Would fantasy games be more retarded had this book never been written?

>>48631098
>illustrated by some cunt other than Tolkien

What a bitch. They should bring Tolkien back and make him illustrate his books and shit fully.

>>48631133
Unfortunately Ouija boards aren't fine enough to guide drawing and I'm pretty sure real zombie stuff only works on the presently living.

>>48631098

Have you read any pre-Tolkien fantasy at all? Maybe you should, and make up your own mind.

>>48631184
This is such bullshit. Who the fuck invented Ouija boards? Bring his ass over here and make him make a Mk.2. Call the Devil, make him upgrade his services dammit.

File: Tarnsman_of_gor_vallejo_cover.jpg (49KB, 307x518px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 307x518px

>>48631186

Is Gor pre-Tolkien?
I read the first Gor book, and found it to be quite good.

File: Gor Plant Copy Pasta.png (125KB, 848x1342px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 848x1342px

>>48631225

>Gor
>1966
>Sword & Planet

It's not only NOT pre-Tolkien, but it's also not even fantasy.

Also,

>Trash

Pic related.

>>48631133
No, he would die of fright at the state of the Church anon.

>>48631219

>Who the fuck invented Ouija boards?

Milton Bradley.

>>48631225

>Gorfags

WOMEN CAN'T WIN AGAINST DICKS: THE WORLD

Complete with "Worthy men from Earth can leave their mundane life and go to Gor and rule over women, since they are naturally stronger than everyone there due to Earth's higher gravity!"

>>48631348

That being said, there are some redeemable things about the series. Some of the non-slavery world building is cool, like the cities, castes, fauna, cultures, and the aliens. The Priest Kings and the Kurii are among the best parts. It's a shame about the other stuff, and that Norman spends too much time wanking over his idiotic philosophy on male and female natures.

>>48631225
Asimov actually did some fantasy.

Pre-Tolkien fantasy was generally more based in folklore and myth directly. What Tolkien did was make it so that abstracting or redefining something was cool.

>>48631267
The first was a pretty solidly male fantasy book, but that picture sums up everything after the first, from what little others I read, so well it's scary.

Legitimate keks were had.

>>48631225
Well yeah anon, if you like Conan the Barbarian but with Mysoginistic overtones and stupid shit like "Hurr durr, Aliens keep everything shitty", than Gor is a masterpiece.

>>48631098
That specific book? Probably not. Most hardcore Tolkien fans who read all of his works before the first Lord of the Rings movie came out....well how to say this politely? 1 in 4 were already cringe level autists...

You see, Tolkien had a great mind for world building and a decent mind for story telling. What the man best understood was war, for obvious reasons. So here comes The Hobbit. Not his best work, but it does its job in building fluff for a great fantasy trilogy. Can this book be linked directly to how well fantasy is doing today? Not as much as Lord of the Rings and other fantasy series that eclipse the book. If you have someone around you who is an autistic rager, they would most likely be this way regardless of whether this specific book was written or not.

Fantasy is a sum collection of all of its parts like any genre. If the Hobbit were missing we would only miss out on back story to the real story Tolkien wrote, which was the real contribution to the community.

tl;dr - Autists gonna autism regardless of what is written. They will always find something to bitch about, get uppity about, or just shitfit because of what they think is important.

>>48631671

>Most hardcore Tolkien fans who read all of his works before the first Lord of the Rings movie came out....well how to say this politely? 1 in 4 were already cringe level autists...

Confirmed for being a social justice liberal born in the 90's.

Get out of my hobby, hipster.

File: 1469218102162.jpg (89KB, 679x657px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 679x657px

>>48631225
>Be Me, at 17
>Go to a friends house for his birthday party
>He's dating this really cute girl I've got the hots for
>Shes into sewing and making all kinds of cute nerdy stuff
>Get there before her
>The guys kind of a pussy, and doesn't really stand up against assholes who make fun of his GF
>Although to be fair, his GF does stupid shit like bring her creations to highschool
>Besides, he gives me free MtG cards that I can resell since he has no idea what their worth
>to ne honest, feel like a bit of jerk and plan to tell him what he actually has
>Anyways, get to his house, waiting for his GF before we hit the pool
>I look into his closet, before laughing a bit
>Has a whole collection of Bakugann
>Has a box of Yugioh
>Holy shit, even a collection of Beyblades
>What else can this-
>I look up
>mfw he has a entire section in his closet dedicated to the Gor series
>I never mention it
>Not a word
>At the end of the party, I dont feel so bad when he gives me a Mishra's workshop for free in exchange for a bunch of commons

Pre-LotR (1954) is a somewhat larger set of fantasy books than pre-Hobbit (1937), but still not large.

>>48631796
Read what you just wrote. You are a terrible person.

>>48632043
I am, but you see, Im really good at telling myself im not. By seeing that he enjoys the Gor series, I can justify my terrible actions in a logical sense, while normally, I would be apalled at my actions and feel remorse.
Plus, I only really took a Winter Orb and Manavault. I was hoping that by hyperboling my claim, I'd elicit a comedic reaction.

>>48631098
Would fantasy games even exist as they are now?

File: Ringstrilogyposter.jpg (143KB, 800x540px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 800x540px

>>48631098
Would fantasy games, movies, books, and overall culture be less retarded had these movies never been made?

>>48631796
>17
>Already a shitty "adult"

>>48631829
Notably, Leiber's Fafhrd & Grey Mouser tales started just after Hobbit, but the fantasies of Andre Norton and Poul Anderson prior to LotR were retellings of folk lore or heroic poetry; both of them used the Song of Roland, for example.

Lord Dunsany's "The King of Elfland's Daughter" is 1924.
Much of Burroughs (Tarzan, John Carter, etc) pre-dates The Hobbit.
Verne and Wells are pre-Hobbit
Conan just barely pre-dates the Hobbit, but Howard was writing other muscle fantasy (such as Bran Mak Morn) in the 20s.

My take away is that the Tolkien influence does not start with the Hobbit, but only with LotR, and only after the craze of it swept through the nascent fandom in the 60s.

>>48632099
Yes and no. There would probably not have been enough cultural traction to make FRP a notable hobby without LotR, but a lot of the elements were in place.

>>48632213
>My take away is that the Tolkien influence does not start with the Hobbit, but only with LotR

Without The Hobbit, LotR would have never been written though right?

>>48631671

>he knows nothing about the 60s or 70s

>>48631756

I think you called it.

>>48632423
hobbit was written later

Is uhh...is Lord of the rings any good? The novels or the movies?

>>48632589

The novels are a little dry, but are good. The movies are pretty good, too, though they change a fair bit. The recent film of the Hobbit is pure cancer, though, avoid it. The corny old animated one is better.

>>48632589

I'd give the novels a go. They're pretty good and they'll give you an appreciation for what people copied from them later.

The LotR movies are also pretty good, especially the extended editions. The Hobbit... is not great.

It didn't need to be extended into three movies. Plus, they added or changed a ton of thing that didn't need to be changed or added.

>>48632610
Do almost all cliches really come from the dude?
Would I get more out of reading obscure fantasy stuff or pre Tolkien than just cementing the stereotypes?

>>48632589

The movies are okay. But only okay. It glosses over a lot of the sort of history and depth of the setting.

The books are really good, but people complain they're wordy and dry, and the musical and oral tradition parts of the book fall flat because you can't hear the rhymes spoken or songs sung.

Trust me when I say that the definitive LOTR experience is the 1982 BBC radio adaptation.

https://soundcloud.com/inkmore/sets/lord-of-the-rings-radio

The only part the series omits is the Tom Bombadil segment, which is essentially a non-essential chapter that was omitted from the movies too, because it serves no purpose but for Tolkien to wank over his self-insert from his short stories.

Read The Hobbit. You can do this at any time, it is not essential reading for LOTR.


Like let me put it to you this way: The talent was good enough that the first person on the movie's list of actors to play old Bilbo was the guy who did Frodo in the 1982 radio show.

>>48632683

There's no reason to avoid reading Tolkien. Pre-Tolkien fantasy is pretty diverse, and you'll likely find stuff you enjoy. Post-Tolkien though... there's a lot of people who borrow liberally from him, and as a result, a lot of fantasy is very samey (elves, dwarves, wizards, castles, etc.).

>>48631671
Why do people always criticize the Hobbit. Its a fucking kids book. Literally he made it for his kids.

>>48632683

Absolutely none of the cliches do, actually.

Not a one.

His dwarves aren't unwashed savages obsessed with liquor.

His elves aren't tree-hugging pansies.

There's virtually no overt magic.

There is a constant thread of lost grandeur, great deeds being not what they seem, and sad endings rather than of heroism and adventure.

>>48632705

I want to add on to my post that this anon >>48632713 is correct, and that what I meant from "liberally borrowing" was that they borrow at a very superficial level.

>>48632610
NO Watch the extended cuts of the Hobbit. They redeemed the entire series for me. Still not great, but much better.

>>48632687

I should probably add:

There are five characters who are enhanced by reading The Hobbit first, two of whom are in the principal cast, two of whom are linked to characters in the Hobbit, and one who is a carryover character but is not in the principal cast.

>>48632705
Not really avoiding, just limited on time is all. I was just thinking that the horror vibe that some early folk lore and fantasy stuff would suit my tastes better and give some new material to draw from as well would be better than reading what's essentially already everywhere
> implying it's not just a meme

>>48632707

That guy's an idiot, though. Just disregard his post entirely, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

>>48632736

>extended cuts

Not no, but HELL no. Most of the time I sat there wondering when all this CGI tripe would finally be over. It was one book padded out to three films, with tons of fast-action CGI filmic equivalents of those styrofoam peanuts you fill out your packaging with. Boring as hell, badly made, and just way too long.
The prospect of an even longer version of that shitfest makes me want to die.

>>48632830
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpsFWBzDHkk
Boo hoo cry some more. Maybe learn how to make a fucking film before you start criticizing it. you have many valid points, and after watching the 2nd and 3rd films I would've found myself agreeing with you. But really the etended editions are much much better. Of course you may still not like them, but then you aren't me

>>48632807

I understand the limited time. Tolkien though is very different than his imitators, who borrow the trappings, but not the soul of his work.

>>48632713

Has it right.

Favorite Poem/Song in LOTR?

Personally, I'm partial to Durin's Song.

From the 1982 radio play:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz9cETyteww

>>48632532
False. Hobbit definitely came first.

>>48632707
It's a really good kids book. It's a kids book in the way Watership Down is a kids book.

>>48632589
Listen to LotR, don't read it. Movies are good but they get the tone wrong imo. The hobbit is basically a warhammer fantasy battle movie.

>>48634244

Don't forget the video gamey bits, like when Legolas runs across the falling blocks of a collapsing bridge like he was Sonic the Hedgehog, or that stupid barrel ride fight that felt like a overlong quick time event.

File: im-ok-with-this.png (187KB, 600x339px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 600x339px

>>48631348
>>48631427

>>48631098
What's wrong with her eyes? Did someone use the photoshop bloat tool on them?

>>48632172
As someone who remembers the time before these movies, I am very grateful they have been made, although I find them to be merely good, not great, awesome or legendary.

They popularized the fantasy genre. Without them, no GoT TV show. So, yeah, I'm good.

>>48632610
The first Hobbit movie is better than any LotR movie. Only in the parts 2 and 3, they completely lost it.

>>48632830
Sorry but An Unexpected Journey wasn't boring at all. It was good, decent fun and Martin Freeman was GREAT.

File: Coco.jpg (91KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 250x250px

>>48631427
>misogyny
>yeah nah
>inigo, etc.

In Normantown, B&D is normcore, so "slaves" are beaten and raped because that's the way they want it. But everything else happening day-to-day on Gor is pretty mundane. All of the action revolves around the protag fighting his way out of "cunning" traps hidden in pages of exposition about the Earth Culture of the Month that makes up the "setting" of that book. The series peaked at [Marauders? The Viking one] though, and the remainder did the author no favors. Alcohol may have been involved ...

>>48632683
There are few things that Tolkien did that would go on to be cliche. About the only thing his work really had a lasting effect on was what is considered to be the base races of fantasy: Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Orcs and Goblins.

In the grand scheme of things Tolkien's work is a deconstruction on what is considered Tolkienesque .

>>48631405
There's other stuff, though. What about The Worm Ouroboros?

>>48632172
maybe dragon age origins would have been something more interesting that LotR meets GoT, and then they wouldn't have been so creatively bankrupt that they shat out a braindead sequel in a year and then had to turn tumblr into a single-player mmo for the third installment

>>48634432
>Without them, no GoT TV show.
Sounds like heaven.

>>48634575
>Tolkien's work is a deconstruction on what is considered Tolkienesque
wat

>>48632683
Not really. The cliches come from writers who copied him. Blame terry brooks, tas williams, robert jordan, terry goodkind, etc for them.

>>48634622
For you.

>>48634676
Why not list Gary Gygax? Anyway, people are fine in drawing on european mythology or even a particular (Tolkienesque) version of european mythology.

>>48634635
Tolkien's works are very a-typical to current fantasy once you get past the summary text.

His elves, dorfs and hobbits are a people and a culture, first, and then a non-human race second. His magic isn't waving your hands around spending mana and incantating science, it's supernatural creatures giving up pieces of themselves to alter reality and if a mortal wanted to be spellcaster then he needed a supernatural to be his patron. His BBEG isn't just a menacing warlord out for non-specific evil, he's a fallen angel who is convinced that they can do creation and fate better than God and who demand worship and submission to fuel their ego.

The group of heroes isn't entirely infallible and untouchable, even though the films may make them seem so. They survive most encounters by simply running away and not fighting their way out, and if they fight they have an actual army backing them up.
He does play his heroes larger than life, that is true, however considering be writes in the style of medieval folklore this sort of thing can be forgiven.

>>48634789
Aye, for me.

>>48632683

Yep

>Another example of Tolkien’s great influence is that in RPGs “...elves consider (...) dwarves not at all fun.”[79]. This is based on some events in the novels such as the wood-elves who try to capture the dwarves in The Hobbit[80] and the dislike of dwarves (“They are not permitted in our land.”[81]) in Lothlórien.

Dwarves and Elves wold be buddies if it weren't for Tolkman

>>48632687

Wow. Nice.
This is really quite something.

>>48631225
>I read the first Gor book, and found it to be quite good.
>What are low standards

>>48631402
No, the whole thing is shit. All of it is shit.

>>48631267
hawt.

>>48632872

Jackson kind of got fucked. Del Toro was originally set to do the movie, but had to drop out for some reason, and the Studio brought Jackson in last moment, no time for prep, and pretty much had to put all threee movies together on set, borrowing from what Del Toro had set up. He hardly left set and everyone was overworked, and I think he lost control of the production early on, as I doubt he wanted to do a trilogy, and the fact that shit like the actress requesting not to be forced into a love-triangle got shoehorned into a love triangle when it was too late for her to check out.

The Hobbit movies were a total clusterfuck from beginning to end.

>>48633968

Published first. Tolkien wrote LotR first, but couldn't get it published in the twenties, and ended up writing the Hobbit and publishing it as a Kid's book.

>>48634575
>deconstruction
Don't use that word like that. Its irksome.

It doesn't deconstruct any fantasy tropes, it averts a lot of things that have become chliche. If it had the cliches but it expounded on them, or turned them on their head, then it would be a deconstruction.

>>48636370
Different Anon here. Even if true, I maintain that the first Hobbit movie is the best movie set in Middle-Earth.

>>48634575
It's not really a deconstruction, it's just very different to a lot of fantasy when you get into it. You're right that it was only the surface level stuff that got copied like orcs and dwarves.
I haven't seen many fantasy settings that have borrow heavily from pagan mythologies while also being influenced heavily by the writer's Christianity, like an old medieval epic.

>>48637265
Well, Tolkien has de facto canonized to some degree mythical figures. Can anyone really blame following generations for adopting his appealing interpretations of common myths?

>>48631225
So I browsed the wiki and it says that it takes a few books to get to the real depraved stuff.

Any anons know when it switches from slightly sexy Conan to full on BDSM world?

>>48632687
Audio drama: the most underrated storytelling medium.

>>48637734
Like... yeah basically. It is really weird not seeing as much of it as I would think. It is remarkably easy to set up, and only really takes people and a script.

the UK is currently the king of it, with a few production companies putting out amazing things. Like doctor who stories were they get the original actors to show up and do new stores. I mean amazing adventure hour has some decent stuff, but not that many.

>>48637734

It really is!

By the way, if you haven't listened to Mask of Inanna, do so.

>>48631308
He'll be ok because "we friendly and sheit" or bust a vein so far he'd start speaking in spanish with madrid accent.

>>48631348
desu little bitches (Ie women and sissy crackas) can't stand vs the all might mandingo monster cock that is known as the all powerful BBC, all sissy cracka nations need to import all bruthas, out cock is worth trillions and da white man keep us down.
#BLM

>>48631402
RAPE SERIES IS OK WHEN YOU IGNORE THE RAPEY PARTS.

>>48632589
It's definitely not the usually pulp fantasy novel.
It's worth reading. Personally I love LotR but for almost totally different reasons than I love Conan.

The books are slow and focus more on the quieter aspects of adventure. It seems to mostly about living in world of beauty and danger and of experiencing the fallout of myths.
To Tolkien the actually battles, swords and evil aren't all that interesting. The bad guys are bad, REALLY bad, apparently, and the battles are bloody but those aren't things the reader is meant to dwell it.
I guess the war spoiled JRR taste for violence.

The movies are a pretty easy watch. The tone is different from the books in many places but it fits an admirable amount of the plot into it's run time. It dishes out the fights if you want action. The casting goes from just ok to really fucking good, there are some retarded design and choreography decisions but mostly they're pretty minor. The locations and score is wonderful.
All in all solid fantasy movies that are a light intro into Tolkien.

>>48641072

Rape aside, the series still has pacing problems. Most of the books have a plodding plot where the protagonist wanders around being an idiot until the last third of the book, where all the action happens. There are a couple of exceptions, but for the most part, the novels adhere to this formula. And it sucks.

>rape

I like rape in fiction/magical realm. But it's not erotic at all in the series because Norman can't write erotic dialogue or situations to save his life.

Also, I tracked down and read a bunch of the books so I could have a more in-depth assessment of why it was bad beyond "my soggy knees" and "raep=bad".