Generic Fantasy novels?

[Yora]

We all know generic fantasy: Having all the things that Tolkien had, but without the backstory and creation myth. And any time you're talking about generic and original fantasy, most people will complain at least a bit about how boring all these Tolkien imitations are and we really please would like to see something else.

Now for RPGs and videogames that is certainly true, as well as for all the licensed novels based on them. But outside the world of game, are there actually any cases of settings that have elves, dwarves, orcs, and dragons and the established generic standards of lots of wizards and gods? I am not aware of any!

[hamishspence]

Mercedes Lackey's Tales of the Five Hundred Kingdoms, and also Terry Pratchett's Discworld, are the first that spring to mind.

[factotum]

You've clearly never read Terry Brooks' "The Sword of Shannara" if you've never encountered a straight Tolkien ripoff--and yes, it definitely has dwarves in it, although I can't remember if it also has elves. Guy Gavriel Kay's Fionavar trilogy is less derivative, but definitely has elves and dwarves in it, complete with the concept that the elves go on boat journeys into the ocean when they're tired of living in the mortal world. Can't immediately think of any others--I'd say that Pratchett includes dwarves and elves because it's supposed to be a spoof of that whole kind of generic fantasy, so it's a bit unfair including it with them!

[Dienekes]

Eragon comes pretty close. It's been a very long time since I read it, so I'm not sure if there were wizards and gods. But everything else was there in spades. Though I think they called the orcs something different.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Eragon comes pretty close. It's been a very long time since I read it, so I'm not sure if there were wizards and gods. But everything else was there in spades. Though I think they called the orcs something different.

If I remember correctly, the main character in Eragon is a human orphaned peasant boy who is the son of a powerful evil wizard and eventually becomes a wizard himself, and then an elf. I stopped reading around that time, but I suspect godhood was not far off. The whole thing reads like someone smashed Tolkien's setting and Star Wars' plot together.

Grey Wolf

[SiuiS]

You've clearly never read Terry Brooks' "The Sword of Shannara" if you've never encountered a straight Tolkien ripoff--and yes, it definitely has dwarves in it, although I can't remember if it also has elves. Guy Gavriel Kay's Fionavar trilogy is less derivative, but definitely has elves and dwarves in it, complete with the concept that the elves go on boat journeys into the ocean when they're tired of living in the mortal world. Can't immediately think of any others--I'd say that Pratchett includes dwarves and elves because it's supposed to be a spoof of that whole kind of generic fantasy, so it's a bit unfair including it with them!

Nuclear Armageddon. Those humans who fled underground became dwarves (possibly in the literal sense as opposed to fantasy sense), those dwarves who something something became yellow skinned gnomes, orcs of some variety exist as mutants, and elves were just elves, returned for he world after their long a scene as the nuclear effects forced them out of hiding. Shanara isn't exactly original in that sense, but I think it did an admirable job of asking "why do these exist?" And workig with that. The answer may be juvenile but it's an attempt.

The others I haven't read.

[comicshorse]

Shadowrun the rpg fits ;, dwarves, elves, orcs and wizards galore. Though the dwarves are more likely to pack assault shotguns than axes and the wizards are probably on some Corporate payroll. Possible exception of Gods (depends if you count Totems ).

[Kitten Champion]

The War God series by David Weber has most of the hallmarks with a bit of "I'm doing it differently here!" razzmatazz.

Brook's Shannara series, as mentioned. It's Tolkien with a bit of paint splashed over it. Although in this analogy Tolkien's original paint colour would be charcoal-grey whereas Brooks' is dolphin grey.

Elizabeth Moon's Legend of Paksenarrion series is pretty generic as far as I can recall.

Paolini's The Inheritance Cycle, as mentioned. Generic fantasy, and Star Wars. Sort of like a value pack of cliches.

M.L. Forman's Adventurer's Wanted series is generic fantasy... and also terrible, but mostly generic.

Iron Elves series by Chris Evans is generic, technically. Although the intention is to strike a contrast between his work and Tolkien, where the big difference is that humans are the British Empire at its most heinously imperialistic. Sort of like Warhammer, but tolerable.

There are more, although I tend to find boiler-plate fantasy is more about recycling plots and characterizations than being Tolkien-esque in every measure. Most who literally use the Orc/Elf/Human aesthetic are like Thraxas or Discworld where it's meant as sort of a tongue-in-cheek play on the concept or otherwise it's some attempt at a dark subversion of expectations with dwarves being cannibal nazis - who live above ground - or some such. With either your mileage will vary - that is if they're sufficient unique in their approach rather than their world. Whereas truly generic fantasy usually tries to throw out apparently unique-seeming ideas and not really have them being meaningful or distinct when you actually think about them, calling them Kasnizzes and having them being furry bear men with Germanic accents doesn't really change the fact that in the narrative they're just Dwarves - is roughly the point I'm trying to make.

[comicshorse]

.
Iron Elves series by Chris Evans is generic, technically. Although the intention is to strike a contrast between his work and Tolkien, where the big difference is that humans are the British Empire at its most heinously imperialistic. Sort of like Warhammer, but tolerable.

DOH ! Of course Warhammer (both RPG and books set in the universe) fit perfectly. You could make an argument for 40K as they DID have Dwarves (don't tell Games Workshop I said that)

[Palanan]

I've only read one of the Thomas Covenant novels, and it was partway through the series, but it felt like a painfully pale and thin imitation of Tolkien to me. Maybe the world had some unique elements, but I can't remember them; just a sense of the prose and characters being a rather tired rerun of Tolkien.

And yes, Terry Brooks is legendary--or notorious--for stripping virtually every element from Tolkien and adding almost nothing original of his own.

[Seerow]

Feist's Riftwar Saga fits the bill. Elves (dozen subraces included!), Dwarves, Dragons, fair number of casters in the world (though only a few of great power), lots of different gods. The only thing missing on the check list I think is Orcs, though there are Goblins and Trolls.

[Eldan]

DOH ! Of course Warhammer (both RPG and books set in the universe) fit perfectly. You could make an argument for 40K as they DID have Dwarves (don't tell Games Workshop I said that)

Warhammer Fantasy had some interesting ideas even when it still was an RPG setting. It just doesn't seem to come up as often anymore in the newer editions. The entire idea of internal cults of depravity and chaotic corruption, for one and the witch hunters fighting against it4. And unlike many settings, there's actual technological and social progress.

[comicshorse]

I've only read one of the Thomas Covenant novels, and it was partway through the series, but it felt like a painfully pale and thin imitation of Tolkien to me. Maybe the world had some unique elements, but I can't remember them; just a sense of the prose and characters being a rather tired rerun of Tolkien.

I've got to disagree here. There are no dwarves or elves, no wizards (debatable I know) and only one god. More in avoiding the generic fantasy cliche there is no merry band of brave adventurers to save the day just one mightily screwed up human being who doesn't want to believe where he is real most of the time

Warhammer Fantasy had some interesting ideas even when it still was an RPG setting. It just doesn't seem to come up as often anymore in the newer editions. The entire idea of internal cults of depravity and chaotic corruption, for one and the witch hunters fighting against it4. And unlike many settings, there's actual technological and social progress.

I think Games Workshop have pretty much given up on doing anything interesting with Warhammer Fantasy

[BannedInSchool]

Rick Cook's Wizardry series is intentionally "generic", although not Tolkien. Elves live in hills where time passes differently. Dragons are animals ridden as mounts. People have true names that are magically important. Wizards abound. Brownies help out with household chores. Demons are summoned and commanded. Hedge witches are busty and red-haired.

[Mx.Silver]

The Witcher series probably deserves mention. In terms of tone of it's very different, but it's still a gritty take on the Generic Fantasy Setting.


In regards to what makes a generic fantasy setting, the number of Gods is a bit of a red herring; the thing about generic fantasyland is in how it handles religion (usually with little depth and generally not have it have much of an impact on the societies). This is more noticeable in settings with a lot of active gods because said scenario spotlights it. In terms of general criteria my starting list usually looks something like this:

• Earth-like planet
• Pseudo-Medieval European
• Old Wizard Magic
• Intelligent nonhumans (usually some variation on Dragons, Elves, Orcs, Dwarves etc.)

That to me is already putting it into the vicinity of Generic FantasyLand, and the more 'standard' elements (ancient Evil Powers; Magical Relics of a Past Age etc.) you start adding to it the further in it goes.
Note that a setting does not have to tick every single box to be Generic Fantasyland. If it's largely the same 'except for X' then it's still a Generic Fantasy setting, just slightly tweaked.


Alternatively, if it's reasonably well described by Diana Wynne Jones' The Tough Guide to Fantasyland it's a Generic Fantasy Setting.

There are no dwarves or elves, no wizards (debatable I know) and only one god.

It does however have giants and whatever-the-hell the fey-like creatures were, who fulfil largely the same roles. Although if by 'debatable' you mean 'there actually exists an order of actual wizards who feature prominently in the cast' then yes, I suppose you're right on that point.

More in avoiding the generic fantasy cliche there is no merry band of brave adventurers to save the day just one mightily screwed up human being who doesn't want to believe where he is real most of the time

That same human, known as the Ringbearer, spends the third book with his compaion transporting a magic ring to a mountain in the middle of the territory of The Enemy, whose forces are currently besieging the capital of the forces of good, who are operating under the command of the head of the order of Wizards and the defence of said city is nearly undone when an important figure, driven to despair by the loss of his child, goes mad, gives up hope and tries to sabotage things. Said siege also features a last-second cavalry charge by reinforcements on the side of good. So while you might argue it's a not a world you could model in D&D in terms of Tolkein derivatives it's definitely pretty high up the list.

[comicshorse]

It does however have giants and whatever-the-hell the fey-like creatures were, who fulfil largely the same roles. Although if by 'debatable' you mean 'there actually exists an order of actual wizards who feature prominently in the cast' then yes, I suppose you're right on that point.

I haven't read the books for a bit so, pinch of salt.
I really don't see how the Giants and the Elohim ( is that who you mean ?) fulfill the same roles. None of them, save Foamfollower, aid Covenant in any way and their cultures are entirely different
Nor would I describe the Lords as an 'order of wizards' they are far closer to being Clerics (to use a DnD term) as all their power is drawn from the land and they exist to preserve it. Which is what I meant by debatable.

That same human, known as the Ringbearer, spends the third book with his compaion transporting a magic ring to a mountain in the middle of the territory of The Enemy, whose forces are currently besieging the capital of the forces of good, who are operating under the command of the head of the order of Wizards and the defence of said city is nearly undone when an important figure, driven to despair by the loss of his child, goes mad, gives up hope and tries to sabotage things. Said siege also features a last-second cavalry charge by reinforcements on the side of good. So while you might argue it's a not a world you could model in D&D in terms of Tolkein derivatives it's definitely pretty high up the list

While that is mainly true it does avoid many details to force similarities. For example : the main character is never called the 'Ringbearer', the cavalry charge is not done by an external rescuing force but a last ditch attempt by the besieged to break the siege and the battle is really won when Mhoran defeats the Raver leading the besieging forces. Nor is the ring destroyed or volcanoes involved or everybody gets snatched out of trouble by convenient eagles, or.............
Neither for that matter do I really think Tolkein's using them makes sieges or cavalry charges off limits to every author since

ER...sorry for the de-rail there

[Grinner]

If I remember correctly, the main character in Eragon is a human orphaned peasant boy who is the son of a powerful evil wizard and eventually becomes a wizard himself, and then an elf. I stopped reading around that time, but I suspect godhood was not far off. The whole thing reads like someone smashed Tolkien's setting and Star Wars' plot together.

Grey Wolf

Only read through book two myself, but I'll note that the author started the series at age fifteen. Certainly it's quite a feat to get published at that age, but the whole thing reads like a particularly coherent D&D campaign write-up.

Also, I remember there were dwarves. And they liked jewelry.

I need to read Brisingr someday...

[LibraryOgre]

Guardians of the Flame by Joel Rosenberg has a number of these tropes, but it's also explicitly built to be RPG-like.

[Math_Mage]

Only read through book two myself, but I'll note that the author started the series at age fifteen. Certainly it's quite a feat to get published at that age, but the whole thing reads like a particularly coherent D&D campaign write-up.

Also, I remember there were dwarves. And they liked jewelry.

I need to read Brisingr someday...

You really don't. You could probably find a hate-read of it online, though. Might be good for shiggles.

[Kitten Champion]

I had forgotten the Chronicles of Siala series by Alexey Pehov, which has all the elements of generic fantasy except dragons. With a bit of minor tweaking Siala could easily be a D&D campaign setting.

[factotum]

While that is mainly true it does avoid many details to force similarities.

Not to mention: the ring carried by Thomas Covenant is his own, not something made by the Dark Lord that he found in a corner somewhere; the Dark Lord still possesses the thing that gives him the majority of his power (the Illearth Stone); the final battle takes place directly between Covenant and the Dark Lord rather than happening by proxy miles away; I could keep on pointing out the differences, but I doubt it will convince anyone.

One thing I will say, though, is that the idea of rings possessing power is an idea that *far* pre-dates Tolkien, so somebody using it in a modern work does not automatically mean they're cribbing from LOTR...

[Man on Fire]

As mentioned, the Witcher books - msotly because they started as playing fairy tales and generic fantasy stories with a twist until they just went full into dark territories.

Fionavarn Tapestry by Guy Gavariel Kay - author wrote it after helping Christopher Tolkien assmbling and editing Sirmaillion and it shows. Pretty generic fantasy, but with a lot of backstories for everything so you have feeling of grand scale of everything. Also, there's King Arthur there. Not a stand-in, literally the King Arthur Pendragon.

Belgaraid series feels pretty generic Tolkien as well.

[Wardog]

The Dwarves series, by Markus Heitz is very generic, at least in the first novel. Standard-issue dwarves, elves, orcs, and wizards. I can't remember if there were any dragons.

The only notable difference from the standard setting and tropes is that rather than going for the "pure" version of "our dwarves are all the same", the dwarves are spilt into five clans each of which focuses on one stereotypical dwarvern trope. And that the drow-equivalent (alfs) are pale-skinned and live above ground (but even that's not unique, because Warhammer did that first).

Despite that, it does have some quite interesting themes (particularly on what it actually means to be from an [Evil] race in a universe where [Evil] is an actual thing), and the later novels play with (and eventually completely subvert) several of the generic tropes.

[Dienekes]

As mentioned, the Witcher books - msotly because they started as playing fairy tales and generic fantasy stories with a twist until they just went full into dark territories.

Fionavarn Tapestry by Guy Gavariel Kay - author wrote it after helping Christopher Tolkien assmbling and editing Sirmaillion and it shows. Pretty generic fantasy, but with a lot of backstories for everything so you have feeling of grand scale of everything. Also, there's King Arthur there. Not a stand-in, literally the King Arthur Pendragon.

Belgaraid series feels pretty generic Tolkien as well.

I'd argue Belgariad. No elves, no dwarves (except the guy with dwarfism), no orcs. He also makes a point that not everyone in the evil culture is evil, just the current power structure, and goes into much greater detail on how the two forms of magic work.

Though the story structure itself is very band of misfit heroes go off on adventure to save the world from an evil overlord. There is a council of wizards, and technically a dragon. Which is described as more of a giant pathetic bird. Also since Yora mentions the lack of creation myth and depth of backstory as making it generic, in the Belgariad there are 3 books on the backstory, and world building, as well as the creation myth being very tied to the main plot of the series.

Of course, it does nothing as well or as complicated as Tolkien.

[hamishspence]

I think Games Workshop have pretty much given up on doing anything interesting with Warhammer Fantasy

The End Times period seems to be heading in the direction of interesting stuff - Nagash (the closest thing Warhammer has to Sauron) has returned, and unified the undead factions - and there's rumours that the High Elves & Dark Elves will end up allying, as well.

[Winterwind]

I'm not sure some of the series mentioned throughout the thread - the Fionavar Tapestry, the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Belgariad - really fulfill the criteria. Yes, they do have some similar themes in the setting - especially the first of the three - but the story they actually end up telling, and more importantly, the way they choose to tell their story, is very different from Tolkien's. Tolkien's work has much more of a feel like an epic saga, even in the Lord of the Rings (not to mention the Silmarillion) - pretty much all characters are fairly superhuman, not necessarily so much in terms of their capabilities, as in terms of their character. They are absolutely dedicated to their cause, unwavering, and most of the conflicts (with the notable exception of what the ring does to Frodo) are outward, facing the hardships the antagonists throw against them, rather than inward.

Compare this to the protagonists of the Fionavar Tapestry (A person so guilt-ridden and weary of the world that he chooses to commit suicide by sacrificing himself in place of another (it doesn't quite work out as expected). A person who, early on, gets raped - literally - by this setting's equivalent of Sauron, and tries to cope with the trauma from there on out. Arthur and Lancelot, fighting evil while simultaneously fully aware that they are destined to kill each other, as they have in innumerable previous incarnations. A person whose duty it is to call forth all sorts of powers to aid them in their struggle - hereby corrupting and destroying what they actually are forever, and struggling with that fact. I could go on.), or to the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, where the main protagonist spends the majority of the first three books not even believing the world around him is real, and as a consequence, not giving a damn about what he does - thus often commiting outright evil acts - and only over time learning more and more about the Land, what it means, what it means to him, and growing personally. Those are far more character-driven narratives, where introspection is far more in the focus than outward conflict resolution.

There's also a difference in tone. Tolkien's work for the most part just feels epic; the Fionavar Tapestry and Thomas Covenant feel much more melancholic and are often a fair bit darker; the Belgariad, in turn, is generally much lighter and more humourous (which makes sense, given that it has a fairly big coming-of-age theme in the form of its main protagonist, that is completely absent from Tolkien).

With all of this, even if the settings were similar - something I'd agree with to some extent in the case of the Fionavar Tapestry, not so much in the case of Thomas Covenant - the books themselves are very different, in my humble opinion.

For honesty's sake, I should add the disclaimer that the Fionavar Tapestry and the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant are my number 1 and number 2 most favourite fantasy series respectively, with Tolkien's work "only" on number 3, in spite of me having read it much, much earlier (at an age of 6) and more often (somewhere in the 15-20 times region with regards to the Lord of the Rings and probably still a double-digit number for the Silmarillion), so I might be biased.

[Mad Hattington]

Only read through book two myself, but I'll note that the author started the series at age fifteen. Certainly it's quite a feat to get published at that age, but the whole thing reads like a particularly coherent D&D campaign write-up.

About that: It was first published by his parent's publishing house...

[factotum]

I'm not sure some of the series mentioned throughout the thread - the Fionavar Tapestry, the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Belgariad - really fulfill the criteria.

The criteria, as far as I can tell, is that "generic fantasy" = "has elves and dwarves". Yora never specified that it had to be a straight ripoff of Tolkien, and most generic fantasy isn't a direct ripoff in that way.

[Yora]

This is really about the general idea, not about minimum scores on a checklist. If it feels mostly like standard fantasy, that's good enough for this purpose.