Fantasy resides in that place that still believes they are possible even though they shouldn’t be. Those quick moments where we do a double-take and say “this isn’t happening.”

A couple of posters above have expressed that their appreciation for magic involves it being inherently mysterious and exceptional in ways that are difficult for a scientific perspective to incorporate. In those kinds of worlds, persistent skepticism alone wouldn’t necessarily be lazy characterization of a scientist. It might raise a warning flag to me, but as long as the character is well-developed and doesn’t exhibit other cardboard characteristics — like sneering, you can always tell the straw scientists by their sneer — I think the presence of intelligent disbelievers, however mistaken, can make for a richer world.

I think Dan’s mention of the importance of personal will is really a key distinction to make, because if reality is even the slightest bit affected by human thought then the whole scientific process falls apart, doesn’t it?

Healing potions are cool. But I can’t stand the aftertaste. It’s like, I don’t know, licking the inside of a unicorn’s nose? Or the ear of an unfortunately sweaty elf maid? Well, you know what I mean, right?

And by the way, if you were going to respond “how would you know what licking a unicorn’s nose or a sweaty elf maid’s ear tastes like,” well, okay, you got me.

I’ve only done one of those things.

Actually one of my first exposures to fantasy outside of Tolkien. Well done. His evil baddies were slavers. His good characters made terrible mistakes. I really dug those books, especially when Walter Slovotsky became the main POV character. Totally jumped the shark with “Not Exactly the Three Muskateers.”

So I’m not completely off-topic here, the system of magic was very cool. It wasn’t explained in much detail, but it was obvious there was a price to be paid. The use of healing potions throughout were nice ways to keep the characters alive, and inexplicably escape death on numerous occasions.

Now I’m way off topic.

Although technically it is sci-fi, if you are looking for applications of modern engineering in a medieval setting then you could also check out Leo Frankowski’s “The Adventures of Conrad Stargard” series (aka the “Cross-Time Engineer” series).

It is about a modern Polish engineer who is accidentally transported back to Earth’s medieval Poland by a time machine. I enjoyed its discussions and applications of modern engineering to prepare feudal Poland for the invasion of the Mongol Hordes. The writing and characters are a tad chauvinistic, but arguably that fits the time period being written about.

“As for science vs. magic, I recommend Lyndon Hardy’s “Master of the Five Magics.” This novel, while average in many ways, is a real gem when it comes to its magic systems. There are, as the title implies, five different forms of magic, each with its own laws and limitations, and the best part is that most of those laws are magical laws, not scientific laws.”

I’ll second that one. It’s a good book with a great and consistent magic system that is subject to scientific development.

I also liked Joel Rosenberg’s Heroes of the Flame series. The world is something you’d find in D&D, but one of the characters from our world brings engineering into it, to great effect.

I’m not at all saying we need science in fantasy, or vice versa, but to pretend that there’s a conflict when there isn’t fails to portray science accurately and builds in misunderstanding in our society.

Interesting comments and good points!

He is saying (I think) that in a well-constructed fantasy world that has its own consistency and rules (even if they are magical), a person who applies the scientific method would not be an automatic foil, fool, or disbeliever.

And conversely, a “scientist” character who simply dismisses the fantastical, regardless of evidence as to its existence and nature, is indeed a one-dimensional fool and not, in fact, a scientist.

So if Einstein had traveled to the Land with Thomas Covenant, he might have realized that Wild Magic is, in fact, the cosmological constant (duh).

Darwin would have loved Pern, with its dragons and fire lizards. I did. Though have you ever tried to get fire lizard poo off your shirt?

If Pavlov had traveled to Narnia, he might have got a rather nasty shock the first time a dog said, “I don’t care how many times you ring that bell, do you really expect me to drool over this slop?” But he would not have then dismissed the dog as unreal just because dogs on Earth have neither the cognitive nor biological development to speak.

And if the world’s leading scientists traveled into the realm of the Never Ending Story, they would no doubt come to a consensus and publish a report stating that the Nothing was, in fact, rapidly growing and consuming the realm, and a contributing factor was the clear loss of human imagination.

Unfortunately, King Bush would then edit their report to replace “the Nothing” with “a Minor and Unconfirmed Absence of Something,” and the term “rapidly growing and consuming the realm” with “possibly affecting minor outlying regions.” And of course, any reference to human imagination would be removed entirely.

But then, that is the difference between scientists and “believers;” scientists are constrained by nasty little things like observable and repeatable facts — whether it’s that on Earth an apple will always fall if you drop it, or that in Middle-Earth a ring makes the wearer invisible every time they put it on, exactly when they put it on, and only when they put it on.

On the other hand, a reckless scientist might also say, “Hmmmm. I wonder if the ring would have the same effect on non-humanoids? Like, say, a dragon? Perhaps I should conduct a controlled experiment …” (cue ominous music)

As far as vampires go, I most often see it explained scientifically from genetic and infection terms. It is a retro-virus of some kind, etcetera.

In some cases, this is fine. It depends on the style of story. Dracula is a figure of seduction and power and tragedy, and needs no explanation for why he is a vampire.

The Blade comics and movies, or Underworld, on the other hand, are about wars between humans and vampires in modern times, and understanding that vampirism is a virus opens the door for plots, character storylines, and weapons based on the struggle to control, spread, enhance or cure the virus.

So while I never think that fantastic events and elements should be given SCIENTIFIC reasons, I do think they should have something similarly constructed based on the magic/myths of that world.

Of course, I’d have done a thesis on vampiric metaphysics if I could have.