|
|
Post by cadriel on Feb 22, 2013 10:27:03 GMT -6
In the fantasy post-Roman world I'm running, I've used demihumans and nonhumans in the sense of "They've been there all along." They're somewhat rare, but in my case the Hunnic and Vandalic federations included some number of orcs, goblins live in the mountains, and other stuff is rare but lives out where civilization isn't. Hobbits are treated just like humans (although they have their own dialect of vulgar Latin), while elves are clannish and live in the forests and speak Sindarin. Nothing particularly problematic as long as it's an "If you don't push too hard at the boundaries" kind of world.
|
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Feb 27, 2013 2:56:41 GMT -6
What would hobbit be in the Vulgar? Homunculus?  Nanus would be reserved for dwarf obviously. Hobbitus is ghastly, and I'm confident the Doctor would agree. Hmm... |
|
|
|
Post by aher on Feb 27, 2013 4:26:26 GMT -6
Trying to figure out how demihumans and nonhumans fit in this context, if at all. Any thoughts anyone would care to share would be warmly received. Ideas I'm already bouncing around include: - Everyone is human but folks from different geographical areas have demihuman characteristics. (e.g. "Elves" are actually humans from Scandanavia, "Dwarves" are from the Alps, etc...)
- Avoid the whole moral issue of Christianity vs. Islam by making Saracens goblins.
- Humans only. No other races at all. Monsters are very rare and in out of the way places.
Make your Northern Europeans hobbits... After all, In Northern Europe, human height reached a maximum around 800 A.D., but then dropped to a minimum in the 17th century before climbing back up again. ...according to the article, " Why Are the Dutch So Tall?" RE "Saracens goblins": Just remember, at the Siege of Ma'arra (1098), the crusaders ate the Saracens and their babies. Do your PCs really want to eat goblins??? Quoting Fulcher of Chartres: I shudder to tell that many of our people, harassed by the madness of excessive hunger, cut pieces from the buttocks of the Saracens already dead there, which they cooked, but when it was not yet roasted enough by the fire, they devoured it with savage mouth. Quoting Radulph of Caen: Some people said that, constrained by the lack of food, they boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots, impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled. Come to think of it, in Dark Sun (2E), halflings were cannibals... |
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Feb 27, 2013 9:48:48 GMT -6
Trying to figure out how demihumans and nonhumans fit in this context, if at all. Any thoughts anyone would care to share would be warmly received. Ideas I'm already bouncing around include: - Avoid the whole moral issue of Christianity vs. Islam by making Saracens goblins.
Would that avoid the issue, or make a rather stark and ethnocentric statement on the issue? Or were you going to make the Christians trolls, too? |
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Feb 27, 2013 9:52:29 GMT -6
If you anticipate the characters being around any battles, Infidel by Richard Berg could give a feel for period warfare. |
|
|
|
Post by sulldawga on Feb 27, 2013 19:49:50 GMT -6
Ideas I'm already bouncing around include: - Avoid the whole moral issue of Christianity vs. Islam by making Saracens goblins.
Would that avoid the issue, or make a rather stark and ethnocentric statement on the issue? Or were you going to make the Christians trolls, too? Yeah, I had already discarded that one. I guess I had hoped that I could find a few gamers who wouldn't be making a big deal out of all of this, but so far most of the comments on this board are very negative. I'm thinking I shouldn't bother at all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 20:04:34 GMT -6
Make your Northern Europeans hobbits... After all, In Northern Europe, human height reached a maximum around 800 A.D., but then dropped to a minimum in the 17th century before climbing back up again. ...according to the article, " Why Are the Dutch So Tall?" RE "Saracens goblins": Just remember, at the Siege of Ma'arra (1098), the crusaders ate the Saracens and their babies. Do your PCs really want to eat goblins??? Quoting Fulcher of Chartres: I shudder to tell that many of our people, harassed by the madness of excessive hunger, cut pieces from the buttocks of the Saracens already dead there, which they cooked, but when it was not yet roasted enough by the fire, they devoured it with savage mouth. Quoting Radulph of Caen: Some people said that, constrained by the lack of food, they boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots, impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled. Come to think of it, in Dark Sun (2E), halflings were cannibals... Medieval humans were never as short as hobbits, though. The only extant humans who are 4' tall on average are Pygmies (IIRC), excluding dwarfs, of course. |
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 28, 2013 0:19:49 GMT -6
Would that avoid the issue, or make a rather stark and ethnocentric statement on the issue? Or were you going to make the Christians trolls, too? Yeah, I had already discarded that one. I guess I had hoped that I could find a few gamers who wouldn't be making a big deal out of all of this, but so far most of the comments on this board are very negative. I'm thinking I shouldn't bother at all. I wouldn't let the comments of a few cynics bother you. What's important are the gamers who are going to playing in your group. Have you asked anyone you normally play with, at your FLGS, or some people to PBEM? I mean I for one would love a game like this. |
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Feb 28, 2013 6:39:15 GMT -6
I guess I had hoped that I could find a few gamers who wouldn't be making a big deal out of all of this, but so far most of the comments on this board are very negative. I'm thinking I shouldn't bother at all. I wouldn't let the comments of a few cynics bother you. What's important are the gamers who are going to playing in your group. Have you asked anyone you normally play with, at your FLGS, or some people to PBEM? I mean I for one would love a game like this. I don't think most of the comments here have been negative; perhaps that makes me a cynic? I would also enjoy adventuring in the time of the Crusades. But I guess the thoughts I cared to share were not warmly received. Please allow me to try again. Trying to figure out how demihumans and nonhumans fit in this context, if at all. Any thoughts anyone would care to share would be warmly received. Ideas I'm already bouncing around include: - Avoid the whole moral issue of Christianity vs. Islam by making Saracens goblins.
I think your game would be much better if you did not do this. Yeah, I had already discarded that one. Awesome! If you anticipate the characters being around any battles, Infidel by Richard Berg could give a feel for period warfare. I still think this could be helpful. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonzavoda on Feb 28, 2013 6:48:19 GMT -6
What a troll thread this turned out to be. Is there an ignore button on the forum?
|
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Feb 28, 2013 8:05:47 GMT -6
What a troll thread this turned out to be. Is there an ignore button on the forum? Did I just go from a negative cynic to a troll? I seem to consistently fail at positive contribution to this community, which is not my intent. I'm going to delete my account, which should address the lack of an ignore function. I hope the absence of further posts from me will in some small way make the forum more enjoyable for others, and demonstrate that I sincerely do not wish to retain any ability to potentially troll any threads. |
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Feb 28, 2013 8:06:02 GMT -6
I guess I had hoped that I could find a few gamers who wouldn't be making a big deal out of all of this, but so far most of the comments on this board are very negative. I'm thinking I shouldn't bother at all. I think it is a cool idea for a game and you should still bother. I hope you are able to continue productive discussion of further ideas for your campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonzavoda on Feb 28, 2013 10:16:14 GMT -6
What a troll thread this turned out to be. Is there an ignore button on the forum? Did I just go from a negative cynic to a troll? I seem to consistently fail at positive contribution to this community, which is not my intent. I'm going to delete my account, which should address the lack of an ignore function. I hope the absence of further posts from me will in some small way make the forum more enjoyable for others, and demonstrate that I sincerely do not wish to retain any ability to potentially troll any threads. You weren't the droid I was wanting to ignore. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2013 11:22:14 GMT -6
Did I just go from a negative cynic to a troll? I seem to consistently fail at positive contribution to this community, which is not my intent. I'm going to delete my account, which should address the lack of an ignore function. I hope the absence of further posts from me will in some small way make the forum more enjoyable for others, and demonstrate that I sincerely do not wish to retain any ability to potentially troll any threads. I really wish you would reconsider your decision to depart the forum. Discussion may get a bit intense around here, but it is only because it is a gathering of really smart folks (and the egos that arise from being such). You are welcome here. I'm asking you to please come back. |
|
|
|
Post by sulldawga on Feb 28, 2013 12:42:26 GMT -6
Did I just go from a negative cynic to a troll? I seem to consistently fail at positive contribution to this community, which is not my intent. I'm going to delete my account, which should address the lack of an ignore function. I hope the absence of further posts from me will in some small way make the forum more enjoyable for others, and demonstrate that I sincerely do not wish to retain any ability to potentially troll any threads. You weren't the droid I was wanting to ignore. Yeah, I didn't think you were trolling either. Your comment was a bit cynical but, quite frankly, spot on and relevant. I was reacting more to the accumulation of negative comments from a number of folks. I mean, seriously, if someone's got an axe to grind with Crusaders, that's fine. But maybe this thread ain't the place to express it. Anyway, g-bat, don't quit because of this comment. |
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 28, 2013 13:23:35 GMT -6
Just to clarify my comment wasn't directed at anyone. It was more or less just some morale boosting to sulldawga, because I think it's an awesome idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by derv on Feb 28, 2013 19:51:47 GMT -6
Though my earlier post may not have been encouraging, it was simply based on my experience. But I think sulldawga should carry on as well. To me, this is an awsome historical time period that is rich in possibilities. It's just a challenge to sidestep some very polarizing issues.
It might be interesting to look more into the later crusades. The Teutonic Order of Knights and the Battle of Grumwald might give a different spin on things. This was essentially a Christian vs Christian conflict. The crusades were not all about the holy land.
Then again, who said a campaign set during this time period even has to be based on history. An alternative history with different agendas maybe?
|
|
|
|
Post by aher on Mar 1, 2013 6:41:06 GMT -6
Interesting subject. I've always found it difficult to mix this subject with gaming because it has alot of religious hot buttons. Yeah, the trick will be to find some mature adults who can play a campaign like this without it devolving into a quagmire of religious BS. That's not the game I'd like to run. One meta-gaming approach I found that really works: If you start your campaign in your FLGS, say in a weekly game, you'll no doubt attract a large number of players. After a few weeks or a few months of gaming, you'll know exactly which players are the "mature adults" and which are ruining the game for everybody. At that point, privately invite the mature gamers to a "private game" held at your house or some other private location. You can explain the situation to them: The univited players simply aren't mature enough to handle the game, and you can't take all the BS. Once you get your private game up and running, cancel the game at the FLGS. Be nice about it. You can say that you can no longer run the game due to time constraints. Alternatively, you could continue your "public game" at the FLGS, but make changes to avoid the hot button issues. You can keep these issues going in your "side game" since the players there can handle it. @giantbat: I hope you decide to stay. Your posts are always thoughtful, concise, relevant. And besides, I'm likely the "troll" and "droid" referred to above. It's true that I have no great love for crusaders, but that doesn't mean I am in any way trying to subvert sulldawga's efforts here. In fact, as I stated in my second post, I gave sulldawga a +1/Exalt for trying to make his campaign authentic to "what life was like in the Levant in the 11th or 12th century," a goal stated in the OP. That's highly admirable. And tricky to accomplish. I apologize if my posts about crusaders came off as trolling. WRT "an ignore button on the forum": Proboards has code for this function here, but an admin would have to add it to the site. If you use Firefox, you could probably whip up a quick greasemonkey script to handle this functionality on the client side--a "blacklist" for users you don't like. I'm not saying this to be inflammatory, I truly want to help. There's no reason you should have to put up with posts/users you find objectionable. Life is too short. Personally, I would never use an "ignore" button, since I find value in each and every person's posts, even the snarky ones. However, if the original poster has a problem with the tone of the responses he is getting, please say so. For example, he could clarify: "I'm not interested in any more criticisms of crusaders, it's not really helping me towards my goals." And if he has a problem with one particular user's posts, it wouldn't be out-of-line to PM that user, and ask him politely to stop derailing your thread--even if that user were me, I wouldn't take offense.  |
|
premmy
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 295
|
Post by premmy on Mar 1, 2013 8:03:12 GMT -6
I guess I had hoped that I could find a few gamers who wouldn't be making a big deal out of all of this, but so far most of the comments on this board are very negative. I'm thinking I shouldn't bother at all. Personally, I think this is a very intriguing project and you should go on with it. And use proper humans, none of this "demis masquarading as humans" bullcrap. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonzavoda on Mar 1, 2013 8:15:22 GMT -6
Life is to short not to use an ignore button. Let me be clear, I'd love to use an ignore button for you, aher. I don't know why giantbat thought I was referring to him.
As a reader I don't find your posts helpful, pleasant or enjoyable. I don't think you post to help but to beat your own particular hobbyhorse, and I object to the cruelty of animal totems or imaginary childhood steeds and companions. You aren't going to find an authentic non-subjective account of what life was like in the Levant in the past year let alone the 11th or 12th century, and this is about running an enjoyable game not
an attempt to recreate history.
I would suggest, as source material, adventure fiction and film for an adventure game, blended in with whatever fantasy elements seem most suitable. Ivanhoe, Cadfael, Black Adder, perhaps some Warhammer for examples of fantasy races in a fantasy euro-medieval setting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Mar 1, 2013 12:36:22 GMT -6
Don’t forget about the chivalric romances: Gerusalemme liberata (Jerusalem Delivered) ( wiki), which is is a straight up “fantasy First Crusade,” is directly up your alley and was a hugely popular work. Orlando furioso ( part two) ( wiki) is an even greater work in the same vein, ripe to be mined for adventuring material (though it’s not directly about the Crusades). Perceval ( wiki) and Perlesvaus ( wiki), of course, deal with the Grail Quest, which is ultimately a symbol of the crusades, so a lot of thematically relevant material here even though the setting is far removed. |
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Mar 2, 2013 0:11:08 GMT -6
I'm hesitant to post this, as I've avoided the religious argument thus far. However this document has some interesting facts, that may give some insight into the crusader's mindset. If you can get past the lining of paranoia, and instead take in the facts, and accept that certain aspects of history have been misrepresented, it's a very interesting documents. Key points include: -The Muslims were in fact the aggressors; this is common knowledge, that a lot of people simply ignore -Crusaders were not power or wealth hungry pirates, but often gave up much of their wealth to help fellow Christians -The actual goal of the Crusades was to retake Christian holy lands, and protect Christians in the Middle East -There was only ever one attempt made to convert those in the Middle East, and it was not the main goal during the First Crusade Finally here's the link to the video. Please try to view it with an open mind, and ignore the paranoia. www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLVXRrzm0kc |
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Mar 2, 2013 5:22:44 GMT -6
I'm hesitant to post this, as I've avoided the religious argument thus far. However this document has some interesting facts, that may give some insight into the crusader's mindset. If you can get past the lining of paranoia, and instead take in the facts, and accept that certain aspects of history have been misrepresented, it's a very interesting documents. Key points include: -The Muslims were in fact the aggressors; this is common knowledge, that a lot of people simply ignore -Crusaders were not power or wealth hungry pirates, but often gave up much of their wealth to help fellow Christians -The actual goal of the Crusades was to retake Christian holy lands, and protect Christians in the Middle East -There was only ever one attempt made to convert those in the Middle East, and it was not the main goal during the First Crusade Finally here's the link to the video. Please try to view it with an open mind, and ignore the paranoia. www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLVXRrzm0kcHoly misinformation batman. Here's a quick tip, if you're hesitant to post a link to something, keep it to yourself. Any "historical" account that posits the crusades as a religious defence over a political strategy by the pope should be ignored. |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Mar 2, 2013 8:10:37 GMT -6
I was cruising the blogs this morning and was reminded of a supplemental game source for this subject on the Save vs. Dragon blog- Galloways Fantasy Wargaming. I've always found this to be an inspirational text for ideas and it was one of my earliest purchases after B/X and AD&D. I never played FW, but frequently used it as a reference for creative ideas.
Save vs. Dragon has a few helpful links that eventually leads to a discussion on Dragonsfoot that might be of interest too. There is also a subsequent link to a medieval bestiary. I would post the links directly, but don't want to breech any protocol on the board.
I utilised FW when I was putting together a similiar project to the OP's. For my game I took Microlite 74 v 2.0 and house ruled it into what I called "Kingdoms, Clerics, & Crusaders". The theme of the rules was "By Force Take Your Kingdom!". In my game, I emphasised personal quests with the object of establishing a stronghold. The particulars of the time period were happening in the background and not directly an influence on play, but the politics, power, and religion offered the atmosphere that the characters played in.
|
|
|
|
Post by llenlleawg on Mar 2, 2013 9:37:28 GMT -6
Holy misinformation batman. Here's a quick tip, if you're hesitant to post a link to something, keep it to yourself. Any "historical" account that posits the crusades as a religious defence over a political strategy by the pope should be ignored. Without intending to judge the merits of the linked video, and granting that the bullet points above need each, like any other such claims, to be nuanced for as wide and long-ranging a phenomenon as the Crusades, the overall claims being made are precisely those made by some of the foremost scholars of the Crusades writing today in English, e.g. Jonathan Riley-Smith and Thomas Madden. For a game, someone might well choose to bypass the best of current scholarship and attend instead to widely held, even if inaccurate, portayals of the Crusades as a kind of neo-colonialism or an outgrowth of pre-modern Christian fundamentalist mania. So long as no one at the table thinks they are actually being especially historical in so acting, such a thing might be fine. I would, however, second jasonzavoda's post above. The most fruitful way to "play" the era of the Crrusades would be a inspired by Ivanhoe, Cadfael, Black Adder and, as Falconer adds, Medieval romances such as Gerusalemme liberata, Orlando furioso, or Perceval. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Mar 2, 2013 10:10:07 GMT -6
From page 8 of Chainmail: "Besides providing you with an exciting and enjoyable battle game, we hope that these rules will interest the wargamer sufficiently to start him on the pursuit of the history of the Middle Ages. Such study will at least enrich the life of the new historian, and perhaps it will even contribute to the study of history itself."
In light of the above, I do not think the discussion of history inappropriate here.
My favorite books on the Crusades are Sir Steven Runciman's three-volume, A History of the Crusades. My take-away: Pity the poor noncombatants (Christians, Muslims, and Jews) caught between the Frankish forces from the west and the Turkish forces from the east. Massacre begat massacre, and ignorance and violence displaced enlightenment and debate. The most intolerant and extreme rose to the top.
Gaming application: One of the groups that most impressed me in Runciman's history was the Assassins. Imagine the PCs as Assassins (using the class in BLACKMOOR) on missions for the Old Man of the Mountain, undoubtedly a dual-classed cleric/magic-user with 18s in intelligence, wisdom, and charisma. As Assassins, the PCs try to carve out a small enclave of independence, free from their old Sunni oppressors and free from the loutish Franks. Since the Assassins are out-numbered a thousand to one, they employ the tactics of subterfuge, stealth, spying, and (of course) assassination.
Sign me up!
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Mar 2, 2013 10:44:48 GMT -6
Holy misinformation batman. Here's a quick tip, if you're hesitant to post a link to something, keep it to yourself. Any "historical" account that posits the crusades as a religious defence over a political strategy by the pope should be ignored. Without intending to judge the merits of the linked video, and granting that the bullet points above need each, like any other such claims, to be nuanced for as wide and long-ranging a phenomenon as the Crusades, the overall claims being made are precisely those made by some of the foremost scholars of the Crusades writing today in English, e.g. Jonathan Riley-Smith and Thomas Madden. For a game, someone might well choose to bypass the best of current scholarship and attend instead to widely held, even if inaccurate, portayals of the Crusades as a kind of neo-colonialism or an outgrowth of pre-modern Christian fundamentalist mania. So long as no one at the table thinks they are actually being especially historical in so acting, such a thing might be fine. I would, however, second jasonzavoda's post above. The most fruitful way to "play" the era of the Crrusades would be a inspired by Ivanhoe, Cadfael, Black Adder and, as Falconer adds, Medieval romances such as Gerusalemme liberata, Orlando furioso, or Perceval. Any academic, especially one in the field of history, who is cartoonishly emphatic as Jonathan Riley-Smith is, should also be ignored. Not to mention the total misunderstanding academics like Riley-Smith have of Jihad. In all honesty, I don't actually care but you do your brain a great disservice if you don't critically evaluate crusade papers in a post 9/11 world. |
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Mar 2, 2013 11:06:28 GMT -6
Except it is widely known that the Catholic Church and Christiandom never launched any incursions into Muslim land until the Orthodox Church asked for assistance because of Muslim aggression, against Jews, Pagans, and Christians in the Holy Land. Furthermore it is widely known from first hand accounts that Crusaders donated most of their lively goods to wage the wars, this includes Nobles.
Most of this information pertains to the First Crusade era in which the game will be set.
|
|
|
|
Post by derv on Mar 2, 2013 11:09:23 GMT -6
From page 8 of Chainmail: "Besides providing you with an exciting and enjoyable battle game, we hope that these rules will interest the wargamer sufficiently to start him on the pursuit of the history of the Middle Ages. Such study will at least enrich the life of the new historian, and perhaps it will even contribute to the study of history itself." In light of the above, I do not think the discussion of history inappropriate here. My favorite books on the Crusades are Sir Steven Runciman's three-volume, A History of the Crusades. My take-away: Pity the poor noncombatants (Christians, Muslims, and Jews) caught between the Frankish forces from the west and the Turkish forces from the east. Massacre begat massacre, and ignorance and violence displaced enlightenment and debate. The most intolerant and extreme rose to the top. Gaming application: One of the groups that most impressed me in Runciman's history was the Assassins. Imagine the PCs as Assassins (using the class in BLACKMOOR) on missions for the Old Man of the Mountain, undoubtedly a dual-classed cleric/magic-user with 18s in intelligence, wisdom, and charisma. As Assassins, the PCs try to carve out a small enclave of independence, free from their old Sunni oppressors and free from the loutish Franks. Since the Assassins are out-numbered a thousand to one, they employ the tactics of subterfuge, stealth, spying, and (of course) assassination. Sign me up! I like it geoffrey- good take. |
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Mar 2, 2013 11:26:28 GMT -6
Except it is widely known that the Catholic Church and Christiandom never launched any incursions into Muslim land until the Orthodox Church asked for assistance because of Muslim aggression, against Jews, Pagans, and Christians in the Holy Land. Furthermore it is widely known from first hand accounts that Crusaders donated most of their lively goods to wage the wars, this includes Nobles. It also ignores Urban's personal motivations, as a pope who had been living in the shadow of Gregory VII. Come to think of it, it also ignores Gregory VII completely who wanted a holy war against the moors way before the crusades. Most of this information pertains to the First Crusade era in which the game will be set. It is also widely known that this was only one of the motivations for the crusade. It also ignores the already entrenched hatred of Muslims in Europe at the time (since this wasn't Christian Europe's first military contact with Muslims). It ignores the desperation of Christian Europe to escape famine, civil conflicts and the desire of the church for divine reward (possibly as a solution to the aforementioned aliments afflicting Europe at the time). It ignores the motive of power over the bishops on the part of the European nobles. It's a vast topic and we could go on all day about it but I'll leave you with this. Academics from the Riley-Smith faction have been around for awhile and largely ignored...until 9/11, doesn't that strike you as strange? I find your link narrow in scope, bias, and while based in fact, it doesn't tell the whole story and tries to assert a moral high ground on the crusaders which is disingenuous. |
|
Nanus would be reserved for dwarf obviously. Hobbitus is ghastly, and I'm confident the Doctor would agree. Hmm...
