tetsujin28
First Post
Those are darn fine and interesting books, especially The Warhound and the World's Pain.Hussar said:
Who are Howard and Leiber?
- Thread starter MerricB
- Start date
Hussar
Legend
Funnily enough, I'm currently far closer to Shaman in my games than previously. I've gone back to the "kick in the door" approach with my World's Largest Dungeon game. Loads of fun.
And, yes, railroading is probably the worst thing you can do in a game. I'll agree with that.
My point will still remain that modern authors are by no means destroying the genre, nor are they simply pale comparisons to older authors. That's just nostalgia talking. Yes, I love Howard and I love Tolkein. I've read and reread them enough times to say that. But, I also love new authors as well. Painting them all with broad strokes and saying they are locked into post modern tropes is simply ignoring the really excellent work that is being done. Sure, there's tons of crap out there. But, there's also lots of good stuff that can be mined.
On a side note, I would say that Pratchett is a satirist, not a humourist. There's a world of difference.
To be fair though, over the past couple of years, I find myself reading a lot more SF than fantasy, so, I avoid most of the really trashy fantasy stuff out there. But, really, I think saying that all modern fantasy is crap is really shortchanging things.
And, yes, railroading is probably the worst thing you can do in a game. I'll agree with that.
My point will still remain that modern authors are by no means destroying the genre, nor are they simply pale comparisons to older authors. That's just nostalgia talking. Yes, I love Howard and I love Tolkein. I've read and reread them enough times to say that. But, I also love new authors as well. Painting them all with broad strokes and saying they are locked into post modern tropes is simply ignoring the really excellent work that is being done. Sure, there's tons of crap out there. But, there's also lots of good stuff that can be mined.
On a side note, I would say that Pratchett is a satirist, not a humourist. There's a world of difference.
To be fair though, over the past couple of years, I find myself reading a lot more SF than fantasy, so, I avoid most of the really trashy fantasy stuff out there. But, really, I think saying that all modern fantasy is crap is really shortchanging things.
Krypter
Explorer
Hussar said:
Well, there are exceptions to everything, but for me at least it's not nostalgia at all. I just read Howard and Leiber for the first time a couple of years ago, in the 90s, and I'm a young-ish guy. Hardly weeping gently at my glory days there. I tried reading the Shannara books and the Wheel of Time series, honestly I did, but it was just so mediocre. I too am reading more SF than fantasy; the quality seems to be much higher. Tad Williams was not bad though.
So what modern writers are truly exceptional in your opinion? I'm genuinely interested in writing that exceeds the Brooks\Eddings\Martin level, but I don't have time to research obscure authors. (And no, I don't consider Mieville to be truly exceptional. Not when I can spot dozens of grammatical and spelling mistakes in his books, and I'm hardly a Lit major.)
Something with the flair and impact of Leiber's The Bleak Shore would be good. I find that the masters can tell a better story in 100 pages than Brooks et al. can tell in 1000.
Krypter
Explorer
One master author who is almost never mentioned is Mervyn Peake. Gormenghast is quite possibly the finest piece of fantasy writing in the English language. Yes, better than Tolkien, though his world is far different and less detailed than Tolkien's. I was amused to no end when I saw it cited as the inspiration for Perdido Street Station.
That, and the quote from Dick's We Can Build You. Where did that come from?
That, and the quote from Dick's We Can Build You. Where did that come from?
Hussar
Legend
Hrm, excellent fantasy (and, I avoided Jordan like the plague)
Stephen Erikson - hands down
Lynn Abbey - the new Thieves World novels have been really excellent
Guy Gavriel Kay - although its been a long time
Stephen Donaldson - I've mentioned before
Neil Gaiman - American Gods is really excellent IMO
Robin Hobb - to be fair, I've never read them, but I've heard very good things
Stephen King - writes some darn good fantasy - Eyes of the Dragon?
Julian May - not specifically fantasy, but close
Michael Moorcock
Terry Pratchett - again, I'Ve mentioned him too
Fred Saberhagen - to be fair, I'm not sure if I'd include him in new school or old
Weiss and Hickman - hit an miss really, but the Deathgate Cycle really was pretty cool
That would round out authors I think are more than just "post modern hacks". As I say, I follow SF far more than fantasy now.
Stephen Erikson - hands down
Lynn Abbey - the new Thieves World novels have been really excellent
Guy Gavriel Kay - although its been a long time
Stephen Donaldson - I've mentioned before
Neil Gaiman - American Gods is really excellent IMO
Robin Hobb - to be fair, I've never read them, but I've heard very good things
Stephen King - writes some darn good fantasy - Eyes of the Dragon?
Julian May - not specifically fantasy, but close
Michael Moorcock
Terry Pratchett - again, I'Ve mentioned him too
Fred Saberhagen - to be fair, I'm not sure if I'd include him in new school or old
Weiss and Hickman - hit an miss really, but the Deathgate Cycle really was pretty cool
That would round out authors I think are more than just "post modern hacks". As I say, I follow SF far more than fantasy now.
tetsujin28
First Post
A much better writer of fiction than Tolkein. I put him up there with E.R. Eddison.Krypter said:
One of the things that... well, I can hardly say it amazes me. Perhaps saddens. One of the the things that saddens me about this thread are the group of people who seem to think that if you're a modern writer of fantasy who is incredibly succesful, you're a BAD WRITER.
I'd say the edge of Classic - most of his seminal work was back in the 60s and 70s.
One aspect to look at is the length of the books - newer authors tend to use more pages and tell bigger stories.
Consider Louise Cooper's Indigo series, Katherine Kerr's Deverry series, Jennifer Roberson's Chronicles of the Cheysuli, and the works of Martin, Goodkind, Jordan, Erikson and - indeed - J.K.Rowling.
Fantasy fiction is unusual as to how many books it takes to tell one story. Most other genres do it in one.
There's more of a link between modern fantasy tales and the Adventure Paths - especially the ones in Dragon - then between classic fantasy and Adventure Paths. Classic Fantasy, especially Leiber, Howard and ERB, tends to concentration on more episodic, self-contained adventures with continuing characters.
Cheers!
I'd say the edge of Classic - most of his seminal work was back in the 60s and 70s.
One aspect to look at is the length of the books - newer authors tend to use more pages and tell bigger stories.
Consider Louise Cooper's Indigo series, Katherine Kerr's Deverry series, Jennifer Roberson's Chronicles of the Cheysuli, and the works of Martin, Goodkind, Jordan, Erikson and - indeed - J.K.Rowling.
Fantasy fiction is unusual as to how many books it takes to tell one story. Most other genres do it in one.
There's more of a link between modern fantasy tales and the Adventure Paths - especially the ones in Dragon - then between classic fantasy and Adventure Paths. Classic Fantasy, especially Leiber, Howard and ERB, tends to concentration on more episodic, self-contained adventures with continuing characters.
Cheers!
Hussar
Legend
Ok, let's see if I can be coherent. I've been having trouble with that, so, here goes. 
From what I understand, people are arguing that later players and versions of DnD have moved farther and farther away from the roots of Tolkein or Howard. At some point in the past, DnD closely resembled Tolkein and now it doesn't. That is how I am understanding the arguement. If that's incorrect, I appologise.
Now, to answer the idea that we started close to Tolkein and then moved farther away, I would say that DnD has only ever passingly come close to Tolkein. Other than creatures and a few concepts, DnD in play has never looked like Tolkein. Now, before you start tossing tomatoes at me, let me give an example. Take the famous scene in Moria when the goblins come boiling out of the halls to chase the heroes. What do the heroes do? They run. "Fly you fools" says Gandalf.
Pardon me? Gandalf, in DnD terms is a double digit spell caster. He may not be the greatest mage around, but, he's certainly in the top ten. And he's running from goblins. Imagine the situation around the gaming table for a second:
DM: You see hundreds of goblins boil out of every entrance to the great hall. They are everywhere behind you.
Wizzie: I cast protection from missiles. They're more than one round behind us right?
Dm: Yup.
Wizzie: Ok, second round, I cast fly, rise up about forty feet.
DM: The goblins pelt you with arrows to no effect.
Wizzie: Hmm, ok, time to magic 'em till they glow. We'll lead off with a wall of fire to slow them down. Follow that with a couple of fireballs, maybe a Major Creation to make lots of oil, close to the wall of fire.
DM: Thousands of goblins die. But! Here comes the dreaded Balrog.
Wizzie and Players: All RIGHT! TIme for some serious XP. None of that nickle and dime crap anymore. We hit this thing with everything we got!
DM: Balrog dies.
THAT'S how that scene from the LOTR would play out around a high level DnD table in any edition. First, Second or Third, it doesn't matter. High level mages are death on wheels and they are NOT going to start running from a bunch of bloody goblins.
Or, take Conan for a second. Conan once again swings into that forbidden temple to save the fair damsel. High Priest Gehnerik sneers at the steely thewed barbarian, drops a Hold Person and giggles slightly as Conan freezes in mid stride. End of story.
The idea that DnD has abandoned its roots is a false one brought on by nostalgia IMO. DnD has never had its roots in Tolkein or Howard or Leiber. It borrowed lots of ideas from all of them and more, that's true. I won't deny that at all. And certainly any player of DnD should read those authors. Denying them their place is like trying to study English Lit without reading Shakespeare. Seeing where things began is always a good thing. But, DnD has never had more than a passing relationship with those authors. They were the source of ideas nothing more. And certainly nothing less as well.
From what I understand, people are arguing that later players and versions of DnD have moved farther and farther away from the roots of Tolkein or Howard. At some point in the past, DnD closely resembled Tolkein and now it doesn't. That is how I am understanding the arguement. If that's incorrect, I appologise.
Now, to answer the idea that we started close to Tolkein and then moved farther away, I would say that DnD has only ever passingly come close to Tolkein. Other than creatures and a few concepts, DnD in play has never looked like Tolkein. Now, before you start tossing tomatoes at me, let me give an example. Take the famous scene in Moria when the goblins come boiling out of the halls to chase the heroes. What do the heroes do? They run. "Fly you fools" says Gandalf.
Pardon me? Gandalf, in DnD terms is a double digit spell caster. He may not be the greatest mage around, but, he's certainly in the top ten. And he's running from goblins. Imagine the situation around the gaming table for a second:
DM: You see hundreds of goblins boil out of every entrance to the great hall. They are everywhere behind you.
Wizzie: I cast protection from missiles. They're more than one round behind us right?
Dm: Yup.
Wizzie: Ok, second round, I cast fly, rise up about forty feet.
DM: The goblins pelt you with arrows to no effect.
Wizzie: Hmm, ok, time to magic 'em till they glow. We'll lead off with a wall of fire to slow them down. Follow that with a couple of fireballs, maybe a Major Creation to make lots of oil, close to the wall of fire.
DM: Thousands of goblins die. But! Here comes the dreaded Balrog.
Wizzie and Players: All RIGHT! TIme for some serious XP. None of that nickle and dime crap anymore. We hit this thing with everything we got!
DM: Balrog dies.
THAT'S how that scene from the LOTR would play out around a high level DnD table in any edition. First, Second or Third, it doesn't matter. High level mages are death on wheels and they are NOT going to start running from a bunch of bloody goblins.
Or, take Conan for a second. Conan once again swings into that forbidden temple to save the fair damsel. High Priest Gehnerik sneers at the steely thewed barbarian, drops a Hold Person and giggles slightly as Conan freezes in mid stride. End of story.
The idea that DnD has abandoned its roots is a false one brought on by nostalgia IMO. DnD has never had its roots in Tolkein or Howard or Leiber. It borrowed lots of ideas from all of them and more, that's true. I won't deny that at all. And certainly any player of DnD should read those authors. Denying them their place is like trying to study English Lit without reading Shakespeare. Seeing where things began is always a good thing. But, DnD has never had more than a passing relationship with those authors. They were the source of ideas nothing more. And certainly nothing less as well.
Similar Threads
