I Just Realized The Elder Scrolls can be considered Sci-Fi

Recommended Videos

Onyxlycan

New member
Nov 17, 2013
1
0
0
I know this is a pretty late comment to the party but after going back and playing TES again i've noticed things that blend sci-fi and fantasy so hard it seems to be something new.
Like iamLEAM stated above, their faith is their science. But more than that the way it is presented it seems that their magic is their science as well. Scientists do experiments and research to find out why things happen. In TES wizards do this all the time. Thinking of Mass Effect, the things that happen there are readily accepted because of technobabble and handwaves. And the handwavium is Eezo, as another user said of we were to find such an element we could reasonably do the same things. Well, to the residents of Nirn, Magicka is such an element. It just happens to be infused into every being so they have the inate ability manipulate it, mind of like the Asari dont you think? Perhaps Magicka can alter the state of the basest perticle of existence itself which would explain the fact it can practically do anything. Speaking of Nirn, it was created by the fusion of what was once the solar system into one planet. The different races were actually all aliens to each other. Noted in a book is the story of a wizard who traveled to all the planes of Oblivion, each one created and ruled by a Deadric Prince. In the game Redgaurd it was observed that the planes of oblivion appeared as other planets in the solar system, also we know that every one of the Aedra(nine devines) sacrificed their corporeal forms to form the other planets. In Oblivion itself the oblivion gates were possibly just stargates to the planet created by Mehrunes Dagon. In line with our actual physics is the law of conservation of energy, the Deadra cannot die as stated in a book their souls simply return to oblivion and they reform. I don't know if this makes any sense or whether these thing were already dealt with i was just trying to point out some interesting facts that made me look at the series in a new light.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,410
16
23
Sci-fi means -science- fiction. Fantasy means fantasy. Now if TES was dominated by the dwemer and their advancement, it would be arguably sci-fi. But they are dead and everyone runs around with swords and sorcery. Not Sci-fi.
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,021
0
0
Personally, I think the lines fantasy and sci-fi are much blurred and interchangable than people think. And it doesn't, in all honesty, matter in slightest what is which.

Unless you have sworn yourself to one or the other and declared the other one simple and beneath you, perhaps. I imagine some people do.

But I would say that The Elder Scrolls are decidedly more on the fantasy side, rather than sci-fi. For instance, the stars in the Elder Scrolls universe are, according to myth, holes punctured through reality into Aetherium, the dimension of magical forces. These were made when the Adrea, the gods who traded their power for the good of Creation (The Daedra are different in that they did not), and thus escaped into Aetherium.

It could be a religious mythos, and the stars could be huge orbs of burning elements like in an universe more closely modelled after our own. But many myths in the Elder Scrolls universe tends to be true, at least partially. It's built on fantastic ideas, rather than modelled on scientific ideas conforming to our own reality.

There are certainly sci-fi elements in that universe, though. What is a sorcerer, if not a scientist trying to explore and explain a source of power that change the surrounding world when channeled properly? A sorcerer exploring teleportation magic isn't terribly different from a scientist developing warp travel, when it comes down to it.

One is just more closely resembling of the rules we've got in the real world than the other.

EDIT: I would also like to make it clear that neither option is worse or better. It is different ways of setting up the basic rules in a universe that has been made up.

EDIT-EDIT: We are now Necromancers. How Fitting.

http://hydra-media.cursecdn.com/wowpedia.org/thumb/0/0b/Orcnecromancer.jpg/485px-Orcnecromancer.jpg

"Arise, Forgotten Thread. Arise, and do my bidding!"
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,256
0
0
It's an interesting theory, I don't think Sci-Fi is defined by that, though.

However how can all these people be aliens when Earth doesn't exist (as far as we know) in The Elder Scrolls? They're all native to the planet Tamriel is on (besides the demons). At least in Star Wars (I know it's Science Fantasy) the place they're is described as "far, far away" and it's set "a long, long time ago" so Earth does exist (or maybe it will?) in that universe.
 

Shoggoth2588

New member
Aug 31, 2009
10,247
0
0
I can kind of see it that way if you exchange the word "magic" with...something to represent psychic powers...like Focus. I really dislike how Sci-Fi and Fantasy are seldom put together when they really nicely compliment each other.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,305
0
0
No.

Sci-fi is fiction using high-end technology with semi-solid concepts backing them to do their "magic".

Fantasy makes no effort to explain magic as anything other than a "higher-power" thing.

If it does both (like Myst and prequel-Star Wars), then you've got science-fantasy.

At no point do sci-fi and fantasy, as separate genres, overlap.

EDIT: Oh God, we necro'd the poor thread! D:
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,021
0
0
lacktheknack said:
No.

Sci-fi is fiction using high-end technology with semi-solid concepts backing them to do their "magic".

Fantasy makes no effort to explain magic as anything other than a "higher-power" thing.

If it does both (like Myst and prequel-Star Wars), then you've got science-fantasy.

At no point do sci-fi and fantasy, as separate genres, overlap.

EDIT: Oh God, we necro'd the poor thread! D:
Well, magic and its mechanics doesn't neccessarily have to be lazy, if written and explained well. That will also help the situations you get with badly written magic, where you are left wondering why a wizard couldn't just come along and sort everything out.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,305
0
0
Muspelheim said:
lacktheknack said:
No.

Sci-fi is fiction using high-end technology with semi-solid concepts backing them to do their "magic".

Fantasy makes no effort to explain magic as anything other than a "higher-power" thing.

If it does both (like Myst and prequel-Star Wars), then you've got science-fantasy.

At no point do sci-fi and fantasy, as separate genres, overlap.

EDIT: Oh God, we necro'd the poor thread! D:
Well, magic and its mechanics doesn't neccessarily have to be lazy, if written and explained well. That will also help the situations you get with badly written magic, where you are left wondering why a wizard couldn't just come along and sort everything out.
It's not a question of "badly written".

In Myst, for instance, there's an extremely precise and brutal science behind the book-writing, and if you make even a tiny mistake, it has a butterfly effect that's well demonstrated and explained.

But there's no explanation as to how the link itself works.

Thus, science-fantasy. It thoroughly explains its magic scientifically, but a key component of it continues to have no adequate explanation.
 

JazzJack2

New member
Feb 10, 2013
268
0
0
Science Fiction has always meant to me something that discusses the implications that future technology, science or societal-ideals would have, things like BladeRunner or Star-Trek, Skyrim doesn't really fit that.
 

Tom_green_day

New member
Jan 5, 2013
1,383
0
0
I'm pretty sure that technically, if a novel explains how shit works it's science fiction, and if it doesn't then its fantasy. I'm generalising of course, but I'm lazy.
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,021
0
0
lacktheknack said:
It's not a question of "badly written".

In Myst, for instance, there's an extremely precise and brutal science behind the book-writing, and if you make even a tiny mistake, it has a butterfly effect that's well demonstrated and explained.

But there's no explanation as to how the link itself works.

Thus, science-fantasy. It thoroughly explains its magic scientifically, but a key component of it continues to have no adequate explanation.
True, very good point. But I suppose they have their reasons to leave that blank. I can imagine that no explanation can be better sometimes than an inadequite explanation.

I do think that it does matter wether magic is badly written or not, though. If it is, then suspending the disbelief and rolling with the rules that's been dealt becomes much easier. If it's badly written, it will stand out rather terribly, and make it much harder to simply accept the new rule sheet.

EDIT: Sorry, I borked up the quoting lines. And took me sweet time noticing. :p
 

piinyouri

New member
Mar 18, 2012
2,706
0
0
In narrative/story style and structure, no I'd say not.

In the fact that behind the scenes there's a lot of fantasy science going on, yeahsureok.

It's kind of like how the old Ultima games were, with little bits of sci-fi interspersed with the rest of the fantasy setting.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,660
0
0
It isn't Sci-Fi in the slightest simply because the genre is defined by speculation and extrapolation of existing scientific concepts. For example, while there is no narrative difference between the Star Trek Teleporter and any of a variety of spells in D&D, the act is justified differently. In D&D, it is the result of a wizard manipulating the Weave - an energy inherent in the universe where in Star Trek it's the result of breaking a person down into a different form, projecting it as pure energy, and then reconstituting them at the other end. The difference, then, is that Star Trek offers an an explanation about the way the process works. If D&D wanted to do the same, it could say that (for example) the Weave was Dark Energy and a wizard was using some kind of device to direct that energy to a particular end. Mass Effect does this exact thing with spells simply being the result of modification of mass fields allowed for thanks to the existence of a mysterious element (Element Zero).

Even when it comes to sci-fi though there are degrees of qualification. Some settings have very little explanation for how things work; Doctor Who is effectively fantasy since nothing of consequence is ever explained in a rigorous way. By contrast, the work of Arthur C Clark is a very hard edged science fiction which rarely relies on plot magic beyond the notion that in the future, a device will be possible to build that we can only theorize about now.
 

LadyLightning

New member
Jul 11, 2013
64
0
0
FEichinger said:
Well, teeeechnically we have the Dwarven creations that don't necessarily run on magic, so ... it's more Steampunk-ish ... and you can certainly twist it to turn it into Sci-Fi, but ... personally, I'd stick with the general Fantasy, and nowhere near actual Science, thus Sci-Fi. So ... nope.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3 said:
inb4 Chim. Anyway, if you refer to Chim, the Elder Scrolls is actually a dream just taking inside someones head.
Depending on your view on D/Aedra, that whole "Mundus/Nirn is just a dream" thingy may actually be the case in the Elder Scrolls lore, btw.
The Dwemer centurions do indeed work on the principles of magic as recognized by the rest of Nirn - specifically the Enchantment school. They're powered by the soul gems they drop, some of which have a soul inside and others which don't. We even see broken-down centurions that stopped working before the player got there, which implies that, just like a magic sword, the soul gem powering the centurion doesn't last forever.
 

LadyLightning

New member
Jul 11, 2013
64
0
0
Eclectic Dreck said:
It isn't Sci-Fi in the slightest simply because the genre is defined by speculation and extrapolation of existing scientific concepts. For example, while there is no narrative difference between the Star Trek Teleporter and any of a variety of spells in D&D, the act is justified differently. In D&D, it is the result of a wizard manipulating the Weave - an energy inherent in the universe where in Star Trek it's the result of breaking a person down into a different form, projecting it as pure energy, and then reconstituting them at the other end. The difference, then, is that Star Trek offers an an explanation about the way the process works. If D&D wanted to do the same, it could say that (for example) the Weave was Dark Energy and a wizard was using some kind of device to direct that energy to a particular end. Mass Effect does this exact thing with spells simply being the result of modification of mass fields allowed for thanks to the existence of a mysterious element (Element Zero).

Even when it comes to sci-fi though there are degrees of qualification. Some settings have very little explanation for how things work; Doctor Who is effectively fantasy since nothing of consequence is ever explained in a rigorous way. By contrast, the work of Arthur C Clark is a very hard edged science fiction which rarely relies on plot magic beyond the notion that in the future, a device will be possible to build that we can only theorize about now.
The Weave is purely a Forgotten Realms thing and is by no means inherent to D&D as a whole, only its least enjoyable campaign setting. The way spells of the Teleportation subschool are explained in D&D is that the caster is travelling through some sort of planar rift where both ends open onto the prime material plane, as opposed to some other plane of existence, like the Nine Hells, or one of the Elemental Planes.

Transporter technology in Star Trek is explained as breaking down an object or creature into its constituent molecules, transforming those molecules into energy, projecting that energy as a beam, and re-forming the original person or object at the other side. A recurring concept in Star Trek technology is the idea that energy and matter are no longer separate things - that we've discovered how to convert matter into energy and vice versa. It's how holodecks and replicators work.

The difference is this:
In D&D, it's assumed that spellcasters teleport by manipulating extraplanar energies, according to a cosmology that cannot exist in our reality - the idea that the world is a material plane formed by the intersection of the four elemental planes of fire, water, air and earth. It's pure fantasy.

In Star Trek, engineers teleport by applying scientific theory (matter/energy conversion, molecular reconstruction of matter) which was extrapolated from real-world scientific theory (matter is made of tiny molecules, which are clusters of atoms). We don't have anything like transporter technology today, but it's feasible that, in the future, we very well might. It could very well exist in our reality, once our technology becomes sufficiently advanced. This is science-fiction - a fictional look into what science and technology might be able to do someday.
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
this is why sci-fi and fantasy tend to share a shelf in book stores and libraries, but it is ultimately silly. To me, Sci-fi has always depicted a world that could exist, whereas fantasy depicts a world that, given our current understanding of science, could not.