> One of Nick's other comments in that message (that no new material
> is being published anymore) is absolutely untrue, as Greg continues
> to work, put out books, and the work which is planned for the future
I actually wrote:
: there's no mass-market commercial/"official" published material : coming out any more.
Now, call me odd, but Greg's recent expensive (though cheaply produced) draft "work in progress" manuscripts, which he openly states to be inaccurate, as yet unsuitable for publication (except to hard-core Glorantha fans), and subject to ongoing changes and revisions, and which have little or no connection to our games and are available only through specialist mail order or at Gloranthan conventions, don't look like mass-market commercial publications to me.
Maybe the words "mass-market commercial publication" mean something different in Californian? Something different enough to warrant calling my comment "absolutely untrue", perhaps? I doubt it, and feel rather put out at Stephen P Martin for calling me a liar. I look forward to an apology.
Further to that, Stephen P Martin's claim that "work planned for the future" is in fact coming out now is rather an unfounded leap of faith: by this token, none of us should be working on HeroQuest rule systems for ourselves, as the "official" ones will be coming out Next Year, at about the same time we'll be getting a Gloranthan edition of RQ4, it seems...
> Maybe if Nick would stop taking any disagreement I have with him
> (or anyone else) as an attack, this type of discussion wouldn't
> need to go on so long.
As Stephen P Martin considers use of the popular and affectionate nickname "Stevie" to be "an attack", it is perhaps understandable that I have no idea which "attacks" (on himself or others) he is referring to here. (If anyone does know, please could you tell me?). For the record, my potential "attacks" on Stephen P Martin since his all-too-recent entry to the Glorantha Daily (a mere month and a half ago) have amounted to:
Now, other than the tenth (which I now know to be classed as an "attack", in Stephen P Martin's own peculiar mindset), I can't see which of these is a particularly hostile, destructive or unjustified post, by the standards either of the Glorantha Daily or of normal civilised debate (although Stephen P Martin appears to be unfamiliar with both of these).
My posts waver between constructive criticism and source-citations of the type Stephen P Martin himself has championed. Most aren't "disagreements" - they are speedy refutations of theories posted by Stephen P Martin which run counter to our published sources and our collective gaming experience. They certainly aren't anything like the great flame-wars of bygone days, though as Stephen P Martin never saw any of these, his confusion is perhaps understandable. (If you want to see hostility on the Daily, Stevie, just you try calling me a liar again).
To sum up, if Stephen P Martin is upset to learn that among his writings are copious quantities of non-Gloranthan rubbish which won't stand up to a moment's inspection, I'm very sorry to be among the first to point it out. But why on earth should I let him get away with it, just because he has free access to Greg Stafford's waste-paper basket, and an overweening sense of his own ability and importance?
My RQ-Con Chicago report will follow by the next post; I'm off to stick pins into a Stephen P Martin-shaped voodoo doll... (Yep, I'm still fuming about that "absolutely untrue" line: God, what a prat the man can be!)
Powered by hypermail