Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6831790" data-attributes="member: 42582">I agree with both these posts. I think they are consistent with what I've said in some posts above (and on another thread in this subforum) - at most tables there is just not this degree of drilling down into the fiction, and if there is then the players will just author the fiction they need to make it work.I think this is a misreading of LotR. Frodo, Faramir, Boromir, Legolas et al do not hold Gandalf or Aragorn in holy reverence. That would be sacrilege; and for Gandalf or Aragorn to accept such reverence would be to commit the sin of pride of which Sauron is guilty (and arguably the Ringwraiths also, in their lust for domination which led them to take the rings from Sauron).Gandalf and Aragorn aren't worshipped. They are loved, admired and respected.Which leads me to my main point: I am extremely puzzled by your "most obvious" explanation. [MENTION=6801209]mellored[/MENTION] has already mentioned upthread, mulitple times, that one person might inspire another through the words they use, and the strength of their personality, without the inspired person loving or admiring them.I would add that it is not uncommon for one person to come to respect another person because that other person is inspiring to them; that is, respect is an effect and not a cause of inspiration. I also think that it is possible to be inspired or motivated by someone you don't particularly care for, at least in certain circumstances.But even if we put all these cases to one side, and treat admiration, love or respect as the paradigm - I don't see the problem. D&D is based around party play. In the typical D&D campaign the PCs spend nearly all their time together, having one another's backs in life and death situations. They regularly take risks on one another's behalf, contribute large sums of money to raising one another from the dead, etc.To me, it is natural that such people should feel admiration, respect and/or love for one another. Which means that this narrative of the warlord doesn't raise any problems - the reason the warlord is able to inspire my PC is because s/he is someone whom my PC respects and admires.This raises the same issue. Why would anyone suppose that subordination is a necessary condition of inspiration? Legolas, for instance, isn't subordinate to Aragorn - Aragorn is his friend and companion, not his master.It's only "damned if you do or damned if you don't" if there is some sort of cost to playing my PC as respecting or admiring your PC. But why is that a cost? How is that inconsistent with the way that most D&D party play unfolds?In other posts on the warlord I have conjectured that the real source of the warlord divide is differing conceptions of protagonists, as either self-sufficient atoms, or as related to and even dependent on others. It seems to me that only if you have the former conception would it be some sort of burden on your agency, as a player, to play your PC as admiring and respecting a fellow PC.</blockquote>

Verification