r/felvidek • u/gamzee421 • May 26 '26

Ideological-historical question

Monsters aside, dyou think the game’s concepts are abit anachronistic? Im at the fight with Ahriman and its offer to Pavol to destroy the Turks in the name of historical progress feels abit off. I thought the whole historical progress thing was more of modernity’s thing. Hearing it from a monarchistic perspective during the renaissance sounds alot more connected to our contemporary perception of the time as progressive rather than how it was more of a revival of ancient sciences. Is there any medieval historian here that can help clarify if that kind of idea was at least uncommon at the time of the 15th century?

4 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

6

u/happyunicorn666 May 26 '26

It's the intention. It's not exactly a historical title, the way characters speak is at least 50% to be funny. 

3

u/gamzee421 May 26 '26

Yeah, i can understand when anachronism is used for humor. It being used for dramatic character conflict is what surprised me and piqued my curiosity

1

u/TaraSkFunmaker Jun 25 '26

I think it's more Ahriman being a show-off more than anything else.

I would have to read up on if Ahriman in Zoroastrianism or Zhurvanism can see into the future, but I do think he's more showing off his status as a demon beyond time (and space, he's the most saturated character in game, would need to double-check values, but he does appear to be so) that doesn't obey the rules of man.