Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 9404811"><p>Mine is too, and not trying to be disagreeable at all as I often share your views on history, but I tend not to think of history as a genre but as an academic subject. This seems a little pedantic to me. I think when people talk about historical fiction as a genre, they understand it is going to be impossible to get everything right, but that is a distinct genre from something like alt history. And there is space in between too (i.e. movies that try to get things right but will choose good drama over reality, or restructure events for the sake of story). I think the issue is most mediums don't do history, as in the field of history, well. I you make a movie about someone's life, that only allows you to tell the narrative (narrative in the sense historians use it, not journalists, pundits or novelists), but it leaves out both the analysis and the ability to compare conflicting primary sources (i.e. X may have happened but there are others who think Y happened, and BFG argues it was actually Z). But if a GM says they want to run a historical campaign, I take that to mean they want to run a campaign that is based as much as possible on real history and their research into the time period.</p></blockquote><p></p>