[P2TM Chat] The Restaurant at the End of the Multiverse III

[Insaeldor]

And are ghouls and other mutants called Youkai and Oni?

Yes, there would also be underwater mutants referred to as “kawatora.” another word for kappa which I think sounds cooler.

Isn't the whole point of fallout to evoke amaracana and comment of very american centric themes? Setting it in japan just wastes the whole idea because it throws out almost all of the thematic elements and imagery.

Just makes an OG Post-Apoc RP set in japan. That probably more artisticly fulfilling in the long run anyway

Fallout intentionally parodies the propaganda and pop culture of America in the Cold War, and there's quite a gold mine of 1960's - 70's Japanese history and pop culture to draw on for a Fallout RP : Pinkie violence films, the Tatenokai, ũman ribu, etc.

At that point its just fallout in name only. Yes fallout parodies consumerism and militarism, and yes japan has those too. But they're very different to account for cultural norms in both societies. Fallout spacificly targets the american concepts of these things and a translation to a whole knew culture would require do much change that it might as well not even be fallout.

Just make your own OG RP that isn't constrained by these thematic and narrative issues.

[Barapam]

Imagine if somebody made an Indiana Jones RP? Would anybody be interested in that?

I would. I remember joining one once, that never took off.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Imagine if somebody made an Indiana Jones RP? Would anybody be interested in that?

I actually had something like that in mind a while back. Either Victorian or Eduardian era, adventurers looking for the Lost Kingdom of Prester John...

[Seraven]

Imagine if somebody made an Indiana Jones RP? Would anybody be interested in that?

I actually had something like that in mind a while back. Either Victorian or Eduardian era, adventurers looking for the Lost Kingdom of Prester John...

Not Excalibur?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

I actually had something like that in mind a while back. Either Victorian or Eduardian era, adventurers looking for the Lost Kingdom of Prester John...

Not Excalibur?

That would be less adventurous!

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

Not Excalibur?

That would be less adventurous!

But it would more historical.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That would be less adventurous!

But it would more historical.

More historical than the Kingdom of Prester John? I think those two are equally mythical.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

But it would more historical.

More historical than the Kingdom of Prester John? I think those two are equally mythical.

A lot of Medieval English's histories are mythical, and yet they were included as real things.

[G-Tech Corporation]

More historical than the Kingdom of Prester John? I think those two are equally mythical.

A lot of Medieval English's histories are mythical, and yet they were included as real things.

Tbf, Excalibur was probably actually a real sword, made of good steel or meteoric iron instead of whatever the yokels of Dark Age Britain were mucking about with. To the low-tech men and women of those times, such a blade would seem mystical.

[Constaniana]

A lot of Medieval English's histories are mythical, and yet they were included as real things.

Tbf, Excalibur was probably actually a real sword, made of good steel or meteoric iron instead of whatever the yokels of Dark Age Britain were mucking about with. To the low-tech men and women of those times, such a blade would seem mystical.

So THAT'S where Sokka's Space Sword went at the end of Avatar.

[Olthar]

A lot of Medieval English's histories are mythical, and yet they were included as real things.

Tbf, Excalibur was probably actually a real sword, made of good steel or meteoric iron instead of whatever the yokels of Dark Age Britain were mucking about with. To the low-tech men and women of those times, such a blade would seem mystical.

You mean steel? It's been used since, at least, 1800 BC.

And the story of Excalibur likely does not even come from Britain. The most probable source of inspiration for it in history is the sword of Charlemagne, which was quickly mythologized as a magic blade.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Tbf, Excalibur was probably actually a real sword, made of good steel or meteoric iron instead of whatever the yokels of Dark Age Britain were mucking about with. To the low-tech men and women of those times, such a blade would seem mystical.

You mean steel? It's been used since, at least, 1800 BC.

And the story of Excalibur likely does not even come from Britain. The most probable source of inspiration for it in history is the sword of Charlemagne, which was quickly mythologized as a magic blade.

Oh yes- but there was precious little of it smelted to a high grade in pre/post-Roman Britain.

[Ithalian Empire]

You mean steel? It's been used since, at least, 1800 BC.

And the story of Excalibur likely does not even come from Britain. The most probable source of inspiration for it in history is the sword of Charlemagne, which was quickly mythologized as a magic blade.

Oh yes- but there was precious little of it smelted to a high grade in pre/post-Roman Britain.

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages. The areas where steel was being produced, like the middle east at that time were producing it more or less because they had to. The Middle East has no large deposits of iron-bearing ore, and what they do have is relatively poor in quality compared to what Europeans where mining, if I remember from my metallurgy classes there is too little iron in the ore and they way they smelted iron left to much carbon and other impurities in the steel. Thus they had to layer their native iron with iron imported from other places to make laminated, or Damascus steel, and the repeated hammering and folding produced decent steel. The Japanese had the same issue and that's why the Katana is made the way it is.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Oh yes- but there was precious little of it smelted to a high grade in pre/post-Roman Britain.

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages. The areas where steel was being produced, like the middle east at that time were producing it more or less because they had to. The Middle East has no large deposits of iron-bearing ore, and what they do have is relatively poor in quality compared to what Europeans where mining, if I remember from my metallurgy classes there is too little iron in the ore and they way they smelted iron left to much carbon and other impurities in the steel. Thus they had to layer their native iron with iron imported from other places to make laminated, or Damascus steel, and the repeated hammering and folding produced decent steel. The Japanese had the same issue and that's why the Katana is made the way it is.

I love it when katana plonkers talk about the way a katana is made, how the steel is folded and hammered to form the perfect blade... while it is not really a way to make a perfect sword and more a method to deal with subpar iron.

[Ithalian Empire]

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages. The areas where steel was being produced, like the middle east at that time were producing it more or less because they had to. The Middle East has no large deposits of iron-bearing ore, and what they do have is relatively poor in quality compared to what Europeans where mining, if I remember from my metallurgy classes there is too little iron in the ore and they way they smelted iron left to much carbon and other impurities in the steel. Thus they had to layer their native iron with iron imported from other places to make laminated, or Damascus steel, and the repeated hammering and folding produced decent steel. The Japanese had the same issue and that's why the Katana is made the way it is.

I love it when katana plonkers talk about the way a katana is made, how the steel is folded and hammered to form the perfect blade... while it is not really a way to make a perfect sword and more a method to deal with subpar iron.

Now, here is the kicker. The steel that's been folded a thousand time? Yeah, that's not even the whole blade. That's just used for the edged side, the spine of the blade is still subpar iron, which is why the katana has a curve to it. The two metals cool down at different rates resulting in a curved blade after the heat treatment. This does actually make for an overall stronger sword, but at the end to katana and traditional European swords really don't have any real advantage over the other.

[Olthar]

Oh yes- but there was precious little of it smelted to a high grade in pre/post-Roman Britain.

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages.

Absolutely false. Steel was commonplace throughout all of Europe long before then. In fact, steel smithing was discovered just about the same time as iron smithing everywhere in the world that had iron smithing. Steel is just carbonized iron, and iron was smelted with wood and coal furnaces, so whenever they made iron, they'd get a certain amount of steel just by accident. It took a while for them to figure out how to intentionally and consistently make steel, but they were working with it since long before Rome.

[Hanafuridake]

Weapons are gross and uncouth. Real men write love poetry and cry their eyes out about the intransigence of existence.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages.

Absolutely false. Steel was commonplace throughout all of Europe long before then. In fact, steel smithing was discovered just about the same time as iron smithing everywhere in the world that had iron smithing. Steel is just carbonized iron, and iron was smelted with wood and coal furnaces, so whenever they made iron, they'd get a certain amount of steel just by accident. It took a while for them to figure out how to intentionally and consistently make steel, but they were working with it since long before Rome.

But there is a difference between a technology being discovered and the fruits of that technology being common-place. The steam engine was discovered in 200 CE, but the technology did not become important until the 18th century. Same goes for steel. After the fall of the Roman Empire, the pan-European market basically collapsed together with the economy. This is why we see a regression in technology after the fall of Rome: not so much because the knowledge disappeared, but there was no economy to support large scale steel production. For the same reason, you don’t see any dark age aquaducts or large theatres being built. The technology exists, theoretically, but the markets do not.

[Ithalian Empire]

Or in the whole of Europe for that matter until the later middle ages.

Absolutely false. Steel was commonplace throughout all of Europe long before then. In fact, steel smithing was discovered just about the same time as iron smithing everywhere in the world that had iron smithing. Steel is just carbonized iron, and iron was smelted with wood and coal furnaces, so whenever they made iron, they'd get a certain amount of steel just by accident. It took a while for them to figure out how to intentionally and consistently make steel, but they were working with it since long before Rome.

That's the accidental creation of steel. To my knowledge, the conversation has been about the production of steel. Last I checked, making stuff on accident is a lot different than actually producing enough of something for it to be used on a wide basis across a whole continent.

[Olthar]

Absolutely false. Steel was commonplace throughout all of Europe long before then. In fact, steel smithing was discovered just about the same time as iron smithing everywhere in the world that had iron smithing. Steel is just carbonized iron, and iron was smelted with wood and coal furnaces, so whenever they made iron, they'd get a certain amount of steel just by accident. It took a while for them to figure out how to intentionally and consistently make steel, but they were working with it since long before Rome.

But there is a difference between a technology being discovered and the fruits of that technology being common-place. The steam engine was discovered in 200 CE, but the technology did not become important until the 18th century. Same goes for steel.

The steam engine is a complicated piece of technology both to build and utilize. It not being useful until a way to use it was also discovered is logical. Steel, however, is just stronger metal, and there is always a use for that. No one discovered steel and just decided not to use in favor of inferior metals.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, the pan-European market basically collapsed together with the economy. This is why we see a regression in technology after the fall of Rome: not so much because the knowledge disappeared, but there was no economy to support large scale steel production. For the same reason, you don’t see any dark age aquaducts or large theatres being built. The technology exists, theoretically, but the markets do not.

The "dark" age is, in fact, a myth. It never happened. While certain specific technologies were lost, like aqueducts and Roman cement, most things were maintained. Not only that, but technology actually continued advancing throughout the Medieval period with, for example, the invention of the plow or the windmill. This idea that the Middle Ages were somehow full of backwards neanderthals is just cultural chauvinism tinged with a modernist superiority complex. There was no great loss of technology, especially not for steel. There are plenty of examples of steel swords from all across Europe throughout the entire Medieval period. Which should be plainly obvious. As I said, steel is just carbonized iron it is made in virtually the same way. If you have iron, you have steel.

[G-Tech Corporation]

But there is a difference between a technology being discovered and the fruits of that technology being common-place. The steam engine was discovered in 200 CE, but the technology did not become important until the 18th century. Same goes for steel.

The steam engine is a complicated piece of technology both to build and utilize. It not being useful until a way to use it was also discovered is logical. Steel, however, is just stronger metal, and there is always a use for that. No one discovered steel and just decided not to use in favor of inferior metals.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, the pan-European market basically collapsed together with the economy. This is why we see a regression in technology after the fall of Rome: not so much because the knowledge disappeared, but there was no economy to support large scale steel production. For the same reason, you don’t see any dark age aquaducts or large theatres being built. The technology exists, theoretically, but the markets do not.

The "dark" age is, in fact, a myth. It never happened. While certain specific technologies were lost, like aqueducts and Roman cement, most things were maintained. Not only that, but technology actually continued advancing throughout the Medieval period with, for example, the invention of the plow or the windmill. This idea that the Middle Ages were somehow full of backwards neanderthals is just cultural chauvinism tinged with a modernist superiority complex. There was no great loss of technology, especially not for steel. There are plenty of examples of steel swords from all across Europe throughout the entire Medieval period. Which should be plainly obvious. As I said, steel is just carbonized iron it is made in virtually the same way. If you have iron, you have steel.

Not my argument, but this is broadly true - however, it is important to remember that one should certainly distinguish between the Middle Ages and the Migration Period/Fall of the Western Roman Empire. The years of 400-700 AD, when the country was transitioning from post-Roman warlordism into native kingdoms and the medieval period as we conceive of it, was a time of turmoil, war, and a great amount of erosion of existing trade links and knowledge. Certainly not all knowledge was lost, but that was a time during which a substantial amount of de-urbanization occurred, and well-crafted weapons might have indeed taken on mythical proportions. Sure, there was still steel being produced here and there, but to the average peasant or man-at-arms in a fiefdom, such weapons would have been nearly unknown.

[Olthar]

The steam engine is a complicated piece of technology both to build and utilize. It not being useful until a way to use it was also discovered is logical. Steel, however, is just stronger metal, and there is always a use for that. No one discovered steel and just decided not to use in favor of inferior metals.


The "dark" age is, in fact, a myth. It never happened. While certain specific technologies were lost, like aqueducts and Roman cement, most things were maintained. Not only that, but technology actually continued advancing throughout the Medieval period with, for example, the invention of the plow or the windmill. This idea that the Middle Ages were somehow full of backwards neanderthals is just cultural chauvinism tinged with a modernist superiority complex. There was no great loss of technology, especially not for steel. There are plenty of examples of steel swords from all across Europe throughout the entire Medieval period. Which should be plainly obvious. As I said, steel is just carbonized iron it is made in virtually the same way. If you have iron, you have steel.

Not my argument, but this is broadly true - however, it is important to remember that one should certainly distinguish between the Middle Ages and the Migration Period/Fall of the Western Roman Empire. The years of 400-700 AD, when the country was transitioning from post-Roman warlordism into native kingdoms and the medieval period as we conceive of it, was a time of turmoil, war, and a great amount of erosion of existing trade links and knowledge. Certainly not all knowledge was lost, but that was a time during which a substantial amount of de-urbanization occurred, and well-crafted weapons might have indeed taken on mythical proportions. Sure, there was still steel being produced here and there, but to the average peasant or man-at-arms in a fiefdom, such weapons would have been nearly unknown.

Europe did, of course, degrade, but it was mostly cultural and economic. Good swords have always been expensive, but that just made them status symbols, not mythical. Certain swords, like, as I said, Charlemagne's sword, did acquire that legendary aspect, but that had more to do with the man wielding it than the sword, itself.

[Esternial]

Well that escalated quickly.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Well that escalated quickly.

Swords and materials are srs bzns.

[Constaniana]

Weapons are gross and uncouth. Real men write love poetry and cry their eyes out about the intransigence of existence.

Real men pilot giant robots that throw galaxies at their omnipotent foes.