# Take a stand! LotR vs. GoT



## AeroDm (Jun 1, 2011)

You have no choice. Place your stake in a camp. The comments are the place for nuance and dissent and we look forward to both!


----------



## jonesy (Jun 1, 2011)

I voted Game of Thrones, but if you'd had Hobbit as an option I'd have picked that instead. Hobbit always felt more complete to me than Lord of the Rings. LotR is epic, but There And Back Again is more mysterious and fantastic.

As for the poll options, Tolkien is the master of world building while Martin is the master of character building. Character wins.


----------



## Hodgie (Jun 1, 2011)

Lord of the Rings but I'd like to see Game of Thrones last as many seasons as the books.


----------



## Pseudonym (Jun 1, 2011)

I went with Game of Thrones. It might have something to do with the fact that I just read the series and really enjoyed it. I don't think I would have appreciated it as much had I read it when I was in my teens.

I would have chosen The Silmarillion over both, but it wasn't an option.


----------



## Krug (Jun 2, 2011)

LotR right now. At least it's complete, though I'm a bigger fan of The Hobbit. Until GoT is finished and I can see the finished story, Tolkien wins.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 2, 2011)

LotR

Talk to me again if GoT ever gets finished.


----------



## messy (Jun 2, 2011)

can't vote until grrm finishes the books.


----------



## Sombalance (Jun 2, 2011)

LOTR is responsible for a lot of us gamers, and I'd feel foolish not to side with Gandalf.

Plus, I'm begging to hate writers who don't seem to be capable of finishing a story, even if I think the story they are writing is fantastic.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jun 2, 2011)

I had my first fantasy romance with _LotR_, as it were.  It mattered to me then and it matters to me now, too.

When the films were released, I was at the 12:00 midnight showing -- three films in a row. I loved them.

That said, while you never forget your first, your "first" is rarely the one you'll marry.

I "married" _Game of Thrones_. Easily my favorite series of all time. Yes, even if it is unfinished. 

I believe _A Storm of Swords_ is the best fantasy novel ever written, bar none.


----------



## Orius (Jun 2, 2011)

LotR.  It's at least a finished story.  And Martin's work doesn't sound like the sort of thing I'd enjoy, though I could be wrong.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jun 2, 2011)

I choose Other...

The Dark Tower series by Stephen King.




Orius said:


> And Martin's work doesn't sound like the sort of thing I'd enjoy, though I could be wrong.



I didn't think so either.  I was more a Moorcock/Lieber style fantasy guy.  But damn.... I was so wrong.  It really is good stuff, his character development is very strong.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 2, 2011)

Lemon curry.

Or maybe Arthur Curry.  Or Tim Curry.


----------



## El Mahdi (Jun 2, 2011)

Ones chicken, the other is pork.

They're both different, and I like them both.

There is no vs. for me...

So I'll have a helping of both please...with lemon curry.


----------



## ssampier (Jun 3, 2011)

Different strokes for different folks. One is gritty and realistic and one is fantastic and epic.

Both have awesome critters, oliphaunts, demons, and barrow-wrights in one and mammoths, dragons, and half-dead in the other.

If you put a gun to my head, I'd pick GoT, simply because they are readable. I have tried many times to get through LoRT and it's slow going.





El Mahdi said:


> Ones chicken, the other is pork.
> 
> They're both different, and I like them both.
> 
> ...




Both are white meat, according to the commercials....


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 3, 2011)

*re*

Like them both. _Lord of the Rings_ is my all time favorite fantasy books though. Something about it resonates with me. It is one of the clearest fantasy pictures of what goodness, nobility, honor, friendship, faith, and hope are. I always feel a great deal of emotion when I read it because of the depth of the narrative. The world building and detail is immersive, but it is the strength of the friendships that make the story truly go. _Lord of the Rings_ is a classic story of good versus evil that is very well done. 

_Game of Thrones_ I like because of the plot and characters. I'm less emotionally invested in it is because it is drama in a purer form. Sometimes over the top, sometimes subtle, but always focused on drawing the reader along with what happens next with very little emotional context or investment required. It has all the things you enjoy about a good drama including gratuitous sex and over the top violence along with the great story.

I'll probably only ever read _A Song of Ice and Fire_ series once, while I read _Lord of the Rings_ once a year. If you appreciate and share Tolkien's idealistic vision of good and evil and appreciate the values layered into the narrative, _Lord of the Rings_ is a much deeper book than _A Song of Ice and Fire_.

Both are entertaining stories.


----------



## Jan van Leyden (Jun 3, 2011)

It's at the same time difficult and simple to decide, because the books are very different.

LotR is like a painting. You can enjoy it as a sedate scenery as well as step closer and marvel at all the details contained therein. The story it tells is a simple one at its basics, it's the old fight of good versus evil with a clear-cut border.

GoT on the other hand gives you drama. There's no easy to grasp image, and all the details are ever shifting and morphing. It tells many stories at the same time. There's no objective perspective. The focus is clearly on the acting persons who develop and change their views.

While both books don't compete with each other, I personally prefer the more dynamic nature of GoT and its focus on people.


----------



## Herschel (Jun 3, 2011)

Lord of the Rings: It's a literary classic, not just a fantasy classic, for a reason.


----------



## Mark (Jun 3, 2011)

<----- HmmmmmMMM?


"I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side, if you undertand me" - Treebeard


----------



## drothgery (Jun 4, 2011)

If I have to pick one, LotR gets points for inventing the genre and so gets my vote. But having no interest in JRRT's attempts at poetry or GRRM's brutally killing every other character in a grim world, I go elsewhere for my fantasy epics, thanks.


----------



## Diamond Cross (Jun 6, 2011)

I say  making a choice and I nuke anybody who says I have to I will like both if I damned well please.


----------



## El Mahdi (Jun 6, 2011)

Diamond Cross said:


> I say  making a choice and I nuke anybody who says I have to I will like both if I damned well please.




So, are you saying just nuke Westeros and Middle Earth from space?  (You know, just to be sure and all...)


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jun 6, 2011)

LotR -- it is a classic, been around and read by millions.  While GoT may be just a fad of the times, I heard the same about WoT and where did that go?


----------



## Thunderfoot (Jun 7, 2011)

None of the above -

The Wheel of Time!


----------



## Jhaelen (Jun 7, 2011)

AeroDm said:


> You have no choice. Place your stake in a camp. The comments are the place for nuance and dissent and we look forward to both!



Is this about the books or the LCGs?

I went with the LCGs since that was easier to decide (LotR)


----------



## ssampier (Jun 11, 2011)

El Mahdi said:


> So, are you saying just nuke Westeros and Middle Earth from space?  (You know, just to be sure and all...)




Post apocalyptic Middle Earth and Westeros?

I think a mutant _oliphaunt_ would be awesome.

I have a feeling that the _Others_ would survive and thrive in Westeros with the onset of nuclear winter....


----------



## Descartes (Jun 13, 2011)

I went GoT for now because while not complete it is more detailed IMHO. But to compare the two in my eyes is like comparing a Model T to a 2011 Mustang. I'd rather drive the Mustang but every car built since the Model T owes some sort of nod to it.

Tolkein did something that was not widely done at the time and drew inspiration from mythology, environmental issues of his time (still relevent today), and his personal experiences in WWI.
Martin on the other hand draws inspiration from Tolkein and many other authors, history (the war of the roses), and his experiences as a screen writer.

The result is that both are original and thoroughly entertaining. Maybe its more a choice of Chinese or Vietnamese. You can be sure some sort of rice or noodle is going to be involved it just depends on what you're hungry for.


----------



## GandalfMithrandir (Jun 13, 2011)

Sombalance said:


> LOTR is responsible for a lot of us gamers, and *I'd feel foolish not to side with Gandalf.*
> 
> Plus, I'm begging to hate writers who don't seem to be capable of finishing a story, even if I think the story they are writing is fantastic.




I like that attitude


----------



## Morkul (Jun 15, 2011)

neither.  ive never read Game of Thrones and I am more into pre-Tolkein fantasy.  Tolkein's work doesnt hold a candle to that of Lord Dunsany, E.R. Eddison, A. Merritt, Lovecraft or Mervyn Peake...


----------



## Morkul (Jun 15, 2011)

Descartes said:


> I went GoT for now because while not complete it is more detailed IMHO. But to compare the two in my eyes is like comparing a Model T to a 2011 Mustang. I'd rather drive the Mustang but every car built since the Model T owes some sort of nod to it.
> *
> Tolkein did something that was not widely done at the time* and drew inspiration from mythology, environmental issues of his time (still relevent today), and his personal experiences in WWI.
> Martin on the other hand draws inspiration from Tolkein and many other authors, history (the war of the roses), and his experiences as a screen writer.
> ...




pulp magazines back then were full of fantastic stories drawing from mythology.  by the time Tolkein wrote his books, the heroic fantasy genre was 50 years old, dating back to William Morris in the 1890's.  it had been done before, and better...


----------



## jonesy (Jun 15, 2011)

Morkul said:


> ...by the time Tolkein wrote his books, the heroic fantasy genre was 50 years old...



I'm not disagreeing with your view on the writers you mentioned, but how are you defining heroic fantasy there? There are stories I would place there that are thousands of years old.


----------



## Morkul (Jun 15, 2011)

jonesy said:


> I'm not disagreeing with your view on the writers you mentioned, but how are you defining heroic fantasy there? There are stories I would place there that are thousands of years old.




Heroic Fantasy based in a world other than our own.  William Morris wrote the first heroic fantasy based in another world.  Older heroic fantasies were based somewhere in our world.  when i speak of heroic fantasy, i am excluding things like Alice in Wonderland, which is fantasy, but not heroic fantasy...

Of course, i put a lot of stock in the forwards Lin Carter wrote for the Ballantine Adult Fantasy series (released in the late sixties-early seventies).  there may be newer, more informed fantasy writer/scholars out there...


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jun 15, 2011)

Morkul said:


> neither.  ive never read Game of Thrones and I am more into pre-Tolkein fantasy.  Tolkein's work doesnt hold a candle to that of Lord Dunsany, E.R. Eddison, A. Merritt, Lovecraft or Mervyn Peake...



Game of Thrones is a very well written series, especially the first three books.  It's no wonder the series is considered a masterpiece of modern fantasy.  I recommend reading, at least, the first book.

On a side note... I am sure there are a number of highly qualified writers and critics that would disagree with your statement about Tolkein.




Morkul said:


> by the time Tolkein wrote his books, the heroic fantasy genre was 50 years old, dating back to William Morris in the 1890's.  it had been done before, and better...



Fortunately, the definition of better (in this case) is subjective.  And just because it is old, doesn't make it better.


----------



## Morkul (Jun 15, 2011)

catsclaw227 said:


> Game of Thrones is a very well written series, especially the first three books.  It's no wonder the series is considered a masterpiece of modern fantasy.  I recommend reading, at least, the first book.
> 
> On a side note... *I am sure there are a number of highly qualified writers and critics that would disagree with your statement about Tolkein*.
> 
> ...




i dont think Tolkein was that great of a writer.  he was a linguist.  i find LOTR to be overly-descriptive of terrain at times and i really hate the army of the dead saving the day.  Gondor should have lost in the end...

none of the LOTR books crack my top ten fantasy novels.  the names i mentioned were better writers than Tolkein not because they were writing before him, but because they used words more economically and effectively than Tolkein did...


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jun 15, 2011)

Morkul said:


> i dont think Tolkein was that great of a writer.  he was a linguist.  i find LOTR to be overly-descriptive of terrain at times and i really hate the army of the dead saving the day.  Gondor should have lost in the end...



I suppose you aren't a Robert Jordan fan either.  (I'm not really, I only mention it because of his long winded descriptions.)





> none of the LOTR books crack my top ten fantasy novels.  the names i mentioned were better writers than Tolkein not because they were writing before him, but because they used words more economically and effectively than Tolkein did...



Now, don't get me wrong, I love HP Lovecraft.  But he could get a little overly verbose as well, and you mentioned him as one of your favorites.  His descriptive _style_ is what catches me.

Do you like Leiber or other Swords & Sorcery writers?  Moorcock?


----------



## El Mahdi (Jun 15, 2011)

catsclaw227 said:


> I'm not really, I only mention it because of his long winded descriptions.




...and braid tugging!  Don't forget the overabundance of braid tugging...


----------



## jonesy (Jun 16, 2011)

El Mahdi said:


> ...and braid tugging!  Don't forget the overabundance of braid tugging...



And putting hands on your hips. And glaring. And raising chins. And folding arms. And half-smiling. Giggling girlishly. And turning your back to people. And smoothing skirts. Oh boy.


----------



## Morkul (Jun 16, 2011)

catsclaw227 said:


> I suppose you aren't a Robert Jordan fan either.  (I'm not really, I only mention it because of his long winded descriptions.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




i have no inclination to tackle Robert Jordan.  I actually prefer stories that end in one book...

ya, Lovecraft can be rather wordy in his descriptions.  so can Dunsany.  but i dig the way they describe things better, especially Dunsany.  he had a better grasp on the fantastic than any other writer ive ever read...

ya, i dig Leiber, especially that book Gather, Darkness!  never read any Moorcock...


----------



## Morkul (Jun 16, 2011)

Morkul said:


> i have no inclination to tackle Robert Jordan. * I actually prefer stories that end in one book...*
> 
> ya, Lovecraft can be rather wordy in his descriptions.  so can Dunsany.  but i dig the way they describe things better, especially Dunsany.  he had a better grasp on the fantastic than any other writer ive ever read...
> 
> ya, i dig Leiber, especially that book Gather, Darkness!  never read any Moorcock...




i agree with what this guy said here.  i tried to read the Riverworld series by Philip Jose Farmer.  got to about 100 pages from the end of the fourth book and Cyrano de Bergerac (my favorite character) dies.  i put it down.  continuing to decipher the dialogue of a Titanthrop speaking with a lisp did not appeal to me at all.  i sold them on ebay...


----------



## El Mahdi (Jun 16, 2011)

So you agree with yourself as if you're two seperate people...?

No wonder you like Lovecraft.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jun 16, 2011)

Morkul said:


> Morkul said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was thinking Morkul has two site IDs and uses them both at different times?  Maybe he forgot he was logged in as his previous alias.


----------



## Morkul (Jun 16, 2011)

El Mahdi said:


> So you agree with yourself as if you're two seperate people...?
> 
> No wonder you like Lovecraft.






catsclaw227 said:


> I was thinking Morkul has two site IDs and uses them both at different times?  Maybe he forgot he was logged in as his previous alias.




i was drinking and joking around...


----------



## El Mahdi (Jun 16, 2011)

Yeah.  Drinking tends to bring out the Cthulu in me too.


(Actually it doesn't, but it made for a decent joke.  Drinking tends to actually bring out the Robin Williams in me...)


----------



## catsclaw227 (Jun 16, 2011)

Morkul said:


> i was drinking and joking around...




Ahhh!  I am quite agreeable with myself after a few pops off the ol' hooch bottle too!


----------



## Morkul (Jun 17, 2011)

El Mahdi said:


> Yeah.  Drinking tends to bring out the Cthulu in me too.
> 
> 
> (Actually it doesn't, but it made for a decent joke.  Drinking tends to actually bring out the Robin Williams in me...)






catsclaw227 said:


> Ahhh!  I am quite agreeable with myself after a few pops off the ol' hooch bottle too!




i enjoy drinking in moderation, but if i drink too much at once, i get very antisocial and want to crawl back to Sunken R'lyeh to finish my booze...


----------



## Holy Bovine (Jun 17, 2011)

Lord of the Rings.

George Martin is a hack.

*dons fireproof suit*

nyah!


----------



## jonesy (Jun 17, 2011)

Holy Bovine said:


> Lord of the Rings.
> 
> George Martin is a hack.
> 
> ...



Your fireproof suit will not protect you when the dragons finally.. ! Oh, I see.


----------



## AeroDm (Sep 5, 2011)

Having just finished a Dance with Dragons, I am leaning more towards LotR. I think the first three Song of Ice and Fire books are phenomenal and then fame started to catch up with GRRMartin and allowed him to push his editor over. They got real wordy real fast. That isn't to say that LotR isn't wordy, but it is a different sort of wordy. Tolkien evolved the setting with his wordiness while Martin evolves the scene with his. Setting trumps scene, and so scene gets annoying quicker.


----------



## IronWolf (Sep 5, 2011)

Wow! How did I miss this the first time through? 

Definitely Lord of the Rings, without a doubt. I enjoy Game of Thrones and it is certainly a good series, but Lord of the Rings still stands well above it in my opinion.


----------



## Gronin (Sep 6, 2011)

Lord of the Rings -- absolutely --no doubt whatsoever.

Lord of the Rings, as has been said before, was my first and it is the one I go back to.  I will find books that have one aspect or another that beats Lord of the Rings but very rarely do I find a book (or series) that I like more and Game of Thrones is certainly not it.

Lord of the Rings is comfortable -- it fits well.  I read it and I feel good at the end.  Lord of the Rings led me to gaming.  

Game of Thrones is well written and I enjoy the story, the setting and the characters (all though in many cases not for long) but I am not sure it knows where it's going -- frankly it may be a case of taking too long to get to the point.  Just because Wheel of Time series (which I have started to read several times and never made it past the fifth book) stretches on into infinity doesn't mean it is a good idea.  In fact it has been my experience that the longer the series the less it holds me.  (As an another example I present L. Ron Hubbards "Mission Earth" series).

I guess what it comes down to is Lord of the Rings and I have a love affair that goes back a long way and while a nice set of young legs can get me to look I still go home for dinner.


----------

