How is this, of all things, something which feels like "nasu desperately trying to get people to accept his philosophy"?Originally Posted by Byegod
How is this, of all things, something which feels like "nasu desperately trying to get people to accept his philosophy"?
It personally feels like it ties into the 'ghosts cannot change the past' that we talked about, 'servants are bound to there story'.
As you know several works have said its bad for them to influence or choose the present so it fels like that ties into this if that makes anyway.
And what I mean by people who dont accept it, people are here for the servants, thats a fact, we want to see servants do great things, which the aforementioned philosophy goes against no?
I mean he didn't use it, and his attitude doesn't imply that having it means using it.
The other parts of his myth (in Fate) regarding having everything is being conveniently ignored huh. So by the current logic, it's not contradictory for him to have gone and found it again later on.
Saber was in FSN an almost dead person who made a contract, and not a HS yet. Later on per FGO she's a HS so the "rule" would be applied. And even then the "rule" isn't a hard thing that requires every matching detail as was discussed in the Questions thread, so ignoring those points for no reason is baffling.
Define story for heroic spirit, I want you to define it, is it the history or the myth?
Last edited by Byegod; May 11th, 2020 at 05:25 AM.
It's both in Fate. And generally per Fate's versions/interpretations of the stories/histories of the characters. Doesn't change my point that you haven't figured out the right examples and ideas for your point.
And by the very nature of the myth such concept as "definitive version" isn't applicable in the first place.
Probably? feels like my thoughts are muddled here, sorry to bother
It's not that much of a bother if you can figure out what you want to say and can explain why so, while acknowledging how stuff works in practice (like for example Karna getting screwed over at certain moments that leave him unable to win/survive).
It's just hard for my thoughts to come out coherent most of the time, which sucks for a place like this
I mean more like how you can see "servants are like pages from a book" as trying to push the idea of "the dead should not lead the living". Like I actually don't understand the relation here. All the former is saying is that "what you see as a servant is merely a part of the person who once existed, and is not equivalent to their entire being". So I guess you're trying to say that "since they're 'incomplete' that's the same as saying they're wrong so they fundamentally cannot lead the living", which I think is just wrong for a lot of reasons if so, but please do elaborate on what you actually mean here because I'm quite lost.
It's a childishly hyper-idealist way of thinking that splits hairs, like a lot of stuff in there. 'Cause if you're borrowing a dead person's ideas, then that's not progress, you're regressing to something already tried instead of coming up with something on your own. You should make a personal contribution to society instead, like the complete adult you are with satisfied needs and a creative drive... unless!?
When you try this argument in the real world, then you're of course going to hear that since Huang Shi never actually got to implement his ideas in life, then it's okay to try them out millenia later because after all, we've never had real communism.
Pretty good ngl. (Can't tell if thats towards me or nasu)
But I feel like one issue is that a lot of servants have character development that sticks around, obvious example being Liz, which kinda against the staticness implied by 'pages of a record'
Last edited by Byegod; May 11th, 2020 at 12:49 PM.
well like all of us you're just trying to figure out what did he mean by this, so Nasu, obviously
It gets funny with things like the Once and Future King, or how exactly star attribute servents are different in this regard. Man had ideas, but star servants had the right ones, even though there are no verifiable right ones because of the alternate timelines and the setting's varied eschatology.
Well clearly there are "right" ideas what with time culling/pruning and QTL, regardless of how deterministic that may be
But is that "can't" or "shouldn't"? Because anyone can lead after offing the competition.
I'm also basing this off what we see in Initium Other. He's calm to the point of being emotionless, and he cares about the greater good of humanity, but in a very removed, magus-like way with seemingly none of Kitsch's silliness or humanizing moments.
- - - Updated - - -
I always thought of the whole "ghosts have no right to change the world" was more along the lines of that the living are ultimately responsible for choosing what they want, whether it be original or borrowed, but the dead cannot actively choose for the living, and the living should not try to directly emulate the phantoms of bygone eras.
It was probably most elucidated in the Extra scenario because of Twice ie. Extra Material
I thought that was more his stagnation fetish instead? also isnt that a bit sabotaged or at least iffy what with servants ruling the mooncell WITH hakuno who the ghost argument could also be applied too>
Because of the climatic quote Hakuno that rebukes Twice despite acknowledging the reality of stagnation in their world. That they are both ghosts no longer in their time, that they no longer have the right to decide humanity's future. Of course we still take action as the player to fight against Twice, but I can accept that over letting a world punish it self with endless war.
It's why the final 'fight' is not against Saver, it's always been between Twice H. Pieceman and Hakuno Kishinami.
Of course Extella shits the bed so I'm not defending it.
It's almost as if multiple points of view are valid, huh? Like I said, anyone can lead after offing the competition. Their own vitality is... irrelevant.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
