[UA] True King (was Re: Gardener)

[Matt Norwood]

> > Eh. Honestly, I thought that publishing the True King really
> > threw everyone off the idea of UA avatars. It was too
> > abstract, especially after we had all read the "unshaven guy
> > on a motorcycle with a big gun" archetype in the core book.
> 
> Hey, you're welcome. One does try.

Ach. Sorry, Chad. I don't mean to dis you or the avatar as a
stand-alone publication. But I just think that the Masterless Man
-- so specific and so pop-culch in its published form (big gun or
sword, motorcycle or horse, stubble) -- shouldn't coexist in a
Clergy that contains something as abstract as the TK. If the TK
is a UA archetype, then a lot of the published archetypes need to
get a lot more general in their focus. The TK is near the level
of the Jungian archetypes, along with the Trickster, the Fool,
the Magus, the Shadow, the Anima/Animus, etc. If UA had decided
early on to go that route, we'd see the Outsider broadened into
the Shadow, subsuming the Dark Stalker and the Savage. We'd see
the WECHBY turned into the Anima. And the True King would
probably be an aspect of the Father.

UA archetypes strike me as more cinematic, more media-created:
the Flying Woman and the Masterless Man being prime examples. 

Maybe I'm wrong. I keep coming back to the MM as an example of
one of those media-created archetypes, probably because I just
don't buy Greg's claim that hitorical avatars exist. It could
work if the channels weren't so combat-oriented, maybe. Then
you'd get all the Rebels and Individualists under that archetype.
Ditto for the Dark Stalker: the channel involving the use of two
or three specific weapons was the one that really turned me off
to that archetype.

> > The True King could replace almost every other archetype in
> > the game -- the Healer becomes the True King of Hospitals,
> > the Flying Woman becomes the Ture King of Rape Crisis Centers,
> > the Pilgrim becomes the True King of Route 66.
> 
> I disagree -- a TK of hospitals (or a hospital... oooh, St.
> Eligus, cool) would only care about the people in that hospital
> (doctors, nurses, patients, orderlies, etc.), not the
> wide-ranging "heal the world" vibe that the Healer has going on.

Okay, you're right. Maybe it's the name of the archetype that
throws me off: I might find it easier to swallow if it were
called the Steward of the Land or something.

> > And it's too saccharine.
> 
> Again, I disagree. Depending upon how you look at it, a TK is a
> frightening concept: someone who's convinced the Cosmos that
> he's fit to rule. Even Arthur slaughtered the innocents, and
> he's the prime TK stereotype.

Yeah, you're right. I guess it's just important to remember that
the TK is very specific in its meaning: I've concluded that it
lends itself to overly broad interpretation after hearing a lot
of ideas like, "Maybe the Naked Goddess is channelling the True
King of Licking My Nuts!"

> And
> nothing precludes a Martyr et al. being a leader, but the cosmic
> wimwam that the Martyr et al. is following *isn't* leadership,
> it's whatever the Archetype is... leading folks is just gravy.

I think the Martyr is really close to the TK: they both identify
so completely with a "cause" (i.e. organization, place, etc.)
that they can give of themselves completely to it. 

> Speaking of, I've always hated the Dark Stalker.

Ditto, as stated above. I like the concept, but I don't like it
as published. Channels need to be re-written, as do those of the
Masterless Man, if we are to have archetypes instead of
stereotypes.

** Special Bonus Archetype-related Rant **

Why is the Necessary Servant so weak? I love the archetype
concept, but it needs to be beefed up. Any suggestions from the
list?

Matt Norwood

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua