| >> |
!!cJ4MGVqvOKw 09/05/11(Mon)09:47 No.29390747>>29390633
Hey, it's your story, your narrative, your idea. I don't have the right to interfere with any of it, your prerogative is to do whatever you want to do however you want to do it. You've basically interpreted what I'm getting at - why involve other ponies when the duumvirate has their own personal feud they can settle? It's always seemed more feasible to me that they'd pit their wits against each other as a test, just as much to keep each other sharp against dissidents, schemers and usurpers as to prove who is better.
Don't scrap your idea just because one random tripfag and/or anyone else doesn't like it, you seem to have some pretty solid reasoning going on that I can respect. I'm not going to lie to you, I enjoyed "Nightmare Rarity" but I didn't like the Nightmare hook at all. Even from Jetfire it seems wildly clichéd, and a weak way to approach the issue. Moralism, personal belief, that's what I believe is involved in the best storytelling, and though the idea of a corruptive influence is neat, it works better to me as a corruption stemming from the human element rather than an eldritch power. But then, I've had this conversation with Jetfire before, and we disagreed then, so...eh.
A story based on war needs to have a meaning, a point, otherwise it's simply visceral brutality. There has to be an intrinsic moral behind it. With the Nightmare you destroy that moral - the fallibility of even gods - and weaken the fabric of the story as a whole. That's my belief.
I agree with that, mostly, but I believe reason CAN lead to resolution. At the end of WWII, Lord Curzon was able to defeat the Ottoman threat through reasoning, trickery and bluff - Winston Churchill's oration in WWII is argued as the bolstering point of the war. Words are more powerful than weapons in most occasions, and a better preventative measure.
That's what I'm saying, but stick to your idea, I like it so far aside from complaints raised. |
