Search results

Why can't we also talk about the realities of history that some people might want to address in their games? That seems like a perfectly valid topic to discuss as well.

Very much what I was trying to say, with less eloquent results.

Approaching history as exclusively fun is, in itself, a political position. If you're dealing with actual history, you're going to be dealing with a lot of ugliness. The choice to not address that ugliness is a political one.

Not only do I think your claim is false, I can present evidence that the exact opposite of what you claim is what's actually happening. Take the 2021 film The Last Duel. It's set in 1380s France, and is based on real events. I won't go into detail about the subject matter, for the sake of...

You can stop there, since this thread is specifically about historical Vikings, not fantasy pastiches of them. So there's one book, and 1/11th of another book.

Since you're the one claiming that they do not, surely you must already know the answer to this, right? Have you read these books? If not, how can you claim that certain things are no longer written about in "all of fiction"? It might help if you were actually specific in what you're referring...

Easy answer why: it's not profitable enough for them. RPG settings based on historical cultures are BY FAR my favourite thing in all of RPGdom. But I'm aware my tastes are relatively uncommon. Which means such things don't sell terribly well, which in turn means while it can be profitable for a...

That's not what poisoning the well means. And, as pointed out earlier, fans called it 5e long before WotC did. So blame the fans I guess?

The difference is they never claimed it was going to be a revision rather than a complete overhaul. It was explicitly always going to be very dfferent from 4e. It was designed specifically to be very different.

5e was explicitly a big departure from 4e. One D&D is not. Which makes using the term 6e an accusation of dishonesty towards the designers.

And yet you refer to it as 3.5, the publisher's term.

That's great, because we haven't stopped. That was the point. The claim that we have stopped is demonstrably false.

That's exactly what I meant.

Demonstrably false, even just within the RPG world. Castles & Crusades various Codexes based on historical cultures leap to mind as a start. The reality in general is actually that historically INaccurate materials are less acceptable, so you can't get away with whitewashing and apologia as...

It's like different groups approach the game differently, explaining why some posters claim something in the game is completely broken while others think it works just fine.

If you think that's worthy of respect, your standards for what is worthy of respect are far too low.

You have expressed that, it just doesn't affect the argument. Bipartisan genocide is still genocide. The idea that the good gods could not intervene directly because the evil gods might do something bad in return is completed defeated by the fact that the good gods agreed to participate in a...

What? No, the point is that they didn't try, not really. They didn't do nearly all of what was in their power to do. The interdiction against direct action is a facade, because the Cataclysm itself is direct action. "I'm not allowed to directly intervene to prevent this particular direct...

They can take it up with TDD.

There is no right answer to that question. It's subjective. People need to remember that where they personally draw the line is subjective.