Correct me if I'm wrong but no major Western film or book is that historically accurate, so why should a RPG be so?

Quote from: RPGPundit;971454Good that you acknowledge your irrelevance.

Do you realize how much you're projecting your own pathological fear of insignificance onto me? Or is that a level of self-awareness your narcissism can't countenance?

I can't decide if it's funny or sad.


Nah, that's not true - it's hilariously funny. no question.

Quote from: Voros;971482Correct me if I'm wrong but no major Western film or book is that historically accurate, so why should a RPG be so?

Some are semi-accurate, which as much as is true of just about any movie set in a historical setting.

After all - I don't think that there was actually a 'Private Ryan' in the 101st whose brothers all died and had a mission sent just to rescue him.

I'm no fan of Private Ryan the film personally. My understanding is the there was a real Private Ryan but he was just pulled from service after his brothers died. Of course no unit was sent to fetch him.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;971584If your definition of "alternate history" means that all historical fiction is alternate history, your definition has prima facie failed because the entire reason the term "alternate history" exists in fiction is to distinguish it from historical fiction in general.

Precisely.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;9715842. If you have to keep telling people how important or famous you are, you are neither that important nor particularly famous.

So mean.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;9715841. If your definition of "alternate history" means that all historical fiction is alternate history, your definition has prima facie failed because the entire reason the term "alternate history" exists in fiction is to distinguish it from historical fiction in general.

The phrase exists as a marketing concept. Defend that holy word, crusader!

Quote from: flyingmice;971702The phrase exists as a marketing concept. Defend that holy word, crusader!

Again, I'm not so sure. There is most certainly a difference between the writing of Bernard Cornwell and Harry Turtledove. Or between the different takes on the Golden Age of Piracy of Pirates of the Caribbean and Black Sails.

Those two different definitions have distinct meaning. If you sell a group on one, then deliver the other, you've bait-and-switched them.

Quote from: Kiero;971713Again, I'm not so sure. There is most certainly a difference between the writing of Bernard Cornwell and Harry Turtledove. Or between the different takes on the Golden Age of Piracy of Pirates of the Caribbean and Black Sails.

Those two different definitions have distinct meaning. If you sell a group on one, then deliver the other, you've bait-and-switched them.

Some games are alt from the get go - Cold Space, Weird Wars - they are designed to be alt-history. Let's remove them from consideration in this special bait-and-switch case.

If you present a "historical" 1950s setting, then decide to assassinate Eisenhower just before the election, you have pulled a bait-and-swtich.

If you present a "historical" 1950s setting, and the PCs decide to assassinate Eisenhowr, *you* have *not* pulled a bait-and-switch.

If the PCs can succeed in this assassination, if they plan well and execute well, then at what point does it become alt-historical? When it succeeds? Eisenhower's administration is pretty well covered, and within living memory of some elders. There was no assassination plot in history. When the plan was hatched? When the PCs and non-historical NPCs were placed? This is the little bit pregnant thing. If you always approach the historical campaign as if it can go a-historical at any time, you as GM are better prepared and the players know you won't undercut therm by GM fiat because Hey! Historical!

If they can't succeed by GM fiat, why are they playing this?

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;971830When the known facts of history stop being true because the timeline has been altered.

The point at which it becomes an alternate history setting, I would argue, is when the changes are sufficiently drastic that they continue generating new events that contradict the known facts of history. (If you attempt to assassinate Eisenhower, fail, and there's no meaningful impact on subsequent events, that's technically an alternate history, but not really an alternate history setting: A campaign set a year later in such a world is essentially indistinguishable from one set in a completely historical setting.)

We agree to disagree, then, and nobody is going to change their minds. I know I would be more than happy to join any game run by Kiero, despite us disagreeing on this small point of semantics. I don't think there would be a whit of difference in how we actually handle history.

Quote from: flyingmice;971851We agree to disagree, then, and nobody is going to change their minds. I know I would be more than happy to join any game run by Kiero, despite us disagreeing on this small point of semantics. I don't think there would be a whit of difference in how we actually handle history.

Well, and maybe the only difference is definitional, in what we'd choose to call the setting/genre at any particular point in time. As I said, I'm happy to let the game go where it will, but until it has changed something fundamental, I don't consider it to be alt-history.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;971919No. You remain objectively wrong. Words mean things.

:rolleyes: