Appendix N: The Literary History of D&D by Jeffro Johnson

[oakesspalding]

My assumption, though I could be wrong, is that even though Gygax published the Appendix N list in the AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide, he was mainly referring to inspiration for OD&D. And, of course, AD&D is largely simply a more lengthy, detailed, complex and fussy extrapolation or expansion of OD&D. It isn't clear what important or essential thinks are really new in it. I don't know whether Jeffro directly addresses this question.

[Deleted]

Maybe its just me, does anyone else find it to be both amusing, perplexing and terribly sad that both the new book Appendix N: The Literary History of D&D by Jeffro Johnson (which is about Gygax and his inspirations) and the new book Dave Arneson's True Genius by Rob Kuntz are both being received by a lot of people with hostility, disdain, derision, slander and libel. Is there really only a One True Version that is allowed and all other opinions and viewpoints are to be silenced? I am glad to see books being written that shed more light on things and I don't feel a need for those books to contain only things I agree with or to have a title that is acceptable to me.

If anyone wants a book with an approved by them title and approved by them contents, then go write it and publish it. I would likely buy it and give it a look. So if you don't like these books, fine don't like them, don't buy them, don't read them. But when someone goes to great lengths to silence and censor a book, it makes me wonder what the agenda is.

[strangebrew]

I don't see any of the criticisms in this thread as being attempts to silence and censor. I think thats a bit excessive - likewise with "terribly sad" and "hostility, disdain, derision, slander and libel." People make statements, and other people disagree with them. If you don't think there should be disagreements and discussions over things, then that sounds a bit more like silencing or pushing a "one true version." I haven't read anything about Kuntz's book, but any book entitled (NAME)'s True Genius is going to ruffle some feathers.

Edited this in:

May 27, 2017 6:07:51 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

May 26, 2017 22:43:03 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

This chapter reads as a dude ranting about his opinions and preferences (essentially a long blog post) with a new cringe-worthy lines thrown in.

FWIW I see nothing in the quoted chapter that warrants the insults of "dude," "ranting," and "cringe-worthy."

I don't think any of this was approaching "hostility, disdain, derision, slander and libel" but I think you could fairly label my words as being "dismissive." As in, if I read this on a blog post, I'd probably roll my eyes and click somewhere else. The point of my comment was to contrast Johnson's casual, conversational style with Peterson's dryer, academic approach.

[tetramorph]

May 27, 2017 10:33:57 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

The point of my comment was to contrast Johnson's casual, conversational style with Peterson's dryer, academic approach.

I agree with you, here, strangebrew.

If you are expecting a strict, rigorous history following all the methodologies of sound historiography, you are going to be disappointed with Johnson's book, and rightly so. (You are going to be thrilled with Peterson's book, and rightly so.)

But I, personally, am not expecting that. I knew this was an edited compilation of blog-posts, so that is how I expected it to read. I also knew I would probably disagree with portions and skim over portions that weren't helping me to think or see things in a new way.

So I set realistic expectations for myself and thus, so far, it has been a fun book to read for me. I've learned a few new things and made a few new connections and that is more than I hope for from a lot of the stuff that I read.

Fight on!

[tetramorph]

May 27, 2017 8:14:44 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

May 27, 2017 6:40:51 GMT -6 @rafael said:

There are a few titles right away that I can name that demonstrably had a massive impact on D&D that the Appendix N doesn't list:

- A. E. van Vogt, "The Voyage of the Space Beagle".
- Robert Adams, "The Coming of the Horseclans".
- John Norman, "Tarnsman of Gor", and "Nomads of Gor".
- Robert Silverberg, "The Tower of Glass".

...And, obviously, there's that critical, almost comical underplaying of the importance of "The Lord of the Rings".

We have to be a little careful here, to specify whether some of these sources were inspiration for D&D or AD&D. I know that AD&D is the source for "Appendix N" but a lot of the books there were also listed a year or two earlier in an article in Dragon magazine. (Issue #4, December 1976.) Even in the earlier article, Gary isn't specific as to which sources are OD&D and which are AD&D specific.

I find the above fascinating.

@rafael, are those books part of Arneson's "Appendix N"? Or can we reasonably surmise that? If not, where did your list of additions come from? And, either way, do we know some of the other books that inspired Arneson?

Finarvyn, I don't have Dragon magazine (although everybody around here mentions it. Is it actually easily / readily available and I just haven't run into it yet?) so I am wondering about it, especially if there are any different books on that list.

And, Finarvyn, why do you make such a clean distinction between 0e and early 1e? Just curious.

Fight on!

[Deleted]

I should probably apologize - I sound very worked up about the topic, and the truth is, I just wrote the post while cooking, and not really paying attention on how precise my verbiage would be. This is why I return to 5this topic, though I had no "computer" planned for this evening - to evade that this gets out of hand.

May 27, 2017 7:58:47 GMT -6 oakesspalding said:

And I should say, I'm not talking about mere disagreement over facts or opinions, but, rather, what seems to be out and out blanket dismissal. Again, and with respect, I just don't understand it.

Okay, I'll try again, then, and to be tamer this time:

First of all, I don't read the bloggosphere - I bought the book on kindle, back when it came out. (In March?) I was extremely disatisfied with it, because Johnson either tries to amplify his readership by oversimplifying - or because he doesn't know much about literature, in general. It's essentially opinion pieces masking as "literary criticism". Damon Knight could pull that off, sometimes, sure - but Jeffro Johnson can't. Johnson has obviously read "The Hero's Journey", and "The Writer's Journey", and a few more standard books of genre theory, but that's not enough for a work like this one. - Or, in other words, I appreciate the effort, but I want my money back.

May 27, 2017 7:58:47 GMT -6 oakesspalding said:

Or perhaps it's really about Gygax.

In general, you might well be right. The online presentation of the entire "Gygax party" has been pretty clumsy, and people usually slam them pretty badly.

As to me, myself, I don't have skin in this game. If I might be so blunt, what differentiates me from the usual "very involved fan" is that I don't ask for anybody's approval, or value a specific partisanship. That makes me a dumb rock of a dude to deal with, sometimes, but it keeps communcation honest. Now, I'm certainly way more involved with 'Moor than I'm with 'Hawk, but that things went this way was not, whatever, a "political decision"; things just evolved like this in a fairly natural way.

May 27, 2017 8:14:44 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

For example, Coming of the Horseclans wasn't published until 1975 which means it can't have been an inspiration for OD&D. I've seen several sources quote this book as one of Arneson's inspirations for Blackmoor, but the dates don't work if you are considering the original campaigns.

...But apparently the first two novels were serialized in '73 and '74, so it's not impossible. --- I'll look for the source for this info, if you like: As you know, I am a big fan of Robert Adams' Ithkar collections, and I stumbled over this when I was reading up about that later one...

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 11:17:50 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

@rafael, are those books part of Arneson's "Appendix N"? Or can we reasonably surmise that? If not, where did your list of additions come from? And, either way, do we know some of the other books that inspired Arneson?

While I usually not try to emphasize it, because of the implications of partisanship that it would bring, I'm the same Rafael (that's my real name) who is also part of the Comeback Inn admin clique.

At the CBI, we investigated this topic over years, and years, talked to the survicing St Pauls group members, and so on - to find that their main influence might have actually been TV series and movies, notably "Dark Shadows", the German "Edgar Wallace" serials, and Charlton Heston's "El Cid". Tolkien, though, for sure, was Arneson's primary source, at least when it came to setting structure. ...And all his cities were named after kinds of whiskey and other spiritual drinks. Not a joke.
,
As to books, the only ones that really came up except the few I've named was the (aaaargh) world-dividing question whether Arneson had also been a fan of the Fritz Leiber stories. The answer so far is: Maybe.


I've looked for the threads where we posed these questions, but right now, they're either private/in admin, or they're over here: blackmoor.mystara.net/forums/viewforum.php?f=26


Either way, havard might have a better idea than me where to find them, if we can summon him from the Northern Marches.

[jeffro]

May 27, 2017 11:18:40 GMT -6 @rafael said:

First of all, I don't read the bloggosphere - I bought the book on kindle, back when it came out. (In March?) I was extremely disatisfied with it, because Johnson either tries to amplify his readership by oversimplifying - or because he doesn't know much about literature, in general. It's essentially opinion pieces masking as "literary criticism". Damon Knight could pull that off, sometimes, sure - but Jeffro Johnson can't. Johnson has obviously read "The Hero's Journey", and "The Writer's Journey", and a few more standard books of genre theory, but that's not enough for a work like this one. - Or, in other words, I appreciate the effort, but I want my money back. 

Hello,

I am the author of this book.

A claim is made here about my work. I would like to ask, how is it obvious that I have read "The Hero's Journey" and "The Writer's Journey"?? I am really interested in hearing more about this!!

Everybody else, if you have any questions about this project I am happy to answer them.

[Zenopus]

May 27, 2017 11:17:50 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

Finarvyn, I don't have Dragon magazine (although everybody around here mentions it. Is it actually easily / readily available and I just haven't run into it yet?) so I am wondering about it, especially if there are any different books on that list.

tetramorph, it was in Dragon #4, Dec '76, titled "Fantasy/Swords & Sorcery Recommended Reading From Gary Gygax". Just a list with no further commentary. I have a screenshot of it here. All of the authors made it into Appendix N, save Algernon Blackwood, but Appendix N adds a number of authors not in the original list.

[Finarvyn]

May 27, 2017 11:17:50 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

@rafael, are those books part of Arneson's "Appendix N"? Or can we reasonably surmise that? If not, where did your list of additions come from? And, either way, do we know some of the other books that inspired Arneson?

Well, the big problem is that Dave never wrote a concise "Appendix N" list of his own. The best we can do is look at (1) The First Fantasy Campaign book for clues, or (2) track down hints in various interviews. For example, reference to "red silk" and "white silk" slave girls in the FFC as well as Tarns seems to indicate a familiarity with the Gor series. And countless interviews indicate that Dave had been watching a monster movie marathon when he got inspired to morph his Napoleonic game into Blackmoor. Some discussion of this stuff can be found on The Comeback Inn boards.

blackmoor.mystara.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=705

May 27, 2017 11:17:50 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

Finarvyn, I don't have Dragon magazine (although everybody around here mentions it. Is it actually easily / readily available and I just haven't run into it yet?) so I am wondering about it, especially if there are any different books on that list.

Actually, I copied the full list on the Goodman Games boards in their "Appendix N" section. I could copy it here or you can just follow the link below.

www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=41938

May 27, 2017 11:17:50 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

And, Finarvyn, why do you make such a clean distinction between 0e and early 1e? Just curious.

A couple of reasons. (1) The distinction between OD&D and AD&D is part of what separates this board from Dragonsfoot, and the reason I created this forum in the first place. I like to assume that most of the chatter here centers around OD&D, otherwise folks would scurry over to DF. (2) My group fragmented with the release of AD&D with one of us (me) continuing to run OD&D and my best friend running AD&D. To me, those systems have always seemed distinct even though logically I know that AD&D was just at re-organization and evolution of OD&D.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 10:33:57 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

I don't see any of the criticisms in this thread as being attempts to silence and censor. I think thats a bit excessive - likewise with "terribly sad" and "hostility, disdain, derision, slander and libel."

I view personal attacks against someone's character as an attempt to silence and censor. That is the most effective way to silence and censor someone, by the process of character assassination.

May 27, 2017 10:33:57 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

People make statements, and other people disagree with them. If you don't think there should be disagreements and discussions over things, then that sounds a bit more like silencing or pushing a "one true version." I haven't read anything about Kuntz's book, but any book entitled (NAME)'s True Genius is going to ruffle some feathers.

As noted, it is the personal attacks that I have a problem with. As for the title of Rob Kuntz's book, the thought that someone has there feathers ruffled because one person wants to write a very positive book about someone only makes me wonder what the person with ruffled feathers agenda is, what skin do they have in the game? Why can that title possibly justify feathers being ruffled? I can only think of one reason, the people who for the last 40 plus years that have been claiming that Arneson deserves zero credit for anything ever, have been found out and exposed.

May 27, 2017 10:33:57 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

The point of my comment was to contrast Johnson's casual, conversational style with Peterson's dryer, academic approach.

If that is what you had done, then I would have been fine with that; however, you went way beyond that with an attack on the his character. That is what I took away from the "dude", "rants" and "cringe-worthy" comments. I don't have a problem with disagreement, I do have a problem with unnecessary personal insults.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 11:14:33 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

But I, personally, am not expecting that. I knew this was an edited compilation of blog-posts, so that is how I expected it to read. I also knew I would probably disagree with portions and skim over portions that weren't helping me to think or see things in a new way.

So I set realistic expectations for myself and thus, so far, it has been a fun book to read for me. I've learned a few new things and made a few new connections and that is more than I hope for from a lot of the stuff that I read.

Fight on!

I agree fully with this, knowing what you are reading and having reasonable expectations, instead of holding it to standards it was never intended to meet is always the way to go.

[oakesspalding]

Yeah, I think Arneson has generally been portrayed as the very much lesser partner, which may or may not be accurate or fair. But if you're trying to redress that, titling your book "Dave Arneson's True Genius" is a good way to go, I think. One of my favorite books of fantasy criticism is Tom Shippey's J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. He makes that case (that Tolkien was the author, not just the fantasy author , of the century) within the book, of course, but the title helps. If you're going to try to change the paradigm, you might as well blare it, even in your title.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 20:02:43 GMT -6 oakesspalding said:

One of my favorite books of fantasy criticism is Tom Shippey's J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. He makes that case (that Tolkien was the author, not just the fantasy author , of the century) within the book, of course, but the title helps. If you're going to try to change the paradigm, you might as well blare it, even in your title.

When I see that title, I immediately know where the author is coming from and if I am a big Tolkien fan I will want to buy it, if I am not a Tolkien fan I may still be open minded enough to want to know why this guy thinks Tolkien is that great. Maybe he changes my mind and maybe he doesn't. Now if I am completely closed minded about Tolkien, there is nothing he can do to sell me his book and a meeker title would not change that. IMO bold is almost always the way to go.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 14:18:32 GMT -6 jeffro said:

]Hello,

I am the author of this book.

A claim is made here about my work. I would like to ask, how is it obvious that I have read "The Hero's Journey" and "The Writer's Journey"?? I am really interested in hearing more about this!!

Everybody else, if you have any questions about this project I am happy to answer them.

Hello jeffro, I have never heard of those books, so I am interested in the answer myself. I had not really heard of your book before this thread, I have limited reading time these days for a variety of reasons; however, now I intend to get a copy of your book, it sounds like a fun read.

[geoffrey]

May 26, 2017 12:56:19 GMT -6 oakesspalding said:

Seriously, though: what kind of epic myth is it where the guy doesn’t get the girl in the end?

This is one of the many reasons that I do not consider The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi canonical. Neither has ever rang true for me, in spite of the fact that I enjoy watching them.

I think Alan Dean Foster's Splinter of the Mind's Eye is a better sequel to 1977's Star Wars than anything else I have seen or read.

[jeffro]

May 27, 2017 20:14:22 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

When I see that title, I immediately know where the author is coming from and if I am a big Tolkien fan I will want to buy it, if I am not a Tolkien fan I may still be open minded enough to want to know why this guy thinks Tolkien is that great. Maybe he changes my mind and maybe he doesn't. Now if I am completely closed minded about Tolkien, there is nothing he can do to sell me his book and a meeker title would not change that. IMO bold is almost always the way to go.

Funny thing about that, my original title was "Get Off My Lawn: How Science Fiction and Fantasy Novels You Never Heard of Reveal That You Are Playing D&D Wrong."



My publisher axed that early on but I'm still not sure if we made the right call on that!

[MormonYoYoMan]

May 27, 2017 21:34:17 GMT -6 jeffro said:

Funny thing about that, my original title was "Get Off My Lawn: How Science Fiction and Fantasy Novels You Never Heard of Reveal That You Are Playing D&D Wrong."



My publisher axed that early on but I'm still not sure if we made the right call on that!

This is the best argument I've ever heard for self-publishing.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 21:34:17 GMT -6 jeffro said:

May 27, 2017 20:14:22 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

When I see that title, I immediately know where the author is coming from and if I am a big Tolkien fan I will want to buy it, if I am not a Tolkien fan I may still be open minded enough to want to know why this guy thinks Tolkien is that great. Maybe he changes my mind and maybe he doesn't. Now if I am completely closed minded about Tolkien, there is nothing he can do to sell me his book and a meeker title would not change that. IMO bold is almost always the way to go.

Funny thing about that, my original title was "Get Off My Lawn: How Science Fiction and Fantasy Novels You Never Heard of Reveal That You Are Playing D&D Wrong."



My publisher axed that early on but I'm still not sure if we made the right call on that!

With that title, my expectation would have been that I was going to be laughing until my sides hurt!

[18 Spears]

May 27, 2017 21:34:17 GMT -6 jeffro said:

My publisher axed that early on but I'm still not sure if we made the right call on that!

you'uns did

nobody ever did more sales by being a troll

[strangebrew]

@theperilousdreamer

I think you're being a bit dramatic. I wasn't assassinating his character, I was giving my impression of the chapter I read.

This chapter reads as a dude ranting about his opinions and preferences (essentially a long blog post) with a new cringe-worthy lines thrown in.

I'm allowed to have opinions and voice them. Even the author of the chapter in question isn't bothered, and why should he be? I'm just some dude (gasp!) on the internet.

I read the thread on this board about the Kuntz book, and unless you were referring to a different thread or that thread had been cleaned up by mods after some argument, I just saw some disagreement and nothing approaching "slander and libel."

That's all I'm gonna say on this. Apologies for derailing the thread.

[jeffro]

May 28, 2017 11:02:22 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

Even the author of the chapter in question isn't bothered, and why should he be? I'm just some dude (gasp!) on the internet.

How do you know know what I think or feel about the matter?

What have you seen or heard that would cause you to speak with such confidence on it?

Those are rhetorical questions. You do not and cannot have answers to them.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2017 14:18:32 GMT -6 jeffro said:

I am the author of this book.

A claim is made here about my work. I would like to ask, how is it obvious that I have read "The Hero's Journey" and "The Writer's Journey"?? I am really interested in hearing more about this!!

Howdy, pilgrim!

Well, it's pretty easy to explain, if again unpleasant for you: Christopher Vogler, the author of "The Writer's Journey", is basically the founder of the literary style you try with "Appendix N": Generally colloquial and conversational, but full of oversimplifications, and often misleading or imprecise. Now, Vogler applies this style consciously, to teach people who don't know about literature some basic principles, and to give them some context.

You, in turn, apply this style because you don't appear to know better. - Because it makes good for a blog post, or rather, a short-form essay. But as a long-form, it gets boring quickly. That feeling that people express, about your book - or, rather, your blog post collection - lacking substance, it primarily stems from there. One of those chapters, every few weeks, via an alert in my RSS program, that's alright. It's only when one reads them in sequence that you realize how little you actually have to say about the topics you want to discuss - except for misplaced colloquialisms, and wikipedia-based knowledge.

May 28, 2017 11:51:51 GMT -6 jeffro said:

May 28, 2017 11:02:22 GMT -6 strangebrew said:

Even the author of the chapter in question isn't bothered, and why should he be? I'm just some dude (gasp!) on the internet.

How do you know know what I think or feel about the matter?

What have you seen or heard that would cause you to speak with such confidence on it?

Those are rhetorical questions. You do not and cannot have answers to them.

See, I wouldn't throw you under the subway train like I am doing, if you didn't come here to mark territory:

Trying to shame or guilt people into taking back their criticism won't work here, so STOP calling user strangebrew a bad critic for reacting with casual neglect. If you think your book deserves more than casual attention, earn it.


And mind you that we here are still polite, if direct about our criticism. We don't say, "yeah, sure, a GURPS dude who started a blog about 'Car Wars' and then tried a new, low-effort publishing venue with the 'OSR' frate trane". We don't say that.


You yourself give a good summary of the feedback your book gets from other people in the RPG community:

jeffro.wordpress.com/2017/03/31/more-feedback-on-appendix-n/


The word to sum things up from that post is: "Meh."


Now, that could be because the scene harbors you whatever amount of bad blood; or, it could because your book really isn't what you hoped it would be.


My advice, given how impolite and bully-like your responses have been so far: Write about stuff you know more about. And get a more competent editor.

[Finarvyn]

Well, this thread turned from nice to nasty in a hurry.

We have some folks who are really passionate about their gaming, but overall this really is a friendly place to visit if you give it a chance.

May 27, 2017 21:34:17 GMT -6 jeffro said:

Funny thing about that, my original title was "Get Off My Lawn: How Science Fiction and Fantasy Novels You Never Heard of Reveal That You Are Playing D&D Wrong."

Love the alternate title. Haven't read the book yet. Welcome to the boards!

[Deleted]

Just for the record here is what I consider to be an honest review of the book from someone who does not have a personal ax to grind.

On one level, this book provides some fantastic insight into the stories that influenced the development of the granddaddy of all role-playing games, Dungeons & Dragons. If you are a gamer, it succeeds on that level alone. Jeffro Johnson provides plenty of advice for gamers based on the ideas from these stories. This was fascinating to me as a gamer, because I always believed that Appendix N of the Dungeon Master’s Guide was there more as cover for Gary Gygax as his company drew fire from the Tolkien Estate’s Lawyers. As it turns out, a lot of the criticisms leveled against D&D for how poorly it simulates Tolkienesque fantasy (which, after around 1980 or so, became something of the definition of the fantasy genre) is probably because it was never intended to do that. The game drew from a wealth of source material, I now believe, and as Johnson illustrates in great detail here.

But the book succeeds spectacularly on a completely different level, and that is shining a light on the wealth of fantasy stories of the early-to-mid 20th century which was largely forgotten about, hidden by Tolkien’s shadow. In the 1950s, it was unimaginable that some of these classic stories could be forgotten, and yet a couple of decades later, these pulp classics (and, admittedly, some less-than-classics) have been largely forgotten and lost in an era of the new. We’ve forgotten our roots as fans of fantasy stories, and Johnson helps us rediscover them. While I was familiar with some of them, especially the awesome Conan stories by Robert E. Howard (and others), Burrough’s Barsoom series, and Leigh Brackett’s space opera, there’s a lot more to be discovered here.

You’d think a book consisting mainly of book reviews wouldn’t be all that great, but I was thoroughly intrigued.

Then here is havard giving some really good and valid criticism i.e no ax grinding in sight and no personal insults.

Finally, a couple of questions from Havard, a respected name in the old school game blog scene if there ever was one:

I always find it interesting when people are making a serious effort to research the early influences of our hobby. I might check this book out. It does look like this person (whom I have never heard of?) has take his time to do the research.

I do find the title somewhat problematic for two reasons:

1) If you are going to look into the origins of D&D, you need to investigate both D&D co-creators and probably some of the other people involved as well.
2) To what extent was really literature the most important influence of D&D? My impression is that Gary was a gamer much more than a literate. Elements found in books surely appear in D&D, but based on some of his statements, it also seems that Gary had a tendency of evaluating literature based on what would be useful in a game or not.

Many of Gary’s later statements about fantasy literature are clearly influenced by the commercial interests of TSR, including his negative opinion on Tolkien (TSR was involved in a legal battle with the Tolkien estate at the time) and his high praise of Fritz Leiber (Leiber was Gary’s friend and allowed him to use the Lankhmar stuff in D&D). I wonder if one of the primary functions of Appendix N might not have been to send the Tolkien Estate a message?

I wonder if this book goes into any of these issues at all, or whether it simply takes the appendix and investigates the novels listed there?

May 29, 2017 2:44:26 GMT -6 @rafael said:

Well, it's pretty easy to explain, if again unpleasant for you: Christopher Vogler, the author of "The Writer's Journey", is basically the founder of the literary style you try with "Appendix N": Generally colloquial and conversational, but full of oversimplifications, and often misleading or imprecise. Now, Vogler applies this style consciously, to teach people who don't know about literature some basic principles, and to give them some context.

You, in turn, apply this style because you don't appear to know better. - Because it makes good for a blog post, or rather, a short-form essay. But as a long-form, it gets boring quickly. That feeling that people express, about your book - or, rather, your blog post collection - lacking substance, it primarily stems from there. One of those chapters, every few weeks, via an alert in my RSS program, that's alright. It's only when one reads them in sequence that you realize how little you actually have to say about the topics you want to discuss - except for misplaced colloquialisms, and wikipedia-based knowledge.

I have not seen anything to support this yet, once the book is delivered(i.e. when I figure out how to read it on my computer) and I have read it, I may revisit this.

May 29, 2017 2:44:26 GMT -6 @rafael said:

See, I wouldn't throw you under the subway train like I am doing, if you didn't come here to mark territory:

Trying to shame or guilt people into taking back their criticism won't work here, so STOP calling user strangebrew a bad critic for reacting with casual neglect. If you think your book deserves more than casual attention, earn it.

However, don't ignore that strangebrew used personal insults, including one that is the second worst insult you can use here in the USA, that makes him a bad critic, he made it a personal attack, which is way different from valid criticism.

May 29, 2017 2:44:26 GMT -6 @rafael said:

And mind you that we here are still polite, if direct about our criticism. We don't say, "yeah, sure, a GURPS dude who started a blog about 'Car Wars' and then tried a new, low-effort publishing venue with the 'OSR' frate trane". We don't say that.

You just did say that.

May 29, 2017 2:44:26 GMT -6 @rafael said:

My advice, given how impolite and bully-like your responses have been so far: Write about stuff you know more about. And get a more competent editor.

Are we reading the same thread, I have not seen a single impolite statement and I have not seen anything bully-like in anything he has said so far in this thread, where is that coming from? However,I have seen him use humor and I got a laugh out of it. The last two sentences go right back to being insulting for no reason that is apparent to me. Would someone fill me in on why there is so much hate for jeffro and for this book, because I am not seeing where any of this is coming from.

[Deleted]

Over at www.goodreads.com/book/show/33869020-appendix-n there are 20 ratings and six reviews so far with an average rating of 4.2.




I also see that someone named Colin Anders Brodd started his own Appendix N Revisited project on Tuesday, December 13, 2016. colinandersbrodd.blogspot.com/2016/12/appendix-n-revisited-new-project.html

B&N says:
May 23, 2017 at 10:16 am
“Author Colin Anders Brodd is about to fire his own science fiction canon into the SJW abyss.”

Ha! It’s like an 1812 overture all over again. Break out the steampunk airships and let’s fly!

[MormonYoYoMan]

My guess (as to why the Jeffro Hatred) is the gut reaction of sophisticates to a nickname that reminds us of "the Beverly Hillbillies," an old show that embarrasses us by reminding us of our grandparents. I see Jeffro's (not Jethro's) book as a bunch of personal overviews of stories that an editor of Arneson's chaotic notes had read. (Grammatically, that sentence just sucked mop water through a straw.)

[Deleted]

May 29, 2017 7:46:26 GMT -6 MormonYoYoMan said:

My guess (as to why the Jeffro Hatred) is the gut reaction of sophisticates to a nickname that reminds us of "the Beverly Hillbillies," an old show that embarrasses us by reminding us of our grandparents. I see Jeffro's (not Jethro's) book as a bunch of personal overviews of stories that an editor of Arneson's chaotic notes had read. (Grammatically, that sentence just sucked mop water through a straw.)

I guess that is why I don't see it, I loved my grandparents and I am not the least bit embarrassed by them. You just reminded me how much I miss them. I still enjoy "the Beverly Hillbillies."

[MormonYoYoMan]

Me Too - well, my grandparents, not yours. "Jethro" would have fit right in with my cowboy/migrant cotton-and-fruit-picker Grandpa Claude.

As to Jeffro, I need to get to his book, so I can disagree with his Dejah Thoris premise. It'll be fun AND low carb!

[jeffro]

May 29, 2017 4:55:00 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

We have some folks who are really passionate about their gaming, but overall this really is a friendly place to visit if you give it a chance.

Under the circumstances, I'm going to have to take your word for this!

May 29, 2017 7:03:07 GMT -6 @theperilousdreamer said:

Would someone fill me in on why there is so much hate for jeffro and for this book, because I am not seeing where any of this is coming from.

It's not about me. The sort of suppression fire you see here... well, it's strange to say this, but it's a type of warfare.

The fight is not recent, but goes way back. Here is an example of it from a writer that your "Rafael" deems to be far superior to me:

Damon Knight said:

Howard’s tales lack the de Camp verisimilitude–Howard never tried, or never tried intelligently, to give his preposterous saga the ring of truth…even when they’re most insulting to the rational mind. Howard had the maniac’s advantage of believing whatever he wrote; de Camp is too wise to believe wholeheartedly in anything. All the great fantasies, I suppose, have been written by emotionally crippled men. Howard was a recluse and a man so morbidly attached to his mother that when she died he committed suicide; Lovecraft had enough phobias and eccentricities for nine; Merritt was chinless, bald and shaped like a shmoo. The trouble with Conan is that the human race never had produced and never could produce such a man, and sane writers know it; therefore the sick writers have a monopoly of him.

I had no idea that this sort of thing went on when I was writing my book. I was baffled by the fact that these supremely talented authors that engineered the foundations of fantasy and science fiction were so strangely and weirdly obscure. I know when I read them I kept saying to myself, "why didn't anyone tell me to read this author before?!" and "why is the only discussion about this on some stale blog posts from the OSR?!"

The fact is, there are people that can only enjoy contemporary works, that have a difficult time reading anything from before 1980, and that have a meltdown when they encounter things from before 1940. And whether they know anything about me or not, they are my enemies from the moment they catch wind of anything related to my efforts.

How can you know if you'll like my book or not...? Well I've seen enough to have an idea. If you have read any Howard or Lovecraft or Merritt and thought to yourself, "I'd really like to read more stuff like that," then you'll be glad to learn more about the authors that would been considered to be their peers by the designers of the first wave of role-playing games. If you look at the Appendix N reading list and don't recognize more than a few names, you will come away with a list of authors that you are excited about and that you'll want to start reading right away.

If you're the sort of person that thinks that the ugliness of a Damon Knight is something to aspire to as a critic, then you'll hate it.