So, the companion thread.

It happens that a particular book can be full of poop, but another by the same author isn't (for example, Luke Crane seemed quite into himself the first few BW books, then backed off, then got quite good in Burning Empires and Mouse Guard. To me).

However, some authors are so full of themselves that you can read a line without tripping over them. And then online they act like asshats as well. And then in person you keep hearing how they make asshats out of paper mache and shit on them. For you, which ones?

For me: John Wick. On a thread on RPGnet, he proceeded to fit tooth and nail with everyone there who said they didn't like the tone, insinuated we didn't know how to tell his ridiculous posturing from his "writing style" and other such niceties. What a cockbag.

Close second goes to Ron Edwards. Never had a normal interaction with that guy (though he's less annoying than Wick, hands down. I can imagine at least talking to Ron in person; I can imagine fitting in the same room with John Wick's goddamned ego).

My gut reaction was immediately "Mark Rein-Hagen."

It's getting to where I'm thinking "Mike Mearls? I'll pass."

Raymond Feist had a computer game based on his books. In the game was also included interviews with the author, wherein I found him so pretentious about his work that I simply couldn't find myself playing the game more than a few minutes.

Ron Edwards

Vinnie Baker

Monte Cook

Those three I avoid.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;421898Ron Edwards

Vinnie Baker

Monte Cook

Those three I avoid.


- Ed C.

Monte Cook seems like the odd man out among the three. Why do you object to his work in particular?

Quote from: Cole;421900Monte Cook seems like the odd man out among the three. Why do you object to his work in particular?

He must have said something bad about GURPS or Star Trek once. :idunno:

Naw. A game itself might put me off, but I wouldn't let an author ruin my potential enjoyment of his or her work.

Seanchai

Ron Edwards. I tried Sorcerer, and it turned me off of anything else he's done.

Quote from: Doom;421893Raymond Feist had a computer game based on his books. In the game was also included interviews with the author, wherein I found him so pretentious about his work that I simply couldn't find myself playing the game more than a few minutes.

If that game was Betrayal at Krondor, you missed one of the best CRPGs of the mid 90s. Just sayin'.

Authors who turn me off? I can't stand Mark ReinDOTHagen's persona; in that respect, later editions of Vampire were a major improvement (not that they made me want to play the game, but they stopped me from wanting to stab its authors). Ron Edwards is borderline; I wouldn't buy anything from Matt Snyder if he counts as a designer. Still, I am usually not picky enough to dismiss a game just because of the author as a person - there are design attitudes that are an instant turnoff, but otherwise, a good game is a good game.

Quote from: Melan;421937If that game was Betrayal at Krondor, you missed one of the best CRPGs of the mid 90s. Just sayin'.

I never understood the hype; I thought it was clunky and bland. But I digress.

Quote from: Melan;421937I wouldn't buy anything from Matt Snyder if he counts as a designer.

Fair enough, good call.

Quote from: Melan;421937Still, I am usually not picky enough to dismiss a game just because of the author as a person - there are design attitudes that are an instant turnoff, but otherwise, a good game is a good game.

Yeah - that's how I was looking at it. I have nothing against Mike Mearls, the guy, but his track record with design and philosophy of design pretty much said "don't even bother."

The only thing an author can do to turn me off from his game is not writing a great game that is fun to play.   And if the game sucks, I don't care how good the writing may be.

But in general I prefer authors with a strong voice in their writing.

Quote from: Cole;421900Monte Cook seems like the odd man out among the three. Why do you object to his work in particular?

I'm actually w/ Koltarr on this one, though probably for different reasons. When I hear "Monte Cook," I think of tons of D&D and d20 books that I saw of his back when my area used to have a gaming store. Since I don't like D&D, and that's all his name means to me, his name is enough to turn me off.

I'd probably say Mike Mearls for similar reason. Not only does his name scream D&D to me, but 4e D&D which from what I've seen is like 3.x with the parts I already found most boring cranked up to 11.

It's really a system thing rather than my disliking the authors or their writing styles. Just sometimes an author's name because nearly synonymous with a system in my mind, so, yeah.

When an author or writer's name is above the title of the book as "John Smith's Big Boggly-woogly Book!" - then I know that John Smith's ego is getting too large or he no longer has an editor looking over his shoulder.

 Same goes for Monte Cook.

- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;422049When an author or writer's name is above the title of the book as "John Smith's Big Boggly-woogly Book!" - then I know that John Smith's ego is getting too large or he no longer has an editor looking over his shoulder.

 Same goes for Monte Cook.

- Ed C.

I think of it as marketing rather than ego.

Quote from: Cole;422061I think of it as marketing rather than ego.

RPG writers are supposed to toil away in complete obscurity for pennies a page instead of becoming a marketing ploy, donchaknowthat?