|
...Hodgesaargh?
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:57 |
|
rejutka posted:...Hodgesaargh? It has been like, seven years since I read it.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Hodgesaargh
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
rejutka posted:...Hodgesaargh? He's the Lancre court falconer, whose control over his birds is less than complete. People naturally refer to him by the name he introduces himself with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Bit of trivia: He's based on a real person, a fan who works at a company that keeps birds away from airports and such. One of the "tools" they use are falcons. And they DO bite. Not really sure where I read it, but it stuck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Bit of trivia: He's based on a real person, a fan who works at a company that keeps birds away from airports and such. One of the "tools" they use are falcons. And they DO bite. I didn't have to read it - I've met him. He did a couple of talks on falconry at the early Discworld Conventions. Interesting stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
For awhile Lords and Ladies was my favorite Disc book for sure. Is it that one or Carpe Jugulum that some Pratchett fans have an irrational hate for? Or is it just disdain for the fact that they have similar plots? I dunno, whatever, I love 'em both. The only Disc book I would say I remotely dislike is The Last Continent because way too many jokes are just "Australia. Get it?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
Who'd hate Carpe Jugulum? that bit with Oates and Granny talking with the axe after she was bitten is simply amazing!
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
precision posted:For awhile Lords and Ladies was my favorite Disc book for sure. Is it that one or Carpe Jugulum that some Pratchett fans have an irrational hate for? Or is it just disdain for the fact that they have similar plots? I don't know if there are any really solid disliked-by-the-fan-community choices out there. Personally I don't care much for
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
Everything after Going Postal feels to me like a slow decline of quality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Everything after Going Postal feels to me like a slow decline of quality. On the other hand Thud!, Wintersmith, and Snuff are all pretty drat good. Going Postal just happens to be brilliant. Not to mention that Nation, Dodger, and The Long Earth were all great non-Discworld reads that came afterwards too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
Snuff was amazing. The beginning felt, to me, a little overly long and boring, but once things started happening it was great, probably my favorite Discworld book. It feels like there's some legitimate authorial anger boiling under the surface--definitely the most, I don't know, passionate book of his I remember reading.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
ThaGhettoJew posted:On the other hand Thud!, Wintersmith, and Snuff are all pretty drat good. Going Postal just happens to be brilliant. Not to mention that Nation, Dodger, and The Long Earth were all great non-Discworld reads that came afterwards too. I liked Dodger. I'm trying to get through The Long Earth and I just don't like its slow, slow pace. Yes, I get it, anyone with a potato can build a Stepper and visit any Stepwise Earths, move ON already. I don't think the real plot started until 1/4 of the way into the book. Far, far too long a premise for what is essentially a simple concept.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Everything after Going Postal feels to me like a slow decline of quality. I agree, but only because Going Postal was the best Disc book since Small Gods and really, it's hard to live up to that standard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Everything after Going Postal feels to me like a slow decline of quality. Unseen Academicals is unquestionably the worst Discworld book I've ever read. I can't even pick it up to read it again, I get about halfway through the first chapter then it's just like errrrghhh and I have to put it down. I got Snuff for
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
AXE COP posted:Unseen Academicals is unquestionably the worst Discworld book I've ever read. I can't even pick it up to read it again, I get about halfway through the first chapter then it's just like errrrghhh and I have to put it down. Finished Carpe Jugulum last night, (very little sleep is giving me a lot of reading time) and the ending was pretty good, saw it coming a good distance back in the book but it was good all the same. Granny is a great character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
daggerdragon posted:I'm trying to get through The Long Earth and I just don't like its slow, slow pace. Yes, I get it, anyone with a potato can build a Stepper and visit any Stepwise Earths, move ON already. I don't think the real plot started until 1/4 of the way into the book. Far, far too long a premise for what is essentially a simple concept. It's clearly a book setting up a further series (that I can only pray Pratchett will still be in on), but it sets up some really interesting science fiction ideas. YMMV of course, but the book opened up for me later when the characters had been a bit more fleshed out and the plot had settled down and focused some. I'm looking forward to seeing what will happen. I can see it turning into some sort of shared universe series where lots of authors could have a try at it, but I'm willing to wait to see if it turns into a bigger story for Pterry and Steven Baxter (who I've only read a small amount of outside of this).
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
AXE COP posted:I got Snuff for
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
What's up with the dislike of Unseen Academicals?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
Geokinesis posted:What's up with the dislike of Unseen Academicals? It's a bit not good and lacks any tension. Plus how many people give a gently caress about David and Victoria Beckham? Plus that crazy guy whose name escapes me at the moment felt like a retread. I still like it but...
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
I'm just glad that there are other people who really, really like Going Postal. Usually the book seems to be almost forgotten and I can't imagine why. I think I need to reread the Witch books. Given the discussions above, I think I was probably too young when I read them to 'get' what was going on. I can't even remember any of the plots, other than staring at the Sun with cocky girl 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Geokinesis posted:What's up with the dislike of Unseen Academicals? It's not particularly compelling reading, and it really to me personally like Terry was writing about something that he didn't particularly care about but rather had absorbed through the media. Plus it lacked a protagonist. Glenda comes closest but she's a side character for much of the first half and Mr Nutt doesn't at any point feel like a full character to me. Regardless of all that subjectivity, I'd like to hear more about the Ankh-Morpork board game! Can we hear about some interesting cards, characters and winning conditions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
I find it very interesting to read everyone's opinions of Unseen Academicals. I read it when I was sitting in intensive care waiting to see if my wife would die (she didn't!), so while it helped pass the time I didn't exactly have a positive experience reading it. I still think it might be worth rereading to give it a better chance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 12:21
|
|
|
Thud feels subtly wrong to me somehow. Snuff feels like Discworld fanfic. e: And Making Money suffers from not really building to a big finish the way Going Postal does- I found myself at the trial scene going "Oh, I guess this is supposed to be the big finish" but never really feeling it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
I didn't like UA. I've never really liked stuff with the Wizards anyway, but nothing really interested me in UA. I've started listening to the Guards! Guards! radio play though. Melvyn Hayes is now how I imagine Nobby to sound in my head. Same for Helen Atkinson-Wood as Lady Ramkin. It's a pretty good adapation really.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:It's not particularly compelling reading, and it really to me personally like Terry was writing about something that he didn't particularly care about but rather had absorbed through the media. Plus it lacked a protagonist. Glenda comes closest but she's a side character for much of the first half and Mr Nutt doesn't at any point feel like a full character to me. I don't mind UA at all. It's not the best Disc book, but it's hard to pick a best or worst. I wasn't a huge fan of Going Postal, either. Entertaining, but somewhere in the middle for me. The Discworld boardgame is pretty awesome. I'll talk about it, but I'm not going to spoiler stuff because it's all things you'll see as soon as you read the rules (win conditions are on the player mats, for instance), it's mostly stuff you can find in reviews of the game, and it doesn't heavily relate to anything in the novels anyway. Playable characters include: Vimes, who wins when the cards run out and nobody else has won Vetinari, who wins by having agents in a certain number of areas at any point Three Lords (Rust is one), who win by controlling a certain number of territories (suburbs, I guess) Dragon King Of Arms, who wins when there are a certain number of Trouble markers on the board. Chrysophrase, who wins by accumulating money. If there aren't 4 players, Chrysophrase is removed from the game before play starts. The board: Is really pretty. It's like the AM map, divided into zones that represent controllable territory. Very well made and colorful, but still feels like something from the Discworld. The cards: Lots of discworld characters and locations appear on these. They've got cool, fun artwork. They have a row of stuff along the top that indicates what they do, and some text that can be part of what they do. There are two "colours" of cards, and the more powerful/destructive cards appear later in the game. Some cards are reactions, which means you can play them in response to another player playing a card, but most are played on your turn. Some cards let you dick the other players over, like force them to give you some money or one of their buildings is destroyed. Or they can give you $2 or a card, their choice. Some cards let you deny actions to other players. Some cards just give you cash. One card does nothing at all (useful for giving to someone who's forcing you to give them a card, or for discarding to power other effects). There are some symbols on cards that mean you have to do something (like draw an event card), but most stuff on the cards is optional in that you can skip that part of the card if you want. However, you must do the actions on the card in order, even if you skip one. So if the card has "Build a building, receive $10, draw an event card", you can't skip the building, get the $10, then go back and build the building. You can skip the building, get the $10, and then draw an event card. You can skip getting $10, but I'm not sure you'd ever want to. Some cards make you draw an Event Card, which is not skippable. Event cards might signify an earthquake, a flood, an invasion by trolls or demons, or something else even weirder. There are also buildings you can build, which have a card to represent them, and start to do stuff in a territory once you build them. They are all locations in AM. There are money counters representing $AM which you use to build stuff, pay for other stuff, and give to other players sometimes. YOu accumulate money by controlling territory (having more agents + buildings in it than any other player). Each territory does a different thing each round, and can be upgraded by building in it. The Gaspode card is awesome. The gameplay: At the start, the character cards are shuffled, and you pick one without showing it to anyone else. That defines your victory condition. Place an agent in a territory, play one or more cards and then do what is says on the card/s. Try to meet your victory condition while faking people out about what you're trying to do (the most entertaining element). Make lots of discworld jokes that people who haven't read the novels won't understand. Some cards let you peek at one or more of the discarded character cards, so you at least know which victory conditions aren't being pursued. There are "trouble" markers that some players find a little tricky to understand, but boil down to "when an agent is placed where another player's agent is, place a trouble marker. When an agent is removed from an area, remove the trouble marker regardless of how many agents remain". You can only do certain card actions when there is / isn't a trouble marker in an area. Victory occurs at the end of the turn following the turn in which you won. So if I'm Vetinari, and I've placed my final agent and now there's enough that I win, the next player takes their turn before I can declare "I win". If someone else has figured out that I must be Vetinari, then they have to try very hard to remove one of my agents before their turn ends. You need a good poker face, or clueless friends. In a very discworld manner, people can wreck your victory without realising they've done so. There is a scoring system at the end of the game, but if you've met your victory condition, you win unless something I can't remember happens. Or that might be a different game. It's fine to play with people who haven't read Discworld. There aren't really any jokes in the game itself. The jokes happen when certain combinations of cards are played (like Gaspode blocks Angua from doing something, or someone plays Carrot and ruins the guy who played Dibbler) and Discworld fans start laughing and quoting the novels. It's a fine game if you're not a Disc fan, but if you're playing with fans you might not understand half the table banter. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Jan 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
The Witches books are, strangely, the only ones of the series I don't have. I have multiple copies of Fifth Elephant and Jingo and Last Continent...but somehow never got Lords and Ladies or Witches Abroad. And my local library doesn't have them... Would anyone be interested in a book trade?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
I need to see if the game store near me has a copy of the Discworld book game, it sounds like a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:I need to see if the game store near me has a copy of the Discworld book game, it sounds like a lot of fun. They sell it in Waterstone's in the UK. Try chain booksellers as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
Jedit posted:They sell it in Waterstone's in the UK. Try chain booksellers as well. I got mine from bookdepository.com. it was way cheaper than in stores when I looked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Some cards make you draw an Event Card, which is not skippable. Event cards might signify an earthquake, a flood, an invasion by trolls or demons, or something else even weirder. All Event cards are Wizard cards, which is the best part  AlphaDog posted:Victory occurs at the end of the turn following the turn in which you won. So if I'm Vetinari, and I've placed my final agent and now there's enough that I win, the next player takes their turn before I can declare "I win". If someone else has figured out that I must be Vetinari, then they have to try very hard to remove one of my agents before their turn ends. You need a good poker face, or clueless friends. In a very discworld manner, people can wreck your victory without realising they've done so. Actually, you win if your win condition is met at the start of your own turn. So if you place your final minion as Vetinari, all other players get to take their turns before you win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
John Dough posted:All Event cards are Wizard cards, which is the best part That's what I meant. I somehow tried to word it in the most confusing way possible. I usually play the game with two players, so it's effectively "I win at the end of the other player's turn". It's a more fun game with 4 players than 2 or 3, but it's not the most popular boardgame with my group (that would be Carcassonne or Dixit).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
Pyramids was good. Really good, I thought. I'm reading Guards! Guards! now, in between chapters of Huckleberry Finn. One thing that's driving me nuts is that Pratchett always says "would of" or "might of", instead of would have, might have. I always see the same crap online, but I always figured it was people misunderstanding the contraction when they say "would've / might've" and thinking they were actually saying "would of". But now seeing the same thing in a published, edited book... is saying "of" instead of "have" a British thing, or something? Because drat it's grating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
Huh. I don't remember noticing that before. Is this happening in the narration or the dialogue? If it's the latter it might be intentional. I doubt Vetinari would make that mistake in his lines.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
"Would of" is incredibly common, to the point where I'm surprised when I hear "would have".
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 07:33
|
|
|
Redmark posted:Huh. I don't remember noticing that before. Is this happening in the narration or the dialogue? If it's the latter it might be intentional. I doubt Vetinari would make that mistake in his lines. Both narrative and dialogue. I think mostly narrative though. I've noticed it in every book so far, and it's driving me nuts. Next time I come across some examples I'll make a post. stratdax fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jan 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
That's extremely surprising to me - it wasn't something I ever noticed in Pratchett and I'm sure I would have noticed it, because I'm a big pedant about that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
stratdax posted:Pyramids was good. Really good, I thought. My Kindle copy of Guards! Guards! has "would of" in one place near the end, where Carrot says “Because the sergeant’s lucky arrow would of hit the spot and the dragon’ll be dead, so we won’t have anything to worry about.”. It has plenty of "would have" though. I'm not going to try to check every instance against my old paperback copy, but in that, the first "would have" I found in the Kindle version is on the last line of page 12, and the spoilered bit is still "would of". Is this maybe one of those American publisher things? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Jan 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:My Kindle copy of Guards! Guards! has "would of" in one place near the end, where Carrot says “Because the sergeant’s lucky arrow would of hit the spot and the dragon’ll be dead, so we won’t have anything to worry about.”. The only place "would of" would appear in Prathett's books is whenever a character is speaking. He does that often - characters are quoted verbatim in his books and make mistakes. I'd be surprised to find "would of" anywhere outside of a character quote. Carrot doesn't have any education, and doing a mistake like that is not out of character - remember the letters he wrote back home?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
Yes, I know how Carrot speaks. The post I was responding to surprised me, because I would have remembered that since that sort of thing pisses me off, but it turns out that neither of the two versions of that book I own has the issue he's describing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 01:30
|
|