Yes I agree. It`s time to move away from terms that in the minds of many will always be derogitory. Gulliver`s Travels would be classed as fantasy today, and would probably have been disregarded as the classic it is because of this. There`s no point catering to people who clearly don`t understand the genre that they`re dismissing, by simplifying the terms of reference into `fantasy` or `science-fiction` dump-bins.
does the mod team have a problem with women?
- Thread starter heartofgrigori
- Start date
- Status
Yes I agree. It`s time to move away from terms that in the minds of many will always be derogitory. Gulliver`s Travels would be classed as fantasy today, and would probably have been disregarded as the classic it is because of this. There`s no point catering to people who clearly don`t understand the genre that they`re dismissing, by simplifying the terms of reference into `fantasy` or `science-fiction` dump-bins.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
The Silmarilion does speak of the final fates of Human and Elven Souls, but in a way that makes it clear that not even the Valar know these things for sure. This was presented more as what the Valar suspect.
Yes, Orks are/were elves, but Tolkien is said not to have changed his mind about that later. He was working on revising Arda's history to make men show up early enough for them to be the source of the orks when he died. He never finished this, and personally I prefer it the original way. (There is also some controversy about whether that siege was really the one from the second age. Many think it spoke of a more recent siege, but that would still have to be over 200 years earlier.) Multiple origins is another possible explaination. Some think that the orkish hero Baldog may be a type Maia of slightly lower rank than the a Balrog.
By your reasoning the Elven women don't seem to have a problem with bestiality. Of course, Luthien herself wasn't wholly an elf. Her mother was a Maia who took on an elven form in order to mate with Thingol (and was unable to maintain this form when he died). I suppose it is possible that this some of her "DNA" was somehow designed to facilitate "interspecies" mating. That might help explain the offspring of Luthien and Beren and of Arwne and Aragorn, but not of Tuor and Idril Celebrindal.
Yes, Orks are/were elves, but Tolkien is said not to have changed his mind about that later. He was working on revising Arda's history to make men show up early enough for them to be the source of the orks when he died. He never finished this, and personally I prefer it the original way. (There is also some controversy about whether that siege was really the one from the second age. Many think it spoke of a more recent siege, but that would still have to be over 200 years earlier.) Multiple origins is another possible explaination. Some think that the orkish hero Baldog may be a type Maia of slightly lower rank than the a Balrog.
By your reasoning the Elven women don't seem to have a problem with bestiality. Of course, Luthien herself wasn't wholly an elf. Her mother was a Maia who took on an elven form in order to mate with Thingol (and was unable to maintain this form when he died). I suppose it is possible that this some of her "DNA" was somehow designed to facilitate "interspecies" mating. That might help explain the offspring of Luthien and Beren and of Arwne and Aragorn, but not of Tuor and Idril Celebrindal.
I don't understand the point of the first post. Firstly it goes on about how fantasy is a waste of space, then how the poster liked the whole FFH background and how it was so realistic before finishing up with a rant about how unfair it is to women and finally about how unrealistic it is.
1 - Its a game, which not to denigrate CIV 4 or FFH, is hardly realistic.
2 - This game has one of the strongest female lead line ups I've ever seen in anything. Frankly I think the guys are rather dull in comparison. Airheads? obviously he didn't read up many of the female backstories.
3 - If the poster has such a low opinion of fantasy why did they bother?
It just doesn't match up with my experience of FFH. I like it because its not formulaic, can't see half of these characters ever making it to an EA title anywhere soon. Tactics that are just plain mean or so outright nice that they're fascist are available.
Sex is almost non-existent from Tolkien, as is much of relationships, he didn't write about them. However the time period he was writing about (the sagas) didn't tend to go into the squishy details much.
You really want to look harder at some of those children's stories!
You can find just about anything, and everything, in Tolkien's works if its deconstructed enough. It was meant as a saga type story and should be taken as such, I wish people would stop looking for hidden meanings all the time. Sorry Magister, this isn't aimed at yourself I just wanted to add to your comment.
1 - Its a game, which not to denigrate CIV 4 or FFH, is hardly realistic.
2 - This game has one of the strongest female lead line ups I've ever seen in anything. Frankly I think the guys are rather dull in comparison. Airheads? obviously he didn't read up many of the female backstories.
3 - If the poster has such a low opinion of fantasy why did they bother?
It just doesn't match up with my experience of FFH. I like it because its not formulaic, can't see half of these characters ever making it to an EA title anywhere soon. Tactics that are just plain mean or so outright nice that they're fascist are available.
Sex is almost non-existent from Tolkien, as is much of relationships, he didn't write about them. However the time period he was writing about (the sagas) didn't tend to go into the squishy details much.
You really want to look harder at some of those children's stories!
You can find just about anything, and everything, in Tolkien's works if its deconstructed enough. It was meant as a saga type story and should be taken as such, I wish people would stop looking for hidden meanings all the time. Sorry Magister, this isn't aimed at yourself I just wanted to add to your comment.
so far, silmarillon does give the historicity of Arda and midle earth, it is not mythology so much as fact. some elves living in Bilbo time were born at that time. therfore it is not myth but history.
then, a common ancestor is not myth or philosophy, but biology and archeology (eventually). in RL, being able to have fertile offspring between two "race" (I hate this word) means that there is enough common ancestry to be of the same specie.
in fantasy, the myth of creation are not myth but facts given by the author so as the reader understand the world. finding the silmarillon is not the same as finding 'the hobbit'. thus, creation of the different race of dwarves elves and humans is possible (oh, what do you say about the SF serie "farscape" so many different alien races !!! but there are mix-blooded people... are they of the same specie ??)
duh.
and really, good vs evil (even race of good vs race of evil) is more manicheisme than anywhere close to nazi ideas...
the fact that actual litterature always try to find almost good in the evil race and bad guy in the good race is more a trend than anything else. it is a bit easy to judge the way litterature worked compared to haw we do it now, as plots that are common now and even necessary where not invented yet or not as "inevitable".
then, a common ancestor is not myth or philosophy, but biology and archeology (eventually). in RL, being able to have fertile offspring between two "race" (I hate this word) means that there is enough common ancestry to be of the same specie.
in fantasy, the myth of creation are not myth but facts given by the author so as the reader understand the world. finding the silmarillon is not the same as finding 'the hobbit'. thus, creation of the different race of dwarves elves and humans is possible (oh, what do you say about the SF serie "farscape" so many different alien races !!! but there are mix-blooded people... are they of the same specie ??)
duh.
and really, good vs evil (even race of good vs race of evil) is more manicheisme than anywhere close to nazi ideas...
the fact that actual litterature always try to find almost good in the evil race and bad guy in the good race is more a trend than anything else. it is a bit easy to judge the way litterature worked compared to haw we do it now, as plots that are common now and even necessary where not invented yet or not as "inevitable".
Don Pelayo
Chieftain
I find this thread distressing. What surprises me is not the first post -after all we are all used to see from time to time some degree of mental disorder- but the fact that such nonsense has been generally addressed as if there were something that needed explanation or, worse, excuse. We need to get rid of this cancer refered to as political correctness. And the first step is not to feel forced to treat with extreme care what is simply ridiculous. It'd suggest to simply laugh at it.
Thanks to the mod team and Kael in particular for their awesome work.
Thanks to the mod team and Kael in particular for their awesome work.
Cuteunit
Danse Macabre
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2007
- Messages
- 618
Threadcromantic post here but..
I was wondering and this seemed a nice place to ask.. is everything sourced from your old campaigns or could someone like me invest some days worth of creativity and say " Hi kael, here is a backstory and concept art for a female Sidar to serve as leaderhead or hero" or something like that?
I was wondering and this seemed a nice place to ask.. is everything sourced from your old campaigns or could someone like me invest some days worth of creativity and say " Hi kael, here is a backstory and concept art for a female Sidar to serve as leaderhead or hero" or something like that?
We have created a ton of material outside of the campaigns. We just use them as inspiration, we aren't trying to recreate them (whatever is best for FfH is what we use). That said the civs and leaders are fairly locked down, we probably won't add any more.
But if you'd like to writeup a pedia entry for an existing character that doesn't have one I'd love to read it. No promises that it will be added though. In fact I would just assume that it won't be. I tend to be overly picky and there is a lot of background stuff that the story would have to mesh with before it would be useable.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
But don't try for a female Sidar...we hate women.
just kidding.
I for my part love women
I also think people should look back in time and recognize that fantasy did not start with Tolkien. Fantasy had a strong tradition. The Gormenghast trilogy was very popular among fantasy fans. (The first book, Titus Groan, came out in 1946. The other books were in the 50's after Tolkien was published.)
There is no question that fantasy as an art form exploded after Tolkien, and created a whole genre. But it didn't start there, or work independently. What Tolkien did is make fantasy 'mainstream', so you weren't a member of a weird and odd cult.
Tolkien completed Lord of the Rings in 1949 or so, I'm pretty sure. Most fantasy critics immediately declared it as a masterpiece, but it didn't become a phenomenon until the 1960's. It's 'break' was when Harvard University made it part of its literature review -- Tolkien was literature! But so is Mervyn Peake! And Lord Dunsany. And William Morris.
Is Tolkien 'dark'? As pointed out above, the Silmarillion is incredibly dark. But Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit were not, and its light tone dominated its acceptance. For older people like me, we had Lord of the Rings from 49 (Ok, even I'm not that old) until the 70's before the Silmarillion came out, and Lord of the Rings was 'traditional' lighter fantasy. Yes, the Tolkien movement as a phenomenon began in the '60's, a period of incredible change in the United States and in the West as a whole. Society changed, and the anti-traditionalism also lead to the explosion of civil right, rock and roll, and other movements; all of these had earlier antecedents but they both impacted and were impacted by the change in society.
Michael Moorcock is derisive of Tolkien specifically because of the 'Merry England' view, that there is something better about pre-industrialized societies. It fit the 60's movements perfectly.
Moorcock, also an amazing author, is very dark. To him, fantasy is not classic escapism to a 'better' time, and his worlds of fantasy are very harsh.
Anyway, my take on this -- Kael and his colleagues have done an amazing job. Not just as an amazing mod, which it is, but in creating so much back-story. I love Civ, but to me FFH is just so much better. It is great strategy and immersive. If this can be done with dark fantasy, great. If it can be done with light fantasy, that's good too.
Best wishes,
Breunor
There is no question that fantasy as an art form exploded after Tolkien, and created a whole genre. But it didn't start there, or work independently. What Tolkien did is make fantasy 'mainstream', so you weren't a member of a weird and odd cult.
Tolkien completed Lord of the Rings in 1949 or so, I'm pretty sure. Most fantasy critics immediately declared it as a masterpiece, but it didn't become a phenomenon until the 1960's. It's 'break' was when Harvard University made it part of its literature review -- Tolkien was literature! But so is Mervyn Peake! And Lord Dunsany. And William Morris.
Is Tolkien 'dark'? As pointed out above, the Silmarillion is incredibly dark. But Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit were not, and its light tone dominated its acceptance. For older people like me, we had Lord of the Rings from 49 (Ok, even I'm not that old) until the 70's before the Silmarillion came out, and Lord of the Rings was 'traditional' lighter fantasy. Yes, the Tolkien movement as a phenomenon began in the '60's, a period of incredible change in the United States and in the West as a whole. Society changed, and the anti-traditionalism also lead to the explosion of civil right, rock and roll, and other movements; all of these had earlier antecedents but they both impacted and were impacted by the change in society.
Michael Moorcock is derisive of Tolkien specifically because of the 'Merry England' view, that there is something better about pre-industrialized societies. It fit the 60's movements perfectly.
Moorcock, also an amazing author, is very dark. To him, fantasy is not classic escapism to a 'better' time, and his worlds of fantasy are very harsh.
Anyway, my take on this -- Kael and his colleagues have done an amazing job. Not just as an amazing mod, which it is, but in creating so much back-story. I love Civ, but to me FFH is just so much better. It is great strategy and immersive. If this can be done with dark fantasy, great. If it can be done with light fantasy, that's good too.
Best wishes,
Breunor
I still don't get what the OP's problem with Rohanna is. She's slightly attracted to a wispy, androgynous, non-threatening boyband-type. All too common, I fear.
Still, if I were going to pick the single most awful thing I could see setting across from me at a negotiating table, a pretty, confident woman with her own horde of screaming Mongol horsemen would be a definite contender.
Still, if I were going to pick the single most awful thing I could see setting across from me at a negotiating table, a pretty, confident woman with her own horde of screaming Mongol horsemen would be a definite contender.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
nah, it was an interesting thread and no offense taken.
I still don't get it. What exactly IS the reason woman are not equal to men?
I just can't see ANY disregard of women in western society (e.g. North America, Europe and Russia) on Earth (edit: of course there are individuals who still treat women as "possesion", but it's not a majority anymore - at least I hope so!), nor do I on Erebus, aside of the feeding on village people by some vampires, which is - at all - also a matter for male Calabim "cattle".
Women in Western Society are in fact MORE free to do whatever they LIKE, than men. Most Countries in Europe know conscription only for men. Conscription only for one gender is quite unfair, isn't it?
Well anyway - in Europe a Girl can get a Woman and there are no strong feelings against the idea, that she does any job she wants (if nescessary diploma achieved), nor is there any such thing as the term "a real women". While on the other side, if you're a man and not so much in cars, football (soccer for the Americans) and other "male" thingies - you are disregarded not only by your "fellow" men, who think your gay, but also by women, who think fantasy and computer games are some kind of love affair which has to be destroyed...
so WHERE exactly is this Mixigenoplumbification - in the civilized zones on this planet? of course if your looking on other parts of the world which are not willing to renounce the will of the church (whatever religion this curch has), and get in an age of Enlightenment, which europe and america had by 1700s, women are mistreaten, true.
but to say such a thing - of course - is considered "racism"...
Now for the Erebus World. There, women are equally strong, they are equally crazy, they are equally brutal, and they do rule over their people equally, like all the male characters. They all got a background story (unlike in Tolkin, aside of Luthièn), they are treated by the designers of this marvelous mod as equal beings as their male counterparts - absolutely inessential which race (orc, human, elvish etc.) they are. The Designers of this mod respected the role of the women in this world.
So what is the matter?
it-ogo
Hedgehog
- Joined
- May 23, 2007
- Messages
- 589
Both Khazad leaders are male, and Luchuirp... I think dwarven races have some problem with gender equality... Something is hidden in the Lore and needs revelation. 
Actually women "equality" in Erebus is one of many concessions to contemporary esthetics and ideology. Nice to see a woman-warrior if the war is a kind of art. It is quite acceptable even if the military service is enough clean and safe and needs just some professional skills and does not really need your life to be spared or your body to be crippled. But males genetically are spending material and more eager to die while females should be kept for the benefit of specie and usually prefer to submit rather then to die. So if warfare and leadership in some society imply big permanent risk of violent death (as well as dirt and brutality) then women there will be in great minority in theese areas even if they are welcome.
Actually women "equality" in Erebus is one of many concessions to contemporary esthetics and ideology. Nice to see a woman-warrior if the war is a kind of art. It is quite acceptable even if the military service is enough clean and safe and needs just some professional skills and does not really need your life to be spared or your body to be crippled. But males genetically are spending material and more eager to die while females should be kept for the benefit of specie and usually prefer to submit rather then to die. So if warfare and leadership in some society imply big permanent risk of violent death (as well as dirt and brutality) then women there will be in great minority in theese areas even if they are welcome.
BCalchet
Human, all too human.
You sure? We're talking dwarves here, after all...
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
The Civilopedia does say that Keldon Ki created both male and female Dwarves, but it never confirms nor contradicts the Lord of the Rings movie's assertion that female dwarves look just like dwarves, beards and all.
It could be that the Dwarves are extremely traditional and that their women all stay at home in the underhome (doesn't explain it so well for the Luchuirp), or it could be that the genders are so equal that no one even knows who's a male and who's female.
Still, I believe the civilopedia does use masculine pronouns to refer to all the dwarves mentioned, so it is a safe bet that the leaders are indeed male.
It could be that the Dwarves are extremely traditional and that their women all stay at home in the underhome (doesn't explain it so well for the Luchuirp), or it could be that the genders are so equal that no one even knows who's a male and who's female.
Still, I believe the civilopedia does use masculine pronouns to refer to all the dwarves mentioned, so it is a safe bet that the leaders are indeed male.
reverend oats
King
Terry Pratchett says most of Dwarven countship is tactfully finding out your partner's gender. Who's to say Erebus dwarves aren't the same?
- Status
Similar threads
