How do you like your fantasy?

[Operator5]

I just picked up some books for research (a Conan collection and some John Carter: Warlord of Mars) and it got me thinking about what type of fantasy people prefer.

Now, I have read quite a bit, though not much of the newer stuff. I've read Tolkien every other year for the past 20 years. I've read, Leiber and Moorcock. I've read the light stuff by Piers Anthony and more dense material as well.

But I have found that the fantasy that I come back to is that of Conan and Leiber. No elves and dwarves running around in a world of good and evil. Lots of human races, some degenerate, animalistic races, and lots of demons and monstrous creatures. Magic is more powerful but requires more than a wave of the hand and some fancy words to make it happen.

So, if I were gaming the genre, I would want my game to be the same way. What is everyone else's take on it?

[KeyanSark]

I like both approaches...

Tolkien is the king for me... but his style of fantasy (several races in the same world) has been ab-used to the limit... I frankly reject Warhammer, Dragonlance, Dungeons & Dragons and all those Tolkien-clones except for a holiday light-read.

Said that, I prefer the Heroic fantasy approach... I really like the way in which Howard mixed real story and mythos with the Lovecraft mythos in a coherent universe.

[PeteMurray]

Mexican magical realism. Like this.  

Seriously, though, I like Conan because REH had a dungeon master's ability to spin exciting locations, and to come up with new stuff each week. I really think Tolkien is the king of the genre, but everyone's comments on that vein having been mined are pretty much exactly on.

I'd like to see a "gaslamp fantasy" a la Girl Genius, but I don't see that easy to be a solid game without lapsing into the sins that plague syncretic fantasy settings.[/url]

[Prof.Witchheimer]

But I have found that the fantasy that I come back to is that of Conan and Leiber. No elves and dwarves running around in a world of good and evil. Lots of human races, some degenerate, animalistic races, and lots of demons and monstrous creatures. Magic is more powerful but requires more than a wave of the hand and some fancy words to make it happen.

that's exactly the sort of fantasy I like. The almost real world but with a touch of mystery, magic and some(not too much) monsters.

Conan's world is just the best example. I would wish, you would take this world for your coming fanatsy game, maybe some adaptions but not more, it's good enough  

[knoxville]

If Tolkien is the king of fantasy, I'll immediately join the rebellion forces to kick him off his throne! His books are the most boring stuff I've ever read. I like the original dragonlance trilogy by Weis/Hickman the most. After that dark fantasy stuff, like the Witchhunter books from GW, the Diablo novels (by R.A. Knaak), Kane by K.E. Wagner or anything like that. Conan is cool, but the stories are all the same. He kills the bad guys and gets the chick. But the world is very cool, though!

[matakishi]

If Tolkien is the king of fantasy, I'll immediately join the rebellion forces to kick him off his throne! His books are the most boring stuff I've ever read. I like the original dragonlance trilogy by Weis/Hickman the most. After that dark fantasy stuff, like the Witchhunter books from GW, the Diablo novels (by R.A. Knaak), Kane by K.E. Wagner or anything like that. Conan is cool, but the stories are all the same. He kills the bad guys and gets the chick. But the world is very cool, though!

The above illustrates the beauty of variation and choice. I disagree with all of it of course but then I'm picky and expect some level of craft from the writers whos work I buy

Copying Tolkien is never done right because the authors who try completely miss the point and don't have the skill to pull it off. I avoid everything that resembles a Tolkien rip off whether it's books, films or games.

REH is good, Conan, Bran, Kull etc. are all good.

Burroughs is very formulaic and whereas I enjoyed him once I find the Mars books hard going these days. Tarzan is the same. I like the Mars setting though.

Moorcock is fantastic. Elric, Corum, and the rest of the eternal Champions are better than anything else for ideas, plot and pacing. His later work is not as good I feel, he has let himself wander into pretentiousness. Anything after the dancers at the End of time I tend to ignore.

Leiber is good but limited.

Gene wolf writes fantasy disguised as science fiction but is one of the greatest living writers and all his stuff is good. Book of the New Sun is a true masterpiece.

Lord Dunsany is one of my favourites, capturing the whimsical nature of his stories in a game would be a challenge indeed.

Jack Vance is a genius. Everything he writes is original and surprising. I have a new Vance to read at the moment so I'm happy

There are other writers who have individual works that are good but the above are the originators of the ideas that others, particularly those mentioned by knoxville, regurgitate and turn into cliches.

So, anything along the lines of any of the above I would at least try. Another volume of 'doorstop fantasy', book seventeen in the Boring as Shite tridecalology for instance, gets nary a glance.

I don't like fantasy wargames because they're all marketed at the lowest common denominator and do a bad Tolkien. I play the Ars Magica RPG and I've had fun with Everway and Stormbringer in the past.

[Grimm]

I am a big fan of stereotype fantasy (include Tolkin) where dwarf´s are solitary person´s ,elfs are like Legolas and babarian´s more like conan .
ok that  might, be boring but Ilike that easy stuff  :oops:

Grimm

[WitchfinderGeneral]

I never finished reading any Tolkien story. It just becomes too boring. Although I like the imagery of Middle-earth and all the artwork basing on it very much.
I also like all this rogh fantasy suff you can find in old D&D, like the Monster Manual and other books, but I never read a story basing on D&D and I doubt I ever will.

Recently I started reading Conan and I love that stuff because all his adventures are really adventurous, unbelievalbe coincidences and dangerous actions.

[cwchmc]

I prefer Hyboria and Barsoom style fantasy. I've never read Leiber but I may have to pick some up and give it a try.
Middle Earth is Fine but its been covered and copied over and over and over.

Chuck

[Poliorketes]

Tolkien is top of 'em all, but I really like Moorcock, even read R.E. Howard several years ago. My favorite Hack&Slay-Author is Karl Edward Wagner (RIP). Lately I prefer epic fantasy like early Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin and Steen Erikson.

Same with SF, Asimov & Heinlein are cool stuff even today, but I like every Subgenre if it's well-written and has a good story.

Weird stuff like Jack Vance is another favourite of mine.

[Mike D. Mc Brice]

If Tolkien is the king of fantasy, I'll immediately join the rebellion forces to kick him off his throne! His books are the most boring stuff I've ever read. ....

 ::  I thought I'd be the only who who found LOTR boring. Well I find fantasy on a general a bit boring. Isn't Conan middle ages for people too lazy to read about history? I don't mind to add some mystics for spice though.

[Driscoles]

Hi,

Lord Of The Rings is boring. The GW Game is better than the books. The movie was crap in my eyes.

I also come always back to Conan. He is not my idol or such but he and Howards other heroes help me to drift away much easier than others authors ever could. They start my imagination and help me dreaming and its much much more than always getting the chick when the evil guy is dead.

I also like to read Karl Edward Wagner. His story Mirage is my all time favourite Sword and Sorcery Story. I think, but ask me again tomorrow....

Greetings
Björn

[abbot_amaury]

So, if I were gaming the genre, I would want my game to be the same way. What is everyone else's take on it?

Although I really love authors like Moorcock and G.R.R. Martin I would prefer a Tolkien setting when gaming the fantasy genre (I was always tempted by those great Vendel fantasy minis - way better than those GW-LotR ones IMHO). Greg Stafford's Glorantha would be a fantasy setting I would even prefer over Middle-Earth - tons of great background material and you have broos, morocanths and ducks! And with the relaunch of RuneQuest by Mongoose there is quite a chance of a new Glorantha-'hype' coming....

Gruß, Hagen

[supervike]

I do tend to like darker fantasy...the less magic the better.  Conan is a great example.  Some of those GW Black Library books are not as bad as I thought they'd be.  Actually, the Dwarfslayer series is about the best they have to offer, and its very fun reading.

I do like Tolkien's idea of magic as it was much more subtle, and not so much readily apparent as it was in the Dungeons and Dragons inspired crap.

My wife reads alot of fantasy, but they tend to be the more popular 'unicorn' type that reads more like a soap opera than a gritty dark world.  She can keep them...

[Pappa Midnight]

Edgar Rice Burroughs with his John Carter series first got me interested in Fantasy. The plots were a bit thin, but as a kid I found his tales of Mars gripping!

Fritz Leiber for no-nonsense sword and sorcery. A little elimited in scope , but a good fun read!

Tolkien is not really my thing. I prefer the films to the books. His books did however inspire Role Playing games and "Non-historical" wargames.

I personally like Moorcock with his anti-heroes, dark sorcery, Demons, alternate universes ( Multi-verses) and his ability to turn the whole Fantasy Genre on it's head!
Elric Rocks!!!!

PM