this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
36 points (89.1% liked)

rpg

3141 readers
32 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
36
D&D is anti-medieval (2016) (www.blogofholding.com)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de to c/rpg@ttrpg.network
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] huf@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

well, yes, none of the dnd setting people think like medieval people at all.

but i take exception to this idiocy:

fundamentally incompatible with the European fantasy typified by Lord of the Rings, in which no fellowship can alter the fact that Sam is by birth a servant, Frodo a gentleman, Strider a king, and Gandalf a wizard.

has this person read the lord of the rings? sam becomes a land-owning gentleman at the end of the novel. he actually makes it out of his class.

to be fair, he's the only one in the entire god damned book. there arent even many speaking roles for named commoners in there. sam, the gaffer, ted sandyman, farmer maggot, butterbur, gamling, ioreth. that's about it. the vast majority of these are in the shire portions of the book.

edit: i forgot beregond and his son! but he may be a minor noble who has lost their land but kept the memory, or he may be a commoner of ithilien of numenorean descent. i dunno.