[Rant] Fantasy - beyond the "standard" paradigm

[jgbrowning]

snip...

Generally it's because default fantasy is quasi-medieval/ancient world just as you say. Anything else usually requires an adjective such as "urban," "horror," or "modern" to describe.

It's a cultural thing, I think. For example, when I say, "Let's get some breakfast" you're probably thinking eggs, toast, bread rolls, maybe some pork. If I bring out some idili and sambar you'd have appreciated me saying, "Let's get some Indian breakfast!"

joe b.

 

[rounser]

Bah. See all the chaos that is created when people don't distinguish between "big F" Fantasy and swords & sorcery fantasy? D&D specialises in the second, although you can have talking white rabbits with pocketwatches and people running around fighting robots with laser rifles and power armor in it if you really want to (and it's done both in the past as a lark). The fact that some prefer their chocolate free of such peanut butter doesn't make them narrowminded.

Back to your regularly scheduled self-righteous indignation.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Maybe it is just me but I am not very big into being told what I will think or how I will think about it. I like the way I think but most of all, I like the freedom to think how I wish. He is free to like his fantasy however he desires but the moment he thinks his opinion is better then anyone elses or we all should change ours to match his.. very sadly mistaken. I like the fact I can say this, he and everyone else is free to like whatever fantasy they enjoy.

Well, of course you may define words of the English language however you wish. However, this is an international discussion board, and I'd rather use the common meaning of words - such as those that might be found in a dictionary - than each poster using his very own personal definition.

I mean, English is not my native language, and keeping up with all the words in that language can be quite an effort at times - and I'd rather not have to keep track of what each individual poster here thinks certain words mean.

To reiterate, I have no problems with someone saying: "That's not the type of fantasy I like!"

But when someone claims "This isn't fantasy!" when it very clearly is according to every reasonable definition of the word, I take issue with it. In my opinion, there is a difference between objective reality and personal taste.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I think all the things you described are labeled as sub-genres of fantasy. Eberon, to my limited knowledge, isn't fantasy in the stock meaning of the word. It does fall under the general heading of fantasy but fills a much more narrow niche. Ditto for Shadow Run and post-apoc settings or space opera.

I think you have it backwards - the kind of sword and sorcery fantasy that is most typical (though by no means universal) for D&D worlds is only one of the subgenres of fantasy. But it is nowhere near the whole of the thing.

 

[jdrakeh]

Not all "fantasy" (as the word is defined by the majority of the human race) is a fictional analogue for medieval Europe. To claim as much ignores such very real bodies of work as Odysseus and 1,001 Arabian Nights (both of which, incidentally, predate medieval Europe) and a great number of contemporary fantasy novels (at least one of which - The Dying Earth - heavily influenced D&D).

 

[Henry]

As I noted in the very thread, I believe that saying something is "too fantastic for fantasy" is like saying that an effectively infinite distance is "too large to be infinite."

 

[Vascant]

Jurgen hasn't told anybody what to think or said that he knows better than others, he's simply presented an opposing viewpoint (i.e., a viewpoint in opposition to the 'If its' not dervived from medieval Europe, then it's not fantasy' perspective).

Nice edit

Anyways, this thread is a rant is it not? I am pretty sure you have access to a dictionary and don't need a quote. So yes I am glad it speaks volumes (Your pre-edited words) that I oppose anyone who thinks they can Rant because of the way I think.

*chuckles*

Then again, for gamers talking about genre is almost like talking about religion. Case in point, back in the early 80's when I read an article on guns in AD&D I wondered about it and for a few sessions we had guns. I didn't care for it, it didn't add anything to the game really. So from that point on, I do not allow any tech related items in my fantasy, yes I do keep my game pretty medieval Europe. I am one of those people that research to find out how much wheat can be harvested from a plot of land so I can better describe the landscape around a population center. Because of this though, I stay away from Eberron. This doesn't mean it is a bad setting or should be burned, just means it is not for me. When I was growing up my father would call this "Respecting a person's opinion"

 

[Umbran]

Maybe it is just me but I am not very big into being told what I will think or how I will think about it.

Think about it how you like - if humans are going to communicate, we have to be at least in the same ballpark on the definitions of the words we use. If you choose to think of "fantasy" as "a small blue fruit of indeterminate origin" you're going to find it darned difficult to carry on a meaningful discussion of "fantasy" with most other folks.

I don't think all that many people really have such a narrow definition of fantasy. I think somewhat more do have a narrow concept of "fantasy rpg", but it is reasonably easy to break themn out of the rut of their thinking.

I think all the things you described are labeled as sub-genres of fantasy. Eberon, to my limited knowledge, isn't fantasy in the stock meaning of the word.

I disagree. Rather by definition, a sub-set must fit entirely within the parent super-set. This, effectively, seems to be much of what the OP is talking about. "Fantasy" as a genre, is very, very broad. It covers everything from King Arthur to Star Wars (which is frequently branded "science fantasy").

 

[Psion]

Anyways, this thread is a rant is it not?

Well, it's a point that frustrates me and I am setting here nodding in agreement. So I think so, yes.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I am one of those people that research to find out how much wheat can be harvested from a plot of land so I can better describe the landscape around a population center. Because of this though, I stay away from Eberron. This doesn't mean it is a bad setting or should be burned, just means it is not for me. When I was growing up my father would call this "Respecting a person's opinion"

Which is part of my point. It's allright to dismiss Eberron as something you wouldn't want to play in. But some seem to dismiss it entirely by saying that it "isn't fantasy", which is not very respectful of those who do play it.