[Ironshanks]

Strange, we seem to be arguing for the same point but from different angles. For me personally, I react to archetypal heros on an intellectual level and complex characters on an emotive level. In any case we can agree that emotional response is good.

Yeah, the reason Boromir appealed to me was the tragic aspect...I'm a sucker for weakness and tragedy, I feel most strongly about both.

Anyway, I'm in favour of archetypes too, but I don't think that they cancel out complex characters.

You know what, before this discussion continues I think we should clarify what exactly a 'complex' character is. We may be thinking of totally different things, and it certainly is starting to look that way.

I was thinking that we were referring to characters with believable, well thought out, emotional responses to their environment as well as a changable personality. Maybe there are other details, but those are the most important.

Hmmm, I'm starting to think that both can get the same reaction if done well enough. Conan for instance, I find extremely entertaining...and well, let's just say that it isn't the pinacle of imagination when it comes to plot and character use.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[Tenshi]

- To me a Complex character is capable of change, or evolving, based on his/her interaction with the universe that he/she is a part of . This is different from "flat" characters who aren't capable of changing. A character with a complex personality is not necessarily a "complex" character, to me, unless they are capable of more than just static, predictable decisions and responses.

- I have to agree, that a combination of archetypical ("flat") characters and complex ("round") characters promotes a more enjoyable response. I forgot what other kinds of characters there are, it's been a while since English class. =T
_________________
- Jaeda

[Ironshanks]

I await Mandrake's response with bated breath. No really, this is cool.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[Jihgfed Pumpkinhead]

     Hope my response will do in the interim.
     Yeah, we're definitely talking about different things, then. I would call a character who changes during the course of a story a dynamic character. Dynamism is good. Every mythical story is a journey; a journey in which the hero doesn't change is no journey at all.
     The thing is, however, that in a myth, that change is pre-scripted, in a sense. Unlike "real" stories, myths have to follow certain rules, or rather scripts; the more you deviate from these scripts, the less mythical the story becomes. Of course, some deviation is necessary, and encouraged, but still, there is a definite sense, in myth and fable, of inevitability. The trick is to have inevitability without staleness. That's hard.
     Why does it have a script? I think it's because the myth, the fable, is essentially moral. The "real" story is essentially amoral. By "moral", I mean only that it is done with the intention of improving, or expanding, those who hear it. The hero has to conquer, in some way; he has to improve. If he has made mistakes, he has to realize them, or at least the major ones. At least, this is true so far as I'm aware.
     I've never heard of "flat" or "round" characters before. I've heard of "square" characters; that's what everybody calls me.
     And hey, why are there never "triangle" characters in RPGs? In case you missed the barely-veiled allusion, I meant homosexuals. I don't think I've ever even heard of a game that has a gay person in it (well, except for Bahamut Lagoon, but that character didn't actually make great inroads, or anything like that; if you know who I'm talking about, you know what I mean).

[Tenshi]

- =D

- My red-head (sig) is bisexual... and this character is a sex-changling (like Ranma, but without the water curse) who has the mind of a guy, so half the time that makes her a lesbian. To be politically correct I intend on having a gay man in there somewhere.
_________________
- Jaeda

[Ninkazu]

Dude......... I seriously want to play your game BADLY.
I mean... DUUUUDE, that's so KEWL...

[Ironshanks]

Well I figure that quite often it's not appropriate for the setting. In fact, there isn't that much sexuality in general in RPGs so I don't think it's too surprising to see that it isn't diverse.

Anyway, I'd consider Heracles a mythic hero, but he never changes. Actually, maybe it is just a "bad" myth, even though it's so well known.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[mandrake@yoink]

[grenideer]

Ok Mandrake, at least now I can say that I understand your point of view. The first post that I replied to almost seemed to contradict itself, but your second post clarified those points for me.

Still, though, I have to say that I strongly disagree with you. But I don't doubt that good stories can come out of your way of thinking.

I also agree that extremely simple emotions and reactions, added even to the most complex characters, can help add an emotional attachment with the player. But I'd argue that even these simple things are realistic, being a large part of real life. My main gripe is just when the player is too simple, or simple all across the board. Then it becomes too fake for me to even care about. That's it.
_________________
Diver Down

[Nodtveidt]

I sure did open a can of worms, didn't I :P

-nek
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[mandrake@meepmeep]