| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 10 Oct 2010 : 23:10:14
So WotC has posted a novel survey on their main D&D site (www.wizards.com/dnd).
The link to the survey is on the right, about a third or halfway down. Mostly, the questions are about your buying habits as regards the novels, and it offers you a chance to post other comments near the end of the survey. Even if you don't actively buy the novels these days, this is still a great opportunity to tell them what you want.
Please go fill the survey out! It may mean a great deal for the novel lines.
Cheers |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Dart Ambermoon |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 16:41:24
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
As for me, speaking only for myself as I always do (though I think many of my fellow authors would likely agree), I'm going to go ahead and keep writing what I think is good and what I legitimately think people will enjoy to the best of my ability. And that's good enough for me.
Cheers
You better do that, or I´ll have to hop on a plane and force you to... |
| Dennis |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 07:19:32
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm going to go ahead and keep writing what I think is good and what I legitimately think people will enjoy to the best of my ability. And that's good enough for me.
Cheers
As are the other FR authors. And that's precisely one of the reasons the Realms is still ALIVE. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 05:54:06
I know I for one will take grievous offense if my thread turns into a "true fan" debate thread.
As far as I'm concerned, we're ALL true fans, whether we love the 4e FR or stick to the old stuff or both.
As for me, speaking only for myself as I always do (though I think many of my fellow authors would likely agree), I'm going to go ahead and keep writing what I think is good and what I legitimately think people will enjoy to the best of my ability. And that's good enough for me.
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 03:57:57
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
This path has been walked many times before, I guess?
I don't see the problem, personally. It's like arguing endlessly whether a Roman campaign or a Viking campaign has better stories and characters. Whatever.
The problem isn't in the discussion, the problem is when people start being dismissive of other people's opinions. We've seen far too much of that. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 03:30:33
This path has been walked many times before, I guess?
I don't see the problem, personally. It's like arguing endlessly whether a Roman campaign or a Viking campaign has better stories and characters. Whatever. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 03:20:29
Okay, so we're leaning in the direction of "if you don't prefer this era of Realmslore, then you're not a fan of the setting". And do we really want to walk that path yet again? |
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 23:17:48
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
Not everyone is as open-minded as we are.
If someone has valid reasons for not enjoying post-Spellplague FR novels they're not open-minded? Come again?
For instance if I enjoy cheeseburgers but my favorite restaurant suddenly only offers them with mango mayo on top, all preprepaired so that it's hard to take the mayo off, I might try it once but if I really truly don't like it and stop eating there because of that, choosing instead to go to other restaurants that don't have mango mayo on their cheeseburgers by default, it doesn't make me close-minded.
I know where this is heading, so I'll 'pretend' I am ignoring this...To paraphrase James Clemens, 'some things are best left unsaid.' |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 22:46:47
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
Not everyone is as open-minded as we are.
If someone has valid reasons for not enjoying post-Spellplague FR novels they're not open-minded? Come again?
For instance if I enjoy cheeseburgers but my favorite restaurant suddenly only offers them with mango mayo on top, all preprepaired so that it's hard to take the mayo off, I might try it once but if I really truly don't like it and stop eating there because of that, choosing instead to go to other restaurants that don't have mango mayo on their cheeseburgers by default, it doesn't make me close-minded.
If you didn't intend for that to come off as an insult, please correct me. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 21:21:35
quote:
Originally posted by Dart Ambermoon
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Do they, though? There are some very vocal 4e opponents on these boards and others who refuse to purchase any WotC products, sourcebook or novel, but I think the novels are still selling well, or at least well enough to justify their continued existence.
To my mind, it just comes down to what you like and what you don't. Read what you like, don't read what you don't like. Simple!
Cheers
This. I´ve found myself most pleasently surprised by some of the "newer" novels (as I´ve stated before). The whole "Waterdeep"-Series was fantastic, both of Richard Lee Byers´books set post-spellplague were awesome reads and I also found Mel Odom´s "Wrath of the Blue Lady" to be a great book. Furthermore "Realms of the Dead" had some great stories.But, and that may just be the snag to this whole "Post Blue Fire Book Debate" (at least for me), I have found those books to have a completely different feel from the others (say the rest of the Wilds-Series or Cordell´s novels).
And hey, I´m not saying all older FR novels were gold, but I could relate most of them to the setting I loved (yada), which I believe now some people simply find very difficult to do.
If the first "4E"-novel I had read, would have been one of Cordell´s or the Empyrean Odyssey, admittedly, I would have lost a lot of faith in the franchise. And I read a LOT, so I could well imagine people that are more into FR from a "playing and picking up the novels for that reason" perspective being thrown off rather quickly.
I would have just liked to see some more attempts at breaching what happened inside of some novels (like the final part of Richard´s last trilogy did nicely) and I know quite a few people who simply hated the way a lot of it was shown in the Empyrean Odyssey trilogy.
Therefore I believe that the good new novels may have a harder task in winning some people over or simply getting read by some. Which is a pity, because there are some great novels there, wherefore I´m happy to hear that they are selling alright, because, especially for those of us that do not play in the setting, good new FR novels are actually the saving grace when it comes to a FR fix.
Not everyone is as open-minded as we are. They have reasons, true. But to dislike 'the whole, or everything' just because 'one huge thing' besmirched it is a view that never applies to me. There's always something good in what is generally considered bad if we look a little bit closer. A comparison: I once almost lost faith in Magic: The Gathering novels. The quality really deteriorated at some point in time. Yet lately there's salvation. And I wouldn't have known about it had I not bothered to read the books.
|
| Dart Ambermoon |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 21:05:37
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Do they, though? There are some very vocal 4e opponents on these boards and others who refuse to purchase any WotC products, sourcebook or novel, but I think the novels are still selling well, or at least well enough to justify their continued existence.
To my mind, it just comes down to what you like and what you don't. Read what you like, don't read what you don't like. Simple!
Cheers
This. I´ve found myself most pleasently surprised by some of the "newer" novels (as I´ve stated before). The whole "Waterdeep"-Series was fantastic, both of Richard Lee Byers´books set post-spellplague were awesome reads and I also found Mel Odom´s "Wrath of the Blue Lady" to be a great book. Furthermore "Realms of the Dead" had some great stories.But, and that may just be the snag to this whole "Post Blue Fire Book Debate" (at least for me), I have found those books to have a completely different feel from the others (say the rest of the Wilds-Series or Cordell´s novels).
And hey, I´m not saying all older FR novels were gold, but I could relate most of them to the setting I loved (yada), which I believe now some people simply find very difficult to do.
If the first "4E"-novel I had read, would have been one of Cordell´s or the Empyrean Odyssey, admittedly, I would have lost a lot of faith in the franchise. And I read a LOT, so I could well imagine people that are more into FR from a "playing and picking up the novels for that reason" perspective being thrown off rather quickly.
I would have just liked to see some more attempts at breaching what happened inside of some novels (like the final part of Richard´s last trilogy did nicely) and I know quite a few people who simply hated the way a lot of it was shown in the Empyrean Odyssey trilogy.
Therefore I believe that the good new novels may have a harder task in winning some people over or simply getting read by some. Which is a pity, because there are some great novels there, wherefore I´m happy to hear that they are selling alright, because, especially for those of us that do not play in the setting, good new FR novels are actually the saving grace when it comes to a FR fix.
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 02:16:23
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
It's a bit mind-boggling how the Realms still survive in spite of the fact that A LOT (or is it really a lot or just a teensy-weensy number?) of old fans shun the 4E novels.
There are some very vocal 4e opponents on these boards and others who refuse to purchase any WotC products, sourcebook or novel, but I think the novels are still selling well, or at least well enough to justify their continued existence.
That's good news.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
To my mind, it just comes down to what you like and what you don't. Read what you like, don't read what you don't like. Simple!
Indeed. It's just like eating a salad prepared by someone else. You pick and eat what you like, and leave what you don't. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 15:04:39
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
It's a bit mind-boggling how the Realms still survive in spite of the fact that A LOT (or is it really a lot or just a teensy-weensy number?) of old fans shun the 4E novels.
Do they, though? There are some very vocal 4e opponents on these boards and others who refuse to purchase any WotC products, sourcebook or novel, but I think the novels are still selling well, or at least well enough to justify their continued existence.
To my mind, it just comes down to what you like and what you don't. Read what you like, don't read what you don't like. Simple!
Cheers
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 08:47:53
I find nothing good in Empyrean Odyssey. Not even the resurrection of my favorite character, Pharaun. Sadly, everything in that trilogy (for me) is a mess. One reason I understand why some Realms fans avoid many post-SP books; but not enough reason to understand why some avoid ALL the novels. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 08:35:34
I've read a few 4e novels (Empyrean Odyssey and Blackstaff Tower) but I don't have an opinion to give in the survey. Not read enough. |
| Pazuzu |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 08:19:35
I have to admit that I haven't read a 4th Edition novel yet, but since years the novels are not translated anymore. Furthermore, I don't have so much time, so I'm in a little delay. I just read "The Twilight War" and "The Last Mythal" triologies (which are "new" for me) and I have to say I like it! I really look forward to read some new novels as well.
For the spellplague thing: I currently run a campaign including Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave and the rest of that :-D and I think I will explain at least my group more detailed what happened after these events and how it comes to the spellplague. Maybe I even find a new Mystra in my campaign (if Ed doesn't do it earlier :-D ) |
| Dennis |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 06:58:49
It's a bit mind-boggling how the Realms still survive in spite of the fact that A LOT (or is it really a lot or just a teensy-weensy number?) of old fans shun the 4E novels. I'm not sure if I can call myself an old Realms fan, for I have been exploring this marvelous world for only three years now, but I read quite several novels – in different editions! While 4E is not my favorite, and SP perhaps the worst RSE ever, I nevertheless find * many * things I like in the current edition. Besides, the Realms' great writers, His Royal Highnesses Ed, Richard LB, Paul, Bob, and Steven and Her Royal Majesty Elaine are still around and are far from letting us down with their books.
|
| Corrupteddragon |
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 03:05:33
I might be in the minority, but I've never once played a D&D game! I do own every single Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, etc novel ever made though! For me I love the novels because of the settings even though I have no knowledge of the game itself and it really isn't required to enjoy the novels. I know the spellplague was a huge deal as far as the game goes, but for the novels, it didn't really bother me. I do find now that even though there are less novels produced per year in the settings ( RIP Dragonlance novels) that the quality of the writing is much higher now. |
| Kerrigan |
Posted - 16 Oct 2010 : 10:01:56
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Maybe the next change will be for Realms novels to be more flowery again.
Well, not to denigrate the old school novels, but I personally hope that doesn't happen! I like my darkness too much. 
http://www.wychwood.co.uk/new_images/art_lagerboy_halloween_800x.jpg
Actually, i like boths - the old, flowery style (Elminster series, Elaine's novels) and the newer, grittier novels (like Mistshore or House of Serpents). I didn't read many 4e/post/Spellplague novels yet, always wanted to check ot the Blades of the Moonsea-Trilogy.. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 18:31:17
Richard, I think given the sheer books-department throughput that's broadly how things always had to be, and I'm sure that diversity has contributed to the world's wide and durable appeal, just as the specifics of Ed's original and continuing work has. There are times and places where I personally wish authors had been pulled in a little tighter, in others given more lease, but I appreciate how difficult and barely precedented that kind of shared-world brand-editing was. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 18:16:34
quote:
Originally posted by Faraerquote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
We're in the Tolkien phase of the cycle, Jorkens. Alas, I think it's a long cycle (60-70 years), so the next batch of short novels won't probably come out for another 15-20 years...
On the other hand . . .
Hmm... interesting. Maybe the new cycle's getting a good start. |
| Richard Lee Byers |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 18:12:12
Faraer: I'm inclined to see the Realms as a big, complex world that can comfortably accommodate more than one kind of story. In that regard, it's kind of like the real world, and to my mind, this distinguishes it (in a good way) from universes like DragonLance and Star Trek, which strike me as more limiting with regard to tone, theme, etc. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 17:21:12
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
P.S. Also, saying "I don't read 4e FR novels, but I would read FR novels that didn't have anything to do with the spellplague" is a little bit like saying "I'm not interested in the Expanded Star Wars Universe novels, but if you go back to releasing movies like the original three, I'll certainly give you my business."
It's much more like saying 'I'm not interested in the EU novels post-Return of the Jedi [or whenever], but I'd buy novels set in or before the time frame of the films' -- except that SW fiction is published for multiple eras, so it's hardly an impossibility.quote:
To paraphrase Ed on the subject, for better or worse, IPs have to grow, and they have to embrace their own change, sometimes in ways people don't like.
I agree that Wizards and its authors, once the decision was taken, are best off carrying on as best they can and not half-heartedly. But as I've said before, a refashioning and hybridization from without, imposed for reasons external to the setting, doesn't constitute (implicitly natural, organic) growth just because they can both be labelled 'change'. It might be, at least given particular criteria, but that'd have to be argued on the merits.quote:
The Spellplague can be a big stumbling block for readers who don't like the concept, but I think its significance in FR is kinda overstated and overhyped (largely by marketing and by its detractors).
True; 'Spellplague' often gets used in discussions, sometimes incoherently, as an emblem.quote:
On the subject of old-school TSR vs. WotC novels: you know, I've read a lot of both, and there is a pretty serious difference, but it's mostly the sort of difference I see between eras of fantasy writing in general. I think modern fantasy writing is sharper, grittier, and less flowery than it used to be.
1990s TSR soft fantasy and 2000s fantasy grimness are both pretty discordant with the Realms as I see it, which is something actually rather odd and non-trend-followingly sui generis. Whereas I think short stories through novellas fit it better than novel sequences, at least the onces we've got.quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
We're in the Tolkien phase of the cycle, Jorkens. Alas, I think it's a long cycle (60-70 years), so the next batch of short novels won't probably come out for another 15-20 years...
On the other hand . . . |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 11:51:28
Aha, my bad. Sorry about that. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 11:45:30
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Fellshot
If they want it to, the Realms setting can support most of the fantasy subgenres (not just high fantasy and adventure).
You mean the Realms doesn't already support high fantasy and adventure?
I read the wikipedia definition of "high fantasy" and I don't understand your distinction. What were you trying to say with this statement? What sorts of fiction would you call high fantasy?
No, she was saying the Realms can support more fantasy subgenres, in addition to high fantasy. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 06:01:50
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Fellshot
If they want it to, the Realms setting can support most of the fantasy subgenres (not just high fantasy and adventure).
You mean the Realms doesn't already support high fantasy and adventure?
I read the wikipedia definition of "high fantasy" and I don't understand your distinction. What were you trying to say with this statement? What sorts of fiction would you call high fantasy? |
| Lady Fellshot |
Posted - 15 Oct 2010 : 04:01:15
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Ooh, I see I wasn't clear. Let me rephrase:
I don't actually mean light/dark, I mean "fat" writing (exhaustive description, overly long dialogues, etc.) vs. tight/efficient writing. It's not a pejorative: one way or the other might be more appealing, I just happen to like the latter, and it's not that I'm calling out any Realms novels in particular. That's just a noted difference between fantasy fiction of 10-20 years ago and fiction of today.
Presumably you all aren't paid by the word for one thing. :P
Also, the fantasy genre itself has exploded like a herd of sneezing dust bunnies. There's literally something for everyone, from the socially inept science nerd to the giggling valley girl. I wonder if it might be in their best interest to begin to expand the novel line's targeted audience. If they want it to, the Realms setting can support most of the fantasy subgenres (not just high fantasy and adventure).
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Fellshot
Debating applying to that editing job, but I don't think they'd take me. :/
Give it a shot! The worst they can say is no.
Cheers
LOL would it give me extra leeway to grouse about the illogical world changes because I would like to be a part of the solution?
In all seriousness, I don't have the background they want although I do have the ability. I have a really hard time not being nitpicky and critical about narrative form. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 14 Oct 2010 : 16:52:24
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Ooh, I see I wasn't clear. Let me rephrase:
I don't actually mean light/dark, I mean "fat" writing (exhaustive description, overly long dialogues, etc.) vs. tight/efficient writing. It's not a pejorative: one way or the other might be more appealing, I just happen to like the latter, and it's not that I'm calling out any Realms novels in particular. That's just a noted difference between fantasy fiction of 10-20 years ago and fiction of today.
(For instance, compare Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule [1995ish] to, say, George R.R. Martin's Feast for Crows [2005ish]. )
Cheers
Hmm...I actually thought in spite of the length that A Feast For Crows was a bit lean and could have used more "fat"
I generally find that althoug he writes alot ( as in page count) there is much that could be expanded on.
Now as for True "fat" writing as you define it, if you had said The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.....or another Steig Milenium novel....now thats Fat City! |
| Kno |
Posted - 14 Oct 2010 : 13:30:11
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
(For instance, compare Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule [1995ish] to, say, George R.R. Martin's Feast for Crows [2005ish]. )
I'd be happy if the former style is not represented in FR novels |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 14 Oct 2010 : 06:10:39
Ooh, I see I wasn't clear. Let me rephrase:
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Fellshot
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Good point about the cyclical nature of the genre/industry, which is reflective of trends in the broader society. Every generation is sort of a reaction against the previous generation--sometimes we get innovation, and sometimes we get people wearing bell-bottoms again.
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Maybe the next change will be for Realms novels to be more flowery again.
Well, not to denigrate the old school novels, but I personally hope that doesn't happen! I like my darkness too much.
Cheers
Is there any particular reason why there can't be both flowery stories and darker stories set in the Realms, regardless of era?
I don't actually mean light/dark, I mean "fat" writing (exhaustive description, overly long dialogues, etc.) vs. tight/efficient writing. It's not a pejorative: one way or the other might be more appealing, I just happen to like the latter, and it's not that I'm calling out any Realms novels in particular. That's just a noted difference between fantasy fiction of 10-20 years ago and fiction of today.
(For instance, compare Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule [1995ish] to, say, George R.R. Martin's Feast for Crows [2005ish]. )
quote:
Debating applying to that editing job, but I don't think they'd take me. :/
Give it a shot! The worst they can say is no.
Cheers |
| Lady Fellshot |
Posted - 14 Oct 2010 : 00:53:27
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Good point about the cyclical nature of the genre/industry, which is reflective of trends in the broader society. Every generation is sort of a reaction against the previous generation--sometimes we get innovation, and sometimes we get people wearing bell-bottoms again.
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Maybe the next change will be for Realms novels to be more flowery again.
Well, not to denigrate the old school novels, but I personally hope that doesn't happen! I like my darkness too much.
Cheers
Is there any particular reason why there can't be both flowery stories and darker stories set in the Realms, regardless of era? I would think that a broad change in overall writing style is more entwined with changing audience tastes than anything in the setting.
Debating applying to that editing job, but I don't think they'd take me. :/ |
|
|
