For at least the past decade one can see the terms ‘High’ and ‘Low’ Fantasy tossed around by different people, and now tenfold (a hundredfold?) with the internet. Just doing a Google search gives multiple (sometimes the opposite) definitions for the terms.

I’d like to hear from this community regarding two questions: 1) The oldest use of the terms (an etymological answer), and 2) the most common use of the terms (a practical answer).

I have a picture of what I love most about fantasy RPing (which I learned to name ‘High Fantasy’), but now am uncertain which term gives which connotation to the RPing community.

Hi Daniel,

I've participated in a discussion about what defines "High" and "Low" fantasy in another forum. The consenus was that we all disagreed. The terms have little definnitive use because neither means the same thing to a large number of role-players.

Instead of trying to boil your game proposal down to one descriptive term, I think you'd do better to define the elements more - Are the character's abilities of human or superhuman scale? Are the magics world-changing or minor? Do the character's influence the fate of the world, or just their own?

These kind of specifications will not only help communicate what your game is about, but will also help you consider what sets of rules will best produce the kind of experience you want.

Well I found this:

High fantasy
[Categories: Fantasy]

High fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy fiction that is set in invented or parallel worlds. These stories are serious in tone, often epic in scope, dealing with themes of grand struggle against supernatural evil.

Other typical characteristics of high fantasy include fantastical races (such elves and dwarves, magic, wizards, invented languages, coming-of-age themes, and multi-volume narratives.

In some high fantasy, a contemporary, "real-world" character is placed in the invented world. Purists might not consider this to be "true" high fantasy.

Heya,

I agree with Contracycle's definitions. That's what I think of when I see those terms tossed around. However, I think Alan offers the best advise when describing your game. Use definitive discriptors of your game to tell us what it's like, not buzz words. :)

Peace,

-Troy

Ron Edwards argues in this essay that "high fantasy" tends to mean, NOT "fantasy in the manner of Tolkein," but "fantasy in the manner of D&D."

Hello,

I strongly suggest that a "what the terms mean to me" survey will be counter-productive and not at all consistent with the general goal of discourse at this site. I think Alan's post and suggestions are extremely wise.

To clarify Sydney's point about my essay, I am referring to gamer culture's common use of many terms like high fantasy, Tolkien fantasy, and similar to refer to D&D fantasy (a collective pastiche). This does not mean that any of those terms actually do or should refer to that pastiche, which as a topic is beyond any one person's scope.

Daniel, I'd like for this to be a useful thread, so maybe you can help us out by talking about what it's for. Are you thinking of using these terms in your game text or as a promotional device? Are you working with a fairly distinct definition in your own mind, and seeking confirmation? Or what?

Best,
Ron

The terms ‘high’ and ‘low’ fantasy show up in my introduction. I, of course, define the terms myself, but I posed the question here to align my definitions with those of the RPing community. I have seen multiple definitions that are aligned with mine and multiple others that clash.

After I define the terms, I have to keep referring back to them. I am searching for terms that do not offend the constructs of the readers. Some can accept new definitions when offered, but others get really annoyed at ("what I think is") a ‘fish’ being called a ‘duck’. Maybe I am concerned over a tiny minority?

I'm passing on the #1 piece of advice about writing, especially for the RPG indus/indies-try that I personally have ever heard: write for you, not for anyone else. In this context, that means that if you have a particular conception of these terms, define them how you mean them and how you're going to use them, then use them that way. People who are into what you're into will be fine, and people who aren't into what you're into - well, the chances of them picking up the book in the first place is rather low anyway, right?

I hope thats helpful.

Hi Daniel,

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what you say, the community is such that someone, somewhere, will take issue with your game for any reason. You'll probably encounter a person who will send you an email once a week about how System X is better than yours because it uses a different font type in its layout...

Don't worry about it. Worry about making a solid game, and clearly explaining what it is about.

Chris

Ser gut. Thanks all.

Domhnall wrote: I’d like to hear from this community regarding two questions: 1) The oldest use of the terms (an etymological answer), and 2) the most common use of the terms (a practical answer).

very intersting.
Are there any references to this subject (books or links)?

thanks.

Personally I think any distinction between the two nowadays is trite and irrelevant, seeing as how everyone and their mother is copying Tolkien and they all know it. Really, you can TRY calling your elves "Kelethiels" or "Remaleliels" or "Fair People" or "Emaleleielieleliels" or whatever else suits your stupid fancy, and you can TRY to convince your audience that the writing on the stone arch looks kinda runic but in a "weird way", and you can TRY to disguise the orcs by making them lizards or lupine or such, and you can TRY to tell the rest of us that you listen to Loreena McKennit and Enya and all that other Celtic crap during your games because the "lilting Faery tones resonate deep within your cradle of womyn-hood" or some bullshit like that, but face it, all you bitches is just suckin' off of Tolkien's teat.

Well I'm tired of it. More indie games need to focus on fantasy settings NOT phagocitized by the d20 Plague. High fantasy, low fantasy, medium-rare fantasy, Fantasy Island, who cares as long as it's GOOD, or at the very least, new?

I'm trying to think of all the production RPG settings that are classically fantastical without having to ride in Tolkien's wake.

Conan (as mentioned earlier)
Amber (great setting, horrible game)
Elric/Stormbringer (just barely unTolkien)
Pendragon (protoTolkien)
Dying Earth (one of the sexiest settings EVAR)
L5R (Not Tolkien just because he never visited Japan)
Glorantha

I know I'm missing a few, but you gotta admit that's a pretty short list, which must become much, MUCH longer. Who's with me?

Hi TGIM (What's your actual name, by the way?),

I'm not sure how much it relates to the High/Low Fantasy split (which I have trouble getting my head around, personally), but based on some of the fantasy settings you mention, it seems you'd get a kick out of Sorcerer & Sword. It's all about capturing the "sword & sorcery" feel of Conan, Elric, and the Dying Earth.

Anybody else have any thoughts on where sword & sorcery tales fall? I suppose it's "low fantasy" if the term refers to moral ambiguity, but I'm not sure.

I kinda have to admit that last post was pretty abrasive. Sorry. I just had to get it out of my system since I'm so sick and tired of the same retreaded garbage.

As far as "high" or "low" fantasy is concerned, I've never been a big fan of specific genre distinctions, because that inevitably leads to an unnatural lust for convention. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. Make your game as good as any genre can possibly be.

The God of the Machine wrote: I kinda have to admit that last post was pretty abrasive. Sorry. I just had to get it out of my system since I'm so sick and tired of the same retreaded garbage.

The God of the Machine wrote: Personally I think any distinction between the two nowadays is trite and irrelevant, seeing as how everyone and their mother is copying Tolkien and they all know it.

The God of the Machine wrote: Well I'm tired of it. More indie games need to focus on fantasy settings NOT phagocitized by the d20 Plague. High fantasy, low fantasy, medium-rare fantasy, Fantasy Island, who cares as long as it's GOOD, or at the very least, new?

I'm trying to think of all the production RPG settings that are classically fantastical without having to ride in Tolkien's wake.

Conan (as mentioned earlier)
Amber (great setting, horrible game)
Elric/Stormbringer (just barely unTolkien)
Pendragon (protoTolkien)
Dying Earth (one of the sexiest settings EVAR)
L5R (Not Tolkien just because he never visited Japan)
Glorantha

I know I'm missing a few, but you gotta admit that's a pretty short list, which must become much, MUCH longer. Who's with me?

I'll leave any debate concerning Tolkienesque gaming to the side.

Concerning the terms, however, how distracting is it to readers for an author to title his paradigm "High" or "Low" fantasy while providing a definition of that term when some readers have different/opposite definitions of their own?

But, it sounds like it's unavoidable. Even here, say, on the issue of 'Realism' vs 'Plausibility', the rub is evidenced. What I have learned to call 'Realism' is in contrast to what others (from their respective experiences) must label 'Plausibility'. And letting go of terms is hard.

Domhnall wrote: Concerning the terms, however, how distracting is it to readers for an author to title his paradigm "High" or "Low" fantasy while providing a definition of that term when some readers have different/opposite definitions of their own?