What are essential novels you need to read to run a decent game?

is the only specific answer.

I don't think any specific book is essential for running a game.

That said, you should be well-read if you ever want to be creative. Believe it or not, those Scholastic posters you saw in grade school were right and reading is good for your mind. The best writers are the ones who read a lot.

I would actually recommend reading "On writing" by Stephen King. A lot of the discussion within that can be applied to worldbuilding and running a TTRPG.

Lord of the Rings. It's a shining bright example how not to run a campaign.

The Lord of the Rings is a great example of how to build a world, but it would be an awful campaign, yeah. It's still definitely one of the best recommendations for making a fantasy campaign though, due to its immense influence on the genre. Understanding Middle Earth will help you understand fantasy conventions.

underrated

I wouldn't say "essential", but the Ketty Jay series by Chris Wooding gave me thousands of ideas.

Drunken debauched sky-pirates with shotguns, jet-fighters, demon-possessed steel golems and ADVENTUUUUURE!

The fantasy conventions in Lord of the Rings are so far removed from modern kitchen sink fantasy tropes there's no point in comparing them.

It's nothing like what most people associate with your average D&D game.

Gary gygax once wrote a book entitled "on worldbuilding". I can only recommend that. 3.5 had a dming for dummies book. And if you are going to run a campaign involving Espionage or necromancy of any kind, then I strongly recommend necroscope by Brian Lumley it's actually a collection of seven or eight books, but the first one is the only one that I think you really need.

Blood Meridian

This guy is right.

Even as an atheist, there's a surprising amount of cool weird thematic shit in there.

>no Harrison
>no Borges
Oof. But really, you should read anything. Anything can give you inspiration for games.

Blood Meridian for gritty anything or low fantasy.
The Artemis Fowl series for magitek or rogues.
Anything by Neil Gaiman, especially Neverwhere, for urban fatasy.
Stephen King's The Dark Tower for how to get a good Fantasy Kitchen Sink going.

Eragon to know exactly what not to do.

Lots of them, user. Just reading plenty of decent books will give you a good feel of when a campaign needs to speed up, when it needs to let off, when comedy relief is needed, when to up the pressure and when to let the characters breathe. A feel for basic storytelling is far better for a game than anything else. I can't tell you how many games I've been in where the DM gets all the details down, but can't tell the tale.

Care to explain why not Eragon?

Play Dirty by John Wick
So you know what not to do.

It's awesome for seeing how mood is built and how to make a world engaging without having something die every few seconds. It's also important that the reader compare what is actually Tolkenesque to what so many wrongfully assume is Tolkenesque.
So pretty much this Also:
Conan is bloody and fantastic but it is rarely gritty in tone. In fact it is very much heroic. The characters themselves may have grit but the stories flow smoothly to capacitate glorious hacking, slashing and general swashbuckling.
My point is that much like Tolkien many fa/tg/uys tend to just absorb the popular opinions of various fiction, instead of coming to their own conclusions. The same lines about authors' works are repeat over and over again, the same way like clockwork. I doubt many here have tactually read Howard, Lovecraft, Tolkien or Vance.
Veeky Forums has a bad habit of not playing the games it talks about or reading the books it loves. This is a hobby all about personal creativity and initiative. Say what you will about Gygax and Arneson but they knew what they liked and weren't afraid to use what they liked in making games. They didn't need to ask permission, or consider fantasy conventions they just made the game theirs. They had something to love and something to share. I think they expected the same of us.
Veeky Forums as a whole is timid and often small minded in the way it thinks about games. Whatever you're going to read, read it before you look it up on wikipedia. And play those fucking games. Don't worry about shit like that-guys or originality or tradition, just play the fucking game you want play.

While it's not a novel I would suggest the short stories by Clark Ashton Smith. He's a weird fiction writter that doesn't get nearly enough love. You can probably find his stuff online. Abominations of Yondo is a fun place start and the Charnel God is one of his iconic stories.

The first book is basically the classic Hero's Journey scheme. You could even say it's all a huge star wars ripoff, with Brom being so reminiscent of Obi-Wan, the kid being the "chosen successor of an order of knights that upheld the peace with magic until they were betrayed by a young and angsty guy that founded the Empire" and the magic swords with shining blades in varied colors.
.
The setting of the book is just. So. Fucking. Tired. Literally everything in Eragon is based on some D&D cliche. The author didn't put any effort on giving the smallest twist on Generic Fantasy Land. Not in a "White Walkers are just fancy fair folk wendigos" way, in a "the greatest thing he does is change the name Ogre to Urgal and giving them horns" way. If you ever played a basic D&D campaign with a beginner DM, you will know exactly how every character will react to every situation, and how every race/faction will behave.

It only gets worse from then on. The sequel tries to be more "fluffy", giving more detail and worldbuilding, like showing elven ceremonies and dwarven religion and whatever. And every time the author tries to get out of his comfort zone and invent a bit himself, he shoves his foot up his own mouth. More than half the second book is spent on the elven lands, and it ended giving me a years burnout of playing elvish characters.

has it right.

Eragon is a perfect example of how someone took the advice "well nothing is original" and completely failed to learn something use from it. Everything in that series is something we've all seen a million times before, with more than a few moments taken straight out of other works.

Saying "nothing is original" is no excuse for lack of imagination. And "unimaginative" describes Eragon perfectly.

None. I'm illiterate and have run games fine. Reading is for losers.

It's written by a kid who took what he liked and put it into a book. You are judging it far too harshly, presumably because you are jealous and feel you could have done better.

As a first effort by a kid writer, it's bloody remarkable. And the fact that it didn't pull any lame 'whitewalker tweest' out of its ass is a good thing. Seriously, not everything needs to have a tweest to be ooh so edgy and cool. ffs.

And like that, a wild Eragon fanboy shows up to tell us off for shitting on his series.

Honestly, the fact it was written by a kid who just "took what he liked and put into a book" doesn't change the fact it's not a good example of worldbuilding or even storytelling. It really only reinforces the point.

And nice potshot at GRRM. There's a lot you can praise and criticize about his writing. But the white walkers aren't really a tweest considering they're established in literally the first chapter of the very first book.

HA! Wrong!!
Just a reasonable person, asshat.
If you proffer whitewalkers as a tweest, then i will use them as a tweest, moron.
Never ever said Eragon was anything; I merely said you were shitting on it for no purpose. And here you are continuing to prove my point!
Never read it, but you shitting on it is just plain weak - maybe you should write your own, eh?

Seriously, expecting a child to write a perfect fantasy novel is pretty dumb, user. Shake your head.

user that ACTUALLY wrote the post here.
White Walkers are not a twist. They are wendigo/fairies/necromancers. The ingredients are there if you piece it apart. But you must actually think a bit and piece it apart to see them.

Now Eragon doesn't do that. There are the Urgals. They are D&D Ogres/Orcs in appearance, in behavior, in powers, in everything. BUT THEY HAB TEH HORNZ! You can literally tell they were going to be the evil mook race in the first book, then leave the emperor in the second once he "acts dishonorably" (because apparently literally killing the last Dragon Knight with a kick to the balls and stealing the crowns wasn't dishonorable). Because that's the Dumb Proud Warrior Race stereotype they follow to the letter.

White walkers are a pie. Eragon is a bag of flour, carton of milk and egg in a plate.

>pls don't be a meanie, he was like 15 man
And... does that allows him to write poorly... how? He made a book, good on him. He may grow into something better. But Eragon is shit. If something is shit, the I will bloody say it is shit. He being a kid doesn't mean I can't do that.

Oh, fuck off, tripfag.

>muh, it's shit if i say it's shit!
>muh, grrm is god-tier, don't shit on grrm!!!!

Just fuck off. Give the kid a fucking break, and fuck right off. You clearly have superior tastes. You clearly know what true fantasy ought to be. You clearly are the expert on all things fantasy. Tell us more about grrm's 'pie'; you are so clearly the expert, tripfag - amaze us! Tell us more about how an author with some 20 + years of experience can write a book with more depth than one written by a 15 year old?

Faggot.

>The Bible.
Top pick.

>Not knowing the difference between a tripfag and a namefag

Look at this newfag.

>Eragon is a bag of flour, carton of milk and egg in a plate.

This is the most accurate description of the series I've read.

Two can play that game.
Something something summer early
something something you must be 18 or older
something something... whatever. Eragon is horrible. Deal with it.

>something something you must be 18 or older

Shitposting has no age maximum, user.

I honestly can't tell if this dude is bait or not.

I would recommend The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath by H.P. Lovecraft. It's good to experience some pre-Tolkien fantasy.

YES.

not a single fucking Arthurian book? But they list fucking Kingkiller?

In a similar vein, the Gods of Pegana by Lord Dunsany are worth checking out for a look at building a cosmology/pantheon.

holy fuck, yes.

pic very related.

Snow Crash, for anything cyberpunk.

Hour of the Dragon.

Are you implying that they have objectively good taste?

Hardwired is a better cyberpunk option.

>The best writers are those who read a lot

I read shitloads and I still have the writing style of a sixth grader.

The only good post this thread will contain.

user should have included "and write a lot".

Mein Kampf

so was Mein Kampf

what are some good arthurian books for someone who doesn't know shit about it except what they gathered from Fate/stay night and common knowledge?

I've read something like 20 or more of his stories but never this particular one. How is the feel compared to his standard "mortal man sees otherwordly being, goes insane" stories?

Heinlein's Starship Troopers. It's not just a fairly good insight into the mentality of a soldier. It's also been ripped off by lots of sci-fi tabletop games, like Warhammer 40k; knowing the source material's source material is a good thing.

Inheritance Cycle was good. It's a fun series with cool moments and colorful characters. Cry more.

Just imagine if said mortal man was in a dream state and knew his shit enough to just wing it and actually interact with the otherworldly beings. It feels kinda like a fable, in the sense that the ones who generally don't talk(and just make the people go insane) are more than willing to either demonstrate hostility or cooperate with the protagonist(unlike the usual apathy higher beings generally show in his stories.

>No Eddings
>No Hobb

anything by Dan abnett

I'm not saying he's great literature, but you can't do better for putting an adventuring party in interesting situations

Almost the only thing notable about Mein Kampf is the person who wrote it, and then only because of the massive shitstorm he caused.

basically think LOTR but on a shitload of drugs

Then how did you read OP's post?

Read both, and Neuromancer.

You may have enjoyed it, which is fine, but it contributes nothing new and everything within it is a stale rip-off of something else.

Man, for a reasonable person you tend to call people morons a lot, don't you? Everything you've written sounds like the most defensive, butthurt nonsense. Instead of trying to bring some perspective on the discussion you shit on people. There's no such thing as shitting on a book for no reason, it's an opinion. You give opinions and people judge the opinion on it's merrits, not it's reason of being or the person who gave it. Also, what the fuck kind of world do you live in where you can't judge something without having done the same thing. Reading a book and writing one are two seperate things. I dislike the movie Looper and I don't need to have made a time-travelmovie to know it's a terrible movie.

Damn, I ate the bait didn't I?

18 or older is an age minimum though

Haven't actually read it, but doesn't it endorse genocide?

War & Peace by Tolstoï.

Oh, I remember these bloated tomes from my school days. Frenchaboo nobility, le love stories, colourfully described soldier life, masons, Bezuhov character development (a good one), moar boring love stories...

Your mind is poisoned by Type Moon cancer so I'd suggest you read nothing

It depends entirely on the tone, theme and scope of your game.

No novels are essential though.

It just helps a ton if you want to run anything that's not a World of Warcraft dungeon.

My best GM's have invariably been the ones who read the most books, because they have way more stuff to steal from and take inspiration from, which makes them way better at improvising.

It also helps in creating worlds that feel complete and grounded, and not just a white map dotted with dungeons.

I honestly think that a lot of GM's would learn a lot more by reading than by writing.

I'd pick the guy who makes the game feel alive and open ended because he's constantly pulling plot inspiration and characters from a ton of books he read, over the one who uses GMing as an outlet for creative writing and forces us to act out his speshul babby's first novel plot every time.

Awesome greentext stories on Veeky Forums.

A good combo would be T.H. White's The Once and Future King along with Mary Stewart's Merlin trilogy (starts with The Crystal Cave).

Those are novels that tell their own story with the existing Arthur mythos as a jumping-off point. If you want a retelling of the Morte D'Arthur in modern English then I recommend Steinbeck's Acts of King Arthur and His Noble Knights

Just read enough good novels that you're a complete human being, and don't limit yourself to genre crap

Le Morte D'Arthur
Idylls of the King
Four Arthurian Romances
Once and Future King
Story of King Arthur and His Knights by Howard Pyle

These actually make games worse.

Hm, from thoes I already read that is probably one of the least liked by me. But probably only, because I found it a bit harder to read as the others (reading in english and I'm not native speaker).
Maybe I should reread it at some point.

I'd personally recommend Roger Lancelyn Green's King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table over Steinbeck for a relative newcomer to the lore like .

> taking the bait

I found GURPS Ultratech somewhat annoying and dated feeling, personally, but the other books have been generally solid.

Chretien De Troyes did the best Arthurian stuff.

The Knight with the Lion and the Knight of the Cart are where it's at, friend. And his grail story is better and less dogmatic and preachy than most of the other ones, but it doesn't actually have an ending.

Which UTech? 4e or 3e?

Do you guys know any schlocky fantasy to read on my morning train ride? Not complete dreck but something simple and doesn't take too much thinking about.

Tintin books and Candide by Voltaire. At least for me the adventures end up seeming kind of like them where the party goes on a whirlwind tour of the world where crazy things happen one after another without pause.

It would be fine to leave it as a fair first attempt by a kid writer if it didn't get all the critical acclaim and a goddamn movie deal out of it. Once something is in that spotlight you can't defend it with saying it's being judged to harshly.
It flew to high and you can't blame the sun for being to hot.

Now, this isn't exactly the writer's fault, you can't control the fame you receive but you also can't have it both ways. Just because it was written by a kid doesn't mean it's beyond reproach.
Frankly, falling back on defending it as being written by a kid strikes me as more of an insult, compared to the other anons critique of its contents.

All writers are readers but not all readers become writers.

Sorry. But hey, practice makes perfect.

>Looper
>terrible movie
I dunno, I seems like a decent short story from the 70s to me. What are your specific gripes with it? Just trying to improve my taste, no bully pls.

Don't listen to internet randos for tastemaking. Listen to yourself. If you liked it, you liked it. If they didn't, they didn't.

The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan

Scott Lynch, Matt Stover.

Yeah, but if I like something that everyone hates, I'd like to understand why they hate it and see how much I agree. I don't think that's contemptible or giving undue influence to others or something.

4e, I think.

Isn't that the bizarre Tolkien/Herbert rip-off that goes on forever?

This one? sjgames.com/gurps/books/ultra-tech/
That's from 2007.

Common knowledge will tell you a bit, but the
Fate/whatever stuff, whilst something entertaining, is pretty far removed from any other works I've seen that incorporate Arthurian legend, since, you know, none of them have King Arthur being a superpowered girl with a laser shooting sword. First off, try and find a vanilla ish recolelction of the "standard" bits of the Arthruian mythos (Roger Lancelyn Green's King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, whcihw as mentioned above, is a good one), then try Once and Future King, then watch Disney's Sword in the Stone for shits and giggles, then go with the one with the french name I can't remember.

The novels are not being defended - it is merely being pointed out that you are purdy dumb if you thought a 15 year old was going to write great lit.

If you bought into the hype, and got burned, that's YOUR fault, not the author's. Don't blame a book or its author for YOUR mistake. Don't judge a book or its author by the MARKETING CAMPAIGN of the publisher.

Any book written by a 15 year old is going to be pretty plain, at best. Expecting anything more is just not smart on your part.

Step up your game and think harder.

Yeah, that's it. Wait, seriously, 2007? It felt like it was from the late 90s/early 2000s with the "MUH ENERGY WEAPONS" and drastically underestimating tech trends.