Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You

[BRC]

How?

If orcish culture is aggressive and brutal and merciless and based on dominance by might and intimidation, and every orc people meet behaves in this manner because that's what their culture teaches them to be like, how is racial prejudice for people who've only ever seen orcs behave that way to worry that members of the orcish species to behave that way when they encounter them in the future?

And if a reader is stupid enough to confuse those three different things and take some sort of racist inference out of that fiction, then there's no helping them.

We had this exact discussion before, and it didn't get across, but I'll try to explain this concept one last time.

If 1) Orcish Culture is Evil

And 2) just about every orc (With a handful of notable exceptions) is the product of Orcish Culture.

Then assuming that every Orc you meet is Evil is perfectly reasonable within the narrative, it is ALSO the textbook definition of racial prejudice.

The objection people have is to a world where textbook racism IS perfectly reasonable.

We're not saying that the random peasants shouldn't assume that Orcs are evil in a world where 99.9% of orcs are evil. We're saying that the Writer shouldn't have written a world where 99.9% of Orcs are Evil.

Acceptable ways to do it

1) Orcs are NOT people. They're the physical embodiment of hate or something, dark sorcerers create Spawning Pits that produce fully-grown Orcish warriors. If literally every orc in the world is a bloodthirsty raider, then explain that.

2) Orcs ARE People, with everything that implies. They may have an aggressive and martial culture, but it's not inherently Evil. Orcish society exists as something more than an excuse to send bloodthirsty raiders at innocent human settlements. Orcs can be kind, cruel, noble, brave, ect. Better yet, have multiple Orcish cultures, or have multiracial cultures that include Orcs.
Sure, Orcs living in the Badlands might be raiders, but Orcs on the coast fish and sail and make wonderful Scrimshaw. Orcs in the city just want to get a decent wage for a days work.


It's also fine to have people WITHIN the narrative assume that all Orcs are Evil, because Racism is a thing, the key is to make sure your narrative doesn't agree with them.

Spoiler: Semi-Related non-sequiter

Show

I have Vague, yet Strong memories of reading, and loving, the Redwall books growing up. If you're not familiar, Mice fill the role of Humans in your standard medieval fantasy world, while Rats are basically Orcs. Most of the books feature an evil army of Rats laying siege to the good, peace-loving Mice at Redwall Abbey.

I recall one book opened with our protagonist, a young Mouse, raised in the abbey, getting into a fight with another child at the Abbey.
Protagonist declares that the other child is a Rat.
Other Child says "no, I'm a Mouse", and the monks of the abbey break up the fight and scold our protagonist.

This is portrayed as the classic "Adults Know Nothing" moment, as the story goes on the other child IS a Rat, and despite being raised in the abbey, betrays it to the Villain (Also a Rat) of that book. Our protagonist gets to feel vindicated that their accusation was correct.

This is about the most egregious example of Fantasy Racism I can think of. Not only was the protagonist proven correct, but the narrative implies that the Rat was inevitably going to be Evil. "Kids!
Remember to judge your peers based on their heritage!"

[Deepbluediver]

I have a lot more patience for plots of this nature like these, at least, where the "destined from birth" element is because of something DONE to make them so, rather than a random, "Oh, the stars say that Bob the Bestest will be born in 1111 years and 11 days on the 11th hour's 11th minute, and he will be the Bestest."

Even better, though, are the prophecies which are conditionals whereby the prophecied one chooses himself. In Supernatural, the first seal is broken by a particular action which somebody must meet certain alignment criteria to perform, and the prophesied "Chosen One" who can save the day is the one who breaks the first seal.

It isn't, "Bob the Bestest was born, as foretold in prophecy," but rather, "By doing this thing, you have marked yourself as the Chosen One." Arguably, the act of revealing oneself as Chosen is also what makes one qualified to be the one to solve the problem. At that point, it is about what you've done.

Ehhhh.....
I dunnoh- I kinda feel like these sorts of stories my have a main character who's good and resolute and determined and smart (sometimes) and kind and fair and all that other stuff, but it gets overshadowed because the thing that makes them special is the super-secret power source that they got from being someone else's child, or that they inherited before they could walk, or that they lucked into just by being in the write place at the write time.

Lets take something like Boku no Hero Acadmeia, which (full disclosure, I haven't actually watched) my understanding of is that the main character gets superpowers given to him by the formerly most-powerful-superhero in the world. He may still go through hell learning how to use them, but the essence of the story, the seed that kicks everything off, is still basically a gift from someone else.

And it's not just anime- though that medium provides a surfeit of examples. I've heard the Japanese really like this trope because it fits cultural expectations about your place in life being determined by birth, which is more prevalent over there than it is in the west- I can't swear how much truth there is to that.

And again, this trope by itself is NOT BAD. I've loved plenty of stories that had this as a defining characteristic. It's the all-encompassing pervasiveness of it that's starting to wear on me. I'd prefer more stories where someone could be lauded solely for the choices they make and their own accomplishments, as opposed to becoming the main character because of their birth or an accident or someone else's actions.

[pwykersotz]

Ehhhh.....
I dunnoh- I kinda feel like these sorts of stories my have a main character who's good and resolute and determined and smart (sometimes) and kind and fair and all that other stuff, but it gets overshadowed because the thing that makes them special is the super-secret power source that they got from being someone else's child, or that they inherited before they could walk, or that they lucked into just by being in the write place at the write time.

Lets take something like Boku no Hero Acadmeia, which (full disclosure, I haven't actually watched) my understanding of is that the main character gets superpowers given to him by the formerly most-powerful-superhero in the world. He may still go through hell learning how to use them, but the essence of the story, the seed that kicks everything off, is still basically a gift from someone else.

And it's not just anime- though that medium provides a surfeit of examples. I've heard the Japanese really like this trope because it fits cultural expectations about your place in life being determined by birth, which is more prevalent over there than it is in the west- I can't swear how much truth there is to that.

And again, this trope by itself is NOT BAD. I've loved plenty of stories that had this as a defining characteristic. It's the all-encompassing pervasiveness of it that's starting to wear on me. I'd prefer more stories where someone could be lauded solely for the choices they make and their own accomplishments, as opposed to becoming the main character because of their birth or an accident or someone else's actions.

...you should watch it. The moral is not what you suppose it is.

[BRC]

Ehhhh.....
I dunnoh- I kinda feel like these sorts of stories my have a main character who's good and resolute and determined and smart (sometimes) and kind and fair and all that other stuff, but it gets overshadowed because the thing that makes them special is the super-secret power source that they got from being someone else's child, or that they inherited before they could walk, or that they lucked into just by being in the write place at the write time.

Lets take something like Boku no Hero Acadmeia, which (full disclosure, I haven't actually watched) my understanding of is that the main character gets superpowers given to him by the formerly most-powerful-superhero in the world. He may still go through hell learning how to use them, but the essence of the story, the seed that kicks everything off, is still basically a gift from someone else.

And it's not just anime- though that medium provides a surfeit of examples. I've heard the Japanese really like this trope because it fits cultural expectations about your place in life being determined by birth, which is more prevalent over there than it is in the west- I can't swear how much truth there is to that.

And again, this trope by itself is NOT BAD. I've loved plenty of stories that had this as a defining characteristic. It's the all-encompassing pervasiveness of it that's starting to wear on me. I'd prefer more stories where someone could be lauded solely for the choices they make and their own accomplishments, as opposed to becoming the main character because of their birth or an accident or someone else's actions.

That's basically the gist of it.

BNHA does slightly mitigate that "Chosen One" sense in a handful of ways.

1) The protagonist isn't picked at random, or because of family connections. He Impresses the aformentioned hero with a display of heroic bravery and Intelligence (Sort of, he does a really stupid thing in the smartest way possible).
2) The story itself focuses mostly on the "Going through hell to master your powers" Part of things, where the protagonist's success is reliant more on their own skills and abilities than on the legacy they've inherited. We're told that eventually they become The World's Greatest Hero, and inheriting the superpowers certainly made that possible, but it's hardly a sure thing.
3) The Protagonist isn't the only character with very powerful abilities. While we know that this particular power has the POTENTIAL to make you The Greatest Superhero Ever, at the level the story focuses on, it's maybe in the top 5.

It's less "Chosen One Saves the World", and more "Guy who ends up saving the world gets his start by winning a scholarship".

[Blackhawk748]

You're right -- the "One Culture" thing is potentially a big problem, but it's a separate problem.

In a fantasy setting, the scale can be such that the characters and the NPCs they interact with have only ever encountered that one orcish culture -- one out of many that exist across the broader world.

I think some modern criticism here is (ironically) couched in an unconscious expectation of far-reaching travel, wide awareness, and cosmopolitan multiculturalism.

Another good point. Most fantasy im aware of takes place in land masses about the size of Europe (give or take) so the One Culture is less stupid.

Honestly im not overly bothered by it, same way im not overly bothered by a similar thing in Star Trek. Its there for narrative convenience.

Also i would like to point out that Orcs are basically Vikings and do a lot of Viking related stuff. Also, now that i think of it, i never actually see Orcs outside of combat, so all we see are their warriors doing warrior stuff.

[Max_Killjoy]

We had this exact discussion before, and it didn't get across, but I'll try to explain this concept one last time.

If 1) Orcish Culture is Evil

And 2) just about every orc (With a handful of notable exceptions) is the product of Orcish Culture.

Then assuming that every Orc you meet is Evil is perfectly reasonable within the narrative, it is ALSO the textbook definition of racial prejudice.

The objection people have is to a world where textbook racism IS perfectly reasonable.

We're not saying that the random peasants shouldn't assume that Orcs are evil in a world where 99.9% of orcs are evil. We're saying that the Writer shouldn't have written a world where 99.9% of Orcs are Evil.

Acceptable ways to do it

1) Orcs are NOT people. They're the physical embodiment of hate or something, dark sorcerers create Spawning Pits that produce fully-grown Orcish warriors. If literally every orc in the world is a bloodthirsty raider, then explain that.

2) Orcs ARE People, with everything that implies. They may have an aggressive and martial culture, but it's not inherently Evil. Orcish society exists as something more than an excuse to send bloodthirsty raiders at innocent human settlements. Orcs can be kind, cruel, noble, brave, ect. Better yet, have multiple Orcish cultures, or have multiracial cultures that include Orcs.
Sure, Orcs living in the Badlands might be raiders, but Orcs on the coast fish and sail and make wonderful Scrimshaw. Orcs in the city just want to get a decent wage for a days work.


It's also fine to have people WITHIN the narrative assume that all Orcs are Evil, because Racism is a thing, the key is to make sure your narrative doesn't agree with them.

First, as a writer, if my entire story takes place in a scale and scope that only exposes the characters to a single orcish culture out of many, and that particular orcish culture encourages its members to be brutal, merciless, domineering, etc, and take whatever they want from anyone who can't stop them, especially those non-orcs over there who are all weak and soft and inferior because they're not orcs (ironically, this is a racist orcish culture), then I do not have any reason or responsibility within that story to include some other orcs who are different. That's another story, somewhere else, and/or with a different scale and scope.

Second -- and this is where I turn some against me I'm sure -- a culture can be evil. There are evil cultures that encourage evil actions and produce evil people, in real life as much as in fiction. I cannot give IRL examples, obviously.

To me, it only treads on "racial ground" if an orc that was, say, raised by non-orcs still ended up behaving in exactly the same way as those orcs, with no mitigation at all, because orcs are "evil by blood" or some such.

[8BitNinja]

@Drow Controversy: I always saw Drow depicted as having dark gray skin or (in the case of Elder Scrolls) blue gray skin.

[BRC]

First, as a writer, if my entire story takes place in a scale and scope that only exposes the characters to a single orcish culture out of many, and that particular orcish culture encourages its members to be brutal, merciless, domineering, etc, and take whatever they want from anyone who can't stop them, especially those non-orcs over there who are all weak and soft and inferior because they're not orcs (ironically, this is a racist orcish culture), then I do not have any reason or responsibility within that story to include some other orcs who are different. That's another story, somewhere else, and/or with a different scale and scope.

Second -- and this is where I turn some against me I'm sure -- a culture can be evil. There are evil cultures that encourage evil actions and produce evil people, in real life as much as in fiction.

I already adressed your second point, so I'll focus on the first.


I'll allow it to be acceptable within the context of a short story, but the more you present the world as fully realized without putting some ink towards contradicting the idea that some people (Orcs) are inheriently evil, the more culpable you are as the author.

Worldbuilding, especially as its done by D&D monster manuals, starts with a specific role (Orcish Raiders), and then builds the entirety of orcish culture and society around producing evil raiders. Orcs are a single-purpose monoculture built around producing acceptable targets for heroes to murder. They then present this to be the culture of all orcs in the world.



Also, something can be narratively consistent, perfectly logical, and still be bad writing.

[Max_Killjoy]

I already adressed your second point, so I'll focus on the first.


I'll allow it to be acceptable within the context of a short story, but the more you present the world as fully realized without putting some ink towards contradicting the idea that some people (Orcs) are inheriently evil, the more culpable you are as the author.

Worldbuilding, especially as its done by D&D monster manuals, starts with a specific role (Orcish Raiders), and then builds the entirety of orcish culture and society around producing evil raiders. Orcs are a single-purpose monoculture built around producing acceptable targets for heroes to murder. They then present this to be the culture of all orcs in the world.



Also, something can be narratively consistent, perfectly logical, and still be bad writing.

If you addressed the second point, I missed it.

I'm not going to defend D&D worldbuilding -- it's terrible, and bass-ackwards, and laughably ridiculous. I'm not playing, using, worrying about, or basing anything I do on D&D's settings.

As for culpability... no. Just no. The writer is not responsible and cannot be held responsible for every stupid inference that this or that reader might leap to. Orcs are not humans -- whether a story takes the approach that orcs are people, or that orcs are monsters, they're not homo sapiens sapiens. Some reader taking orcs as allegory for humans isn't my concern.

[Cosi]

Evil races are only the most visible part of it, though. It is common in fantasy that people or creatures become stereotyped for no real reasons.

I think I would identify at least the following as fantasy tropes I think are racially problematic:

1. Ethnostates. The Dwarves live in a Dwarven Kingdom. The Elves live in an Elven Kingdom. The Humans live in a Human Kingdom. Not only is this lazy, it's stupid and offensive, because it attacks the argument that "race and culture are different". In the real world, they are. But if all your Orcs are in the Empire of Evil, it sure doesn't look like it works that way in game. For an example of a setting that doesn't do this, look at MTG, particularly Tarkir. Most Orcs are members of the Mardu (who do pretty traditional Orc-ish stuff). However there are plenty of Orcs who are part of the Abzan (who are much less traditionally Orc-y).

It doesn't help that the most diverse group is often the villains, who have "evil Elves", "evil Dwarves", and "evil Humans" all living and working together alongside whatever races of evil exist.

2. Subraces. This is largely specific to RPGs, and maybe D&D itself, but it is super racist because it is injecting something that is exactly what race is in the real world into the game. The relationship between High Elves and Wood Elves is exactly the same as the relationship between Polish People and French People, and the fact that it has mechanically enforced distinctions is very racist.

3. There are some things that are legitimate and explicit racist stereotypes (for example, Spelljammer has Space Gypsies).

Take, for example, dragons. Dragons hoard gold and gems, everybody knows it. Yes, but why? They have absolutely no use for them. Or did you ever saw a dragon go to the market and buy something. And yet they'll risk their lives on a regular base to hoard more (because the hoard makes them target for adventurers, if nothing else). Why? Are all dragons under a sort of compulsion to be total moron? Standard explanation is that they are arrogant, but that explains nothing. Still, for all their being smarter than genius level humans, they can't help but act like morons. If they were just arrogant and showy I'd at least expect them to find different individual ways to do it.

Don't actual humans spend a great deal of effort accumulating more wealth than they could possibly use? I don't understand how the behavior of a Dragon is all that different from the behavior of, say, Bill Gates.

If orcish culture is aggressive and brutal and merciless and based on dominance by might and intimidation, and every orc people meet behaves in this manner because that's what their culture teaches them to be like, how is racial prejudice for people who've only ever seen orcs behave that way to worry that members of the orcish species to behave that way when they encounter them in the future?

Because that is how culture works in the imaginations of racists, not how culture works in the real world. In the real world, the correlation between "born into a culture" and "remains a member of that culture as an adult" is not 100%. There are people who were raised Mormon and are now atheists, or people who were raised in communist Russia and became international businessmen. In the real world, you wouldn't have an "Orcish culture". You would have some nation that would be some percentage Orcs and some percentage other people -- just like England includes people who are not British, and not all British people live in England. There should be Humans who live among the Orcs because they enjoy killing people and hate respecting property rights, and there should be Orcs living among the Druids because they decided they wanted to meditate on the virtues of nature rather than raiding all the time.

As for culpability... no. Just no. The writer is not responsible and cannot be held responsible for every stupid inference that this or that reader might leap to. Orcs are not humans -- whether a story takes the approach that orcs are people, or that orcs are monsters, they're not homo sapiens sapiens.

So to be clear, you think that you have to be homo sapiens sapiens to experience racism? If there was another world somewhere with fish people, those fish people couldn't be racist against each other?

[BRC]

If you addressed the second point, I missed it.

This Bit

2) Orcs ARE People, with everything that implies. They may have an aggressive and martial culture, but it's not inherently Evil. Orcish society exists as something more than an excuse to send bloodthirsty raiders at innocent human settlements. Orcs can be kind, cruel, noble, brave, ect. Better yet, have multiple Orcish cultures, or have multiracial cultures that include Orcs.
Sure, Orcs living in the Badlands might be raiders, but Orcs on the coast fish and sail and make wonderful Scrimshaw. Orcs in the city just want to get a decent wage for a days work.

Basically, it's okay to have an evil culture, it's even okay to have that culture associated with a specific race, but because Race/Culture are so often conflated (especially in fantasy), it's best if you provide some evidence that the Orcs (or whatever) are evil by nurture, not Nature. The best way to do this is to establish that there are many orcs NOT from that culture who are Not evil (This works better IMO than having a single Orc Raised in Human Culture, since that only implies a single Extraordinary example, and, if we're digging into real-world allegories, the concept of "Improving" members of an ethic group by taking them from their cultures has it's own long history)

I'm not going to defend D&D worldbuilding -- it's terrible, and bass-ackwards, and laughably ridiculous. I'm not playing, using, worrying about, or basing anything I do on D&D's settings.

Sounds good.
Most of the worldbuilding I do is idle thoughts for RPG settings, so that's how I view things.

As for culpability... no. Just no. The writer is not responsible and cannot be held responsible for every stupid inference that this or that reader might leap to. Orcs are not humans -- whether a story takes the approach that orcs are people, or that orcs are monsters, they're not homo sapiens sapiens.

We had this whole discussion about the real world implications of fantastic racism but...you know what, I'm not going to argue this point. Not in a "Ugh, You'll never see reason" way, but just because, while I disagree with you, it's not a big deal. Some people like pineapples on pizza.

Like, I (clearly) have a lot to say on the subject, and I feel that writing Orcs (Always Chaotic Evil) is a lazy cop-out, but, I think the worst thing that will happen if somebody writes Orcs as Always Chaotic Evil, is that somebody else will read their story and do the same.

Unless you reach the point of Obvious Allegory, you're "Culpable" for very little besides perpetuating a trope I find annoying.

[Xuc Xac]

What are your thoughts on Deliberately Fulfilled Prophecies, somebody "Destined from Birth" because their birth/upbringing was arranged to fulfill the prophecy.

Like "The Champion will be born in 233 years", so 233 years later the ancient society kidnaps/adopts a hearty looking newborn and raises them to fulfill The Prophecy?

I've always wanted to run a campaign where the PCs are the Chosen Ones who are foretold by prophecy as the only ones who can destroy the Evil Lich King, so they go through all kinds of wild adventures to accumulate the magical doodads and fulfill the prophecy. Then when they finally confront the Lich King in his throne room, he asks "What makes you think you can destroy me?" and they flaunt their status as the Chosen Ones.

"Oh, really? All of you? You're all the 7th son of a 7th son raised by mothers with one hand?"
"Uh, no."
"Don't tell me you actually swam the Lake of Fire to retrieve the Amethyst of Eternity?"
"What? No!"
"Then which prophecy did you fulfill?"
"We slew the Five Dragons of Night and reassembled the Rod of Doom to strike you down forever and bring freedom to the land!"
"Oh! Right, right, right... I forgot about that one. How long has it been? All five of those things still alive? I stopped restocking their prisons centuries ago because nobody was taking the bait. Good for you, though! That's impressive."
"What?"
"I made up all those prophecies. Nobody wants to lead a rebellion against me if they know I'm destined to be destroyed by someone who is very specifically not them. Although that '7th son of a 7th son' prophecy really helped boost the labor pool for the first few centuries. Stupid peasants were breeding like rabbits trying to give birth to their savior. I wouldn't have been able to strip mine the Silver Mountains without that labor surplus. I could easily destroy any rebellion, of course, but it's just more efficient to avoid them altogether. Every peasant uprising that needs to be slaughtered is a big setback in time and resources. Anyway, before I destroy you utterly, I would absolutely love to hear about that whole 'Five Dragons of Night' thing. Did you find the secret passage to the treasure vault under the Red Throne? I didn't want to make it too easy to find, but obviously it's wasted if nobody finds it. Ooh, ooh! What order did you do them in? If I remember correctly, I put a map of shortcuts in a hidden room in the Onyx Temple, so the whole thing would be much easier if you did the black dragon first and found that map room..."

[Max_Killjoy]

This Bit

Basically, it's okay to have an evil culture, it's even okay to have that culture associated with a specific race, but because Race/Culture are so often conflated (especially in fantasy), it's best if you provide some evidence that the Orcs (or whatever) are evil by nurture, not Nature. The best way to do this is to establish that there are many orcs NOT from that culture who are Not evil (This works better IMO than having a single Orc Raised in Human Culture, since that only implies a single Extraordinary example, and, if we're digging into real-world allegories, the concept of "Improving" members of an ethic group by taking them from their cultures has it's own long history)

I'd rather have multiple cultures than avoid the ugly truth that evil cultures can exist.

Conflating race and culture is sadly not limited to fiction, people do it IRL far too often, and it's no limited to any one node on the political plot.

Sounds good.
Most of the worldbuilding I do is idle thoughts for RPG settings, so that's how I view things.

There's plenty of good RPG worldbuilding. I've just never seen good worldbuilding associated with published D&D (or D&D-like system) settings, particularly the big centerpiece official settings.

We had this whole discussion about the real world implications of fantastic racism but...you know what, I'm not going to argue this point. Not in a "Ugh, You'll never see reason" way, but just because, while I disagree with you, it's not a big deal. Some people like pineapples on pizza.

Like, I (clearly) have a lot to say on the subject, and I feel that writing Orcs (Always Chaotic Evil) is a lazy cop-out, but, I think the worst thing that will happen if somebody writes Orcs as Always Chaotic Evil, is that somebody else will read their story and do the same.

Unless you reach the point of Obvious Allegory, you're "Culpable" for very little besides perpetuating a trope I find annoying.

Thing is, I don't even like "Orcs are Always Evil", and I prefer "Orcs are people"... I'm just really bugged by the notion that an evil race is inescapably and inherently an ugly allegory about real life.

[Deepbluediver]

...you should watch it. The moral is not what you suppose it is.

BNHA does slightly mitigate that "Chosen One" sense in a handful of ways.
.....
It's less "Chosen One Saves the World", and more "Guy who ends up saving the world gets his start by winning a scholarship".

Maybe- I'll consider it. I'm sure it can be a perfectly entertaining story, it's just once I notice this trope in effect, it diminishes my enjoyment of whatever I'm watching or reading or playing or what-have-you.

[pwykersotz]

There's plenty of good RPG worldbuilding. I've just never seen good worldbuilding associated with published D&D (or D&D-like system) settings, particularly the big centerpiece official settings.

(Sidebar) As someone who is worldbuilding right now, what are some of your favorite examples?

[VoxRationis]

RE: Prophecies and chosen ones
One of the things about "only X can slay you" types of prophecies is that they don't necessarily stop other sorts of people from breaking your kneecaps, pummeling you unconscious, stuffing you in a crate, and carting you around until they find X who's willing to administer the coup de grace. I rather like the idea of an ancient order of prophecy or whatever just keeping the chosen one in some safehouse until their elite operatives bring an incapacitated but still very much alive Dark Lord back to them.

[Deepbluediver]

RE: Prophecies and chosen ones
One of the things about "only X can slay you" types of prophecies is that they don't necessarily stop other sorts of people from breaking your kneecaps, pummeling you unconscious, stuffing you in a crate, and carting you around until they find X who's willing to administer the coup de grace. I rather like the idea of an ancient order of prophecy or whatever just keeping the chosen one in some safehouse until their elite operatives bring an incapacitated but still very much alive Dark Lord back to them.

Spoiler: spoilers

Show

I'm pretty sure that [spoiler alert] at least one faction attempted that in the Wheel of Time series. [another spoiler alert] It went poorly.

Prophecy in general is just another trope I don't like, because it raises serious questions about the nature of free-will and whatnot. I do my best to ignore it.

[Max_Killjoy]

(Sidebar) As someone who is worldbuilding right now, what are some of your favorite examples?

I'll think about that -- don't let me forget if I don't get back to you on it, I'm a bit of a scatterbrain.

Prophecy in general is just another trope I don't like, because it raises serious questions about the nature of free-will and whatnot. I do my best to ignore it.

I'm pretty much dead-set against notions of fate and destiny, so things like oracles and prophesies really need to walk a tightrope to avoid my ire. Prophesies need to be cryptic, double-edged, and "fulfillable" in multiple ways -- or to express something that will happen because of cause and effect from past events, rather than fate. Example, say there's a prophesy that when certain astronomical signs come to pass, all of creation will be in jeopardy -- I'm OK with that if what's actually going on is that the deity who created the seals that protect creation from the forces of unmaking, was betrayed by her follow deities and imprisoned or banished, in the long ago, and has been whispering across the void to those that can hear to warn that the seals will only last a set amount of time if she's not around to maintain them.

[VoxRationis]

Spoiler: spoilers

Show

I'm pretty sure that [spoiler alert] at least one faction attempted that in the Wheel of Time series. [another spoiler alert] It went poorly.

Prophecy in general is just another trope I don't like, because it raises serious questions about the nature of free-will and whatnot. I do my best to ignore it.

Spoiler

Show

Well, of course it did. If it succeeded, presumably there wouldn't be so many books. But that's another trope I hate: when the good plan fails simply because it's too easy and anticlimactic, rather than because it has any good reason to fail without a deus ex machina.

[Satinavian]

I'm pretty much dead-set against notions of fate and destiny, so things like oracles and prophesies really need to walk a tightrope to avoid my ire. Prophesies need to be cryptic, double-edged, and "fulfillable" in multiple ways -- or to express something that will happen because of cause and effect from past events, rather than fate. Example, say there's a prophesy that when certain astronomical signs come to pass, all of creation will be in jeopardy -- I'm OK with that if what's actually going on is that the deity who created the seals that protect creation from the forces of unmaking, was betrayed by her follow deities and imprisoned or banished, in the long ago, and has been whispering across the void to those that can hear to warn that the seals will only last a set amount of time if she's not around to maintain them.

Prophecy is basically time travel as seen from the other side.

If one is careful, it can be done. But all of the same tricks and problems and solutions exist.

[Astofel]

Ooh, I just thought of another trope I hate. I really get annoyed when the Big Bad is defeated by 'sealing them away'. To me that just feels like a lazy solution. I'd rather the protags got their stuff together and worked out a way to kill the dude for good, because everyone knows when you seal something away forever it just means that it'll be a problem for some other group of heroes a few centuries down the line. But hey, not our problem right? The day is saved, so who cares about the future?

Probably the only time I'd accept this trope is if the protagonists explicitly created a temporary seal to buy time so they could figure out a way to kill the Big Bad for good. After all, if it can't be killed permanently ever, what's the point in fighting it? It has infinite time, so it'll win eventually.

[Xuc Xac]

After all, if it can't be killed permanently ever, what's the point in fighting it? It has infinite time, so it'll win eventually.

Nuclear waste will outlive humanity, but we still bury it so it doesn't kill us early.

[Deepbluediver]

Prophecy is basically time travel as seen from the other side.

Oh, that reminds me: TIME TRAVEL

I've read exactly one series that I liked it in, and all the rest just either ignore the potential for setting-ruining (aka game-breaking) consequences and/or simply handwave all the issues over paradox and such.

[Lord Raziere]

my experience with time travel is that generally one of three things happen:

1. you don't think about it too much and just enjoy the story (Chrono Trigger)

2. you embrace the time travel insanity in all its weird glory and throw consistent logic out the window for enjoyable-ness (Doctor Who)

3. you go super consistent with it and soon everything becomes complicated to understand. (Homestuck)

[Satinavian]

Personally i like time travel, but i hate how nearly every fiction does it. It is mostly used as some lazy plot device without considering any of the implications. One of the other major ways to handle it is trying to use it as source of confusion and trying to make it as self contradictory and convoluted as possible.

There are so many ways to have time travel make sense but they all take at least some effort and are a little boring because they are not full of paradoxes/can resolve continuity problems.

[Sinewmire]

RE: Prophecies and chosen ones
One of the things about "only X can slay you" types of prophecies is that they don't necessarily stop other sorts of people from breaking your kneecaps, pummeling you unconscious, stuffing you in a crate, and carting you around until they find X who's willing to administer the coup de grace.

This cliché gets skewered in Half The World by Joe Abercrombie.

"The prophecy said that no man can kill me... not that you would."

and yeah, there's the this gem in Carpe Jugulem "Maybe I can't kill you... but I can make you wish that I could"

[exelsisxax]

I'd rather have multiple cultures than avoid the ugly truth that evil cultures can exist.

There's plenty of good RPG worldbuilding. I've just never seen good worldbuilding associated with published D&D (or D&D-like system) settings, particularly the big centerpiece official settings.

So you've never really looked into Eberron?

[Max_Killjoy]

So you've never really looked into Eberron?

I have an Eberron setting book here in my "study".

Just another world that fails to follow through on the implications of the rules.

Of course, I doubt many people would want to play in a setting that actually did.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Just another world that fails to follow through on the implications of the rules.

Of course, I doubt many people would want to play in a setting that actually did.

The bold section (in my experience) holds generally, for all settings and all playable rule systems.

That's something I've come to accept generally--"failing to follow through on the implications of the rules" is the normal for all game settings (as opposed to settings for other media) and systems. I have yet to find a game system that can handle a serious look "under the covers" (a serious analysis of the consequences) and still remain playable.

Once I realized that I'd have to chose (on a sliding scale) between playability and "following through," I decided that as long as there's a plausible fig-leaf explanation for things being the way they are I'm fine with it. The more a setting or system claims to be "following through," the lower my ability to suspend disbelief when it (inevitably) fails to do so.

That's all personal opinion, not some kind of objective truth.

[Max_Killjoy]

The bold section (in my experience) holds generally, for all settings and all playable rule systems.

That's something I've come to accept generally--"failing to follow through on the implications of the rules" is the normal for all game settings (as opposed to settings for other media) and systems. I have yet to find a game system that can handle a serious look "under the covers" (a serious analysis of the consequences) and still remain playable.

Once I realized that I'd have to chose (on a sliding scale) between playability and "following through," I decided that as long as there's a plausible fig-leaf explanation for things being the way they are I'm fine with it. The more a setting or system claims to be "following through," the lower my ability to suspend disbelief when it (inevitably) fails to do so.

That's all personal opinion, not some kind of objective truth.

This isn't about physics, or perfect modelling.

When I say "fails to follow through", I don't mean there are little disconnects or odd edge cases that you find if you deliberately go looking. I don't mean that the rules fail to clear the bar of being a robust physics model on the level of modern IRL science.

I mean that the rules and the setting are utterly dissonant.