Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jester47" data-source="post: 1918192" data-attributes="member: 2238">Rounser, we are talking about two different things.&nbsp; The problem with this whole thread is semantics.&nbsp; You are incorrectly using the word &quot;anachronism.&quot;&nbsp; An anachronism is somthing that is out of place in a time line.&nbsp; An SUV in greyhawk is not an anacronism.&nbsp; Its just a little (or maybe a lot in your opinion) weird.&nbsp; Good clerics casting divine spells after the cataclysm and before the War of the Lance in Dragonlance IS an anachronism because it violates the agreement that clerics cant do that in that time period.&nbsp; &nbsp; You are using anachronism to mean somthing that you don't think shoud belong in fantasy.&nbsp;&nbsp; There are many words to describe what you mean but &quot;anachronism&quot; is not the one.&nbsp; The phrase you are looking for is Non sequitur.&nbsp; Its not anachronisms that drive you crasy, its non sequitur elements.&nbsp;&nbsp; An SUV in Greyhawk is a non-sequitur.&nbsp; It could have a very valid and magical reason for being there, but as the setting goes the SUV does not fit into the unspoken expectations set by the source material.&nbsp; The noir/pulp elements of Eberron are not non sequiturs because that is set up in the background, art, and style of the setting.&nbsp; However having soldiers of the Third Reich show up is a non sequitur.&nbsp; An I agree with you that a DM has to be very careful when dropping a non sequitur into the game as it can and often does destroy the versimilitude.&nbsp; But done carefully and sparingly, both anachronisms and non sequiturs can add somthing to a game.&nbsp; non sequiter:&nbsp; An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. anachronism:&nbsp; The representation of someone or somthing as existing or an event as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order. Aaron.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jester47, post: 1918192, member: 2238"] Rounser, we are talking about two different things. The problem with this whole thread is semantics. You are incorrectly using the word "anachronism." An anachronism is somthing that is out of place in a time line. An SUV in greyhawk is not an anacronism. Its just a little (or maybe a lot in your opinion) weird. Good clerics casting divine spells after the cataclysm and before the War of the Lance in Dragonlance IS an anachronism because it violates the agreement that clerics cant do that in that time period. You are using anachronism to mean somthing that you don't think shoud belong in fantasy. There are many words to describe what you mean but "anachronism" is not the one. The phrase you are looking for is Non sequitur. Its not anachronisms that drive you crasy, its non sequitur elements. An SUV in Greyhawk is a non-sequitur. It could have a very valid and magical reason for being there, but as the setting goes the SUV does not fit into the unspoken expectations set by the source material. The noir/pulp elements of Eberron are not non sequiturs because that is set up in the background, art, and style of the setting. However having soldiers of the Third Reich show up is a non sequitur. An I agree with you that a DM has to be very careful when dropping a non sequitur into the game as it can and often does destroy the versimilitude. But done carefully and sparingly, both anachronisms and non sequiturs can add somthing to a game. non sequiter: An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. anachronism: The representation of someone or somthing as existing or an event as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order. Aaron. [/QUOTE]

Verification