So, name one thing in a setting (be it fantasy, sci-fi, or other) that you've seen so many times that you'd rather gouge your eyes out than have to see it once more.

RPGPundit

Sci-Fi settings which have magic in them, except they call the magic "psionics" or "nanotech" which they think cloaks the effects in a blanket of acceptability.

errr...does that include scifi settings with balls out bizarre magic with no apologies?

I'm sorry but leading questions are not allowed in this thread.

I dunno -- "signature" characters?  Maybe I just don't like them.

Dragons as the progenitors of civiliation, all wise, anything like that.

Honestly, basically dragons as anything but to be killed.

superhero games where the powers section is just a piss poor skin on top of the magic rules, or horror games with a level based xp system.

Any scientific explanation for magic is horrible to me.

Any creature, power, or person that's ability can be described by anyone as, "evolution." Evolution as an explanation is instantly stupid.

Quote from: Pierce Inverarity;281392I'm sorry but leading questions are not allowed in this thread.

Seriously though, Rifts has magic and it's just there and it's just magic.  Warhammer 40000 has magic being called psychic powers with very little attempt at justifying it, Mutant Chronicles has psychic powers being called magic but it also has magic.  So I think it's a fair question.  It' doesn't change my own attitude on mash ups at all.  I think they're good when they're good and they're bad when they're bad and it's got a lot more to do with style and flair than whether they try to explain magic scientifically or not.

Sf fan snobbery has been done to death.  I think science fiction can survive a few fictitious technologies in the name of the story.  Get over it, main stream culture will never believe sf is an adult genre no matter how boring you make it.

Quote from: David Johansen;281418Get over it, main stream culture will never believe sf is an adult genre no matter how boring you make it.

Seconded.

Elves.

Quote from: David Johansen;281387errr...does that include scifi settings with balls out bizarre magic with no apologies?

Depends on if the magic is called magic or if it is called a self-replicating nanite assembler cloud. I'm not talking about mash-ups (like Shadowrun) or stuff that is supposed to be gonzo (like Gamma World). I'm talking about people using Clarke's Law (Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.) to justify whatever bizarre tech they have that they cannot explain, but is essential to the background. It's a nitpick of mine that pops up in games and SciFi media often (usually transhumanist stuff). It bugs me because I like immersion and this hampers my suspension of disbelief because even though some technology may be really advanced, it still has to at least pay some lip service to the Laws of Physics to be believable.

The schtick where some advanced race has developed psionics and can use it to effectively do magic is so old it has grey hairs. Yet people seem to like that because psionics are usually handled as magic. I think the only setting that handles psionics in a way that doesn't break the game is Traveller and I'm not fond of it there.

It's not SF fan snobbery if the way the subject is handled does not make the media or game enjoyable to me. It is personal preference and knowing what I enjoy.

I think Zombies and Vampires are overused, and I think were only included in the original D&D so the cleric would be more than a traveling hospital for the rest of the party. SF games that pretend to not be Space Opera but include psionics.

Here's the thing, it's all down to perception.

If you talk to a heavy metal fan, he will point out to you the radical difference between the different strains of metal and tell you how he loves some and hates others. If you ask my grandmother, all rock'n'roll is essentially an infernal racket. At the same time, while the heavy metal fan might consider "classical music" as one homogenous category, my grandmother might tell you how she loves early baroque music by has no patience for Wagner and romantic movement.

Another example. Husband and wife enter a shoe shop. The wife oohs and ahhs at all the new styles. The husband just sees a series of black shoes, blues shoes and red shoes.

The thing is the closer to your heart a subject is, the more the nuances of difference matter. So even though from the outside there may seem to be a ridiculous number of Tolkien-inspired pastiche fantasy games to the fans of the genre the marginal differences between one game and another or just editions of the same game can be deal breakers.

So in a sense nothing can be said to be done to death as long as there is a really dedicated fan base who will make much out of minor differences.

I hate the distinction between 'divine' magic and 'arcane' magic in fantasy games.  Why can't magic just be magic?

  I also detest 'alignment', as I see it as being utterly useless.