Experiences Whats making you angry today? Rp pet peeves

[nerdy tangents]

Lol or to make it simpler :

Harry Potter = realistic setting
Lord of the Rings = fantasy setting
Marvel Comics = realistic setting
Game of Thrones = fantasy setting

(( there are probably other types of fantasy I just can’t think of main stream examples)

** these are also obviously fandoms but if you want to figure out if an original world is fantasy vs. realistic **

 

[Onmyoji]

Harry Potter could still be considered Fantasy tbh given how important magic is in that world. I'd say it's a borderline case between realistic and fantasy lol

 

[nerdy tangents]

Harry Potter could still be considered Fantasy tbh given how important magic is in that world. I'd say it's a borderline case between realistic and fantasy lol

It’s realistic because it takes place in a real world using real world politics and history. It’s all through allegory but it wouldn’t make a lick of sense if you put Hogwarts in say Middle Earth or whatever.

It is grounded too much in the real world setting even if there is magic.

 

[Uxie]

It’s realistic because it takes place in a real world using real world politics and history. It’s all through allegory but it wouldn’t make a lick of sense if you put Hogwarts in say Middle Earth or whatever.

It is grounded too much in the real world setting even if there is magic.

apologies if i am getting this wrong, but isn't harry potter consisted low fantasy, while stuff like lotr is within the realm of high fantasy instead??

is there some aspect of harry potter (beyond it being set in the real world) that takes it out of low fantasy as a category? or do you not consider low fantasy to be fantasy :"") i don't discuss these genres often, so i'm asking out of pure curiosity! (*'ω'*)

 

[sevyn]

apologies if i am getting this wrong, but isn't harry potter consisted low fantasy, while stuff like lotr is within the realm of high fantasy instead??

is there some aspect of harry potter (beyond it being set in the real world) that takes it out of low fantasy as a category? or do you not consider low fantasy to be fantasy :"") i don't discuss these genres often, so i'm asking out of pure curiosity! (*'ω'*)

you weren’t asking me, but you’re right. harry potter is generally considered low fantasy since it’s set in the real world, even though the wizarding world also exists, which could be considered a high fantasy setting. like a high fantasy setting within a low fantasy world? i guess it’s… somewhere on the line between the two, like alice in wonderland or the chronicles of narnia.

 

[Murdergurl]

People who seem to use pretty much all the filters when posting an advert.

The amount that have say 'realistic', and 'zombie' for example.
Oh so zombies are realistic now?!

It makes it hard to find roleplays I like as I'm generally into modern realistic slice of life type. 'm not into fantasy so want to filter it out but loads of people seem to have both fantasy and realistic tags which means I'm scrolling through pages and pages of fantasy roleplays to actually find a realistic roleplay

In my opinion, Zombies fall more into science fiction if they are written as coming from some kind of bloodborne disease or something. Now, if the zombies are the result of magic (like necromancy), then its fantasy. If it's pseudo-science for the explanation, it's sci-fi.

apologies if i am getting this wrong, but isn't harry potter consisted low fantasy, while stuff like lotr is within the realm of high fantasy instead??

is there some aspect of harry potter (beyond it being set in the real world) that takes it out of low fantasy as a category? or do you not consider low fantasy to be fantasy :"") i don't discuss these genres often, so i'm asking out of pure curiosity! (*'ω'*)

LotR is basically the definition of High Fantasy. Tolkien pretty much set the standard. People don't realize how many of their fantasy tropes and archetypes are based on those books.

Harry Potter is... well, I'm no Harry Potter expert (I'm not even a fan). But it seems to me that Harry Potter is modern, low fantasy. But anything with magic and wizards and fantastical creatures that defy physics should not be considered "realistic". They definitely have the "pew pew" magic that Onmyoji mentioned.

Low Fantasy just means magical BS in the "real world", with the magic being uncommon. Whereas High Fantasy is set in its own fantasy setting (ex. Middle Earth). But as far as the inclusion of the [REALISTIC] tag... I've honestly never really understood exactly what that label was meant to construe

 

[Wandering Fae]

Isn't Harry Potter more historical fiction or historical fantasy or would it be considered modern fantasy?

 

[Melpomene]

Isn't Harry Potter more historical fiction or historical fantasy or would it be considered modern fantasy?

I think Harry Potter is supposed to be set closer to the modern day so... Urban Fantasy I think is the word for it.

 

[sevyn]

Isn't Harry Potter more historical fiction or historical fantasy or would it be considered modern fantasy?

i don’t think so? it’s set in like 1991 to 1998 which is pretty modern.

I think Harry Potter is supposed to be set closer to the modern day so... Urban Fantasy I think is the word for it.

definitely not. with a few brief exceptions, harry potter doesn’t take place in an urban setting, so it’s not urban fantasy. you’re looking for contemporary fantasy.

 

[Melpomene]

definitely not. with a few brief exceptions, harry potter doesn’t take place in an urban setting, so it’s not urban fantasy. you’re looking for contemporary fantasy.

Oh thanks. Everyone I ever talked to just called all modern fantasy urban fantasy so I assumed that was just the agreed on genre name. I don't read or consume any type of modern fantasy so I never really never got to know the way the genres were broken down lol.

 

[Murdergurl]

Isn't Harry Potter more historical fiction or historical fantasy or would it be considered modern fantasy?

speaking of Historical... when exactly was the setting supposed to be? Like, I never so much as saw a cell phone or a kid using the internet. Typically when a setting is claimant to being "historical", they strive to accurately portray the times. Like, Stranger Things for instance, everything is an 80's throwback.

i don’t think so? it’s set in like 1991 to 1998 which is pretty modern.

When does it exemplify that? Like I said, I'm not a big fan or anything. So forgive me if I missed something blaringly obvious. I just always felt that the setting was super ambiguous.

 

[sevyn]

speaking of Historical... when exactly was the setting supposed to be? Like, I never so much as saw a cell phone or a kid using the internet. Typically when a setting is claimant to being "historical", they strive to accurately portray the times. Like, Stranger Things for instance, everything is an 80's throwback.

in harry potter, cell phones, computers, internet and other modern technological advancements exist but aren’t used because:
1. magic interferes with it
2. in the wizard’s society, most muggle things aren’t commonly used as a way to clearly differentiate muggle society and wizard society

as for how i know it’s set in the 90s: harry’s born in 1980, kids attend hogwarts at age 11, so he starts in 1991. then there’s 7 years, so ends in 1998 — the epilogue is somewhere in the 2000s though.

 

[nerdy tangents]

I think Harry Potter is supposed to be set closer to the modern day so... Urban Fantasy I think is the word for it.

Nailed it, but Urban fantasy is considered realistic by the site.

Actually I think a better example might be comic books.

Realistic setting (on the site) is just “set on earth, not in futuristic setting, may or may not have magic.”

So superheroes are almost always realistic. Does that mean it’s possible to have laser vision IrL? No. It means they are usually set on a version of earth that isn’t in the future.

Fantasy (on the site) just means “set in a made up location, not futuristic setting, may or may not have magic.”

So if I wrote a story about pink cats living on an island that’s fantasy. The cats do not have to have magical powers. There does not need to be magical elements on the island. It just had to be a setting I made up from scratch that is not linked to IRL earth.

 

[sevyn]

Fantasy just means “set in a made up location, not futuristic setting, may or may not have magic.”

that’s very much Not what fantasy is [high] fantasy stories usually are in made up places but fantasy as a genre isn’t dependent on location.

magic and supernatural (or otherwise fantastical) elements are core characteristics in fantasy. high fantasy might be able to be defined as just “a piece of media with no linkage to the real world” but that ignores the distinction between various other types of fantasy— high, low, urban, contemporary, et cetera. what they all have in common is supernatural elements, not setting. like, for example: the movie your name takes place in the fictional town of itomori. does that make it inherently fantasy? no! what makes it fantasy is the body switching, the supernatural nature of the musubi concept, intertwined souls, stuff like that. without these aspects, it’d just be like a coming of age film in a made up town, not a fantasy.

twilight takes place in the real town of forks, washington, the main distinction between their world and ours is the existence of vampires and shapeshifters. but since it’s in a real place, does that mean it’s not fantasy… ? no. if you wrote a story about pink cats living on an island, it would probably be loosely considered fantasy more so for the aspect of the cats being pink, which would be unusual, something that isn’t naturally possible in our world. i guess that’d be called mundane fantasy though. if you wrote a story about normal-looking cats living on an island, that’s just… a story about cats on an island.

 

[nerdy tangents]

sevyn i meant that is how this site defines fantasy. Not how the literary genre is defined.

Mostly because this site is using broad categories for prefixes. You are meant to use the filters to clarify what the individual themes of your roleplay are.

It’s why fantasy is the prefix but you can put sub genres of superheroes, magical, realistic, etc. onto the search.

 

[Uxie]

sevyn i meant that is how this site defines fantasy. Not how the literary genre is defined.

Mostly because this site is using broad categories for prefixes. You are meant to use the filters to clarify what the individual themes of your roleplay are.

It’s why fantasy is the prefix but you can put sub genres of superheroes, magical, realistic, etc. onto the search.

i see! that said, if i am understanding the prefixes post made by kaerri correctly,, low fantasy (regardless of where it is set) would still get the fantasy prefix, no???

also i’m aware that we’re derailing the thread a little but i would like to clear this up so i don’t tag my rps wrongly

edit: link was broken!

 

[nerdy tangents]

i see! that said, if i am understanding the prefixes post made by kaerri correctly,, low fantasy (regardless of where it is set) would still get the fantasy prefix, no???

also i’m aware that we’re derailing the thread a little but i would like to clear this up so i don’t tag my rps wrongly

They used to have the definitions listed. But yeah the definition was specifically about where it was set geographically and not so much supernatural elements.

Superheroes are a great litmus test. No one is gonna assume superheroes are fantasy.

But if you count the existence of superpowers as realistic then the existence of magic alone can’t be disqualified.

So therefore it has to be something else. It is the world itself being entirely made up and not grounded on earth.

So say your world has vampires and werewolves. If they live on earth then it’s still realistic.

If they live on some made up planet with flying islands and pink rain then it’s fantasy. Because they aren’t on earth.

 

[sevyn]

i know i talk so much shit on here, but there is so much shit to be talked??? so here i am. talking shit.

i hate this like… hyper competent role that people push their female characters into. this also applies to the few women in any media that has mostly men tbh, like natasha romanoff as the only female avenger or katara in atla.

idk if that makes sense? but like, when people are like “yep, this character is the only one with functioning braincells, yep! 110% the mother figure, she is the only responsible and controlled one here, the only one capable of being rational and keeping her little [grown ass men] boys out of trouble <3 boys will be boys” or whatever. it is literally! so! boring!! where r the bad bitches? where’s the funny girlies? i need more unhinged women, i love women who are both very smart and capable but also… idiot vibes, love u. also love women who are just completely funny & wild & don’t have to have the fattest brain of all time, bimbos rise it is Such an endearing trait for male characters to have, mfs go insane for it, but i rarely see women characters, ocs or otherwise, with the same. LET HER PARTICIPATE IN THE SHENANIGANS!!! INITIATE THEM, EVEN!!! if we r going to be doing illegal stuff then dont make the female characters be the buzzkill, ihy

 

[Melpomene]

i know i talk so much shit on here, but there is so much shit to be talked??? so here i am. talking shit.

i hate this like… hyper competent role that people push their female characters into. this also applies to the few women in any media that has mostly men tbh, like natasha romanoff as the only female avenger or katara in atla.

idk if that makes sense? but like, when people are like “yep, this character is the only one with functioning braincells, yep! 110% the mother figure, she is the only responsible and controlled one here, the only one capable of being rationale and keeping her little [grown ass men] boys out of trouble <3 boys will be boys” or whatever. it is literally! so! boring!! where r the bad bitches? where’s the funny girlies? i need more unhinged women, i love women who are both very smart and capable but also… idiot vibes, love u. also love women who are just completely funny & wild & don’t have to have the fattest brain of all time, bimbos rise it is Such an endearing trait for male characters to have, mfs go insane for it, but i rarely see women characters, ocs or otherwise, with the same. LET HER PARTICIPATE IN THE SHENANIGANS!!! INITIATE THEM, EVEN!!! if we r going to be doing illegal stuff then dont make the female characters be the buzzkill, ihy

Ok but for real.

Why do all women have to be hyper competent all the time? Why do they always have to be the responsible ones telling the boys how to do their own damn jobs? Like damn yes I love women kicking ass but why do they always have to be hyper-competent while they do it? I wanna see female Sokka's and shit. It just is what we deserve damn it.

 

[sevyn]

Ok but for real.

Why do all women have to be hyper competent all the time? Why do they always have to be the responsible ones telling the boys how to do their own damn jobs? Like damn yes I love women kicking ass but why do they always have to be hyper-competent while they do it? I wanna see female Sokka's and shit. It just is what we deserve damn it.

i have to give atla credit. i think the katara thing i referenced is more the work of the fandom, cause she's pretty wild at times, but y'know who's such a good example? toph. matches sokka's energy so well. azula's lil crew is everything to me. suki's also GIVING!!! what'd she say? "i am a warrior, but i'm a girl too." LOVE YOU BABYGIRLLLL!

a lot of media definitely has a "one or the other" type of mentality when it comes to powerful women, whether they're fighters or scientific minds or whatever else. you can't be that and also have a lighthearted, funny or... god forbid, feminine side! the best they'll give us for badass women who are also feminine, is a femme fatale, in which her femininity is usually a weapon and not just like... a fucking style preference, Please. everybody say thank you atla for the well-rounded female characters!

mmm that is a slightly different discussion of powerful female characters and their relationship with femininity, but in some ways i do think it rolls back to my original point of female characters not being able to be less than perfect, or at least has some parallels.

 

[nerdy tangents]

sevyn the answer is misogyny, because you have to pit women against each other. So you create a “not like other girls” narrative when your most masculine women are the ones who are rewarded and your feminine women aren’t.

The reason you see more variety in men is because of literally the “Everyman” trope. The idea that the male perspective is default and so of course you need variety. Because all men being the same is boring. All women the same is idk biological fact based on the womb or whatever.

Heavy sarcasm but that is literally why that exits in literature. It’s just misogyny. I try not to get too angry at roleplayers cuz their usually just repeating what they see on TV. And this is a hobby so they don’t have to do in-depth literary analysis. But fuck the people who get paid for a living who recreate that reductive bullshit.”

 

[nerdy tangents]

Added to above it doesn’t bother me in roleplays because I can also change the narrative. Like “I’m excuse me but your character isn’t pulling their weight. So if they could maybe help push the plot forward a bit that would be great.”

I mean I would be nicer about it but I also would just ask them to make their guy less incompetent.

 

[sevyn]

the answer is misogyny because you have to pit women against each other. So you create a “not like other girls” narrative when your most masculine women are the one rewarded and your feminine women aren’t.

The reason you see more variety in men is because of literally the “Everyman” trope. The idea that the male perspective is default and so of course you need variety. Because all men being the same is boring. All women the same is idk biological fact based on the womb or whatever.

(Heavy sarcasm but that is literally why that exits in literature. It’s just misogyny. I try not to get too angry at roleplayers cuz their usually just repeating what they see on TV. And this is a hobby so they don’t have to do in-depth literary analysis. But fuck the people who get paid for a living who recreate that reductive bullshit.”

yeah, duh? i'm well aware of the reason behind it. i understand like, not wanting to get annoyed at roleplayers for creating characters like that - i generally don't hold roleplayers to a higher standard than people who literally do this as a job, but that doesn't make it less weird and annoying to me. personally, i'm pretty character driven; characters are the most important part of a story to me, whether that's in published literature or in roleplay. yeah, i'm not gonna go out of my way to diss people who fall into this category, but i'm definitely not gonna write with them or pretend to like their characters. it's literally just bad character creation - to me, that's a sign of bad writing, i don't really care what your reason is. plus, if someone is constantly creating female characters to pit them against each other, or against my female characters, that's not really a good sign of who they are as a person. even more reason to dislike it.

also, i'm not really sure what you're referring to with the everyman trope. that probably has like... the least variety of most tropes, since the everyman is supposed to relate to the average viewer. they're supposed to be pretty ordinary. not sure that it implies that the male viewer is the default, it's just that the character itself is pretty default, so i honestly don't really see where you're coming from.

Added to above it doesn’t bother me in roleplays because I can also change the narrative. Like “I’m excuse me but your character isn’t pulling their weight. So if they could maybe help push the plot forward a bit that would be great.”

I mean I would be nicer about it but I also would just ask them to make their guy less incompetent.

if we're still talking about how women are portrayed, i think you might be misunderstanding. the problem is that women are way too competent instead of being allowed to just chill and be loosey goosey like the male characters often are. i'm not a fan of pushing women characters into a motherly or nanny-like role for a bunch of grown male characters - not saying that every serious, rational woman is trying to be "not like other girls" as you said, just that it's boring when those are the only types of characters i encounter, or just the vast majority rly.

 

[nerdy tangents]

sevyn my point is that assuming your playing the female role then just ask the men to step up their participating.

If your playing the male role then don’t let the women do all the work.

It’s not one person writing the narrative so women don’t have to be stuck playing a specific role when other characters don’t play along.

 

[sevyn]

sevyn my point is that assuming your playing the female role then just ask the men to step up their participating.

If your playing the male role then don’t let the women do all the work.

It’s not one person writing the narrative so women don’t have to be stuck playing a specific role when other characters don’t play along.

imma assume we're not doing the same kinda roleplay, cause this is simply not clicking for me. like i get the general point you're trying to make, but i'm not usually writing just a male or just a woman. i do 1x1 doubles, you seem to be speaking from the experience of a group roleplayer or something.

also, what someone else does with their character is generally out of my control, nine times outta ten if i bring something like this up, it's just gonna start a conflict and they're not gonna change it anyway, or if they do they'll be hella passive aggressive about it, so it's waaay better to just cut it right there. maybe cause i've been writing for so long that i just cannot be bothered, my patience is running pretty thin and i already know what i love vs what i hate, so like... why would i roleplay w someone whose character i cannot stand? usually, these characters revolve mostly around their competence, they have very little purpose outside of being a Badass Woman, so it's hard to ask them to change that without dismantling the character entirely. the whole point i'm making is less that competent woman characters are inherently bad, and more that it's boring the experience the same character again and again, especially since they're so very stagnant and tend to have little personality other than to be stoic, bemusedly exasperated, rational, blah blah blah.

it's also definitely not my responsibility to tell people that misogynistic tropes are bad.