We've all seen medieval fantasy cultures based on Britain,

Andoran from Pathfinder

>>47440333
The issue is that there is no data on what that might be like. You could take the current United States culture and potentially imagine what you might get if you nuked the US back to the stone age and then let them redevelop to medieval level of tech.

Indians

>>47440333
Self destructive.

>>47440333
It doesn't exist. You could have mesoamerica medieval fantasy, but not normal American. The closest you can get is colonial fantasy, or wild western fantasy, and either way, you need magic injuns

>>47440333
The United States was never cucked by having Royalty so you'd have to figure some form of government that might not be typical in a fantasy setting

If your country has Royalty you should be embarassed

>>47440333
The US didn't have Middle Ages.

>>47440444
Honestly, if you or one your parents weren't born in America, you should just kill yourself

File: The-Dark-Tower-by-Stephen-King.jpg (85KB, 500x440px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 500x440px

>>47440333
Stephen King's Dark Tower series

Although I guess DT is more "Good the Bad and the Ugly" + Arthurian legends than American fantasy.

File: blood meridian.jpg (155KB, 1501x866px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1501x866px

What system can be used for a Blood Meridian esque campaign?

I've always wanted to run a western fantasy game, as opposed to a fantasy western game. Not a western with fantasy elements, but a fantasy with western flavor.

File: joe_brown_pike.jpg (8KB, 200x711px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 200x711px

>>47440333

A little known fact is that the best sword design in the world was devised by none other than George S. Patton himself, and that during the early years Americans fielded pikemen, while a few individuals were still wearing plate (though doing so was looked down on as "cowardly").

If nothing else, I'd say they'd have high quality weapons (a-la Japan), but not an awful lot of armor, and a heavy reliance on light cavalry. Mobility warfare would be key, and their main shtick would be having non-noble cavalrymen making up their main heavy hitters not unlike the Mongols or Huns.

File: Average America AI.jpg (158KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 600x338px

>>47440333

>Medieval United States

The problem there is "medieval" tropes aren't applicable to the US's culture.

What is one of the main tropes of medieval fantasy? Nobility. Whether it takes the form of knightly orders, scheming lords, or kings ruling over it all, these don't work in a US-inspired setting. We burgerlanders historically hate the concept of nobility. The Constitution explicitly states the government can never grant anyone a title of nobility. There are no Knights in America. No lords, no vassals, no dukes, no earls, no kings.

You can argue there are roundabout analogues to those, like landowners, politicians, entrepreneurs like Rockefeller, but these are only superficially similar. George Washington did not sit on a throne, and that was by conscious design.

I dunno, some medieval "kingdom" where the castle is occupied by an elected ruler who peacefully abdicates after two terms feels really weird.

How can you say you love America if you want to mash it up with shitty old world things like nobility?

File: America+on+a+scale+from+1+10+how+american+are+you+dale_389526_5161577.jpg (42KB, 780x439px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 780x439px

>>47440771

>All these people thinking royalty exclusively ruled in medieval and renaissance times
>What are elected monarchy (A la Scandinavia)
>What is oligarchy (A la Venice)
>What is theocracy
>What is a council of nobles/landholders running things
Etc

>>47440333

Play D&D, but have everyone think Dwarves are cool instead of elves.

>>47440866
Yes, but when one thinks of "medieval Europe", they do not think of Scandinavia or Venice.

File: The_protectors_of_our_industries.jpg (458KB, 1200x889px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1200x889px

>The United States was never cucked by having Royalty
>There are no Knights in America. No lords, no vassals, no dukes, no earls, no kings.

>americunts actually believe this shit
LAND OF THE FREE
A
N
D

O
F

T
H
E

F
R
E
E

>>47440696
>best sword design in the world
For what? According to whom?

>>47440866

None of those things still have any real analogues to the US's culture.

While there are valid criticisms about money in politics, things like wealth and landownership are not prerequisites for governing.

The closest you get is Venice, if only because it's similar to American mafioso rule than the actual government.

>>47440916
Again, economics and politics in America can only be equivocated to actual nobility in the most rhetorical sense. There has never been a literal king with literal landed titles or knights in America. American politics don't translate to medieval fantasy, and the politics of American capitalism certainly have no analogue for a traditional fantasy story.

>>47440905
Yes, because what medieval fantasy needs is MORE bland France-Germany-and-UK-are-literally-all-of-Europe settings. You don't even have to go full Eberron or Dark Sun, just take inspiration from beyond the bog standard.

>>47440916
>lols butthurt,
>jealous that he doesn't have a country based upon natural laws and the rights and freedoms of men.
>thinking america is the only nation that has rich people.
>has history of being cucked and is now currently cucked.

atleast we had our glorious moments, I can't say the same for you guys.

>>47440905
fuck them then.

File: Patton_Sword.png (321KB, 2072x812px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 2072x812px

>>47440923

http://www.pattonhq.com/sword.html

Admittedly, he had 2000ish years of accumulated knowledge to work off of and the reason it's one of the greatest is likely because it was also one of the last designs, but that's not a bad accomplishment for what was in essence an amateur's work.

>>47440444
>America invented republics

File: lolkaathe.jpg (65KB, 564x468px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 564x468px

>>47440968
>>jealous that he doesn't have a country based upon natural laws and the rights and freedoms of men.
Anon, please. I can only laugh so much.

File: 1452043359210.jpg (57KB, 500x562px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x562px

>>47440960

OP's not asking for a "Scandinavia or Venice-themed medieval setting" He's asking for an America-themed medieval setting. And America still isn't anything like medieval Scandinavia or Venice.

>>47440706
Your concept of nobility is in many ways far more contemporary with Washington than with the middle ages.

In many cases a noble title wasn't yours by birth until death. Instead there was a contract between you and whatever lord granted you that title. You'd provide a certain amount of military assets (usually starting with yourself) and in return you didn't need to pay taxes. You might also be granted land, and over time some fancy names for these people popped up.

If you couldn't live up to your end of the bargain, it's back to being a commoner.

This then slowly mutated into a more hereditary system, with granted lands for example starting to be seen as belonging permanently to the vassal, with services rendered to the lord being more a thing of "that's just what you do".

So we can quite easily take the wealthy of the early US and turn them into medieval style nobles. They simply start providing armed forces instead of paying taxes. Then come up with some new title for it, and there you have it.

I'm not sure how marshals and sheriffs and whatnot worked either, but you could probably turn that into somethign pretty feudal too without much work. You take a big piece of land out on the fringes, put a guy in charge of making sure shit doesn't blow up there, let him keep part of the taxes he collect so he has the resources to do this and recruit some men and so on, and when he starts getting old, well, his son will have learned the craft by then, so just have him take over. And there's your fief.

>>47440444
>Witnessed.

File: too loyal for this shit.jpg (77KB, 593x720px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 593x720px

Probably something clan or other kind of pocket federation of disparate city states.

US is pretty divided as a country due to large geographical size.

Honestly wild west with swords instead of guns would be how I would imagine "midieval" US

Start with the roman Republic, make all the patricians merchants and all the slaves black. That's your ye olde murrica.

>>47440936

>The dual party system
> State of Deseret
> The CSA during its brief stint of existence

Aside from a monarchy, the US has experienced all those forms of government in some form or shape. Ask yourself this: when was the last time a non-wealthy land owner became president? And of those, which of them wasn't a former military official (ergo the most common way someone became a noble if they weren't rich to begin with)? Heck, when was the last time a senator and/or congressman wasn't a landholder?

File: 1454181430980.jpg (103KB, 1090x645px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1090x645px

>>47441031

This can work, but there is one problem:

> Instead there was a contract between you and whatever lord granted you that title

The way American politics works in theory and for the most part in practice is that contract you sign is between you and the people you rule, rather than some guy above you. American leaders are granted their power from the governed.

But how you suggest it is the closest you'll get to a medieval America. Though you still need to find a way to reconcile Burgerlanders' obsession with personal freedom with the concept of a central ruler.

>inb4 more "lol Amerifats Wall Street runs you, you have no real freedom, and you're stupid if you disagree" retardation from self-hating Americans and buttmangled Eurofags.

>>47440333
Wide swaths of wilderness infested by all manner of cryptids and demons; things the natives have always had lurking around and the horrors that were brought during the Exodus from overseas.

A Kingless people who for a time bowed to a King, held servants indentured, and were pilfered of their wealth to pay Noble Houses overseas. They cast down their old master, and when he tried to suppress them they showed that they were willing to fight dirty and without honor to ensure that they would never serve a foreign master.

The Kingless seek often to anoint their Military Leaders in places of power, but for fear of reprisal from others they step down after eight years. The Commander's Cabinet is made up of each of the colonial states military leaders who choose from within from candidates that the Kingless seek to see in power. These candidates are always secretly chosen to be isolationists, as the Cabinet fears that a foreign war may hurt them beyond the point of recovery.

The Kingless and the Natives do not trust one another due to years of atrocities committed as a colonial power. Every chance for diplomacy always ends in betrayal against the Natives; yet grouping them all together as barbarians and savages feels like the propaganda the Old Masters used against the Kingless during the war. It is a problem without an answer.

The Kingless have taken to using slaves shipped over from the Southlands, but there is a divide among the Western Commander's Cabinet (which is far from the coast and seldom receives the slaves, so it needs them not) and the Eastern Commander's Cabinet (which uses them exclusively for their agriculture). It does not help that much like the Kingless, they brought in their own horrors and demons when their culture came to exist here.

>>47441099

Technically speaking, and im Speaking as a resident of Utah, when the Mormons first settled here the territory was part of Mexico. It bece part of the states after the war, then the government came in and built some forts and Deseret as an independent entity ceased and it became just another part of the United states as the territory of Utah. So while you can say that was a government system that existed on the north American continent, I dont know that you can say it existed in the USA.

>>47440953
Doesn't mean it can't be done.

>>47441099
>State of Deseret
"Move in here and take care of the Indian problem before we come in and take over" isn't really analogous to a separate nation.

>>47441099

I won't argue most career politicians in the US are similar to medieval nobility. A hard reality is running for office is expensive, and will only get more expensive as time goes on because voters are obsessed with idiotic advertising and masturbatory campaign rallies.

But the point I make is there is no formal rule at any level of US government which says "You must have X amount of land or have Y title in order to run for office". And the culture here reflects that, even if reality doesn't always do the same.

Though I agree with >>47441068 here. I think the best way to make an America-themed medieval setting is blend the Old West with 16th century Japan. American outlaw culture is very easy to replicate in any setting and the lack of any real central authority has precedent in the US.

Maybe it would be Norman.

>>47441144
Problems within the Kingless lands come from upstart militias, nightmare creatures from three people's races, the fear of what lies beyond the misty mountain borders that need to be traversed, and the fact that not all of the Kingless bow to no king. Some secret away funds and weapons for Royalist infiltrators who pervert the cause of the fledgling power.

The woods are wicked. There are no fair folk here. The native fey are strange, they till the land like man does, give you a drink and you sleep for fifty years, they laugh and they mock and they cream their corn.

More people come to this new land for asylum, bringing more of their monsters with them. The Kingless have taken to some evils of their own within the Cabinet. Sending plague blankets to shanty towns under the guise of charity; drowning individuals who have magical potential possibly great enough to rival their own, and worshiping the Azure Serpent of the Ziggurat; an eldritch abomination that grants them a third eye which lets them see into the hearts of others for the purpose of determining their lusts and desires. Some say a reptillian spawn of the Serpent lurks in the Cabinethall of Boltonroost; slashing away at women in the night because it needs to eat their sweet meats.

But that's all just conjecture.

>>47440977
I don't see them claiming it was the best.

Which is good for them. It's a ridiculous thing to state. Just as claiming that this is the best gun, or that is the best car. If someone tries, you know he doesn't have a clue.

Now if you want a sword to fight with, unless you are like Patton and have extensive sport fencing experience that you'd like to try and make fighting relevant, how about a sword that's been designed to kill form the ground up, instead of a piece of wepaonised sports equipment? For any actual fight, Patton had guns and tanks, the sword was for amusement.

As for cut or thrust, we've had swords for either, or both at once, since the bronze age. Had it been truly superior to heavily favour one, we'd have known long before Jesus got nailed.

>>47441180

Out of curiosity what informs that view of the historic events? I remember hearing it differently, but the guy who told me was admittededly biased.

>>47441108
>you still need to find a way to reconcile Burgerlanders' obsession with personal freedom with the concept of a central ruler
Most medieval kings and emperor weren't any more powerful than the US president. Most of the time, those who really had power were the small nobility, who had the power to apply laws and deliver justice.

>>47441099
>This thing happened within the geographical area of a country
>therefore it is applicable to the entire nation
How much of Europe counts as caliphates then?

>>47440333
The best way to do it would be to base it on colonial but pre-US America, or the wild West.

>>47441144
>they were willing to fight dirty and without honor
MEMES
Most battles were fought VERY conventionally during the American Revolutionary War. The Brits lost thanks to sending too few troops and some retarded generals.

>A military junta
No.

>Secret isolationists
M8 for the first 150 years of its existence the USA was incredibly expansionist. The war of 1812 was basically fought for the the hell of it.

>The Kingless and the Natives do not trust one another due to countless atrocities by both sides and bitterly fought battles.
Don't go acting like the Natives didn't kick some ass and hit back MORE than hard enough.

The slavery debate gets a little stupid without Industrialization but w/e. I guess you could always paint it as a religious divide.

>>47441225

> Most of the time, those who really had power were the small nobility, who had the power to apply laws and deliver justice.

See now we're getting somewhere, because you can capture American culture really well with this dynamic. Especially if it's an Old West-style setting somewhere out in the hinterlands.

Just replace the Sheriff or the Mayor with Lord Whatshisname and you can have cowboys with swords pretty easily.

>>47441302
Why even bother making them Lords?

Corporations would be kingdoms.
Employees would be serfs.
Middle/upper management would be lords/knights.

Government falls and is replaced with a handful of huge conglomerates fighting over power. Build their own armies and go to war with one another. Alliances form only to maximize profits. Etc...

>>47441328
So people will know we're medieval now. The sheriff of Nottingham isn't enough to stand up to all the wild west stuff.

Militarism, a former (or current) slave economy, bipartisan politics, and multiple houses of senators plus a ruler independent of the senatorial houses with the power of veto. Also: a heavy religious bent, large industrial cities (much like medieval Venice), lots of urban poor, and farmer migrations.

File: 1452088987722.png (74KB, 249x362px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 249x362px

>>47441296

>M8 for the first 150 years of its existence the USA was incredibly expansionist.

They were only really expansionist by virtue of wanting the rest of their part of the continent. After they reached the Pacific, the US didn't really bother jumping on the same colonial train Europe was running. We didn't even start any overseas wars until the ass end of the 19th century and we smelled Spain's blood in the water.

And once we got Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines we basically dropped the imperial angle. Barely anyone wanted to join WWI and even fewer wanted to join WWII. We had to be pushed into those.

So no, the US was never totally isolationist but they generally avoided getting involved anywhere else in the world until after World War II.

File: Murricaknight.jpg (9KB, 270x187px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 270x187px

>>47441344

Eh, I think one of the main things you need to do to keep it American is to retain the "cowboy" who is in essence the knight archetype only instead of being a noble is in essence a special type of mounted militiaman. They'd offset their lack of heavy gear with guns, or if you don't want them to have those, really good quality swords and lances; all their funds go towards superior weaponry, and /everyone/ is armed.

>>47441144
>infested with cryptids

I'm begging my GM to let me play a sasquatch and you can't stop me.

>>47441296
Hey, I'm just trying to come up with rough fantasy America tropes that don't devolve into FREEDOM LIBERTY HONOR fappery. A vaguely democratic military junta with issues involving how to deal with anybody who isn't them in a land where the rules of the Old World need not apply seems interesting to me.

>>47441442

I find the best "pre-America" comparison to cowboys is Sengoku-era ronin. There's a reason those Samurai movies in the 50s translated so well to cowboy movies.

>>47440604
Dogs in the Vineyard.

>>47441442
>>47441479

Not really? Cowboys were usually cattlehands far before they were fighters. More survivalist (with monetary obligations to his cattle) than warrior.

>>47441491

The popular image of cowboys is the Western outlaw. There were plenty of guys like that, most of whom were Confederacy veterans who were shut out of any legitimate work because of their military history. Outlaws seem pretty ronin-esque to me.

>>47441491

Many American cavalrymen were cattlehands before they became professional soldiers (and returned to such after they were discharged), so it sort of goes both ways.

>>47441434
>They were only really expansionist by virtue of wanting the rest of their part of the continent.
You mean the parts that were owned by other countries, native americans, and that multiple wars were fought over?

Guess we don't even need to talk about all the fuckery in South America, the Mexican-American War, and the Monroe Doctrine.

>Barely anyone wanted to join WWI and even fewer wanted to join WWII. We had to be pushed into those.
So a 30 year period of isolationism defines the entire history of a nation?

>>47440503
WOWIE ZOWIE OOPIE I THOUGHT THEY DID WHAT OH MY BAD HAHA SILLY MISTAKE

After the End, the Crusader Kings 2 mod. Amercanist cult(founding fathers are demigods), Mormon Kingdom, native resurgence, Emperor of California, Pope in St. Louis, Holy Columbian Confederacy, etc.

>>47441548
I mean, looking at your system of "welfare" and general lack of education, I can see how you'd make that mistake...

>>47440401
/thread

>>47441328
It doesn't really matter I think. You can call them Lords and Knights or landowners, what really amtters is there is no powerful central authority. You could have a King or Emperor or President or Whatever of Acirema, what is really important is that he and his direct collaborators have no way to keep an eye on everything, probably because the territory is too big. So on a local scale the King-President has to delegate most of his functions to Baron-Executives and Knight-Sheriffs.
If I come to run a game in America-but-Medieval I think I'd use noble titles, if only because "Knight of America" sounds cool as fuck.

>>47440401
>WE WUZ WARRIORS N SHIEETT

>>47441540

I'm simply saying by comparison to their peers, the US was fairly isolationist and there was a significant political movement demanding more isolationism. Marching across the continent is expansionist, but they didn't go much farther than that.

France, Britain, and Spain were running empires which spanned across the entire world. The US was basically confined to its current borders by around the 1870s, a time when Britain ran half the planet.

America didn't even have any holdings outside of its hemisphere until the turn of the century.

>>47441540

It sort of does, in the same way that Switzerland is defined as uberneutral and France has to deal with those damn monkey memes even though both events make up only a fraction of their respective countries' histories.

>>47441599
If I remember correctly my History classes, during the 19th century the US wanted to reclaim the whole of America (north and south) as its own.
Even if they didn't succeed, that sounds pretty damn expansionist to me.

>>47441618
>>47441599
And America's actions since WW2 have absolutely no impact on this despite being far longer and far more influential in the way the world sees the US.

>>47441599

Colonialism doesn't just take the form of literal land-holdings, anon. America has been making plans to make Cuba a state since the 1830s, the Mexican-American War, the Panama Invasion, the War of 1812, the War in the Phillipines, the taking of Hawaii and (on a less violent note) the purchase of Alaska from the Russians, not to mention the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the collapse of the Qaddafi Regime or even the funding of Opium warlords and mujahideen in the Soviet-Afghanistan war...

America has involved itself with boots on the ground PLENTY of times all around the globe, and when it hasn't it's done its work through funding and supplying the enemies of its enemies. Often with disastrous results a few years down the line.

>>47441442
Cuirassiers?

>>47441575
Are you TRYING to bait the ">implying welfare is good" /pol/acks?

>>47440333
A vast land dotted by increasingly westward farming communities and the occasional large port city.

The people on the agrarian side of things live and die by their own efforts, fostering a culture of self-reliance and needing to exploit the (admittedly large amount of) resources, and hospitality towards those few you might encounter so far on the frontier. Unless they're pagans, devils, or servants of the High Priest in the Eternal City.

To the east, the great port cities drink deep of commerce and political shenanigans, as the leaders of men seek office through speech and slander. Vast catches of fish and timber flow forth from the industrious cities of the North, while the southern reaches pull the most valuable of plants out of the soil with hands of the unwilling.

Faith is altogether important, as it's the only thing holding back the witches and pagans that are known to stalk the lands. It's also far more divergent, as the land scorns high priests and their ilk. Magics most vile are held in scorn, even as enterprising alchemists peddle their snake oil.

>>47441747
>Magics most vile are held in scorn, even as enterprising alchemists peddle their snake oil.
Outside of the prestigious eastern colleges of magic. Meanwhile hedge mages and innovative tinkerers are common and held in high esteem.

That's 10/10 though.

>>47441747
This is a good post. To add on:

Splintering religious factions/churches.
Geopolitical/Cultural separation across the North/South, East/West, et cetera.
Isolation from the other major powers of the world by sea.

File: condescension .jpg (12KB, 215x211px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 215x211px

>>47441575
>missing the most obvious sarcasm

>>47441858

Don't forget the not-Oregon Trail.

>You will still die of dysentery.
>It's not even going to be magical.

>>47441225

Just dont give them strong centralized government, make them like dirty scotts clans always crying about "muh freedoms" except they actually have said freedoms

I'm thinking city-states.

>>47440444
America damned near made George Washington their king.

America is plenty cucked by its government.

>>47440444
Trips for the trip god

U S A
S
A

>>47441442
>Everyone is armed

This is important. One of the foundations of the 'frontier justice' culture that developed in the Old West was that *everyone* could have a gun.

You'd have to find a way to replicate that in a medieval fantasy, and that's going to be tricky - even if everyone owns a sword, you can wear platemail and now you're a leg up on the arms race. And having everyone wear platemail 24/7 is obviously impractical.

>>47440333
if you do alternate history it's easy, just give Europeans better ships and more regional cohesion a couple hundred years earlier

>>47442593

Wasn't plate-mail ridiculously expensive though?

Like, part of the reason everyone could have a gun in the Old West was because those Winchester rifles and Colt revolvers were actually pretty cheap.

I don't think the armor gap presents too huge of a problem.

>>47442593

Technically speaking, platemail actually did a good job against protecting from the sort of guns they wielded at the time provided it was properly made, but it was simply viewed as cowardly to wear.

Simply keep the stigma that being a tincan is considered dishonorable.

>>47442702
That's my point - everyone in the West could afford to be lethally armed, because it was cheap.

Everyone in the West couldn't afford platemail, because it's not.

If you try to do swords-and-sorcery Old West, you've got to ask yourself: what happens when a tinned up knight wanders into Old Shitsville? Everyone's got a knife, but he's in full plate. He unbalances the equilibrium that frontier 'equality' is centered on.

File: 960.jpg (55KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 960x540px

Would over the garden wall count or is that to colonial.

>>47442786
Simple, armor is uncomfortable for most environments and has tons of inconveniences.

A simple cuirass is enough for a wealthy traveler going through hostile lands, but add on the rest of a suit of mail and he's going to be sweltering, slowed, and a HUGE target for any group of bandits or thugs.

>>47440444
They just cucked themselves by selling out to users.

>>47442593
Crossbows or recurve bows would be the answer IMO. A strong tradition of mounted archery in the frontier areas and a few guilds of crossbow makers in the cities that flood the country with cheap and adequately deadly weapons.

>>47442933
>>47442593
>Medieval Wild West is Mongolia with Dusters
Perfect

>Cowboys
>That literally came from "vaqueros"

>>47443100
>this word used to mean this one thing, but then later it was used to mean this other thing, and then these other guys started using a different word based on the later meaning of the other word

Great contribution anon, really moved the thread forward.

>>47443126

I know.

>>47440333
Problem about "medieval" fantasy, based on the USA is... they never had any medieval age, like in europa.
But maybe, it would be something similar to the "Tyranny of King George Washington" DLCs from Assassins Creed 3.

>>47443208
>"Tyranny of King George Washington" DLCs from Assassins Creed 3.
I would be surprised by the idiocy of this thing if not for
>Assassins Creed

>>47443236
School is out for most of the US now, you really shouldn't be surprised by any incredibly stupid posts.

>>47443236
Well yeah, I only said similar...

>>47443208
Well, it's not like there weren't merchant republics in the middle ages, or that the idea of a republic was foreign to them. Let alone that you could tie it back, the same way a few of the Founding Fathers did, to the Romans and their republic. Plus it might be a more "Age of Sail" fantasy than a "Medieval" Fantasy.

Besides, this is a fantasy setting, where people with guns and deep water navies coexist with bronze age city states and old style armor. It's anachronism central.

USA is a colonial state. So you take some medieval folks and haul them to distant land where they displace some more primitive folks. It would be harder for them to take over, with less edge, but it would still be fun.

>>47440333
Before or after "old world" cultures was introduced to the Americas?

>>47440333
>>47440389
>>47440439
We could probably piece something together based roughly on what we have. It would require building a bit of an alternate history though, something like:

>Vikings arrive in America and introduce various European concepts (like kingdoms) and technology (such as metalsmithing)* as they spread but ultimately wither away
>the information inadvertently spreads like the plague across the continent, but distorted into a sort Native version
>Aztecs catch wind and begin a big conquest

And that's all I got and it feels a bit improbable and silly.

*I'm aware neither of these are exclusive to old-world nations, but I mean like the european versions of it.

But, still, what seemed to help establish Europe was non-migratory peoples, metalsmithing, and masonry.

Presumably you could get sort of "Medieval Native" thing by having a handful of tribes figure these things out and becoming full on nations.

Then toss in either Viking Colonists or Renaissance Era European Explorers to include a point of familiarity, I guess?

Okay, so, the thing that made America distinct at he time it was created was almost complete lack of capital - everyone could he a landowner, because land was so cheap. People had little means of production, because it's hard to bring factories on ship. It created a society of amazing opportunities. With some work you could become filthy rich, at least compared to anybody else.
Considering all that, I'd say that the closest would be some kind of crusader states. You've successfully driven infidels out and now you're rolling in almost free land - but the road back home is still long and dangerous, so you need to make do with what you have there and most of the good stuff got destroyed during the war.

>>47443731
Of course, if you're taking about modern day America just take any semi-centralised empire that's trying to "uphold the order" by exploiting both other countries and their own people.
Essentially Rome, just turn slaves into serfs.

>>47443711

Aztecs were already conquers. Nearby cities had to submit to Montezuma, and they (along with the Inca) were the closest thing to a "medieval" society the Americas ever got. In fact, the main reason Cortes won was because he enlisted legions of natives sick of the Aztecs' shit and itching for any excuse to topple them.

So if you want to do a medieval america you need to do a few things. First you need to keep in mind the core ideas of America. Secondly you need to establish an earlier founding for it.

For point one those ideas would be Democracy, no nobility, manifest destiny, Free enterprise, and independence. Regardless of how you view these ideas and how they relate to America these will provide the foundation for what makes a medieval america.

Now takes those ideas and reverse the clock on how they exist today. Democracy in Medieval America will be highly restricted only for land owning white males. A faux class of aristocracy is formed by the rich and they are often the power players along with government. Each colony/state or time appropriate title of Hold would have their own flag, banners and aspects of culture and tradition. There would be no national army, just Hold militias. Equally frontier territories are essential, they border the establish holds and are like the wild west. Also the government would essentially be an early relatively shitty democracy. Each hold runs itself, but all Holds elect an Elector for a certain term who is essentially the representative of America. His cabinet and depts are responsible for foriegn affairs, and national debts. Make it so only the elector and national gov can do foriegn affairs stuff that affect the whole country. National gov would have their own army, usually raised and subsidized by the current Elector's party so the American Army is really only loyal to the Elector/ Minister of war.

All of you are idiots. There was a medieval, well more like early modern, period in the US. The Spanish conquest of the southwest. Sure you have some European influences, but you also have the Pueblo cultures, and the cliff dwellers.

>>47444676
The OP's pic suggests wild west america. Hence why everyone in this thread is trying to emulate a medieval wild west.

>>47444645
Now on to the founding of Medieval America:

You want it to the basterd colony of notGB. Essentially it was settled by citizens from notUK and companies with royal charters etc but simply can't be maintained by the UK due to the sheer distance between the two. Hence why the notPresident is called the Elector of America, because technically America is still in league with the UK, but completely autonomous.

Now going outside of the Medieval America, you will have massive Native America Populations and civilizations. In this scenario handwave away the effects of european diseases on the Natives, which destroyed 96% of their population. You can have substantial loses like 20-40% but not more than that. As a result it leaves Medieval America the chance to establish itself without getting murdered. On the other hand it creates a very tense situation and real foreign politics on the frontier side.

Now on to business and Free enterprise which is crucial. Medieval America will be extremely supportive of Free Enterprise. As an earlier comment said, suprising amounts of people have land because of how cheap it was, so big agriculture economy. There will be slaves, the extent of them is up to you. However big industries will be tobacco, cotton, rice, lumber, mining and horses. Doing medieval America means that horses have just been brought to the region so maybe a few families and businesses hold an extremely tight grip on horse breeding operation. Many people may own a horse, but few will actually have large stocks of them. Equally Because of how young it is, there will be a shit ton of forest. Even in the established states/holds it will all mostly be forest. Even the south with plantations will have shit tons of forests. Expect small populations relative to the size of the Holds so there will be plenty of room for trappers, and criminals to make a living.

>>47444802
Eh. Same place, just 200 years off. Honestly, if OP wants a wild west fantasy, he should look up East of West, and tone down the sci-fi elements

>>47440604
speaking of blood meridian, i read it last year for school, and i noticed that judge holden and sundowner are pretty goddamn similar

>>47444821
Dude. People are having fun coming up with medieval west settings. Just because there are a few that already exist doesn't mean we can't think of a few more.

>>47444809
Now the next problem is reconciling real America's growth against the constraints of a medieval setting. Going by a pure medieval setting will mean no six shooters or revolvers. There will be guns, but those will really be restricted to flintlocks at best. It's up to you to decide how much technical progress is happening. Equally without trains moving into the frontier will be a bitch and dangerous. There will be displaced natives sown throughout the territory.

So what you end up with is a large area with a fair size population concentrated around the coasts or spread out over farms in towns further inland with all surrounded by forests or plantations. Then over the mountains is wild frontier territories with fortified towns surrounded by ranches, farms, forests and natives spread out in pockets and big cities. Rivers will be the borders between American territories and Native American territories.

Also play up regional divide. Traveling via horse or foot through the east coast of america or early frontier will take a long fucking time. As a result the northeast states stick together, southern states stick together. People are more patriotic about their state then the union. If bordering states get into disputes it will be militias in the involved states duking it out, unless a very friendly state offers some help.

What's a good way to play a wild-west setting with magical and high-tech elements?

File: goats.jpg (155KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1280x720px

>>47440333
>What would a medieval fantasy culture based on the United States be like?
Honestly, the middle ages were basically what rich people wanted the Wild West to be - a race for colonization where might, connections and riches made right.

>>47440977
It's a pretty fucking terrible sword. You're basically supposed to hold it out straight and run a dude through and that's it. It dehumanizes the cavalryman like they had been Japanese infantry all along.

>>47441108
>The way American politics works in theory and for the most part in practice is that contract you sign is between you and the people you rule, rather than some guy above you. American leaders are granted their power from the governed.

Yes, that's how shit works in a system of personal loyalty in which one side has to ritually guarantee that it won't change the terms of the bargain and not infringe on their subject's liberties in exchange for the rights they recieved. It's just that this loyality was somewhat of a commodity that could be traded in exchange for other people's loyalty rather than something one political entity held exclusive rights to.

>>47441108
>But how you suggest it is the closest you'll get to a medieval America. Though you still need to find a way to reconcile Burgerlanders' obsession with personal freedom with the concept of a central ruler.

Feudalism is an extremely decentralized and fractured system of rule and people did constantly stab each other over real and imagined infringements of their liberties. It's really not hard.

>>47445061
But that was only the lords and land holders who backstabbed each other. In medieval America everyone is backstabbing everyone over liberties, and everyone is armed.

>>47440333
>What would a medieval fantasy culture based on the United States be like?
>not immediately thinking of the early colonial period, when Murrican immigrants were a disunified bunch, fighting each other some of the time and the natives most of the time, still theoretically under the rule of distant Euroyalty

Monster races as natives of a notably more assholish bent than many native American tribes, humans as Spaniards, elves as Frenchmen, dwarves as Brits. The civilized races must carve out places for themselves on the new continent, because this was the condition given to them in exchange for not getting smote in religious/political purges in the homeland.

>>47445096
>But that was only the lords and land holders who backstabbed each other.

Communities and individuals fought aplenty. The whole mess in Switzerland was basically started by a bunch of cow herders who burnt down parts of a monastery when the monastery claimed that some alps were actually theirs and only they could use them to raise cattle. Shit like that's inevitable in a culture with a right that are habitual and oral.

>>47445096
So a shitload of petty kingdoms like the british islands 700-950? When everyone is armed any sort of centralised goverment is unlikely with medival tech level.
Enjoy war where 100 guys are a big army.
Expect to get steamroled by the most ruthless internal or external conqueror.

>>47440333
95% of the natives did not die through illnesses from europe.
Let the fun begin.

>>47440696
"best sword design"

Do you want to be a cultist?
I hope not.

>>47445227
Oof, fuck. With a population scant of 500,000 the Iroquois are going to carry the French into the Boston and let them wipe their ass on the American flag.

Actually, this reminds me of the Yeomanry from Gary Gygax's old Greyhawk milieu. A bunch of people from a traditional European feudal society an isolated land. there they form a (mostly) representative democracy (heavy emphasis on Representative) and a military based on minutemen styled militia (The Yeomanry).

>>47445836

>Actually, this reminds me of the Yeomanry from Gary Gygax's old Greyhawk milieu. A bunch of people from a traditional European feudal society COLONIZE an isolated land. there they form a (mostly) representative democracy (heavy emphasis on Representative) and a military based on minutemen styled militia (The Yeomanry).

>>47441594
I mean, they WAS warriors and shit. The Comanche, Apache, Dakota/Lakota, Creek, and many other Indian nations were no joke. The Comanche were only wiped out after the US basically launched a crusade against them in the Indian Wars, and that was with the help of dozens of other Indian nations (who fucking hated them), and the Apache were feared by pretty much everybody in the SW.

>>47444593
>In fact, the main reason Cortes won was because he enlisted legions of natives sick of the Aztecs' shit and itching for any excuse to topple them.

As well as the insanely lucky timing that he had at landing when he did.

Had Cortez landed on literally ANY other day besides 1 Reed, Montezuma would most likely not have overrode his generals and would have kept him isolated on the beaches (or at least in a vassal town). Cortez happened to land on the exact day that Quetzalcoatl was supposed to land, in almost the exact place, and he bore incredible power at his disposal. Montezuma (who was raised to be a priest of Quetzalcoatl, and was only given the title of tlataoni when his older brother died at the last minute) was deeply superstitious, and viewed the massive cascade of omens and signs that had preempted Cortez's arrival for weeks as being a sign that he was either a demon or a god (The words he's described as basically mean "man-spirit").

Had Cortez even been off by ONE day, who knows how shit would have gone down, and that's NOT including Cortez's incredible military cunning and raw skill at fighting and commanding men in battle.

Simply put, the fact that Cortez was able to accomplish what he did flat-out should not have happened, and yet it did.

File: cavesquatch.jpg (86KB, 366x401px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 366x401px

>>47444941

If you mean "what system" then use Deadlands. It is literally exactly what you just described, and the book stats all of it out.

I would retcon some of the history though. It's an alternate timeline where the South won the Civil War and remained independent. But slavery and racism no longer exist there for no real reason than the authors figured most players would find those elements unpalatable.

If you mean "what kind of game" well I've always wanted to run a Wild West X-Files type game where the players are government agents investigating paranormal activity.

>>47446566

>the Spaniards won because the Aztecs thought they were gods and got blindsided.

This is a myth propagated by the same people who buy into the "noble savages lived completely off the land so pure so naturalistic" stereotypes hippies invented. It is unbelievably patronizing and it baffles me so many social leftists still cling to it.

Montezuma and his advisors had no delusions Cortes was anything other than a man. They certainly did think his arrival had some kind of religious significance; IIRC they may have believed he was a sign of Queztalcotl's eventual return, as the god supposedly departed across the ocean. The main reason they put significance on Cortes's arrival was because no one had ever seen people like the Spaniards before. But they never believed Cortes was divine in his own right. In fact, Montezuma was very weary of Cortes and held off meeting him in person as long as he could. And when he did, it was mostly so he could size up Cortes because Montezuma was certain he'd fight the guy at some point.

Turns out his suspicions were correct.

>>47446756
>Montezuma and his advisors had no delusions Cortes was anything other than a man.

His advisers didn't, and certainly counseled him to deal with Cortez as quickly as possible either diplomatically or militarily. His generals wanted to capture and interrogate them immediately, fearing what they might represent and highly interested in their homeland (which may be a threat to Tenochtitlan dominance of the region).

However, Montezuma was paralyzed with indecision because of the incredible significance of the day and time Cortez arrived, in conjunction with the dozens of strange omens that had been read in the temples of Huitzilopoctli and Quetzalcoatl for weeks beforehand. Montezuma was an extremely superstitious person because of his priesthood upbringing (as again, he wasn't even supposed to be tlataoni until the last minute), and because of the incredible significance of a pale stranger arriving in a "floating island" (they were awed by the size of Spanish boats) with great power on the very day and time Quetzalcoatl was supposed to return from the East. The Nahuatl word they used to describe the Spanish wasn't "God," capital G, or even "gods," in a European sense, but basically "spirit-man," somebody of incredible power either spiritually or physically (The closest descriptor we have would be "angel"), who often represented the Gods (which were described much more as forces of nature) striding the Earth. He went against the advice of pretty much everybody in his council and held off addressing the issue until Cortez was pretty much right at the gates of Tenochtitlan out of fear of making the wrong choice - he didn't act until he knew that Cortez wasn't truly divine for fear of basically destroying the world. Given the "divine authority" of the Tlataoni, his generals dared not contradict him (until they did).

So yes, Montezuma was extremely superstitious about Cortez, and held off acting until he was sure Cortez wasn't actually Quetzalcoatl.

>>47447455
Again, this is a total myth.

>>47448101

This. Montezuma had no real religious hangups with Cortes. There might have been some spiritual considerations, but that probably had more to do with Aztec perspectives on leadership than anything else.

Monty also addressed the Spanish question very quickly. He sent emissaries to meet Cortes but also gave him the express message he wasn't welcome in Tenochtitlan yet. At least until Montezuma changed his mind which was again because he wanted to size the guy up.

>>47448161
>>47448101
>>47447455
>>47446756
You know what's fun about this, NO SOURCES

>>47448345

I'm inclined to side with you on this, and went out to my garage so I could hunt for the books I have on the subject and cite my sources. I got really triggered when I couldn't find them; I guess they were rentals and I returned them when my classes were over.

The best one I had was Matt Restall's "Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Myths_of_the_Spanish_Conquest). It focuses on debunking a lot of misconceptions, such as the belief the Aztecs though the Spanish were gods or the notion the conquistadors conquered the Indians entirely by themselves. As far as I know, the historical world largely accepts it and there is no controversy surrounding its veracity. Unlike similar books like "Guns, Germs, and Steel" or "1421".

I had another really good in the same vein but I also can't find it.

>>47440516
Wat?

>>47448161
>Montezuma had no real religious hangups with Cortes.

He had major religious hang-ups with him, and was terrified of him at first because he did not know whether his arrival was truly significant religiously (as it followed dead-on the myth of the return of Quetzalcoatl from the East). He only sent those emissaries after constant urging of his generals to handle the matter, and he considered it a compromise. The REST of Aztec society, however, did not, and viewed him as he was: a strange and powerful outsider.

> also gave him the express message he wasn't welcome in Tenochtitlan yet

That part is correct.

>At least until Montezuma changed his mind which was again because he wanted to size the guy up.

No, that was after Montezuma learned that Cortez had built a tens-of-thousands strong alliance of natives who hated the Aztec guts and was marching them to Tenochtitlan. He saw the writing on the wall, and brought him in to attempt diplomacy, even going so far as to violate the unbroken custom of allowing the Spanish and their allies to march down the streets of Tenochtitlan under arms (which was HUGELY offensive, and further undermined Montezumas authority among his people).

Montezuma was a deeply superstitious, fatalistic, and very weak leader who never wanted the job in the first place. His indecision and fear was not shared by the rest of the Aztec society, but as tlataoni his word was obeyed. He firmly believed that the arrival of Cortez was the end of the world, religiously or not, especially after he allied with the Tlaxcalans, and his constant supplications to him eventually caused the Aztec people to riot and rebel and reject him as tlataoni - only then did the Aztecs begin to fight back. The man basically handed the Aztec Empire to Cortez on a platter, and it was only the desire of the Aztec people and his advisers that finally took it back (if only for a brief time).

File: ANDREW JACKSON.jpg (60KB, 466x599px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 466x599px

Let me just get this out of the way and post best president.

>>47448345
The sources I've got on hand are Warlords of Ancient Mexico, by Peter G. Tsouras, The Broken Spears by Miguel Leon-Portilla , and another book that I cannot find ("I think it's "Illustrated History of the Aztec and Maya?") but is actually an extremely comprehensive analysis of the Triple Alliance and Aztec culture throughout the course of its existence.

A major part of the book is devoted to their crazy pantheon and their religious structures. This is the part where it references referring to the Spaniards and Cortez as "gods," but goes out of its way to specifically mention that this has a very specific and non-traditional meaning. The Nahuatl word used doesn't refer to actual "gods," but to people who are touched by the gods. These can be spirits, demons, or just really powerful people (such as great Aztecs), and the word was used interchangeably between the different groups. The word for their actual gods was quite different, and was more akin to a force of nature than an actual being.

So no, they weren't "gods" to the Aztecs as we would understand them, but they were still thought to have strange spiritual power (at least at first), that merited a distinction from "normal" people.

>>47440333
Cool. I'm actually working on writing something like that right now.

Well, you'd have to move the timeline from a typical DND Medieval Fantasy Europe world to a North American Age of Exploration folklore setting. So I'm guessing you have a wide open frontier populated only by tribals who vary from the super peaceful douchebag hippy types (to keep Tumblr happy), and the more realistic raider savages who often attack both weaker tribes and unlucky colonials who wandered too far into the frontier. With the coasts being settled by brave pioneers in search of gold, religious freedom, or even just a new life. They might be developing Burgerland's care for personal freedom, but that's still quite a bit away.

Because this isn't a "Merica with Knights and slutty Elves." Nope. It's the era of Jamestown and Pocohauntus, Nathaniel Bumppo and Chingachook, Salem and Roanoke, Icabod Crane and Sleepy Hollow. Where a thin line of civilization stands at the crescipice between the feuding crowns of the Old World and the savage primitive Tribalism of the frontier. That's what a fantasy America would look like.

Hell, if you need Monsters you can just use creatures from folklore like the Thunder Birds or even the Wendigo. Hell depending upon how far north you go, you can use Orca or Sea Lions as unseen predators slowly stalking your party as it trudges through the ice.
Other than the typical plethora of fantasy races (stock Dorf, half naked Elf, chintzy Hobbit, that one guy wearing a Fedora), how about adding different human ethic groups to the setting?

Like say having the English Frontiersmen as the baseline humans, the Cherokee as the Gnolls, and having a surviving population of Vikings operating as your Half-Orcs.

>>47440444
> Doesn't know who the Kennedies or Rothschilds are.

Bullshit America never had Royalty. You're about to have a good 3 decades of Presidents from the same families if Trump doesn't win as well.

>>47440333
The united states is too big it actually holds a number of different cultures(that hollywood likes to either pretend don't exist or make fun of it).

Just by going by accents alone reveals a number of them.

If you tried you'll just end up with a medieval wild west frontier style or overgrown trade republic if things are much more settled.

>>47441434
Not really the USA fucking hated it when Europe messed around in the rest of the Americas making them sign a treaty and it stayed that way unit the Soviet Union tried to shake things up.

Pretty much a mix between Native American, Hawaiian, Caribbean, Mexican, Aztec, Mayan, Viking and Eskimo styled culture setting

>>47440333
This is why all of my games are set in colonial times. Get a lil bit of everywhere in all muh games as I need them

>>47440706
Fuck, I'd love to see a fantasy setting where we had disproportionate factions like robber barons trying to gobble up land, loosely independent cities with elected councils and mayors pushing back, and all of it set on a wild frontier with savage warriors regularly making raids on the peripheries of society. Maybe have something like early ideological warfare, elevating ideas to take the place of lords and other nobility. Or possibly focus on the disconnect between the advancement of industry and the upheaval it causes to the rest of society.

Could even do something like the red scare, a small outlying city adopts an alien way of thinking compared to the rest of the region, suddenly everyone becomes absolutely paranoid about spies and sees dissenting thought everywhere, leading to stagnation in society and eventual medieval police states. Toss an analog to Christian majorities further dividing the rest of the other religious populations/atheistics and fighting among themselves internally, and you've got a perfect setting to deal with American issues and ways of thinking in a lower tech setting.

>>47441485
Is a shitty system.

>>47441108
>Though you still need to find a way to reconcile Burgerlanders' obsession with personal freedom with the concept of a central ruler.
Don't worry, we're already doing that ourselves.

Some people aren't even being tricked into it anymore.

>>47454062
Then make it. Conceptualizing a setting is like 90% of the world unless you have worldbuilding autism.

>>47454234
I've got dozens of these settings conceptualized, but I no longer have players. Maybe I should collect them together and release them in a book or something. Settings interesting enough for a run or two for players but not detailed enough to be a reoccurring thing.

Sort of like the tabletop equivalent of short stories?

>>47440333
I once designed an "American Fantasy", it was an alegorical setting.
The godlike Founders fled from the corrupted "Old Country" and created a New World Order do fight the native orcs and ghosts. All Freeborn people have paid the Price of Freedom which is a magic coin that contains your soul. However various Cults began forming and trying to trick people into paying their soul coin for worldly power. Adventures take place in The Frontier, or Back East in the steampunk dystopia. However there is a coming apocalypse which will doom the entire country but none of the Federals or Cultists are doing anything about it.

Kinda like Doomtown I guess.

>>47440916
>industrialists provide steel, oil, transportation that makes the country grow prosperous
>same as kings taxing the shit out of their serfs
>people actually believe this

>>47440333
Being a non american, generic D&D sounds literally like that to me to be honest. American stuff with a "medieval" mask.

>>47450754
>Kennedies
>or Rothschilds

Rothschilds are exclusively European.

The biggest banks active in the US are non-Jewish owned. And if you wanted to bring up wealthy families, well, the DuPont's literally OWN Delaware.

>>47440587
What the fuck are you talking about, it's a Western + Conan.

File: TSR 9333 FMA1 Fires of Zatal.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47440333
Maztica?

>>47440333
Probably a bit like Poland actually during the late medieval era of the lGolden Liberty.
>Each region has an aristocrat in charge such as a Baron or whatnot, but each Baron has a lot of autonomy over his land. The King is elected by members of the artistocratic council.
>Emphasis is given in the land on protecting individual freedoms, so much so that different parts of the land have local laws that do not even remotely resemble the rest of it. The emphasis on individual freedoms for actually sometimes makes some areas worse and massively hurts them because their leaders are irresponsible or simply stupid.
>HUGELY ethnically diverse, with lots of different religions and ethnic groups, a great ideological melting pot of everyone living together. In reality in a lot of places the different ethnic groups and ideologies hate the shit out of each other but since the one rule every can agree upon is "muh freedoms" they manage not to kill each other, so you have neighbors who live in close proximity to each other who manage to have wildly different religions without going to war over it....barely.
>Some parts of the country are filled with some of the richest and best-educated people on Earth who are exposed to a huge number of cultures and have an incredible grasp of varying philosophies for the time period thanks to it. Other places are poor as fuck.
>REAL proud of it's military might, even when it's size starts to gradually be too expensive to practically maintain and in many ways becomes slowly outdated for the type of wars being fought then.
>Lots of emphasis on "we are all different, but we are also all the SAME" when it comes to rhetoric by the rulers to keep their individual lords from killing each other.
>Had a really big, really bloody, really violent civil war once over idealogical, economic, and political reasons.

The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth mirrors the US in so many ways.

>>47456868
Oh, and lest I forget!
>Has a large rural expanse considered a dangerous place to live on the edge of civilization, but also considered a place where the smart, brave, and strong can make their fortune settling and controlling their bits of it.

Yeah, the Commonwealth even had an Old West. Only it was in the East.

>>47441099
>Ask yourself this: when was the last time a non-wealthy land owner became president?
Obama?

>>47456916
>>47456868
>the Commonwealth even had an Old West. Only it was in the East
Yes, it literally MIRRORS the US.
Heh.

>>47457429
You should be ashamed of yourself.

>>47440333
It would just be native americans

>>47441199
No one going to comment on triple dubs?