Originally posted by Gameloading Originally posted by LostGrace Hmm, lets say in the Archlord videos. The kngith is the leader of the human army. Why not a human mage?
Because Knights look better then mages, and more..."commander" like, mages aren't the military type.
Originally posted by LostGrace I just dotn understand. Why cant a mage be the leader of an army? Mabey a ranger or something. Why always a knight?
Hello LostGrace, and welcome to MMORPG.com
It is nice that you show some critical thinking. Most people lose it after age 3
It all comes down to the person behind the movie, or comptuer game. And how much research they have done. What books they have read, and how varried or limited their influences are.
1. In JRR Tolkien's books, a mage was indeed the leader of an army. Not only that, a mage DUEL WIELDED two swords at the same time.
JRR Tolkien also had a Ranger lead an army. (in the books, Aragorn leads an army of Rangers AND undead to take out the corsair pirates on their ships. The undead army then leaves since their debt is paid off. Aragorn and the ranger army then sail the ships to the battle at the city.)
2. There are many other ancient books, and stories, of a hero not fitting the "knight template" who is the hero.
--------------------------
BTW, guess where Knights come from?
1. You have a regular fighter: Simply a guy/girl with a sword or whatever weapon. -> Barbarian: A fighter who is VERY good with whatever weapon. -> Mercenary: Any fighter or Barbarian who fights for payment. Rulers are usually the ones who hire mercs. But anyone with some form of payment can hire a merc. A merchant for example. -> Knight: A fighter or Barbarian or Merc who becomes retained by a ruler. The ruler likes them soo much, that the ruler KNIGHTS them. Then, any childern born to a Knight can also become a knight.
And there you have it, that is where Knights come from. Once a knight, one cannot become "unknighted". They can become a fallen knight. For example if they turn coward in battle, etc...
A Paladin is simply a Knight in the service of a religious leader. The pope, or church for example. In ancient times the church had as much power as the king (sometimes more power!).
No-one wants to watch a mage (i.e. goofy-looking skinny guy in clown suit) lead an army, that's why. It's much easier to make the audience feel the bone-jarring impact of a sword than some ridiulous glowing ball of whatsit.
Originally posted by Aquakitty Why are all fantasy characters always tall and good-looking? back then everyone was short, malnutritioned and covered in boils!
Meow. Silly kitten! Of course, no one wants to see those kinds of characters! Why do you think that so many people bluntfully refuse to play those types of races in most games out there? I could give examples, but all you have to do is think about it!
People like to be impressed, shining armor and a huge honkin sword is more attractive as a leader than a skinny figure in robes trying to avoid getting hit. Not to say that a mage wouldn't make a good leader, its just bad marketing so to speak
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
Same reason you don't see a Medic in charge of a infantry Battalion in Real life, or commo, or truck driver...
You have a Army of 20 thousand Martial skill trained individuals. You get someone trained in Martial skills to lead them. Now if you have a Game where you have a thousand Wizards per side fighting each other and have a knight lead them... looks funny doesn't it? youwould espect a High Mage or whats not to been leading that since he knows the magic strengths and weeknesses.
Every mmorpg the warrior is the leader of the group, he is the main guy, no one is going to attack the monster until the warrior does, no one is going to attack till the boss has 3 sunders, plus a big guy in plate wielding a sword bigger then he is > anything else.
Cause there were no true warriors with gandalf, a true warrior woulda been like @%@ YOU YOU DRESS WEARING SISSY, HE WOULDA TOOK HIS HUGE 2 HANDER AND SLICED THAT NUB IN HALF THEN WENT ON AND SOLOED SAURAMON, POKEMON and ANY OTHER TYPE OF MONS.
Point of order! Gandalf wasn't some guy that studied magic until he was old. He was a frigging Maia.
Also, I assume when you say Ranger, you mean Archer.
Well, some logical reasons: 1) The leader might have to go out in front. Hence, (s)he would have to be able to: a) Wear heavy armor. b) Fight melee.
I'm not saying it's impossible or anything but if you mean leading from the front instead of commanding or being strategically gifted the character in question might end up indistinguishable from a "knight". Simply out of a need to fight back effectively if rushed or ambushed and be protected from unexpected attacks.
Originally posted by Aquakitty Why are all fantasy characters always tall and good-looking? back then everyone was short, malnutritioned and covered in boils!
Some people are using classes like those found in D&D or MMOs and trying to equate them to what peoples' roles were in LotR. This is a bad idea.
Yes, Gandalf occasionally used magic, but mostly he acted without the use of magic, and I don't recall him ever duel-wielding any swords. In LotR, he had Glamdring, and that was it.
Aragorn spent time in military service in Rohan and in Gondor, and not as some guy shooting arrows, but rather as a man who led other men. In particular, he was considered a great captain of men in Gondor when Denethor's father was Steward. In the books, Aragorn doesn't have or use a bow -- at least, it is never stated that he had one, and he was never shown to use one; only Legolas had a bow.
Don't confuse what Hobbits and ignorant townsmen call Rangers with what D&D and various MMOs call Rangers: they're not the same hting.
* * *
To address the OP:
In most settings, it is supposed that the study of magic requires intense committment and time so that, while one may understand the nature of the arcane, a mage would not have had much time to master such mundane skills as swordsmanship or military tactics and strategy. Those skills wouldn't even necessarily be taught to most swordsmen, but to nobles and others who had the freetime to focus on such studies instead of magic or day-to-day living.
Commanding armies is not a simple thing. It requires a lot of knowledge, skill, and energy. Also, if you are leading an army of people in armor wielding swords, it is important that you understand how people who armored and weilding swords fight, and that knowledge is best gained directly, through personal experience.
cause you eventually have to fight with the guy. and the AI for a good warrior is a bit easier. also when the AI goes stupid, he/she can live longer for it in the armour.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
look at the archtype. Knights are the heroic "fight till you fall" armor clad charaters. Rangers hide in the shadows picking of enemies with stealth, wit, and ranged combat. Mages are often (in western mythology) the old man with untold power that has had to study for many years, often more focused on him self then those around him. Its obvious of those three which not only makes for the best leader, but makes for the most interesting character for a movie/cut screen/opening.
Modjoe86- Gambling is a sin. Laserwolf- Only if you lose. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
Sure they are.
Hello LostGrace, and welcome to MMORPG.com
It is nice that you show some critical thinking. Most people lose it after age 3
It all comes down to the person behind the movie, or comptuer game. And how much research they have done. What books they have read, and how varried or limited their influences are.
1. In JRR Tolkien's books, a mage was indeed the leader of an army. Not only that, a mage DUEL WIELDED two swords at the same time.
JRR Tolkien also had a Ranger lead an army. (in the books, Aragorn leads an army of Rangers AND undead to take out the corsair pirates on their ships. The undead army then leaves since their debt is paid off. Aragorn and the ranger army then sail the ships to the battle at the city.)
2. There are many other ancient books, and stories, of a hero not fitting the "knight template" who is the hero.
--------------------------
BTW, guess where Knights come from?
1. You have a regular fighter: Simply a guy/girl with a sword or whatever weapon. -> Barbarian: A fighter who is VERY good with whatever weapon. -> Mercenary: Any fighter or Barbarian who fights for payment. Rulers are usually the ones who hire mercs. But anyone with some form of payment can hire a merc. A merchant for example. -> Knight: A fighter or Barbarian or Merc who becomes retained by a ruler. The ruler likes them soo much, that the ruler KNIGHTS them. Then, any childern born to a Knight can also become a knight.
And there you have it, that is where Knights come from. Once a knight, one cannot become "unknighted". They can become a fallen knight. For example if they turn coward in battle, etc...
A Paladin is simply a Knight in the service of a religious leader. The pope, or church for example. In ancient times the church had as much power as the king (sometimes more power!).
No-one wants to watch a mage (i.e. goofy-looking skinny guy in clown suit) lead an army, that's why. It's much easier to make the audience feel the bone-jarring impact of a sword than some ridiulous glowing ball of whatsit.
People like to be impressed, shining armor and a huge honkin sword is more attractive as a leader than a skinny figure in robes trying to avoid getting hit. Not to say that a mage wouldn't make a good leader, its just bad marketing so to speak
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
You have a Army of 20 thousand Martial skill trained individuals. You get someone trained in Martial skills to lead them. Now if you have a Game where you have a thousand Wizards per side fighting each other and have a knight lead them... looks funny doesn't it? youwould espect a High Mage or whats not to been leading that since he knows the magic strengths and weeknesses.
Heh, YOU tell Gandalf he wasn't the leader. I'll just stand back and watch
Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of eldeberries.
I am more powerful than both Gandalf the Grey and Gandalf the White. I am Murais, the Periwinkle! FEAR ME!
Frail, blown-over-by-the-wind types don't command the respect of grunts.
Point of order! Gandalf wasn't some guy that studied magic until he was old. He was a frigging Maia.
Also, I assume when you say Ranger, you mean Archer.
Well, some logical reasons:
1) The leader might have to go out in front. Hence, (s)he would have to be able to:
a) Wear heavy armor.
b) Fight melee.
I'm not saying it's impossible or anything but if you mean leading from the front instead of commanding or being strategically gifted the character in question might end up indistinguishable from a "knight". Simply out of a need to fight back effectively if rushed or ambushed and be protected from unexpected attacks.
(green is a better colour for sarcasm!)
Some people are using classes like those found in D&D or MMOs and trying to equate them to what peoples' roles were in LotR. This is a bad idea.
Yes, Gandalf occasionally used magic, but mostly he acted without the use of magic, and I don't recall him ever duel-wielding any swords. In LotR, he had Glamdring, and that was it.
Aragorn spent time in military service in Rohan and in Gondor, and not as some guy shooting arrows, but rather as a man who led other men. In particular, he was considered a great captain of men in Gondor when Denethor's father was Steward. In the books, Aragorn doesn't have or use a bow -- at least, it is never stated that he had one, and he was never shown to use one; only Legolas had a bow.
Don't confuse what Hobbits and ignorant townsmen call Rangers with what D&D and various MMOs call Rangers: they're not the same hting.
* * *
To address the OP:
In most settings, it is supposed that the study of magic requires intense committment and time so that, while one may understand the nature of the arcane, a mage would not have had much time to master such mundane skills as swordsmanship or military tactics and strategy. Those skills wouldn't even necessarily be taught to most swordsmen, but to nobles and others who had the freetime to focus on such studies instead of magic or day-to-day living.
Commanding armies is not a simple thing. It requires a lot of knowledge, skill, and energy. Also, if you are leading an army of people in armor wielding swords, it is important that you understand how people who armored and weilding swords fight, and that knowledge is best gained directly, through personal experience.
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
"Speaking haygywaygy or some other gibberish with your mum doesn't make you foreign."
-baff
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
Modjoe86- Gambling is a sin.
Laserwolf- Only if you lose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waiting for= PSU, WAR