Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PaulKemp" data-source="post: 1067061" data-attributes="member: 2809">Of course styles are going to differ -- each author speaks with a different voice.  That's not a problem, in my view; that's a strength.  I don't think many readers who pick up Salvatore today and Kemp tomorrow expect to get the same style, nor should they.  What they should expect, and should get, is a consistent presentation of the factual underpinnings of the world.  I couldn't agree more.  My point is simply that a reader's experience in reading, and perhaps not liking one FR author (or other gaming fiction author) does not provide a logical reason for dismissing all authors who write in the same world (or the same sub-genre).  If I read Feist, and don't like it, I do not then conclude that I will not like all non-gaming fiction.  I simply move to another author of non-gaming fantasy fiction (if that categorization is important to me).     Because the odds, in my view, are fictitious.  In my opinion, *today* a reader is no more likely to encounter bad gaming fiction than he/she is bad non-gaming fiction.  The myth of generally bad gaming-fiction has lingered, even while the reality has outrun it.  Obviously, I'm biased here, but I think it's true nevertheless.  Here's the thing: If a reader has read widely in the "gaming fiction genre" and decided, for whatever reason, that it's not for him or her and doesn't hold up with non-gaming fiction, that makes sense.  But if the reader's view of gaming fiction is based on some old TSR novels he or she read back in the late eighties/early nineties, I'd suggest that such a reader has an insufficient sample from which to generalize to the sub-genre today.    Paul</blockquote>

Verification