Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Posted ImageWelcome to Golden Sunrise. We hope you enjoy your visit.
Golden Sunrise is a Golden Sun fan forum. Along with Golden Sun discussion, Golden Sunrise members enjoy particularly debate, forum games, role-playing, and various forms of creativity from writing to visual art to music.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can post in the City Gates section. If you join our community, you'll be able to makes posts in the other sections and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Conceptually speaking; Experimenting the in depth analysis of concepts
Topic Started: Apr 7 2018, 01:44 AM (235 Views)
Member Avatar

So, this is it : The time to talk about GS and storytelling, by taking a step back.

To start I thought we may pinpoint and analyse concepts and tropes, appearing in GS,
but that are far less explored, by people, than the usual RPG and adventures tropes.

Note that this thread is open to everyone that want to give their opinion,
on the concepts that they think deserve further analysis.

Let's start with the abstract concept I call :
"Whatever your faith"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar
Orzic Nedbens

Miniature secondary party members that can actually be carried in relative size by the team-

>whatever your faith

Sorry for the following rant, but I'm about as contractually and emotionally obligated to respond to that irritably as RJ is to shout HERESY at things.

The conceptual brakes on the train have slammed so hard it derailed. I am unsure if I am misinterpreting this, but from what I can see I don't quite follow (see if it has mistranslated). That whole situation was a disaster of failure to communicate and long-standing bad blood leading to wars and apparently racially profiled puzzle-based security systems and excessive violence, amplified by external psychosis-inducing situations. Faith lead to sending under-armed children on a dangerous quest they could easily die on, repeatedly, and probably did. At the very least Dora could have done something, but they told her to stay home instead of at least trying to protect her son as a mother and a functional Adept. Faith lead to not engaging in dialogue when Prox came, and letting them release a disaster. Faith lead to....Do I even need to go over how the Wise One's programming is essentially evil at this point?

And that's about it. Unsubstantiated belief that perhaps the present is worth holding onto, when the slightest of real vision reveals it's a fucking disaster. The reason everyone changes so quickly when they hear what happens at Prox or see it in Lemuria or whatever is because the disaster is concrete, objective, and too late to stop, but faith means that the Proxians see the Vale team as unchangeable without the kind of physical force you get rid of extremists with and they die for it.

And that's just faith removing decent options when there are already few. The situation is such that one side wins objectively, with facts so big you can see them from orbit (and admittedly that's the best way to see it except from up close or by mapping). Trying to save the world from cultists is more or less the thing. In TBS-TLA, Vale has guarded things that would allow stopping the murder of the entire world for far too long, admittedly on passed-down incomplete beliefs about what was done and why it stopped a bunch of superweapons as well, but it is killing the world so hard it can be seen. The situation is no longer one where worldview is honestly applicable: those that do not see it that way are discarded as useless or opponents because essentially they are in a clear-cut slow-motion emergency. [Jokes about climate change deniers here, I'm too edgy to make them.]

And Dark Dawn...that was a manmade disaster, released on misguided faith. Belinsk believed it would save them and tried to backpedal at the attosecond it became clear they were wrong and it would hurt them instead, only to be foiled. The Tuaparang's motives are unclear, but they clearly intend to ruin things for worldly takeover reasons and power as far as I am aware. These are not questions of faith the moment the very physical disaster is a clear-cut thing. There's barely any time for emotion: people are dying left and right and up and down and forward and back and all around and even in the sky and the high seas, like seriously there's barely time to mourn Briggs because there is a giant blanket of darkness spawning monsters in major cities.

>let's consider atheism and agnostic as religious faiths

I'd insert a vastly inappropriate gif about self-destruction here if I wasn't so annoyed. :/ I don't think what you're trying to say has translated properly: worldviews instead, maybe?
Edited by Nedben, Apr 7 2018, 03:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar

0 is an integer number.
So, not believing is not different from believing.
Some people that don't believe in gods, believe in the sciences and the universe.
It is a spiritual faith based on something different than "regular" faith, if you want.

There is really bad cases of misunderstanding and poor communication skills, in GS!
But, this only prevent the solving of the conflict between the two groups.
It does not really change the concept of their beliefs.

In real life, difficulties in communicating and understanding each others,
are among the driving factors in conflicts of beliefs or interest.

The idea was to highlight the fact that GS explores the conflicting beliefs,
that comes from the common will of doing the best for people.
The fact is that the difference in belief comes from different values and principles.

And, then, the conflict is resolved once Isaac party understands
what they were missing about what was happening to the world.

Dark Dawn has some shades of what the Wise One was trying to prevent.
His point was that humans would bring chaos to the world.
He was programmed/believed that it was the worst for the world.

It stays that you can still think, that letting everything go,
is better than exposing everyone to suffering.
(I'm not thinking it myself, but it can make sense, as it does for the Wise One.)

My main point was to bring up the idea that :
The conflicts don't come from incompatible wills,
they come from different strategies to express and make these wills a reality.

"Whatever your faith" is fitting for stories of conflicting worldview,
as people wills are often linked to an objective of making the world a better place.
However, there is no objective best way to do it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar
Orzic Nedbens

CLARIFICATION IS PARAMOUNT. The difference between zero and one is a brutal and important thing to consider here. It is the very essence of THIS IS against THIS IS NOT. You're abusing terms and terminology in a way I will constantly disapprove of until you change or clarify: if it is not faith or belief in the religious sense, specify that it isn't and stop mixing it as such. If it's a linguistic problem so be it, but I don't grasp it and that's entirely the problem with explaining. Expand vocabulary, call it ideology or worldview or whatever else fits better than that.

Your connection appears to me as something mangled and incomplete: the backing isn't shown or explained, there is not enough connection to and from evidence, it's all vague or is so questionable I request points of text. Even so, I'd ask that you go farther. It sounds like it's building up to something that never arrives: is this intended, or what?

Sorry for being incendiary, but it reminds me uncomfortably much of my mother so I'll rant a lot. >_<

...but the objective of making a world a better place can still be ATTEMPTED: the entire story is of whether they are for the doing or not doing of an objective: the people who want the lighthouses to stay silenced are proven wrong in force. The 'end of the conflict' disproves one side's reason to exist entirely because it is already too late, the things have gone on and the adventure continued, and it is a mix of the irrelevance of the old enemy and needing to finish the task that carries the game to its end on a firm notice that one side is horrendously in the wrong and no longer valid: the parties have teamed up and the Wise One is a horrible 'person' who tries to make children and their parents murder each other, who barely has the decency to send some warning messages when failure is inevitable and inexplicably equates 'would kill a dragon via lots of psynergetic power' to 'wouldn't abuse alchemy as a weapon', which is beyond non sequitur to being dangerously close to evidence for the opposite, on top of evidence the Wise One is...well, abusing alchemy as a weapon. Hypocritical and insane.

In TLA, the people who are against the proceedings in the late phase are usually various forms of violently insane or incompetent. In Dark Dawn, the problems are a mix between 'we're just doing a task to fix X no real moral valence here', and 'there is a mess caused by evil people that we need to get rid of' with very little justification given for the opposing side.

I am completely unable to parse your logic and struggle to follow your words. Could you please explain what events specifically in game brought up this theme so conflicted by incidents?
Edited by Nedben, Apr 8 2018, 01:34 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar

The idea of the concept did not came first from the games.
I just found that it may be applied to it, given the narrative.

I use faith in the sense of
Deep belief that can not be explicitly proven against of objectively argued with.

There is no real word for this notion, that I know of, except "faith".
I know that it has religious connotation, but I want to consider it outside of that.
My opinion is that this faith can be found in the spirituality of atheist.

Related to the games, we have to consider that, "not saving the world"
could be a valid option, if the chaos induced by humans is considered worst than death.
(You could relate it to the euthanasia debates, except people are choosing for everyone.)
But, the two party choose to let the world live, because, well...
How can they deny people the right to live on ?
It now borders on fanon, but I feel like the elders of Vale, given their own teaching,
would have decided, for everyone, to let the world dies away.

Through their journey, Isaac and co changed their faith, or more accurately, found their own.
In the end, both party agree on the same faith.
I think that it is because they value life more than the teachings they had.

Dark Dawn explores the idea of what the Wise one was saying :
Humans have dark sides and the access to power would consume them into chaos.

My sentence about Dark Dawn was more about the GS fans, themselves :
Some would have preferred no DD than the third game we had.
It is strange how it echoes the Wise one idea of casting out the future because it is bad.
It would have been better if DD had no death and no frustrating elements.
But, it is like that (blame Nintendo or Camelot for it).

I know that my thoughts are a little messy, but I try to extract what's important from it.
And, what I feel is important, here is that :
Conflicting beliefs often share common concepts.
Solving the conflict does not comes from finding a right or wrong.
It comes from finding what is this common ground and reach it together.

It is like the game of go, you want to have the largest territory
(Have your beliefs agreed the more with, because you think they are good.)
However, the best way to achieve that is to stay respectful of your playing partner.
And, in the end, the end territories look fine and balanced, in harmony.

Yes, the purpose of this thread is to explore concepts in an abstract way.
The objective is to improve our understanding of them, through cross-writing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar
Orzic Nedbens

..."spirituality of atheist"

That entire direction is a debate made of maimed terminology, an ideological minefield made of incompleteness and vagueness and conflation where it doesn't belong, because what you are trying to reduce to one thing feels like a constellation of wonder and apathy and countless other things which are separate aspirations and should be treated as such. I'll leave it to others to contest that because it sickens me to the point I do not wish to dissect it at this time.

"Conflicting beliefs often share common concepts.
Solving the conflict does not comes from finding a right or wrong.
It comes from finding what is this common ground and reach it together."

I will contest you intensely on 'often'. I have seen plenty of conflicts that are 'do or do not', plenty of conflicts that view 'X is more effective than Y at solving Z'. The arts of persuasion and critical thinking comparison build off that the common ground is nothing beyond the room to debate, and that options are to be weighed and considered and that a middle point is not necessarily right or effective. From personal experience, there are simply people who changing is beyond reasonable, those who have nothing in common and do not want to, and a mess that doesn't feel right.

It is either terminology mangling or syncretism to mix that kind of 'the only thing we have in common is the board and we must debate the effectiveness of the options' with 'there is surely a way to mix these things': the types of conflicts have elements in common, but little doesn't.

This feels more apples and oranges (both fruits) instead of giraffes and crystal meth (both can get you high and hurt you, but in different ways), let's see where it leads.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Creativity · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Member of the Golden Sun United Nations, helping fansites help each other since 2016
33 Points
14 Points
12 Points
0 Points
Last season winner is Venus


Golden Sunrise GSAR ToK Golden Sun Universe GSHC GSL Aeiou TLW GSUN