Worlds of Design: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi Part 2

I hope I showed in my last piece that "science vs magic" is not a sufficient way to differentiate fantasy from science fiction. What about other ways?

I hope I showed in my last piece that "science vs magic" is not a sufficient way to differentiate fantasy from science fiction. What about other ways?


What about the size (and speed) of typical vehicles as a separator? Science fiction often has vast spaceships that you "never" see in fantasy, yet even fantasy can have small space-traveling ships as in the Spelljammer setting for AD&D. Games that are clearly fantasy rarely have land or sea vehicles that can travel 60 miles (100 km) an hour or more. They have nothing like airliners or container ships; rarely anything like a railroad (but some do . . .).

Benny Sperling on Twitter suggested "Low tech (fantasy) knights, wizards, kings vs high tech (sci-fi) robots, space ships, AI".

This led me to think that in fantasy the fighting is almost always melee or short range (catapults, arrows, and spells), whereas in science fiction the fighting is almost always at considerable if not immensely long (in outer space) ranges. This is a useful distinction, though with exceptions, in a fantasy video game such as Age of Wonders III, the wizards are casting their battle spells across dozens or hundreds of miles. But I can't think of a fantasy (story or game) with combat ranges longer than the size of a planet . . .

Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom stories involve both short range (sword) and longer range (the Martian warships) fighting; I'd call Barsoom more fantasy than science fiction.

"Science fiction is fantasy about issues of science. Science fiction is a subset of fantasy. Fantasy predated it by several millennia." Raymond E Feist​

The biggest typical explosions in science fiction are immensely greater than the biggest explosions one typically encounters in fantasy.

Knights? We have knights in armor riding horses, we have Jedi Knights, it's just a word. If by Knights we specifically mean armed horsemen who hold their land in fee to an overlord, then we have something that's medieval, and medieval often translates to fantasy. But that's more often because of low tech and short range fighting than because of the feudal system! We can have a fantasy such as Empire of the Petal Throne that has little resemblance to the medieval. (Though some would call EPT science fantasy, because the technology is supposedly science-based.)

Benny also mentioned Kings, but many science-fiction Empire stories involve monarchies. As for "AI", we see fantasy golems and automatons that exhibit signs of intelligence.

What is "science fantasy?" Star Wars, perhaps, but not Star Trek. Scientific trappings over what is otherwise a fantasy? I think I'll try to avoid the term.

Believability might come into all of this. Science fiction can be quite believable, whereas fantasy is almost always fantastic and ultimately unbelievable. Yet one of the most believable fictions in our genres is the Lord of the Rings, clearly a fantasy. Star Wars isn't believable (though it's enjoyable), and many would say it IS a fantasy. Fantasy elements in what is otherwise science fiction tend to break immersion (take the player out of the game), as do scientific elements in what is otherwise fantasy.

Where do we fit in alternate history - for example, Harry Turtledove's series in which the South wins the Civil War? It's no longer real, though starting from our reality, and it may be realistic. Do we just call it Alternate History and leave it at that? This is related to stories, e.g. Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen, where time- or multiverse-travelers go to an earlier time(line) and use their knowledge of technology to make big changes. Fantasy? SF?

In the end, I think I have to point first to natural versus supernatural as a means of separating fantasy and science fiction. After that I focus on fighting methods, especially ranges, and to vehicle and explosion sizes. Star Wars is fantasy because of the supernatural elements, the prophecy and The Force, and somehow a lot of melee and short range combat. The Pern books are science-fiction because there is no supernatural element. And so on.

You might be able to have an interesting discussion with your players about this topic. It's an intellectual exercise in considerable part, but one that many have tried over the years if we can judge from the weight of material online.

This article was contributed by Lewis Pulsipher (lewpuls) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. You can follow Lew on his web site and his Udemy course landing page. If you enjoy the daily news and articles from EN World, please consider contributing to our Patreon!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Yaarel

He Mage
[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]

What the Norse understood to be ‘magic’ (seiðr) was achieved by the forces of ones own mind (hugar).

What the 1950s science fiction writers understood to be ‘psionics’ (psi + electronics) was achieved by the forces of ones own mind (psyche).

These are tautologically identical concepts. In this case, the ‘fantasy’ and the ‘science fiction’ are the same, except the choice of language to describe it.

It is easy to have a ‘science fiction’ movie in a Viking Era setting, where the ‘mindforces’ (hugar) accompanies a plausible explanation.

Actually, the movie Outlander resembles such. It is a Viking movie where the dragon is a space alien.

To me, I can find no meaningful distinction between fantasy and science fiction.

I am comfortable with the need of scifi (aka speculative fiction) to be able to represent both.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

He Mage
Viking + mindmagic + cryptozoology can be pure ‘hard science fiction’.

Perhaps oppositely, works that often wear the label ‘science fiction’ are often pure ‘fantasy’. Such as, Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]

What the Norse understood to be ‘magic’ (seiðr) was achieved by the forces of ones own mind (hugar).

Neopagan interpretations of Norse magic were informed by modern literary genres, not the other way around.

We have no insight into the actual metaphysical understanding of a magician in a pre-literate society 1200 years ago.
 

dragoner

KosmicRPG.com
Viking + mindmagic + cryptozoology can be pure ‘hard science fiction’.

I would disagree here, though maybe, depending on process; one could argue procedural similarity.

As far as combining all genres into just "fiction", one library I go to, does just that, though it is rather a pain to sort through the stacks. Genres, far from being precise, do tend towards ease of use.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
Neopagan interpretations of Norse magic were informed by modern literary genres, not the other way around.

We have no insight into the actual metaphysical understanding of a magician in a pre-literate society 1200 years ago.

I am referring to the Old Norse texts themselves that say things like using ones own ‘mindforces’ (hugar) to ‘play with minds of others’. Teleportation is described as ‘traveling at the speed of thought’. And so on. The Norse worldview of magic is strictly what we would call ‘psychic powers’.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
I would disagree here, though maybe, depending on process; one could argue procedural similarity.

As far as combining all genres into just "fiction", one library I go to, does just that, though it is rather a pain to sort through the stacks. Genres, far from being precise, do tend towards ease of use.

There is a ‘feeling’ that ‘science fiction’ tries to come up with an explanation that sounds plausible to the audience − while ‘fantasy’ simply relies on ‘suspension of disbelief’ after spelling out how the fictional universe operates.

However, there is plenty of ‘science fiction’ that refuses to explain how the marvel works, and actually has characters who call attention to how the mysterious phenomenon seems impossible.

Currently, the tv show Manifest, so far, seems like it *might* be ‘science fiction’ that leaves the mystery of timetravel and prophetic visions unexplained. Therefore labeling it ‘science fiction’ or ‘fantasy’ remains objectively undetermined.
 

dragoner

KosmicRPG.com
There is a ‘feeling’ that ‘science fiction’ tries to come up with an explanation that sounds plausible to the audience − while ‘fantasy’ simply relies on ‘suspension of disbelief’ after spelling out how the fictional universe operates.

However, there is plenty of ‘science fiction’ that refuses to explain how the marvel works, and actually has characters who call attention to how the mysterious phenomenon seems impossible.

Currently, the tv show Manifest, so far, seems like it *might* be ‘science fiction’ that leaves the mystery of timetravel and prophetic visions unexplained. Therefore labeling it ‘science fiction’ or ‘fantasy’ remains objectively undetermined.

Science is a process, and often non-linear; more so than a body of knowledge, which it is as well. Plausible is a good word for science-fiction, as it means seeming reasonable, yet may be specious. The fundamentals of language are that two words can be put together to create new words. Philip K Dick, also stated that science fiction can play the "divine fool", saying something in a way that might be considered offensive otherwise; for example, right now in China, sci-fi has be used as thinly veiled criticism of the communist party, something that could not be done in normal literature.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
Science is a process, and often non-linear; more so than a body of knowledge, which it is as well. Plausible is a good word for science-fiction, as it means seeming reasonable, yet may be specious. The fundamentals of language are that two words can be put together to create new words. Philip K Dick, also stated that science fiction can play the "divine fool", saying something in a way that might be considered offensive otherwise; for example, right now in China, sci-fi has be used as thinly veiled criticism of the communist party, something that could not be done in normal literature.

Yeah.

Scifi, by formulating a ‘hypothetical’ setting can function as a parable, that can explore the ethical problem itself without the blame and accusations that provoke the need for self-defense that can interrupt honest ethical introspection.



Recently, I have been enjoying Russian scifi. It seems to be a vehicle to explore traditional Russian cultural identity, religion and folkbelief, in ways that a Communist outlook might be adverse to.
 

The Norse worldview of magic is strictly what we would call ‘psychic powers’.

We can't assert anything categorically about ancient Norse magic, much less the worldview or context in which it was understood. We can venture tentative inferences based on very scant information.

We have a book of poetry (Codex Regius) and a prose mythic history from the 13th century. Iceland had already been Christianized for more than two centuries when they were written down. The extent to which the Prose Edda reflects anything other than Snorri Sturluson's personal invention is also highly questionable - assuming that Snurluson even compiled or wrote it.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
We can't assert anything categorically about ancient Norse magic, much less the worldview or context in which it was understood. We can venture tentative inferences based on very scant information.

We have a book of poetry (Codex Regius) and a prose mythic history from the 13th century. Iceland had already been Christianized for more than two centuries when they were written down. The extent to which the Prose Edda reflects anything other than Snorri Sturluson's personal invention is also highly questionable - assuming that Snurluson even compiled or wrote it.

I am unsure if you are aware, but there is lots of Old Norse literature beyond the Codex Regius.



Descriptions about magic according to the Old Norse texts themselves are clear.



Also, the descriptions of Norse style psychic magic are Nonchristian, where the Christian outlook would rather there be no magic going on at all, and every ‘miracle’ coming directly from God, rather than from a ‘powerful mental visualization’.



Even after the Icelandic parliament sessions became officially ‘Christian’ Norse spiritual customs remained legal within ones own private homes. Indigenous Norse beliefs continued for centuries.

Snorri himself had Nonchristian friends and was knowledgeable about the indigenous Norse beliefs.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top