Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 7842187" data-attributes="member: 18">It's a terrible criticism made by ignorant people who you shouldn't be listening to because now they've embarrassed you by having you repeat it.D&D is the exactly same thing - a synthesis of various fantasy elements in a somewhat clumsy way. Also, Warhammer is far, far less derivative from D&D than you seem to think. It's separately derivative from similar sources - it takes far more from Michael Moorcock, and takes stuff directly from Tolkien, rather than filtering it through a D&D lens. A good example are the Orcs, which are derivative of Tolkien's Orcs, not D&D's modified Orcs and later became their own wildly wacky almost-sci-fi thing. They're vastly better developed and more original than anything D&D has ever done with orcs or goblins (though Eberron's goblins are pretty great). I mean, they develop from spores for god's sake. They're sentient fungus. And you're claiming they derive from D&D's grey-skinned pig-men orcs from the 1970s? No. Just no. They're smarter than those, too, more like Tolkien's Orcs again.Bretonnia isn't derivative of D&D, and you're ignorance about the origins of Bretonnia is showing here. When it was first added, it was basically "France immediately before the Revolution", with poncy 18th-century-style Aristos and a rebellious underclass. Later they retcon'd into into a darkside version of the whole King Arthur deal, with a strong French flavour. There's nothing in D&D particularly like it, and it's not derivative of D&D.In terms of Elves and Dwarves, D&D is in many cases derivative of Warhammer. But both are directly pulling from Tolkien. Still, a lot of the visual design D&D post-1990 has used for Elves and Dwarves is in fact derivative of Warhammer. Warhammer certainly isn't derivative of D&D here - their Elves and Dwarves have far darker, more Silmarillion-esque histories, and neither is "Lawful Good".None of it is "truly original" (even all the Chaos stuff is inspired by Michael Moorcock's books, albeit really heavily developed - Moorcock is also why D&D has Lawful and Chaotic alignments, note, and the planar structure it does), but the idea that it derives from D&D is laughable (spurred to exist by D&D becoming popular, perhaps, but that's different), and the idea that that criticism makes any sense in the context of D&D, which is exactly the same mish-mash of this and that, is just bizarre.Orc-wise, let's talk who is derivative of who:Orc, D&D, 1977 - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orc_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)#/media/File:D&DOrc.JPG" target="_blank">Orc (Dungeons & Dragons) - Wikipedia</a>Quite clearly pig-men, which they are still described as in 2E, and depicted as, and have grey skin.Orc, Warhammer, 1986 - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_Bowl#/media/File:Blood_Bowl_cover_photo.JPG" target="_blank">Blood Bowl - Wikipedia</a>Already by 1986 Warhammer Orcs (seen left) are the classic short-nosed, musclebound, green-skinned orcs we are used to in various things.Orc, D&D, 1993 - <a href="https://www.tumblr.com/search/2e%20d%26d" target="_blank">2e d&d | Tumblr</a> - The image on the left, from Iuz The Evil, 1993. Still with the pig-men.Warhammer Orcs haven't changed since the 1986 image, not significantly (and indeed looked like that earlier in the 1980s, but I wanted an image with a hard and undeniable date)Yet let's see how D&D Orcs looked later:[URL unfurl="true"]https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Orc[/URL]Wow even better they show 1E/2E/3E/4E/5E progression (the 2E one is from 1994, note, when the change to copy Warhammer Orcs had begun). You can quite clearly see that D&D Orcs are derivative of Warhammer Orcs, not vice-versa.</blockquote>

Verification