D&D General Introducing a Scientific Mindset to Dungeons and Dragons

[Corinnguard]

Fine, but then you're not in a "scientific mindset" any more.

Which is fine by me. You see, the issue is that all the cool lore around our fantasy-world biology was developed without the smallest whit of a thought to real-world biology. So trying to retroactively explain it with real-world biology will fail.

The idea of categorizing things according to being a "vegetable, animal, or mineral" was the endeavor of a "scientific mindset." It obviously doesn't match our current understanding of the science. However, this is why I think that a "scientific mindset" does not necessarily mean that it would reflect actual science or real world understandings of phenomena. I don't think that a "scientific mindset" in a D&D setting would look like real-world biology.

A wizard studying the remains of a beholder, for instance, is going to be asking themselves a number of questions about how each of the beholder's eye rays work. They might also be asking themselves as to what they hope to get out of their study. Are they looking to create a new spell off of their work? Are they looking to creating a new magic item based off their work? And so forth. So, biology will be involved, just not real-world biology. Their science is a completely different brand of science.

The wizard is essentially an arcane scientist within a fantasy setting.

 

[Li Shenron]

A major part of the appeal of a fantasy game or story, is usually stuff that doesn't make sense or cannot be fully explained, like how is it possible that undead are neither alive nor dead, or how does a beholder just floats?

I don't like ruining the fantasy world trying to explain it scientifically, almost as much as I don't like ruining the real world trying to pretend some fantasies are real. But I definitely understand the reasons why some people like mixing them up.

 

[Gus L]

As James Brown once said "GODDOG!"

The idea of "science" and "race" in the same room as each other makes me a pretty queasy. Because history.

Now kindred, folk, lineage, culture etc - it's all equally fine...

But ... the core assumption of fantasy "races" is going to be near impossible to shake - and that assumption is that distinctive groups of people (the dodge of fantasy being not-people who are people like) have compelling distinctive differences that are universally shared among them. This is just part of modern fantasy and it's an inheritance from the culture of the eras modern fantasy was formed in. RPGs (and Tolkien based fantasy generally) compound this by transforming mythical creatures or peoples like dwarves and elves into something knowable and person-like. When you make an "elf" a character with an inner life and da culture rather then something alien and fantastic (e.g. Rumpelstiltskin has no interior life, he's basically a plot device) it will create comparisons to real world people, and these will almost inevitably be based on ethnic stereotypes about real world people.

So to some extent the problem of fantasy race is a baked in issue with modern fantasy and it's something that should leave one perhaps feeling a bit unbalanced, maybe giving a bit of side eye... much like the glorification of violence in fantasy. If you have physically and culturally distinct "not people", your fiction will have racialized others, monocultural stereotypes, and biodeterminism to some degree no matter what label one uses.

When we bring modern conceptions of scientific taxonomy (which is not science so much as it is an ordering system that allows science) or inheritance and genetics it gets awfully close to sounding like ideas out of the 1920's very, very quickly.

 

[Oofta]

No, the point is, real world science does not work. There is absolutely no way you could create an owlbear using real world science. There is no way a dragon can fly and breathe fire using real world science. If you invent "alternative science" such as Biomancy, that's magic. You can try and dress it up using scientific-style language, but it's still magic.

Obviously D&D world is shaped, at least to a certain degree, by magic. Doesn't mean it can't still rely on real world assumptions with exceptions caused by magic. Nobody is saying a flying dragon is physically possible in our world any more than I can cast fireball. In addition, the scientific approach just tries to explain how the world works, even if it doesn't work like ours. Scientific approach is not the same as "must work like the real world".

 

[Oofta]

As James Brown once said "GODDOG!"

The idea of "science" and "race" in the same room as each other makes me a pretty queasy. Because history.

Now kindred, folk, lineage, culture etc - it's all equally fine...

But ... the core assumption of fantasy "races" is going to be near impossible to shake - and that assumption is that distinctive groups of people (the dodge of fantasy being not-people who are people like) have compelling distinctive differences that are universally shared among them. This is just part of modern fantasy and it's an inheritance from the culture of the eras modern fantasy was formed in. RPGs (and Tolkien based fantasy generally) compound this by transforming mythical creatures or peoples like dwarves and elves into something knowable and person-like. When you make an "elf" a character with an inner life and da culture rather then something alien and fantastic (e.g. Rumpelstiltskin has no interior life, he's basically a plot device) it will create comparisons to real world people, and these will almost inevitably be based on ethnic stereotypes about real world people.

So to some extent the problem of fantasy race is a baked in issue with modern fantasy and it's something that should leave one perhaps feeling a bit unbalanced, maybe giving a bit of side eye... much like the glorification of violence in fantasy. If you have physically and culturally distinct "not people", your fiction will have racialized others, monocultural stereotypes, and biodeterminism to some degree no matter what label one uses.

When we bring modern conceptions of scientific taxonomy (which is not science so much as it is an ordering system that allows science) or inheritance and genetics it gets awfully close to sounding like ideas out of the 1920's very, very quickly.

The reason I prefer species to race is because if I'm talking the difference between an elf and a dwarf, it's not just different external differences we use to categorize homo sapiens into groups. Elves and dwarves may be closely related, just like lions and house cats, but they are not anything we would term different races. In some ways elves and dwarves are very similar but have very different taxonomy.

As far as attitudes and approach, genetics and instincts can shape that to a degree, but for the most part it's just an oversimplification along the lines of the Planet of Hats - TV Tropes which is common in a lot of fiction. It's just one of the multitude of over-simplifications that D&D, and most fantasy, does.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Obviously D&D world is shaped, at least to a certain degree, by magic. Doesn't mean it can't still rely on real world assumptions with exceptions caused by magic. Nobody is saying a flying dragon is physically possible in our world any more than I can cast fireball. In addition, the scientific approach just tries to explain how the world works, even if it doesn't work like ours. Scientific approach is not the same as "must work like the real world".

Then why is there so much obsession about DNA?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Didn't spot it before, so obligatory mention of Eberron here, where they have shown what a scientific mindset might result in.
Note that there is still much about Eberron that its inhabitants don't understand, but that doesn't mean that its not science.

No, the point is, real world science does not work. There is absolutely no way you could create an owlbear using real world science. There is no way a dragon can fly and breathe fire using real world science. If you invent "alternative science" such as Biomancy, that's magic. You can try and dress it up using scientific-style language, but it's still magic.

I think that if you're introducing a scientific mindset into D&D, you are going to get science, but it may not resemble real world science much.

 

[Oofta]

Then why is there so much obsession about DNA?

Is there? I guess some people have mentioned it, but DNA in a magic world doesn't have to work exactly the same as DNA in the real world. After all, people don't really seem to care (for the most part) that one of Star Trek's main characters is a half Vulcan.

But there is no reason to think we couldn't have something that looked like an owlbear with enough genetic tinkering. A mammal that lays eggs, has a bird's bill and has venomous claws? Never happen ... wait a minute ... Platypus | Eggs, Habitat, Venom, & Facts.

No, dragons can't fly or breath fire. They've obviously incorporated magical abilities into their physical form somehow. Because it's not just reality.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Is there? I guess some people have mentioned it, but DNA in a magic world doesn't have to work exactly the same as DNA in the real world. After all, people don't really seem to care (for the most part) that one of Star Trek's main characters is a half Vulcan.

But there is no reason to think we couldn't have something that looked like an owlbear with enough genetic tinkering. A mammal that lays eggs, has a bird's bill and has venomous claws? Never happen ... wait a minute ... Platypus | Eggs, Habitat, Venom, & Facts.

No, dragons can't fly or breath fire. They've obviously incorporated magical abilities into their physical form somehow. Because it's not just reality.

You cannot make a platypus by "genetic tinkering". That's not how genetics works. That's the issue, really - so many people want to apply "science" to D&D without actually understanding the science. Causing those of us who actually have science backgrounds to throw up our hands in dismay.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, the point is, real world science does not work. There is absolutely no way you could create an owlbear using real world science. There is no way a dragon can fly and breathe fire using real world science. If you invent "alternative science" such as Biomancy, that's magic. You can try and dress it up using scientific-style language, but it's still magic.

Forgive me, but you're not @Umbran .