Worlds of Design: Escaping Tolkien

In my previous article we discussed technological differences; this article focuses on cultural differences. Perhaps the cultural differences aren’t as clear in one’s awareness, but can be very important and just as far-reaching. Don’t underestimate culture!

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

Part of world building is figuring out the consequences of changes you make from the technological and cultural background that you start with. You always start with something. For example, there’s often an assumption that there are horses large enough to be ridden in the world, even though for thousands of years of real-world history, they weren’t large enough to ride.

Trapped by Tolkien​

Some world builders get “trapped by Tolkien” as I like to put it. They think elves must be like Tolkien’s (even though those aren’t traditional), dwarves must be like Tolkien’s, etc. Imagine elves with the capabilities of Tolkien’s, but inclined to be Imperials! It’s a change of culture only, but a mighty one. Imagine if dwarves and orcs tended to work together! Similarly, monstrous humanoids aren’t necessarily antagonistic towards humans and vice versa. These are cultural changes that can differentiate your fantasy world from so many others and while subtle, but they can make a big difference. Turn your imagination loose, don’t let it be constrained by a single author or book.

Magical Attitudes​

Attitudes toward magic make a big difference on how a setting works. In one setting the magic users may be the rock stars, while in another they may be dreaded and avoided shadowy figures; they can be as rare as professional athletes or an everyday occurrence.

Modern Attitudes​

It’s probably inevitable that modern attitudes will shape how game masters create their fantasy worlds. Using slavery as one example, whether or not it “makes sense” in a world must also be balanced by how it will be represented in the game. If you are going to take on mature topics for a fantasy world that has a long history similar to our world (including the unpleasant parts), you should consider how your players will deal with the topic.

Intentions​

I haven’t said much about intentional versus unintentional change to a fantasy world, because in the end it’s the change that matters, not the intention. I suppose you’re more likely to figure out what changes will occur, when you’re intending to introduce changes. But a world is a huge collection of interactions, and any change is likely to affect more than you intended.

Your Turn: In your experience, what was the change (from the “default”) in world-setting that made the biggest difference?

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

I'd be happy of they broke out of the oddly monotheistic polytheism. It seems like most D&D characters are only concerned about their one god and pay no mind to the myriad of others that might exist within the setting. And usually it's only the clerics who care. For one of my characters, a fighter, I once wrote "As Needed" under his deity of choice and the DM gave a little chuckle at that but it wasn't meant as a joke. When going into a fight my fighter prayed to the god of war, when it was harvest time he prayed to the appropriate god, and when he had to do on a sea voyage he prayed to that god. But for a game where some characters literally channel the power of divinity, D&D is an oddly irreligious game.

This is something I often remind my players of in most games, as monotheism (particularly Christianity and the Catholic or Baptist churches where our players live) are incredibly pervasive in every aspect of daily life to the point where many people are literally incapable of imagining a church that isn't celibate, strongly gendered or hierarchical, and highly intolerant of other Faiths in the setting. To be clear this is not to knock those with Christian beliefs (you do you), merely that it shapes many a player's opinions of d&d religions subconsciously. I've found often the best way to counter this is to present multiple NPCs who do worship multiple gods as it makes sense to, adding in statements like "Luck god(dess)'s random body part" as what would realistically be slang in universe for people to swear or utter. That, combined with taking time to present dieties with blatantly not Christian style temples (like healing or love gods with literal brothels for temples, or nature dieties whom worship in a field instead of a building) really helps to shatter these conscious expectations.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Now I personally always design my settings - mostly because I love the process. But I can understand why many DMs go the route of a pre-published setting, and if they have no interest (or skill) in world-design, maybe that isn't a bad thing?

I believe DMs using premade settings does more harm than good, in terms of quality (not quantity) of play. Of course, not everyone DM's world will be brilliant at first, but everyone's got to start somewhere.

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

I believe DMs using premade settings does more harm than good, in terms of quality (not quantity) of play. Of course, not everyone DM's world will be brilliant at first, but everyone's got to start somewhere.

I agree with you theory in theory, but having been subjected to many a terrible boring homebrew by otherwise decent DMs whose only real issue was boring and lifeless homebrew worlds, personally find it an equal trade off to use homebrew worlds, especially so if said DM isn't okay with players suggesting adding things to their world to help fill in unexpected gaps in their creation.

At least running in an established world gives me some idea of what to expect for a game. Also, let's not write off some of the benefits of using a published setting: players and DM's can use preexisting maps and other forms of support by others online, and can swap "war stories" with others of their time in Ravenloft, or how they handled the Tomb of Horrors, or whom their players decided to kill or romance in a certain module. As a DM who often runs prewritten modules I can tell you both of these benefits have greatly improved the quality of my games and I have only really ever felt constrained sometimes with not being able to make my dungeon from complete scratch if I'm using a well known dungeon, i.e. making changes to the tomb of horrors or castle Ravenloft.

Of course my games almost never use dungeons anyway, as my players avoid the classic dungeon raid for loot model like the plague, they'd rather spend 4 hours speaking with random NPCs or running a tavern any day. Your milage may vary.

 

[Tonguez]

I'd be happy of they broke out of the oddly monotheistic polytheism. It seems like most D&D characters are only concerned about their one god and pay no mind to the myriad of others that might exist within the setting. And usually it's only the clerics who care. For one of my characters, a fighter, I once wrote "As Needed" under his deity of choice and the DM gave a little chuckle at that but it wasn't meant as a joke. When going into a fight my fighter prayed to the god of war, when it was harvest time he prayed to the appropriate god, and when he had to do on a sea voyage he prayed to that god. But for a game where some characters literally channel the power of divinity, D&D is an oddly irreligious game.

Henotheism is a thing though and Monolatry (consistent worship of one god while acknowledging the existence of others) is the particular form seen which you are referring to as ‘oddly monotheistic polytheism’. SO I dont find it at all weird that an educated cleric gives exclusive service to the god that blesses them with spells.
Its also not at all weird for common folk to not care about religious matters unless they have to - at which point they will pray to the deity they know...

In Late Antiquity a sense of monotheism was pervasive in the educated circles wherein Zeus as king and father of the gods was considered supreme, all-powerful and all-knowing with the other dieties interpreted as aspects of one supreme Divinity.
Equally you get things like the exlusive worship of Aten in Egypt. Then you have the national/tribal gods of the Canaanites. So while El was a supreme diety amongst Canaanites the Philistines worshipped Dagon, the Moabites worshipped Chemos, the Edomites worshipped Quos and the Pheonicians worshipped Baal.

 

[Aldarc]

I'd be happy of they broke out of the oddly monotheistic polytheism. It seems like most D&D characters are only concerned about their one god and pay no mind to the myriad of others that might exist within the setting. And usually it's only the clerics who care.

I suspect you are talking about what is called 'henotheism.'

 

[Scott Christian]

I'll be honest, I do not see D&D being trapped by Tolkien. Yes, there are commonalities, but there is a lot more difference than likeness.

Start with races. Elves - similar. Dwarves - similar. Halflings - similar (in some settings). The other twenty races - different.

Move to magic. Middle Earth and D&D are world's apart. I mean, magic is magic. But, D&D's is off the charts magic, while Tolkien's was understated.

Creatures? No comparison. Tolkien had nine or ten. D&D has hundreds.

Religion? Tolkien's mythos was awesome. But D&D's mythos houses hundreds of gods. It is almost the difference between mono and polytheistic.

Even combat is different between the worlds. Look at the Icewind Dale trilogy and compare it to the Hobbit.

Just my 2 copper.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I suspect you are talking about what is called 'henotheism.'

I have learned a term today from you and Tonguez. Knowing the term now I think doesn’t change my disquiet over the ubiquity of it in D&D settings.

 

[Aldarc]

I have learned a term today from you and Tonguez. Knowing the term now I think doesn’t change my disquiet over the ubiquity of it in D&D settings.

That's fine. Religion is mostly a half-baked afterthought in D&D settings anyway.

 

[Scott Christian]

That's fine. Religion is mostly a half-baked afterthought in D&D settings anyway.

I'm not sure. There are classes dedicated to religion, an entire system of magic dedicated to religion, major events with hundreds of pages of lore dedicated to religion, races were created due to religion. How is that an afterthought?

 

[Aldarc]

I'm not sure. There are classes dedicated to religion, an entire system of magic dedicated to religion, major events with hundreds of pages of lore dedicated to religion, races were created due to religion. How is that an afterthought?

Because there are classes that are dedicated to gods, not religion. There is a system of magic that is largely shared between all casters, though some believe that divine magic connects a caster to their god. Major events with hundreds of pages of lore that are dedicated to gods, not religion or common piety, or cultic practices, etc. And there are races that were created due to gods. You are basically conflating gods with religion. Gods and divinities may receive a lot of attention, but religion in D&D settings are mostly half-baked afterthoughts.