gamegrene.com

A hearty list, aye.

I agree that REH isn't all that when it comes to actual talent. I enjoy his works and his best stories are full of "dash."

I think he should be credited with inventiveness as well. While not as strong at world building as Tolkien, REH came up with some pretty exotic locales and some pretty weird criters n' such.

I think maybe "legacy" should also be a factor. Lord of the Rings has legacy, so does Narnia...and, well, so does Conan.

I suppose, tho, everything you have listed would be factors that contribute to "legacy." And, I think REH had enough going for him that he should be thrown in. Some would argue that he invented the fantasy genre.

I'd add Frank Herbert's Dune stuff to the list of greats. I, personally, think that he excelled at each item on the list when writing Dune -- some of his other stuff ain't so grand.

Might also be fun to discuss which items on the list are most important.

My favourite Fantasy is Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, Thorn trilogy. It meets (and surpasses) all of your criteria Cocytus. A small note of warning though. Williams' work is very realistic in that characters who make the right choices (good over evil, selfless acts over selfish) still have bad things happen to them. In the Lord of the Rings, all the main characters, all the heroes lived. The only person who seemed scarred by the ordeal was Frodo. In Williams' work, everyone is scarred or dead. The characters make choices that make sense and very rarely, if ever, do dangerous missions or make choices just because it is the "right" thing to do.

Another Word of warning: The first book, "The Dragonbone Chair", starts off pretty slow. I have yet to know of anyone who has read it and not finished the trilogy though... It's that good.

Just FYI

"Never make your home in a place. Make a home for yourself inside your own head. You'll find what you need to furnish it - memory, friends you can trust, love of learning, and other such things. That way it will go with you wherever you journey."
Tad Williams

"We tell lies when we are afraid... afraid of what we don't know, afraid of what others will think, afraid of what will be found out about us. But every time we tell a lie, the thing that we fear grows stronger."
Tad Williams

So Boromir wasn't a main character?

;-)

{I do take your point; just being picky...}

Glad to hear someone else chiming in on the G.G. Kay fandom. I have not yet read Last Light of the Sun, but my wife liked it.

If you're at all into historical fiction, I cannot recommend Patrick O'Brian strongly enough. But that's really not a subject for this board...

As Kay matures, I find he incorporates less and less fantasy. And I find I still enjoy his work. The Lions of Al-Rassan is, of course, a thinly veiled retelling of El Cid. I really enjoyed The Sarantine Mosaic on almost every level: a marvelous read. And I certainly agree with you on Tigana: the magic system alone makes it one of the best fantasy novels I've ever read, and the Russian-inspired Ruselka is a very nice touch. But my favorite Kay book was A Song for Arbonne, so much so that I'm currently researching the County of Toulouse, Languedoc, and Narbonne/Galla Narbonensis in the 6th-10th centuries as the basis for my next campaign.

Humor should be a criterion...I suppose I omitted it because it seems to be strangely lacking among my favorite fantasy authors. I was a fan of the Xanth novels in my adolescence. I seem to recall the third book being particularly funny. Really, any good writer should command the entire spectrum of human emotions, and humor is an oft-overlooked bit of color. But I don't think it should be the driving force in an adventure story: too much levity deprives the adventure of some of its sense of peril and thrill. I can't think of too many fantasy books that employ humor to superior effect. Two of my favorite fantasy movies, however, Conan (the Milius-directed original, not the miserable sequel) and The Princess Bride use humor superbly. In the former, it's a seasoning; in the latter, it's a major element of the story. But in neither case, I think, do you forget that the major themes are love, death, and the triumph of heroism over villainy.

I haven't read RAS or any of the others recommended by zip. I didn't mean to slam his taste by sort of starting a different thread in his post, but I don't know enough about any of the authors he mentions to comment intelligently.

As for O'Brian, well: to put it simply, he's the best writer of adventure stories I've ever read. Now, I am something of a sailor, but I could never get into the Hornblower series, and the better part of Moby Dick bored me to tears; so the fact that O'Brian possesses a singular mastery of nautical knowlege and early 19th-century period detail actually counted against him when I started reading his Aubrey-and-Maturin series. But I was soon won over. His gift for storytelling is incredible; his command of language equals that of any writer I've read in any language, with the possible exceptions of Shakespeare and Ovid; he commands the entire range of human emotions, summoning pity, disgust, horrror, suspense, joy, admiration, romantic tension, and above all humor with equal ease; and most importantly to a guy such as myself, he spins a cracking good adventure story, where acts of heroism and intrigue combine in a way I've simply never encountered in any other writer. And all this should be underscored by the proviso that I don't even get all the jokes and references in his novels. I'm on my second pass through them, and I keep finding things I missed the first time, and reading (on the websites of other fans whose scholarship and devotion absolutely humble me) about the hundreds of little details that O'Brian never explains, but which continue to provide delight to the perceptive reader. Is he for everyone? No. But he has something for everyone, and if you have a heart that can be moved by a tale of heroics, I find it difficult to believe you would not like reading his stories.

The only comfortable analogy I can muster is the movie Casablanca, which I managed to live 33 years of my life without having seen. When I finally did see it, I found that all the great things I'd heard about it actually failed to do it justice: it's one of those works of art that I think deserves its title as a "Classic," and as such it is really immune to hype. In my opinion, O'Brian is much the same.

Though I've not read Shaara's Killer Angels, my father loves it and I mean to read it at some point. At any rate, I'll always love it, because it was after reading that book that Joss Whedon started to conceive of Firefly, which is some of the best damn television I've ever seen.

Yeah, I'm a fanboy. Sorry.

I can't remember where I heard that. I can dig up the reference, if you like.

Some of the extras are quite good. The cast interviews are all great, but the highlight is definitely Adam Baldwin singing "The Man They Call Jayne" wearing that absurd hat.

And yes, I'll be off to see Serenity. I had planned to lose more weight this year and go dressed as Captain Reynolds (when I'm close to my ideal weight, I bear a passing resemblance to Nathan Fillion). But I'm about 30 lbs. overweight again, so I must simply be content to be the average, cheering, popcorn-eating fan.

I hear great things about Martin from nearly everyone who's read him. I'll definitely have to check him out.

You shouldn't have to look as far as Amazon to find POB. I don't know what bookstores in Israel are like, but here in the 'States you can find the entire 20-volume series in any major bookstore. I'd recommend starting with the first one, Master and Commander. If you like that one, you'll like them all.

Terry Pratchett deserves a mention, I'd say. Cocytus was talking about humor in fantasy... well, there you go. Pratchett's a satiric genius.

I've often found that fantasy aimed towards a somewhat younger age group is often superior to adult fantasy. Harry Potter is an obvious example. Diana Wynn Jones has written some very clever fantasy short stories, and I enjoyed Tamora Pierce's Circle of Magic books a great deal.

I'd definately say that the most important criteria in fantasy is originality. When you've got as much flexibility as the genre has - you can do anything you WANT, for heaven's sake! You can have snakes come out of the ceilings if you can come up with a reasonable reason! - then you really shouldn't be using the same tired story elements as the last five zillion authors have. I'm not saying there can't be repetiton, I'm just saying that there is far too much of it these days.

Funny...I liked the first one and didn't like the second. Nearly all my friends agree I should've kept reading, though.

For those George R. R. Martin fans out there, I just made a discovery at my local bookstore. There is a D20 gaming supplement for the Game of Thrones, the first of the Songs of Fire and Ice series. This book retails for $50 and only covers the 1st novel. It is hardback and looks pretty.

Here is the product description:

"This essential d20-based role-playing game details the first novel, A Game of Thrones, in George R. R. Martin's masterpiece of fantasy literature, "A Song of Ice and Fire." Now's your chance to explore the mysteries of the Seven Kingdoms and its noble houses -- Starks, Lannisters, Tullys, and more! This authorised full-colour reference guide and RPG features new classes, feats, weapons, and rules appropriate to the series -- along with noble house analyses, character profiles, setting details, gorgeous illustrations, and a pull-out map of Westeros. A fantasy RPG alternative for fans of "A Song of Ice and Fire" and OGL connoisseurs."

There is a $100 version as well, here's that product description:

"For the most dedicated fans of George R. R. Martin's masterpiece of fantasy literature, A Song of Ice and Fire, only the best will do -- and this Deluxe Limited Edition doesnít hold back! This full-colour book details the first novel in the series, A Game of Thrones, presenting a wealth of resource and reference material about the dynamic and mysterious lands of the Seven Kingdoms. Additionally, role-playing game rules for engaging the characters and plots of Westeros are included for both the d20 and Tri-Stat Systems. The book features: full-colour printing on premium quality paper, dozens of gorgeous images, a foil-stamped leatherette hardbound cover, an exquisite dust jacket, and cloth bookmark. An essential companion book for the serious Martin fan and role-playing game connoisseur. Supplies are limited."

These are both outta MY price range but I think that the world is cool enough and the books are good enough that those of you who want a great pregenerated world could do a lot worse. I didn't try pricing these out on Ebay or anything, so don't let the price tag discourage you.

Here is where I found these books:

http://www.guardiansorder.com/

All D&D worlds can be translated to Gurps. Ignore the D&D stats, and keep the descriptions. Remake the character or creature based on the description.

For example (I don't have a monsters manual here, so bear with me):

A typical D&D Orc is described as a mansized bipedal creature with green, brown, or black skin, a piggish snout and tusks. They typically use low quality short swords, spear, xbows, shields, and are armoured with leather or chainmail armour.

They are described as strong and viscious, cunning but not too bright. They are tough and extremely aggressive.

In D&D they are given a certain number of hit dice which relates to the level of the characters. In Gurps they get stats just like the PCs and NPCs do. They are described as strong, but not massively, thus they'd get a +1 or 2 to strength. They aren't bright, but they are cunning and they're alert and notice things. I'd leave their Iq and raised their perception a level or 2. I'd give them the Orcish Martial art Smasha for their fighting skills (it includes broadsword) and a couple of missile weapons. A level of Toughness or two, High Pain Threshold, and Combat Reflexes account for Advantages and Bloodlust, Bad Temper, and Callous are their Racial Disadvantages.

Gurps Fantasy Races (3rd ed) will give you a good idea of Racial stats. I believe Fantasy (4th ed) will have Fantasy Race Creation Rules in it.

I hope that this helps...

In GURPS Magic (3d ed), "orc" is a -10 point racial disadvantage. You have to decide whether or not you want that profile to be the one you use.

For a guide to how to create your own GURPS races, refer to GURPS Bestiary (I used it for weres)...or just total the advantages, stat modifiers, etc. that you want to use. It's surprisingly easy, and unsurprisingly rather addictive.

As a general rule, "normal" folk in GURPS are meant to be built on 25 points. So I'd put 25 points in the average, generic fantasy, cannon fodder orc warrior. The chief of the tribe might get as many as 50 or even 75. 100+ points you want to save for really major NPCs, lethal fights, and so on.

I'm sure Calamar will come around to correct me here--he has a LOT more experience actually playing the sytem than I have (I've mainly just designed about three settings for it and then got bullied into running d20 games for my worthless...I mean, well-behaved, open-minded, brilliant players), but these are the guidelines I've used so far.