> > >And how great and powerful a "hero" was the anonymous archer who slew
> > >Richard I, arguably one of the great heroes of England (in the mythic
>sense)?
> >
> > He wasn't a 'hero', he was a follower. This is modeled quite well by HW.
> > That would be the point of him being an anonymous archer.
>
> Who did he follow--quick, name the "hero"? Do so without looking it up,
>since any "hero" great enough to slaughter Richard Coeur de Leon would HAVE
>to be as famous as he! >>
>
> No, he wouldn't. Remember, you only become 'invulnerable' when you've
>got three masteries advantage over someone - a huge difference in skill
>levels. If it was a really lucky shot, the Islamic hero could have been a
>couple of masteries below (a really minor figure by comparison) or, if it was
>just moderately lucky, one mastery below (still a gap of around 75% in RQ
>terms, and really, do you call someone with a RQ skill of 75% 'as famous' as
>a person with 150%?).
Richard wasn't killed by an Arab. He was laying siege to the castle of the Viscount of Limoges, a recalcitrant vassal of his in France. A lone crossbowman, using a frying pan as a shield (!) hit Richard with a lucky shot, in the shoulder. The surgery to remove the bolt hacked up his shoulder and the wound turned gangrenous and killed him a few days later.
While the Richard of legend may have been a Hero, by Gloranthan standards, the Richard of history was not. He was, in fact, a mediocre general and strategist whose reputation was a lot bigger than his boots. Overall, he was a Bad Thing for England, as Sellars and Yateman would say.
Andrew E. Larsen
Powered by hypermail