Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6120224" data-attributes="member: 4937">Well, then you are arguing with me.Now I'm confused.I agree that the plot of the Matrix is one of the archetypal plots, but we appear to have a very different understanding of what plot is or what the Matrix is about.   The archeatypal plot of the Matrix is 'The Unrevealed King' - see for example the King Arthur story.  I don't even agree that The Matrix is really about overthrowing tyranny, per se, although ultimately that's one consequence.  Nonetheless, to say that all stories containing the 'The Unrevealed King' though they have common elements ('The King Knows Not Who He Is' or 'The People Do Not Know Their King' and 'The Land and the King Are One', etc.) also have the same plot is I think wrong.   Plot isn't just a synonym for conflict.   You can say that the conflict is 'Man versus Nature' or 'Man versus Society', but that really tells us nothing much about the plot since the conflict is only one small element of the plot.   'Leningen versus the Ants' doesn't have the same plot as Jack London's 'To Build a Fire', despite sharing the 'Man versus Nature' conflict.  They are radically different stories not just in the series of events that occur, but in the theme these events reinforce.  Nor are the two settings equivalent, though I suppose you could tell 'Leningen versus the Snow' and 'To Build a Fire' from the stand point of defending yourself from an encrouching ant swarm, the emotional impact would I think be different.  (For one thing, 'Leningen versus the Ants' might be 'man versus nature', but 'Leningen versus the Snow' borders on 'Man versus God'.)   At the end of 'To Build a Fire', the man's death is surprisingly gentle, but might be more horrific if he was eaten alive.Your discussion of how a module leads to a plot is so interesting, I may have to start a different thread on that.  Point being, I find it an intruiging example, but I don't draw the conclusion that you do.  I'll just say here that I think it is wrong to concluded that because two people play the same module that they necessarily have the same setting or plot, much less story.   And even if they did, two different stories can have the same plot, they will be just very similar stories if they do.  And in general, we wouldn't find it too surprising if the same module produced two similar stories.And again, you can put the same plot in a different setting, but if the plot isn't going to adapt, it implies that the new setting has a one to one and onto relationship with the original setting.  Thus, we could say, "Orcs = Storm Troopers, Wizard Knights = Jedi, The Black Knight = Darth Vader, The Dark Lord = The Emporer, The Unknown King = Luke Skywalker, Magic = The Force, The Dragon = The Death Star" and whatever, and we could move one fantasy story in a futurist fantasy setting to a quasi-medieval fantasy setting with little difficulty.  We might however have a great deal of difficulty doing so if we changed the setting in fundamental ways: there is no magic, there is a monotheistic god, there is no ruling tyrant but rather a democracy or a beloved extant king, the setting requires that the culture reject the idea of a savior, etc.  If the setting fundamentals change, for example you want to set a fantasy story where learning magic is fundamental to the plot in a setting where magic has no good counterpart, then you might have a problem.   Sanding off the proper nouns and changing the drapes doesn't really change the fundamental setting much.  Creating a setting to fit the plot is of course easy, but not every setting supports every story and that is fundamentally my point.Huh.  I don't understand you.</blockquote>

Verification