|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 27, 2007 16:24:10 GMT -5
I'm interested in finding out what counts as "canon" Amber.
In other words, do you count only Roger's works? If so, which ones?
What about the extra works of Neil Randall (two choose-your-adventure books and the Visual Guide)?
How about Theodore Krulik's Complete Amber Sourcebook or Betancourt's prequel novels?
What does it take to be "official" Amber?
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 27, 2007 16:27:44 GMT -5
It's worth noting that when The Great Book of Amber: The Complete Amber Chronicles was published, they put all ten novels together but didn't bother to get the rights for the short stories.
Does this mean they were (1) cheap, (2) lazy, or (3) didn't think that the short stories were needed to be "complete"?
|
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Sept 25, 2007 9:01:03 GMT -5
I have to admit I haven't read the Merlin series; every time I tried to read the first book, I got bogged down with the idea of not being concerned that someone is trying to kill you once a year. (shrugging) But I liked the Corwin series a lot. Still, they're both written by Zelazny, so they're both Canon. End stop. Having said that, I don't positively object to Betancourt's novels or Erick's source materials; they are fine to include in an adventure. It just makes things a bit more complicated.
As for your question about the short stories, Fin, I'd say all three are correct: they were cheap, lazy, and decided it didn't really matter anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevelyan on Nov 21, 2007 12:09:13 GMT -5
Canon Amber is everything RZ wrote. Other material may be useful for anything ranging from inspiration (Wujick, Randall, the Visual Guide) to toilet paper (Betancourt).
|
|
Dilvish
Low Rank in Amber
The damned
Posts: 76
|
Post by Dilvish on Sept 7, 2008 18:41:04 GMT -5
I think that Canon Amber is really Corwin's first series. I think that the series was supposed to end at that point, and has a really complete feel at that point. Merlin's books brought in elements of the Amber Universe which were not even hinted at in Corwin's books, and I don't really think that they should be part of the "real" Amber for that reason. (Sort of like George Lucas changing his mind after the first STAR WARS movie came out -- some of the later ideas just don't fit the earlier ideas.)
Having said that, I really like parts of the Merlin books. I like the Merlin character as well as the added details about the workings of the Courts of Chaos. Not so thrilled with the Spikards and Ghostwheel and the whole "soap opera" aspects that got brought into the books.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarondor on Aug 23, 2009 0:52:29 GMT -5
Canon Amber is whatever the GM says it is. For one campaign it may be the Corwin books, for another it may be just "Nine Princes".
But when we say "canon" outside the context of a single campaign, it must be the whole of Zelazny's Amber works.
I liked both series, but they have a very different feel. Corwin's is an epic tale involving the fate of existence. Merlin's is a high fantasy tale that feels like a good (but not great!) ADRPG campaign.
I think people are a bit unfair to Betancourt. His books are interesting and I'm glad I read them. No one is ever going to live up to the original, not even Zelazny himself. Are they canon? By definition, no. Are they fun to read? I think so.
|
|
