Which of these games would you rather play (and why)?

[Holy Bovine]

Option One all the way.

I have no interest in Conan, swords & sorcery, Crapsack Worlds, or sandbox campaigns. Nothing cheeses me off more than a campaign setting that's dark/edgy/gritty for the sake of darkness/edginess/grittiness, where the DM has made sure by fiat that good simply can't win (whether because evil is too powerful or because the setting is so amoral and shades-of-gray ambiguous that Good™ technically doesn't exist). In my experience, these games tend to be a vicious exercise in screwing over the odd player who actually wants to run a good-aligned, heroic character.

I'll take LotR over Conan, thanks. When I roll up a character, I want to save the world and banish the Dark Lord of Darkness for another thousand years. I want high fantasy, Big Damn Heroes and Villains, Good vs. Evil, and by Jove the DM had better have a bloody plot up his sleeve. That's my D&D game.

Yikes. have you ever played in some messed up 'gritty' campaigns. I too would never want to play in a game where the DM is out the screw over any of the players.

Of course the situation you describe doesn't really have anything to do with the 'grittiness' of a campaign world and is almost wholly a DM/player issue.

I have played, run and heard of countless 'gritty' games where heroic, good-aligned characters can thrive. Indeed I love the challenge of holding to a strong moral center when all those around me wallow in decadence. I really would hope you'd get to play something like that before condemning the genre.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No kidding.

Conan ended up the King of Aquilonia, where he defended freedom of religion and freedom of speech, among other "Good" actions.

Frodo ended up relatively unknown in his own country, and ultimately unable to enjoy what he fought to preserve.

Who really got screwed over?

Is there anywhere in any Conan story half so dark as Mordor? Is there any character half so gritty or dark as Gollum? (And I mean the book versions, not the movies, here!)

Boromir's betrayal of not just the Fellowship, but of his own ideals and standards, is certainly darker than any betrayal a REH character endures. Sauron is certainly more powerful an evil than anything REH served up. REH's S&S stories are almost universally about the triumph of good over evil, even if they occur in a morally complex backdrop filled with shades of grey. JRRT's world is far more black & white in its large-scale morality, yet it hits harder, has greater betrayals, greater evils, and more pitiful/loathsome amoral characters than REH did. And, yes, more shades of grey in the small scale!

I am a fan of both writers, but I am well aware that the Fellowship faced harder choices than ever Conan did. Conan's path was always relatively clear to him -- that is one of the appeals of the character. Given a choice between "save the girl" or "keep the treasure", Conan will always save the girl. Or the child. Or anyone who is unable to defend himself, and is not deserving of his fate. And he is willing to risk his life to do so. The Fellowship, conversely, is always facing hard choices, with a world balancing on the outcome of those choices. Their way is not always clear. An easy example is the choice to enter the Mines of Moria, and the despair Aragorn feels when the weight of leadership is thrust upon him thereafter. "All my choices have proven ill" or words to that effect.

And Howard's villians are clearly villians. They are Evil, and need to be stopped. JRRT also gives us orcs who would rather be farmers, and men who believe that they are doing good, but have been fooled into thinking the other side is evil.

Conan lives in a world where the Big moral compass is cloudy, but the day to day moral compass that guides him is clear. What needs to be fought, is fought. What needs to be saved, is saved. There is never any real doubt about where things stand on the individual level.

Frodo lives in a world where the Big moral compass is clear, but the day to day moral compass that guides him is cloudy. Is Gollum to be feared or pitied? Or both? Should he be killed? Should he be trusted, and how far? Will the elves help us, or wil they slay us if we enter Lothlorien? Are the Rohirrim our friends, or have they fallen under the sway of Saruman?

Conan is very light reading compared to the Lord of the Rings.


RC


.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I have no interest in Conan, swords & sorcery, Crapsack Worlds, or sandbox campaigns. Nothing cheeses me off more than a campaign setting that's dark/edgy/gritty for the sake of darkness/edginess/grittiness, where the DM has made sure by fiat that good simply can't win (whether because evil is too powerful or because the setting is so amoral and shades-of-gray ambiguous that Good™ technically doesn't exist). In my experience, these games tend to be a vicious exercise in screwing over the odd player who actually wants to run a good-aligned, heroic character.

That's a particularly common worldview amongst teenagers and young adults.

Several of the GMs in my neck of the woods are quite strongly that way inclined. Very cynical, comes from being British. All NPCs are evil or crazy or, at best, selfish. All paladins are like Miho from Order of the Stick.

Incidentally, the Gygaxian combination of gamism and simulationism works imo, because of the cynical worldview, also common to pulp fantasy such as Vance and REH's Conan (not found in Moorcock or Tolkien). Succeeding is a challenge because no one will give a sucker an even break. This is different from the real world, ofc where charity, generosity, brotherhood and so forth do exist. And different from the real medieval world where success and status were largely determined by parentage.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Incidentally, the Gygaxian combination of gamism and simulationism works imo, because of the cynical worldview, also common to pulp fantasy such as Vance and REH's Conan (not found in Moorcock or Tolkien). Succeeding is a challenge because no one will give a sucker an even break. This is different from the real world, ofc where charity, generosity, brotherhood and so forth do exist. And different from the real medieval world where success and status were largely determined by parentage.

Have you actually read the REH Conan stories?

 

[Doug McCrae]

Have you actually read the REH Conan stories?

The majority, not the novel. I stopped cause I hate them so.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The majority, not the novel. I stopped cause I hate them so.

* Succeeding is a challenge because no one will give a sucker an even break: Not part of the Conan stories. Not only does Conan give others an even break, others give Conan even breaks. Lots of times, in lots of stories.

* Charity, generosity, brotherhood and so forth do not exist: Not a part of the Conan stories. EX: Conan's defense of free speech and religion, even when that free speech is used to turn his subjects against him and that defense of an unpopular religion is, itself, unpopular. EX: The Tower of the Elephant, in which Conan feels brotherhood with another thief he meets casing the same joint, and feels sympathy for a Lovecraftian elephant-thing from beyond time and space as he knows it.

* The real medieval world where success and status were largely determined by parentage: True for most of the people in Conan's world, too. That it is not true for Conan is one of the things that makes Conan exceptional.

Whether or not you enjoy REH's writing is your own concern. Clearly, though, your understanding of it is flawed. What you are suggesting sounds, to me, more like a pastiche of REH.


RC

 

[Doug McCrae]

Those were all in reference to the Gygaxian secondary world. I just said that REH's Conan stories presented a cynical world view. Conan encounters many selfish and downright evil people, as you say. He himself is a thief, a pirate, etc. In most of his adventures he's a treasure hunter or tomb raider, just as the PCs are in D&D, particularly OD&D, 1e and 3e. Conan doesn't plan to spend the money on the betterment of mankind, it's for ale, easy women and gambling.

We see different sides of Conan in different stories. Or perhaps REH's view of the character changed. You're right that in Jewels of Gwahlur he chooses to save girl rather than treasure. But in the Frost Giant's Daughter he attempts rape, unsuccessfully. At least that is my interpretation. One could say that attitudes to relations between men and woman have changed a lot since the 1930s, maybe I'm reading it with too modern an eye.

 

[Raven Crowking]

And suddenly all fear and repulsion went from him, to be replaced by a great pity. What this monster was, Conan could not know, but the evidences of its sufferings were so terrible and pathetic that a strange aching sadness came over the Cimmerian, he knew not why. He only felt that he was looking upon a cosmic tragedy, and he shrank with shame, as if the guilt of a whole race were laid upon him.

- The Tower of the Elephant

 

[Raven Crowking]

Conan encounters many selfish and downright evil people, as does both Frodo and Bilbo. Bilbo himself is a thief. In most of his adventures he's a treasure hunter or tomb raider, just as the PCs are in D&D, particularly OD&D, 1e and 3e. Bilbo doesn't plan to spend the money on the betterment of mankind.

EDIT: It is from raiding a barrow of the dead that the hobbits gain swords that can harm the Witch-King of Angmar, and Merry & Pippen certainly help themselves to Saruman's storehouses in Orthanc!

But in the Frost Giant's Daughter he attempts rape, unsuccessfully. At least that is my interpretation.

I would say that it is far more likely that Conan failed his Will save against an Enchantment/Charm effect, as other Conan stories demonstrate that Conan views rape as beneath him:

From The Frost Giant's Daughter by REH:


His gaze went again to her unruly locks, which at first glance he had thought to be red. Now he saw that they were neither red nor yellow but a glorious compound of both colors. He gazed spell-bound.

<snip>

"Then why do you not rise and follow me? Who is the strong warrior who falls down before me?" she chanted in maddening mockery.

<snip>

He did not wonder at the strangeness of it all, not even when two gigantic figures rose up to bar his way. The scales of their mail were white with hoar-frost; their helmets and their axes were covered with ice. Snow sprinkled their locks; in their beards were spikes of icicles; their eyes were cold as the lights that streamed above them.

"Brothers!" cried the girl, dancing between them. "Look who follows! I have brought you a man to slay! Take his heart that we may lay it smoking on our father' board!"

<snip>

"I saw a woman," Conan answered hazily. "We met Bragi's men in the plains. I know not how long we fought. I alone lived. I was dizzy and faint. The land lay like a dream before me. Only now do all things seem natural and familiar. The woman came and taunted me. She was beautiful as a frozen flame from hell. A strange madness fell upon me when I looked at her, so I forgot all else in the world. I followed her. Did you not find her tracks? Or the giants in icy mail I slew?"

Niord shook his head.

"We found only your tracks in the snow, Conan."

"Then it may be I am mad," said Conan dazedly. "Yet you yourself are no more real to me than was the golden-locked witch who fled naked across the snows before me. Yet from under my very hands she vanished in icy flame."

"He is delirious," whispered a warrior.

"Not so!" cried an older man, whose eyes were wild and weird. "It was Atali, the daughter of Ymir, the frost-giant! To fields of the dead she comes, and shows herself to the dying! Myself when a boy I saw her, when I lay half-slain on the bloody field of Wolraven. I saw her walk among the dead in the snows, her naked body gleaming like ivory and her golden hair unbearably bright in the moonlight. I lay and howled like a dying dog because I could not crawl after her. She lures men from stricken fields into the wastelands to be slain by her brothers, the ice-giants, who lay men's red hearts smoking on Ymir's board. The Cimmerian has seen Atali, the frost-giant's daughter!"


----------------------

Fault REH for being a simpler storyteller than JRRT, and I will agree with you. But pirates, thieves, murderers, betrayers, etc., are as much a part of JRRT's world as they are REH's. And The Scouring of the Shire is as dark and cynical a tale (chapter) as any story of REH's ever was. Darker, in many ways.

At the worst, REH's cynicism rises to the level of The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, with Conan in the place of Blondie. This is nothing compared to Saruman's betrayal of the Hillmen who live near Rohan (Saruman steals their women, breeds his orcs with them, and then blames the Rohirrim so that the Hillmen fight -- with the orcs -- to preserve Saruman!). This is nothing compared to the men of Gondor (the good guys, let us remember) hunting the human wood-woses for sport.

REH has a reputation for being dark and cynical; JRRT truly pulled it off. And JRRT pulled it off in such a way that, unless you were paying attention, you might not even notice.


RC

 

[Doug McCrae]

Good points regarding the Hobbit, which is a lot closer to Gygaxian D&D than the Lord of the Rings, and also the Frost Giant's Daughter - reading your quotes it does look a lot like an enchantment.

However I must still disagree with you regarding the level of cynicism to be found in Conan versus Tolkien's works as a whole. There is no sexual desire in Tolkien, just romantic love, and mostly no women at all. The women Conan meets are not princesses but dancing girls (which could be read as code for prostitutes), typically wearing very few clothes. Their nubile bodies are lovingly detailed by the author (indeed, Conan's sexy thews get plenty of description too). Apart from sex, money is Conan's major motivation. The treasure hoard is the plot driving macguffin in most of the stories. While this is also true of the Hobbit, it isn't the case with the rest of Tolkien's oeuvre. Conan wants treasure, or a kingdom, Frodo just wants a quiet life in the Shire.

In Tolkien there are may noble and spiritually enlightened beings - Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel and the other elves. There is a heaven, to the west, across the sea. In Conan, beings from other worlds are demons or Cthulhoid horrors. There are no angels. There is no heaven, but there is a hell. Seldom are there even wise old men, Conan himself is probably the noblest character, and, as previously mentioned, his gods are sex and cash and political power. And Crom ofc, who is a neutral, uncaring force, at best.

The world of Conan is one of thieves, pirates and mercenaries, of dancing girls and swarthy, sadistic high priests. Of primitive savages worshipping grotesque Lovecraftian idols, of former great races now degenerate. Of treasure hoards to be won and soon spent.

Middle-Earth is a world of great evil, but also great good, with men somewhere in between. There is Mordor but there is also the Shire and Galadriel's forest and Gondor and the land beyond the sea. It's a world not of thieves and cuthroats but of elven gifts, pipe-smoking camaraderie, and a stout-hearted working class lad who'd do anything for his beloved gaffer.

Above all in Tolkien there is a longing for the past. A sense of lost nobility. Of lost goodness, as well as greatness. Although in Conan there is fallen Atlantis and other great civilizations long gone, one gets only a sense of the loss of the latter.

Finally I would ask - do you think this is pandering to any base instincts?