PDA

View Full Version : Aspirations of Grandeur: Power and Standards of Acheivement in RPGs



Archpaladin Zousha
2013-06-18, 09:15 PM
I've recently been debating a friend of mine on the nature of a character's goals in an RPG. I contend that bringing a character's story to a close in a way that makes sense with the story and personality of the character is much more satisfying than the character achieving godhood or conducting a ritual to turn them into a true dragon or something. He, on the other hand, feels that retiring to a life of spiritual contemplation, or ruling the kingdom you've founded, or just opening a tavern and raising your kids and grandkids to be a waste, and that given how powerful the average adventure can become, it'd be foolish to get as close to godhood as you possibly can.

To illustrate, I brought out the well-trod example of Bilbo Baggins. Despite flushing out Smaug, saving Thorin and the others time and time again and risking his life to promote peace between Men, Elves and Dwarves, he didn't go on to become a king or leader. He returned to the Shire to live a quiet life, and later retired to Rivendell to focus on his writing.

He replied by stating that while that may be true, Bilbo still got to go into the West with Gandalf and Elrond to live forever, and posited that Bilbo becoming deified by the hobbits "seems logical, assuming follow the same patterns as ancient humans did. Bilbo was well known among his people, and on a momentous birthday he vanished from sight, and he was not seen in the Shire until it was to travel to the Havens, and even then only three hobbits returned with knowledge of what happened. Three famous hobbits, by the way. The events surrounding his disappearance, and the fact Merry, Pippin and Sam would inevitably tell someone what happened that day, would create a local legend about Bilbo. Give it a few hundred years, let it be retold and exaggerated a few dozen times, and the hobbits could very well come to see him as a god."

What does the Playground think? Is it more satisfying for your character to ascend to godhood or gain as much power as the campaign setting will allow for that character's ending? Or do you prefer more humble endings for your characters, especially if the idea of ascending to godhood is out-of-character in some way? Why do some players think in terms of achievement like this?

Thanks for your consideration and ideas. :smallsmile:

tensai_oni
2013-06-18, 09:21 PM
Achieving godhood is a DnD cliche I'm tired of, and don't really see much outside of DnD in the first place.

In the example given, Bilbo does not actually become a god. He becomes a venerated figure figure, a hero remembered forever by his people - but that's not the same as a god. I think your friend forgot what Tolkien's stance on religion was.

The Rose Dragon
2013-06-18, 09:29 PM
Depends on a lot of things. The setting, the character, the theme of the campaign. Even the system, in some cases (Nine Worlds, for example, having actual rules for non-lethal character retirement). A Remnants game, where having enough land and goods to live out comfortably is the biggest thing you can aspire to (aside from fixing the world, which is not for every character), is much different from a Godblind game, where you are constantly hunted by gods in a battle for the fate for mankind, even though both are mecha games. Some games are constant downward spirals, with your only hope doing as much as you can, as spectacularly as you can, before succumbing to one thing or another, Don't Rest Your Head being a good example. In Summerland, on the other hand, the stated goal of each character is to find peace of mind so they can settle down instead of wondering the post-apocalyptic jungles, never being welcome anywhere.

So, I guess I agree with both of you. I don't think a character's ending has to be humble or positive, but it has to fit in well with everything else. If every character wanted to be King of the Universe (or just King of Prom, in high school settings), that would be boring pretty fast.

Water_Bear
2013-06-18, 09:37 PM
I'd say it depends on the character's goals, which of course are set by the player according to what they want. If your character is focused on getting revenge, whatever happens afterwards is going to be equally fun live or die. If your character wants to be a king then getting the crown and passing it to the next generation with a nicer shine is the goal. If your character is looking to save a lover and/or family member, then settling down with said person or even dying together can work. It all comes down to whether or not you've achieved your goal, both as a player and in the role of the character.

As for Bilbo... no. First of all, you don't become immortal from living in the undying lands; mortality is Eru's gift to mankind (hobbits are technically men) and the Valar have no power to take it away, the very idea was a lie told by Sauron to the Numenoreans as part of his plot to trick them into waging war on the gods. Secondly, even if the hobbits were the kind of people to deify the subjects of tall tales (they aren't) they were incorporated into the Reunited Kingdom as a part of Arnor in the Fourth Age which probably reintroduced worship of the Valar anyway. Plus the Red Book is a pretty good safeguard against Bilbo's adventures being too exaggerated, since it eventually survives longer than the hobbits themselves do and tells the true story.

Archpaladin Zousha
2013-06-18, 09:38 PM
To put it at its simplest, my friend and I have this argument every time I wanna play Pathfinder. He always wants to do stuff like lead a successful rebellion against the Thrice-Damned House of Thrune in Council of Thieves, or find some way to steal the divinity of Ysersius after the end of Serpent's Skull, etc.

Slipperychicken
2013-06-18, 10:22 PM
@LOTR: Bilbo didn't become a god. Neither did any of the elves who moved West.



Achieving godhood is a DnD cliche I'm tired of


Couldn't agree more.

I don't think one should be able to become a god at all. The most you could get from the divine is afterlife in the better spots in heaven (like Hades' Elysian fields), and that's if you're a truly exceptional saintlike hero. Something like saving the god's home-plane from demons might score you a position as an angel, but even that's seriously pushing it.

As for killing them, that would be like a maggot plotting to destroy a solar system. You just can't do it, it's impossible. Deal with it.

I don't think it's satisfying for a character to attain godhood. I think it's cheap and immersion-breaking. If someone wants to have a special snowflake epilogue, he can try to become famous, but godhood is much too far.

navar100
2013-06-18, 10:38 PM
I must have had BadWrongFun then a couple of campaigns ago where not only did the party help create 3 new gods, twin gods of Magic (one spellcraft, the other item creation) and a god of Justice, part of my character's soul coalesced into becoming one of the twins. My character's soul that remained mortal, that is, my character, became the first cleric for the new god of Justice. These gods are now part of our gameworld's Pantheon. A character of mine in a later campaign even worshipped The Twins. Temples to the god of Justice my cleric established are still there in campaigns that take place many generations later.

erikun
2013-06-18, 11:03 PM
I think that the characters's best ultimate goal depends on the character. Some characters want to transform into undead or outsiders or gods and live forever. Some want to affect the campaign, and leave their name on the world permanently. Some want to go back home and live with their family, now that the world is safe.

Why would the go-deity crowd be any more generic or any more overused than the go-home crowd?

Of course, just because a character wants to do something doesn't mean they accomplish it. But if a player wants a particular path or ending for their character, is it a problem to try working with the player to give the character goals to do so? Sometimes it may just not be possible (becoming a deity in DarkSun, for example) or the situation in the campaign won't warrant it. However, I think you should at least talk with the player and, if nothing else, explain why that particular situation would not work in the setting.

TuggyNE
2013-06-18, 11:05 PM
To put it at its simplest, my friend and I have this argument every time I wanna play Pathfinder. He always wants to do stuff like lead a successful rebellion against the Thrice-Damned House of Thrune in Council of Thieves, or find some way to steal the divinity of Ysersius after the end of Serpent's Skull, etc.

Sounds good. Nothing wrong with that, even if it's not for you. There is very definitely no single "all characters should fit this mold" that you're going to be able to derive from this; this is highly subjective, and depends partly on the character's quirks and partly on the player's desires.

What's more, I'm not even sure a given game is unable to incorporate both for different characters, so where's the problem?

Knaight
2013-06-18, 11:36 PM
It really depends on the game. For some, rising in power and status is pretty much expected, for other games an ignominious execution followed by being forgotten at best is just fine. I tend to lean towards the latter end of the spectrum personally (the last Microscope game I was in ended in a sudden and unpredictable extinction from an alien virus), but I've been in games that were all over it.

Archpaladin Zousha
2013-06-18, 11:38 PM
Sounds good. Nothing wrong with that, even if it's not for you. There is very definitely no single "all characters should fit this mold" that you're going to be able to derive from this; this is highly subjective, and depends partly on the character's quirks and partly on the player's desires.

What's more, I'm not even sure a given game is unable to incorporate both for different characters, so where's the problem?
The problem appears when we begin collaborating to co-GM something and have differing opinions on what is achievable by PCs and when it becomes achievable. It also probably has to do with the fact that we have different ideas of where things should start too. I always insist on starting with first-level characters, while he likes to start out 5th, 10th or even at epic levels. I like the idea of From Nobody to Nightmare, he finds it tedious and annoying to slog through that kind of stuff and likes to have the superpowers right out of the box.

Slipperychicken
2013-06-18, 11:39 PM
I must have had BadWrongFun

It's your game. Enjoy it the way that works best for you.

Rhynn
2013-06-19, 01:19 AM
given how powerful the average adventure can become

This is game-specific and seems like a bad "given."

Anyway, there's nothing wrong with either. In OD&D & B/X, retirement some time after achieving 9th level is assumed, largely for reasons of the character being so dang powerful, and also because there was an assumption that they'll put their treasure to use creating a domain and have to focus on that. But in BECM, you can keep trucking to 36th level, then undertake generations-long quests (seriously, some of the quests specifically must last for generations) involving reincarnations and reaching incredibly high levels all over again, and become a divine being.

Salbazier
2013-06-19, 02:38 AM
... worship of the Valar anyway.

Worship of Eru

tensai_oni
2013-06-19, 09:06 AM
Looks like your friend might be better off playing Exalted. Gods? Forget that noise! A starting Solar is more powerful than all but a handful of gods, it's just that there is more of them.

Jokes aside. Your approach to gaming? Nothing wrong with it. His approach? ALSO nothing wrong with it. But that's not what your original post was about. It wasn't about what is acceptable, but what is NOT acceptable.

We have clashing gameplay styles so if it becomes a problem and you can't find a middle ground that satisfies both parties, then the answer is: you simply shouldn't co-GM with each other.

Archpaladin Zousha
2013-06-19, 04:55 PM
Oh, he LOVES Exalted. And I don't. So much so that I started a thread here once whining about how much I dislike it. Though that was less the power level and more the fact that I just can't wrap my head around the Asian culture and fiction it's inspired by. :smallannoyed:

The reason we co-GM together is because he's the admin of the RP forum we both spend the most time on and I'm a moderator there, so we're often in touch regardless of tastes. Also because our forum's population is very very small. If either of us wants an RP, the other HAS to become involved at some point, or there just aren't enough people to do it.

Morty
2013-06-19, 05:00 PM
I think the best way I can sum up my opinion on the matter is that I don't think characters have to grow in power. I'm perfectly content when a character finishes their entire story arc at the same level of competence and power they had when the story began. Drastic increases in "power level" (I loathe this term, but it works) should only occur when they make sense, and an actual in-story reason is provided. Killing enough conveniently evil humanoids doesn't really count. Small increases in competence are fine, of course, since people naturally improve in things they do a lot.

horngeek
2013-06-19, 07:32 PM
Oh, he LOVES Exalted. And I don't. So much so that I started a thread here once whining about how much I dislike it. Though that was less the power level and more the fact that I just can't wrap my head around the Asian culture and fiction it's inspired by. :smallannoyed:

Amusingly enough, it's more Epic (or perhaps Classic) literature that's Exalted's real inspiration. The North apparently draws from major Skyrim inspirations in 3e, after all.

Despite loving Exalted, though... I'm more on your side, with a solid 'depends on setting'. D&D, it's perfectly possible and acceptable to go for 'retires to a simple life'.

Overall, this is a 'play how you want to'.

Hiro Protagonest
2013-06-19, 07:48 PM
Amusingly enough, it's more Epic (or perhaps Classic) literature that's Exalted's real inspiration. The North apparently draws from major Skyrim inspirations in 3e, after all.

Yeah, but they did state they wanted to go back to the classical feeling in 3e.

Still, Hindu is about the only Asian that dominantly influences Exalted. The Realm vs The Hundred Kingdoms is more like Rome and Greece than anything else, with Lookshy being Sparta and probably Great Forks as Athens, and while Japan was a superpower cut off from the rest of Asia by the sea, so was England. Culturally, the Realm is like Japan, but the world is vast and varied, there's room for a nation like Asia without it being all Asia (which is something I see as a fallacy in general. A world wholly influenced by Western Europe is less realistic than one that seems like a kitchen sink at first glance. Yeah, it's complex. It's a whole frickin' world the size of Earth).

Slipperychicken
2013-06-19, 08:23 PM
nation like Asia

Might want to reconsider those words. Just saying.

horngeek
2013-06-20, 12:32 AM
Yeah, it's complex. It's a whole frickin' world the size of Earth

Creation is significantly larger than Earth, actually.

Especially in 3e.

Jay R
2013-06-20, 04:02 PM
Bilbo was not deified as a hero in the Shire. He was remembered, though incorrectly. According to The Fellowship of the Ring, Chapter II:
It became a fireside story for young hobbits; and eventually Mad Baggins, who used to vanish with a bang and a flash and reappear with bags of jewels and gold, became a favourite character of legend and lived on after all the true events were forgotten"

The Rose Dragon
2013-06-20, 04:29 PM
Creation is significantly larger than Earth, actually.

Especially in 3e.

It's slightly smaller than Earth in 2nd Edition, according to official numbers, just covered in more land.

TheCountAlucard
2013-06-20, 04:54 PM
Ignoring the infinities at the Poles, anyway.

Edge of Dreams
2013-06-20, 05:16 PM
I feel like 4e D&D specifically was the edition that really started saying "At 30th level, you are god-like in power", what with Epic Destinies and all that jazz. I don't really have a problem with that, but I do think it's important that not all players and GMs will want that kind of ending.

What I find even more annoying is the assumption that every long-running campaign has to involve saving the world and characters whose role in life is defined as "hero" or "adventurer". In the last campaign I ran, the most awesome ending anyone got was the bartender who went adventuring on the weekends - he took all his treasure and bought the tavern he worked in, then settled down with the beautiful barmaid.

Scow2
2013-06-20, 05:32 PM
I don't think one should be able to become a god at all. The most you could get from the divine is afterlife in the better spots in heaven (like Hades' Elysian fields), and that's if you're a truly exceptional saintlike hero. Something like saving the god's home-plane from demons might score you a position as an angel, but even that's seriously pushing it.

As for killing them, that would be like a maggot plotting to destroy a solar system. You just can't do it, it's impossible. Deal with it.

I don't think it's satisfying for a character to attain godhood. I think it's cheap and immersion-breaking. If someone wants to have a special snowflake epilogue, he can try to become famous, but godhood is much too far.

You give gods too much credit, and people too little.

BWR
2013-06-20, 05:46 PM
Does it have to be either or? Can't people do one one game and the other another?
In 25 years of playing D&D, I've never had any PC in my groups achieve godhood, or even epic levels. The highest we've gone is 18th level, and most rarely make it past 10th.
I'm planning on allowing my current players to advance their characters to Immortality, since you can make some fun stories of it and in similar lengths of playing time they've never gotten to godhood either. It would be fun to have at least one character you have built up from nothing and had them go on to do amazing stuff and finally become a god, or as near as.

I've had some few characters retire to important positions and that was awesome. I don't think I've ever had one that has returned to obscurity like Bilbo, Most characters have died or the campaign has been abandoned so when a PC gets a proper end I'm ecstatic.

Also, the question is rather biased towards D&D. Not all settings have the same standards or goals for end-game. In Kult and Scion, ascending to godhood is the point ofthe game. In Rokugan it's technically possible to achieve godhood through story, but the point of the game is samurai drama (one popular piece of advice at character creation is to think about how you want to die). In Call of Cthulhu the best you can hope for is to prevent the world from being eaten for at least a little while longer and if you're really lucky you might only need a few years of therapy to recover.
In Nobilis you start out as a god.