Senken no Majutsushi to Yobareta Kenshi - Vol. 1 Ch. 1
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
- Messages
- 1,271
OP MC
MC has unique power no one else has (but really isn't actually as strong as they make in this story)
Archer from Goodwill
Savery
Slavery is so typical in isekai/fantasy stories this one had to make super slaves
Child (super) slaves
(Saving) loli
MC not liking a divine deity
MC not having common sense in magic/use magic differently/is magically stronger than average
Is an adventurer
Offended a high authority person/group
High authority person/group is rude/bad/incompetent
Finding lost/missing people/items
The list can go on but this is what I've checked, man an actual isekai/fantasy bingo would be fun to play
@Hcheaz because bAdaSs mAIn ChaRacTeR if we're being real here
MC has unique power no one else has (but really isn't actually as strong as they make in this story)
Archer from Goodwill
Savery
Slavery is so typical in isekai/fantasy stories this one had to make super slaves
Child (super) slaves
(Saving) loli
MC not liking a divine deity
MC not having common sense in magic/use magic differently/is magically stronger than average
Is an adventurer
Offended a high authority person/group
High authority person/group is rude/bad/incompetent
Finding lost/missing people/items
The list can go on but this is what I've checked, man an actual isekai/fantasy bingo would be fun to play
@Hcheaz because bAdaSs mAIn ChaRacTeR if we're being real here
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2023
- Messages
- 929
Looks really interesting. I really enjoyed the first chapter. Looking forward to seeing where this goes.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2019
- Messages
- 325
Yet another series in which religion is "evil" — where do I even start?
This is also yet another series which involves twin's being considered "evil" — looking the matter up, I found no cases of this native to Western religion, mythology, and folklore (opposition between siblings, yes; twins or other multiples being evil, no). I found considerably less information for East Asia, but again, no real evidence for this type of discrimination. So I'm guessing it's the result of one influential example; possibly being used as a symbol for customs of forced conformity.
As a note, although it was translated strangely (probably a lack of native Japanese terminology + ingnoance of history and Western terms for concepts there in = awkward literal translation). What's actually going on here is that the setting has two classes of slaves: regular slaves and chattel slaves. The discription provided mostly works, but is somewhat confusing in terminology (although the human rights for the setting's chattel slaves is far worse than their real life compatriots). In most Western languages, "slavery" has come to refer to chattel slavery unless otherwise specified, but many other languages, Japanese included, default to the broader definition.
With regular ownership, the owner has rights of use, with chattel, both rights of use and abuse. In the case of slaves, right of use is over the enslaved person's labour and freedom, while right of abuse is over the enslaved person's bodily integrity and life. Historically, unless you were a POW or something of the kind, your owner would typically only have right of use; slavery involving both right of use and right of abuse is associated with POWs and slavery post-Enlightenment (at some point, manumission often became illegal outside of wills, which is the worst kind of limitation on right of abuse). (This division of ownership rights is still in practice today, most obviously with regards to historic properties — owners have the right to use them and make easily removable alterations, but permanent alterations or destruction are not. This is even more in effect for property bound to a particular blood-line.)
This is also yet another series which involves twin's being considered "evil" — looking the matter up, I found no cases of this native to Western religion, mythology, and folklore (opposition between siblings, yes; twins or other multiples being evil, no). I found considerably less information for East Asia, but again, no real evidence for this type of discrimination. So I'm guessing it's the result of one influential example; possibly being used as a symbol for customs of forced conformity.
As a note, although it was translated strangely (probably a lack of native Japanese terminology + ingnoance of history and Western terms for concepts there in = awkward literal translation). What's actually going on here is that the setting has two classes of slaves: regular slaves and chattel slaves. The discription provided mostly works, but is somewhat confusing in terminology (although the human rights for the setting's chattel slaves is far worse than their real life compatriots). In most Western languages, "slavery" has come to refer to chattel slavery unless otherwise specified, but many other languages, Japanese included, default to the broader definition.
With regular ownership, the owner has rights of use, with chattel, both rights of use and abuse. In the case of slaves, right of use is over the enslaved person's labour and freedom, while right of abuse is over the enslaved person's bodily integrity and life. Historically, unless you were a POW or something of the kind, your owner would typically only have right of use; slavery involving both right of use and right of abuse is associated with POWs and slavery post-Enlightenment (at some point, manumission often became illegal outside of wills, which is the worst kind of limitation on right of abuse). (This division of ownership rights is still in practice today, most obviously with regards to historic properties — owners have the right to use them and make easily removable alterations, but permanent alterations or destruction are not. This is even more in effect for property bound to a particular blood-line.)
