| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 10:18:59
I've heard lots of complains about the sensless killing in FR novels. Is there really too much blood and loose bodyparts? I think not. Of course it depends who wrote the novel, but who cares about farmer Frank having trouble with his sick cow?
And are the heroes too powerful? That also depends, but its kinda hard to build an epic story with a guy who gets beaten up by the first goblin he meets.
There is a fine line between too much and not enough, but I think that all that killing is a part of fantasy novel. Others may freely disagree |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Lina |
Posted - 02 Apr 2004 : 10:29:20
It's good to know that when we get bored of the same old, same old that there are other authors we can rely on. Especially in the Sembia series, which makes it one of my favs. The different authors have various writing sytles, which is highly effective in portraying the different scenes and characters of the Uskervern family jumping from novel to novel, making it a good read. |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 27 Mar 2004 : 11:39:00
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Depends. Do you like Ed Greenwood's style in general?
Hmm.. Hard to tell. I have only read spellfire and I didn't like it very much (I mean 3 dracoliches?) |
| Winterfox |
Posted - 27 Mar 2004 : 11:08:00
quote:
Originally posted by Narad Bladesinger
Are those Elminster-books good? Haven't had an opprtunity to read any of them...
Depends. Do you like Ed Greenwood's style in general? |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 27 Mar 2004 : 09:59:34
quote:
Originally posted by Elmonster
And a very necessary change, i would say. When i've started the Starless Night i already knew the ending more or less clearly. I wanted a novel that will prove interesting from the very beginning till the end, and somehow i chose the right book. Elfshadow is one of my favourite (others are Elminster The Making of the Mage, Elminster in Myth Drannor...)
Are those Elminster-books good? Haven't had an opprtunity to read any of them... |
| Elmonster |
Posted - 27 Mar 2004 : 08:20:53
And a very necessary change, i would say. When i've started the Starless Night i already knew the ending more or less clearly. I wanted a novel that will prove interesting from the very beginning till the end, and somehow i chose the right book. Elfshadow is one of my favourite (others are Elminster The Making of the Mage, Elminster in Myth Drannor...)
|
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 27 Mar 2004 : 03:47:34
quote:
Originally posted by Elmonster
The first FR novel i've read was Dark Elf Trilogy. Since then i started reading Salvatore. By the time i've reached "The Legacy" i was absolutely tired of non-stop hack\slash, so i switched to E.Cunningham Songs&Swords Series.
A refreshing change wasn't it? |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 26 Mar 2004 : 19:21:58
quote:
Originally posted by Elmonster
The first FR novel i've read was Dark Elf Trilogy. Since then i started reading Salvatore. By the time i've reached "The Legacy" i was absolutely tired of non-stop hack\slash, so i switched to E.Cunningham Songs&Swords Series.
A wise move. Cunnigham doesn't concentrate so much on the fighting as Salvatore I agree there.
I've read novels 10 in a row, all Salvatore's and it was refreshing to switch to Cunningham's novels for a change. |
| Elmonster |
Posted - 26 Mar 2004 : 18:25:06
The first FR novel i've read was Dark Elf Trilogy. Since then i started reading Salvatore. By the time i've reached "The Legacy" i was absolutely tired of non-stop hack\slash, so i switched to E.Cunningham Songs&Swords Series.
|
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 17:56:55
quote:
Originally posted by Lina
The ones I've read so far have just the right amount of hacking and slashing. They don't overkill it and at the same time there's enough related the story line so it's not too dull. Although I think that the Drizzt series have a bit too much of the killing and stuff.
Some novels just got an OD of Hack 'n Slash. the Drizzt-series are indeed packed with killing, but not all of them. I've read the Thousand Orcs and based on that, the Lone Drow's gotta have a LOT of killing. |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 14:24:00
quote:
Originally posted by Rad
A Novel which appealed to me more of late is The Sapphire Crescent - very little hack-and-slash and a lot more stealth and intrigue.
That's a very good novel to bring up that clearly did not let the hack-and-slash moments dominate the novel, but was still very interesting.
I know with some novels that overwhelm with combat, combat, chase scene, combat...it seems I'm not so much reading a novel as watching a commercial for one of the Matrix movies. |
| Lina |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 09:27:59
The ones I've read so far have just the right amount of hacking and slashing. They don't overkill it and at the same time there's enough related the story line so it's not too dull. Although I think that the Drizzt series have a bit too much of the killing and stuff. |
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 08:41:27
When it comes to novels I do get quite bored with hack-and-slack. No offense to any authors but it just isnt the most gripping part of the novel for me. I struggled a bit with The Lone Drow as there was a LOT of fighting (still a good novel, none-the-less!). A Novel which appealed to me more of late is The Sapphire Crescent - very little hack-and-slash and a lot more stealth and intrigue. |
| VEDSICA |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 05:38:34
I love the hack and slash.That's my favorite part of any book.Tho I do like a good thieving scene as well. |
| Signal-9 |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 05:36:38
NO i dont think there is too much, it always depends on the author of the books, but I find it well balanced. If the books did not have any graphic depiction about the killing of FR people, then it would not satisfy the drama of the situation. |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 14:44:54
Winterfox, try to remember that by the time LOTR came out it was considered as an extended fairy-tale for adults.
Many seem to think that heroes can be too good and it ruins the story a bit. I agree, at some level at least. I just hate paladins. Instead of regular brains, they have GLORY, HONOR and very little else in their heads. I can't help it, they just seem stupid.
And Josh, good luck with that story. Story with that kind of complexity will likely grow to be well worth reading. Many plots nowdays just seem too plain and its boring to read a book if you can quess what happens next.
Thanks Richard for sorting that out. I think that there were some changes like those you mentioned. I'll check it out. |
| Ezindir the dark |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 13:58:19
Yes, I loved the book. But I hate the movie. |
| Winterfox |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 11:39:29
Oh, yes -- that reminds me.
I don't think I have ever hated a villain to the point of wanting to scream "Die, you son of a slimy Hutt, die!" On the contrary, the only type of characters that elicits that kind of response from me is the heroes. Just for their sheer stupidity, unbeatable combat prowess, angst, or some other pet peeve.
When I first read LOTR, I remember wishing that Aragorn would just get slaughtered -- in gory details, please -- by the forces from Mordor. And wishing that Wormtongue and Saruman would get fleshed out a little more. I end up not liking LOTR very much, because of its black-and-white approach and the silly attitude toward royal/noble lineage. |
| Zelg of Cyric |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 11:01:31
If you are going to create and villian for intelligent adults, he or she or it shouldn't be only kinda evil, he or she or it should be extremely evil, extremely complex, or both.
I'm twenty-six years old. Gargemel and Skeletor don't do much to scare or apall me anymore. In fact, I've seen scarier and eviler people down at the DMV or IHOP at 3am saturday morning.
The more extreme the evil, the more heroic the heroes are to fight it, maybe even die by it. I know there is a saying I want to insert here but I can think it. Something like, "When faced against the worst kind of evil, is when men show their true valor." I think it was Gandalf that said something like that. Maybe it was George W. Bush or Churchill, I don't know.
Also, just because someone chooses to appreciate the bad guys it doesn't make him bad guy, no matter how bad the villian is. Sometimes people wind up routing for the bad guys just because the good guys are so dang good and self-righteous that readers can't stand them. Or then again, truely evil people like to read too sometimes I guess.   |
| Josh Davids |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 00:01:55
Yep came from there under the name Josh Davids, my real name figured I might as well post under it, plus it is easier then trying to remember which of the countless character names I am under in this or that board.
Richard Lee Byers actually hit the two points I was trying to make on the head, what I get for trying to post at 2am with very little sleep under my belt, doesn’t exactly come out the way I wanted it to.
I write, for a better word carnage, in two ways I either detail it out in horrific graphic manner to try and give the reader the sense of agony this or that character is suffering through, the horror they have to witness or the acts they have to commit and the effect it has on them. Or I just say it happened and the after effects. A week ago I finished a chapter dealing with a succubus, she basically used a 12 year old boy to kill his mother skinning her alive, forced to watch as the succubus had sex with his father then devoured his soul then told to kill his two year old brother. Didn’t detail the murder of the mother, the sex with the priest but I did detail the effects, the blood, the screams as the priest’s soul is devoured and what it did to the teenager. There are times I will be graphic other times that I will skip something, it all depends on the emotions I am trying to stir up in someone at that moment, sadness, grief, horror, revulsion, despair or hope.
As for the villains, gonna have to clear that up. I actually want people to love to hate this guy like you said. The word I was looking for last night and the mind was trying to work through the fuzz of being half dead was idolize. That is the one thing I worry about with some of the characters, and if someone does come up and idolize the main villains for me I will find that disturbing because some of the villains make even my skin crawl, and that is a big thing trust me. All the villains will be complex, believe me on that but they will also clearly be villains, there will be nothing redeeming about them. They might have a complex code of morals or beliefs but that will not stop them from being the villains in the book. Like I said before just a personal thing for me villains should be villains, heroes should be heroes. I will rarely write the antihero up.
I should also clarify the above statement, when I start a character I know the path they will take. If they start out shady and not clearly a hero I will still label them as a hero because I know the path they will take throughout the book. There are a few characters I will write about like that, seem shady or the anti hero type at first but it will be clear they are truly heroes. Villains will almost always be villains, I haven’t yet delved into the ones I plan to set up for redemption but there will be one or two, but out of a cast of thousands that isn’t many.
And Narad there is one character I will be writing up like what you mentioned, I talked a little about him in the Greenwood thread. He is a great fighter a hero of this one town. one day an army threatens his town, he is sent out to face them and in the end kills the general leading them. What he didn’t know at the time was the fact this general was a son of the lord who was disposed of nearly fifty years before, and he just killed the rightful heir to the throne. Before he has a chance to act against his lord he is imprisoned and killed, that is just the beginning of his story though. He is vilified by the people who wanted to reclaim their land, seen as a hero by the people he helped defend, in the end he is a hero and does redeem himself but only after an arduous task.
|
| Richard Lee Byers |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 17:32:46
How is it that the villain stops being so villainous in the sequel? Well, if the author is doing his job, the reader should be able to perceive a reason for it. Seems to me there are two possibilities:
1. The character goes through experiences that change him.
2. His circumstances change. Maybe he was committing atrocities in the service of some cause. Now the cause is either won or lost beyond hope. Thus, he has no reason to impale the peasants and burn the crops anymore. |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 15:42:35
Gotta say that often reality is more horrifying than fiction.
Usually in books that are accepted, the slaughtering party of heroes has a moral reason behind it all.
But sometimes that reason seems to fade away and the heroes just attack because they think that the group of men ahead is evil. So, what if those men are indeed robbers and ambushing the next caravan, but what if they are also exiled by the local lord who stole their land and now they are just taking back their own without killing anyone. The band of heroes suprises the robbers and kills them instantly without any questions.
By doing that, the heroes aid the local lord who stole the land from the peaceful farmers.
However the heroes learn all this later on and return to the lord of that land. Now they instantly kill him, but without knowing that the lord had a herited claim for the land and that claim was made before any of those farmers had come and taken the land as their own.
So now the lord is dead, rightfully in the minds of the heroes.
A large force of men is organized to hunt the group of heroes. When they meet, the force attacks the heroes and quickly responding, the heroes slaughter many of them as an act of self-defence. After a long battle the heroes are captured (not killed) and brought back to the now deceased lords domain to be executed.
Finally the local executioner rises his axe and one-by-one cuts off the heads of the unarmed, helpless heroes.
Question is: who is the villain of the story?
And indeed, what if those bad guys are made really appealing?
"I wanna be Homicide-Harry cutting off peoples heads!"
And the reason? "He was so great in that book".
I haven't heard that anything like this had happened, but if something like that someday does happen...
Well things will get ugly.
Appealing or not, the villains should be made intresting. It can't go to the point where the reader just skips the parts that tell about that villain. The main problem about villains is that they actually are bad. Make him bad, people hate him. Make him more intresting and suddently he isn't so bad anymore. And the worst of the villains: assasins. I think they are quite popular.
But gotta keep in mind that people like different things. If somebody likes the violence thats fine, I know I like it (in a reasonable amount).
And if somebody adornes the really specific torturing parts, just call the cops. Different people like different things and react to things differently.
A major part also depends on the author and what he thinks about all that violence. Is it 'acceptable' or 'horrifying' or 'somewhere between' is a decicion author has to make and that decicion reflects on the reader.
I'm not an expert on these thngs, so correct me if you think I'm wrong.
And this may not have anything to do with the topic, but I've also noticed that in the beginning of some novels the bad guys are really bad, but if the writer shifts the story so that the next novels is about the villain, I've noticed that the villain isn't so bad anymore.
His deeds are justified in some manner and he doesn't do so bad things anymore.
How is that? |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 15:29:46
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers
If you study history, psychology, current events, or whatever, it's quite clear that people in the real world who perform "villainous" acts often do nice things and exhibit certain virtues
Absolutely. John Wayne Gacy anyone? The charming person who performed as a clown at parties and murdered, what was it? 30 plus teenagers or young men?
Ted Bundy? Who if I recall was so charming, the judge apologized as he setenced this serial killer to death.
The list can go on and on... |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 15:26:36
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
To me, the most terrifying villains are the one that seem normal. Have a cup of tea and joke with you one moment, and mount your head on a pike in the next.
One may smile and smile... Or in the case of the example below, a cutting smile is how I recall him being described:
quote:
There're villains you love to hate, and then there're villains with depth. Take, for instance, Jaime Lannister in A Song of Ice and Fire. This guy? We're talking about someone who pushed a child off of a window (causing the child to be permanently crippled) and has sex with his twin sister. He grows up me, though, especially since parts of the books are written through his third-person limited view.
I agree that the best villians are those that remind us that they are human still which makes me realize such acts can come from anyone.
Jaime Lannister is a perfect example of a charming villian. He delivers some very funny lines about horribly cruel moments. Take for example what Winterfox described above, in another book when confronting the child's mother, the following exchange takes place:
Mother: "You were trying to kill him?"
Jaime: "I normally don't push six-year old children out a window to improve their health."
A horribly cruel act, but damn, that line is funny because Jaime has depths or the writer has written him with depth. |
| Richard Lee Byers |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 14:05:54
If you study history, psychology, current events, or whatever, it's quite clear that people in the real world who perform "villainous" acts often do nice things and exhibit certain virtues, also. If we writers deny ourselves the opportunity to create antagonists who possess such complex and to some degree contradictory natures, we places limits on the capacity of our fiction to say interesting and, who knows, perhaps even profound things about the human spiirit.
Which is not to say that there's anything wrong with a purely fiendish villain now and again. They can be a ton of fun if they're right for the plot at hand.
With regard to how graphic and horrific you make the violence, that's an interesting question. To some people, if you simply show the hero swinging a sword and the bad guy's henchman falling down, that's okay. But if you pile on the gory descriptive detail of what a sword cut actually does and what it's like when a person dies a violent death, that's wallowing in the act of slaughter, and it's sick and disgusting. But there's an argument to be made from the opposite perspective, namely: If you take the horror out of violence, you make it seem fun and acceptable. If you show the awfulness, the reader may understand what a grim business it actually is. So the latter approach is more socially responsible.
Me, I've done it both ways, depending on the dramatic effect I want to create at that particular moment. |
| Winterfox |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 11:37:47
Hi, Josh. Did we meet on the Wizards.com board?
quote:
onto the villains, yes i do believe a villian can pick flowers and escort an old lady across the street. why does each and every villain have to be so clear, carrying a blood soaked knife or just stand out with a sign "Villian hate me" around there neck. to me someone who plants flowers, volunteers at a youth program, helps out an old lady across the street then later that night goes out and kills a teenager, skinning them then going back to thier normal life would creep me out more then the villain who stood out.
I agree. To me, the most terrifying villains are the one that seem normal. Have a cup of tea and joke with you one moment, and mount your head on a pike in the next.
quote:
me personally i find it kind of disturbing that so many villians either rped or written about have redeeming qualities that make people like them. i hope that no one ever comes up to me and goes "oh like that Thurin guy was so kewl i want to be just like him." at which point i will blink, write a note to security to watch that guy then tip them off to the authorities as a possible danger, if anyone has but a reaction of "i want to burn this guy at the stake for what he did" i just didn't do a good job of writing them. a hero should be liked maybe even loved and definitely respected, a villain should be hated, reviled and loathed. plus it is just disturbing when someone likes the villian who can torture and skin a six year old child in order to get some information on a hero or some plot or just get back at the hero, if people can like the main villians in my stories there is something wrong with them, very wrong.
I don't know. :)
There're villains you love to hate, and then there're villains with depth. Take, for instance, Jaime Lannister in A Song of Ice and Fire. This guy? We're talking about someone who pushed a child off of a window (causing the child to be permanently crippled) and has sex with his twin sister. He grows on me, though, especially since parts of the books are written through his third-person limited view. Or take the Baron Vladimir Harkonnen in Dune by Frank Herbert. This is a sick, sick man who beds boys and is the book's antagonist. I certainly don't like him very much, but I have to admire his cunning and political acumen. Then there're the people who are ardent fans of Artemis Entreri, but I wouldn't hasten to make comments about their psychological state.
Besides, there's a difference between liking a loathsome fictional character -- nay, even a historical one -- and having a messed-up mind. You understand, the same argument can be used in regard to writers who concoct these villains. I've had a review for my LOTR satire (wherein a Mary Sue murders Legolas and then cannibalizes his corpse)--
quote:
YOU ARE PERVERTED!
CYNICAL!
CORRUPTED!
sick... just plain SICK!
Heh. *shrugs*
EDIT: Grow on me, not grow up me, damn it! *stomps on her own, uh, grey matter* |
| Josh Davids |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 10:48:07
been wanting to get to this since it started haven't had any time yet till now that is.
ok a few things i want to adress after i say the following besides EC's books the starlight and shadows and the return of the arch wizards series i haven't had a chance to read the new stuff though i have all the books, so this is pre sembia and pre war of the spider queen for me.
i haven't seen the violence getting out of hand at all in the books i have read. i have been reading them since 13 or so and i have come across all of the back lashes against fantasy books from they are too violent to they cause someone to worship demons.
as a writer i tend to focus on details, so far alot of people said i have a very peotic or flowery style, which i take it as a good thing for me anyways. when i write characters out in a fight they come out with cuts and bruises, thier clothes are soaked in blood and sweat and i know not many authors will do that, put in the small details because some times those small details will make a book jump from pg-13 to R real fast. as a member of elfwood there is a fine line i got to tread because everything there has to be pg-13 which is not easy when dealing with some of the stuff i write about, from sacrifices to demons to entire villages being crucified as a mark of a certain general, from the succubus who goes after a priests family using the teenage boy to work her will to many other dark things i skirt the boreder of too much description and not enough at times.
forgotten realms to me isn't at all violent, people come out of fights with barely a scratch, or if they just fought off an orc horde not a drop of blood on them, i think it is more of a writing style then anything else. i have had to defend my reading habits, to teachers who said they encourage violence at which point i wrote a twenty page essay showing how they don't using everything i saw in day to day life to show the real world was much more violent then the books. then came the side that said i worshipped demons because i read those books and played MtG, nearly got killed because of that when some kids jumped me after school using a 2x4. it didn't work needless to say, got a hard head thankfully and high pain tolerance.
anyway the point of this is, as a writer i will use very vivid descriptions to try and shock the readers, not by the gore but trying to show the reader why this character is horrified by what he just saw, did or had happen to him or her, i don't use description like that through the entire books but if someone is reading through the book and just goes "oh a mass grave whoopie" i just didn't do my job as a writer. however if they come to that scene and feel like they are immersed in it, threatening to loose thier lunch from the sights, sounds and smells of it then i did my job. then i managed to drag them into the world and feel what the hero is feeling. but that is just an opinion of mine.
onto the villains, yes i do believe a villian can pick flowers and escort an old lady across the street. why does each and every villain have to be so clear, carrying a blood soaked knife or just stand out with a sign "Villian hate me" around there neck. to me someone who plants flowers, volunteers at a youth program, helps out an old lady across the street then later that night goes out and kills a teenager, skinning them then going back to thier normal life would creep me out more then the villain who stood out. that is one thing i think is lacking in fantasy novels, subtly for villains. it is rare to come across a book and go woah that was who was behind the mass slaugher of the halfling village, i never would have thought. i know why it is rare, facing the same problem in my own you got to move the story along and give recognizable evil guys for the heroes to fight. though i have broken that mold with several of the villains, from the succubus who hides her true identity, to an anti paladin who seems to be immortal that plagues the heroes in the book, i don't want to give away anything other then that throughout the books i will drop clues to who they are, but never tell the reader till near the end so that way they don't know where the villain will appear next, what he or she will do next or who they treuly are. i like a good mystery to villians, just a personal taste of mine.
me personally i find it kind of disturbing that so many villians either rped or written about have redeeming qualities that make people like them. i hope that no one ever comes up to me and goes "oh like that Thurin guy was so kewl i want to be just like him." at which point i will blink, write a note to security to watch that guy then tip them off to the authorities as a possible danger, if anyone has but a reaction of "i want to burn this guy at the stake for what he did" i just didn't do a good job of writing them. a hero should be liked maybe even loved and definitely respected, a villain should be hated, reviled and loathed. plus it is just disturbing when someone likes the villian who can torture and skin a six year old child in order to get some information on a hero or some plot or just get back at the hero, if people can like the main villians in my stories there is something wrong with them, very wrong.
for the other topic brought up, i have already made the decision on which characters will die by series end, which will live and which ones will go insane from thier ordeals. there is but one character out of 80 or so that can not be beat in a fight with sword, but that is his character he is a walking legend in one of the kingdoms and a cousin of the king so he is entrusted with running errands for the crown since he is the bext fighter no matter the ammount of assassins sent against him he will live, no matter the traps and raod blocks in his way he will make it through to see his job done, he will mainly be a third teir character, not seen all that much. i rarely if ever write about a fighter that can't be beat, what is the point to that? if you know there is no equal to so and so fighter why read about them facing down 4 orcs, you know they will win. Wylder Emberflame my one fighter that lived for a long time in a FR game always had some type of wound and he was supposed to be an expert fighter. broken ribs, broken wrist, cut forearm or black eye, arrow holes and spear wounds, to me it just isn't realistic to have a guy go up against twenty goblins and come out without a scratch, or a drop of blood on him no matter how good they are. i just can't write about a character that can't be beat, no matter how popular they get or how much i like them they will still die it if is there time to go. |
| Zelg of Cyric |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 09:31:08
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Narad Bladesinger
Yes those things happen around the world and I'm not saying that only USA has those 24/7 players.
It is just that in USA people sue other people for so little things.
For example; this one guy sits in a Mac Donalds. Waiteress comes and accidentally poures the coffey she was carrying on the man.
So the man decides to have Mac Donalds sued and for what reason:
The coffey mug didn't have any warning that it was containing hot coffey.
So, he won and had very much money.
Thats the thing I'm talking about. I'm not definetly sure how the real story went, but thats how I heard it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a law school student. I've not heard of this case. But I have heard of the McDonald's case involving a woman who spilled coffee on herself at McDonald's, and she sued them winning millions of dollars. That seems silly, but there is a reason for why courts do what they do. The court slapped the chain with punative damages because they were serving their coffee so hot that it instantly gave a third degree burn. Plus, they were intentionally serving it that hot everywhere, because they were offering free refills for coffee, and if it takes a long time to cool down so you can actually drink it you probably won't be getting too many refills. Also, they never consulted a burn expert. The court was so apalled by the behavior that the millions of dollars was to punish Mcdonalds more than to right any wrong to the woman. After all, how much does a little burn cream cost? This case you are talking about my be a continuance of courts disdain for Mcdonalds past behavior. The court may have felt tha like McDonalds didn't learn its lesson from the first time. I'm not saying I agree with the treatment, all I am saying is that McDonalds isn't quite an innocent victim. Man! would like to my hands on some of those attorney's fees. 
As far as the violence in books go. I like it, because brings some sense of reality to these books. FR books are not just about magic and mystery. Mostly it's about fighting. The reality is that when a anvil or a piano drops on your head, you don't see stars or birdies, but you take some serious trauma that will kill you. It's kind of like the gladitors. What makes the fight so exciting is that someone's life is on the line. Granted, in this day and age, talking about real people it's demented to think like that. However, these are fictional characters, so it's ok in my opinion, and it makes the stories more intersting, because other characters have to deal with the losses and the horror. The reader has to as well, and anytime you can tap into a reader's emotions the book has some value.
|
| Winterfox |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 08:52:27
quote:
Originally posted by Narad Bladesinger
Yes those things happen around the world and I'm not saying that only USA has those 24/7 players.
It is just that in USA people sue other people for so little things.
For example; this one guy sits in a Mac Donalds. Waiteress comes and accidentally poures the coffey she was carrying on the man.
So the man decides to have Mac Donalds sued and for what reason:
The coffey mug didn't have any warning that it was containing hot coffey.
So, he won and had very much money.
Thats the thing I'm talking about. I'm not definetly sure how the real story went, but thats how I heard it.
I've heard of a case similar to that, but... he won the case? Won the bleedingly inane case?! Please, tell me that you're kidding.
*flushes her faith in human intelligence down, down, down the drain* |
| Narad Bladesinger |
Posted - 09 Mar 2004 : 05:32:23
Yes those things happen around the world and I'm not saying that only USA has those 24/7 players.
It is just that in USA people sue other people for so little things.
For example; this one guy sits in a Mac Donalds. Waiteress comes and accidentally poures the coffey she was carrying on the man.
So the man decides to have Mac Donalds sued and for what reason:
The coffey mug didn't have any warning that it was containing hot coffey.
So, he won and had very much money.
Thats the thing I'm talking about. I'm not definetly sure how the real story went, but thats how I heard it. |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 02:51:49
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Sirius: Hee, yes. There was a case in Thailand where a fellow was playing Counter Strike for... I can't remember how many hours on end. I think he ended up dead. The media, of course, went to rant and rave about the 'Net and online gaming for a while.
Kinda makes me happy I don't live in that backwater country anymore.
Yes, that's one of the other cases I've heard mentioned where someone died after playing a computer game for countless number of hours. I wouldn't call the country backwater, but then again I've never lived there. The one point I was trying to make by bringing up the Thailand instance was that it isn't just the U.S. that is reacting this way to online computer gaming. |
|
|
