Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: More magazine thoughts (was Re: Gurth has some ideas)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 08:07:44 +1000
>Anyway, to further explain my idea for a NERPS magazine a bit: I don't see
>it as a magazine in which we do reviews of all sorts of stuff, or have
>general interest articles, or stuff like that. IMHO it should be the same
>NERPS does now, namely provide source material and other articles that
>directly support the SR world -- place descriptions, equipment, spells,
>NPCs, spirits, house rules, and so on.
>
>This means we won't be in competition with TSS as much, and also we'll be
>able to do the things NERPS has always done. It would just be on a more
>regular basis than what we have now, namely about one book a year at
>really irregular intervals.

Hm... I'm not 100% happy with the idea of a magazine, for my two cents'
worth. For a start, it -does- actually seem to be in direct competition
with TSS, since the list of stuff above that you mentioned sounds just like
the contents of an average TSS.

Second I think it'll take away from the books effort. Most of us only have
so much spare time, and any time we spend on the magazine is time taken
away from the books - hence making the books-publishing situation even
worse. And let's face it, the *books* are what make NERPS special, since
they're rarer than magazines.

The only way of solving that second problem is to make books -out of- the
magazine submissions, which has its' own brand of problems - the main
problem being probably not enough material about any one topic to actually
make a book out of (with any decent regularity).

I guess I vote we stay with books only, if my vote counts for anything.

Lady Jestyr

- Eagles may soar, but turkeys don't get sucked into jet engines. -
jestyr@*******.com.au URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.