A new formula for "Epic" gaming

[takyris]

Ah, but saying that "two spoiled brats fighting over the shared wife/mistress" negates things from being epic ignores the fact that a ton of Epic Literature is based around stuff like that.

Epic clashes are often, if not always, about the clash of different archetypes, or the destructive fury of two forces of the same archetype hitting each other. The archetypal nature of these characters forces them, in some ways, to become stereotyped or one dimensional.

Not to bring religion into it, but I would argue that the story of Exodus is a good example of an epic story, in terms of archetypal confrontations. In the story (and I'm thinking of it as a story in this case and really trying hard to avoid any kind of religious argument), it is said that God "hardens Pharoah's heart" so that he wouldn't let the Israelites go, which, if you squint, is really just an attempt to justify the one-dimensional character of a tyrannical ruler.

This is not to say that people in (what I think of as) epic stories don't suffer from indecision. A great warrior might be forced to choose between obeying his ruler and siding with his friend, when his friend has been declared an outlaw and his ruler has ordered the warrior to find and kill the friend. Either way he chooses, he's heading for one archetype or another.

Although, like numerous other people have said, we're coming into yet another definition of epicness.

So perhaps it's better to figure out whether we're thinking about:

Epic Level -- Level 20+

Epic Saga -- Characterized by having the same characteristics as the ancient Norse sagas

Epic Scope -- Characterized by the fact that the scope of the battle means that most of the known country, world, or universe is at stake

Epic Heroism -- Characterized by the archetypal nature of the characters, each of whom generally embodies a singular emotion or ideal

There's a bunch of spillover possible, and I just made all that up, so it's possible that I'm really really full of it.

-Tacky

 

[Desdichado]

Yes, Tacky, but I'm not arguing that the Iliad isn't epic, I'm merely claiming that according to a lot of the definitions here, it isn't epic. Since Homer essentially defined what it means to be epic, I find that those definitions lose a lot of credibility with me real fast.

I find then, that scope is not a good indicator of "epicness" as exemplified in Beowulf, for example (saving a rural petty king and his surrounding farmlands is very low-level scope in terms of typical D&D adventures.) Heroicism is not a good indicator of epicness as the Iliad shows, since few (if any) of the characters therein would fit the bill of true heroism, certainly not in our society (although arguably Achilles was a paragon of heroic virtue to the Dark Age Greeks, at least to a certain extent.) And heroic power (level) is not a good indicator of epicness as the Lord of the Rings shows (Frodo and Sam can't be more than a few levels up the chain, for the entirety of the story.)

So epic must mean something else. Personally, I don't think you can put your finger on exactly what epic means -- as the supreme court justices say about pornography, you can't define or describe it, but you know it when you see it. YMMV, though.

 

[Bob Aberton]

"Epic," in my opinion, is somewhat like a fire - shiny and pretty while it burns, but by its nature won't last.

What I mean is, as others have said, "Epic" implies the height of the character's achievement; after their epic achievement, the characters either die or retire, knowing they can never, ever top what they just did. It's like the craftsman who makes a masterpiece and then lays down his tools, knowing that he has just achieved the height of his skill and will never equal that again.

So, in other words, you just can't sustain an epic feel. For true epic feel can only come at the end of a campaign. The epic feel is when you put the dice in their bags, the character sheets in their binders, sit back, and say:

"Wow. That was good."

Know what I'm saying?

 

[takyris]

I find then, that scope is not a good indicator of "epicness" as exemplified in Beowulf, for example (saving a rural petty king and his surrounding farmlands is very low-level scope in terms of typical D&D adventures.)

Well, Beowulf could be read as low level, or he could be read as high level. It depends on what level most other people are. I don't remember the big Wulfman fighting anybody except big-name monsters, though, and he always won -- despite dying after the fire-drake.

Actually, Beowulf read like a great D&D adventure when I read it recently. His fight with Grendel's mom is a great example of how a good DM could use the environment, a creature's DR, and the potential treasure lying around, to make a tough but winnable encounter.

Heroicism is not a good indicator of epicness as the Iliad shows, since few (if any) of the characters therein would fit the bill of true heroism, certainly not in our society (although arguably Achilles was a paragon of heroic virtue to the Dark Age Greeks, at least to a certain extent.)

Achilles wasn't meant to be the hero. Hector was meant to be the hero, albeit in the "going to get killed because I'm not as powerful as Achilles" sense. Hector was uncomplicated and good, a simple man who was as good a man and a warrior as he could possibly be -- and he got killed by a spoiled young man with godlike powers. Hector's death, and what happens with Priam, Hector's father, sort of makes Achilles grow up a bit. (Then, of course, Achilles dies.)

-Tacky

 

[shilsen]

Achilles wasn't meant to be the hero. Hector was meant to be the hero, albeit in the "going to get killed because I'm not as powerful as Achilles" sense. Hector was uncomplicated and good, a simple man who was as good a man and a warrior as he could possibly be -- and he got killed by a spoiled young man with godlike powers. Hector's death, and what happens with Priam, Hector's father, sort of makes Achilles grow up a bit. (Then, of course, Achilles dies.)

-Tacky

Maybe to some modern readers, but hardly to the intended audience. Achilles is definitely the hero of the epic.

 

[hong]

Epic Level -- Level 20+

Epic Saga -- Characterized by having the same characteristics as the ancient Norse sagas

Epic Scope -- Characterized by the fact that the scope of the battle means that most of the known country, world, or universe is at stake

Epic Heroism -- Characterized by the archetypal nature of the characters, each of whom generally embodies a singular emotion or ideal

Like I said, epic is a state of mind.


Hong "next month: the Reader's Digest condensed ELH!" Ooi

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

The problem with campaigns is that they are difficult to maintain at these levels of greatness. Most epic heroes have one great achievement in their lives, and if you follow the classic structure, often die in their moment of triumph. But even if they don't, the story usually ends with that single epic moment. For example,
Maximus kills the Emperor of Rome at the end of Gladiator, and
Luke defeats the Emperor and redeems his father at the end of the original Star Wars saga. The tales are nearly over at the moments of their greatest triumphs. Life may go on for some after that, but the tale of the epic hero is over with that victory.

In the case of Star Wars, was it truly over at the end of RotJ? It seemed to me that Luke's story was just beginning- he had finally become a Jedi! The campaign wasn't over- the gamemaster of the Star Wars universe still had lots of challenges to pull out of his sleeve, from invasions of Ssi-Ruuk and Yuzhan Vong to Grand Admiral Thrawn to Sith Spirits to re-establishing the Jedi Academy and becoming a master... the story was far from over. Now, some of us still think that it ended at the end of RotJ, (including myself), but that's a different argument.

I'm just pointing out that Star Wars is a really bad example to use, as it contradicts the point you were trying to make.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

OK, here's a question.

In the DC universe, which is more epic? Batman's struggle against the horde of enemies he fights every night in Gotham (and I include all the recent Cataclysm/No Man's Land/Legacy storylines) or The Justice League?

You can argue it each way. Batman is more epic because he fights overwhelming, never ending foes with only a few friends to help (and frankly, the rest of them mostly exist as back up, specific help or plot hooks, none of them are as powerful as him personally), but on the other hand his is also a good example of an ongoing campaign.

the Justice League appears more epic because it's more powerful (ie compare Green Lantern vs Robin one-on-one), however, they routinely face more powerful opponents. So whilst the setting is higher level, is it more epic?

Personally, I think neither campaign is epic in feel, although both run epic style adventures (the aforementioned Batman stories, for the JLA stuff like Mageddon and the DC One Million story).

 

[willpax]

My students always point out one thing about the epics we read: they are long.

I think this is an indispensable part of the Epic Feel: you have to know that you have worked for this a long time. While some people can generate the required emotions without the build up, most people need to have been working toward a goal for a long time, and that goal needs to tax them to the utmost.

My strategy for creating this (most desirable) effect is to rigorously control the scope of the game so that there is a larger scope easily available. Currently, the group is mainly dealing with minor political intrigue in two local nations; they are slowly becoming aware that there are larger forces that are having an influence on them, but they don't comprehend the nature of those forces yet. It will require all their resources to accomplish their current goals.

When they accomplish their political goal (which is really short term, but not to them as this will stretch out over many sessions), they will be in a position to realize that there are larger forces that threaten their new gains. And, hopefully, the slow buildup to a climax can begin again.