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="Desdichado" data-source="post: 5099148" data-attributes="member: 2205">Wow, really?  I mean, I hate to seem incredulous, but I've never heard anyone make that claim before.  I want to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding.Rather, it's more like eating at MacDonalds.  You have heard of the movie/documentary Supersize Me, right?You're a lot more likely to encounter authors unknown to you in the shared world universes, where author name isn't as important a draw, and authors are (to a relatively greater extent) much more replaceable.Of course it does.  If the editing team comes to a writer and tells him all the things he must include in the book, all the things that he can't include, and gives him a very specific word count target to hit, regardless of how clearly he's able to develop the characters and plot he wants to under those strict constraints... all of those are features that don't necessarily drive towards lesser quality, but will trend that direction.Also, if the writers are write for hire, contract freelancers, basically, they're also much more likely to be less enthused about the project than if they're working on their own material.Again, not absolute drivers towards poorer quality, but certainly features that will tend to make the odds worse. Yes, I know quite well who she is.  I also think you misread my post; I said that my opinion is not just based on the Rose Estes books.  I've read a fair bit of shared world fiction.I disagree.  Line editors have other considerations besides just getting the best authors.  They've got brand name to consider.  They've got deadlines to consider.  They've got a master publishing plan to consider.  "Regular" fiction writers don't have those constraints, and dare I say it, distractions.Again; not a guarantee of higher quality, but certainly a situation that will tend more often to select for higher quality, whereas the shared world situation will tend to create situations in which quality can and sometimes does take a secondary role to production and brand considerations.Yes; I know.  You keep telling me things I already know.  I have those books.  I already referred to them, in fact, as among the few shared world fiction that I considered good enough to retain my old paperback copies of.And I clearly remember the advent of the D&D fiction line, and the potential inherent in the concept of D&D fiction.Just like I clearly remember being incredibly disappointed by a lot of it, including stuff like anything written by Ed Greenwood, or the Avatar Trilogy, or the Lingering and Repetitive Adventures of Driz'zt.Seriously, did you even read my post at all, or just respond to the thread title?  I already referred to several new(ish) D&D fiction novels I've read, including several from Eberron.  I couldn't penetrate the rambling, poorly structured plot of The Dreaming Dark and dropped it about 2/3 of the way through.  The War Torn series started off on an incredibly poor note, although books two and three semi-redeemed them by being decent, if not exactly great.I've read at least a round dozen Forgotten Realms books... probably closer to two dozen.  I've read at least a round dozen each of Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Warhammer, Star Wars, and a few other shared worlds too.  Read the first few Thieves World books.  Read a few Dark•Matter books.Again; I'm not some shared world neophyte who doesn't know anything at all about the phenomena.  I've read at least 60-70 shared world books---maybe closer to a hundred if I really stop and take inventory, and more than half of them are D&D ones.Lately, I've found that the Black Library seems to be the most consistently pretty good.  I've read a few D&D books that I really like.  I've also, hopefully not in vain, gotten myself a bit excited about the prospect of the upcoming Golarion novels.</blockquote>

Verification