D&D General No One Reads Conan Now -- So What Are They Reading?

[Bedrockgames]

Of course people will continue to read and make adaptations of Conan--it would take a very long time for such a singular character to completely vanish from culture--but the entire premise of this thread is that he's no longer familiar to a wide range of DnD players, and I think that's almost certainly true. He was once one of the fundamental texts of fantasy fiction, and now he isn't. So I'm speculating about why I think that is.

I'd say this is a very contested claim

 

[Count_Zero]

View attachment 399051
I messed around with google trends and got Blades in the Dark, Dungeon World, and Shadow of the Demon Lord as popular. I probably did not include some of the better options. (Mork Borg, and Pirate Borg did not do well so I removed them.)

For the record, I'm basing my claim in terms of what I'm seeing in terms of other development work - not just in terms of relevant play, but also looking at (for example), when Zine Quest comes around, what are people doing game material for? What am I seeing getting additional play material on DriveThru and elsewhere from people other than the original creators? Not just what's getting people discussing them or how many groups are playing them on Roll20.

That said - Shadow of the Demon Lord and Blades in the Dark still lean heavily on the grimdark side. Oddly enough, Dungeon World ends up somewhere in the middle, because character retirement there is structured more around the "Characters aren't as fun to play once you hit level 10" concept.

 

[Voranzovin]

Sure but Conan isn't a realistic portrayal of an ancient barbarian either. The point wasn't that people were replicating feudalism, frontiers, the ancient or medieval world perfectly (there are other genres and styles of fantasy that try to do this, but generic fantasy has long been anachronistic). The point was people are drawn to these things and inspired by them long after they are gone.

I was responding to the idea that these ideas would remain relevant because the conflict between civilization and frontier remains relevant. I took your raising of feudalism as an assertion that this isn't the case--that ideas from the past are still relevant even if they are not held by contemporary writers and readers. So my response was that, actually, there's hardly any feudalism going on, which is part of a larger point that I can maybe make this way:

I can't recall where the quote comes from, but it's long been taken as a truism that science fiction is never really about the future, it's always really about now. I think we can extend this to fantasy, which is never really about the past (or about myth and legend); it's always about how people think and feel about things right now, in the real world, refracted through that lens. So no, I don't think that fictional ideas just stick around--they get turned into whatever's needed to express what matters to people now, at the time a work of fiction is written. If you're lucky, that fiction continues to be relevant to a long time. But there are no guarantees.

 

[rhythmsoundmotion]

For the record, I'm basing my claim in terms of what I'm seeing in terms of other development work - not just in terms of relevant play, but also looking at (for example), when Zine Quest comes around, what are people doing game material for? What am I seeing getting additional play material on DriveThru and elsewhere from people other than the original creators? Not just what's getting people discussing them or how many groups are playing them on Roll20.

What third parties create is often limited by the ease of use of a system’s public licenses.
In another words is a restrictively licensed system less significant?

 

[Voranzovin]

I'd say this is a very contested claim

Fair enough--I certainly have no data to back it up. But I expect you don't either, so all we're going off of here is anecdote and vibes. All I can say is that it seems like an extremely likely claim to me.

 

[Count_Zero]

What third parties create is often limited by the ease of use of a system’s public licenses.
In another words is a restrictively licensed system less significant?

It can be, but there are other less restrictively licensed systems. Heck, Powered by the Apocalypse has the same license as Forged in the Dark, and Forged in the Dark probably has more active development than its parent system.

(Also, I remember seeing lots of Third parties writing stuff for Savage Worlds, and that feels like it dried up - which is a bummer, because I like Savage Worlds.)

 

[GobHag]

All that said this is just one aspect of Conan. I don't think you can pinpoint one feature of the stories, declare that feature no longer relevant, and then say therefore what Conan embodies is irrelevant. If you ask 8 different people what Conan embodies you are probably going to get 8 different responses because he can resonate with folks for different reasons.

And 4 of them would have never read a single word of Conan(or watched one), at least.

 

[Bedrockgames]

And 4 of them would have never read a single word of Conan(or watched one), at least.

I don't know. Perhaps. But I think if we grant that, I think those 4 people, if they read Conan or watched the movie, would likely find something that 1) is easier and more engaging to read than they would expect, 2) gives them a lot of gaming inspiration

 

[Umbran]

Well, not totally - of the Big 3 general RPG rules system structures right now, the two outside of D&D are *Borg ...and (as an extension of Powered by the Apocalypse) Forged in the Dark

Upon what do you base that these are the "big three"? Like, do you have sales numbers or something? Or is it just your personal assessment based on what you see in the discourse you happen to see?

So, the TTRPG space is leaning really hard into grimdark and nihilism outside of the D&D space (which, ironically, makes it harder to find players who want to play something other than D&D - the Grimdark FitD games have made it rather tricky to get anyone actually into playing something else if they don't want to do Grimdark).

Note that the youngest of these is already 5 years old. So, even if we accept your assertion, they no longer represent where things "are going". That's where RPGs went 5 years ago and more. That doesn't speak to where they are going now.

RPGs generally develop in response to literature, not the other way around. Today's literature trends will be in tomorrow's games.

 

[The Firebird]

The “might makes right” philosophy that Conan embodies? The idea that there isn’t a problem that can’t be solved with a big enough weapon? The idea that individuals are more important than the common good? Definitely the main cause of our problems. But that’s getting too political for this forum. If you don’t get it, you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Huh. I'd suggest you head back to the texts, especially the ones dealing with Conan as king. Hour of the Dragon, for example, sets up Conan as a wise and just ruler, as opposed to the greedy and oppressive rule of Valerius and Xaltotun. For example, one passage:

"Again Conan shook his head. 'Let others dream imperial dreams. I but wish to hold what is mine. I have no desire to rule an empire welded together by blood and fire. It's one thing to seize a throne with the aid of its subjects and rule them with their consent. It's another to subjugate a foreign realm and rule it by fear. I don't wish to be another Valerius. No, Trocero, I'll rule all Aquilonia and no more, or I'll rule nothing.'"

Conan doesn’t do any brooding in the original stories, nor is he chivalrous, unless chivalry allows rape now.

Not gonna get into specifics, but again I don't think this interpretation is held up in the originals. One of the ways Howard shows the decadence of civilization is that it controls social relations, often putting women in positions to be exploited and controlled by power structures which only exist in civilized society. Conan is presented as a contrast to this. He is lustful, but there is simultaneously an equality of desires that isn't present in civilization.

The (unpublished, now available in critical editions) version of Phoenix on the Sword has the best brooding scene, and I suggest you check that out. But more generally, Howard's Conan is far from the stupid barbarian stereotype. He's thoughtful and intelligent as well as physically impressive.

Edit: ah, we deserve the text. Here's what I have in mind from Phoenix:

"His mirth fell away from him like a mask, and his face was suddenly old, his eyes worn. The unreasoning melancholy of the Cimmerian fell like a shroud about his soul, paralyzing him with a crushing sense of the futility of human endeavor and the meaninglessness of life. His kingship, his pleasures, his fears, his ambitions, and all earthly things were revealed to him suddenly as dust and broken toys. The borders of life shrivelled and the lines of existence closed in about him, numbing him. Dropping his lion head in his mighty hands, he groaned aloud.

Then lifting his head, as a man looks for escape, his eyes fell on a crystal jar of yellow wine. Quickly he rose and pouring a goblet full, quaffed it at a gulp. Again he filled and emptied the goblet, and again. When he set it down, a fine warmth stole through his veins. Things and happenings assumed new values. The dark Cimmerian hills faded far behind him. Life was good and real and vibrant after all – not the dream of an idiot god. "