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

Hussar

Legend
By the way, I am comfortable using the term ‘scifi’ as synonymous with ‘speculative fiction’. Because, once one includes the human sciences of archeology, history, ethnography, religious studies, mythography, folkbelief studies, psychology, sociology, anthropology, art history, and so on, these human sciences along with the physical sciences cover every subgenre of speculative fiction.

You can be comfortable with it all you like. It doesn't make you right. Spec Fiction and science fiction are not the same thing. Speculative Fiction is the genre. Science fiction is simply one sub-genre of the trifecta that makes up Speculative Fiction.

Trying to invent your own definitions makes conversation rather difficult.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

He Mage
You can be comfortable with it all you like. It doesn't make you right. Spec Fiction and science fiction are not the same thing. Speculative Fiction is the genre. Science fiction is simply one sub-genre of the trifecta that makes up Speculative Fiction.

Trying to invent your own definitions makes conversation rather difficult.

I am saying

scifi ≠ science fiction




The reallife usage of the word ‘scifi’ has expanded to include things that are fantasy, including Star Wars, and so on.
 



MarkB

Legend
What makes faerie tales and fables (and maybe myths, as well) different from the Fantasy genre is their purpose. Imho, they're first and foremost meant as allegories. Fantasy is usually 'just' entertainment.

I always felt that Tolkien's work was a strange beast and doesn't really fit in well with the rest of the Fantasy genre, because it's been an attempt of creating a modern myth.

But maybe I'm just overthinking things...

To at least some extent, much of the fantasy genre exists because LotR created that modern myth. Many works live within and explore the narrative boundaries laid out by Tolkien's works, drawing upon their established tropes whether to play them straight or subvert them. Even those that grow beyond those boundaries still often use them as a basic foundation, relying upon a shared thematic understanding for the initial reader buy-in.

To me, what distinguishes whether a work feels like science fiction or fantasy is not the essential plausibility of the setting's trappings, but whether the characters or audience are invited to try to understand and explore their nature. Star Wars stories are fantasy in essence because exploring the parameters of the technology is never crucial to the plot - it's about exploring the nature and motivations of the characters. Whereas a story like Lois McMaster Bujold's Curse of Chalion, which is strictly fantasy in trappings, feels like a science fiction story because the plot hinges upon the characters exploring, understanding and exploiting the underlying rules of its fantasy-religious elements.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top