Fantasy Faction

Fantasy Faction => Fantasy Book & Author Discussion => Topic started by: Lady Ty on January 08, 2018, 12:30:08 AM

Title: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Lady Ty on January 08, 2018, 12:30:08 AM

That may very well be true.
But the question was about a futuristic powered armour. IMO, fluid operated pistons are lot less futuristic.


Unless it's basically a fairystory, or fantasy like Marvel you can't break the laws of physics. The future will not make electric motors replace hydraulic or gas powered actuators.

That post was accidental, but came about because I was concerned by Ray’s comment, so may as well pursue it.

I accept that SciFi should probably be aware of Laws of Physics, and certainly X-men would not work so brilliantly if they tried to observe them.

But seems to me fantasy by it’s very definition can break any physical rule and is not always required to explain in convincing detail how or why something is possible ( Why does this stupid keyboard write pissible all the time ::) ?)

In fact, I enjoy brief explanations of how an author perceives that his fantasy phenomenon comes about and will accept it in a good story, but not necessarily care about its veracity. And Brandon Sanderson has definitely not shown respect for the chemistry of metals.

I suspect  @Mark Lawrence ‘s Broken Empire and Red Queen’s War trilogies both play some strange games with laws of physics and they are enthralling fantasy.

Most of you may heartily disagree with my disregard of scientific rigour, and certainly Ray has different views, but  I would be interested to hear any comments. Am no scientist so please KIS for this Stupid.  ::)

Please could @Elfy or @xiagan or any kind mod around, move this post to start a new thread as below just cannot do it tidily without computer.

Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?






Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: RobertS on January 08, 2018, 08:40:00 AM

That may very well be true.
But the question was about a futuristic powered armour. IMO, fluid operated pistons are lot less futuristic.


Unless it's basically a fairystory, or fantasy like Marvel you can't break the laws of physics. The future will not make electric motors replace hydraulic or gas powered actuators.

That post was accidental, but came about because I was concerned by Ray’s comment, so may as well pursue it.

I accept that SciFi should probably be aware of Laws of Physics, and certainly X-men would not work so brilliantly if they tried to observe them.

But seems to me fantasy by it’s very definition can break any physical rule and is not always required to explain in convincing detail how or why something is possible ( Why does this stupid keyboard write pissible all the time ::) ?)

In fact, I enjoy brief explanations of how an author perceives that his fantasy phenomenon comes about and will accept it in a good story, but not necessarily care about its veracity. And Brandon Sanderson has definitely not shown respect for the chemistry of metals.

I suspect  @Mark Lawrence ‘s Broken Empire and Red Queen’s War trilogies both play some strange games with laws of physics and they are enthralling fantasy.

Most of you may heartily disagree with my disregard of scientific rigour, and certainly Ray has different views, but  I would be interested to hear any comments. Am no scientist so please KIS for this Stupid.  ::)

Please could @Elfy or @xiagan or any kind mod around, move this post to start a new thread as below just cannot do it tidily without computer.

Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?

Depends on the level of suspension of belief that you wish to compel in your reader. Quite a bit of great fantasy has a minimal expected suspension of belief. "Through the Looking Glass" or Diskworld are examples of wonderful fantasy, without strong suspension of belief.

One of my strong desires in writing is to encourage people to examine their own beliefs. For me, adhering to Physics is very important. I want the reader to slip into strong suspension of belief so they can view things from perspectives that might not be their own.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ray McCarthy on January 08, 2018, 09:47:52 AM
That post was accidental, but came about because I was concerned by Ray’s comment, so may as well pursue it.

I accept that SciFi should probably be aware of Laws of Physics, and certainly X-men would not work so brilliantly if they tried to observe them.

But seems to me fantasy by it’s very definition can break any physical rule and is not always required to explain in convincing detail how or why something is possible ( Why does this stupid keyboard write pissible all the time ::) ?)


Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
IMO X-Men and most Marvel is "Superhero" genre and not SF at all. It's fantasy, magic really.
So if the special suit is in SF, it ought to seem feasible (handwavium allowed). If it's superhero or outright fantasy then it can be as fanciful as the author desires.
In NEITHER case should the design or operation of such things be described in any detail (The trap ST-TNG fell into). Tecnobabble at a minimum.

Fantasy and Superhero genre don't need to confirm to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular, but ought at least to be internally consistent.
It's all about telling stories, not delivering a science text or attempting Technological Futurology. So what ever the story & plot needs and works to suspend the reader's disbelief.

Context is important.

Also comics / graphic novels, animation and live action will be more visual and what is "cool" in cinema (say X-men or Avatar) may be very poor indeed in a written novel.

How a mecha-suit works isn't important. It's what the character is enabled to do. I've read Starship  Troopers (many years ago), Iron man comic. I've watched Iron Man movie #1 and a Japanese mechasuit romp. They work because of the story, not the suits.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ray McCarthy on January 08, 2018, 09:56:24 AM

Most of you may heartily disagree with my disregard of scientific rigour, and certainly Ray has different views, but  I would be interested to hear any comments. Am no scientist so please KIS for this Stupid.  ::)

Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?

I don't think we have different views when we both agree a title is really Fantasy rather than SF.

Short answer: No, Fantasy does NOT need to adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular. Sometimes SF isn't really SF and thus works fine with a disregard of physics. I enjoyed Dune and the first six McCaffery Pern books which are supposedly SF, but really fantasy.
Loads of good SF ignores physics. It gets away with it best when it is glossed over with NO EXPLANATION AT ALL.
Better SF might only handwave over one or two things in the story. A.C. Clarke thought that a good principle for SF.

See TVtropes.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: ScarletBea on January 08, 2018, 10:00:09 AM
(pssst @xiagan, could you move this to the 'Fantasy Book Discussion' section? this here is mainly for chit-chat hehe)

My opinion is 'definitely not' - in fact, the best ones defy laws of nature with a good explanation - like the use of metals and colour in Mistborn and Lightbringer, and as Lady Ty said, the spoilery bits in Mark Lawrence's books.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: xiagan on January 08, 2018, 10:12:42 AM
(pssst @xiagan, could you move this to the 'Fantasy Book Discussion' section? this here is mainly for chit-chat hehe)
Oops. When you split a topic you aren't asked where you want to have it, so it got overlooked.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Nora on January 08, 2018, 10:32:41 AM
I don't mind really. Depends on what rules are broken and how, but any appearance of magic is already breaking the laws of physics.
I can accept that things are different in another world, especially if it's a pretty distant type of fantasy world, on a non-earth like planet.
It's best when it has explanations for it, like Sanderson does it, but a good super power, like in Vicious, doesn't need to be realistic for me to believe in it. Plus, sometimes you have dream-like weird genre doing stuff to physics that is just great! Like weird alien zones a la Annihilation, or the stories in Three moments of an Explosion, by China Mieville...

I think the key is consistency, and well defined limits in the author's mind, so that they don't make it overly confusing.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ray McCarthy on January 08, 2018, 11:06:18 AM
For SF universally regarded as SF, there are two very common accepted violations of science:

1) FTL travel. Basically any starship tech other than suspended animation coasting or a coasting generation ship. Even with antimatter (a scary battery technology) you need all the fuel to accelerate out of a star system and decelerate at destination. The LeGuin Hainish Universe starships are nearly realistic.

2) Psychic powers. Probably due to Campbell's interest in 1930s (the pulp SF&F USA magazine editor).

As you add additional stuff that seems to violate science you move along the spectrum from Hard SF, Science Fiction, Science Fantasy, Space Opera, Fantasy (which can be futuristic or in space, not just historic styled or Contemporary Urban vampires).
No genre is better or worse. The stories can be better or worse.

There is no hard boundary or dividing line between Superheroes, Fantasy, Space Opera, SF, hard SF. It's a continuous spectrum. Ultimately "official" genres are a publisher/marketing invention.

Mary Stewart is sometimes credited with inventing the modern Adventure / Romance with often a dash of Fantasy in them (she did write some actual fantasy, the Arthurian trilogy), but actually some of the original westerns 1900s to 1930s are equally Romance and Adventure, so appealed to a very wide readership. Hence Zane Grey was first author to $1Million.

Whatever works for your story. Don't worry too much if it's Superhero (anything goes), SF, Fantasy etc. BUT only explain science if the plot needs it. You don't explain a petrol engine in a detective story unless there is clever sabotage. So don't explain how the FTL drive works or the armoured suit works.

You don't need to stick to what you know, but if you don't know, search online and use Wikipedia as a starting point. Zane Grey was inspired by reading "The Virginian". He hadn't ridden, nor been to the West, so did both as well as learning to write.
Obviously we can't first hand use powered suits (but powered exoskeletons exist, read up) or starships (but read up on basic astrophysics) or Psychic powers (but read up what they are supposed to be).
Widely read many books in and outside your genre. Pickup school texts and college introduction texts on science subjects in Charity/Thrift shops and randomly get 100s of fiction books outside your genre there too.  Avoid coffee table books and breathless science hype / futurist magazines and websites, real SF books are better!
 
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Eclipse on January 08, 2018, 11:24:16 AM
This should be moved to the writers corner
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: ScarletBea on January 08, 2018, 12:15:59 PM
This should be moved to the writers corner
Don't we readers have an opinion too? This isn't asking specifically for writers...
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ray McCarthy on January 08, 2018, 12:37:06 PM
Don't we readers have an opinion too?
Readers opinions are the most important. By far.  Look at the mess Modernist and post-modern Literary Fiction has created for itself by basically ignoring readers. Do now only critics, Uni courses and other "Literary" authors along with a few snobs read it?

The day SF&F ignores readership, it heads to irrelevancy. I don't mean we should "write for the market", that is another road to perdition. Some beta readers that would read the kind of genre your book roughly fits are worth their weight in gold. The other important thing is an editor. Unlike decent beta readers they can be hired from 1c a word.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Eclipse on January 08, 2018, 01:03:48 PM
This should be moved to the writers corner
Don't we readers have an opinion too? This isn't asking specifically for writers...

I thought This section is to discuss fantasy books ? There’s nothing stopping readers from reading this debate or posting in the writers corner

You will be putting history book on the geography shelf next ????



Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: ArhiX on January 08, 2018, 01:15:39 PM
I can understand that in science fiction we might crave for some good explanation why 100 000 000t star-ship just went from 0 to the speed of light in a matter of seconds (It's hyper-space-fart-drive) but we are not really interested why in the world the crew was not transformed into a steamy pile of crushed flesh and bones because of the sudden acceleration.

Of course - it's science fiction, so we have "science" in there. But still we have another word - which is "fiction" so the fart-drive stays in it's place.

In fantasy I care even less. I mean... we have dragons in there! Giant, armored lizards. Sometimes hundreds of meters wide. Weighting a tone or two. Maybe ten. AND FLYING! The heaviest living birds with ability to fly are like... 20 kg. The biggest flying things ever - Quetzalcoatlus (how do one even pronounce it?) weighted from 45,8 do 200 kg. Hetzegopteryx was about 180 to 250 kg and was propably too big to fly.

So if were to adhere to laws of science we would never have dragons in fantasy. Can you imagine fantasy with NO dragons? Or dragons being fat, barely moving over-grown and lazy lizards?

Go away!

I want magic! I want Smaug. I want Kalameet and Midir! I want epic dragons, and epic dragon-battles. Science people can have their science. I want a dragon. A big one.

Ok. Ok. I like it, where there is some link to laws of normal world. That's why I have spent quite some time trying to justify why my race of dino-birds can move and fly fast with relative ease. That is why I have some kind of entrophy-like force.

I like science. But I like dragons too.

And there is enough room for both of it.

Right?

(https://pa1.narvii.com/6492/8c93367dc46907e4a214be6bf724fd5fa259e601_hq.gif)

<insert Jimmy Barnes screaming in the sky from "Big Enough">

TLDR;
1. Science is nice.
2. Laws of physics not so much.
3. Gravity broke my phone.
4. But dragons are nice.
5. As a reader I want magic and dragons.
6. As a writer I want magic and dragons too.

Pssst.

Gimme mah dragons!
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: DrNefario on January 08, 2018, 01:23:03 PM
I get a bit weirded out if there's too much science in my fantasy. It's like it's drawing attention the impossibilities I'm trying to overlook.

I think fantasy should obey Newtonian mechanics, unless there's a good reason not to, but I'm not so bothered if it doesn't obey Einsteinian mechanics.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: The Gem Cutter on January 08, 2018, 05:39:06 PM
Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular? No. It should artfully break them in ways that are interesting and entertaining.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Yora on January 08, 2018, 06:02:14 PM
Fantasy needs to adhere to the laws of its own setting. The laws don't have to be the same as in reality, but it's vital that the story sticks to the laws it has. They don't need to be explained, and it's usually more interesting if they aren't, but they have to be consistent.

If something works one way in one scene and a different way in another scene, then there has to be an aditional rule that governs under what special circumstances they work differently. If rocks are always fall down and sink to the bottom, then they have to keep doing this in the future. You can still have floating mountains later on, but then it needs to be a special rock that is different from all the rock we've seen before, or it is lifted up by some force that was not presence in all the other scenes when rock didn't float.

It does not need to be explained how things are suddenly behaving differently than they've been shown before, but it needs to be explained why the rules seem to be different for this exceptional situation.

My rule of thumb is always stick to the standard rules of physics and nature unless you make an active decision to change them. When a normal steel sword cuts through normal steel armor, then there is clearly something wrong. Then I need a statement that this is a magical sword or that the armor is actually made out of rubber.

I think fantasy should obey Newtonian mechanics, unless there's a good reason not to, but I'm not so bothered if it doesn't obey Einsteinian mechanics.
Great example. Because we experience newtonian mechanics all the time in our everyday life, but Einsteinian mechanics are pretty much invisible to our normal perception.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Rostum on January 08, 2018, 08:30:13 PM
absolutely not, with a bucket load of proviso's. Describe your world, universe, pond or whatever and either define the laws that enable it or or the exception that defines it. Don't use an earth type template and suddenly decide to ignore physical laws to suit your story without previously having made it clear in the worldbuilding. If snow isn't cold in your story then it cant be made out of ice crystals precipitating out the atmosphere at Earth temperatures so the freezing point of water (and boiling point) must be different or snow isn't made of ice or someone magiked it that way, but make the reader believe.

I can cope with Dragons and magic but my belief will not be suspended by the the hand and a half sword your barbarian favours in a back scabbard unless they have seven foot arms and their knuckles drag on the floor behind them.

Make it consistent and logical no matter how fantastical it is and it works for me.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Skip on January 08, 2018, 09:17:15 PM
I agree with the comments generally. Do what works. Do it well, and no one will fuss. But the discussion has raised a couple of questions for me.

Which laws are we talking about here? I'd like to see a list. Thermodynamics. That's three laws. Which other ones?

As a corollary, would we have to adhere to *all* of them? Whichever ones are on your list.

Are there aspects of "science" that you would include for adherence that are not necessarily formal laws? I can think of something like Euclidean geometry, for example.

And now I've brought it up, a cleverer person that I could write a hard SF story that intentionally broke exactly one law. Just to explore what happens. Change one variable at a time, young Jedi.

Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Lady Ty on January 08, 2018, 10:12:29 PM
 ;D ;D I love it when a post takes off and so many new perspectives, ideas and talking points crop up. It is also confirmation of how much we all love our chosen variants of SFF, so writers should rejoice because you are readers too and it all goes to widening the audience.

Thank you all, loving all I read, any further thoughts, keep them coming, especially if you can reference books that bear out your comments as some have done. That way we can increase our TBR’s piles  to topple-over point.

It will take me some time to read through carefully all that has arrived here, mostly when I was asleep, so will be back to comment more on individual points.

Thank you @xiagan and @ScarletBea for moving the thread to exactly where I should have chosen to begin it. Sorry @Eclipse, but this is a general discussion and putting anything in Writers’ Corner may unfortunately imply it is limited to their comment and interest, even though that is a misconception. No way, all readers deserve to make clearer bids for what we want to read and what makes the books more appealing so up there at the top is a perfect place. Mutual advantage.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Nora on January 08, 2018, 11:40:58 PM
There is gravity, weak and strong nuclear forces, and electromagnetic force.
But go figure which one magic breaks? Potentially all of them? Often gravity, with people and things getting to flying...
But plenty of natural "laws" of biology get broken or simply stretched.

I honestly don't think fantasy breaks these laws in secondary worlds, or even books with hidden sub worlds. It implies that it is a natural state. That it adds forces rather than break the others. It says that it's a world in which monsters have evolved somehow. The potential realism of that is what makes zombies so scary, especially the virus kind, for me at least!
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: The Gem Cutter on January 09, 2018, 01:38:40 AM
There is only one rule - the work must be entertaining. So sure - have spaceship sounds in space, swords of light that do not pass through each other, alien races with predictably identical personalities from one to another. It's all good - so long as it's good.
Hence The Rule of Cool and its cousins, which are to the arts what the Special Forces saying is to war: "If it works but it's stupid, it isn't stupid."
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: JMack on January 09, 2018, 02:17:49 AM
There is only one rule - the work must be entertaining. So sure - have spaceship sounds in space, swords of light that do not pass through each other, alien races with predictably identical personalities from one to another. It's all good - so long as it's good.
Hence The Rule of Cool and its cousins, which are to the arts what the Special Forces saying is to war: "If it works but it's stupid, it isn't stupid."

Quite off-topic, but I love the advertising motto: “it’s not creative if it doesn’t sell.”
Applied to writing, none of it matters if it doesn’t excite.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: cupiscent on January 09, 2018, 02:40:07 AM
I'm with Yora: break all the rules of reality that you like, just do it consistently. The world of the novel needs to have its own laws of physics, but they need to be laws, with consistency of effect and consequence, otherwise it's just a constant deus ex machina as the author pulls out whatever nonsense s/he likes to make things interesting or solve problems. (e.g. weren't we all just bitching about Holdo's swandive in the Last Jedi discussion?)
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Skip on January 09, 2018, 04:29:08 AM
There is gravity, weak and strong nuclear forces, and electromagnetic force.

Thanks for the reply, Nora. I got hung up on the word law, which has a rather specific meaning in science. If we are talking forces and principles, the list gets very much longer. I reckon few will fuss if my magic system breaks the weak electromagnetic force. :)
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Nora on January 09, 2018, 09:01:44 AM
I reckon few will fuss if you break any law. Having beings who survive eternally on blood and sparkle in the sunlight isn't exactly biologically possible, without even getting into the mind reader, super speed, special powers side of things.
Yet as an author, Meyer is very rich and very able to find publisher for anything she desires to publish. People complained that sparkling vampires were ridiculous, not impossible. We're all ready to accept them and the multitude of natural laws that they break.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: NedMarcus on January 09, 2018, 12:42:14 PM
Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?


No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no... I was asked this question at the weekend and my answer was no  ;D
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ryan Mueller on January 10, 2018, 04:26:45 AM
If breaking the laws of physics is consistent with the world's magic and overall worldbuilding, then it's fine. If your story seems to follow our laws of physics and then suddenly doesn't follow them for no logical reason, that's going to annoy me as a reader.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Justan Henner on January 11, 2018, 04:51:33 AM
Whatever works for your story. Don't worry too much if it's Superhero (anything goes), SF, Fantasy etc. BUT only explain science if the plot needs it. You don't explain a petrol engine in a detective story unless there is clever sabotage. So don't explain how the FTL drive works or the armoured suit works.

Heh. It's an odd paradigm that writing advice in SF is shifting to a state of "Don't describe the science" while fantasy has been in a state of "describe the magic system to the point that it's basically a science."
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Rostum on January 11, 2018, 07:42:19 AM
I am reminded of this particular gem http://www.davidbrin.com/practiceeffect.html (http://www.davidbrin.com/practiceeffect.html)

I change to the laws of physics consistently played, and played with to create a lot of fun.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: S. K. Inkslinger on January 12, 2018, 01:47:02 PM
Absolutely not for Fantasy, that's one thing. I think it's enough for the novel to adhere to its own set of internal rules and laws (in terms of consistency). Something like the magic system created by Sanderson or the twist on physics by Mark Lawrence are my absolute favorites.  8)
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Skip on January 12, 2018, 03:20:04 PM
They're more what you call guidelines than actual laws ....
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Lady Ty on January 14, 2018, 06:07:15 AM
My apologies for not returning to this thread, having started it, we have had a week of extreme heat and I couldn’t cope well. Tomorrow should be cooler and I will read properly.  ;)
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Ryan Mueller on January 14, 2018, 06:27:48 AM
I've always liked the idea that you get "One Big Lie." It may not be strictly one thing, but it makes sense to me.

Obviously, you can have magic and creatures and such that break the laws of physics. But if regular people (those with no magical talent) are breaking laws of physics left and right, it makes your magic less interesting. Magic is interesting in part because it breaks the laws of physics. If you play fast and loose with those laws everywhere in your book, then your magic loses a lot of its impact.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: The Gem Cutter on January 14, 2018, 06:53:12 AM
Magic is interesting in part because it breaks the laws of physics. If you play fast and loose with those laws everywhere in your book, then your magic loses a lot of its impact.
Barrel-surfing dwarves and shield-surfing elves in the LOTR & Hobbit Movie - she's talking to YOU
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: Rostum on January 14, 2018, 09:49:53 AM
I recently forced myself through the Emperors Blades and while the story had stuff going for it, the book was constantly let down by people not dying through the authors laziness to actually research what he was writing about or the consequences thereof. Burying someone for a week in the ground in tundra described as having snow on the ground walking over mountains without food shelter clothing etc. then the rational for actions was often twisted round breaking people makes them broken not in some way tougher. This made reading it a chore.
Title: Re: Should Fantasy adhere to the Laws of Science, Physics in particular?
Post by: SevasTra82 on January 16, 2018, 04:27:24 PM
I don't think fantasy books should adhere to anything real-world.  It's kind of like saying "hey, this is a medieval book, therefore it must have castles in it!"

Ok, maybe not that extreme, but you get my point  :)

I once witnessed Mary Robinette Kowal go off on a guy on Twitter because the guy told her that there was no such thing as a black viking, therefore her story shouldn't have any in it.  It unnerved me so much that I did a Youtube rant on the subject, lol.

So yea, works of fiction can have any laws they want in it, IMO :D