D&D General "Red Orc" American Indians and "Yellow Orc" Mongolians in D&D

[Bedrockgames]

It's possible to be inspired by multiple sources at once.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this. I think the contention is over whether D&D is fundamentally a western or a western in a key structural way. Personally, I think there are western influences, but there are also historical romance influences, fantasy lit influences, ancient epic and folklore influences, and historical influences (Gygax was coming out of a wargaming background, and his interests seem more to do with European and ancient warfare than American (though I am sure there is some of that in there too). It is also a game, and sometimes with games, structures emerge out of a necessity of play. Conceits of play may have zero connections to any literary and historical influence*. Like Massive dungeons I can see getting a lot of trappings from various genres and history, but at the end of the day they are mostly divorced from anything we would regularly see in the real world. I also think just because something is influenced by a thing, that doesn't mean everything else to do with that thing is carried over like it is DNA or something. I find a lot of these discussions seem to be rooted in an original sin of X idea: where a trope is considered polluted if it game from a particularly thorny area in history. But I think when tropes get cycled through genres, over decades and centuries, that isn't really quite the case


*Edit: I think there is probably more in common here with stories about ventures into various underworld, than with western expansion (and of course that isn't 1-1 because underworlds and afterlife serve a different purpose than a dungeon in a game....but I can see some connections there

 

[Maxperson]

It seems to me that the question of whether or not Dnd was inspired by westerns is irrelevant. The question is whether it reflects particularly American ideals of heroism, which also happen to be exemplified by westerns.

And super hero movies, and action movies, and fantasy movies, and... Further, we also admire things like King Arthur and St. George and the Dragon, so American ideals of heroism include heroism ideals from around the world.

I'd say that it does. "The hero goes out into the untamed frontier and carves out their own empire by their own effort, needing no ones permission" might not be completely unique to America, but it's unusually central to American culture. A literal frontier isn't even necessary: consider the many stories of immigrants rising to power from nothing, including plenty of classic gangster films, and even recent examples like Hamilton. Dnd's leveling system has that idea baked in.

But again, this isn't anything tied to the old west. If you are going to say that American love for heroes has a great influence, then I absolutely agree. I'm disputing that it's specifically the old west that is the major influence. The influence of the old west is very minor at best. One aspect among many from America and around the world that all influenced how D&D was designed and played.

Comparisons to LOTR made in this thread seem apt. Yes, Sam jumps social classes, but only because Frodo leaves him Bag End. That was entirely up to Frodo. A lot of European rags-to-riches folktales end with the peasant becoming a king and living happily ever after, but often because the hero demonstrated his qualities to an existing king (probably meaning he gets to marry the princess). The hero can't just go out and make themselves a king by their own effort.

The Silmarillion is full of men who by their own hand gained fame and power. Arthur became king because he drew the sword from the stone, not because the kingdom was left to him. Knights(lower nobility) in Europe have been made due to the acts of heroism of commoners.

 

[Maxperson]

It's possible to be inspired by multiple sources at once.

Sure, but the Kung Fu series' influence seems to be limited to giving the monk creator the idea for a monk class and not really anything about the class itself. Kwai Chang Caine has almost no monk abilities. Arrow deflection is about it.

 

[Voadam]

Arthur became king because he drew the sword from the stone, not because the kingdom was left to him.

You mean Arthur Pendragon, son of Uther Pendragon the former king.

 

[Maxperson]

You mean Arthur Pendragon, son of Uther Pendragon the former king.

Shh! Tired migraine minds miss that sort of thing.

 

[Voranzovin]

And super hero movies, and action movies, and fantasy movies, and... Further, we also admire things like King Arthur and St. George and the Dragon, so American ideals of heroism include heroism ideals from around the world.

But again, this isn't anything tied to the old west. If you are going to say that American love for heroes has a great influence, then I absolutely agree. I'm disputing that it's specifically the old west that is the major influence. The influence of the old west is very minor at best. One aspect among many from America and around the world that all influenced how D&D was designed and played.

The Silmarillion is full of men who by their own hand gained fame and power. Arthur became king because he drew the sword from the stone, not because the kingdom was left to him. Knights(lower nobility) in Europe have been made due to the acts of heroism of commoners.

Precisely. Knights were made. They didn't make themselves. Arthur is "the once and future king," and was since he was born. The sword just reveals that he's the rightful king. And while there are some self-made heroics in The Silmarillion, there's an awful lot more lineage and pseudo-divine right.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the old west as a counter argument, since my entire point is that the old west isn't actually relevant--it's the cultural ideas that underlie it, which do not require any of the trappings of the western.

Culture is fuzzy around the edges. It always has been. You're looking for completely distinct categorization with no counter examples. That this does not exist--and never has, for any work of fiction--does not mean that there are no identifiable underlying concepts in Dnd that are associated specifically with American culture, and American ideas about expansionism.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Eh. There are certainly situations where power vacuums occur and where someone who had the personal capability of a high level D&D fighter and brought along a bunch of men at arms could fill it, call himself whatever the hell he liked, and have his claim recognized by history later. It just doesn't describe most periods of history, because in well-inhabited areas power vacuums are transient, and in poorly inhabited ones there's usually a reason they're poorly inhabited.

Its not a coincidence how often settings where this is possible are remnants from fallen cultures, as its about the only way this works.

 

[Helldritch]

Precisely. Knights were made. They didn't make themselves. Arthur is "the once and future king," and was since he was born. The sword just reveals that he's the rightful king. And while there are some self-made heroics in The Silmarillion, there's an awful lot more lineage and pseudo-divine right.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the old west as a counter argument, since my entire point is that the old west isn't actually relevant--it's the cultural ideas that underlie it, which do not require any of the trappings of the western.

Culture is fuzzy around the edges. It always has been. You're looking for completely distinct categorization with no counter examples. That this does not exist--and never has, for any work of fiction--does not mean that there are no identifiable underlying concepts in Dnd that are associated specifically with American culture, and American ideas about expansionism.

For the last sentence...
So was the Roman Empire, so was the Egyptian, Babylonian , Aztec, Inca and Chineese Empire. So were the British with their Empire upon which the sun would never set. This is true of all countries at one point or another in their history. The need for more territory to expand was a common thing and, still is.

And knights were made in recognition of their deeds, not for the fun of it (well, at first, in late periods it became not big of a deed to be one. Just having the right connections or enough money...). Arthur still had to fight to get his kingdom. That is why he created the round table.

The self-made men/women, even today, still need recognition by their peers to be recognized as such. No one is given recognition for nothing. But inheritors can lose everything if they do not act in accordance within the expectations their peers want. So the tropes of D&D transcend much more than the simple west America...

 

[Maxperson]

For the last sentence...
So was the Roman Empire, so was the Egyptian, Babylonian , Aztec, Inca and Chineese Empire. So were the British with their Empire upon which the sun would never set. This is true of all countries at one point or another in their history. The need for more territory to expand was a common thing and, still is.

Especially when American expansionism is really European expansionism. England, France and Spain expanded to the Americas and we just continued with what they brought here(and other places around the world).

 

[Helldritch]

Especially when American expansionism is really European expansionism. England, France and Spain expanded to the Americas and we just continued with what they brought here(and other places around the world).

They are simply the most recent to have "expanded". This has been done through out history on a continual basis. Just check what China is claiming in territory in its "little" corner of the world... It has happened and it's still happening. I hope the next frontiers will be among the stars. Star Frontieres if you guess what I mean .