Quote from: jhkim on January 28, 2023, 03:11:06 AM

Quote from: Opaopajr on January 27, 2023, 07:39:45 PM
I know what you go through, jhkim. I use a lot of culture analogs to rapidly create my campaign settings. For me the biggest aid is to find monster analogs, if possible, and if not tap into similar monsters that show variance by the culture that surrounds it.

For example, at first Occident dragons & Orient dragons, and similarly with undead vampire/hungry ghosts. But then similarly look how a culture re-reads things like 'undead' or 'goblins' and try to convey that. A lot of White Wolf material, for good and ill, attempts  to tap into those materials. And lastly, if there is no analog or variant -- and everything else is too alien -- I take a "social" monster and attach cultural trappings to keep things suitably in theme (and unexpected for lore munchkins).

So, my orcs & trolls of Thar by the Moonsea have more horseriding raiding parties... and they do underground longhouses if they can, and they like saunas, too. Emulates that Finnish, Karelia, Russian steppe mix. I'm sure I'd add a licorice flavored alcohol of some putrid sort (can you ferment blood? or just add blood to alcohol?) to make it suitably of that region, but also alien to that species. It shows a cross-cultural influence, despite hostilities, and individualizes my campaign monsters from bog standard.

Does that help? 

Yep. That's similar to the sort of thing I've been doing with different intelligent monsters. I agree that thinking monsters can easily have cultural traits that fit with the local culture.

I've been thinking more about how to adapt in wider-ranging monsters as the campaign continues.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
IIRC the Incas had mummies.

How do I do it? I go balls deep and make the setting it's own thing, most of the X folklore monsters have their equivalent on other cultures. It just requires a LOT more work to stat the new monsters, classes, races and to re-skin them correctly.

The Inca had mummification as a burial ritual -- but their mummies were not regarded the same way as the mummies of D&D. Especially, past emperors were mummies - but they were respected and holy mummies who continued the work of the good Sun God Inti with their immortal life. Since past emperors are patrons rather than foes, their combat stats aren't important, but it's a big point to consider.

As it turns out, my PCs are all working for a mummy - the long-dead grandfather of the current emperor.


I personally am interested in detailed historical campaigns that go all-in. However, I find that it takes a hard-to-find group of players to take to it. The players for this campaign are long-time gamers, but we're fairly casual, and we don't put in a lot of prep time between sessions. We've mostly got busy lives and have only been meeting once a month lately.

This fits well with the D&D-ish approach that goes light on historical details, but still conveys some broad strokes of the geography, politics, a bit of technology, and a smattering of religion and customs. But a lot of specifics are glossed over in favor of action-packed, relatable fantasy.

A good mummy can still be an oponent if you cross it: You did something that put at risk the Empire or it's plans for the wedding of his living descendants or stole an artifact...

Just like an Evil Monster can be an (temopraly) ally if both your goals align, I have just set a Vampire against a Dark Druid becauise even though Duncan doesn't understand the whole Neutral/Neutral/Neutral he rather deal with the normal Druids that want "balance" (whatever that is) than with a worshipper of Teon (The ultimate Evil of the world). The Vampire is searching for a ring of stupidity, in exchange for our help she has provided intelligence on the underdark monsters (included the Yuan-Ti and the Drow) that are intent on destroying us because we crossed them by disrupting their plans. Once the alliance ends she promissed to leave the Kingdom for 100 years and has not been feeding on humans, elves, dwarves or halflings, only the monsters.

I actually cooked up a homebrew for a 'Guardian Mummy', a nonevil mummy that acts as a tomb guardian and advisor, based off this line of thought.

Of course, the trick to approaching one was to properly propitiate and venerate it. Better not screw up those religion skill checks.

I don't see any problem. Almost every monster has an equivalent in other cultures: dragons, undead, giants, faeries, etc can be easily given a new coat of paint to keep the local homeowners' association happy. Those that can't could be explained with very little effort: for example, that vampire from Transylvania who was smuggled to London.

I don't really have that problem since I'm quite comfortable with mixing cultures so copper-skinned ninja-pirates speaking French is very acceptable civilisation in my wanderings, and I'd just adjust bestiary by renaming various beings into French or Breton

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 29, 2023, 07:10:12 PM
I don't really have that problem since I'm quite comfortable with mixing cultures so copper-skinned ninja-pirates speaking French is very acceptable civilisation in my wanderings, and I'd just adjust bestiary by renaming various beings into French or Breton

That works if that's what you want, but if what you're looking for is a smidge of authenticity and/or uniqueness to a culture in your world then it doesn't.

Quite the contrary - mix of real world and fantasy elements then carved to my liking give me more sense of verisimilitude and authenticity than another fantasy Egypt, Rome, Germany or England.

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 29, 2023, 09:14:37 PM
Quite the contrary - mix of real world and fantasy elements then carved to my liking give me more sense of verisimilitude and authenticity than another fantasy Egypt, Rome, Germany or England.

To YOU, not everybody likes the stuff you do, not everybody HAS TO like the stuff you do, and that's okay.

More importantly, yours isn't "the one true way".

The problem is that once you have a world with monsters, it's no longer like the real world. And so authenticity is just an illusion.

If monsters were real, they'd likely move and migrate just like humans. Unless there was someplace really inaccessible, like Australia or they got exterminated in an area, like horses in the Americas or Lions most places but Africa.

And if people move, monsters would move. Someone mentioned Dracula moving to England. But there's also the case of the Rakshasa, we only have it in D&D because one popped up in Chicago on Kolchak: The Night Stalker. And even then, you can arguably see similarities between them and the Fomorians of Ireland, since both cultures have Indo-European roots, just 1000s of miles apart

Quote
To YOU, not everybody likes the stuff you do, not everybody HAS TO like the stuff you do, and that's okay.

More importantly, yours isn't "the one true way".

My friend it's you who started with denouncing my way for lack of authenticity, after I merely described my way. So get off this high horse of "subjectivity"

Quote from: JeremyR on January 29, 2023, 10:55:51 PM
The problem is that once you have a world with monsters, it's no longer like the real world. And so authenticity is just an illusion.

If monsters were real, they'd likely move and migrate just like humans. Unless there was someplace really inaccessible, like Australia or they got exterminated in an area, like horses in the Americas or Lions most places but Africa.

And if people move, monsters would move. Someone mentioned Dracula moving to England. But there's also the case of the Rakshasa, we only have it in D&D because one popped up in Chicago on Kolchak: The Night Stalker. And even then, you can arguably see similarities between them and the Fomorians of Ireland, since both cultures have Indo-European roots, just 1000s of miles apart

True. If monsters were real, then they'd have evolutionary relationships just like humans and other animals. They wouldn't just pop into existence and stay neatly in their boxes (aside from the monsters which literally do that, like dryads and other genius loci whose main property is a lack of larger scale mobility).

Then again, fantasy kitchen sink settings with fantasy counterpart cultures never actually take into account things like the migration and genetic drift that created different human populations and cultures.

Altho if the monsters were influenced by human beliefs, then you might have a stronger case? Idk

My friends dark fantasy setting had beings born as manifestiation of local belief called elementals, that could manifest in variety of ways depending only of what local ensouled beings believed in.
But on the other hand - those tended to be very unique.

I have no issue with using monsters from all cultures, although nowadays I prefer using published adventures.

Interesting monster are interesting regardless of culture, and D&D is already a hodge-podge of folklore, sci-fi, misconceptions and stuff Gygax et al. made up.

But yes, I try to tie them with the current setting. In my current setting, for example, the major deity is the Lord of Water; it replaces the Catholic Church in all myths that are related to this religion.

I like monsters to make a coherent whole somewhat. For example, all aberrations come from other planes while monstrosities are beast warped by magic, etc.

I'm currently writing a book on Brazilian folklore and it think those monsters could be used anywhere (although many are specific to rivers or forests). It is not always easy to stay true to the source material and usable at the same time (many monsters are a single individual, for example), but I think it is worth the effort.

We've got were-anteaters, flayed tapirs, demonic sows, alligator witches, fire-breathing goats, giant sloths, burning anacondas covered in eyes... cool stuff!

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 30, 2023, 02:50:16 AM

Quote
To YOU, not everybody likes the stuff you do, not everybody HAS TO like the stuff you do, and that's okay.

More importantly, yours isn't "the one true way".

My friend it's you who started with denouncing my way for lack of authenticity, after I merely described my way. So get off this high horse of "subjectivity"

What I said was this:

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 29, 2023, 07:13:26 PM

Quote from: Wrath of God on January 29, 2023, 07:10:12 PM
I don't really have that problem since I'm quite comfortable with mixing cultures so copper-skinned ninja-pirates speaking French is very acceptable civilisation in my wanderings, and I'd just adjust bestiary by renaming various beings into French or Breton

That works if that's what you want, but if what you're looking for is a smidge of authenticity and/or uniqueness to a culture in your world then it doesn't.

So, I'm not "suddenly" getting in no "high horse of subjectivity", I started WITH subjectivity. To YOU (you have the right to be wrong) putting Inca Emperor mummies right next to European style vampires in a pseudo-Incan setting gives it "authenticity". To others it doesn't, it can be fun but it doesn't feel right, hence why people resort to re-skining monsters into something that feels like it belongs when they're not going for the gonzo approach (nothing wrong with gonzo mind you).

Now, I'm not saying every damn setting HAS TO BE "historically accurate", Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur & Maztica to name a few are perfectly fine settings and lots of fun can be had on those, but they are built to allow for the kitchen sink approach.

If what I want (and what I think Jhkim is searching for) is a high fantasy setting that feels like Inca/Aztec/Maya/Generic precolombine culture then that approach doesn't work. You have to work harder to create/addapt the races, classes, spells, monsters, etc for the setting to feel "authentic". I know because my High Fantasy Mayan inspired game is taking a lot of hard work (I might end importing stuff from other precolombine cultures).

Quote from: JeremyR on January 29, 2023, 10:55:51 PM
The problem is that once you have a world with monsters, it's no longer like the real world. And so authenticity is just an illusion.

If monsters were real, they'd likely move and migrate just like humans. Unless there was someplace really inaccessible, like Australia or they got exterminated in an area, like horses in the Americas or Lions most places but Africa.

Sure, authenticity is an illusion in the sense that it is purely in the perception of the players. But that illusion matters for the feel of the game. I could make a game that is historically accurate to 15th century Britain, but it has anime-inspired psychic powers and alien monsters. That could be logically consistent and fun, but for many players it wouldn't *feel* authentic to 15th century Britain.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 30, 2023, 12:52:13 PM
To YOU (you have the right to be wrong) putting Inca Emperor mummies right next to European style vampires in a pseudo-Incan setting gives it "authenticity". To others it doesn't, it can be fun but it doesn't feel right, hence why people resort to re-skining monsters into something that feels like it belongs when they're not going for the gonzo approach (nothing wrong with gonzo mind you).

Now, I'm not saying every damn setting HAS TO BE "historically accurate", Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur & Maztica to name a few are perfectly fine settings and lots of fun can be had on those, but they are built to allow for the kitchen sink approach.

If what I want (and what I think Jhkim is searching for) is a high fantasy setting that feels like Inca/Aztec/Maya/Generic precolombine culture then that approach doesn't work. You have to work harder to create/addapt the races, classes, spells, monsters, etc for the setting to feel "authentic". I know because my High Fantasy Mayan inspired game is taking a lot of hard work (I might end importing stuff from other precolombine cultures).

I largely agree, but I'd clarify some. GeekyBugle is working on something that sounds more authentic than what I'm trying for. In my campaign, I am intentionally and explicitly setting a low bar for authenticity. But that still means there is some authenticity. I don't want kitchen-sink anything-goes, because I want to convey broad strokes of Incan culture even though I'm skipping a lot of the details.

I don't want to have all-new races, classes, magic, and monsters that fully reflect Incan cultures. That's not just because it's too much work for me, but because it would be a lot of work for the *players* to learn. That is why I am using a lot of the standard D&D races, classes, magic, and monsters. This limits the difficult learning curve.

In my game last night, I conclude that I messed up by my own standards. When going into the vampire's ruined lair, I included a banshee. It was reskinned to relate to an Incan myth, but a player commented that the banshee broke his sense of culture since he felt concept was too tied into Irish myth. In retrospect, I agree with him.

Banshees aren't murderous monsters in Irish folklore either. A ghost that causes sonic damage by screaming is not authentic to Irish folklore.