| From: | Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: World Map |
| Date: | Thu, 3 Apr 1997 00:09:03 +0100 |
<gurth@******.NL> writes
>Avenger said on 23:12/ 1 Apr 97...
>
>> Well, yeah I guess so in some cases, however, Gen-ichi, had a real
>> problem with Japan as a last bastion,
>
>I didn't even know somebody had written a Japan sourcebook outside of the
>net
It wasn't common knowledge. I seem to recall a post from Gen-ichi
himself ranting about the crap release from this company, and how he and
some friends in Japan were producing something to counter it. :)
>(and I even haven't looked at that last one. Is it available in
>English?)
Yes it is. Both English and Japanese. Now there's dedication for you
:)
>but anyway, from the various things FASA has told us about Japan
>it would be really strange if that country were to appear as some
>enlightened state in a sourcebook...
That's what cheesed Gen-ichi so much. It was in direct contradiction
with everything Shadowrun stood for, and massively contradicted the
little information FASA has given out. He was not a happy chap.
>LS sourcebook, I can live with. Changing the way a whole country "feels"
>isn't the way to write about it, OTOH.
You are not alone in _that_ opinion.
>> I certainly don't want England to be a glowing example of normality
>
>That would call for major changes between now and 2050. *grin*
Damn right it would. If there's one thing Britain ain't, it's "normal"
<snigger> Nevertheless. Although FASA do have the decency to ask
people of the host nation to write sourcebooks, I don't feel that they
are totally fair about it. They don't seem to take a broad spread of
people from different areas to provide, allowing people limited to one
area to write about an entire country. You want to hear the reaction of
a couple of Scottish players I know to what those bozos responsible for
the London sourcebook did to Scotland. Ireland... well. I'll not try to
repeat her comments. <g> Wales was dealt with, I feel, extremely
poorly. But then I live here. I'm _bound_ to complain aren't I. <g>
>> so much of [Europe and the Middle East] have been destroyed by fASA,
>> loosely termed as irradiated or toxic... Ho hum...
>
>Maybe it's because some people think you can make a dark world by
>destroying parts of it in not-nice ways? For example, the way lots of
>nuclear power plants suffered meltdowns, according to the history in the
>Black Book. Why?
Darned good question? OK, neglect, lack of "experienced technicians. I
can think of a few arguments "Why", but it strikes me as a convenient
way of righting off large areas of the world, just to save having to
think about them, and provide any information on them, something I feel
is going to hurt this game in later years. There's going to come a time
when FASA are going to regret allowing the writers of sourcebooks to do
this. After all, although they've got a heck of a lot of land left to
cover, they are going to run out eventually, and then what will happen
to Shadowrun? Another line getting dropped like Renegade Legion, or
Star Trek. (OK, that's not fair, Paramount were mainly responsible for
that.) But all the same, I'd like to see Shadowrun live a long and
fruitful life. This constant insistance in destroying huge great lumps
of continents and countries to the simple "duh, irradiated, erm, toxic"
is just wasteful for future source material or updates.
>> reinforcing some of the stupid ideas they put forth... Well. <no further
>> comment>
>
>Nonetheless, because it's in print people will take it as "the truth"
>(whatever that may be :) a lot faster, even if FanPro only has a license
>from FASA. Also, FanPro stuff, according to the text in the front of the
>Germany Sourcebook, takes precedence over FASA-published material when
>you (the players, not the characters) play in Germany.
Yeah yeah... don't say that to Sascha, he'll get all rabid on your butt
<grin>
I do understand the logic of that statement, I mean, who better to write
the material than Germans? But a better spread of German writers would
have been nice, and the arbitrary destruction of the rest of Europe was
so ludicrous as to be unbelievable. What the hell were the Euro wars
about then, who fought them and why... A shattered France only
interested in wine and crepe? A fractured Italy/Spain who's only
interest is in Bulls and women? A drowned Netherlands who's primary
interest now is in barnacles? <grumble mumble, moan, mutter>
>The way I picture Threats, is that the GM uses one of the groups to build
>a campaign around, and at some point in it the players uncover enough
>information about it so the GM hands them the book and allows them to read
>the relevant chapter. The only real way (IMO) you can do that now is by
>photocopying the pages, cut off the GM material, and give the copies to
>the players.
An expensive and time consuming process, or the alternative, is to deny
the players access to interesting information. I much preferred the
idea behind the Universal Brotherhood and Denver. Although I have a
couple of problems with the Denver sourcebook in it's treatment of
Denver, the idea behind the two books was splendid, and in many ways,
especially if FASA are now going to combine things in a manner like
Threats, then two books would be better. It might bump up the price a
couple of bucks, but I get charged more than the going rate already, so
I could care less. I don't think many other people would complain
about a coulpe of dollars for the convenience either.
>> Oh yes, it's a good idea, I just don't see it happening. In browsing
>> around the net, and maliciously stealing loads of stuff for my game,
>
>That's what the stuff is put on the WWW for in the first place, isn't it?
Yep, that's what I thought, and I have indulged copiously :)
>I haven't seen Underworld yet, but I guess I'll have it the day after
>tomorrow, when I come back from a con. From what you're saying, it looks
>like it more or less suffers from the same kind of things as the CorpSec
>Handbook -- that there's not much in it that you can't think up yourself
>if you give it some thought?
Remember, the above, is my opinion. Many people here accepted the
Underworld source book with a great deal of enthusiasm. I didn't like
it's layout, which is totally different from the other books, the lack
of decent "new" material, and the massive amounts of decker comments
that litter the book, and take up almost 50% of it's substance. A
couple of pages get devoted to each crime syndicate, a subject which
could have been covered better and in more detail. And for some obscure
reason, a number of gangs were introduced in the back of the book.
Gangs that have already been detailed in other source material. it just
looked like a desperate cobbled together deadline thing. This is the
only book, I've ever regretted buying for Shadowrun. Even my rabid
hatred of the London/Germany sourcebooks, gave me sufficient material to
rewrite and use. Underworld didn't give me anything I didn't already
have on my shelf. But you must remember, a lot of people like the book,
and quite possibly don't have access to the kinds of material I have on
my shelves. :)
>> No I'll stop there, before I get start a row in here.
>
>You're pretty good at it :)
Oh, you've noticed then Gurth? <grin>
>> This is something I do find strange, the amount of web support is
>> phenomenal for Shadowrun, and I can't believe that teh SR team haven't
>> bosed around some of them, yet their reticence in including a page of
>> liks in their Shadowland area is "odd".
>
>My thoughts exactly. And if they don't want to do it themselves, some
>script could easily be added that allows anyone dropping by to add a link,
>like on Paolo's page.
It's not that difficult to set up a web bot for that purpose. Provided
the contributors get it right, the link can be added to a page
automatically without the author needing to touch it, and it's even
possible for short comments to be added to help provide a short
description of what the site is or a precis on its content.
>> In my not so humble opinion, FASA should be proud that people are
>> prepared to devote so much time and energy - and web space - to a simple
>> game.
>
>At any rate it beats the "Hi, I'm Joe Blow and this is what I look like"
>kind of pages there are way too many of already :)
<sigh> Tell me about it.. No, in fact don't. That's part of the
hateful thing about the web, the massive amounts of high bandwidth
graphical "Hello, I'm me, and I do this, and..." cutsey "home" pages.
OK, not everybody has an interest they're as rabid about as us Shadowrun
players... but surely there's more to their life than that.
>> Unless of course there's a more sinister reason, after all it is FASA
>> "Corporation" <g> maybe they don't want to acknowledge the web
sites,
>> as it would mean they approve of the content of these sites, and
>> recognise that they are unofficial Shadowrun sites, thereby forcing them
>> to reduce the silly limitations on submissions.
>
>You're saying that as if it's a Bad Thing(tm) :)
No, it's a bad thing if they *are* the "sinister" corporation... :)
>> getting offended because FASA linked to their page, god that'd be the
>> ultimate in ludicrous. <g>
>
>I know I wouldn't...
Add your name to the multitude Gurth. :)
>> for the post office to deliver and eventually bring back that all
>> important accept/reject slip. It conjurs quite a silly picture really.
>
>You're saying that because the web is electronic, and FASA doesn't accept
>electronic submissions, they can't pull stuff off a web site and ask the
>author's permission to publish it in a book? Well yeah, if you look at it
>that way, it makes sense somehow...
That's about it. They hyave it written on their site and in their
submission guidelines. They can't contradict themselves... Now can
they? <grin>
>FASA sourcebooks combined. Then there are the loads of country/city/area
>descriptions, spells, vehicles, a handful of paranormal animals, and
>whathavewe that get put up on web sites. There has to be /something/
>worthwhile in all that...
I should imagine so. And as you said, that applies to other games as
well. So it's not as if FASA are doing anything different. That's why
I was so encouraged by Talsorian's decision to acknowledge the effort
made by their fans, and live in hope that this is something FASA will
take to heart and think seriously about.
>[submission guidelines]
>> Seconded, it put me off too, it seemed like an awful lot of hassle, when
>> elsewhere would consider material with much less trouble.
>
>I guess a problem for me here is that I'm much better in coming up with
>rules and gear than in working out story elements, and there's this thing
>I read in those submission guidelines about FASA wanting new authors to
>write an adventure first...
Ah, that... Yeah, sorry that bit had slipped my mind. I tend to
canibalise stuff from other games in this respect, so I use CP202
modules, Rifts stuff, Gurps, ICE, almost anything. I'm just too lazy
really to write an adventure myself. I suppose, if I really put my mind
to it I could, but... I don't like doing it.
>> company over the Battlemech designs, but really, do they honestly
>> believe that we're all like that?
>
>One thing I've learned from paying a little attention to corporate America
>is that they think _everybody_ is out to make money from their work. What
>else explains all the trademarks and registered trademarks?
And the massive fascination the American public has with suing people
over everything. Yes, in life that is a highly likely case. But this
is a little different. The people here are "gamers", they have produced
material for a game they enjoy a gret deal, if they didn't, they
wouldn't produce that material. They are unlikely to want to cause any
ructions with FASA provided they receive that all essential piece of
credit in the acknowledgements section, and maybe a complimentary signed
copy of the book. Mike Mulvihill's signature, in a sourcebook, would be
considered as "really cool" by many here and on the net.
>> And that's the biggy. No E-mailed submissions.
>
>What bugs me about that is that I absolutely for the life of me can't see
>the point of not accepting email proposals for sourcebooks. From my POV,
>the only thing it does is take several weeks out of the submission
>process, nothing more...
It also follows more in keeping with the "environmentallyu friendly"
attitude people are supposed to consider more these days. Wasting vast
reams of paper writing letters back and forth, with copious corrections
and alterations. Ok, it's a tad costly in bandwidth to send a document
via the net, but a reasonably simple affair to set up an FTP server to
accept uploads. It's sometimes easier to read through an electronic
post, than a poorly hand typed, or hand written one. Plus, it follows
the vision of the paperless office that so many companies are chasing
after.
>> submitting an entire sourcebook, printed and wrapped, is damned
>> expensive from England, if only because of the weight of all that paper,
>> from the continent I can't see that there's any greater advantage.
>
>Tell me about it... I'll be having to send a couple hundred pages to the
>US next week.
Good luck. Finally got something accepted by someone did you?
--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/
