Keep your Science out of my Fantasy!

Kalanyr said:
It depends on to what extent you mean, if someone tells me my geography is wrong, yeah it annoys me, I'm not a geography major, nor are most of my players so it doesn't hinder our suspension of disbelief. On the other hand if my geography is completely illogical in a way obvious even to a non-geographer then I should have a good explanation and such things should occur only rarely.
The most furstrating game that I ever attempted to DM was on a Boy Scout campout. I was 20, and one of the players was a 55 year old Assistant Scoutmaster who had been a surveyor for over 30 years. He wanted the terrain described in great detail, and would question me at length at anything that wasn't exactly right. That campaign died after the one session, because the younger players found it too boring as it took hours of gaming just to hike a mile.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I do agree that people tend to put too many real world scientific ideas into fantasy, or even just real world references. I mean, we know that the world is approximately a sphere and that it orbits our sun, while the moon orbits earth. That is our perspective, and we tend to think that everything has to be this way. We tend to expect that it works the way we think it does.

Eberron, WotC's new setting, is a planet with one or more rings. Relatively scientific, but a surprising twist (add to that that the rings are at least partially magic).
Enworld, the PbP world here on ENWorld, is a hexagon carried by a large elephant. Much less scientific, but still a great basis for adventuring.

In a world where dragons and beholders can fly, and do so naturally, not magically, can you really expect the exactly same laws of nature? Wouldn't it make sense for Lolth to twist some part of the dark elves to make them more of her own? Why would a magical world adhere to the same biology as the real world? If there can be giant insects, why not a race that is interfertile with many others?

Of course, even with scientific approaches, one can have interesting results, such as the ring(s) around Eberron. It is not wrong to have some real world science in a fantasy world, as long as it fits the setting, but one has to remember that especially the things a typical character won't see (atoms vs elements, genetics, etc) might not be what the player knows. We know about the DNA, but does it even exist on Oerth, Faerûn or Scarn? Especially on the latter, I have my doubts.
 

wingsandsword said:
This isn't a rant against Science Fantasy (I love Star Wars and the SW-RPG), but I do have one thing about the mixing of the two that I don't like.

I don't like introducing, or forcing modern scientific concepts into a medieval fantasy game, especially one where the DM isn't trying to be "scientifically accurate", but the PC's cannot get out of a scientific mindset (which destroys a lot of the fantasy, IMO).

People get upset at the idea of half-orcs and half-elves, because humans and orcs and elves are different species, and thus shouldn't be able to produce a fertile offspring. That's modern biology, modern definition of species. Yes, farmers have known for millenia that you can't crossbreed a goat and a horse, but you can't crossbreed a Human and a Bugbear either. You can crossbreed wolves and dogs, yes dogs are just domesticated wolves. Maybe a secret elves have is that humans are just "domesticated" elves, with shorter ears, shorter lives, and generally "inferior" to their original "wild" cousins. Not that they would ever let humans know they are so close to Elves, but it's one reason Elves are so interested in (and feel superior to) Humans.

Gods may have created all these races, perhaps the creator of humans really wanted them to be able to breed with almost anything that walks on two legs. Maybe the deity that created elves only trusted his offspring to enter into unions with humans (barely), and the jealous patron of the Dwarves wanted them to keep to themselves, so they cannot mate with anyone.

I remember one person I know going ballistic at the mention in the 2nd Edition AD&D Complete Book of Elves saying that an Elven pregnancy was 2 years long. She ranted at length about how lifespan does not determine the length of a pregnancy. Never mind that Elves were created whole-cloth in that setting by the god Corellon Larethian of blood spilled in an epic battle with Grummsh. Never mind that they were created in his image as beings of a long, contemplative lifespan of many centuries on the material plane (and an eternity in Arvainaith in the outer planes). Never mind that their creator god decreed that they will have 2 year pregnancies. Modern biology says that a human-like being with a 500 year lifespan and pointy ears wouldn't neccesarily have a 2 year pregnancy, so it's so very wrong to do so in a fantasy game.

I remember the same mentality with geography of fantasy worlds. If a PC looks at the map and says "there is no logical reason for there to be a mountain range there" or "natural weathering wouldn't produce a coastline like that", I think they are forgetting the world they are in. A world created by a deity who actively intervenes in the world (sending avatars, granting spells), isn't likely (IMO) to be so "hands off" that there are absolutely no signs of divine presence . Also, a world is not automatically millions or billions of years old, maybe it was created by the gods only a few centuries or millenia before. When recorded histories go back a few thousand years to "the gods came down and gave us civlization" it isn't quaint legends of a primitive people, it's very possibly the literal truth. Palentology has little place in many fantasy worlds.

Cosmology is affected too, I've seen PC's in a renaissancel setting (where Copernican astronomy is supposed to be a new and controversial theory, and lots of commoners think the world is flat and the sun goes around the world) talk about modern astronomical concepts, talking about stars as distant suns, the planets as potentially habitable other worlds, and generally thinking in terms of modern astronomy. The idea of the sun as a flaming chariot of the gods, or as the body of a god itself is laughable, since "everyone" knows it's a ball of fusing hydrogen and helium.

Why is it that gods, divine interventions, magic and wishes, psionics, alternate planes of existence, undead, golems, fiends, celestials and such are all perfectly believable, but people just can't accept the idea of "the gods made it that way" or "just because, and nobody's ever questioned it before". It's a very 20th/21st century attitude, and as modern day gamers, we come to the table with modern ideas, philosophies and concepts, but if we're making a game to represent high fantasy, we should (IMHO) realize that sometimes all that magic and divinity can override rules of geology, biology and other modern sciences.

What do you all think?

I have to disagree with the main rant. Without similar underlying scientific concepts in a fantasy world, players have no way to relate to it. If wood doesn't burn, ice doesn't melt, and falling objects don't have a terminal velocity, then all the assumptions we have about our world don't apply.

I have played in several campaigns where the rationale was handwaved away as "because its magic." In one, the DM had rivers flowing out of a crater uphill, deserts bordering jungle with no transition (ie, savannah), normal mountains that suddenly became volcanos, weather patterns that made no sense, half-race hybrids everywhere, etc. This totally killed the believability of the game for me, and the world seemed silly and comical, despite (or maybe because of) the epic plot the DM was trying to run. Of course, the DM was utterly clueless about science in general (he thought lightning moved at 80 mph, and that the sun was the center of the Milky Way galaxy).

I have found the best way to build a plausible world is to start with a world that is utterly non-magic and normal, and then alter just a few things by the inclusion of magic. Add in a cursed blasted wasteland in an area, add in one or two natural occurances due to magical interactions (ley lines for example), and you're ready to go. If the world departs too far from normality, a LOT of serious thought needs to be done as to the explanations for events, or else the whole thing lacks internal consistency and falls apart.
 

Perhaps I was not as clear as I could have been (and maybe I shouldn't rant at 4 AM).

I didn't mean that I didn't like worlds to have any internal consistency. Fires should burn, water should freeze to ice when it's cold, wind blows, and such things are just the underpinnings of what we see as reality. IMO, if those aren't there, then suspension of disbelief is stretched too far. However, saying that giant insects/arachinds shouldn't exist because the physical strength of the exoskeleton has to become prohibitively thick proportional to the size of the creature, it just seems to me to be hauling in way too much 20th/21st century knowledge to the game.

My objection was to the mentality that I have seen that everything must completely follow modern concepts in every way. Especially interracial/interspecies unions (this entire rant was inspired by a thread I can't find right now, where I was reading people complaining that elves and humans shouldn't be able to cross-breed, because they are different species).

As an example, if you went to an ancient civilization, like the Egyptians or the Greeks, and asked about the "why" for various things, you would be told various colorful stories. A lot of those myths you had to study in grade school were there to explain "why" to a world that didn't have modern science, and those explanations were believed just as much, and seen as just as believable as modern scientific explanations. The sun is the chariot of a god who drives it through the sky. The world is made from the body of a dead titan, and the king/emperor/pharaoh speaks with the authority of the gods themselves. Why is this wrong, maybe these stories are true, in this world anyway?
 

Gothmog said:
I have found the best way to build a plausible world is to start with a world that is utterly non-magic and normal, and then alter just a few things by the inclusion of magic. Add in a cursed blasted wasteland in an area, add in one or two natural occurances due to magical interactions (ley lines for example), and you're ready to go.
Get out of my campaign notes.;)

If the world departs too far from normality, a LOT of serious thought needs to be done as to the explanations for events, or else the whole thing lacks internal consistency and falls apart.
Agreed.
 

I haven't read through the whole thread but I have to say the original poster has a good point. If I read one more thread where someone tries to use modern science (and its not d20 modern) to defeat a monster (an example that comes up to much, is making gunpowder to use against an enemy) I'm going to be tempted to scream.

But on the other hand a certain amount of science needs to apply for a player to be able to imagine the world. If in your ice didn't melt when exposed to fire, there is no gravity on a world bigger then earth, living creatures needed breath in solid iron to survive and so on then you've gone to far away from science.

Like almost everything there is a balance that is needed as to far either way can ruin the game.
 

wingsandsword said:
My objection was to the mentality that I have seen that everything must completely follow modern concepts in every way. Especially interracial/interspecies unions (this entire rant was inspired by a thread I can't find right now, where I was reading people complaining that elves and humans shouldn't be able to cross-breed, because they are different species).

I understand your point. However, I particularly dislike half-species because it suggests (to me, with my 21st Century viewpoint) that all the humanoids really are just funny-looking humans with a few neat abilities. I had the same problem with Star Trek. I'd much rather have some species that do not reproduce sexually and so cannot interbreed with humans. This, in turn, makes them feel more alien, more non-human.
For example: dwarves that are crafted from stone and then infused with the breath of life; gnomes that spring out of holes in the ground fully grown; hobgoblin larvae that arise from the corpses of dead hobgoblins.
Likewise for half-races: perhaps half-trolls are the result of humans infected with trollish blood in a battle, and the trollish blood is slowly taking over. Perhaps half-orcs are humans who have experimented once too often with rage-inducing magic (think Jekyll and Hyde) and after a period of time they become full orcs. Maybe half-fiends are humans corrupted by demonic influence. Half-elves could be humans altered by the Realm of Faerie.
My problem with your normal half-species is that they aren't fantastical enough. All of them are assumed to be the result of breeding, and there are so many more ways you could explain their presence.

wingsandsword said:
As an example, if you went to an ancient civilization, like the Egyptians or the Greeks, and asked about the "why" for various things, you would be told various colorful stories. A lot of those myths you had to study in grade school were there to explain "why" to a world that didn't have modern science, and those explanations were believed just as much, and seen as just as believable as modern scientific explanations. The sun is the chariot of a god who drives it through the sky. The world is made from the body of a dead titan, and the king/emperor/pharaoh speaks with the authority of the gods themselves. Why is this wrong, maybe these stories are true, in this world anyway?

Myths and fantastical stories are an excellent way of establishing a setting. It gets even better if you give different PCs different stories that they "know to be the truth." "The source of arcane magic is the Weave, a near-infinite pool of mystical energy all around us." "Arcane magic comes from and strengthens gods and demons; every Fireball spell brings Surtur one step closer to the world." "Arcane magic draws upon the life force of future generations." "All magic - arcane, divine, and psionic - in truth comes from the power of the human mind to change reality through the strength of belief."

Gothmog said:
I have found the best way to build a plausible world is to start with a world that is utterly non-magic and normal, and then alter just a few things by the inclusion of magic. Add in a cursed blasted wasteland in an area, add in one or two natural occurances due to magical interactions (ley lines for example), and you're ready to go. If the world departs too far from normality, a LOT of serious thought needs to be done as to the explanations for events, or else the whole thing lacks internal consistency and falls apart.

Excellent advice. Make a few changes, then the logical secondary changes that would be a consequence of that.
 
Last edited:

IMHO, it's because deep inside we want to believe the fantasy world COULD exist somewhere, so the more plausability it shares with what we have learned about our world, the easier this is for us.

...looking to go through the wardrobe one day...whimsically speaking.
 

Science is good, because it opens up incredible new ideas through the application of logic. Would we have mind flayers, displacer beasts, etc etc, without scienctific concepts? I doubt it. Plus there's the cool stuff like the old Basic D&D Immortals game, where you get to stand at the heart of the galaxy or jump around through dimensions (not planes, dimensions - depth, width, height, and the other two).

Science is bad, because it opens up incredible ways to ruin a world: unbalanced creations, suspension of disbelief coming crashing down, etc etc. Plus it does away with cool stuff like nonstandard creation methods (as detailed above) and the power of the gods.

Personally, I use as much science as I can in order to make things seem more realistic. But I also use magic to make things seem cooler, and I don't break into a fight to say 'might I just point out that the squamous openings along its upper ventricular appendage are, in fact, dual-function sensory nodes and respiratory ducts?' or the like. Because that would be stupid.

And then there's the whole myth-is-old-science thing. For example, the reason the heart is so associated with emotion? It was once thought to serve the purpose we now attribute to the brain. English just never caught up to science.

Very interesting.
 

wingsandsword said:
People get upset at the idea of half-orcs and half-elves, because humans and orcs and elves are different species, and thus shouldn't be able to produce a fertile offspring. That's modern biology, modern definition of species.

If different species can interbreed, ecologies and evolution will take a vastly different route than they did in our own world. And THAT is internal consistency. If I, as a player, see that half-dragons are not only physically and charismatically superior to ordinary humans, but they breed true, I will be wondering why a half-dragon two millenia ago didn't become the source for the modern human.

Even if they don't breed entirely true (quarter dragon, eighth dragon, sorcerer, normal), a very slight preference for those with faint draconic heritage will result in an enhancement of the breed. If 10% of the population is native-born sorcerers, eventually 90% of the population will be native-born sorcerers... and eventually, "half" dragon will be the predominant trait.

wingsandsword said:
I remember one person I know going ballistic at the mention in the 2nd Edition AD&D Complete Book of Elves saying that an Elven pregnancy was 2 years long.

And this person is just being silly. Elves age and develop in slow motion. It takes them a hundred years just to reach physical maturation. That is obviously the work of a magical slowing of their biologic processes. Personally, I'm surprised that it doesn't take them 63 months, or roughly 5 years, for the baby to finish growing sufficiently to survive on its own.

wingsandsword said:
What do you all think?

I think it depends on the group. A fairy tale, "just so" setting doesn't appeal to me or my group - I like my fantasies to seem plausible to a stronger degree than you do.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top