TheRPGSite

So, my Wild West campaign is now well over a year of real time old (two years of game time so far, from 1876-1878).

Has anyone else run a western campaign (anything longer than a three sessions) that wasn't some kind of fantasy world or alternate-history?
Where did you set it? When? What did you do?

Back in the 90s there was a 3e Boot Hill campaign that ran I think 3 years. I only got to play at it once as it was just too far away to attend regularly but that one chance came up. In that one it was set in a mining town and there was alot of ranch warring and mine warring going on. The session I participated in involved a train robbery, of the train my PC was riding into town on, and a rescue by the locals. Who were the established players PCs that werent part of a secondary hostile group that was run on a different day. There was a big shootout at the robbers camp played out on a diorama with some really nice metal cowboy minis I still have no idea of their origins.

If things work out will be playing in one soon after 3 tries now.

A player I know though has had better success. Shes been in a western RPG campaign about two years I think. Not sure what system though. Could be Boot Hill.

I love playing Boot Hill, but I don't think I've seen more than a handful of PC's survive one night of play. And I'm cool with that.

No, but I would like to. Western without fantasy is one of my favorite settings.

Back in the 1970's we had an on-again-off-again Boot Hill 1E campaign that lasted for around a year. It was one of those "too many players are missing for our regular game, so let's play Boot Hill" kinds of things. Lots of bank robberies and excessive uses of dynamite.

We had a lot of characters die off and kept bringing in siblings, cousins, kids of characters, or whoever struck our fancy in order to keep the game going. We weren't really that historically accurate and didn't try to set a specific year for the campaign.

If you kind of like Boot Hill, you will love Behind Enemy Lines (FASA). Seriously; do yourself a favor and go find a copy. I don't think I've ever had more fun playing a table top rpg.

I've often thought of running a Wild West campaign. I'd like to take an approach like the great Robert Benton 70s film Bad Company.

I ran a very long running campaign set in Pawnee OK. The game ran from 1893 to 1904 game time, and over about 5 years of real time. We could pick it up anytime and resume. Three player characters got married and had kids - two to each other. We used an adaptation of my Sweet Chariot rules.

I ran a shorter game as well, set in Montana in 1880. That ran for a couple dozen sessions!

Quote from: Larsdangly;965682If you kind of like Boot Hill, you will love Behind Enemy Lines (FASA). Seriously; do yourself a favor and go find a copy. I don't think I've ever had more fun playing a table top rpg.

So tell us about Behind Enemy Lines.

I ran Aces & Eights, weekly, for almost 3 years.

Back in the mid 80s, ran one for right at 18 months that was fun.  Setting was mostly central Colorado and game time was from 1876 up to 1890.  A load of fun then, lots and lots of explosives used.

Quote from: RPGPundit;965450Has anyone else run a western campaign (anything longer than a three sessions) . . .

A campaign is "anything longer than three sessions?" Another Pundejo out-of-the-ass pronouncement?

Quote from: RPGPundit;965450. . . that wasn't some kind of fantasy world or alternate-history?

What the fuck, man? How the fuck are you using 'alt-history' here?

Quote from: RPGPundit;965450Where did you set it? When? What did you do?

Our current campaign is set in fictional El Dorado County, New Mexico Territory - the main river on the Boot Hill campaign map is the Pecos in our game. We started in the spring of 1873 in-game, and it's now July 1874 - in real-world time, we're coming up on one year.

And we do the whole fucking L'Amour.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;965860What the fuck, man? How the fuck are you using 'alt-history' here?

History turns to alt-history the moment a PC's boots hit the ground.

Ohh, I just thought of how awesome a Wild Bunch style game would be. Any suggestions for a fairly light but relatively deadly and naturalistic system to play a Western RPG in?

Quote from: Voros;965888Ohh, I just thought of how awesome a Wild Bunch style game would be. Any suggestions for a fairly light but relatively deadly and naturalistic system to play a Western RPG in?

Boot Hill, Traveller, Twilight/Merc 2000, Phoenix Command, D&D, Rolemaster...

The game itself didn't matter -the group often acted like the Wild Bunch at one point or another.

We had a lot of fun using the Phoenix Command Old West expansion rules. The combat rules being overly detailed immediately turned every gunfight into a slow-motion bloodbath -like shooting your own Sam Peckinpah movie with dice!

Quote from: Black Vulmea;965860A campaign is "anything longer than three sessions?" Another Pundejo out-of-the-ass pronouncement?

No, but some people think running two sessions passes for a 'campaign'.

QuoteWhat the fuck, man? How the fuck are you using 'alt-history' here?

As in what you see in both Deadlands and Aces & Eights. As in, not our own historical timeline.

While going over Masque of the Red Death again it occurred to me that you could strip out the magic and supernatural and run a western with it without too much hassle. Though would have to wind back the clock a decade or two limit levels to keep guns dangerous.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966094No, but some people think running two sessions passes for a 'campaign'.

Fuck a bunch of your "some people" bullshit, Pundejo - who the fuck said "two sessions passes for a 'campaign'?"

And what makes three 'sessions' holier than two? Why not four? or six? or ten? What makes this anything more than you trying to claim authority over definitions beyond just talking out of your "alpha-male" asshole?

Quote from: RPGPundit;966094As in what you see in both Deadlands and Aces & Eights. As in, not our own historical timeline.

1e Boot Hill's default setting is 'El Dorado County, somewhere in the Southwest' - is that fantasy or alt-history to you?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;9662081e Boot Hill's default setting is 'El Dorado County, somewhere in the Southwest' - is that fantasy or alt-history to you?

Hmm, you and Pundit slugging it out might become popcorn worthy, but in the meantime it has produced something of value.  This is actually a good question.

El Dorado County is where the CA Gold Rush started, not far from the now aptly named Placerville (which was once named Dry Diggin's and Hangtown - I love wandering around Northern California checking out all the little museums and landmarks).  El Dorado County was one of California's original counties, so has been around since 1850.

If a campaign is set in the actual El Dorado County in year whatever, then I'd called that "historical".
If the campaign is set in the real world, but a fictional El Dorado County that's meant to stand in for any Southwest County circa 1865-1890, I wouldn't call the campaign either historical or alt-history.  It's a "fictional" Western campaign, maybe.
For a campaign to be "alt-history" it has to clearly diverge from our history at some point prior to the PCs involvement.

But of course, Clash is right: no matter whether it's "historical", "fictional" or "alt-history" it becomes alt-history as soon as PCs enter the picture, it becomes in essence an alternate timeline.

To me alternative history is when something is obviously different than history as we know it. In this game Hitler won the second world war. That kind of thing. When is a game officially a campaign? I don't know really. One quest could take 3 or even 4 sessions in my experience. So I would say 5 sessions or longer? Longer than a month if you play weekly?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;966208Fuck a bunch of your "some people" bullshit, Pundejo - who the fuck said "two sessions passes for a 'campaign'?"

And what makes three 'sessions' holier than two? Why not four? or six? or ten? What makes this anything more than you trying to claim authority over definitions beyond just talking out of your "alpha-male" asshole?

I'm not sure what the fuck your problem is, retard, but here is why I put that definition in the first post: to make it clear that while it didn't have to be a short campaign, I wasn't talking about one-shots and I wasn't talking about something that you'd thought about running and then didn't and I wasn't talking about a game that petered out immediately; but that otherwise I didn't really care how many sessions you'd played.

I'm not sure what satanic motive you think I had for what I wrote, or if you actually have a thought process of any kind running through the mess of obvious frustration and confused-neanderthal-rage-at-a-world-you-could-never-understand that is your mind, but that was my actual reason for writing it that way.

Quote1e Boot Hill's default setting is 'El Dorado County, somewhere in the Southwest' - is that fantasy or alt-history to you?

Neither. It's a non-fantasy fictional setting. Not history, but unless you have wizards or sexy vampires or such in it, then it's not fantasy either.  It's just a made up quasi-real make-believe-town like you see in westerns written by people who didn't want to do the research.

Quote from: CRKrueger;966212Hmm, you and Pundit slugging it out might become popcorn worthy, but in the meantime it has produced something of value.  This is actually a good question.

El Dorado County is where the CA Gold Rush started, not far from the now aptly named Placerville (which was once named Dry Diggin's and Hangtown - I love wandering around Northern California checking out all the little museums and landmarks).  El Dorado County was one of California's original counties, so has been around since 1850.

If a campaign is set in the actual El Dorado County in year whatever, then I'd called that "historical".
If the campaign is set in the real world, but a fictional El Dorado County that's meant to stand in for any Southwest County circa 1865-1890, I wouldn't call the campaign either historical or alt-history.  It's a "fictional" Western campaign, maybe.
For a campaign to be "alt-history" it has to clearly diverge from our history at some point prior to the PCs involvement.

I haven't looked at the Boot Hill book in years, but as far as I know it was the latter. The fact that they called it "el dorado county" was almost certainly a total coincidence.

I've only played Boot Hill as one shots. Maybe a couple sessions back in the 80s, but nothing memorable.

All my Western campaigns have been Deadlands or other Fantasy West. I ran my own Sixguns & Sorcery campaign on and off for a couple years using AD&D. Think Shadowrun with horses.

2nd Ed Boot Hill notes El Dorado County is "somewhere in the west" and some GM suggestions are Colorado, Wyoming or Texas along the Mexican border. Also gives examples for Texas near a reservation or the border, and one for Colorado and suggestion for orienting the map. But notes it was meant to be placed about anywhere the GM wants.

Make of that what you will.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966391I haven't looked at the Boot Hill book in years, but as far as I know it was the latter. The fact that they called it "el dorado county" was almost certainly a total coincidence.

I'd have to check but I'm pretty sure the El Dorado County in Boot Hill has zilch to do with the real El Dorado County. I'm almost certain they just grabbed it as a cool Western name and placed it in a vague Southwestern U.S. I always had the impression it was meant to be in the Colorado/New Mexico/Arizona region. I don't think anyone here in Southern California would even think of El Dorado County as being "southwest" as it's practically Oregon.

Quote from: Dumarest;966511I'd have to check but I'm pretty sure the El Dorado County in Boot Hill has zilch to do with the real El Dorado County. I'm almost certain they just grabbed it as a cool Western name and placed it in a vague Southwestern U.S. I always had the impression it was meant to be in the Colorado/New Mexico/Arizona region. I don't think anyone here in Southern California would even think of El Dorado County as being "southwest" as it's practically Oregon.

You live here, so you know, but California's so damn big, "practically Oregon" is still over 200 miles away.  El Dorado's about as far north as Kansas City or Colorado Springs.  Depending on the definition, no part of California is in the Southwest, while others count the eastern deserts.  In any case, you're right, Placerville ain't it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;966583You live here, so you know, but California's so damn big, "practically Oregon" is still over 200 miles away.  El Dorado's about as far north as Kansas City or Colorado Springs.  Depending on the definition, no part of California is in the Southwest, while others count the eastern deserts.  In any case, you're right, Placerville ain't it.

Of course we consider Sacramento to be practically Moscow, too. ;)

Quote from: Dumarest;966787Of course we consider Sacramento to be practically Moscow, too. ;)

At least we do in Rocklin.

My latest blog entry (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-fleeting-nature-of-wild-west.html) is somewhat relevant to this thread.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;966218To me alternative history is when something is obviously different than history as we know it. In this game Hitler won the second world war. That kind of thing.

Agreed. A true alternative history should be one where it's clear that some major event made history different from what we know now. Little ripples in the timestream are just regular RPG sessions.

As to campaign locations, I often keep things as vague as possible. "Somewhere in Texas" usually is enough for my group, unless they come up with a specific plan that involves an actual person or location.

Right. "Fictional locale" is not "Alternate history" unless the fictional town is set in some sort of alternate history.

I played and then GM'd an online historical* Western game that ran about 6 months, back in the mid '90s. Great stuff.

*The original GM had the Mexican railroad hub further north than it should have been for 1871. But it certainly wasn't a fantasy game.

Quote from: Ulairi;966844At least we do in Rocklin.

Hell, in Sacramento (Natomas) we do too. :D

Quote from: jan paparazzi;966218To me alternative history is when something is obviously different than history as we know it. In this game Hitler won the second world war. That kind of thing. When is a game officially a campaign? I don't know really. One quest could take 3 or even 4 sessions in my experience. So I would say 5 sessions or longer? Longer than a month if you play weekly?

I don't think I'd refer to anything I ran with sessions in single figures as a campaign. I had an 18 session campaign, a 12 session mini-campaign,  a 13 session mini-campaign, and various adventures less than that. 6 sessions is an adventure not campaign almost always, I'd think.

Quote from: Omega;967136Right. "Fictional locale" is not "Alternate history" unless the fictional town is set in some sort of alternate history.

History turns into alt.History the moment a player character's boots hit the ground.

I somehow forgot the two mid length campaigns I did with Coyote Trail! D'oh! Love that game!

Quote from: flyingmice;967269I somehow forgot the two mid length campaigns I did with Coyote Trail! D'oh! Love that game!

I was looking at the Coyote Trail Big Bundle at the PIG web site...any insights into what makes the game so good? The only Western  RPG I have now is Boot Hill (both the 2nd and 3rd editions), and I used to own Aces & Eights but found it to be too complicated and too rules-heavy for me or anyone I play with to want to run it. Does Coyote Trail do anything Boot Hill doesn't do, or do anything better than Boot Hill?

Quote from: Dumarest;967292I was looking at the Coyote Trail Big Bundle at the PIG web site...any insights into what makes the game so good? The only Western  RPG I have now is Boot Hill (both the 2nd and 3rd editions), and I used to own Aces & Eights but found it to be too complicated and too rules-heavy for me or anyone I play with to want to run it. Does Coyote Trail do anything Boot Hill doesn't do, or do anything better than Boot Hill?

I have never read or played Boot Hill, so I couldn't compare, unfortunately.

Quote from: flyingmice;967269I somehow forgot the two mid length campaigns I did with Coyote Trail! D'oh! Love that game!

Did you run this strictly RAW?

Quote from: flyingmice;967413I have never read or played Boot Hill, so I couldn't compare, unfortunately.

Fair enough. Care to point me in the direction of  any reviews of your World War I pilot RPG?

Quote from: 3rik;967419Did you run this strictly RAW?

I don't even run my own games RAW....

Quote from: Dumarest;967420Fair enough. Care to point me in the direction of  any reviews of your World War I pilot RPG?

Here's Pundit's review (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?6592-In-Harm%27s-Way-Aces-In-Spades), and here is one from a customer (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=19076&products_id=25609&it=1). However if you have a system you like, you can probably choose something to roll for gunnery and something to roll for piloting and be happy with the air combat system.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . . here is why I put that definition in the first post . . .

Okay, here we go.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . . to make it clear that while it didn't have to be a short campaign . . .

Wait for it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . . I wasn't talking about one-shots . . .

Wait for it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . . and I wasn't talking about something that you'd thought about running and then didn't . . .

Wait for it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . .  and I wasn't talking about a game that petered out immediately; but . . .

Nearly there now.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390. . . otherwise I didn't really care how many sessions you'd played.

And thank you for confirming that you pulled that number straight out of your brown eye.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390I'm not sure what satanic motive you think I had . . .

I don't think your motives are satanic. You're just a shallow thinker who tries so friggin' hard to give yourself airs of authority. It's part of being an egoist blowhard.

And you could never be Satan. You'd be the guy Satan sends to the bodega for a pack of cigarettes and a lottery ticket.

Quote from: RPGPundit;966390It's a non-fantasy fictional setting. Not history, but unless you have wizards or sexy vampires or such in it, then it's not fantasy either.  It's just a made up quasi-real make-believe-town like you see in westerns written by people who didn't want to do the research.

It takes remarkable flexibility to fellate yourself like that, doesn't it?

No matter how much research your put in, historical fiction blends the real and the imaginative (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/09/in-age-of-three-musketeers-and-captain.html), and fictional locations in the real world (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/01/place-that-never-was.html) in no way preclude bringing in a shitload of history (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/03/playing-with-history.html).

I like to get the history 'right' (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?34883-Experiences-with-real-life-figures-in-historical-and-modern-games&p=944847#post944847), but as clash already noted, it's fiction the moment the adventurers get turned loose in the setting, with all that that entails (http://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/wikis/the-role-of-history), and I'm not there to impress the players that I can read a fucking book but to run a fun game.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;967550I like to get the history 'right'[/url], but as clash already noted, it's fiction the moment the adventurers get turned loose in the setting, with all that that entails, and I'm not there to impress the players that I can read a fucking book but to run a fun game.

I read the links, and I agree entirely with this! Not the fight with Pundit - that's your affair - but how you deal with history in a game.

Quote from: RPGPundit;967077My latest blog entry (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-fleeting-nature-of-wild-west.html) is somewhat relevant to this thread.

Excellent read.  The transition from frontier to state happened rather quickly, no doubt about it.  I credit the railroad and the increase in number of local newspapers.

Quote from: Prairie Dragon;968715Excellent read.  The transition from frontier to state happened rather quickly, no doubt about it.  I credit the railroad and the increase in number of local newspapers.

Yes. The irony was that the railroad made Dodge into a wild-west boomtown (well, the railroad and the restriction on cattle drives everywhere east of Dodge), but it was also what doomed it to respectability in only a few short years.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;967550And thank you for confirming that you pulled that number straight out of your brown eye.

I'm sure you have some kind of history behind this prissy little attitude of yours. Surely I said something, at some point in time, that made you awful cross at me. It was a big deal, clearly.

But here's the thing: I have no recollection what it was. That's how little you matter to me. I get that it was some kind of massive traumatic event for you, but for me it was utterly insignificant. As in, you are insignificant.

QuoteNo matter how much research your put in, historical fiction blends the real and the imaginative (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/09/in-age-of-three-musketeers-and-captain.html),

And? I get that you think you have a point there. You don't, though. I mean, you get that I wrote a little book called Dark Albion, right?
 Which is both the most historically-accurate RPG book ever written on 15th century England, and also has frogmen and dragons in it.  
This doesn't change the fact that there's still accurate historical fiction, and sloppy inaccurate historical fiction. Second-rate hacks will say bullshit like "it's all imaginative anyways" as a cover for their inadequacy.

Quoteand fictional locations in the real world (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/01/place-that-never-was.html) in no way preclude bringing in a shitload of history (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/2012/03/playing-with-history.html).

I like to get the history 'right' (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?34883-Experiences-with-real-life-figures-in-historical-and-modern-games&p=944847#post944847), but as clash already noted, it's fiction the moment the adventurers get turned loose in the setting, with all that that entails (http://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/wikis/the-role-of-history), and I'm not there to impress the players that I can read a fucking book but to run a fun game.

Congratulations on your literacy. Is it a recent accomplishment?

Anyways, over here, my  historical games are beloved and in huge demand on account of being enormously fun BECAUSE of the careful historical research.  Even the ones that have frogmen in it. Maybe especially those ones.



Oh, and before I forget, I apologize in advance for how in a couple of years' time you'll be seething about all this and I won't remember a damn thing about it, because you don't matter.

Quote from: flyingmice;967267History turns into alt.History the moment a player character's boots hit the ground.

I don't agree, that's too binary and arbitrary a definition. As far as I'm concerned, alt-history is deliberately taking a departure from whatever is known of a period/place. A game might stray into alt-history over time and if certain major events take place, but equally it might not.

My own historical game was set in a little-recorded part of the Mediterranean before the rise of Rome. Besides noting its major allegiances and the rough mix of people around it, there isn't anything recorded about the day-to-day goings on. So who knows if what the PCs were up to was really a departure from history, we don't know what it was in the first place.

Quote from: Kiero;969793I don't agree, that's too binary and arbitrary a definition. As far as I'm concerned, alt-history is deliberately taking a departure from whatever is known of a period/place. A game might stray into alt-history over time and if certain major events take place, but equally it might not.

My own historical game was set in a little-recorded part of the Mediterranean before the rise of Rome. Besides noting its major allegiances and the rough mix of people around it, there isn't anything recorded about the day-to-day goings on. So who knows if what the PCs were up to was really a departure from history, we don't know what it was in the first place.

Well, technically, I guess, you're correct.  If the players never change anything, then it kind of stays history.  But I think what Clash and others were getting at is that PCs are presumed to have the capability to change things, thus the whole setting is wide open and effectively becomes "alt-history" from the point of view of the GM because it can go anywhere, even if you look back later at the campaign and there hasn't been change enough to merit the true alt-history label.

Quote from: Kiero;969793I don't agree, that's too binary and arbitrary a definition. As far as I'm concerned, alt-history is deliberately taking a departure from whatever is known of a period/place. A game might stray into alt-history over time and if certain major events take place, but equally it might not.

My own historical game was set in a little-recorded part of the Mediterranean before the rise of Rome. Besides noting its major allegiances and the rough mix of people around it, there isn't anything recorded about the day-to-day goings on. So who knows if what the PCs were up to was really a departure from history, we don't know what it was in the first place.

But your players created their PCs, so you *know* it's not something that really happened. They aren't channeling long-dead people from that time and place. Why pretend? Why is it so important to you? What do you gain by pretending it is real history and not alt-history?

Quote from: CRKrueger;969825Well, technically, I guess, you're correct.  If the players never change anything, then it kind of stays history.  But I think what Clash and others were getting at is that PCs are presumed to have the capability to change things, thus the whole setting is wide open and effectively becomes "alt-history" from the point of view of the GM because it can go anywhere, even if you look back later at the campaign and there hasn't been change enough to merit the true alt-history label.

This is indeed the crux. My Napoleonic naval game set in the Mediterranean and Caribbean went for many years without changing history. Eventually they did something that changed history, but they knew they were already alt-history, and had been since the first session, which gave them the confidence that if they ever did attempt something really big, it wouldn't be shot down or undermined. They could reach whatever heights in the game world they were willing to push themselves to.

Quote from: flyingmice;969937This is indeed the crux. My Napoleonic naval game set in the Mediterranean and Caribbean went for many years without changing history. Eventually they did something that changed history, but they knew they were already alt-history, and had been since the first session, which gave them the confidence that if they ever did attempt something really big, it wouldn't be shot down or undermined. They could reach whatever heights in the game world they were willing to push themselves to.

And my game would, likely, drift into that territory eventually. It was looking like one of the PCs might become a ruler in the Gallic hinterland, and who knows where she might have taken it from there.

But the point is until that actually happens, you can't really call it alt-history.

But you can Kiero! You can because there are no PCs in real history. Having PCs is the same as being a little bit pregnant. But, from your answer above, I can see it is a semantic difference, not an effective one. ;D

Quote from: RPGPundit;969492I'm sure you have some kind of history behind this prissy little attitude of yours. Surely I said something, at some point in time, that made you awful cross at me. It was a big deal, clearly.

But here's the thing: I have no recollection what it was. That's how little you matter to me. I get that it was some kind of massive traumatic event for you, but for me it was utterly insignificant. As in, you are insignificant.

I know your enormous yet unistratose ego would love for that to be true, but the fact is, I bust the balls of pretty much anyone on this site who says ridiculously stupid shit, and you're no different.

Get that, Pundejo? You're not special. Not even a little bit.

Quote from: RPGPundit;969492I mean, you get that I wrote a little book called Dark Albion, right?
 Which is both the most historically-accurate RPG book ever written on 15th century England . . . . Anyways, over here, my  historical games are beloved and in huge demand on account of being enormously fun BECAUSE of the careful historical research.

Real men don't do this. Because they don't need to.

Seriously, your preening narcissism is inversely matched by the profound triviality of your self-proclaimed 'accomplishments.' You're a fin-rotted betta in a muddy puddle who proclaims himself a mako. Your boasts carry the flop-sweat stink of desperation.

Quote from: RPGPundit;969492This doesn't change the fact that there's still accurate historical fiction, and sloppy inaccurate historical fiction.

(https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder435/250x250/67332435/thanks-captain-obv-thanks-captain-obvious.jpg)

Quote from: RPGPundit;969492Second-rate hacks will say bullshit like "it's all imaginative anyways" as a cover for their inadequacy.

Calling Clash Bowley a "second-rate hack" is one of your lowest points, Pundejo, and with so gawdamn many truly awful things you've written to choose from, that's really saying something.

But let's see if we can't salvage this into an actual gaming discussion nonetheless.

First, let's torch the strawman: no one here said, 'It's all imaginative anyways." What was said is, the actions of the player characters are inherently imaginative and that a historical roleplaying game setting blends fact and fiction, if for no other reason than those fictional player characters tromping around in it.

What was argued is, given that by its very nature historical fiction is necessarily fiction, the decision isn't between 'accurate' and 'sloppily inaccurate,' but rather how the fiction is integrated into the campaign setting and actual play. Frex, in my Flashing Blades campaign, I accept the anachronism of social clubs as depicted in the game rules, but swapped out fictional military units (http://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/wikis/royal-army), knightly orders (http://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/wikis/orders-of-knighthood), and bureacratic offices (http://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/wikis/ranks-and-positions-in-the-bureaucracy) for historical ones. I utilize many historical non-player characters, even in bit roles where the available history is terribly sparse, while integrating fictional characters from swashbuckling novels and published FB adventures. My goal is a setting which presents the period in detail while calling out the historical fiction on which the game is based.

I've also integrated imaginary locations as well - one of the projects I will eventually publish on my blog is a fictional city, a Ruritania based on one of Jordi Ballonga's treatments of the history of a place through time from pre-history to the present day. In a number of ways it's taken more work to create a credible fictional setting that ties tightly into real world history than it did to simply take an actual town and 'stat it up' for the game - dismissing something like this as 'lazy' or 'sloppy' reflects a Platte River-shallow, myopic view of creating historical fiction.

He said unistratose. I like it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;969489the restriction on cattle drives everywhere east of Dodge.

Texas.  It's an excellent example of your premise.  Frontier to independent nation to a state in the union in a matter of years.  Your mention of the Native American tragedy happens literally in between Dodge and Texas.  So many fast moving parts.

No one gives a shit about your setting, Vulmea. Because you're not me.

Quote from: RPGPundit;971029Because you're not me.

Deo gratias.

Good that you acknowledge your irrelevance.

Well, pards, I get the feelin' this town ain't big enough for the two o' ya, so you'd best meet out in front of the saloon at high noon and grab iron to settle this.

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. :D

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! :D

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

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:

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?

Every film takes some poetic license, but there's different degrees of historicity.  Some movies happen in "wild west land" with no concern at all for history; and essentially are a genre in and of themselves.  It's certainly valid to say you want to run a campaign of the Cinematic Wild West, as opposed to the Historical Wild West.  You should just admit that this is what you are doing.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;971584I have three general observations to make:

1. 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.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "it's the wild west, only the confederacy never fell but they're not racists!" is in no way historically accurate. I really wonder at the people who think they have to object to such an obvious statement.

I can't make a definitive claim in the definition of "alt-history," but, I agree with JA in that, any alternative has to turn on an event which changes the original outcome (which, if I remember right, is also called a "counterfactual?") Cor instance, the "What if...?" series posited 13 ways The U.S. Could have lost the Revolutionary War (quite a few of of which involved Washington getting captured or killed, or some other such thing). They present the situation, then posit the effect, with more than one example focusing on someone being removed from the situation (EX:the anecdote about Churchill nearly being run over by a car [if I remember right]). I would think an alternative history would have to turn on some event for which a substantially different outcome has a "plausible" cause (City on the Edge of Forever?).

Historical fiction, on the other hand, doesn't present alternative outcomes, but rather places fictional characters in the actuality, or crafts story using real folks, positing what they might have said or thought, intertwined with the facts (a la "Killer Angels").

So, if you place fictional characters in a real historical setting, actual historical events occur (are simulated), and their effect on major events is non-existent, then you have historical fiction. If the setting is accurate, but not really geared toward events that make a difference, then, to me, that's just plain fiction. It's the difference between characters fighting in the Battle of Gettysburg, participating in Chamberlain's desperate bayonet charge, and characters fighting in some location in the wilderness, with the war as setting alone, and the battle not making a difference.

But, really, this is just splitting hairs. I don't think most players give a shit whether they're in the actual El Dorado, or whether Dark Albion is 100% accurate. All that is secondary to the fun.

Or should be, anyway...

Quote from: RPGPundit;969492I mean, you get that I wrote a little book called Dark Albion.
 Which is both the most historically-accurate RPG book ever written on 15th century England, and also has frogmen and dragons in it.

I'm curious-- how many other rpgs were attempts at an accurate 15th century England? Because if yours is the only one...

QuoteAnyways, over here, my  historical games are beloved and in huge demand on account of being enormously fun BECAUSE of the careful historical research.  Even the ones that have frogmen in it. Maybe especially those ones..

Are you're trying to say your frogmen are more fun thanks to the "careful historical research?" Because that just sounds...well, I dunno what that sounds like.

Thanks for making RPGs great again, though.:-/

Quote from: cranebump;972437IAre you're trying to say your frogmen are more fun thanks to the "careful historical research?" Because that just sounds...well, I dunno what that sounds like.

He makes the best games. Their success is bigly. Those storygame LOSERS just can't handle how... Did I mention that they're swine? Real swine. Oink. Oink. Like Rosie O'Donnell. There was a study done-- This is true. There was a study done that swine can't play a game unless they-- They can't even roll the dice, right? The dice. I own gold dice. They're the best dice. Lou Zocchi's dice are actually based on molds taken from my dice. He borrowed them from me back in 1973 when I was playing with him and Gygax and Marc Miller in Lake Geneva. I told him-- I told him, "Gary. I think you've got a winner here." That's what a real RPG looks like, right? Me, Marc, and Lou in a basement in Lake Geneva. Now, of course-- Forget the file cabinet. I play in Brazil. Boys of Brazil. They knew how to run a wargame. Don't-- Don't get into a game of Advanced Squad Leader with Adolf. That's what we used to say. Huge demand for the games. Huge.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;972571He makes the best games. Their success is bigly. Those storygame LOSERS just can't handle how... Did I mention that they're swine? Real swine. Oink. Oink. Like Rosie O'Donnell. There was a study done-- This is true. There was a study done that swine can't play a game unless they-- They can't even roll the dice, right? The dice. I own gold dice. They're the best dice. Lou Zocchi's dice are actually based on molds taken from my dice. He borrowed them from me back in 1973 when I was playing with him and Gygax and Marc Miller in Lake Geneva. I told him-- I told him, "Gary. I think you've got a winner here." That's what a real RPG looks like, right? Me, Marc, and Lou in a basement in Lake Geneva. Now, of course-- Forget the file cabinet. I play in Brazil. Boys of Brazil. They knew how to run a wargame. Don't-- Don't get into a game of Advanced Squad Leader with Adolf. That's what we used to say. Huge demand for the games. Huge.

That's rather good uncanny.:-)

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

They do but no one can agree just what they mean. To claim they have 'objective' meaning is bizarre, to say the least.

Quote from: Voros;972597They do but no one can agree just what they mean. To claim they have 'objective' meaning is bizarre, to say the least.

I am forced to agree with your claim that the chrysanthemums have eaten the junipers, for the bizarre tornados have leaped over the frogs and swallowed their own tracheotomy.

(I make it a rule not to take obvious sophistry seriously.)

You've obviously never read a surrealist poem then.

Quote from: Voros;972739You've obviously never read a surrealist poem then.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/4d173dbcd67990142d165cd35fd13667/tumblr_mtlkdeCjWs1qkiyi1o1_400.gif)

Sorry were you the asshole quoting Hemingway out of context earlier?

Back on topic...

No, back in the day we never played Boot Hill even though I would have loved to have been in a campaign. Nowadays I work in an on again off again manner on my western themed RPG I wrote myself called Hurled into Eternity. What I really need to finish is the character classes which I've avoided for years.

For the most part it works and is based off using a deck of cards, no dice required. I should get working on it again.  

Also if a play by post pops up for Boot Hill let me know there pardners'

Quote from: flyingmice;970075But you can Kiero! You can because there are no PCs in real history.

Backtracking, but just on this point, I see you and raise you one Demetrios Poliorketes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demetrius_I_of_Macedon). :D

Quote from: Kiero;972834Backtracking, but just on this point, I see you and raise you one Demetrios Poliorketes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demetrius_I_of_Macedon). :D

Ah yes! I remember him from that book by deCamp about the Rhodian sculptor! Polioketes was the "bad guy" in that book, so he was technically an NPC... ;D

But yes - when you look back some people really look like PCs! This one for sure! I have to agree with your point. :D

Quote from: flyingmice;973195Ah yes! I remember him from that book by deCamp about the Rhodian sculptor! Polioketes was the "bad guy" in that book, so he was technically an NPC... ;D

But yes - when you look back some people really look like PCs! This one for sure! I have to agree with your point. :D

Alfred Duggan wrote a similar style of novel, Elephants and Castles, but featuring Poliorketes as the main character. He's not exactly the hero, things seem to happen to him. He drinks himself to death in captivity, which seems a very PC way to go out.

He's also the villain (though of course he doesn't see himself that way) in the second main arc of Christian Cameron's Tyrant series. He's on the other side of a rough alliance of kings and states opposing the Antigonid dream of restoring Alexander's empire (under their banner).

Quote from: Voros;972759Sorry were you the asshole quoting Hemingway out of context earlier?

Y'know, I let this shit slide the first time because it's you and who the fuck cares, but if you're going to trot this same tired shit out twice, (1) Hemingway said every writer should have a shit-detector and mine is dialed up on acuity and concision and (2) Hemingway is renowned for his terse, minimalist writing style usually attributed to his early training as a journalist, so go fuck yourself, you pretentious shitbird.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;973431...pretentious shitbird.

Isn't that what Dr. No was using for his cover on Crab Key? If only he hadn't messed with those roseated spoonbills...

Quote from: Kiero;973233Alfred Duggan wrote a similar style of novel, Elephants and Castles, but featuring Poliorketes as the main character. He's not exactly the hero, things seem to happen to him. He drinks himself to death in captivity, which seems a very PC way to go out.

He's also the villain (though of course he doesn't see himself that way) in the second main arc of Christian Cameron's Tyrant series. He's on the other side of a rough alliance of kings and states opposing the Antigonid dream of restoring Alexander's empire (under their banner).

Good villains never see themselves as villains!  :D

Quote from: flyingmice;973552Good villains never see themselves as villains!  :D

He is quite clearly insane in that portrayal, he thinks he's the hero of a grand saga which will end with him ruling the world. Other men are simply not great enough to oppose him or match his deeds.

Quote from: Kiero;973635He is quite clearly insane in that portrayal, he thinks he's the hero of a grand saga which will end with him ruling the world. Other men are simply not great enough to oppose him or match his deeds.

So, like most drivers, then? :D

Quote from: Kiero;973635He is quite clearly insane in that portrayal, he thinks he's the hero of a grand saga which will end with him ruling the world. Other men are simply not great enough to oppose him or match his deeds.

Wait, I lost track, are you referring to RPGPundit or Poliorketes?

Quote from: cranebump;972437I'm curious-- how many other rpgs were attempts at an accurate 15th century England? Because if yours is the only one...

Fine. I'll up the ante.  Dark Albion is both the best OSR setting book ever written, and the most historically-authentic OSR medieval sourcebook ever written. And those two facts are not disconnected from each other. It is Albion's attention to historical detail that helps make it awesome.  If it was otherwise dull (though that would be very hard given the historical source material being worked with), it would obviously not be great, but if it was full of fantasy hipsterism but zero  historicity it would be just another one of dozens of equally dullish fantasy worlds.

QuoteAre you're trying to say your frogmen are more fun thanks to the "careful historical research?" Because that just sounds...well, I dunno what that sounds like.

Thanks for making RPGs great again, though.:-/

No, I'm saying that a setting that has medieval-authenticity thanks to careful historical research, and frogmen; is superior to a game that has frogmen and a bunch of 2nd-rate fantasy tropes pulled out of the author's ass with zero attention to history. ESPECIALLY if they then pretend that their game is "historical".

Dark Albion is really good and useful. It's even educational as there are a lot of facts and figures in there I wasn't aware of.  I just hope subsequent printings fix the typos and occasional bad grammar. The frogmen don't bother me; I just ignore them and substitute the French. They're not that different anyway. ;)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;973431Y'know, I let this shit slide the first time because it's you and who the fuck cares, but if you're going to trot this same tired shit out twice, (1) Hemingway said every writer should have a shit-detector and mine is dialed up on acuity and concision and (2) Hemingway is renowned for his terse, minimalist writing style usually attributed to his early training as a journalist, so go fuck yourself, you pretentious shitbird.

A typical childish outburst after being exposed as the truly pretentious bullshitter you really are BV. First, my comment about the surrealists is what we adults call a joke, based on the resemblance between the previous sentence's nonsense and surrealist nonsense. Maybe not that funny a joke but of course as usual you missed any intended humour because you are such a self-important prick.

But I've met macho assholes like you name dropping Hemingway without a fucking clue my whole life. Wow, you know that Hemingway worked as a journalist, how impressive!

Fact remains you tried to use his quote and his authority as a great writer (otherwise why even mention him?) to claim that being concise was the end-all and be-all of good writing instead of a style that Hemingway used for his own writing but was far from a prescription for all the writers he admired and had as peers.

The 'pretentious shitbird' is the one who brings up Hemingway when discussing style in rulesbooks for RPGs and then misrepresents what he was saying: i.e. you.

So... about those western campaigns....

Quote from: Willmark;975012So... about those western campaigns....

:D :D

Hahah yeah. Anyone played Dust Devils? Apparently a hated 'storygame' but I've read it nails elements of the film version of the West.

I'm wondering what system would best fit a SW approach or a 70s 'revisionist' style. Both very different but 'Westerns.' There are a lot of different kinds of 'revisionist' Westerns, from Ford's The Searchers to Ulzana's Raid. The gunfight at the end of McCabe and Ms. Miller is the opposite of Good, Bad and the Ugly.

Quote from: Voros;975055Hahah yeah. Anyone played Dust Devils? Apparently a hated 'storygame' but I've read it nails elements of the film version of the West.

I'm wondering what system would best fit a SW approach or a 70s 'revisionist' style. Both very different but 'Westerns.' There are a lot of different kinds of 'revisionist' Westerns, from Ford's The Searchers to Ulzana's Raid. The gunfight at the end of McCabe and Ms. Miller is the opposite of Good, Bad and the Ugly.

Haven't heard of Dust Devils until now. But I'm always keen to hear about Western RPGs.

From the sounds of it Dust Devils is actually a storygame, (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Devils_(game)) not an RPG appended with that title as an insult. The poker mechanic sounds fun and appropriate.

Eh, I can't say I know what a storygame is, really. I have the Prince Valiant game and it basically seems to be an RPG as far as I can tell.

Yeah they're all games to me. Prince Valiant is great, both the game and the comic strip.

Quote from: Voros;975066Yeah they're all games to me. Prince Valiant is great, both the game and the comic strip.

I have the 15 volumes from Fantagraphics collecting the strips through 1966. My indulgent gift to myself, although I think after the Amazon pre- order price guarantees I paid maybe 50 to 60% of the list price for each volume as it came out.  I'm not sure how many volumes there will be.

On the rare occasions I get to play Pendragon, the Prince Valiant strips are an inspiring resource. When my kids get older, I may try introducing them to RPGs with Prince Valiant. Although my son is much more interested in Star Wars, so I might try the West End version of that with him as it's awfully easy to learn.

My wife has the complete Little Nemo in Wonderland strips. Would love the Valiant strips. We really lost something with the vanishing of the large format Sunday colour strips. Bill Waterson fought the good fight.

Quote from: Voros;975076My wife has the complete Little Nemo in Wonderland strips. Would love the Valiant strips. We really lost something with the vanishing of the large format Sunday colour strips. Bill Waterson fought the good fight.

I have the complete Calvin & Hobbes,  too. My daughter loves the tiger.

Bill Watterson also had the good taste to stop while he was on top and declined to merchandise his creations. Cool guy. He's done some C&H stuff for charity from what I recall, but has not been tempted to cash in.

Quote from: Dumarest;975064Eh, I can't say I know what a storygame is, really.

Dust Devil's mechanic has you play poker hands for a "scene", your characters abilities and actions determine your hand.  Whoever wins the hand gets to narrate what happens.  The games rules literally are there to determine who is the current storyteller, with the characters basically being a source of modifiers for the storytelling poker mechanics.

Cue someone coming in and telling us how much of a traditional RPG it is.

Quote from: RPGPundit;965450So, my Wild West campaign is now well over a year of real time old (two years of game time so far, from 1876-1878).

Has anyone else run a western campaign (anything longer than a three sessions) that wasn't some kind of fantasy world or alternate-history?
Where did you set it? When? What did you do?

I ran one for a couple of years. The possibility of magic and/or the supernatural matters being involved was there but it never came up. The alternate history involved was that it was set in a made-up town, Clanton, Kansas, on the Kansas/Oklahoma border on the Chisholm Trail. The player-characters were townsfolk, not cowpokes, and the conflict was often with drunken cowboys but bank robbers, poker cheats, one Comanche raid and other villains abounded. As to when: I ran it in 2003-2005 but it was set in 1872.

The game rules we used were my homebrew Glory Road Roleplaying rules, minus the magic and with additional rules for the firearms of the period.

-------
Bill Reich
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/

Quote from: flyingmice;973552Good villains never see themselves as villains!  :D

"Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes." Lazarus Long in Heinlein's _Time Enough for Love_

---
Bill Reich

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;975244"Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes." Lazarus Long in Heinlein's _Time Enough for Love_

---
Bill Reich

Would I gainsay Mr. Heinlein? Never! :D

-clash

As of this weekend, we just hit 1879.

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;976129Ozymandias would disagree.

Huh? Isn't he the very definition of a guy who kills millions of people and sees himself as the hero who saves the world?

Ozy was smart enough to know that the necessary thing isn't always a good and moral one, and honest enough to himself to not deny the conclusions;).

Quote from: CRKrueger;975126Dust Devil's mechanic has you play poker hands for a "scene", your characters abilities and actions determine your hand.  Whoever wins the hand gets to narrate what happens.  The games rules literally are there to determine who is the current storyteller, with the characters basically being a source of modifiers for the storytelling poker mechanics.

Cue someone coming in and telling us how much of a traditional RPG it is.

It's a traditional RPG, of course!
(I haven't read it, despite owning the PDF from a Bundle of Holding, but if anyone is looking for a reason to rant, you can have at it!)

Quote from: RPGPundit;976581Huh? Isn't he the very definition of a guy who kills millions of people and sees himself as the hero who saves the world?

Indeed he was, assuming you're talking about Watchmen rather than pharaoh Ramesses II.

Lots of good discussion in the thread, it also gave me the drive to finish up my western rpg.
On a camp out at the moment and finally nailed down the last sticky part of the resolution system (it's a deck of cards). I'll post here shortly the updated rules.

Quote from: AsenRG;976588Ozy was smart enough to know that the necessary thing isn't always a good and moral one, and honest enough to himself to not deny the conclusions;).

Ozzy also bit the head off a bat!

Wait... are we talking about the same Ozzy? :O

Quote from: flyingmice;979076Ozzy also bit the head off a bat!

Wait... are we talking about the same Ozzy? :O

That happened when he was battling Moloch, if I remember it right. Which I don't.

Quote from: Dumarest;979113That happened when he was battling Moloch, if I remember it right. Which I don't.

That's the way I mis-remember it too!