|
Post by Kage2020 on May 11, 2004 17:59:41 GMT -5
I post this here as a public version of a thread that goes on (slowly! ) in the "Eldar Sourcebook" board. Anyway, I'll post the link to CH and the thread in question... Check it out but, if you could, post your concepts here. I might end up moving this to RPG depending on how things go. Kage
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 15, 2004 2:18:49 GMT -5
<spam>
Not at all, apparently. Ah well...
Is this one of those concepts, out of interest, that people shelve under "covered already to my satisfaction and therefore not worth discussing"? Or is it a case of the concepts are far too whacky in your mind?
</spam>
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Aug 17, 2004 9:34:58 GMT -5
Having skim-read the first post, all well and good considering I don't play RPG's, and I imagine your intention was purely to create an RPG-alike system of some sort, but I think you've inadvertently done something to the ethos of the Path.
Put another way, I don't think it's 'proper' to express something as complex as the Path system as a set of rules like this. To me, the Path is one of those things that is very different for every Eldar, and a classification of Path is based almost wholly on an individual Eldar's interpretation of his place in society.
Which, perhaps, is one of the greatest challenges for an Eldar. Reconciling one's place within one's own mind with one's place in society seems wholly appropriate as a quandry which every Eldar faces.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 17, 2004 11:48:11 GMT -5
Having skim-read the first post, all well and good considering I don't play RPG's, and I imagine your intention was purely to create an RPG-alike system of some sort... Yes, it was. It includes a certain amount of 'hand-waving' but saves far, far more. It creates an integrated system by which exceptions to be made rather than a system where exceptions are made to everything in the hope that it creates a 'realistically complex' situation. but I think you've inadvertently done something to the ethos of the Path. You would be wrong, I'm guessing. There is little inadvertent about it... Put another way, I don't think it's 'proper' to express something as complex as the Path system as a set of rules like this. And I would say that you're incorrect in this assertion. Yes, the experience of the Path is unique to each indiviudal eldar, but that does not prevent there being specific generalities made. Consider the typical favourite of wargamers: the Path of the Warrior. We know that there are going to be certain 'standard' approaches to, say, the Way of the Dire Avenger whether it's something as obvious and superficial as 'they can shoot a shuriken catapult' to something a bit more abstract. Does that nullify the concept of the Path system? Or hang on, what about the 'Path of the Warrior' itself? Surely that is inherently restrictive because of the resolution into different Ways (Aspect Shrines)...? Obviously not, for the last. Rather we have a "catch all" phrase ("Path of the Warrior") to which we place the various Aspect Shrines (Ways), either those that are canonical or those that we - as fans - make up. We do not necessarily restrict ourselves. Thus with the advocated system. It allows for the general framework (Paths being split into finite, if very large in some cases, number of Ways) with the progression and individual experience and determinations of the eldar (or, rather, the player) allow variation from the template. Otherwise it would be like saying, erm, all accountants are exactly the same? Surely if life itself is too complex to capture in an RPG then how the heck can a wargame do it? Or is one an acceptable level of abstraction and the other not, perhaps? All valid questions... To me, the Path is one of those things that is very different for every Eldar, and a classification of Path is based almost wholly on an individual Eldar's interpretation of his place in society. Now that I would agree with. But you have to take everything in entirety, not take a 'blinkered' approach to each every little thing or manifestation of 'culture'. Consider, for example, the concept of personal responsibility, the nature of Clans (advocated herein), and then the Path... Which, perhaps, is one of the greatest challenges for an Eldar. Reconciling one's place within one's own mind with one's place in society seems wholly appropriate as a quandry which every Eldar faces. Get a job. Get a life... No, I'm not being harsh although it was designed to sound like it! (Hence over-dosing on smilies.) Rather your making the eldar sound rather human... which is fair enough in some regards. But RPGs have been caricaturing and abstracting humans for decades... Remember, though, it's hard creating an abstract (discrete) system to model a more complex dynamic and continuous situation and rather easy to talk about such abstractions...
|
|