Let's Talk Blue Rose

[takyris]

I have very specific complaints about Blue Rose's setting and the genre it's based on, and, yes, they do turn my stomach. Or make me bust out laughing.

Hey, MEM, question/request: Have you read Kristen Britain's "Green Rider"? I believe that Kristen Britain was listed as one of the influences for the book, and, well, that's the first of her two books. Having read and not been wowed by some Mercedes Lackey and Melanie Rawn, I gave Britain a chance without knowing that she was considered a romantic fantasy writer and really enjoyed her. Of course, now that you know that she's arguably a romantic fantasy writer, that could color your perceptions and you'll be sick to death of it by page four.

It's available at e-reader.com if you want to get it cheaper. I'm sure it's in used bookstores, too. If you do a lot of fantasy reading, I'd like to hear your take on this, as someone who dislikes romantic fantasy. I thought it was pretty much a good light fantasy novel, with many of the usual tropes and a young adult female protagonist. Not groundbreaking or life-changing for me, but a good read. If Britain could write more than one book a decade, I think she'd have her own little marker on the bookshelf at Borders, like Rawn and Lackey do -- with the important difference being that I liked Britain...

My point, in as much as I've got one, is that I think that if it was ever possible to say, "I don't like (genre)," it's getting to be less and less so now, if only because genre definitions have become so mixed. It's like the rock & roll lovers who claim to hate country music but listen happily whenever "Desperado" gets played on the classic rock station. I can no longer say that I hate country music, but am stuck with, "I generally dislike it, don't spend much time hanging out on the country music station listening for good stuff, and don't intentionally listen to much except that Garth Brooks double live album and Faith Hill's "Breathe", the former proving that Brooks, like Elvis and the Beatles, was born to perform live."

It's complicated, being somebody who admits that the situation might be a bit fuzzier than wide sweeping generalizations would imply, but in the long run, it has its advantages.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

-snip-

I haven't read Britain, I'm afraid. Honestly I don't read a lot of newer fantasy in general, and don't care for most of what I try to muddle through, "romantic" or otherwise.

I'm more of a Sci-Fi/Space Oper/Sword and Sorcery reader. However, I'll keep an eye out for the Green Rider.

What I'd really like to find is some good romantic fantasy in the sense of a family saga set in a fantasy world.

 

[takyris]

Which is fair. If you're not into general fantasy, I suspect that Green Rider is going to fail for that reason. I don't think it'd fail for the "romantic fantasy" reason. But I could be wrong on that.

As far as what you're looking for... I don't know if you tried Robin Hobb's Liveship Traders series... it can be read along with her assassin books or alone, and it follows several members of a trading family as their world goes all to smithereens and they get scattered across the country... Some folks who read her assassin books complained about the difference in tone. I did notice a difference, but it didn't bother me.

 

[Skywalker]

It's as if, in trying to embody the ideals of romantic fantasy, they took it a few steps too far and produced something that feels more like a parody of the fantasy genre. (That's not to say that most other fantasy RPGs tend to be full of revolutionary new spins on the genre, of course. It's just that I find the particular tone here to be rather grating.)

I don't really get the feeling that the authors are into this kind of thing themselves, but are assuming their intended audience is. And I think their intended audience ought to feel a little insulted.

Cheers for the detail.

FWIW I agree that GR has made an uncompromising "romantic fantasy" break into the RPG market with BR. However, based on their track record of smart design and product decisions, I think they did this intentionally. By going in strong with a product you know may face a lot of criticism, you raise the general noise level for that product, it becomes easier to defend the product and it paves the way for other "romantic fantasy" products they are looking to sell.

...shift the emphasis of magic away from nature-wankery...

It is funny I thought the "psychic" elements would get more outcry from those who don't like romantic fantasy than "nature". I didn't find that the magic system had an unusual focus on nature. In fact, it has less than LotR.

 

[Skywalker]

So, the real burning question on my mind is, how easy is the game to run? How quick can you set up NPC's?

Besides, there are some people I can lure into games with it.

Now... If it's just easy to use.

Compared to M&M I would say it would be easier. The simplicity gained in not having superpowers could be lost if you have many high level multi-role NPCs. However, if you have single Role NPCs then it becomes easier as you don't need to juggle overall power points. Abilities are easily distributed. The Roles work out all stats except Skills and Feats. Skills are now simply choose X Known Skills. Most of the time you can assume that they are all Favoured. Choosing Feats may take a while but doing so normally covers any Arcana you are dealing with. The lack of magic items also helps.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well I do indeed loathe the genre of 'romantic fantasy' (or at least the samples that I have encountered in the past). Many apologies for actually expressing my opinion, and inquiring the extent to which I can ignore a genre that I loathe in order to get to the (what sound like fairly interesting) rules.

I was responding to someone alleging that people were expressing their disinterest. I did not say you're not allowed to express your opinion, but surely you wouldn't characterize yourself as merely disinterested.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

A generational family saga fantasy novel sounds like a pretty good idea, actually. There have been some books that featured families and descendants and such, but not in the same way that non-fantasy books do generational sagas.

 

[GreatLemur]

It is funny I thought the "psychic" elements would get more outcry from those who don't like romantic fantasy than "nature". I didn't find that the magic system had an unusual focus on nature. In fact, it has less than LotR.

I actually haven't had a chance to look through the LotR RPG, but I've got a some minor flavor issues with whole magical disciplines focused on manipulating plants and animals. And if I never see a magical system involving the classical four elements again, it'll be too soon.

The psychic stuff, however, makes loads of sense to me. I might ditch the word "psychic" itself, but the basic effects of those arcana fit very well with my atypically-scientific vision of magic.

 

[BryonD]

The comments he was responding to weren't people who were disinterested: People said they felt physically sick based on the setting, or that they "loathed" it.

I read the comment he quoted and his reply. I'll stick with my reply.

It's fun to exagerate on the Internet, but at the same time, what one writes is all one can be judged on here -- taken at face value, people were absolutely not merely disinterested. They were overreacting, to put it mildly.

<SNIP>

We get it, folks. Girls and kissing are icky. Get over it.

umm........

OK, I think I'll just consider the source from now on when you post.
If you've got a thoughtful statement basedin reality, I'll take a look. But hypocritical misrepresentastions are easy and boring.

 

[BryonD]

Just like running a Star Wars game from the view of the Empire....

Except for that the Empire and the Dark side being bad is built into the system.. Right?