Gunpowder, fantasy and you

[Wolf1066]

I've got no objection at all to gunpowder or firearms in a fantasy setting.

As has been frequently pointed out in the thread, they are not automatically common across the whole world from the moment of their invention and they do have both advantages and disadvantages that mitigate both their use and them being ignored in favour of other weapons - including magic.

I think, though, if you're going to introduce realistic advantages and disadvantages of firearms, you'd have to do it for all weapons - which is something I don't particularly have an issue with.

If you can't realistically model the advantages and disadvantages of other weapons, then arbitrary restrictions/attempts at realism with firearms would not work.

 

[kitsune9]

For my own personal tastes, I love a good deal of steampunk in the fantasy world. Iron Kingdoms is the campaign setting that I have found that scratched my itch.

Unfortunately, my players are bit more ranging on their tastes. I have one player who only likes traditional sword and sorcery campaigns. No guns. I have another player who thinks they are O K A Y, but with serious limits and so on. I have another player who rather we dumped magic and switch a more historical fantasy so guns are cool. Actually, he'd rather play science fiction rpgs than fantasy. And my last player is kind of like me, he'd love to run / play an Eberron or Iron Kingdoms game, but can't illicit the interest.

Now, where I would draw the line is the introduction of science fiction into the fantasy. No ray guns, laser blasters, derelict spaceships, or computers running around waiting to be discovered or used in the world. That's my own personal preference.

 

[Haltherrion]

Now, where I would draw the line is the introduction of science fiction into the fantasy. No ray guns, laser blasters, derelict spaceships, or computers running around waiting to be discovered or used in the world. That's my own personal preference.

I agree. Was surprised to see the old scenario where the players explored a down spaceship rating so high.

Reminds me of the old Might and Magic games where a perfectly reasonable fantasy game always ended up wondering into alien blasters and space ships. I guess the creators of the series had a thing for mixing the two. I always hated it and stopped buying the games for that reason.

 

[pawsplay]

Now, where I would draw the line is the introduction of science fiction into the fantasy. No ray guns, laser blasters, derelict spaceships, or computers running around waiting to be discovered or used in the world. That's my own personal preference.

This is a big disconnect between the origins of FRPGs and the interests of many people who play. Because D&D dipped heavily into LOTR for flavor, many D&D fans think of D&D as being LOTR-inspired, with its Dark Ages technology and mythological roots. In actuality, though, Gygax was principally inspired by works that were emphatically part of the science-fiction genre: Vance's Dying Earth, Howard's Conan stories, Moorcock's Elric, Norton's Witch World, Burroughs' Mars, HPL's Dreamlands. Furthermore, Gygax favored the high medieval - early Renaissance of the chivalric romances over Beowulf and Charlemagnes. From the beginning, interdimensional portals were an implicit part of the setting.

 

[Haltherrion]

This is a big disconnect between the origins of FRPGs and the interests of many people who play. Because D&D dipped heavily into LOTR for flavor, many D&D fans think of D&D as being LOTR-inspired, with its Dark Ages technology and mythological roots. In actuality, though, Gygax was principally inspired by works that were emphatically part of the science-fiction genre: Vance's Dying Earth, Howard's Conan stories, Moorcock's Elric, Norton's Witch World, Burroughs' Mars, HPL's Dreamlands. Furthermore, Gygax favored the high medieval - early Renaissance of the chivalric romances over Beowulf and Charlemagnes. From the beginning, interdimensional portals were an implicit part of the setting.

That's an interesting historical perspective and perhaps there is a disconnect between one of the games creator's view on the matter and how most of the players view it but Gygax’s world preferences are hardly sacrosanct. If many players don’t like science fiction with their fantasy and they run their games accordingly, what difference does it make if one of the early gamers liked to mix the two?

Myself? I absolutely play D&D to experience a Tolkien type world and other similar “high fantasy” settings. My early gaming views are mostly lost in the haze of long ago decades but the intent to recreate a LOTR type feel I do remember (I even remember running some sessions that were siege of Minis Tirith-ish complete with laughable siege weapon rates of fire; hey, I was 13 or so.)

In any case, an aversion to mixed genres is not terribly hard to understand. Do you want harry Potter handing James Bond a magic acorn to turn his foe to stone at the end of the movie? Sticking to a genre is part of the implicit contract in most media.


More power to Gygax for helping to launch a hobby I cherish. But as far as his specific game, setting and other decisions? Never been especially impressed with them. I've found far more thoughtful folks on this board, whether I agree with them or not. I suppose I blaspheme...

 

[Hussar]

Marcq - I think you're misunderstanding Pawsplay here. It's not that he's in any way saying that you're doing anything wrong in perfering not to blend genres. It's just that for a lot of older fantasy fans, the dividing line between fantasy and SF was nowhere near as sharply defined as it is now.

As Pawsplay mentions, loads of fantasy and SF authors jumped the divide all the time. It wasn't until the huge bump that fantasy got in the 80's that you actually see "pure" fantasy authors outside of a very few names like Tolkien. In fact, before the 80's, about the only way a lot of fantasy books could see print was to dress themselves up as SF.

So, it's hardly surprising that a lot of the earlier D&D works, like White Plume Mountain (fallen spaceship), Secret of the Slavelords Stockade (wagon mounted flame thrower - although that's perhaps less anachronistic than you might think), and The Dancing Hut (complete with miniaturized city and giant, fire breathing lizard) pick and choose all sorts of stuff from both sides of the fence.

Heck, Mystara borrows very heavily on this - flying ships, six guns, all sorts of anachronisms.

There is a very long tradition in D&D to mix and match genres.

 

[Aus_Snow]

It wasn't until the huge bump that fantasy got in the 80's that you actually see "pure" fantasy authors outside of a very few names like Tolkien. In fact, before the 80's, about the only way a lot of fantasy books could see print was to dress themselves up as SF.

You might be right, but I'm not so sure...

A few of the big (pre-'80s) names that come to mind immediately: Conan, Tolkien's works of fiction, the Chronicles of Prydain, the Chronicles of Narnia, many (all?) of George MacDonald's works, the Earthsea trilogy... hm. I'm sure there are many others too (*big* names that apply, that is), but that's all for now. Surely though, even those would be [the beginnings of?] a reasonable counterpoint?

That is to say, at least some of the most influential fantasy of all time has absolutely nothing to do with guns, technology in the commonly used sense of the word, etc. And that's before you even get to the '80s, as you more or less imply.

 

[Hussar]

Umm, you do realize that Narnia's main characters were all modern day children no?

In Tolkien, the fireworks dragon that zoomed down through the party sounded like a freight train.

Or, put it another way, for every pure fantasy author, you can probably name at least one mixed genre author.

Heck, even the Conan stories borrowed from the Cthulu mythos - which has aliens.

 

[humble minion]

While conventional Tolkien-inspired 'fantasy', which includes much of the history of D&D generally doesn't include gunpowder, I certainly wouldn't want to limit myself or the genre so severely as I would by saying 'gunpowder = no fantasy, full stop.'

For great fantasy which DOES include gunpowder, how about Pirates of the Caribbean, Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell, His Dark Materials, and China Mieville's Bas-lag? Iron Kingdoms, the Warhammer World, Mary Gentle, the Bartimeus books, or Stephen Hunt? And that's just from a quick sideways look onto my bookshelf without even going into the Harry Dresden type modern-day fantasy.

The castle problem is ... solvable, in my opinion. Historically, some of the greatest sieges in history DID coincide with the presence of gunpowder weapons. Constantinople, Vienna, Rhodes, Malta, and certainly none of these were over in a week. In fact, this period might actually be easier to use in an RPG, because gunpowder weapons promoted sieges to be solved by storm, which provides an interesting action sequence, rather than by three years of sitting around in your own dysentery hoping that the defenders will run out of rats to eat soon. And besides, two other factors at work. Firstly, castles were not always designed with the intent of holding out against serious heavy military assault backed with artillery. Quite often they were just a force multiplier, to allow fractious conquered populations and rebellious peasants to be controlled with a relative minimum of resources and men. Secondly, historically building and maintaining castles was a vast investment of time, money and labour. In a fantasy world, a few earth elementals or walls of stone (or your non-D&D equivalent) can make them a much more economical, survivable, easily repairable, and therefore common measure.

Castles are cool. Sieges are cool. Fantasy is cool. Gunpowder is cool. Why limit yourself? Sure they may not have their place in every world or setting (probably not the best fit in Athas...), but saying 'no' sight unseen just because of some arbitrarily defined line where 'fantasy' ends and 'sci-fi' or 'steampunk' or whatever begins is just a waste of potential imho.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Umm, you do realize that Narnia's main characters were all modern day children no?

Yes, and the fantasy realm that most [understatement? ] of the story takes place in... yep, free of all that. Of course, they are from "the real world", or close enough. But the fantasy part (i.e., the relevant part) - that's what I was meaning, natch. Anyway, it's literally a few writers/settings that popped into my head that minute. Perhaps, with a bit of research, I could do a whole lot better. Are you of the mind to insist?

Or, put it another way, for every pure fantasy author, you can probably name at least one mixed genre author.

I'm not sure on the numbers. But if that's so, then 50/50 means each view is equally valid. I'd be happy with that, because then one kind of semi-regular post might disappear (ironically, the "sticking to pure fantasy is badwrongfun" kind) ... should those posters likely to to make them in the first place acknowledge such a fact, anyhow. Again, assuming it is a fact...


Anyway, regarding D&D adventures? The overwhelming majority of them do not feature guns, tech, et al. At all. So it's (unsurprisingly) rather easy to have played D&D for most of one's years, and never to have encountered that style of setting / flavour. That is the case for me, for example. And I would rather keep it that way. There are plenty of other games and settings that scratch those itches, big time. Likewise, I'm not a fan of Shadowrun, whatsoever. But bully for those who do like mixups and crossovers, or simply different historical influences for that matter. More power to them/you. To each his or her own.