D&D 5E Nations and Cannons: The American Crisis for DND 5E

[Sparky McDibben]

My solution for gunpowder weapons in 5E has always been to have exploding damage dice for blackpowder weapons, but the designers seem to be leaning on a basis just way more damage. For example, in their core rules, they mention that most enemies won't last long, and to start the PCs at 2nd level.

I am, however, FASCINATED by the flintlock fantasy idea. A pointcrawl where you roam the New England wilderness helping defend small settlements (native and colonial alike) from the resurgent threat of D&D magic and monsters would be quite compelling. The Patriot meets the Witcher, essentially.

 

[MGibster]

But a campaign somewhat similar to Assassin’s Creed 3, that is willing to actually ask things like “we’re any of these people except maybe John Laurens remotely good people?” and “realistically, was it even about “liberty” for most of the leaders, when King George III was more consistent in his opposition to slavery than almost all of them?” And “Can I merc Jefferson?”

If you've ever read Herodotus, one of the interesting things is the Spartans going on and on about how awesome it is to be free but don't seem to be bothered by all the Helots they have as slaves back home. I agree, it would be an interesting topic for the game. There were Americans at the time who did not care for slavery, but they still had to work with people from the Carolinas if they wanted to win the war. Hell, even Jefferson recognized the evils of slavery, but then it's not like he did a whole lot about it.

Was he? Demanding the colonies actually pay for the expense of keeping them from being taken by France (and being sacked sucks no matter who it is) seems pretty reasonable, and I dare say his views on slavery were far from tyrannical, and certainly couldn’t have made the southern colonies comfortable as British citizens.

That's a legitimate point of view. On the other hand, if Great Britain wanted an empire, that's just the cost of doing business and it's not fair to expect people who have no say in going to war that they should pay for it. Funnily enough, Americans thought they won the war as if Great Britain wasn't the one who did all the heavy lifting. From Great Britain's point of view, the colonies simply existed to be economically exploited with raw goods would be shipped from the Americas to Britain and they in turn would ship finished products back. Strangely enough, it took quite a while for the colonists to build up ire against King George. Most of the dissastisfaction was directed at Parliament and it wasn't until close to the outbreak of war that it was directed at George specifically.

well Mel Gibson and Heath Ledger are a couple of Australians who seemed to have done alright with their Revolutionary War movie. Johnny Depps Sleepy Hollow also referenced the Hessian mercenaries

Yeah, I remember that movies. I also remember a line, "We're not slaves, we're free." that threw me completely out of the movie. They really went out of the way to make the British look like a bunch of monsters and whitewashed the Americans.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

If you've ever read Herodotus, one of the interesting things is the Spartans going on and on about how awesome it is to be free but don't seem to be bothered by all the Helots they have as slaves back home.

The ancients didn't think of universal human rights like we do now. To them freedom was a privilege, not a right. Being free was awesome, but so was being right, or being strong etc. It's especially awesome to be free when you see how bad the alternative can be.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If you've ever read Herodotus, one of the interesting things is the Spartans going on and on about how awesome it is to be free but don't seem to be bothered by all the Helots they have as slaves back home. I agree, it would be an interesting topic for the game. There were Americans at the time who did not care for slavery, but they still had to work with people from the Carolinas if they wanted to win the war. Hell, even Jefferson recognized the evils of slavery, but then it's not like he did a whole lot about it.

Jefferson is his own entire can of worms, but all I will say on this is that he was an especially bad slave master in certain ways. It seems all his beautiful enlightenment sentiments were hypocritical.

That's a legitimate point of view. On the other hand, if Great Britain wanted an empire, that's just the cost of doing business and it's not fair to expect people who have no say in going to war that they should pay for it.

Eh, I get what you mean, but other colonies paid taxes. Americans didn’t because we made Britain a lot of money in raw resources, but finally being asked to pay taxes, mostly to pay for a war we barely did anything in is just…hard to sympathize with, for me.

Funnily enough, Americans thought they won the war as if Great Britain wasn't the one who did all the heavy lifting. From Great Britain's point of view, the colonies simply existed to be economically exploited with raw goods would be shipped from the Americas to Britain and they in turn would ship finished products back. Strangely enough, it took quite a while for the colonists to build up ire against King George. Most of the dissastisfaction was directed at Parliament and it wasn't until close to the outbreak of war that it was directed at George specifically.

Amongst the populace, sure. I just don’t believe for a second that Jefferson and the other southern founders weren’t keenly aware that Britain wasn’t far off from potentially banning slavery, with a king and prominent parliament members strongly disgusted by the practice, and the British populace not especially dependent on it anymore.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Finally, a game we can all agree on that has no problematic aspects!

Why we'll probably never see a Western RPG. RPGs based on historical colonialism are...challenging to make.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The ancients didn't think of universal human rights like we do now. To them freedom was a privilege, not a right. Being free was awesome, but so was being right, or being strong etc. It's especially awesome to be free when you see how bad the alternative can be.

“The ancients” isn’t a helpful category. For instance, square the about with Cyrus the Great and the First Persian Empire.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Why we'll probably never see a Western RPG. RPGs based on historical colonialism are...challenging to make.

I take that as a challenge.

I will make a game for westerns that depicts the old west in a mixture of realism (most cowboys Mexican, people like Bass Reeves running around, golden age of cocktails, Tombstone had multiple ice cream shops, but also oh here supernatural stuff).

Like I’ll probably never make a non-fantasy game of any kind, but a fantasy western is still a western.

 

[MGibster]

Eh, I get what you mean, but other colonies paid taxes. Americans didn’t because we made Britain a lot of money in raw resources, but finally being asked to pay taxes, mostly to pay for a war we barely did anything in is just…hard to sympathize with, for me.

Hey, all the 2.5 million people living in the colonies wanted was a little representation in Parliament. Tax them, sure, but shouldn't they have a say in how they're governed? Isn't that fair?

Amongst the populace, sure. I just don’t believe for a second that Jefferson and the other southern founders weren’t keenly aware that Britain wasn’t far off from potentially banning slavery, with a king and prominent parliament members strongly disgusted by the practice, and the British populace not especially dependent on it anymore.

With the American Civil War, we have ample evidence that slavery was the reason the South attempted to secede but we don't have that same evidence for the Revolutionary War. The truth is, like many people in the North who were disgusted by slavery, the British were more than happy to do business with slavers both before and after the war.

Why we'll probably never see a Western RPG. RPGs based on historical colonialism are...challenging to make.

Wasn't there a Dutch or Swedish company that just recently came out with a Western RPG within the last 3-4 years or so?

 

[Sacrosanct]

I take that as a challenge.

I will make a game for westerns that depicts the old west in a mixture of realism (most cowboys Mexican, people like Bass Reeves running around, golden age of cocktails, Tombstone had multiple ice cream shops, but also oh here supernatural stuff).

Like I’ll probably never make a non-fantasy game of any kind, but a fantasy western is still a western.

Years ago I tried my hand at a western fantasy rpg, and while I tried to be sensitive for the obvious things, I kept running into problems with the not-so-obvious things, like a big theme of what westerns are in general (expansion and taming the wilds, AKA colonial expansionism). I eventually shelved it because as I learned more from indigenous people, I didn't like how it turned out. It takes a lot more work then being inclusive on cover art (see below) or avoiding blatant stereotypes. That era was a giant onion, each layer a problem area.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Wasn't there a Dutch or Swedish company that just recently came out with a Western RPG within the last 3-4 years or so?

Let me amend. Creating a Western RPG as a white American is challenging.