Has Pathfinder given up on being fantasy?

[zagnabbit]

Braggart.

[pres man]

"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."

Jester David wrote:

How else can you kill a werewolf except with a silver bullet?

With a silver-headed walking stick decorated with a wolf?

[danielc]

Zeetle Wyrp wrote:

The real cause of all this Sci-Fi, Steampunk, technology, aliens, guns, and awesomeness in general is the evolvement of people's imaginations. It's us that's changing, Paizo along with everyone else.

Amen, we all vote for change with our money. If they put out an adventure that had guns and no one bought it, guns would die real quick in the setting. We, the fan base, have a great influence on what is and is not included in the game. Paizo (and other publishers too) listen to the fans and pay attention to what sells. That is just good buisness sense.

[Daronil]

Forgive me if this has already been said (I'm at work at present, and don't have time to read through 9 pages of posts), but Pathfinder is exactly as "fantasy" as you want to make it.

"My" Pathfinder (or more accurately, my Golarion) is absolutely, 100% fantasy. I don't have technology in it, for example. My Alkenstar isn't a technical marvel, it's more like 12th century England due to the lack of magic. There are no guns, and there is no gunpowder, in my Golarion. Whenever there is something "tecchie", it gets replaced with something fantasy.

[Yosarian]

zagnabbit wrote:

RPGs (in all of their weird variations) borrow from multiple sources. Even the most strident Fantasy Purist GM incorporates a little Horror and Action into the game. That long ago left me at the conclusion;
RPGS ARE THEIR OWN GENRE.

Eh. I don't think that you can say that, say, D&D, Paranoia, Shadowrun, and Vampire: The Masquerade are all in the same genre just because they're all RPG's. A RPG can be in almost any genre, or it can be a mix.

[Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus]

The White wrote:

After looking through some of the books (namely UM and UC), it has occurred to my group that PF has pretty much given up on being a fantasy game and just gone "screw it, let's go Steampunk". Especially after UC. I mean, just look at the picture of the Spellslinger Wizard... Not that this is a bad thing, just an observation and a thread to see if anyone else has noticed this and what people's thoughts are on it. Personally, I quite like it.

It is my understanding that Steampunk is more of a sub-genre of Sci-Fi so having a game with spells in it and some Steampunk aspects to it doesn't cut it as a steampunk game. Pathfinder is still a fantasy, because fantasy can include some steampunk in it, but true steampunk real can't include any pure fantasy in it.

[Kevin Andrew Murphy]

Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

The White wrote:

After looking through some of the books (namely UM and UC), it has occurred to my group that PF has pretty much given up on being a fantasy game and just gone "screw it, let's go Steampunk". Especially after UC. I mean, just look at the picture of the Spellslinger Wizard... Not that this is a bad thing, just an observation and a thread to see if anyone else has noticed this and what people's thoughts are on it. Personally, I quite like it.

It is my understanding that Steampunk is more of a sub-genre of Sci-Fi so having a game with spells in it and some Steampunk aspects to it doesn't cut it as a steampunk game. Pathfinder is still a fantasy, because fantasy can include some steampunk in it, but true steampunk real can't include any pure fantasy in it.

Hogwash. You just Clark's Corollary it: "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science." If seemingly magical things are occurring, you go look for the man behind the curtain. If you see some witch flying around on a broomstick, and you substantiate that the trick is not done with wires, and she doesn't have an airship hiding in a nearby cloud to tow her broomstick around via piano strings, you investigate the phenomenon like a proper scientist. You don't accept "It's magic!" as an explanation. If you did, you'd still believe that rock that witch sold you is magic and calls iron to it via sympathetic magic rather than it just being a lodestone which you documented in a paper on magnetism for the Royal Society.

So, the witch flies a broomstick. The phenomenon is observable and reproducible. You ask the witch how she does this. She finally admit that she doesn't know how it works, but it does, and her cat told her how to do it. So you interview the cat. Is it done via magnetism? No, the cat admits, but finally it says something that sounds like "odyllic force," which you research and find is related to the ancient Azlanti energy called vril.

This is pulled directly from Edward Bulwer-Lytton's 1871 hollow-earth science fiction novel The Coming Race which is plenty of Steampunk provenance for anyone.

So, once your Alkenstar steampunker understands the mechanism of levitation via vril, she can rig up her penny-farthing boneshaker to run on this and go flying. She might rig up a rudder and fins to her bicycle for extra stability, but it's all perfectly good from the standpoint of 19th century science fiction.

[insaneogeddon]

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

[Kevin Andrew Murphy]

insaneogeddon wrote:

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

Yes, but Tolkien means you can wander into a cave, talk with a psychotic homeless person, and walk out with a magic ring that turns out to be a major artifact.

[Nigel Ripped]

Yo Bro, Token is boring and over-rated trash. I would rather read something more fast paced such as Home or Dante.

[Rynjin]

Nigel Ripped wrote:

Yo Bro, Token is boring and over-rated trash. I would rather read something more fast paced such as Home or Dante.

I don't know who Token and Home are, would you mind explaining?

[AdAstraGames]

Ashiel wrote:

Jodokai wrote:

Gaekub wrote:

Mikaze wrote:

Every time I see this thread bumped up in the sidebar I feel the urge to start a thread titled "Has Pathfinder given up on being hard sci-fi" complaining about all the fantasy elements that are still present and prevalent alongside the elements being complained about in this thread.

But then I worry that someone might actually seriously take up that argument.

Do it.

If anyone does take you seriously, I'll come in and immediately and passionately argue that Pathfinder is indeed a Sci-fi game.

Orson Scott Card once said that the difference between fantasy and SciFi is what's on the cover. If you see trees, it's fantasy, if you see rivets, it's SciFi.

What happens if you see trees and rivets?

Or trees using rivet-guns to pin up annoying dwarves?

[AdAstraGames]

The real dichotomy is this:

Is mobile technology muscle-powered? If so - it's medievaloidish fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to gunpowder? If so, it's pseudorenaissance fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to steam and gunpowder? If so, it's steampunk.

Is mobile technology limited by electricity/batteries/etc? It's SF.

Note that you can do far more damage to your fantasy world assumptions with communications technology than you can with weapons.

If your communications technology is set by carrier pigeon/muscle transport, your most effective form of government is very decentralized, and it's very easy to "go beyond the reach of the law" - this is a common trope in adventure fiction. Adventures happen where the laws run out.

If your communications technology can move faster than a horse, but isn't instantaneous, your most effective government gets a lot more centralized.

If your communications technology can instantaneously cross oceans, you've just made piracy almost impossible, because the news of a pirate attack can reach the opposite shore before the pirate does.

If your communications technology can be mounted on ships, you get the revolution in sailing practices and safety that happened after Tsushima in 1905. Putting radio masts on ships reduced the likelihood that a cargo would be lost at sea by a factor of twenty in the real world.

[Icyshadow]

Rynjin wrote:

Nigel Ripped wrote:

Yo Bro, Token is boring and over-rated trash. I would rather read something more fast paced such as Home or Dante.

I don't know who Token and Home are, would you mind explaining?

I believe he means Tolkien and Homer.

[Rynjin]

Icyshadow wrote:

Rynjin wrote:

Nigel Ripped wrote:

Yo Bro, Token is boring and over-rated trash. I would rather read something more fast paced such as Home or Dante.

I don't know who Token and Home are, would you mind explaining?

I believe he means Tolkien and Homer.

I know, it was poking fun at the atrocious misspelling.

Though I'm pretty sure he was joking since he called Homer and Dante "fast paced".

[thejeff]

AdAstraGames wrote:

The real dichotomy is this:

Is mobile technology muscle-powered? If so - it's medievaloidish fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to gunpowder? If so, it's pseudorenaissance fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to steam and gunpowder? If so, it's steampunk.

Is mobile technology limited by electricity/batteries/etc? It's SF.

Except you're limiting your tech to real world stuff. All of your examples could just as easily be historical or modern fiction as fantasy/steampunk/SF.

The straight addition of magic to otherwise real world technology of whatever era, makes it fantasy. Steampunk usually doesn't have outright magic, but generally has advanced tech based on past era's technology. Steam-powered robots, etc.

Or, using your original classification where does Phlogiston powered technology fit?

[AdAstraGames]

thejeff wrote:

AdAstraGames wrote:

The real dichotomy is this:

Is mobile technology muscle-powered? If so - it's medievaloidish fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to gunpowder? If so, it's pseudorenaissance fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to steam and gunpowder? If so, it's steampunk.

Is mobile technology limited by electricity/batteries/etc? It's SF.

Except you're limiting your tech to real world stuff. All of your examples could just as easily be historical or modern fiction as fantasy/steampunk/SF.

The straight addition of magic to otherwise real world technology of whatever era, makes it fantasy. Steampunk usually doesn't have outright magic, but generally has advanced tech based on past era's technology. Steam-powered robots, etc.

Or, using your original classification where does Phlogiston powered technology fit?

Magic is always the exception to the rules. Magic characters are rare. Their power is generally not explained, or even described that thoroughly (which is a huge way RPGs differ.)

Phlogiston is likely "steam analog." :)

Communications will break up your game assumptions faster than phlogiston powered aetheric electro-bolt throwers. Phlogiston-powered aetheric cake mixers may also be more damaging to your finely held fantasy assumptions as well... :)

[Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus]

Kevin Andrew Murphy wrote:

Hogwash. You just Clark's Corollary it: "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science." If seemingly magical things are occurring, you go look for the man behind the curtain. If you see some witch flying around on a broomstick, and you substantiate that the trick is not done with wires, and she doesn't have an airship hiding in a nearby cloud to tow her broomstick around via piano strings, you investigate the phenomenon like a proper scientist. You don't accept "It's magic!" as an explanation. If you did, you'd still believe that rock that witch sold you is magic and calls iron to it via sympathetic magic rather than it just being a lodestone which you documented in a paper on magnetism for the Royal Society.

So, the witch flies a broomstick. The phenomenon is observable and reproducible. You ask the witch how she does this. She finally admit that she doesn't know how it works, but it does, and her cat told her how to do it. So you interview the cat. Is it done via magnetism? No, the cat admits, but finally it says something that sounds like "odyllic force," which you research and find is related to the ancient Azlanti energy called vril.

This is...

Actual Sci-Fi has probable advancements in technology, not Harry Potter! However Harry Potter could have Sci-Fi in it and it would still be considered fantasy. So sorry, Yes, Pathfinder is still fantasy by definition. It may not be the puritan fan-crazed Talkeen fantasy any more, but it hasn't been much near that since ever, as psychic abilities were in all other versions of the game, and this one, as you pointed out has guns and other steam-punk aspects.

[thejeff]

AdAstraGames wrote:

thejeff wrote:

AdAstraGames wrote:

The real dichotomy is this:

Is mobile technology muscle-powered? If so - it's medievaloidish fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to gunpowder? If so, it's pseudorenaissance fantasy of some stripe or another.

Is mobile technology limited to steam and gunpowder? If so, it's steampunk.

Is mobile technology limited by electricity/batteries/etc? It's SF.

Except you're limiting your tech to real world stuff. All of your examples could just as easily be historical or modern fiction as fantasy/steampunk/SF.

The straight addition of magic to otherwise real world technology of whatever era, makes it fantasy. Steampunk usually doesn't have outright magic, but generally has advanced tech based on past era's technology. Steam-powered robots, etc.

Or, using your original classification where does Phlogiston powered technology fit?

Magic is always the exception to the rules. Magic characters are rare. Their power is generally not explained, or even described that thoroughly (which is a huge way RPGs differ.)

Phlogiston is likely "steam analog." :)

Communications will break up your game assumptions faster than phlogiston powered aetheric electro-bolt throwers. Phlogiston-powered aetheric cake mixers may also be more damaging to your finely held fantasy assumptions as well... :)

If you're leaving magic out of your classification, then I'm really not sure what you're talking about. How do you distinguish fantasy from everything else? Are we assuming magic in everything? If so, how does "mobile technology limited by electricity/batteries/etc" + magic = SF. Modern fantasy is SF?

Something with actual 19th century technology and magic is steampunk?

As I said above, steampunk requires some kind of advancement on the actual technology of the period.

I do agree that communications will break game assumptions, but that's sort of a side issue. Magic communications are as likely to do so as tech. Most people handwave that kind of thing, along with many other issues, because they want to play in a recognizable setting plus magic, rather than a thought experiment of what a world would look like with these assumptions. I know I do.

[loaba]

Fantsy is everything from the Dragon Riders of Pern to the Lord of The Rings to Heavy Metal. Neat thing about Pathfinder is, if you don't like certain elements you can cut 'em out. But the term fantasy is indeed broad.

/ would love to play in a Heavy Metal world.

[LazarX]

Jodokai wrote:

Orson Scott Card once said that the difference between fantasy and SciFi is what's on the cover. If you see trees, it's fantasy, if you see rivets, it's SciFi.

Orson Scott Card is a poster boy for my principle of deliberately not trying to find out personal things about the creators of artwork and literature that I admire, as his bigotry straddles if not crosses the line to actually being hateful.

But in this case, he is absolutely one hundred and 10 percent correct. In fact I'd say that most modern science fiction, especially TV and Movies, is simply redressed fantasy, disguised with plastic, chrome, and tons of technobabble.

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Genres are overly limiting, and generally completely craptacular in their definitions.

Look back to the earliest writings of fantastic nature, or look at the writings that inspired the list of works that later inspired D&D - you will see that once, long ago, all of these unnecessary distinctions being made (steampunk, fantasy, sci-fi, etc.) would all have fit safely and securely within the general term of science fantasy.

Breaking things down beyond saying that sci-fi and fantasy are basically interchangeable with the only difference being that sci-fi chooses to explain rather than leave to mystery is completely unnecessary... and typically ends up making someone look ill informed because they throw out some kind of blanket statement like 'no guns allowed in fantasy' when the fantasy genre was defined by a variety of works, some which included guns.

[Starbuck_II]

insaneogeddon wrote:

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

Please, there are like 30 magic items in the books in 3rd age

1. Tom gave everyone a magic short sword.
2. the magic armor everyone got
3. Magic rings (Gandalfs, Frodo's, the elves they meet)
4. Wraith swords
5. magic bread, healing leaves used by Aragorn to heal Frodo, etc
6. Gandalf's sword, Aragorn's sword, Legolas's bow, Gimli's axe

I mean, they are a phrethla of magic items. Low magic items it is not.

Unless you are assuming the cast are level 21... (1 magic item per 7 character levels =3 magic items each fits)

[Kevin Andrew Murphy]

Starbuck_II wrote:

insaneogeddon wrote:

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

Please, there are like 30 magic items in the books in 3rd age

1. Tom gave everyone a magic short sword.
2. the magic armor everyone got
3. Magic rings (Gandalfs, Frodo's, the elves they meet)
4. Wraith swords
5. magic bread, healing leaves used by Aragorn to heal Frodo, etc
6. Gandalf's sword, Aragorn's sword, Legolas's bow, Gimli's axe

I mean, they are a phrethla of magic items. Low magic items it is not.

Unless you are assuming the cast are level 21... (1 magic item per 7 character levels =3 magic items each fits)

And the Palantir, and ent water....

[thejeff]

Starbuck_II wrote:

insaneogeddon wrote:

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

Please, there are like 30 magic items in the books in 3rd age

1. Tom gave everyone a magic short sword.
2. the magic armor everyone got
3. Magic rings (Gandalfs, Frodo's, the elves they meet)
4. Wraith swords
5. magic bread, healing leaves used by Aragorn to heal Frodo, etc
6. Gandalf's sword, Aragorn's sword, Legolas's bow, Gimli's axe

I mean, they are a phrethla of magic items. Low magic items it is not.

Unless you are assuming the cast are level 21... (1 magic item per 7 character levels =3 magic items each fits)

Though I don't think everyone (anyone?) had magic armor. Frodo had mithril. I don't think anyone else had anything special.

I'll give you the hobbit's magic swords, though there's debate about that. And of course, Sting, Anduril/Narsil and Glamdring. No evidence that Legolas's bow or Gimli's Ax was magic.

Cloaks of Elvenkind from Lorien though. And possibly the rope.
Of course that depends on what you mean by magic. Magic tends to be subtler.

FotR wrote:

'Are these magic cloaks?' asked Pippin, looking at them in wonder.

'I do not know what you mean by that,' answered the leader of the Elves. 'They are fair garments, and the web is good, for it was made in this land. They are elvish robes certainly, if that is what you mean.'

FotR wrote:

'And you?' she said, turning to Sam. 'For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. But this, if you will, is the magic of Galadriel. Did you not say that you wished to see Elf-magic?'

That mirror is magic, though it's not entirely clear it's an item. The Palantirs definitely are.

There are others. Possibly Boromir's horn? Again, subtler.

Still, ignoring those things that belong to NPCs, and the consumables (lembas & athelas) Frodo and Gandalf each have a ring and a weapon. Aragorn has his sword. As do the three hobbits. They all get cloaks in Lorien and that's pretty much it.
Not quite 1/7 levels, but still pretty low magic. Especially if you consider Gandalf a higher level NPC mentor and remember that the Ring is a McGuffin that is more of a threat than a tool.

[Deyvantius]

I don't know about Steampunk, but the whole gunslinger angle was a joke to me. By far the cheesiest and most out of place character I've ever seen in a RPG. IF I wanted to play with guns I'd play Shadowrun.

On another note, I'm with the Tolkien sucked crowd. 3 pages to describe a tree...Nah duke, I'd much rather read Robert Howard, the Dragonlance Chronicles Trilogy or anything by Joe Abercrombie. In my opinion "The Name on the wind" is highly over rated too.

it's all good though, whatever...

[AaronOfBarbaria]

See, this is exactly what I was getting at earlier by being so strict about genre:

Deyvantius wrote:

...the whole gunslinger angle was a joke to me. By far the cheesiest and most out of place character I've ever seen in a RPG.

In one sentence we have this guy saying that the gunslinger angle is way out of place...

Deyvantius wrote:

...I'd much rather read Robert Howard...

...and in the next sentence he says he'd rather read Howard, who happens to be the author of Solomon Kane - a character I might just call a gunslinger considering his typical armament of a rapier, dirk, and flintlock pistols (with occasional musket) as he travels the world vanquishing evil.

A fantasy that Howard started writing before he put Conan to paper - both of which were originally published in the same magazine.

I mean yeah, you can go ahead and say "I don't dig gunslinger types," but when you exaggerate that to "don't fit in this genre," when doing so disagrees with an author you quote you would rather read... starts to look pretty silly.

[Deyvantius]

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

I mean yeah, you can go ahead and say "I don't dig gunslinger types," but when you exaggerate that to "don't fit in this genre," when doing so disagrees with an author you quote you would rather read... starts to look pretty silly.

What does what I like to read have anything to do with what fits in the context of the PFRPG.

LOL, you must be Reed Richards with that stretch.

Solomon Kane and Conan were not even in the same stories/time periods/etc.

[sunshadow21]

Gunslingers, steampunk, and for that matter, pretty much anything, have exactly as much place in fantasy as the individual wants to make for them. I've seen both examples used in fantasy quite well, and I've see both examples stand out like a sore thumb when used. If the person using those elements is willing to make them fit with the rest of the story, they do fine; if they insist on treating them as something sacred and apart from the rest of the story, they will always fail.

[TriOmegaZero]

Deyvantius wrote:

What does what I like to read have anything to do with what fits in the context of the PFRPG.

You should read the Corean Chronicles.

[thejeff]

The trouble with gunslingers isn't that they don't belong in fantasy, but that, to me at least, they feel out of place with all the other pseudo medieval/early renaissance parts of the standard high fantasy genre.

You want to run an America West fantasy with gunslingers, I'm in. You want to run Caribbean pirate fantasy with cannons and flintlocks, I'm in. You want to run 3 Musketeers fantasy, I'm in.
You want to run sword & sorcery or epic fantasy + plus a few guys with guns wandering about and no real change in other technology, I'm a lot sketchier about it.

Note also that the gun tech gets a lot worse as you move further back. American West: rifles and revolvers. Very effective. No real need for other weapons. A knife if someone gets too close.
Pirate era: Flintlocks. Fire once, then drop and draw your cutlass.
Musketeers: Guns are for battles. Rapiers are for Adventures.

PF went for a full gun-using class which puts them very late.

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

The word fantasy is like the word cake.

Lots of people enjoy cake. Some like chocolate cake, others like a nice pavlova, another might like ice-cream cake on a cookie base.

All of those are cakes, adding fruit, making the cake out of ice-cream or putting gummy bears all over the cake doesn't make it not cake. It might come in a flavour you don't like. Guess what it's still cake and someone else probably finds it delicious.

So stop being cake snobs, because we should all be united in our love of cake!

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Deyvantius wrote:

What does what I like to read have anything to do with what fits in the context of the PFRPG.

Simple: Pathfinder is the successor to D&D - a game inspired by a wealth of fantastic literature.

That is to say that the source material directly upon which PFRPG is built includes examples of fantasy fiction in which the element you declare out of place is present all the same.

Guns, aliens, laser weapons, high-tech weapons from a long ago age, space travel, other dimensions - and everything else, possibly even a kitchen sink or two, have always been present in D&D and PFRPG embraces that rather than artificially limiting the source material.

Deyvantius wrote:

LOL, you must be Reed Richards with that stretch.

Yeah, I am pretty fantastic.

Deyvantius wrote:

Solomon Kane and Conan were not even in the same stories/time periods/etc.

Not the same stories, nor time periods - just by the same author and in the same setting - that setting being "our world" and either in "time immemorial" (Conan) or "late 16th to early 17th century" (Kane).

There is no separation - at least not any more separation than there would be in a PFRG campaign set in any point of the setting's history rather than the assumed modern age.

I would also like to point out Murlynd - a wizard of some substantial fame in the Greyhawk setting, where nothing that Gary didn't okay himself came into being, was a cowboy from Arizona - six-shooter and all.

[Kthulhu]

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

So stop being cake snobs, because we should all be united in our love of cake!

The cake is a lie.

[thejeff]

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

Deyvantius wrote:

Solomon Kane and Conan were not even in the same stories/time periods/etc.

Not the same stories, nor time periods - just by the same author and in the same setting - that setting being "our world" and either in "time immemorial" (Conan) or "late 16th to early 17th century" (Kane).

There is no separation - at least not any more separation than there would be in a PFRG campaign set in any point of the setting's history rather than the assumed modern age.

So based on that argument, that time immemorial and the late 16th to early 17th century are essentially the same, you'd have no problem with guns in a historical game set in Ancient Rome or Greece?

I mean seriously, your example:
Classic Swords and Sorcery: No guns
Late Historical fiction: guns
means guns are fine in any style of fantasy? Just because the same guy wrote them?

Many fantasy writers also write Science fiction. And in many different sub-genres of each. I guess that means there's no reason not to just mix it all into the same setting.

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I probably should just say "nope," and move on... but I won't yet because I have nothing better to do than break down this silly business:

thejeff wrote:

So based on that argument, that time immemorial and the late 16th to early 17th century are essentially the same

That was not my argument at all.

My argument was that "fantasy story set in our real world," is the same as "fantasy story set in our real world," whether the in-setting year is 1598 AD or 42,845 BC.

Both are fantasy stories in the same setting. Think of it like a campaign setting with a rich history, like Pathfinder, where there is a distinct established timeline.

In Howard's fiction we are looking at a current year of 1920s and 1930s, the year when Solomon Kane's adventures took place being the 1590s and 1600s, and the time of Conan being somewhere between 40,000 and 10,000 BC.

In Pathfinder the current year is 4711, but a story set at the founding of Osirion in -3470, or even way back in the Age of Serpents, would still be a game in the Pathfinder setting.

The time periods aren't the same - the setting those time periods exist as part of is the same, which is a big difference.

thejeff wrote:

you'd have no problem with guns in a historical game set in Ancient Rome or Greece?

Historical fantasy? Nope.

Historical fiction does not, however, always have to be fantasy - and if it weren't meant to be fantasy, then yes I would have problem with weapons not matching the technology level of the era.

Since the discussion is about guns having a place in fantasy, I fail to see what the question had to do with anything.

thejeff wrote:

I mean seriously, your example:

Classic Swords and Sorcery: No guns
Late Historical fiction: guns
means guns are fine in any style of fantasy? Just because the same guy wrote them?

Again, that was not my example. Seriously.

My example:
Classic Swords and Sorcery: Guns - Solomon Kane, Princess of Mars, and I'd bet there are other pieces of proof too.
Late Historical Fiction: Guns - not that I ever mentioned any late historical fiction since all I have mentioned are works of fantasy literature.

thejeff wrote:

Many fantasy writers also write Science fiction.

The distinction between the two is artificial and unnecessary, which is pretty much the first thing I said on the matter.

thejeff wrote:

And in many different sub-genres of each. I guess that means there's no reason not to just mix it all into the same setting.

There is no reason, beyond personal preference.

I never said everyone should just mix everything and enjoy it - I said that saying "I don't like guns in my fantasy" is perfectly acceptable as a statement of opinion, but saying "guns have no place in the entire fantasy genre" is no longer a statement of opinion, and is also completely and demonstrably wrong.

Fact: the fiction that was written before some ridiculous person decided to split science fantasy into science fiction and fantasy had fantasy stories and guns.

Fact: you don't have to like it, and you don't have to use guns in your fantasy if you don't want to.

Fact: you are wrong if you say that guns have no place in fantasy.

[insaneogeddon]

Starbuck_II wrote:

insaneogeddon wrote:

Its high fantasy mixed with steam punk.

If you want tolkien fanatsy.. well 2nd edition had source books for such 'low/mythological/historic fantasy': everyone starts as commoners and can only levelin non-magical classes. A few rare NPCs might be casters. Your your lucky to have 1 magic item per 7 character levels.

Rangers/Bards etc get no casting.

When people mention playing tolkien they rarely follow through and really mean 'play like i was used too'!

Please, there are like 30 magic items in the books in 3rd age

1. Tom gave everyone a magic short sword.
2. the magic armor everyone got
3. Magic rings (Gandalfs, Frodo's, the elves they meet)
4. Wraith swords
5. magic bread, healing leaves used by Aragorn to heal Frodo, etc
6. Gandalf's sword, Aragorn's sword, Legolas's bow, Gimli's axe

I mean, they are a phrethla of magic items. Low magic items it is not.

Unless you are assuming the cast are level 21... (1 magic item per 7 character levels =3 magic items each fits)

Even if the above is correct. Its not quite. Thats 30 items out of thousands of high level heroes gathered. So yeah the immortal king of kings drizzt do urden and elminster character had some bling, along with the major npcs (one per character). But the others were lucky to have a +1 item.

The above makes a good point.Its more like epic heros roll percentile and if your character gets a 00 then you can roll for ONE random item every 10 levels is more tolkien then my suggestion.
But its not allbad because everyone gets some magic bread ....

Look at the Wheel of Time books/rollplaying game if you want a equivocal guide to that style of play. PS having played it, low items really bites, give me high fantasy steam punk any day !!!

[Icyshadow]

Kthulhu wrote:

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

So stop being cake snobs, because we should all be united in our love of cake!

The cake is a lie.

That joke's as old as an arrow to the knee. XD

[Rynjin]

Icyshadow wrote:

Kthulhu wrote:

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

So stop being cake snobs, because we should all be united in our love of cake!

The cake is a lie.

That joke's as old as an arrow to the knee. XD

Portal Release Date: 2007

Skyrim Release Date: 2011

Nope.avi

[Icyshadow]

Rynjin wrote:

Icyshadow wrote:

Kthulhu wrote:

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

So stop being cake snobs, because we should all be united in our love of cake!

The cake is a lie.

That joke's as old as an arrow to the knee. XD

Portal Release Date: 2007

Skyrim Release Date: 2011

Nope.avi

Okay, they're both overused despite the age difference.

[Harrison]

Bruunwald wrote:

I swear to god, I will turn this forum around and head back to WoTC if you kids don't stop squabbling over this.

I'm gonna grab some popcorn and watch the whole forum explode in nerd rage when the science-fantasy city of Numeria gets expanded upon.

[Mikaze]

Harrison wrote:

Bruunwald wrote:

I swear to god, I will turn this forum around and head back to WoTC if you kids don't stop squabbling over this.

I'm gonna grab some popcorn and watch the whole forum explode in nerd rage when the science-fantasy city of Numeria gets expanded upon.

I'm going to play an android wizard/paladin who rides a unicorn equipped with horseshoes of the warpdrive and also has a pseudodragon familiar that wears DinoRider-style armor* that my pixie cohort can ride in while wielding a miniature plasma lance.

*with +2 holy "Macross" missiles.

:7

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

Mikaze wrote:

Harrison wrote:

Bruunwald wrote:

I swear to god, I will turn this forum around and head back to WoTC if you kids don't stop squabbling over this.

I'm gonna grab some popcorn and watch the whole forum explode in nerd rage when the science-fantasy city of Numeria gets expanded upon.

I'm going to play an android wizard/paladin who rides a unicorn equipped with horseshoes of the warpdrive and also has a pseudodragon familiar that wears DinoRider-style armor* that my pixie cohort can ride in while wielding a miniature plasma lance.

*with +2 holy "Macross" missiles.

:7

Sounds pretty FANTASTIC.

Spoiler:

See what I did there.

[Gaekub]

Mikaze wrote:

Harrison wrote:

Bruunwald wrote:

I swear to god, I will turn this forum around and head back to WoTC if you kids don't stop squabbling over this.

I'm gonna grab some popcorn and watch the whole forum explode in nerd rage when the science-fantasy city of Numeria gets expanded upon.

I'm going to play an android wizard/paladin who rides a unicorn equipped with horseshoes of the warpdrive and also has a pseudodragon familiar that wears DinoRider-style armor* that my pixie cohort can ride in while wielding a miniature plasma lance.

*with +2 holy "Macross" missiles.

:7

Rifts.

That is all.

[Harrison]

Gaekub wrote:

Mikaze wrote:

Harrison wrote:

Bruunwald wrote:

I swear to god, I will turn this forum around and head back to WoTC if you kids don't stop squabbling over this.

I'm gonna grab some popcorn and watch the whole forum explode in nerd rage when the science-fantasy city of Numeria gets expanded upon.

I'm going to play an android wizard/paladin who rides a unicorn equipped with horseshoes of the warpdrive and also has a pseudodragon familiar that wears DinoRider-style armor* that my pixie cohort can ride in while wielding a miniature plasma lance.

*with +2 holy "Macross" missiles.

:7

Rifts.

That is all.

Typical Thursday in Spelljammer, really.

[Gaekub]

Harrison wrote:

Gaekub wrote:

Mikaze wrote:

Harrison wrote:

...

I'm going to play an android wizard/paladin who rides a unicorn equipped with horseshoes of the warpdrive and also has a pseudodragon familiar that wears DinoRider-style armor* that my pixie cohort can ride in while wielding a miniature plasma lance.

*with +2 holy "Macross" missiles.

:7

Rifts.

That is all.

Typical Thursday in Spelljammer, really.

If that's just Thursday, what happens on Friday?

[Harrison]

Gaekub wrote:

If that's just Thursday, what happens on Friday?

Dance Party.

[Gaekub]

Harrison wrote:

Gaekub wrote:

If that's just Thursday, what happens on Friday?

Dance Party.

I'm on board. In more ways than one.

[Nigel Ripped]

Rynjin wrote:

Icyshadow wrote:

Rynjin wrote:

Nigel Ripped wrote:

Yo Bro, Token is boring and over-rated trash. I would rather read something more fast paced such as Home or Dante.

I don't know who Token and Home are, would you mind explaining?

I believe he means Tolkien and Homer.

I know, it was poking fun at the atrocious misspelling.

Though I'm pretty sure he was joking since he called Homer and Dante "fast paced".

I am glad that you "pretty much" figured that out, bro.

[Rynjin]

Nigel Ripped wrote:

I am glad that you "pretty much" figured that out, bro.

With the sheer amount of mind boggling stupidity I deal with on a daily basis, I can never be sure when someone's joking, brosef.