D&D General D&Difying History

[Stormonu]

I attempted an Ancient Greek campaign using one of the historical green books from 2nd edition AD&D. It didn't go very well as I don't think AD&D was well suited to that kind of thing. There are just too many changes one has to make and you get to the point where it no longer feels like you're playing D&D. So why bother using D&D at that point?

To me, the stickler always seems to revolve around with dealing with magic. D&D's default magic system is generally to flashy and powerful for "historical" games, where magic is hidden, restricted and/or difficult. It can be done, but as MGibster points out, there's other game systems that can handle it naturally where you don't have to throw out half of D&D's systems to get similar effects.

Though, Theros shows you can do history/real-world inspired campaigns if you're willing to bend to accept "magic is real" and "magic is common" of regular D&D play.

 

[billd91]

To me, the stickler always seems to revolve around with dealing with magic. D&D's default magic system is generally to flashy and powerful for "historical" games, where magic is hidden, restricted and/or difficult. It can be done, but as MGibster points out, there's other game systems that can handle it naturally where you don't have to throw out half of D&D's systems to get similar effects.

Though, Theros shows you can do history/real-world inspired campaigns if you're willing to bend to accept "magic is real" and "magic is common" of regular D&D play.

I'm not sure you have to throw out a lot of D&D's systems or default to a magic is common campaign. You do have to pare down spell lists to effects that are generally subtle. No fireballs, no Leomund's tiny huts, etc.

 

[schneeland]

We played two (somewhat) historical campaigns using D&D3.x in the early 00s - one happened in India before the colonization (or rather, a pulp movie version of India), the other, which unfortunately died somewhere in the middle, played in Constantinople shortly before its fall. In both cases, everybody just played human and there were less magic items than usual (though we never had too many of them even in our regular fantasy campaigns), but that was basically all the change w.r.t. mechanics.
Today, I would probably use another system (maybe Mythras or OpenQuest) instead of a d20 system, but back then we used the D&D mechanics for a lot of things.

 

[MNblockhead]

No. Never had much interest in running a game that tried to be historically accurate in any way. Depending on the DM, I could see enjoying playing in such a campaign, but I fear that there would be a lot of lecturing about what my character says, does, knows, is anachronistic. I like to read history, but I don't want to have to do a lot of homework to play a game.

 

[Voadam]

Does a d20 modern game with hidden magic type stuff count?

Everyone was human with some connection to the supernatural and some secret our secret organization was blackmailing us with. Very X-Files/Delta Green/Conspiracy X/Warehouse 23.

I played an Aglican priest who became a monster hunter and eventually a paladin type custom prestige class. First meeting the rest of the party my character brought a tray of deviled eggs. No magic or even a gun for my PC for about the first half of the campaign. My eventual summoned mount was a K-Car.

Investigating a haunted Ikea built over the site of an early Quaker prison that ended poorly.

Aliens.

Cthulhu fungi things.

Mothmen.

Illuminati.

A pact with The King of TV.

Civil War re-enactor Wild Hunt.

Illithid plot tied into a fast food chain.

 

[Reynard]

Does a d20 modern game with hidden magic type stuff count?

Only if it was explicitly set in Earth's past.

 

[GuyBoy]

I’ve never actually done it yet but one day I hope to run a game set in a historically accurate Europe in the year 1,000.
The game would be set initially in Normandy and England and would play on the (at the time very real) fear that the turning of the Millenium would bring about an apocalypse of evil. Kind of like a millenium bug but with demons.

I’ve taught 1066 era history for some years so it would be based on an era of history that is dear to me.

 

[MGibster]

No. Never had much interest in running a game that tried to be historically accurate in any way. Depending on the DM, I could see enjoying playing in such a campaign, but I fear that there would be a lot of lecturing about what my character says, does, knows, is anachronistic. I like to read history, but I don't want to have to do a lot of homework to play a game.

It can be difficult for players to wrap their head around playing a character with a very different perspective from their own. I suspect one of the reasons D&D is so popular is because the "good" guys embody modern western liberal values like individuality, freedom of speech, secularism, rule of law, and political freedom (insofar as politics comes into play during games). This is true not only of games set in our past but also games where social norms do not match modern sensibilties.

I do run games set in historical eras, most notably Call of Cthulhu, and what I like to remember is that while social norms were different back then, there were always oddballs who marched to the beat of their own drum. As a GM, I don't like to tell players what their characters would think of something. The 1920s is sometimes called the nadir of race relations in the United States post Civil War, but you'll find people from many walks of life who thought everyone deserved to be treated equally regardless of race or religion. So it's not out of place for a character in a campaign from that era to have similar ideas. They're not going to be in the majority, but they exist. So there's no need to stifle player agency here.

Nor should there be any need for a player to do homework. For the 1920s, it's at once familiar and unfamiliar to players. They have a lot of what we're used to in modern life, like automobiles, telephones, radio, accountants, etc., etc., but it's different enough to be just a bit unfamiliar. And it's not like I know everything even though my speciality in graduate school was American history from 1877-1939. There are a lot of little things I either never knew or escaped my notice. But during my last CoC game, it was a lot of fun seeing the Investigators try to locate a phone, having to explain to them what a party line was, and then making it clear that someone could alway be listening in to a call.

 

[Reynard]

I like to read history, but I don't want to have to do a lot of homework to play a game.

That's interesting. I have always thought that there was more "homework" when playing in a published campaign setting. As someone who enjoys history myself, i feel like I have a pretty good (if shallow) knowledge base and can "figure out" a historical period more easily than, say, the Dalelands in the year 1312 or whatever.

 

[Voadam]

Only if it was explicitly set in Earth's past.

I should have specified it was consciously set in a vague "a couple years in the past" so we would not be dealing with then-currently ongoing political issues.