D&D General Why Fantasy? Goin' Medieval in D&D

[Cadence]

That's especially funny since he social class in UA.

UA is like a lot of Marvel comics since the early 80s... I treat it like it's apocryphal

In any case, I wonder if social class was put in because of working on the Cavalier and OA.

 

[Jer]

That's especially funny since he social class in UA.

Gygax knew that pumping out new rules volumes was a business model that would work, even if he had no intention of using those rules himself. And if social class was an area where the game didn't have rules, well, lets make some rules for it.

 

[Umbran]

"Beowulf had to swim underwater for three days and then he fought The Troll-Wife. After he defeated the troll wife he then proceeded to get back to the king to get his reward."

Even the best part of a day is inhumanly possible. Even low level D&D spells that allow this kind of thing don't last long enough to do it at low level.

Do you find it odd that I choose the actual text over a summary?

 

[David Howery]

Gygax knew that pumping out new rules volumes was a business model that would work, even if he had no intention of using those rules himself.

the people who ran TSR after him knew that too.....

 

[Jer]

the people who ran TSR after him knew that too.....

Honesty pretty much every RPG company up until Wizards decided to try a different model with D&D 5e. Every one I know of at least.

 

[ART!]

Maybe? In early fantasy power was often intangible to the protagonists. They survived by being smart or sheer will against ghostly beings and cosmic horrors they could never fully comprehend. Modern fantasy is much more tangible. Protagonists wield the power of Gods as easy as picking up a sword. I think the power fantasy is a more modern experience/expectation. Fantasy is a great vehicle for this, but its not always been the expectation. So then, why was it so popular before it was about power fantasy?

Fantasy also has the attraction of escapism, which is arguably also about power - the power to do what you will. Fantasy also can connect us to older or ancient modes of thinking, and to the natural world. I know for me one of the appeals of fantasy games is playing a character who spends an awful lot of their time outdoors, and I often play rangers, barbarians, druids, and the like.

Given the overwhelming presence of superheroes for the past decade (or two decades), I find claims that the continued success of fantasy RPGs to be solely due to power-tripping to be somewhat suspect, at best. Or, at a minimum, lacking in foundation.

But that's just my opinion!

It's intriguing that this popularity and ubiquity has not created a parallel in supers rpgs - although arguably M&M rode the early wave of supers movie popularity.

Except D&D largely ignores this aspect of the medieval world. The PCs are never located in the strictly ordered social order of the medieval world nor are they restricted by it. Kings or Barons never have life and death power over them nor are they made answerable to them in the base assumption of the game, your particular game world may vary.
Instead you get characters that would be equally at home in Ank-Morpork, Deadwood or Barsoom

I think we can take the section on Boot Hill in the 1st edition DMG as evidence of that!

And there is a strong "Old West" influence on Howard and Burroughs, who both get mentioned in Appendix N.

Speaking as someone who isn't American, that sense of "Americana" is something that feels distinctively D&Dish to me.

The style of D&D is often very European, but the vast "untamed" or "wild" [sic] spaces are very American Westward Expansion.

Cacao is not very pleasant to eat.
Chocolate, on the other hand, is widely accepted as adorable.

And this is the time when Beowulf and the early Arthurian myths are being created, and which inspired Tolkien to create Rohan. But of course it is called the Dark Ages because no one knows about it (see also: Dark Matter, Dark Energy).

Dark Chocolate.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I don't like arguments like this because they read as, "you and most everyone who posts here are irrelevant to modern D&D, so stop cluttering up the internet with your outdated opinions".

I think that, that is an uncharitable reading of my post. What I am saying is that all chatter here is immaterial to the future of the game. We are not big enough nor many enough to carry weight with the design team. Irrespective of our opinions. Post all you like.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think that, that is an uncharitable reading of my post. What I am saying is that all chatter here is immaterial to the future of the game. We are not big enough nor many enough to carry weight with the design team. Irrespective of our opinions. Post all you like.

I don't think the point of this thread was anything to do with WotC, I think it was to ask us to think about what we do in our own games.


For me, I make my D&D distinctly modern in tone and values. This is because I'm quite knowledgeable about European history, and if I made the game remotely historical I would be constantly worrying about getting it wrong, rather than making the game fun. It's a straightjacket I prefer to avoid.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I don't think the point of this thread was anything to do with WotC, I think it was to ask us to think about what we do in our own games.


For me, I make my D&D distinctly modern in tone and values. This is because I'm quite knowledgeable about European history, and if I made the game remotely historical I would be constantly worrying about getting it wrong, rather than making the game fun. It's a straightjacket I prefer to avoid.

as soon as you add objectively fact gods in the rule of the setting change as let us say some similar to modern western values is objective good then the gods start empowering mortals to do their will and hey all of a sudden you get many of the more familiar value of dnd making sense, aside from the murder hoboing and the areas with just no civilisation on it.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

as soon as you add objectively fact gods

That is not a requirement. Eberron does not have that.

And even if you do, you can have objectively fallible gods. The gods might be real, but they are not necessarily right.

And of course polytheism as standard is a way D&D has always differed drastically from medievalism, with huge cultural implications if you want to follow through with it. "Western values" are historically based on the assumption of a single infallible god. Remove that an you are not going to get the same values.

If I did do a medieval setting, the first thing I would do would be to make it monotheistic.