Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3553592" data-attributes="member: 30001">From what I can tell on this thread little effort has been made to determine what would constitute &quot;medieval&quot;.&nbsp; There were &quot;swords&quot; in the Middle Ages, and there are &quot;swords&quot; in DnD.&nbsp; Nobody has given that a point value to weigh it against the degree to which something like a money economy, or whatever, would stack up against it.&nbsp; Most people who wish to be pedantic in this would rather show off their knowledge of the differences in Medieval vs. DnD rather than provide relatively obvious and trite examples of the similarities.&nbsp; Plus there's the faction that treats this issue as a proxy battle for the edition wars - hardly a good environment for subtlety or restraint.&nbsp; If people want their nose-rings and mohawks bad enough, anything goes.So for example - without the historical Middle Ages, you can't explain familiars, or even where the term comes from.&nbsp; I could list these elements all day, but I'd be wasting my time as the burden should have been on one of the many people saying &quot;X is nothing like Y&quot; to at least establish their criteria.So IMO the &quot;vast majority of opinions&quot; aren't shedding any light on this issue.&nbsp; A is like B, and A is not like B.&nbsp; It's simple, however nuanced, and apparently just outside the grasp of what this thread seems capable of.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 3553592, member: 30001"] From what I can tell on this thread little effort has been made to determine what would constitute "medieval". There were "swords" in the Middle Ages, and there are "swords" in DnD. Nobody has given that a point value to weigh it against the degree to which something like a money economy, or whatever, would stack up against it. Most people who wish to be pedantic in this would rather show off their knowledge of the differences in Medieval vs. DnD rather than provide relatively obvious and trite examples of the similarities. Plus there's the faction that treats this issue as a proxy battle for the edition wars - hardly a good environment for subtlety or restraint. If people want their nose-rings and mohawks bad enough, anything goes. So for example - without the historical Middle Ages, you can't explain familiars, or even where the term comes from. I could list these elements all day, but I'd be wasting my time as the burden should have been on one of the many people saying "X is nothing like Y" to at least establish their criteria. So IMO the "vast majority of opinions" aren't shedding any light on this issue. A is like B, and A is not like B. It's simple, however nuanced, and apparently just outside the grasp of what this thread seems capable of. [/QUOTE]

Verification