Hateful Darkblack Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 I'm excited about Book 3. They added 20 semi-new Masters (which is pretty much how I see the Avatars), some of which are really tactically intriguing. They're not more powerful than the base Avatar, generally (except maybe aZoraida) -- just a different option, and often a different option that the Master in question might want to switch to around turn 4 anyway. And it seems like most crews got some consideration. Usually in the form of "Hmm, what does this crew need?" Lilith needs a ranged attack? Check. Collidi needs a summoner? Check. Lazarus needs a Scavenger? Check. Perdita needs disposable thugs? Check. ...and so on. It's not as much new rules content as Book 2, but I like the writing, and the characterization. And the rules content that's in there is a lot of fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachtnebel Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) Glad its not just me who hates the (at times) clumsy writing style. The speech written for Hoffman and Sebastian is just awful IMO, they sounds like no Englishmen I've ever met. On the other hand the concepts are imaginative and enjoyable to read. While the writers no doubt love doing it, they need better editing to make their ideas shine. In summary; great ideas for a fictional world, poor written execution. Well, if the characters are linked to the "real world fluff" they are based on, which seems natural, than I'm not surprised that e.g Hoffman doesn't sound like any other Englishmen you ever met, since he's a German (as are Von Schill, Hamelin and McMourning could easily be the Swiss Doktor Viktor Frankenstein). Edited January 6, 2012 by nachtnebel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybaris Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Book 2 concerned me about power creep...and it made some older models obsolete, which is very bad imho. Book 3 was more about tactical innovation than power, so let's hope they learned from book 2. What i wish is that they'll revisit the power curve between book 2 and book 1 and make the whole miniature range useful again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsallchant Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 i like the rough, raw and under edited writing style. it adds to the atmosphere and makes me feel more connected to the writers real train of thought. to hell with all these wanna be proof readers, wyrd you rock just the way you are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silas Cordell Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 I don't want to put Snowstorm and Blessed of December in the same force because I know that settings wise that should be impossible. I just want to counter this nitpick by pointing out that Snow was not the Silent One who became the Blessed, and in fact appears on the following page of that story. There's no reason you can't take them together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
011121 Posted January 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 I just want to counter this nitpick by pointing out that Snow was not the Silent One who became the Blessed, and in fact appears on the following page of that story. There's no reason you can't take them together. Actually when I wrote that I hadn't quite finished the very end of book 3 so it looked like storm had really died at the same time the blessed was created. At the end of course they did bring him back (I was only acting!) so ultimately you're right that you can use them together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradox Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 to hell with all these wanna be proof readers, wyrd you rock just the way you are No offense, but this is possibly, literally, the most ignorant thing I have read. Further, there is a difference between honest constructive criticism and attacks. The commentary on the writing and grammar so far have been the former. There is no call to rush to defend Wyrd from people who actively want it to produce a better product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sholto Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 As one of the writers, I can assure you that while we love being told how great we are , there is nothing quite like some informed, constructive criticism to mull over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfgar Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 And when we do criticize the writing, it's because we see what great ideas are there expressed to full potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsallchant Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) so whats wrong with enjoying the writing the way it is? because that concept doesnt fit in with what you want or like? and you sit here and call me the ignorant one im not rushing to wyrds defence, i really have no reason to. i just happen to enjoy the product the way it stands. if you polish and gloss something too much, well it just starts to lose a little of its soul. just my opinion. and Baudrillards. Edited January 7, 2012 by letsallchant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anathema Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Well, if the characters are linked to the "real world fluff" they are based on, which seems natural, than I'm not surprised that e.g Hoffman doesn't sound like any other Englishmen you ever met, since he's a German (as are Von Schill, Hamelin and McMourning could easily be the Swiss Doktor Viktor Frankenstein). Really? A gentleman type from London who studied at Oxford, watches rugby, drinks tea and uses the word "chap" all the time is German? I can accept the fact that the only Englishmen in the fluff are (as usual) either the upper class gent or the Cockerney rogue, as the background has some good fun with stereotypes throughout and usually to amusing ends. It it's just a bit jarring when IMO they read wrong. The Hoffman concept is great though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradox Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) so whats wrong with enjoying the writing the way it is? because that concept doesnt fit in with what you want or like? and you sit here and call me the ignorant one im not rushing to wyrds defence, i really have no reason to. i just happen to enjoy the product the way it stands. if you polish and gloss something too much, well it just starts to lose a little of its soul. just my opinion. and Baudrillards. I'm trying to decide if you are being willfully ignorant of the point being made. It's one thing if grammatical "errors," "misspellings," and poor diction occur in character dialogue. That would be "in character" for the text and I would be entirely OK with it. That is not what I am criticizing. It's a whole other thing when it occurs in the narration that is obviously the voice of the actual, living and breathing author narrating the story. In this case it does not add "charm" or "character," it is simply bad writing. Because the product in question here is the story itself, and it is being sold for profit, it is a professional work. It is unprofessional to write poorly when you are a professional writer writing a piece for publication and sale. If you enjoy bad writing, bad grammer, bad diction, and confusing dialogue, you are certainly entitled to that. I suspect you will be rather lonely, though. I do not enjoy such things. I'm no english professor. I commit my own writing sins. And we are all human. But if you are going to publish an internationally distributed book of fiction, maybe you should expend a little extra effort and do real and professional proofing and editing. That said, I'm sure Wyrd does. But alot slipped through the cracks in this book, enough for even me to notice, and I'm no professional. If it were someone writing fan-fic in an internet forum, I would not care enough to comment. When it's published and sold professionally it's a different matter. To answer your question, that is what I find wrong with enjoying the work as it exists. Now it's my turn. What's so wrong with wanting Wyrd to improve their product and produce grammatically correct, well-written material? Edited January 8, 2012 by paradox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachtnebel Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 Really? A gentleman type from London who studied at Oxford, watches rugby, drinks tea and uses the word "chap" all the time is German? Well, I'm German and I know the word "chap" due to my school English (6th grade IIRC). I don't know if C. Hoffman is an Englishmen or not, I don't recall if the fluff mentions where he was born. However, the historical person (or better, the characters this person used in his books, Hoffman is more like Spalanzani) he is based on was German. So, if "real life fluff" and Maulifaux fluff are somehow connected, this could explain why certain characters have a weird mode of speaking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsallchant Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 i understand what your saying completely!! im just saying i enjoy the text the way it is... its not like its unreadable or anything. just a bit rough around the edges. i actually like it like that. gives it a more underground kind of feel as opposed to some mass produced over polished souless wargame clone. obviously if you care enough about the correctly written word to post here you are probably going to have a hard time understanding that. i guess i just dont care enough about grammar to think that it detracts from the experience of reading the books at all. and like i said, i actually enjoy it. its a sign that im on the right track here with a game that is more about content and playing/reading experience than crossing all the t's. but yeah thats just my opinion on the matter take i or leave it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omenbringer Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 If you enjoy bad writing, bad grammer, bad diction, and confusing dialogue, you are certainly entitled to that. Definately hate reading stuff like this, but unfortunately it is becoming more common and accepted in modern culture(especially down in my neck of the bayou, "ya heared me?") What's so wrong with wanting Wyrd to improve their product and produce grammatically correct, well-written material? Nothing at all wrong with wanting to improve a product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradox Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 i understand what your saying completely!! im just saying i enjoy the text the way it is... its not like its unreadable or anything. just a bit rough around the edges. i actually like it like that. gives it a more underground kind of feel as opposed to some mass produced over polished souless wargame clone. obviously if you care enough about the correctly written word to post here you are probably going to have a hard time understanding that. i guess i just dont care enough about grammar to think that it detracts from the experience of reading the books at all. and like i said, i actually enjoy it. its a sign that im on the right track here with a game that is more about content and playing/reading experience than crossing all the t's. but yeah thats just my opinion on the matter take i or leave it Good writing is never soulless. And no matter what you wish to imagine, the books are mass-produced. In fact, a company that does not strive for clarity and perfection in writing is likely one that does not care much for its product. I would have quite the opposite opinion as you if there were uncrossed t's and undotted i's in a book. It would tell me that they did not care enough to make sure their readers had as much clarity as possible. Company A wants to put out the best product possible, so they take time to make sure their work is the best it can possibly be. Company B just wants to push product out. Tehy do not take time to edit, polish, corect etc. the shoddy worsmanship shows they simply want your money and do not care waht they sell you. Wyrd has already shown that they DO care. They delayed the Terra-Clips line quite a bit because they did not like the initial product (though that too was pretty impressive). If Wyrd went for the "rough around the edges" approach, you would have a sub-standard product that did not perform or hold up as well as you would like, and Wyrd would already have your money. That is soulless. Quality work is never soulless. Careing about what you produce is never soulless. Striving for perfection is never soulless. I gave Wyrd my feedback and criticism because I believe they will take it on board for what it is and look to see what can be improved. If I thought they didn't care, I wouldn't bother wasting my time. I'd be selling off what I had and moving on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anathema Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 Well, I'm German and I know the word "chap" due to my school English (6th grade IIRC). I don't know if C. Hoffman is an Englishmen or not, I don't recall if the fluff mentions where he was born. However, the historical person (or better, the characters this person used in his books, Hoffman is more like Spalanzani) he is based on was German. So, if "real life fluff" and Maulifaux fluff are somehow connected, this could explain why certain characters have a weird mode of speaking. There's a difference between knowing a word and using it liberally in conversation and I'm not doubting the generally incredibly good command of English of many Germans by the way. It's just the way Wyrd like stereotypes I'd imagine German characters saying things such as "Now ve haf ze soulstones herr doktor Ramos!" but I may be doing them a disservice. Anyway, Hoffman strikes me as an attempt as an upper class English gentleman scientist. I'm not saying that the fluff must match real life, but a lot of Hoffman and Sebastian's speech is pretty incongruous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.