The Heroic Impulse: Where Have All the Heroes Gone?

[Jack7]

ESSAYS ON GAME DESIGN

Essay Four: The Heroic Impulse - Where Have All the Heroes Gone?


When I was younger I played games in which I took on the role of a Hero. Later on, when I got older I discovered RPGs (though that was a later term, at that time Dungeons and Dragons was the only such game really around) and started doing the same thing through that particular venue of the imagination.

Oh, on rare occasions I played the Anti-Hero and once I even played a villain, but it was not a normal enterprise to do so, nor a normal interest. Such activities were more diversionary and experimental than common personal practice. Either for myself as a player, or among the players who exercised the worlds I had created for them to explore. Heroism was the norm of play, and the norm of imaginary conduct. At times everyone played shtick, played comic relief, played ne’er-do-well, slack about, or even second-string. But most everyone played to be heroic as often as possible, most every real opportunity that presented itself.

But over time I noticed something changing in these games. In D&D in particular. Heroes went the way of the elder ages. Into lost memory, instead of into fresh action.

At first it seemed subtle. Characters were given new powers, new skills, and new capabilities. All of which seemed good and often were, as well as being utilitarian, pragmatic, and most of the time even effective. But it didn’t end there. Magic became practical (notice the definitional irony of the one transforming into the other), monsters became categorical, feats became statistical expressions of success and failure, and skills became not practiced capabilities but comparative gradations of chance. And heroism…

What then of heroism? Of manhood? Of valiantry and honor? Quo Vadis, Heroicus? Quo Vadis?

This made me consider, to ponder how even in the hallowed halls of human imagination one might define a thing so completely and precisely by effects, and yet possibly still lack all understanding of causes.

Is heroism not born of powers? Of feats? Of skills? Does not magic create heroes? What of class, or levels? Is the king not more of nature the hero than the squire?

Doesn’t becoming 30th level make one a hero? What about 15th level? Doesn’t that qualify me truly as a Paragon among persons? What about an Epic Destiny? Does this make one heroic? Important? Accomplished? At the very least in the imaginary sense?

Surely there is some mathematical mechanic that will render an acceptable definition of when and where heroism is most likely to bloom within the vineyard of a game designed to simulate heroism. And if this mechanic does not yet exist then we must encapsulate it quickly and proclaim and publish it throughout all the land so that it may become universal. So say we all…

And what of words? Many, many, many words. And titles, with fancy and clever phrases of nomenclature? Surely of all things words and titles and symbols of status and ranks of level and class and Orders ad infinitum make for real heroes? Why just look, I am a War-Forged, Angelic Avenger of 30th level with an Epic Destiny to one day save the World from the Spell Blight of Cumberfoot! Surely such emblazures of appellation make me immortal among all. One with whom to be reckoned, a hero profound. (I for one would never trade titles for action or status for deeds. Why you could never sell deeds for the necessary funds to buy upgraded armor or more magical swords.)

So heroism must be something very much like that. Like the clickity clack of the soft-shoe toe-taps of the ceremonial page as he leads the staid and proper procession before parliament, or the dreaded snicker-snack of the ferocious Bandersnatch as he lounges on the green grass in the bright sunshine to slurp up his curds and whey.

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?

[Mallus]

Originally Posted by Jack7

Heroism was the norm of play, and the norm of imaginary conduct.

I thought the norm back in the day was "sociopathic looter". The kind of person who would lead 10 unsuspecting henchmen into a troll warren just to soften the big green guy up.

[Jack7]

I thought the norm back in the day was "sociopathic looter". The kind of person who would lead 10 unsuspecting henchmen into a troll warren just to soften the big green guy up.

And I thought that was what you did in real life on Saturdays nights right before the big football game.

See there, you learn something new every day.

[DEFCON 1]

So basically... you're asking if you can have a Hero if there is math used to determine how successful he is in what he does.

The answer is Yes.

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by Jack7

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?

Very pretty, but having put so much effort into style, I think you've drifted a bit into the realm of the vague and overstated.

My games have always had heroes. They never left, so coming back isn't much of an issue.

[Ktulu]

I've read it twice and it sounds like a philosophy instructor breaking down D&D to some sort of ID.


I think in terms of having a rules-set to assist me in telling a heroic tale. My players a heroes, whether anti, or not. I'd say the heroes are all there, at my table.

[Jack7]

you're asking if you can have a Hero if there is math used to determine how successful he is in what he does.

I suspected it would be something very like that..

[shilsen]

Originally Posted by Jack7

And I thought that was what you did in real life on Saturdays nights right before the big football game.

See there, you learn something new every day.

Cute, but Mallus has a point. There was nothing any more heroic about characters back in the day than now, so any heroism there was in the game hasn't gone anywhere.

[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.

[Jack7]

I've read it twice and it sounds like a philosophy instructor

Now was there any call for that kinda language?

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.

No, I don't think 4E sucks. And all the games use math. That wasn't the point at all.

[fba827]

Regardless of edition, the games I'm in generally have heroic characters. Sure, there are players that opt for antihero or reluctant hero but it's either them trying variety in style or they are like that all the time -- so it isn't a time/generation/edition/etc factor.

A heroic mentality for roleplaying a character is a function of the union between player-mentality and group-mentality, not a direct function of game edition, mathematical representation of effects, or generation.
(at least in my experiences)

[DEFCON 1]

Originally Posted by Jack7

No, I don't think 4E sucks. And all the games use math. That wasn't the point at all.

Really? Well then perhaps you should cut out the flowery language and make your points that are backing up your thesis statement a bit clearer then.

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.

[Vayden]

Removed due to being hot-headed and offensive. Sorry all.

[Umbran]

Personal attacks or insults will not be tolerated.

Got it? Don't start, people. If you don't like what he's saying to the point that you have to get personal, just don't post.

[Vayden]

Sorry Umbran, sorry Jack. Got a little carried away there. My apologies.

[Raven Crowking]

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.

As far as heroism within the game, though, I think you might also be seeing the result of more careful encounter balancing. Of old, players were rewarded for taking on the toughest encounters they could possibly handle (in terms of XP and possible treasure), so that a "How can I handle this threat?" attitude was more prevelant. Within 3.X speak, if you could figure out a way to take the CR 5 encounter at level 1, you would do so. Of course, the modern "encounter as unit of interest" design means that what is considered an approriate 5th level encounter then and now are two different beasts.

Within the Megadungeon concept, where players choose the level they delve at, Level 1 usually contained encounters appropriate for PCs level 1-3, level 2 for PCs level 3-5, level 3 for PCs 5-7, etc. There was a flatter power curve, enabling lower-level PCs to reach for greater heights as those heights were defined by the system. 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.

This is, actually, one of the effects that I am trying to re-engineer into RCFG....a flatter power curve, allowing lower-level PCs to have a chance against higher-level monsters.

And, for the record, it isn't that difficult to house rule any edition of D&D to make it closer to the normatives of 1e. Several good house rules have been suggested on EN World (mostly to reduce combat grind) that would also help to flatten the power curve in 4e. Well, the monster power curve, anyway. Chief among them? Half the total hit points of all non-minion monsters.


RC

[Hellzon]

Where have all the heroes gone
And where are all the gods?
Where's the street-wise Hercules
to fight the rising odds?

(Sorry, first thing I thought of.)

[jasin]

Originally Posted by Jack7

Many, many, many words.

Indeed.

[jage]

Originally Posted by Jack7

The Heroic Impulse: Where Have All the Heroes Gone?

When I was younger I played games in which I took on the role of a Hero. Later on, when I got older I discovered RPGs...

I think that's your answer. If you found a way to imagine being an Hero before discovering RPGs, and cannot now, that seems like a failure of the imagination. True heros aren't preventable by rules any more than they are by their own shortcomings.

[Fallen Seraph]

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.