall, and lost the battle, and the Roman Centurion did not die, but was knocked unconscious and evacuated by his comrades, would his actions have been any less heroic?

My answers would be 1. No and 2. No.

The question might remain: If the task is easily accomplished with your abilities, is it still heroic? Depends. Does it still risk life and limb? I'd say yes.

One major problem I'm seeing arise here in these discussions is the metagame debate. Is it really heroic if you know that your PC will likely survive the event? Who cares? That's a metagame debate that may be about cautious vs risky play. Is it, from an in-character perspective, a heroic thing to do? Then yes, the character is a hero.

[Mallus]

Originally Posted by JRRNeiklot

A 1e first level character had a couple more hit points than a farmer, but otherwise, they were pretty much the same.

How about a 15th level 1e character? Using your logic, they would be unable to perform heroic acts.

The mechanics nowadays don't support heroes.

1e characters become superheroic as they gain levels. Are you forgetting this?

When pcs are just exponentially better than everyone else, it's not heroic to face down an ogre, it's just being mercenary.

So you cap PC advancement at 5th level to preserve the heroism?

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by Mallus

1e characters become superheroic as they gain levels. Are you forgetting this?

Superheroic is relative, though. No character in 1e can do some of the things that relatively low-level 3e and 4e characters can do.

A 1e level fighter liteally becomes a superhero, though, according to the level progression tables.

RC

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by billd91

My answers would be 1. No and 2. No.

The question might remain: If the task is easily accomplished with your abilities, is it still heroic? Depends. Does it still risk life and limb? I'd say yes.

One major problem I'm seeing arise here in these discussions is the metagame debate. Is it really heroic if you know that your PC will likely survive the event? Who cares? That's a metagame debate that may be about cautious vs risky play. Is it, from an in-character perspective, a heroic thing to do? Then yes, the character is a hero.

Agreed on all points.


RC

[Gentlegamer]

Originally Posted by FireLance

So, being a hero means you can't have a plan B if plan A doesn't work out? Or that you can't try your best to maximize your chances of survival in the event that plan A fails, so that you can activate plan B?

I'm speaking to the "safety net" of inherent rules that you allude to in a RPG. You essentially said you're now free to act heroically because the rules themselves provide a safety net. Taking an action knowing the rules themselves will save you or greatly mitigate your failure isn't acting heroically (as a player).

Which definition of hero are you using anyway? Extraordinary ability? Morality? Courage? The willingness to take risks and sacrifice oneself for others? IMO, none of the above precludes the use of a safety net if it is feasible to have one.

This whole discussion mixes narrative and game rule considerations, but I will say that, in my opinion, a hero is not someone who acts knowing there is a safety net in the event of failure. In RPGs, this applies to both the character and the player.

All versions of D&D have a certain level of "safety net" built in to their rules. Acting heroically (game-wise) in any of the editions is doing something that the player knows isn't covered by them. Acting heroically (narrative-wise) is doing something the character doesn't know there is a guaranteed safety net for.

IMO

[Remathilis]

Originally Posted by Gentlegamer

You're not a hero if you have a safety net . . .

See, that is not true. Firefighters have PLENTY of equipment and training that helps them battle fires, police carry firearms and wear Kevlar in dangerous situations, and the US armed forces has some of the best training, gear, and backup of all the nations of the world. I dare you not to call any of them a hero.

D&D PCs are like these folk. They are better than farmers in the realm of adventuring because (by training, generics, or magic) they are better suited to the job. They have the best gear, training, and are slightly less risk-adverse than the typical folk.

Now, in D&D if I do something dangerous (attack an ogre or rescue a drowning child) I see no fault in minimizing my personal risk. That includes maximizing my chances of success. That's what these folks above do every day. They don't charge into burning buildings in T-shirts and sandals, they do everything needed to minimize risk and maximize success. Are they any less heroic for doing so?

Which is more heroic, the deed or the intention?

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by Umbran

Roll d%. has the same effect as the arguments anyway

So true, and true for so many issues.

[PIM68]

Originally Posted by FireLance

1. Do you need to die to be a hero?

I would say, no, I'm sure there are/were plenty of living heroes.

Originally Posted by FireLance

2. Do you need to succeed to be a hero?

I would say, yes, otherwise it can be categorised as a brave 'attempt'. I don't think "Captain Failure" is big-selling comic book.

The above are very much generalisations of course. "Heroes" are ultimately in the eye of the beholder. (e.g. see 'Freedom Fighters' vs. 'Terrorists')

You can still be a hero if you have a safty net, because usually those "safety nets" are not guaranteed to succeed.

Evil people can be brave too, (anti) heroes to their fellows even, because, when you boil it down - it's about overcoming fear/surmounting great risk. Just my two-penneth anyway.

[Gentlegamer]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

See, that is not true. Firefighters have PLENTY of equipment and training that helps them battle fires, police carry firearms and wear Kevlar in dangerous situations, and the US armed forces has some of the best training, gear, and backup of all the nations of the world. I dare you not to call any of them a hero.

Firefighters and other civil servants that risk death and injury for others are heroes. No debate there.

D&D PCs are like these folk. They are better than farmers in the realm of adventuring because (by training, generics, or magic) they are better suited to the job. They have the best gear, training, and are slightly less risk-adverse than the typical folk.

Now, in D&D if I do something dangerous (attack an ogre or rescue a drowning child) I see no fault in minimizing my personal risk. That includes maximizing my chances of success. That's what these folks above do every day. They don't charge into burning buildings in T-shirts and sandals, they do everything needed to minimize risk and maximize success. Are they any less heroic for doing so?

Which is more heroic, the deed or the intention?

You're talking about narrative heroics, which is fine. However, if the player knows there is some built-in mechanic that can be relied upon to save his bacon, an action taken relying on this knowledge isn't heroic, in my opinion.

That is, taking in-game actions that mitigate risk is fine and heroic, relying on hard-coded game rules to mitigate risk is also fine, but not heroic.

[jasin]

Originally Posted by Gentlegamer

I'm speaking to the "safety net" of inherent rules that you allude to in a RPG. You essentially said you're now free to act heroically because the rules themselves provide a safety net. Taking an action knowing the rules themselves will save you or greatly mitigate your failure isn't acting heroically (as a player).

As a player, you aren't acting heroically even when there is a significant, unknown risk of failure for the charater, since you're still doing nothing more than sitting in someone's basement pretending to be an elf.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Originally Posted by Gentlegamer

That is, taking in-game actions that mitigate risk is fine and heroic, relying on hard-coded game rules to mitigate risk is also fine, but not heroic.

Nothing in a RPG creates a real risk. You can only use your PC. The player is not heroic, but his character is. The character is constantly risking his life - even if he has a "reroll your save" or hit points. Because things can still go wrong.

But the player does not risk anything "meaningful" that his actions could be deemed heroic. The PC doesn't necessarily know that he can jump the chasm in 19 out of 20 situations. He just knows that if he falls, he will plummet to death. Of course, if he has a feather fall spell prepared, his action might seem less heroic. (but then, what if he might need the feather fall in another case, where there is no one to rescue but himself?)

I do not think heroismn always requires risking your own life. Life is just the highest think you can sacrifice to someone else. But it can already be heroismn if you just help someone (and possibly save his life) without expecting anything in return (except the warm, fuzzy feeling of having done something good).