OOTS #1217 - The Discussion Thread

[ebarde]

Fantasy in general does sorta still more or less functions by those ideas of nobility and special heritage. Although not always as blatant, especially this day and age when the whole chosen one thing usually needs to come with some sort of twist to the formula instead of just a magically asigned main character status.

[Goblin_Priest]

I am guessing this is a Japanese game. Since we do still have a monarchy and a high elite class who are elite by virtue of being intermarried to the imperial family. It seems like the kind of game people in this society would churn out.

Aren't most countries monarchies? Western as well as Eastern?

Also, fantasy has a boner for monarchy. Not sure why we love monarchies so much, I guess it plays easier into hero tropes and escapism than modern-esque democratic systems do.

[pendell]

Aren't most countries monarchies? Western as well as Eastern?

Also, fantasy has a boner for monarchy. Not sure why we love monarchies so much, I guess it plays easier into hero tropes and escapism than modern-esque democratic systems do.

Monarchy tells us that there is a Chosen Hero who is out to right all wrongs and establish justice in the world. King Arthur or what not.

Fantasy is often about BEING the chosen hero out to save the world.

Since the two are telling the same story, naturally there is a close correlation between the two. Even George Martin, who in Game of Thrones is trying to deconstruct the ideology of fantasy monarchies, still falls into this trap with Daenerys. She can walk through fire and master dragons because she's of the right bloodline. No one who's not a Targaryan can do these things.

There aren't many stories where common people sort their own problems or kill the dragon or what not, because if ordinary people can do it there's no reason for a hero in the story. Which is not what most people want from their fantasy. Go to a Ren Faire, how many people are dressed up as peasants and keen to work the land from dawn till dusk while living on bread and broth?

I think fantasy allows people to escape to a world where they are extraordinary and different from regular people. Naturally, such a world must have chosen people, which of necessity turns into monarchy. That way you can have heroic heroes and evil villains that ordinary people can't just see to with a pitchfork-waving mob.

It does seem like this is more common in Japan then in the west. I've watched two anime in the past few months (Assassin's Pride, Ascension of a Bookworm), and in both cases magic, or mana, is something only the noble classes can do. In their world, being noble means having special abilities and powers that ordinary people simply don't have, and the degree of power is directly related to purity of bloodline. That seems less true in western stories, where anyone can learn magic at the local Tower of High Sorcery or become a magician if they find the right item or finish the right subquest.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[snowblizz]

Also, fantasy has a boner for monarchy. Not sure why we love monarchies so much, I guess it plays easier into hero tropes and escapism than modern-esque democratic systems do.

Because Fantasy is a fantasy of our medieaval past and that was rather thin on the democracy. Historically even when popular uprisings overthrew the monarchy it tended to end up back as one, or the classic, "we deposed all the advisors because it just them that were doign wrong and left the king", for the simple reason that there was no viable alternative for a workable social system.

A hero in a modern-esque democractic system is a violent sociopath trying to impose their own selfish vision of how things should be on the rest. Basically that's what forms th backbone of the superhero genre.

It does seem like this is more common in Japan then in the west. I've watched two anime in the past few months (Assassin's Pride, Ascension of a Bookworm), and in both cases magic, or mana, is something only the noble classes can do. In their world, being noble means having special abilities and powers that ordinary people simply don't have, and the degree of power is directly related to purity of bloodline. That seems less true in western stories, where anyone can learn magic at the local Tower of High Sorcery or become a magician if they find the right item or finish the right subquest.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Not sure I'd go that far. Western fantasy is probably quite evenly split between the "anyone can be come special" and "only those born to be special can be special". For the latter LotR (arguably), Wheel of Time, Star Wars, Game of Thrones (apparently) and some other works I've read all lean on the "you gots to be born to it".

Most of them do not make the magic = nobles argument, but if you think of it, that's what we'd all expect woudl happen though isn't it? Isn't there load sof "wizards should rule the world " treads on these boards.

[Fyraltari]

Aren't most countries monarchies? Western as well as Eastern?

According to Wikipedia 151 countries are currently republics (ie anything that's not a monarchy) out of 200ish countries.

Monarchy tells us that there is a Chosen Hero who is out to right all wrongs and establish justice in the world. King Arthur or what not.

Fantasy is often about BEING the chosen hero out to save the world.

Fantasy is rooted in fairy tales and myths who were created by societies with kings and suchlike. And it shows. Then again urban fantasy and other more modern settings don't always fall for that worldview. I'd say more but I'd be going political so...

Even George Martin, who in Game of Thrones is trying to deconstruct the ideology of fantasy monarchies, still falls into this trap with Daenerys. She can walk through fire and master dragons because she's of the right bloodline. No one who's not a Targaryan can do these things.

That's not quite true. Daenerys walked through fire onceas part of a magic ritual. This one event aside she (and the rest of her family) have absolutely no particular protection from fire (they do seem to be more resistant to illness but they're not immune either). As for dragon riding while being a Targaryen helps (sometimes), Fire and Blood shows that basic positive reinforcement is enough since has-absolutely-zero-drop-of-noble-blood Nettles maaged to tame the dragon Sheepstealer by feeding it sheeps regularly.

[hamishspence]

As for dragon riding while being a Targaryen helps (sometimes), Fire and Blood shows that basic positive reinforcement is enough since has-absolutely-zero-drop-of-noble-blood Nettles maaged to tame the dragon Sheepstealer by feeding it sheeps regularly.

Some of the Targaryens had dark hair - the fact that Nettles had brown hair isn't really evidence of her being Not A Targaryen.

It's true that there isn't much evidence for her being a Targaryen either - but she's usually described as a bastard and a dragonseed, by characters in-universe.

The most common out-of-universe theory I've seen is that she's Daemon Targaryen's daughter, and that's why they spent so much time together - not an affair, but father-daughter bonding.

[KorvinStarmast]

Durkon's so considerate.

I wonder if now is when they discover the MitD's betrayal.

It's so nice to see someone discussing the topic of this thread. Thank you.

I also think that perhaps maybe we’re overanalizing this.

Ya think?

I always figured that over analyzing works of entertainment was, like, the number one geek hobby.

Can't argue with that.

Aren't most countries monarchies? Western as well as Eastern?

Nope, at least, not in the current day. Are you referring to the year 1350? Then the answer would be yes.

Because Fantasy is a fantasy of our medieaval past and that was rather thin on the democracy. A hero in a modern-esque democractic system is a violent sociopath trying to impose their own selfish vision of how things should be on the rest. Basically that's what forms th backbone of the superhero genre.

Yep.

Western fantasy is probably quite evenly split between the "anyone can be come special" and "only those born to be special can be special". For the latter LotR (arguably), Wheel of Time, Star Wars, Game of Thrones (apparently) and some other works I've read all lean on the "you gots to be born to it".

There's no shortage of the latter.

Most of them do not make the magic = nobles argument, but if you think of it, that's what we'd all expect woudl happen though isn't it? Isn't there load sof "wizards should rule the world " treads on these boards.

Yes. A nice and detailed bit of world building along those themes is Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy (Assassin's Apprentice, Royal Assassin, Assassin's Quest).

[danielxcutter]

I always figured that over analyzing works of entertainment was, like, the number one geek hobby. I'm perfectly content to enjoy the story as is, but sometimes it's also fun to think about how things work.

...Okay point.

True on both accounts. With Harry Potter magic you could probably discriminate between good people and evil people, at least in how the spellcaster judges good and evil. And it's also possible thet Dumbledore gave a very simplistic version of the actual criteria to Harry.

The main problem is that by this point we reach the limits of information available to us. The only thing I believe is hard canon is the statement that only someone who wished to obtain the Stone without wanting to use it could get it, with everything else being additions meant to make it less of a terrible idea.

Also while a perfect security system doesn't exist you can still grade them on a scale, and you ain't going to get a passing grade with a locked door for which the required key is flying about right in front of the door.

Hmm, this is more speculation, but I wonder if the puzzles were to distract people from trying the obvious route and blasting a hole through the defenses or breaking them somehow. If someone challenges you to chess then you don't automatically think of smashing their head in with the board.

Though that could be why Quirrel got there so fast, actually, having Voldy on the back of his head probably helped.

We've got cloning, btw. It's just mostly illegal everywhere, due to ethical concerns, but if we wanted to... and were willing to spend the money on it... and had a few years to work out the finer details, we could absolutely clone a large quantity of people. I mean, the first clone was 26 years ago, and that's 6 years before Attack of the Clones came out (though yea, the Clone Wars was referenced in the original movie).

I'm not saying that the Star Wars universe doesn't have tech that we couldn't mimic before a great many years of technological improvements, that was never my point. My point is that, functionally, their tech is not really any different than ours.

A speeder is just like a car, except floating (which is completely superfluous to the function of a car). Their society is not really any more advanced than ours. Yea, they can go to other planets. So what? Going to Swamp Planet or Ice Planet is functionally the same as going to Swamp Country or Ice Country. The differences between overland movement and interplanetary movement are never made to matter in the Star Wars movies. Moreso that each planet is made to feel like it has a single small city anyways, and the rest is 99% barren. And in the odd case they do need to go on the other side of the planet for whatever reason, all that means is doing a small swim drive by a couple of big fish. Qui-Gon makes travelling through the core of Naboo feel easier than traveling to a neighboring country just a few hundred kilometers away.

The Star Wars tech is always essentially made to be analogous to RL tech, but flashier. Except those stupid First Order treadspeeders. The differences between the modern equivalents and the flashier versions are pretty much never made to matter, except for a handful of rule of cool moments, and even then.

The same goes with every other tech advancement you mentioned. Good AI, yea so what? They just replace a few things that normal people would otherwise do. They still make them humanoids, who fight in medieval-style formations of just casually walking into the enemy lines while shooting. The non-combat ones just replace human labor. Overall, AI is less integrated into their society than it's likely to be just a few years from now. I mean, common, they have humans do their hyperspace calculations on the star destroyers...? There's no way such a task wouldn't be handled by software IRL (Isn't that part of the astromechs' role on X-wings?). Who fires the canons on the death star? And the Falcon...? And every other single ship...? People... Why? Once you've managed to build robust AI and overcome the obstacles allowing you to make their ships' weapons able to aim instead of just shoot straight, there's really little reason to force the pilot or crewmen to shoot. And why are all the droids subservient? They've got "perfect AI" but there has never been an AI mutiny as far as we can tell?

Same with the energy sources. Sure, the jedis run around with mini nuclear reactors on the belts. But what does access to this kind of energy fundamentally change in the world? What do they do that we can't? They make... energy swords? Swords are already obsolete by a few centuries, for the most part. I mean, really, with such miniaturized energy sources, the CIS or the Empire could just have sent tiny fighters or infiltrator ships nuke planets from orbit and wipe out planets cold-war style, with nuclear winters.

But no, instead they make a single big weapon, that blows a single planet at a time, in a setting where planets essentially just have one city each on them. The Death Star is essentially analogous to a RL nuclear weapon, and nothing more. It's a localized destruction, planets come a buck a dozen and are no more important to the galaxy than big cities are to our planet.

So yea, do we have death stars, hand-held nuclear reactors, hover tech, and interstellar travel? No, we don't. But that doesn't matter, because our modern tech can achieve all the same things they do with that fancy tech.

I'm pretty sure that the lightsabers were more a sign of status rather than actual effectiveness; Jedi aren't primarily warriors in peacetime I believe. Also wasn't the Death Star partly an intimidation tactic and partly due to dictators finding appeal in superweapons in general? I've heard a lot of dictators invested in stuff like giant railroad cannons or something.

Monarchy tells us that there is a Chosen Hero who is out to right all wrongs and establish justice in the world. King Arthur or what not.

Fantasy is often about BEING the chosen hero out to save the world.

Since the two are telling the same story, naturally there is a close correlation between the two. Even George Martin, who in Game of Thrones is trying to deconstruct the ideology of fantasy monarchies, still falls into this trap with Daenerys. She can walk through fire and master dragons because she's of the right bloodline. No one who's not a Targaryan can do these things.

There aren't many stories where common people sort their own problems or kill the dragon or what not, because if ordinary people can do it there's no reason for a hero in the story. Which is not what most people want from their fantasy. Go to a Ren Faire, how many people are dressed up as peasants and keen to work the land from dawn till dusk while living on bread and broth?

I think fantasy allows people to escape to a world where they are extraordinary and different from regular people. Naturally, such a world must have chosen people, which of necessity turns into monarchy. That way you can have heroic heroes and evil villains that ordinary people can't just see to with a pitchfork-waving mob.

It does seem like this is more common in Japan then in the west. I've watched two anime in the past few months (Assassin's Pride, Ascension of a Bookworm), and in both cases magic, or mana, is something only the noble classes can do. In their world, being noble means having special abilities and powers that ordinary people simply don't have, and the degree of power is directly related to purity of bloodline. That seems less true in western stories, where anyone can learn magic at the local Tower of High Sorcery or become a magician if they find the right item or finish the right subquest.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

I've seen "people are special because they get special abilities" a few times from both sides of the Atlantic, but not much in more recent works I think. And you typically do have to accept that the main characters have something special to them, even if it's just being lucky or being at the right place in the right time.

Because Fantasy is a fantasy of our medieaval past and that was rather thin on the democracy. Historically even when popular uprisings overthrew the monarchy it tended to end up back as one, or the classic, "we deposed all the advisors because it just them that were doign wrong and left the king", for the simple reason that there was no viable alternative for a workable social system.

A hero in a modern-esque democractic system is a violent sociopath trying to impose their own selfish vision of how things should be on the rest. Basically that's what forms th backbone of the superhero genre.

Eh... I wouldn't say that's the backbone of the superhero genre. And it's not like all uprisings against monarchies went back to square one.

Not sure I'd go that far. Western fantasy is probably quite evenly split between the "anyone can be come special" and "only those born to be special can be special". For the latter LotR (arguably), Wheel of Time, Star Wars, Game of Thrones (apparently) and some other works I've read all lean on the "you gots to be born to it".

Most of them do not make the magic = nobles argument, but if you think of it, that's what we'd all expect woudl happen though isn't it? Isn't there load sof "wizards should rule the world " treads on these boards.

Magic -> therefore noble(or at least special) can make sense in the context, but noble -> therefore more likely to have magic is kinda weird for me. Maybe that's why it's been phased out more these days.

According to Wikipedia 151 countries are currently republics (ie anything that's not a monarchy) out of 200ish countries.

Fantasy is rooted in fairy tales and myths who were created by societies with kings and suchlike. And it shows. Then again urban fantasy and other more modern settings don't always fall for that worldview. I'd say more but I'd be going political so...

That's not quite true. Daenerys walked through fire onceas part of a magic ritual. This one event aside she (and the rest of her family) have absolutely no particular protection from fire (they do seem to be more resistant to illness but they're not immune either). As for dragon riding while being a Targaryen helps (sometimes), Fire and Blood shows that basic positive reinforcement is enough since has-absolutely-zero-drop-of-noble-blood Nettles maaged to tame the dragon Sheepstealer by feeding it sheeps regularly.

Urban fantasy does sometimes have bloodline stuff though; look at the TYPE-MOONverse. That being said, there it's not having special abilities that set the protagonists apart, but having wild-card abilities that aren't strictly powerful but give a fighting chance against even the strongest of foes.

[Fyraltari]

Some of the Targaryens had dark hair - the fact that Nettles had brown hair isn't really evidence of her being Not A Targaryen.

Nettle has dark hair, brown skin and dark eyes. Really doesn't look like a Targ at all.

It's true that there isn't much evidence for her being a Targaryen either - but she's usually described as a bastard and a dragonseed, by characters in-universe.

She's assumed to be a dragonseed by the other characters solely because she tamed a dragon. They don't know any better than we do because no-one know who her parents are. The fact remain that she's the only one who did not tame her dragon by walking to it hoping for the best and frankly do you see any of these people admitting that a commonborn teenage girl was smarter than they were.

The most common out-of-universe theory I've seen is that she's Daemon Targaryen's daughter, and that's why they spent so much time together - not an affair, but father-daughter bonding.

Nettles was 16 in 129, in 112-113 Daemon was in the stepstones waging his private war and persona non-grata in the Seven Kingdoms. Besides, do you really think that Mushroom would have passed the chance of telling us in details how he'd cinceived her if she'd looked a little like Daemon? It's more likely that he took a shine to her because she was a fellow free-spirited go-getter. Surrogate daughter yes, biological? I don't see it.

[Goblin_Priest]

Most fantasy settings don't have the protagonist born from a regal line, though. There's a few cases that revolve around executive power, like King Arthur or Game of Thrones, but overall, even stories that do place the protagonists in the royal families, it's not about being the king. Aladdin ends up marrying the princess and likely being next in line to be Sultan, but we end the story well behind that, it was all just about bonking his royal crush. Snow White is a princess, but it's all about dealing with the evil queen, we never see her crowned. Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty are both, like Aladdin, about marrying that sweet royal piece of ass. So's The Little Mermaid. We never see them obtain executive powers, and in cases like Merlin where the protagonist does ascend to kinghood, it still just ends there before he actually gets to significantly rule. Otherwise, it's often mostly just a tool to put focus on the protagonist. "Why's he standing up to the evil emperor? Well, he's the line of his line that was snuffed out".

What I had more in mind, though, was the more typical D&D-esque setting. In most campaigns settings, the world is littered with kingdoms, mostly kingdoms, but the heroes themselves aren't royal at all. Part of that stems from these settings typically being Pseudo-Europe+Magic Simulator, but then again there's no obligation to go down that path. Some settings will tend more towards Arabian or Asian settings, though still filled with monarchies. Some settings are set in the present or the future, but if we consider popularity, these campaign settings are way, way less popular than stuff like Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Eberron, Inner Sea, Dark Sun, Order of the Stick, Middle Earth, or the plethora of other fantasy settings for D&D, Pathfinder, and ton of other game systems. And even when set in space, Star Wars is full of queens and princesses, and even the Hutts are kind of regal.

There's a lot of fun to be had in settings where monarchies are rare if existent at all. I've played D20 modern games where monarchism did not feature at all, and it was quite enjoyable. But in addition to the two points I made prior, about the appeals of escapism and hero narratives, feudal or absolute monarchy systems make things a whole lot *simpler*. Political entities are made to be largely monolithic, and influencing politics is simply about dealing with a handful of NPCs. I'm sure it's occurred, but I've never seen or heard of players organizing a political campaign... in the literal sense of trying to get certain people elected. And then deal with parliaments where those elected officials are just a few cogs in a big complex machine.

When an evil kingdom is invading, you can just go bonk the evil king on the head. When a neighboring democracy is invading... that's a hell of a lot messier and more complicated to deal with.

When the Good King recognizes the heroes deeds and knights them, that feels rewarding. When the local peasants hold a vote and the heroes get a trophy thanks to 26% of the popular vote, that's much less rewarding.

Monarchy helps make individuals matter in fantasy settings, which make these settings both simpler to understand and interact with, as well as simply more fun to play a hero in.

According to Wikipedia 151 countries are currently republics (ie anything that's not a monarchy) out of 200ish countries.

Fantasy is rooted in fairy tales and myths who were created by societies with kings and suchlike. And it shows. Then again urban fantasy and other more modern settings don't always fall for that worldview. I'd say more but I'd be going political so...

That's not quite true. Daenerys walked through fire onceas part of a magic ritual. This one event aside she (and the rest of her family) have absolutely no particular protection from fire (they do seem to be more resistant to illness but they're not immune either). As for dragon riding while being a Targaryen helps (sometimes), Fire and Blood shows that basic positive reinforcement is enough since has-absolutely-zero-drop-of-noble-blood Nettles maaged to tame the dragon Sheepstealer by feeding it sheeps regularly.

Huh, which goes to show that just because every country I was thinking of was a monarchy, countries that came to mind were not really representative. I stand corrected.

[bunsen_h]

I'm sorry what? Did we invent artificial gravity, instantaneous communication, alcubierre-drive-like space travel, perfect artificial consciousness and power efficiency so great an object the size of a lamptorch can generate enough eat tobcut through metal pretty much indefinitely without ever needing to be recharged and nobody told me?

Some guys from my home province recently came up with a "plasma-based" "light saber". It's actually a modified cutting torch; it's "plasma-based" in that it runs at 4000'F (2200'C) and therefore partially ionized. And it can run for about 5 minutes off back-pack-sized tanks of gas.

Just because they are utterly stupid with how they use their tech doesn't mean it's not light-decades ahead of ours.

"Light-decades"? Don't you mean "parsecs"?

[Fyraltari]

Some guys from my home province recently came up with a "plasma-based" "light saber". It's actually a modified cutting torch; it's "plasma-based" in that it runs at 4000'F (2200'C) and therefore partially ionized. And it can run for about 5 minutes off back-pack-sized tanks of gas.

I think you missed the "power efficiency", "indefinitely" and "without needibg to be recharged" bits in my post.

"Light-decades"? Don't you mean "parsecs"?

No. A parsec is only about 3 light-years.

[Riftwolf]

You might have an issue recruting guards, though.

Just to be clear, guardfarting isn't a royal privilege. You can do it before you become King, when you're part of the rebellion to overthrow the current tyrannical ruler, with total impunity.
The reason Kingly guardfarting is a tactic is solely because of the weapon levelling system. After becoming King, you get access to a weapon that levels up if you use evil expressions on people. With normal citizens, this makes them hate you, and there's a limit on how many times the fart is counted for levelling. Guards, however, can neither hate nor love you, so farting on them levels the weapon without any repercussions. Also, if you leave one area and return, it resets the fart counter for the weapon on all guards, and the main city in the game has four non-combat areas (for some reason Millfields, supposedly the posh part of town, is plagued by bandits and werewolves, but that's beside the point). So running round the city Kingly Guardfarting can level your weapon in about ten minutes with no repercussions for evil behaviour.

And I'm pretty sure it's an American/British game. All the accents in-game are of the 'cor blimey guvnor knees up maaaaver braaaan' type.

[bunsen_h]

I think you missed the "power efficiency", "indefinitely" and "without needibg to be recharged" bits in my post.

No. A parsec is only about 3 light-years.

Sorry: unmarked joking. The supposed "light saber" is far short of the "real thing" for all that the creators talk it up, and you were using "light-decade" as a unit of time much as the movie appeared to use "parsec" as a unit of time.

[Petrocorus]

Yes. A nice and detailed bit of world building along those themes is Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy (Assassin's Apprentice, Royal Assassin, Assassin's Quest).

BTW, hasn't anyone made a RPG out of it yet?

[Goblin_Priest]

I think you missed the "power efficiency", "indefinitely" and "without needibg to be recharged" bits in my post.

And which still completely misses the point of my own post, in which how long until we can have identical copies of these techs is irrelevant because their existence does not change Star Wars societies in any meaningful ways.

Star Wars stories are mostly about jumping from planet to planet for the one thing each planet has to offer, treating these planets as if they were actually pretty small locations where everything is close to everything. When has distance ever been a meaningful plot element in Star Wars? It hasn't. Because the ability to hop from planet to planet is so widespread, the quantity of stuff to visit per planet is so limited, it acts fundamentally the same as real world people just taking a car to go to a neighboring city. The vast distance between the planets never matters in the movies. They hop on the ship, do a flashy hyperdrive jump, and, cut scene, they've arrived at their destinations. The universe is technically large, but narratively, it's very small. Even if you want to go in the uncharted funky space of Rise of Skywalker... the whole galaxy's resistance fleet gathers there in a moment's notice, despite coming from all over the unvierse.

Alright, my apologies for quoting the sequels, which are overall consistent only in their stupidity and lore breaking, but it remains true even disregarding them.

People don't need hyperspace drives to get to the farthest human settlement, they can do it by plane, or boat, and most settlements they can reach easily by car. They don't need perfect energy laser swords, regular swords slice people just fine. They don't need anti-gravity cars, wheels do just fine (plus there's basically floating trains already). SW's tech is just eye-candy, nothing more.

[Rogar Demonblud]

When has distance ever been a meaningful plot element in Star Wars?

Um, like 15 minutes into the first movie when the droids are lost in the desert. 30 minutes later when they need a particularly fast ship to get to Alderaan in time. When they're looking for a system they can get to with the Falcon's engines damaged in ESB. When Obi-Wan needs a relay transmitter in AOTC.

Off the top of my head.

[rbetieh]

The food is kinda mediocre though

The point is, he was so successful a pirate that he was able to settle down to restaurateur and build an EMPIRE. That he asks for more money than the food is worth is just Piracy of a different sort.

LJS wins. Goblin Dan wishes he was as successful.

[ozmar]

I am SO glad that now I know that the sound that accompanies the end of a meld into stone spell is "SKLUN"!

-Ozmar the Grateful

[Goblin_Priest]

Um, like 15 minutes into the first movie when the droids are lost in the desert. 30 minutes later when they need a particularly fast ship to get to Alderaan in time. When they're looking for a system they can get to with the Falcon's engines damaged in ESB. When Obi-Wan needs a relay transmitter in AOTC.

Off the top of my head.

Yea, and they get picked out of the desert like /right away/ (after a few scenery shots), which then goes to Luke's farm basically next door, and they find a good enough "piece of junk" the first place they look. The Falcon's speed always felt more like Han's baseless boasting (like the parasecs claim) than actually being incredibly fast. Everyone else just ridicules it.

Imo the example with ESB is more pertinent, as it actually forces them to pick a planet they wouldn't have picked otherwise and has an actual bearing on the plot, but it's still akin to "I've got half a tank of gas left in my car, I can't make it across the continent without finding a gas station first". Same with Obi-Wan, it's just like "oh, crap, I'm in the woods and there's no reception here".

None of these cases really highlight how incredibly vast the universe is, but are mere analogues to RL issues with travel. Compared to a lot of sci-fi settings that are set in the nearer future in terms of tech, the SW universe is much closer to our own. The tech being "more advanced" just means everything is functionally the same as with our world. You don't have month/year long treks to get somewhere, and travels that are otherwise so long you need cryosleep. You don't have significant lag in communicating between planets. Save for TLJ and Solo (which felt like it was made wholly in response to TLJ criticism), you don't really have issues with people being forced to stop due to fuel (they do refuel, but it's just something they do while they are somewhere, it's not something they need to constantly before reaching their destinations). They don't have tiny colonies where people struggle with hostile terrain. It doesn't feel like a large universe. It just feels like Earth, where none of the distinctions actually change anything.

[Ruck]

That's not quite true. Daenerys walked through fire onceas part of a magic ritual. This one event aside she (and the rest of her family) have absolutely no particular protection from fire (they do seem to be more resistant to illness but they're not immune either). As for dragon riding while being a Targaryen helps (sometimes), Fire and Blood shows that basic positive reinforcement is enough since has-absolutely-zero-drop-of-noble-blood Nettles maaged to tame the dragon Sheepstealer by feeding it sheeps regularly.

Not sure if this is from the TV show and not the books, because my memories of the latter are fuzzy and often mixed in with the show, but I'm pretty sure she shows resistance to fire in other scenarios. (And at least in the show's first season, when Viserys still thinks he's the rightful king, she mentions that he doesn't have the blood of the dragon because, you know, that thing that happened to him.)

[Cazero]

The point is, he was so successful a pirate that he was able to settle down to restaurateur and build an EMPIRE.

In other words, he quit at the first opportunity to chase his REAL dream. He never had the soul of a pirate and only ever saw that activity as a mean to an end.
But Hook? If he wasn't so busy chasing children for a personal vengeance, he'd be sailing around digging treasure so he can save up enough loot to bury. You couldn't pull the pirate out of him with a construction crane.

That he asks for more money than the food is worth is just Piracy of a different sort.

Asking for more money that what the product you sell is worth is not piracy, it's basic economic theory.

[Fyraltari]

Not sure if this is from the TV show and not the books, because my memories of the latter are fuzzy and often mixed in with the show, but I'm pretty sure she shows resistance to fire in other scenarios. (And at least in the show's first season, when Viserys still thinks he's the rightful king, she mentions that he doesn't have the blood of the dragon because, you know, that thing that happened to him.)

Pretty sure that's show only. Book!Daenerys seems to believe she's redistant to fire but she burns herself a few times. And she never contradicts Viserys' right to rule, she just ends up thinking he'd have made a terrible king.

[KorvinStarmast]

BTW, hasn't anyone made a RPG out of it yet?

I am not sure if it could stand up as its own RPG, and I am also not sure that Robin (Megan, etc) is interested in others fiddling about with her creation. She's got quite a bit of complex messaging and world building going on there. I am pretty sure that she's not going to welcome having it made into a mini series. (More's the pity, I think it's one of those stories that would make for a fine Netflix or HBO series).

However, in the deepest archetypical sense, the structure of the royalty being something like sorcerer kings or priest kings sits there without too much window dressing.

Her take on dragons is something I've always liked. As much as I enjoyed the Liveship traders, and what followed from that, I liked the original carved dragons quite a bit more.

[Jason]

I'm very disappointed about the distinct lack of debate regarding the respective pirate merits of Captain Hook and Long John Silver.

Long John Silver, of course. There wouldn't be a Captain Hook if LJS hadn't blazed the trail for affably evil pirates, and the pirate accent everyone knows comes from the Disney version of Treasure Island.

[KorvinStarmast]

Long John Silver, of course. There wouldn't be a Captain Hook if LJS hadn't blazed the trail for affably evil pirates, and the pirate accent everyone knows comes from the Disney version of Treasure Island.

Not to mention that Long John Silver was the ship's cook; they called him Barbecue. I like to cook, and I find that skill to be quite useful IRL.

[hamishspence]

And it was under that name that he was referenced in Peter Pan - with Hook being "the only man Barbecue ever feared".

[Schroeswald]

And it was under that name that he was referenced in Peter Pan - with Hook being "the only man Barbecue ever feared".

I do believe thats a point to Hook's favor, right?

[Rogar Demonblud]

Depends on why he's feared. It could be because Hook is horribly off-key every time they do a chorus of "Fifteen Men".

[KorvinStarmast]

Depends on why he's feared. It could be because Hook is horribly off-key every time they do a chorus of "Fifteen Men".

Do you mean Derelict?

For my money the Jolly Rogers' version is the best. (Saw them live near Kansas City over 20 years ago, they did a great job with pirate songs).

This one ain't bad, but it's a bit too orchestral for my tastes

And if were talking about rum, what one does with a drunken sailor has to be included. Hate to break up a set ....