What is Vanilla?

General
#1

Recently I’ve been noticing people lamenting the lack of vanilla in the OSR/D&D in general. Aside from “I know it when I see it” how do you determine if something is indeed vanilla?

Is it: using a Tolkien-esque setting? IE: elves, dwarves, hobbits and men?
Is it: using basic settings and creatures from early D&D?
Is it: using a faux-English background?
Is it: using a minimum of new mechanics or themes?

Obviously if the pcs start off in a tavern in a small village and then travel through a forest to slay a cave full of goblins is quintessentially vanilla. But how much can you add before it loses the vanilla flavor?

What are other must-include elements of vanilla?

3 Likes
Happy Pitday! A retrospective of the past year of the Pit
#2

I don’t think there is a universal definition of vanilla. I think it’s not using, or using as little as possible, more punk/metal elements:

  • Violence or gore (like the Death and Dismemberment table)
  • Weird monsters (most traditional fantasy monsters are vanilla, lovecraftian horrors are not vanilla)
  • Punk themes, like having the party be a bunch of misfits

Like, a good example of a vanilla game with a distinct OSR feel, to me, is Beyond the Wall and Other Adventures, which is faux-English with a strong Tolkien and Earthsea feeling.

3 Likes
#3

To me, adherence to expectations/tropes is what makes for a more Traditionally Vanilla Setting/Theme.

If player’s only have exposure to conventional Fantasy (like Tolkien that you mention), and the Setting/Themes explored do little to subvert their expectations, then this is a good way to maintain a desired Vanilla feel. It is still eminently possible to paint a fantastic world within these boundaries, even if there is a pervasive prevalence of “weirder” settings out there nowadays :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#4

This. Also, I feel there exists a sort of super-vanilla within OSR, defined by vintage art, a limited selection of monsters and clean-cut evil Skeletor-like antagonists. Dungeon Crawl Classics a near-perfect example of this. It presents this nostalgic fantasy world, untouched by modern ideas, like a time capsule preserving an 11-year-old’s naive, vibrant vision of the world. It’s the world I might have envisioned as a kid, when looking at the Hero Quest boardgame cover, or an Iron Maiden record sleeve.

6 Likes
#5

I see what you’re saying. I think most of that makes a lot of sense, although surely a bunch of misfits is part of the DNA of vanilla. At least all the Dragonlance and other TSR books always had misfits at their core.

I’ve heard about Beyond the Wall, but it never caught my fancy. However, if it has a strong Tokien and Earthsea feeling, then I’ll definitely check it out.

#6

I’m wondering: whose expectations and what tropes? Or is it even possible to know?

#7

DCC has always struck me as pretty gonzo. Maybe it’s a module by module basis.

Heroquest is a pretty damn good example though. Probably the warcraft games are too. Or maybe they are simply derivative. Or maybe those are the same things?

3 Likes
#8

I don’t see the Dragonlance characters as misfits. They are much more like Tolkien’s characters than Conan the Barbarian. While they are characters from different species and backgrounds, but they are not outcasts and they could blend in civilized society again. Take Raistlin: while he is evil, he is civilized evil. He is capable of good manners and no society would just throw him out. On the other hand you have characters like Conan, who is somewhat punk: he rejects civilization and civilization rejects him. He could never blend in the adventuring society, or have a normal job in the setting. Other than adventuring, Conan of Cimmeria has no place in the world.

#9

The player’s expectations to a degree. If you sell a game as “Legend Of Zelda” and deliver on the players expectations of what a game like this would be like, then it is “Vanilla” for the stated purpose :). By my reckoning, vanilla Horror exists (with tropes like “Don’t go in the basement!” or “Don’t split up!”), as does vanilla Cyberpunk (tropes like “Mirror Shades” backstabbing "Mr. Johnson’s), etc. What matters here is that you cleave closely to the conventions found within the inspirations for the setting, which can be quite varied.

If I’m running “Vanilla Fantasy” and suddenly incorporate UFOs, I’m straying from expected convention a bit (but even “Gonzo” like this can be run “Vanilla” to a degree if you meet player’s expectations and don’t actively attempt to contravene them, subverting tropes sometimes is fine and plenty surprising).

I tend to stick very close to “Traditional Fantasy” in my Wilderness Hexes for example, mainly so they can find the broadest possible utility with other DMs, but I’m sure that some would consider some of the entries “Neapolitan” (to extend the ice cream metaphor) based on their own perception of “Traditional Fantasy” :slight_smile:

1 Like
#10

I don’t mean to quibble. I understand your larger point. But Conan literally became the King of an entire nation.

Additionally, I think one could argue that at least some of Tolkien’s characters were misfits as well: Frodo, certainly, was neither of the Shire nor Buckland. That was at the beginning, and by the end he was such a misfit he could take no happiness even in resounding Hobbit victories. Strider is certainly a misfit in Fellowship, though he too becomes king. Gandalf I think fits pretty well–a man with no home, and who is often accused of bearing ill tidings.

The idea of who is a misfit and who isn’t is very interesting, and perhaps more relative than I would have guessed.

#11

I see what you’re saying, but the way people use the term gonzo is often the opposite. Most people wouldn’t describe the DCC aesthetic and adventure design as vanilla, I.e. fight a god/demon lord/Cthulhu monster in your first adventure

1 Like
#12

Yes, I think vanilla means some combination of Tolkien and baseline D&D faux medieval settings and adventures. As Gabor Lux said in an interview with Patrick Stuart: “vanilla can be delicious”! he had some good advice in that interview. https://youtu.be/GW-pM4hA6eA

1 Like
#13

I don’t know DCC very well, I’ve only read the core book, not the modules. I think it kinda fetishises vintage fantasy to an extreme, which is maybe what i meant with super-vanilla. Cthulhu and eldtitch horrors, while part of DnD’s dna maybe, are definitely gonzo. I think of gonzo as stretching the limits of fantasy, or breaking them, being very anachronistic, postmodern etc.

Are tieflings and dragonborn vanilla? For me they are just weird.

1 Like
#14

Just to rectify: I fear that “misfits” wasn’t the appropriate term. I think it’s better to use punk.

Like, Conan became the King of an entire nation but he was still an outsider and never fit in the nation.

Frodo didn’t feel like he fit in the Shire, but he wasn’t felt like an outsider by his countryhobbits.

They are the two best examples of punk/misfits in Tolkien’s work, but even they are part of some kind of society: Strider has his companions and friends (and no one could say that Elrond wasn’t a member of some kind of elite) and as Aragorn, King of Gondor, he was accepted by his subjects, unlike Conan; Gandalf was a man with no home, but of high standing between the political powers of Middle Earth, he didn’t settle, but if he wanted many kings of Middle Earth would have been happy to have him as court wizard.

In fact, you helped me clarify what I intended: vanilla characters are drawn towards adventure and so leave civilized society, punk characters are kicked out of society into a life of adventure (or a gruesome death).

2 Likes
#15

If it fits in the Forgotten Realms, it’s vanilla :grin: lol!

3 Likes
#16

Personally, I think “vanilla” is a term that is being used to describe more traditional ideas of fantasy. It is probably not all that useful without understanding what is not vanilla.

In my observation, many authors seem to aim for originality by way of Rorschach-test-style concept splicing (for example, take a disturbing word [let’s go with “bile”] and combine it with a common trope [let’s say “witches”] and we get “the bile witch”, and so now we work backwards and come up with a description for what a ‘bile witch’ is, and voila! originality). It’s actually a really useful technique and can produce some cool results, so I’m not knocking it (I do it too!).

So I think folks are starting to miss ‘classic adventures’ that aren’t trying to spawn some kind of ground-breaking, never-been-done-before idea. I think creative people get hung up on trying to create that brand-spankin’ new thing. Like, when was the last time someone took the time to make a really well-produced adventure about saving a princess (or prince) from a dragon? Classic idea! Makes for a great adventure! But nobody does that because it’s “too cliche”.

People still actually really like the classic tropes, and folks are missing them because authors today are very concerned about being labeled derivative by their peers. So nothing feels familiar anymore because it’s all purposely made to feel unfamiliar to protect the author’s reputation for not being a copy-cat, derivative hack.

5 Likes
#17

A very vague definition I’m throwing into the ring, it’s mine when it comes to “Vanilla”:
Commonly shared elements and ideas when the term “fantasy” is brought up.

If we asked a random person what Fantasy included to them we would most likely hear of Elves & Dwarfs & swords and dragons. For me, Vanilla is this set of answers.
The elements/tropes/ideas/burdens brought up as a reply to “What is Fantasy?”, the assumptions we can freely take. (I’m aware this is not a good definition and incredibly ambigious.)

I think this common ground is an incredible advantage when it comes to gaming. Even with never having played once, you have something you know and can stick to, you can work with, you can immerse yourself in.
With newbies one has to explain mechanics and the like but question like “What is a dwarf?” never come up.

2 Likes
#18

A little late on the post, but I want to add to the discussion.

Personally, Vanilla fantasy is composed of the regular Tolkien races of Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Halflings playing often “Good” races with monstrous humanoids like Orc, Goblins, and similar races being the antagonists/baddies. Big creatures like Dragons, large scale battles, and a feudalistic government system appearing across the world can also be found in the milieu of vanilla.

I personally think Vanilla (both the ice cream flavor and the flavor of fantasy we are discussing) is dependent upon the group and game in question. For my own group and the Weird West game, I am running with them; it features your Tolkien races, but also Androids, and some anime-styled humanoid races with guns, cowboys, and magic thrown into the mix for good measure. For me and my group, there is enough Vanilla Fantasy and even Vanilla Westerns present to help new players coming into the group to play adjust to the game, but there is enough other flavors injected into the mix to make it different from my other games.

Similarly, when I began planning for a Gangbusters B/X game, I found myself first establishing the tone and feel of the genres of Noir and Hard-boiled Detective type stories before I began injecting my own milieu of Vanilla Fantasy and anime trimmings to both help get my players into the possible game but also help slide them slide into the game since they’ll have a handful of threads to hang onto at the start of the game.

I think the inclusion of Vanilla Fantasy even into some of the Wacky/Punkish style of games provides an easy thread for both rookie players and veterans to slide in and out of different games since the common thread vanilla fantasy provides is easy and simple to grasp. I think it’s how you can inject other flavors into the Vanilla is what makes things interesting.

1 Like
#19

Very weird. And stupidly named. For a long time, I thought tieflings were some kind of new thief.

1 Like
#20

I think I agree, but that makes the whole distinction rather unhelpful. I am thinking that very basic vanilla must come from either European folklore or a Gygaxed version of the Tolkien races. Most people don’t go purely vanilla. But those elements must be agreed on, at least by most western players.

1 Like