gothwalk: (D&D)
([personal profile] gothwalk Nov. 13th, 2003 01:08 pm)
OK, I got up there for about ten minutes to look for a notebook, didn't find the notebook, and am now knackered by the effort, and have to sit down again. Being ill sucks, so to take my mind off it, I'm going to ramble a bit about RPGs, D&D, high and low fantasy, and other such stuff, and all of you are going to comment and ask me interesting questions, and before I know what's happening, I'll have the energy to have another crack at finding the notebook. Which is, of course, a D&D notebook.

People know I'm a gamer. They might not know the word "gamer", but they know I play D&D, and every now and then I'll get asked how the D&D is going - usually in work, since most non-work people will know to ask about the campaign, or even campaigns. I used to just mumble something about it going well, but of late I've decided that fuck it, you ask one of my co-workers about soccer, and you'll have to gag him to stop him talking, so why shouldn't I do likewise? So now, when people ask, I set off into a big long ramble about the current plots, and what the PCs have done, and what this NPC did, and why time travel is a bad idea, and why I'm really glad I got rid of speak with the dead and resurrect and (*spit*) time pool. And instead of backing off in a stunned way, they... ask questions.

One of the more thoughtful ones that gets asked once in a while is "So why do you run games, and not play them? It sounds like a lot of work."

And sometimes I'm hard put to answer that one. It's a lot of work, yeah. And even though it's a lot of work, I don't put as much into it as I feel I should. By rights, with the three hours preparation to one hour's playing that leads to a really good game, I should be investing upwards of fifteen hours a week into solid preparation for this week's (or this month's) games. I don't do that, and sometimes I feel guilty about it, and then I decide that being guilty about it is daft, and stop. But still, yeah, lot of work.

First up, I like my campaign world. My campaign multiverse, even, because it has its own cosmology, more or less ripped off from Spelljammer and Planescape, and pushed to fit where they didn't quite mesh, and with bits bolted on at various points. As an aside, I want to read some of Michael Moorcock's stuff again, and would appreciate a loan of some from anyone local-ish. It's very much my campaign world, with a few concessions to the sensibilities of my players - but it's all personal. I know that world inside and out; I can write short essays on the tax practices of a given kingdom off the top of my head, and tell you exactly which of the three kinds of luminescent fruits is a hallucinogen that only works for halfbreeds. It's my world, I built it, I spend a lot of time thinking about new stuff to do in it.

Second up, I like running games. The mixture of acting and calculating and on-the-spot-plotting and improvisation is something I'm really rather good at. I may need to emote a bit more, but I'm working on that too.

And third up, I don't like playing all that much. Other people run games in published worlds, which are kinda dull and not as alive as home-built ones, or they run sci-fi, or superhero games, or White Wolf stuff, which I've tried, but which I'm not all that enthused about. I've yet to find anyone who's running a decent D&D campaign in a home-built world, let alone one which I'd actually like to play in. If someone does that, sure, I'll play. No, I'm not all that interested in other systems - D&D took me long enough to learn, and I know it well now; I can't be bothered to learn another one, and I really can't be bothered to learn the ones where the system and the world are tied together. Yech.

High and low fantasy, now. This is one that bugs me. I know a good few people who like low-fantasy games - I'm married to one, even. But low fantasy... well, it bores me. I read, write, play fantasy so that I can deal with things that are not possible in this world. The notion of a game where it's swords and mud, well, that was here six hundred years ago. I'm much more interested in examining the consequences of a world where anyone, given opportunity, time, and some basic suitability, can create magical items, be served by undead, travel to other planes, or talk to rocks. Low fantasy misses something essential, to me - it doesn't think it through. You have wizards who can do incredible things, and they're not hired by monarchs to increase their prestige, de Medici style, or to wipe out their enemies. And if the wizards can't do incredible things, then, um, what's the point? People point at low-fantasy books, like The Mists of Avalon. And sure, that was cool, but the bits that stick most in my mind from that are the bits that weren't low-fantasy; the Isle of Avalon moving in and out of the Real World, for instance. In my mind, at least, people will use whatever they can get their hands on to make their lives more comfortable, easier, or interesting. For me, trying to run a low-fantasy fantasy setting is like trying to run a low-science modern setting.

So, enough rambling. Tell me what you think.

From: [identity profile] teapot-farm.livejournal.com


What's the difference between 'low fantasy' and 'high fantasy', as you're using it here? I thought I had it, but the Mists Of Avalon ref has now confused me.

I can see the appeal of running games far more easily than the appeal of playing - the whole world-building and playing god thing has huge amounts of potential for complexity, even without then seeing how people interact with it... So, um, yeah.
ext_34769: (Default)

From: [identity profile] gothwalk.livejournal.com


Low fantasy is mud & swords, most if not all people are human, and magic doesn't appear much in the world, and doesn't have much effect when it does. High fantasy is when you have elves and humans and dwarves all living together, and priests of various orders have spells that can cure every illness at a touch, and there's a wizard in every village, and a dragon overhead isn't all that strange, and so on.

From: [identity profile] redfishie.livejournal.com

random comment (cause i was trying to figure out if i knew you...i don't think i do)


hmm...i think some of the point of low fantasy is that high fantasy could exist or did exist but the knowledge has been lost. It's sort of like post-appocalypse fantasy. At least if I'm following you right....I haven't run into the terms high and low fantasy before, and I find I tend to like my games muddled somewheres between the two.

"In my mind, at least, people will use whatever they can get their hands on to make their lives more comfortable, easier, or interesting" - and abused and used for nefarious purposes ;)
phantom_wolfboy: picture of me (Default)

From: [personal profile] phantom_wolfboy


I would just like to point out that High Fantasy need not involve elves, dwarves or dragons at all; they are just manifestations on particular worlds.
.
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags