"Epic" and "Saga" roleplaying

[Matt Wilson]

I think I can solve the problem : )
Ralph, I believe you're paying too much attention to the numbers. See, if the normal human range is e.g. 1- 10, and Odysseus has a wisdom of e.g. 15, that's an epic scale by most means. IMHO very few people will be concerned, that such a character has a 1% chance of being outsmarted by someone with a wisdom of 10 (or whatever else that probability is in a particular system).

I think, actually, that Ralph is saying that it doesn't matter what your STR is: 12, 15, 18. None of those numbers makes a character epic or helps to generate an epic feel. There needs to be something else that provides an epic quality to a game.

I could be wrong, though.

[Valamir]

I could be wrong, though.

Nope, you are quite correct.

Heh...this thread's been hard for me.  I keep thinking that I must just be babbling incoherently...

[montag]

So, Ralph, your whole point was, that numbers on the character sheet do not an epic game make?
Come on, there must have been something more to it. ;)

[John Kim]

I've split out the point about http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=10377">Stats for Epic Heroes as a separate thread.

[aplath]

I think the "feel" or "tone" of an epic is more important than the scale, all things considered.

Couldn't agree more.

Reading through this thread got me thinking about my own games. There was one particular campaign that had an awesome epic feel and yet was played in 9th to 11th level D&D which is relatively low by the standards of this thread.

What made the campaigh powerful though was the story and the commitment of every player to it.

It was a several years long (game world time) quest of a dwarf, leading a small group of younger and inexperienced dwarves, to rescue the women and children of their village that had been taken away by foreign slave traders.

The scale was hardly world shattering since we're talking about a small village of dwarves in a really big world, but what made it huge was the importance of the quest for those pursuing it and the alternance of hope and despair in each character as they pursued this quest.

The characters also made it big by the tough decisions made throughout the campaign, putting them way beyond your everyday dwarf, even though they wouldn't be considered powerful in terms of the game world (or system).

So I think epic has to do with the stakes, that must be big inside a given context. Also it has to do with choices made and, as someone said, the values represented by this choices. And most of all, epic has to do with the tone of the story.

All this things, and this is my humble opinion, has little to do with system and much to do with the story and the commitment of all those involved in telling the story.

Andreas

[John Kim]

So I think epic has to do with the stakes, that must be big inside a given context. Also it has to do with choices made and, as someone said, the values represented by this choices. And most of all, epic has to do with the tone of the story.

All this things, and this is my humble opinion, has little to do with system and much to do with the story and the commitment of all those involved in telling the story.

But would you agree that the tone of the story is influenced (maybe even strongly influenced) by the system?  i.e. A game run using Sorcerer & Sword will have a different tone than D&D which will have a different tone than, say, Toon.  Right?

[M. J. Young]

I have reached the conclusion that we are spinning our wheels.

We are arguing about how to make a game feel epic. We can't even agree as to what that means. Let me suggest that it means nothing that can be captured by system or setting or character or even by players, because it is not specific enough to identify.

[*]In The Last Starfighter, Navigator Grig says, "I've always wanted to fight a desperate battle against incredible odds", and then they do it.

There is something epic in that: fighting a desperate battle against incredible odds, being in the war you can't possibly win, and then somehow, by the skin of your teeth, winning.

It is the moment at which the armies of Middle Earth stand in front of Sauron's gate, and the ring falls into the crack of Mount Doom, and suddenly victory has landed within the grasp of the heroes.

It is in one sense a very gamist sense of what makes an epic feel--that notion that we should have lost, we were going to lose, we were this close to losing, and then, somehow, we pulled out of it, and we won.

To some people, that will always feel epic. There are a ton of epics in which that's not remotely part of the story, but we're talking about an epic feel, not an epic emulation.

[*]It's been observed that some epics cover great distances in space, some span vast lengths of time, and some bring people from many places together. Beowulf is a strange epic in some ways, because a great deal of it occurs in a dining hall, during which adventures are recounted--but those adventures told carry us to many places. Epics seem to have scope.

Star Wars for some has an epic feel, not because of the incredible victory, but because of the vast world painted by the creator. Lord of the Rings has that vastness also. For some people, Glorantha is itself epic in feel, not for what happens there, but for its sheer expanse. To feel like you were somewhere big, somewhere that was far from your little home town, that you visited the stars--maybe all of them--or traversed a continent, or delved the depths to the center of the earth. It doesn't so much matter what happens; it feels epic because it was so incredibly big.

This is perhaps a simulationist experience of epic. I can't believe we were really there, but it sure feels like we were.

[*]We keep hearing the narrativist version of epic again and again on this thread. To feel epic, it has to really deal with major issues that impact the world; the characters have to be able to make a difference to the premise in a big way. Sure, that would feel epic, to some people. To others, it would be boring.[/list:u]
So I don't think we're going to find the secret to making play feel epic for everyone. We're going to have to decide that there are several ways to make games feel epic, and that they work with greater or lesser degrees for different people. Then we can start to work on how do we make a narrativist game feel epic, or a gamist game, or a simulationist game, and stop trying to say that this way or that way doesn't work, because nothing works for everyone, and some of the things that have been rejected as unworkable generally would be quite workable as an approach to creating an epic feeling of a particular sort.

As to whether system matters, of course it does. It determines what kind of epic feeling you might reasonably hope to achieve.

--M. J. Young

[contracycle]

I agree this thread is now useless.  I'm still hung up on why War And Peace should not be an epic and, for some reason, only essentially mythical works are to be considered 'epic'.  I think the term is too vague to be useful, any further, and that rather we should SELECT a meaning for epic that conveys what we want it to convey.  Websters cites the following for Epic:

1) An extended narrative poem in elevated or dignified language, celebrating the feats of a legendary or traditional hero.
2) A literary or dramatic composition that resembles an extended narrative poem celebrating heroic feats.
3) A series of events considered appropriate to an epic: the epic of the Old West.

adj.
1)Of, constituting, having to do with, or suggestive of a literary epic: an epic poem.
2) Surpassing the usual or ordinary, particularly in scope or size: "A vast musical panorama... it requires an epic musical understanding to do it justice" (Tim Page).
3) Heroic and impressive in quality: "Here in the courtroom... there was more of that epic atmosphere, the extra amperage of a special moment" (Scott Turow).

When we say 'epic feel', I'm not sure anyone of us really know what the others means.

Saga is less ambiguous, but its formal definition is very different to any sense of significance:

Saga
1) A prose narrative usually written in Iceland between 1120 and 1400, dealing with the families that first settled Iceland and their descendants, with the histories of the kings of Norway, and with the myths and legends of early Germanic gods and heroes.
2) A modern prose narrative that resembles a saga.
3) A long detailed report: recounted the saga of their family problems.

The only thing that Saga and Epic have in common, significantly, are their role as historical sources, and length.  There is no meaningful 'epic feel' - that is a product of the stylisation applied by the PERFORMERS of the epic or saga, which we encounter in one or other recorded format.  Thats the 'elevated or dignified language' part.

[aplath]

But would you agree that the tone of the story is influenced (maybe even strongly influenced) by the system?  i.e. A game run using Sorcerer & Sword will have a different tone than D&D which will have a different tone than, say, Toon.  Right?

I think that what you mean is that setting has strong influence on tone. Or perhaps the premise of the game have a strong influence on tone.

But the system ? Well, I don't think it really matters how the characters are described in terms of game mechanics or how conflicts are resolved.

That said, system of course might help. For instance there might be a system that actually gave some kind of meta-game reward to "epic" play of characters or story or both.

But I guess what I'm saying is that I don't consider it to be a required factor that the system "supports" epic campaigns. I don't know if there is such a thing. And if there is, I doubt that it alone is enough to bring this epic tone to life.

Andreas

[Rexfelis]

I have reached the conclusion that we are spinning our wheels.

We are arguing about how to make a game feel epic. We can't even agree as to what that means. Let me suggest that it means nothing that can be captured by system or setting or character or even by players, because it is not specific enough to identify.

Let me suggest again that the most focal concept of epic for the purposes of this thread is that of the epic genre of literature (i.e. poems composed "in an elevated style" which recount the exploits of heroes). I thought that that was what this thread was supposed to be about all along.

And, I think there are specific mechanics which can be designed to emulate this type of literature for purposes of role-playing.

Rexfelis

[orbsmatt]

It definitely is hard to define this idea, which makes it even harder to discuss, but I do feel it is possible, as I have tried to get that "feel" in my games when necessary (not always, just when necessary).

In all cases, I think some of the ideas shared here would work great to give the game a more dramatic, epic feel, IMO.

I'll just leave it at that for now.

[FredGarber]

<delurking>

I would say all of those (a) "skip the little stuff," and (b) "have a grandoise feel/poetry" comments are describing either the (a) Scene Framing  or the (b) Mood and Style of common Epics

I would offer the following definitions:

Mythic: The PC's actions have larger-than-life effects.  Example: Hercules diverts a river to clean out a stables.

Epic : The characters actions have a long-lasting effect on the society that they live in.

Example 1: All of Hercules' efforts didn't change the fact that he lived at a time "when the ancient gods were petty and cruel, and plaged mankind with suffering." (cf Sorbo.)
         Not Epic, to me.

Example 2: Star Wars IV (alone) is heroic, and mythic, but not Epic.  At the beginning of the story, there are Rebels and an Empire.  At the end of the story, there are Rebels and an Empire.
         Not Epic, to me.

Example 3: A game set in the Civil War, where the PCs play either Federalists or Southerners with an eye to the Post-Reconstructionist South could fit the requirements.  Society changed in the South because of the War, and if the PCs have a direct effect on how they change, then the story could be epic.

Example 4: Star Wars 4-6, the Classic Trilogy, would be Epic, because by the end, the Empire is overthrown, and Luke and the Gang were primary movers in making that happen.  

So something could be mythic AND epic, or only one or the other.

To use the LOTR / Hobbit, LOTR is Epic, since the Age of Man has begun and the Four Hobbits must Scour the Shire when they return, but "The Hobbit" is not, since Bilbo returns to the Shire which was unchanged by the adventure.

[Rexfelis]

Suggestion: at this point, if someone wants to discuss design issues re. an "epic" rpg, he might as well just start his own thread and simply stipulate what he means by "epic." We could then have different threads addressing the several conceptions of "epic-ness."

It does seem as if this thread has devolved into quibbling over the proper meaning of the word "epic," and, since there seems to be no convergence on that score, little substantive work is being done (IMHO).

Rexfelis