Moorcock is actually pretty obscure outside of certain circles.  There's not much social capital to spend there.  Maybe if they'd made that Elric movie.  Oh well, he always was pretty full of himself.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 23, 2021, 07:36:10 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 07:28:19 PM

Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2021, 07:00:01 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 06:44:53 PM
The corporal punishment bit is so outdated. Studies have shown that severity of punishment doesn't deter crime, higher risk of getting caught does. That's why increasing the size of the police force doing patrolling reduces the crime rate.

Greetings!

Whatever "studies" you must be reading are flawed. Common sense tells you that in a society where the justice is pussy coddling and weak, a rational person is more tempted to engage in crime. In a justice system where a criminal is severely flogged and fucking strung up to swing high for everyone to see, that people are less inclined to engage in crime.

Yes, of course a higher chance of getting caught plays a role--but if the punishment is pussy codling, who cares if you get caught?

Stretching the criminal's stupid ass on the jig is not only good for showing the population the price of crime, but also demonstrates that justice will be swift, severe, and ruthless. It also ensures that the criminal doesn't repeat offend--as we know much of the crime is perpetuated over and over again by the same small percentage of evil, dysfunctional, morons.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

What social science studies reveal about human psychology is often at odds with our "common sense".

If what you're saying is true, then we would expect developed countries with more lenient justice systems to have worse crime compared to the USA. Is that what we see?

According to Encyclopedia Brittanica:

QuoteThe claim that corporal punishment is an especially effective deterrent has been refuted by empirical evidence, however, which shows that offenders who are punished by corporal means are actually slightly more likely to commit further crimes than are those punished by imprisonment.

The replication crisis called; it wants your bullshit statistics back...
https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/a-new-replication-crisis-research-that-is-less-likely-be-true-is-cited-more

That doesn't refute the statement. What is your peer-reviewed empirical evidence that corporal and/or capital punishment reduce crime?

Let's try to drag this kicking and screaming back on topic.

Will the next WOTC D&D book be about woke drow? I think the woke part is a foregone conclusion. The question there is how woke.

The unadrow will be TERFs?

  The real question is, how will the Matriarchy react when the Drow males start using magic to identify as female to improve their position in society?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 07:54:15 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 23, 2021, 07:36:10 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 07:28:19 PM

Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2021, 07:00:01 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 06:44:53 PM
The corporal punishment bit is so outdated. Studies have shown that severity of punishment doesn't deter crime, higher risk of getting caught does. That's why increasing the size of the police force doing patrolling reduces the crime rate.

Greetings!

Whatever "studies" you must be reading are flawed. Common sense tells you that in a society where the justice is pussy coddling and weak, a rational person is more tempted to engage in crime. In a justice system where a criminal is severely flogged and fucking strung up to swing high for everyone to see, that people are less inclined to engage in crime.

Yes, of course a higher chance of getting caught plays a role--but if the punishment is pussy codling, who cares if you get caught?

Stretching the criminal's stupid ass on the jig is not only good for showing the population the price of crime, but also demonstrates that justice will be swift, severe, and ruthless. It also ensures that the criminal doesn't repeat offend--as we know much of the crime is perpetuated over and over again by the same small percentage of evil, dysfunctional, morons.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

What social science studies reveal about human psychology is often at odds with our "common sense".

If what you're saying is true, then we would expect developed countries with more lenient justice systems to have worse crime compared to the USA. Is that what we see?

According to Encyclopedia Brittanica:

QuoteThe claim that corporal punishment is an especially effective deterrent has been refuted by empirical evidence, however, which shows that offenders who are punished by corporal means are actually slightly more likely to commit further crimes than are those punished by imprisonment.

The replication crisis called; it wants your bullshit statistics back...
https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/a-new-replication-crisis-research-that-is-less-likely-be-true-is-cited-more

That doesn't refute the statement. What is your peer-reviewed empirical evidence that corporal and/or capital punishment reduce crime?

Greetings!

Well, BCT, as a historian, I refute these worthless, corrupt "studies" from my own analysis of history. HISTORY demonstrates that being vigilant, strict, and strong on crime creates a better, safer, happier society. Conversely, being a pussy cucked society that coddles criminals creates nothing but more chaos, mayhem, and tears.

In keeping with the SJW trend, the Drow will continue to be watered down and pussified, and made "misunderstood" instead of wicked, corrupt, and evil. So tragic what WOTC is doing, and likely to do more so.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

   As for a capital and corporal punishment system being less likely to discourage crime....Were Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar in those studies?  To link it back to Drow, I would imagine they have incredibly harsh punishments to keep a Chaotic Evil society functioning (which never made sense to me given the level of organization they seem to have when they have to get things done).   As to that, if elves trend Chaotic and Good, wouldn't their opposites trend towards Lawful and Evil, rather than Chaotic Evil?   I know the whole layout from the G series all the way to Q1 was a long series of adventures to find who started a large "organization" across several dimensions as an invasion effort by making alliances and deals.   That is NOT the act of Chaos, so it never made sense to me the Drow, and Lolth are CE.  They seem to act a whole lot more Lawful Evil. 

Quote from: oggsmash on May 23, 2021, 08:47:20 PM
   As for a capital and corporal punishment system being less likely to discourage crime....Were Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar in those studies?  To link it back to Drow, I would imagine they have incredibly harsh punishments to keep a Chaotic Evil society functioning (which never made sense to me given the level of organization they seem to have when they have to get things done).   As to that, if elves trend Chaotic and Good, wouldn't their opposites trend towards Lawful and Evil, rather than Chaotic Evil?   I know the whole layout from the G series all the way to Q1 was a long series of adventures to find who started a large "organization" across several dimensions as an invasion effort by making alliances and deals.   That is NOT the act of Chaos, so it never made sense to me the Drow, and Lolth are CE.  They seem to act a whole lot more Lawful Evil.

These would be the same drow that have priestesses wielding snake-headed whips that deal intense pain to those struck. Those drow.

As so often I really end up just shaking my head.

You think Drow are problematic?  Just drop them entirely.

You don't have to agonise over whether fictional creations from 40 years are ok by moderrn standards if you just make new stuff.

The best thing the SRD ever did for the OSR was free them from D&D 'Canon', and force people to create their own things, and not just keep using the same ideas endlessly.

I don't get how modern fandom is both so determined to update stuff and yet at the same time so stultifyingly tied to the weight of tradition.

The funny thing is that, in AD&D Drow were so much cooler than the other elves and were generally higher level and equipped with adamantium weapons and armor that disintegrated in sun-light.  They were practically a fan-wank insert from the very start.  So, I always wonder, was there really ever a point when the Drow were unpopular or presented as less cool than white skinned races?  Probably during the second edition scrubbing of anything offensive to people who didn't buy TSR's products.

Sure there were a couple Drow painted as sexy Africans on a cover or two in that period of time but when Gygax said "black skinned" that ain't what he meant.

Quote from: SirFrog on May 22, 2021, 12:51:02 AM
When did the drow become light purplish grey? Every image I've seen lately has this new color.

It's the new art direction for the Drow WOTC has taken. From here on in the Drow are all light purplish grey for all time.

To be honest, I really prefer it to the all black look.

It is unfortunate that it is being done for woke reasons, not just because it looks better.

Quote from: Zelen on May 22, 2021, 02:00:05 PM
...
The thing that I find objectionable is how this type of manipulation is going back and undermining the artistic and creative vision of people who made something that became organically popular. If I were R.A. Salvatore, for example, I'd be considering how to make WotC pay up for trying to rewrite important plot elements when light purplish grey Salvatore himself was probably the single most important creative vision for those plot elements.

No need to worry about Salvatore, he is being taken care of.

All this month WOTC is doing a "Summer of Drizzt".
https://www.thegamer.com/dungeons-dragons-kicks-off-summer-of-drizzt-with-new-animated-short/

He and Ed Greenwood have always been down with whatever retcon WOTC wants to do.

They have both taken that WOTC ticket long ago.

Quote from: TJS on May 23, 2021, 09:22:50 PM
...
You think Drow are problematic?  Just drop them entirely.

You don't have to agonise over whether fictional creations from 40 years are ok by moderrn standards if you just make new stuff.
...
I don't get how modern fandom is both so determined to update stuff and yet at the same time so stultifyingly tied to the weight of tradition.

You need to remember that these people do not know how to create anything.

They are parasites of legacy IP, that they then subvert to their own ends.

Every time they try to push something 100% original it flops. Nobody wants it.

They can only attract eyeballs by subverting what is already popular.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 23, 2021, 03:21:23 AM

I believe the argument against the Drow Matriarchy is that it's Evil and therefore some kind of knock against matriarchies.

I have witnessed this very argument posted out in the wild on ENWorld.

They can't even stand that a make believe fantasy race might be showing "Women" in a bad light...

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 23, 2021, 04:40:46 PM

Oof! That was a turgid spiel. I actually haven't read any Moorcock, but I doubt his writings would survive a similar examination.

Moorcock is a typical Marxist subversive hack, and a Western Civilization hating SJW before the term SJW was coined.

He is protected.

There is a reason his books have been in continual print when everyone else of his era, and even R. E. Howard's Conan stories, have gone out of print at one time or another.

I'll just come out and say it: Elric fucking sucks.

I tried to read Elric of Melnibone I really did.

Ohhh, so sickly emo-albino that nobody understands, with magic sword that gives oh so cool powerz, but I'm doooooomed...

Fuck off.


Reckall's post sums up Moorcock perfectly:

Quote from: Reckall on May 23, 2021, 12:06:54 PM
...
Moorcock... said that, when he created Elric, he took Conan and, character trait by character trait, he created someone who was "the total opposite of the howardian hero".  ...

He created Elric because Conan repulsed him.

That is all you need to know about Moorcock as a man.

Quote from: David Johansen on May 23, 2021, 07:48:36 PM
Moorcock is actually pretty obscure outside of certain circles.  There's not much social capital to spend there.  Maybe if they'd made that Elric movie.  Oh well, he always was pretty full of himself.

He is full of hubris because that is all he has.

He knows deep down in his little gamma heart of hearts that his name will never be spoken of with the same love as R.E. Howard.

And he damn sure knows he is not worthy to so much as kiss a random footprint in the dirt that Tolkien made as he walked down a path in the English countryside.

Quote from: Jaeger on May 24, 2021, 04:34:38 AM
He is full of hubris because that is all he has.

He knows deep down in his little gamma heart of hearts that his name will never be spoken of with the same love as R.E. Howard.

And he damn sure knows he is not worthy to so much as kiss a random footprint in the dirt that Tolkien made as he walked down a path in the English countryside.

Nothing to do with Drow, but....

Michael Moorcock was an SJW before the first SJW SJW'd, and was (still is?) a bad writer to boot. I liked both Lord of the Rings & the Elric saga when I was 9, but on adult re-visits found that only one of those was readable, and it sure as shit wasn't Elric.

And that was the best thing he ever did, and he threw it under the bus *years* ago, in prophetic 'subverting fan expectations' style, to the disgust of 12-year old me, who still sorta had a soft spot for the albino :/

Oddly, some bullshit happened to Moorcock recently where he got kicked off Facebook, I have no idea why, so maybe his old school superlib credentials don't protect him from 'cancellation.' I'm not sure anyone would know or care if it happened though.

I know that the mere fact that Moorcock is a fairly radical lefty is enough for most people on this forum to convict him of wrongthink themselves but...

While he may have attacked Tolkien and disliked his politics he never called for him to be recalled from publication or tried to stop other people from reading Tolkien and judging his work for themselves.

Some here would do to remember that distinction before calling him an 'SJW'.  After all, it's kind of important as it's really the only claim most of the right wing ideologues on this forum have to being better than the 'SJWs'.

(I have never heard him say he 'detested Howard', only that he wanted to create an anti-Conan.  God knows the world didn't need any more Thongor's or Braks, or other Conan imitations so obviously the anti-Conan was a more successful and memorable root to take).

Also Moorcock isn't really being cancelled because he doesn't have any input into any major fandom franchises.  If he were to write a Star Wars novel you bet he would be a candidate for cancellation.  People either get cancelled because they have power that people want to wrest from them, or because they're up and coming people at vulnerable points in their career and easily bullied.  Moocock is neither.

Quote from: Jaeger on May 24, 2021, 04:34:38 AM
Moorcock is a typical Marxist subversive hack, and a Western Civilization hating SJW before the term SJW was coined.

Marxist, maybe (Moorcock defines himself as an "Anarchist Pragmatist"), but... hack? Even those who disagree with his dissing of basically anything under the sun (if you are not H.G. Wells, Alfred Bester or Alan Moore) recognise his talent in writing.

Gwydion M. Williams, who demolished Moorcock's opinions in "Defending Tolkien Against Michael Moorcock's Condemnation - Cock-and-Bull about Epic Fantasy" recognises that:

"Moorcock is a good writer, and one might have hoped that he would give some insights into what it that makes a good story work. Or perhaps he would provide some fresh and original insight into some well-known tales. Unfortunately, he provides very little of this. He gives you opinions, but no reasons."

Quote
I'll just come out and say it: Elric fucking sucks.

I tried to read Elric of Melnibone I really did.

Ohhh, so sickly emo-albino that nobody understands, with magic sword that gives oh so cool powerz, but I'm doooooomed...

Fuck off.

Pssst... I'll let you to be part of a secret: no one forces you to like Elric. You can sleep peacefully 

Quote
Reckall's post sums up Moorcock perfectly:

Quote from: Reckall on May 23, 2021, 12:06:54 PM
...
Moorcock... said that, when he created Elric, he took Conan and, character trait by character trait, he created someone who was "the total opposite of the howardian hero".  ...

He created Elric because Conan repulsed him.

That is all you need to know about Moorcock as a man.

Well, no. That's something you need to know Elric as a character. It doesn't even tell us anything about Corum or Hawkmoon - let alone Moorcock. The most that it can tell you about the writer is what that question asked: for sure the parallels between drug use and the relationship Elric has with Stormbringer are eerie, even if Moorcock refused them.

And that Elric was the most successful among Moorcock's creations may at most tell you something about the public - with the ironic fact that a lot of players of the Stormbringer RPG included in their campaigns the Lovecraftian Mythos (being CoC about 80% compatible with Stormbringer). The horror! 

Quote
He is full of hubris because that is all he has.

He knows deep down in his little gamma heart of hearts that his name will never be spoken of with the same love as R.E. Howard.

And he damn sure knows he is not worthy to so much as kiss a random footprint in the dirt that Tolkien made as he walked down a path in the English countryside.

I do seem to understand that you don't like Moorcock.

I actually do, even if, in his life, he wasted a lot of good ideas with shoddy, slapdash writing - because he had to pay the bills. If his vision of the World was 180° from Tolkien's, good for us. I like everything.

Quote from: TJS on May 24, 2021, 07:55:00 AM
While he may have attacked Tolkien and disliked his politics he never called for him to be recalled from publication or tried to stop other people from reading Tolkien and judging his work for themselves.

Moorcock met both Tolkien and C.S. Lewis in person and he always pointed out how he has fond memories of them. It is the contents of their works that he disagrees with, not the authors themselves.

And you are right: I don't remember a single case where Moorcock called for censorship. He may have denounced Campbell and his "Astounding Stories" magazine as "crypto-fascist" (just one among his many rants) but AFAIK he never called for the "cancellation" of anything (which puts him head and shoulders above any current "hysteria du-jour" IMHO).