Changeling: Cantrip Cards
Justin Mohareb
cards are going to be collectible. Here's the quote:
"These oversized cards bring together over 160 original, full colour pieces
of art from Changeling. Fans of all things fae and game fans alike will
want to own and collecte every design to have a piece of the wonder that
is Changeling. These cards feature edge to edge artwork and playig card
backings.
These fantastic cards are also game accessories that simulate the wild
flow of faerie magic. While not necessary for game play (rules for making
yor own cards arew available in the Changeling rulebook), they certainly
enhance it."
All for the low low price of $2.50 a pack (US. $3.60 in Canuck)
Geez. This collectible thing just went one step too far. If they're
going to do something like this, it should be purchasable in one fell
swoop.
JJ Mohareb
--
Justin Mohareb, bd...@freenet.carleton.ca: All Sig'd up, with no one to quote
Andrew Young
Oh well... I was planning on buying Changeling. Now I'll just
have to boycott it.
Regards,
Andy
Hewlett Packard
Vancouver Division - Software Quality
P.O. Box 8906, Vancouver, WA 98668-8906
Johann Hibschman
Justin Mohareb <bd...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>It turns out that (at least as far as I can tell) the Changeling Cantrip
>cards are going to be collectible. Here's the quote:
>
>"These oversized cards bring together over 160 original, full colour pieces
>of art from Changeling. Fans of all things fae and game fans alike will
>want to own and collecte every design to have a piece of the wonder that
>is Changeling. These cards feature edge to edge artwork and playig card
>backings.
>These fantastic cards are also game accessories that simulate the wild
>flow of faerie magic. While not necessary for game play (rules for making
>yor own cards arew available in the Changeling rulebook), they certainly
>enhance it."
"the wonder that is Changeling?!" Ahh! I can't take it anymore! Too
much syrupy prose... Insulin shock... <cough>
I wonder if Barney the ubiquitous purple dinosaur appears on any of
those cards; he certainly has the right attitude of overbearing smarmy
sweetness. "Fans of all things fae and game fans alike"--who writes
this stuff?
- Johann
Kevin Mowery
: It turns out that (at least as far as I can tell) the Changeling Cantrip
: cards are going to be collectible. Here's the quote:
: "These oversized cards bring together over 160 original, full colour pieces
: of art from Changeling. Fans of all things fae and game fans alike will
: want to own and collecte every design to have a piece of the wonder that
: is Changeling. These cards feature edge to edge artwork and playig card
: backings.
: These fantastic cards are also game accessories that simulate the wild
: flow of faerie magic. While not necessary for game play (rules for making
: yor own cards arew available in the Changeling rulebook), they certainly
: enhance it."
: All for the low low price of $2.50 a pack (US. $3.60 in Canuck)
: Geez. This collectible thing just went one step too far. If they're
: going to do something like this, it should be purchasable in one fell
: swoop.
Well, if they're going to be collectible, I just won't buy 'em.
Seems fair enough to me.
However, I do think that making them collectible is a really sucky
move, if this is the case. 220 cards for INWO cost me about $16 or $17.
I think that the Cantrip Cards should be sold in one mondo pack for about
the same price (or less--there's fewer cards). If anyone wants to buy
extras, fine, pay the exorbitant $2.50 a pack.
What's next? Collectible rulebook pages? "Page 55, the
description of the various natures and demeanors is Common, but page 216,
the experience point chart, is Rare."
--
Kevin Mowery --- kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"This calls for a special blend of psychology and extreme violence."
--Vyvyan, "The Young Ones"
Kevin Mowery
: "the wonder that is Changeling?!" Ahh! I can't take it anymore! Too
: much syrupy prose... Insulin shock... <cough>
At least there didn't seem to be a single "redefining roleplaying"
in that particular piece of ad copy.
: I wonder if Barney the ubiquitous purple dinosaur appears on any of
: those cards; he certainly has the right attitude of overbearing smarmy
: sweetness. "Fans of all things fae and game fans alike"--who writes
: this stuff?
<ad copy courtesy of the Franklin Mint, producer of fine
collectible plates and chess sets> :)
Kevin Mowery
this whole collectible card thing is a horrid mistake and the cantrip
cards will be available, at worst, in half a dozen packs numbered for our
buying convenience.
Or else someone give me some idea where I can get playing cards
with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
Deird'Re M. Brooks
> Please, Dierd're (or Ragabash or Madweaver, for that matter), say
>this whole collectible card thing is a horrid mistake and the cantrip
>cards will be available, at worst, in half a dozen packs numbered for our
>buying convenience.
Nah, they're collectible, BUT...
There will be nifty photocopy-able pages in Changeling, I think...if not,
you can always use 3x5 cards. That's what the ad-copy says.
MadWeaver can give official info... I am in no way a net.representative
of White Wolf Games.
I just write for them sometimes.
> Or else someone give me some idea where I can get playing cards
>with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
Deird'Re
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>And here I thought I was going to really like this game...
All right, here is my unofficial spin-doctoring, but since I do know some
of the story:
The cards in the packs are not necessary to play the game. As it says on
the back of the promo flier, "(rules for making your own cards are
available in the Changeling rulebook itself.)"
So, even if you feel they are necessary (they are *not*, and I say this
as someone who *has* seen the rules) to play of the game, it will only
take a few minutes for you to make your own cards, say with 3x5 cards or
suchlike.
Just as an aside, using the cards *does* add an element to the game.
But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even in the
stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too harsh.
Deird'Re
Sublieutenant Toozday
johann> "the wonder that is Changeling?!" Ahh! I can't take it
johann> anymore! Too much syrupy prose... Insulin shock... <cough>
johann> overbearing smarmy sweetness. "Fans of all things fae and
johann> game fans alike"--who writes this stuff?
Marketroids. I think that should be obvious.
-two
Andrew Rilstone
of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
"Sad" is one word I would use. Remember the dedication in Werewolf
"To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
and important dreams can be?
Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
--
Andrew Rilstone and...@aslan.demon.co.uk
*********************************************************************
Ray Gonzalez
Personally, I thought that it was a bad idea to make the cards
collectible, but I got a chance to actually play the game and without
giving away anything that WW would not want me to, I thought that the
cards were what made the game. Sure they include rules for the use of
dice in the rulebook, but I think that the cards are what made the game
so fun. I still don't agree with the collectible format, but I will buy
them because I liked playing with them, even though the cards we used in
the game were pieces of paper instead of the actual cards.
Ronald Legere
: And here I thought I was going to really like this game...
Don't forget they did say the cards would be optional... and they
will include rules for making your own.(Exactly how that will work, i
dunno...) I have not completely given up on this game :)
(Maybe having a ccg aspect can be fun too.. )
--
| | |
)_) )_) )_) Captain:Ron Legere
___|____|____|___ email: leg...@Minerva.cis.yale.edu
---------\ /---------
John Sullivan
kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Kevin Mowery) wrote:
> Or else someone give me some idea where I can get playing cards
>with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
>
There are blank faced playing cards. You should be able to get them at a
game store, as in _games_ like bridge and mah jongg, not places where gamers
hang out, although there is sometimes some overlap. Apparently there is a
subculture of card players who like to homebrew their own stuff. A store
near me has blank cards, as well as other oddities like a deck with six
suits, etc.
John Sullivan
Stainless Steel Rat
Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
Deird'Re> harsh.
It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
--
Rat <rat...@ccs.neu.edu> |Happy Fun Ball contains a liquid core,
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/|which, if exposed due to rupture, should
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |not be touched, inhaled, or looked at.
Andrew Young
: >>>>> "Deird'Re" == Deird'Re M Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> writes:
: Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
: Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
: Deird'Re> harsh.
: It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
Yup. WW could easily have packaged all the cards together and sold them
in a cool ornate wooden box -- but nooooooo, they have to be 'collectible'
Kevin Mowery
: kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Kevin Mowery) writes:
: > Please, Dierd're (or Ragabash or Madweaver, for that matter), say
: >this whole collectible card thing is a horrid mistake and the cantrip
: >cards will be available, at worst, in half a dozen packs numbered for our
: >buying convenience.
: Nah, they're collectible, BUT...
: There will be nifty photocopy-able pages in Changeling, I think...if not,
: you can always use 3x5 cards. That's what the ad-copy says.
As long as there's an out. And I really hope that the pages (if
you're right) are photocopiable. I was just going to write down the
pertinient text, since having nifty cards with cool pictures would
manage to distract the players (without taking their mind off the game,
oddly).
: MadWeaver can give official info... I am in no way a net.representative
: of White Wolf Games.
: I just write for them sometimes.
Yes, but you're the most *frequent* poster of everyone we know.
And, of course, we all look up to you... :)
: > Or else someone give me some idea where I can get playing cards
: >with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
: I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
I guess I'll have to call around. With as many hobby, novelty,
and office supply stores as Columbus has, there ought to be a few such
decks floating around. To be honest, I was just on a fishing expedition,
I didn't even know that such things existed.
: Deird'Re
Kevin Mowery
: Stainless Steel Rat (rat...@ccs.neu.edu) wrote:
: : >>>>> "Deird'Re" == Deird'Re M Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> writes:
: : Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
: : Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
: : Deird'Re> harsh.
: : It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
: Yup. WW could easily have packaged all the cards together and sold them
: in a cool ornate wooden box -- but nooooooo, they have to be 'collectible'
Well, I think that White Wolf will ultimately get the storage box
concession on this one, too. Remember that the cards are *oversized*.
This means that all those boxes we have for normal cards (or, for those of
us who refuse to collect cards, that we've seen) and all the card binders
are going to be useless. White Wolf will get to create the disease and
the cure...
I still like White Wolf games, and I'll still buy Changeling. But
marketing gimmicks like this really bother me. 'Course, at least it would
seem that there's a way to avoid getting the cards altogether. (And for
that piece of news the left half of me will salaam to Dierd're whilst the
right half of me will face toward Georgia and mutter and shake my
fist--no, wait, I think I'll have to switch sides due to geography, but
the sentiment is still there.)
Electric Monk
> These fantastic cards are also game accessories that simulate the wild
> flow of faerie magic. While not necessary for game play (rules for making
> yor own cards arew available in the Changeling rulebook), they certainly
> enhance it."
>
> All for the low low price of $2.50 a pack (US. $3.60 in Canuck)
I believe that they will be sold in cartons of 24 packs..
That means $60 US per carton. But with only about 160 cards
and packs of 15 cards each that means your chances of buying
a carton and not having oneof each card are nearly null..
Think of it like card games.. A carton of booster packs generally
has over 160 different cards.
"The nice man who had subsequently acted so oddly to being shot at."
--==<< Electric Monk >>==--
"The designer of PSNHB and Knight of Unsubbing"
Stainless Steel Rat
>>> It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
Andrew> Yup. WW could easily have packaged all the cards together and
Andrew> sold them in a cool ornate wooden box
Now that would be nice, and keep the cards in good condition when not
being used as long as there's a bit of room to wrap them in some fabric
to keep dust out.
--
Rat <rat...@ccs.neu.edu> |Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/|
Kirby Krueger
Deird'Re M. Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Kevin Mowery) writes:
>
>
>> Or else someone give me some idea where I can get playing cards
>>with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
>
>I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
>
Just by some stickers. Those ones used for names, such as "Hi, My Name is
______" fit nicely on a playing card, and allow you to write in what you'd
like there. And, they're readily available and cheap. Customizable cards
would be better, but this is a decent poor man's solution. I'm certainly
not going to buy any of those cantrip cards unless Changeling really
impresses me - Mage and Wraith didn't.
--
Kirby Krueger
kir...@peak.org
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>>>>>> "Deird'Re" == Deird'Re M Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> writes:
>Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
>Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
>Deird'Re> harsh.
I canna say anything about that, but I've already stated that the
collectible cards are *not* required, and that you can make your own.
Was that lost in the shuffle in the need to find yet something else to
hate about White Wolf?
Deird'Re
Tracy L. Preas
says...
>
>It turns out that (at least as far as I can tell) the Changeling Cantrip
>cards are going to be collectible. Here's the quote:
And here I thought I was going to really like this game...
--
T.L. Preas
-Coincidental sunlight at 2am???
-It's that damned russian space mirror!!!
John P. Raynor
: It turns out that (at least as far as I can tell) the Changeling Cantrip
: cards are going to be collectible. Here's the quote:
: "These oversized cards bring together over 160 original, full colour pieces
: of art from Changeling. Fans of all things fae and game fans alike will
: want to own and collecte every design to have a piece of the wonder that
: is Changeling. These cards feature edge to edge artwork and playig card
: backings.
: flow of faerie magic. While not necessary for game play (rules for making
: yor own cards arew available in the Changeling rulebook), they certainly
: enhance it."
:
: All for the low low price of $2.50 a pack (US. $3.60 in Canuck)
: Geez. This collectible thing just went one step too far. If they're
: going to do something like this, it should be purchasable in one fell
: swoop.
Yeah...this is a pretty pathetic, and transparent, attempt to cash in one
the "Magic: the Gathering" hype, before it dies out. I strongly suspect
that, unless those miserable cards are written so tightly into the rules
that there is absolutely no way to avoid 'em, they will be quietly
forgotten as soon as the "card fad" dies down. I would be _very_
surprised if the company made all of the wretched things available "in
one fell swoop," because that would kill the "collecting and trading"
hysteria they're trying to provoke.
- J. Raynor
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>Deird'Re M. Brooks (mar...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: Nah, they're collectible, BUT...
>: There will be nifty photocopy-able pages in Changeling, I think...if not,
>: you can always use 3x5 cards. That's what the ad-copy says.
> As long as there's an out. And I really hope that the pages (if
>you're right) are photocopiable. I was just going to write down the
I can't guarantee it, but there are instructions, so. :-)
>pertinient text, since having nifty cards with cool pictures would
>manage to distract the players (without taking their mind off the game,
>oddly).
That's weird.
I'm about to banish cards from my ST sessions... It's always "One more
game of Magic..."
>: MadWeaver can give official info... I am in no way a net.representative
>: of White Wolf Games.
>: I just write for them sometimes.
> Yes, but you're the most *frequent* poster of everyone we know.
>And, of course, we all look up to you... :)
That's because I'm a masochist. :)
>: I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
> I guess I'll have to call around. With as many hobby, novelty,
>and office supply stores as Columbus has, there ought to be a few such
>decks floating around. To be honest, I was just on a fishing expedition,
>I didn't even know that such things existed.
I kind of figured.
They were for magic tricks, if that helps.
Deird'Re
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>The thing which amuses me about Changeling is its subtitle. We know,
>of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
>and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
>without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
Actually, the name really doesn't have much to do with Gaiman's writing,
other than the name itself.
You might be surprised about what the Dreaming is, exactly.
Deird'Re
Timothy Toner
Andrew Rilstone <And...@aslan.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The thing which amuses me about Changeling is its subtitle. We know,
>of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
>and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
>without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
>
>
>"To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
>between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
>planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
>they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
>and important dreams can be?
Do you know what "The Dreaming" refers to? Are you certain that they
could have plumbed its depths without the help of Neil Gaiman? Or
are you making a bad assumption, cutting on a product that hasn't even
hit the shelves yet?
Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth. He's a
member of the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, which honestly believes that the
man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
Stories used to be about stories.
I also think you've misread the quote. My friend was quite proud that the
only book he had read for recreation prior to freshman year of high
school was, "First Blood." During a book fair, he discovered the DragonLance
saga, and was swept away. Other people reccomended Donaldson, Tolkien,
Lewis, and several others, and now he himself writes poetry (and damn good
stuff at that). But that doesn't change the fact that the first person
to teach him that literature could be great was Margaret Weis and Tracy
Hickman.
>
>Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
>or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
>"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Gaiman is damn insightful. You can't argue that. As for the greatest
comic ever, I still go with Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, which proved that
you could take a really stoopid idea, and make it amazingly profound.
>--
>
>Andrew Rilstone and...@aslan.demon.co.uk
>*********************************************************************
--
Timothy Toner - than...@interaccess.com - Whipping Boy, TEAM VISIONARY
"I've always had trouble with my employers. They forget that they're
only renting my judgement, not buying my soul. That's why they're paying
so much." - Solomon Short
Jay Knioum
>The thing which amuses me about Changeling is its subtitle. We know,
>of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
>and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
>without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
>"Sad" is one word I would use. Remember the dedication in Werewolf
>"To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
>between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
>planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
>they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
>and important dreams can be?
I do agree with all of the above.
>Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
>or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
>"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Hmmm.
Yes, this is the inevitable response from some whacked-out die-hard Neil
Gaiman fan, so bear with my literary immaturity (after all, I only MINORED
in English :) ).
First, IMO Sandman IS one of the greatest comics ever, and is a welcome
change from the absolute crap that people like Image are shoving down our
throats. Sandman is quite possibly the most cheese-free comic I have ever
seen, it's characters (while beyond wierd) are believable...which is more
than I can say for the X-Men.
Second, Neil Gaiman (there's that IMO again) is a great writer because he
does something that great writers do...he draws upon the works of other
great writers to inspire his own. Just the mythological and historical
references in Sandman alone would fill up any annotator's day. What's more,
he weaves many divergent legends, ideas, historical facts(?), and myths into
a damned interesting storyline that keeps the reader turning pages.
He does this in "Good Omens," too. "Angels and Visitations" also featured
this style.
No, Gaiman is not the end all, be all of literature. NO one writer is.
But, I believe that his contributions are valid and distinct. After all, it
was writers like Shelley, Shakespeare, Milton, and Carol (sp?) that make
writers like Gaiman (among many others) possible.
Let me close by pointing out that while I am a great Gaiman fan, I do
realize when he screws up. I cite the comic series "Angela" as one example.
As for Gaiman having any special insight into dreams: No more than any other
person does (he just got his version published :) )
And all that's about as IMO as you can get...
jk
Peter Hentges
>: Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
>: Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
>: Deird'Re> harsh.
>
>: It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
>
>in a cool ornate wooden box -- but nooooooo, they have to be 'collectible'
Yup. And have you been keeping an eye on EVERWAY coming out of
WotC? Their version of a roleplaying game with cards (which looks
much better as a game, IMJBO) will include "chase" cards in the
packs released through a fantasy art-card manufacturer.
-Peter Hentges [O]
-peter_...@ccmgate.adc.com [O]
-JBRU [O]
Peter Hentges
>Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
>or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
>"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Now, now Andrew. Don't go confusing net.folks with obscure OTE
references. ;)
Robert Barrett
: In article <803816...@aslan.demon.co.uk>,
: Andrew Rilstone <And...@aslan.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: >
: >"Sad" is one word I would use. Remember the dedication in Werewolf
: >"To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
: >between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
: >planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
: >they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
: >and important dreams can be?
Ah, Andrew, this Middle English specialist thanks you for including Long
Will (aka Langland) in your list of dreamers.
: Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth. He's a
: member of the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, which honestly believes that the
: man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
: enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
: we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
: Stories used to be about stories.
Well, Timothy, speaking as a professional literary critic, conferences
and classrooms would be very boring if all we ever did was sit around and
go "What a great story! I liked how he did this! And the language!"
Literary appreciation should be part of criticism, but only a small part;
after all, taste is notoriously specific and historical. I find it
easier to get a room of students to discuss constructions of masculinity
in *The Alliterative Morte Arthure*--if we were to talk about it as a
story, most of them--sad to say--would look at me and agree that it
sucked. And that reaction has been uniform when I've taught that and
several other medieval or modern texts, in spite of my reputation on
student evaluation forms as a goofy cheerleader who loves what he does
and reads. Now, this isn't to say that I won't talk about the way
Wolfram von Eschenbach carefully constructs *Parzival* or Chretien de
Troyes *Erec and Enide*, but students' eyes tend to glaze over at
structural or aesthetic discussions. At least topics like gender,
identity, politics, and such implicate them in what they're reading to
some extent.
Sigh. I'm sorry to hear that Neil Gaiman feels that way about Joyce and
criticism. Of course, authors never know what they're talking/writing
about in their books and poems anyway, and that's why we needs critics. ;-)
: >
: >Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
: >or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
: >"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Andrew, check out Gaiman's *The Doll's House* collection for *Sandman*.
It contains a tribute to *Little Nemo*. Gaiman is always very generous
about acknowledging his inspirations and sources. As for his less
well-read fanbeings, nothing one can do about them but hand them the
reprint of *Little Nemo* and hope it catches . . .
: Gaiman is damn insightful. You can't argue that. As for the greatest
: comic ever, I still go with Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, which proved that
: you could take a really stoopid idea, and make it amazingly profound.
Timothy, I just bought Moore's *Love and Death*--incredible. Just goes
to show why Alan Moore is without a doubt the most important writer
working in comics over the last fifteen years (*Swamp Thing*, *Watchmen*,
*V for Vendetta*).
Oh, and just to stay on topic, I'm not entirely pleased with the bastard
child that will be the Changeling Cantrip Cards, but my understanding
from certain net conversations I've had is that the WWGS marketing people
insisted--and in capitalist America Big Daddy Greenback rules the roost.
CCGS are hot now; get the sales made before the big Gen Con blow-out this
August (a lot of companies are going to be wishing they hadn't thrown all
their efforts into CCGs come September).
Rob
--
Robert W. Barrett, Jr. * E-mail: rbar...@dept.english.upenn.edu * World
Wide Web: http://dept.english.upenn.edu/~rbarrett/index.html * "He ran,"
the unicorn said. "You must never run from anything immortal. It
attracts their attention." - Peter S. Beagle, _The Last Unicorn_, 1968
Darren Lane Comeaux
> Oh well... I was planning on buying Changeling. Now I'll just
> have to boycott it.
Nahhh. Just wait until the second edition! That's what I always do.
*******************************************************************************
,
d8.
Darren Comeaux d888 d8
dco...@tiger.lsu.edu d8888d8'
d888888P
___ .m8888888P
\ # \d888888888b
| d888888P`888b
P-Chan "Cute Pig" |# 88888888 Y888
aka \ 88888888 Y88
Ryoko /#\8888888b. (|L
\/ Y8888888b.__dP)
/ #| Y8888888888(/
\# db#Y888888888(
\_|88b.#~"""8mm88b
Y88bmmmd8888888(\ )
d8888888888888L_T~
""Y88P"Y88888P
`-"888"~
Ranma 1/2
*******************************************************************************
William Timmins
editions. One sequential, one collectible, with different borders (or
something).
That way, they could please the whole crowd.
Well, who knows, maybe they will.
I don't HATE WW, I just don't like them. And I, for one, didn't need new
reasons to dislike them. ;) This whole argument doesn't show me anything
new about WW. But hey, the fact that SOME people enjoy them is reason
enough for them to exist, and I wouldn't begrudge other people's
enjoyment.
-Me
Poohthulhu... the Elder Teddy
Bryan Maloney
>>"Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Heh. Dat's good.
>First, IMO Sandman IS one of the greatest comics ever, and is a welcome
>change from the absolute crap that people like Image are shoving down our
You pretty much said it yourself--it's a welcome change from crap. As a
comic, Sandman (and Gaiman's other comic forays) are possibly _non pariel_.
As literature in general, I wouldn't go so far...
>Second, Neil Gaiman (there's that IMO again) is a great writer because he
Gaiman is a GOOD writer. We'll know if he's a great writer in another fifty
to one-hundred years. I will agree that he is among the best in his medium,
but let's face it, so far we've got only one true, confirmed "great" in comics
(Kirby). But I will admit that there are a lot of contenders running around
at the moment.
>does something that great writers do...he draws upon the works of other
>great writers to inspire his own. Just the mythological and historical
True, Shakespear was the world's greatest plagiarist. He never bothered to
come up with "original plots", just better ways of telling the tales. Now we
remember Shakespear and forget his sources.
Gaiman gave himself a leg up by searching out sources that were MUCH less well
known to his audience than did Shakespear--a cheap shot by the 20th century
fellow. For example, everybody knew who the character "Malvolio" was in
Shakespear's play as soon as he appeared. How did they know? Malvolio was
the villain in a drama that had already come out, by a contemporary.
Shakespear had simply written a prequel. Gaiman picks up far less popular
sources than did Shakespear, so he is praised as a genius in his own life.
Posterity will judge the longer term.
>No, Gaiman is not the end all, be all of literature. NO one writer is.
>But, I believe that his contributions are valid and distinct. After all, it
>was writers like Shelley, Shakespeare, Milton, and Carol (sp?) that make
>writers like Gaiman (among many others) possible.
Ah, but I believe that the original complaint was the apparently narrow
results of some Gaiman fans. If somebody reads Gaiman and lauds him, I am far
from impressed. If somebody reads Gaiman and then locates and reads Gaiman's
sources, then I won't simply dismiss the person as another drooling
fanboy or fangirl.
I've gotten a great deal of enjoyment from Sandman, and I am impressed at the
breadth of Gaiman's allusion and explicit reference, but I certainly am not
awestruck by his work. Of course, I have as much fun using Sandman as a
"reading list" as I do actually reading the comic. If only I had the time to
read these days...
>As for Gaiman having any special insight into dreams: No more than any other
>person does (he just got his version published :) )
The reason that Gaiman is so popular is that he tells us what we already
believe.
"Tell people something special, something important, and you'll be ignored
your whole life. Say something as obvious as the nose on your own face, and
the whole of Christendom will stand up and applaud you."
--Wibberly
Bryan Maloney
>Timothy Toner <than...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>>Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth. He's a
>>member of the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, which honestly believes that the
>>man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
>>enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
>>we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
>>Stories used to be about stories.
Urk?
I enjoyed Joyce, but I still prefer the more conventional approach that Gaiman
takes.
Joyce is just Joyce--he had no power except what fools gave to him. He wrote,
some read. He changed the pompous, pretentious part of the literary
establishment so that they were even more unreadable, but that's about it.
Storytellers still wrote stories, it's just that pretentious gits refused to
read them because they weren't "literature" anymore.
If Joyce "destroyed" anything, he destroyed the last, tenuous connection
between the literary intelligentsia and the real world. Too bad those same
intelligentsia were permitted to reproduce (via snooty "literature" education
and academic degrees).
Bryan Maloney
>>"Sad" is one word I would use. Remember the dedication in Werewolf
>>"To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
>>between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
>>planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
>>they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
>>and important dreams can be?
>Do you know what "The Dreaming" refers to? Are you certain that they
>could have plumbed its depths without the help of Neil Gaiman? Or
Uh, I know that I could have plumbed the depths of "The Dreaming" without Neil
Gaiman, and so could have a lot of other people. Some of the folks at WW
could have done it (Sam, for example--but he's not there anymore, but he was,
so I guess he'd still count). I was playing around with similar ideas before
Sandman came out--Neil just started before I did, and his realm is more
literary whereas I'm a biologist. Our "Dreamings" take different paths to the
same peak, though. As somebody who read Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare,
Carrol, (not Keats), and many others before I ever found Gaiman, I can tell
you that SOMEBODY could have done it without him.
>Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth. He's a
Uh, yeah? Your point? So he's a myth-reteller? So? It'd be nice if people
went beyond the comic book, though. Some do, too many don't.
>I also think you've misread the quote. My friend was quite proud that the
>only book he had read for recreation prior to freshman year of high
>school was, "First Blood." During a book fair, he discovered the DragonLance
Anybody who is proud of having a limited scope experience is--
is...
is so darn pathetic that I can't even come up with a pithy aphorism or snide
put-down to cover such a creature.
>Gaiman is damn insightful. You can't argue that. As for the greatest
>comic ever, I still go with Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, which proved that
>you could take a really stoopid idea, and make it amazingly profound.
But...
you've got....
to...
put ellipses.....
all over...
the...
place....
;-)
Bryan Maloney
>You might be surprised about what the Dreaming is, exactly.
Merrily,
Merrily,
Merrily,
Merrily...
Bryan Maloney
If the rules/descriptions for the cards appear in the text and the cards are
just a nice bit of flash (like lead figures), he'll think they're kind of cute.
If they actually introduce rules on their own, he'll think they're a pain in
the ass.
Jay Knioum
>Stainless Steel Rat (rat...@ccs.neu.edu) wrote:
>: >>>>> "Deird'Re" == Deird'Re M Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> writes:
>: Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
>: Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
>: Deird'Re> harsh.
>: It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
>Yup. WW could easily have packaged all the cards together and sold them
>in a cool ornate wooden box -- but nooooooo, they have to be 'collectible'
Ohhh, man. Why did you have to suggest this? I'm depressed now. Boxed
cards for sale would be damn cool. I'd buy them.
Of course, there's nothing stopping us from making our own boxes to put our
"collection" in, I suppose. <sigh>
SMITHERS! Some varnish and woodburning tools, please! :)
When's Changeling due out, anyway?
jk
Glass
>of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
>and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
>without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
Don't forget Kate Bush.
--
Sudd'nly my feet are feet of mud
it all goes slo-mo
I don't know why I'm crying
Raven
: The thing which amuses me about Changeling is its subtitle. We know,
: of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
: and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
: without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
When someone does thi skind of thing for the hell of it, or just to be
creative, he's an "artist". When someone is in a position to make money
with it, he's an "over-hip commecializer" or some such.
Just an observation. :)
: "Sad" is one word I would use. Remember the dedication in Werewolf
: "To Neil Gaiman who first taught us about the delicate barrier
: between dream and reality?", or some such? These people share a
: planet with Keats, Shelly, Langland, Shakespeare, Lewis Carol, and
: they had to wait for Sandman to come along to learn about how strange
: and important dreams can be?
: Whenever anyone tells me that Sandman is the greatest comic ever,
: or that Gaiman has some special insight into dreams, I mutter
: "Little Nemo" under my breath. They usually go away.
Anyone who claims anything is the greatest whatever should be smited across
the brow. I can say, however, that The Sandman is the only comic that has
ever managed to consistenly hold my attention. Superheroes, however neat,
tend to bore me quickly.
--
Raven E-Mail: 94f...@viking.dvc.edu
Jay Knioum
(Bryan Maloney) writes...
>Merrily,
>Merrily,
>Merrily,
>Merrily...
"Mankind is the dream of the dolphin..."
-- Enigma
Kevin Mowery
: >>>>>> "Deird'Re" == Deird'Re M Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> writes:
: >Deird'Re> But hey, if ya wanna prejudge its playability before it's even
: >Deird'Re> in the stores, fine with me, but I think you're being far too
: >Deird'Re> harsh.
: >It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
: I canna say anything about that, but I've already stated that the
: collectible cards are *not* required, and that you can make your own.
: Was that lost in the shuffle in the need to find yet something else to
: hate about White Wolf?
: Deird'Re
Well, as someone who hates the idea of a collectible supplement,
but still loves the idea of the Changeling game (and from people I've
talked to, it's a complete blast to play), that they're not required is
nice, but not quite as good.
After all, I could make my own Storyteller's Screen with
posterboard, an ink pen, and a pair of scissors to cut it to size. But I
like to buy the official stuff because it has a nice look to it (and hey,
what else am I gonna do with my money? Eat?), and it usually adds
something to the game.
I'll probably end up reading the game, seeing how the cards work,
deciding if I want to use them, then grumbling and making my own.
Just because I can make my own doesn't mean I have to be happy
about it.
--
Kevin Mowery --- kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"This calls for a special blend of psychology and extreme violence."
--Vyvyan, "The Young Ones"
Stainless Steel Rat
>> It's not the playability, it's the marketing gimmick.
Deird'Re> I canna say anything about that, but I've already stated that
Deird'Re> the collectible cards are *not* required, and that you can
Deird'Re> make your own.
If they're not required to play the game, then they're completely
supernumary. If they're not just a marketing gimmick, then they're not
unrequired to play the game, in which case the cards should be in a
"perfect collection" type of set, not bubblegum cards without the gum.
Regardless of which is the case, setting the cards up as a "collectable
card game" is nothing more than White Wolf cashing in on the biggest
thing to happen to the game industry in over a decade.
Deird'Re> Was that lost in the shuffle in the need to find yet something
Deird'Re> else to hate about White Wolf?
I'm not slamming White Wolf, I'm slamming "collectable card games" in
general. I understand that the concept is the biggest thing to happen to
the game industry in a decade. That doesn't mean I have to like them.
--
Rat <rat...@ccs.neu.edu> |Caution: Happy Fun Ball may suddenly
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/|accelerate to dangerous speeds.
Nathan Bardsley
Bryan Maloney <bj...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>
>>Timothy Toner <than...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>>>Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth. He's a
>>>man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
>>>enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
>>>we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
>>>Stories used to be about stories.
BZZZTTT!!! Wrong. The Pre-Joycean Fellowship does not "honestly believe
that the man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
enjoyment of literature."
There is no one true definition of the PJF, but after hearing a half-dozen
explanations, from the folk that put PJF after their names, the second best
summary I can put together is: Sometime after James Joyce there was a
split between literary values and storytelling values. (And that's certainly
an argueable point.) The PJF wants to bring these two views back together
and write good stories told well.
The best explantion for the PJF is that it's an excuse to sit in a bar and
argue about books.
The problem is that the whole "PJF thing" is essentially an in-joke among
a group of people that got out-of-hand and blown out of proportion. I would
seriously examine the context of any statement like "[Joyce] single-handedly
destroyed the enjoyment of literature," for signs of a party.
--
Nathan Bardsley -- nat...@player.org, sh...@clark.net
WinningerR
but let's face it, so far we've got only one true, confirmed "great" in
comics (Kirby)<<<
What?!?
While, I'm a great admirer of Kirby, you wildly overstate his abilities.
Dont forget McCay, Herriman, Segar, Hal Foster, Sterret, Alex Raymond,
(in more modern times) R. Crumb, Art Spiegelman, and probably one hundred
others.
Bryan Maloney
>From: winni...@aol.com (WinningerR)
>Subject: Re: On Gaiman... (was Re: Changeling: Cantrip Cards)
>Date: 23 Jun 1995 12:39:45 -0400
>What?!?
Well, I HAD forgotten their names, but I knew that you would remember them.
I'm having to remember things like uL15, that ICP8 is also uL26, which is also
"the Protease", and that "MCP" is also uL19, so more comprehensible stuff gets
crowded out.
I still love Wimpy's ode to a bleached bull skull found in the desert.
Tom Grant
come...@umcc.umcc.umich.edu writes:
> Personally, I thought that it was a bad idea to make the cards
>collectible, but I got a chance to actually play the game and without
>giving away anything that WW would not want me to, I thought that the
>cards were what made the game. Sure they include rules for the use of
>dice in the rulebook, but I think that the cards are what made the game
>so fun. I still don't agree with the collectible format, but I will buy
>them because I liked playing with them, even though the cards we used in
>the game were pieces of paper instead of the actual cards.
I'm a big fan of the cards used in Torg, Shatterzone, and the Masterbook
games. They did a fantastic job of keeping the players on their toes,
giving them something to help shape the odds somewhat, and making the
climactic scenes truly challenging.
However, the decks in these games were self-contained, not random (er,
"collectable"). It's one thing to have a deck in which the odds are
carefully balanced through a limited set of cards; it's another to have
whatever cards the player or GM happens to have on hand. Still, I haven't
seen the game, so who knows what WW has planned?
=================================================
"I've got to follow them. I'm their leader."
--Ledru-Rollin,
watching the mob, 1848
-------------------------------------------------
Tom Grant Senior Tech Writer
CSSD
Oracle Corporation
tgr...@us.oracle.com
415-506-8481
=================================================
Keith Johnson
>
>In article <bjm10.475...@cornell.edu>, bj...@cornell.edu
>(Bryan Maloney) writes...
>
>>>You might be surprised about what the Dreaming is, exactly.
>
>
> -- Enigma
Tell that to a can of tuna.
Andrew Rilstone
> Do you know what "The Dreaming" refers to?
I have no idea at all. I merely think it amusing that their quest
for gothic street cred requires them to put such a predictable
subtitle in there at all.
Maybe I'm just disappointed that it isn't "Fairy: The Cobbling"
after all.
> Are you certain that they
> could have plumbed its depths without the help of Neil Gaiman?
Absolutely certain.
> Or
> are you making a bad assumption, cutting on a product that hasn't even
> hit the shelves yet?
I'm making no judgement on the *game*. I liked the original ideas
behind Vampire and Wraith (i.e the stuff in the rulebooks: I can't
be bothered to keep up with the house campaign.) I'll look forward
to seeing Changeling.
> Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth.
Y'what? Gaiman himself brought back myth? Where was it before
Sandman #1, pray tell?
This is what irritates me. We go from "a talented writer, writing one
of the half dozen best comic books that's going right now" to "the
only good writer of comics that there has ever been" to "a prophet
who has single handedly recreated mankinds lost mythic sensibillity."
I am reminded of a story that John Byrne (comic book artist) told.
A fan at a convention told him that he (Byrne) was the greatest
artist of all time. That same fan threatened Byrne with physical
violence when he (Byrne) said that this was a little unfair to
the reputations of Kirby, not to say Picasso. Byrne concluded
"Fans can only think in absolutes."
>He's a
> member of the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, which honestly believes that the
> man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
> enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
> we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
> Stories used to be about stories.
I'd like to know what Gaiman, or the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, acutally
said about this. It seems hard to believe that an educated man like
Gaiman would think that Joyce single handedly did anything. Is Ulysses
less about "story" than "The Waves" or "At Swim Two Bird"? Has the
existence of the introspecitve novel really wiped out all the
millions of westerns, fantasy stories, crime stories, historical
novels, shopping and f*cking novels and so on that make up the vast
majority of what real people actually read? And surely a writer
as incredibly derivative as Gaiman (the whole point of
Sandman is the way it uses material from both other comics
and older folklore) couldn't possibly see "intertextuality" as
a bad thing?
> I also think you've misread the quote. My friend was quite proud that the
> only book he had read for recreation prior to freshman year of high
> school was, "First Blood." During a book fair, he discovered the DragonLance
> saga, and was swept away. Other people reccomended Donaldson, Tolkien,
> Lewis, and several others, and now he himself writes poetry (and damn good
> stuff at that). But that doesn't change the fact that the first person
> to teach him that literature could be great was Margaret Weis and Tracy
> Hickman.
I think that that is incredibly sad. Sad, I mean, that either
television, or the compulsery teaching of literature in school, or
the lack of free libraries, or some other cause, can stop someone
from reading up until the age of 11.
> Gaiman is damn insightful. You can't argue that.
I could do, but I won't. I think that he is an excellent writer.
> As for the greatest
> comic ever, I still go with Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, which proved that
> you could take a really stoopid idea, and make it amazingly profound.
I wouldn't call Swamp Thing amazingly profound, but it is certainly
very well written. I tend to think that the new cult of the writer
puts too much emphasis on the words, where the comics that I most
admire are the ones which are doing creative things with words and
pictures. Currently, that means Cerebus, Yummy Fur, Beanworld and
on balance Frank Miller's Sin City, even though I dislike the
subject matter. Historically, my "greatest comics" would just
be a list of the canon; limited to a single vote I'd go for
"New Gods." Call me a purist.
Andrew Rilstone
> First, IMO Sandman IS one of the greatest comics ever, and is a welcome
> change from the absolute crap that people like Image are shoving down our
> throats. Sandman is quite possibly the most cheese-free comic I have ever
> seen, it's characters (while beyond wierd) are believable...which is more
> than I can say for the X-Men.
I've said elsewhere that I admire Sandman lotsly. And far be it from me to
disagree with *anyone* who thinks that Image are absolute crap. However, I do
feel obliged to point out that you go from "one of the greatest
comics ever" to "better than the X-men", which are hardly synonymous!
What percentage of the comics that have been published in the last
50 years have you, or anyone else who makes a judgement about
the "greatest comic ever" read?
Andrew Rilstone
> Anyone who claims anything is the greatest whatever should be smited across
> the brow. I can say, however, that The Sandman is the only comic that has
> ever managed to consistenly hold my attention. Superheroes, however neat,
> tend to bore me quickly.
Fair comment. There have been one or two non superhero comics pre-Gamain,
however... :)
Have you read the original Doctor Strange? The writing is, well,
excreable, but Ditko seems to be in touch with, or possibly smoking,
something very interesting... Plus, of course, Sandman readers will
find Nightmare oddly familiar.
Douglas L. Vandenburgh
: Maybe I'm just disappointed that it isn't "Fairy: The Cobbling"
: after all.
I was disappointed that they couldn't stop the subtitle thing.
Just plain 'Fairy'.
- Doug
Kevin Mowery
we have pissed-off White Wolf *fans* on this thread, rather than just
random detractors), I just found out today that White Wolf (along with TSR
and WotC) are all raising their prices.
Strange how what are really 3 of the biggies in the fantasy hobby
industry (I won't say RPG industry, because of WotC) decide to raise
prices within 24 hours of each other, neh?
Y'know, here locally a few years ago (maybe the better part of a
decade ago) we had a problem with groundhogs at the airport. The little
buggers were tunneling under the runways and causing all sorts of merry
mayhem.
Ultimately, a guy was called in who had converted a very large
truck into a very large shop-vac. A tube was inserted into the groundhog
holes and they were sucked through the tube and deposited in a holding
tank, shaken but unharmed, to be moved to a site where they would stand
little chance of destroying the airport.
It seems to me that a similar technique could be used on marketing
weasels. You'd need a bigger tube, of course, and a more powerful vacuum.
But the extra cost there would be easily made up for when you eliminated
the cost of transporting them anywhere by replacing the holding tank with
a whirling blade.
Put in as many :)s as necessary to keep from being offended.
PS: Remember who to direct your anger at. Things like these are marketing
decisions, not the work of the writers (like Dierd're & Madweaver), who
seem to be very nice people interested in the (legitimate & informed)
views and problems of their audience.
Timothy Toner
Andrew Rilstone <And...@aslan.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <3schvl$r...@nntp.interaccess.com>
>
>> Do you know what "The Dreaming" refers to?
>
>I have no idea at all. I merely think it amusing that their quest
>for gothic street cred requires them to put such a predictable
>subtitle in there at all.
Heh. You'll be pleased to know that it wasn't their first
choice. THey felt the original gave too much away.
>
>Maybe I'm just disappointed that it isn't "Fairy: The Cobbling"
>after all.
Me too. There's going to be smurfs cobbling somewhere in my
game, dammit!
>
>> Are you certain that they
>> could have plumbed its depths without the help of Neil Gaiman?
>
>Absolutely certain.
Ah. Either a mind reader, or an expert on pop psychology. Good
on yer father.
>
>> Or
>> are you making a bad assumption, cutting on a product that hasn't even
>> hit the shelves yet?
>
>I'm making no judgement on the *game*. I liked the original ideas
>behind Vampire and Wraith (i.e the stuff in the rulebooks: I can't
>be bothered to keep up with the house campaign.) I'll look forward
>to seeing Changeling.
But you are making an assumption that they picked it to pander to the
Gaiman-heads and Gothers. That might not be the case, depending on
what precisely the Dreaming is. Did SJG call their CCG Illuminati:
New World Order because White Wolf had a group in their game called that?
Did Palladium call a rulebook New World Order for that reason? Doubtful.
The terminology is out there, and creative folx dont need Papa Gaiman
picking stuff out for them.
>
>> Neil Gaiman himself will defend his role in bringing back myth.
>
>Y'what? Gaiman himself brought back myth? Where was it before
>Sandman #1, pray tell?
Mostly gathering dust on bookshelves. By the time the Brothers
Grimm go around to compiling a list of fairy tale and folklore
stories, more to preserve the lingusitic style of the narrators,
fairy tales were perceived as wholly lacking in value. Bruno
Bettelheim taught us that there were stories in the stories, and
soon it became a pursuit of studying the subcontext, the motives of
the teller in telling that story. It all went downhill from there.
>
>This is what irritates me. We go from "a talented writer, writing one
>of the half dozen best comic books that's going right now" to "the
>only good writer of comics that there has ever been" to "a prophet
>who has single handedly recreated mankinds lost mythic sensibillity."
>
>I am reminded of a story that John Byrne (comic book artist) told.
>A fan at a convention told him that he (Byrne) was the greatest
>artist of all time. That same fan threatened Byrne with physical
>violence when he (Byrne) said that this was a little unfair to
>the reputations of Kirby, not to say Picasso. Byrne concluded
>"Fans can only think in absolutes."
I am reminded of a koan that deals with a student going to the Master
after five years of intense mediation. "Master," he said, "I have
studied the koans of your master, and your master's master. I have
performed zazen from the first light of dawn until the evening breeze
washes over my body. I have done all that you have told me, and yet
I am not enlightened. What more must I do?"
The master paused for a moment, then whapped the student on the side of
the head.
The student was enlightened.
It's not that Gaiman opened some cosmic box where myth was hiding. As
a popular writer, he brought a whole new audience to the art form.
While it can be said that he wrote in the shadow of giants (which he did),
they would be largely ignored if not for the renaissance he spawned.
Gaiman's style is simply and liad out for the reader to see (by picking
up the Dream Country graphic novel, you can get a glimpse at his
script. Only Alan Moore has a more complete vision before going into
an issue). He's accessible, and more than that, he's engaging. Dick and
Jane are accessible. Gaiman makes you think.
Obviously it clicked in you faster than it clicked in most people. But
it's unfair to deny people their personal epiphany just because you
managed to decode the secrets of the universe from a bubblegum wrapper.
>
> >He's a
>> member of the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, which honestly believes that the
>> man, no matter how brilliant he was, single-handedly destroyed the
>> enjoyment of literature. Now we can talk about _language._ Now
>> we can talk about _intertextuality._ But we've missed the bigger picture.
>> Stories used to be about stories.
>
>I'd like to know what Gaiman, or the Pre-Joycian Fellowship, acutally
>said about this. It seems hard to believe that an educated man like
>Gaiman would think that Joyce single handedly did anything. Is Ulysses
>less about "story" than "The Waves" or "At Swim Two Bird"? Has the
>existence of the introspecitve novel really wiped out all the
>millions of westerns, fantasy stories, crime stories, historical
>novels, shopping and f*cking novels and so on that make up the vast
>majority of what real people actually read? And surely a writer
>as incredibly derivative as Gaiman (the whole point of
>Sandman is the way it uses material from both other comics
>and older folklore) couldn't possibly see "intertextuality" as
>a bad thing?
Modern literature becomes a matter of intent and motive. Although the
deconstructionists believe, amongst other things, that the author is
dead, we must look at inherent intent and perhaps even critical motive.
We can forgive other writers whose works were flayed alive by critics,
but Joycie fully intented to cram all that crap in there, to unfold
stories within the stories like a Chinese puzzle box.
Gaiman and the PJF believe that sometimes a story is just a story, and
sometimes it's a damn good read. He includes intertexuality as a
means of instantaneously invoking mood and history, and not as some
exercise in pedanticism (and I'll assume you've seen the anntated
Ulysses).
>
>> I also think you've misread the quote. My friend was quite proud that the
>> only book he had read for recreation prior to freshman year of high
>> school was, "First Blood." During a book fair, he discovered the DragonLance
>> saga, and was swept away. Other people reccomended Donaldson, Tolkien,
>> Lewis, and several others, and now he himself writes poetry (and damn good
>> stuff at that). But that doesn't change the fact that the first person
>> to teach him that literature could be great was Margaret Weis and Tracy
>> Hickman.
>
>I think that that is incredibly sad. Sad, I mean, that either
>television, or the compulsery teaching of literature in school, or
>the lack of free libraries, or some other cause, can stop someone
>from reading up until the age of 11.
His mom was a teacher. I chalk it up to youthful rebellion.
>
>> Gaiman is damn insightful. You can't argue that.
>
>I could do, but I won't. I think that he is an excellent writer.
>
>> As for the greatest
>> comic ever, I still go with Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, which proved that
>> you could take a really stoopid idea, and make it amazingly profound.
>
>I wouldn't call Swamp Thing amazingly profound, but it is certainly
>very well written. I tend to think that the new cult of the writer
>puts too much emphasis on the words, where the comics that I most
>admire are the ones which are doing creative things with words and
>pictures. Currently, that means Cerebus, Yummy Fur, Beanworld and
>on balance Frank Miller's Sin City, even though I dislike the
>subject matter. Historically, my "greatest comics" would just
>be a list of the canon; limited to a single vote I'd go for
>"New Gods." Call me a purist.
Okay, you're a purist. If I may indugle your attention with an example
of Moore's profoundness. In the Saga of the Swamp Thing arc, we have
the Floronic Man telling the wrld's trees to overproduce oxygen,
which isn't all that swell for animal life. We have the Justice League,
the superheroes, trying to figure out what to do. There's FireStorm, saying
that all he has to do is transform the air into CO2 with his powers.
Superman shoots it down, saying, "Do you have any idea how many molecules
there are in the universe? I know. I've _counted_ them." They continue
to chatter along, about how to use this godlike power to decimate the
plants, until Green Arrow pipes in.
Now Green Arrow is a joke. Anything that could pose a threat to Superman
would _kill_ Green Arrow. He's there just for the camaraderie, and
merchandising apparently. But not this time. He slams his bow down, and
tells them all to shut up, an admit for once that they're impotent. In
their haste to save the world from the safety of their orbital satellite,
they've ignored the town of Hadley, Louisiana, dying right now beneath
their feet. "Who cares about Hadely?" No one replies.
It's common to kill someone in the hero mythos to give the hero sufficient
justification to get off his duff, and take the kid gloves off. Hell,
Beowulf let most of his men get _eaten_ before he decided to stop napping,
and kill Grendel. Occuassionally, in these monolithis stories, a town
or two has to fall before the threat. The heroes steel themselves, and
go forth to make sure it never happens again. Moore took us into that
town, and made us share in their suffering. It _was_ a profound thing.
Something, perhaps, I won't see in a comic for a long, long time.
>
>--
>
>Andrew Rilstone and...@aslan.demon.co.uk
>*********************************************************************
--
Timothy Toner - than...@interaccess.com - Whipping Boy, TEAM VISIONARY
"I've always had trouble with my employers. They forget that they're
only renting my judgement, not buying my soul. That's why they're paying
so much." - Solomon Short
Timothy Toner
>50 years have you, or anyone else who makes a judgement about
>the "greatest comic ever" read?
Sigh. You don't want to know. How about the _entire_ run of Pep, where
Archie Andrews got his start? My head hurts just thinking about it...
Hey! GURPS: Riverdale!
Andrew Young
Regarding the recently-announced price hike: it seems to be connected to
a world-wide shortage of paper, believe it or not.
Regards,
Andy
Hewlett Packard
Vancouver Division - Software Quality
P.O. Box 8906, Vancouver, WA 98668-8906
Kirby Krueger
Kevin Mowery <kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us> wrote:
> Well, just to further fan the flames a little (since it seems that
>we have pissed-off White Wolf *fans* on this thread, rather than just
>random detractors), I just found out today that White Wolf (along with TSR
>and WotC) are all raising their prices.
> Strange how what are really 3 of the biggies in the fantasy hobby
>industry (I won't say RPG industry, because of WotC) decide to raise
>prices within 24 hours of each other, neh?
While I hate price increases as much as anyone, in this case it's not
solely a greed-motivated phenomena. There is a worldwide paper shortage
at the moment, and paper prices have risen astronomically. (I'm tempted
to recall figures of 60% in the last six months, but that may be my lack
of sleep talking.) If you follow the comics industry, a similar price
increase has recently taken affect there.
It's still possible for companies to do things for valid economic reasons,
such as this. We just become cynical with all the money-grabbing that
does go on.
--
Kirby Krueger
kir...@peak.org
Jay Knioum
>In article <22JUN199...@vms2.tamu.edu>
>> First, IMO Sandman IS one of the greatest comics ever, and is a welcome
>> change from the absolute crap that people like Image are shoving down our
>> throats. Sandman is quite possibly the most cheese-free comic I have ever
>> seen, it's characters (while beyond wierd) are believable...which is more
>> than I can say for the X-Men.
>I've said elsewhere that I admire Sandman lotsly. And far be it from me to
>disagree with *anyone* who thinks that Image are absolute crap. However, I do
>feel obliged to point out that you go from "one of the greatest
>comics ever" to "better than the X-men", which are hardly synonymous!
What I was clumsily trying to say is that Sandman is a much better comic
than, say, the X-Men, even though I daresay that X-Men has a much bigger
readership and has been around a LOT longer. I was not trying to make
"Greatest Comic Ever" and "Better than X-Men" synonymous in any way.
>What percentage of the comics that have been published in the last
>50 years have you, or anyone else who makes a judgement about
>the "greatest comic ever" read?
A fair number of many different genres, but probably not enough to impress
you. Ranges from Popeye and Action Comics to some of Valiant's stuff today.
Hell, one of my favorite comics of all time remains "G.I. Combat," a DC war
comic series that I loved as a kid.
BTW, "Firearm" is a damn good title, IMO, and is among my top 10.
Sadly, my limited budget prevents me from buying ANY comics nowadays, and I
only buy certain Vertigo titles when they are compiled...
And please recall the several IMO's I placed in the same post I said the
dreaded words "one of the greatest comics ever."
My criteria for judging comic "greatness" comes from the uniqueness of the
storyline, and the bulk of the "super hero" genre does little more than
irritate me these days. What I like are comics about folks in extraorinary
circumstances, with strange powers if need be, but otherwise act believably
(i.e. DON'T feel the need to dress up tight underwear and fight crime for no
reward).
One thing I like about the "WildCards" series of books and comics is that
they present a more believeable view of folks with strange powers. I love
the Strange and Bizarre as much as the next reader, but I want at least a
little realism in there somewhere. Golden Boy's having to deal with the
Communist witch hunts in the '50s was one of the greatest "super hero" stories
I've read.
[getting out net.astrolabe]
Wasn't this a gaming group a minute ago? :)
jk
Jana Wright
(defensive hat on)
We are an RPG company that makes TCGs as well. The fact Magic
became insanely popular does NOT mean that we don't have
role-playing games as well. Currently: SLA Industries, Ars Magica,
we are adding Everway this summer, and the RPG team is working
on an unnamed game that I can't talk about. Now all we have to
do it get the stores to realize this. Sigh...
> There is a worldwide paper shortage at the moment, and paper prices
> have risen astronomically.
This is indeed true. It sucks, but it's true.
(defensive hat off)
Robbie Westmoreland
Jana Wright <tsi...@wizards.com> wrote:
>
>> There is a worldwide paper shortage at the moment, and paper prices
>> have risen astronomically.
>
>This is indeed true. It sucks, but it's true.
B-b-but why?
What's causing a paper shortage? Is it making recycled paper
cost-effective?
The Houston Post cited a >50% increase in newsprint costs over the last
three years as one reason for folding... What's causing the paper
shortage?
[tongue-in-cheek theory: if we all believe REAL HARD that there is
plenty of paper, then we won't have to deal with this horrific plot
by the Cabal that really runs things...]
--
Robbie Westmoreland, Dilletante | "What people don't understand is that
rob...@phoenix.net | pedophiles are stalking kids on the
rob...@txs.uscourts.gov | Internet." --Kristi Hamrick, Family
http://www.phoenix.net/~robbiew/ | Research Council, 6/96 ** Be Afraid **
Kevin Mowery
: >Deird'Re M. Brooks (mar...@netcom.com) wrote:
: >: Nah, they're collectible, BUT...
: >: There will be nifty photocopy-able pages in Changeling, I think...if not,
: >: you can always use 3x5 cards. That's what the ad-copy says.
: > As long as there's an out. And I really hope that the pages (if
: >you're right) are photocopiable. I was just going to write down the
: I can't guarantee it, but there are instructions, so. :-)
I'm hoping. I've seen some really bad ideas from game companies
before when it came to photocopiable pages ("It's full-color, see, and
right in the middle of the book, and on this really nice glossy paper, and
all you have to do is photocopy it..." BTW, the prize for knowing which
game company did this is 3 attaboys, which you will have to administer to
yourself).
: >pertinient text, since having nifty cards with cool pictures would
: >manage to distract the players (without taking their mind off the game,
: >oddly).
: That's weird.
Yes, but they'd still be thinking about Changeling. That's a big
improvement from the time I made the mistake of bringing HoL to a Werewolf
game... You wanna talk major distraction? (Although we did find some
nifty things to exclaim in there... :))
: >: MadWeaver can give official info... I am in no way a net.representative
: >: of White Wolf Games.
: >: I just write for them sometimes.
: > Yes, but you're the most *frequent* poster of everyone we know.
: >And, of course, we all look up to you... :)
: That's because I'm a masochist. :)
I think that only I would look up to you because you're a
masochist. I could be assuming an unusual degree of normality among the
posters on this thread, though... :)
: >: I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
: > I guess I'll have to call around. With as many hobby, novelty,
: >and office supply stores as Columbus has, there ought to be a few such
: >decks floating around. To be honest, I was just on a fishing expedition,
: >I didn't even know that such things existed.
: I kind of figured.
: They were for magic tricks, if that helps.
: Deird'Re
Actually that probably will help. I know of several stores which
carry that sort of thing.
Kevin Mowery
: >The thing which amuses me about Changeling is its subtitle. We know,
: >of course, that there are only two writers in the world (Neil Gaiman
: >and Joseph Campbell), but don't you think we could have got the point
: >without you calling the game "The Dreaming."
: Actually, the name really doesn't have much to do with Gaiman's writing,
: other than the name itself.
: You might be surprised about what the Dreaming is, exactly.
: Deird'Re
Well, I looked through all the books last night to glean as much
info on the Faerie as I could (much of which I'd done before for some
local folks who thought, for some reason, that I'd know more about the
game than them). I came up with a lot of concepts that didn't seem to
have any mention in the big ad (mottleds vs. smooths, faeries having
powers centered around aspects of nature, Arcadia changing so much over
the past few centuries that it wouldn't be recognizable to the guardians
of the Arcadia Gateway).
And, from the Malkavian Clanbook, I came across the Wall of Sleep
as the barrier between the earth and Arcadia. It would seem that that is
still intact (as a concept and an actual thing in the game).
Damian O'Dea
>>with blank faces to make my own cards (index cards shuffle like crap).
>
>I wish I could remember, I used to have some blank bicycles.
>
plain single colour back). I got a couple of packs through Advance
Comics.
You could, of course, just beg somebody who does end up getting the cards
to allow you to photocopy them (violating copyright?). Of course, I would
only do this to protect my cards from being damaged through use...
--
ODie...
#include <std_disclaimer.hpp>
===================================================================
=== Damian O'Dea Damia...@dsto.defence.gov.au ===
=== Information Management/ITD phone: (08) 259 5839 ===
=== DSTO - Salisbury fax: (08) 259 5619 ===
=== P. O. Box 1500 ===================================
=== Salisbury, SA 5108 ===================================
===================================================================
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>Well, I can see the local Storyteller GM I know reacting in one of two ways:
>If the rules/descriptions for the cards appear in the text and the cards are
>just a nice bit of flash (like lead figures), he'll think they're kind of cute.
>If they actually introduce rules on their own, he'll think they're a pain in
>the ass.
Well... They do have rules associated, but they make life a bit more
interesting, that's all I can say.
Damned NDAs.
Andrew Rilstone
[getting out net.astrolabe]
>
> Wasn't this a gaming group a minute ago? :)
Er...yes. Sorry.
Lur...@nr.infi.net.nr.infi.net
> It will be interesting to see if and how wrong I am about this...
>
> -John
>
Yeah, if they ever put out the bloody book, damnit!
Andrew Rilstone
> What?!?
>
> While, I'm a great admirer of Kirby, you wildly overstate his abilities.
> Dont forget McCay, Herriman, Segar, Hal Foster, Sterret, Alex Raymond,
> (in more modern times) R. Crumb, Art Spiegelman, and probably one hundred
> others.
The people you list didn't have an influence on anything like
Kirby's scale: we don't have an entire industry churning
out sub-standard versions of Hal Foster, but we do have Marvel, Image
and a large chunk of DC putting out nothing but poor imitations
of Kirby's work. And that, of course, is part of the problem: as a
result of Kirby's influence, mainstream comics came to be synonymous
with superhero comics; so if you only read the mainstream, then
you are inevitably going to regard Kirby as pre-eminent.
My own feeling is that after the publication of "New Gods", everyone
should have given up on superheroes: the genre had been done as well
as it could possibly be done, and everything since has been
inferior or derivative. (Although you could regard "Watchman" as
a sort of glorious hari-kari.)
James Wallis
> Well, just to further fan the flames a little (since it seems that
> we have pissed-off White Wolf *fans* on this thread, rather than just
> random detractors), I just found out today that White Wolf (along with TSR
> and WotC) are all raising their prices.
> Strange how what are really 3 of the biggies in the fantasy hobby
> industry (I won't say RPG industry, because of WotC) decide to raise
> prices within 24 hours of each other, neh?
Well, the price of paper going up 30% in the last nine months
(that's a world-wide increase) might have something to do with
it as well. It's a miracle prices didn't go up a lot sooner.
If you want to start sniffing for conspiracies and cartels behind
this price rise, you're thinking much too small. Everybody's being
hit by this one. Some of us are just trying to hold on a little
longer.
--
James Wallis
Director of Hogshead Publishing <> Any statements and sentiments in
(ja...@hogshead.demon.co.uk) <> <> this post should not be taken as
Writing in a personal capacity <> opinions of Hogshead Publishing.
Bryan Maloney
>From: kejo...@peseta.ucdavis.edu (Keith Johnson)
>Subject: Re: Changeling: Cantrip Cards
>Date: 23 Jun 1995 18:05:31 GMT
>In article <22JUN199...@vms2.tamu.edu>, jmk...@vms2.tamu.edu says...
>>
>>In article <bjm10.475...@cornell.edu>, bj...@cornell.edu
>>(Bryan Maloney) writes...
>>
>>>>You might be surprised about what the Dreaming is, exactly.
>>
>>"Mankind is the dream of the dolphin..."
>>
>> -- Enigma
> Tell that to a can of tuna.
Are all dreams pleasant?
PS: Vampire: the Masquerade
Werewolf: the Apocalypse
Mage: the Ascenscion
Wraith: the Oblivion
In all cases, the second name is an event.
Thus, Changeling: the Dreaming probably doesn't refer to a "location".
Bryan Maloney
>Have you read the original Doctor Strange? The writing is, well,
>excreable, but Ditko seems to be in touch with, or possibly smoking,
>something very interesting... Plus, of course, Sandman readers will
>find Nightmare oddly familiar.
Man, Ditko wasn't smoking, he was GROWING IN HIS OWN EARS! A seriously
warping thing for a boy to read late at night in his bedroom, let me
tell you...
Andrew Finch
: However, the decks in these games were self-contained, not random (er,
: "collectable"). It's one thing to have a deck in which the odds are
: carefully balanced through a limited set of cards; it's another to have
: whatever cards the player or GM happens to have on hand. Still, I haven't
: seen the game, so who knows what WW has planned?
I don't think it takes a mind reader to figure this out. I would say they
planned to cash in on the card game craze as ahrd as they can, and see
how many suckers are willing to pay for random cards in order to play
their RPG. A year ago, those cards would have come as a complete set,
with the game.
David
Raven
: info on the Faerie as I could (much of which I'd done before for some
: local folks who thought, for some reason, that I'd know more about the
: game than them). I came up with a lot of concepts that didn't seem to
: have any mention in the big ad (mottleds vs. smooths, faeries having
: powers centered around aspects of nature, Arcadia changing so much over
: the past few centuries that it wouldn't be recognizable to the guardians
: of the Arcadia Gateway).
: And, from the Malkavian Clanbook, I came across the Wall of Sleep
: as the barrier between the earth and Arcadia. It would seem that that is
: still intact (as a concept and an actual thing in the game).
Well, you can't honestly expect them to explain everything in the ad, can
you? The ad for Mage only had cursory mention of the Technocracy and
Paradox. The ad for Wraith had hardly any mention of the Heirarchy. Both
games have had much more detail in them than what was in the ads.
A friend of mine has a good amount of knowledge about the fey, from actual
folklore. She said that they appear to be using the traditional separation
between the Seelie and Unseelie, which is just pretty and non-pretty. Even
trolls, an ANSI standard monster, are described as honorable. (That did
confuse me, though. The old stories I've read about trolls describe
hideous monsters who devour men, women and children, and explode messily
in the sun, their remnants turning to stone.)
Anyway, I hoping that even if there is anything that sucks, it can be
tweaked with to cease sucking.
--
Raven E-Mail: 94f...@viking.dvc.edu
Raven
: > Anyone who claims anything is the greatest whatever should be smited across
: > the brow. I can say, however, that The Sandman is the only comic that has
: > ever managed to consistenly hold my attention. Superheroes, however neat,
: > tend to bore me quickly.
: Fair comment. There have been one or two non superhero comics pre-Gamain,
: however... :)
: Have you read the original Doctor Strange? The writing is, well,
: excreable, but Ditko seems to be in touch with, or possibly smoking,
: something very interesting... Plus, of course, Sandman readers will
: find Nightmare oddly familiar.
Not familiar with that one. I haven't much bothered with comic books,
mainly because I never had enough money to spend on something consistently.
I've been meaning to see if I could find The Maxx as a comic book
somewhere. I much liked the MTV production, However, we are grossly of
topic here, so I think I'll shut up now. :)
--
Raven E-Mail: 94f...@viking.dvc.edu
Deird'Re M. Brooks
> Well, I looked through all the books last night to glean as much
>info on the Faerie as I could (much of which I'd done before for some
>local folks who thought, for some reason, that I'd know more about the
>game than them). I came up with a lot of concepts that didn't seem to
>have any mention in the big ad (mottleds vs. smooths, faeries having
>powers centered around aspects of nature, Arcadia changing so much over
>the past few centuries that it wouldn't be recognizable to the guardians
>of the Arcadia Gateway).
Let me see if I can address these without giving too much away:
Mottled vs. Smooths... All I can say is that they were Faerie, not
Changelings, but even when you get right down to it, it *can* happen.
Powers centered around aspects of nature: That's how the Garou would
view them, not to say they don't, y'understand...
Arcadia changing? *shrug* Don't know much about how it looks, except
that it *has* changed.
> And, from the Malkavian Clanbook, I came across the Wall of Sleep
>as the barrier between the earth and Arcadia. It would seem that that is
>still intact (as a concept and an actual thing in the game).
Yes, of course.
But you might still find yourself surprised.
BTW, perhaps some things have changed--that is to be expected, games
change in development.
Deird'Re
WinningerR
Kirby's scale: we don't have an entire industry churning
out sub-standard versions of Hal Foster, but we do have Marvel, Image
and a large chunk of DC putting out nothing but poor imitations
of Kirby's work. And that, of course, is part of the problem: as a
result of Kirby's influence, mainstream comics came to be synonymous
with superhero comics;<<<
Kirby, by his own admission, was a direct descendant of Hal Foster. In
fact, one could argue that the whole idea of the adventure comic was
derived from Foster, Raymond, and Caniff. These three people certainly had
a profound influence upon Siegel/Schuster and Kane/Finger and are thus as
responsible for the modern superhero comic as just about anybody else.
Furthermore, mainstream comics were already synonymous with superheroes
before Kirby's heyday. DC began the "silver age" in the late 50s and met
with such success that virtually all of the non superhero books on the
market were crowded off the shelves.
I'll grant the fact that Kirby's work is more "plainly visible" in today's
crap comics than that of Hal Foster. But if this is the criteria of
greatness, we must look even further down the historical food chain than
you suggest. Sadly, today's crop of superhero artists aren't even stealing
from Kirby any more -- they're stealing from the people who stole from
Frank Miller.
>>>My own feeling is that after the publication of "New Gods", everyone
should have given up on superheroes: the genre had been done as well
as it could possibly be done<<<
In one sense, I completely agree -- Kirby absolutely mined the "fantasy
and wonder" side of the genre down to its last nugget. That said, though,
there have been a few masterpieces in the superhero genre since. In recent
years, I've come to think that in many ways, DARK KNIGHT RETURNS is
superior to WATCHMEN (and, for the sake of disclosure, I'm partisan toward
the latter). Then, there's AMERICAN FLAGG!, Alan Moore's run on SWAMP
THING, and even (gulp) SANDMAN (which began as a superhero title, though
it now seems to have drifted into its own territory).
God, I can't believe I'm actually saying positive things about superhero
comics!
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>> (I won't say RPG industry, because of WotC)
As an aside, you may have heard of Talislanta and Primal Order? Those
were WotC, pre-Magic.
::sigh::
Hey, I finally met Richard Garfield today, and hey, he's a nice guy.
Certainly not the engineer of the downfall of RPGs.
>(defensive hat on)
>We are an RPG company that makes TCGs as well. The fact Magic
>became insanely popular does NOT mean that we don't have
>role-playing games as well. Currently: SLA Industries, Ars Magica,
>we are adding Everway this summer, and the RPG team is working
>on an unnamed game that I can't talk about. Now all we have to
>do it get the stores to realize this. Sigh...
Except for SLA (which my store doesn't seem to carry), I've been grabbing
nearly every WotC rpg module. :-)
>> There is a worldwide paper shortage at the moment, and paper prices
>> have risen astronomically.
>This is indeed true. It sucks, but it's true.
That's life, but, hey, we're entering the fifth stage of society
(Aftermath).
>(defensive hat off)
Deird'Re
Lea Crowe
In article <bjm10.489...@cornell.edu>
bj...@cornell.edu "Bryan Maloney" writes:
> PS: Vampire: the Masquerade ...
>
> In all cases, the second name is an event.
All cases... except one, Doctor Nemesis!
> Thus, Changeling: the Dreaming probably doesn't refer to a "location".
I don't think anyone imagined the Dreaming of "Changeling" would be a
location--that would invite *too* much litigation. My guess, like yours,
is for an event, a la Ascension. But who cares? Anyone who buys a game
for its subtitle is... but then again, the subtitle was the best thing
about "Mage."
--
l...@hestia.demon.co.uk Ka ao, ka ao, ka awatea!
Charles M Seaton
off-topic for the board, but I can't resist, and hey, =I= didn't
start it. =) ]
Every several years, we have a new writer who people who don't know
much about comics (except for the most popular ones) think of as
"the greatest comic book writer ever." Generally, these are people
who do interesting things in the superhero/fantasty genres; since
the people who call them "the greatest" are generally ignorant of
any non-genre comics, or any comics published more than seven years
ago, the writer quite often is the best comics writer they've ever
read.
Gaiman is the one right now. Before Gaiman, Alan Moore was "the
greatest comic book writer ever." And before Moore, we had Frank
Miller. (Gaiman is read much more outside the comics ghetto than
Moore or Miller, but popularity != greatness; and anyway, Sandman
isn't nearly as popular with the general public as Maus, let alone
Calvin & Hobbes, so using popularity as the arbitor of "best ever"
-ness won't put Sandman in the top spot.)
It's telling that Gaiman's fans, on this thread, have compared him
to Image Comics and X-Men - damning with faint praise, imo. Is
anyone about to argue that Sandman is better than Maus, than Krazy
Kat, than Thimble Theater, than Tezuka's Pheonix, than Acme Novelty
Library, etc? No, probably not: because it's very likely that the
folks who declare Gaiman (or even Kirby) the best ever haven't read
many, or any, of these comics.
Two more quick comments on this thread: would anyone expect a book
fan to have read a large percentage of all books ever published
before having an opinions on which ones are great? And I think Zot!
showed that there was new territory in superheroes, even after New
Gods: but it's territory that the writers don't want to explore, and
the fans don't want to read.
Yours,
--Ennead
Andrew Rilstone
winni...@aol.com "WinningerR" writes:
> Furthermore, mainstream comics were already synonymous with superheroes
> before Kirby's heyday. DC began the "silver age" in the late 50s and met
> with such success that virtually all of the non superhero books on the
> market were crowded off the shelves.
It's a fallacy to place Kirby's "heyday" in the 1960s. There are those
who hold that 'Mother Delilah' in "Boys Ranch" is Kirby's single
best work and the single best comic ever. At any rate, "Captain America"
was 1941, and that had such an influence such that comics never really
stepped out of its shadow. (Steranko lists something like 100 direct
imitators of the Captain America character, that's without
even considering the way it defined the visual vocabularly of superheroes
for decades afterwards.)
> you suggest. Sadly, today's crop of superhero artists aren't even stealing
> from Kirby any more -- they're stealing from the people who stole from
> Frank Miller.
Who freely admits that he learned everything he knew from Kirby...
Carl Perkins
}
}Regarding the recently-announced price hike: it seems to be connected to
}a world-wide shortage of paper, believe it or not.
I believe it. I gather that in the last 2-3 years the price of paper has
gone up by 50% to 150% (depending on the type of paper).
I'm sure someone will blame it on the many tons of paper being used up by the
collectable trading card games.
--- Carl
John R. Cooper
kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Kevin Mowery) wrote:
> : A friend of mine has a good amount of knowledge about the fey, from actual
> : folklore. She said that they appear to be using the traditional separation
> : between the Seelie and Unseelie, which is just pretty and non-pretty. Even
> : trolls, an ANSI standard monster, are described as honorable. (That did
> : confuse me, though. The old stories I've read about trolls describe
> : hideous monsters who devour men, women and children, and explode messily
> : in the sun, their remnants turning to stone.)
>
> Well, I think that the game seems to be leaning toward the
> interpretation of Seelie and Unseelie as good and evil, not pretty and
> ugly (otherwise the game will end up stuck on a newly-revived "Evil Races"
> thread, accused of the same stereotyping as other games that do that).
> And I think that Scandinavian trolls were actually intelligent,
> accomplished sorcerors. If I remember correctly.
I wouldn't get too caught up in figuring out how traditional faerie
myth fits into _Changeling_. How much of the traditional European view of
lycanthropy survived in _Werewolf_?
Bear in mind the fact that players do not play faeries (or, I should
say, full faeries). You play a changeling, a half-faerie, half-human
creature. Furthermore, as I understand it the game takes place on Earth,
not Arcadia, so much of the "pure faerie myth" that ostensibly inspires
the game is out of reach and inaccessible to players (e.g., only a pale
imitation of the politics between the Seelie and Unseelie would get played
out on Earth).
It will be interesting to see if and how wrong I am about this...
-John
+--------------------------+------------------------------------------+
| John R. Cooper | Internet: jo...@cooper.terranet.com |
| Vivid Technologies, Inc. | j...@vivitech.com |
| Waltham, MA 02154 | jco...@world.std.com |
+--------------------------+------------------------------------------+
| | GCS/O d H s g+ p? au>+ a- w v++ C++$ U-- |
| "Rub her feet." | P- L- 3- E N+ K++ W++ M++ V -po+ Y+ t++@ |
| - Long's Notes | 5 j R+++$ G' tv@ b+ D+ B--- e++ u** h--- |
| | f+ r++ n->+ y+++*>$ |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Lea Crowe
kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us "Kevin Mowery" writes:
> SLA Industries: to my knowledge, made by someone else then
> acquired by WotC. Ars Magica: the same. Everway: an RPG based on
> collecting cards, from what I understand. Unnamed game: can't say a thing
> about it.
> The Primal Order: actual role-playing game/game supplement. Did
> you guys also do Talislanta, or I am thinking of someone else?
I think Talislanta was bought in. I'm sure it's been around for longer
than WotC. It certainly *feels* like ages...
And from what I've heard, "Everway" allows you to *use* cards--but you
can use *any* cards, and WotC won't be publishing a "collectible" set.
Timothy Toner
Deird'Re M. Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>Hey, I finally met Richard Garfield today, and hey, he's a nice guy.
No whisps of brimstone, eh? 8^p
>
>Certainly not the engineer of the downfall of RPGs.
But humanity itself, that's a different story...
You do have to admit, it's rather funny, seeing Garfield go back to
all the other math profs at the university where he works, with pots
of money. "Richard, what did you do, rob a bank?" "Remember that
'child's game' I was working on?" "Oh. Well, really Richard. If
you're not going to devote your time to _serious_ pursuits..."
--
Timothy Toner - than...@interaccess.com - Whipping Boy, TEAM VISIONARY
"I've always had trouble with my employers. They forget that they're
only renting my judgement, not buying my soul. That's why they're paying
so much." - Solomon Short
Deird'Re M. Brooks
Just as an aside, before it was anything else, WotC was RPG.
> SLA Industries: to my knowledge, made by someone else then
>acquired by WotC. Ars Magica: the same. Everway: an RPG based on
>collecting cards, from what I understand. Unnamed game: can't say a thing
>about it.
Ars Magica was acquired after WotC acquired one of the co-designers of
the game (Jonathon Tweet)
> The Primal Order: actual role-playing game/game supplement. Did
>you guys also do Talislanta, or I am thinking of someone else?
They did Talislanta.
> Not to seem like I'm dismissing you as an RPG company out of hand,
>but it seems to me that Magic: The Cash Cow really built the company to
>the level it's at. Without it, how many of these RPGs would you be making
>(or distributing, or rewriting)?
Of course Magic helped out, but you're making it sound as if WotC
_expected_ the success they received with Magic, and that just ain't so.
They'd probably have Ars Magica at the very least, simply because of
other factors which had nothing to do with CCGs or anything else, and a
lot to do with disappointed fans.
Yes, WotC is an RPG company.
>Kevin Mowery --- kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
Deird'Re
Kevin Mowery
: > Well, I looked through all the books last night to glean as much
: >info on the Faerie as I could (much of which I'd done before for some
: >local folks who thought, for some reason, that I'd know more about the
: >game than them). I came up with a lot of concepts that didn't seem to
: >have any mention in the big ad (mottleds vs. smooths, faeries having
: >powers centered around aspects of nature, Arcadia changing so much over
: >the past few centuries that it wouldn't be recognizable to the guardians
: >of the Arcadia Gateway).
: Let me see if I can address these without giving too much away:
: Mottled vs. Smooths... All I can say is that they were Faerie, not
: Changelings, but even when you get right down to it, it *can* happen.
True. However, I think the book that was from (Rage Across New
York, I believe, or maybe Rite of Passage) was written well before any
work was done one Changeling (at that time still known as Faerie).
Evidenced by those little critters being real Faeries, not Changelings.
I think that also plays into the use of Seelie and Unseelie as
good and evil, not pretty and ugly, too. Those were ugly little goblins,
but half of the options from the encounter involved befriending the Garou.
: Powers centered around aspects of nature: That's how the Garou would
: view them, not to say they don't, y'understand...
This is also true. Like I said, the games contain lots of
misinformation on the other critters. BTW, I think I saw a reference in
one book, a single sentence, more than likely, about animosity between
Faerie folk and Magi.
Since they both seem like they'll be pretty potent magickally, I
can see this (judging from the hints and whispers on here--which have
served to bolster the validity of another sentence from some book or
other--the Faerie folk will be able to manipulate what we Sleepers think
is reality at a fairly basic level).
: Arcadia changing? *shrug* Don't know much about how it looks, except
: that it *has* changed.
Well, that was from the Umbra book. Something about the changes
that have gone on in Arcadia over the past few centuries rendering it
unrecognizable to the outcasts. Or at least that it's so radically
different from what they called home that even if they could get back they
wouldn't want to.
: > And, from the Malkavian Clanbook, I came across the Wall of Sleep
: >as the barrier between the earth and Arcadia. It would seem that that is
: >still intact (as a concept and an actual thing in the game).
: Yes, of course.
: But you might still find yourself surprised.
I nearly always find myself surprised (okay, Werewolf 2nd didn't
surprise me, but that was because I'd been playing Werewolf 1st for a year
solid before then). I was really surprised by Wraith, but that surprise
went in two directions (this is great! I can't play a Wraith in the
campaign!).
But the Dreaming thing probably won't be as big a surprise thanks
to the big advert and the folks on this thread.
: BTW, perhaps some things have changed--that is to be expected, games
: change in development.
: Deird'Re
Of course they have. Trying to integrate everything published up
to this point in the Storyteller system on the Faerie folk would make a
big, cluttered mess (sarcastic comments not appreciated, folks).
I just like to track the changes, keep an eye on what was kept in
or thrown out.
Kevin Mowery
Distribution:
John R. Cooper (jo...@cooper.terranet.com) wrote:
[various bits about Seelie, Unseelie, and Scandinavian trolls snipped]
: I wouldn't get too caught up in figuring out how traditional faerie
: myth fits into _Changeling_. How much of the traditional European view of
: lycanthropy survived in _Werewolf_?
Hereditary lycanthropy is a valid legend. That the infectious
lycanthropy bit was left out was, IMHO, a good call on White Wolf's part.
And the game seemed to integrate European myth, Native American myth, and
stuff made up from whole cloth by the authors. It's recognizable, but
skewed 90 degrees.
For instance, the many of the tribes seem to be like the
traditional werewolf--bloodthirsty and evil (I'm thinking primarily of the
Shadow Lords and Red Talons). The Get seem to take after the Scandinavian
myth of shapechanging berserkers. Native Americans had their own
shapechanger myths (as did Africans and Asians).
The Bone Gnawers remind me strongly of the "Wolfen" from the
Lycanthropes supplement for Chill (and to a much lesser extent, the
original Wolfen from the book).
And anyone who wants what could almost be a historical reference
to the Garou in 1800s America, check out the book Moon Dance. It
integrates a lot of myth and comes out with something that seems quite a
bit like a confrontation between Shadow Lords and Uktena/Wendigo...
: Bear in mind the fact that players do not play faeries (or, I should
: say, full faeries). You play a changeling, a half-faerie, half-human
: creature. Furthermore, as I understand it the game takes place on Earth,
: not Arcadia, so much of the "pure faerie myth" that ostensibly inspires
: the game is out of reach and inaccessible to players (e.g., only a pale
: imitation of the politics between the Seelie and Unseelie would get played
: out on Earth).
Yes, but I suspect that it would only make sense for Changelings
to have very long lives. And wouldn't each House be ruled by the oldest
of the members? Which could result in the Changelings in charge being old
enough to remember the old divisions and trying to keep the old order
functioning.
Or, to add to the good v. evil view I have of Seelie v. Unseelie,
there's a few points in the various Storyteller books where it's mentioned
that the Unseelie have gone to the Wyrm--which may not be the Wyrm that
the Garou think, of course. There are 3 broad varieties of demons that
Nephandi Magi can ally with--I suspect there are even more creatures of
evil that come from Arcadia...
: It will be interesting to see if and how wrong I am about this...
: -John
I think we're all waiting with baited breath to get all the details.
WinningerR
who hold that 'Mother Delilah' in "Boys Ranch" is Kirby's single
best work and the single best comic ever.<<<
But we're mixing arguments here. While Boys Ranch may have been Kirby's
artistic zenith, it certainly wasn't "influential" in the sense that its
shadow is plainly visible in today's mainstream comics. For that, we have
to go to Fantastic Four and the rest of his Marvel output.
>>>(Steranko lists something like 100 direct
imitators of the Captain America character, that's without
even considering the way it defined the visual vocabularly of superheroes
for decades afterwards.)<<<
How many imitators of SUPERMAN and BATMAN does Steranko count? (If there
are 100 Captain Americas, there are probably 1000 Batmen).
I 'd also dispute the idea that Kirby's 1940s (Joe Simon era) Captain
America work defined the visual vocabulary of superheroes for decades --
Kirby certainly accomplished this feat, but not until 1964-65 and those
Marvels. The artists drawing DC's Silver Age (Murphy Anderson, Gil Kane,
et al) seemed much more influenced by people like Jack Cole and Lou Fine.
>>>(Frank Miller) Who freely admits that he learned everything he knew
from Kirby...<<<
Well, who freely admits that he learned "a lot" of what he knows from
Kirby. (He also sports that enormous manga influence).
In any case, my point was that Kirby himself admitted that he learned much
of what he knew from Hal Foster, so who can say where the chain ends.
Foster's contribution to the mainstream is certainly present but so
watered down that its nearly unrecognizable. Kirby's contribution to the
mainstream is still apparent, but is rapidly becoming watered down beyond
recognition.
WinningerR
much about comics (except for the most popular ones) think of as
"the greatest comic book writer ever." Generally, these are people
who do interesting things in the superhero/fantasty genres; since
the people who call them "the greatest" are generally ignorant of
any non-genre comics, or any comics published more than seven years
ago, the writer quite often is the best comics writer they've ever
read.<<<
Here, here.
I do have to stick up for Alan Moore just a bit, though. Moore has done a
lot of work outside the safe superhero/fantasy genres and some of it is
among the very best "narrative-style" comics I've seen (I'm thinking of A
SMALL KILLING and FROM HELL in particular) -- and yes, I've read every one
of the benchmarks you cited in your post. Hell, Moore even had work
published in Art Spiegelman's RAW.
Kevin Mowery
Distribution:
Deird'Re M. Brooks (mar...@netcom.com) wrote:
: kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Kevin Mowery) writes:
: Just as an aside, before it was anything else, WotC was RPG.
: > SLA Industries: to my knowledge, made by someone else then
: >acquired by WotC. Ars Magica: the same. Everway: an RPG based on
: >collecting cards, from what I understand. Unnamed game: can't say a thing
: >about it.
: Ars Magica was acquired after WotC acquired one of the co-designers of
: the game (Jonathon Tweet)
Acquired, nonetheless. And from what I've heard (on the Internet
and from a person who usually manages to get pretty accurate info due to
his position), Ars Magica is undergoing a massive re-write, in addition to
being broken up into a huge collection of books instead of just one, easy
to buy book.
: > The Primal Order: actual role-playing game/game supplement. Did
: >you guys also do Talislanta, or I am thinking of someone else?
: They did Talislanta.
: > Not to seem like I'm dismissing you as an RPG company out of hand,
: >but it seems to me that Magic: The Cash Cow really built the company to
: >the level it's at. Without it, how many of these RPGs would you be making
: >(or distributing, or rewriting)?
: Of course Magic helped out, but you're making it sound as if WotC
: _expected_ the success they received with Magic, and that just ain't so.
: They'd probably have Ars Magica at the very least, simply because of
: other factors which had nothing to do with CCGs or anything else, and a
: lot to do with disappointed fans.
: Yes, WotC is an RPG company.
They publish RPGs. But, as someone else pointed out, so does (or
did) Avalon Hill and Mayfair. But their revenues really come from
somewhere else (boardgames, train games). During WWII, one of the
American car manufacturers made the Liberator pistol (I can't remember
which company). I'd hestitate to call them an armory.
I don't call a comic-book store with a single rack of RPGs in the
back an RPG store. I don't call the place that quit selling RPGs changed
ownership to be a barber shop an RPG store. I don't call the hobby shop
that also carries a few music cassettes in their selection a record store
(or whatever, since records are official dead, except in a few select
cases). I don't call Grenadier a wargame company, even though they've
published a set of rules or two.
I don't call a company that used to publish a couple of games,
went on to flood the market with a bunch of card games, then bought the
rights to a couple of RPGs and has a couple of other in the works (but
hasn't published them yet--heck, I've got a bunch of games I'm working on;
I'm not the author of half a dozen RPGs) an RPG company.
Just my personal opinion. And it would seem there's actually
something we disagree on, Dierd're... For a minute there I was beginning
to wonder about cloning and some strange Boys from Brazil scenario being
played out in Columbus and Seattle... :)
: >Kevin Mowery --- kemo...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
: Deird'Re
--
Deird'Re M. Brooks
> Or, to add to the good v. evil view I have of Seelie v. Unseelie,
>there's a few points in the various Storyteller books where it's mentioned
>that the Unseelie have gone to the Wyrm--which may not be the Wyrm that
>the Garou think, of course. There are 3 broad varieties of demons that
>Nephandi Magi can ally with--I suspect there are even more creatures of
>evil that come from Arcadia...
Again, I say that referring to the Unseelie as evil is oversimplifying
matters greatly.
ACk! Ah, well, I have a whole series of things to add, just can't add 'em
yet. :-/
>: It will be interesting to see if and how wrong I am about this...
> I think we're all waiting with baited breath to get all the details.
Nah, some of us are patient. ::ducking::
Deird'Re
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>In article <margaliD...@netcom.com>,
>Deird'Re M. Brooks <mar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>Hey, I finally met Richard Garfield today, and hey, he's a nice guy.
>No whisps of brimstone, eh? 8^p
Nope...for a $yndicate Barabbi, he was pretty nice.
>>Certainly not the engineer of the downfall of RPGs.
>But humanity itself, that's a different story...
Yes, but that's a secret.
>You do have to admit, it's rather funny, seeing Garfield go back to
>all the other math profs at the university where he works, with pots
>of money. "Richard, what did you do, rob a bank?" "Remember that
>'child's game' I was working on?" "Oh. Well, really Richard. If
>you're not going to devote your time to _serious_ pursuits..."
You know, he did look like a math professor, now that you mention it.
But he had that "Dr. Emmet Brown" gleam in his eye.
Deird'Re
>--
>Timothy Toner - than...@interaccess.com - Whipping Boy, TEAM VISIONARY
Deird'Re
Deird'Re M. Brooks
>But are they WotC post-Magic? Haven't these lines been discontinued?
I dunno about TPO, but Talislanta has been sold to another publisher.
>If my faulty memory isn't playing tricks on me, Avalon Hill probably has
>more roleplaying lines than WotC. I still wouldn't call AH an RPG
Perhaps more RPGs, but then, they have more RPGs than WW, but whose RPGs
do you see presented boldly for the public's eye? At my favorite, Ars
Magica and Storyteller, while AH's RPGs aren't even carried. Quantity is
not quality.
>company. It's just a matter of semantics, really, but I think most
>gamers would agree that AH and Mayfair are boardgame companies, WotC is a
>TCG company, TSR and WW are RPG companies, and SJG (with its interests
>so diversified) is simply a game company.
It's nice to see you speak for most gamers. I've always thought of WotC
as an RPG-type of company. WotC has _two_ TCGs.
>None of which is to imply that companies whose primary emphases aren't
>RPGs can't make outstanding RPGs. Quite the contrary, IMO.
Give with one hand, take with the other?
>I can't help but wonder if this unnamed game is the apocryphal Dominia
>FRPG. Lord, but I'm curious about how this one will work out - both the
>game itself and its potential popularity among the MtG fans.
Well, what with NDAs and such, ye'll have to wait and see.
Deird'Re
Bryan Maloney
>> Mostly gathering dust on bookshelves. By the time the Brothers
>> Grimm go around to compiling a list of fairy tale and folklore
>> stories, more to preserve the lingusitic style of the narrators,
>> fairy tales were perceived as wholly lacking in value.
Then why did Tolkien self-identify his Lord of the Rings as a Fairy Tale?
He explicitly rejected "allegory".
Bryan Maloney
>From: Lea Crowe <l...@hestia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Changeling: Cantrip Cards
>Date: Sat, 24 Jun 95 00:42:10 GMT
>Look, Billy! There, on the horizon! Killer pedants!
>In article <bjm10.489...@cornell.edu>
> bj...@cornell.edu "Bryan Maloney" writes:
>> PS: Vampire: the Masquerade ...
>>
>> In all cases, the second name is an event.
>All cases... except one, Doctor Nemesis!
A "masquerade" is also a "masked ball", hence an event.
See, I really AM a killer pedant!
Bryan Maloney
>In any case, my point was that Kirby himself admitted that he learned much
>of what he knew from Hal Foster, so who can say where the chain ends.
>Foster's contribution to the mainstream is certainly present but so
>watered down that its nearly unrecognizable. Kirby's contribution to the
And this is why it's good that you can find Hal Foster in reprints.
Andrew Rilstone
ENN...@deimos.oit.umass.edu "Charles M Seaton" writes:
> Two more quick comments on this thread: would anyone expect a book
> fan to have read a large percentage of all books ever published
> before having an opinions on which ones are great?
If I say "David Lodge handles character very well" then I am
making a statment about David Lodge: I need only have read
one David Lodge novel for this to be an informed opinion.
If I say "David Lodge is the greatest novelist there has
ever been", then I am making a statment about novelists
in general. If someone says "What, better than Dickens?"
and I reply "I've never read any Dickena" then it would be fair for
the first person to say "Then you don't have much basis
for your opinions on who the greatest novelists are."
This doesn't mean that you have to have read everything, but
it does mean that you ought to have sampled the writers who
have been widely regarded as the greatest before making
general statments about writing.
This is even more true if you start making claims for originality:
it would be foolhardy to say "Joyce was the first person to
write stream of consciousness" or "Gaiman was the first person
to write realistic dialogue in comics" unless you had studied
the field very widely indeed.
I guess I roughly agree with your point: I wish comic book
readers weren't so damned ignorant about the mediums
history; and I wish they didn't think that, in order
to praise the latest Hot Writer, they had to damn
everything that went before.
Eric Tolle
>If my faulty memory isn't playing tricks on me, Avalon Hill probably has
>more roleplaying lines than WotC. I still wouldn't call AH an RPG
>company. It's just a matter of semantics, really, but I think most
>gamers would agree that AH and Mayfair are boardgame companies, WotC is a
>TCG company, TSR and WW are RPG companies, and SJG (with its interests
>so diversified) is simply a game company.
_most_ gamers? I trust you have some figures or statistics to back this
up? Or _anyhting) besides your personal oopinion?
_I_ consider WoTC an RPG company that has a couple card games. Most of my
friends, if you mention WoTC will talk about Ars Magica or Primal Order.
WoTC has done some very good RPG's before Magic, and will do more after
Magic disappears. From what I've heard the people at WoTC say, they
consider themselves RPG oriented.
'TCG company'. Hmmph. Just the makers of one of the best games about
magic ad midevel Europe, and it's a 'TCG campany'.
feh.
Eric Tolle unde...@mcl.ucsb.edu
Not to say that I'm especially happy about WoTC's current Magic spree...
anything but.
WinningerR
Unfortunately, though, it isn't all that easy to find Foster reprints.
It's much easier to find collections of bad SpiderMan comics published
just a few months ago.