Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 3558435" data-attributes="member: 151">So the terms Medieval and Dark Ages are, themselves, considered anachronistic now, yes?The question of whether D&amp;D was ever truly 'medieval' is, I think, something of a misnomer.&nbsp; IMHO, Gygax clearly was attempting to 'kitchen-sink' all of his favorite concepts from all of his favorite literature, movies and TV shows as the whim struck him.&nbsp; So we see elements that are inspired by Tolkien, Vance, Howard, Lieber, Anderson, Lovecraft and whoever else passed his fancy at that particular moment.D&amp;D has medieval window dressing, to be sure...but so many elements of a classical medieval society are simply not present.&nbsp; D&amp;D characters are inherently mobile...they travel from place to place with ease.&nbsp; They have ready access to technologies that, in the real world, were spread out over a vast array of time.&nbsp; There is no cultural or technological disparity nor very little scarcity of certain resources.&nbsp; A great deal of lip service is paid to the idea of such things, but the reality of the rules, game books and modules don't back them up.&nbsp; Characters seem to be able to ignore or somehow sidestep things like the feudal system until or unless it becomes necessary to do so.&nbsp; The monarchs of Greyhawk being high-level characters was an act performed out of necessity...if the PCs become 14th level characters, what's to stop Robilar from killing the Overking and taking power?&nbsp; Better make him an 18th level thief.Things like conflicting currencies aren't really in the game...and why should they be?&nbsp; That's not really very much fun.&nbsp; Neither is dealing with incurable illnesses, overpopulation (or rapid depopulation), decades-long wars, famines and other things that aren't really that interesting in large doses.&nbsp; I keep thinking of the character of Hob Gadling in Gaiman's Sandman when he visits a modern Renfaire and laments how it's a sugar-coated version of the past.&nbsp; D&amp;D is like that, and for good reason.D&amp;D is medieval in the same way that Robert Boorman's Excalibur is medieval...which is to say not really that much at all.&nbsp; But that misses the point: it's as medieval as it needs to be to enable the game to be fun.&nbsp; Which is fine by me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 3558435, member: 151"] So the terms Medieval and Dark Ages are, themselves, considered anachronistic now, yes? The question of whether D&D was ever truly 'medieval' is, I think, something of a misnomer. IMHO, Gygax clearly was attempting to 'kitchen-sink' all of his favorite concepts from all of his favorite literature, movies and TV shows as the whim struck him. So we see elements that are inspired by Tolkien, Vance, Howard, Lieber, Anderson, Lovecraft and whoever else passed his fancy at that particular moment. D&D has medieval window dressing, to be sure...but so many elements of a classical medieval society are simply not present. D&D characters are inherently mobile...they travel from place to place with ease. They have ready access to technologies that, in the real world, were spread out over a vast array of time. There is no cultural or technological disparity nor very little scarcity of certain resources. A great deal of lip service is paid to the idea of such things, but the reality of the rules, game books and modules don't back them up. Characters seem to be able to ignore or somehow sidestep things like the feudal system until or unless it becomes necessary to do so. The monarchs of Greyhawk being high-level characters was an act performed out of necessity...if the PCs become 14th level characters, what's to stop Robilar from killing the Overking and taking power? Better make him an 18th level thief. Things like conflicting currencies aren't really in the game...and why should they be? That's not really very much fun. Neither is dealing with incurable illnesses, overpopulation (or rapid depopulation), decades-long wars, famines and other things that aren't really that interesting in large doses. I keep thinking of the character of Hob Gadling in Gaiman's Sandman when he visits a modern Renfaire and laments how it's a sugar-coated version of the past. D&D is like that, and for good reason. D&D is medieval in the same way that Robert Boorman's Excalibur is medieval...which is to say not really that much at all. But that misses the point: it's as medieval as it needs to be to enable the game to be fun. Which is fine by me. [/QUOTE]

Verification