Irrational Hatreds in RPGs

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
"Dark and Satiracal" is my definition of GrimDark..I wouldn't even call modern 40K Gremdark, because it takes itself too seriously. It's just "dark". The combination of Grim + Dark to me is the expression of the over-the-top, silly nature of it, that I think 2000AD comics pioneered and original Warhammer basically took it's tone from.
I go the other way. The grim is the part that takes itself too seriously. 2000AD, back when I was reading in the 80s and early 90s, was dark and dealt with some grim stuff. But it also had a self awareness and a sense of humour that I find most so called Grimdark material doesn't have.

Grimdark isn't satire. Because satire is aware that it's poking fun at something.
 
Yeah, that sucks. Examples?

As TJS TJS Adventures in Middle Earth is the type of thing that I'm talking about.

Product Identity: The following items are hereby identified as Product Identity, as defined in the Open Game License version 1.0a, Section 1(e), and are not Open Content: All trademarks, registered trade-marks, proper names (characters, place names, etc.), new rules, classes, items, virtues, backgrounds, places, characters, artwork, sidebars, and trade dress. Open Game Content: The Open content in this book includes material taken from the Systems Reference Document. No other portion of this work may be reproduced in any form without permission.

But it's not the only one. For example, the Castle Keeper's Guide declares:

Designation of Product Identity: Product identity is not Open Game Content. The following is designated as product identity . . . (E) all content not specifically designated above to include the story, storylines, plots, thematic elements, dialogue, incidents, all descriptive
text and explanatory text, language, depictions, likenesses, concepts, world and campaign descriptions, all tables, table content, proper names of the characters, creatures, groups, spells, enchantments, personalities, teams, personas, likenesses, skills, items, deities, and special abilities other than those designated as open game content above, as well as places, locations, settings, and environments and their descriptions and other accompanying text.

The part that is designated as Open Content is:

. . .the following open game content related words, phrases, and abbreviations wherever they appear: Strength (Str), Dexterity (Dex),
Constitution (Con), Intelligence (Int), Wisdom (Wis), Charisma (Cha), Class, Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, Assassin, Barbarian, Monk, Wizard, Illusionist, Cleric, Druid, Knight, Bard, Paladin, Race, Demi-human, Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, Half-Elf, Halfling, Half-Orc, Hit Dice (HD), Hit Points (HP), Alignment, Lawful Good (LG), Lawful Neutral (LN), Lawful Evil (LE), Neutral (N), Neutral Good (NG), Neutral Evil (NE), Chaotic Good (CG), Chaotic Neutral (CN), Chaotic Evil (CE), Level, “to hit”, Damage, Experience Point, Saving Throw, Player Character (PC), Non-player Character (NPC), Turn Undead, Spell, Arcane, Divine, Magic, Spell Resistance, Item, Equipment, Armor, Weapon, Potion, Rod, Staff, Wand, Scroll, Ring, Wondrous Item, Artifact, Cursed,d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, d%, round, and turn.

Compare those to Swords & Wizardry Complete:

This entire work is designated as Open Game Content under the OGL, with the exception of the trademarks “Swords & Wizardry,” “S&W,” “Mythmere Games,” “FGG,” “Frog God Games,” and with the exception of all artwork. These trademarks, artwork, and the Trade Dress of this work (font, layout, style of artwork, etc.) are reserved as Product Identity.

Or to Mongoose's Legend rpg:

All the text of this book is designated as Open Content – this means you are free to use the Open Game Licence (overleaf) to reproduce this text and build upon it with your own scenarios and mechanics. You can even print and sell such work, if that is your desire (and we
would wish you the very best of luck if you choose to do this!).

Or robertsconley robertsconley Blackmarsh:

Designation of Product Identity: The following items are here by designated as Product Identity in accordance with Section 1(e) of the Open Game License, version 1.0; Any and all Delving Deeper logos, identifying marks, and trade dress; Any and all Bat in the Attic
Games logos, identifying marks, and trade dress; all artwork, symbols, depictions, and illustrations is designated Product Identity; except such items that already appear in the System Reference Document.

Designation of Open Content: Subject to the Product Identity designation above, all text and maps. It is the author’s intention that the Blackmarsh setting is open content and free to use for commercial and non-commercial projects.
 
Hm, can you unpack that assertion? Because I don't know what to make of it honestly. I've never known any not-Grimdark setting to not include plenty of conflict. Marvel/DC Superheroes, James Bond, Pendragon, Prince Valiant, Dragonlance, Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Glorantha, Star Wars, Star Frontiers, BattleTech, Robotech, Lord of the Ringsetc etc etc - all have tons of conflict. While I love the original Warhammer, I don't really see it as any easier/harder to run games with.

Grimdark is really just over-the-top to the point of parody. It's Judge Dredd, Warhammer, and H.O.L. - satire that poikes fun at cynicism and edginess. It's not really "more conflict", it's simply more savage, ruthless, and extreme outcomes to those conflicts.

Well, the first thing I should clarify is that the problem isn't games that aren't grimdark. Most games aren't, not exactly. The problem is that a game that defines itself by not being grimdark is inevitably going to overshoot the mark.Not being 100% grimdark doesn't make a game boring, but being 0% grimdark does.

I don't mean any game that isn't wall-to-wall despair. I mean Blue Rose here. I mean Pugmire. I mean Eldritch Skies. The ones where there's very little to do because everything is already super-nice and nothing is going to go wrong. (though Pugmire isn't a major offender. It tries a little too hard to be nice, but it does sort of reluctantly include a lot of not-nice things - to the point where my main concern for the game is actually that it will be too depressing since you're going to get to see cuddly cartoon dogs get horribly devoured by monsters. :/ The other two, on the other hand, are - and both of which are written by the same guy, I can't help it notice...)
 
I go the other way. The grim is the part that takes itself too seriously. 2000AD, back when I was reading in the 80s and early 90s, was dark and dealt with some grim stuff. But it also had a self awareness and a sense of humour that I find most so called Grimdark material doesn't have.

Grimdark isn't satire. Because satire is aware that it's poking fun at something.
TristramEvans TristramEvans, I have to agree with Steve here. I think most people's usage of the term Grimdark is the post-2000AD era 40K, where the satire was gone and everything was marketed to 12-14 year olds as opposed to adults. Maybe from 40k 3rd Edition on?
 
To me 40K went through a period where it was very seriously "ultra dark" in an adolescent way. More recently though (post 2014-ish) it's more like modern 2000AD where there is satire, humour with lighthearted stuff and also exploring Dredd as a serious character with long running arcs.
 
Yeah, that sucks.
Examples?
Most adventures, Adventures in Middle Earth, Castles & Crusades, etc.

Basically it variations of

The document is declared to be product identity except for those sections based on the d20 (or 5e) System Reference Document.

Does this met the requirement of clearly designating open content as found in Section 8? Maybe or maybe not!?

8. Identification: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.

I used this approach with Source of the Demon Wolf

Designation of Product Identity: The following items are here by designated as Product Identity in accordance with Section 1(e) of the Open Game License, version 1.0; Any and all Judges Guild logos, identifying marks, and trade dress; Any and all Bat in the Attic Games logos, identifying marks, and trade dress; all artwork, maps, symbols, depictions, and illustrations; all of Underworld and Adventures is designated Product Identity; except such items that already appear in the System Reference Document.

Designation of Open Content: Subject to the Product Identity designation above, all creature and NPC statistic blocks are designated as Open Gaming Content, as well as all material derived from the SRD or other open content sources.

But Scourge is nearly a pure setting and adventure product the only derived mechanics are the stat blocks I used. Everything else is my original work and a few Judges Guild Wilderlands names.

In contrast in the Majestic Wilderlands the first two sections: Men & Magic plus Monster & Treasure are both rules heavy and declared as open content. The third sections Wilderness & Underworld Adventures, is setting information and declared product identity.

In general what I recommend that if a product is mostly rules, like the Majestic Wilderlands supplement then be generous. If it an adventure or setting supplement then just make the statistic clear, declare those open content and the rest product identity.

The problem comes with works like Adventure in Middle Earth where large sections are clearly rules and while original clearly rely on the mechanics of 5th edition but still declared as being mostly product identity.

As for why declaring original works open content like my Blackmarsh, I consider it not only contributing back but an effective form of advertisement for this day and age. The primary goal of Blackmarsh is to popularize the hexcrawl format of the Wilderlands in a form that easier to use and read.
 
I think I may be developing a hate for settings that bill themselves as "bright and hopeful" or "not grimdark." Or in the case of Dark Albion, "not postmodern," which seems to mean roughly the same according to the author's convoluted worldview.
See that's the problem I have with 'GrimDark' or 'Crapsack', there is no conflict. Or rather if there's any it's pointless. You can't win. The 'evil' has already won and all you can do is 'survive' in it. Which to me sucks, because I like SOME hope in my settings, the idea that the players CAN get some good going for more than a fleeting moment.

But I also love me some Dark Fantasy, which tends to be GrimDark et al. Irrational. I know.
 
TristramEvans TristramEvans, I have to agree with Steve here. I think most people's usage of the term Grimdark is the post-2000AD era 40K, where the satire was gone and everything was marketed to 12-14 year olds as opposed to adults. Maybe from 40k 3rd Edition on?

I mean, I can't police what it's been used for since, but I think it loses all meaning if one starts excluding the literal origin of the term in the first place.
 
Last edited:
It's my contention that WFRP and Rogue Trader were both very self-aware products.
Were. Before the term 'grimdark' was coined to describe what they became. Once they lost thatr sense of sardonic, slightly mocking fun and became SRS BZNS, they went from being satirical dark fantasy to being grimdark. After all, as 40k said, "In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only WAR!"

The irony being, WArhammer eventually became that which is took the piss out of. For me, it was when Karl Franz went from chinless wonder who was there to be worked around by the people who actually ran the Empire and became MIGHTY KARL FRANZ. WITH A WARHASMMER! That's when Warhammer lost it's way and became Grimdark. As opposed to being dark fantasy in a grim world.
 
Were. Before the term 'grimdark' was coined to describe what they became..

Um, no - that term was coined literally in the first edition of Rogue Trader and was used too describe WFRP 1st edition and WFB 3rd edition. It's only continued to be applied to GW since then.
 
Um, no - that term was coined literally in the first edition of Rogue Trader and was used too describe WFRP 1st edition and WFB 3rd edition. It's only continued to be applied to GW since then.
Yes and no. The words grim and dark were used. But in their OED sense. Not in the sense of grimdark. Which was.coined years later.

I remember Warhemmer FRP, Wahammer Battle 3rd edition and Rogue Trader coming out. I still have my copies o them. And the first Realms of Chaos, too.

This is one area I'm confident on. The term grimdark may have came from them, but those three games, while being dark and grim, weren't grimdark.
 
Yes and no. The words grim and dark were used. But in their OED sense. Not in the sense of grimdark. Which was.coined years later.

We were using the term frequently by 1990. Those three games are what Grimdark is. But we can agree to disagree at this point, I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
 
That's... pretty obvious, really.

A chunk of british grimdark is explicitly a satire of fascism.
Well, there is no contention of the following, I think we can all be in agreement that:
1. WFRP1 and Rogue Trader are both “self aware” satirical products.
2. RT era 40k in particular was very satirical of British Fascism, Catholicism (or Christianity in general) etc..

The question is, the etymology of the term Grimdark.

Does Grimdark refer to...
A. The dark British satire of 2000AD, WFRP1 and RT?
or
B. The ”serious business” over the top darkness that 40k became after the satire left?

I guess it all depends on what you consider the origin of the word and it’s usage.

In 40k, 3rd edition (1998) the game had a tagline that it did not in 1st (1987) and 2nd (1993) (I just checked).
This new tagline was...
“In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only War!”

There is no doubt that the “common wisdom” Internet definition of the term comes from that 3rd Edition tagline, I haven’t seen a single source that contradicts this.

However, that certainly does not mean that the term wasn’t in usage before that. In fact, GW may have created that phrase as a joke itself.

When you look specifically for “British Grimdark” you see reference to the 80’s, to Judge Dredd, to Fighting Fantasy books, and especially to the works of John Blanche as well as Warhammer Fantasy.

So I have no doubt that the term was in use in the 80’s. I also have no doubt that most people these days are using the word to mean something else.

While I played WFRP1, WFB3, and RT, I wasn’t a heavy wargamer. I also hadn’t discovered 2000AD until 89-90 or so. I hadn’t really heard or used the term Grimdark until I got back into 40k in the tail end of 3rd, by which point it had pretty much acquired the modern definition.

So, Internet co-opts word, I guess. Same shit, different day.
 
For me personally, the term "Dark Fantasy" already was in existence, so we don't need another term for that. "GrimDark" to me was the ridiculous excess that was a self-parody of the dark. Darker than Dark. None more dark. And, as I said, I encountered the term in the early 90s when it was coined to refer to these satircal, black humour British games. Otherwise, I see the term as redundant. Like, what is the difference between Dark Fantasy and Grimdark for people using it to refer to the straight, not overt-trhe-top satircal nihilistic stuff?

But this is like arguing over definitions of genres and subgenres. I'm going to go with what actually makes sense to me and has some utilitarian reason for existing, but I'm well aware I won't convince anyone else.
 
See that's the problem I have with 'GrimDark' or 'Crapsack', there is no conflict. Or rather if there's any it's pointless. You can't win. The 'evil' has already won and all you can do is 'survive' in it. Which to me sucks, because I like SOME hope in my settings, the idea that the players CAN get some good going for more than a fleeting moment.

But I also love me some Dark Fantasy, which tends to be GrimDark et al. Irrational. I know.

Well, yeah. That's the 100% darkness option. I'm not a fan of that one either. I'm just saying, people who try to create 0% darkness games because they're so sick of 100% darkness games tend to be even more boring.

Were. Before the term 'grimdark' was coined to describe what they became. Once they lost thatr sense of sardonic, slightly mocking fun and became SRS BZNS, they went from being satirical dark fantasy to being grimdark. After all, as 40k said, "In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only WAR!"

The irony being, WArhammer eventually became that which is took the piss out of. For me, it was when Karl Franz went from chinless wonder who was there to be worked around by the people who actually ran the Empire and became MIGHTY KARL FRANZ. WITH A WARHASMMER! That's when Warhammer lost it's way and became Grimdark. As opposed to being dark fantasy in a grim world.

Arguably that makes it less depressing, though? I mean, Warhammer Fantasy isn't a satire of overly dreary settings anymore, but that's because it's not actually very dreary in most ways. Karl Franz, saviour-assassinating aside, is presented as basically a good dude who's worth following, and the Empire, while full of bickering and petty stupidity, is a more or less decent place to live and worth saving from Chaos. There's no paladins in WFRP, but there's room for some grumpy cynics who scoff at all that "honour and justice" garbage but still do the right thing because someone has to, damn it.

Meanwhile, the God-Emperor of Man still eats psykers for breakfast, it's just that now that's supposed to be justified. :tongue:
 
Well, yeah. That's the 100% darkness option. I'm not a fan of that one either. I'm just saying, people who try to create 0% darkness games because they're so sick of 100% darkness games tend to be even more boring.

Do you have an example of a 0% darkness game?

There's no paladins in WFRP

Y'know, except that entire country full of them...
 
Well, Toon and My Little Pony come to mind as 0% darkness settings.

The Bretonnians changed a great deal when WFB 5th edition came out as you well know. And even then, the lot of the peasants isn't great. It's funny, I built and painted two Brettonian armies but I don't think I even played them, other than as a Mordheim warband.
 
For me personally, the term "Dark Fantasy" already was in existence, so we don't need another term for that. "GrimDark" to me was the ridiculous excess that was a self-parody of the dark. Darker than Dark. None more dark. And, as I said, I encountered the term in the early 90s when it was coined to refer to these satircal, black humour British games. Otherwise, I see the term as redundant. Like, what is the difference between Dark Fantasy and Grimdark for people using it to refer to the straight, not overt-trhe-top satircal nihilistic stuff?

But this is like arguing over definitions of genres and subgenres. I'm going to go with what actually makes sense to me and has some utilitarian reason for existing, but I'm well aware I won't convince anyone else.
Dark Fantasy was a term I first heard applied to Stormbringer. You could make a case for Call of Cthulhu, Ravenloft and so on falling under that umbrella. Grimdark, on the other hand, was as best I can tell, a somewhat ironic and self deprecating term that ended up being taken at face value. Losing that bit of self awareness and being used unironically for a while.

Theres no tongue in cheek about it now.
 
Well, Toon and My Little Pony come to mind as 0% darkness settings.

Honestly, no. Toon is downright bleak, it's just played for laughs - every sample adventure ends with the PCs losing everything they worked for or finding that their reward is worthless.

MLP, eh. Calling it "dark" is probably a stretch, but there's a ton of villains afoot. It's just that the stakes are lower - the villains don't necessarily want to kill you or take over the world, they may just be out to scam you or make you miserable.
 
I don’t know this author, but he has a good point.
So does Samwise Gamgee.

Look at the difference between Lovecraft and Howard when it comes to the Mythos. Conan’s response to the Outer Dark is “Silver and Fire!”, not the sanitarium.

Even if you have the “Hard Men Doing Hard Deeds” Trope or even “Bad Men Doing Bad Deeds”, it’s frequently in service to something less Hard or less Bad then themselves. Even S&S heroes have a sense of Honor, even if it is personal, and to society they may be outright criminals.

”The World needs bad men. We keep other bad men from the door.” -Rust Cohle, True Detective

So I guess the real issue is, does the darkness serve a purpose or is it gratuitous? To a degree that’s obviously going to be subjective.

So what do we call darkness for the sake of darkness? Isn’t that what being edgy or an edgelord is all about?
 
Last edited:
The question is, the etymology of the term Grimdark.

Does Grimdark refer to...
A. The dark British satire of 2000AD, WFRP1 and RT?
or
B. The ”serious business” over the top darkness that 40k became after the satire left?

I guess it all depends on what you consider the origin of the word and it’s usage.

In 40k, 3rd edition (1998) the game had a tagline that it did not in 1st (1987) and 2nd (1993) (I just checked).
This new tagline was...
“In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only War!”
That line's on the cover of the 2e box set (The main way it was sold, although you could mail-order the books individually), albeit with slightly different punctuation...
1584349158717.png
...so it was before then.

But I was, like, twelve, then. So you'd need to speak to an older british nerd, really.

Well, Toon and My Little Pony come to mind as 0% darkness settings.
MLP, the series with a big bad who literally eats the magic from ponies? Or the villain who stole their identities to turn them into interchangable drones? Or one of the gang hanging around with basically Tzeentch? The race of evil shapeshifters who are trying to drain love from the world?

It's not the grimmest, but for a show for kids it's pretty dark.
 
That line's on the cover of the 2e box set (The main way it was sold, although you could mail-order the books individually), albeit with slightly different punctuation...
View attachment 16362
...so it was before then.

But I was, like, twelve, then. So you'd need to speak to an older british nerd, really.


MLP, the series with a big bad who literally eats the magic from ponies? Or the villain who stole their identities to turn them into interchangable drones? Or one of the gang hanging around with basically Tzeentch? The race of evil shapeshifters who are trying to drain love from the world?

It's not the grimmest, but for a show for kids it's pretty dark.
Oh, nice catch, it’s not on the books themselves. I never had that box.
 
I already gave some. Blue Rose. Eldritch Skies - which I did a whole readthrough of where I complained about this very thing, actually.

I know Blue Rose, there's plenty of antagonists in the setting. The latter...well, that's a lot of words. If you're saying a game ostensibly about the future of Lovecraft's world has no conflict, welll...OK, I'll take your wored for tat. What are you supposed to do in the game then?

Fine, but the whole point of them is that they're not actually good and pure, they just think they are. :tongue:

well...that's somehat debateable. But I don't think I'd describe most of Charlamagne's posse as "good and pure", and they weren't fighting off objectively evil entities...
 
Well, Toon and My Little Pony come to mind as 0% darkness settings.

I've never read/played Toon, but I'll give you that, I guess (I mean, I personally would say Looney Toons are at least 5-10% dark - there was a lot of skits revolving around animals causing humans to have SAN loss, among other edgier content) - maybe Rocky & Bulwinkle too? But I don't think those would count as examples of games created because "people were sick of 100% darkness", at least not in that time period.

MLP is, as someone else pointed out, actually a kind of f-ed up show, about on par with Adventure Time.

And that's not counting the fanbase (shudder)

The Bretonnians changed a great deal when WFB 5th edition came out as you well know. And even then, the lot of the peasants isn't great.

Sure, and I really love that 3rd edition interpretation of them that seemed to be nothing so much as a giant justification for the invention of the guillotine - more clever by half than the Arthurian parody they became. But honestly they pretty much match what I think of Paladins in general - aristocrats playing at being the medieval equivalent of superheroes.
 
Last edited:
I know Blue Rose, there's plenty of antagonists in the setting. The latter...well, that's a lot of words. If you're saying a game ostensibly about the future of Lovecraft's world has no conflict, welll...OK, I'll take your wored for tat. What are you supposed to do in the game then?



well...that's somehat debateable. But I don't think I'd describe most of Charlamagne's posse as "good and pure", and they weren't fighting off objectively evil entities...

Okay, you know what, right now I'm feeling very much like you're being downright painfully literal in picking apart what I say just so you can prove me wrong. I say there are no paladins in the setting, and your answer is, "nuh-uh, there are these guys who fit the original historical meaning of the word!" Was it in any way unclear that I was using the word as a shorthand for shining, perfect, morally impeccable heroes?

And what you're supposed to in Eldritch Skies is the same thing as you're supposed to do in Blue Rose, namely deal with a vaguely defined Few Bad Apples whose petty crimes, while irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, are an unsightly blemish on the shiny perfection of the world as a whole. And yes, you can run a game righting small wrongs. I've run both games, it can be done. But it would have been a damn sight easier if either game had presented some villains with some forward momentum, who had some plans to foil that didn't amount to things like failing to pay their taxes and tariffs. (and that one, by the way, you can take literally - because in both games, smuggling is an evil that you're supposed to be eager to tackle)
 
Okay, you know what, right now I'm feeling very much like you're being downright painfully literal in picking apart what I say just so you can prove me wrong. I say there are no paladins in the setting, and your answer is, "nuh-uh, there are these guys who fit the original historical meaning of the word!" Was it in any way unclear that I was using the word as a shorthand for shining, perfect, morally impeccable heroes?

Well, I mean, it was unclear you were trying to say that "Warhammer "doesnt include any [ shining, perfect, morally impeccable heroes]". I don't know why you'd say Paladins specifically, a character archetype primarily characterized by how they fail to live up to that ideal. And I guess since that was what you were trying to say, I'm now unclear what point you were trying to make by the statement. But if that's me being too "nitpicky", you don't have to respond.

And what you're supposed to in Eldritch Skies is the same thing as you're supposed to do in Blue Rose, namely deal with a vaguely defined Few Bad Apples whose petty crimes, while irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, are an unsightly blemish on the shiny perfection of the world as a whole.

If I'm coming across as nitpicky, it may jusy be that I'm thoroughly confused by a lot of statements. Like, I don't know how a setting can feature a perfect idealized world if Elder Gods actually exist. And while Blue Rose obviously aims at a "lighter" approach to fantasy, it also features countries at war, political intrigue, etc.And I think about your average Dungeoncrawl adventure, and it's really not generally going to have any effect on the grand scheme of things.

Obviously you're totally freew to dislike any of these games, or any game "too optimistic" or "too dark" for your tastes, I really just can't parse a lot of your statements. But I'm not trying to browbeat you over it. When I ask questrions, unless they are rhetorical, it's usually just so I can understand a PoV, not because I'm trying to change it.
 
In Warhammer, Verena is the Goddess of Law, Justice, Wisdom, and Knowledge. Her daughter, Myrmidia, is the Goddess of War, Civilization and Honor. Either one of those might make for a Templar Order that could be seen as Paladin-like. Verena’s other daughter Shallya, is pretty much straight up unironically Good, even in the satirical days.

Warhammer was never ALL mud, blood, and shit.
 
MLP is, as someone else pointed out, actually a kind of f-ed up show, about on par with Adventure Time.
Oh, dude, I would love to see that! I'm totally serious. I love Adventure Time so seeing how MLP compares to it would be really interesting.
And that's not counting the fanbase (shudder)
Oh, dude, I have a friend who's a huuuuuge fan and it's funny hearing him justify his interest in front of his wife. I had other friends who got super into it, too, so I did try a few episodes for their sake. It was fine. Like if I had a kid, I could watch it with her without wanting to vomit. But I don't really get the hype.
 
I really dislike that font that looks like an old typewriter or command line computer. You know, this one. I get the desire for retro aesthetics, but page after page of that just makes my eyes cross.
Courier is such a terrible font. There are way better monospaced fonts if you want a monospaced font for listings, and ITC American Typewriter does a much better job of portraying the look in an typeface you can read without making your eyes bleed.
 
Oh, dude, I would love to see that! I'm totally serious. I love Adventure Time so seeing how MLP compares to it would be really interesting.

Oh, dude, I have a friend who's a huuuuuge fan and it's funny hearing him justify his interest in front of his wife. I had other friends who got super into it, too, so I did try a few episodes for their sake. It was fine. Like if I had a kid, I could watch it with her without wanting to vomit. But I don't really get the hype.
I think it was that it had decent scripts for what it was - it was one of those shows that looked like it should have been much worse than it really was. I still don't get bronies, though.
 
Last edited:
Oh, dude, I would love to see that! I'm totally serious. I love Adventure Time so seeing how MLP compares to it would be really interesting.

I think it was originally done by the creator of Powerpuff Girls, at least the first season or so.

Oh, dude, I have a friend who's a huuuuuge fan and it's funny hearing him justify his interest in front of his wife. I had other friends who got super into it, too, so I did try a few episodes for their sake. It was fine. Like if I had a kid, I could watch it with her without wanting to vomit. But I don't really get the hype.

I dunno how huge a fan he could be if he still has a wife...

1441098729_386595_1441098810_noticia_normal.jpg


2205929.main_image.jpg


article-2629225-1DD4F25700000578-494_306x572.jpg


539.jpg


te_vez_ridiculo.jpg
 
Hmm, weird example, because Dark Albion has plenty of conflict, and is a helluva lot closer to something like WFRP then the Forgotten Realms.

I'll buy what you're sellin' because Sweetness & Light settings are impossible, as long as humans are involved. I just don't think Dark Albion is anything close to what you think it is.
I'd agree. Dark Albion isn't a Sweetness & Light setting. What differentiates it from its WFRP inspiration is that it's a heroic world of moral absolutes. It isn't cynical and grey like WFRP.

Most nobles are good and honourable men who care about their subjects. The Church is a force for good and its problems are caused by Chaos infiltrators, not the venal and corrupt.

Cults of Chaos. It has some good ideas in it, but someone more knowledgeable about the subject matter than I might not think so.

It's decent and there were less historical errors. FHis overview of heresies was well done, even if I personally find making them all Chaos aligned less interesting than actual heresies.

I haven't read Dark Albion, but when Pundy was first promoting it he said that it was an "attempt at Warhammer for Britain" and then compared it often to Game of Thrones, which leads e to believe that it is intended to be a Grimdark setting.

I have read it. If it was supposed to be a Grimdark setting he failed. It's a bit darker than standard D&D tends to be, but at its heart its a very idealistic game.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top