Mixing Fantasy and Sci-Fi

[Callos_DeTerran]

This is part question and part starting a discussion type thing, but for people who haven't been following Paizo's new releases for August, they're releasing a fair number of sci-fi tie-in products to Pathfinder (Iron Gods AP, People of the Stars, Technology Guide, Starship Map Squares, Numeria) though they've touched on that subject in the past with their Distant Worlds book. Now I know that Spelljammer used to be a thing a while back and, from what little I've heard, people really liked it or at least it had some vocal fans out there.

Thing is, I've been seeing signs of discontent on the Paizo forums (albeit not much mind you) about sci-fi peanut butter getting mixed into their fantasy chocolate but not really any explanations about...well...why they are unhappy. Personally, I've always been a huge fan of combining sci-fi and fantasy with one another, even if I haven't always had the tools to combine the two together at the time and I was an avid reader of the Weatherlight Saga and the idea of a ship traveling between planes (worlds) fascinated me. If nothing else it seems like a wonderful change of pace from typical fantasy settings, but now I'm a little curious about where other people stand on the subject!

Do you enjoy mixing fantasy and sci-fi or no?
If you don't, could you try and explain why?
If you do, how do you try and mix them? In other words do you just dive into the deep end of mixing the two, do you just stick the proverbial toe in by having just specific parts of your world involved with sci-fi, or is it more just light seasoning that you use to spice up an otherwise 'mundane' adventure?

[Lord Raziere]

1. Yes, I do like to mix them

2. well I myself enjoy sci-fi fantasy mixing, the reasons why people don't like it seem to be, that they want their fantasy "pure" because they want this "mystery" feel to it, and that sci-fi somehow ruins that- hey thats just what I heard from people on this subject dude, I don't understand it myself.

3. How I try to mix them, is that I go all in. I try to figure out how mages react to technology and how technologists react to mages, I try to make a society that integrates both into it and what conflicts would arise from magic and technology working together, what changes this would make and so on. I see no problem playing an orc paladin fighting robots possessed by a demonic entity...by using holy laser guns and laser swords, while on a space station powered by a ritual circle that draws energy from the plane of hope. (and before you say anything about superheroes: Not good enough. they don't change the world enough)

[Eldan]

That's really just another form of Fantasy to me. It can work well (Shadowrun) or be a miss (Star Wars), but that kind of fantasy is really done all over. Has usually little to do with SciFi, though.

[Lord Raziere]

not really, Shadowrun is the only one that comes close to my idea of a sci-fi fantasy mix, and it doesn't have magic changing the tech of society enough, sure it wrought huge changes, but there is no integrating magic with the rest of life and such, its still pure tech, which just makes it cyberpunk WITH WIZARDS! to me, and that just isn't enough for me.

and if its done all over, I don't see it man. to me, everything seems to dominated by either pure fantasy or pure sci-fi with maybe some weak psychic powers added in, but that hardly counts to me.

[Mastikator]

I dislike it and refuse to acknowledge a mixture of being sci-fi. It's just fantasy in space with a futuristic theme. Sci-fi is based on science, it's incompatible with fantasy.
Sci-fi should be entirely materialistic IMO, there can be people who practice religions or believe in ghosts, but no spirits or ghosts. If it's not potentially explainable with science then it has no place in sci-fi, and that categorically excludes fantasy.

[LibraryOgre]

Sci-fi is a form of fantasy, but I don't necessarily want sci-fi elements in all my fantasy. I like my standard fantasy, without sci-fi elements, and the capacity to mess up the combination makes me leery of mixing the two, especially when you're adding science fiction to an established fantasy setting, rather than designing a sci-fi/fantasy mix from the outset.

Take, for example, Forgotten Realms. You can add a bit of steampunk around the edges (Gondians and gnomes and smoke powder) and the setting remains pretty solidly fantasy. However, if you toss in laser rifles, and the capacity to recharge and reuse them, a lot about the game changes. The guys using the swords are now dead meat, burned to a crisp from 1000 feet away. Griffon riders of Waterdeep? Skeet. Sure, there's magic and gods and all sorts of things still around, but once laser rifles become common, a lot of other aspects of the setting change.

Compare that to, say, Fading Suns. Where psychic powers, theurgy and high technology exist side-by-side by design. That mix of fantasy and sci-fi is ok with me, because you're not changing an established setting, but rather creating a setting that works in.

[Arbane]

Star Wars leaps instantly to mind, with Warhammer 40K close behind it.

[Hytheter]

Sci-fi is based on science, it's incompatible with fantasy....If it's not potentially explainable with science then it has no place in sci-fi, and that categorically excludes fantasy.

Yeah because all sci-fi is totally scientifically accurate.

[ChaosArchon]

Yeah because all sci-fi is totally scientifically accurate.

You're telling me that I can't break Newtonian physics and go faster than the speed of light, how dare you!

[Ravens_cry]

I tend to mix science fiction in my fantasy, and I don't mean space ships and stuff. Well, not always anyway.
Rather, I like to think about the implications. For example, I had this idea that elves wouldn't have much of a written tradition in this one world because they are so long lived that it wouldn't be necessary. The history and knowledge could be stored much better in people. They would have a very strong oral history though, obviously. Another question I thought not asked enough is 'Where do Dwarves get their food'? My idea is that the mountains were basically fortresses, castles, with two distinct cultures that were at odds, the main population considering the fortress dwarves to be greedy warmongers and the fortress dwarves consider the main population to be ungrateful bumpkins.
Of course, all this leads to conflict, and conflict is the catalyst of story.

[Knaight]

It sounds more like they're mixing space fantasy with their medieval fantasy than anything. They're distinct genres for a reason, and there are settings that are firmly in one camp or the other and work better that way. These books are also optional, so I really don't see what the fuss is about.

As for my preferences, I do mix the two occasionally. Heck, one of my current games is centered around two locations - a wizard's convent and a crashed star ship, and there's as much mixing as one would expect out of that, if not more.

[Eldan]

Yeah because all sci-fi is totally scientifically accurate.

It doesn't have to be accurate. But I think Science Fiction is fundamentally about a different mentality than fantasy. Fantasy is about imagination. Science Fiction is about conjecture. Imagining a world changed by new developments. Those developments can be realistic or not, but from there, the world should develop along lines that make at least some sense. And I think trying to incorporate at least potentially possible science is a part of it as well.

It's the difference between Space Opera and Science Fiction.

Premise: we have lasers and FTL drives.
Space Opera: let's use those for space piracy, treasure hunting on Mars and sword fights against alien cyborgs on Jupiter!
Science Fiction: now that the galaxy opened up, how would society on earth change to reflect that? What kind of people would join an interstellar colonialization effort? How do military doctrines change? Which expertise and resources become valuable and which lose value?

As for fantasy mixed with or disguised as science fiction: Star Wars. Mass Effect. The Marvel movies. Doctor Who. Shadowrun. Warhammer 40k. The Elder Scrolls.

[Prince Raven]

As a Dark Heresy GM I very much enjoy Science Fantasy.

[Mastikator]

Yeah because all sci-fi is totally scientifically accurate.

Should've written "all good sci-fi". My bad.

[Kalmageddon]

Should've written "all good sci-fi". My bad.

So basically the only good sci-fi is based around current technologies and the current understanding of scientific facts? So basically not science fiction...

[Prime32]

Take, for example, Forgotten Realms. You can add a bit of steampunk around the edges (Gondians and gnomes and smoke powder) and the setting remains pretty solidly fantasy. However, if you toss in laser rifles, and the capacity to recharge and reuse them, a lot about the game changes. The guys using the swords are now dead meat, burned to a crisp from 1000 feet away.

But magic is already better at burning things to a crisp from a distance. When a large chunk of the populace have the ability to do not only that but teleport, shapeshift, read minds, create illusions, see into the future, control the weather and bring the dead back to life (including themselves), that's far more disruptive to the idea of "guys using swords".

Besides, it didn't stop Star Wars from having swords.

[Man on Fire]

I'm superhero fan so I have no problem with mixing the two. I see no problem with Doctor Strange existing in one universe with Silver Surfer and one of my favorite superhero teams, Runaways, features a witch and a cyborg/android.

What I hate however is "Magic is unexplained science" approach. No, don't do that. Magic is magic, science is science, best if the two simply cannot work together. Making magic unexplaied science makes it stop being magic and robs the setting from it's fantasy, now making it all very silly science fiction. If you need that in order to explain your wolrdbuilding, okay, but don't pretend it's a fantasy story, even if you have living suit of armor riding dragon that drops bombs full of werewolf goblins.

[Eldan]

The thing is, though, if you try to approach at least character-building semi-realistically, any scientist around will absolutely want to study magic. Quantify it. Qualify it. Run tests and statistics on it. Gather data. And I can also guarantee, from personal experience, that the harder something is to study, the more scientists will want to.

[LibraryOgre]

But magic is already better at burning things to a crisp from a distance. When a large chunk of the populace have the ability to do not only that but teleport, shapeshift, read minds, create illusions, see into the future, control the weather and bring the dead back to life (including themselves), that's far more disruptive to the idea of "guys using swords".

Besides, it didn't stop Star Wars from having swords.

Not a large portion of the population. Some. Enough. But Elkmonster the wizard had to study for years to be able to toss a single cantrip, and then practice for years more to be able to throw fireballs. But where things change with technology is the ability for average people to do it. You can toss a laser rifle to Billy from the farm and he can incinerate people from a thousand feet away. And with manufacturing, you can give a laser rifle to Billy and every person from his village.

Star Wars had swords, yes, but they were also a setting designed to include such things... and swords were primarily a prestige weapon for wizard-monks, who had the ability to effectively people armed with lasers. You don't see a lot of non-jedi running around with swords in the movies... because most people know not to bring a knife to a gunfight.

Introducing technology to a traditional fantasy setting is disruptive to that setting. Designing a setting to include technology is fine, though not always what I want.

[Thrudd]

Science fiction does not automatically mean everyone has energy weapons and space travel, nor does fantasy automatically mean a strictly medieval society and technology. I love the mixture of science fiction and fantasy, in different degrees. It is all fiction, so there is no reason to limit what can be accomplished or explained. I suppose "hard" science fiction does not mix well with fairy-tale style medieval or classical fantasy, but these are the extremes.

You could develop a world with both advanced technology, space travel, and magic (as Fading Suns, or even WH40k, parts of the cosmic Marvel Universe). You could develop a medieval or classical world with magic that has remnants of advanced civilization or some anachronistic technology (Dying Earth, D&D is pretty much this already, or can support this easily). Then you've got pulp swashbuckling sci-fi/fantasy like Barsoom. Manly men and sexy women fighting with swords and rifles on flying ships, psychic powers, genetic engineering, astral projection (I guess?), alien beings and cool names. And how about your gonzo super-science/post apocalyptic world, like "Thundarr the Barbarian". Science fiction or fantasy?


Remember that AC Clarke saying? "Any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic." Magic can have almost any explanation you want, even if the characters in the society don't understand the science behind how it works. As long as the setting is internally consistent and logically thought-out, there is no reason not to use any elements of either type of fiction. You may call a setting that has magic or things which operate in ways unexplainable by current scientific understanding "science fantasy" or "space fantasy" rather than "science fiction", but it's really just a matter of degrees. Even the hardest of hard sci-fi takes some idea and extrapolates it beyond the realm of reality in ways science can not yet accomplish, creating a fictional world.

[tomandtish]

Not a large portion of the population. Some. Enough. But Elkmonster the wizard had to study for years to be able to toss a single cantrip, and then practice for years more to be able to throw fireballs. But where things change with technology is the ability for average people to do it. You can toss a laser rifle to Billy from the farm and he can incinerate people from a thousand feet away. And with manufacturing, you can give a laser rifle to Billy and every person from his village.

Star Wars had swords, yes, but they were also a setting designed to include such things... and swords were primarily a prestige weapon for wizard-monks, who had the ability to effectively people armed with lasers. You don't see a lot of non-jedi running around with swords in the movies... because most people know not to bring a knife to a gunfight.

Introducing technology to a traditional fantasy setting is disruptive to that setting. Designing a setting to include technology is fine, though not always what I want.

Exactly. For the average person (which includes most soldiers) you'll eventually hit a balance point of cost/ease of use/effectiveness of weapon. In the Star Wars universe that appears to be the blaster.

Lightsabers lose out because (for most people) of ease of use and effectiveness. Unless you are a Jedi (or cybernetically enhanced like Grevious), the odds are that you will kill yourself with it long before you master it. And even if you can use it without killing yourself, most non-Jedi won't won't be able to reliably deflect laser fire, so they are in the position of having brought a knife to a gun fight.

If you are designing a setting that merges the two, what's your balance point? If your world contains laser weapons and swords, why does someone carry a sword when there are laser weapons? Simon Green's "Death Stalker" novels covered this by having laser weapons have a long recharge period. Chemical propellent weapons had fallen out of favor, so you fire your laser weapon then close to hand to hand with the sword. It's actually a pretty big deal when someone finds an old cache of projectile weapons (guns).

Getting the toe wet has happened a long time ago in role-playing. Remember S-3: Expedition to the Barrier Peaks? That was a pretty tame exploration, and was pretty easy to self-correct if you felt things went too far.

If you're diving in full-tilt (a world with both magic and tech as significant forces), you'll have to be more careful. In most cases, tech is usually the tool of the masses. It's cheaper, easier to replicate, and easier for anyone to use. Magic is more often limited to secret practitioners, or those in elite positions. Again, look at Simon Green's "Secret Histories", where the Droods basically blend magic and tech to hide in plain sight.

[Mastikator]

So basically the only good sci-fi is based around current technologies and the current understanding of scientific facts? So basically not science fiction...

No I said potentially explainable by science, not already explained by science. Those are two different things. For example, a flying machine is today science fact, 300 years ago it would've been science fiction, it however was even back then potentially explainable by science, so it was never supernatural fantasy magic, unlike for example wizards, who explicitly aren't potentially explainable by science (because magic is "the unknowable").
So a hand held laser rifle capable of cutting a man in half is sci-fi, but only because of size issue, not because a laser is necessarily space magic. But Spock being able to read minds with telepathics is on the other hand space magic, it's not sci-fi.
Using "sub space" as a tool to explain away all plot holes without ever explaining what "sub space" is is sci-fi too, but it's bad sci-fi.

Also, good sci-fi doesn't necessarily mean good plot, just like in a movie good acting doesn't necessarily mean good plot.

[BWR]

It depends on the setting. I have no problems with adding SF elements to otherwise 'standard' fantasy worlds. I love the Dragonstar setting, which is basically straight D&D with starships and ray guns and computers. Mystara, one of my all time favorite settings, has ahistory that is intimately tied to SF elements: Arneson's Blackmoor culture was made a canon part of the backstory, and the explosion of the starship that crashed there thousands of years ago is responsible for how the setting looks now. I loved the old "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" and "Tale of theComet" adventures. Golarion is basically Mystara 2.0 (or is it more like 3.x, considering Bruce Heard's Calidar?) so I'm more than pleased with the inclusion it in that setting.

I wouldn't want it in all settings. Spaceships suddenly crashing on Krynn or Rokugan are not to my taste (though it would hardly make the canon settings worse at this point, come to think of it), but I probably wouldn't mind if FR or Eberron got some high tech elements.

[Mr. Mask]

Can anyone think of a fantasy styled setting or story which was treated in a scifi manner? Shadowrun comes to mind, asking the question of what if magic and elves suddenly appeared in the world and treats the matter with reasonable speculation.

[BWR]

Can anyone think of a fantasy styled setting or story which was treated in a scifi manner? Shadowrun comes to mind, asking the question of what if magic and elves suddenly appeared in the world and treats the matter with reasonable speculation.

I don't understand what you are asking. What is a 'sci-fi manner'? What is 'reasonable speculation'?
If you just want magic to be codified and explained as far as it can in universe, there are plenty of settings that do this. Most D&D worlds, for instance.
Reasonable speculation: do you mean actually thinking through consequences of what is posssible and likely to happen in the setting if you have magic that can do X? Again, there are several.

[Mr. Mask]

Uh, yeah, I'd say that's a reasonable interpretation of what I said. It seems the definition being used for fantasy and scifi is whether you use the word "elf" or "space" in the setting (leading to conflict when stories feature space elves). I see the definitions as being rather separate, from the extreme of fairytales, to the extreme of near present day fiction with a presented speculative element.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Introducing technology to a traditional fantasy setting is disruptive to that setting. Designing a setting to include technology is fine, though not always what I want.

This, honestly, is what I think is the reason for the grumbling about the addition of (further) space fantasy elements to Golarion: If Numerian laser rifles and space ships are something just anyone can get, then it'll cause strain against the established elements of the setting.

Now, even though I understand this concern, tonal and thematic mish-mash is something already present in full force on Golarion (and is honestly part of the setting's appeal). I think that, so long as the writers are careful, this can be handled well. And Paizo's worldbuilding is reasonably competent: I'm more worried about feat/item/class options messing things up. (Hey look, it's a laser-based gunslinger archetype!)

[Man on Fire]

The thing is, though, if you try to approach at least character-building semi-realistically, any scientist around will absolutely want to study magic. Quantify it. Qualify it. Run tests and statistics on it. Gather data. And I can also guarantee, from personal experience, that the harder something is to study, the more scientists will want to.

Maybe I got a bit overboard with "not working together at all". I'm okay with scientists studying magic, even with there being Institute of Mystic Studies at every University, magitech and whatever you want, just without making up some "rational" explanations for magic like "really advanced alien technology".

[LibraryOgre]

Maybe I got a bit overboard with "not working together at all". I'm okay with scientists studying magic, even with there being Institute of Mystic Studies at every University, magitech and whatever you want, just without making up some "rational" explanations for magic like "really advanced alien technology".

To me, there are two basic ways to approach magic in a game, especially when the knowledge of physical science is about where it is on Earth today (or better).

1) Magic is completely ineffable; you never know quite what you're going to get with magic, even if you've been practicing it for years.

2) Magic is a science, slightly off-kilter from the science we know, but with repeatable effects from given actions.

The problem with 1 is that it's a lot harder to put into rules... ineffable magic must always be able to go outside its own rules a bit. The 2nd version, however, runs the risk of becoming incredibly common and mechanical, losing some aspect of the "magic" of magic. The 2nd version is what leads to things like the Tippyverse... magic is commodified and reproducible and starts to severely mess with the standard assumptions of the world (as another example, look to Brust's Dragaera, where easy resurrections have wildly changed society.

[Callos_DeTerran]

This, honestly, is what I think is the reason for the grumbling about the addition of (further) space fantasy elements to Golarion: If Numerian laser rifles and space ships are something just anyone can get, then it'll cause strain against the established elements of the setting.

Having recently acquired he Numerian book and without interrupting the debate at all (hopefully), I can honestly say that Numerian laser weaponry and space ships are not something that just anyone can get, both because of the Technic League's oppressive control of all things technological or xenobiological and the difficulty in actually acquiring them in the first place since you both need to find a piece of the starship that's still intact enough to be salvaged as well as a way inside, survive the dangers within, and than get back out without somebody else taking the easy route in just waiting outside to mug you for your new baubles.

Doesn't hurt that so far they haven't (apparently) figured out a way to replicate the stuff they're using and only seem to have managed recharging and repairing (to a degree) it.