Actually no, if I were rewriting history, I'd be rewriting the Wane History, FS, GRoY and Entekosiad. Since I'm not rewriting those, rather using them as source material, I can't see how I'm doing what you've accused me of. I am egregiously writing stuff based on history. Of that I plead guilty.
>Martin said:
>There is no previous version.
>Pardon me sir, but there is: even if you want to discredit a lot of what
>went into "Life of Moonson" as amiable frippery to help run the freeform
>smoothly, there's still the "Rough Guide to Glamour", the two "Tales" Lunar
>Specials and "Tarsh War", etc. This material exists, is out there, has been
>enjoyed and been used widely, and would be considered by just about
>everyone as GAG.
Actually, I disagree. There have been some significant amounts of people who _disagree_ with much of the material in the products you've mentioned. In the intro to Tarsh War for example, Greg says that quite explicity. If I were alone in my comments or views, I'd feel somewhat abashed, but there is a fair few people who disagree with a lot of fan publications on the Empire, particularly after much of it contradicts in style and tone Gregs work in FS, GRoY and Entekosiad.
Not to mention the fact that the pool of people we have to work with is small, much smaller that the potential HW market will be, so most of them will not have heard of Tales (which is a damn shame BTW) by the time they see suppliments.
I have noticed that you didn't mention Enclosure in that list, especially the infamous "Gods and Goddesses of the Lunar Empire" section which you disagree with even though its GAG to almost everyone who read it. Funny that. One fan publication is cast in stone, while another is not mentioned at all! Is there a certain partisan edge to this or is it simply because you don't like that piece (as it contradicts much Tales and LARP stuff) and thus do not include it in GAG?
Now, I've stated clearly that I don't want to get involved with books that piss in other peoples pools, so I won't, but you can hardly expect me to write things I disagree with and have disagreed with since day one of reading them or seeing them?
The only reason _much_ of this material is seen as GAG is, as you point out, that no-one else has anything to offer. Nothing has been published with solid Imperial info in eons. Does this make it right? Does this make it perfect? I think the answer is subjective. I don't agree with everything you've done and I can be assured you won't agree with everything I do. But you seem to be implying that the works quoted above are sacrasanct to change and this is simply not the case. If Greg is willing to turf whole sections of his own past work to make way for new concepts that fit his vision, why are some people so resistant to change or experiment?
I have one rule in life that I hold sacrasanct. If it ain't broke, break it anyway and see if we can build a better one, cos NOTHING is perfect. If you're a Babylon 5 fan, I guess I'm a Shadow - evolution through conflict and change. This is why I'm arguing this through with everyone who wants too, rather than writing. If you can convince me through argument that I'm wrong, then great. I want to evolve my thinking on the Empire, not stay stuck in one mode of thought.
Convince me I'm wrong. What is your logic?
>All other views on it were speculation by fans.
>Just because it was written by "fans" doesn't mean it should be dismissed
>out of hand.
Nothing is dismissed out of hand. I read everything done and use what works. You make it sound like I read an article, find out Nick wrote it and then turf it for its origin alone. Not true. If its good and fits, it gets used, if it doesn't then I move on. This is of course highly subjective, based on my own beliefs, but I'm writing it with Wes and he has his views too. We have to make decisions _sometimes_! If its a big deal to you, argue it through. I needn't say anything on the digest, I could just ignore all this, write it and present a fait accompli. But I don't want to do that as this would be a limiting factor on the depth of my work. If _I_ cannot argue my views through to my satisfaction, then they are not worthy of being in the book.
>All the above works - even "Life of Moonson" - weren't
>written in a vacuum. In fact, much of it came about through close
>collaboration with Stafford himself (ironically, probably not unlike the
>same way Martin is writing his own material now).
True enough.
>So yes, I could see your point, if there was a publication that said
otherwise, but there hasn't been,
>other than fan and LARP stuff.
>It's a shame these terms seem to be gaining pejorative connotations. As
>Martin well knows, the reason why this material has only appeared in "fan"
>publications is because there hasn't been any fucking official material
>published since the early 90's. And if not for David Hall and TotRM et al,
>would we even be having this debate now?
A darn good point. We owe David a debt and Greg knows this. He's told me so several times in person.
I don't want the fan publications to become pejoritive in players minds, I've got the odd piece in there myself. However, its going to happen. I have choices and I have to chose those that fit with Gregs vision. I have a life and I refuse to spend months slaving on a book to find that I've gone off on a tangent and Greg and I have diverged resulting in far more work and a slower production schedule.
I simply won't waste my time or waiting fans time like that.
If Greg wants to change his own history, that is of course his perogative, something I think people forget, but I won't write anything that invites editing if I can help it. I know Wes feels the same way.
>Bear in mind that if YOU were writing it or MOB was writing it or whoever
was writing it, we'd all be
>disagreeing with them too.
>Interestingly, the only person who seems to disagree with the current GAG
>version is one of the people who helped create it, Mr Stafford, and his
>able proxie, Martin.
Yep, Greg and I are alone on an island in a sea of people who agree with everything written in the hallowed publications mentioned above.
>On returning to Greg on this issue, he said and explained at length that the
>Emperor is singular and that is how he has seen him for a long time.
>The genesis of much of the Moonson/Proxie/Masks/Succession stuff came about
>with intense, fruitful discussions Nick, Stafford and I had in Greg's
>lounge room following GloranthaCon 2 in 1994. Maybe it was Greg's evil
>identical twin brother (or maybe a Proxie?) in the room with us...
Greg changed his mind! Or he thought about it! Or he developed his thinking more, based on his discussions with you and a myriad of others! What is so hard to accept about this? That was 6 years ago. Greg has moved on a lot since then and a lot of water has passed under the proverbial bridge. Are we dwarfs to live in a world of creative stasis?
>In the intervening period, "Life of Moonson" the "Rough Guide to Glamour",
>the two "Tales" Lunar Specials and "Tarsh War" have all appeared, more or
>less developing the same background material for the Lunar Empire, Moonson,
>etc, much of it written in collaboration with Greg or with his approval.
And much without his approval and some with his active disapproval. But hey, Reaching Moon was publishing, Greg wasn't so the cards weren't on his table. Ultimately he could only advise and caution and at least _something_ was being published. At the very, very least it has sparked interesting debates widely and thoroughly. Mostly the fan stuff gave good ideas and fun concepts.
>Greg has the same problem, its his goal to write canon and sometimes he
>disagrees with people and the shit hits the fan.
>There's a difference between disgreeing with people and claiming you never
>agreed with them in the first place.
Seems like people do this all the time. Its called selective memory or editing and we all do it to a degree. Greg is no less human than an of us. I don't know what he said to you in the past, but plainly you disagree on it. I cannot do anything about that, other than to do my job.
>That's why (admittedly in face of
>mounting evidence to the contrary) I blithely choose to believe that this
>"single emperor" nonsense
You say "nonsense" but it makes perfect sense, you just don't like it. Disagree with it, but why use such a word to describe it?
>is just all Official Lunar Empire Spin for new purchasers of Hero Wars.
YGMV Martin Laurie
Powered by hypermail