Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9734736" data-attributes="member: 18">Nah.3/4/5 were humourless rubbish. Absolute rubbish.And no, they didn't "codify" the modern setting. 2E did. I've had this argument at great length with assorted 40K people, and it always ends the same way, the person claiming 2E didn't do that ends up admitting they weren't very familiar with 2E, because they started later than that.You see it with 40K podcasts even when they go back to 2E lore, they're always astonished, because some concept they thought was later is full-formed already there.Sure, you can define it that way, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimdark" target="_blank">most people don't</a> but you can, and in that case, Dark Sun has absolutely never, ever, even for one second been grimdark, because literally first adventure, which came packed into the Dark Sun boxed set in 1991, features the good guys killing Kalak and fundamentally changing the setting. So what are you even upset about lol?Also, most literary grimdark isn't by that token. Malazan isn't. The First Law isn't. None of Moorcock's stuff is. Black Company isn't. In fact, the only fantasy settings I can think of which are 100% definitely grimdark by that logic, Prince of Nothing and A Land Fit for Heroes. Which I think most fantasy readers would consider like ultra-grimdark.</blockquote>