Things Other People Aren't Allowed to Like

[echoVanguard]

D&D isnt a game of heroic fantasy, although you can play it that way if you wish to. 4th edition, which is not D&D, but a version thereof; has the unmet premise of being heroic fantasy.

Can we really make this assumption? What, specifically, is heroic fantasy - in other words, what are the key factors that define it?

echo

[shadzar]

D&D isnt a game of heroic fantasy, although you can play it that way if you wish to. 4th edition, which is not D&D, but a version thereof; has the unmet premise of being heroic fantasy.

Can we really make this assumption? What, specifically, is heroic fantasy - in other words, what are the key factors that define it?

echo

4th edition defines itself as heroic fantasy, so i was using that definition, and than reminding it doesnt do it well.

so heroic fantasy is fantasy in which you start out as the hero. 1st level 4th edition = heroic tier....

one of the many things making 4th NOT D&D, but no other edition tries to define you are heros when you start playing, only that you are adventurers. you MAY start as heros if you want, "everyone returns in a few years to the inn of the last home" is where your game starts. thought you are not FORCED to be declared a hero at the start of the game, and can go whatever direction you wish.

i hate being in a multipage thread and forget the thread title and phpBB 2.0 used here doesn't show the title on the compose post mode.

anyway, forgetting this threads title and not to derail it...

to define a game as heroic fantasy, it would need that as one of the premises, rather than being open to allow for other playstyles such as D&D is. everyone shouldnt be forced to play a hero, if they just want to be an adventurer or mercenary or whatever.

just another case of:

can D&D be X?
should D&D be X?

[Swordslinger]

one of the many things making 4th NOT D&D, but no other edition tries to define you are heros when you start playing, only that you are adventurers. you MAY start as heros if you want, "everyone returns in a few years to the inn of the last home" is where your game starts. thought you are not FORCED to be declared a hero at the start of the game, and can go whatever direction you wish.

4E doesn't make you a hero, as that's more accomplished by doing heroic deeds. 4E just makes you capable of doing heroic stuff right in the beginning.

That's fine to me, because the game is supposed to be about the PC's story. They're the protagonists, and protagonists in stories get special treatment.

[echoVanguard]

This is exactly the sort of thing I mean. We're throwing around this "heroic" descriptor, but we can't even agree on what it means. Does it have a behavioral component, or merely an impressiveness one?

4th Edition encourages players to make characters of similar alignment, but there's no prohibition on making evil or chaotic evil characters right out of the box at level 1. How, then, can one assert that 4E defines itself as heroic fantasy? Just because the first tier is defined as "The Heroic Tier"?

Google's dictionary function defines heroic as thus:

he·ro·ic
noun /həˈrōik/ 

Behavior or talk that is bold or dramatic, esp. excessively or unexpectedly so
- the makeshift team performed heroics

adjective /həˈrōik/ 

Having the characteristics of a hero or heroine; very brave
- heroic deeds
- a few heroic individuals

Of or representing heroes or heroines
- early medieval heroic poetry

(of language or a work of art) Grand or grandiose in scale or intention
- one passes under pyramids and obelisks, all on a heroic scale

(of a statue) Larger than life-size but less than colossal

Many of these definitions merely talk about the scope or boldness of the endeavor, not the goodness of a character. Furthermore, the 4E dmg makes it pretty clear (around page 12) that setting the tone of the campaign anywhere between morally ambiguous or heroic is the stylistic choice of both the DM and the players, and that any choice is equally valid. More than anything else, it's important to remember that any TTRPG can be used to play almost any trope - players in Shadowrun don't have to be runners, any more than players in D&D have to go into dungeons or interact with dragons.

echo

[shadzar]

This is exactly the sort of thing I mean. We're throwing around this "heroic" descriptor, but we can't even agree on what it means. Does it have a behavioral component, or merely an impressiveness one?

4th Edition encourages players to make characters of similar alignment, but there's no prohibition on making evil or chaotic evil characters right out of the box at level 1. How, then, can one assert that 4E defines itself as heroic fantasy? Just because the first tier is defined as "The Heroic Tier"?

while that is true, those definitions dont really fit with me or anything i learned. maybe every dictionary has changed to be more vague in recent years....

4th edition does, within the rules, inspire more people to think of their characters as heros to begin with. you dont need to work for it. more stupid shit form James Wyatt probably in his misunderstanding of the english language and D&D.

to me a hero doesnt have to be good or bad, but doing something selfless and beyond his job to the benefit of others. take the pilot of the flight that crashed into the Hudson. he helped people get off the plane to safety as it sank. many people considered him a hero. he was just doing his job, which included the safety of the passengers. he himself calims that as well, he isnt a hero, he just did his job.

now if he had been off-duty, and near a plane crash and rushed into the burning rubble to pull people out of a plane, then maybe consider him a hero, because he never had responsibilities to those passengers.

so 4th makes bad assumptions in design, and leaves holes in its own design.

How did these characters become heros? did they already perform some heroic feat that earned them status?

AD&D you had to reach 9th level to get a name for yourself...but 4th you skip straight to it.

so D&D ISNT heroic fantasy, because then it couldnt allow for the dirt farmer done good character.

you CAN play it as such, but to state that because you DO play it as such that IT is, would be wrong.

you should say "i play D&D as heroic fantasy", because as you say it is possible to play D&D with some or all evil characters with no intent of heroics, and IT WORKS; as it should with the proper DM and group of players wanting to make it work.

when you start the game, such as 4th, claiming that the characters are heros by default, you already put the seed into mind, that you cannot play dirt farmer done good. you have tempered your game with this statement that it was designed with this focus, and designed to be in opposition of dirt farmer done good. telling people that their playstyle is badwrongfun, with things like "its about killing things and taking their stuff", "it isnt about traipsing through fairy rings and talking to the little people".

hope this has also answered to your post Swordslinger. 4th doesnt make you capable of doing heroic stuff right in the beginning, if the PLAYER isnt capable of coming up with some deed the WORLD would see as being heroic.

one proclaiming themselves a hero is often times just a braggart, blowhard, or cavalier.

to become a hero requires deeds that make OTHERS call you one.

so again why 4th sets up the false premise, because in order to have level 1 hero characters, there needs to be a group in the game world that views and treats the characters as such.

look at Disney's Hercules (the one with James Woods as Hades), to see the difference in claiming to be a hero, and BEING one.

[Aryxbez]

except, it is not. you can play it that way if you want, but it isnt about heroic fantasy. this can go in the other thread to not derail this one on general ideas...but D&D isnt a game of heroic fantasy, although you can play it that way if you wish to. 4th edition, which is not D&D, but a version thereof; has the unmet premise of being heroic fantasy.

Except it is, even 3rd edition has stated this in their books, hell the Back of the book even says: "Prepare to venture forth with your bold companions into a world of Heroic Fantasy". Furthermore, on page 4, second paragraph of Introduction: "D&D is a game of your imagination in which you participate in thrilling adventures and dangerous quests by taking on the role of a hero---a character you create". Hell, under Characters: "Your characters star in the adventures you play, just like the heroes of a book or movie." Oh, and under that on adventures? "Your character is an adventurer, a hero who sets out on epic quests for fortune and glory."

Also, not sure exactly what your precious "2nd edition" tells you, but I'm tempted to go check the ones out at my hobby store to see otherwise. Also, simply put, adventures, where you apparently go @$$stab Lolth and all her minions in hell, another where I think its Vecna? super liches, or whatever? Yeah...and you want to say D&D = not Heroic Fantasy...

[Prak]

look at Disney's Hercules (the one with James Woods as Hades), to see the difference in claiming to be a hero, and BEING one.

Alternatively, go read actual greek myths to see why Hercules is a bad example of a hero under the modern definition, and the Iliad/Odyssey to see what an Iron Age hero was like. Hint: It includes lots of indiscriminate murder of acceptable targets and treating women as property.

D&D is heroic fantasy because, apart from it's memetic mutation into the game of "Murder Hobo: the Stabbening" here on the den, what the books actually encourage, to some extent, is the playing of selfless characters who will slay the dragon threatening the town they're in, not because it's asked or expected of them, but because it's the right thing to do.

Sadly, the actual adventures, both published and private, encourage more of an Iron age heroism, what with the "stab first, ponder moral quandries about baby kobolds never" attitude they're written with.

[Josh_Kablack]

Alternatively, go read actual greek myths to see why Hercules is a bad example of a hero under the modern definition, and the Iliad/Odyssey to see what an Iron Age hero was like. Hint: It includes lots of indiscriminate murder of acceptable targets.

And this is different from modern Hollywood blockbusters solely in that "acceptable targets" is now defined to be aliens, nazis, and the occasional terrorist, evil robot or meglomaniac.

[Prak]

True, though there are a few more cosmetic differences. It's generally implied that the women made some kind of decision or something.

[Doom]

And this is different from modern Hollywood blockbusters solely in that "acceptable targets" is now defined to be aliens, nazis, and the occasional terrorist, evil robot or meglomaniac.

You left out zombies.

[Prak]

Zombies are essentially objects. That's like saying he left out mailboxes, or photographs.

[Josh_Kablack]

Well I also left out Ice Giants, Kaiju and Serial Killers among other acceptable targets. But really none of those are as common as Nazis or Aliens.

Heck, I'm eagerly awaiting the release of the Alien Nazi Movie even though I understand that most actual Nazis were just low-ranking soldiers honorably upholding their enlistment oaths (albeit under a loathsome regime) and I outright blanched at the bit in Invasion: LA where the "heroes" decided that completing the vivisection of a sentient lifeform was more important than retreating in the face of a life-threatening enemy advance.

[Psychic Robot]

that's what you get for watching invasion: LA

[shadzar]

except, it is not. you can play it that way if you want, but it isnt about heroic fantasy. this can go in the other thread to not derail this one on general ideas...but D&D isnt a game of heroic fantasy, although you can play it that way if you wish to. 4th edition, which is not D&D, but a version thereof; has the unmet premise of being heroic fantasy.

Except it is, even 3rd edition has stated this in their books, hell the Back of the book even says: "Prepare to venture forth with your bold companions into a world of Heroic Fantasy". Furthermore, on page 4, second paragraph of Introduction: "D&D is a game of your imagination in which you participate in thrilling adventures and dangerous quests by taking on the role of a hero---a character you create". Hell, under Characters: "Your characters star in the adventures you play, just like the heroes of a book or movie." Oh, and under that on adventures? "Your character is an adventurer, a hero who sets out on epic quests for fortune and glory."

Also, not sure exactly what your precious "2nd edition" tells you, but I'm tempted to go check the ones out at my hobby store to see otherwise. Also, simply put, adventures, where you apparently go @$$stab Lolth and all her minions in hell, another where I think its Vecna? super liches, or whatever? Yeah...and you want to say D&D = not Heroic Fantasy...

This is the heart of role-playing. The player adopts the role of a character and then guides that character through an adventure. The player makes decisions, interacts with other characters and players, and, essentially, "pretends" to be his character during the course of the game. That doesn't mean that the player must jump up and down, dash around, and act like his character. It means that whenever the character is called on to do something or make a decision, the player pretends that he is in that situation and chooses an appropriate course of action.

Physically, the players and referee (the DM) should be seated comfortably around a table with the referee at the head.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

PC--abbreviation for player character.

Player character (abbr. PC)--the characters in a role-playing game who are under the control of the players.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

High-level AD&D® campaigns pose some special problems for the referee. Encounters are more difficult to construct because the DM cannot simply throw monsters at characters whose prowess are equal to those of Hercules, Merlin, and other heroes of myth and legend. Keeping a high-level campaign on-track and exciting can be so difficult that many players and DMs prefer to retire their high-level characters and start over at 1st level rather than continue the campaign.

Chapter 7: High-Level Characters

Chapter 1 explained that high-level characters are unusual and heroic. This chapter includes rules for giving high-level characters abilities that allow them to function as epic heroes that are truly different from lesser mortals. It also explains some limitations that even epic heroes must face.

you see 1st edition and D&D (IIRC), had this thing where you had to EARN your name...when you did that was called "name level"...9th level.

Robilar was just Robilar until 9th level when he gained the title Sir Robilar. HLC also continues that vein that 10th and higher levels are those who have earned a name as heros.

funny how 3rd then tries to claim the fresh off the turnip farm PC is some automatic hero, and 4th brings the game down having you start at level 10, be enumerates it to be level 1 to have the "heroic tier".

again, another proof where 3rd fucked up, because it took the bad parts of 2.5 (which was 98% trash) and built an edition off of it.

yeah, you should go read some older editions, before spouting off what D&D is and "always was" and you will find out how fucking wrong you are to have let WotC pull the wool over your eyes and make you sound like a fucking idiot.

having to earn a name for yourself, in no way means you start off as a hero.

another reason why some people just dont like 3.x/4th because the assumption you are a hero form the start...which means for those wanting to earn such through play... the game offers nothing and no reason to play it. with so many people buying into the bullshit, playing the game the way you would want to is impossible, due to their constant infusion of that bullshit and forcing it onto others.

Monte, Tweet, etc wanted to play a game of heroes so changed (A)D&D to try to be one so they could masturbate over their "contribution to the game", and now Monte is seeing the folly of his ways to notice he didnt add shit to the game. someone could ALWAYS play a game where the PCs were heroes form the start, but forcing that nto the game makes it hard to remove it for those who want to earn the name of "hero".

[shadzar]

look at Disney's Hercules (the one with James Woods as Hades), to see the difference in claiming to be a hero, and BEING one.

Alternatively, go read actual greek myths to see why Hercules is a bad example of a hero under the modern definition, and the Iliad/Odyssey to see what an Iron Age hero was like. Hint: It includes lots of indiscriminate murder of acceptable targets and treating women as property.

D&D is heroic fantasy because, apart from it's memetic mutation into the game of "Murder Hobo: the Stabbening" here on the den, what the books actually encourage, to some extent, is the playing of selfless characters who will slay the dragon threatening the town they're in, not because it's asked or expected of them, but because it's the right thing to do.

Sadly, the actual adventures, both published and private, encourage more of an Iron age heroism, what with the "stab first, ponder moral quandries about baby kobolds never" attitude they're written with.

all published adventures are shit to compare the game itself to.

some may not be able to see the game without them, but the game didnt before come out and say it was heroic fantasy.

the foundation is there, even if everyone prefers to walk on the grass. walking on the grass doesnt make the foundation disappear, so jsut because SOME people wanted to worship at the church of Minister Wyatt and "kill things and take their stuff"...doesnt mean that is what the game was about, only what he has bastardized it to become.

(so his son can become a good little murdering hobo in the real world.)

[Swordslinger]

you see 1st edition and D&D (IIRC), had this thing where you had to EARN your name...when you did that was called "name level"...9th level.

Robilar was just Robilar until 9th level when he gained the title Sir Robilar. HLC also continues that vein that 10th and higher levels are those who have earned a name as heros.

I would think that names should be earned by stuff you do in character, not by gaining levels. You become Sir Robilar when a king actually knights you. Depending on what you do and your background, that may come very early in your career or never.

funny how 3rd then tries to claim the fresh off the turnip farm PC is some automatic hero, and 4th brings the game down having you start at level 10, be enumerates it to be level 1 to have the "heroic tier".

Giving you the ability to do heroic things and being recognized as a hero by the NPCs are two different things.

[shadzar]

you see 1st edition and D&D (IIRC), had this thing where you had to EARN your name...when you did that was called "name level"...9th level.

Robilar was just Robilar until 9th level when he gained the title Sir Robilar. HLC also continues that vein that 10th and higher levels are those who have earned a name as heros.

I would think that names should be earned by stuff you do in character, not by gaining levels. You become Sir Robilar when a king actually knights you. Depending on what you do and your background, that may come very early in your career or never.

funny how 3rd then tries to claim the fresh off the turnip farm PC is some automatic hero, and 4th brings the game down having you start at level 10, be enumerates it to be level 1 to have the "heroic tier".

Giving you the ability to do heroic things and being recognized as a hero by the NPCs are two different things.

1. levels are the metric used for MANY things. every Joe Schmuck couldnt just go out and buy a stronghold, this was earned at a certain level in the game, because the ability to keep a stronghold was at that level of strength AND acknowledgment. a level 1 in ANY edition, will not be able to hold onto a stronghold from invaders, nor inspire many people to want to help that level 1 defend it.

again think about Hercules by Disney... this is the same thing said about earlier D&D. your own remarks about your accomplishments dont make them valid; but when seen as others in this way you then gain that acknowledgment.

so for people to believe your claims, you have to back it up with proof of action, and that could not be done until 9th level. you jsut didnt have enough clout in the area for people to view you in such a manner. even with name levels, you didnt pick your own name...but it was given to you a kingdom somewhere bestowed the name of Sir or Lord, a council of wizards bestowed you as a master, a druid council bestowed upon you...., a clerical order bestowed upon you.... get the idea?

either way, you didnt start at level 1 as a hero, and that is what 4th edition assumes and it started in 3.x since people associate "heroic fantasy" as one where the protagonist IS a hero, not BECOMES a hero.

D&D has always been "fantasy adventure".

2. until recognized by the NPCs...the ability are NOT heroic. which is my point. the power level of a hero and villian can be equal, but it is their actions that define them to one or the other.

which leads back to point #1...or the first part you mentioned... at level 9 there was enough action on the PCs parts to have others call them a hero, and the news to spread far and wide to be recognized. a single event in a small village wont really mark your claim to fame as a hero in the kingdom of Farawayistan. you will still be some local turnip farmer not even worthy of cleaning the boots of the kingdoms stableboy.

EDIT: properly order fantasy adventure

[Swordslinger]

either way, you didnt start at level 1 as a hero, and that is what 4th edition assumes and it started in 3.x since people associate "heroic fantasy" as one where the protagonist IS a hero, not BECOMES a hero.

4E starts you out with a greater level of competency, but that doesn't make you a hero.

As for earning the title of hero, you could hold off a band of orcs singlehandedly and be a village hero, or you could save the world from the god of darkness and be an epic hero. The level of heroism rises with the level of the PC and what they're capable of doing.

Having a set level that says "Okay, now you're a hero or a knight, regardless of what you've done" is pretty stupid, as these are titles of public opinion. Playing this magic scenario where the world suddenly knows you dinged level 9 and the king instantly grants you knighthood seems nonsensical.

You could easily get such titles and recognition through falsehood, much like that phony wizard from Harry Potter who took credit for everyone else's work but actually sucked at magic.

[shadzar]

either way, you didnt start at level 1 as a hero, and that is what 4th edition assumes and it started in 3.x since people associate "heroic fantasy" as one where the protagonist IS a hero, not BECOMES a hero.

4E starts you out with a greater level of competency, but that doesn't make you a hero.

level 1-10: heroic tier
level 11-20: paragon tier



not only does the game itself state that "you are a hero adventuring".

[fbmf]

adventure fantasy

Can you provide a cite that proves you didn't make up this subgenre, maybe going so far as to cite examples of popular stories that we might have heard of in the adventure fantasy genre/sub-genre?

Game On,
fbmf

[shadzar]

adventure fantasy

Can you provide a cite that proves you didn't make up this subgenre, maybe going so far as to cite examples of popular stories that we might have heard of in the adventure fantasy genre/sub-genre?

Game On,
fbmf

can you link back to that post, since the quotes of phpBB2 do not possess that function inline?

[fbmf]

adventure fantasy

Can you provide a cite that proves you didn't make up this subgenre, maybe going so far as to cite examples of popular stories that we might have heard of in the adventure fantasy genre/sub-genre?

Game On,
fbmf

can you link back to that post, since the quotes of phpBB2 do not possess that function inline?

Why? Are you disputing that you said it?

Game On,
fbmf

[shadzar]

im disputing i said it was a subgenre, yes. so i want to see the full context of my own post. maybe you misread it and i can explain what was said, in the event you did misread the post quoted.

[fbmf]

To clarify: You never said it was a sub-genre. Sub-genre is the best thing I know to call it, "Fantasy" being the genre.

I'm calling you on the concept of "adventure fantasy". I ain't saying it doesn't exist, but I am saying I've never heard of it and a GOOGLE search only turned up hits for fantasy adventure.

As the context of the quote was you saying that D&D is not heroic fantasy but rather adventure fantasy, and I know heroic fantasy is a sub-genre of fantasy, I assumed you were subbing in one sub-genre for another.

If not, that's all good. I just want to know what "adventure fantasy" means.

If it matters, it's about seven or eight up from this one about halfway through the post.

Game On,
fbmf

[shadzar]

i replaced "heroic" with "adventure" but forgot to transpose it after to "fantasy adventure".

so it isnt a game about heroes, but about adventures; thus the replacement.