Fiend Folio
Programmers' Society
Hey AD&Ders,
I want to know what the approximate price for a Fiend Folio is in your area.
I have two copies, mine with all my notes in it and the other is a mint
condition one, that I picked up in an old book shop for $7 (Australian). I
have been told that prices have skyrocketed for this particular book, someone
paying $300 for a copy here in Sydney. I just wanted this confirmed or not
Thanx,
Andrew.
--
/\ P r o g r a m m e r s ' S o c i e t y
/% \
/%% \ University of Technology, Sydney "My hovercraft is full of eels"
/%%%___\ pro...@ultima.socs.uts.edu.au -- A hungarian
Stephen Drew
has anyone got any ideas?????
Please forward to:v065...@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
From covpoly!warwick!ukc!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu!v065lrn6 Mon Nov 12 11:21:43 WET 1990
Article: 4048 of rec.games.frp
Path: covpoly!warwick!ukc!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu!v065lrn6
From: v065...@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Todd G Vaarwerk)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp
Subject: PaRaNoIa PbEM Game
Keywords: Paranoia Play-by-Email Possible
Message-ID: <44...@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 7 Nov 90 21:20:15 GMT
Sender: ne...@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Reply-To: v065...@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
Followup-To: V065...@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
Organization: University at Buffalo
Lines: 26
Nntp-Posting-Host: ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4.3
As I have heard nothing more about it here, but *have* had some inquiries on
_Paranoia_ PbEM game in mail, ** THE COMPUTER ** has kindly directed me to ask
if anyone wishes to play _Paranoia_ by E-mail ..
-- ** NO ** Experience with the game is neccessary
-- Rules for PbEM will be compiled after all persons who wish to play
have been received ..
Anyone who wishes to give advice or assistance in the running of a PbEM
campign [As this is my first ..] may also contribute ..
Requests must be receieved by: 23 November 1990 .. Both E-mail and UseNet
[With the above subject header, Please] will be accepted ..
The Computer is your friend ..
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Todd G Vaarwerk | Bitnet: V065LRN6@UBVMS |
| State University of | Internet: V065...@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU|
| New York at Buffalo | VAAR...@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
| Disclaimer: Believe what you want .. I trashed all my views of|
| reality ages ago d8-) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just read about playing Paranoia by Email and think its a great idea.
I would love to play,if possible.
I have played before so know all the tricks of the trade.
I also enjoy using R&D stuff,great fun!!!!!
_ _____ _
' ) / // _/_
( / o _, o // __. __ / _
\/ <_(_)_<_</_(_/|__/ <_<__</_
/|
|/
esg...@uk.ac.cov.cck
-- ------------------------------
| ONE MAN CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE |
---------------------------------
Christopher M. Dicely
> Hey AD&Ders,
>I want to know what the approximate price for a Fiend Folio is in your area.
>I have two copies, mine with all my notes in it and the other is a mint
>condition one, that I picked up in an old book shop for $7 (Australian). I
>have been told that prices have skyrocketed for this particular book, someone
>paying $300 for a copy here in Sydney. I just wanted this confirmed or not
> Thanx,
> Andrew.A
Haven't found any available for sale... No one that has it will sell it...
Question:
Why did TSR pull it??
Why didn't they reprint it when they ran the last run of Monster
Manuals with the original cover???
-Chris Dicely
Karl Allen
br...@cs.utk.edu (Lance A. Brown) says this about the Fiend Folio:
{
The reason it was pulled was that their was a bunch of COPYRIGHTED
material in it. The Cthulu Mythos was just one. It was basically
taken out of print due to threat of lawsuit, AND RIGHTLY SO!
TSR had blatently violated copyright on a number of different literary
mythos, and got caught at it!
Lance Brown
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lance A. Brown br...@cs.utk.edu
3500 Sutherland Avenue, Apt. L-303 Graduate Student in Computer Science
Knoxville, TN 37919 Sun SparcStations are Neat!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
}
Umm, are you sure about this? I know that the original Dietes and Demigods
was pulled for this reason, but as far as I can remember, the FF didn't
have any references to Cthuloid monsters. I always suspected the reason
it didn't come back was that it was heavily influenced (or even published
by, I'm not quite sure) the English division of TSR. Also, for some
reason, many of its monsters were not well recieved. (Gorilla bear,
Githyanki <sp?>, Grell, I love 'em all, and that's just the G's!!)
Of course, I could be wrong, but I think you got a little mixed up.
Always willing to try and set a fellow Vol fan straight!
******************
Karl Allen
kal...@cs.utk.edu
Man without a Sig
*****************
I just thought of one more thing. Weren't all the monsters (except for
some Gygax creations) made by readers of some British fanzine? In the
back each monster has a credit for who created it. This would make the
problem of copyrights more a matter of bad editing than willfull
infringement.
Lance A. Brown
Lance Brown
Yikes, Once again I have shot off my mouth without thinking beforehand.
Karl is quite correct in that it was Deities & Demigods I was describing
above. My apologies to all.
Lance
Allen Rout
It carried monsters that were cookie-cutters
of each other, lacked any ecological niche, and generally existed
without rationale. It was lauded as "the UK's first contribution
to the AD&D universe".... Note that there was never a second...
I haven't even OPENED THE THING in >8 years. If anyone wants
to pay me 300????dollars for it (is this true??) I'd be GLAD to
sell the thing.
--
The Human Chameleon Returns!!!
a...@beach.cis.ufl.edu- aka -ze...@circa.ufl.edu
Please feel free to respond to any comments I make... I am outspoken and
enjoy debate.
Bruce Onder
>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
>It carried monsters that were cookie-cutters
>of each other, lacked any ecological niche, and generally existed
>without rationale. It was lauded as "the UK's first contribution
>to the AD&D universe".... Note that there was never a second...
>I haven't even OPENED THE THING in >8 years. If anyone wants
>to pay me 300????dollars for it (is this true??) I'd be GLAD to
>sell the thing.
Cookie cutters of each other? What, for instance?
I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio. Anyone who tries to
tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
And lest we forget, fantasy generally exists without rationale. For
every argument, there is an opposite and equal conter-argument.
Brewster
--
Bruce W. Onder on...@isi.edu
"Sally and Sue, don't be blue/We'll just be gone for years and
years and then/We're shovin' right off for home again!" -- Conrad the Sailor
Rick Hunt
>pro...@ultima.socs.uts.edu.au (Programmers' Society) writes:
>
>
>>[...] I
>>have been told that prices have skyrocketed for this particular book, someone
>>paying $300 for a copy here in Sydney. I just wanted this confirmed or not
>> Thanx,
>> Andrew.A
>
>Haven't found any available for sale... No one that has it will sell it...
>
>-Chris Dicely
I have it and would be willing to sell it for anything even remotely close
to $300. For that I would even be so kind as to pay shipping. I always
thought it was a silly book myself and would not miss it in the least.
Make me an offer!
Rick Hunt
rh...@med.unc.edu
[Gosh, my first for sale posting :-) ]
Tim Stellmach
>In article <25...@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> a...@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Allen Rout) writes:>
>>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
You got that right. No one I currently game with, anyway, which makes
zero out of a dozen or so.
>I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio.
That's one.
> Anyone who tries to
>tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
>niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
I'll grant you the Githyanki. But how many FF monsters have the full
page description that they and the Githzerai got? The Hook Horror?
The Bonesnapper? The Quaggoth? The Bunyip? The Bloodworm? The
Gorrilla Bear? The FLUMPH??? Then there's the ones that are just
plain rediculous, like the Nilbog and the Adherer. No, I'm sorry two
(or even a dozen) good monsters does not a good Fiend Folio make.
Anyone who wants to give me $300 for mine (or $30, for that matter) is
welcome to it. I can spent 40 cents photocopying the good parts and
bid it a tearful farewell.
T i |\\
Bruce Onder
>In article <15...@venera.isi.edu> on...@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) writes:
>>In article <25...@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> a...@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Allen Rout) writes:>
>>>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
>
>You got that right. No one I currently game with, anyway, which makes
>zero out of a dozen or so.
Speak for yourself, dudes.
>>I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio.
>
>That's one.
Oh, ye of little vision...
>> Anyone who tries to
>>tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
>>niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
>
>I'll grant you the Githyanki. But how many FF monsters have the full
>page description that they and the Githzerai got? The Hook Horror?
>The Bonesnapper? The Quaggoth? The Bunyip? The Bloodworm? The
>Gorrilla Bear? The FLUMPH??? Then there's the ones that are just
>plain rediculous, like the Nilbog and the Adherer. No, I'm sorry two
>(or even a dozen) good monsters does not a good Fiend Folio make.
Well, the Nilbog certainly wasn't all that great. But I used the FF
successfully for years, and got more mileage out of the monsters in it
than I did the MM and MM2 monsters.
>Anyone who wants to give me $300 for mine (or $30, for that matter) is
>welcome to it. I can spent 40 cents photocopying the good parts and
>bid it a tearful farewell.
Not without seriously breaking some federal laws you can't.
>T i |\\
R T Fanning
I was under the impression that the 2nd edition monster manuals had all of the
nasties such as drow and dungear, or kua-toa. Field folio I thought was 1st
edition. In second ED I thought you didn't need it.
The Anti-Q
creatures described within are quite silly. However, I have had great
amounts of fun springing some of the nastier, and occasionally sillier,
monsters on my unsuspecting party...
Although I've forgotten the name of the monster, there's one in there
that looks like a skull just sitting on the edge of a pit, until it
springs out at you... I remember a look of horror on the face of the
player who thought it might be magical and ran over to grab it...
--
========================================`\ Joshua Brandt
That is not dead which can eternal lie \\ mu...@wpi.WPI.EDU
But with strange eons, | =================================
Even death may die... (hpl) // Ia, Ia, Cthulhu!
========================================'/ Ia, Ia, Shub-Niggurath
Allen S. Rout
Try Mephits... Try Elemental Grues... Try Elemental Evil Princes...
try Githyanki/Githzeri...(the original idea is not bad.. but what was that
aincient split between them?) and now there's a third gith****-i in
spelljammer (not blamed on the white dwarf dudes). Try Sladds...
"it secretes a poisionous pellet in it's hand..."???? no makea sensa...
It might be different if there were some sort of mythological basis for
these critters, and my lack of knowledge of such a thing may be just that..
a lack of knowledge. But one of the Prime Requisites for an INTERNALLY
self-consistent universe is that the various critters must have a rationale
for their existance. Seeing that there is some debate as to the utility
and reasonableness of the FF, I am going to undertake the structured defense
of my thesis: THE FIEND FOLIO IS DRAKH!... (Read the _sten_ series...) If
anyone wants to defend it, I will be glad to (arrogantly, holier-than-thou-
ly, ) prove them wrong (gee, this should be fun! ) Note:: This is supposed
to be a discussion.. I'm just having fun. If you've played all your monsters
from FF for the last 10 years and had perfectly good campaigns, that's FINE
I just don't wanna play in your universe. OK.. The challenge is out.
(duck flames)
PS I'll be bringing my FF to the term for the next few days, so I'll be
prepared with quotes.
Loren J. Miller
| I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio. Anyone who tries to
| tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
| niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
agreed. the Githyanki, Githzerai, and Slaad are great monsters from the
FF, as was the Acherai. However, I think all those monsters came from
the CN plane or some such place. I had the impression that they were written
up in White Dwarf for some special feature on the outer planes and plopped
right into the FF. In fact, that's how I thought the whole thing was designed,
since I had seen a few FF monsters previously in the "reader's monsters"
section of WD.
anyway, must get those monsters transferred over into Torg. (evil laugh)
--
Loren Miller
MIL...@desci.wharton.upenn.edu
I've seen the Ocean break on the shore, comes together, no harm done
Bruce Onder
>Cookie cutters?
>Try Mephits... Try Elemental Grues... Try Elemental Evil Princes...
>try Githyanki/Githzeri...(the original idea is not bad.. but what was that
>aincient split between them?) and now there's a third gith****-i in
>spelljammer (not blamed on the white dwarf dudes). Try Sladds...
>"it secretes a poisionous pellet in it's hand..."???? no makea sensa...
>It might be different if there were some sort of mythological basis for
>these critters, and my lack of knowledge of such a thing may be just that..
>a lack of knowledge. But one of the Prime Requisites for an INTERNALLY
>self-consistent universe is that the various critters must have a rationale
>for their existance. Seeing that there is some debate as to the utility
>and reasonableness of the FF, I am going to undertake the structured defense
>of my thesis: THE FIEND FOLIO IS DRAKH!... (Read the _sten_ series...) If
What is the rationale for the existence of a demon? Even better: what
is the rationale for the existence of a human? You're speaking in
tongues and arguing in circles.
>anyone wants to defend it, I will be glad to (arrogantly, holier-than-thou-
>ly, ) prove them wrong (gee, this should be fun! ) Note:: This is supposed
>to be a discussion.. I'm just having fun. If you've played all your monsters
>from FF for the last 10 years and had perfectly good campaigns, that's FINE
>I just don't wanna play in your universe. OK.. The challenge is out.
That's okay. We have a house rule against arrogant, holier-than-thou
buttheads, and we've since gone on to other gaming systems.
>(duck flames)
Duck that.
>PS I'll be bringing my FF to the term for the next few days, so I'll be
>prepared with quotes.
PS: Why not spend your time role-playing with gaming aids you *do*
like and not waiting around to pounce on someone who has the temerity
to disagree with you?
Rationale, schmationale.
>The Human Chameleon Returns!!!
>a...@beach.cis.ufl.edu- aka -ze...@circa.ufl.edu
>Please feel free to respond to any comments I make... I am outspoken and
>enjoy debate.
Brewster
Bruce Onder
>either I am nuts, or on...@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) said:
>| I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio. Anyone who tries to
>| tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
>| niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
>
>agreed. the Githyanki, Githzerai, and Slaad are great monsters from the
>FF, as was the Acherai. However, I think all those monsters came from
>the CN plane or some such place. I had the impression that they were written
>up in White Dwarf for some special feature on the outer planes and plopped
>right into the FF. In fact, that's how I thought the whole thing was designed,
>since I had seen a few FF monsters previously in the "reader's monsters"
>section of WD.
Oh well. Being basically lazy myself, I find myself admiring this
ploy!
>anyway, must get those monsters transferred over into Torg. (evil laugh)
Now there's a thought. I've always wanted to see the Berbalang make
an appearance in India...
>--
>Loren Miller
>MIL...@desci.wharton.upenn.edu
>
>I've seen the Ocean break on the shore, comes together, no harm done
Brewster
Beth MOURSUND
(the Seattle area gaming convention)...
Klaus Ole Kristiansen
>In article <15...@venera.isi.edu> on...@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) writes:
>>In article <25...@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> a...@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Allen Rout) writes:>
>>>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
>You got that right. No one I currently game with, anyway, which makes
>zero out of a dozen or so.
>>I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio.
>That's one.
>> Anyone who tries to
>>tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
>>niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
>I'll grant you the Githyanki. But how many FF monsters have the full
>page description that they and the Githzerai got? The Hook Horror?
>The Bonesnapper? The Quaggoth? The Bunyip? The Bloodworm? The
>Gorrilla Bear? The FLUMPH??? Then there's the ones that are just
>plain rediculous, like the Nilbog and the Adherer. No, I'm sorry two
>(or even a dozen) good monsters does not a good Fiend Folio make.
That is true, but you could say the same about MM or MMII
Klaus Kristiansen
Support the atheist church, a non-prophet organization
Brian or James
Well, I can't judge how many folks *liked* the FF, but I do know
the sucker *sold* poorly. I suspect that's the reason it got dropped,
although since the FF used monsters from (I *think*) White Dwarf's
Fantasy Factory column, and given that Games Workshop (If this were a
bad horror flick, all the horses would have whinnied just then) is
no longer interested in any great amount of intercompany cooperation,
I would not be amazed if GW didn't want the FF continued.
Remember when White Dwarf was a useful magazine even to
non-GW gameplayers? *sigh*
James Nicoll
Allen Rout
I guess that I'm being BADLY misinterpreted here... I was suggesting a
(sprited, proabaly, since there are some people who really like
the FF) _Discussion_ about the merits/failings of the FF....
I've been getting flames about the entirely wrong kinda stuff... please,
limit flames to my innaccuracies or things about the book in which you feel
I'm mistaken..
this:
>That's okay. We have a house rule against arrogant, holier-than-thou
>buttheads, and we've since gone on to other gaming systems.
>
>>(duck flames)
>
>Duck that.
Is entirely uncalled for, and besides, should have been done in mail.
--
The Human Chameleon Returns!!!
a...@beach.cis.ufl.edu- aka -ze...@circa.ufl.edu
Please feel free to respond to any comments I make... I am outspoken and
enjoy debate... BUT ALL FLAMES TO E-MAIL...
Rick Novy
folio. That was a rather weak book as far as quality monsters go,
tho. Anybody want to buy my copy for a mere $300.00?!?!
--
Rick Novy - via FidoNet node 1:143/12
UUCP: {pyramid,amdcad,apple}!weitek!wyrm!Rick.Novy
RBU...@maine.bitnet
the Oriental Dragons in the good stuff. Not to mention the Death Knight,
the Crypt thing, and even such stuff as Carytid Columns (maybe not given much
description, but really a neat monster that was given a full explaination of
their existance.
There was a lot of filler (which they acknowledged -- Dragon gave it a
negative review and the compiler ran an apology -- I'd like to see that
happen today, heh heh heh). But I felt it was money well spent, and (even
though I've gone to the Second Edition rules) I use concepts from it even
today.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Eric, Lord Sabre |"Oh, By the Way, did I mention the fresh snowfall?"|
| |"No, Mother, that must have slipped your mind." |
|E...@CORNELLC.BITNET|"Oops. Sure is pretty, through, don't you think?" |
| |"Pretty...deep." |
| |-}------------- |"Mmmmm...well, better get stacking that wood." |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew David Weiland
Rout) writes
>Try Mephits... Try Elemental Grues... Try Elemental Evil Princes...
>try Githyanki/Githzeri...(the original idea is not bad.. but what was that
>aincient split between them?) and now there's a third gith****-i in
>spelljammer (not blamed on the white dwarf dudes). Try Sladds...
The githyanki and githzeri were, at least originally, an in-joke so
subtle that most of the AD&D world has missed it. Most people use them
as interesting psionic monsters without ever realizing what "the ancient
split" really is (maybe not most people, but i certainly did). That is,
the githYANKi and the gith(C)ZARi.
(auuugh!)
Kind of makes you wonders about the third race. . .
Hope this helps,
Andrew D. M. U. Weiland
RBU...@maine.bitnet
was back when it was published and run by TSR-UK (the same folks who
put out the Fiend Folio, and a division of TSR). They later sold
the magazine to Games Workshop, who destroyed it.
Does anyone remember when Dragon magazine was useful for non-TSR game
players? Or when it occasionally gave negative reviews for TSR products,
and its Advertising was limited to one-quarter of the magazine?
Please note the conspicuous lack of smilies.
Willis F York
>The githyanki and githzeri were, at least originally, an in-joke so
>subtle that most of the AD&D world has missed it. Most people use them
>as interesting psionic monsters without ever realizing what "the ancient
>split" really is (maybe not most people, but i certainly did). That is,
>the githYANKi and the gith(C)ZARi.
I Don't get it.................
--
yo...@ecn.purdue.edu Willis F York
----------------------------------------------
Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still
not know ANYTHING about computers.
Christopher M. Dicely
>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
>It carried monsters that were cookie-cutters
>of each other, lacked any ecological niche, and generally existed
>without rationale. It was lauded as "the UK's first contribution
>to the AD&D universe".... Note that there was never a second...
>I haven't even OPENED THE THING in >8 years. If anyone wants
>to pay me 300????dollars for it (is this true??) I'd be GLAD to
>sell the thing.
NOBODY LIKED IT???
Hmm...
Seems the Githyanki/Githzeri (sp?) thing has gotten a lot of use in mid- to
high level campaigns I've seen, as have a lot of the undead and quasi-undead,
and Gee, it looks undead, things from FF. As a matter of fact, it was probably
the most liked monster book of the three in my gaming group (and there was only
one copy around!)...
-Chris Dicely
Christopher M. Dicely
>In article <15...@venera.isi.edu> on...@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) writes:
>>In article <25...@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> a...@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Allen Rout) writes:>
>>>The fiend folio is rare because NOBODY LIKED IT!
>You got that right. No one I currently game with, anyway, which makes
>zero out of a dozen or so.
>>I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Fiend Folio.
>That's one.
>> Anyone who tries to
>>tell me that the Githyanki are cookie cutters lacking any ecological
>>niche is going to have an astral visit real soon. :)
>I'll grant you the Githyanki. But how many FF monsters have the full
>page description that they and the Githzerai got? The Hook Horror?
>The Bonesnapper? The Quaggoth? The Bunyip? The Bloodworm? The
>Gorrilla Bear? The FLUMPH??? Then there's the ones that are just
>plain rediculous, like the Nilbog and the Adherer. No, I'm sorry two
>(or even a dozen) good monsters does not a good Fiend Folio make.
The ADHERER!!! My favorite!! (well, not really, especially as a player)...
Actually, the thing about the FF is that there are a lot of monsters that
can be used in very interesting manners as great surprisers... I mean, sure
there are some flops, but there are those in the MMs too!
-Chris Dicely
Christopher M. Dicely
Well, drow were re-introduced into 1st Ed in the UA, as were the duergar...
I've heard the Kua-Toans were in one of the 2ED Monstrous Compendiums...
But I doubt they kept all the undead, pseudoundead, semiundead, and just
plain weird stuff from FF. Furthermore, I DON'T HAVE 2ED. And I don't want
to go out and buy a ney PHB and DMG and 2 new monster books just to get the
FF monsters. Furthermore, a lot of 1ED add-ons (like the MoP) have not been
replaced for 2ED and I don't feel like doing my own converting (as minimal as
it would be).
-Chris Dicely
Christopher M. Dicely
Oh, well ain't that interesting...
Brings up another reason I like TSR:`
There "House Organ" isn't...
OH, okay, it is in that its primary focus is TSR games, especiall AD&D, but
if you consider where D&D and Dragon came from, its not surprising...
But then, there is more to Dragon the pro-TSR stuff... I mean they tore-up a
TSR-approved computer product by SSI (DM's Assistant: Volume I) as an example,
and there have been many extremely favorable reviews and useful suggestions
aimed at non-TSR game systems, and articles that were specifically designed to
address using similar concepts in multiple different gaming systems.
I personally would never have started playing FASA's Star Trek RPG if it hadn't
been for a set of suggestions in Dragon which indicated that it was a good
gaming system.
Viva DRAGON!!!
-Chris Dicely
Klaus Ole Kristiansen
> Well, I can't judge how many folks *liked* the FF, but I do know
>the sucker *sold* poorly. I suspect that's the reason it got dropped,
>although since the FF used monsters from (I *think*) White Dwarf's
>Fantasy Factory column, and given that Games Workshop (If this were a
That's FIEND factory
>bad horror flick, all the horses would have whinnied just then) is
>no longer interested in any great amount of intercompany cooperation,
>I would not be amazed if GW didn't want the FF continued.
> Remember when White Dwarf was a useful magazine even to
>non-GW gameplayers? *sigh*
the good old days
Klaus Kristiansen
Klaus Ole Kristiansen
>jdni...@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (Brian or James) writes:
>> Well, I can't judge how many folks *liked* the FF, but I do know
>>the sucker *sold* poorly. I suspect that's the reason it got dropped,
>>although since the FF used monsters from (I *think*) White Dwarf's
>>Fantasy Factory column, and given that Games Workshop (If this were a
>>bad horror flick, all the horses would have whinnied just then) is
>>no longer interested in any great amount of intercompany cooperation,
>>I would not be amazed if GW didn't want the FF continued.
>> Remember when White Dwarf was a useful magazine even to
>>non-GW gameplayers? *sigh*
>Oh, well ain't that interesting...
>Brings up another reason I like TSR:`
>There "House Organ" isn't...
You forgot the smiley here
>OH, okay, it is in that its primary focus is TSR games, especiall AD&D, but
>if you consider where D&D and Dragon came from, its not surprising...
>But then, there is more to Dragon the pro-TSR stuff... I mean they tore-up a
>TSR-approved computer product by SSI (DM's Assistant: Volume I) as an example,
>and there have been many extremely favorable reviews and useful suggestions
>aimed at non-TSR game systems, and articles that were specifically designed to
>address using similar concepts in multiple different gaming systems.
>I personally would never have started playing FASA's Star Trek RPG if it hadn't
>been for a set of suggestions in Dragon which indicated that it was a good
>gaming system.
>Viva DRAGON!!!
>-Chris Dicely
Oh, you were serious! Is this really so? Have the Dragon improved this
much? There used to be great articles lik An Army Travels om it's
Stomach and Survival is a Group Effort, but that is many years ago.
It is some years ago that I let my subscribtion lapse, is it worthwile
to pick up an issue?
Klaus Kristiansen
Christopher M. Dicely
>>Viva DRAGON!!!
>>-Chris Dicely
They still have the same people doing the titles, apparently :-)
Actually, though, the articles are generally useful, and often applicable
to multiple game systems. Also, their reviews are generally pretty good, both
of "normal" games and books and computer games... Unfortunately, SnarfQuest
died...
-Chris Dicely
reminds me... I gotta re-subscribe...
>Klaus Kristiansen
Bruce Onder
>Hey, folks..
>
>I guess that I'm being BADLY misinterpreted here... I was suggesting a
>(sprited, proabaly, since there are some people who really like
>the FF) _Discussion_ about the merits/failings of the FF....
Then cut the "I'll be glad to prove you wrong" angle. These are
_opinions_ here, and you're out of line to cry "foul" now, of all
times.
>I've been getting flames about the entirely wrong kinda stuff... please,
>limit flames to my innaccuracies or things about the book in which you feel
>I'm mistaken..
How can you be inaccurate about your opinion? Besides, I see you've
cut all my real points about your stance, and kept on the bit below.
>this:
This is me, btw, that he's quoting.
>>That's okay. We have a house rule against arrogant, holier-than-thou
>>buttheads, and we've since gone on to other gaming systems.
>>
>>>(duck flames)
>>
>>Duck that.
>Is entirely uncalled for, and besides, should have been done in mail.
Why? On the one hand, it's true. On the second hand, I don't take
kindly to blanket statements such as "The FF sucks because nobody
likes it!" And "rationalization for existence." Feh.
>Please feel free to respond to any comments I make... I am outspoken and
>enjoy debate... BUT ALL FLAMES TO E-MAIL...
Pass the maple syrup, please.
Raouls Used CamlShop
>>Oh, you were serious! Is this really so? Have the Dragon improved this
>>much? There used to be great articles lik An Army Travels om it's
>>Stomach and Survival is a Group Effort, but that is many years ago.
>>It is some years ago that I let my subscribtion lapse, is it worthwile
>>to pick up an issue?
>
>They still have the same people doing the titles, apparently :-)
>Actually, though, the articles are generally useful, and often applicable
>to multiple game systems. Also, their reviews are generally pretty good, both
>of "normal" games and books and computer games... Unfortunately, SnarfQuest
>died...
>
>-Chris Dicely
>
>reminds me... I gotta re-subscribe...
>
>
>>Klaus Kristiansen
Snarfquest died? Dont you remember Wormy? What about Fineous
Fingers? If you are going to talk comics, Talk REAL comics.
Also, I personally check out the contents of each and every
dragon these days to see fi its worth buying. Most of the
stuff is in-house-if-you-dont-use-this-your-not-playing-the-
real-thing-junk. Sure, the reviews may be good, but have you
checked out White Wolf's? They give good review. (When they
finally make it to the news stand)
Lets face it, the primary purpose for Dragon is to sell TSR.
I dont blame them...money is god in the business world. Would
a smart man try to sell you somebody elses product when he
knows that a gamers budget is limited? I think not.
I personally trust a mag more if it is not a captive house
mouth. I'd even get a subscription to White Wolf if they
would stop their practice of theme issues. No way am I gonna
buy a horrer issue that has no application to the stuff that
I am interested in. They really need to provide for most
interests as often as possible.
james seymour
came...@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Jennifer Burdick
collection? I mean, Fineous Fingers came out with one, and that was
good, but Wormy was always the best. If there are no plans for this
collection, I think it's about time to bug the hell out of TSR.
Anyone else interested?
Dakin Burdick
Ron Dawson
Yes, I would dearly like to see a Wormy Collection. I remember
flipping to read Wormy first thing with each new Dragon. Dragon has
not been the same without it. I'd also like to see some of the
earlier Wormy segments (pre-issue 45). Does anyone out there know
exactly why Dave Trampier stopped penning the series? And was there a
falling out between Trampier and TSR/Dragon?
- Ron Dawson
--
Internet: rda...@ccs.carleton.ca UUCP: ...!uunet!ccs.carleton.ca!rdawson
I really hate this machine, I wish that they would sell it.
It never does what I want, but only what I tell it.
Mike Whitaker
>> the UK-# series. I don't remember the individual names but the "Gauntlet" and
>> "Adlerveg" were two of them.
Adlerveg wasn't it's name I don't think.....
> And let's not forget the classic Saltmarsh series which was
> UK-produced.
First TSR module I ever ran, U1
I have run a goodly number of the UK and U series. Particularly good also,
however is O2 (one of the One-on-one series).
O1 is pretty dire: O2 however is written by Jim Bambra who wrote some of the UK
modules, and is really very good indeed. It's actually Expert D&D but converts
no trouble. Also good (and I believe UK produced) is B/X1.
I should add, I'm biased becuase a) I'm English (ignore the Internet address!!)
and b) I DM an awful lot of one-on-one - usually totally improvised.
--
Mike Whitaker, Shape Data Ltd, | Voice: +44-223-316673
46, Regent St, Cambridge, | Internet: mi...@shapec.mdcbbs.com
CB2 1DB, ENGLAND. | UUCP: uunet!shapec.mdcbbs.com!mikew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...if one could not learn from one's students, one had no business being a
teacher..." (from "Gossamer Axe", by Gael Baudino) <-- READ THIS BOOK
Christopher M. Dicely
>In article <1990Nov16....@nntp-server.caltech.edu> dic...@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Christopher M. Dicely) writes:
>>>Oh, you were serious! Is this really so? Have the Dragon improved this
>>>much? There used to be great articles lik An Army Travels om it's
>>>Stomach and Survival is a Group Effort, but that is many years ago.
>>>It is some years ago that I let my subscribtion lapse, is it worthwile
>>>to pick up an issue?
>>
>>They still have the same people doing the titles, apparently :-)
>>Actually, though, the articles are generally useful, and often applicable
>>to multiple game systems. Also, their reviews are generally pretty good, both
>>of "normal" games and books and computer games... Unfortunately, SnarfQuest
>>died...
>>
>>-Chris Dicely
>>
>>reminds me... I gotta re-subscribe...
>>
>>
>>>Klaus Kristiansen
>Snarfquest died? Dont you remember Wormy? What about Fineous
>Fingers? If you are going to talk comics, Talk REAL comics.
>Also, I personally check out the contents of each and every
>dragon these days to see fi its worth buying. Most of the
>stuff is in-house-if-you-dont-use-this-your-not-playing-the-
>real-thing-junk. Sure, the reviews may be good, but have you
>checked out White Wolf's? They give good review. (When they
>finally make it to the news stand)
Mmmm... Actually, I think the TSR line is if you DO use any rules changes in
Dragon or otherwise, including the old crit tables, etc., it is not the
Official AD&D (or whatever) game... The Dragon staff takes the line that most
gamers does -- it doesn't matter if its the official game, it matters if it
works!
Also, (unless they've changed in the last 4 months) they generally have a
decent selection of articles, sometimes even the main special feature, which
is cross-applicable to multiple game systems. The special features
on castles and gods were like that last year, among others.
>Lets face it, the primary purpose for Dragon is to sell TSR.
>I dont blame them...money is god in the business world. Would
>a smart man try to sell you somebody elses product when he
>knows that a gamers budget is limited? I think not.
While it may seem to you to be their primary purpose, I see it as having four
purposes, in this order:
1. Sell Dragon magazines
2. Get people (esp. other game companies) to advertise in same
3. Provide support for gamers (esp. but not exclus. TSR players)
4. Sell TSR
(actually 3 is more of an implementation of 1&2, but selling TSR is not the
main thing on Dragon's list of priorities, although making money for TSR
naturally is...)
-Chris Dicely
Chester H Zeshonski
Anybody hear of "Dark Clouds Gather"? (UK7, I believe)
The adventure was for a group of 5-8 characters of levels 7-9.
It featured the aarokocra and a new race, the ba'atun, a sort of white-furred
flying baboon with big teeth and a serious attitude problem.
Especially their leader.
I DM'd the adventure, and to this day, Yesorkh Pahyeh is spoken of only venom-
ously.
A magic-using, clerical-spell-equipped possessor of souls...
I don't want to give away too much of the plot, but I will say that there was a
lot of combat, with the problem-solving focusing on prejudice and see-
ing past appearances. All in all, a superb module.
We sent the Lords of Midnight (four members) plus a fifth character (new play-
er) into this module when we were all levels 5-7 (and only 1--7th level
character at that). We seemed to regularly make a point of going into
a module below both the number of characters recommended and the "ap-
propriate" levels, since we figured we were good enough players to work
our way out of the extra difficulties (every adventure, pre-packaged
and personal, went down to the wire, life-and-death, tooth-and-nail--
great fun!)
Well, anyone remember this one?
---Chet Zeshonski
******************************************************************************
* "I can *never* kill enough of them..."--Frank Castle (aka the Punisher) *
******************************************************************************
Richard Vowles
In message <1990Nov16.0...@diku.dk>, kl...@diku.dk (Klaus Ole
Kristiansen) writes
[ Stuff about Dragon as a House Organ ]
> Oh, you were serious! Is this really so?
It _is_ true, they do ask for and print nonAD&D items, quite a few, but
as they are TSR, they don't tend to attract to many and about 70% of them
seem to be written by people who actually WORK for TSR (and RQ one comes
to mind, can't remember any others lately). The RPGA Network Magazine also
had the same problem (people in Australia & NZ please take note, we have our
own now, and don't have to pay $US45/year for an airmail sub and nothing but
6 small magazines to look forward to) as it was a TSR sponsered thing, most
of the articles were TSR. They say they will take any good quality articles
for any gaming system, so all you people with rules supplements, send in!
They pay quite good rates I think, and have writers guidelines, if anyone
is interested I can post the address to write to on here..
I get Dragon airmail, mainly for the ads so I can find out when new Cyberspace
stuff will come out (anyone think of a cheaper way?) The articles in Dragon
just don't seem that interesting now.... (that I don't play AD&D much, only
on my BBS (which is RPG specific for the regular postings information, it
has special forums designed for use in role gaming on a BBS, evlolved over
5 years of BBS gaming))
Anyway, i'd better shuttup!
# "And now kiddies, bicycles are very important in this film, see
# how many YOU can spot." Alexi Sayle, Didn't You Kill My Brother
#\ # ACJackBBSSYSTEM h...@nacjack.gen.nz or ric...@nacjack.gen.nz
# \# Either this man has serious brain damage or the new vacumn cleaners'
# arrived!
# "Wheres the spoons?! Wheres the spoons?! Wheres the blo**y spoons?!"
Kristian Damm Jensen
> And let's not forget the classic Saltmarsh series which was
>UK-produced. "The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh,""Danger at Dunwater," and "The
>Final Enemy" are three of the best low-level modules ever written. I have run
>these modules in several campaigns and they have never failed to challenge all
>types of players.
Yes, they are good. But tell me: how do a part go about in U3? I know of three different groups, that have played this module - and all of them failed. One group (that I DM'ed) died save a few.
Kristian
(da...@diku.dk)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kristian Damm Jensen (da...@freja.diku.dk)
Todd South
One thing that I really dislike about standard TSR materials is that you
have to wait years for an `Ecology of' article till you finally get a good
description of what the author fully intended a new monster to be.
Although, the Fiend Folio may not have had the greatest of reviews, it
certainly had a rich background history on most non-standard monster
fodder. I especially liked the faerie creatures--the little nuance notes
about what pissed them off or made them happy. My only gripe about the
manual was the limited amount of background for creatures that should have
had pages written about them, e.g., the Giths.
Todd South
--
--
tso...@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!tsouth
Public Access UNIX at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400) Voice: +1 503 646-8257
Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Bruce Onder
[Stuff about Dragon deleted]
They pay quite good rates I think, and have writers guidelines, if anyone
is interested I can post the address to write to on here..
Hee hee! Four cents a word! Um, John Campbell was paying Robert
Heinlein nearly two cents a word back in the thirties. Truth of the
matter is, for selling all rights for four cents a word, you're
getting ripped big time.
Course, I've done it twice now, so who am I to bite the hand that lets
me get a Big mac and Fries? :)
Christopher M. Dicely
>Yes, I remember when White Dwarf was useful for non-GW players. That
>was back when it was published and run by TSR-UK (the same folks who
>put out the Fiend Folio, and a division of TSR). They later sold
>the magazine to Games Workshop, who destroyed it.
>
>Does anyone remember when Dragon magazine was useful for non-TSR game
>players? Or when it occasionally gave negative reviews for TSR products,
>and its Advertising was limited to one-quarter of the magazine?
Well, I don't know about TSR products, but their was an issue where they
seemed like they decided to play beat up on SSI's TSR-licensed Dungeon
Masters Assistant: Volume I. But I remember many highly positive reviews of
TSR-competitive material, and ads&reviews&articles in Dragon resulted in me
playing and adding to ST: The RPG [FASA], buyign tons of BattleTech stuff
[FASA], adn trying (unsuccessfully) to find an Ars Magica (??not TSR but I'm
not sure who??) campaign...
And I haven't but anything from TSR in that time period (well, except the
MoP...)
Oh, and I forgot, Paranoia... [West End Games].
Wow, I almost stopped playing TSR games and buying their products because of
Dragon. Gee, what a successful house organ.
-Chris Dicely
TB25...@miamiu.bitnet
Personally, I find the Fiend Folio to be the best book for
keeping the party humble (If not outright terrified).
PC: "Things couldn't possibly get any worse."
DM: "Ok, you see a...(Lifts book to read description, PC catches
glimps of cover)
PC: "AAAAUUUUGGGG!! Run! It's worse!"
DM: sadistic giggle
Matt
for those of you who continue to bash white dwarf:
white dwarf is a vital playing aid to games such as warhammer 40,000
and blood bowl. just because you don't care to play a real game
like these doesn't mean that it's a bad periodical. also, bashing
any mag on the net takes up space. try to think of someone else other
than yourselves.
send flame to the address below.
******************************************************
| matt spratt -----> saue...@expert.cc.purdue.edu |
******************************************************
| those who think they know it all really annoy |
| those of us who do. |
| -anonymous- |
******************************************************
| wise men say things and fools repeat them. |
| -matt spratt- |
******************************************************
DISCLAIMER: i have to many of my own opinions to use
somebody else's...
Christer Renfors
>Yes, I remember when White Dwarf was useful for non-GW players. That
>was back when it was published and run by TSR-UK (the same folks who
>put out the Fiend Folio, and a division of TSR). They later sold
>the magazine to Games Workshop, who destroyed it.
------------
Are you really sure that White Dwarf first was owned by TSR-UK? I thought that
it had belonged to Games Workshop since the start.
In a White Dwarf published a couple of years ago the story of the magazine
are told. It started as a fanzine called Owl & Weasel. A copy of the fanzine
somehow crossed the Atlantic and TSR got hold of it (TSR was at this time a
very small company, just like Games Workshop). They congratulated Games Workshop
for a good fanzine and sent a copy of their new game, D&D, a roleplaying game!
Owl & Weasel grew bigger and bigger and after 25 issues Games Workshop thought
it was time to create a "real" magazine. They did so and named it White Dwarf
(1977). The first issue of White Dwarf was printed in 4000 copies.
The contents in early White Dwarf's were of course dominated by D&D-material
because there wasn't so many games available in the 1970:s. When more games
was published some of them were supported in White Dwarf. Most of them had
some connection to Games Workshop.
Over the last years the featured material has changed. The articles about games
not published by Games Workshop has disappeared. White Dwarf only supports
Games Workshop-games nowadays.
I don't think that this is a drawback. The articles are always of high quality
and often very useful. The miniature-painting material are superb. Maybe the
magazine contains to many adverts.
I don't agree with you that White Dwarf has been destroyed. I'd rather say that
the magazine has developed in a positive way. For all players of Games Workshop-
games it's invaluable. I think that every game-company should publish a magazine
Wes Nicholson
Organization: University of Canberra
References: <1990Nov20.020125.22960@mercury> <15...@venera.isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 90 01:08:33 GMT
In article <15...@venera.isi.edu> on...@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder) writes:
>In article <1990Nov20.020125.22960@mercury> ric...@nacjack.gen.nz (Richard Vowles) writes:
>
>[Stuff about Dragon deleted]
> They pay quite good rates I think, and have writers guidelines, if anyone
> is interested I can post the address to write to on here..
>
>Hee hee! Four cents a word! Um, John Campbell was paying Robert
>Heinlein nearly two cents a word back in the thirties. Truth of the
>matter is, for selling all rights for four cents a word, you're
>getting ripped big time.
>
It's not only TSR that pay 4 cents a word. Chaosium do the same, at
least that's what their guidelines say. Chaosium also say that they will
negotiate up to 7 cents a word, but don't give much info on what you have to
do to get that much.
Other games companies are probably comparable, if they paid lots more
no-one would write for TSR or Chaosium (or would they?).
Anyway, it IS shit money. Freelance rates for newspapers in Oz are
40 cents a word, some professional magazines (like computer ones) pay more.
Then again, they're more fussy over what they publish than your average game
company.
Umm, who says you're selling all rights? that's not the way I read
TSR's or Chaosium's release forms. Then again, US law is pretty confusing to
a lot of non US citizens, especially me.
Wes
===============================================================================
w...@csc.canberra.edu.au | Opinions mine
Wes (The WIld Baron) Nicholson | typos two!
Viktor Haag
>
> for those of you who continue to bash white dwarf:
>
>white dwarf is a vital playing aid to games such as warhammer 40,000
>and blood bowl. just because you don't care to play a real game
>like these doesn't mean that it's a bad periodical. also, bashing
>any mag on the net takes up space. try to think of someone else other
>than yourselves.
First of all, let's not get into the 'real game' argument - what you think of
as a real game, others may think of as facile toe-tapping, and (of course) the
opposite is true.
Secondly, let's get this bad periodical thing straightened out. A periodical
can be thought of as bad on two grounds - quality and mandate (or declared
content). I have no problem with the quality aspect of WD's articles, so the
point is moot (at least for me). I would rather focus on the mandate aspect.
A while ago, WD was a magazine that was basically a UK Dragon - only better
in quality, but I digress. It featured well written articles on a variety of
gaming systems, including, but not limited to, the games that GW produced
and distributed in the UK. It also featured great book and product reviews
that were objective, straight shooting, and well written. It also had cute
cartoons (anyone remember THRUD?).
Then, the book review column disappeared, and I (for one) should have seen that
from then on it would be downhill. The articles contained less and less info
on distributed and other game systems, and more on the inhouse games. WD used
to be a mag that produced primarily articles on AD&D and D&D, until WFRP came
along, and then the TSRUK support went out the window. Then the product
review column said (in a written anouncement), "we won't be doing any more
reviews, we will now be devoting this space to previewing the *great* products
that we will be giving you in the near future!". At this point, WD had become
pretty much a complete house organ (about issue 90 onwards) - concerned for
and with only products that GW had exclusive copyright on.
This is when most people threw their subscriptions out the window. I for one
said to myself - ok I can deal with it, I play WFRP, I like the WFRP articles,
and every now and then there is a neat RQ, StrmBringer, or CoC article that I
can use, so I will keep buying it. At that time, GW had a wide product base,
including a wide variety of board games, all of which were plugged and
supported to a certain degree by WD. The accent in WD at this point was still
on role playing games, and WFRP was featured.
Then WH40k came out, and the mag plugged it and supported it like any other
product. Pretty soon though Rick Priestly and co. decided that WD was going
to become an organ devoted almost exclusivley to WHFB and WH40K, and
miniatures. I should have suspected this when the " 'Eavy Metal" got more and
glossier pages than anything about WFRP. Since then WD has pandered to
the WH40K audience, the WHFB audience and the Blood Bowl groupies, as well
as plugging and supporting the tons of games that have been churned out
dealing with Priestly's WH40K universe. I find it interesting to note, as an
aside, that until WH40K came along the support for WHFB was present but took
up about the same amount of space you would expect a miniatures game to use
in a 'role playing' magazine.
Now don't get me wrong. There are reasons why I hate GW in general, but they
have nothing to do with WD specifically. If you want details, then perhaps
you should get James Nicoll to post an article about the business politics of
GW in the UK. WD has now become a house organ miniatures mag, and that's fine.
I think what cheeses me and the rest of the old WD crowd is two things.
One - they never told us that their mag was changing their mandate, and so they
managed to soak us for an extra year or two subscription (or newstand)
before we got mad enough to stop buying. This is pretty sleazy business.
They just gradually started moving Priestly in and everyone else out. They were
still calling WD a roleplaying mag long after the balance shifted to less than
half space for frp's, and then the ads percentage went through the roof!
Second - with the exception of the Gallagher-Bambra-Sargeant WFRP team, the
quality of GW's products (on the design end) has gone down *severely*, while
the prices have jumped. Even the WFRP stuff is starting to wane - for those
who doubt, check out the quality of the Enemy Within series, and then take
a look at Priestly's Lichemaster and the Doomstones stuff. The latter two are
almost all combat oriented, and the interaction stuff is not very well designed.
Doomstones seems to be a loosely strung together series of dungeon crawls -
exactly something that early WFRP openly avoided! With all the wealth of
background and interesting races in the WFRP rulebook, the latest products
have focussed almost exclusively on undead, orcs, orc undead, and undead orc.
Big deal. No expansions stuff for interesting parts of the world like Araby,
Tilea, Brettonia. What rules supplements have they produced lately?
Realm of Darkness (which is, by the way over half filled with WH40K and
WHFB stuff). Yuk. Not because I hate the miniatures stuff, but merely that
I don't play either game, and when I pay $40 Canadian for a sealed book,
that is supposed to be primarily for WFRP, I dont' want to get stuff about
other games in it. The magic supplement that was mentioned in the rule book has
not yet appeared, and yet there are tons of WH40K products oozing off the
shelf. My bet is that when the magic supplement does materialise it will
contain a lot of goo on *chaos magic* (big woo), and a lot of stuff on
magic in the WH40K and WHFB world (big woo), when what it should be focussing
on is the magical heritage and techniques of the Old Worlders, including Elf
and Dwarven magic (neither of which ahs been touched) and Druidic magic (which
so far has been treated as sorry lookin' clerics a la AD&D).
The good design teams at GW have either been shoved aside or shot. Remember
those great board games they used to have - the Dracula game, Blood Royale,
Curse of the Mummy's tomb, Talisman (the original game), all of which were
intelligently designed, fun to play, ground breakingly new ideas in board
games, and didn't sell to a big market. GW has since decided to go the
Priestly route and sell, sell, sell, their WH40K universe line, and the
quality for the new board games has dropped thorugh the floor - design wise.
What they are producing now is expensive, and well packaged fluff.
In other words, sir, our anger at WD is merely peripheral. What we are really
mad about is that a once great game company (remember Golden Age of Heroes?
great game, flawed but fun) has decided to sell its soul to Mr. Money, and
they are paying the price. Unless the brave Bambra-Gallagher-Sargent team
can keep the quality end of WFRP aflaot, I think that WD and GW will only
last as long as the WH40K fad lasts and then it will die, slowly, painfully,
slowly loosing its fascistic toehold on the UK gaiming market inch by inch
to younger, leaner and hungrier companies.
Someone should write to Gallagher-Bambra-Sargent and get them to move the
real talent over to a company that would capitalise on their great quality as
game designers and writers. Carl Sargent may just be the Aaron Allston of the
UK. Perhaps ICE could get them and gradually squeeze their way into the UK.
They were smart enough to support HERO in the proper manner!
Sorry about the length. My next post will be more brief!
vik
Adrian Hussey
to the various games companies - which unfortunately I didn't keep
details of.
Now, a friend of mine has a module which he'd like to submit for
publication for the HERO game system. Could any kind soul out there
possibly email me with the following information:
- an address to write to for HERO Games (are they now part of Iron
Crown?)
- details or rumours of their submissions policy - how they pay and
what rates; what sort of format they want information in; what sort
of stuff they want or don't want.
Thanks in advance
Adrian Hussey
adr...@siesoft.co.uk