Posted by Amblemourne on March 6, 2000 at 15:18:29:
In Reply to: In response to Graham's and Arcane's pissing match below. posted by Grallon on March 6, 2000 at 13:37:18:
This is not meant to pick at the arguments presented, that is too easy to do when we all put our thoughts in print. I mean no offense, please take none.
> The reasons it seems (if it isnt actually so) to be balanced towards evil in cf...are manyfold.
>
> 1) Look at the name of the Mud CARRION fields.
It's a name, nothing more, though descriptive
> 2) It is more fun to be good, when you have something to hate. This is just plain human Nature
> (read:inquisition/jihad/crusades/holocaust)
Umm.let's not get into the "goodness" of the "Church" in this and the ritualized torture and maiming of thousands during the Inquistion and Crusades (Both a very black mark in human history). I also do not think having something to "hate" is part of human nature. This seems to be more of a cultural contstrual rather than something passed through genetics.
> 3) The two classes that lent themselves to drastic changes the easiest, just happened to be two evil only classes, A-P and Necro.
> These were changed and beefed up ALOT not only because the imms wanted lightwalkers to die and have a disadvantage(if it is this at all) but because they were the two classes that it was easiest to think up neato and cool stuff for.
I have no clue, not being an IMM.
> This is not to say I totally agree with cf being weighted towards evil (yes, this is a valid perception Arcane, nomatter what you say, and yes I have had Numerous Heroes...and recently). Here is why.
(My two cents on why folks are evil, though I only address one facet. Some folks just find it fun and refreshing, but I am not addressing them. Playing evil is a question of empowerment. By empowerment, I refer to an individual's desire to assume control of teir own life in a fantasy setting. Most of use have little real control over our lives and are reactive vs proactive. In RL, we have many folks, organizations telling us how we should live our lives and being evil in CF gives us a nice chance to say "Bugger It! I don't need no stinkin' rules!" It is a measure of control that we don't feel in our daily lives...an outlet.)
> When in history's epics and stories of valor is there examples of an Evil person alone taking out hoards of Good people. I can think of a few:
>
> 1) Goliath. But he was taken out by a little boy who combined brains with Holyness.
>
> 2) Dragons in eurocentric Knight myths. Again, always taken out by a single champion.
>
> 3)Graendel and Mother. Again taken out by a single Champion.
>
> 4) Numerous examples from the Bhagavad Ghita, again without fail, all taken out by a single Champion.
Your citations regarding the 'evil' creatures being taken out by a single champion may seem valid, but realizing they (the evil) had bashed dozens, or hundreds of champions, they lost only in a specific case, so it seems likely that the victory vs loss column was heavily in favor of the evil. Many of the heroes were given a certain 'Goodly' or were the best ever, and so on.
Heroes like Gilgamesh are not good examples as his fear of death bordered on insanity. In CF, life and death, heroines, villains and such are not mythological creations, though they may achieve such status in our minds. In the conflicts you cite, we are dealing with not only legends and mythologies of an earlier time (enhancements in the tale-tellings do occur), but we are dealing with archetypical forces.
> The thing these have in common is that nomatter how strong/smart/brave/evil an anti-hero is, there is at least a possibility of a single champion prevailing through faith and brains.
Mostly luck *smiles*
> Now lets look at the other side of the coin.
> How many tales are there in History, both mythic and real, where a Single champion held of hoards almost indefinately before falling to the masses of Evil minions, but not before saving the town/retreat/reserves/legion.
>
> 1)Sampson
> 2)Gilgamesh
> 3)David
> 4)3 hundred Knights Templar who bested 14 thousand Shiite Moors as a rear guard for the main retreat.(real)
> 5)a Knight templar who attacked and killed a 120 man retinue of an Assassin peace negotiator single handedly.
> 6) etc
> 7) etc
Hmm...well the Templar examples are interesting, though very Eurocentric. Now if I were Moorish, I might consider the Templars anti-heroes.
> Now before you all go up in arms about CF being a Fantasy world, Fine, how many Works of fantasy have Single Heroes triumphing over an overwhelming foe. How many do you have showing an Evil Monster that is not brought down by a single hero.
> Not very many.
umm...Sauron, Morgoth (LoTR), Dragonsbane (Hambly)(very dishonorable). But and however, let us consider folks like Thor and Siegfried and such...each held a weapon specific to their enemies. The destruction of the Lord of the Nazgul by a woman, and so on. Consider each had either an item that fulfilled its purpose or was the fulfiller of a specific destiny. A hero with a slaying-specific sword/weapon is no more than a beast of burden to that item and is not alone in that battle
> What we have in cf, is a situation(noone's fault really) where the Holy good champion is in effect highly improbable (I will not say impossible because look at what Ihlrath did. But that was before A-p's changed, and certainly before Istendil became gross).
>
> Now while rare, this is not exactly *wrong* in a fantasy setting. Hell, I have DM'ed roleplaying worlds where it was turned upside down like this (hell look at ravenloft).
>
> I do beleive tho, that Carrion fields, as fun and addictive as it is now, would be just amazingly and insanely more so if it was at least possible for a lightwalker to "Stand up to the hoards of the Dark" like 98% of our historical/fantastical Heroes, Like Liches and A-p's can against the Hoards of the light.
Agreed!
>
> Just some ramblings.