Quote from: droogSo 'hero' today means everything and nothing. Your concept of a hero reflects you rather than the hero.

I think that was a very interesting and insightful post.

Do you lot think that people's idea of what is a "hero" - or whether there should be heroes at all - influences their game play style? Even down to such things as whether there should be fudging, how many points to build a character in with some generic game, etc?

Quote from: droogSo 'hero' today means everything and nothing. Your concept of a hero reflects you rather than the hero.

Once again, first and foremost: I reckon a "hero" is somebody on your side. Whatever side that is.

You need look no further than the collective of today's newspapers around the world to see this in action. A hero in one place is a terrorist in another and an imperialist over there and satan incarnet to the person down the block. And this is NOT something new.

Here's my experience of something that dovetails with the shared ground between Eliot and JimBob:

There's a common kind of disagreement among fantasy gamers between people who supposedly like something called "high fantasy" and people who supposedly like something called "swords and sorcery". I think in some cases these labels are more than anything masks for different ideals of heroism. The great-personal-sacrifice-to-save-the-world, romantic-love-is-a-high-ideal kind, and the i'm-more-clever-and-cunning-than-you, i-care-about-my-friends-and-a-few-other-people-but-might-save-the-world-to-save-them, sex-is-good-entertainment-between-killing-and-drinking kind of heroism. The knight and the knave.

I've seen lots of trouble, in fantasy games, between players who have the knight ideal and the knave ideal. They get in each others' way and tend not to have much fun together, EXCEPT in the case where they become 'buddies' in the game and use each other for a kind of counterpoint. But in big group play, lots of friction, generally.

Quote from: JimBobOzDo you lot think that people's idea of what is a "hero" - or whether there should be heroes at all - influences their game play style? Even down to such things as whether there should be fudging, how many points to build a character in with some generic game, etc?

Fudging? Yes.  As far as I can tell, fudging is all based upon drama (or lack thereof) and could be influenced by someone's idea of what a hero is.  Munchkinism? Perhaps a tiny portion
Level-based vs Skill-based? No
How many points to start with? Sure

I don't think it's at the heart of the issues for most people, however.

Quote from: CalithenaThere's a common kind of disagreement among fantasy gamers between people who supposedly like something called "high fantasy" and people who supposedly like something called "swords and sorcery". I think in some cases these labels are more than anything masks for different ideals of heroism.

Good call. I guess that the differences are more or less transparent to various observers, though.

Also, I find your use of the word "supposedly" intriguing. There are other elements that I think go into the "high fantasy" vs. "S&S" distinction and I wonder how many of them help support the fundamental difference in ideal, versus simply being traditional tropes of the respective genres.

QuoteI've seen lots of trouble, in fantasy games, between players who have the knight ideal and the knave ideal. They get in each others' way and tend not to have much fun together, EXCEPT in the case where they become 'buddies' in the game and use each other for a kind of counterpoint. But in big group play, lots of friction, generally.

I haven't seen this exact friction but I have felt a similar disconnect between players and GMs--specifically, GMs who think the players will automatically respond to some emergency, and players who think "what's in it for me?"

Quote from: JimBobOzI think that was a very interesting and insightful post.

Do you lot think that people's idea of what is a "hero" - or whether there should be heroes at all - influences their game play style? Even down to such things as whether there should be fudging, how many points to build a character in with some generic game, etc?

I know this was addressed to droog, but on one of these threads I suggested that the use of "hero points", even in generous quantities, may help convey the idea of the "ordinary person hero" better than the use of "high level" characters. It may also depend on how the hero points are earned/refreshed.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen[...]I suggested that the use of "hero points", even in generous quantities, may help convey the idea of the "ordinary person hero" better than the use of "high level" characters.

Absolutely. It's what me and Xypho did for Outbackalypse, where in GURPS we made a caricature of me, who was of course quite ordinary, and he adventured through postapocalyptic Australia. He wasn't very heroic, though, despite spending lots of CP as Hero Points!

Quote from: Elliot WilenI know this was addressed to droog, but on one of these threads I suggested that the use of "hero points", even in generous quantities, may help convey the idea of the "ordinary person hero" better than the use of "high level" characters. It may also depend on how the hero points are earned/refreshed.

Have you ever tried this? How'd it go? I don't think I'll ever use hero points...for some reason, I'd prefer it, if they were ordinary type heroes their characters fail or succeed with what they've got...

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RHave you ever tried this? How'd it go? I don't think I'll ever use hero points...for some reason, I'd prefer it, if they were ordinaty type heroes their characters fail or succeed with what they got...

That's the beauty of a Hero Point system where the Hero Points come from XP - each player can decide whether or not to use them. I found that some used them all the time, others only to save their or another character's life or limb, others still not even then. It was up to each player how they did it...

Quote from: JimBobOzThat's the beauty of a Hero Point system where the Hero Points come from XP - each player can decide whether or not to use them. I found that some used them all the time, others only to save their or another character's life or limb, others still not even then. It was up to each player how they did it...

Okay, if the players are going to use them(HP) for stuff other than you know heroic stuff shouldn't they be called drama points or something ?

What I have noticed about heroism is that it was always a reaction to certain in game events rather than anything the pcs planned on. There is a certain element of spontaneity and sacrifice in these heroic acts that I think should exist without the aid of game mechanics....but yeah, this is just biasness on my part...

Regards,
David R

A hero is a guy who makes the effort.

There is no demarcation between the UK hero and the US hero both have varying definitions. I like proper flawed Scottish and Western heros like Billy the Kid and Rob Roy who fought first for their families and local communities and then for their larger communities. I know they're myths but heroes have to care.

Quote from: YamoA hero is a larger-than-life figure that embodies his or her culture's values.

I was going to reply that this was the most insightful thing I'd read in this thread, but droog's post immediately following yours stole that distinction.