Um I know they aren't Totems. For one, one can argue if totems are real or not. They do not anywhere fully state taht totems are real to anyone who is not shaman or a believer. Notice how the totems do not always act in the same way,. Not all dogs shamans are the same, nor how they interact with dog. Also totems give you power.. Or do they ? Notice how the elder ones think shamans are jokes?

Passions on the other hand are proveable. They have have real world powers. They don't make shamans, or anything like the. That is least what I understand.

Toturi is right... Just look at Assets Inc. mission in the DH trilogy....

That's exactly what you do when you fight against Blood Spirits... Toxic Shamans... Mad AI's... The Invae... Dr. Halberstam...

I never owned Tir Tairngire sourcebook (shame on me!).

Can you paste the text here if you have it?

I always took that to mean that it was an insulting misrepresentation to elves to suggest they were shamans that were following Passions like totems. Insulting to the point that they'd be motivated to snuff the speaker for making the suggestion.

Hmmm you're right... That can be interpreted in various ways.

However, assuming that Harlequin is really speaking with Vestrial in "Voices from the Past". (No proof that this is Vestrial... Not even proofs that Harlequin isn't even speaking to himself!), that could mean that -H- really dislike passions (especially Vestrial...)

Anyway, the funny thing about Harlequin is that he is taking the name of a Commedia Dell'Arte italian theater character that personifies "The Trickery, Good Humor and Pranks" which were Vestrial's domain before becoming mad

...

coincidence? doubt it

I don't know where you're coming from here, but according to my cultural origins, you can consider me a celt and there I'll tell you that all the faery tales talking about elves I've heard since my childhood (and I'm not talking about Tolkien whom has - mostly - just combined many european legends and themes) make elves, faeries, and such, the closest thing to immortal things there is by being magical creatures (i.e. spirits) per essence.

That's how I see it (and that is how we played it). More Fantasy with Cyberware than Cyberpunk with Magic.

But it was always left out there floating as to why he had those shares. That it was likely a covert operation to keep an eye on them. Which is i think why i was uneasy with Dunk in SR. Then came his operatic death/rebirth that even further struck an odd cord for me. He was a [mostly] fantasy character in a non-fastasy setting.

I always saw Harlequin as the fallen paladin/failed jedi, the one who - after the downturn in magic and the destruction of everything he knew and loved - basically said "screw it" and went out to make his own way in the world. And yes, he's almost certainly done some terrible things since then, and some great things also. Now the magic is back, and so is the threat from the horrors and the bugs and all the rest of it, and his conscience is starting to prick him. He doesn't want to be a hero; but the world may not give him a choice.

Just to digress slightly - to be quite specific, Jedi are supposed to refrain from allowing their emotions to govern their actions. They're quite capable of having them. It's okay for a jedi to feel love, happiness, even anger - it's when they act on those emotions alone that their stability within the Force is compromised ("I killed them. I killed them all". Which for some reason seems to cement Amidala's affection for the spoiled, egotistical arrogant little turd. Go figure).

The "failed jedi" reference, however, was very specifically referring to the archetype from the old (and imho superior, but that's a different kettle of fish) WEG system, and I apologise that the reference was too obscure.

Burned out, that's exactly the phrase I was looking for. It's almost a stereotype of pulp literature; the burned out hero who doesn't want to be a hero any more, but whom the world simply will not allow to roll over and give up.

Er -- what? Fantasy is no more inherently moralistic than any genre. Inherently mythic, definitely: but inherently black/white good/evil, no. The examples given are all examples of Christianised fantasy -- Tolkein is considered one of the great Christian commentators of the 20th C, and LotR is commonly interpreted as a Christian fantasy -- and yes, Lucas too: try comparing his work to actual Zen or Tao, and you quickly run into problems precisely because of this attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole. But there are traditions in fantasy other than the Christian. Ever read Mary Stewart's or Marion Zimmer Bradley's take on the Arthur legends? (Edit to add a few more non-black/white fantasy authors -- Ursula K Leguin, Barbara Hambly, Peter Beagle, Orson Scott Card, Michael Moorcock, Lord Dunsany ... heck, most fantasy touching on the essence of elves/underworld/otherworlds.)

Edit: Dr Jest has already covered what I would have said re Jedi. Call it the difference between acting with passion and acting from passion: do you control your actions, or do your emotions?

Funny, I always figured shadowrun as Fantasy with cyberpunk elements.

Perhaps it is neither fantasy nor cyberpunk, but both. It has elements of both and I dont think we should be upset over the presence of one or the other, because it is both of them that make SR what I love.

Good Lord, someone quoting an author list I've read almost all of for a change Hey Talia, you know they're re-filming Beagle's Last Unicorn?

But you don't need an overarching "Good" group being threatened by evil. You just need one person.


Saving an impoverished single mother from being ravaged by a gang as she tried to take groceries home to her kids is a great low-level heroic encounter in SR.

Saving an impoverished single mother from being ravaged by brigands as she tries to take groceries home to her children is a great low-level heroic encounter in D&D.

By the same token, ravaging an impoverished single mother as she tries to take groceries home to her children is a great low-level evil encounter in both systems.

And how is committing crimes for money not fantasy? The standard dungeon crawl is essentially an elaborate B&E job. Lets not forget the whole thief class and stories that revolve around the profession.

Frito the Thief and Goben that Barbarian are hired by a mysterious man to break into a vampire's mansion and steal random Ubermagic Artifact #127. Of course, they take the job. That they can keep anything they find that is not Ubermagic Artifact #127 is implied in the agreement.

A Mysterious Johnson hires Fritz the Covert Op and Gill the Sammie to break into a vampire's mansion and steal random Ubermagic Artifact #17. Of course, they take the job. That they can loot anything that is not Ubermagic Artifact #17 is implied in the agreement.

How are these scenarios different? Other than the fact that one is a D&D scenario and the other is an SR scenario I see little distinction.

Heck, one could easily compare extraterritorial facilities to sovereign castle-states.


Want to inject a moral dilemma into the most epic high fantasy? Here is a good one. The party spends the entire campaign tracking down an "evil" wizard who wants to destroy the world.

Along the way they learn that Buddha was right. Existence is suffering. The Wizard they are tracking came to understand this and sought a way to end suffering for good. So, he found a magic ritual that would destroy the world but allow all souls to ascend to a Nirvana-like oneness with the universe.

The Party can choose to complete the ritual and be the worst mass-murders in history, taking away the joys of existence as well as the suffering. Or, the can choose to kill the Wizard and destroy his knowledge along with him, dooming all souls to a never-ending cycle of suffering and reincarnation.

Of course, there is a difference between high-fantasy and sword and sorcery. Most, if not all, high-fantasy is sword and sorcery. However, not all sword and sorcery is high fantasy.

Sword and sorcery can easily have dirt and grit. It can easily have moral dilemmas. It can have the good guys lose and the bad guys win and not be an over-the-top evil campaign. Sword and Sorcery can have rival nations fighting each other for the reasons that real nations fight each other.

Look at the Iliad. It is a fantasy story. It has people with swords killing each other. It has nigh-invincible demi-god. It has deities butting in at every turn.

Troy isn't the slightest bit evil. If anything, It is more noble that the Achaeans' Alliance.

Look at Achilles. He is a Mercenary with a Vindictive flaw the size of Wisconsin and about a million points worth of Combat Monster. He refuses to fight throughout most of the story because his Johnson screwed him out of his slave girl. He finally takes to the battlefield because of his anger over he death of his friend. He slaughters the Trojans left and right and he goes so far as to desecrate their bodies to make their afterlives more unpleasant.

Of course, Achilles doesn't have to be perfect because Troy isn't a story about the triumph is good or righteousness. It is about human triumph, which is what good SR games should be about, as well. Achilles dies before the war is over but, despite his flaws, he succeeded in redefining "Good" and "righteousness" for future generations.
His story as told by Homer marks a turning point in the whole of Western civilization. It is at this point that the Heroic Code (Kill or be killed in glorious battle -blah, blah, blah) begins to slowly decline in favor of intellectual humanism.

Perhaps, centuries in the future, the story of how some runner overcame his Vindictive flaw will inspire a new way of thought just as with Achilles.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with mass-murdering super-powered runners either. It depends on your taste.

More epic sourcebooks are produced than low-level sourcebooks are produced because epic sells. Anyone can throw together a band of thugs for your weak characters to take on. In any game world there are millions of them. After a while they all start to blur together. The epic metaplot stories, that is what makes the world stand it. That is what makes the reality distinctive. That is what most people pay for.



--------

I would disagree that the Horrors are fantasy. The Horrors are Horror. Like all good monsters they are forces of nature. Morality doesn't really apply to them any more than it would to a wild Lion or an Earthquake. Of course, one doesn't have any pity for an Earthquake and most people would stop them if it were in their power. However, it isn't in anyone's power, not really. That is what makes them so scary.


I don't think bringing the Horrors through is the best idea. Surviving Horror Construct, on the other hand, are nice to have around. For pure creepiness value one could use that woman who was granted immortality but not eternal youth. She must be very bitter by now.

For the scary ubbermonsters nothing beats Verjigorm's pet dragons. Many would have been killed in the fourth world, more still would have been slain by downcycle hunting. However, a few Adults would have survived - and maybe a Great or two.

Have the runners be hired by a mysterious Johnson to guard the lair of a dragon who has not yet awaken from slumber. The Johnson speaks of a benefactor who wants the dragon to be in his debt and knows that there will be hunters after the sleeping beast to chop up for telesma.

The pay is high and a hefty bonus will be paid for every hunter killed.

The runners will have a tough time beating back the hunters, who turn out of be working for the Draco Foundation if anyone checks.

After beating back or killed the hunters, the Dragon awakens and appears before the PC's eyes. It is a horrific beast with seven glowing eyes and seven tattered wings. Its scales are a mottles mix of hues so foul that none are recognizable from rainbow or palate save a few specks of puke green. Every inch of it's massive body drips nauseating icor.

It chows down on some hunters or their corpses and then takes to the sky.
It vanishes after that. It makes its aura as best as it can and attempts to blend in as a human. It lays low as it gathers a ritual group of the power-hungry and the foolish - A renaming group.

Suddenly, "Seattle" becomes "Stinking vomit-soaked pile of dung-stuffed skunk corpses" with the aesthetics to match (Not that there would be a noticeable difference).

An entire campaign could center around killing this Corrupted Great Dragon. It is a big task, almost epic. But, it is an assassination mission at heart. No threat from other Horrors, just from this monstrosity.

For something less extreme those Obsidimen who were consumed by Ristul at the point where it physically entered the world could begin to wake up.


Edited for spelling

Way to pay attention.

Now, if you really think Earthdawn is "standard fantasy," you just don't know what you're talking about. Is it fantasy? Yes. Is it any sort of default fantasy setting? Not by a longshot.