|
Post by jmccann on Apr 2, 2012 22:38:25 GMT -6
Marv, I just want one for a clean copy. :-) The non-OCR copy from when WOTC sold the PDFs just needs to have the gray show-through from the wrong side of the paper removed and the gamma tweaked, and I think it would make an OK printout, presuming you have the PDF from when it was being sold. I plan to do it at some point but not any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Apr 2, 2012 22:34:00 GMT -6
The only thing I've ever seen AAR for is "ascending armor rating". I don't know if that is what he means or not. As someone else points out I meant After Action Report. I'd like to know what the setup was and then how it turned out. I am really interested in how to have character actions impact the mass actions and vice versa, so I'd like to hear how these CM games work in your campaign, in both directions.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Apr 1, 2012 19:40:33 GMT -6
We played OD&D 3lbb's w/Chainmail and used troop rules. I thought it went great and was quite enjoyable for all. (a "kill" = a "hit" for d6 damage) I think I'll run the next session the same way. I'm not as found of "man-to-man" but we did a couple combat using just that. (and a little of the "alternate." How about an AAR? What was the situation? Did you use CM as written or one of the variants?
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 31, 2012 22:28:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 30, 2012 21:22:44 GMT -6
I think people just need to face the fact that Hollywood is not going to produce any fantasy or SF which will do justice to any book in the minds of fans of the book.
It will never happen. Get over it, and take the movies as an entertaining and diverting way to spend a couple hours. Just skip the movie if you demand faithfulness to the book as a condition of enjoyment because you will be disappointed otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 25, 2012 15:27:36 GMT -6
This place is nice with 99.9% of people posting respectfully. DF has a different demographic that sadly may get in the way of good conversation. I'm glad things worked out the way they did Marv, this is my favourite forum and an enjoyable part of my daily routine. I agree with this - it is actually not good in my view that the discussion might be split. It is better if there is a clear, best place to go for discussion.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 21, 2012 22:37:15 GMT -6
That was an interesting thread about scrolls in Holmes. I had a quick look and did not find anything in OD&D about this kind of prepared scroll. I did not check the supplements though, they might add something re. scrolls. I really should carefully read through the LBBs to determine what they actually say - we always played a mishmash, tending toward AD&D as it came out, so I don't necessarily know what is in the 3 original books, what is in GH, etc.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 21, 2012 22:33:23 GMT -6
I'll just tell my wife that it's cheaper than a sports car. We should start a thread in the Resources topic: "Things to point out to your wife are more expensive and bad than gaming" 1. Sports cars 2. Crack cocaine ...
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 21, 2012 22:28:14 GMT -6
I am making an adjustment to the wrap and will see if using a plastic spoon in place of a bone folder will get good results. There is no spoon. Hmm.. I will think about this.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 20, 2012 21:19:00 GMT -6
I saw the movie over the weekend. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and I thought it was as good as could be expected from Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 20, 2012 21:16:07 GMT -6
Not sure if you've sent out the initial run or not, but I've not received anything in the mail yet. I have not sent anything out yet, I am worried that the results will be poor. I am making an adjustment to the wrap and will see if using a plastic spoon in place of a bone folder will get good results.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 20, 2012 20:38:46 GMT -6
Here is an update. Most of the process is pretty easy, but there are two tricky bits. There is a corner that is hard to fold and glue nicely, and a bone folder is needed for best results or else the folded corners don't end up looking good. I have some new wraps printed with the latest graphics - I have been through three printings so far. I am trying to come up with a replacement for a bone folder, which I don't think is realistic to expect people to have.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 15, 2012 20:56:20 GMT -6
Just this last weekend I attended Cold Wars the Historic Miniature Wargame convention in Lancaster, PA. Seemed to me that there was a pretty good turn-out all things considered. There are lots of conventions all over the countries well attended by wargamers. Every year there are a couple of big conventions with a lot of board wargames and a handfull of minis wargames, and a couple of minis-focused ones around western Washington. I'd like to go to Cold Wars some time. The problem is my in-laws are in Maryland, so it would be possible, but we always go either in the summer or for Christmas.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 14, 2012 19:16:22 GMT -6
Keep in mind that AH was bought out by TSR, who was bought out by WotC. WotC has an Avalon Hill section of their boards, but it doesn't get much action. (At least, it hadn't last time I checked.) This is not quite right. SPI was bought by TSR, who pissed off all SPI's customers and released a few crappy games before basically shutting down the whole thing. Costikyan's article describes this well. A company called Decision Games got the rights to a few of the games and still publishes Strategy and Tactics. AH was bought by WOTC which is now owned by Hasbro. They similarly shut down nearly all of the real AH games. Multiman Publishing licenses the rights to a number of the AH games, and a few others have been reissued by L2 designs, GMT and others.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 14, 2012 19:05:06 GMT -6
Those articles broke my heart. The wargamers loved their hobby every bit as much as we do D&D, and apparently it is totally gone. I wonder if they have a website where the hardcore wargamers still get together and talk about it and hopefully still play it? I think the hobby is less gone than you seem to think. talk.consimworld.com is the biggest site for boardgames. There is a lot of wargame representation at boardgamegeek.com as well. Lots of people play by email or by Vassal.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 13, 2012 22:28:52 GMT -6
I'm a big fan of Avalon Hill's THE MAGIC REALM. I think it has a really nice atmospheric 'flavour' that makes it stand out. Indeed, I'm trying to do something OD&D based with it if I can ever find the time... I definitely agree about MR, somehow it oozes theme despite being rather generic fantasy. I have also been kicking around a loosely-MR-based design for some years but never seem to get much progress on it.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 13, 2012 22:26:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 12, 2012 22:09:48 GMT -6
I thought it was awesome. Was it exactly like the books? No. Did it come close to capturing their spirit? I thought so. Is it likely we'll ever see a better movie based on sword-and-planet fiction during our lifetimes? I highly doubt it, unless this one does well enough that they make the sequels. Yep, it is not enthusiasm I have for the Conan movies (any of them), but the realization that Hollywood is not going to come close to realizing a movie that honors the vision of any author, pulp or otherwise. The independent Cthulhu movies that James Maliszewski of Grognardia has posted about sound like the only movie treatments of a pulp author's work which have much integrity, and even those are compromised.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 11, 2012 15:58:35 GMT -6
I barely made it through the DVD of the new Conan movie once and have no desire to see it again, but I can't wait for JC to come out in DVD. (Hopefully with special features.) Huh. I thought the Conan movie was OK - not OK in the sense of having much to do with REH's work but an all right S&S movie. I could see watching it again in a year or two. What was so offensive about it to you - leave aside lack of adherence to REH cuz that is given?
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 11, 2012 12:40:26 GMT -6
The combat charts list four key things: (1) Number to wound (2) Number to kill (3) Number for panic (4) Special, where appropriate .... Also, the panic number seems needlessly complex. Each monster has its own number to panic against each other monster. I have thought about averaging the numbers so that each monster gets a single moralle number just to have fewer numbers to keep track of. Thoughts? Chainmail and WOM (which I have not played or read carefully) both have a creature-type X creature-type matrix then. I think that is a big simplification that D&D's combat system makes, using the 2 "to-hit" tables. I agree that having a panic number be creature X creature is too complex, it makes it very hard to extend the system to new creatures. Does panic affect player characters as well or just NPCs and monsters?
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 9, 2012 23:45:04 GMT -6
I am interested in both and would love to see more info. Would love to see an OD&D version since not all the book sets off eBay come with boxes. These should be going out early next week, then I'll be looking for feedback on how the assembly went. As for doing an OD&D version, that would not be a good idea since the phrase "Dungeons and Dragons" is trademarked and the image is copyrighted. That said though, a box that had a similar trade dress and image should be OK. I'll be working on something like that soon.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 9, 2012 23:37:34 GMT -6
I picked up Eldritch Wizardry last year for $25 I think. I have Swords and Spells in PDF. I found it almost useless and definitly not a replacement for Chainmail. The same here. I couldn't even bother to read much of it. Maybe someday I'll clean up my PDF, and print it nicely... that may be incentive to figure it out. I had Swords & Spells back in the day... it is one of the products I feel no need to replace.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 6, 2012 22:06:48 GMT -6
Very cool! I would love to see the self assembled version. Any idea on pricing? I don't know what the price will be yet, either for custom or generic boxes. So far, all the box wraps I have worked on have required at least some individual attention, with some back and forth with the tester which is not a good thing from the viewpoint of keeping the cost down. I was hoping I could write a simple script that would take care of all of the formatting and still look good, but it seems that it won't be as simple as I had hoped. I'll probably make some generic OSR boxes which won't have any custom elements -- a couple of designs for fantasy, and a science fiction box or two (other eras and genres according to demand). The price of those will be the base price of the boxes, and then I'll figure out how much time it takes per setup for a custom order and what my time is worth. From that I can set the price of a custom box setup. So the first box will be most expensive, and the cost of each remaining box will be the cost of one existing box, making it economical to order more than one custom box. I also need to figure out how much to charge for shipping, but that is pretty straightforward. I think 1 box will use USPS first class, and I'll use priority mail for larger orders. I should have all of the testers' designs out for final approval tonight, then I'll get them printed and start gluing them up. I also need to write up an instruction sheet for assembly.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 3, 2012 21:08:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Mar 3, 2012 17:47:42 GMT -6
I want to experiment with making custom digest boxes through my (currently non-existent but long-planned) wargame design studio. I have set up a template and attached an example cover which is greatly reduced. The idea is to write an automated box creation script which eventually would have a few stylistic choices and a small number of images. Right now I just have 1 PD image, but that could be expanded.
It would be cheaper and less time-consuming for me to just do the printing, minimal cutting, and part of the gluing (the gluing cannot all be done when the cardboard is flat) and then mailing the package flat. The cardboard and paper wrap are both included. Actually assembling the boxes is more time consuming and so would drive the cost way up. I want to test both.
If you are interested, please post in this thread. Let me know if you want the assembled and glued version or the flat self-assembly version. The first poster of each type will be selected for the experiment. If you prefer one or the other but would like to take part if you don't get your first preference, let me know which would be preferred. I will pay for the box and the shipping, and in return I'll have a short questionnaire I'd like you to fill out about pricing, how the assembly went, and so on.
If you see that you are too late to be one of the first responders, please post anyway with any comments or suggestions you might have. I am especially interested in hearing if people would be willing to complete partially assembled boxes.
If you are selected I'll send you a PM with a form to fill out to determine the text, font, colors, mailing address and so on for the box.
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Feb 19, 2012 18:03:35 GMT -6
In theory, if I wanted to make a film of the first book, with John Carter as the star, I should be well within my rights. Or a fan fic book based off of the first 5 books, etc. Yeah, you may or may not have some heat from ERB Inc and/or Disney, but as long as ou were careful to use the works in the public domain, you're standing on the same solid ground that allows you to make a film or play using A Mid-Summer Night's Dream. OK, I think I finally see where we differ. You think that the PD nature of the first 5 books permits use of trademarked or copyrighted characters (staying away from trademarked imagery) in derivative works so long as they are only in those 5 books and not the subsequent ones still under copyright - is that a fair reading? I don't know of such a mechanism but would be curious to read about this. I don't think the situation is analogous to Shakespeare though - there is no Shakespeare Inc. protecting rights, although movie studios would obviously protect distinctive imagery from their movies (no Gwyneth Paltrow lookalikes on book covers etc.) since all of Shakespeare is in the PD.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Feb 19, 2012 13:02:03 GMT -6
I'll still stick by my "in theory" post. If you've dealt with Copyright and Trademark law, you'll know that derivative works are a protection of Copyright, not Trademarks. Yes, you'd have to dance nimbly, and likely you might be put upon by ERB Inc or Disney for things depending upon how nimbly you danced, but again, public domain means available for public use to copy directly, make derivative works without permission, etc. (Meaning make sure you're referencing only stuff from the first 5 books and not later books, and also make sure you aren't referencing things from the upcoming movie or any likenesses from the movie and not the books. You should be able to use characters, descriptions, etc. from the books. Again, in theory.) Now, with Disney jumping into the fray, I'm not saying I'm eager to test the waters, but even then, for a minor run RPG, my guess is that you'd get a C&D at the worst, out of the gate. (IANAL and all that) I'm looking forward to the people who have a preexisiting TM on John Carter for Toy Figures to see how they play it. Dancing nimbly means: No John Carter, no Dejah Thoris. You might get away with a handful of minor characters and creatures that appear nowhere in the current movie or which Disney or ERB Inc. have staked out. The PD status of the first 5 books has no bearing on this. It would be like renaming hobbits halflings, ents treants, Balrog Balor and so on. At least you apparently could use the name Barsoom. If you want to call that a Barsoom game, then yes, you could publish a Barsoom game. My definition of Barsoom game includes major recognizable characters however. It would be like Stormbringer without Elric or Hyboria without Conan. If someone bought it without being aware in advance of the copyright doging they would be rightly upset.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Feb 19, 2012 12:53:45 GMT -6
It would be great if WotC republished the 1974 rules in a sturdy, wooden box. (Talk about woodgrain!) And not as some sort of limited specialty item, but as a continuously available game. In addition to the booklets and referee sheets, they should include a set of dice as well (but no 10-sider, and the 20 should be numbered 0-9 twice!). On top of that, they could also publish a "Deluxe" version of the above boxed set. It would also include supplements I through IV. Hear hear! And off topic, look what I got from Amazon a few days ago:
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Feb 18, 2012 21:54:05 GMT -6
I dunno; if you can publish a collection of short stories, why not an RPG? As long as you don't use any trademarked names or copy anything from the books still under copyright, I think you'd be just as OK as whoever published the book in the OP. Sure. But I was responding to the claim that the public domain status of the first 5 books means that the publication of a Barsoom RPG would be "in the clear". It would not necessarily be. The public domain status of 5 of the Barsoom books alone does not mean that an RPG could be published about Barsoom and would be clear. You'd have to tread very carefully indeed and omit anything that Barsoom Inc. or Disney has trademarked or copyrighted - which I suspect is pretty extensive given Disney's upcoming release. TSR's big problem was using names/terms that were directly trademarked; the ERB estate had no choice but to issue a C&D because you have to actively defend a trademark in order to keep it. Steer clear of those and I think you'd be fine. Martian encounter lists are featured in Vol. III, and no one has challenged those. So in some respects, a Barsoom RPG already exists. There is a huge difference between a game which skirts around the copyrighted and trademarked names of things and one which uses them. Calling OD&D a Barsoom RPG because of the "Green Martians" and so on entries is silly in my view. I was astonished to find that the word Barsoom itself is not trademarked, but other obvious names are. So someone could publish a game with huge, obvious holes - like no John Carter character, and a number of others I am sure. I suspect that the publishers of the collection in the OP know this and that is why they are doing this. But you can be sure that they are being very careful. -- edited to fix blockquote fail and again for grammar
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Feb 18, 2012 21:34:23 GMT -6
|
|