Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Does being a true hero require an act of wrecklaceness and risk upon yourself ?
Discuss .... 
0
Comments
https://g.co/kgs/niXrmB
You can only help others if you yourself are alive. Acting reckless and killing yourself not only that it helps noone but can also put others in danger alongside yourself.
Only smart people can be true heroes. Brave but smart, knowing how to use strategy to reach the best outcome. When to make a move and when not to.
I'm always the hero, except when I screw up and accidentally become the villain.
Is Superman standing in front of a hail of bullets he knows cant hurt him more heroic than a poor person giving their last pound to a person with no money at all?.......... I think not.
I prefer to wreck lace..... private joke I have that I cant share and always use.
Glad you got the true jist though
This commercial was brought you by Your friendly neighborhood Necromancer Doc Bones
However, in a more fantasy/fiction oriented "main character" style of hero I would say recklessness (wrecklaceness) is not necessary but appears common.
Books/Shows/Movies seem to glamorize a hero's necessity to put themselves at great risk to save the underdog/populace or what have you. Superman will sometimes risk a fight against a Kryptonite wielding Luther or Batman will go head first into a conflict that relies on brute force even if he risk a brutal beating.
My answer, for the ratings, would be yes.
For everyday people, no.
Personally, for me, I like the recklessness even if the hero makes everything worse because they through caution to the wind... I don't think heroes always have to win either.
I am a huge Superman fan. More the Christopher Reeve variety than the the comic one who could drag planets about on very strong chains. The CR Superman always had exposed weaknesses and hence was heroic in his actions. The Planet dragging comic version was not in my opinion heroic because he was nigh invulnerable well until he fought Doomsday. Nothing more heroic than giving your life to save the day. However the new movie superman who happily destroys half a city probably killing 1000s of people with his reckless abandon seems to fit your description
This discussion further cements why I love the character Stain (My hero Academia). Today doesn't have any heroes anymore. I mean come on, a nurse is doing her job. So because you fell ill you have several heroes now? Which are interchangeable btw., just whoever happens to work that day? Your doc is a hero, your nurse is a hero, the guy who invented the medicine is a hero, all the people involved producing and transporting it to you are heroes now?
My mother works in a home for elderly people, she does it because it's a job she could get, learned it and does it diligently now. It's a painful job, she takes care of them daily, gets to know them and watches them die on a frequent basis. (I mean that, in most cases, she knows why they are gone) It's a hard job that can burden an individual greatly and is certainly not suited for everybody.
Does that make her a hero because it burdens her?
Not in my book.
Would it change anything if the motivation behind it would be pure and out of genuine love for people?
I call that decency.
In my opinion we failed as a human race on this basic principle already. Those basic values already praised as heroism. Everyone's a hero now elevated to some mystical thing. Give some war victims food and water, you're a hero now, while you are at it, make a picture.
Nurture an abandoned animal back to health, you are a hero now.
Threat the symptom not the cause and you can be a hero forever. <cheer>
How great we are in those dark times of others. <rolls eyes>
I am not sure if we failed from the beginning or if we just lost those values along the way, maybe I'm just the odd one out in the end, thinking to highly of where we should be with, and demanding to much from, our values.
So who would be a hero? What would it take to be a true hero?
I would need more time than a random 15 minute post in a forum to avoid getting even more political and avoid starting heat on opinions to answer that.
Forget about yourself for a second and try saving others. Don't wield your power for your own sake. Because getting trapped by your own hate and acting out of pure self-interest... makes you the furthest thing from a hero. - Stain
I agree, first it was participation trophies, somewhere along the way we started celebrating "graduating" from kindergarten to preschool and from preschool to grade school and from grade school to high school. Now we feel morally obligated to call someone a hero for doing a job they chose to do.
Sometimes they are heroes, the right circumstance and argument can make anyone fit someones definition. But hero does seem a strong word more often than not. Good Samaritan has been replaced with hero.
Are firefighters heroes? Policemen? Soldiers? Of course, they do put their lives on the line for the better good. An ER surgeon? Yes. Your primary care doctor? Probably not. A nurse... maybe, assuming they responded to an emergency in a selfless act and used their training to save a life.
I don't exactly subscribe to someone having to risk their life, just actively saving one. Not with continued care or monitoring or guiding you on the path to recovery. The person who performs CPR, the Heimlich, or a surgery in a moments notice can be heroes even if their lives are not at risk. There's no law that says you have to save a man from choking to death.
Will I ever be a hero? Probably not, and that's okay, heroism is not the same as participation.
Definition of one well-known dictionary*:
(*Other dictionaries are available)
'...recklessness
NOUN
mass nounLack of regard for the danger or consequences of one's actions; rashness.
@Valentines: I suspect it would only be 'wrecklace' of you if you posted a photo of said thongs on this thread!!!
I see an environment of great danger for another or others, a moment that pauses time itself.
Where our protagonist faces a choice between ignoring the threat and carrying on with their own life, or stepping into the danger at great risk to themself. They made a counter intuitive choice for better or worse.
Can you be a hero without courage ?
What is courage without risk ?
I dont know.
Anyway, thanks everyone for your thoughts.
They have kept me amused, happy, heartened or sad.
All are good. All tell a story.
I never really thought of being a hero as a subjective thing.
But each of us has our own unique perception and insight.
Its what defines us I guess.
Standing by watching everyone die from 1 million and 1 to a billion knowing you could have stopped it could make you a villain. Especially if the first million that died were the ones that you or the character(s) were going to kill to prevent the others from dying.
If instead you randomly chose a million people I think the gray line would be more blurred. Worse yet if you only chose people because of a common feature they shared you again could be a villain. I could go either way, do you have an example or just the rhetorical question?
Clearly the million you killed put the billion and yourself at risk.
So you were a hero.
What do you care anyway.... you're dead.
Do you have any feelings to put into any context ?