D&D General Why Fantasy? Goin' Medieval in D&D

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yeah, I am thinking back to those early games which were far more survive it if you can. Later, it has become more kick it's ass because you are powerful. The GM's NPCs have to try and survive the PCs! A complete turn around.

Given the overwhelming presence of superheroes for the past decade (or two decades), I find claims that the continued success of fantasy RPGs to be solely due to power-tripping to be somewhat suspect, at best. Or, at a minimum, lacking in foundation.

But that's just my opinion!

 

[J-H]

I agree with the OP.
I'd like to add another reason to "why fantasy?"
Fantasy supports power growth through increasing acquisition of powerful magic items and abilities... from the a low-level village where a +1 sword is a notable heirloom, up to the iconic +5 flaming longsword and teleportation twice a day.

Most non-fantasy setting types (stone age, wild west, sci-fi) do not support such a breadth of "external to the character" options. A better gun in an American West setting does more damage, but if it also lets you teleport across the room or sets buildings on fire, you're stepping into magic item/fantasy territory.

Sufficiently advanced technology can be similar to magic (I know where the quote comes from, but given his life choices involving minors I'm not going to mention him), but there's usually not a lot of room for technology change on an individual level in sci fi. Star Trek covers a couple of hundred year (+-), but most of the technology changes are on the ship level (stealth, better teleportation, faster engines). At the level of the individual player (one of many characters aboard a ship), the only improvements you could hope for is getting better phasers, personal shields, and maybe a couple of other gadgets - a far cry from the dozens-to-hundreds of options available in D&D.
There's room for more "individual gadget/magic item" diversity in science fiction if you make the technology uneven, have relics from previous times, and give some people special psionic powers... but then you're doing something more like Star Wars, which is basically fantasy in spaaaaace.

The feedback loop of increasing personal power through leveling up, items, etc. is one of the attractions and reward mechanisms in D&D, and fantasy settings simply support it better.

 

[payn]

I agree with the OP.
I'd like to add another reason to "why fantasy?"
Fantasy supports power growth through increasing acquisition of powerful magic items and abilities... from the a low-level village where a +1 sword is a notable heirloom, up to the iconic +5 flaming longsword and teleportation twice a day.

Most non-fantasy setting types (stone age, wild west, sci-fi) do not support such a breadth of "external to the character" options. A better gun in an American West setting does more damage, but if it also lets you teleport across the room or sets buildings on fire, you're stepping into magic item/fantasy territory.

Sufficiently advanced technology can be similar to magic (I know where the quote comes from, but given his life choices involving minors I'm not going to mention him), but there's usually not a lot of room for technology change on an individual level in sci fi. Star Trek covers a couple of hundred year (+-), but most of the technology changes are on the ship level (stealth, better teleportation, faster engines). At the level of the individual player (one of many characters aboard a ship), the only improvements you could hope for is getting better phasers, personal shields, and maybe a couple of other gadgets - a far cry from the dozens-to-hundreds of options available in D&D.
There's room for more "individual gadget/magic item" diversity in science fiction if you make the technology uneven, have relics from previous times, and give some people special psionic powers... but then you're doing something more like Star Wars, which is basically fantasy in spaaaaace.

The feedback loop of increasing personal power through leveling up, items, etc. is one of the attractions and reward mechanisms in D&D, and fantasy settings simply support it better.

I believe this to be more of a D&D thing, than a fantasy thing. I mean, there is nothing about medieval Europe that suggests magic items and growing individual power is/was a common thing. Not anymore than wild west or sci-fi. Some non-fantasy RPGs do have leveling and items, but many outside the D&D/fantasy brand have no leveling at all (see Traveller). So, I disagree about fantasy doing it better/best, and that it just comes down to D&D (the coke of RPGs) using fantasy as the backdrop for a zero to hero game loop.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Given the overwhelming presence of superheroes for the past decade (or two decades), I find claims that the continued success of fantasy RPGs to be solely due to power-tripping to be somewhat suspect, at best. Or, at a minimum, lacking in foundation.

But that's just my opinion!

Most superheroes don't get markedly more powerful over time, so IMO it's a bit different. Some superhero video games do have PCs "level up".

 

[payn]

Most superheroes don't get markedly more powerful over time, so IMO it's a bit different. Some superhero video games do have PCs "level up".

I do hear about folks wanting first level DD PCs with lots of HPs, able to breath fire, and be able to teleport. At some point, being powerful has become synonymous with being heroic in RPGs of all kinds. Being fed a steady diet of super hero stories might have given a popular expectation of such an experience culturally.

 

[deganawida]

I do hear about folks wanting first level DD PCs with lots of HPs, able to breath fire, and be able to teleport. At some point, being powerful has become synonymous with being heroic in RPGs of all kinds. Being fed a steady diet of super hero stories might have given a popular expectation of such an experience culturally.

It's been a trend in fantasy fiction, too, since at least the early-mid '90s. Very strange when compared to pre-90s fantasy, where the heroes are typically weak.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

"Fantasy" is getting wider and wider in scope with each passing decade

No, it became narrow in the 60s-70s due to the popularity of Tolkien. Now it's bouncing back to it's original shape.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's been a trend in fantasy fiction, too, since at least the early-mid '90s. Very strange when compared to pre-90s fantasy, where the heroes are typically weak.

Weak? Really?!

Conan, John Carter, Tarzan are weak? Lancelot is weak? Aragorn is weak? Elric is weak? Okay, so Elric is pretty weak without his magic, but really, I don't recall a time when fantasy heroes where weak.

 

[Stormonu]

It should be noted that even in the Middle Ages, their artists wouldn’t depict ancient Romans and others in the correct fashions or armor a lot of times as well. Not being able to seperate one’s self from “modern” sensibilities is not a recent thing.

 

[deganawida]

John Carter and Tarzan aren't fantasy. Aragorn is not the protagonist of LotR and he's no where near the same power level as even Glorfindel, Saruman, Gandalf, Elrond, etc . Compare Rand al'Thor or Richard Rahl to Taran Wanderer or Frodo Baggins and you see a vast gulf.

Also, I should have clarified (and nearly did) that I meant high fantasy, rather than the heroic fantasy of Howard and Moorcock (when he's doing fantasy and not something like DatEoT).