Arref has an interesting “IMC” post where talks about reconciling the very different Chaos’ Zelazny shows us in the first and the second Amber series.
The comment thread is as enlightening as the post itself, and I want to branch off a comment Ginger made:
The other question is why, other than “Oops, I forgot to eliminate the annoying part of the canon!”, anyone who didn’t care for the second series would *want* to use it in a game at this late date.
Folks like Arref and Paul, who did “canon” games before SFSP was in their orbit of accepted Amber stances, are one thing. But most people who don’t like second-series Chaos (or all-singing, all-dancing powers, or whatever) have moved on, and that’s one of the worst sources of the problem–the remaining Chaos-oriented players and GMs have a worldview that’s miles apart from most SFSPs
I want to talk about my use of the Second Series, in Strange Bedfellows.
It’s gotten me into difficulties that I did not anticipate. And I think, although I could be wrong, that Second-series was mainly considered canonical and widely used back when I started SB. These days? Pure second-series canonical games seem an exception, not the rule.
And I admit that, even given the framework of Second Series Chaos, I’ve tried to make it work with additions, changes, and other modifications to the edifice.
Lessima. A system of Greater and Lesser Houses, complete with rules of succession. Reasons why the Logrus was not seen in the first series. The sociological makeup of various Houses.
And still, I think my Chaos comes off much more second-series than first. One of my regrets is the loss of the player of a PC who is half-SS and half-amberite, but is very much in the mold of a first series Chaosian in her “alien” viewpoint. And I’d love to have a real Lessiman in my game, too.
But, still, the next major game I run that involves Chaos…I am going to avoid the second series as much as possible. Take bits and pieces, but I am going to try and keep the Chaos in Chaos.