Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GuardianLurker" data-source="post: 350100" data-attributes="member: 786">Posted by Sir Eldaen:____________________________________________________Quote:"Um... yes, then my definition of "low-fantasy" is a little different. What I mean is: there is more than sufficient fantasy in both Hârn and LOTR, isn't it? Wouldn't that justify the term "med fantasy"? And if the fantasy in LOTR and Hârn is sufficient, credible, reasonable and sophisticated, doesn't that lead to the conclusion that adding more fantasy elements to this working system tends to make the whole thing ... silly? ....____________________________________________________End Quote.Heh. Yet another example of why you always need to define your terms before you use them.'Cause frankly, I always though that LOTR was the defining example of Epic High Fantasy, at least in literary terms.This gentleman seems to be using "high fantasy" to mean large numbers of magical elements, which I would call "high magic", if I even addressed it at all. It's also important to note that a story element can be magical without being fantastical, as well as fantastical without being magical.It is possible to write a story with a high number of fantastical elements without ever involving magic, as well as the converse. I've read large numbers of both kinds of stories, as well as a large number of stories that have a mixture of both.There may be a very weak correlation between high magic/low fantasy and immaturity in stories, but I wouldn't argue for it.The comments about power-fantasy and immaturity may be more telling, but I'm not sure that the blame can be laid upon the gaming systems; I've yet to observe a role-playing system that can't be made to work towards those ends. In fact, some of the game systems that enable the most maturely-themed (or perhaps deeply-themed is a better description) stories I've run have been *wide* open to power-fantasies. (As an example, I offer White Wolf's Mage.) The immaturity of any role-playing system lies in its players, not its ruleset, in my opinion.D&D (in its various incarnations) has probably acquired its reputation based solely on its common use as a "gateway" RPG, just as Pokemon is regarded as more immature than Magic: The Gathering, even though both CCGs use very similar mechanics, and have similar depths of play.In short, another vote for "It's the players, not the game."</blockquote>

Verification