08-11-2011, 06:11 PM | #101 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
|
08-11-2011, 06:11 PM | #102 | ||
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
Quote:
Anything pivitoal, even if the details aren't, the outcome will be documented. Usually quite heavily. And researchers go in and find more information. If you want your Pure Historical Game to have a lasting effect on the world, you're playing the people who made the change. And, in my opinion, that's even less fun to play. I'll read a book about it. |
||
08-11-2011, 06:12 PM | #103 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbia, Maryland
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
You are obviously missing my point.
|
08-11-2011, 06:14 PM | #104 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
It seems to me that "pure" historical is being used in this thread in two different ways.
1) Historical--you can not alter the course of events. 2) Historical--no magic powers or vampires or zombies or other things to make it more fancy. I think most of us (including the OP) are talking about version 2. But that said...even if you can't change history, there are still really amazing stories to be told. Heck, there have been a gazillion interesting World War 2 films that haven't changed history and are still full of interesting stories. But then, I am interested in people...and as the opening of Dragnet used to say, "There are 1000 stories in the city..." Micro history. The story of this particular group of people and their relationships to each other and their experiences in the war. And then also, I was in the military and wasn't special forces and did lots of interesting things and made interesting choices...so I can see lots of interesting possibilities for exciting games even as a regular joe. |
08-11-2011, 06:15 PM | #105 |
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
Which I would have no problem with. If I know it's an alternate history, then that's all good. But, when it's Pure Historical, that means that history, as we know it, has to be accurate. The Battle of the Bulge was not won by a single squad of soldiers with a tank doing the impossible. That would be more fun, but it's not Pure Historical.
|
08-11-2011, 06:16 PM | #106 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbia, Maryland
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
And sometimes that information changes history. And sometimes that change gets argued about or reinterpreted based on other information. Or archaeology. So in some respects history is fluid. True, some facts can't be argued. What I'm suggesting, to those who are interested in a historical game, is to avoid those facts that are set in stone and concentrate on things less well known.
|
08-11-2011, 06:19 PM | #107 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
|
08-11-2011, 06:24 PM | #108 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbia, Maryland
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
My apologies for the misunderstanding. I wasn't dealing so much with the "Battle X Won on Day Y by Force Z" as I was "there were a group of guys in Force Z that did something vaguely hinted at by the history books." This sort of thing crops up all the time in pirate history. There are things that are known, and things that are assumed or theorized. I'd roleplay the latter.
|
08-11-2011, 06:30 PM | #109 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbia, Maryland
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
Quote:
|
|
08-11-2011, 06:38 PM | #110 | |
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: "Pure" historical roleplaying?
Quote:
But, even so, even with your type 2, which I still find boring, though less so than your type 1, that drastically limits what you can do. A WWII, type 2 story, still would be more of examining the events of the war and the individual toll it exacted on the soldiers fighting it and less about them saving the world. Sure, they'd be killing Germans and Nazis, and maybe even have some casualties themselves. But, the outcome of the war wouldn't be in jeopardy in the player's minds. I wouldn't mind a film on the soldier's survival, but, to me, it would be a boring game. And, PyrateJohn, I understand what you're saying. But, for me, there is no grab. And that's the discussion. I've run scenarios where the players know that, by the end of the scenario, all the characters will be dead. But, the challenge is seeing how long they can stay alive, and what they can do before the end. (I usually run something like that when the players encounter a video file or something that has information they need.) My example before, with the two games, cites exactly my problem. Even making things up, but putting them against a backdrop of something real, minimizes the character's actions. And thus, makes it less interesting for me. |
|
Tags |
fantasy, historical |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|