|
Post by Charles X. on Jul 22, 2021 20:17:37 GMT
I've noticed in FF it tends to be the case you're taking on individual bad guys, not a whole group or system; to elaborate, the books don't tend to be particularly political. The one big exception I can think of is Rebel Planet, which is Sci-fi, and The Gates Of Death, which is a failure. Can anyone mention counter-examples, or suggest reasons why this is so? My first thought is the prosaic one FF is written for a younger audience. However, I've also noticed there is a strong 'libertarian' current in FF, with you playing mercenaries, sometimes working for bad people, and money playing a big part in things. This is consistent with its very British roots.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 23, 2021 12:01:52 GMT
The Riddling Reaver isn't a fight against a single baddy. Rather it's a sole hero trying to liberate humanity from its shackles, and a gang of baddies -- assassins -- pursuing him and attempting to preserve the status quo.
Unless you're foolish enough to think that the player characters are the heroes...
But your point is correct, that FF reflects the mercenary concerns of its founders (don't forget that the original, heroic self-sacrificing ending of Slaves of the Abyss was rejected because it was considered necessary -- by Steve Jackson, not by its authors -- that the reader's avatar receive a substantial reward).
I don't think the books being written for a younger audience is any sort of justification, though you may be right that this may be held up as an excuse. And it would certainly be used to shoot down any politics that peeped above a very low threshold of metaphor.
And I've just remembered another related point: the cover art was of massive importance. Steve, at the very least, believed that there had to be a single central figure on the cover. The original brief (and draft) for The Riddling Reaver had the Reaver himself as a much more peripheral (and human!) figure. Lizardmen were more prominent, and I think the Reaver's place on the cover was more as a manipulator in the background. But Steve steamed in and got Peter Jones to redo the cover with the Reaver a dominant -- and for some reason lizard-featured -- aggressor.
|
|
|
Post by daredevil123 on Jul 23, 2021 12:29:06 GMT
But your point is correct, that FF reflects the mercenary concerns of its founders (don't forget that the original, heroic self-sacrificing ending of Slaves of the Abyss was rejected because it was considered necessary -- by Steve Jackson, not by its authors -- that the reader's avatar receive a substantial reward). I'm a huge fan of Steve Jackson, but it annoys me that he vetoed a self-sacrificing ending, which we rarely, if ever, see in FF. Do you still have the original ending, and if so, would it be possible for you to share it?
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 23, 2021 12:40:33 GMT
But your point is correct, that FF reflects the mercenary concerns of its founders (don't forget that the original, heroic self-sacrificing ending of Slaves of the Abyss was rejected because it was considered necessary -- by Steve Jackson, not by its authors -- that the reader's avatar receive a substantial reward). I'm a huge fan of Steve Jackson, but it annoys me that he vetoed a self-sacrificing ending, which we rarely, if ever, see in FF. Do you still have the original ending, and if so, would it be possible for you to share it? I would happily do so if I still had it, but Slaves was written on an Amstrad PCW, and so even if I still had the disks, they would be unreadable. And when I moved to Japan, bringing piles of paper associated with FF wasn't a priority! Actually, I made a point of not changing the ending too much. The whole business about you getting immense power and adventuring among the planes was my sop to Steve. The original was pretty similar, except with all that stuff being replaced by a downbeat line about living out the rest of your life among the Ectovults and other denizens of the Abyss. That's what I remember, anyway. And it annoyed me, too, because I had very little time for Ian, and always felt Steve was the more decent and creative of the two, and yet apart from it being thanks to Steve that I wrote the books in the first place, I always found his interventions crass.
|
|
|
Post by a moderator on Jul 23, 2021 13:11:45 GMT
The Riddling Reaver isn't a fight against a single baddy. Rather it's a sole hero trying to liberate humanity from its shackles, and a gang of baddies -- assassins -- pursuing him and attempting to preserve the status quo. Unless you're foolish enough to think that the player characters are the heroes... Well, if he hadn't taunted them into pursuing him because he wanted to trick them into fetching the Pendulum for him, rather than sending his Lizard Men into the shrine to recover it... ...then there wouldn't have been much of an adventure for the player characters. But the point remains that he only has trouble with those 'baddies' because he chose to involve them for the sake of a needlessly overcomplicated plan.
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 23, 2021 18:09:28 GMT
The Riddling Reaver isn't a fight against a single baddy. Rather it's a sole hero trying to liberate humanity from its shackles, and a gang of baddies -- assassins -- pursuing him and attempting to preserve the status quo. Unless you're foolish enough to think that the player characters are the heroes... From Titan: The Reaver is said to be a master of disguise, able to transform himself into almost anyone or anything in a matter of minutes, he often uses such disguises to get close to his ‘victims’. He is also a very puzzling being... ... He seems to have almost limitless powers to draw on in his task of bringing confusion and balance to the world. At last. The final piece of the jigsaw falls into place. As a result of this posting, I now feel confident in sharing with you all my theory that in fact the real Paul Mason was captured and imprisoned in a dungeon beneath London at some point in the late 1980’s and his identity assumed by the Reaver himself. He never left England. My fear is that the scenario and picture below (which was included in the RR FF book) is a cruel and ironic taunt and was based closely upon Mason’s true fate. So now, I declare openly and publicly, that YOU sleepyscholar aka 'Paul Mason' are the Riddling Reaver and I claim my five pounds!
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 23, 2021 19:14:33 GMT
I've noticed in FF it tends to be the case you're taking on individual bad guys, not a whole group or system; to elaborate, the books don't tend to be particularly political. The one big exception I can think of is Rebel Planet, which is Sci-fi, and The Gates Of Death, which is a failure. Can anyone mention counter-examples, or suggest reasons why this is so? Some initial ideas of mine, Charles X. Rings of Kether and Appointment with FEAR are both attempts to break up a powerful crime syndicate. Demons of the Deep is combatting a pirate crew and so is Bloodbones. Moonrunner is bringing to justice a war criminal and also breaking up a conspiracy to stage an uprising by scores of his followers. Armies of Death is defeating an army led by a demon. Robot Commando is defeating an enemy invasion in which one of the ways to win involves not fighting the enemy leader at all but reviving the populace. Battleblade Warrior is not against a single arch-enemy, instead the enemy is the 'system' of the warlike Lizardman Empire. Is this what you mean? If not, then I'm not sure Rebel Planet meets your own criteria. Instead of a Lizard King or a Balthus Dire style warlord, it's a supercomputer you are sent to destroy. It's still a 'cut the head off the snake' mission. As to why this is so, maybe it's because it fits in with heroic stories and legends (from ancient times through to Westerns and onwards) where the protagonist must find and slay the antagonist in a climactic struggle at the end. The 'one big man who we must fixate on and kill and then all will be well' is hardly a childish idea but one shared by many adults today. How many people think 'If only we can remove [insert name of dictator here] then the land he has been ruling over will surely be just fine with a bit of luck and hard work'? Loads do. But your point is correct, that FF reflects the mercenary concerns of its founders And to be fair early D&D itself, where the aim tended to be to rinse a dungeon of all wealth and come out covered head-to-toe in gore. I don't think the books being written for a younger audience is any sort of justification, though you may be right that this may be held up as an excuse. And it would certainly be used to shoot down any politics that peeped above a very low threshold of metaphor. Politics in terms of representing the politics of the fantasy world was done rather well in the Way of the Tiger - books 3 (plotting coup against a usurper), 4 (running the city) and 5 (seeking allies in wartime). Political intrigue played a part in many of your own books too, as we know. What was mercifully kept out of the books (as far as I can tell or else it was well hidden!) was the shoehorning of overt contemporary divisive party-politics or ideologies. And thank goodness for that! They have their place in the world but for these books (and entertainment as a whole generally speaking) I say it would be cancer. No-one i know, child or adult, sits down to play one of these books (FF, Lone Wolf, Way of the Tiger etc) wanting a critique of Thatcherism or the shortcomings of 1980's British Trades Unionism to be subliminally hammered into their skulls. 'Can you Brexit' is another thing entirely because that is the whole point of the book. And I've just remembered another related point: the cover art was of massive importance. Steve, at the very least, believed that there had to be a single central figure on the cover. The original brief (and draft) for The Riddling Reaver had the Reaver himself as a much more peripheral (and human!) figure. Lizardmen were more prominent, and I think the Reaver's place on the cover was more as a manipulator in the background. But Steve steamed in and got Peter Jones to redo the cover with the Reaver a dominant -- and for some reason lizard-featured -- aggressor. In general I think their instincts here were correct. I much prefer the UK covers to the American FF ones where various monsters or characters from the book are included in one artificial scene, sometimes like actors in an ensemble gathering at the end of the play. Have a look at the various Deathtrap Dungeon covers... the Japanese one is appallingly bad. Ironically given that you are the creator of the Riddling Reaver, I think you had inordinately bad luck with your covers.
|
|
|
Post by Charles X. on Jul 23, 2021 21:30:39 GMT
I've noticed in FF it tends to be the case you're taking on individual bad guys, not a whole group or system; to elaborate, the books don't tend to be particularly political. The one big exception I can think of is Rebel Planet, which is Sci-fi, and The Gates Of Death, which is a failure. Can anyone mention counter-examples, or suggest reasons why this is so? Some initial ideas of mine, Charles X. Rings of Kether and Appointment with FEAR are both attempts to break up a powerful crime syndicate. Demons of the Deep is combatting a pirate crew and so is Bloodbones. Moonrunner is bringing to justice a war criminal and also breaking up a conspiracy to stage an uprising by scores of his followers. Armies of Death is defeating an army led by a demon. Robot Commando is defeating an enemy invasion in which one of the ways to win involves not fighting the enemy leader at all but reviving the populace. Battleblade Warrior is not against a single arch-enemy, instead the enemy is the 'system' of the warlike Lizardman Empire. Is this what you mean? If not, then I'm not sure Rebel Planet meets your own criteria. Instead of a Lizard King or a Balthus Dire style warlord, it's a supercomputer you are sent to destroy. It's still a 'cut the head off the snake' mission. As to why this is so, maybe it's because it fits in with heroic stories and legends (from ancient times through to Westerns and onwards) where the protagonist must find and slay the antagonist in a climactic struggle at the end. The 'one big man who we must fixate on and kill and then all will be well' is hardly a childish idea but one shared by many adults today. How many people think 'If only we can remove [insert name of dictator here] then the land he has been ruling over will surely be just fine with a bit of luck and hard work'? Loads do. But your point is correct, that FF reflects the mercenary concerns of its founders And to be fair early D&D itself, where the aim tended to be to rinse a dungeon of all wealth and come out covered head-to-toe in gore. I don't think the books being written for a younger audience is any sort of justification, though you may be right that this may be held up as an excuse. And it would certainly be used to shoot down any politics that peeped above a very low threshold of metaphor. Politics in terms of representing the politics of the fantasy world was done rather well in the Way of the Tiger - books 3 (plotting coup against a usurper), 4 (running the city) and 5 (seeking allies in wartime). Political intrigue played a part in many of your own books too, as we know. What was mercifully kept out of the books (as far as I can tell or else it was well hidden!) was the shoehorning of overt contemporary divisive party-politics or ideologies. And thank goodness for that! They have their place in the world but for these books (and entertainment as a whole generally speaking) I say it would be cancer. No-one i know, child or adult, sits down to play one of these books (FF, Lone Wolf, Way of the Tiger etc) wanting a critique of Thatcherism or the shortcomings of 1980's British Trades Unionism to be subliminally hammered into their skulls. 'Can you Brexit' is another thing entirely because that is the whole point of the book. And I've just remembered another related point: the cover art was of massive importance. Steve, at the very least, believed that there had to be a single central figure on the cover. The original brief (and draft) for The Riddling Reaver had the Reaver himself as a much more peripheral (and human!) figure. Lizardmen were more prominent, and I think the Reaver's place on the cover was more as a manipulator in the background. But Steve steamed in and got Peter Jones to redo the cover with the Reaver a dominant -- and for some reason lizard-featured -- aggressor. In general I think their instincts here were correct. I much prefer the UK covers to the American FF ones where various monsters or characters from the book are included in one artificial scene, sometimes like actors in an ensemble gathering at the end of the play. Have a look at the various Deathtrap Dungeon covers... the Japanese one is appallingly bad. Ironically given that you are the creator of the Riddling Reaver, I think you had inordinately bad luck with your covers. Your examples are more articulate than mine. What inspired this thread and what stands out for me was where the ending for Slaves Of The Abyss was ordered to be changed from a more D & D, 'you now rule this dangerous world, good luck with that', to the regular 'you're rich and now have a palace, and go on a bunch of new adventures' happy ending. Most of these gamebooks came from another time, such as 1990. Today, with superheroes and the big-budget Harry Potter, it's fashionable for shows to be about saving the world, not booting out threats (digressing a bit, prioritising that ambition was probably what made Wonder Woman 1984 so messy and flawed). Maybe we'd prefer it if our heroes used magic more often. This was possibly what led to some of the criticism about Eye Of The Dragon. It's definitely not the worst FF; but it's also painfully unoriginal and old-fashioned.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 24, 2021 1:21:40 GMT
The Riddling Reaver isn't a fight against a single baddy. Rather it's a sole hero trying to liberate humanity from its shackles, and a gang of baddies -- assassins -- pursuing him and attempting to preserve the status quo. Unless you're foolish enough to think that the player characters are the heroes... From Titan: The Reaver is said to be a master of disguise, able to transform himself into almost anyone or anything in a matter of minutes, he often uses such disguises to get close to his ‘victims’. He is also a very puzzling being... ... He seems to have almost limitless powers to draw on in his task of bringing confusion and balance to the world. At last. The final piece of the jigsaw falls into place. As a result of this posting, I now feel confident in sharing with you all my theory that in fact the real Paul Mason was captured and imprisoned in a dungeon beneath London at some point in the late 1980’s and his identity assumed by the Reaver himself. He never left England. My fear is that the scenario and picture below (which was included in the RR FF book) is a cruel and ironic taunt and was based closely upon Mason’s true fate. View AttachmentSo now, I declare openly and publicly, that YOU sleepyscholar aka 'Paul Mason' are the Riddling Reaver and I claim my five pounds! All I will say is that the picture you have chosen to illustrate your post with was one that pretty much informed my entire attitude towards writing Fighting Fantasy in general, and The Riddling Reaver in particular. And I'm not sure it was the late 80s. I seem to recall the Reaver emerging in an East London line train at Whitechapel in early 1986.
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 24, 2021 7:40:50 GMT
This was possibly what led to some of the criticism about Eye Of The Dragon. It's definitely not the worst FF; but it's also painfully unoriginal and old-fashioned Yes. It was the resurrection of an older adventure, dug up from a book written in the early 80's but with some more flesh grafted onto its bones. My opinion is that as a gamebook it belongs in those early 80's, but it came out in 2005. Gamebooks had moved on in many respects and it had been clearly shown that more could be done with them. However, I've also noticed there is a strong 'libertarian' current in FF, with you playing mercenaries, sometimes working for bad people, and money playing a big part in things. This is consistent with its very British roots You've set me thinking. Could you expand on that, with a few examples? My overall impression of FF is that the books normally have you as an essentially 'good' character working towards a noble cause. The books where that is not the case stand out because of this - like being an immoral/amoral pirate captain in Seas of Blood, or working for Grimslade in Scorpion Swamp... You are an avowed mercenary in Legend of the Shadow Warriors but a key part of that book is a feeling that you have let down the people you were working for, and so decide to set things right. Fabled Lands books might be described as the most 'libertarian' of all gamebooks, not FF. As for money playing a big role in things, yes I suppose that is the case in FF - you often have to buy a lot of stuff - from equipment to advice - and managing your finances is a crucial part of it. You could argue that is quite realistic - that little actually can be done without money. Money plays a much smaller role in Lone Wolf once you get past book 2, and it is very rarely mentioned in Way of the Tiger.. but both these book series are British to the core.
|
|
|
Post by Charles X. on Jul 24, 2021 7:58:32 GMT
This was possibly what led to some of the criticism about Eye Of The Dragon. It's definitely not the worst FF; but it's also painfully unoriginal and old-fashioned Yes. It was the resurrection of an older adventure, dug up from a book written in the early 80's but with some more flesh grafted onto its bones. My opinion is that as a gamebook it belongs in those early 80's, but it came out in 2005. Gamebooks had moved on in many respects and it had been clearly shown that more could be done with them. However, I've also noticed there is a strong 'libertarian' current in FF, with you playing mercenaries, sometimes working for bad people, and money playing a big part in things. This is consistent with its very British roots You've set me thinking. Could you expand on that, with a few examples? My overall impression of FF is that the books normally have you as an essentially 'good' character working towards a noble cause. The books where that is not the case stand out because of this - like being an immoral/amoral pirate captain in Seas of Blood, or working for Grimslade in Scorpion Swamp... You are an avowed mercenary in Legend of the Shadow Warriors but a key part of that book is a feeling that you have let down the people you were working for, and so decide to set things right. Fabled Lands books might be described as the most 'libertarian' of all gamebooks, not FF. As for money playing a big role in things, yes I suppose that is the case in FF - you often have to buy a lot of stuff - from equipment to advice - and managing your finances is a crucial part of it. You could argue that is quite realistic - that little actually can be done without money. Money plays a much smaller role in Lone Wolf once you get past book 2, and it is very rarely mentioned in Way of the Tiger.. but both these book series are British to the core. One good example is the first book, WOFM, where you are motivated to go rob a wizard who hasn't even terrorised people. In the newer PC game adaptation, after you beat him, you can become the wizard yourself. It's possibly comparable to Overlord! in The Way Of The Tiger.
|
|
|
Post by philsadler on Jul 24, 2021 8:51:53 GMT
Very British? British to the core? Do you mean they were written in Britain? I guess books written in Japan are Very Japanese to the Core?
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 24, 2021 9:25:00 GMT
Very British? British to the core? Do you mean they were written in Britain? I guess books written in Japan are Very Japanese to the Core? Depends who is writing the books and what is in them, obviously. Me writing a Sherlock Holmes style mystery set in 1880s London during a quick two week stay in Tokyo is hardly going to be 'very Japanese' is it? They are British authors for one thing with British brains in their British heads. Written in Britain. In English. For a mainly British audience (initially). All these things help. Like the Iliad and Odyssey are Greek to the core, yes? Or are they not? That the stories translate well into other languages and cultures is a testament to how good they are, but like the Arabian Nights they are a product of a certain area and the people that lived in it. You don't see the enormous Tolkien influence in the Lone Wolf books and Magnamund? Tolkien was writing a mythology for England. Have a quick look at his influences on Wikipedia. You may as well have a look at Joe Dever's too. Beowulf, Ivanhoe, writings by Moorcock and Mervyn Peake. Orb as a world is similarly influenced by British mythology including Tolkien, many of the placenames are clearly British in origin. The authors' interest and knowledge of Japanese culture and decision to make the player character a ninja from a remote island put an interesting spin on the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 24, 2021 15:43:42 GMT
Very British? British to the core? Do you mean they were written in Britain? I guess books written in Japan are Very Japanese to the Core? You're thinking of Magehunter, are you? It having been written in Japan and all. Actually this issue reminds me of an argument I had in the good old days of fanzines, when vicious put-downs took several months to permeate, rather than the nearly instantaneous transmission of the Web. A correspondent to my zine claimed that my idea of culture games, which lay behind the historical Chinese role-playing game I was writing, was doomed to failure, because I wasn't Chinese. He seemed to think that some blood connection, or whatever, meant that a historical British rolegame (which I regard as equally a culture game as a Chinese, Japanese, or Tekumel game) was feasible, but an 'oriental' game was impossible. I felt this was racist -- and I had a son to demonstrate the absurdity of these absolutist notions about cultural boundaries. But in those days, it was rather more difficult to be taken seriously about topics such as racism. In the current case, though, I think there's a big difference. As I understand it, what's being suggested here is British culture as an influence on the writing. An American might happen to be influenced by Monty Python. And we would find that interesting, in the same way as, say, Dave Morris being influenced by Stan Lee. But when a British writer is influenced by Monty Python I think it's fair to say that it's akin to something in the water. If you grow up watching Doctor Who, Blake's Seven etc, you are inevitably influenced by certain ideas about fiction. You are more likely to be thinking of protagonists as Avon rather than Kirk. There are multiple forms of 'Britishness'. I use the 2012 Olympic opening ceremony in a class I teach about UK culture. I think that ceremony showcases a particular form of Britishness, which is now very much in abeyance, dominated by a different -- but equally British -- culture of public schoolboys and getting Brexit done. If you have a work of fiction which seems to feature many British cultural tropes, I think it's fair to say it's very British. I read Jonathan Coe in the Guardian today (Coe went to King Edwards, which was the most similar school in the area to my own Bishop Vesey's) mentioning that he used to read a scene from his novel The Rotter's Club based around those who had forgotten their trunks being forced to swim nude. In Britain it was a comic scene, generating laughter; when he read it in Canada it elicited sympathy, anxiety about whether the book was autobiographical, and whether he had received counselling. The point being that there are certain differences, and the FF books, although varying because of the various authors, generally exhibit an attitude to violence, and a level of cynicism, that does characterise British gamers of the 80s and 90s. Or is that just me?
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 24, 2021 22:53:48 GMT
You understand what I was trying to get across. A couple of extra points... ...A correspondent to my zine claimed that my idea of culture games, which lay behind the historical Chinese role-playing game I was writing, was doomed to failure, because I wasn't Chinese. He seemed to think that some blood connection, or whatever, meant that a historical British rolegame (which I regard as equally a culture game as a Chinese, Japanese, or Tekumel game) was feasible, but an 'oriental' game was impossible. I felt this was racist -- I came across this in a review as I was trawling the net for the 'Critical Twits' thread a while ago, what you've just said reminded me of it: The point being that there are certain differences, and the FF books, although varying because of the various authors, generally exhibit an attitude to violence, and a level of cynicism, that does characterise British gamers of the 80s and 90s. Or is that just me? That's it. Same with early Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and 40,000 in terms of attitude and the style. In the same way that Superhero comics and films, and film noir, and 'hardboiled' detective stories feel very American to me. And as Anime feels Japanese, etc
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 25, 2021 1:46:15 GMT
You understand what I was trying to get across. A couple of extra points... ...A correspondent to my zine claimed that my idea of culture games, which lay behind the historical Chinese role-playing game I was writing, was doomed to failure, because I wasn't Chinese. He seemed to think that some blood connection, or whatever, meant that a historical British rolegame (which I regard as equally a culture game as a Chinese, Japanese, or Tekumel game) was feasible, but an 'oriental' game was impossible. I felt this was racist -- I came across this in a review as I was trawling the net for the 'Critical Twits' thread a while ago, what you've just said reminded me of it: View AttachmentThe point being that there are certain differences, and the FF books, although varying because of the various authors, generally exhibit an attitude to violence, and a level of cynicism, that does characterise British gamers of the 80s and 90s. Or is that just me? That's it. Same with early Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and 40,000 in terms of attitude and the style. In the same way that Superhero comics and films, and film noir, and 'hardboiled' detective stories feel very American to me. And as Anime feels Japanese, etc I like that quote you found: 'a couple of Anglos'? The writer signally fails to notice that I was not writing about China and Japan (and come to that, in that particularly book, I was working with a co-author who had little interest in writing about China and Japan) but about a fictional land called the Isles of the Dawn. I presume the same author would excoriate Prof. MAR Barker for not being from Mesoamerica and India, and, for that matter, Chris Chibnall for not being from Gallifrey... Or, come to that, if he'd bothered to read certain other books in the series, Messrs Mason and Williams for not being from Iraq. But back to 80s and 90s British writing: you're spot on. Hence my mention of the influence of Stan Lee on Dave Morris (well, Dave's a fan of the original Iron Man comic), and Kirk as a hero. It is perfectly possible for us to have influences from other cultures -- and I think this enriches creative work. But at the same time we're going to be most influenced -- subconsciously -- by the culture that surrounded us in our formative years. Even if that influence turns out to be by reaction. Of course, it isn't simply reducible, in the way my correspondent tried to claim that a British gamer could only hope to play in a 'British' culture. Rock'n'Roll is 100% an American creation. But look what happened to it when Brits got hold of it...
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Jul 25, 2021 9:36:36 GMT
I ought to have said, but that quote was part of a review on goodreads for Sword of the Samurai so it wasn't your good self and Steve Williams in the crosshairs there, but Smith n' Thomson.
|
|
|
Post by The Count on Jul 26, 2021 11:38:20 GMT
You can't get more British than the bawdy seaside innuendo in a certain place name in Sorcery!
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Jul 26, 2021 16:15:30 GMT
I ought to have said, but that quote was part of a review on goodreads for Sword of the Samurai so it wasn't your good self and Steve Williams in the crosshairs there, but Smith n' Thomson. That makes it even more risible, though no less relevant: Jamie and Min were writing about a place called Hachiman, not Japan or China. I made my debt to Jamie explicit by including the ambassador from Hachiman (who coincidentally is my wife) in The Crimson Tide. As is obvious, Jamie loves a particular take on Japanese culture. And I think his enthusiasm for that comes out very strongly in his books. Dave Morris, who probably knows much more about Japanese culture than Jamie (however weak his pronunciation may sometimes be) has a different, though probably less commercial take. His Kwaidan game for example, never published because it was sort of tied to my never published Outlaws game, plays up the more psychological, spooky aspects from earlier in the history (though nevertheless present in things like the Sengoku-set Onibaba, which inspired The Crimson Tide). Dave and Jamie were doing the Japanese Warhammer, lest you not forget, but in one of those stories which is endlessly repeated, Games Workshop canned it when they ditched the role-playing version of Warhammer, and a host of subsequent publishers, including Kevin Siembieda, and whoever did Zweihander, seemed to feel it necessary to demonstrate their own racism before rejecting it. Thus Tetsubo is left as a sort of substitute Kwaidan, which may conceivably get finished if I finish Outlaws.Remind me again who the baddie is in Crimson Tide?
|
|
|
Post by drmanhattan on Aug 8, 2021 14:13:57 GMT
I don’t understand the premise of the OP, British roots? How did that inform the original books written by IL/SJ, which were directly influenced by them being into American RPG, D&D etc. there were no political undercurrents that I can see in the original books by the original authors.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Aug 23, 2021 2:41:56 GMT
I don’t understand the premise of the OP, British roots? How did that inform the original books written by IL/SJ, which were directly influenced by them being into American RPG, D&D etc. there were no political undercurrents that I can see in the original books by the original authors. Let me get this straight: you're saying that if a British person creates something that has American influences, then it cannot have British roots? So skiffle is irrelevant to the Beatles, and we might as well think of them as an American band? There is some discussion of different approaches to RPG between the US and UK in a recent blog post and video by Dave Morris. Also, just because you can see no political undercurrents in the original books does not necessarily mean there were none. It can be difficult to spot 'political undercurrents', especially when they match one's own philosophy. But confirmation of one's own politics does not constitute an absence of politics. This is especially true of mainstream conservative politics, which are often regarded as 'apolitical' by their adherents. The political undercurrents in the FF books are to be found in the ways in which choices pay off, and the dynamics of the plot. And, of course, who are framed as heroes, and who as villains.
|
|
|
Post by drmanhattan on Aug 25, 2021 11:04:39 GMT
If you can list some of the ideas in the original books which are derived from a British political viewpoint I am all ears. Genuinely curious. Like specifics not just abstract repeating that you think there are, I’ve no idea if there are any, certainly no 11 year old played those books considering the global political perspective, so let’s have some concrete examples of let’s say 3 things which you think show a UK based political perspective and how they might have been presented in a US centric way for one example contrast
|
|
|
Post by bloodbeasthandler on Aug 25, 2021 19:10:12 GMT
If you can list some of the ideas in the original books which are derived from a British political viewpoint I am all ears. Genuinely curious. Like specifics not just abstract repeating that you think there are, I’ve no idea if there are any, certainly no 11 year old played those books considering the global political perspective, so let’s have some concrete examples of let’s say 3 things which you think show a UK based political perspective and how they might have been presented in a US centric way for one example contrast To start with, I will tentatively put forward para 118 (and what follows) from Legend of the Shadow Warriors - Ranters' Corner. Which is of course Speakers' Corner. Where we see a CND activist (abolish all higher magicks NOW!), an end of the world environmentalist, and a blackshirt. Edit: To answer your second point - Is there an American version of speaker's corner? What might we have there? An apocalyptic fire and brimstone preacher perhaps. A Titan version of a Dr. Martin Luther King?
|
|
|
Post by CharlesX on Aug 25, 2021 19:32:53 GMT
If you can list some of the ideas in the original books which are derived from a British political viewpoint I am all ears. Genuinely curious. Like specifics not just abstract repeating that you think there are, I’ve no idea if there are any, certainly no 11 year old played those books considering the global political perspective, so let’s have some concrete examples of let’s say 3 things which you think show a UK based political perspective and how they might have been presented in a US centric way for one example contrast Not the most point-scoring but here's three examples: Eye Of The Dragon's parodical fantasy is comparable to Terry Pratchett as I mentioned in another thread. Star Strider's take on Earth as being insignificant is clearly developed from D. Adams. Sky Lord has a few Monty Python's Life Of Brian references ('Wodewick!') Midnight Rogue and Seas Of Blood have you playing bad guys - in the latter, you even hold slaves. In US gamebooks you are more normally scolded if you play a bad guy, partly because their audience is younger than ours, but partly because of the foreign, more feel-good scene, as well. Cite me counter-examples (that is, US gamebooks where you play a bad guy and get good endings if you do well). I think you're partly right 11YOs don't tend to think about global politics but that doesn't mean it itself wouldn't appeal to them if presented correctly. The government section in Overlord! (which is a collaboration of UK US authors) was pretty successful.
|
|
|
Post by CharlesX on Aug 25, 2021 19:59:09 GMT
If you can list some of the ideas in the original books which are derived from a British political viewpoint I am all ears. Genuinely curious. Like specifics not just abstract repeating that you think there are, I’ve no idea if there are any, certainly no 11 year old played those books considering the global political perspective, so let’s have some concrete examples of let’s say 3 things which you think show a UK based political perspective and how they might have been presented in a US centric way for one example contrast To start with, I will tentatively put forward para 118 (and what follows) from Legend of the Shadow Warriors - Ranters' Corner. Which is of course Speakers' Corner. Where we see a CND activist (abolish all higher magicks NOW!), an end of the world environmentalist, and a blackshirt. Edit: To answer your second point - Is there an American version of speaker's corner? What might we have there? An apocalyptic fire and brimstone preacher perhaps. A Titan version of a Dr. Martin Luther King? As a Brit I remember reading the Endless Quests book Hero Of Washington Square, which features exactly such a scene, where you interact at a US speaker's square. A pro Russia red saves your bacon from some bad guys down one of the paths.
|
|
|
Post by daredevil123 on Aug 25, 2021 23:14:09 GMT
To start with, I will tentatively put forward para 118 (and what follows) from Legend of the Shadow Warriors - Ranters' Corner. Which is of course Speakers' Corner. Where we see a CND activist (abolish all higher magicks NOW!), an end of the world environmentalist, and a blackshirt. Edit: To answer your second point - Is there an American version of speaker's corner? What might we have there? An apocalyptic fire and brimstone preacher perhaps. A Titan version of a Dr. Martin Luther King? As a Brit I remember reading the Endless Quests book Hero Of Washington Square, which features exactly such a scene, where you interact at a US speaker's square. A pro Russia red saves your bacon from some bad guys down one of the paths. Is that right? I thought he was an anti-communist fearmonger, though still good-hearted.
|
|
|
Post by CharlesX on Aug 25, 2021 23:27:20 GMT
As a Brit I remember reading the Endless Quests book Hero Of Washington Square, which features exactly such a scene, where you interact at a US speaker's square. A pro Russia red saves your bacon from some bad guys down one of the paths. Is that right? I thought he was an anti-communist fearmonger, though still good-hearted. I might well be wrong, I haven't read HOWS for about 30 years .
|
|
|
Post by peasantscribbler on Aug 25, 2021 23:45:56 GMT
I don't think an American could have written House of Hell in the 80s as a children's book due to the Satanic cult scare. Changing the title to House of Hades for the American editions was pretty ingenious, creating plausible deniability that the human-sacrifice practicing cultists were, in fact, Satanists. (Would you believe classicist cultists? Anyone?)
If an American did write a haunted house-themed gamebook, the estate owners wouldn't be titled aristocrats. They would more likely be wealthy New England industrialists descended from the Puritans.
Finally, the statement in section 73 that "Yesterday they trapped a girl, a pretty young district nurse who happened to call" wouldn't have been written by an American author. Perhaps she would have been a college student (a "coed") collecting money for the Red Cross.
|
|
|
Post by a moderator on Aug 26, 2021 1:11:13 GMT
If an American did write a haunted house-themed gamebook, the estate owners wouldn't be titled aristocrats. They would more likely be wealthy New England industrialists descended from the Puritans. How about a mad scientist descended from Confederate supporters in South Carolina? That's what the author of the Plot Your Own Horror Story gamebook Craven House Horrors (renamed Horror House for UK publication) went with.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyscholar on Aug 26, 2021 2:01:31 GMT
If you can list some of the ideas in the original books which are derived from a British political viewpoint I am all ears. Genuinely curious. Like specifics not just abstract repeating that you think there are, I’ve no idea if there are any, certainly no 11 year old played those books considering the global political perspective, so let’s have some concrete examples of let’s say 3 things which you think show a UK based political perspective and how they might have been presented in a US centric way for one example contrast There have been several specific examples given, but the problem is that your question misses the OP's point. There has been no suggestion of overt political references shoehorned into the books. There may actually be one or two*, but that isn't what we're talking about. You can dismiss the abstract, and demand specifics all you like, but it's hardly relevant when we are mostly talking about feel and atmosphere -- abstract qualities. In this respect I sympathise with your frustration: as you say, it boils down to 'what you think there are' and this just seems like evanescent flim-flam. But if, out of 100 Brits, 60 of them are able to identify something as 'feeling' British, then I think we have to reluctantly accept that, even in the absence of specific examples, there is something there. What are the specific differences between Star Trek and Doctor Who? There are plenty, of course, but are they really relevant to a discussion of the differences between the shows? No. Instead, let's consider the differences between Doctor Who and the US remake of Doctor Who, called DC's Legends of Tomorrow. Moreover, if you throw into the pot the original Leekley US plot for the Doctor Who movie of the 90s, a sub-Chibnall effort where the Doctor goes on a quest to find his father Ulysses and defeat his half-brother, The Master, it becomes clearer that the cultural difference appears in relatively subtle emphases and ideas about narrative structure. DC's Legends of Tomorrow even casts one of the Doctor's companions, Rory, as the Doctor stand-in, so it knows exactly what it's doing. But it is time travel as an excuse for two-fisted action and violent melodrama in support of the family. It has goodies and baddies (the latter of whom are capable of redemption), and if the goodies (including the baddy-goodies) are just sincere enough in their belief in the righteousness of their cause, then they'll be able to win through. Doctor Who has a moral core -- 'There are some corners of the universe which have bred the most terrible things. Things which act against everything we believe in. They must be fought….!' but it approaches it with less sentimentality. The British version has more irony, and more camp (which is really an offshoot of irony). And I raise this Doctor Who example because I think it matches the Fighting Fantasy example reasonably well, although it's far from an exact fit. The whole idea that makes FF work -- that you fail at your task more often than succeed -- matches the British approach. That's why British gamebooks, to a far greater extent than their US counterparts, relish the death paragraphs, and understand their importance as part of the experience. That's also why the British gamebooks take a more ironic approach, sometimes standing at a slight distance from their material, or repurposing other material in a deliberate way. I did my Masters at a university in California, and I remember a class on archetypal criticism where we looked at this approach to analysis (Northrop Frye is the name to follow up on this). A simple point is the categorisation of fiction into romance, tragedy, comedy and irony based on the plot arc. I managed to point out to the instructor, using the materials we had to read, the ways in which British fiction combined comedy and irony, which ought not to be possible. Classical comedy follows the structure of the smile on the mask: things get in a muddle, then at the end it's all resolved. British comedy ends with something like Basil Fawlty dropping the vase: an ironic undercutting of the resolution. And I'd argue that this matches FF. It isn't that there is no successful resolution ('romance'), it's just that there is an abundance of irony, more so even than the classical tragedy (which, like classical comedy, is also more common in US fiction). Way more of the deaths in FF are ironic; very few are tragic. Now I grant you, I never got into the Tunnels & Trolls solos which probably provided L&J with their most proximate inspiration, and I'd be very interested in input from anyone who did. But my recollection of them was that the humour was 'wacky', rather than morbid. Spell names like 'Oh there it is' -- that sort of thing. The closest to Tunnels & Trolls humour that FF gets is stuff like the Wheelies. But even the Wheelies had that weird edge to them. And it should be noted that the Tunnels & Trolls solos, like the game itself, failed to set the US imagination alight to anything like the extent the FF books did the British one. *And the RPG adventure The Riddling Reaver resolves around an overtly political theme.
|
|