So what kind of fantasy medieval elements do you prefer in your game? Do you adhere to a specific era? Or are you pretty much just into ren-faire pseudo-medieval with whatever is fun?

Or are you a purist? Do you go for a realistic era of the "Low" or "High" middle-ages? Or are you more into Bronze/Iron age sword-n-sandals?

Feel free to cite details, likes/dislikes and why. Also - I'm interested in how your tastes have changed over the years.

I have no real attachment to any particular area of development in human history as a player.  I'm far more attracted to setting that's internally consistent. 

When I run fantasy, I like take inspiration for setting and circumstances from periods of rapid shifts in power and society.  For example, the rise of the Roman empire, the bronze age collapse, the Sengoku period of Japan, the 900s in Europe, etc.

This may be a lame answer but...it depends.

Mine tend to be based on fantasy literature rather than historical medieval Europe.  Conducting even a historically semi-accurate game requires quite a bit of knowledge on the parts of both the GM and players unless, I suppose, they're history major, and I just don't have that kind of time.  On the other hand, I'm familiar with hundreds of fantasy book setting and so are most of my players so that's relatively easy.  Most of the time it's a moot point - our adventuring tends to be out past the edge of civilization with only occasional city adventure - so we don't actually see much of the culture.  I'd be interested in trying a historically accurate game as a player if someone wanted to run one, but running such a game requires more investment than I'm able to give.

I lean heavily towards late dark ages to early medieval (Western/Central European flavor) as a base for "reality" in the world.  Then I'll selectively advance a few technologies explained as magic--often with the physics of the world reinforcing that.  For example, in my current world, not only is magic blacksmithing the only known way to currently make steel, it's the also the only way to make steel, period. You can't apply real world methods to iron and get steel in this setting.

The idea is to explain why technology absent magic stagnates at an early medieval level. There's holes in this method for a rules lawyer.  Fortunately, I don't play with any. It's good enough for a consistent, plausible world in play.

I rarely can tolerate gunpowder--even a magical equivalent. I want minimal plate armor.  No galleons.  No Venetian-style banking (with "banking" topping out at personal letters of credit). 

I do like some variation in tech, ideally tied to cultures or regions.  Even when doing a circa 1100 AD game, I'd like places to have tech more appropriate to 800 AD. 

I'm quite happy to include some (magically supported and/or constructed) later medieval devices--modest telescope, better paper (though usually without the printing press), advanced irrigation and milling techniques.  Though since I usually run games in the climb out of a world-wide apocalypse, such things often need to be discovered by adventurers in ruins.

Strangely enough, despite all these preferences, I don't much enjoy ancient world games.  If I did, I'd probably run a post bronze age collapse variant.  Height of Rome really leaves me cold.

As for tastes changing with age, they are steadily moving back. The basis for my current setting is 600 to 800 AD tech, with the assumption that before the current fall several centuries prior, it had capped out around 1100 tech.  There's even an aesthetics side to this, since I like the way that late-period scavenged Roman armor or a spatha or a seax look on fantasy characters.  I'd rather have characters wearing tunic and sandals than hose and pointy shoes. 

Quote from: tenbones on June 04, 2024, 01:07:47 PMSo what kind of fantasy medieval elements do you prefer in your game? Do you adhere to a specific era? Or are you pretty much just into ren-faire pseudo-medieval with whatever is fun?

Or are you a purist? Do you go for a realistic era of the "Low" or "High" middle-ages? Or are you more into Bronze/Iron age sword-n-sandals?

Like others, my answer is "it depends", but I often have a base period that I diverge from. So, the campaign that I just wrapped up was loosely based on late medieval Peru -- the height of the Incan empire. But it was still a fantasy game with elves and dwarves and orcs, so authenticity was more in big picture and style rather than any sort of purism.

In other games, I've jumped around in period and region of influence. I've had a realistic early medieval Norse alternate history; and a over-the-top fantasy inspired by 19th century China; and various modern and sci-fi games.

I have run more and less realistic games, so that varies a lot, but I usually don't go for random jumbling together different cultures and/or periods as sources. I like having a consistent basis for culture and beliefs and such. That said, I have had games set in Forgotten Realms which is pretty much a jumble, but it's the exception.

Greetings!

Well, I generally run my Thandor World with a foundation comprised of Ancient to Dark Ages and Early Middle Ages historical themes. So, essentially Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, Carthage, the Persian Empire, the Germanic Barbarians, the Celtic Barbarians, the Huns, Scythians, Egyptian Empire, the Gupta Empire, the Tang Empire, the Song Empire, the Abbassid Caliphate, the Kwarazm Empire, the Crusades, the Arthurian Age, the Ghana Empire, Numidia, Ethiopia, the Kushan Empire, the Kievan Rus, the Russian Empire, the Bulgarian Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Kazan Khanate, the Empire of the Volga Bulgars, the Vikings, and the Mongol Empire. There are additional regions and themes, though these mentioned and noted are the primary foundational sources.

I tend to default to a "Low Fantasy" milieu, with occasional episodes or special regions "spiking" up to "Hogh Fantasy." I even have a few areas that embrace "Gonzo" and weird technology. All of that is great for spice and variety, though again, the foundations are more historical "Low Fantasy" so that a baseline of verisimilitude and relatability is maintained. Such dynamics also serve to form a kind of internal consistency, and a "Firewall" system, so that magic, weird technology, and other problems from Gonzo elements do not get out of control and annihilate the campaign world. A large part of me is a historical purist, so while I also embrace part of me that enjoys Gonzo, I love historical consistency, realism, and relatability more than I love Gonzo crazy elements.

Of course, some might wonder "Why, SHARK?" The answer is rooted in the fact that I have always loved the study of History--though I am an educated Historian specialized in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, with secondary specializations in Dark Ages/Early Medieval History, Ancient India, and Ancient China. I didn't get a degree in Mongolian Studies, but I may as well be a specialist in Mongolian Studies as well by now. That tends to almost come by a default dynamic of Early Medieval History, Indian History, and Ancient China studies. All three of such areas eventually circle around and focus on the Mongol Empire. So, yeah, I'm somewhat crazy about Mongolian Studies as well. *Laughing*

Thus, the foundations of my campaign inspirations!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well, when I first started playing (in the early 80s), most of our games were "fantasy medieval," though I think a better description is technologically medieval, as the social structure was far more Wild West than anything medieval.  I think as time has passed (I'm playing with several of the guys who were in my first group even today) we have gotten more comfortable with putting in a little work to play in cultures that have a few more cultural constraints.  Still, I'd say our favorite technologically level is mid-to-high medieval, with the exception of gunpowder (as we all generally dislike that and steampunk elements like the Artificer or gnomish inventions).  We still tend to play in Wild West or re-conquering after the fall sorts of fantasy settings; weak government and high danger outside of the sparsely scattered towns, which really doesn't track nicely into medieval societies and expectations..

I tend towards a potpourri of medieval elements scattered onto a setting that likely isn't very medieval at all, largely because I find the fantasy aspect tends override normal medieval development.

Take something like metallurgy for example; one of the main limits on the development of certain weapons and armor was the lack of being able to achieve the sustained heat needed to completely melt iron (and in large quantities) until you got the development of the blast furnace.

Now, add magic fire to your setting. What does metallurgy look like when something like the Myceanians or Egyptians of antiquity already have the capacity to produce blast furnace-like heats?

Take it a step further and what about when magic can command lightning and could magically produce the sort of heats needed to purify materials like Aluminum?

How about commanding the cold and what that means for a population's diet? Unless you've got giant hostile reptiles going about (yet another variance from history) that requires the majority of magic use, what king wouldn't want the increased productivity of sending the court wizard out to every manor to fill an insulated basement with ice so less food goes bad?

Let's not even start on what European society looks like if Christianity wasn't around to mold it and instead had real pagan gods instead.

So much of a fantasy setting depends on the whens and whats of magic that trying to set it to a particular real world era is pretty futile as a general exercise (Note - it is useful for a specific exercise where you know when and how the magic caused things to diverge however).

The only way a particular Medieval era really makes sense is if the world largely IS our own and anything fantastic is some combination of subtle, hidden, and/or recent enough to have not caused anything civilization altering to have occurred (or, if such changes are actually part of some secret history where a magical intervention changed what overwise would have occurred... ex. The Bubonic Plague being spread by fleas/rats is just a cover story for what was really a fiendish curse laid upon the land and was only stopped from killing everyone by some magical force for good).

In short, fantasy is too broad a term to lay out any specifics and tends to matter more for my enjoyment of a setting than the Medieval aspects... I just want the Medieval aspects to make sense for the fantastic elements.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 04, 2024, 02:44:34 PMI lean heavily towards late dark ages to early medieval (Western/Central European flavor) as a base for "reality" in the world.  Then I'll selectively advance a few technologies explained as magic--often with the physics of the world reinforcing that.  For example, in my current world, not only is magic blacksmithing the only known way to currently make steel, it's the also the only way to make steel, period. You can't apply real world methods to iron and get steel in this setting.

The idea is to explain why technology absent magic stagnates at an early medieval level. There's holes in this method for a rules lawyer.  Fortunately, I don't play with any. It's good enough for a consistent, plausible world in play.

I rarely can tolerate gunpowder--even a magical equivalent. I want minimal plate armor.  No galleons.  No Venetian-style banking (with "banking" topping out at personal letters of credit). 

I do like some variation in tech, ideally tied to cultures or regions.  Even when doing a circa 1100 AD game, I'd like places to have tech more appropriate to 800 AD. 

I'm quite happy to include some (magically supported and/or constructed) later medieval devices--modest telescope, better paper (though usually without the printing press), advanced irrigation and milling techniques.  Though since I usually run games in the climb out of a world-wide apocalypse, such things often need to be discovered by adventurers in ruins.

Strangely enough, despite all these preferences, I don't much enjoy ancient world games.  If I did, I'd probably run a post bronze age collapse variant.  Height of Rome really leaves me cold.

As for tastes changing with age, they are steadily moving back. The basis for my current setting is 600 to 800 AD tech, with the assumption that before the current fall several centuries prior, it had capped out around 1100 tech.  There's even an aesthetics side to this, since I like the way that late-period scavenged Roman armor or a spatha or a seax look on fantasy characters.  I'd rather have characters wearing tunic and sandals than hose and pointy shoes. 

Greetings!

I love it Steven! *Laughing* Absolutely ruthless and beautiful campaign standards, my friend! Yeah, you must be ruthless to maintain the campaign milieu properly, and definitely restrain or gatekeep "Rules Lawyers" from the game. Thankfully, I don't really have any "Rules Lawyers" in my groups. Well, maybe a few, but they know that being too obnoxious also invites disaster and wrath from the Gods, so they tend to keep themselves in check. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Chris24601 on June 04, 2024, 03:08:54 PMI tend towards a potpourri of medieval elements scattered onto a setting that likely isn't very medieval at all, largely because I find the fantasy aspect tends override normal medieval development.

Take something like metallurgy for example; one of the main limits on the development of certain weapons and armor was the lack of being able to achieve the sustained heat needed to completely melt iron (and in large quantities) until you got the development of the blast furnace.

Now, add magic fire to your setting. What does metallurgy look like when something like the Myceanians or Egyptians of antiquity already have the capacity to produce blast furnace-like heats?

Take it a step further and what about when magic can command lightning and could magically produce the sort of heats needed to purify materials like Aluminum?

How about commanding the cold and what that means for a population's diet? Unless you've got giant hostile reptiles going about (yet another variance from history) that requires the majority of magic use, what king wouldn't want the increased productivity of sending the court wizard out to every manor to fill an insulated basement with ice so less food goes bad?

Let's not even start on what European society looks like if Christianity wasn't around to mold it and instead had real pagan gods instead.

So much of a fantasy setting depends on the whens and whats of magic that trying to set it to a particular real world era is pretty futile as a general exercise (Note - it is useful for a specific exercise where you know when and how the magic caused things to diverge however).

The only way a particular Medieval era really makes sense is if the world largely IS our own and anything fantastic is some combination of subtle, hidden, and/or recent enough to have not caused anything civilization altering to have occurred (or, if such changes are actually part of some secret history where a magical intervention changed what overwise would have occurred... ex. The Bubonic Plague being spread by fleas/rats is just a cover story for what was really a fiendish curse laid upon the land and was only stopped from killing everyone by some magical force for good).

In short, fantasy is too broad a term to lay out any specifics and tends to matter more for my enjoyment of a setting than the Medieval aspects... I just want the Medieval aspects to make sense for the fantastic elements.

Greetings!

*LAUGHING* Ah, yes, my friend! Yeah, I have periodically through the years wrestled with precisely these kinds of issues, and their deeper campaign implications! I love it, too! However, several friends of mine basically argued with me, explauning, that once you have established an absolutely powerful empire like the Roman Empire, or the Gupta Empire, or the Tang Empire, or the Song Empire, with unimaginable access to wealth, near-infinite natural resources, and populations of tens and hundreds of millions of people--take those basic foundations, and then add the fantasy game's magic system to ut, then you can forget having an ancient or Dark Ages/Medieval fantasy world. You won't even have what we know of as the "Modern World." Your campaign world--so rich and historically deep and awesome--will very rapidly transform into an uber-Gonzo High-Fantasy Science-Fiction campaign world. That development will blow past anything we know of today, and will eventually distort what we can even comprehend on a campaign level. Everything within a few centuries would change so fast and so horrifically dramatically, that everything would be unrecognizable.

They continued--by pointing out that remaining historically grounded, or going Gonzo crazy, as choices, neither are right or wrong. However, logic, reality of historical imperial power, and the game's magic will inevitably result in a crazy Gonzo Science-Fiction High Magic world. So, you, as the Viking DM, must make some deep choices, and maintain your world, by divine dynamics, or whatever you want to establish, because otherwise, the uber Gonzo direction is the destination that awaits. I readily admitted that they were very right, so I had to make certain dynamics become established within my Thandor World to maintain the milieu.

I have found that doing so, however, requires some degree of vigilance, and frequent overview monitoring, so as to keep the Gonzo dynamics restrained properly. I love the result, but it does take some work, and a ruthless insistence on saying "NO" to some stuff, even if such things you yourself might very much enjoy--at least for a time. *Laughing*

It is always a discussion and thought experiment I hugely love having and thinking about!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Chris24601 on June 04, 2024, 03:08:54 PMI tend towards a potpourri of medieval elements scattered onto a setting that likely isn't very medieval at all, largely because I find the fantasy aspect tends override normal medieval development.

Take something like metallurgy for example; one of the main limits on the development of certain weapons and armor was the lack of being able to achieve the sustained heat needed to completely melt iron (and in large quantities) until you got the development of the blast furnace.

Now, add magic fire to your setting. What does metallurgy look like when something like the Myceanians or Egyptians of antiquity already have the capacity to produce blast furnace-like heats?

Take it a step further and what about when magic can command lightning and could magically produce the sort of heats needed to purify materials like Aluminum?

How about commanding the cold and what that means for a population's diet? Unless you've got giant hostile reptiles going about (yet another variance from history) that requires the majority of magic use, what king wouldn't want the increased productivity of sending the court wizard out to every manor to fill an insulated basement with ice so less food goes bad?

Let's not even start on what European society looks like if Christianity wasn't around to mold it and instead had real pagan gods instead.

So much of a fantasy setting depends on the whens and whats of magic that trying to set it to a particular real world era is pretty futile as a general exercise (Note - it is useful for a specific exercise where you know when and how the magic caused things to diverge however).

The only way a particular Medieval era really makes sense is if the world largely IS our own and anything fantastic is some combination of subtle, hidden, and/or recent enough to have not caused anything civilization altering to have occurred (or, if such changes are actually part of some secret history where a magical intervention changed what overwise would have occurred... ex. The Bubonic Plague being spread by fleas/rats is just a cover story for what was really a fiendish curse laid upon the land and was only stopped from killing everyone by some magical force for good).

In short, fantasy is too broad a term to lay out any specifics and tends to matter more for my enjoyment of a setting than the Medieval aspects... I just want the Medieval aspects to make sense for the fantastic elements.

This, plus heavy use of fantasy novels.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 04, 2024, 02:44:34 PMI rarely can tolerate gunpowder--even a magical equivalent. I want minimal plate armor.

That can be a toughie.  The technology in my current project is age of pirates meets D&D, and I wanted cannons, muskets, bows, swords, and armor all together.  I spent quite a bit of time studying the reasons gunpowder weapons replaced everything else and decided that the only change I wanted to make is that in the physics of this world firearms penetrate armor no better than bows and swords.  There are still plenty of other advantages, but that seems to justify the technology with minimal ripple effects on the setting.

Quote from: SHARK on June 04, 2024, 03:35:25 PMGreetings!

*LAUGHING* Ah, yes, my friend! Yeah, I have periodically through the years wrestled with precisely these kinds of issues, and their deeper campaign implications! I love it, too! However, several friends of mine basically argued with me, explauning, that once you have established an absolutely powerful empire like the Roman Empire, or the Gupta Empire, or the Tang Empire, or the Song Empire, with unimaginable access to wealth, near-infinite natural resources, and populations of tens and hundreds of millions of people--take those basic foundations, and then add the fantasy game's magic system to ut, then you can forget having an ancient or Dark Ages/Medieval fantasy world. You won't even have what we know of as the "Modern World." Your campaign world--so rich and historically deep and awesome--will very rapidly transform into an uber-Gonzo High-Fantasy Science-Fiction campaign world. That development will blow past anything we know of today, and will eventually distort what we can even comprehend on a campaign level. Everything within a few centuries would change so fast and so horrifically dramatically, that everything would be unrecognizable.

They continued--by pointing out that remaining historically grounded, or going Gonzo crazy, as choices, neither are right or wrong. However, logic, reality of historical imperial power, and the game's magic will inevitably result in a crazy Gonzo Science-Fiction High Magic world. So, you, as the Viking DM, must make some deep choices, and maintain your world, by divine dynamics, or whatever you want to establish, because otherwise, the uber Gonzo direction is the destination that awaits. I readily admitted that they were very right, so I had to make certain dynamics become established within my Thandor World to maintain the milieu.

I have found that doing so, however, requires some degree of vigilance, and frequent overview monitoring, so as to keep the Gonzo dynamics restrained properly. I love the result, but it does take some work, and a ruthless insistence on saying "NO" to some stuff, even if such things you yourself might very much enjoy--at least for a time. *Laughing*

It is always a discussion and thought experiment I hugely love having and thinking about!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I think the rapid advancement we've seen of the last millennium or so is a result of the discovery and use of the scientific method and is not typical of the span of history.  IIRC the stone age lasted millions of years.  If I wanted a more static world I'd probably postulate that the scientific method is never discovered, isn't used in a widespread manner, is suppressed by leaders, doesn't fit with the people's psychology or somesuch.  That way you don't have to totally redesign your setting in the middle of the campaign because some turkey invented the magic transistor.

I like late Dark Ages with low fantasy, though I see the charm of knights in plate and princesses in towers. One of the things I find fascinating is feudalism as a way of structuring society. All too often, fantasy stories have what's essentially a modern state, except it's led by a hereditary monarch rather than an elected government.