Avatar The Last Air Bender

[druid91]

Yup. Winning the award for “The Only Time Korra Made Me Laugh.”

Really not getting the Bolin love. But then I dropped midway through season 2. Does he get less annoying?

Don't get me wrong, I still like Bolin. But I.... Honestly cannot say in any way I recall ANY maturity plot with him and Mako.

Mako was always the responsible, working man of the two of them.

while Bolin was the goofy, irresponsible one who's constantly involved in some kind of get rich quick scheme.

Neither was entirely mature. As evidenced by Mako and his.... Questionable navigation of the pointless and annoying love triangle. And as evidenced by Bolins.... Bolinness.

[Pex]

In Book 2 now. They're really trying to give sympathy to Zuko. It's a common story thread, but it's fine. I wonder if they'll do the sappy solution: Zuko joins Aang and the gang, helps the Avatar defeat the Fire Nation, and become the new Fire Lord. He doesn't have to become the new Fire Lord but otherwise helps to defeat his father and get his revenge or at least his Honor back despite not being the way he originally intended.

[Peelee]

In Book 2 now. They're really trying to give sympathy to Zuko. It's a common story thread, but it's fine. I wonder if they'll do the sappy solution: Zuko joins Aang and the gang, helps the Avatar defeat the Fire Nation, and become the new Fire Lord. He doesn't have to become the new Fire Lord but otherwise helps to defeat his father and get his revenge or at least his Honor back despite not being the way he originally intended.

Imean, even throughout Book 1 Iroh has been around to temper Zuko on the antagonist side of things.

Iroh is, of course, the best.

[dancrilis]

Imean, even throughout Book 1 Iroh has been around to temper Zuko on the antagonist side of things.

Iroh is, of course, the best.

Felt that Iroh was better in books1 and 2 - more dubious about 3.

Think my favourite character might have been Azula, on consideration Iroh might be in second place.

[Lethologica]

Felt that Iroh was better in books1 and 2 - more dubious about 3.

Think my favourite character might have been Azula, on consideration Iroh might be in second place.

This was partly forced by external circumstances - namely, Iroh's VA dying at the end of Book 2.

[dancrilis]

This was partly forced by external circumstances - namely, Iroh's VA dying at the end of Book 2.

I'm aware of that (which was sad and I felt that episode in Book 2 that was dedicated to him was well done), but it wasn't the issue I had:

Spoiler: Book 3 Iroh

Show

They turned the own wise mentor into someone who could have made a fair go at ending the fire nation war decades ago.

Even before he lost the seige of Be-Sing-Se he was apparently a good guy (sparing the dragons for instance).
There was debate on if he could have taken his younger brother in a fight so that might have been touch and go - except that he had an entire team that could have helped him and Ozai had no one for the most part who could have stood helped him.

Effectively had Iroh decided at the start of the series to take out Ozai he likely could have, he could have done it before the series also - and the only reason that they gave for him not doing so was 'it is the Avatar's job - if anyone else does it the system will merely continue' and other then helping Zuko he didn't really have any interest in the avatar for the most part.

I would have preferred they left him as a more or less non-action character, there to be a good guy and occassionally helpful but not someone who merely could have solved the core conflict of the series but didn't due to pseudo-aphaty.

[Yanagi]

Spoiler: Zaheer

Show

I felt like Zaheer was the best villain of LoK... though really, the competition isn't exactly stiff. Yeah, he becomes extremely good at airbending very quickly, but he had studied the Air Nomad culture extensively and was a skilled martial artist before getting bending - dangerous enough for the White Lotus to lock him up as securely as his bending allies. And when you look closely, his airbending style does differ from that of traditionally-trained airbenders. Plus as Marillion said, Tenzin more or less has his number. He's got a more or less coherent ideology that touches on Korra's own frustration with authority figures. He's solid, if not spectacular. Better than Ozai or Zhao, for sure.

Compare him to Amon, who is all flash and no substance and the revelation that he's just a bloodbender with daddy issues renders him an utter joke. And whose successes mostly boil down to everyone conveniently failing to do anything about his Cunning Plans. And Unalaq... if he had a moustache, he would twirl it relentlessly and he doesn't keep a consistent motivation for more than five minutes.

Kuvira is the only other villain who approaches some kind of quality, even if she's not quite as good as Zaheer.

Spoiler

Show

LoK's writers came up with some very ambitious scenarios--sociological storytelling; plus a flawed protagonist who sacrifices a great deal for each win; plus an arc villain with a perspective that must be articulated and their defeat is not just physical--but then compressed each arc into a single season and tried for two seasons to have slow-reveal on who the antagonists were. They try to compress materials that could be spaced out over multiple AtLA-sized seasons and the result was...less of a success.

Villains for season three and four worked better because the writers acclimated to the time pressure. Zaheer and Kuvira are immediately identified as antagonists and a great deal of what they want is said upfront. This left more of the run-time to make them feel detailed, reveal the final forms of the plan, and give them screen time to just be people that audience engages with. Zaheer has a tight group he interacts with that makes him more relatable. Kuvira is a character isolated by her own accumulation of power, so we see less of her.

Amon...and Tarrlok and the Equalists...were a lot of story to tell in so little time, while also establishing the protagonist, the secondary characters, and the settings. Which is a shame, since I think the premise--two damaged people hiding their personal agendas inside institutions that abuse power, hijacking legitimate concerns making systemic problems worse--is really interesting, the sort of thing you could stretch over a full series. But it's a story that needs the kind of length and scope that Avatar had, and would have benefited from a deuteragonist or two.

<removes multiple paragraphs of rewrites because I like this flawed show enough to think too much about this.

Unalaq...could have been interesting if they committed to giving him a perspective, such as making him more explicitly a millenarian reactionary--trying to take the world back to Turtle-Dragon days because he can't stand the accelerating societal change--and less of a "Mostly I'm just nasty but also here's some reasons on a Post-It."

They also missed out on how cool it would be to have an four-element-bender improvising from Water techniques only, fighting the Avatar...but <removes multiple paragraphs of rewrites because I like even this trash baby of a season.>

[druid91]

Spoiler: Legend of Korra - Setting

Show

Spoiler: What's with the Fire Nation?

Show

One of the things that bothers me very much about Legend of Korra is that they never show us how the Fire Nation has changed since the first series. Now, the plot has it that things are pretty settled in the FN and there isn't much need for the Avatar to do anything of substance there, but there were four seasons to play with and they could easily have squeezed an episode into showing the FN in its modern state, even while focusing on something else in terms of the actual plot (maybe there would be a summit held there to discuss one of the season-defining problems, or maybe Team Avatar just stops over shortly on their way to go somewhere else). Instead, we see one isolated (and fairly traditional-looking) temple on one island and get Izumi's opinion on one matter of geopolitics. I liked that scene, and it's nice to see a character in that series with a sensible outlook on things for a change, but we don't get A) her opinion or ideas about anything else, or B), insight into how one of the foremost powers in the setting has changed. We've seen so much of them in ATLA, of how their society is developed with this layer of modernity over older elements, of how their people are and are not affected by the culture the leadership has worked to instill. How have Fire Nation citizens handled their abrupt demilitarization*? How has their society, which was already fairly industrialized, changed technologically? Are they prosperous, having thrown the resources they sunk into war into economic development and social programs, or have they languished from a generation of high unemployment as the military was disbanded and from a lack of resources from the former colonies? How has the royal family, an institution deeply affiliated with bender supremacy, interacted with the anti-bending sentiment in the first season of the show? Has any of that sentiment made its way to the Fire Nation? (It might well not have, if the monarchy has spent a generation administrating competently using power rather than violence, but it would be nice to see it either way.) The show spent two entire seasons examining how the Earth Kingdom has adapted (or largely, failed to adapt) to technological and cultural change since the first series, and didn't spend one episode on its counterpart.

*I understand that there were comics about that, but those were in the immediate aftermath of the war, so a generation has passed since then, and that's also supplementary material, and showing things in the core work is generally superior to doing so in supplements; reliance on tie-ins for world-building was one of the weaknesses of the Star Wars sequels.

Spoiler: The Implications of Book 2

Show

The other big issue with the setting was the way in which they reinterpreted the Spirit World (meta)physically and then failed to reinterpret it culturally. The Spirit World in ATLA was a reflection of the physical world, the yin to its yang and a natural counterpart. While they were separate for the most part, things in one affected the other, and it all seems like this is the natural order to things. In LoK, the Spirit World is revealed to be separate only by intentional design, and the spirits that seemed like natural outgrowths or incarnations of physical things are reinterpreted as independently existing beings, almost more like aliens, that are so inimical to human life that all of human civilization as we know it has only been possible due to the spirits' active exclusion from one half of the cosmos.
And yet, no one reacts to this. People still treat spirits with awe and reverence (except when they're being portrayed by the show as grouchy, short-sighted workaday sorts). Korra, after learning that A), everything she has ever known has been possible only because the Spirit Portals were closed because B), spirits are incredibly dangerous to human life and only a handful of people in the setting can address that danger, leaving everyone else defenseless against monsters that appear whenever people have negative emotions, chooses to keep them open, and people (and the writers) treat this as an unalloyed good, because spirits are good (again, unless the people are whiny, entitled Republic City citizens who need to cut the Avatar some slack). This is like a Christian dying to find his heart being weighed by Thoth against the Feather of Ma'at and saying nothing about it. It's baffling to have a character (or every character) confronted with evidence that shatters their understanding of the universe and then largely not react to it. If the point of the show was that people are too hidebound to change their viewpoints even when presented with firm evidence, that's one thing, but first, that's rather more cynical than even this series, which is more cynical than its predecessor, tends to be in other respects, and second, the show's writing doesn't seem to be arguing that; it's only something we can infer from what we see.

Spoiler: Why does this feel so familiar?

Show

Another, more minor, problem I had was that modernization in the show was often tied in with Westernization in a setting where the West in a cultural sense does not exist and has never existed. Democratic institutions spring up overnight with no precursors. (The Republics switched from a blue-ribbon panel of appointed leaders to an elected president off-screen, between seasons, in a setting where no one has ever elected anything.) Fashions change to forms more familiar to us. Language and terminology doesn't seem like it's grown from previous incarnations in the setting, but simply been transplanted from the equivalent period in our history.

That said, I don't think the setting design was all bad. Seeing the decentralization in the Earth Kingdom result in a crisis of leadership that addresses the nature of political power was good. Seeing the interplay between tradition and modernity, to the point where a religious traditionalist is offended enough by modern lifestyles to act to seize power in order to counteract prevalent cultural change (the Book 2 conflict before all that Vaatu stuff stole the show), is a reflection of times past and present.

Spoiler: Demography

Show

The last main setting gripe I have is one of scale. The Southern Water Tribe was depicted in ATLA as depleted by intentional genocide to the size of a small village, and the Northern Water Tribe was merely one city of moderate size, probably lesser in population than Omashu by itself. In LoK, the Southern Water Tribe has a massive, sprawling city, orders of magnitude larger than either Water population before. We know that some members of the North moved south to help rebuild, but since there was no cause for a mass exodus from the North, we can presume that this was probably a small minority of their population, and the North seems to have the level of available manpower and technological development to be on par with the South, so they're likely of at least roughly equivalent size, and thus also significantly more populous than they were in ATLA. It seems unlikely that this was due to immigration from other regions, as we never see any of the ethnic conflict that would result from that level of immigration (or, indeed, significant numbers of Earth or Fire immigrants), so we are left with the notion that the Water Tribes have experienced at least a 1000% growth rate per generation. This conflicts with the families we see in the show, which generally have somewhere between one and three children, and no one, at least to my recollection, mentions that the Water Tribes are abnormal in this aspect. The biggest family we see on the show is from Ba Sing Se, and the second is Tenzin's family (which is to be expected, since he's being held personally responsible for the task of repopulating an entire ethnic group; one wonders how he sold that notion to Pemma).

Spoiler: Legend of Korra - Plot

Show

I'll edit these in later. I've been writing practically a blog post about just the setting, and my gripes with the show are much more about the writing.

Well. Pemma was an air acolyte, and approached him rather than the other way around.

So presumably she was already interested in the idea.

[VoxRationis]

Spoiler

Show

Unalaq...could have been interesting if they committed to giving him a perspective, such as making him more explicitly a millenarian reactionary--trying to take the world back to Turtle-Dragon days because he can't stand the accelerating societal change--and less of a "Mostly I'm just nasty but also here's some reasons on a Post-It."[/i]

Spoiler

Show

I think that's why season 2 seems to be considered egregious in the two series. For all its spirits, magic, and fantasy, the Avatar universe is ultimately one of humans with human motivations and human flaws, operating in human societies and with human philosophies. The first series is almost wholly about thwarting imperialism; in LoK, we also see proletarian revolts (Amon), anarchist terrorists (Zaheer), and fascists (Kuvira). Unalaaq is set up the same way; his motives in the beginning of his season fit neatly into traditionalism and a sort of religious devotion. But then it turns out that he's not really a reactionary; he's working for a giant spirit of darkness for... no particular reason in order to bring about... 10,000 years of darkness. He's pretty explicit about that, even describing himself as a "Dark Avatar." Unalaaq, by the end, doesn't see himself as a hero or a good person standing against the forces of wickedness; he's just a cackling movie stereotype. This untethers him from his human motivations and pretty much all the political setup that defined the first half of the season and turns him into an out-of-context sort of villain from a wholly different (and rather more generic) kind of fantasy, and that's really not satisfying.

[Rater202]

Yeah Bolin isn't broken, don't fix him. Sometimes a flat character doesn't need any development, they are just great the way they are and thats fine, sometimes a little even ground is welcome after climbing the mountains of character development whether its for up or down. that and flat characters are less a person that changes and more someone that changes others around them, like a rock bending anything that hits it. it all fits the fact that he is an earthbender: he is unchanging, but he is overall a good guy so its not like he needs to.

@ Rater: yeah I didn't say anything before, but I'm simply not interested in playing a bender. don't get me wrong I love the Avatar setting, but I consider the metaphysics and stories in it pretty much solved and done. I can't really think of anything substantial enough I'd commit to a roleplay for, and there is simply not enough there for me to be interested, and I'd much rather go for a monster/superhero game because there are some character concepts that are much more interesting to me than playing a manipulator of classical elements.

Honestly, at this point, I'm willing to be flexible.

[dancrilis]

Honestly, at this point, I'm willing to be flexible.

I have been thinking about it for the day - and happy to give it a go, will post a character concept and see what you think).

[Yanagi]

Spoiler

Show

I think that's why season 2 seems to be considered egregious in the two series. For all its spirits, magic, and fantasy, the Avatar universe is ultimately one of humans with human motivations and human flaws, operating in human societies and with human philosophies. The first series is almost wholly about thwarting imperialism; in LoK, we also see proletarian revolts (Amon), anarchist terrorists (Zaheer), and fascists (Kuvira). Unalaaq is set up the same way; his motives in the beginning of his season fit neatly into traditionalism and a sort of religious devotion. But then it turns out that he's not really a reactionary; he's working for a giant spirit of darkness for... no particular reason in order to bring about... 10,000 years of darkness. He's pretty explicit about that, even describing himself as a "Dark Avatar." Unalaaq, by the end, doesn't see himself as a hero or a good person standing against the forces of wickedness; he's just a cackling movie stereotype. This untethers him from his human motivations and pretty much all the political setup that defined the first half of the season and turns him into an out-of-context sort of villain from a wholly different (and rather more generic) kind of fantasy, and that's really not satisfying.

Spoiler

Show

I'd argue season one has many themes and doesn't resolve them well. It's not really one thing: it tries to address abuse of state power, class alienation, vigilante violence, hate crimes, an attempted pogrom? (was that S1?), and a charlatan running a cult all in one go. The premises are good, even the worldbuilding's decent...it's just too much, too complicated, for that little time. I think you could take the exact same material and write a really good multiseason arc.

I agree season two's the weakest, but there was a good armature. Unalaq worked well as a theocrat. His end goal being "become an Avatar so I use all that power to spank the world until it goes back to how it was" works well with that starting point, particularly since the Avatar he's fighting is his nontraditional, citified, abrupt niece who's trying to be more than she was trained to be.

It also works because it makes Unalaaq Wan's ultimate enemy: the force that wants not to make things just and good, but to put everyone back in fixed role and unable to change. Wan's build up to becoming Avatar is moral expansion: resisting the hierarchy of his city even though he knows nothing else, befriending spirits even though they're hostile, healing animals, saving people in a different city...trying to save everyone.

[Lord Raziere]

Honestly, at this point, I'm willing to be flexible.

None of my character concepts would fit Avatars setting, not even close. like its a setting thats too good in my eyes, I do not want to ruin it by introducing something completely nonsensical to what it is, and its simply too limited for what I want. Sorry Rater, but I'm simply not interested because there is simply nothing I can do with it that hasn't already been done.

like the Naruto and Dragon Ball roleplays, they work for me, because there is so much left open-ended about them that I can fill in and make an entirely different story with them because of all the stuff left behind in their long runs just used once then never explored again just there waiting to be repurposed to make something new and different. Avatar is great because its tightly written: every part of it is used efficiently and the world is focused in a way that makes the stories consistent, human and sympathetic and thus work with the themes its trying to tell, and anything I'd try to do with it would only retell that, thats retreading the same ground, so why would I want to do that? the Avatar world is great for telling a tightly written limited story, but its not so great for a roleplay in my eyes, because those thrive on having unfulfilled mysteries and plots that aren't finished, with dangling threads and themes left unexplored,, but Aang explores its themes really well.....then Korra while maybe not as good, still explores everything it left untouched complete with a contrasting protagonist that I would usually make to explore them with. Korra is already all the stuff I'd try to look at and do myself and its already done.

Sure, in hindsight I would do some changes:

Spoiler

Show

make the Korrasami romance bigger and more upfront, make Zahir and Amon the two most prominent baddies for all the seasons not just one and they'd probably be partners because their equalist and anarchist philosophies are compatible with a sophisticated "always on edge" relationship to keep it realistic, while Kuvira and Tarrlok/Unalaq being there but only seasonal antagonists since their motivations are more tied to politics and their nations, change the confrontation of Vaatu to be the final fight and maybe make ZAHIR to be the one becoming the Dark Avatar in his quest for anarchy, but the Airbenders coming back earlier to change things up, to make the return of them as more of a mystery to investigate rather than a consequence, No Meelo, Varrick I'm not sure on he is weird but somewhere between being a greedy semi-antagonist and comic relief I'm sure something about him could be executed better....

...but nothing I'd consider good for a roleplay. it'd all be great changes for some fan fic, but nope.

[t209]

Watched The Great Divide.

Spoiler: Plot Hole

Show

- So the village didn't decided to check up on their messenger, who would have bail him out once things get cleared up?
- And what happened to the crystal ball?
- And I know it's one of the least liked episodes, but I can't stop thinking.

[Anonymouswizard]

In Book 2 now. They're really trying to give sympathy to Zuko. It's a common story thread, but it's fine. I wonder if they'll do the sappy solution: Zuko joins Aang and the gang, helps the Avatar defeat the Fire Nation, and become the new Fire Lord. He doesn't have to become the new Fire Lord but otherwise helps to defeat his father and get his revenge or at least his Honor back despite not being the way he originally intended.

Don't worry, Zuko's arc is done a lot better than it might appear at this stage. Zuko's entire arc is about what honour and family is, and as such doesn't go exactly where it seems to at first. I'm not saying Aang doesn't end up dating the Fire Lord, just that it's not straightforward. Warning white text is spoilery.

[Sivarias]

Iroh rant ahead.

Spoiler

Show

Iroh's entire story is about his conflict with his family. He lost his son, and that tragedy hurt him deeply and gave him a new appreciation for family. This is why you see him go into voluntary exile with Zuko. Over the course of book 1 and 2 you can see him struggling to heal Zuko's wounds, but if you listen to how he talks about his brother and his father, you can tell he disapproves, but sticks with them because of family loyalty and honor.

In book three, you see a man who realizes that honoring your family is a noble goal, but not all family members deserve to be honored. He then takes responsibility for his family, and like Travis Cotes and Ole Yeller, sees it as his responsibility to put Oazi down.

Book 1 and 2 establish values and the conflict between them. Book 3 shows Iroh taking action on the values that won.

And honestly, that makes Iroh more amazing in my eyes. It's serious character development.

[VoxRationis]

To the OP's original point:

Spoiler: Pex

Show

Curious. Is it stereotypical for Fire to be the bad guys? Could this show have worked if it was Avatar The Last Fire Bender and say Earth Nation were the bad guys? I could be overthinking this as an adult about a children's program. This does not take away anything from the show. With bias in my own gameworld as DM there are good guy undead and kobolds and there's a full orc Lawful Good cleric PC, so I like flipping the stereotype. Did Fire have to be the bad guy for the story to make sense?

It is a bit stereotypical to have Fire be the antagonists, and I think that might be intentional; the show is ultimately for children, and the first episodes show that the most. Having the opponents be scary fire-hurling masked soldiers in towering battleships connects quickly on an emotional level and helps sell the show initially, and then the writers can introduce the nuance that makes the show great. It's not difficult to contemplate ways in which the primary antagonists would be from the other nations (and I'll go into that momentarily), but it would be perhaps more difficult to display the conflict in a way which would resonate with children.

Making the Earth Kingdom the aggressor and Fire the victim wouldn't take much rewriting at all. After all, the Earth Kingdom is a state and therefore can mobilize for war readily, and we see that they've been the primary threat to balance in past generations. You'd basically need to swap the royal families of each state (though giving the defending nation cutthroat royal politics at the top levels while still being attacked would be a good way of keeping the nuance, so the Zuko-Azula feud might be good to keep). Maybe the Fire Nation colonized abandoned coastal areas a couple generations before the start of the conflict, and now an irredentist Earth King has attacked them, or maybe the Fire Nation always had a presence in the west, but the Earth Kings developed a philosophy that the whole continent was theirs, driving them to attack the Air Temples (which seem all to be on the main continent) and start conquering the outlying Fire Nation settlements. The ineffectual Fire Lord remains aloof to the plight of his subjects, safe on the core island from immediate harm and more concerned with royal politics. The superior Fire Nation navy can keep the heartland safe, but struggles to protect the continental settlements, both because of failures of leadership and because of their difficulty projecting power onto the land. (With a little more rewriting, you could emphasize that fire, while flashy, is in truth probably the weakest of the four elements when it comes to combat and have that influence the world-building. Firebenders don't have strong defensive techniques (against the other elements), and the other elements can defend against theirs pretty easily; moreover, earth and water both can shape the battlefield, which fire cannot. This puts firebenders at a pretty sizable disadvantage. One could see their culture focusing more on use of fire for utilitarian purposes like kilns and ovens and forges.)

Writing water or air to be the antagonists would require much more rewriting to make plausible. As it stands, neither culture has the capability to organize as an offensive force or the real desire to conquer. That said, you could rewrite the Air Nomads to be a conquering force pretty plausibly. Give them a Genghis sort of unifier who masses them into a horde, sweeping through the Earth Kingdom, outmaneuvering larger Earth Kingdom armies and pillaging the land, sometimes smothering entire cities that resist them. As the show progresses and we start to see more of the Air Nomads' perspective, we see how they've been historically relegated to mountain peaks and high steppes, starving and freezing while within sight of the fertile lowlands. By the end, the Avatar sets up the Air Temples (because seriously, there's no way those were built by airbenders) and introduces the principles of monasticism which would eventually come to define airbending as a culture.

[t209]

To the OP's original point:



It is a bit stereotypical to have Fire be the antagonists, and I think that might be intentional; the show is ultimately for children, and the first episodes show that the most. Having the opponents be scary fire-hurling masked soldiers in towering battleships connects quickly on an emotional level and helps sell the show initially, and then the writers can introduce the nuance that makes the show great. It's not difficult to contemplate ways in which the primary antagonists would be from the other nations (and I'll go into that momentarily), but it would be perhaps more difficult to display the conflict in a way which would resonate with children.

Making the Earth Kingdom the aggressor and Fire the victim wouldn't take much rewriting at all. After all, the Earth Kingdom is a state and therefore can mobilize for war readily, and we see that they've been the primary threat to balance in past generations. You'd basically need to swap the royal families of each state (though giving the defending nation cutthroat royal politics at the top levels while still being attacked would be a good way of keeping the nuance, so the Zuko-Azula feud might be good to keep). Maybe the Fire Nation colonized abandoned coastal areas a couple generations before the start of the conflict, and now an irredentist Earth King has attacked them, or maybe the Fire Nation always had a presence in the west, but the Earth Kings developed a philosophy that the whole continent was theirs, driving them to attack the Air Temples (which seem all to be on the main continent) and start conquering the outlying Fire Nation settlements. The ineffectual Fire Lord remains aloof to the plight of his subjects, safe on the core island from immediate harm and more concerned with royal politics. The superior Fire Nation navy can keep the heartland safe, but struggles to protect the continental settlements, both because of failures of leadership and because of their difficulty projecting power onto the land. (With a little more rewriting, you could emphasize that fire, while flashy, is in truth probably the weakest of the four elements when it comes to combat and have that influence the world-building. Firebenders don't have strong defensive techniques (against the other elements), and the other elements can defend against theirs pretty easily; moreover, earth and water both can shape the battlefield, which fire cannot. This puts firebenders at a pretty sizable disadvantage. One could see their culture focusing more on use of fire for utilitarian purposes like kilns and ovens and forges.)

Writing water or air to be the antagonists would require much more rewriting to make plausible. As it stands, neither culture has the capability to organize as an offensive force or the real desire to conquer. That said, you could rewrite the Air Nomads to be a conquering force pretty plausibly. Give them a Genghis sort of unifier who masses them into a horde, sweeping through the Earth Kingdom, outmaneuvering larger Earth Kingdom armies and pillaging the land, sometimes smothering entire cities that resist them. As the show progresses and we start to see more of the Air Nomads' perspective, we see how they've been historically relegated to mountain peaks and high steppes, starving and freezing while within sight of the fertile lowlands. By the end, the Avatar sets up the Air Temples (because seriously, there's no way those were built by airbenders) and introduces the principles of monasticism which would eventually come to define airbending as a culture.

Ironically,

Spoiler: Rise of Kyoshi novel spoiler

Show

This was the entire subtext of Chin the Conqueror.

[VoxRationis]

Ironically,

Spoiler: Rise of Kyoshi novel spoiler

Show

This was the entire subtext of Chin the Conqueror.

What was? I'm not sure what concept you're referring to with "this."

[t209]

What was? I'm not sure what concept you're referring to with "this."

I mean

Spoiler: Rise of Kyoshi and an episode

Show

Chin the Conqueror tried to claim entire Earth continent and only stopped at Kyoshi’s island, albeit mostly because he refuse to run away when the ground fell under him.
He is one of example of Earth Kingdom as villainous role.

[uncool]

Iroh rant ahead.

Spoiler

Show

Iroh's entire story is about his conflict with his family. He lost his son, and that tragedy hurt him deeply and gave him a new appreciation for family. This is why you see him go into voluntary exile with Zuko. Over the course of book 1 and 2 you can see him struggling to heal Zuko's wounds, but if you listen to how he talks about his brother and his father, you can tell he disapproves, but sticks with them because of family loyalty and honor.

In book three, you see a man who realizes that honoring your family is a noble goal, but not all family members deserve to be honored. He then takes responsibility for his family, and like Travis Cotes and Ole Yeller, sees it as his responsibility to put Oazi down.

Book 1 and 2 establish values and the conflict between them. Book 3 shows Iroh taking action on the values that won.

And honestly, that makes Iroh more amazing in my eyes. It's serious character development.

Spoiler

Show

I'm not sure I agree that that's character development in the sense of Iroh changing; I think a lot of that comes from our viewpoint character of Zuko changing, and so seeing Iroh differently.

Take Iroh's first conversation about Azula: "She's crazy and she needs to go down", as opposed to Zuko's "I know what you're going to say. She's my sister and I need to try to get along with her."

Or his first fight with Azula: redirects her lightning and kicks her so hard she goes from the middle of the ship straight over the edge.

I think the change you notice comes more than anything from the fact that he knew Zuko wasn't ready to face Ozai or Azula - either on a physical or mental level.

[JadedDM]

Apparently, Legend of Korra is coming to Netflix next month.

[Pex]

Apparently, Legend of Korra is coming to Netflix next month.

Read that. I was pondering seeing it as people have been giving negative reviews about it. I have to finish Avatar first anyway. I'll probably give Korra a chance for an episode or two, make up my own mind.

I'm up to where Aang the gang are in the Earth Kingdom and reunited with lost Aba. They're showing Earth benders as bad guys. It's the common trope of the King's Vizier, but it's fine. I'm not the target audience, yet I like how the show has become a bit more serious in nature. Sokka is getting respect even if still the butt monkey sometimes, and they're making me care about Zuko which is good.

I always did like watching Mako when he appeared in a movie or tv show.

[hungrycrow]

Read that. I was pondering seeing it as people have been giving negative reviews about it. I have to finish Avatar first anyway. I'll probably give Korra a chance for an episode or two, make up my own mind.

If you like AtLA and were able to tolerate the low points of that, you'll probably like LoK too. There wasn't anything as lame as the Great Divide in Korra.
Really the worst thing about that show was that there were so many great ideas that never got executed to their full potential.

[Peelee]

If you like AtLA and were able to tolerate the low points of that, you'll probably like LoK too. There wasn't anything as lame as the Great Divide in Korra.
Really the worst thing about that show was that there were so many great ideas that never got executed to their full potential.

I still don't agree with the hate on the Great Divide.

[Anteros]

If you like AtLA and were able to tolerate the low points of that, you'll probably like LoK too. There wasn't anything as lame as the Great Divide in Korra.
Really the worst thing about that show was that there were so many great ideas that never got executed to their full potential.

I'm gonna go ahead and say that the Great Divide is better than anything in LoK after season 1.

[Rynjin]

I still don't agree with the hate on the Great Divide.

Diff'rent strokes and all, but the Great Divide is an episode so vapid and pointless even the creators don't like it. It might be vaguely entertaining in its own right, but it is the singular episode of the series that could be completely cut with no consequences on the narrative or individual character arcs.

[Anteros]

Diff'rent strokes and all, but the Great Divide is an episode so vapid and pointless even the creators don't like it. It might be vaguely entertaining in its own right, but it is the singular episode of the series that could be completely cut with no consequences on the narrative or individual character arcs.

It's no worse to me than a lot of the other "filler" episodes like Waterbending scroll, Ember Island players, avatar day, and I'm sure a lot of other episodes that were fun but don't do much to grow the characters or advance the plot.

It also shows that Aang is willing to lie to people for their own good, which I thought was a good bit of character development.

[hungrycrow]

I'm gonna go ahead and say that the Great Divide is better than anything in LoK after season 1.

Well this is objectively wrong. Season 2 has Varrick in it.

[Anonymouswizard]

Well this is objectively wrong. Season 2 has Varrick in it.

I honestly didn't like Varrick in Season 2, although his appearances in Season 3 and 4 were amazing.

I honestly think that Season 4 is my favourite because I just love what they did with Bolin (who's character hasn't reset since Season 3) and Varrick, along with Korra finally beginning to act like the Avatar. It also cemented Mako as my last favourite of the main characters, because urgh.