Lands of Red and Gold, Act II

[Kaiphranos]

Nice Calvin & Hobbes references--I might not have caught the one without the other.

 

[aldonius]

And at last a straightforward explanation for the Noodle Incident!

 

[PlotVitalNPC]

What..what is the Naturale profession in Wizards and Warriors?

 

[Jared]

Nice one Jared.

I like the Hulk Trolls. Nice touch. That and the "don't feed the trolls". Wise advice in any universe.

Thanks. I had fun including Easter eggs / allusions / references / bad AH puns in this instalment. There's rather a lot of them in there, some much more obscure than others.

Nice Calvin & Hobbes references--I might not have caught the one without the other.

Two-for-one deals available this weekend- limit of three per customer per visit!

And at last a straightforward explanation for the Noodle Incident!

But of course- some things would only be explained in an alternate universe...

What..what is the Naturale profession in Wizards and Warriors?

Very roughly, an analogue to a ranger character class, though there's some overlap with druids too.

Wizards and Warriors has a lot of parod^H^H^H^H^H reinterpretations of more familiar role-playing games like that.

 

[Rich Rostrom]

Thoughts?

The Intellipedia article is authentically peppered with grammar errors and sentence fragments. (Len Goodman voice)Well done.(/(Len Goodman voice)

P.S. In the changed circumstances of the world of Lands of Red and Gold, the equivalent of modern fantasy fiction has developed without any analogue to JRR Tolkien. Even historically, of course, Tolkien was not the only fantasy author of his era; there was also Mary Shelley, Lord Dunsany, Fritz Leiber, Ray Bradbury, HP Lovecraft, Robert E Howard, CS Lewis and Ursula K Le Guin, to name but a few. But no-one else popularised the genre in quite the way that Tolkien did, and so his distinctive influence was marked across much of fantasy literature during the second half of the twentieth century. (And even, to a lesser degree, today.)

Here, without an analogue to Tolkien, ‘romance’ literature developed quite differently. Rather than one overwhelmingly influential author in fantasy, a wider variety of authors, settings and themes were present and explored through the somewhat broader romance category.

This has led to a wide variety of changes. For instance, romance does not have the same dominant, quasi-medieval setting as its preferred background for invented worlds.

I don't think that Tolkien is solely or even predominantly responsible for this aspect of modern fantasy. There was considerable attraction to the Middle Ages as the backdrop for fantasy long before Tolkien. One of the major figures of early 20th century fantasy was James Branch Cabell, whose work was mostly pseudo-medieval (though satirical rather than dramatic). E. R. Eddison, though less important, was another.

Indeed the medieval fascination goes back to Le Morte d'Arthur, which is pre-contact-with-Aururia.

 

[Jared]

I don't think that Tolkien is solely or even predominantly responsible for this aspect of modern fantasy. There was considerable attraction to the Middle Ages as the backdrop for fantasy long before Tolkien. One of the major figures of early 20th century fantasy was James Branch Cabell, whose work was mostly pseudo-medieval (though satirical rather than dramatic). E. R. Eddison, though less important, was another.

Indeed the medieval fascination goes back to Le Morte d'Arthur, which is pre-contact-with-Aururia.

Certainly Tolkien wasn't the only author writing pseudo-medieval fantasy, and the absence of an *Tolkien doesn't mean there's no medieval-type settings. However, I do think that the runaway popularity of Tolkien made the quasi-medieval setting the default for much (though certainly not all) of fantasy, particularly high fantasy.

Without such a figure, there would probably be a broader range of settings. In an ATL where a couple (though not all) of the pioneers draw on more classical Greco-Roman themes, then I'd expect them to become more common. Certainly not universal - TTL will still have a decent number of pseudo-medieval settings - but the single most common setting.

 

[mojojojo]

Nice Calvin & Hobbes references--I might not have caught the one without the other.

Which one was that?

 

[mojojojo]

Vorns are a reptilian (vaguely lizard-like / snake-like) race. Shulin are a cat-like humanoid race.

Are those two based on mythological creatures?

 

[Archangel]

Nice (mythological -themed) interlude, Jared!

 

[mojojojo]

[4] Satyrs are ultimately derived from the classical Greek mythological creatures, but the W & W conception of them is most heavily influenced by how they were presented in Francis Arnold’s Novatlantis trilogy: Father, Son, and Holy Goat [11]. In that setting, Arnold largely conflated the Greek satyrs (part-horse creatures) with the Roman fauns (part-goat creatures), as well as adding some reinterpretations of his own.

Are they still seen as all male or have they been given females like dwarves have in out TL's fantasy literature?

 

[Jared]

Which one was that?

Two of Calvin's alter egos are Spaceman Spiff and Tracer Bullet.

This is part of the broader problem with Easter Eggs: if you make them too subtle no-one notices, if you make them too obvious there's no point. Always have to try to find a happy medium.

Although I'm surprised that there weren't calls for a public lynching over two of the very bad AH puns in the "cognates" section.

Are those two based on mythological creatures?

No, they're both invented AH creatures. The vorns draw a little from the Naga from Hindu (and Buddhist, Sikh and Jain) tradition, though they're not too close a parallel.

Shulin are actually creatures from a kind of AH/fantasy crossover which I have vague plans of writing someday, but it's way down the list of priorities at the moment (non-fiction, then DoD, then everything else). I liked the idea of them actually being written within the LoRaGverse.

Nice (mythological -themed) interlude, Jared!

Merci.

Are they still seen as all male or have they been given females like dwarves have in out TL's fantasy literature?

Stayresses have been added to the mythological repertoire. In many ways, satyrs fill a similar niche in W&W to what elves do in OTL RPGs.

 

[mojojojo]

This has led to a wide variety of changes. For instance, romance does not have the same dominant, quasi-medieval setting as its preferred background for invented worlds. In so far as there is a predominant background, it is more influenced by classical Greco-Roman mythology rather than medieval society or Tolkien-style Germanic mythology. So in romance there are more legions, theatres, republics and democratic city-states, fewer knights and castles, less conceptualisation of monarchy as an ideal state of government, more satyrs, dryads, nymphs and centaurs, and fewer elves, dwarfs, goblins and trolls.

reminds me a bit of Thomas Burnett Swann's work

 

[mojojojo]

he mythological repertoire. In many ways, satyrs fill a similar niche in W&W to what elves do in OTL RPGs.

Do the Bucca fill the role of dwarves?

 

[Jared]

reminds me a bit of Thomas Burnett Swann's work

Quite a bit in common, yes. The (relatively) stronger classical emphasis would fit in well. In particular, the gradual decline of the classical mythological races over time would be one theme that would slot in easily to the ATL romance canon.

Do the Bucca fill the role of dwarves?

Somewhere between dwarfs and gnomes, to use the classical AD&D roles. Although more the mischievous side of gnomes than the engineering side. There's a bit of overlap because vorns are also engineers/ craftsmen.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Now I'm curious with what's going to happen in Denmark later on, if that author was a refugee from it.

Awesome update, old chap.

I assume that the Cornish Bucca is similar to the Puck/Pucca.

 

[Jared]

Now I'm curious with what's going to happen in Denmark later on, if that author was a refugee from it.

The nineteenth century... is full of events. Although that's an era which won't be explored until Act III.

I assume that the Cornish Bucca is similar to the Puck/Pucca.

Similar, although from my (limited) reading, it sounds like the Cornish version is more likely to be found underground than the Pucca. It was the connection with mine spirits that spread overseas with Cornish miners ITTL, until it was later incorporated into the literary styles of romance.

 

[mojojojo]

[4] Satyrs are ultimately derived from the classical Greek mythological creatures, but the W & W conception of them is most heavily influenced by how they were presented in Francis Arnold’s Novatlantis trilogy: Father, Son, and Holy Goat [11]. In that setting, Arnold largely conflated the Greek satyrs (part-horse creatures) with the Roman fauns (part-goat creatures), as well as adding some reinterpretations of his own..

So aside from goat-kin and horse-kin what other types of satyrs are there?

 

[Jared]

So aside from goat-kin and horse-kin what other types of satyrs are there?

The three main kinds are horse-kin, goat-kin and deer-kin.

Horse-kin have the lower half of a horse, including a long horse tail, and horse-like long ears. They're based on classical Greek satyrs.

Goat-kin have the lower half of a goat, with a short goat tail, and small horns on their forehead. They're based on classical Roman fauns.

Deer-kin have the lower half of a deer (surprise!), with a mid-length tail (like a red deer), and dear ears (if female) or long antlers (if male). They're not based on anything classical, but on the same misinterpretation that fantasy artists made in OTL - they drew some "fauns" with antlers after confusing them with "fawns". This got integrated into the idea of satyrs by later romance writers.

There may be other kind of satyrs too, but I haven't gone into the details.

 

[PlotVitalNPC]

The three main kinds are horse-kin, goat-kin and deer-kin.

Horse-kin have the lower half of a horse, including a long horse tail, and horse-like long ears. They're based on classical Greek satyrs.

Goat-kin have the lower half of a goat, with a short goat tail, and small horns on their forehead. They're based on classical Roman fauns.

Deer-kin have the lower half of a deer (surprise!), with a mid-length tail (like a red deer), and dear ears (if female) or long antlers (if male). They're not based on anything classical, but on the same misinterpretation that fantasy artists made in OTL - they drew some "fauns" with antlers after confusing them with "fawns". This got integrated into the idea of satyrs by later romance writers.

There may be other kind of satyrs too, but I haven't gone into the details.

I wish to posit that before deer kin were integrated into the idea of satyrs fully, someone created and published an illustration which mixed features of the normal two types and the deer-kin, initially untitled but widely dubbed 'The Satyr's Satire'.

To be specific, the lower body was that of a goat-kin, the ears were of a horse-kin, and in spite of being female they were given a male deer-kin's antlers.

 

[mojojojo]

The three main kinds are horse-kin, goat-kin and deer-kin.

Horse-kin have the lower half of a horse, including a long horse tail, and horse-like long ears. They're based on classical Greek satyrs.

Goat-kin have the lower half of a goat, with a short goat tail, and small horns on their forehead. They're based on classical Roman fauns.

Deer-kin have the lower half of a deer (surprise!), with a mid-length tail (like a red deer), and dear ears (if female) or long antlers (if male). They're not based on anything classical, but on the same misinterpretation that fantasy artists made in OTL - they drew some "fauns" with antlers after confusing them with "fawns". This got integrated into the idea of satyrs by later romance writers.

There may be other kind of satyrs too, but I haven't gone into the details.

Going with the theme of humanoids with with tails,legs,ears,and or horns of different beasts
I wonder if Romance authors in this TL would have pronghorn satyrs in North America, vicuna satyrs in South America and roo satyrs in Australia.