The way heroes are portrayed has changed. Multimedia previously positioned heroes as muscle-bound monsters or barely-clothed sirens. Things have changed for the better, and it affects how we think of our characters in role-playing games.
Female heroes have changed too. Decades ago, right back into the Pulp age, the common tendency was to depict female adventurers as showing a lot of skin while wearing ineffective bikini-shaped armor. And to depict female non-adventurers as nearly naked. Nor were there many female adventurers, most females (often princesses) were in the story to be rescued. Now heroines look athletic rather than voluptuous, and they're far more capable of saving themselves than in the Pulp era. Female armor actually makes sense, in many cases!
Like tabletop games, characters are increasingly customizable (this is a tenet of how video games are sometimes considered RPGs because you can change your character’s appearance). This often includes physique. You can make your character look however you want of course, but the barbarian archetype (and its progenitor, Conan) now feels like a throwback to an earlier age.
That’s not the only way heroes have changed.
Heroes act because they see something wrong and feel compelled to make it right. Burnett says:
Contrast this with the movies (2001-2003). The movies are about Aragorn, not an ordinary person but born to a hereditary nobility. And he is frequently torn by uncertainty about what he should do (and also whether he can accomplish whatever he decides to do).
The Hobbit movies (the Hobbit story was completed 1937) are actually closer to pulp than the LOTR movies, but that may come from the early source material. It’s not just traditional fantasy where heroes have changed.
Campbell's heroes and heroines are like Aragorn in the LOTR books; they know what they have to do, though they're not sure they can do it. What counts is what they do. Allan's heroes and heroines are filled with angst about what they're doing. It's more about feelings than action.
Captain Kirk from the original Star Trek (late 60s) is more or less the equivalent of a D&D paladin, using his charisma to talk down the opposition; more like modern heroes, he prefers talking to fighting.
Luke Skywalker is another Hero in the old mold; though tempted by the Dark Side, he is a quintessential Good Guy. But in Star Wars (1977) we also have a capable heroic heroine in the (still-a-princess) Leia.
Older gamers probably notice this shift simply because they’ve been consuming media for longer. There are upsides and downsides to these changes. On the one hand, our heroes worry far more about motivation and whether an action is right. On the other, women are afforded much more respect for their capabilities now. There’s no right or wrong way to approach these characters, but our modern sensibilities have definitely changed what’s acceptable to be a “hero” in movies, TV, books, and role-playing games.
Your turn: How have heroes in your games changed over the years?
Physicality
Instead of the big burly male heroes of the past (influenced by John Wayne and Arnold Schwarzwenegger movie success), wiry fellows are now more common in modern media, sometimes androgynous (likely due to the influence of Japanese anime/manga). This is more obvious in video games than in tabletop RPGs.Female heroes have changed too. Decades ago, right back into the Pulp age, the common tendency was to depict female adventurers as showing a lot of skin while wearing ineffective bikini-shaped armor. And to depict female non-adventurers as nearly naked. Nor were there many female adventurers, most females (often princesses) were in the story to be rescued. Now heroines look athletic rather than voluptuous, and they're far more capable of saving themselves than in the Pulp era. Female armor actually makes sense, in many cases!
Like tabletop games, characters are increasingly customizable (this is a tenet of how video games are sometimes considered RPGs because you can change your character’s appearance). This often includes physique. You can make your character look however you want of course, but the barbarian archetype (and its progenitor, Conan) now feels like a throwback to an earlier age.
That’s not the only way heroes have changed.
The Heroic Attitude
Roughly speaking, this attitude difference is about Pulp heroes (pre- and post-war) vs. modern heroes (21st century). The nominal divide in science fiction and fantasy is 1980. For how the Pulp attitude contrasts with more modern attitudes I rely on SF/F author Misha Burnett’s explanation (my emphasis):This contrasts with a lack of doubt about what is right and what must be done, in modern fiction. Which, oddly enough, seems much different from the real-world polarization and conviction of right and wrong that we see so commonly today.
Heroes act because they see something wrong and feel compelled to make it right. Burnett says:
Like appearance, this changes how we play characters. The lawful alignments of Dungeons & Dragons can feel outdated today, where there is much more of a gray area (and thus, freedom) in a hero’s actions. As an example of how heroes have changed over the years, take the Lord of the Rings.
Lord of the Rings: Books vs. Movies
The Lord of the Rings (LOTR) books, written between 1937 to 1949, feature an Aragorn who knows what he must do; he's just not sure that he is capable enough to do it given the enormous strength of the enemy. He doesn't have angst about it, he goes on and tries to do it. The book is mostly about Sam (and less, about Frodo), the ordinary person forced by circumstances to become a hero.Contrast this with the movies (2001-2003). The movies are about Aragorn, not an ordinary person but born to a hereditary nobility. And he is frequently torn by uncertainty about what he should do (and also whether he can accomplish whatever he decides to do).
The Hobbit movies (the Hobbit story was completed 1937) are actually closer to pulp than the LOTR movies, but that may come from the early source material. It’s not just traditional fantasy where heroes have changed.
Space Opera
In "space opera" I think of a contrast between Jack Campbell's "Lost Fleet" series and spinoffs (which I highly recommend) and Jay Allan's "Blood on the Stars" series. (Both consist of more than a dozen books.)Campbell's heroes and heroines are like Aragorn in the LOTR books; they know what they have to do, though they're not sure they can do it. What counts is what they do. Allan's heroes and heroines are filled with angst about what they're doing. It's more about feelings than action.
Captain Kirk from the original Star Trek (late 60s) is more or less the equivalent of a D&D paladin, using his charisma to talk down the opposition; more like modern heroes, he prefers talking to fighting.
Luke Skywalker is another Hero in the old mold; though tempted by the Dark Side, he is a quintessential Good Guy. But in Star Wars (1977) we also have a capable heroic heroine in the (still-a-princess) Leia.
Older gamers probably notice this shift simply because they’ve been consuming media for longer. There are upsides and downsides to these changes. On the one hand, our heroes worry far more about motivation and whether an action is right. On the other, women are afforded much more respect for their capabilities now. There’s no right or wrong way to approach these characters, but our modern sensibilities have definitely changed what’s acceptable to be a “hero” in movies, TV, books, and role-playing games.
Your turn: How have heroes in your games changed over the years?
Last edited by a moderator:
