Nasuverse Childcare is War Question

[trevelyan1983]

Presuming Archer can trace <s>Excalibur</s> accurately

I've noticed that a lot of discussions tend to boil down to this.

So true.

And to answer your other question, yes, Excalibur and Caliburn seem to be different names from the same sword IRL myths, and share a number of similarities with Caladbolg.

But historical accuracy is . . . flexible within Nasu's playground.

EDIT: Oh, damn, meant to thank F1 for the link. Been hankering for more Childcare since I read the doujin, and this is exactly what the doctor ordered. Thanks, F1.

 

[Avider]

Nasuverse mythology and RL mythology do not always match up. In the Nasuverse, Caliburn and Excalibur are two distinct swords. One is the sword of the king, the other a construct of humanity's dreams given by the Lady of the Lake to Arturia after the sword of the king broke.

Of course, RL mythologies don't always match up with each other also, considering later versions does have Caliburn and Excalibur as being two separate swords, which ultimately is what Nasu decided to use.

 

[Lord Raine]

If by later versions you mean modern and semimodern rewrites that are not a part of the true Arthurian mythology, then yes.

 

[trevelyan1983]

If by later versions you mean modern and semimodern rewrites that are not a part of the true Arthurian mythology, then yes.

Talk about Arturian mythology when Arthur doesn't possess a Delicious Flat Chest and a vagoo.

 

[Lord Raine]

If by later versions you mean modern and semimodern rewrites that are not a part of the true Arthurian mythology, then yes.

Talk about Arturian mythology when Arthur doesn't possess a Delicious Flat Chest and a vagoo.

Merlin was a master shapeshifter, and magic could be taught, though only by people who could use it innately. It's not nearly as unlikely as one might think.

Excalibur and Caliburn not being the same sword, though? Yeah, I would question that.

Of course, it doesn't really matter anyway, because of the way Servants and NPs work. We know it's possible to summon what amounts to the same person, but different versions of them, and we know it's possible to summon them from different points in their respective histories.

I wouldn't buy that Excalibur and Caliburn are two different swords, but I would buy Caliburn being the version of Excalibur that's actually true to the original mythos, while Excalibur a later, postmodern view of the same weapon.

So they're two different swords for the purposes of how the rules work, even though they really aren't.

 

[trevelyan1983]

Excalibur and Caliburn not being the same sword, though? Yeah, I would question that.

Of course, it doesn't really matter anyway, because of the way Servants and NPs work. We know it's possible to summon what amounts to the same person, but different versions of them, and we know it's possible to summon them from different points in their respective histories.

I wouldn't buy that Excalibur and Caliburn are two different swords, but I would buy Caliburn being the version of Excalibur that's actually true to the original mythos, while Excalibur a later, postmodern view of the same weapon.

So they're two different swords for the purposes of how the rules work, even though they really aren't.

Nasu either deliberately rewrote it, or misunderstood the myths and various interpretations. It's as simple as that. There's no paradox or superpositioning of the same sword, or anything.

Nasuverse concepts are convoluted to the point that you don't need to go looking for any further complications, bro - they will find you.

 

[Lord Raine]

There's no paradox or superpositioning of the same sword, or anything.

But how can we be sure?!

 

[trevelyan1983]

Fag: I will take a cat . . . and eat it!

Cat: STFU, noob.

 

[Shaderic]

Ah. Tinfoil.
But which brand?

 

[Avider]

If by later versions you mean modern and semimodern rewrites that are not a part of the true Arthurian mythology, then yes.

Well actually, I was referring to the two differing origin on Arthur's sword, one being the sword pulled from the stone in the poem by Robert de Boron, the other being the sword given by the Lady of the Lake (having broken his current sword) in the Post-Vulgate Cycle. (If you call either of those two sources as "modern" or "semi-modern", I'll facepalm. Hard.)

Most likely, as in many modern rendition of the Arthurian myths, Nasu combined those two origins to have Caliburn be the sword from the stone, and Excalibur be the sword of the faeries.

In anycase, as I've said, in the Nasuverse, they are different swords. That's canon for that Universe, that has nothing to do with whether or not they are different swords in real life. That's what I'm trying to get at, because I've seen too many nitpicks about that particular interpretation. Especially when it's a pretty insignificant change.

Seriously, if you can't suspend your disbelief for a fictionalized version of a fictional sword, then you really need to go and wear another hat.

 

[darthturtle]

Nasuverse mythology and RL mythology do not always match up.

Not just regarding mythology, either. Realistically, had Arturia been female, there would be no justification on hiding it. Back in those days, the Big Island was actually a matriarchal society and worshipped those other gods, until Arthur's circle helped usher in Christianity to strengthen his position as ruler.

So Arturia hiding her gender just to help bring in Christianity so she would then need to hide her gender would be an extraordinarily roundabout way of doing things.

 

[toraneko]

If you're going to be "realistic" about it, there's no real proof that Arthur (any version of him) ever actually existed. Fiction is all there is to go on.

 

[Lord Raine]

That's canon for that Universe, that has nothing to do with whether or not they are different swords in real life.

Except for the fact that it does, because the entire concept of Servants and Noble Phantasms is based on the concept of make-believe things coming to life in forms that are currently accepted by humanity in general, regardless of how accurate they might be, or if said individuals or objects ever actually existed in the first place.

Thus, my argument is quite valid, because the entire mechanic in question is based upon how mythology is perceived. You claim that there are two swords in canon, but that's not entirely true. There are as many as there are different versions of the legend. And they can still all be the same sword, because they're all King Author's sword, and he only ever had one. They're just different versions of the same thing from different branches of Authorian mythology.

It's not the canon number that matters. It's the fact that canonically, you can have two, three, four, or however-many completely different versions of what are essentially the same thing.

It's also worth noting that this is exactly the sort of thing that could happen, because as you yourself pointed out, King Author's sword has two different origin stories, both of which are widely known. Thus, it should not be the least bit surprising that there are two different versions of it floating around.

 

[firestorm]

Quite. FSN is 'clap your hands if you believe'. If enough people believe that George Bush is a hero, by god, he's a potential Servant.

...

George W Bush, Servant Rider, with Noble Phantasm Minuteman: Destroyer of Worlds?

 

[Garahs]

Except for the fact that it does, because the entire concept of Servants and Noble Phantasms is based on the concept of make-believe things coming to life in forms that are currently accepted by humanity in general, regardless of how accurate they might be, or if said individuals or objects ever actually existed in the first place.

Thus, my argument is quite valid, because the entire mechanic in question is based upon how mythology is perceived. You claim that there are two swords in canon, but that's not entirely true. There are as many as there are different versions of the legend. And they can still all be the same sword, because they're all King Author's sword, and he only ever had one. They're just different versions of the same thing from different branches of Authorian mythology.

In Nasu canon, there were two swords, Caliburn and Excalibur. This is a fact that (from my interpretation) Arturia and Heracles accepted. They existed and Shirou even has (or had) Excalibur's sheath. Every Noble Phantasm has at one time existed and been wielded by their respective heroes. They may have been less powerful in real life, but the legends augmented their power as NPs.

I could be wrong since I'm not a nasu expert, but I believe a weapon has to have existed for it to become a noble phantasm.

 

[firestorm]

Noble Phantasms are the crystallization of the historical facts and anecdotes that made the heroic spirit famous

Nope, you don't need it to exist, you just need people to believe it existed.

 

[Avider]

That's canon for that Universe, that has nothing to do with whether or not they are different swords in real life.

Except for the fact that it does, because the entire concept of Servants and Noble Phantasms is based on the concept of make-believe things coming to life in forms that are currently accepted by humanity in general, regardless of how accurate they might be, or if said individuals or objects ever actually existed in the first place.

Thus, my argument is quite valid, because the entire mechanic in question is based upon how mythology is perceived. You claim that there are two swords in canon, but that's not entirely true. There are as many as there are different versions of the legend. And they can still all be the same sword, because they're all King Author's sword, and he only ever had one. They're just different versions of the same thing from different branches of Authorian mythology.

It's not the canon number that matters. It's the fact that canonically, you can have two, three, four, or however-many completely different versions of what are essentially the same thing.

It's also worth noting that this is exactly the sort of thing that could happen, because as you yourself pointed out, King Author's sword has two different origin stories, both of which are widely known. Thus, it should not be the least bit surprising that there are two different versions of it floating around.

I could go tl;dr, but this will suffice.

No. Historical fact for the Nasuverse = Two swords for Arturia. Caliburn being the sword of the king, Excalibur being the sword of the faeries.

And also no on this:

Except for the fact that it does, because the entire concept of Servants and Noble Phantasms is based on the concept of make-believe things coming to life in forms that are currently accepted by humanity in general, regardless of how accurate they might be, or if said individuals or objects ever actually existed in the first place.

Case in point, Assassin. Sasaki Kojirou could not be summoned, because he did not exist. A nameless wraith, who did exist, was summoned. Everybody and everything that were summoned existed, there's no examples of anything or anybody who did not exist being summoned.

There's that issue, and then there's also the issue of you misunderstanding what I mean by the term "real life". It means, outside of the Nasuverse, in our world. Not "life" in the Nasuverse.

Unless you want to make an argument stating that what the Nasuverse say about our historical mythology will change said historical mythology...? Well, go ahead.

 

[ttestagr]

Please note that Assassin did exist. He was an actual swordsman in Japan in the past. It is his identity that did not exist. Sasaki Kojiro was just a story, but this very real man took on the identity as a Heroic Spirit.

The same thing for the Noble Phantasms. There has to be a basis behind the existence.

 

[Avider]

Please make it clear who you're addressing ttestagr.

 

[Lord Raine]

Every Noble Phantasm has at one time existed and been wielded by their respective heroes.

And the characters of both Merlin and King Author were mixed together from, like, five different historical people. Merlin was two different people in one, and Author was either three or four, depending on who you talk to.

If anything, we should be happy there are only two swords floating around. There could be as many as there were individuals who made up the King Author mythos that possessed a sword.

Besides, the entire argument is moot anyway, because the mechanic we're debating is a combination of Clap Your Hands If You Believe and Don't Ask Questions There Are No Answers.

The entire story is an exercise in magic, and Nasuverse magic works on the principle of being unknowable. So the more you know, the less sense it makes by default. Because this isn't really an argument about what was real and what wasn't, but rather an argument about how much of what get's summoned and used is how it's perceived, and how much of it is literal fact. Since I'm pretty sure that's never been definitively clarified to any real extent, the argument is effectively unresolvable.

 

[Aranfan]

Every Noble Phantasm has at one time existed and been wielded by their respective heroes.

And the characters of both Merlin and King Author were mixed together from, like, five different historical people. Merlin was two different people in one, and Author was either three or four, depending on who you talk to.

In Real Life. In the Nasuverse Merlin and Arthuria were real people who really did those things. And in the Nasuverse Arthuria had two swords.

 

[Megaolix]

I can't beleive I forgot to put a link here until now.

http://finality.dasaku.net/?page_id=4562

Following CiW, this is getting translated. Part 1 is already fully translated and up to story 5 of part 2 is done (check main page for Part 2 story 3 to 5).

 

[nick012000]

Hmm. Looks like I was right; it is taking a turn for the grim now that the 4th Holy Grail War's started.

Also, LOL at Archer inspiring child!Shirou into going and helping rescue a little girl. :lol: