Who are Howard and Leiber?

[Darrin Drader]

There are some who will go back into the past and dig up the classics of yesteryear, but the world is moving on.

Wow Merric, thanks for making me feel old. Care to go pick out a coffin and a nice quiet plot for me while you're at it? :\

 

[Captain Tagon]

On topic, I actually enjoy Eberron quite a bit because it does get away from most of the fantasy fiction that I don't enjoy. Of the "classic" big names of fantasy fiction the only one whose world that would be even remotely entertaining to my group and I is Tolkein, but there isn't much you can do in Middle Earth. Of course you could play that same high fantasy feel in other settings, but I'm also glad settings like Eberron are branching out into something different.

 

[MerricB]

Harry Potter and Eberron

Here's an interesting thought: Harry Potter is a higher-magic world than Eberron.

This is not strictly true. I've never really seen anything in Harry Potter that really compares to the destructive power of a fireball. (Most of the Killing Curses are against one foe only).

Why I initially made that comparison is because there's a lot of low-level magic in Eberron, accessible to everyone. This is also true in Harry Potter (amongst the Wizard community only, of course). I know that Harry Potter is in a "modern" society, and there are plenty of other differences between the two, but there's a familiarity to it that is quite a contrast to the low-magic tales of someone like Howard.

We can also see resonances in Piers Anthony's Xanth books (everyone has a magical talent, normally minor), and likewise in the Black Jewels trilogy by Anne Bishop (the witches can do a lot of household chores with magic, in additional to the more serious uses).

That this is occurring in fantasy literature may be a reflection on modern society, where the tools we have available to us are much more advanced and pervasive than even 50 years before. (Consider the computer... or rather, don't. We don't have the time. )

One common tradition in fantasy books is to severely limit the use of magic. It's there, but only a couple of things can be done with it. That style of magic has never really been the style of D&D. One reason for that may be that D&D requires a variety of challenges to remain interesting, and magic is the tool that is easiest to use to give variety.

Another thing that comes to mind when comparing books and D&D is that most D&D games don't have much of a clue of how to do intrigue. Well, sure; it's meant to be there, but the execution of it is often something that the DM knows about afterwards, which isn't very rewarding for the players.

(The Eberron adventures I've seen so far suffer from this greatly, IMO).

Writers like Leiber, Edgar Rice Burroughs and Howard are very important for the form of the traditional D&D adventure: crawling through pits facing challenges. I'm not sure how many of the current fantasy novels really promote that style of adventure.

This may not be a problem, but it does bring up a question: The world of D&D has changed over the years. Has the stories we tell in it changed as well?

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Wow Merric, thanks for making me feel old. Care to go pick out a coffin and a nice quiet plot for me while you're at it? :\

I'll be there beside you, I think. Earlier this year I read the Iliad again!

I phrased that badly. What I meant to say that there will be those who exclusively go back to the early books, without acknowledging that other people are reading the new ones. Or something like that.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

oops - almost started a comparison of authors post. Not the real purpose of this thread. (Some is ok, but most is OT).

Cheers!

 

[Turjan]

I am interested in posts that say "Howard has a strong influence on the adventuring/quest aspect of D&D and the structure of adventures" or the like.

Ah! So why did you dismiss the Vancian magic then? The 3E spell preparation of wizards is an exact fit for the system in the original stories (the fit is now much clearer than before). Also, the idea of spell slots according to "level" comes from there. We have quite a few powerful magic items, and everyone who matters wears at least one. We have gods that deal directly with the mortals. We have the usual rabble of devils and half-intelligent monsters, cities of undead and, not to forget, powerful witches. Just the image of the sword-swinging mage, like my namesake, didn't really make it into D&D, although he might have been a fighter/mage. I find many of those stories pretty D&D-like in their whole atmosphere, despite the sci-fi elements in some of them.

And yes, I've read Harry Potter. At least the first 4 ones (I stopped because I found the 4th book boring and partly illogical).

 

[Akrasia]

I was with you until you continued past that comma.

I think restricting D&D - or any corpus of fantasy "work" - to imitation of someone else's style is ridiculous and destructive. Would Pratchett be a better author of fantasy if he'd never written anything except satires of Tolkien/D&D/Extruded Fantasy Product/crap like his first two Discworld novels?

Hell no. He's much better off for having developed in his own direction - and so is D&D.

So are we, for that matter.

I don't think D&D should be 'restricted' to any set of authors.

My point was that as a 'baseline' or 'default', the classics are best (Tolkien, Howard, Vance, etc.).

The newer stuff shouldn't be built into the core of D&D. For one thing, there is too much disagreement about its quality (I think Feist is mediocre, apparently MerricB does not). For another thing, it should be up to different groups -- and supplements, and campaign settings -- to diverge from the default D&D assumptions.

Default D&D should stick to its original sources -- those are what made it what it is.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Kids will always be telling their parents and elders that they're behind the times. Then they'll grow up and have kids tell them the same thing, and wonder why the kids don't get how their stuff is much better. Then those kids will grow up and repeat the cycle again. This is nothing new. D&D cannot stay tied to Howard and Leiber. The target audience is too young for that. If D&D doesn't keep up, its out.

It doesn't reflect on the actual quality of the old guard, its all oppinion and what people are into at the time. It is kind of sad that the classics are being ignored by so many people nowadays, but I'd feel old if I got upset about it, and I'm only 25, so I refuse! I refuse, I say!

 

[Turjan]

One common tradition in fantasy books is to severely limit the use of magic. It's there, but only a couple of things can be done with it. That style of magic has never really been the style of D&D. One reason for that may be that D&D requires a variety of challenges to remain interesting, and magic is the tool that is easiest to use to give variety.

Another reason might be that the stories D&D magic builds upon are not really limited in their use of magic either. The two magic duels that come immediately to my mind resemble pretty much some common D&D fight. Not surprising, as the spells made it into D&D.

 

[MerricB]

Ah! So why did you dismiss the Vancian magic then?

Because I was thinking of something else at the time?

Actually, the reason I dismissed it was more to do with the people who enter D&D having not first read Vance, not because the contribution isn't important. To someone like that, it isn't the "Vancian" magic system, it's the "D&D" magic system.

(Incidentally, as I've rarely found any Vance to read, how many books does he use the system in? I've read his Lyonesse series, and the magic seems to have a different tone there).

In fact, the adaptation of the Vancian magic system to a game is inspired - and the changes to it in 3e likewise. There's also an example here in how parts of different fantasy (and mythological) sources come together to form D&D.

Cheers!