Wahoo vs. Traditional

[haakon1]

It's interesting that a lot of people see the weirdness getting out of the dungeon and into the cities as a big marker of wahoo, because I don't see it that way at all. A particularly noticeable feature of superhero is that the real world is still there, much as it is in our world, co-existing along side all the weirdness. I know it makes no sense from a verisimilitude perspective, but I think it serves a useful purpose, that of contrast. If everything is weird, then nothing is. You need the 21st century world of iPods, happy slapping and cashback to juxtapose with the guys running at Mach 100 and lifting aircraft carriers.

I think we're mixing concepts. I agree with you that "if everything is weird, then nothing is", and I agree with what I read between the lines which is that you feel "if everything is weird, it's kinda lame". The difference is that I think wahoo is what I don't like, so I push the definition of it towards saying "everything is weird world" is wahoo; whereas you think wahoo is what you do like, so you push the definition towards saying "everything is weird world" has nothing to do with wahoo.

For me the main markers of wahoo are quantity and variety of strangeness. So if there's like 10 different monsters in a setting that's Tolkienesque. If there's 300, as there are in default D&D, then that's wahoo.

Again, we agree on default D&D has lots of monsters, but not on whether it's wahoo or not. I say it's not.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Bah.

I'm going to avoid the whole "name game" thing with what "wahoo" means. The OP's definition is good enough for me: Wahoo all the way. Screw medieval, screw LotR. I've had that for 20 years and I'm _done_.

 

[Desdichado]

Ropers, displacer beasts, druids, bards, and monks are all mainstream core D&D tradition for 30 years. They seem to fit in a quasi-medieval fantasy setting.

That's... just so wrong. And nonsensical.

I'm going to avoid the whole "name game" thing with what "wahoo" means. The OP's definition is good enough for me: Wahoo all the way. Screw medieval, screw LotR. I've had that for 20 years and I'm _done_.

Thank you! And cool, me too. I think that's a driver for my changing tastes too. If I were offered a choice between Tolkclone #487 or "It's sorta like Barsoom... except with MAGIC!" I'd go for Barsoom every time. I've developed a real "pulp" vibe in that I appreciated cheap exotica for it's own sake.

Cheap erotica too, but that's another thread altogether.

 

[WhatGravitas]

If I were offered a choice between Tolkclone #487...

Of course, even Tolkclones can vary. Because my games fall down in roughly three categories (sometimes even in a single campaign):

1) My personal wahoo: Weird. Strange. Think Moorcock, Planescape, Mieville. Things that sort of make sense, but not always to our everyday definition of reality. To go beyond the countless doorways - gaming-wise, I have a deep love for Monte Cook's ideas. Eberron fits into it - somewhat. Not the canon version, but a lot of it.
2) Reeks of Cthulhu - ties into (1) - not the names or the tentacles, but the insanity of too much knowledge, staring into the abyss until it stares back, nihilism, pointlessness and insignificance in the face of otherworldly, larger powers.
3) Something completely different (so it doesn't mix) - my indulgence in Tolkien - but Silmarillion-style, which is a bit of my view of "epic" levels. Ecthelion bringing down the general of the Balrogs singlehandedly. Turin Turambar slaying Glaurung. Fingolfin going toe-to-toe with Morgoth himself (though I admit this is rare, more for big one-shots).

Cheers, LT.

 

[Ariosto]

To me the difference has a bit to do with game focus. Making the "humdrum" in the imagined world bizarre ups the ante for what can be extraordinary. It draws attention to the milieu, bringing "background" into the foreground and downplaying the specialness of adventures and the adventurers who undertake them. Tékumel has a D&D-style underworld, but it's really the "not too much at once" introduction to the world. For D&Ders, at least, an underground maze of monsters, magic and treasure is a familiar scene. The exotic planet, inhabitants and cultures are the main attraction.

What many consider a "traditional" D&D setup works better for drawing a line between a background of mundane life ("Don't sweat the details.") and a spotlight on the peculiar experiences and natures of adventurers ("Oh, the places you've been, the things you've seen and done!").

 

[Mallus]

That's... just so wrong. And nonsensical.

It makes sense if your conception of mainstream fantasy is based on D&D.

 

[Desdichado]

It makes sense if your conception of mainstream fantasy is based on D&D.

Yeah, I had the same thought. Which is kinda a shame, because D&D is far and away not the best fantasy I'm aware of.

 

[haakon1]

That's... just so wrong. And nonsensical.

OK then.

For me, most fantasy literature (and comics) are just plain boring. H.P. Lovecraft, Tolkien, the author of Beowulf, Homer, and Gygax grab my interest . . . most of the rest doesn't, so much so that I fall asleep reading it and usually don't go back. Not sure if that has anything to do with perceptions of what's wahoo and what's not.