Game News Josh Sawyer's long-awaited historical RPG is called Pentiment, coming next year

[Strange Fellow]

I'm sure there'll be plenty of violence, just no dedicated combat system.

 

[pickmeister]

Agreed. There is going to be a ton of violence, murder, rape, and humiliation done on historical accuracy, no doubt.

 

[Volourn]

A bunch of bullshit Obsidian simps. You CANNOT have a legit real world rpg OF ANY ERA and not include combat as a choice.

And, no, having the combat/violence playout in the background or in dialogue or in cutscenes doesn't cut it. That is what an ADVENTURE game does.

ROLEPLAYING GAME means the player should be taking part in ALL ACTIVITIES THEY CHOOSE.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

CLIMB A TREE!

 

[Burning Bridges]

How the fuck do you do a legit a historical rpg without combat? Talk about fantasy. Dragons and wizards ar emore likely to be real than non violence. LMAO

You are oversimplifying things. People from the past were more violent than modern people, but they weren't some kind of complete barbarians who couldn't do anything without violence. Just people living in tough times.

Most medieval subjects weren't even allowed to carry weapons, and a large portion went through life without ever engaging in combat. In Japan this was most pronounced, the idea of a Japanese peasant with a sword is ludicrous, though during the upheavals some peasants were rebellious and refused order, so it is never completely clear cut.

I do wonder though wether it's believable to depict a world in which you would not witness killing. Everyone would be used to people with arms that were not just show. We sometimes like to envision a peaceful past in which people were totally safe but reality would always be able to step in, like Archimedes being slain while he was occupied drawing mathematical symbols.

Although of the points against this latest effort this is the least weighty and I have not seen many realistic depictions of the medieval time in games, and it isn't easy at all if you just think of the language that would have to be researched first. Our knowledge of the medieval time is very small and mostly dictated by folklore. My personal take is always that the behavior of people was entirely rational, within the constraints of the time of course, that means involving belief in demons and magic.

The game will probably be cringe, but on the other hand he is at least trying. I find it just strange that there are not more other game developers stepping in the breach and making better games tbh.

 

[Volourn]

"Most medieval subjects weren't even allowed to carry weapons, and a large portion went through life without ever engaging in combat."

And, that would be a shit rpg to play. That's right, rolks, let us 'roleplay' as some common peasant who isna't llowed to shit except stay on his farm 24/7 working 16 hour days. HOW DEEP AND EXCITING.

I bet the game is gonna have the player interact with alls orts of people not just some lame ass farmer or street sweeper. HAHAHAHHAA.

 

[pickmeister]

Well, people are shitting themselves from Stardew Valley and Animal Crossing so that would actually be a bestseller.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Volourn I would agree most of the time but you can make games about anything and some people should theoretically find that entertaining. The greatest power of rpgs has always been to try new things, like science fiction rpgs were a novelty in the 1990s, or yes, why not a game about a medieval peasant. It depends how much you are really interested in the history. Games are normally not that much interested in historic facts, but just in a good time.

I would welcome for example if someone tried a game about intellectuals in medieval times, lets say something like The Name of the Rose. Or a game about scientists like Descartes or Newton. That would be a more untapped domain, instead of the countless games about knights in armor.

 

[Volourn]

Make the game all you want. It won't be a RPG. It'll be an adventure game. HUGE difference.

I get it, though, in 2021, everything is labeled a RPG. LMAO

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

the idea of a Japanese peasant with a sword is ludicrous, though during the upheavals some peasants were rebellious and refused order, so it is never completely clear cut.

Untrue. During Sengoku there was a lot of peasants who were part time soldiers and had swords at home. Only after Hideyoshi edict banned peasants from having swords this had changed

We sometimes like to envision a peaceful past in which people were totally safe but reality would always be able to step in, like Archimedes being slain while he was occupied drawing mathematical symbols.

This was during siege of Syracuse, when enemy soldiers had broken in. Being in a city when it's being plundered by enemy army may be the most dangerous place to be ever.

I do wonder though wether it's believable to depict a world in which you would not witness killing

If you don't life close to the place of public executions and there is no war nearby, then it's more likely to be a medieval peasant who has never seen killing than to be one that has seen it.

 

[Viata]

I told you he's a sociopath, he proves it yet again. He's the type of guy who destroy cultural heritage for personal tastes like ISIS did in Palmyra.

"Arguably the best"... I'd expect this wording from some rpshit outlet. It's a bad sign that this is now the level of the rpgcodex editorial policy.

You know I was quoting another dude, right?

Should have put a (sic) there after New Vegas.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Untrue. During Sengoku there was a lot of peasants who were part time soldiers and had swords at home. Only after Hideyoshi edict banned peasants from having swords this had changed

You mean Ashigaru? I don't know if it would be correct to call them mere peasants, they seemed quite loyal and privileged, otherwise it would have totally backfired. Perhaps this was a way to advance on the ladder, afaik Hideyoshi was a peasant himself.

Of course that is all quite complicated, that is what I meant. It is what makes it interesting when you are willing to research the paradoxes. You probably find examples of peasants who were armed to the teeth and that's why they banned it. In other times nameless peasants would not flinch when Samurai practiced their skill in cutting off their head with a single stroke. There is no generic society with generic rules in that period. But you are right I was oversimplifying.

This was during siege of Syracuse, when enemy soldiers had broken in. Being in a city when it's being plundered by enemy army may be the most dangerous place to be ever.

What I meant is that many people imagine him spending his entire life in sunny Greece arguing with other bearded men over triangles. The reality was that at all the time they had to worry about invading armies.

 

[Viata]

It was the lack of soul.

No wonder he is going with Prester John in this game. Can't say there is a lack of soul in a Christian character.

 

[Crispy]

THERE IS NO WAY TO AVOID NOT HAVING COMBAT IN JOSH'S NEW HISTORICAL RPG

 

[Burning Bridges]

Make the game all you want. It won't be a RPG. It'll be an adventure game. HUGE difference.

I get it, though, in 2021, everything is labeled a RPG. LMAO

We have come a long way haven't we. 15 years ago there were practically no rpgs at all and now they are commonplace, but usually generic shit. There is now a new generation of developers who knows even less what they are doing than ever before, and it will probably only get worse.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

You mean Ashigaru? I don't know if it would be correct to call them mere peasants, they seemed quite loyal and privileged, otherwise it would have totally backfired. Perhaps this was a way to advance on the ladder, afaik Hideyoshi was a peasant himself.

I don't understand. Most of medieval armies consisted of peasants. Each feudal lords was obliged to bring his own regiment to war. I don't think that having peasants in army is some surprising thing demanding explanation.

Samurai practiced their skill in cutting off their head with a single stroke

That's a myth. Killing peasants for other reason than having been disrespected was banned,

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

You start the game as a medieval peasant working in a collective commune, and work your way up to become union leader who plans to bring down the feudal system by farming a lot of soy and flooding the markets with it.

 

[Burning Bridges]

That's a myth. Killing peasants for other reason than having been disrespected was banned,

If it was banned it must have happened at some time before.

But I also don't believe that it was a logical thing to do, because every killed peasant was a waste of a valuable resource. Only when you were utterly awash with power could you do this on a regular basis.

That is actually something that always bothered me about the stereotypical Japanese history, because all this beheading and seppuku for nothing would have meant endless waste of human resources. The reality was probably much more sophisticated, and most killings or suicides served some purpose.

 

[Viata]

In Japan this was most pronounced, the idea of a Japanese peasant with a sword is ludicrous, though during the upheavals some peasants were rebellious and refused order, so it is never completely clear cut.

From the Heian Period(794-1185) up to Sengoku Period(1467-1615) most men had weapons. Nobunaga wanted to end this practice, mostly because there was a group of monks(or just followers) that were against the samurai rule. Keep in mind that Nobunaga was able to unify Japan while using a lot of peasants on his side. I believe Nobunaga killed himself, in 1582, before he forced that since Toyotomi Hideyoshi, in 1588, issued a decree that no peasants were allowed to carry a sword, only the samurai class would be allowed to carry one. I believe during the Tokugawa shogunate peasants still had swords, but I have no idea if this was during all his time.
The sword hunt(also known as katanagari in Japan) was used in Japan every time someone became a new ruler since this way he could ensure his position. Funny enough, even after WW2 there was a sword hunt by Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, which is said to be the only time that peasants were disarmed completely.

 

[AN4RCHID]

Will be looking forward to seeing Sawyer's vision when he cannot hide behind "I don't like these mechanics but it's the game we were tasked with making"

Spoiler

No, really, I am looking forward to it, sounds cool

 

[Burning Bridges]

In Japan this was most pronounced, the idea of a Japanese peasant with a sword is ludicrous, though during the upheavals some peasants were rebellious and refused order, so it is never completely clear cut.

From the Heian Period(794-1185) up to Sengoku Period(1467-1615) most men had weapons. Nobunaga wanted to end this practice, mostly because there was a group of monks(or just followers) that were against the samurai rule. Keep in mind that Nobunaga was able to unify Japan while using a lot of peasants on his side. I believe Nobunaga killed himself, in 1582, before he forced that since Toyotomi Hideyoshi, in 1588, issued a decree that no peasants were allowed to carry a sword, only the samurai class would be allowed to carry one. I believe during the Tokugawa shogunate peasants still had swords, but I have no idea if this was during all his time.

Yes, two different periods with very contradicting situations.

In Japanese, Samurai are usually referred to as bushi (武士, [bɯ.ɕi]), meaning 'warrior', or buke (武家), meaning 'military family'. I might have confused this as Samurai were allowed to carry 2 swords, so perhaps peasants could own swords. But it was certainly not proper to wield them in front of Samurai or lift a finger when you were punished.

Samurai comprised between 5 or 10% of the population, so that leaves between 90 and 95% who were not Samurai.

Ashigaru were additional infantry, an attempt to have a conscripted army which of course was logical. Being an Ashigaru was already a move up the ladder, normal peasants didn't even have a name, and being a soldier in the Daimyos army, train and wield weapons brought significant power and pride.

 

[markec]

I cant imagine anyone still being excited for anything Obsidian does.

 

[Harry Easter]

That reads so niché, I will keep an eye out for it.

 

[Oberon]

How the fuck do you do a legit a historical rpg without combat? Talk about fantasy. Dragons and wizards ar emore likely to be real than non violence. LMAO

You are oversimplifying things. People from the past were more violent than modern people, but they weren't some kind of complete barbarians who couldn't do anything without violence. Just people living in tough times.

And even if the game doesn't include a combat system doesn't mean violence will be completely absent.
Disco Elysium had plenty of violence.

 

[vonAchdorf]

I don't think that SJWism will be a problem, it's a historical game and not his twitter account.

But I'm not sure about Josh's ability to mould all the knowledge he has into an interesting (adventure?) game with RPG elements.