Conan, Grim Tales, or Iron Heroes

[Wombat]

I always am amused when people begin to define "pulps".

The single, bar none, most popular, most written, most consumed, and most loved style of pulps?

Oaters.

Horse operas.

Westerns.

The uncle of a buddy of mine wrote something like 180 short stories and novellas for the pulps. All were westerns. No horror, no sci fi, no aliens. He is not a name at all "known" (I forget his "pen name" right at the moment -- I'll try and get back with that), but he had a steady income at a penny or two a word for several years.

No magic, no swords, no spaces ships, but popular.

The other side of the pulps.

 

[Jack Spencer Jr]

The uncle of a buddy of mine wrote something like 180 short stories and novellas for the pulps. All were westerns. No horror, no sci fi, no aliens. He is not a name at all "known" (I forget his "pen name" right at the moment -- I'll try and get back with that), but he had a steady income at a penny or two a word for several years.

Ah, those heady days when writing a gunfight and an extra "Bang! Bang!" scored you an extra two cent.

Just remember kids: Indiana Jones is not pulp. Indiana Jones is cliffhanger. Not quite the same.

 

[Kolchak]

Just remember kids: Indiana Jones is not pulp. Indiana Jones is cliffhanger. Not quite the same.

A cliffhanger is a plot device not a genre.

 

[Jack Spencer Jr]

A cliffhanger is a plot device not a genre.

And pulp is a grade of cheap paper the magazine is printed on.

But seriously, I was referring to the serials which were shown on saturday mornings at movie theatres. The cliffhangers, or serials if you prefer, inspired Lucas when writing Star Wars and Indiana Jones. The serials were intended for children, like ages 12 and under, so they were somewhat sanitized compared to the pulps. There were some genre similarities, like mystery men, soldiers of fortune, sci fi and such, but the presentation is a little different because they were intended for a different audience.

EDIT: actually. That raises a pretty decent point. Neither cliffhangers nor pulps are genres, but media. They just happen to be media then tend to contain certain genres (or sub-genres) that become identified with the media itself.

 

[Azgulor]

I'm not sure about easier to GM, but IH maintains the default power level of D&D but without assuming a magic item glut to do it. It's got some cool elements, but doesn't lower the power level or make for a grittier game.

I'd rate Conan and Grim Tales roughly equal in terms of GM effort. I might give a slight edge to Conan since it uses archetype-style character classes while GT uses the stat-based classes. While GT probably provides greater character variance as a result, it might take more work for the GM and players if you're unfamiliar with it. Conan has greater variance from core d20, but GT's toolkit-nature balances this by forcing the GM to pick and choose certain variants. Both are lower-power and grittier than D&D or IH. Both are also top notch.

Azgulor

 

[GlassJaw]

I imagine his thoughts are:

""Based upon the d20 Modern Grim Tales is the high adventure, low magic campaign tool-kit for fantastic roleplaying in your favorite pulp genres, from the dawn of Atlantis to the apocalyptic future of a dying planet. "

But, you know, apparently you know better.

Wow, this thread has attracted all the winners. Never have I been involved in such a mind-numbing thread in this forum before. I was attempting to stay out of pissing contest but apparently some people can't restrain themselves.

I'm still going to hold fast to my opinion. Remember, Grim Tales is just a toolkit - a set of rules. There is no implied setting in the book. Sure, some samples are given, but those just scratch the surface. The ruleset certainly allows you to run a pulp-style game but you definitely aren't restricted to that.

I contend that the word pulp is overused term anyway. Ask a hundred people what their "definition" of pulp is and you'll probably get a hundred different answers.

 

[iwatt]

Gah! Threadjacking! Flamewar! Run!

Anyway, I think I'll probably stick with Iron Heroes pretty much as-is; the recommendations of sticking with villain and NPC classes on the DM side is a good one. While these classes look like a dream to play, they sure look difficult to DM.

Well, it's my experience that whenever you post a thread with IH and GT in the title, you'll start an argument.

So trying to get back on topic: The bestiary supposedly brings more villain classes. Which is excellent.

One thing IHs brings that some GMs won't like is that NPCs are different (ruleswise) than the PCs. Unless DMs really want to go to the effort of creating classed viallains, and managing them.

Thing is, even if you don't want to use the IH classes, DMs should take a serious look at the many other rules introduced in the game. Including stunts, challenges, feat masteries, skill groups, just to name a few.

 

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Wow, this thread has attracted all the winners. Never have I been involved in such a mind-numbing thread in this forum before. I was attempting to stay out of pissing contest but apparently some people can't restrain themselves.

I'm still going to hold fast to my opinion. Remember, Grim Tales is just a toolkit - a set of rules. There is no implied setting in the book. Sure, some samples are given, but those just scratch the surface. The ruleset certainly allows you to run a pulp-style game but you definitely aren't restricted to that.

I contend that the word pulp is overused term anyway. Ask a hundred people what their "definition" of pulp is and you'll probably get a hundred different answers.

So, let's see. You open with an insult. You continue to refuse to read or respond to what was actually written, as the portion in my post in "quotes" was taken from an above post which quotes the ad copy for Grim Tales, and then you move the goal post by switching to talking about Grim Tales like it's a kind of GURPS or something and that the definition of pulp can have many definitions.

My suggestion is to knock it off, because you're acting like an idiot. And worse, you're contridicting yourself now. If pulp can have a hundred definitions, then one of those definitions could be gritty, now can't it?

And it's no longer the definition of pulp that is the issue here. It's your attitude. If you're not mature enough to back down, then that shows poor character.

 

[Hammerhead]

Hey, I think this thread is pretty funny. And pulpy.

 

[jdrakeh]

And it's no longer the definition of pulp that is the issue here. It's your attitude. If you're not mature enough to back down, then that shows poor character.

You've hit the nail on the head. The guy's not worth the time or trouble. He's hell bent on being right, to the point of ignoring a mountain of factual evidence that contradicts him and attacking all who disagree with him as being his intellectual inferiors. Nothing that anybody says will change this, and every word typed in an effort to do so is a word wasted. This guy has to be right and everybody must subscribe to his views or his whole world will fall apart. Just let it go...