StarDestroyer.Net BBS

A friend of mine has been offered an advance provided that a draft is produced before a deadline. He therefore is deciding between two stories with very different settings. He asked me to look to see which setting might have a larger audience.

The first story is sort of in a traditional fantasy setting, in a world still recovering from a past disaster. Monsters and demons roam free, mankind reduced to armed and fortified communities; walled villages and cities holding fast against the wilds. Only the efforts of heroes and soldiers keep the last sparks of civilisation alive.

The second story is in an “urban fantasy” setting. A fairly typical setup with a "dickhead" protagonist who ruins things for everyone, gets his ass kicked for it, then develops some wisdom and compassion and saves the world, where there’s Hidden Magic and Monsters in the world, completed with ancient conspiracies and the spies who fight them with guns and crosses.

Which type do you prefer?

Tell him to go with what he knows. Honestly though, popularity in fiction is extremely luck-of-the-draw. Look at Twilight.

Tell him to flip a coin, it will give him just as accurate results.

Steve wrote:He asked me to look to see which setting might have a larger audience.

I don't think SD.net, or at least the posters on SD.net who bother to vote on this poll, would be an accurate representation of what might get a larger audience. That depends on too many different factors.

Eh, any sample size is what he's looking for. And novels are a bit more niche IIRC in how their markets can work.

Steve wrote:A friend of mine has been offered an advance provided that a draft is produced before a deadline. He therefore is deciding between two stories with very different settings. He asked me to look to see which setting might have a larger audience.

The first story is sort of in a traditional fantasy setting, in a world still recovering from a past disaster. Monsters and demons roam free, mankind reduced to armed and fortified communities; walled villages and cities holding fast against the wilds. Only the efforts of heroes and soldiers keep the last sparks of civilisation alive.

The second story is in an “urban fantasy” setting. A fairly typical setup with a "dickhead" protagonist who ruins things for everyone, gets his ass kicked for it, then develops some wisdom and compassion and saves the world, where there’s Hidden Magic and Monsters in the world, completed with ancient conspiracies and the spies who fight them with guns and crosses.

Which type do you prefer?

Well, in the first case, the traditional one, you have described the setting, but not the plot.

I get the feeling that the first one is more safe, but unlikely to be something special, and the second has bigger potential, but could more easily fail.

So, to me it looks like a question of playing safe or risking for a bigger payoff. Which story does he feel more passionate about?

The setting isn't important, the story is important. That is, plot, characters, plot, writing, plot...

Did I mention the plot is important?

The most important thing is that the story is a good one. So he should go with whichever setting he feels will produce the best story for him.

The second setting sounds a lot better. I would read it if given the chance. Traditional high fantasy has been done to death and unless written very tends to be bland and boring.

I am not "that friend" but I'm fairly well familiar with both proposals mentioned above - I think the characters and plot are both strong but I'm biased.

I'm interested in the second setting and seeing how it'd turn out on print and paper and prose.

What category does Star Wars fall under? Traditional or Urban Fantasy, it has elements of fantasy in it.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is Urban Fantasy as is Dracula by Bram Stoker. I do get tired of seeing vampires all the time though, vampires have been done to death and beyond.

What do you think of Harry Potter, is that Urban Fantasy?

How about the book Operation Chaos by Poul Anderson, was that Urban Fantasy?

I also know the person in question and talked to him about it. We're not here to do nitpicky semantics definition bullshit. When we say 'urban fantasy' we mean what people normally think when they hear the term, and same with 'traditional fantasy.' He just wanted to get a general feel if the market was there or more strongly leaning in one direction or another.

And no I'm not worried about his plot and characters and all the important stuff like that. He can handle that just fine.

I've always been torn between the whole Hidden Magic and Monsters world or Traditional Fantasy. Both work for me, I'd like to see SWAT teams hunting vampires.

Though only if we had human protagonists. That stems from me reading 3 and a half Twilight Books.

Judging by what I've seen on the bookshelves lately, urban fantasy and steampunk seem to be big sellers these days.

All because of Twilight. >.>

There are some very good Urban Fantasies out there, but what I'd love to see is thing in which a futuristic Sci-Fi army does battle with your Fantasy types.

Love to see helicopter gunships mixing it up with dragons.

Oh, and wizards? They need an excuse to finally start packing assault rifles.

Personally, I enjoy Urban fantasy stories even if they aren't in the average grity streets of New York City, and I like fantasy stories particularly if they aren't in a traditional swords and sorcery setting.

For example, I was (and still am) a big fan of the Oz books because it had things like the Tin Woodsman, Tik-Tok the clockwork man, the Wheelers, the race of people who keep their brains fresh in cans (and had an oppressive ruler who stole the brains of his enemies so that he would be the smartest one in the group), and of course Ugo the shoemaker who was an evil sorcerer from a race of skinny people who enslaved giants because they were stronger than them (the skinny guys were crazy strong, they could crush boulders with their bare hands and toss the giants around like rag dolls).

I like the OZ books because they had some pretty crazy and different things in them while having enough inspiration from fairy tales and modern society of the time to make a sort of sense.

I also like the Fables series because it takes place in an urban fantasy setting but has plenty of different things in it and provides a new take on how magic works.

Also the Tenth Kingdom miniseries, starts off in New York in a sort of Urban Fantasy thing, then goes to Fairy Tale land for some fantasy-esque action, but does have a somewhat interesting plot to work with.


But anyway, I'm going to vote for Urban Fantasy... if only because I like stories that have a new twist on old ideas and I think that having the world of fantasy meet up with reality tends to result in more interesting ideas than just straight up fantasy. Though as others have said before, it mostly depends on things like the plot and characters you put in the story though I would recommend adding something unique to the setting no matter which one you choose to use.

* edit: Did a quick wikipedia search and turns it is Ugu the Shoemaker from Lost Princess of Oz I was thinking about. The guys name is easy to remember how it sounds but... you know, its hard to remember if the last letter is an 'o' or a 'u'. Quite different from something like Voldermort.

From a cursory examination of the market, it seems that traditional fantasy is selling well, but is a niche market. By publishing there, you run the risk of being "typecast" by the publishers. Lois Bujold, for example, found that other publishers wouldn't touch her books with a ten foot pole after publishing with Baen (IIRC).

On the other hand, urban fantasy is slowly becoming more mainstream, due to all the vampire romance trash novels (although, being familiar with the person and with both stories in question, I'd say they're the antithesis of vampire romance trash novels and are actually very good). The chance for a breakout hit is greater with the urban fantasy one. Plus, I like it better, so there.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

The momentum in the market does seem to be with urban fantasy. There's a lot more space, as it were, for newcomers to publish and make a mark. Opportunities with traditional fantasy seems to be much more limited unless you've already got a reputation. Granted, many of those newcomers in urban fantasy seem to just rip off Laurell K. Hamilton, but at the moment it's still the more dynamic genre.

I chose urban. Not just for market reasons; I love industrial magic, and industrial magic is only possible in an urban fantasy setting.

Steve wrote: The second story is in an “urban fantasy” setting. A fairly typical setup with a "dickhead" protagonist who ruins things for everyone, gets his ass kicked for it, then develops some wisdom and compassion and saves the world, where there’s Hidden Magic and Monsters in the world, completed with ancient conspiracies and the spies who fight them with guns and crosses.

This is a terrible description of the Urban Fantasy genre. It's a really accurate description of some of the worst examples of the genre, but why the fuck would we define the genre by that crap? Perdido Street Station, for example, isn't like that at all and its one of the great books of the genre.

Imperial Overlord wrote:

Steve wrote: The second story is in an “urban fantasy” setting. A fairly typical setup with a "dickhead" protagonist who ruins things for everyone, gets his ass kicked for it, then develops some wisdom and compassion and saves the world, where there’s Hidden Magic and Monsters in the world, completed with ancient conspiracies and the spies who fight them with guns and crosses.

This is a terrible description of the Urban Fantasy genre. It's a really accurate description of some of the worst examples of the genre, but why the fuck would we define the genre by that crap? Perdido Street Station, for example, isn't like that at all and its one of the great books of the genre.

And plenty of good books, too. Like it or not, Perdido Street Station is an outlier, and does not define the genre.

Of course, none of that is even relevant since the post is describing the book itself, and not the Urban Fantasy genre as a whole.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Perhaps I over reacted to the "fairly typical set up" part, but the summary strikes a nerve and not in a good way.

My problem with ‘traditional’ fantasy is that most of the time people try to make it more modern then it should be, turning archers into long range precision snipers, greatly advanced knowledge of science, people not dieing of gangrene when badly wounded ect… in ordered to make it easier write and closer to what people ‘know’. I can understand that writers also want to just ignore those issues because its ‘fantasy’ but the whole process seems very self defeating to me. I really haven’t seen much fantasy that actually felt like the characters were living in a 1000AD or what have you timeframe, it always feels like modern people with swords instead of pistols, and bows that work like rifles and never run out of expensive arrows. Though I do admit I just don’t really that much of it either.

Starting from the technological/scientific/thinking base you want to work with makes the most sense, whatever that might be.

I would heavily favor urban fantasy all else being equal, since it bypasses problems like that and is generally more likely to be interesting. Plus many of the more popular medieval high fantasy concepts a writer might want to use, like nobility and fragmented feudal fiefdom states have survived into the modern world anyway. The UAE being a prime example of both.

Consider this a write-in vote for both of the above/none of the above. I don't care if the fantasy is traditional or urban. What I want is good fantasy. I want characters with intelligible motives. I want an interesting plot. I want a believable setting. I want a protagonist who isn't a friggin' farm boy that turns out to have preternatural skill with a sword despite having not touched one until the Orcs came to burn his village, rob all the women, and rape all the men. I want an antagonist who isn't some Sauron-esque knockoff who has nothing to say and has no motivation besides being an embodiment of ANSI Standard Pure Evil. I want female characters who aren't Staff Chicks or fainting princesses who do nothing but brew a fondue in their panties every time the hero gives them a smoldering look or blushes in front of them. I want all the Mary Sues up against a fucking wall staring down the barrel of a M61-A1 Vulcan 20mm rotary cannon.

And if nobody else is willing to write that kind of fantasy, then I'll try to write it my damned self.

The first option sounds like the 'Earthdawn' RPG setting.

Sea Skimmer wrote:My problem with ‘traditional’ fantasy is that most of the time people try to make it more modern then it should be,

I can sympathise up to a point - all fantasy is of its time far more than whatever period's technology it adopts. However, I'd like to raise a few quibbles on this:

turning archers into long range precision snipers,

You have half a point here. Traditional fantasy's highly accurate archers partly stem back to Tolkein and the unrealistic feats postulated (Bard the bowman targetting a tiny weak spot on a dragon flying over at night with his last arrow; horse archers targetting the eyes of oversized elephants; Legolas notching up 41 kills, mostly with arrows in one battle; etc.). And to some extent these may have been inspired by his own WWI experiences and the feats of highly accurate snipers in that time. However, these aren't all that worse than the older tales, e.g. of Robin Hood splitting the arrow, never mind truly mythic archers such as Hercules, or Hou Yi (who killed 9 suns with 9 consecutive arrows, and drove off a god by shooting him in the eye). And the odd real life lucky shot (such as Harold Godwinsson being possibly slain by an arrow to the eye in 1066) would have reinforced such myths.

So never mind that there's a very good reason nobody in a modern western army has used the longbow since, well, WWII.

greatly advanced knowledge of science,

No argument here.

people not dieing of gangrene when badly wounded

Again, real-life people of whatever period may have sickened and died of wounds all the time - but mythic heroes have been laughing off serious wounds for as long as there have been mythic heroes. Also, not every wounded warrior in the old days died of gangrene, and it isn't really a good topic for the uplifting note that a lot of fantasy tries to strike (at least some of the time). And as a final justification, in a world where you have magic, you practically always have magical sources of healing, whether you're talking Arthurian legend or D&D.

it always feels like modern people with swords instead of pistols, and bows that work like rifles and never run out of expensive arrows. Though I do admit I just don’t really that much of it either.

Hmmm... some suggestions for you:

Books:
- A game of thrones
- The Eye of the World

Films:
- The Princess Bride
- Prince Caspian

The central issue, however, is that in a world with magic, combatants using swords or bows generally cannot keep up unless either they are inhumanly good at doing so, they're in vast numbers, or the magic itself has great limitations/drawbacks. So realism kinda goes out the window.