Is D&D 4E too "far out" to expand the market easily?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

What you say about gnomes is valid for the english language, but in german for instance the garden gnome is known as zwerg= dwarf, and the gnome (german: gnom) has some air of mystery around him.

And for reference, this is a German Kobold (the iconic Kobold, so to speak:

 

[Hussar]

1/ To actually explain that to a noob, the noob has to be interested in what you're saying, aka he's already giving a chance to D&D. You, potential DM/fellow player, become the entry to D&D. The books therefore are not. They fail as an entry product (whether 3rd ed was any better in this regard is beyond the point).

2/ I was actually talking about how someone totally inexperienced in any form of fantasy/RPG/geekery will react to the memes of D&D. "Gnome" is far more understandable right off the bat for a noob just flipping through the book, and might actually conjure a compelling image of fairy tales/fantasy the potential buyer might want to explore by actually reading the product, rather than seeing "dragonborns", "tieflings" and "eladrins".

I think you are drastically underestimating the pervasiveness of fantasy in mainstream. The idea that someone would not be able, within about 30 seconds, to figure out what a dragonborn, tiefling or eladrin are is pretty far fetched IMO. Gnome? Sure, people know what a gnome is. But, that's not necessarily a good thing.

The setting is what I consider "out there" in 4E. Scaly lizardfolk living in the same society and countries as humans and demi-humans just sounds way more star wars or star trek to me than D&D.

It's funny. You have no problems with humans living side by side with beings that are effectively immortal (elves), but, having scales tips the balance?

Besides, if you use that logic to say Star Wars is not Science Fiction, then several other major works of science fiction would also be disqualified. For example, the Dune series really is not focused on technology at all. The technology is just setting, while the main story is built around political maneuvering and the growth and development of a messiah figure.

Are you kidding? The whole spice thing? The fact that it's the effect of being able to determine the future is the whole point of the series? Dune is quintessential SF and completely falls under my definition.

Similarly, 2001: A Space Odyssey also does not use technology as its central story. It is mainly preoccupied with human contact with an unknown force. The entire interaction between Dave and HAL could just as easily been an interaction between two people; the fact that one was a computer is mostly just window-dressing. I have not read the book myself (I have only seen the movie), but the entire premise behind Contact is the idea of human contact with a an alien life-form. Again, the technology is irrelevent (and in the case of Contact, it is just a magical plot device that is not even understood by the people involved). The real story is about curiosity and faith, not science and technology.

Curiosity, yep. Faith? Not so much. Read the book.

Contact revolves around the idea that there is a super race somewhere out there that is contacting us. The fact that it's a scientist protagonist makes all the difference in the world. In a fantasy story, the protagonist would be a child - making it a much more Alice in Wonderland sort of story.

Anyways, you claim that your definiton is the "accepted definition", but I have to ask "by whom"? Certainly not bookstores, I know that. They don't even treat Science Fiction and Fantasy as different at all... Certainly it doesn't seem to be the definition I see used in common discourse. When someone says "Science Fiction", they usually mean "robots and spaceships", not "cavemen learning how to use bows".

Also, if Science Fiction has such a clear definition, then what is the equivalent definition for Fantasy? These are two terms that always go together, serving as two sides of the same coin. If you want to seperate them at all by genre boundaries, rather than setting boundaries (where the line is fairly distinct), you need to give a good definition. If you can make a claim that Star Wars is Fantasy, but not Science Fiction, what definition are you using other than "it is kinda like Science fiction, but it doesn't meet my definition, so it is Fantasy"?

I highly recommend reading some Gardner Dozois if you are truly interested in the subject. There are loads of critical books and essays that will much better explain this than I ever can.

You are looking for the term speculative fiction when you wrap fantasy with SF. That covers both genres. And, yup, there's overlap. Of course there is. Genre is an art, not a science. But, the division most certainly is not simply setting.

 

[WayneLigon]

Besides, if you use that logic to say Star Wars is not Science Fiction, then several other major works of science fiction would also be disqualified.

They would indeed. There's not nearly as much hard science fiction on the market, but rather science fantasy and space opera. Each of these have a fairly good definition as well.

Hard science fiction - a particular emphasis on scientific detail and/or accuracy
Soft science fiction - focus on human characters and their relations and feelings, while de-emphasizing the details of technological hardware and physical laws
Social science fiction - concerned less with technology and space opera and more with sociological speculation about human society

It's very hard to find 'hard' sf but very easy to find the other types. Herbert uses SF more as a parable in his work, so it's also important to be able to distinquish between what is a set dressing and what is actually SF. Star wars tells a tale with SF as it's set dressing and not as a central theme, so it's soft SF at best. Star Trek goes along the entire gamut from hard to non-existant science.

However it's simply easier to say 'science fiction'. Don't confuse general shortcuts in coloquial language as being some sort of license to leave the barn door wide open.

Anyways, you claim that your definiton is the "accepted definition", but I have to ask "by whom"? Certainly not bookstores, I know that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy
Fantasy uses magic and the supernatural rather than technology in it's themes.


Bookstores shelve things according to publisher desires, not according to any standard that has been set so don't go by what they do. (Also don't forget that most people who work there are just there to keep you from stealing, or to run the equipment; they have no interest or desire to correctly shelve books). Publishers set things into genres according to how they think they will sell. Burroughs gets shelves in 'literature' not 'SF' because it's old. Margaret Atwood gets shelved in 'General Fiction' even through she's written science fiction (even she seems confused about what she writes; it generally depends on who she's giving an interview to, ie, who she wants to suck up to to get sales). King gets put in general fiction because he sells well enough there and most stores don't have a 'horror' section.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Replace the tech with magic, and hey presto. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" as Clarke put it.

/M

Yep, that was kind of the point I was trying to get them to understand.

They were claiming you could simply "re-skin" it as "typical" fantasy and it'd all be fine. That's not the case. You can re-skin it, but it needs to be a kind of ultra-high fantasy (LIKE D&D 4E!!!!!!!! Ahem!), where magic is really an analogue for technology not just a force some people can manipulate etc.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Orcs are savage brutes that plunder and pillage villages that enjoy violence and chaos.
Elves and Humans are civilized beings that form social communities, build cities and enjoy beautiful art and passionate music.

Name a setting in which it's not horribly taboo for humans and elves to be together? I'm pretty sure in 99% of the settings out there, elves are too haughty and arrogant to be seen with the lesser humans, and that the vast majority of half elves come from human men who aren't so interested in a happy monogamous relationship.

 

[OneWinged4ngel]

The problem isn't so much that they have Dragonborn or Tieflings, it's more that they have half the art in the PHB prominently devoted to them (and the prevailing themes of that art besides the racial choices). Basically, it's a presentation issue. They seem to be trying to overemphasize an "xtreme" flavor. Compare to the presentation of even the alpha Pathfinder pdf.

 

[Barastrondo]

Name a setting in which it's not horribly taboo for humans and elves to be together?

Middle-Earth.

The audience might have heard of that one.

 

[The Highway Man]

Middle-Earth.

The audience might have heard of that one.

You're actually mistaken. In all three instances (Beren and Luthien, Tuor and Idril, Aragorn and Arwen. Earendil and Elwing being both half-elven, it doesn't really count), there has been strong opinions not to let human and elf get together, and there were dire (if glorious) consequences.

 

[Particle_Man]

Name a setting in which it's not horribly taboo for humans and elves to be together?

Just about every Santa Claus movie ever, where a human visits the North Pole or an Elf visits the human world.

Also, in the LOTR movies the elves are somewhat isolationist and haughty (like Vulcans) but will work together with humans and occasionally fall in love with them (like Vulcans). So half-elves end up rare, but not children of rape. And this gets backed up in the "Tolkeinesque" settings, including D&D settings such as Dragonlance (with Tanis Half-Elven, the Face character).

The orcs in the LOTR movies are monsters, pure and simple. If they reproduced with a human it would be almost certain to involve the rape of that human.

 

[SKyOdin]

Are you kidding? The whole spice thing? The fact that it's the effect of being able to determine the future is the whole point of the series? Dune is quintessential SF and completely falls under my definition.

Sorry to jump in here, but how is the spice technology? It is a naturally occurring substance with semi-mystical properties. Its main users are people with various degrees of psychic power. It has more in common with religious incense than anything else. It wouldn't be out of place in most fantasy settings.

The reading the future thing is also thematically similar to oracles and prophesy stuff from old folk-tales. For example, Isaac Asimov once wrote a story about a computer that was capable of predicting the future. He admitted that he borrowed much of the plot from an old folk tale.

How can Dune be Sci-Fi but not Star Wars if they both involve organizations of people with supernatural power, nobles ruling over planets as part of a far-flung space empire, desert planets populated by giant monsters, lots of hand-to-hand combat, and so on? The only difference is that Star Wars has aliens in it, but Dune doesn't (though the bizarre Space Guild members practically qualify). Heck, Mentats and Droids are functionally identical within the context of the setting and story (and Mentats are less Hard Sci-Fi).