A Question for the 25 and under crowd - What have you read?
- Thread starter Hussar
- Start date
Read them all... also agree that Gaiman, Butcher, and some other popular writers could have been included on that list and been fine.
Of course, there's a lot of fantasy in our culture in general, but we don't acknowledge the folk tales, mythologies, and other shorts that we read as children...
But hey, it's a strange thing I guess.
Slainte,
-Loonook.
Of course, there's a lot of fantasy in our culture in general, but we don't acknowledge the folk tales, mythologies, and other shorts that we read as children...
But hey, it's a strange thing I guess.
Slainte,
-Loonook.
Wizard Biscuits
First Post
Well, I'm 23 and I've read all of them, but that's only because I'm a voracious bibliophile with too much time on my hands. Mind you, that's not to say I liked all of them (I'm looking at you Rowling and Brooks).
It's a good list, could be broader, but you've nailed some of the writer's who've got a thought out, methodical system to their world and ones which stand out from a lot of the mainstream, generic fantasy drivel out there.
Which leads to a bit of a conundrum, because in a way that's what D&D represents best. But given the nature of D&D, that's no bad thing, because conciously or not, the DM and players will nip and tuck at it till it suits their style of play. It could be argued that to play a style of game reminiscient of any of the above authors would require a couple of tweaks to the ruleset of any edition. But even then, that's not always necessary, because a lot of the changes would simply rely on the way the DM presents it to the players.
In a way, I think the core of D&D has become it's own, identifiably generic, genre of (high) fantasy. It's what's then done to it, be it rules-tweaking, imagery presentation and whatnot, within each campaign setting released that expands it's scope. That's why I don't think the core identity of it 'needs' to be influenced or take cue's from any author, contemporary or not, nowadays because that's then up to the DM, the players, and writers who add to it in supplements, magazines, websites, etc, to make it their game (or a game set in a familiar world).
Um... I hope some of that made sense at any rate.
Oh, and all of the above is pure, 100% my own opinion.
It's a good list, could be broader, but you've nailed some of the writer's who've got a thought out, methodical system to their world and ones which stand out from a lot of the mainstream, generic fantasy drivel out there.
Which leads to a bit of a conundrum, because in a way that's what D&D represents best. But given the nature of D&D, that's no bad thing, because conciously or not, the DM and players will nip and tuck at it till it suits their style of play. It could be argued that to play a style of game reminiscient of any of the above authors would require a couple of tweaks to the ruleset of any edition. But even then, that's not always necessary, because a lot of the changes would simply rely on the way the DM presents it to the players.
In a way, I think the core of D&D has become it's own, identifiably generic, genre of (high) fantasy. It's what's then done to it, be it rules-tweaking, imagery presentation and whatnot, within each campaign setting released that expands it's scope. That's why I don't think the core identity of it 'needs' to be influenced or take cue's from any author, contemporary or not, nowadays because that's then up to the DM, the players, and writers who add to it in supplements, magazines, websites, etc, to make it their game (or a game set in a familiar world).
Um... I hope some of that made sense at any rate.
Oh, and all of the above is pure, 100% my own opinion.
Last edited:
Belorin
Explorer
Jack Vance
Fritz Leiber
Robert Howard
J. R. R. Tolkien
Michael Moorcock
J. K. Rowlings
Robert Jordan
Terry Pratchett
Terry Brooks
H.P. Lovecraft
Anne McCaffrey
David Eddings
Andre Norton
Lord Dunsany
Poul Anderson
Alan Garner
Katherine Kurtz
William Morris
Lloyd Alexander
and others too numerous to mention.
Bel
Fritz Leiber
Robert Howard
J. R. R. Tolkien
Michael Moorcock
J. K. Rowlings
Robert Jordan
Terry Pratchett
Terry Brooks
H.P. Lovecraft
Anne McCaffrey
David Eddings
Andre Norton
Lord Dunsany
Poul Anderson
Alan Garner
Katherine Kurtz
William Morris
Lloyd Alexander
and others too numerous to mention.
Bel
Puggins
Explorer
You included Rowling- who doesn't even consider her work fantasy- and left out George R. R. Martin, who is a miniatures enthusiast, a loud advocate for RPGs of his series and far better selling than anyone on that list short of Rowling herself.
As for me, I'm 38. In order of preference:
Zimmer
Howard
Martin
Rowling
.
.
.
Brooks
Tolkien
Moorcock
Lieber
Jordan
Lovecraft
There's a gulf between the top four and everybody else. And these are the authors I like, so no, I don't think Lovecraft and Jordan suck.
As for me, I'm 38. In order of preference:
Zimmer
Howard
Martin
Rowling
.
.
.
Brooks
Tolkien
Moorcock
Lieber
Jordan
Lovecraft
There's a gulf between the top four and everybody else. And these are the authors I like, so no, I don't think Lovecraft and Jordan suck.
RandomCitizenX
First Post
Turning 25 this year and I have to vote a big YES for Moorcock. Without a doubt he has been one of my biggest inspirations in the realm of D&D.
Fallen Seraph
First Post
19 here. I've read of those on that list:
- JRR Tolkien: Great worldbuilder, not the best author. I've read his work for historical significance, but certainly wouldn't read him for fun.
- Robert Jordan: I wasn't a fan of his writing or his plots. Especially the deeper I got into Wheel of Time.
- JK Rowling: While not the best author. She is actually someone fun to read. I would read her over the above.
- China Meville
- Neil Gaiman
- George R. R. Martin
- Naomi Novick
- R. Scott Bakker
- William Gibson (The Difference Engine)
Last edited:
Similar Threads
