Quote from: ColonelHardissonI'm not sure I follow this. Why would the presence of a floating city remove any of the mystery? Lightning, clouds, the Moon, the stars, all of these things were seen for centuries by man before science could explain them, and were often accounted "magical" and figured very prominently into myths, legends, and religions. Their blatant presence, as you put it, didn't seem to diminish their ability inspire awe.

it could simply be that I'm way wrong.

Quote from: Aosit could simply be that I'm way wrong.

No, not really. The conventions of the two genres - scifi and fantasy - are very hard to define, as is why the conventions of scifi seem inherently fantastic, but don't seem to comfortably fit in fantasy.

maybe the "quaintness" of the fantasy setting is a necessary component, and when you remove it by adding too many (or maybe just the wrong) fantastic elements, it becomes something else, something that many people find less satidfying- like diet soft drink.

Quote from: Aosmaybe the "quaintness" of the fantasy setting is a necessary component, and when you remove it by adding too many (or maybe just the wrong) fantastic elements, it becomes something else, something that many people find less satidfying- like diet soft drink.

Sure, to modern audiences. I guess what I'd like to see more of in fantasy settings is stuff like the Bifrost Bridge or Yggdrasil of Norse mythology, or Mount Olympus or Hades (which could be accessed from the "real world" at various points) of Greek mythology, or even the 3000 spire of Monte's "Ptolus."

Quote from: Aosit's hard to send them to kill orcs when they've seen the floating city.

I've been seriously pondering having my next campaign set in a world of floating "islands" of various sizes, civilizations, etc.  There would be no actual "earth" and it'd be effectively infinite.  All natural phenomena (rain, wind, etc.) would have some esoteric explanation (fighting elementals, pissed off rain spirit, etc.) and, explicitly, would have no real scientific explanation.
 
In short, it's a setting where anything can happen, quite literally, and the players should never, ever be able to start "gaming" the game by bringing in real world physics.  If the rules say something works that way, then it does -- end of story, must just be different than our world.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonSure, to modern audiences. I guess what I'd like to see more of in fantasy settings is stuff like the Bifrost Bridge or Yggdrasil of Norse mythology, or Mount Olympus or Hades (which could be accessed from the "real world" at various points) of Greek mythology, or even the 3000 spire of Monte's "Ptolus."

One of the reasons that the spire is so fantastic, I think, is that the world of Praemal is, for the most part, a normal world - the fantastic events of the world are all centered around Ptolus and the Spire.

Spoiler

Cook designed it with the Galchutt trapped below, causing gathering forces of evil to naturally be drawn to the area.

Because the rest of the world is so "normal," the spire really draws attention because it is such a fantastic detail.

When you make the fantastic into the mundane - the fantastic becomes technology, and commonplace - that's when you get settings like Eberron. Everything is overdone and so the players are just overwhelmed.

If you look at George Martin's Song of Ice and Fire, the reason that The Wall is so fantastic is that it is unique compared to the normalness of the world (at least in the seven kingdoms).

In science fiction, the fantastic is almost the point - changes are far more sweeping in scale and distribution than they are in fantasy literature.

Quote from: SobekI've been seriously pondering having my next campaign set in a world of floating "islands" of various sizes, civilizations, etc.  There would be no actual "earth" and it'd be effectively infinite.  All natural phenomena (rain, wind, etc.) would have some esoteric explanation (fighting elementals, pissed off rain spirit, etc.) and, explicitly, would have no real scientific explanation.
 
In short, it's a setting where anything can happen, quite literally, and the players should never, ever be able to start "gaming" the game by bringing in real world physics.  If the rules say something works that way, then it does -- end of story, must just be different than our world.

sounds good to me.

Quote from: SobekIn short, it's a setting where anything can happen, quite literally, and the players should never, ever be able to start "gaming" the game by bringing in real world physics.  If the rules say something works that way, then it does -- end of story, must just be different than our world.

I like this thinking alot. Esp, the last sentence. I think the problem is that generally human nature seeks an explanation for everything. The fantastic, generally should resist this urge. Most sci-fi settings justify their fantastic elements for various reasons, but I think that fantasy  should be except from this notion -esp, when elements in fantasy settings are justified with real world physics.

Something I have been thinking about since the Colonel first brought up this subject is this. In his first post he said that it seemed that sci-fi had a lot to offer in terms of the fantastic. What I was thinking is, has anyone ever used sci-fi worlds as settings for their  fantasy games.

I have this urge to run Transhuman Space as a fantasy setting, somehow I think that I could pull it off.

Regards,
David R

I usually go with Le Guin's statement about the difference between fantasy and science fiction: fantasy deals with inner psychology, science fiction deals with outer environment. What makes Tolkien's innivations so different from Howard and other earlier fantasists is that he dresses the dream in almost everyday clothing (uses the techniques of literary realism) in order to give the fantastic elements more power by contrast (as has been pointed out in this threas). Fantasy, in the end, treats the environment more symbolically than anything else, and the entire world is a setting for a personal drama (the classic heric quest being one dominant cliche plot that is often played out in rpgs). You can have the huge scale, but, if it dwarfs the hero, then it may not feel like "good fantasy" to many people.

Science fiction, on the other hand, has always been about the toys, the future, and endless possibilities. In its golden age, the genre is fairly optimistic about the power of technology, and the dreams it feeds on are dreams of control, power, and expansion. In that mindset, the gadgets are an extension of the person, and the scale reflects the possibilities.

Obviously, these distinctions aren't hard and fast, and many works of art appeal to both inner and outer impulses in different ways. But Tolkien's example of selective fantasy within a realistic framework looms large in that tradition.

As for my own games, I usually incorporate big-scale items relatively infrequently in order to increase their impact. There is one large-scale topographic feature that was caused by mystic forces, for example. On the other hand, I do like to include creatures that are far too powerful for the players to handle--running away is the only sensible option. I've found that moments like that, when handled well, address the scale/wonder issue well enough. When there are things out there that are too big to handle (at least at that moment), then they seem big enough.

Okay, I'm wandering of topic here, but another aspect about the whole "fantastic" issue, is I think , the way how the GM describes the setting to the players. A lot of it has to do with the use of language -of tone etc.

An average GM may make the fantastic mundane whereas a talented one could make the mundane fantastic. So it may not really be about the setting, per se, but rather how the setting is presented.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: willpax. lots of good stuff

not to wander to far afield here, myself, but I think that , prose style aside,  Tolkien and Howard use magic in somewhat similar ways. Magic is visible in both Hyborea and the Middle Earth, but largely off screen. furthermore, in both setings it is best avoided if at all possible. Vaugenes is also very common with both authors, Niether Tolkien nor Howard give us lengthy system of how magic and spell casting actually work- as opposed to authors like Steven Erikson, or L.E. Modistett, who do provide such systems, and also have magic operate much like technology.

Quote from: David RWhich is why I don't have a problem with a sinister fantasy city made of gleaming bone white marble, riddled with veins of blood red runes, which traps unwary travellers with whispers of shelter and peace and every one hundred years consumes it's citizens and rebuild's itself in another distant land.

As a complete aside, I've read a LOT of things that I saw other people go "Dude, Yoinked!" or variations.  I just wanted to stop and say, That city is a damned cool idea.

Quote from: WolvorineAs a complete aside, I've read a LOT of things that I saw other people go "Dude, Yoinked!" or variations.  I just wanted to stop and say, That city is a damned cool idea.

Thanks. The city has great replay value. The first time I used it was in a homebrew fantasy setting.

Player 1 : The city is out to get us.

Player 2 : Yeah, tell us something we don't know.Everyone here hates us, That's what happens when you expose a much loved priest for the hypocrite that she is.

Player 1 : No, I really mean the CITY is out to get us.

The second time was in a Mage(1st ed) game.

The players had just had a battle with some Syndicate goons, which had destroyed a large section of an office building.

Player 1 : What the fuck is this building made of? (looking at pieces of bone white debris, with strange glowing blood red runes fading like the last embers of a fire)

Player 2 : (She was one of the players in the above fantasy campaign)  Why does this keep happening to me?

Gming, the gift that keeps on giving

Regards,
David R

I once fed an entire party drugged food three times in the same play session- "well we've already been drugged once today, probably wont happen again." "well we've already been drugged twice today- what are the chances?"

In the back of my mind, I keep working on a fantasy setting where the whole world is covered by one city.  All of the different climates and environments run through the city.  It isn't the same style through the whole city, parts may be open like large agricultural fields, but the world is covered in the city.  Some areas of the city have fallen or sunk, and they were built over.  So you have catacombs that may or may not be inhabited.  The city has been around since recorded history.

Things that come into question for me:

Oceans.  They are there, and the cities remain above them.  I've been leaning toward water-dwellers helping build the city to the foundation of the ocean floor.

Tectonics.  In reality, most planets have those wonderful tectonic plates causing things such as mountains and earthquakes and tidal waves.  Tie that into volcanoes, and I'm just not sure if I would include these real-world things.

Wars.  Wars are fought through the city.  There are areas between different regions where the city has been modified so major wars can occur.  There the streets run red with blood, the cobblestones lined in blood.  Massed units of troops are only effective in broad thoroughfares (unsure of what to call them yet, Bloodstreets possibly).  However, smaller unit city wars also occur, where homes and shops become battlezones at the worst of times for the inhabitants.

Origin.  I'm not sure who built the city myself.  Was it the gods?  I don't know.  I have considered that the builders warred between themselves, with the victors ascending to godhood, demonhood, devilhood, elemental hood, and the losers being the founders of the races inhabiting the world.