Post by shana on Feb 9, 2007 5:54:24 GMT -5
Ok, so I've been here since I clicked it in the PA advertisement link. I haven't roleplayed Eragon in a long... long time. There's a reason for that. Two actually. The first being I disliked the books. The plotline is star wars. (Not based off Star Wars, as many say it is. It is star wars.) That and the character development was poor, in fact until Eldest all it tells you of what Eragon looks like is strong brown eyes and luscious thick eyebrows (Pretty sexy eyes on air there CP). Even the timeframe was wrong, not so much in Eragon as it was in Eldest, but it would take too long to explain that.
Anyway, onto why I haven't roleplayed the particular genre. It's been to do with the forums, and how they are run and built. One of my major gripes, that stopped me joining a lot of forums (apart from the illiteracy that runs rampant in many of the fans of these books. Not refering to anyone here of course. Or else I wouldn't have joined.) The major rule I've always hated. Dragons are played by the same person as their rider.
See, I wouldn't have a problem with this if they were like horses, mindless creature considering only themselves. But CP tried, unsuccessfully, to make the dragons a different force to their riders. Their bond, their individualality, that was the center of the book. The dragons bonds with mere humans (Why they did that when they gained nothing from it surprises me, but oh well), was the center of the book.
But why, you say, can the riders and dragons not be played by the same person. Well, it is something called equality. The dragons are said to be equals with their riders, being able to make their own decisions. But how can that be so, when one person would play favourites with the character they like better of their two. For example, Murtagh and Thorn. Thorn is meant to be an aggresive, independant dragon. Played by the same person as the one who plays Murtagh, Thorn would do everything Murtagh said. Why? Because the person who plays Murtagh can't have disagreement or refusal in their own characters. It would be stupid.
If dragons are individuals to their riders, how can the rider play their dragon? Then they may as well be slave and master, the dragon becoming no more than a doll to be used at the whim of the one who plays his rider. With less individuality than a horse.
So, if you had put that idea into force, I wouldn't have joined no matter how literate you are. But since you haven't, I'm hoping it will stay that way, and I will stay here.
Anyway, onto why I haven't roleplayed the particular genre. It's been to do with the forums, and how they are run and built. One of my major gripes, that stopped me joining a lot of forums (apart from the illiteracy that runs rampant in many of the fans of these books. Not refering to anyone here of course. Or else I wouldn't have joined.) The major rule I've always hated. Dragons are played by the same person as their rider.
See, I wouldn't have a problem with this if they were like horses, mindless creature considering only themselves. But CP tried, unsuccessfully, to make the dragons a different force to their riders. Their bond, their individualality, that was the center of the book. The dragons bonds with mere humans (Why they did that when they gained nothing from it surprises me, but oh well), was the center of the book.
But why, you say, can the riders and dragons not be played by the same person. Well, it is something called equality. The dragons are said to be equals with their riders, being able to make their own decisions. But how can that be so, when one person would play favourites with the character they like better of their two. For example, Murtagh and Thorn. Thorn is meant to be an aggresive, independant dragon. Played by the same person as the one who plays Murtagh, Thorn would do everything Murtagh said. Why? Because the person who plays Murtagh can't have disagreement or refusal in their own characters. It would be stupid.
If dragons are individuals to their riders, how can the rider play their dragon? Then they may as well be slave and master, the dragon becoming no more than a doll to be used at the whim of the one who plays his rider. With less individuality than a horse.
So, if you had put that idea into force, I wouldn't have joined no matter how literate you are. But since you haven't, I'm hoping it will stay that way, and I will stay here.
