Yeah- there used to be a button for forking a thread, but now you have to do it the old-fashioned way again.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
History, Mythology, Art and RPGs
- Thread starter Galloglaich
- Start date
Ugulu the Barbarian
First Post
Alchemist stuff (mostly) Fork-ed over to D&D Legacy Houserules ... >.>
Feel free to go back to whatever you were discussing before
Feel free to go back to whatever you were discussing before
Galloglaich
First Post
Can somebody link to the new thread? I couldn't find it.
G.
G.
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
Ugulu the Barbarian
First Post
Sorry about that ... Sometimes silly little stuff like that doesn't occur to me. 
So, over on Giant in the Playground, theirs a discussion on Deadliest Warrior. They say the show doesn't do research because the fight scenes are unrealistic. I say the actual fight scenes don't matter as that just a show which represents the numbers. What do people think about Deadliest Warrior. Is it an accurate portrayal of historical ... weaponry? Is it a good source for a historical campaign?
So, over on Giant in the Playground, theirs a discussion on Deadliest Warrior. They say the show doesn't do research because the fight scenes are unrealistic. I say the actual fight scenes don't matter as that just a show which represents the numbers. What do people think about Deadliest Warrior. Is it an accurate portrayal of historical ... weaponry? Is it a good source for a historical campaign?
Matthew_
First Post
Basically, no. Some of its tests are more valid than others, and there obviously is great enthusiasm for the subject matter, but the primary purpose of the show is to entertain, not to educate, and that frequently shows through. It may well be that the broad conclusions that they reach are accurate within certain parameters, but from what I have watched of it I was left with the impression that it is a show prone to oversimplification and sensationalism. That is not particularly surprising, as most television history follows that paradigm, for obvious reasons.
As to its value to a "historical campaign", a lot depends on what you want out of it, but on the whole you would be better served getting hold of a well regarded book on the subject you are interested in. Mind you, I said pretty much the same thing on Giant in the Playground, so my opinion is hardly going to be much different from what was said there, which I think you are somewhat mischaracterising. The fact that the fight reconstructions at the end of each show were often ridiculous is emblematic of the problems with using the show as a touchstone for historical credibility, not the main issue.
As to its value to a "historical campaign", a lot depends on what you want out of it, but on the whole you would be better served getting hold of a well regarded book on the subject you are interested in. Mind you, I said pretty much the same thing on Giant in the Playground, so my opinion is hardly going to be much different from what was said there, which I think you are somewhat mischaracterising. The fact that the fight reconstructions at the end of each show were often ridiculous is emblematic of the problems with using the show as a touchstone for historical credibility, not the main issue.
Galloglaich
First Post
I would echo Matthews feelings about Deadliest Warriors.
It's a neat idea and I wish somebody would do it a bit more seriously (along the lines of Mythbusters) but sadly it's really more of a 'cheap thrill'.. That said I really wanted to like it, I do watch it, it's a bit of a guilty pleasure, I enjoy seeing all the test-cutting and test-shooting, and they have even occasionally demonstrated some useful memes like the (to most people) surprising idea that ancient armor can actually stop bullets, or seeing a Sikh chakrum used successfully to cut through a big hunk of meat which is something I'd never seen before.
My assessment boils down like this, each episode of that show puts out a certain number of memes or ideas, lets say for sake of argument 10 memes per show. Of that number, typically 5 or 6 are at least partly wrong, and 3 or 4 are outright misinformation. It varies a lot depending which advocates they get for each side. For example, in each episode there is usually at least one weapon which is totally fake, like a 30 pound club, and most of the others are really cheap poorly made replicas. On one episode they might use halfway decent riveted mail for a test, on the very next episode they might use butted mail which did not exist in an Historical European context (except in modern Renaissance Faires).
These 'experts' on the show are not actual academic or even amateur Historical Martial Arts experts but appear to be low level stunt or fight coordinators who specialize in this or that genre, and probably do most of their work for Sci Fi Channel. Some are better than others. So no, I personally wouldn't recommend it as a direct source for an historical campaign.
That said, there is a pretty WIDE gap between historical reality and the version of it portrayed in most RPGs. So maybe you could argue D.W. is somewhere in between a Teifling warrrior carrying a 9 foot spiked fanged bat winged swod and say, a real 16th Century Landsknecht.
I would say if you wanted to use Deadliest warrior as a source, use it as a point of departure. If you see an archtype on D.W. that you hadn't heard of in an RPG before and are interested in, use some other sources for further research. I'd reccomend those Osprey military books as a good starting point, they are probably 80% or 90% accurate (roughly the opposite ratio of D.W.). And you can find an Osprey Military book for practically every single kind of warrior who ever existed in history in any part of the world, from an Aztec Jaguar Warrior to a Knight Templar.
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Aztec-Mixtec-Zapotec-Armies-Men-at-Arms/dp/1855321599"]Amazon.com: "Aztec, Mixtec and Zapotec Armies" (Men-at-Arms) (9781855321595): John Pohl, Angus McBride: Books[/ame]
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Knight-Templar-1120-1312-Warrior-Nicholson/dp/1841766704/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1279749216&sr=1-1"]Amazon.com: Knight Templar 1120-1312 (Warrior) (9781841766706):…[/ame]
And some of them are even availble online for free on google books and other sources.
There are also many good videos out there such as Mike Loades "Weapons that Made Britain" and (though Matthew would disagree with me) Terry Jones various BBC documentaries, particularly his "Barbarians" and "Medieval Lives" series which I thought was quite good.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEMwcSGauY8"]YouTube - Weapons that Made Britain: The Sword (Part 1)[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-BQpfeKtWE&feature=related"]YouTube - Terry Jones' Medieval Lives- Outlaw 1[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ekbzbd0gOLs"]YouTube - Terry Jones' Barbarians - "Savage Goths"[/ame]
G.
It's a neat idea and I wish somebody would do it a bit more seriously (along the lines of Mythbusters) but sadly it's really more of a 'cheap thrill'.. That said I really wanted to like it, I do watch it, it's a bit of a guilty pleasure, I enjoy seeing all the test-cutting and test-shooting, and they have even occasionally demonstrated some useful memes like the (to most people) surprising idea that ancient armor can actually stop bullets, or seeing a Sikh chakrum used successfully to cut through a big hunk of meat which is something I'd never seen before.
My assessment boils down like this, each episode of that show puts out a certain number of memes or ideas, lets say for sake of argument 10 memes per show. Of that number, typically 5 or 6 are at least partly wrong, and 3 or 4 are outright misinformation. It varies a lot depending which advocates they get for each side. For example, in each episode there is usually at least one weapon which is totally fake, like a 30 pound club, and most of the others are really cheap poorly made replicas. On one episode they might use halfway decent riveted mail for a test, on the very next episode they might use butted mail which did not exist in an Historical European context (except in modern Renaissance Faires).
These 'experts' on the show are not actual academic or even amateur Historical Martial Arts experts but appear to be low level stunt or fight coordinators who specialize in this or that genre, and probably do most of their work for Sci Fi Channel. Some are better than others. So no, I personally wouldn't recommend it as a direct source for an historical campaign.
That said, there is a pretty WIDE gap between historical reality and the version of it portrayed in most RPGs. So maybe you could argue D.W. is somewhere in between a Teifling warrrior carrying a 9 foot spiked fanged bat winged swod and say, a real 16th Century Landsknecht.
I would say if you wanted to use Deadliest warrior as a source, use it as a point of departure. If you see an archtype on D.W. that you hadn't heard of in an RPG before and are interested in, use some other sources for further research. I'd reccomend those Osprey military books as a good starting point, they are probably 80% or 90% accurate (roughly the opposite ratio of D.W.). And you can find an Osprey Military book for practically every single kind of warrior who ever existed in history in any part of the world, from an Aztec Jaguar Warrior to a Knight Templar.
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Aztec-Mixtec-Zapotec-Armies-Men-at-Arms/dp/1855321599"]Amazon.com: "Aztec, Mixtec and Zapotec Armies" (Men-at-Arms) (9781855321595): John Pohl, Angus McBride: Books[/ame]
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Knight-Templar-1120-1312-Warrior-Nicholson/dp/1841766704/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1279749216&sr=1-1"]Amazon.com: Knight Templar 1120-1312 (Warrior) (9781841766706):…[/ame]
And some of them are even availble online for free on google books and other sources.
There are also many good videos out there such as Mike Loades "Weapons that Made Britain" and (though Matthew would disagree with me) Terry Jones various BBC documentaries, particularly his "Barbarians" and "Medieval Lives" series which I thought was quite good.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEMwcSGauY8"]YouTube - Weapons that Made Britain: The Sword (Part 1)[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-BQpfeKtWE&feature=related"]YouTube - Terry Jones' Medieval Lives- Outlaw 1[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ekbzbd0gOLs"]YouTube - Terry Jones' Barbarians - "Savage Goths"[/ame]
G.
Last edited:
Ugulu the Barbarian
First Post
Why! Why doesnt my sound work!! ... T.T
Edit: I wanna watch the video
Edit: I wanna watch the video
Galloglaich
First Post
Get more mileage out of your old javelin with the weavers beam technique:
Arms & Armor
This is a trick which goes back a very long way, to pharonic and biblical times, and remained in use through the Renaissance.
G.
Arms & Armor
This is a trick which goes back a very long way, to pharonic and biblical times, and remained in use through the Renaissance.
G.
Galloglaich
First Post
Thanks for this thread! While I don't think we'd agree on what constitutes verisimilitude or historical "realism" in games, I certainly prefer Low Fantasy inspired by historical personages and will find this thread quite useful
Do you have any interest in explaining whast you think constitutes verisimilitude or historical "realism" in games?
G.
