|
Because I've ssen this go of on a tangent in so many different threads I figured I'd throw together one place where everyone can talk about the With alternate history there are a lot of different stories set in completely different time periods. Want to see time-travelling racist South Africans from the far future year of 2014 give AK-47s to the Confederacy? It's been done. Napoleon conquering the world? Done about 180 years ago Life in a United States conquered by Germany and Japan after World war 2? Done really well. Oh and a thousand and one books where the Confederacy wins in the American Civil War or the Nazis win World War 2 because this poo poo is targeted extensively at Americans and those are the only two wars most Americans are assumed to know about. Glossary of Terms POD: Point of Departure. The point at which the story diverged from real history. For example it could be as simple as a blacksmith failing to properly do his job before a minor skirmish or as complicated as Hitler calling off the entirety of World War 2 two days before the invasion of Poland. OTL: Our Time Line/Original Time Line. AKA real history. For want of a Nail: A story that generally doesn't involve time travel but instead usually has one minor and potentially insignificant event that nontheless leads to an entirely different History.Named for an old proverb/poem. Counterfactual: Alternate History as written by professional historians who don't want to be associated with the kind of people who'd find being placed next to a Tom Clancy book on a shelf an honour. ISOT: Island in the Sea of Time, In which instead of a single character going back in time an entire group of people or geographical area is sent back instead. Named for the allegedly terrible S M Stirling series where the island of Nantucket is sent back to the bronze age. So what are peoples favourite stories in the genre? which ones did people find laughably bad? and are there any that can be genuinely be considered to be good? Ferrosol fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Nov 4, 2014 |
#
¿
Jun 12, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
I'm a big fan of Eric Flint and one of his slightly more obscure series is the Rivers of War series. Basically this starts during the war of 1812 in OTL Sam Houston was badly injured storming an Indian barricade. In this time line he slips as he climbs over the barricade turning what would otherwise have been a debilitating injury into a minor flesh wound meaning he has a very different war and a very different career. Originally the author wrote this because he wanted to find a way to do an American history that somehow avoids the Trail of Tears. In reality he ends up taking things a lot further than that. I'd say it's pretty good and it's certainly more obscure than the usual round of American Civil war and WWII you see. Only one thing that might annoy you, He has a somewhat whitewashed view of Andrew Jackson which might not be popular with everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Mojo Threepwood posted:
I've read it and I remember it being decent but if you asked me to name one single plot-point in the entire book i'd struggle to do so. I do remember the utterly fantastic tag line for it though "everyone remembers where they were when John F Kennedy tried to kill them."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
dublish posted:World War 2 alt-hist would be much more interesting if this wasn't always the case. It's pretty hard to get Hitler to win plausibly, The German economy was about the 4th strongest in the world rankings and was going up against enemies who were 1st 2nd and 3rd. You can't even argue that if Germany had had better luck they could've won because Germany was ridiculously lucky as things stand who could predict that first the French would ignore the weakly defended German border while Hitler was busy with Poland. And later that the French would commit their entire reserves forward into Belgium leaving the Ardennes relatively uncovered. German War industry was (speer myth aside) running at full tilt from the start of the war and while they could've made efficiency savings that would require you to utterly change Hitler's entire style of leadership. Also short of massive incompetence on the allied side and perfect "play" on the german side Hitler is not going to win anything like a remotely historical world war.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2014 19:14
|
|