Assumptions

Well, I've gotten some of the scripting work for Casa done and sent, so I figured I'd take a break from the monotony to write a bit about the assumptions of my world. A year or so back, I realized my world was becoming too closely linked with D&D. Their cosmologies and histories were blurring together. So I decided to make some changes. Ironically, many of the changes I made ended up finding their way into D&D 4E. Still, there's some things that differentiate my setting and the generic 4E D&D setting. So let's compare the assumptions of the 4E game world versus those of my world.

In 4E...

• the world is more fantastic. This is a huge step forward. Previous editions of D&D felt the need to have every one of their lands and cultures be an analogue of some real-life culture. This was especially prevalent in the Forgotten Realms, where Oriental Adventures (Asia) and Matzica (Yucatan) were straight out of real life, and as such did not fit with the rest of the setting. Some of the cultures, such as the Ffolk of the Moonshae Isles, fit with the setting but were still so close to real life that it often broke the fantastical portion. Go with what makes sense in your setting, not what happened in reality. Shadows & Silver, like 4E will often be inspired by real life, but it will also have things for which there is no historical analog.
• the world is ancient. In Shadows & Silver, countless empires have risen and fallen, and many of them have been lost to history. Not even the immortal fae remember all of history. Those whose mythology tells them how the world or even their race was created may be correct, or the tale may have been so twisted in the countless of thousands of years of retelling that it is completely false. Because the world is so ancient, there is no end to the mysteries to be uncovered.
• the world is mysterious. Even in the scientific awakening of modernity, man knows only so much about his world. True, his empires have been vast and his explorers have gone far and wide. But danger and disaster keep most folks at home, leaving what is beyond the border to the adventurous. Most folks know some about what lies beyond their home, but only those who have been there know anything beyond myth.
• monsters exist all over. In this, Shadows & Silver differs from D&D. Monsters are thick in my world, though they have been driven from the lands and thoughts of men. They lurk in the mysterious reaches of the world, and in those old, haunted ruins everyone's always afraid to go into. In civilized lands, though, monsters are rare, and people who believe in them are rarer.
• creatures need a place in the world. Everything that exists has an origin, and fantastical races and creatures are no exception. Many creatures have their origins in the original creation, or evolution, or even magical experiments. None exist without a reason.
• adventurers are exceptional. While not everyone needs to play a great adventurer, those who do will find they stand high above the common folk. Sure, the world has its heroes, but killing an orc in battle is extraordinary. Killing a dragon is enough to make a man a legend for decades.
• magic is not everyday, but it is natural. This I disagree with most of all. In Shadows & Silver, magic is nearly a thing of the past. Those few who do believe in it are judged to be either crazy or uneducated. Wizards do exist, but they carefully hide their activities for their own safety. In less civilized areas, mages can display their power much more openly.
• "good" and "evil" mean more. 4E makes alignment actually mean something. People don't fight against evil because they're good, they are good because they fight against evil. Evil is more than just bad thoughts. Because of this, very few people are aligned to good or evil. Judging someone's alignment is no longer possible with spells; you've got to judge based on that person's actions. This flows excellently with Shadows & Silver. The shades of grey concept is easier if good and evil are not so cut and dried. Being good is not about being nice, and being evil is not about being mean.
• the gods are remote. In Shadows & Silver, the Archons still grant power to clerics, but their direct involvement is a thing of ancient times. Some suspect that the Archons are dead and that the clerics are actually tapping into forbidden arcane sources. Whatever the case, man must rely on his own deeds rather than divine intervention.
• there is one sun and one moon. Shadows & Silver does not need some fantastic astronomy or absurd setting to make it interesting. The interest comes from the stories told within it.
• there are no forced race relations. I disagree with this somewhat. Sure, just because you're playing an orc doesn't mean you have to be enemies with elves and men. But racism runs high throughout much of Shadows & Silver, especially with those races perceived to be monsters.
• death matters differently. This is something I've hated in all previous versions of D&D. Coming back from the dead was simply a spell and a bunch of diamonds. In Shadows & Silver, returning from the dead comes at an enormous cost (but I won't reveal what it is yet ;) ).
• there are fantastic locations. Too often have I seen PCs adventure in places that are just not that interesting. The places you go should be as exciting as the fights. They should have effects on the battles and on the adventure in general. Shadows & Silver will have a lot of this.
• there's less evil fighting evil. This I'm mostly indifferent about. Since the world is not good versus evil, it doesn't really matter if evil fights evil. The world isn't cut and dried. What is important, though, is that the antagonists present a suitable challenge to the protagonists.

Well, that's a fair overview of some of the assumptions of the world. We'll do a little more scripting and building before the next post. See you then!

Influences, Part 2

Last time I posted a fairly lengthy observation on how to incorporate influences from other works into your setting, but I ran out of time to write out some of the influences I want to incorporate into my setting. Let's do that now.

One of the basic elements I want in my setting is that of a gritty environment in which realism is practically forced on its denizens. The reason for this is that it causes the reader to retreat into idealism as a natural reaction: when he sees tragedy, he will immediately wonder why the characters simply treat it as the way of life. For the game world, it also ensures that players will have a goal: make things better (if not for others, then for themselves). People in this world may want life to get better, but no one expects it to. Part of grit is the realization that things can always get worse.

Now what works do I know of that show this sort of setting? The first that comes to mind is the game The Witcher, based on a series of novels by Andrzej Sapkowski. While I haven't been able to play it yet (damn that bugged system requirements check!), it shows a world similar to the one I'd like to model. The primary theme is that there is no black and white morality, that everything exists in shades of grey. This is a large leap from most fantasy, and it's something I've already stated that I would like to portray. One of the primary ways in which The Witcher shows the shades of grey in the world is with the deceitfulness of appearances. Just because someone looks monstrous doesn't mean he is evil, and just because he is beautiful doesn't mean he is good. People have realistic desires, goals, and behaviors that can't be quantified with a simple good/evil alignment. Another way in which The Witcher supports this theme is through the pragmatic approach to life Geralt must embrace. The world is a hard place, full of suffering and fear, and he does what he must to stay alive; sometimes that means hurting others to get what he needs.

I can apply both of these concepts to my setting. Sure, characters in the setting (or players in the game world) may choose to look at the world as one of absolutes, but that doesn't mean it's how things are. The world is gritty, and you've got to fight for your place in it because the universe isn't going to spontaneously reward you for longsuffering. Trying to swing the balance of the world in favor of good or evil yields unexpected consequences, because the world isn't run by forces of good or evil. The human desire to compartmentalize everything that goes on will lead to frustration and disillusionment once characters realize the world only exists in shades of grey. Whether the reader (or player) also becomes disillusioned is up to him.

Another work that has influenced me a lot is the anime series Fullmetal Alchemist. The mantra of the series is the law of Equivalent Exchange:

"Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange."

But equivalency goes beyond just a law of alchemy. It's something that applies to everything in the world. If you want something, you've got to give something up. It's a dark message throughout the series; happiness comes at a terrible cost. Towards the end, the Elric brothers realize that the law doesn't seem to always be satisfied. Many people suffer loss with no reward, pain with no pleasure, sorrow with no happiness. Ultimately, though, their idealism wins out:

"The world isn't perfect, and the law is incomplete. Equivalent Exchange doesn't encompass everything that goes on here. But I still choose to believe in its principle: that all things do come at a price. That there's an ebb, and a flow, a cycle. That the pain we went through did have a reward and that anyone who's determined and perseveres will get something of value in return, even if it's not what they expected."

I like this concept because it represents a question that always comes up when people get discouraged. People often ask, "Why do bad things happen to good people?" or "Why am I still poor when I've worked so hard?" Belief, whether conscious or no, in a law of Equivalent Exchange always leaves people discouraged when they don't get the results they wished for. I like that after all the Elric brothers come through in the series, they still arrive at an idealistic conclusion. It's what I'd like to see happen with the characters in my stories.

So how have these themes influenced my setting? Well, I know that the world is a dark and gritty place where you have to struggle to survive. The problem is, you're not always rewarded for your efforts - at least, not in the way you expect. Those who keep hope, though, may see a higher purpose if they look long and hard enough, and they'll realize that all their suffering was not in vain. Of course, that happy ending is reserved for those who persevere in spite of all the horrid things that happen, those who maintain their idealism in the face of discouragement.

Next time we'll look at some more influences, specifically those that affect the style rather than theme.

Influences, Part 1

It is said that imitation is the highest form of flattery. In writing, you often want to pay homage to those who have created works you love. Figuring out how not to plagiarize can be tricky, though, and if you're not careful, you'll end up with a derivative work.

Take the following book concepts, for instance. In the first, a young farm boy who was raised by his uncle finds that he is destined to revive an ancient warrior caste that once brought peace and justice to all lands. The caste was betrayed, as he finds out, by his own father, a fellow warrior, at the behest of one who has now been made emperor. It's up to the farm boy turned hero to right the wrongs and overcome his father's failure. In the second, a fellowship of humans, elves, and dwarves has to keep an evil overlord from capturing an artifact that they miraculously stole from him. In the third, a world is protected by dragon-riding knights who have telepathic links to their mounts.

Know the stories? If you guessed Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, and the Dragonriders of Pern... you're wrong. It's one story called Eragon, written by Christopher Paolini, a boy who apparently has no concept of original storylines. Remarkably, it has succeeded in the marketplace, and has even had a movie made from it. So if it was so successful, why should anyone try to come up with an original idea if they can model Paolini and rehash all the story elements they like best?

The answer is simple. These stories have nothing to say. They only pander to readers that care nothing about message and want only a diversion for a few hours while they read. If you want to simply provide an escape, go with the tried and true. But if you want people to remember what you said, you'd better be saying something important, something people have never heard before, or that they have never heard in the way you want to say it.

How, then, do you avoid Paolini's mistake? One key is to focus on themes rather than plots. Remember, a theme is a message you are trying to communicate; a plot is a conflict that is resolved in the work. Themes are inherently more important than plots because they deal with conflicts that go beyond the storyline of the work. For example, Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest deals with the conflict of independent man versus the "Combine," socialist conformists. The work goes far beyond whether or not McMurphy can overcome Nurse Ratched; it asks the readers if they can overcome society's pressures. One need not rely on the plot and stylistic devices of Kesey's work to write a similar work. The key lies in the theme.

Decide what themes beyond your primary message you want to address. What works express these themes? How do they do it? How well do they do it? (If you are having trouble deciding on the themes, think of some works that you treasure. What themes are these works expressing that cause you to love them so much? The Lord of the Rings deals with corruption and redemption in its subplot of Gollum and Frodo's interaction. In Fullmetal Alchemist, the Elric brothers are frequently confronted with the cost of power. Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea deals with the battle against the self.) List the differences and similarities in the ways these works handle your chosen themes. What methods resonate the most in your mind? How can you improve on such thematic devices or suit them to your work? How can you make them work toward a unified story?

This is a lot to think about, and I've barely even begun to sift through the massive number of works I want to emulate. Next time we'll follow this method I've laid out and work through some of the stories I want to influence my writing.

Purpose

Why make Shadows & Silver? Beyond the stock statement that I feel the need to create, well... I have something I want to say to the world. It's something that can be said in simple words, but it's much more effective to say it with a story. In The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien showed us that after evil comes nothing is ever the same. Saying those words communicates the idea, but not as effectively as watching Frodo and Sam sacrifice everything only to find they didn't save the Shire after all.

In writing Shadows & Silver, I want to deal with many themes. But the overall statement I want to make is that, by forsaking childlike idealism, men lead sorrowful and hopeless lives. There are plenty of applications of that basic concept that can easily be turned into story elements: war and peace, magic and science, liberty and tyranny, faith and doubt, corruption and redemption... the list goes on. My stories will highlight these conflicts. In every case, though, I want to show the tragic state of humanity. The world will revolve around this theme.