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

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm saying this to be helpful:

When you make arguments based on text not supplied without even referencing it somewhere while quoting actual posts that don't even remotely contain your point, it looks like you're pulling arguments outta your butt.

I’m mearly assuming that the people talking about the source material have actually read it.

It’s clear that Conan operates policies that penalise the nobility, who would be responsible for defence in a feudal society, instead choosing to enrich the mercantile classes. He relies of foreign mercenaries for defence - it’s not clear how he pays them - perhaps with the wealth he has personally stolen?

 

[TiQuinn]

That is some seriously purple prose.

I think that’s the kind of purple prose that you expect and maybe want with those books. It’s the same with Lovecraft - if you’re reading him, it’s in part because of his style.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

I’m merely assuming that the people talking about the source material have actually read it.

Whelp, you know what they say about assuming. LOL.

Ok. I understand where you're coming from. It's just I read that and went, "what the...?"

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

I think that’s the kind of purple prose that you expect and maybe want with those books. It’s the same with Lovecraft - if you’re reading him, it’s in part because of his style.

I 'like' Lovecraft but I absolutely hate his style. It's the other thing that makes actually reading him intensely unpleasant.

(Once on Usenet someone told me that I was lying and I really did like his style. I killfiled that twerp so hard their grandparents' posts get blocked by my newsreader.)

 

[Enaknomolos]

The publication of 5e more or less exactly coincided with the historical high-point of interest in Howard's stories, and interest remains far higher than it was at the birth of roleplaying. This thread is based on a false premise.

 

[TiQuinn]

I 'like' Lovecraft but I absolutely hate his style. It's the other thing that makes actually reading him intensely unpleasant.

(Once on Usenet someone told me that I was lying and I really did like his style. I killfiled that twerp so hard their grandparents' posts get blocked by my newsreader.)

For me, it’s the only reason to read him. There’s so many other Mythos writers to choose from otherwise.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

For me, it’s the only reason to read him. There’s so many other Mythos writers to choose from otherwise.

I almost flunked out of my very expensive high school because I will not read the crappy, crappy, crappy writers like Dickens etc. that their English teachers kept trying to force on me.

HPL's style is worse, and he deliberately chose it.

 

[TiQuinn]

I almost flunked out of my very expensive high school because I will not read the crappy, crappy, crappy writers like Dickens etc. that their English teachers kept trying to force on me.

HPL's style is worse, and he deliberately chose it.

I firmly believe Dickens is the reason Cliff Notes were invented.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

I firmly believe Dickens is the reason Cliff Notes were invented.

Let me introduce you to my 'friend' Fyodor Dostoevsky...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

View attachment 399100The publication of 5e more or less exactly coincided with the historical high-point of interest in Howard's stories, and interest remains far higher than it was at the birth of roleplaying. This thread is based on a false premise.

What is this actually measuring?

Where is Red Nails?

Why is the poor and horribly racist Queen of the Black Coast above the actually pretty good Beyond the Black River?

What happened in 1865? And why does Beyond the Black River show a blip at that date, when it wasn't published until 1935?