Sorry about the sudden PM, but I felt I wanted to dress this semi-privately as not to cause a scene.
Originally Posted by
Morg van Destro
I think you misinterpreted my point.
Basically, what I was saying was it didn't need this differention. Of course I wasn't trying to say they should be exactly the same. That's fairly foolish to assume. However, these added effects and the like were rather unneeded and only served the purpose to differentiate. Giving it lightning powers when those that come after it all follow the same general outline doesn't make a lot of logical sense. Why didn't they get powers more in line with that if the original had them? Why'd they only get beams?
Prototypes set the standard typically, and taking away that aspect for the swords after it don't make much sense. Whether it's demonic, holy, divine, or completely grounded to earth doesn't really change much when the two example we have, Gram and Caliburn, both in similar ways without much difference. That is, before Gram was reforged, but even then acts in ways similar to how Excalibur does which is technically the product of Caliburn which was a product of Gram which was a product of Merodach. Logically, Merodach isn't going to much different even given your iPhone example because, unlike the iPhone, those after were less powerful than Merodach, which makes it the gold standard that couldn't be achieved again, making a better example a universally praised movie with good sequels that don't quite reach the same heights.
Merodach didn't need lightning to make it different because it's the standard, meaning it's literally all those after it that should gain new features to make them different from it. Whether this is by holiness, demonisms, divinity, or earthliness.
I understand that, but that's by intention and that was
my choice. I can fully understand if you don't agree with the design to make Merodach different, but ultimately that was a creative choice I made and I stand by it. The innocent monster point, Saver perhaps being contrived and a bit of a stretch even in a lostbelt situation, and my wording on Road of Babylon, those are failures for me to communicate my ideas or older ideas that didn't fully make sense here and acknowledge as legitimate problems with the sheet.
Merodach is however is a separate point and I don't want or plan to change it. I had a choice to either take the weapon as it was shown in Fate and give it to Rider or I could try to do something unique with it. When I tried to give him the default weapon I didn't feel right; It didn't feel like it had anything to give it that unique fingerprint, that sense that it was a weapon Rider used and owned. Lorewise it may not make sense to change Merodach, but I gave it my best to try and change it in a way which didn't cause too much conflict with Nasu's existing lore.
But at the end of the day, I think this comes down to something far simpler. Why do I make sheets here? I do it for fun and I do it to exercise my creativity, that's what the answer was and that is what it will remain for the foreseeable future. That's what I prize above all else in a sheet, and to an extent in other aspects of life in general, creativity and passion. As an example Megaman 5 and 6 are very safes equals, they don't really differentiate much from that which came before and they are good games, yet due to being so safe they almost feel creativity sterile. On the other hand Megaman 8 is a far different beast with a different artstyle, a choice to include voice acting, a plot line around aliens and such, arguably it is a worse game depending on who you ask. But I can respect MM8 more than MM5 or MM6 as it took more creative risks and feels unique.
This ultimately comes down to who I am as a writer and a person, If I can write something which may not agree with Nasu's lore or his portrayals of varying character, but allows me to do something which I enjoy and I can be creative with I will always take that over a sheet which does conform with his lore, but isn't enjoyable for me to write or doesn't allow me to exercise my creativity to any major extent.
I do try my hardest to keep what I make in line with Nasu's lore (which can be challenging as the lore keeps expanding and I don't fully know or understand all of it),
but ultimately I don't ever try to write things which conform with every single detail about the lore Nasu has made or his writing style. Because in my mind that doesn't make sense;
I'm not Nasu and I never will be, so why would I have to abide by everything he says, even if I disagree with it and choose to consider some things he has written as non-canon, as though it is an iron set of rules which I must only write things which conform to? Wouldn't that stifle the creativity I try to express and while writing in terms of having restrictions does allow for more creativity at times, too many resections and you create a bottleneck where everything feels the same and new ideas start to feel few and far between.
You are well within your right to disagree with my decision to change Merodach, but that doesn't mean I am going to change it or that I agree with your argument of why I shouldn't have changed it. I acknowledge your argument and I acknowledge the right for you to feel that way, but I do not have to change it because of that argument you have expressed.
Part of the oft unstated joy of being part of a fanon community which makes fan material or fanon if you will, is the ability to reinterpret and take both characters, situations, and source material in directions that the original author or writers never considered or intended (and may not even agree with). Both Doom and the Elder Scrolls series were birthed from D&D campaigns the original makers played or came up with and I highly doubt the original makers of D&D imagined those scenarios in their heads when the made the game. It's oft forgotten that all forms of media are a two way relationship, there is the writer and their side, but there is also the reader who also can shape the work in their own right.
Although Word of God is can be used to clarify certain points and material may be made later to fill in blanks in the story, the reader is also within their own right to interpret vagueness with what a character is feeling at any given time, unexplained parts of a backstory, or untold events in the story in their own unique way. Additionally simply because an author expressing or explains something doesn't mean that the reader must change how they feel or discard that fanon they made because that new information invalidates it. I would argue there are situations where the fan explanation is both more sensical and can actually add to a story more than the stated intention of the author (regarding FF8 there is a common theory regarding who and what the final boss is which while cited to be incorrect by the creators, I still subscribe to as I feel it adds additional layers to the character and the story).
As fans and readers we are within are rights to choose what we consider canon or not, just as we have a right to choose what we want to read or engage time in/with. Simply because an author made a work does not mean that he can deprive the readers of their right to critically engage and do interpretations of it. This is the conceit as to why fandoms and fanon can exist (and when you think of it entire sects of literature such as interpretations of meaning of varying things the Bible are nothing more than interpretations done by fans or critics of the Bible which may or may not agree with what the church [the closet thing currently existing to an authority or author of the book] has to say on the matter). No author, no matter how great can explain everything perfectly and clearly and that leaves the reader to fill in the blanks. In time those readers may became writers of their own and that fanon they envisioned may spiral off, forming new microcosms and entirely new series and ideas only vaguely attached to the original if at all.
I changed Merodach because I wanted to be creative, I do not ask that you agree with that decision/opinion or even that you like it. I do ask that you respect that it was my choice to make that call and that even if it may not agree with you or fit with Nasu's lore that I can write my sheets how I want (within reason) and that your feedback doesn't mean that something will get changed. While I love hearing feedback and that can draw attention to things to fix, communicate better, or technical aspects of a piece, that doesn't mean I am going to or have a moral obligation to change something because of your feedback. Trying to please everybody pleases nobody, while a compromise can sometimes be reached at other times, much like the boy on the anthill with the cup (the more people you try to satisfy), the more ants you try to cover with the cup, the less you will manage to get in there (the less will be satisfied).
If I wanted to write a story which deconstructs Camelot using Nasu's general setting as a background (but with no intention to change that universe or advocate Nasu should change it) where the MC hates Artoira*, sees the knights of the round as incompetent and mostly nobles drunk on their power**, ends tragedy with both him and Artoria killing each other*** in a large scale rebellion orchestrated due to Morgan inflaming his own hatred (partly by revealing Artoria was never a man and thus further shattering the perception he had of her as the honest, just, caring, ruler who would disempower the corrupt nobles and never lie to or betrayal the people's expectations or needs), and in the aftermath of these events caused the round table shattering and Camelot fragmenting****. Then really even if it may not agree with the characters or situation Nasu wrote than ask yourself, why are you even reading it or why do you care?
* due to blaming her fighting with the saxons in battle she could have negotiated with to peacefully end which resulted in his father dying, and seeing her as a poor military commander as a result
** due to his older brother wanting to speak to Astoria about the letter they got back announcing their father died and they didn't manage to get back his body (penned by someone else, which neither brother knew either then or later) which was so utterly unemotional and unrepentant about the fact (both during the letter and during a speech by Artoia announcing the war's end and the defeat of the Saxons), making no explanation of how or why they didn't retrieve him or how he died, only offering a paltry sum as though that excused his death. Before his brother died by being ambushed by highwaymen (who were former knights fighting against the Saxons) which probably should have been a priority for the knight and her knights to deal with (except the knights of the round were doing other things elsewhere [which the MC wouldn't know and considering how frivolous most of their quests seemed to be, probably wouldn't care about])
*** He and Morgan having a knight mind controlled into stealing Avalon while Morgan caused a distraction to attract Artoria's attention. Than using that as collateral alongside his rebellion marching on Camelot to force Artoia to the battlefield and then have her not allowed to use Rhongomyniad (as he threatened that if she did he would have Morgan "have a bird carry the sacred sheath to the sea before dropping it to the bottom of the ocean") in a 1 on 1 duel with nobody else interfering.
**** Due to him publicly airing all his grievances against the knights of the round, merlin (due to Morgan le fey convincing him Merlin was an amoral, deceptive, mage who had plotted to profit off of Artoia's rule under the guise of a mentor figure and lead Camelot to ruin manipulating events from behind the curtain) and Artoia's rule (which Morgan magnified so that pretty much everyone on both sides heard them) and the shock of her true gender which caused the knights of the round to no longer trust Merlin, some to feel they failed to people of Camelot, Lancelot and Gawain to blame each other's side for their own wrongs, and a sizable chunk of artoria's regular knights to start to both question her and her rule causing the entire kingdom left without a clear leader to break down.
If you don't agree with my choices then I'm not forcing you to read the story, nor does the story in it's own isolated bubble of fanon do any damage to the series or characters you love. Frankly if Nasu is allowed to characterize his characters (or rather characters from existing stories which he borrowed and altered to make them his own) in a certain way in his series or write lore a certain way in his sieges why is it suddenly not okay if I choose to portray those charactters differently or I choose to explore or create different backstories or lore (which in the grand scheme of things all I am doing is much like Nasu, taking characters from an existing work and characterizing them in a certain way to make them more of my own thing [except the only different is that Nasu borrowed them directly from the source, I borrowed them from him])? Am I not entitled to do so as a writer, in what way does this reinterpretation harm Nasu's reinterpretation of events or characters?
Morg I like feedback, but if I can't be allowed to do original things with my writing as people will say things that boil down to "That's wrong" or "X was the wrong way to do Y" or "That's not what/how Nasu wrote/would write things" than either I'm going to have to either drop writing (something which I don't plan to do) or start ignoring that feedback, because neither of those criticisms matter to me, and consequently they don't achieve anything constructive (not that I'm saying that you have done this, just that's the impression I get by these recent posts). I'm not and never will be Nasu and I never have cited I want to write things which fit perfectly with his lore.
If this/that offends you in some way, I apologize, but I would be willing to stay out of your way in future (as I'm not going to ask you to stop being who you are and you aren't going to change how I write things) if you would want/like that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
