Tropes that need to die

[DragonLancer]

Yet, everyone wants D&D worlds to look like Middle Earth.

I'm one of those people. Middle Earth is exactly how I see a typical D&D world.

Magic does exist and it can be powerful but not everyone has the ability to walk around casting spells. A village might have a cleric or druid who can help bless the crops and heal a minor injury, but the locals might go generations without seeing major magics.

Monsters exist but they aren't everywhere. They dwell in the deep forests, far underground, in places where the common folk don't go...etc. No one is going to consider harvesting from giant honey bees, it's too dangerous and just how do you do it when the typical inhabitant of a hive (thousands of bees) is the size of your horse? Risks don't outweigh the benefits.

Basically a D&D world doesn't have to be built upon the notion that magic and monsters are everywhere and part of the daily lives of everyone.

 

[Raven Crowking]

In D&D, there are a bajillion reasons why a fantasy world wouldn't look like Europe with a veneer of magic. I've yet to see a compelling reason why a D&D world would actually look like that.

Say rather, in D&D, there are a bajillion reasons why a fantasy world needn't look like Europe with a veneer of magic, and we agree. I've yet to see a compelling reason why a D&D world must actually look like that.

However, we have had this discussion before, and what it amounts to is controlling the variables not included in the ruleset to either create the world you want, or to somehow imagine that you are "logically" refuting the world you do not want. It's a broad ruleset. There are a lot of variables. You can "logically" create whatever you like, from Europe with a veneer of magic to something completely gonzo....like Spelljammer, for instance.

The only limitation, one way or another, is your imagination.

The demographics don't fit, the magic system wouldn't work, the sheer numbers of monsters and the like would make it virtually impossible.

Again, it is only "virtually impossible" if you lack the imagination to make it rationally possible (or, at least as rationally possible as any other fantasy world! )


RC

 

[MoxieFu]

I like for most of my fantasy RPGing to be in a faux-Europe setting like Greyhawk or the Realms. I like that D&D can handle a range of settings from Conan to Lord of the Rings. The thing I like best about Eberron is that magic has been factored in from the ground up and not bolted on. Unfortunately you get a world where magic basically becomes technology and you get the Flintstones Effect where elements common to the setting just emulate objects from our every day world today. I'm thinking primarily of the lightning-rail but there are others.

(Hehe! Flintstones is in the ENworld spell checkre)

One of my favorite non-European settings is Empire of the Petal Throne. In the decades I have owned it and the stuff I have bought since, I have never found even ONE person willing to play in it. Maybe faux-European is popular for a good reason?

 

[Hussar]

But how many creatures can truly be domesticated? How many species in history have been domesticated out of a choice of millions? An extremely small handful. Why would we expect a fantasy environment to be that much different?
Again, it comes down to how common and usable these fantasy elements, whether magic or creatures, are assumed to be.

That's a bit false though. Sure, only a handful of animals have been domesticated. But, narrow the field down to animals that would actually be helpful to be domesticated (after all, do we really want to domesticate otters?) and suddenly you see that we managed to domesticate a pretty wide selection of species. Large numbers of useful species anyway.

Mythical/magical reasons. "Our god beat up the god of bees back in the dawn age, now we have the secret of taking the magic honey from the bee-people. When our neighbours god tried to do the same, the bee god used his sting, and their weak and foolish god ran away like the coward he is. That's why our neighbours are scared of bees, and have to pay us for their magical honey." That's how it would be explained in Glorantha.

Of course, Glorantha mostly doesn't look like feudal Europe either. But it could be done that way. Secret groups with strange rituals aren't exactly absent from medieval society. So the Ancient Order of Bee-Wranglers teach their secret methods only to one apprentice, who swears on pain of death to teach it to one apprentice in their turn. If someone betrays that, well, it's time to "Cry havoc, and set loose the bees of war!"

See, the problem I have with this is it becomes rather silly after a while. When EVERY option gets whitewashed and hand waved away, I find it far more difficult to believe.

Particularly when species are specifically MENTIONED in the Monster Manual as being domesticatable. Like Hippogriffs for example.

Hang on a sec... in that other thread, hasn't the largest portion of votes gone to "Yeah, guns!"...?

Just for starters. So, who is this "everyone" you speak of?

As for settings making perfect sense, well, have you seen or read much sci-fi lately? Or, yeah, any kind of fantasy at all? Myth, legend, folklore? Eesh, many a rendering of 21st Century "real life"...

Well, thirty years of Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Forgotten Realms fans for one Aus Snow. That might not be everyone, but, the number of Faux European settings in D&D is pretty darn long.

I'm also not saying perfect sense. I'm saying that it becomes very unbelievable after a while that every attempt at any sort of change away from Faux Europe winds up being hand waved away by, as BryonD says, "simply ... accepting the classical stereotypes as the understood boundary conditions for a setting and not spending time going out of your own way to undermine your own fun by dwelling on silly things that never appear on-screen."

See, to me, this sort of thing should be "On screen". And, yes, I do find it bizarre. Any time anyone tries to change the setting, the setting police come out in force. Heck, I'm being dogpiled here by several posters who are clamoring for shoehorning D&D back into Faux Europe.

So, it's hardly a rare thing to see.

Meh, to each his own of course. I just wish there was a little more attention paid to making believable settings.

 

[Orius]

Yet, everyone wants D&D worlds to look like Middle Earth.

Probably because it's an easy starting point.

(Hehe! Flintstones is in the ENworld spell checkre)

Yabba-dabba-do!

 

[Jhaelen]

Yet, everyone wants D&D worlds to look like Middle Earth.

Err, not really. Unless I'm playing MERP (or some other Middle Earth RPG) I would not want the setting to resemble Middle Earth - and it's pretty unlikely I would enjoy playing the game even then (unless the DM is _really_ great and not a Tokien fanatic).

Middle Earth at its roots is _the_ vanilla setting because it's what shaped everyone's idea what a fantasy setting 'should look like'. After playing fantasy rpgs for over 25 years now, I cannot stand it anymore. I want 'exotic', unusual settings.

 

[Bluenose]

That's a bit false though. Sure, only a handful of animals have been domesticated. But, narrow the field down to animals that would actually be helpful to be domesticated (after all, do we really want to domesticate otters?) and suddenly you see that we managed to domesticate a pretty wide selection of species. Large numbers of useful species anyway.

Make sure you're using the terms correctly. A lot of animals have been tamed, without being domesticated. Domesticated animals are rare. Large and useful domesticated animals even rarer. Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel describes the difference. People have been attempting to domesticate some species for decades, without success. Now, magic may make a difference, but in a world where there are deities that like nature in its wild state that would probably come with a risk.

See, the problem I have with this is it becomes rather silly after a while. When EVERY option gets whitewashed and hand waved away, I find it far more difficult to believe.

Particularly when species are specifically MENTIONED in the Monster Manual as being domesticatable. Like Hippogriffs for example.

Arguably in a world of active deities, spellcasting mortals capable of destroying significant parts of armies, and strange monsters, things do get really silly if you just slap those things on top of a normal medieval society. Considering how reliable magic is, it either has to be incredibly rare or the effect on the economies is going to be marked. Depending, of course, on what magic is allowed to do.

BTW, I think the term is being misused. I think they're suggesting you can tame a hippogriff, and using the terminology incorrectly. I certainly don't believe in hippogriff farms.

 

[jmucchiello]

Snow, the reason settings tend to look like Medieval Europe with magic is because it is an easy baseline to explain to CASUAL players. You want to spend hours reading a 300+ page setting book about Fantasy World 2.0 and you want spend time remembering the ins and outs of such a setting. Most players don't. When you say "temple", they think Gothic church or the Parthenon. When you say "ship", they think triple masted sailing ship. When you say "king", they think of a guy in expensive clothes who sits on a throne in a castle. If you introduce domesticated flying animals would castles look the same?

The further your setting is away from the expectations of the casual player, the harder it is to get them involved.

 

[Mallus]

The further your setting is away from the expectations of the casual player, the harder it is to get them involved.

I wonder if magical medieval Europe really does form the baseline for most casual players these days? Or if it does, wouldn't it be the MME depicted in Peter Jackson's take on Middle Earth, complete with shield-surfing elves?

I could easily see a casual players expectations being shaped by a combination of Avatar: The Last Airbender, Naruto, and World of Warcraft.

note: not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[The Shaman]

I wonder if magical medieval Europe really does form the baseline for most casual players these days? Or if it does, wouldn't it be the MME depicted in Peter Jackson's take on Middle Earth, complete with shield-surfing elves?

There is one shield-surfing elf; the rest fight in familiar formations just like the humans and orcs, they wear familiar if fanciful armor and wield weapons at home on a medieval European battlefield, and they live in trees, caves, chalets, and pavillions.

Other than the big tree houses, not really all that exotic.

I could easily see a casual players expectations being shaped by a combination of Avatar: The Last Airbender, Naruto, and World of Warcraft.

I'm more inclined to agree with this.

note: not necessarily a bad thing.

No, it's not a bad thing at all, but it makes it more important to be clear from the outset what the inspirations are for a particular campaign.