I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
well, yes and no... it's possible to magic your way to a resolution in a story that is wholly unsatisfying
I think what it is, is the ability to reproduce/recreate that system or extrapolate how things WOULD work, etc., is an impulse that is linked to the same kind of obsessive fanning that leads to like... the kind of fanfiction it's easy to be condescending about? I dunno, I'm kinda losing the thread
And just got told that I can't see my niece and nephews anymore. I feel like I should be more upset by this but really I'm just surprised that it took this long for her to do that. I came out to her a months ago.
: (
+2
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
@simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Or something?
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
And just got told that I can't see my niece and nephews anymore. I feel like I should be more upset by this but really I'm just surprised that it took this long for her to do that. I came out to her a months ago.
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It can be, but so can bad writing. You don't need to explain magic like a Tolkien college tutorial with a text book, but you can have clearly defined rules.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
Knowing how the work works and is being consistent isn't that bad a complaint. Suspension of disbelief doesn't mean nothing has to make sense, and how a huge impact magic or technology works would effect world building. It doesn't have to be perfect, just enough to make people not notice it by analyzing it for five seconds or watch/reading the media. All you need is the basics and you're good. This applies to technology like Iron Man's suit.
Like, where mechanical inconsistencies are problems is when they rob something from the story: If the bad guy's magic suddenly doesn't work because it gives the hero an easy out, that's bad writing. But if the bad guy's magic suddenly doesn't work because it's the just deserts of his incredible hubris, that's good writing. In either case the world is mechanically inconsistent, but the mechanical inconsistency is never what mattered; the meaning behind the story is what mattered.
0
Options
simonwolfi can feel a differencetoday, a differenceRegistered Userregular
Yesterday I showed my girlfriend the Battlestar Galactica boardgame because I've been mentioning how much I wanted to play it again, and since I've got an informal-but-potential gaming group I figured it'd be worth looking at again
She takes a look at the characters and goes, "I want to be this guy, Gaius Baltar? He seems the coolest."
I then suggested that we watch the first part of the miniseries so she could get a feel for the show and its setting
the best part was her watching and going "wait what is my character doing, is... is he a bad guy???"
you just got baltar'd
+3
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It can be, but so can bad writing. You don't need to explain magic like a Tolkien college tutorial with a text book, but you can have clearly defined rules.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
Knowing how the work works and is being consistent isn't that bad a complaint. Suspension of disbelief doesn't mean nothing has to make sense, and how a huge impact magic or technology works would effect world building. It doesn't have to be perfect, just enough to make people not notice it by analyzing it for five seconds or watch/reading the media. All you need is the basics and you're good. This applies to technology like Iron Man's suit.
Really. The Book of Years, Peter Morwood. Go read. Four books (Horse Lord, Demon Lord, Dragon Lord, War Lord), available as two volumes called The Book of Years. Great low fantasy where magic is rare and mistrusted and you had better respect the dragon. Set in a kind of medieval European setting, with the protagonist coming from a strictly feudal country that has a pretty strong flavor of feudal Japan with warriors honorbound to their clan, etc.
0
Options
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
I like ritualistic magic systems like the Dresden Files. Where you can make simple charms and stuff for later use, but anything big takes time, and blood.
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
like
if you establish that in your GLORIOUS ANIME UNIVRSE there is a rule that your magic uses equivalent exchange and always takes something of equivalent value and then spin a story around what this means
then the mechanic is important
and you, as a reader, would feel fkin cheated if wizards starting walking around doing ridiculous shit with no exchange because it would be just as stupid as any other violation of the internal rules of the story
that does not mean you need to qualify how many joules of energy it takes to cast a fireball
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
I'm can't figure out what exactly your first sentence means.
But it is jarring when an author establishes some rule and then forgets about it.
kedinik on
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It can be, but so can bad writing. You don't need to explain magic like a Tolkien college tutorial with a text book, but you can have clearly defined rules.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
Knowing how the work works and is being consistent isn't that bad a complaint. Suspension of disbelief doesn't mean nothing has to make sense, and how a huge impact magic or technology works would effect world building. It doesn't have to be perfect, just enough to make people not notice it by analyzing it for five seconds or watch/reading the media. All you need is the basics and you're good. This applies to technology like Iron Man's suit.
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Or something?
Miyazaki Hayao, in the documentary about Studio Ghibli called 'The Kingdom of Dreams and Madness', said (in the midst of obsessively figuring out how best to draw the Zero for this key frame), "Otaku obsess and catalogue, but they never learn. No, I'm not an otaku."
I think magic works best when it's arcane and... not really unknown but, eldritch. Not really able to be explained. (Hence the RPG comment.)
Like, there should be an element of unpredictability to it. It shouldn't be automated or expected or reliable... it should be something which has untold costs and unexpected repercussions.
I don't think treating magic as a science is inherently a bad idea. A good author doesn't need something to safeguard against them misusing magic as a tool, but providing a sense of logic behind magic can be flavourful and add to the world they're creating. It all depends on the story and the atmosphere the author's going for.
That said, I love the way GRRM handled magic in ASoIaF - at least in the earlier books. In the world he created, most people don't believe in magic, and even those that do don't understand it, so that when we see magic happen in that universe it's like holy shit, that just happened, I wonder what other legends are real? It leaves the reader questioning the world of the story and creates a sense of endless possibility. Turning around and explaining the mechanics behind the phenomenon destroys the allure.
internal logic is fine-- it's more like trading in magic points for a spell is too gamified.
I agree with/like exploring that notion that magic is perceived to be not real until it is... but then cosmic horror is basically my life's work, so
Giving a story or series a game-like magic system is pretty lame, yeah.
If you like fantasy though, the Malazan: Book of the Fallen series was based on characters from the author's GURPS campaign, and it's amazing. He didn't include any of the game shit when he wrote it. The first book is a slog but the second is amazing, and the momentum carries.
I am a big fan of psychological horror and confusing the line between dreams and reality. That's the butter on my toast. Sometimes the key to that or cosmic horror, as Lovecraft realized, is in what you choose to omit.
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
It's fairly important for just basic writing. If you just do whatever the fuck you feel like at any particular moment people are going to get bored of your story. For tension, there needs to be the illusion that it's a actual world as opposed to the whims of the author.
cB557 on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
YoshisummonsYou have to let the dead vote, otherwise you'd just kill people you disagree with!Registered Userregular
Have magic with mechanics and consistency if it doesn't interfere with making a good story.
Just because x-wings and y-wings are depicted as being more durable than tie fighters doesn't mean when you want to show how much of a badass pilot vader is you destroy the tension and pacing by accurately depicting his ship shooting a hail of lasers to take town one x-wing.
I think magic works best when it's arcane and... not really unknown but, eldritch. Not really able to be explained. (Hence the RPG comment.)
Like, there should be an element of unpredictability to it. It shouldn't be automated or expected or reliable... it should be something which has untold costs and unexpected repercussions.
I don't think treating magic as a science is inherently a bad idea. A good author doesn't need something to safeguard against them misusing magic as a tool, but providing a sense of logic behind magic can be flavourful and add to the world they're creating. It all depends on the story and the atmosphere the author's going for.
That said, I love the way GRRM handled magic in ASoIaF - at least in the earlier books. In the world he created, most people don't believe in magic, and even those that do don't understand it, so that when we see magic happen in that universe it's like holy shit, that just happened, I wonder what other legends are real? It leaves the reader questioning the world of the story and creates a sense of endless possibility. Turning around and explaining the mechanics behind the phenomenon destroys the allure.
internal logic is fine-- it's more like trading in magic points for a spell is too gamified.
I agree with/like exploring that notion that magic is perceived to be not real until it is... but then cosmic horror is basically my life's work, so
Giving a story or series a game-like magic system is pretty lame, yeah.
If you like fantasy though, the Malazan: Book of the Fallen series was based on characters from the author's GURPS campaign, and it's amazing. He didn't include any of the game shit when he wrote it. The first book is a slog but the second is amazing, and the momentum carries.
I am a big fan of psychological horror and confusing the line between dreams and reality. That's the butter on my toast. Sometimes the key to that or cosmic horror, as Lovecraft realized, is in what you choose to omit.
Did you know that Malazan was based on a DnD campaign? So was the Riftwar cycle.
Harry Dresden on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
@simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Or something?
Miyazaki Hayao, in the documentary about Studio Ghibli called 'The Kingdom of Dreams and Madness', said (in the midst of obsessively figuring out how best to draw the Zero for this key frame), "Otaku obsess and catalogue, but they never learn. No, I'm not an otaku."
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Exhibit A: TVTropes
*writes this in his notebook of examples*
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
+2
Options
simonwolfi can feel a differencetoday, a differenceRegistered Userregular
I think that the absolute worst trait of nerds is the desire to question authorial intent by way of mechanics.
It's the dumbest complaint you can possibly have with a story. Like "does this character's decision make sense based on their motivations, personality, and emotional state"; that's important. But "does the outcome of this plot event make sense based on previously defined rules for fake made-up magic and technology" is aggressively unimportant.
simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Or something?
Miyazaki Hayao, in the documentary about Studio Ghibli called 'The Kingdom of Dreams and Madness', said (in the midst of obsessively figuring out how best to draw the Zero for this key frame), "Otaku obsess and catalogue, but they never learn. No, I'm not an otaku."
or something similar but I'd need to rewatch it
Is that on Netflix?
No idea! I saw it in a theatre, since the local indie cinema is doing a Studio Ghibli celebration of sorts
Leave it as vague and undefined as possible, or don't use it at all.
I have strong feelings about vagueness but I don't really want to get into them right now
I also have strong feelings about vagueness; which is to say, everything that does not matter should be vague.
I really want to see more RPGs embrace an attitude of "we ain't explainin' shit"
Does our hero have a backstory? Cool, let it arise through the course of the story and let us figure it out! Don't give us an encyclopedia and expect us to read every entry to understand wtf is going on in your world, just use those entries as an authorial bible and inform our experiences with it! If you're gonna have magic just explain our little corner of magic, you don't have to explain how ALL magic works.
On the flip side, don't pull a lost and just use the not-explaining-things as an excuse to keep on ass-pulling, make earning understanding of the world feel like an actual accomplishment. Few things draw me into a fictional world more than having to puzzle out its secret logic.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Posts
He did not! He let loose some mumbojumbo about believing in yourself!
well, yes and no... it's possible to magic your way to a resolution in a story that is wholly unsatisfying
I think what it is, is the ability to reproduce/recreate that system or extrapolate how things WOULD work, etc., is an impulse that is linked to the same kind of obsessive fanning that leads to like... the kind of fanfiction it's easy to be condescending about? I dunno, I'm kinda losing the thread
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union
*Well I did tell you to quit reading, didn't I?
: (
Only if it costs the character nothing and never causes its own complications.
It is. P.GOOD.
they should exist to serve a purpose
chekhovs explanation
chekhov's fireball
@simonwolf what was that quote you busted out a couple weeks ago?
Nerds catalogue, but do not understand?
Or something?
that's fucked
Sorry Cinders
It can be, but so can bad writing. You don't need to explain magic like a Tolkien college tutorial with a text book, but you can have clearly defined rules.
Knowing how the work works and is being consistent isn't that bad a complaint. Suspension of disbelief doesn't mean nothing has to make sense, and how a huge impact magic or technology works would effect world building. It doesn't have to be perfect, just enough to make people not notice it by analyzing it for five seconds or watch/reading the media. All you need is the basics and you're good. This applies to technology like Iron Man's suit.
She takes a look at the characters and goes, "I want to be this guy, Gaius Baltar? He seems the coolest."
I then suggested that we watch the first part of the miniseries so she could get a feel for the show and its setting
the best part was her watching and going "wait what is my character doing, is... is he a bad guy???"
you just got baltar'd
but magic isn't technology
unless it is
if you establish that in your GLORIOUS ANIME UNIVRSE there is a rule that your magic uses equivalent exchange and always takes something of equivalent value and then spin a story around what this means
then the mechanic is important
and you, as a reader, would feel fkin cheated if wizards starting walking around doing ridiculous shit with no exchange because it would be just as stupid as any other violation of the internal rules of the story
that does not mean you need to qualify how many joules of energy it takes to cast a fireball
When you're a Jedi this is important to know.
I'm can't figure out what exactly your first sentence means.
But it is jarring when an author establishes some rule and then forgets about it.
culture is technology
Bigby's Mansplaining Exposition
That's half of anime.
Melf's Acid Dong
Miyazaki Hayao, in the documentary about Studio Ghibli called 'The Kingdom of Dreams and Madness', said (in the midst of obsessively figuring out how best to draw the Zero for this key frame), "Otaku obsess and catalogue, but they never learn. No, I'm not an otaku."
or something similar but I'd need to rewatch it
Giving a story or series a game-like magic system is pretty lame, yeah.
If you like fantasy though, the Malazan: Book of the Fallen series was based on characters from the author's GURPS campaign, and it's amazing. He didn't include any of the game shit when he wrote it. The first book is a slog but the second is amazing, and the momentum carries.
I am a big fan of psychological horror and confusing the line between dreams and reality. That's the butter on my toast. Sometimes the key to that or cosmic horror, as Lovecraft realized, is in what you choose to omit.
directly related to some stuff i did
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/oct/26/william-burroughs-drugs-cure-inspires-alzheimers-researcher?CMP=share_btn_link#comments
Just because x-wings and y-wings are depicted as being more durable than tie fighters doesn't mean when you want to show how much of a badass pilot vader is you destroy the tension and pacing by accurately depicting his ship shooting a hail of lasers to take town one x-wing.
Did you know that Malazan was based on a DnD campaign? So was the Riftwar cycle.
Exhibit A: TVTropes
Both are okay!
Is that on Netflix?
Leomund's Tiny Echo Chamber
*writes this in his notebook of examples*
No idea! I saw it in a theatre, since the local indie cinema is doing a Studio Ghibli celebration of sorts
I really want to see more RPGs embrace an attitude of "we ain't explainin' shit"
Does our hero have a backstory? Cool, let it arise through the course of the story and let us figure it out! Don't give us an encyclopedia and expect us to read every entry to understand wtf is going on in your world, just use those entries as an authorial bible and inform our experiences with it! If you're gonna have magic just explain our little corner of magic, you don't have to explain how ALL magic works.
On the flip side, don't pull a lost and just use the not-explaining-things as an excuse to keep on ass-pulling, make earning understanding of the world feel like an actual accomplishment. Few things draw me into a fictional world more than having to puzzle out its secret logic.