NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 7831210" data-attributes="member: 59082">Is this aesthetic or ideological or both? Meaning, do you take issue with "Celtic centaurs" because it is aesthetically jarring for you (sort of like pickles in your ice cream) or because you find it disrespectful?The key phrase is "The product needs to be." According to whom? Where is this "need" derived from?I'm not saying that such a product shouldn't be well-researched and such, I'm just questioning the "need" part. I mean, we get into endless semantic nit-picking: influenced by vs. embracing, etc.Well, I personally am pretty permissive and believe that the creator of a fantasy product can do pretty much whatever they want. I mean, obviously there are some things I would recommend against, but in the world of fantasy, i don't have an issue with an author picking and choosing, mixing and maxing different elements--because it is fantasy.Now if they created a "Historic Japan" product, like a GURPS sourcebook, then I think accuracy is more important.As for your question, "who gets to define what Samurai are," I think that's just it. No one in particular. I mean, is there an official Bureau of Samurai Lore in Japan? And if so, would they even care, especially considering the very limited profitability of such a product? I could see them taking issue with a blockbuster film that depicted Samurai in an innacurate way, but a fantasy RPG product that might be purchased by a few thousand people at most?</blockquote>

Verification