Mundane vs. Fantastical

[Quantarum]

The first thing that occurred to me was a newspaper story I read earlier this year where a man had "Killed a bear with his bare hands to protect his son", or so the headline claimed. The details were less dramatic. The man and his son awoke to find a small black bear dragging a cooler full of food off. The man picked up a piece of firewood the length of his forearm and pitched it at the bear, hitting it in the head and killing it instantly. Level up.
I've planned an encounter with some crocodiles at a river crossing and later a pair of cave bears in the first adventure for my redesigned homebrew for 4E. Not because I want a taste of the mundane, but because they make sense in the context of the adventure.

-Q.

 

[Remathilis]

What's the cutoff point? I've seen people mention giant scorpions but like another poster, giant scorpions are definitely fantastical.

Are Illithids fantastical? Is mundane just things that existed on Earth (thus excluding the Dire animals? )

Well, that's one of those "different strokes" kinda things, I guess.

The problem (perhaps) is how "mundane" is defined. Surely, it includes humans and all manner of animals known of in the medieval world, but after that, the definition gets hazy...

* Are dire animals, giant vermin or other "its like X, but bigger" monsters mundane?

* Are dinosaurs, sabre-tooth tigers, and other prehistoric animals mundane?

* Are non-anthropomorphic humanoids mundane (elves, orcs, etc?)

* In an extreme definition, you could say any monster with a relatively common mythical background (vampires, werewolves, ghosts, centaurs, minotaur, and fey) are all "mundane" when presented without a twist or adaptation.

I made a point about animals like thundertusk boars or stormclaw scorpions, but I think they point can be applied elsewhere. I'm not a low-magic or grim-n-gritty DM; I like tieflings and wizards and sweeping epic heroism, but a part of me can't help but feel that the Monster Manual lacking mundane (there's that word again) critters and replacing them with elemental, shadow, fey, or planar variants to make them a better "challenge" seems to ring a bit hollow.

Then again, I can't recall the last time I ran a giant vermin that wasn't in a module. Maybe there is a point to removing mundane monsters like "giant spider' and replacing them with "Demonweb Spider"...

 

[Galloglaich]

re: Fantastic vs Mundane
What's the cutoff point? I've seen people mention giant scorpions but like another poster, giant scorpions are definitely fantastical.

Ah, no. Not really. Likely? No. Plausible? yes (particularly in a semi aquatic environment). Possible? definitely.

News - Science: Fossil tracks of giant scorpion a world first

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y55/silverbeam/A%20CSM%20Blog/SeaScorpion.jpg

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/arthropoda/chelicerata/meaneurypterid.gif

Again, you are talking about internal consistency, plausibility, verisimilitude. Scorpions which shoot lightning out of their tails are a lot further removed than a really big one.

Not that theres anything wrong with that....

G.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

I'd have to say that if my fantastic monsters got taken away and I was mostly fighting humanoid opponents that I'd have to have something like a wuxia movie combat system. Because for me the more real the world seems the less I can personally understand why anyone bothers to be an adventurer: the logic of the "mundane" world intrudes on my imagination.

 

[RFisher]

What's the cutoff point?

There isn’t one. It’s a continuum. The stuff in the middle is a little of both.

 

[Imp]

The problem with mundane animals as antagonists that I've encountered is less boredom and more sympathy. My players know animals pretty well, and it's just really not much of a noble fantasy for them to beat up wolves or bears. If I had wolves or hyenas attack the party, they'd say "Holy crap, something must be really wrong for these poor critters to be acting so out of character."

I think this is a good point... slapping a demonic or pseudonatural or zappy-tailed template on an animal orcifies them to the point where they can be remorselessly slaughtered by the PCs, and conversely, makes it more plausible that they should go after the party with intent to kill. If you roleplay your animals much, a first-level wizard type should be able to scare off just about anything the majority of the time. Animals don't know magic, but the mammals and birds at least aren't stupid.

So while I feel you guys about making the mundane dangerous and the supernatural more super, I don't think straight animals work very well as routine foes. As an exceptional foe, they can be pretty cool. And a straight animal works great as a base model for an imaginatively considered supernatural enemy.

Hippos need to get statted up more often though. Most underrated threat in the animal kingdom. I wanna threaten a TPK with those someday!

 

[Hussar]

I think Imp makes a good point here. Someone above mentioned Ghost in the Darkness. Great story, great movie. But, if EVERY lion acts like this, it's a bit of a stretch. If every bear, wolf, rat, whatever, assaults the party simply because it's hungry, that's just as unbelievable as anything else.

As far as giant scorpions go, well, sure, you can get very big bugs, but, Collosal? I don't think so. A bug 40 feet in diameter? That's WAY beyond real world. And, note, there are environmental reasons why you could have big bugs in the Jurassic (or whatever) - which do not lend themselves particularly well to having humanoids.

Again, it all depends on how fragile your sense of wonder is. Mine's pretty robust. Most of this doesn't faze me too much. If it makes sense in the context of the adventure I'm writing, I'll use whatever creature works. That's about as much realism as I need.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I feel the need to point out that a non-dire bear can break your neck with its paws without even really trying to.

 

[Hussar]

I feel the need to point out that a non-dire bear can break your neck with its paws without even really trying to.

Nobody's arguing that though. Sure, a real life bear kills people pretty easily. Never mind a crocodile, or a hippo or any number of other pretty dangerous animals.

But, in D&D, a bear isn't much of a threat past about 4th level. (in 3e anyway)

In real life, the guy attacking a rhino with a sword gets turned into paste. In D&D, it's just another day at the job. And the rhino breathes fire and has wings.

 

[mmadsen]

Because for me the more real the world seems the less I can personally understand why anyone bothers to be an adventurer: the logic of the "mundane" world intrudes on my imagination.

In a quasi-medieval world, going to college and then getting an office job isn't really an option. If you're the second or third son of a minor noble, you either go out and earn a fortune -- through conquest -- or you live in poverty, since you're not inheriting an estate with a steady income.

In a modern setting, sure, no one reasonable becomes an adventurer, but in a pre-modern setting? Yeah, hop on the leaky boat and cross the ocean to fight savages. At least you have a chance of making it.