Let's Talk about the Avatars of Precipice

Anonymous

Oct 22, 2018 13:18:39 GMT -6

Hello all!

So obviously the setting for Precipice is a little different than the "canon" setting of ATLA or LoK, where airbending is a matter of how spiritual a non-bender can become (also hereditary maybe too?), and an 'Avatar' is just a title theoretically anyone could achieve if they master "the other elements" (this being in quotations because only one element can be bent by any individual, and there doesn't appear to be a single exception in this universe like there is in ATLA in the form of The Avatar [capital "The" to symbolize a single reincarnated spirit-powered Avatar]).

This leaves a few things to consider:

Origin/History of the Title
Prerequisites and Requirements of Achievement
The Special Attributes/Abilities/Privileges/Responsibilities/Purpose associated with being an Avatar

(1) - First and foremost, how do people generally think the "Title" of Avatar could have originated? Is it a case of divergent history where say, Aang was killed in the Avatar State while the Air Nomads were wiped out (maybe later if Azula had succeeded with her lightning bolt in the Earth Kingdom), thus killing the real "The Avatar", but still inspiring people to bring balance to the world by adopting and honoring the Avatar as title taken/given to those who seek to accomplish the same tasks despite the limitations of their human ability?

Is it an alternate history where there never was a singular reincarnating Avatar? And Aang was just a particularly gifted Airbender who happened to survive the genocide, and was able to survive for a 100 years of warfare before finally getting the chance to unite the world as an Avatar of Airbendig in a concentrated effort to dispose of Ozai?

Is it an alternate history where all of the ATLA series "Avatars" from Yanchen, Kyoshi, Roku, Aang, to Korra never existed as people at all, instead replaced by various other Avatars around the world who, with their great understanding of the four elements, tried to keep the world in balance (notably failing for at least 100 years).

With no reincarnating Avatar and a different viewpoint of Aang (assuming he exists at all), does a Lion Turtle ever grant anyone the ability to Energy bend, the sole method used to dispose of Ozai (as opposed to killing him)?

Also, if the Avatar titles are solely honorary with nothing else attributed to them... who gives them out? The four nations? Themselves? An adoring public? A priesthood similar to the Fire Sages, or maybe the White Lotus?

(2) - Secondly, are there are any pre-existing conditions an individual needs in order to become an Avatar? Do they need to be a bender? Are there multiple spirits that may sometimes inhabit a human with exceptional spiritual enlightenment thus allowing them to become an Avatar? Are there multiple different and distinct reincarnating Avatars that may or may not be realized throughout their life due to various factors? What are the requirements assuming there are either no prerequisites or that those prerequisites are met? What is considered "Mastery of the Elements" when an ordinary bender without an Avatar Spirit can only bend a single element?

Is it akin to making one's element most like the other elements? Say for Earth as an example, would an Avatar of Earthbending bend their element "Water-like" by bending say, metal in a fluid way, "Air-like" by sand bending, or "Fire-like" by lava bending?

Would a non-bender Avatar be similar to Guru Pathik who just knows the wisdom of the inner workings of chi, chakras, and how bending works?

Is it symbolic in the sense that they are still whatever element bender they are, but simply utilize the other bending "styles" (a.k.a. the martial arts part of bending) using the natural born element as opposed to the other three? Would one then achieve the title of Avatar if they are able to teach other benders the other bending styles despite not being natural born to the style they are teaching? I.e., a Waterbending Avatar successfully training Earthbenders without difficulty.

Considering all this, assuming he exists, would Amon then possibly be considered a "rogue Avatar" if such a thing can exist?. (Speaking of that topic, I should make a separate one on the exact specifics of what occurred in the Anti-Bending Revolution and if Amon existed and fought an Avatar potentially named Korra.)

(3) - Lastly, what is to be gained by becoming an Avatar?

In the show, it is obvious how being an Avatar is not only a boon to one's power (and a personal guarantee to an after-life that can be remembered) but is also a massive responsibility. Additionally, not everyone agreed with the Avatar or their methods, but all of them respected an Avatar because, well... to put it bluntly, they were as close to a literal divine and godly manifestation in a mortal form on earth as one can get. You didn't want to piss off someone who can literally bend all of nature to their will and still come back to life if you somehow managed to kill them (barring extreme circumstances).

On Precipice... this concept is less clear. Why does the world need Avatars? Why aren't people who master their elements just called Masters of (x)bending? By definition (as according to Hindu philosophy [thanks google!]), an avatar is "a manifestation of a deity or released soul in bodily form on earth; an incarnate divine teacher.", so what is particularly divine or incarnate about our Avatars?

Does achieving "Avatar-hood" allow them the spiritual ability to reincarnate (or at least remember past incarnations for wisdom, if we assume that all humans in the Avatar-verse reincarnate, which there is good evidence for)?

Does it allow accessing the spirit worlds energy for an increase in the influence of their power (i.e., spirit-fueled "Avatar State")?

Does it allow them to energy bend in addition to their natural born bending ability (assuming they have one)?

If there is no added ability associated with becoming an Avatar, is the title a symbolic one in the sense that they may traditionally be afforded different privileges and responsibilities in this world than an ordinary master of their element? What are those privileges and responsibilities if so?

Phew, sorry about the long read there, but I am really passionate about this series, and the fundamental changes here are good ones, but they deserve more explanation behind them. Though the changes are simple, they have far-reaching consequences in regards to our shared setting here and what we can all agree on. Creativity is great, but it isn't so great when two irresolvable ideas pop up unexpectedly and clash because no one decided to fully explain and rationale the implications beforehand.

So what do you think? What are your views on the Avatars of Precipice?

The Avatar titles are solely honorary ones, and are given to anyone who qualifies with very few if any supernatural special qualities and only limited to the privileges and responsibilities accomplishable by a mortal?
The Avatar titles are a worthwhile achievement with physically and/or spiritually tangible results that can be achieved by anyone should they meet the criteria and "Master the Elements"?
Or more likely I think, somewhere between the two?

Thank you for reading and I hope this makes you think about stuff!

- Aspirant

This user is a former member

Last edit: Oct 23, 2018 20:18:07 GMT -6 | Removed dashes to use horizontal rule, it broke mobile

A Long Display Name Here

Oct 22, 2018 22:42:58 GMT -6

What a great thread! I'm tagging Gia since I know she'll want to see this.

A few of your points are addressed in our old plot / revamp announcement [here], but in more detail:

1. No canons from the show exist in the history of our story. Not Ozai, not Aang, no reincarnating Avatars in general, no Amon.

1a. The Lion Turtle, therefore, never taught energy bending. It doesn't exist here.
1b. The 100 Years war ended through a joint effort of the other three nations, and Fire Nation nationals who disagreed with the idea of conquest
1c. The Fire Lord was then deposed*
1d. The Equalist uprising was more along the likes of the antifascist movement — scattered pockets of organisation & resources, but no central command. A few key players may be given code names to communicate with other cells, but there isn't a governing individual or body.

* Since we haven't yet decided what the world state is for places outside of Republic City, we can't say for certain if the Fire Lord was deposed by another, anti-war member of the royal family, if the monarchy was replaced by a new family / branch family, or if the monarchy was abolished all together. Gia and I will decide on that once we're further into the Republic City plot to start involving other nations and will make that determination based on what fits best with the story our players come up with.

2. The world doesn't NEED Avatars; 'Avatar' is a symbolic title.

2a. The word 'divine' doesn't necessarily mean literal and that is the case here; divinity is the equivalent of enlightenment. Some people believe that they are divinely inspired and guided or perhaps a person who has been reincarnated at least once through every element. Not everyone shares these theories, particularly those of Reformist leanings.
2b. Avatars MUST be benders.
2c. There is no technical benefit from being an Avatar beyond personal satisfaction, though in practicality those with the title receive... perks, from those who hold value to the title (though not everyone does). It is effectively a celebrity status, and as such they enjoy fame (or perhaps notariety, depending on your point of view) and the bonuses that other people may choose to bestow upon them.
2d. The above two are the biggest reasons the Reformists are so against Avatars as a whole: special treatment for excelling in a craft that is not available to any nonbender (they don't have the same qualms against 'master', because anyone can master a craft. But only benders are capable of being called an Avatar as the prerequisite requires they be a master in bending to start with).
2e. Avatars can only bend a single element, but embody the styles and teachings of all four. Our canon analogue is Iroh (if canons existed here, he would be considered an Avatar). His firebending style is different from the average firebender because he can, at a whim, change the way he bends fire to use a different element's martial art. A more tangible example is Iroh developing lightning redirecting: it is utilising fire (lightning) and channeling it in the manner a waterbender would channel their chi.
2f. Avatars are a cut above masters. Masters are those who completely master their element, the associated martial art, and philosophy. Avatars do that, then move on to master the philosophy and martial art of the other three (but cannot master the other elements).
2g. Avatars have no obligation to keep the world in harmony. Some try, out of a sense of responsibility, but others decide to be Avatars for personal gain or just for the sake of personal growth.

3. Spirits do not inhabit humans in any way. They exist, and that is a fact, but thus far have kept to the Spirit World (as a note: it is highly unlikely that Gia and I will bring the Spirit World into the plot in the foreseeable future. I'm not saying 'no', but neither Gia and I have found a way to make the idea palatable to us).

4. Reincarnation is a belief, and some people firmly believe they or others are reincarnated, but like other aspects of spirituality there is no definite proof.

5. To your hypothetical re: Amon — no. He only mastered waterbending, and did not utilise all four teachings in his bending art. To your hypothetical re: "rogue" Avatars as a whole — also no. If Amon existed and had fulfilled the qualifications of Avatar as defined above, he would still be an Avatar. He wouldn't be "rogue" as there's no code of conduct. He would be an Avatar who was a bad person, not a Bad Avatar. Does that make sense?

The questions I cannot answer:

How did the title come about in the first place?
Gia and I haven't discussed this yet, so I can't answer it. For now, just assume it's been this way since recorded history. I don't personally think this is a crucial plot point so we'll decide whenever a good idea comes to us.

Who bestows the title?
More important, but something that Gia and I have never discussed. We will be doing so when we have some time to have a decent discussion about it. Off the top of my head, I feel either this would be a title bestowed upon them by a council of sorts, comprised of bending masters or other avatars, or by the Order of the White Lotus. But that's not canon, just an idea I'm having as I respond.

I hope this helps! Gia may have a few additions as well (:

This user is Mod

Last edit: Oct 23, 2018 9:22:51 GMT -6

Anonymous

Oct 23, 2018 10:44:39 GMT -6

A Long Display Name Here Thank you for the reply!

1. No canons from the show exist in the history of our story. Not Ozai, not Aang, no reincarnating Avatars in general, no Amon.

    1a. The Lion Turtle, therefore, never taught energy bending. It doesn't exist here.

    1b. The 100 Years war ended through a joint effort of the other three nations, and Fire Nation nationals who disagreed with the idea of conquest

    1c. The Fire Lord was then deposed*

    1d. The Equalist uprising was more along the likes of the antifascist movement — scattered pockets of organisation & resources, but no central command. A few key players may be given code names to communicate with other cells, but there isn't a governing individual or body.

* Since we haven't yet decided what the world state is for places outside of Republic City, we can't say for certain if the Fire Lord was deposed by another, anti-war member of the royal family, if the monarchy was replaced by a new family / branch family, or if the monarchy was abolished all together. Gia and I will decide on that once we're further into the Republic City plot to start involving other nations and will make that determination based on what fits best with the story our players come up with.

Good to know, that much wasn't 100% clear to me what remained and what did not, and how things were different from the original setting. I appreciate the clarification!

2b. Avatars MUST be benders.

2c. There is no technical benefit from being an Avatar beyond personal satisfaction, though in practicality those with the title receive... perks, from those who hold value to the title (though not everyone does). It is effectively a celebrity status, and as such they enjoy fame (or perhaps notariety, depending on your point of view) and the bonuses that other people may choose to bestow upon them.

2d. The above two are the biggest reasons the Reformists are so against Avatars as a whole: special treatment for excelling in a craft that is not available to any nonbender (they don't have the same qualms against 'master', because anyone can master a craft. But only benders are capable of being called an Avatar as the prerequisite requires they be a master in bending to start with).

2e. Avatars can only bend a single element, but embody the styles and teachings of all four. Our canon analogue is Iroh (if canons existed here, he would be considered an Avatar). His firebending style is different from the average firebender because he can, at a whim, change the way he bends fire to use a different element's martial art. A more tangible example is Iroh developing lightning bending: it is utilising fire (lightning) and channeling it in the manner a waterbender would channel their chi.

2f. Avatars are a cut above masters. Masters are those who completely master their element, the associated martial art, and philosophy. Avatars do that, then move on to master the philosophy and martial art of the other three (but cannot master the other elements).

2g. Avatars have no obligation to keep the world in harmony. Some try, out of a sense of responsibility, but others decide to be Avatars for personal gain or just for the sake of personal growth.

Maybe it's just me, but I think I'm failing to see how an Avatar is different from a Master of Philosophy and Martial Skill, that just so happens to be potentially a bender. Avatars can master the philosophy and martial skill of the elements but cannot inherently bend the other elements, which to me doesn't seem to have any more distinctiveness than say, a non-bender who masters the philosophy and martial skill of all four elements despite lacking true bending ability. If the only thing they gain is satisfaction and maybe some perks from those who respect that particular title (no one is obligated to respect it out of sheer virtue of its meaning unless they are personally involved in the community that respects it for what it is), I doubt it would be an issue as divisive as it is portrayed here. In a real-world example, a significant title that is respected by many is a Noble. There isn't anything inherently different or special about them, except that they have a lot of tangible life-changing wealth (granted to them by heritage or by will), which obviously causes strife amongst the less off who have very little tangible wealth.

The Avatar title honestly has almost no distinction from Master, except that it might be granted by other masters of various elements. Sort of like a council of Chess Masters electing a "Grand Master" (I have no idea how chess works, but similar concept lol). Other people who don't play chess generally won't be upset with who becomes a Chess Grand Master, and probably won't mind if they get perks at establishments that respect the title (like a game store for instance). They have a verifiable and impressively (albeit limited in scope) skill that few can argue against.

If the distinction is solely because they are a bender first, and an Avatar second, I see no reason why the people who are complaining about it couldn't simply become a Guru of all elements, literally the same thing sans actual bending. I feel like people, if they were somehow upset by the concept of an Avatar, would try these tamer, more peaceful methods first before deciding "I'm going to sacrifice my livelihood and personal well-being by causing a riot because some people who are genuinely skilled at what they do get benefits from it, and I can't do the same).

(I do, however, admit that people can be irrational for no reason and that such irrationality, fear, and anger can transmute into a mob if said with such conviction as to convince others their woes are real and actual issues to be upset over.)

I could see them possibly being more upset on religious grounds, where you make your first point in this section:

2a. The word 'divine' doesn't necessarily mean literal and that is the case here; divinity is the equivalent of enlightenment. Some people believe that they are divinely inspired and guided or perhaps a person who has been reincarnated at least once through every element. Not everyone shares these theories, particularly those of Reformist leanings.

If an Avatar genuinely believes that they can remember past lives for example, particularly spiritual people may take offense if they disagree with that assessment (believing them to be both a liar and/or heretic/heathen), and eventually become violent with enough goading and loud angry leaders. I feel like that would be a better focal point for conflict than what is implied at present.

5. To your hypothetical re: Amon — no. He only mastered waterbending, and did not utilise all four teachings in his bending art. To your hypothetical re: "rogue" Avatars as a whole — also no. If Amon existed and had fulfilled the qualifications of Avatar as defined above, he would still be an Avatar. He wouldn't be "rogue" as there's no code of conduct. He would be an Avatar who was a bad person, not a Bad Avatar. Does that make sense?

It does make sense conceptually, but if that title of Avatar is one granted by an organization, it makes less sense to me. If the title is to be respected, it must be taken by respected people, otherwise, the title would be tarnished and lose its inherent power - respect and prestige. Why can't the title be revoked, or a terrible title is attributed to them if their deeds end up being deranged and/or terrible in order to save face for whoever bestows the titles? Imagine, for an extreme example (that isn't 100% equivalent but illustrates the point), that a terrible dictator who ordered the execution of millions had won the Noble Peace Prize... it would immediately lose any merit from those who respected it before an objectively terrible person "won it" by that organization?

Maybe a more prudent example from fiction would the title of Jedi Master or even Jedi Grandmaster. They are respected because these individuals are not only inherently skilled in their particular craft (The Force and Lightsaber Arts) but also possess in them the prestige of wisdom. However, any Jedi can fall "to the Dark Side" and gain a different less respectable title... a Dark Jedi, because although they could be recognized for having great skill, they have lost the respect of those who bestow and honor the titles of Master or Grandmaster, and thus gain infamy.

Conceptually, I think the same could be applied here, with Avatars intended to be more respected than even any individual master, they would be under even more scrutiny to uphold the ideals of a "good Avatar", not less scrutinized after achieving it. I personally, could very well see "Rogue Avatars" being an interesting concept as opposed to Avatars simply being bad people. The title wouldn't/shouldn't be respected, if no one can respect some of the people who wear it.

This is just my viewpoint however, you all are welcome to share your thoughts on this and weigh in what makes sense for our setting or not, and we'll abide by it to the best of our collective ability haha

This user is a former member

Last edit: Oct 23, 2018 20:17:39 GMT -6 | Removed dashes to use horizontal rule, it broke mobile

A Long Display Name Here

Oct 23, 2018 11:12:20 GMT -6

@aspirant :

Maybe it's just me, but I think I'm failing to see how an Avatar is different from a Master of Philosophy and Martial Skill, that just so happens to be potentially a bender. Avatars can master the philosophy and martial skill of the elements but cannot inherently bend the other elements, which to me doesn't seem to have any more distinctiveness than say, a non-bender who masters the philosophy and martial skill of all four elements despite lacking true bending ability.

That is the point of the Reformists. ;) You're absolutely totally correct in that there is inherently no difference beyond bending. Traditionalists argue that all benders are inherently superior to nonbenders, and thus should enjoy the privileges that come with being inherently more talented, skilled, whathaveyou. Avatars get special distinction because they are (1) benders, who (2) have dedicated themselves to mastering all four elements styles and philosophies. A bender who is flexible in how they manipulate their element is more skilled than any single-style master or your average bender, and by virtue of being a bender are inherently more skilled than any nonbender by default. Or at least, the Traditionalists claim.

But this is just How It Is, and the Traditionalists believe it should stay that way while the Reformists believe it should not.

I doubt it would be an issue as divisive as it is portrayed here. In a real-world example, a significant title that is respected by many is a Noble. There isn't anything inherently different or special about them, except that they have a lot of tangible life-changing wealth (granted to them by heritage or by will), which obviously causes strife amongst the less off who have very little tangible wealth.

Avatar is still a significant title. You're not thinking large enough for "perks" — what if an Avatar decided to get into politics? What if an Avatar decided to turn to a life of crime or become the head of a Triad? What if an Avatar decided to try and create a business monopoly? The point here is that privilege — in this case, the privilege of not only being able to bend, but by taking years to train beyond the 'normal' confines of a skill, allows you avenues that, while not official, from a practical standpoint allows them societal advantage — one that nonbenders, no matter how good they are at the martial arts and philosophical portions of it, will NEVER be able to achieve due to a circumstance of birth.

Being disenfranchised and not afforded equal and equitable opportunity, housing, money, and status due to a circumstance of birth — even if not intrinsically tied to wealth, though frequently so — is the reason why most rebellions and civil conflict occur. (The Dragon Flats district — comprised primarily of nonbenders — is also the poorest district in the city).

But I think the issue here is you're misunderstanding that our plot point focuses on the existence of Avatars being "bad" — that is not so. The existence of Avatars is simply a symptom of the inequality in this society that favours benders. For example, CEOs aren't the reason that capitalism is not an ideal model of economy, but they are a symptom of why that is so.

Maybe a more prudent example from fiction would the title of Jedi Master or even Jedi Grandmaster. They are respected because these individuals are not only inherently skilled in their particular craft (The Force and Lightsaber Arts) but also possess in them the prestige of wisdom. However, any Jedi can fall "to the Dark Side" and gain a different less respectable title... a Dark Jedi, because although they could be recognized for having great skill, they have lost the respect of those who bestow and honor the titles of Master or Grandmaster, and thus gain infamy.

Conceptually, I think the same could be applied here, with Avatars intended to be more respected than even any individual master, they would be under even more scrutiny to uphold the ideals of a "good Avatar", not less scrutinized after achieving it. I personally, could very well see "Rogue Avatars" being an interesting concept as opposed to Avatars simply being bad people. The title wouldn't/shouldn't be respected, if no one can respect some of the people who wear it.

Again, I think from a storytelling perspective you're overthinking / analysing the existence of Avatars. "Rogue Avatars" wouldn't work with our story because the problem with Avatars is inherently that the title exists, irrespective of the individuals who hold the title.

Ultimately, the existence of Avatars wouldn't be a problem if all people were afforded the chance to earn the title. They aren't, however, and that fact is symptomatic of the greater inequality that exists that impacts all nonbenders in all aspects of life. For example, think of the bender landlord that discriminates against nonbenders and chargest them extra for utilities because they "can't contribute" due to lack of bending? Or the nonbender who is passed over for a promotion because his counterpart is a bender? Or the fact that the Dragon Flats is a ghetto and receives very little government funding due to the "high rates of crime" (frequently caused by poverty, in which case is contributed to due to antinonbender discrimination), and so on.

The existence of the Avatars is just the poster child for what is wrong with the system, not the reason people are rioting.

This user is Mod

Last edit: Oct 23, 2018 11:36:21 GMT -6

Anonymous

Oct 23, 2018 12:37:02 GMT -6

A Long Display Name Here I like everything you just said!

Now, as far as roleplaying limitations are concerned, could one say:

Have an Avatar character that truly believes in their divine reincarnation, and perhaps "divines" information from the wisdom of their "past lives"?
Have a non-bender self-proclaim themselves as an Avatar on the side of the Reformists?

An additional question: When comparing the Equalist Uprising and this Reformist movement, is there any difference? Would you say the Equalists were more anti-bender lead by non-benders, where the Reformists are more about equality (ironic, considering the name of who we're comparing to, here) between the two "classes" of people, and thus inherently more accepting of bender brothers and sisters in arms?

This user is a former member

A Long Display Name Here

Oct 23, 2018 13:32:00 GMT -6

Oct 23, 2018 12:37:02 GMT -6 @aspirant said:

A Long Display Name Here I like everything you just said!

Now, as far as roleplaying limitations are concerned, could one say:

Have an Avatar character that truly believes in their divine reincarnation, and perhaps "divines" information from the wisdom of their "past lives"?
Have a non-bender self-proclaim themselves as an Avatar on the side of the Reformists?

An additional question: When comparing the Equalist Uprising and this Reformist movement, is there any difference? Would you say the Equalists were more anti-bender lead by non-benders, where the Reformists are more about equality (ironic, considering the name of who we're comparing to, here) between the two "classes" of people, and thus inherently more accepting of bender brothers and sisters in arms?

To answer:

1. Yes
2. Yes in theory — we would have to discuss this with whomever was interested in playing this role to iron out details, but there's nothing from an in-character perspective that would prevent someone from making this assertion.

I think that's a little too simplistic for both groups, so it's more like the focus of the Equalists — which was comprised solely of nonbenders, though they might have sympathisers in the bending brethren — was to change society through any means necessary. They lay siege to the city, with independent cells causing havoc at various times, dates, and places. If benders supported them, then that was great, but they weren't welcome to be a part of the Equalist group as a whole because they were inherently part of the problem.

The Reformists built upon the ashes of the Equalists, so to speak: they respect and understand (and some might even still condone) the actions of the Equalists, but that isn't their sole philosophy. There is larger room for shades of grey in the Reformist ideology and they as a whole have decided to band together with those sympathetic toward them to try and be able to affect change on a larger scale, with the benders using their privileged platform to uplift the criticisms of Reformist nonbenders.

This isn't to say one group is "right" over the other — just that the Equalists, being smaller in number, weren't successful in their uprising because they were outnumbered and lacked the resources to counter the entire might of the Republic City police.

There are still Equalists around, however. My character Charumati is one of them. She calls herself a Reformist now, but she identifies more strongly as an Equalist. However even so, she was never anti bender — she was just willing (and has done, though people don't know this) to do whatever it takes and has no qualms about things like, say, murder or chi blocking, as a means to an end.

Both groups are comprised of individuals with varying stances on extreme behaviour and action, but the Equalists are separate from the Reformists because Equalists did not seek to change things through politics, or a mix of politics and action.

This user is Mod

Last edit: Oct 23, 2018 13:33:33 GMT -6

The Avatar RP

Previously, on Avatar...

The Moderation Team

Latest TARP News