Dear Folks -
OK, it's "my Cr2" time. However, it's turned into Cr20.
Originally posted by Malenfant: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />TNE when released promised not to significantly alter the regency; Nilsen "democratized" it.
Please indicate where TNE "promised" not to significantly alter the Regency.</font>[/QUOTE]I have a vague recollection of what was said regarding the Regency; unfortunately I cannot lay my hands on the exact quote (there goes my role as "Keeper of the Canon"
. It's probably hidden in a
Challenge mag somewhere (and I've just searched thru #68-77 - good luck!).
Thus,
from memory, what I remember is that GDW talked to a number of fans about the TNE timeline, and decided - based on their feedback - to
preserve the Spinward Marches area from the depredations of Virus. The way they did that was to create the Regency, both background and timeline.
I do
not recall reading that they intended to
preserve it frozen in amber; they were more imaginative than that, and worked through "what-if's" until they came to a logical conclusion
that satisfied themselves. (They were, after all, the
publishers of
Traveller, remember?
They were never going to be able to satisfy everyone - but at least they listened to their customers, a rare trait in the RPG world (just ask a
Runequest referee about being "Gregged"
)
But wait. Let's look at the rest of the credits shall we? It's all pretty normal, until...
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
The Hivers are in Charge Because: They say they are [snip etc etc]
Gee. Do you really think he might have been tongue-in-cheek there?
OF COURSE HE WAS BEING TONGUE-IN-CHEEK!!! How on Earth could you possibly think otherwise, given the above?</font>[/QUOTE]Dave was always tongue-in-cheek, even self-deprecating. In
The Regency Sourcebook's "Statement of Culpability", he apologises for the many pages of UWP info (APOLOGISES!?! Man, I LOVED that book!!):
"I realised the [the UWP's] exist as little numerological ends in themselves, and that I could add deep layers of description, updating and
whiney temporizingto their foundation in future products." (emphasis mine)
NILSEN, "B." Dave,
The Regency Sourcebook, GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1995, p 3.
I think the problem was that many people were not used to - and didn't
like - the
tone of Dave's writing style. Fair enough - I continue to be Very Annoyed at Gary Gygax's use of Significant Capitals(TM) and his Patronising, Paternalistic Demeanour - quite unlike the more approachable Dave Arneson.
<deep breath> Folks, it's OK to dislike someone's writing style. Say that you don't like it, and
move on. Most importantly, don't judge the writer - or the rest of the genre - by their style. In this brave new Internet age, we all ought to know that only 10% of the message is the text.
FWIW, Dave also said:
"First of all, don't blame the entire GDW staff for what you dislike about
Hivers and Ithulkur. I thought the credits were clear that those who disliked the book were supposed to blame me (via divine intermediation, of course) but Frank often points out that I am too subtle. [...] My name is Dave. [...] If worst comes to worst, at least you know who to blame."
NILSEN, Dave, "Whither (Not to be confused with "Wither") Traveller?",
Challenge, #77, GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1995, pp 4-5, 37-38.
NB: the whole of the (4-page!!) article is
very worth reading if you want to listen to Dave's defence of TNE. I believe it clarifies
exactly where he was coming from.
In addition, take C. S. Lewis' advice when he was
defending science fiction from reviewers:
"It is very dangerous to write about a kind [of literature] that you hate. Hatred obscures all distinctions. I don't like detective stories and therefore all detective stories look much alike to me: if I wrote about them I should therefore infalliably write drivel. [...] Many reviews are useless because, while purporting to condemn the book, they only reveal the reviewer's dislike of the kind to which it belongs. Let bad tragedies be censured by those who love tragedy, and bad detective stories by those who love the detective story. Then we shall learn their real faults. Otherwise we shall find epics blamed for not being novels, farces for not being high comedies, novels by James for lacking the swift action of Smollett. Who wants to hear a particular claret abused by a fanatical teetotaller, or a particular woman by a confirmed misogynist?"
LEWIS, C. S., "On Science Fiction",
Of This and Other Worlds, London, UK, 1982, p 81.
(These days, we are more sophisticated and say "genre" instead of "kind".
)
(Constantine continues)... </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Dave himself describes prior alien modules, specifically the GDW ones, as "Fatuous Nonsense" (AOTRv1, P88).
I've got AotR open in front of me, and he doesn't specifically imply that previous alien modules are "fatuous nonsense". (in fact, he says specifically that he will "refrain from citations").</font>[/QUOTE][To Constantine: this is unnecessary criticism of William's mis-remembered wording. "Fatuous nonsense" is actually pretty close to being the same as "sanctimonious drivel", Dave's real words (as quoted by you straight after).]
At this point, the real argument is about the
tone of Dave's words (and BTW yes, all this quoting counts as "fair use"):
How many times have you read ad copy from some science fiction game company that includes the sanctimonious drivel about how "the aliens in (insert the name of the company's game here) are more than just people in funny suits"?
[...]
Well, boys and girls, I'm here to tell you that it just ain't so. Any alien played in any roleplaying game is nothing more or less than a person in a funny suit. Sorry. And I'm allowed to sit up here on my blindingly white charger and say that because GDW is the company that invented that fatuous nonsense. I will refrain from citations.
I
won't refrain from citations - here, cop this one:
"To do aliens right requires a lot of work. It is not enough to conjure up a creature seven feet tall, with three arms, purple skin, and an eye in the middle of its forehead and call it an alien. If the only difference between the being described and a human is external, the being is nothing more than a person in an alien suit and the physical description should include a zipper down the front. An alien should have a complex, coherent, consistent background. [...] All of these things and more should be considered when creating an alien, even if no player characters are of the race. (We've done this for all the major races we have designed... although it may take a little time for it all to see print.) The more work you put into the design of an alien race, the longer it will be before your players get tired of that race.
"Players who wish to use alien characters must work as hard as the referee. In addition to studying the background created by the referee, the player must strive to always keep in character when playing an alien persona. [etc etc]"
(author presumed, since he wrote all the
JTAS editorials at this time, but not explicitly identified) WISEMAN, Loren K., "From The Management",
JTAS, #7, 1981, reprinted in
The Best of the JTAS, Vol 2, Bloomington, IL, USA, c.1982, p 2.
In other words, Dave's primary target was, in fact, GDW itself.
And anyway, despite the offence you took to his "fatuous nonsense" comment, I'm pretty sure GDW wouldn't have let him publish that in the afterword if they had been offended by it.
Especially as the book was co-authored by Loren Keith Wiseman, the originator of the quote that Dave was referring to...
However:
In your unending quest to find things to hate about the man... [snip]
...perhaps we should all back off and cool down.
(I'm gonna hafta add this icon to my
TML Cool-Down Policy page...
Meanwhile, I think it's clear that Dave is a smart chap, with a quirky style perhaps, and to be honest I'd love to sit down and have a beer with him someday, because I like his style.
And although I didn't like ALL of his style (in fact, some of it - like "Tyger, Tyger" - had me gnashing my teeth and groaning quietly), I'll second the motion on the beer.
...that is, if I can make mine a Scotch?
Back to the "questions for Dave": In his long editorial he mentions an "upcoming epic": a three-part campaign entitled
Into the Belly of the Beast. It was going to take characters from the RC deep into Hiver space. My question is: OK, sounds cool, NOW GIVE US THE GOSS on this campaign!!!
...Finally, I'll leave you with another snippet from Lewis:
[Lewis, discussing "modern highbrow critics" with Kingsley Amis and Brian Aldiss, 4 Dec 1962]
"Matthew Arnold made the horrible prophecy that literature would increasingly replace religion. It has, and it's taken on all the features of bitter persecution, great intolerance, and traffic in relics."
[Sound familiar? Just how much
is a relic
SoM going for on eBay?
]
"All literature becomes a sacred text. A sacred text is always exposed to the most monstrous exegesis; hence we have the spectacle of some wretched scholar taking a pure
divertissement written in the seventeenth century and getting the most profound ambiguities and social criticisms out of it, which of course aren't there at all... It's the discovery of the mare's nest by the pursuit of the red herring. [Laughter.] This is going to go on long after my lifetime; you may be able to see the end of it, I shan't."
Apparently not.
