40k and WHF are really, really similar

[Kahoolin]

How are pyskers fantasy, and not sci-fi? My argument is one word.

Dune.

Unfortunately I can't give you one word. What I can say is that the psychic powers in Dune are explained as being the product of genetics and drugs, so yes, that's technically science fiction. The psykers in 40k use power from "the warp," a nebulous other dimension made of raw chaos and full of hell-beasts. That's fantasy.

EDIT: Hey! I think I have a good rule of thumb. If you look at the explanation for something and you think "well yeah, I believe that could happen, resulting in something that seems impossible right now," then you have science fiction. If you look at it and think "yeah but in the real world that's pretty much never going to be the case unless the universe goes mad" then you have fantasy.

So Dune, people practice eugenics for hundreds of years and synthesize mental-enhancement drugs, resulting in what we would call impossible psychic powers but which are perfectly explicable - that's sci fi.

In 40k, a parallel universe full of Daemons and chaos exists beside our own, which can be tapped into by certain random individuals to do things that we would think are impossible - that's fantasy. The fact that the random people share a gene just makes it science-fantasy.

How's that? I think it ties in well with the wikipedia explanation of the difference being one of degree, based on how much the author bothers to explain using science.

[Nabterayl]

To be honest, I'm not sure I would classify Dune as science fiction, if the distinguishing characteristic of science fiction is the desire to explain the fantastical elements in the story. But regardless, I'd point to the following factors that cause me to classify 40K psykers and psychic powers as magic rather than technology:

1. The denizens of the universe themselves think of psychic powers in magical terms. For instance, unsanctioned psykers are referred to as "witches," and their practice as "witchcraft." Some particularly bigoted individuals refer even to sanctioned psykers as witches. Chaos psykers are frequently referred to as "sorcerors," and their practice as "sorcery" or "magic," despite the fact that what they are doing is fundamentally no different than what a sanctioned psyker does.
2. Although machines may be constructed that interact with psychic powers, the actions of a psyker in utilizing his psychic powers cannot be replicated from start to finish by a machine - or if they can, there is never any hint of it.
3. Some of the physical objects that affect psychic powers are pretty clearly not machines, such as hexagrammatic wards (which, as physical objects, are simply bits of metal arranged in a particular way).
4. Psychic powers draw upon a power source that is external to the psyker, without which even the most gifted psyker cannot utilize his powers.
5. EDIT: There is such a thing as a "psyker gene." Pegging such a complex phenomenon to a single gene (arguably, pegging into to purely genetic factors at all) is tantamount to hand-waving from the perspective of somebody who has even a high school education in genetics.

[Kahoolin]

To be honest, I'm not sure I would classify Dune as science fiction, if the distinguishing characteristic of science fiction is the desire to explain the fantastical elements in the story.

Yeah me neither, but I didn't want to open that can of worms.

40k I think is like Harry Potter. Some people are wizards, some people are muggles. I'm sure you could say that wizards in Harry Potter are a mutation, but that doesn't make magic science.

[murrburger]

To be honest, I'm not sure I would classify Dune as science fiction, if the distinguishing characteristic of science fiction is the desire to explain the fantastical elements in the story. But regardless, I'd point to the following factors that cause me to classify 40K psykers and psychic powers as magic rather than technology:

First thing. Dune is a seminal science fiction work, I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. Not everything needs to be explained in science fiction, there's always the unknown element. It's not necessarily magical, but it shows that science can't explain everything, it may have theories or hypothesis, but never anything completely concrete.

1. The denizens of the universe themselves think of psychic powers in magical terms. For instance, unsanctioned psykers are referred to as "witches," and their practice as "witchcraft." Some particularly bigoted individuals refer even to sanctioned psykers as witches. Chaos psykers are frequently referred to as "sorcerors," and their practice as "sorcery" or "magic," despite the fact that what they are doing is fundamentally no different than what a sanctioned psyker does.
   

1. This is in-universe. Of course they are referred to as witches, or sorcerers. But we know better. The Emperor knows that they are really the next step in evolution for humanity. However, It's a nice twist that these actually are dangerous individuals, and they need to be controlled/killed for mankind's survival.
   
   

2. Although machines may be constructed that interact with psychic powers, the actions of a psyker in utilizing his psychic powers cannot be replicated from start to finish by a machine - or if they can, there is never any hint of it.
   
3. Some of the physical objects that affect psychic powers are pretty clearly not machines, such as hexagrammatic wards (which, as physical objects, are simply bits of metal arranged in a particular way).
4. Psychic powers draw upon a power source that is external to the psyker, without which even the most gifted psyker cannot utilize his powers.

[Nabterayl]

First thing. Dune is a seminal science fiction work, I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. Not everything needs to be explained in science fiction, there's always the unknown element. It's not necessarily magical, but it shows that science can't explain everything, it may have theories or hypothesis, but never anything completely concrete.

I'm not arguing it. I'm arguing that if the definition of science fiction is the desire to explain things, Dune's status as science fiction would be iffy. At the end of the day, all fantastical elements in even the hardest science fiction boil down to hand-waving - the quality I'm talking about is how "buried" you want the hand-waving to be. Herbert was not very concerned with the plausibility of some elements of his universe, but he lavished quite a bit of work on the plausibility of others.

It's the users belief in the device that makes it work, or his 'faith in the Emperor (Both can be argued)'.

That's exactly my point. If faith is actually what makes a hexagrammatic ward work, then I don't see how you can call a hexagrammatic ward technology. If you can't build a machine that does what a psyker does, I don't see how you can call what a psyker does natural (contrast navigating the Warp, which can't be done without a psyker, with Dune navigators, which can be replaced by machines). If a psyker's power comes not from his mind but an external dimension, I don't see how you can call what he does psionics (the traditional science fiction substitute for "magic").

Remember, it's science fiction. If you pull apart every little thing like that, you'll soon realise nothing in most sci-fi works like it should.

That's true, of course. What I'm trying to point out is that one of the differences between science fiction and science fantasy is in the effort put into obfuscating the fact that it doesn't work. For instance, neither Star Wars hyperdrives nor Star Trek warp drives actually work. Both are based on bad science, or at best unverified speculation. But Star Trek expends a great deal more energy than does Star Wars in trying to make its FTL technology sound plausible and describe exactly how it works, at least in-universe. That is [one of] the thing[s] that makes Star Trek science fiction while Star Wars is science fantasy.

To put it another way, Star Trek cares a great deal about how its warp drives work, as evidenced by the reams of paper spent "explaining" it. Star Wars cares only a little about how its hyperdrives work - there's an explanation, yes, but it's nowhere near as lavish as Star Trek's. Similarly, the fact that 40K explains the psychic mutation as the work of a single gene indicates to me that 40K doesn't actually care very much about how the mutation works, which to me is more indicative of a science fantasy attitude than a science fiction one.

[Melissia]

That's because 40k was an "IN SPAAAAAAAAACE!" rip of WFB when it started. It's drifted away as time goes on, for which I am thankful.

[Lerra]

Isn't WHF supposed to exist within the world of 40k? I remember reading something about the WFB world being inside the eye of terror, or an unknown world on the edge of the galaxy, or something like that.

That would explain some of the similarities, though.

[Kahoolin]

First thing. Dune is a seminal science fiction work, I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. Not everything needs to be explained in science fiction, there's always the unknown element. It's not necessarily magical, but it shows that science can't explain everything, it may have theories or hypothesis, but never anything completely concrete.

I think what we're touching on here is that science fiction is not a very useful term these days. Dune is a seminal science fiction work because that's what it was historically called, and that's what most people would think of it as being. However . . . it is more like Tolkein than Asimov in that the magic and the mythic themes are more important than the explanation as to how FTL travel is possible. The science is not the point in Dune, the science is there to explain the fantasy (e.g. psionics, navigators bending space with their minds) in a way that helps suspension of disbelief. I think most of what people think of as sci-fi is actually sci-fantasy.

Remember, it's science fiction. If you pull apart every little thing like that, you'll soon realise nothing in most sci-fi works like it should.

Yeah but if it doesn't work like it should then it is either bad sci-fi or science fantasy. The point of (actual) sci-fi as opposed to science fantasy is that it is realistic: it is a what-if, set in the real universe with everything that that entails.

Asimov and other classic sci-fi writers tried really hard to make their science accurate and their speculations realistic, and explore the realistic implications of their realistic speculations. Basically they were doing science as rigorously as they would in a lab, but in a story. Hence the name science fiction. What they did not do was think of something cool that fantastically violated the laws of the real universe and then try to justify it with science-talk. That's science fantasy.

I guess there has always been tension between sci-fi written by and for people interested in science, and lite sci-fi written by and for people interested in a cool story with space ships and lasers. I think critics and such usually call the first kind hard SF and the second kind science fantasy nowadays because to call them both sci-fi creates confusion

[Kahoolin]

Here's a useful definition from wikipedia:

A definition, offered by Rod Serling, is that "science fiction makes the implausible possible, while science fantasy makes the impossible plausible." The meaning is that science fiction describes unlikely things that could possibly take place in the real world under certain conditions, while science fantasy gives a veneer of realism to things that simply could not happen in the real world under any circumstances. Another interpretation is that science fiction does not permit the existence of supernatural elements; science fantasy does. Even the usage of this definition is difficult, however, as some science fiction makes use of apparently supernatural elements such as telepathy.
For many users of the term, however, "science fantasy" is either a science fiction story that has drifted far enough from reality to "feel" like a fantasy, or a fantasy story that is attempting to be science fiction. While these are in theory classifiable as different approaches, and thus different genres (fantastic science fiction vs. scientific fantasy), the end products are sometimes indistinguishable.

So by this standard, 40k is definitely science fantasy not science fiction. And so is Dune. WHF is not, it is just straight-up fantasy. I'm willing to admit now that technology doesn't make a fantasy a science fantasy, only when the science is used to excuse the fantasy. That doesn't happen in WHF - magic has nothing to do with steam tanks.

It's interesting though, the parts of the WHF world that aren't to do with magic are surprisingly historical for a fantasy setting. A lot of their tech is stuff envisaged in the renaissance but never built . . . which makes it sort of an alternate history.

[Freefall945]

Isn't WHF supposed to exist within the world of 40k? I remember reading something about the WFB world being inside the eye of terror, or an unknown world on the edge of the galaxy, or something like that.

That would explain some of the similarities, though.

This was once a prevailing and winked at theory by Games Workshop - its evidences include the periodic presence (particularly in blood bowl) of 40k items like chainswords, and bolters.

Melissa's right (though a little turned around - if I understand, Rogue Trader was first an "original" idea of using fantasy tropes in a Sci-Fi setting which were then subsequently projected back into their fantasy forms when WFB arrived), the settings were previously linked by virtue of goofy common authorship, but this all happened before GW started taking their IP's seriously.

Many a hardened forum veteran shudders at the idea of launching into the "Is Sigmar a Primarch" debate again. Other speculative evidence includes concurrent uses of terms like "Old Ones", and a massive explosion of "Old One" technology in WFB resulting in the Chaos wastes being vaguely reminiscent of the explosion of warp power which wiped out the Eldar Empire and created Slaanesh.

That said, it has been officially and vigorously stated that the universes, while similar, are not directly connected. Some folks enjoy speculating that the Warp is a kind of nucleus dimension around which alternate realities revolve, and in this way both W40K and WFB share the very same instances of the Chaos Gods.

Really though - you'd think if that was the case, the Black Legion would just maraud through the Old World at some point, eradicating their opposition which their advanced tactics and weaponry. And powerfists.

Having the WFB world as a world in the W40k galaxy has a certain amount of attractive elegance to it, but it makes every event and adventure within that world seem insignificant. Best to keep 'em apart, I reckon.