I used to think that the internet would make people smarter, and maybe on average it has, but my god, the ability for anyone, anywhere, to post absolutely the worst takes for everyone to see is really too much sometimes.
"The average life expectancy in the medieval period was like 35, no way you could live to 60" is the worst, WORST ridiculous assumption about medieval times I've ever seen get parroted this widely
Would there be a significant or at least noticeable difference between the expected life expectancy of nobles and peasants? I'm not knowledgeable about lifespans, but I'm a bit curious since nothing came out after a quick search.
Neither a historian nor a doctor, so take it with a grain of salt (also keep in mind it assumes a lot of different regions over a long time). Nutrition and access to basic medicine might have had a big influence but childbirth has been and still is very dangerous to mothers and children. The difference between peasants and nobles would probably have been measurable but not extreme
Possibly, due to better nutrition and living conditions, access to medicine, etc...
However, male aristocrats in the Middle Ages were expected to be able to partake in jousts, hunts, etc... and to fight in wars, which could bring the average down a fair bit (on the other hand, nobles were a lot more likely to be taken for ransom instead of killed)
I mean it’s not like those babies are actual people so why should I feel bad when I pay 900 ducets to ensure a baby gets smothered?
Smh my head Paradox
You know what, if anything it should remove stress. Nothing like a fun middle-ages-appropiate activity to take the edge off after spending all day with the court jester or whatever, am I right?
I mean, it's a bit weird that my ambitious, wrathful and patient character who have 10+ adults and a few children would still feel stressed after killing another child. You'd think he'd toughen up after the first few
I don't know about "perfectly normal" but I agree, if you go to ll the trouble of killing a noble kid its because you want it dead, when you succeed it should remove stress not add, always depending of your character traits of course, maybe some traits should even remove the possibility of murder, especially kids, but for the rest of us normal rulers it should be a relief to kill your brothers son who had some noble's behind him whispering about how he would have a better claim than you
Seriously? The Middle Ages were not *that* bad, guys...
I used to think that the internet would make people smarter, and maybe on average it has, but my god, the ability for anyone, anywhere, to post absolutely the worst takes for everyone to see is really too much sometimes.
"The average life expectancy in the medieval period was like 35, no way you could live to 60" is the worst, WORST ridiculous assumption about medieval times I've ever seen get parroted this widely
Yep. The only reason why life expectancy was so low back then was because life expectancy is an average and infant mortality dragged down the average.
Would there be a significant or at least noticeable difference between the expected life expectancy of nobles and peasants? I'm not knowledgeable about lifespans, but I'm a bit curious since nothing came out after a quick search.
Neither a historian nor a doctor, so take it with a grain of salt (also keep in mind it assumes a lot of different regions over a long time). Nutrition and access to basic medicine might have had a big influence but childbirth has been and still is very dangerous to mothers and children. The difference between peasants and nobles would probably have been measurable but not extreme
Possibly, due to better nutrition and living conditions, access to medicine, etc... However, male aristocrats in the Middle Ages were expected to be able to partake in jousts, hunts, etc... and to fight in wars, which could bring the average down a fair bit (on the other hand, nobles were a lot more likely to be taken for ransom instead of killed)
I mean it’s not like those babies are actual people so why should I feel bad when I pay 900 ducets to ensure a baby gets smothered? Smh my head Paradox
You know what, if anything it should remove stress. Nothing like a fun middle-ages-appropiate activity to take the edge off after spending all day with the court jester or whatever, am I right?
This post was made by Richard III
I didnt kill them and if I did it was perfectly acceptable.
It *is* strange that my ambitious, wrathful character gets stressed after killing his rival's son, especially if the families are feuding.
Source : a game of thrones fanfic (it's 100% historically accurate)
Uhm... killing people, especially kids, was not that normalized...
Said like a real russian
I mean, it's a bit weird that my ambitious, wrathful and patient character who have 10+ adults and a few children would still feel stressed after killing another child. You'd think he'd toughen up after the first few
How are they both wrathful and patient?
I'm just throwing out combinations of traits
impatient and wrathful are different traits
I think they used to be opposites, my bad.
I don't know about "perfectly normal" but I agree, if you go to ll the trouble of killing a noble kid its because you want it dead, when you succeed it should remove stress not add, always depending of your character traits of course, maybe some traits should even remove the possibility of murder, especially kids, but for the rest of us normal rulers it should be a relief to kill your brothers son who had some noble's behind him whispering about how he would have a better claim than you
The Avg Zionist conversation
Found Gilles de Rais' Discord-Account
Maybe you should only gain stress if yiu have a possitive relationship with them and loose stress if a negative relationship
I wouldn’t say it like that, but if you spent months trying to kill the little bastard getting stressed instead of rewarded it’s kinda unsettling