We have moved to new forum software and posting here is closed!

PLEASE BOOKMARK THE NEW FORUMS

	Subtopic	Started By	Posts
	Archive through Mar 19, 2005 Last Post: Mar 25, 2005, 05:00 am		20

Posted By: Spiderkeg Mar 21, 2005 - 04:37 pm

I'm not poking fun here, or trying to bash the dreams and intentions of authors. Just merely pointing out a possible plot hole that often times an author overlooks.

Dark Knight, I'm sure there are plenty of people who know what a "Pinto" and "Jian" are. If you feel the term is obscure enough that you could get away with using them, then go for it. If I thought I could get away with calling a four wheel motorized vehicle a Pinto or a brown and white horse a Pinto, then I'd go for it. I'd have to realize though that others would clearly siee the distinction between this "fantasy" created object and one that exists on Earth. Readers might wander if there was some kind of correlation I was trying to make.

Heh, not trying to stir up any hornets in the nest. I'm not sure if this change in topic is a heated one. I just wanted to point out something that I have spotted. Everything fantasy, if it has no relation to Earth, should be seperated from Earth. Try creating a bird type creature that is brown and white, then call it a Pinto.

Posted By: Magus Mar 21, 2005 - 05:11 pm

Well, mine eventually does cross over, but that's down the line and I'm not even sure if Bell, the character with the Jian, will be around for it. I'm undecided what will happen to him at the moment.

Posted By: aldan Mar 23, 2005 - 11:32 pm

One way in which many authors try to use Earth words in non-Earth (fantasy) settings, if they put any thought into it at all (which only some seem to do), is to say that their "novel" is a translation of a historical fictional story. Mr. Brust does this with his novels, but he is doing a 'Morgenstern' with it, in that he is often making fun, so to speak, of writers/writing/publishing as he's writing his fiction, and he makes many asides making stabs at both people who consistently try to treat historical fiction as if it were true history (poking holes in the story because there are minor diversions from what is thought to be the true history), and of those other authors who feel that historical fiction isn't true fiction writing, because the writer doesn't have to create the world or the actions taking place in the story (he rants against those people as well, saying that historical fiction requires much more work than those people realize, and that it requires an IMMENSE amount of creativity as well as knowledge to create good historical fiction - but of course his novels are NOT historical, but are true fantasy).
In any case, the main problem is that if you describe a sword that looks like a katana and acts like a katana and is made like a katana but you call it something else, you will lose the immersion. One way to avoid this is to avoid detailed descriptions of the weapons and just use the description of how it's balanced and decorated (or not) and if it's a named weapon (I wonder if Mr Foreman would call his blade "George"?) and just use a basic description of its length and shape (like long and straight, single edged and very plain, with no engravings or precious metals inlaid, and its balanced to work best in two hands but can be wielded in one by a strong person, and call it a long sword, or even a bastard sword). People will supply their own mental picture of the weapon if you do this, and you may not even NEED to name it long or bastard, but just call it a sword or even a blade.

One thing that I've noticed is that many people try to be TOO descriptive, trying to tell the story and describe the world in all its details, rather than letting the story tell itself and letting the world be described through the eyes and reactions of the characters in said world.

Posted By: Magus Mar 24, 2005 - 05:36 pm

Good points all around says I.

Posted By: Spiderkeg Mar 25, 2005 - 05:00 am

Hmm, so what did we learn here?

Posted By: Talon Sinnah Mar 28, 2005 - 09:22 am

*raises his right hand a jumps up and down like a child*

I know, I know. Aldan is all knowing. And leave some descritption out so readers can use their imagination. After all isn't that what fantasy is about?

Posted By: Magus Mar 28, 2005 - 11:56 am

But still don't be afraid to be detailed and thorough in descriptions, for without them the reader is lost in an incomprehensable world.

That and I should learn how to spell better... but that's for another lesson.

Posted By: Spiderkeg Mar 29, 2005 - 05:45 am

To not let the influences of living on Earth overtake our creation of a fantasy world that isn't Earth.

Posted By: Village Idiot Mar 29, 2005 - 10:58 am

I think, from a reader's perspective, if you use the name 'katana', then the reader will assume that it came from some sort of society that shadows japanese culture. The expectation there is that they will somewhat expect that culture to be introduced at some point and time in the story. Otherwise they will be left wondering why you chose 'katana' instead of 'sword'.

In response to the first post, I had a quick question. If the primary weapon is a gun, then isn't a 'melee' weapon at a rather large disadvantage?

On another note, be careful with your mechanical detail on swords - the more you introduce, the more a reader is going to expect you to know. If your knowledge of swords is like mine (that is to say 'the sharp end goes in the bad guy'), then I would recommend you keep it simple. Every weapon is designed differently for a reason - usually related to style and function. "Why does this guy use an epee instead of a rapier like everyone else?" If you don't know, that guy SHOULD be using a rapier like everyone else.

Posted By: aldan Mar 29, 2005 - 11:16 pm

The response I have for the question regarding guns vs swords is that if the story is set in a time similar to the time period shortly after the invention of guns, when each shot was loaded individually and then fired and then the barrel had to be cleaned before loading a new shot... which meant that firearms were not effective enough to use much. Bows were much faster, and even a crossbow could usually be used more quickly. One other problem with early firearms was the fact that they didn't even come close to firing even 75% of the time when the trigger was pulled, and sometimes it would basically blow up in the wielder's face. Keeping these things in mind should help...

Posted By: Spiderkeg Mar 30, 2005 - 10:54 am

My biggest problem with stories/games that introduce a world in which swords and guns both exist and are equally in use is... why keep swords?

Unless you're a trained warrior/ninja and are effectively a deadly weapon with a sword. Generally, a gun or other projectile really has the advantage. At some point, swords just become useless in combat. Even a pistol offers a better chance to trump someone who is merely using a sword.

Posted By: aldan Mar 30, 2005 - 08:15 pm

About the only real reason I can think of (other than my previously mentioned one, of course!) is if there was a cultural requirement for swords. Let's say that duelling has been split into two types - firearms and swords, and it's the person who is challenged who is allowed the opportunity to choose the type of weapon. This would be a method to cut down on the number of duels, yet still allow the culturally necessary actions to take place when needed...

Posted By: Spiderkeg Mar 31, 2005 - 05:30 am

There comes a time however when a society has to put aside their ideology of using just swords, and begin utilizing the new form of warfare, or else be erased from existence all together. The Japanese hated guns, the idea of using them, the lack of honor associated with them, and yet they eventually relented and began using guns. It was only after massive battles and slaughters, at the hands of gun wielding groups, raiding parties, and armies, that the Japanese society began to change.

Posted By: Forever Zero Apr 02, 2005 - 11:09 am

I know a bunch about melee weaponry, but I'm lazy right now so I won't list all the stuff I know.

For a good reference, check the weapons section of this website:

www.battle.net/diablo2exp

Which is a big giant guide for Diablo II, a game I was into a while back and still play on occasion.

Just click on "Item" and there will be various weapon sections to look at. All of the content on this website is (c)Blizzard Entertainment. The weapons they use though for the most part actually exist, with the exception of high level swords like "Colossus Sword" and stuff. The base weapons should all be real, they use stuff like Bastard Sword, Saber, Claymore, Falcions, Spears, all kinds of cool stuff. Even obscure oriental weapons like Katars.