Qualities of a Hero

[WayneLigon]

A fine and good list of heroic qualities to strive for. Excellent.

 

[Patman21967]

While I think of reading his books as chewing gum for the brain, I actually found myself loving almost all of David Gemmell heros. Druss, Waylander, Skilgannon, Darkmask etc...and eavery one of them was found lacking when held up to that crazy standard. My favorite "anti-hero" however, has to be Angus Thermopyle, from Donaldsons Gap series....Oh yeah, and Thomas Covenant was a rapist and murderer if I remember correctly.

 

[Vonlok The Bold]

I think those qualities are one way to play a hero. Those qualities aren't the only way.

I can point to historical figures that have the qualities listed above. Obviously everyone has flaws and faults, but when bent on a mission of utmost import, or when confronted with danger it could definitely bring out those qualities in people. The Montmorrency family in France had more than one member of that family that would meet those criteria.

Some people might enjoy the challenge of playing a hero that had to live up to those ideals. It is certainly a tougher task than playing a seriously flawed anti-hero. While the anti-hero is more realistic the hero-type mentioned above isn't unheard of, and in a fantasy game it should be acceptable to play the 'one in a million' type hero.

However, others may find the anti-hero more subtle, less borring, and generally more realistic. They may have more dimensions to roleplay and provide challenges of their own. I don't have a problem with people playing either type of hero, and I won't be the one to laugh or scoff at either type.

It is all a matter of what a player would have most fun roleplaying in the confines of a campaign.

 

[Ranger REG]

a hero is not one who does extraordinary things, but one who does ordinary things in extraordinary ways.

Pulling children out of a burning house is an ordinary thing?

 

[Arrgh! Mark!]

Superman isn't a hero. Why?

Because he isn't frightened. He's invincible. He's perfect.

He's not human. So he can't be a hero, he's just being normal for the alien he is. He would do what most people in his situation would do. Thats why we don't like Superman. He makes us uncomfortable at being "Weak". But we aren't weak, the standard is alien.

Now, Jesus is a hero. Not to say he isn't weak and not to say he doesn't have his failures. So what if he takes his weekends off? He's still a hero. But he's a human hero, see? He's not an alien that makes us uncomfortable. He's not an impossible ideal, like Superman is. We can achieve what he has done. Heroism doesn't inspire awe and fear - thats sublimity. Superman is Sublime. Heroism inspires admiration and respect.

 

[Andor]

Are such heroes so overrated that they are no longer admired by people of this generation and era?

I think it would be closer to the mark to say this generation is so lost it no longer finds heros admirable.*




*And that is not strictly true. Almost anyone will credit the 9/11 rescue workers with hero status. And I remember standing in line for hours to donate blood that week. But it is frighteningly close to the truth, I sometimes feel. And now there is never a line.

 

[Andor]

Superman isn't a hero. Why?

Because he isn't frightened. He's invincible. He's perfect.

He's not human. So he can't be a hero, he's just being normal for the alien he is. He would do what most people in his situation would do.

Superman is considered heroic because many (if not most) people with his kind of power would conquer the world, rather than get kittens out of trees. It's not the power, it's what he chooses to do with it.

 

[A'koss]

Am I the only one who thinks we need both kinds of heroes? We need those that try to live up to the ideal just as you need those who are, shall we say, more prudent in their actions.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

Cough, Cough...bulls**t...Cough Cough

Care to elaborate on that? What problem do you have with compassion, responsible free will, generosity, honesty and fairness, honor and nobility, restraint, self-sacrifice, valor, wisdom being considered heroic virtues?

 

[Al]

I can point to historical figures that have the qualities listed above.

I don't believe you can. Or at least, there are no historical figures whom I can think of that embody these qualities consistently. Some may exhibit these traits at some points, but none do so all of the time.

I could name a few RL examples if you want. However, I don't want this to become a politica debate, so I will refrain unless you truely need them.

Likewise, I'm dubious. Nevertheless, I can appreciate that RL examples would make this devolve into a political thread, so you needn't name them if you feel that it would degenerate. It really depends on how distant these figures are: current politicians are probably a no-no, but historical figures like Churchill, Roosevelt and Washington are probably fair game (none of whom meet of these criteria, incidentally).

The point I'm making is that to expect a hero to act with all of these qualities all of the time is too much to ask. The bar is set too high. No realistic hero will be able to maintain these, particularly not if he is actively adventuring. The solitary monk, sealed in his enclave, may just approximate them. An adventuring "hero" (or indeed one active in nearly any walk of life) will never meet these criteria consistently. The question is then begged: do we try to strive for the impossible, or laud these characters anyway? I believe we should do the latter. The problem with setting the bar too high is that it devalues true heroes. Ordinary heroes with ordinary failings cannot meet the challenge, but did does not mean they have fallen short. Using an impossibly difficult yardstick can make our greatest leaders and heroes seem lacking. In calling for an impossible standard for heroism, we make heroes impossible.