|
Basically as the title says, im a huge H.P. Lovecraft fan and i have the d20 cthulhu book from WOTC but notice it states that none of the info in the book is part of the OGL, And i have the Fantasy Flight version Call of Cthulhu Nocturnum d20 stuff but that is non OGL as well, so my question is anything from the Cthuhlu Mythos in the OGL?
You should do serious research on this topic, but IIRC Cthulu is public domain.
What DMcCoy said.
You should do serious research on this topic, but IIRC Cthulu is public domain.
While the subjects of existing gaming products covering the Cthulhu Mythos are public domain, the game stats and specific rules text of those products may not be. So while there are d20 stats for Nyarlathothep, those stats may not be legal reproducible. But there's nothing stopping you or anyone else from making your own version of any of the elder gods or their eldritch minions.
Basically as the title says, im a huge H.P. Lovecraft fan and i have the d20 cthulhu book from WOTC but notice it states that none of the info in the book is part of the OGL, And i have the Fantasy Flight version Call of Cthulhu Nocturnum d20 stuff but that is non OGL as well, so my question is anything from the Cthuhlu Mythos in the OGL?
There's a difference between Cthulhu and the Cthulhu Mythos. While the writings of HP Lovecraft are for the most part in the public domain, a huge chunk of what we call the Cthulhu Mythos wasn't written by Lovecraft. It was written by August Derleth, Brian Lumley, and many, many other writers, none of which is in the public domain.
Unfortunately the d20 Call of Cthulhu game isn't OGL, although the Sanity system is since it was put into the 3.x Unearthed Arcana.
If you're looking to do Call of Cthulhu support material your best bet would be to contact the fine folks at Chaosium.
Hyrum.
Super Genius Games
"We err on the side of awesome."
... or just base your new rules content on original works you create based on the stuff that IS in the public domain (and avoid the stuff that isn't, lest ye be sued!).
Creative Director
|
... or just base your new rules content on original works you create based on the stuff that IS in the public domain (and avoid the stuff that isn't, lest ye be sued!).
AND! It can be really really complicated and tricky untangling what elements of the Mythos are public domain and what elements are not. Especially since copyright law is so hideously bloated and complex (thanks, Disney!).
Conan, believe it or not, was part of the Cthullu mythos, Lovecraft and RE Howard being pen-pals. That said, most of the Conan RPG isn't OGL but some might be, and if nothing else makes a good model of Cthullu in a fan setting.
Perhaps the solutOion is for us mere fans to start a thread and make our own, sticking to HPL for our primary monster source and building new monsters ourselves.
As stated Earlier, sanity is OGL thanks to Unearthed Arcana (3.5) stating that all of it was OGL.
For magic, sanity could be used, but I would also recommend the magic of Iron Heroes which is OGL and can be as dangerous to the user as it is to the target. The mana used to power spells would become sanity points, and the channelling check would become a Forbidden Knowledge skill check.
For classes, I would recommend the Pathfinder NPC classes! That's basically all Monte's Cthullu was, a repackaged Expert and Warrior.
Most skills are generic enough to be in any time period, and the feats are pretty generic as well.
|
The parts of the Mythos that ARE in the public domain might still be trademarked, in which case they would still be off limits. Conan is like that. It is old enough the copyrights ended, but Conan is trademarked. So while we COULD try and write things for Conan, as an example and be legal with copyright, we still run the risk of lawsuits due to trademarks.
So, if you want to tackle anything, check the status of both!
Conan, believe it or not, was part of the Cthullu mythos, Lovecraft and RE Howard being pen-pals. That said, most of the Conan RPG isn't OGL but some might be, and if nothing else makes a good model of Cthullu in a fan setting.
Some of RE Howard's Mythos/horror stories can be found in public domain at Project Gutenburg [/url]
|
|
Conan, believe it or not, was part of the Cthullu mythos, Lovecraft and RE Howard being pen-pals. That said, most of the Conan RPG isn't OGL but some might be, and if nothing else makes a good model of Cthullu in a fan setting.
Some of RE Howard's Mythos/horror stories can be found in public domain at Project Gutenburg [/url]
hehe I know what I'm doing tonight!
Conan, believe it or not, was part of the Cthullu mythos, Lovecraft and RE Howard being pen-pals. That said, most of the Conan RPG isn't OGL but some might be, and if nothing else makes a good model of Cthullu in a fan setting.
Perhaps the solutOion is for us mere fans to start a thread and make our own, sticking to HPL for our primary monster source and building new monsters ourselves.
As stated Earlier, sanity is OGL thanks to Unearthed Arcana (3.5) stating that all of it was OGL.
I don't want to get into a long and technical argument, but I do want to say that just because REH used Lovecraft elements in some of his Conan stories does not mean that Conan is 'part of' the Cthulhu Mythos.
I don't want to get into a long and technical argument, but I do want to say that just because REH used Lovecraft elements in some of his Conan stories does not mean that Conan is 'part of' the Cthulhu Mythos.
Bang a gong its on!
Please justify your statement. If you are basing your argument on REH's Conan stories than, I can see where you might be drawing some of your conclusions from.
Its the wrong conclusion of course - Howard wove many element of mythos into his Conan stories. There are elder horrors and things that man should not know all through the Conan stories.
More importantly his horror and wierd tales stories are full of the Mythos.
To quote from Wikipedia
Most of the elements of Lovecraft's Mythos were not a cross-pollination of the various story-cycles of the Lovecraft Circle, but were instead deliberately created by each writer to become part of the Mythos, the most notable example[citation needed] being the various arcane grimoires of forbidden lore. So, for example, Robert E. Howard has his character Friedrich Von Junzt reading Lovecraft's Necronomicon in "The Children of the Night" (1931), and Lovecraft in turn mentions Howard's Unaussprechlichen Kulten in both "Out of the Aeons" (1935) and "The Shadow Out of Time (1936).[4] Howard frequently corresponded with H. P. Lovecraft, and the two would sometimes insert references or elements of each others' settings in their works. Later editors reworked many of the original Conan stories by Howard; thus, diluting this connection. Nevertheless, many of Howard's unedited Conan stories are arguably part of the Cthulhu Mythos.[5]
4. # ^ King quoted on front cover of 1982 paperback edition of The Best of H.P. Lovecraft: Bloodcurdling Tales of Horror and the Macabre published by Del Rey Books with introduction by Robert Bloch. Other sources quote King as calling this judgement of Lovecraft "undeniable"[1] or "beyond doubt."[2]
5. # ^ Wohleber, Curt (December 1995). The Man Who Can Scare Stephen King. American Heritage Magazine. http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1995/8/1995_8_82_print .shtml.
Containing Lovecraftian elements, or even wholecloth reuse of Mythos creatures and concepts, doesn't make something "part of the mythos." While REH's horror stories certainly qualify, I don't think anything Conan does, though I'd love to be directed to clear examples. Golarion, for instance, isn't part of the Cthulhu Mythos, even though it has gugs, denizens of leng, hounds of tindalos, and spawn of Yog-Sothoth within it. Would you say that Hellboy is part of the Cthulhu Mythos?
I don't think it really matters either way, since copyright and trademark law don't make exceptions for things that fall in or out of this categorization.
Containing Lovecraftian elements, or even wholecloth reuse of Mythos creatures and concepts, doesn't make something "part of the mythos." While REH's horror stories certainly qualify, I don't think anything Conan does, though I'd love to be directed to clear examples. Golarion, for instance, isn't part of the Cthulhu Mythos, even though it has gugs, denizens of leng, hounds of tindalos, and spawn of Yog-Sothoth within it. Would you say that Hellboy is part of the Cthulhu Mythos?
I agree whole heartedly, there is a distinction between being part of the creation of the Mythos and drawing upon the Mythos.
It is when the other writers pick up on your work and themes and incorporate them into their mythos that they can become part of the Mythos.
Hellboy and Golarion draw very heavily upon the "Lovcraftian" Mythos, but do not figure into the Mythos.
I (and this is a personal opinion)consider that REH explores many of the early implications of the Mythos but with less horror and more adventure as the elements are not as rare as they are in the more contemporary stories.
As all of REH's stories are set in the same world Conan is part of that secret or forgotten history.
(Dam I have to go to work - I could ramble all day about this (not make any sense but ramble a lot)).
EDIT: I would love to hear Erik Mona's view - being the grand high guru of Pulp fiction that he is.
EDIT: I would love to hear Erik Mona's view - being the grand high guru of Pulp fiction that he is.
Then you would be referring to the wrong person. The true encyclopedic guru of all that is forbidden lore would be J'thulhu Jacobs. Make no mistake of this.
|
I don't consider the Conan stories a part of the Mythos. The Mythos' primary theme is the utter insignificance of humanity. Conan defeating ancient powerful entities doesn't exactly fit there.
But I've found that many people seem to use the term "Mythos" as an all-encompassing blanket to cover everything that Lovecraft wrote or anything that references Lovecraft or his creations, no matter how vaguely. That's fine, but you shouldn't assume other people do as well. Just because they call the book in Army of Darkness the Necronomicon, that doesn't mean that every Lovecraft fan everywhere considers the Evil Dead trilogy to be a part of the Mythos.
|
Basically as the title says, im a huge H.P. Lovecraft fan and i have the d20 cthulhu book from WOTC but notice it states that none of the info in the book is part of the OGL, And i have the Fantasy Flight version Call of Cthulhu Nocturnum d20 stuff but that is non OGL as well, so my question is anything from the Cthuhlu Mythos in the OGL?
Under US copyright law any Lovecraft tale before 1923 is no longer copyrighted. However, Arkham House Publishing set up by August Derleth after Lovecraft's death.
You might want to follow the links here.
Copyright and Lovecraft
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not sure that Arkham House could in event sue despite the warning. It's a very grey area, and Arkham House is going to need a heck of a lot of cash to pursue any copyright infringement cases, and it may not even win.
The problem is that Lovecraft himself was an "open source" writer and other author's used and made use of many of his ideas and names for the great old ones and the elder beings etc. Lovecraft then went on to include other author's writing in his own - a kind of shared mythology.
Personally I feel the setting up and codification of the Lovecraft Mythos by Derleth and Donald Wandrei (Arkham House) was a disingenuous act of hubris, considering Lovecraft's open ideas about writing.
I don't believe it is possible for Arkham House to successfully challenge any use of the Lovecraft mythos entities or ideas; i.e shoggoths, mi-go, gugs, zoogs, sub niggurath, yog-sothoth, nyarlathotep, or the old tomes such as The Necronomicon(which people have published with their interpretations of what that tome would be about were it real), or The Mystery of the Worm, Die Unaussprechlichen Kulten or what have you. The reason being is that modern authors are referring to them even now without Arkham House's permission.
I believe they might have a very tenuous case were anyone to publish the actual stories of Lovecraft themselves, though I have doubts about doing that as I think that that horse had long bolted before the stable door was closed. You can download Lovecraft works overseas via the net on Project Gutenburg in Australia, though it might be considered illegal for people to do so here in the US. So be careful.
Also remember that though Lovecraft's works may themselves be open now, many of the stories by his colleagues who outlived him might not be.
Just my thoughts.
The problem is that Lovecraft himself was an "open source" writer and other author's used and made use of many of his ideas and names for the great old ones and the elder beings etc. Lovecraft then went on to include other author's writing in his own - a kind of shared mythology.Personally I feel the setting up and codification of the Lovecraft Mythos by Derleth and Donald Wandrei (Arkham House) was a disingenuous act of hubris, considering Lovecraft's open ideas about writing.
I completely agree. A couple of guys who built their careers by mooching off another author's creativity trying to prevent future generations of writers from doing the same thing. Hypocritical.
|
|
I completely agree. A couple of guys who built their careers by mooching off another author's creativity trying to prevent future generations of writers from doing the same thing. Hypocritical.
The problem is that Lovecraft himself was an "open source" writer and other author's used and made use of many of his ideas and names for the great old ones and the elder beings etc. Lovecraft then went on to include other author's writing in his own - a kind of shared mythology.Personally I feel the setting up and codification of the Lovecraft Mythos by Derleth and Donald Wandrei (Arkham House) was a disingenuous act of hubris, considering Lovecraft's open ideas about writing.
I hear you. I was looking through my Del Rey editions and noted Arkham House had renewed HPLs copyright under Derleth's children in the 1990s. I'm not even sure it is legal. They never actually owned the copyright to Lovecraft's works after he died, the copyright was never filed. Some big cheese needs to sue their asses.
I don't consider the Conan stories a part of the Mythos. The Mythos' primary theme is the utter insignificance of humanity. Conan defeating ancient powerful entities doesn't exactly fit there.
But I've found that many people seem to use the term "Mythos" as an all-encompassing blanket to cover everything that Lovecraft wrote or anything that references Lovecraft or his creations, no matter how vaguely. That's fine, but you shouldn't assume other people do as well. Just because they call the book in Army of Darkness the Necronomicon, that doesn't mean that every Lovecraft fan everywhere considers the Evil Dead trilogy to be a part of the Mythos.
I suppose there are two questions here.
Are the REHs horror, weird tales, El Borak, and Solomon Kane part of the Mythos? - I would say yes.
Are REH's Conan, Kull, Cormac Mac Art, and Turlogh Dubh part of the Mythos? - I would say in a round about way yes, as part of the history surrounding the Mythos it as much as Clark Ashton Smith and Fritz Leiber.
|
|
Derleth after all wasn't just someone who came and appropriated. Most of the structure and a good deal of the Mythos are Derleth's creations. Derleth was Lovecraft's publisher and if it wasn't for him, neither of you would have ever even heard of the Mythos. Derleth has more than earned the rights that his family lays claim to.Neither of you are in a position to throw stones at him.
Well two points. I doubt very much that any of Lovecraft's works would have been forgotten if it hadn't been for the altruism of Derleth and Wandrei. After creating Arkham House, they made it a deliberate policy to bully any writer outside their jurisdiction to write under Arkham House or be sued. Robert Bloch, Fritz Leiber and many others would have kept the tales alive in any event. Derleth was out for himself. The Lovecraft family never renewed the copyright themselves and Lovecraft did not give the copyright to Derleth at any point in his short life. The second point is a point of law. Derleth cannot earn the copyright to anyone else's work except his own. That's a legal position and has no bearing on what he did or did not do to keep Lovecraft's work alive for later generations. It's akin to saying that the Egyptian Book of the Dead is copyrighted by the archaeologists who discovered it because without them it might never have been discovered and given to the world. It's a completely flawed argument.
As far as copyright goes any work published prior to 1923 is expired and that's the Law. So Arkham House could not challenge it even if they wanted to. You might want to check out copyright Law online - I have.
Now the only things that can be copyrighted are reproductions and amended versions of the originals by among many people the admired Lovecraft expert S.T. Joshi.
The original unchanged stories prior to 1923 and I would suspect even those written after are public domain.
Neither of you are in a position to throw stones at him.
Note: For the record apart from my opinions concerning Derleth about Arkham House, it does not include my opinions about his writing which to me was first rate stuff. Though he didn't write that many stories and actually tried to change many of the premises behind the mythos that Lovecraft would have disagreed with. To Lovecraft, there was no good or evil. The monstrous entities were there before everything, and man was just a seeding experiment by them, but they were utterly and thoroughly alien and evil. To Derleth's more RC world view he attempted to make distinctions between forces of good and forces of evil in battle with each other and where evil was crushed but still awaiting its moment to strike back. Not a HP Lovecraft mythos view.
Note 2: Hastur the Unspeakable was not a Lovecraft creation, it was invented by William Chamberlain who wrote The King in Yellow, which was an inspiration for HPL and the mythos. Also Derleth and Lovecraft drew on the works of Algernon Blackwood (The Willows, The Wendigo etc.). Blackwood's work was under copyright while the Lovecraft circle was writing. Nobody sued.
Finally:
And a couple of fanboys who think they've got the right to judge because they want to take Lovecraft and Derleth's work for thier own use.
You may perhaps be a little more respectful of fellow posters and the use of fanboys is rather objectionable considering that I'm more than likely older than yourself, and have been a scholar of the Lovecraft circle for many years.
Interesting stuff
So who do you think qualify as important contributors to the Mythos?
I have to say I am REH fan (although I prefer all of his other characters over Conan) so I am biased . I do find Lovecraft to be the better writer but I find Howards stories more interesting.
I don't want to get into a long and technical argument, but I do want to say that just because REH used Lovecraft elements in some of his Conan stories does not mean that Conan is 'part of' the Cthulhu Mythos.Bang a gong its on!
Please justify your statement. If you are basing your argument on REH's Conan stories than, I can see where you might be drawing some of your conclusions from.
Its the wrong conclusion of course - Howard wove many element of mythos into his Conan stories. There are elder horrors and things that man should not know all through the Conan stories.
More importantly his horror and wierd tales stories are full of the Mythos.
Well, I didn't realize that my opinion was so insignificant next to yours. My most humble apologies oh wise and infallible one. :-/
To quote from Wikipedia
Most of the elements of Lovecraft's Mythos were not a cross-pollination of the various story-cycles of the Lovecraft Circle, but were instead deliberately created by each writer to become part of the Mythos, the most notable example[citation needed] being the various arcane grimoires of forbidden lore. So, for example, Robert E. Howard has his character Friedrich Von Junzt reading Lovecraft's Necronomicon in "The Children of the Night" (1931), and Lovecraft in turn mentions Howard's Unaussprechlichen Kulten in both "Out of the Aeons" (1935) and "The Shadow Out of Time (1936).[4] Howard frequently corresponded with H. P. Lovecraft, and the two would sometimes insert references or elements of each others' settings in their works. Later editors reworked many of the original Conan stories by Howard; thus, diluting this connection. Nevertheless, many of Howard's unedited Conan stories are arguably part of the Cthulhu Mythos.[5]
4. # ^ King quoted on front cover of 1982 paperback edition of The Best of H.P. Lovecraft: Bloodcurdling Tales of Horror and the Macabre published by Del Rey Books with introduction by Robert Bloch. Other sources quote King as calling this judgement of Lovecraft "undeniable"[1] or "beyond doubt."[2]
5. # ^ Wohleber, Curt (December 1995). The Man Who Can Scare Stephen King....
Emphasis mine.
Interesting that even the author of this bit of quote suggests that he is able to see alternative views that you label as undeniably 'wrong'.
Actually, it could just be my interpretation, but he seems to be saying that he is willing to concede that they could be part of the Mythos, not that they definitely are.
There was a reason that TSR removed the Cthulu Mythos from it's Dieties and DemiGods and never used it again on any other product, but it escapes me at the moment. Still, I would not assume that the Lovecraft Family has no claim in the matter. Unlike a lot public domain material of similar popularity there hasn't been a string of dollar books of it either.Basically as the title says, im a huge H.P. Lovecraft fan and i have the d20 cthulhu book from WOTC but notice it states that none of the info in the book is part of the OGL, And i have the Fantasy Flight version Call of Cthulhu Nocturnum d20 stuff but that is non OGL as well, so my question is anything from the Cthuhlu Mythos in the OGL?
Under US copyright law any Lovecraft tale before 1923 is no longer copyrighted. However, Arkham House Publishing set up by August Derleth after Lovecraft's death.
You might want to follow the links here.
Copyright and LovecraftI'm not a lawyer, but I'm not sure that Arkham House could in event sue despite the warning. It's a very grey area, and Arkham House is going to need a heck of a lot of cash to pursue any copyright infringement cases, and it may not even win.
From what I can remember TSR removed both the Mythos elements and the Elric bits because Chaosium were producing Elric RPG and CoC RPG and didn't want to tread on Chaosium's toes.
good stuff
I am willing to concede a little, I meant my response to be kinda jesting/teasing I should have put in ;-), they need to work out how to express tone in them thar interwebz.
I do love a literary cage match, at least I didn't call you a fanboy :-).
Although insult Tolkien and then it chainsaws at dawn.
And a couple of fanboys who think they've got the right to judge because they want to take Lovecraft and Derleth's work for thier own use.
Derleth after all wasn't just someone who came and appropriated. Most of the structure and a good deal of the Mythos are Derleth's creations. Derleth was Lovecraft's publisher and if it wasn't for him, neither of you would have ever even heard of the Mythos. Derleth has more than earned the rights that his family lays claim to.Neither of you are in a position to throw stones at him.
I am in America, where I have the right to express my opinions, so I'd say I'm right within range to throw some stones. It could be argued that Derleth watered down Lovecraft's work, though as an obvious Derleth fanboy, I'm sure you'd disagree.
|
|
Interesting stuffSo who do you think qualify as important contributors to the Mythos?
I have to say I am REH fan (although I prefer all of his other characters over Conan) so I am biased . I do find Lovecraft to be the better writer but I find Howards stories more interesting.
Absolutely Robert E. Howard. He was in my humble opinion a master of just about every genre he wrote in. Conan stories are amazing, his horror genre stuff is memorable (It was REH who created the Die Unassprechlichen Kulten by Von Junst if memory serves).
Also Frank Belknap Long (exp The Space Eaters, Hounds of Tindalos)
Robert Bloch, Fritz Leiber, Stephen King and a host of others are also incredible contributers.
Oh and August Derleth, despite my irritations about him, a master mythos writer nonetheless.
EDIT: Also Clarke Ashton-Smith
|
|
good stuffI am willing to concede a little, I meant my response to be kinda jesting/teasing I should have put in ;-), they need to work out how to express tone in them thar interwebz.
I do love a literary cage match, at least I didn't call you a fanboy :-).
Although insult Tolkien and then it chainsaws at dawn.
I'll bring mine too if that happens :)
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Although insult Tolkien and then it chainsaws at dawn.
I'll bring mine too if that happens :)
In this corner, weighing ... whatever they weigh, are 8th Dwarf and Marcus Aurelius!
And in the opposite corner, weighing in at 150 poinds sopping wet, is a British popular author. Except his chainsaw is inky black and murmuring something disturbing.
|
|
Although insult Tolkien and then it chainsaws at dawn.I'll bring mine too if that happens :)In this corner, weighing ... whatever they weigh, are 8th Dwarf and Marcus Aurelius!
And in the opposite corner, weighing in at 150 poinds sopping wet, is a British popular author. Except his chainsaw is inky black and murmuring something disturbing.
Well Mike Moorcock may be popular, in literary terms he can't hold a torch to Tolkien or C. S. Lewis. I've read most of his stuff, interesting in places but mostly superficial. The Eternal Champion crap can get a tad boring after a while.
|
Creative Director
|
Well Mike Moorcock may be popular, in literary terms he can't hold a torch to Tolkien or C. S. Lewis. I've read most of his stuff, interesting in places but mostly superficial. The Eternal Champion crap can get a tad boring after a while.
Like all writing... that depends on the reader. To me, Tolkien's the one who gets boring after a while, and C. S. Lewis is someone I've NEVER been able to stomach. Whereas I quite LOVE the Eternal Champion stuff.
But to get back on topic... Lovecraft's better than all of them. And by "them" I mean "all other writers."
Heh-heh. Reading is intensely personal. No matter how many things one may agree with someone on, you can be just as strongly on opposite ends when it comes to particular authors.
|
|
Well Mike Moorcock may be popular, in literary terms he can't hold a torch to Tolkien or C. S. Lewis. I've read most of his stuff, interesting in places but mostly superficial. The Eternal Champion crap can get a tad boring after a while.Like all writing... that depends on the reader. To me, Tolkien's the one who gets boring after a while, and C. S. Lewis is someone I've NEVER been able to stomach. Whereas I quite LOVE the Eternal Champion stuff.
But to get back on topic... Lovecraft's better than all of them. And by "them" I mean "all other writers."
I hear ya!! Way to go Howard Philips. We shall never forget thee.
good stuffI am willing to concede a little, I meant my response to be kinda jesting/teasing I should have put in ;-), they need to work out how to express tone in them thar interwebz.
I do love a literary cage match, at least I didn't call you a fanboy :-).
Although insult Tolkien and then it chainsaws at dawn.
Yeah, the problem with forums being that jests which require tone/inflection and/or body language to come off right rarely do. And somehow the statement 'You're wrong' falls squarely in that gray area. ;-)
It's all groovy though. No harm, no foul and all that.
There was a reason that TSR removed the Cthulu Mythos from it's Dieties and DemiGods and never used it again on any other product, but it escapes me at the moment.
"Profit and fear of competition" was the reason.
Here is the link to the answer, compiled in part my my efforts while working at TSR and talking to some of the people who were present at the time the change was made:
http://www.hahnlibrary.net/rpgs/faq/rgfdfaq4.html#E8
|
|
There was a reason that TSR removed the Cthulu Mythos from it's Dieties and DemiGods and never used it again on any other product, but it escapes me at the moment."Profit and fear of competition" was the reason.
Here is the link to the answer, compiled in part my my efforts while working at TSR and talking to some of the people who were present at the time the change was made:
http://www.hahnlibrary.net/rpgs/faq/rgfdfaq4.html#E8
Thanks for the link. I read it all it was really interesting.
|
|
Wow, when making this post i dint realize it would stir up such a hornets nest. But im glad i did, i learned alot of cool things i never knew before. and this little bit of info was really cool, alot of cool info there.
Here is the link to the answer, compiled in part my my efforts while working at TSR and talking to some of the people who were present at the time the change was made:
http://www.hahnlibrary.net/rpgs/faq/rgfdfaq4.html#E8
Lovecraft, Poe and Howard - I'm tremendously thankful they lived and tremendously thankful I wasn't one of them.
Sigurd
I'm at work at the moment, and can't link it here now (and it would probably break CoC anyway ... I'll have to review the CoC), but if the OP and other mythos fans who have posted here are interested in reading a mythos-inspired screenplay I've written, I would love some feedback on it.
If it wouldn't violate the CoC to post a link to it, I will start a new thread for it somewhere appropriate, so as not to threadjack, and post a link to that thread here. If it WOULD break the CoC (which I strongly suspect it would), I'll e-mail anyone that is interested a pdf of the script. A few words of warning, though:
1.) It's 98 pages, which will take most people about that many minutes to read it;
2.) If produced as is, it would definitely be rated R, so if strong language, extreme violence, and disturbing sexual content offend you, don't read it! (Yes, I am well aware that H.P. Lovecraft's tales never depicted strong language or sexual content, and the extreme violence was always implied after a gradual build-up, if at all, but the protagonists are bootleggers and a couple of flappers, and they do a bit of swearing and get into a few shoot-outs with cultists.)
|
Creative Director
|
Actually... a LOT of Lovecraft's tales feature sexual content. It's just very very very heavilly disguised or implied. But stories like "The Dunwich Horror" or "Shadow Over Innsmouth" have some pretty creepy connotations when you start thinking about what's going on in the stories.
|
|
Actually... a LOT of Lovecraft's tales feature sexual content. It's just very very very heavilly disguised or implied. But stories like "The Dunwich Horror" or "Shadow Over Innsmouth" have some pretty creepy connotations when you start thinking about what's going on in the stories.
....aaaaand we've reached tentacle porn. Must be an internet meme thing.
Actually... a LOT of Lovecraft's tales feature sexual content. It's just very very very heavilly disguised or implied. But stories like "The Dunwich Horror" or "Shadow Over Innsmouth" have some pretty creepy connotations when you start thinking about what's going on in the stories.
Monsterphilia! :O
My script really only has a couple scenes, one with "heavy petting" (as the protagonists would have described it) in the back of a Model-T, and another where a deranged hillbilly cultist begins to rape one of the flappers, but it doesn't go on for long before the bootleggers rescue her.