Original Vs. Unusual

[peadarog]

I always come back to this, I can't help myself, can't leave it alone. Pick, pick, pick.

I'll try again.

Original is when you make things up. Invent things. The more you create from scratch, the more original it is.
90%* of fantasy books are set in quasi-medieval European worlds. About 5%* are quasi-Asian and 5%* quasi-classical civilisations. If I

Comments

[icemannorth]

I really appreciate your original take on this subject.

[peadarog]

Unusual, Iceman, unusual...

[bondo_ba]

I have something original for you: zombies at a wedding in Manchuria. Never been done...

:-P

[peadarog]

Excellent! Even the place name -- Man-chew-ya -- is well chosen :)

[werthead]

I recently stumbled across my notes for my D&D campaign setting, which I note I created in April 2001. Even way back then, I was so bored of 'being original' that I went completely in the opposite direction. Elves and dwarves? Oh yes, but also ogres, dragons, orcs, gnomes, giants, halflings (with ninja models!), dark elves (with pirate ones!) and even the often-overlooked minotaurs (horny!). There's definitely mileage in going down that route I think

[peadarog]

All good points. Originality is not that important, but I believe it makes us feel better about ourselves if we think we're connoisseurs of the 'new', especially in the SFF community. This leads us to labelling things as original that clearly are not.

Mind you, I do consider cactus folk to be original :-) But Tiste Andii *do* look like elves by another name.

[peadarog]

How sour they are!

[xraytheenforcer]

You just need to set your next fantasy book in pre-historic (or at least pre-Cook) Hawaii. I honestly don't think I've ever read a book like that before.

[peadarog]

You haven't been keeping up! Here, then enjoy!