Here it Comes!

It's finally finished! Bard Conley's Adventures Across the Solar System is finally complete! I've uploaded it to Amazon, so it should be available tomorrow. I'm very, very excited; this is my first science-fiction publication, so it's a new experience. And, as a quick preview, here's the cover art, as done by the amazing Alex Lechev, aka thegreyghost:

I don't know about you, but that makes me want to explore other planets! So, watch this space, and hopefully, tomorrow night I'll make the official announcement. Oh, and it's going to be in paperback, too.

Indie vs. Traditional

I used to be like most writers, wanting desperately to be published by a real publisher and make money as a best-selling author. But it wasn't until last year that I realized that wasn't the way to go to succeed. Now, if I was being published by a 'real publisher' like Tor or Baen, I'd have more sales, but I wouldn't be making very much money, because traditional publishing doesn't pay very well unless you're one of the big-name authors. Which I am most definitely not.

So, I went indie instead, self-publishing through Amazon (for now; there are other platforms for me to use). Sure, my sales aren't exactly setting records, but it's pretty cool to look at my page on Amazon and see nine books (soon to be ten) staring back at me.

At work, I get to listen (quietly) to music. Since it's available, I use YouTube. Usually I'm playing classical music or video game soundtracks (Icewind Dale's music is just awesome). But over the past couple of weeks, I started playing some indie artists, people who were rejected by the establishment at first, but who made great careers on their own. In particular, I've been listening to Postmodern Jukebox, Haley Reinhart, and Lindsey Stirling.

PMJ is one of my favorites; they take modern pop tunes and remake them in older styles. Trust me, you only think your favorite songs are cool. Until you've heard Bruno Mars' Grenade in a 60s surf rock style, or a slow-burn jazz version of Creep, you haven't heard music. And their version of the Titanic song, My Heart Will Go On, is brilliant and awesome in their upbeat, Jackie Wilson 50s' style. Seriously, check them out. You will have a whole new perspective on music.

Haley Reinhart is linked to PMJ, but I first saw her, as many people did, on American Idol. My wife teases me and refers to her as my girlfriend, but it's not her smoldering good looks that impressed me; there are plenty of beautiful women. No, it was her passion, her voice, and her willingness to take chances and be her own person that made her stand out, and it's an absolute crime that she didn't win. She's the best singer in Idol's history, end of sentence.

I suppose part of the appeal was that the judges were unusually harsh on her, as if they were deliberately trying to sabotage her and get eliminated. But she stuck around until the very end, finishing third. Since then, she's gone on to work with PMJ for several songs, but also carved out a successful indie career in jazz-infused pop music that's her own style, and works beautifully for her. She even had a big hit with her remake of Elvis Presley's Can't Help Falling in Love that was in a pretty well-known gum commercial. Trust me, her voice is absolutely amazing.

Then there's Lindsey Stirling. I'm sure that me mentioning her isn't exactly going to make much of a difference on her Youtube channel; she just passed three billion views on her channel. But still, her story is truly inspiring. She went on America's Got Talent almost ten years ago. While she did get through the audition, the judges' criticism after her quarter-finals performance is the stuff of legend. She is a hip-hop violinist, by which I mean she plays the violin but also dances at the same time. Well, the judges didn't think she could pull it off, or fill an arena, or do much of anything with her talent.

Today, she's got five albums, has toured the world several times, has over a hundred videos on her channel, mostly original music but a lot of gaming-related covers, as well. Oh, and she's been invited back to AGT as a guest performer, did a season of Dancing with the Stars, finishing second, and even got an invite to be in AGT: The Champions. She turned them down, of course, and who could blame her? She doesn't need them; in fact, she used their criticism to launch her career in an effort to prove that they were wrong. And did she ever.

My point in this post is that the traditional way of doing things is starting to fall apart, and not just in writing. Music, thanks to YouTube and other streaming options, is a hotbed of indie goodness. The mainstream music scene is just boring now; there's nothing new, nothing exciting, and nothing that you haven't seen a thousand times before, and done better. Indie is where it's at, regardless of your tastes in music.

Movies are a bit tougher, since it takes a lot more work to put one together. But it can be done. Star Wars and Star Trek fan films are legion. Perhaps we'll see some indie movie productions soon; with the current state-of-the-art in computer graphics, it might be possible to rival some of the bigger studios. Making their money isn't going to happen, but unless you're one of the rare few, even in indie, you're not going to make that kind of money anyway. You can still make a decent living from it, and you can certainly have a lot more fun with creative control.

So, check out indie publishing, indie music, and other things indie. It's a brave new world, people, and now is the time. For a good example of indie publishing, check out Best Served Cold, one of the Cameron Vail mysteries, available on Amazon right now.

A Special Anniversary

One year ago, I started writing professionally. That is, I didn't just write for the fun of it anymore, I wrote because I was serious about publishing my work. I'd been looking at getting started for about a month, doing some research and getting rid of some of the myths of writing that I'd been taught over the years. It was a pretty great feeling, and it's been a really fantastic year. I didn't reach my goal of 100,000 words every month, but I did pretty darn well, considering. I'm close to a million words over the course of the past twelve months, which is something a lot of writers never do in their lifetimes.

So, I'm going to celebrate by releasing my tenth book; I'm just putting the finishing touches on Bard Conley's Solar System Adventures, and I expect it will be available by the 31st. I'm excited about this one; it's a semi-anthology; the stories are linked together by an overall plot thread, but it takes a while for that thread to become clear. The last few stories are obviously linked, but they also stand alone. There are ten stories in this book, plus a wrap-up epilogue.

As I mentioned previously, I'm more comfortable writing fantasy than I am science fiction; I've read and played a lot more fantasy than sci-fi in my life. I'm working on fixing that gap with my read-through of Amazing Stories magazine, but it's quite a significant difference. Hopefully, the experience I got writing the Bard Conley stories will help me in that regard.

Back to the Past

So, yesterday I talked about the worst time for Hollywood in terms of making movies parents can let their kids watch, the early 1970s. Alright, I admit I forgot one of the kid-friendly movies from that time: Charlotte's Web. So, there's two. The rest of the half-decade...not so much.

Now, on to the flip side of the equation: The best decade Hollywood ever had. Obviously, it's the 1980s. I mean, there are so many great movies from that decade that it's hard to narrow it down even to a top twenty-five. But I'll give it a try.

1980: Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back

          Superman II

1981: Raiders of the Lost Ark

          The Great Muppet Caper

1982: E.T.

          Tron

          Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

          Annie

1983: A Christmas Story

          Star Wars: Return of the Jedi

1984: The Last Starfighter

          Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

          Ghostbusters

          The Karate Kid

1985: Back to the Future

          The Goonies

1986: Ferris Bueller's Day Off

          Spacecamp

          An American Tail

1987: The Princess Bride

1988: Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

          Big

1989: Batman

          The Little Mermaid

          Honey, I Shrunk the Kids

There you go: twenty-five great movies that you can let your kids watch without squirming. And there are others, as well. The 1980s just simply rocked. Sure, I was a teenager during the majority of the decade, so there's some nostalgia involved, but I didn't go to a lot of movies back then. I mean, I did see Batman in the theatres about a dozen times, but who didn't back then?

Now, there are language issues in some of these movies, absolutely. But these movies aren't rated 'R'. And there's not much in the way of violence, and virtually no sex. No pornos making big at the box office, either. That alone makes the 1980s vastly superior to the 1970s.

I'm not saying that other decades had no good family movies; most movies prior to 1960 were family-friendly, period. But the 1980s produced some of the most innovative, clever, creative movies of all time, where the special effects enhanced the movie but rarely, if ever, dominated it. Even Star Wars, Star Trek and Superman focused on story more than special effects, which is why they were superior to their modern iterations. We'll never get another decade like this in movies, I'm afraid. But we've still got these ones, so enjoy them with your kids. And when they grow up, they'll share them with their kids, too. Pass it on, pay it forward, whatever your cliché of choice may be.

It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Great Classical Literature...or is it?

I've been working on a project for one of my courses, which I handed in earlier this afternoon. It's a project on ancient Greek drama, specifically the playwright Aristophanes. He wrote was is known as Old Comedy, and he's the only person whose Old Comedy writings still exist; the rest are lost to history (and so are three-quarters of Aristophanes' works, as well). And, like Homer, Plato, and Herodotus, I always understood him to be a 'classic' writer, someone whose works should be read and studied to better understand the human condition, society, and life in general.

When I was younger, I picked up a great series of books called The Great Books of the Western World. I had the original, 1952 edition, which I picked up on the cheap a bunch of years ago. Aristophanes and the other great Greek playwrights are in that set, and I've read that entire volume, cover to cover. And yes, the plays were thought-provoking and entertaining at the same time. Truly inspirational writing, among the best ever put to parchment in human history.

Then I read a more accurate, modern translation. Oh, my, was that eye-opening. The translations I read were from the 19th century, public-domain translations which were used in the GBWW set to keep costs as low as possible. Anyone who's read 19th-century English translations from other languages knows that, for the most part, it's very tame. Unless you're reading Richard Burton's translation of the Arabian Nights; he didn't hold back anything in that one, especially in his copious footnotes. But otherwise, the translators held to a strict morality, and didn't expose their readers to the more outlandish things these men wrote.

Today's translators, however, have no such qualms. They relish the opportunity to present these works in their 'original' form with the most literal translations possible while still maintaining the structure of the work itself. And let me tell you, Aristophanes was not at all like the man whose works I read in that volume of Greek playwrights.

Here's a brief excerpt from his play Lysistrata, in which the title character attempts to force an end to the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta by getting all the women of both cities to go on a sex strike. The first version is from Jack Lindsay's translation, done in 1925:

If they were trysting for a Bacchanal,
A feast of Pan or Colias or Genetyllis,
The tambourines would block the rowdy streets,
But now there's not a woman to be seen
Except--ah, yes--this neighbour of mine yonder.

Now, here's George Theodoridis' translation of the same lines, done in the year 2000:

If my invitation was for one of those orgies, held for Little Dick or High Dick or Low Clit, you wouldn’t be able to get through all the bum- and drum-beaters clogging the streets. But for this, no! Oh, no! Not a bloody woman in sight! Not one of them! Pause. Sees Caloniki in the distance, SL

Ah, except for my neighbour! Thank goodness… Hi, Caloniki!

Quite the difference, isn't it? Now, I would frankly prefer to read the earlier translation myself, but from my research for the project, it looks like the second one is more accurate. And that definitely changes my outlook on Aristophanes' merits as a classical writer. The rest of his plays are basically the same. He uses a lot of topical subject matter; current events, local celebrities (mostly of the political or military kind, but not always), and extant literature, what we would consider 'pop culture.' That's right, Aristophanes is the spiritual ancestor of Saturday Night Live. Except he's actually funny. And he throws in a heck of a lot more dick jokes.

Shakespeare is another one who puts more 'rude and crude' in his work. We just don't speak his kind of English anymore, so we get bogged down in all the forsooths and thines and forasmuches. But behind all that, he was quite the earthy fellow.

So, what does this mean? I don't know, really; it certainly has forced me to reevaluate my opinion of the world's oldest comedian. I mean, it's still funny, but relying on sex jokes is entirely too much like today's 'humor.' It gets old after a while. But the older translations do clean it up while keeping the humor and entertainment intact, so that's how I'm going to keep reading them. Sure, it's not 'modern.' But how 'modern' can you expect a guy to be when he's been dead for twenty-four centuries?

For some humor that doesn't rely on crudity, you might want to check out The Missing Magnate, one of my Cameron Vail mysteries, available on Amazon. And, you get a fun murder mystery as well. Double the pleasure, folks! So, support indie publishing, and read a new author today!

A Brave New World of Education

A good friend of mine called me tonight. We haven't spoken for a while, and though we had the usual chit-chat and talk about various current events, he surprised me when he asked me for advice on  homeschooling their thirteen-year-old son. I have to say, it's an unexpected, though welcome, piece of news. And I know, he's not the only one who's looking at homeschooling as an option in September.

The thing is, the schools have failed our children for years. Even back when I was in school, things were beginning to change. Grammar and spelling were falling out of favor, and the books we were handed to read...awful. In fact, it was one of those books that inspired me to be a writer, because I knew, even at the tender age of seventeen, that I could write a better book than what I was being forced to read.

But now, reading isn't even much of a priority in school; when our boys were still going, I don't recall a single book being assigned to read at home. And the books they read at school...awful. At least the ones we had gave a pretense of quality, being 'award-winning' books. Apparently, 'Most Boring Book in Canadian History' was a popular category. But now, they get puerile, mindless pap, the equivalent of feeding them McDonalds every day instead of offering them a nutritious meal. Brain candy, that's all it is. And unfortunately, our kids get addicted to it, and never get the good stuff. They don't even read The Hobbit anymore. How can we condemn our boys to a life where they have never read Tolkien, Burroughs, or even the Oz series of books? Instead, they get Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Harry Potter and the Angst Academy, or other books that just don't measure up. I mean, those books are called 'classics' for a reason. But we've got a whole generation that hasn't even heard of them. It's a crime against our youth.

Now, there's more to a decent education than that, of course. Math, grammar, science, history...and, of course, for my fellow Catholics, religion. My friend is an atheist, so I skipped that last part, but I gave him some recommendations. For those who are considering homeschooling your own kids, consider these as viable options to the curricula being offered by school boards.

Math: Saxon Math series. For the younger grades (K-2), they focus on using manipulatives, while developing basic math skills. The higher grades get a thorough grounding in arithmetic and algebra. They'll even learn long division, something the schools have completely abandoned.

Grammar: Shurley Grammar. An eight-grade series that teaches kids how to diagram and analyze a sentence so they actually know what they're saying, and how to say it better. They also learn composition, vocabulary, and other important writing skills. Highly recommended.

History: The Story of the World series is top-notch for younger grades. Reading historical fiction is also great for kids, although I'd stick to older writers like G.A. Henty for that. Today's history books are somewhat slanted, to say the least.

Reading: Get your kids away from the electronics and into books. Classic children's literature, not the garbage they spew out today. Sure, it's better than nothing, but they can do much better. And they deserve better, too. Younger kids will love Andrew Lang's Colored Fairy Books (12 of them) and Arabian Nights. They'll also like Lang's Book of Romance (no, not the Harlequin type), about King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. Older kids can read the aforementioned Henty, as well as Tolkien, Lewis, H. Rider Haggard, and of course, Edgar Rice Burroughs. Don't tell me a ten- to thirteen-year-old isn't going to be excited about John Carter bouncing all over Mars, or Tarzan swinging through the trees. Girls will love the Little House books and Louisa May Alcott's books.

Religion: Well, I'm Catholic, so I'll have to go with Catholic options; I don't look for non-Catholic programs. Obviously, reading the Bible is essential; there are reading plans all over the place for homeschoolers, or just for yourself. I also recommend the Baltimore Catechism series for kids; it's easy to understand (much easier than the scholarly Catechism we've had since 1992), is set out in straight-forward question-and-answer format, and it's thorough enough to ensure kids know the essentials of the faith. For a good, affordable Bible Study, I recommend the Agape Bible Study website, which is free of charge and has a few dozen Bible study programs covering big or small sections, depending on your needs.

The nice thing about homeschooling is that it's completely open; there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of options. There are countless websites with ideas, and free downloads to get a taste of what's available. Unit studies on all kinds of subjects, entire courses, or just bits and pieces you can put together. Remember, every child is different, which means every homeschooling plan will be different. Do what works for you and, especially, your child.

And, if you want to introduce them to fantastic adventure, you could do worse than to offer them Arrival, the first book of the Chronicles of Meterra series, available on Amazon right now.

Originals or Remakes?

Hollywood is notorious for remaking older movies and 'updating' them. I'm not talking about sequels, I'm talking about redoing the original story for a modern audience, usually with better special effects and more sex. And sometimes, it's hard to fathom just what they were thinking when they decided to remake them. I mean, if the original is good enough for someone to decide to remake it, why not just watch the original in the first place?

A couple of weeks ago I read an article discussing a 'remake' of The Princess Bride. Notwithstanding the concept of the remake (which I hadn't read about yet), where actors would basically redo the exact same scenes separately (different actors playing the same roles in different scenes, for example), the whole notion struck me as utterly stupid. I mean, aside from the low-budget aspects of this 'remake,' what's the bloody point? That movie is as close to perfect as you can ask for. It's got fantastic fencing, romance, Andre the Giant in a role that was literally written for him, 'My name is Inigo Montoya...', Miracle Max, the six-fingered man, and a pompous ass of a Prince who gets what's coming to him in the end.

Seriously, there are some things that should never even be contemplated, let alone actually done. There are plenty of examples of this in recent history, as well. Did anyone actually watch that new Ghostbusters movie that came out a couple of years ago? Because I've never met any one who admitted to doing so. Same with the new Charlie's Angels movie; it doesn't look at all interesting, and I actually liked the first two movies.

And now, Disney is in the process of remaking all their old animated classics as live-action films. We've already seen The Jungle Book, Aladdin, One Hundred and One Dalmatians, Beauty and the Beast, Sleeping Beauty (as Maleficent), Lady and the Tramp, and The Lion King. Mulan is on its way if they ever open the theaters again, and there are even more in the pipeline for down the road. Again, one has to ask, 'Why?' After all, the originals are classics for a reason.

The problem is, there's a serious dearth of creative thinking in Hollywood now. All their creativity goes into bigger and better CGI effects; story and plot, characterization and originality are just tossed by the wayside. And it's not getting any better. Of the thirty or so announced movies Hollywood is releasing over the next year, every one of them is either a sequel or a remake. Nobody is willing to take a chance, and so we're stuck in a time loop of watching the same things we watched before, just with more flash and spectacle.

Now, some movies can certainly survive being remade, especially ones built on classic properties like fairy tales or old books. There have been, for example, four different versions of Jules Verne's Around the World in 80 Days, including the 1956 version, which won Best Picture. The Jackie Chan version (2004) is also fun, but not as good as the previous one. And the 1940 version of The Mark of Zorro has to be considered superior to the 1920 version, primarily because the latter is silent. It's not a bad movie, but it suffers by comparison.

But overall, the trend toward remaking movies is one that will hurt the movie industry, both in the short-term and in the long run. With the exception of some truly timeless tales, you can't watch the same story over and over and get much out of it. Hopefully, someone in Hollywood realizes this before it's too late.

If you want some original material to read, which may someday end up as a movie, check out Arrival, the first book of the Chronicles of Meterra. It's available in both paperback and e-book, so take a look.

Movie Review: The Mark of Zorro (1940)

Let's face it: Swashbuckling action movies are awesome. Even the ones that aren't very good are fun to watch. The 1993 Disney version of The Three Musketeers has very little to do with the plot of the original Dumas book, but it's still fun to see Oliver Platt having the time of his life as Porthos, not to mention the mental gymnastics of watching Charlie Sheen play the pious Aramis. Talk about casting off-type.

But The Mark of Zorro, a black-and-white remake of the silent version starring Douglas Fairbanks, is a joy to watch. I actually found a colorized version of it, which actually improved the movie, although the color can't match the lush spectacle of The Adventures of Robin Hood. Still, it's another great swashbuckling movie, one that everyone should watch. Especially Batman fans, because Zorro was Batman before Batman was Batman.

The movie opens up in Spain, where the young caballero Diego de la Vega is summoned home to California on urgent business. When he returns, he is shocked to find that the Alcalde, his father, is reviled and feared by the peasants for his cruelty and usurious taxation. It's only when he goes to his old house that he finds out his father doesn't have that job anymore. He meets Governor Quintero and his henchman, Capitan Esteban, a fencing master with designs on the governor's wife. Realizing that things are not what he expected, Diego assumes the role of a foppish wastrel, refusing to heed his father's call to fight back against the governor's harsh policies.

Later, disguising himself with a black mask and cape, he becomes Zorro, doing Robin-Hood things like stealing from the governor and giving the money to the poor (in this case, the local friar, who bears a remarkable resemblance to Friar Tuck from Robin Hood, since they are played by the same actor, Eugene Pallette). He also exacts some revenge on the cruelest of the governor's soldiers, and even leaves a threatening 'Z' on the wall in the governor's house.

Meanwhile, he's also romancing the governor's niece, Lolita Quintero, played by the delightfully beautiful Linda Darnell (who, it turns out, was actually only 16 years old at the time), while fending off the advances of the governor's wife, who prefers him to the cold Esteban. The movie's climactic duel between Esteban and Diego (not Zorro) is one of the best fencing duels I've ever seen. Fast-paced, beautifully choreographed, it looks deadly, even more than the famous one in Robin Hood.

Like Errol Flynn in Robin Hood, Tyrone Power was born to play the role of Zorro. He's equally convincing as the foppish Don Diego, and the dashing and deadly masked vigilante. No wonder he inspired Bruce Wayne to don a cape and cowl many years later. Basil Rathbone gets to play the heavy again, and he even gets to win a fencing duel this time, against Pallette's Friar Felipe. And while Power and Darnell don't quite have the same level of chemistry that Flynn and Olivia DeHavilland had in their many screen pairings, they certainly go well together here, despite Darnell's youth.

Along with Robin Hood, this movie is essential viewing for any fan of swashbuckling adventure. It's a movie you can watch over and over again and still enjoy it. And it only runs for 94 minutes, a blink of an eye compared to today's overblown movies. It's available on YouTube, believe it or not, so check it out.

And, for more sword-fighting adventure, check out Arrival, the first book of the Meterra series, available in e-book or paperback now.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Interlude

As I said, I'm going to take about a week to get caught up on some other things (including getting the new book ready) before diving back into this set of books. But I wanted to take a few moments to reflect on what I've seen so far. Those who are Traveller veterans, feel free to chime in with your takes on what I've noticed in the rules.

I think the biggest takeaway I have is that this game is designed for science fiction that has nothing to do with Heinlein, Asimov, and Clarke, the 'Big Three' of science fiction. It's got more to do with Star Wars, Dune, and E.E. "Doc" Smith than those guys, actually. The focus so far has been, of course, character creation and how to beat people up. It's not quite 'two-fisted' pulp action, but it's close. I love the idea of space pirates boarding an interplanetary passenger liner with cutlasses and revolvers. In fact, that's about as pulp as it gets.

The emphasis on skills isn't as high as it is in more modern games; with only a 2-12 range for rolling, modifiers don't need to be big to be significant. A +1 improves the odds quite nicely; a +3 makes you basically an Olympic-level expert in whatever the skill is. Contrast that with d20 skills, where characters have modifiers of +10 or more at low levels. Maybe that's why, at first, the Traveller characters look rather wimpy, even ones with multiple terms and a dozen skill levels in total.

No aliens so far, which makes for a nice, humanocentric game. I know, Traveller eventually added a bunch of aliens, but I'm not talking about what came later, I'm looking at the game as it originally was. And it's humans. So it would work for a military SF setting like David Weber's Honor Harrington series, although the tech is a little past revolvers and cutlasses. Still, the idea of humanity colonizing the stars without encountering much in the way of competing intelligences is a fun one. It doesn't always have to be about aliens, folks.

So, that wraps up my thoughts on the first book of the original Traveller boxed set. Tune in this week to find out more about my own efforts in science fiction writing.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 44

Welcome to the last page of Characters & Combat. This is another page of tables, this time covering the modifiers for melee weapons. Obviously, there aren’t any range modifiers, since those are on the ranged table from the previous page. No, this page discusses required Strength levels, DMs for not reaching those levels, Advantageous Strength levels and DMs, and weakened blow modifiers. At the bottom, there’s a similar table for ranged weapons, but with Dexterity modifiers instead of Strength.

So, what are the easiest weapons to use? A 4 Strength means you can handle a dagger without penalty; a broadsword requires an 8. JR’s strength is 4, so he can’t wield his Blade effectively anymore (5 Str required), and suffers a -2 DM, negating his skill bonus. Well, that sucks. Sniping it is, then. The negative modifiers for low strength are a mixed bag, ranging from -1 for a spear or cudgel to -4 for a broadsword…and a club. Okay, I’m going to go back to the weapon descriptions for a second. What’s the difference between a cudgel and a club?

A cudgel is defined in the text (page 34) as a ‘basic stick used as a weapon.’ It can even be a tree branch or an unloaded long gun. I thought that’s what a club is! But on the previous page, clubs includes ‘found’ weapons like a pistol-whip, or a beer bottle, and basically whatever else you find on the scene. That…doesn’t really differentiate them, does it? Clubs are smaller than cudgels, maybe?

But they have the same Strength requirements for everything except the Required Strength DM for low strength. You need a 5 to swing a club or cudgel properly, an 8 or more for an Advantageous DM, and a -1 for a weakened blow. Why on earth would you call a weapon a ‘club’ instead of a ‘cudgel’?

So, you can’t get more than a +2 bonus from Advantageous Strength, and you need to be pretty muscular to get that much; a dagger, club or cudgel (that’s driving me nuts) requires an 8 or better for Advantageous Strength; only the Broadsword requires the majestic 12. Weakened blows range from a -1 to a -4. Oh, and I just noticed that if you want to punch somebody with your bare hands, if your strength is under 6, you get a penalty of -2. Using your bare hands is inferior in every way to using a knife.

Alright, the ranged weapons. Shotguns are the easiest to use, requiring only a 4 Dexterity to fire them well, and even if you’re really clumsy, you still only get a -1 modifier. Carbines are the next-easiest, with a  Dex required and a -1. Penalties for low Dex range from -1 to -3, so nothing as bad as the melee weapons can be. And the Advantageous Dexterity ranges are from 8 for a Rifle (JR’s specialty) up to 11 for a Body Pistol or a Laser Rifle. Again, Advantageous Dex DMs are either +1 or +2, and there are no ‘weakened blow’ modifiers for ranged weapons. Except if you’re throwing a dagger or a spear, I suppose. Or a cudgel. But not a club.

At the bottom of the page we have the explanation of what I just recapped, with the additional note that Weakened blow DMs are cumulative with any other modifiers affecting the attack.

And that…is that. We have successfully navigated through the Characters & Combat book. Next up, we’ll be tackling Starships, which should be exciting. Because it’s starships. I’m going to take few days off, I think, to regroup and prepare to tackle this all-important subject. That, and I've got a sci-fi book to finish.

Pulp to Pop

Holy, there were quite a few people checking out the blog yesterday. Compared to what I've been getting, anyway. Welcome to any newcomers; it looks like the Traveller series has been a success. Maybe sci-fi is the way to go after all.

So, I had an interesting discussion with my son yesterday. We were talking, as usual, about the pop culture stuff that I'm collecting for him and his brothers to save them from having to watch ugly cartoons and god-awful movies that insult us at every turn. We just finished watching the Adam West Batman movie, which is a total blast of a film. It's egregiously silly, I know. But when I was a kid, that was the only live-action Batman around, and I loved it. He loves it, too.

But I also told him about getting reprints of the original Batman stories from Detective Comics back in the 1930s and 40s. I told him I had a copy of the original Batman story from Detective Comics 27 back in 1939. No, it's not an actual copy of Detective 27. If I could afford that, I wouldn't be here, would I? He expressed an interest in reading them, of course. Who wouldn't? Well, my wife wouldn't, but she's just not as cultured as we are, I suppose.

I particularly enjoyed the part where I mentioned that Batman kills a couple of people in that first story. His shock was absolute. He stared at me in disbelief; everyone knows Batman never kills! Unless it's Ben Affleck beating the holy hell out of guys in a warehouse, at least. Yeah, that's still a killer scene. If that Batman was patrolling the city, I wouldn't even return library books late.

But my son was blown away by the idea that Batman even used guns in those early issues. And it got me thinking (and talking to him) about where Superman, Batman and other early superheroes came from. People think of Superman as just appearing, fully-formed, in Action Comics #1 and changing the pop culture landscape with Kryptonian swiftness. But that just isn't true.

Superman wasn't even a unique idea; Philip Wylie's 1930 novel Gladiator features Hugo Danner, a man with incredible strength and powers very similar to those of the original Superman. And of course, John Carter was the genesis of the man who can leap prodigious distances and fight with tremendous strength and skill. It all goes back to Edgar Rice Burroughs, folks. Never forget that.

And that Superman wasn't the all-American Boy Scout he would later become; he was rough, gruff and tough, like the two-fisted pulp heroes of the day. He threatened criminals and shady characters with things like running across high-voltage wiring, or dangling them from buildings to get information from them. He was no Boy Scout, not then. But he was still awesome and cool beyond the telling of it.

Likewise, Batman came out of the pulp heroes such as the Shadow, the Scarlet Pimpernel, and Zorro (who figures prominently in his origin as well). Masked men who relied on their skill and weapons to fight against evil (although the Shadow's mind-powers gave him a bit more to work with), Batman was simply those characters come to a visual medium like never before.

So, what happened to make these pulp-style heroes into the paragons and icons they are today? When did they develop their 'no-killing' codes? When did Batman decide that he'd never use a gun (because that's what killed his parents)? Those are questions that will take a bit more research, but it's interesting to compare what they were like in the late 1930s, and what they became three decades later, when Batman was TV's golden boy and Superman was still the box-office champion in the comics.

Thinking about their supporting casts, which are, other than Spider-Man, probably the most extensive in comics history, it's interesting to note that in their first appearances, only one of the iconic supporting cast members appeared in each case. In Superman's case, it's Lois Lane. No Jimmy, no Perry White, not even his Kansas parents. In fact, Kansas isn't even mentioned. All we get in the first issue is 'baby rocketed to Earth from another planet' and a few quick vignettes showing Superman in action. Stripped down to the core, it's still a pretty fantastic beginning. In the meantime, over in Gotham City, the only supporting character who appears is Commissioner Gordon. No Alfred, and no Robin, of course. just Bruce and Jim. And Gordon doesn't have much to do in the story, either.

So, it's really fun to go back and observe these characters in their nascent, primitive form and see just how much of their core was already present. Superman was already larger-than-life, public and showy but devoted to justice. Batman was dark, brooding and mysterious, using his acrobatic fighting skills to right wrongs and put down criminals hard. Harder than later, but still. It's a fascinating portrait, and I just wish I could have read these without eighty years of pre-existing baggage to color my impressions of them. Still, it's a lot of fun to read.

Now, if you like pulp-style heroics, you might want to check out The Gilded Age: The Awakening, the first book in a series that will describe a world much like our own, but with a secret hiding in plain sight: People with incredible abilities and powers, just discovering what they can do...in 1908. Check it out, and support indie publishing, because that's where you'll find the modern stories you really want to read.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 43

We’re almost done! This next page is the Range Matrix table, and we not only get to see range modifiers, we also get damage numbers. Well, that’s handy. We get the same list of weapons as the previous page, which makes sense. Why include different weapons, right?

Alright, so what do we have? The melee weapons all have two range options: Close, and Short. As I recall, positive modifiers are good, raising the target number. Negative modifiers make it tougher to hit. Got it. So, it’s interesting to see the melee weapons with two different ranges. I guess there’s ‘right in front of you,’ and ‘a few feet away’, and they have different modifiers. Hands and teeth are better at close range, while claws are better at short range. The already-legendary Thrasher is +5 to hit at close range, and +1 at short range. What the hell is a ‘thrasher’? I really, really want to know. It also does 2D+2 damage, which is 4-14, equal to a spear and better than most of the other melee weapons. The Cutlass does 2D+4, the Broadsword is 4D (but -8 to hit at close range), while the bayonet, halberd and pike are all 3D (and also have worse modifiers than the thrasher).

Ranged weapons come next. Body pistols are useless at Long range, while automatic pistols, revolvers, and shotguns can’t reach Very Long range. Laser rifles are your best bet at Very Long range, actually getting a positive modifier of +1 at VL range. Interestingly, Body pistols, auto pistols and revolvers are great at Close range, too. mind you, they aren’t great at the damage thing (although better than most of the melee weapons). The Laser Rifle is the king of all weapons, doing 5D damage and being great at anything other than Close range.

Sights and stocks are also included on this table; the sights only help if you’re targeting a Long-range or Very Long-range target, giving a +4 modifier to both of them. The Shoulder Stock is best for Medium and Long range, getting negatives for Close and Short. And the Folding Stock makes you worse at Medium, Long, and Very Long range, having no effect on Close and Short.

The notes at the bottom of the page indicate that the sights and stocks add their modifiers to the weapon’s own modifier; they don’t replace them. So, using a Telescopic Sight (+4) with an automatic rifle at Long range (+1) gives a total modifier of +5. Also, pikes only use the Short range modifier (+4) on the first combat round; after that, they’re considered to be Close (-4). So, pikes suck, even though they do 3D damage. You aren’t hitting anyone after the first round.

I think I mentioned before that I like the abstract nature of the range modifiers. It makes for a quicker game, where you can get a pretty good guesstimate of where the opponents are in relation to each other without having to whip out a measuring tape or ruler. It's more free-flowing, which is definitely old-school spirit.

Who is...Bard Conley?

So, I'm working hard on the next book, which I plan to have out by the end of the month. The cover art looks good so far; it's not finished, but when it is, I'll show it to you. The book is Bard Conley's Solar Adventures. I know, it's not exactly the most original title, but it gets the point across.

So, Bard Conley. Well, he's a Marine. An ex-Marine, actually. Born on a high-gravity planet of a native mother and a father from Earth, he's taller than a normal human and strong like a bull. He's basically a big boy built like a brick outhouse. And he's as tough as they come.

More importantly, from my point of view, is that he's the first character I wrote about when I started writing almost a year ago. The first story I wrote was his first story, "The Star of Cassiopeia," which you can find in A Universe of Possibilities. It took a couple of tries to get the character right; originally, he was actually a bookish space nerd crossed with Indiana Jones. The whole idea of the story changed twice before I finally got it done, too. But it was a great feeling and a great experience, because I wrote the whole story in three days, before I started tracking everything in my writing tracker.

So, why didn't I publish this anthology earlier? Because I didn't have it ready, obviously. I'm finding that while I enjoy reading science fiction, writing it isn't as much fun as I thought. I suppose that comes from literal decades of focusing on fantasy stuff, which stems from my RPG experiences (which was about 90% D&D). I've been working on this anthology for a while, on-and-off, and it's just about ready. It will be ready within ten days time, which is my one-year anniversary of serious writing. Not bad, is it?

At the end of the month, I'll take stock of the year's efforts and do some serious goal-setting for the next year. With school, work and family, it makes it tough to get the writing done as much as I want. But there are ways to do it, and I'm going to figure out those ways in time to get myself to wherever I want to get to as a writer and self-publisher.

In the meantime, for a preview of Bard's upcoming adventures, take a look at my first anthology, A Universe of Possibilities, available now on Amazon.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 41-42

Page 41, and now we’ve got some tables. ‘Weapon and Equipment Weights and Prices.’ That’s a handy thing to have. All the information that was in the weapon descriptions is now handily tabled for our viewing pleasure. I find it easier to absorb the information this way, since I can do on-the-spot comparisons. There’s no new information here, it’s just easier to read.

The bottom of the page has the Body Armor table, but all it offers is the name, price, and description of the armor. Man, that Battle Dress stands out with its six-figure cost.

I’m going to do two pages at once here, because there really isn’t anything special about the first page. So, the next page gives us the Weapons Matrix, and now we get a sense of what armor can do in this game. And man, do you ever want to be wearing some kind of armor…If you’re not wearing armor, even the guy with the spear is going to kick your butt. Guns are just going to annihilate you; it’s not going to be pretty.

Oh, what’s this? The first set of weapons are natural ones, and it’s the first mention of unarmed combat that I’ve seen. I guess it’s just standard melee rules for those. We have the following natural weapons available: Hands, claws, teeth, horns, hooves, stinger, and…thrasher? What the heck is that? Whatever it is, it’s nasty; it has the highest modifiers against any armor, including Battle Dress. Seriously, I want a thrasher even over an automatic rifle. +7 against no armor, Jack, and Reflec; +4 against Mesh, Cloth and Ablat, and it’s the only weapon that doesn’t get a negative modifier against Battle Dress. That is monstrous. Or alien; since it’s under the ‘natural weapons’ section, I’m guessing it’s some sort of special animal/alien creature attack.

As for the rest, Battle Dress just shuts it all down (except thrasher). The only reason to wear Reflect armor is if you know you’re going up against someone with lasers, against which this armor has a -8 modifier. Against most of the rest of it, it’s no better than plain old blue jeans and T-shirt. Ballistic firearms (except body pistols) will tear through it like tissue paper.

What else stands out? Mesh and cloth are pretty good against melee weapons and firearms, but not much against lasers. Oh, and there’s a note at the bottom that laser fire ablates ablat armor DM by one with every shot. So, it’s good at first, but it won’t last very long.

Lets Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 40

Nope, there’s still more. Actually, it’s just a discussion of modern weapons that match up with the weapons of Traveller. So, the weaponry is based on today’s tech. There’s interstellar travel, space navies and battle armor, but apparently weapons technology in the far future has atrophied. Sure, there’s laser carbines and rifles, but everything else is something you can find in the local gun shop.

The book even explains that bullets are always going to be a very efficient way of separating a person from their internal organs. Sure, that’s true, but this is science fiction, remember? Where are the ray guns, the gauss rifles, the gyrojet pistols? Come on, guys!

Anyway, some of the weapons used as examples are the Walther PPK (James Bond in space!) for the body pistol, the .44 Magnum for the automatic pistol, the S&W .357 Magnum for the revolver, a Ruger 5.56mm for the carbine, the M14 for the rifle and automatic rifle, the Remington M1100 for the shotgun, and the Uzi for the submachine gun. Well, then. There are a few other examples, but these ones are the ones I’m most familiar with, anyway.

Oh, and the rule book helpfully explains that laser weapons aren’t currently available in 1977. Well, they still aren’t in 2020, so that’s not surprising.

Ah, here we go: “Referees may feel free to create other weapons to suit the needs and desires of Traveller society.” So, there’s suggestions such as laser pistols, pneumatic guns, and silenced machine guns. That last one sounds really cool; I just imagined a space-ninja sneaking into a facility and silently machine-gunning down his targets while their friends are in the next room playing cards, never noticing a thing.

Well, that’s it for this page, too. The bottom third or so is blank. Maybe now we’ve reached the end of the rules. I recall that there are tables at the back, though. Which is good, because so far, I have no idea which weapons are actually better and more effective. We shall see when we turn the page tomorrow.

In the Beginning: Released!

That's right, I'm actually on track this month, with another release mid-way through the month. This one is a unique piece of writing, as I mentioned in the last post. It is a retelling of the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis, from the Bible.

There's not much else to say about it after what I said the other day, so I'll just add that the cover art is taken from Edward Hicks' Noah's Ark, painted in 1846 (and now in the public domain). I think it's a nice piece, and it gets the point across well enough.

The only other thing to say is that to the best of my knowledge, nothing in this book contradicts Scripture or the teachings of the Church. That's part of the reason why this one took me so long to write; I worked on it for months, and that was before I started writing seriously last summer.

So, I'll leave you with an excerpt from the first chapter, in hopes that it will whet your appetite for more.

***************************

He looked around the formless void as the winds blew across the face of the deep waters, swirling and churning them up.  His newfound awareness of his own existence startled him, but he felt an infinite joy in his own creation.  In that moment, Michael knew all he would ever know; above all else, he knew that God loved him, and had created him along with all the multitude of angels.  They were His, and would always be His.  Michael felt that love all around him as he and his new family gathered around their creator.  A nameless joy sprang up in his heart as he saw the majesty of God.  He listened with rapture to the voice of God, a voice that spoke as if it were three.

“My children,” he announced in the depths of their being.  “On this day I have created the heavens and the earth.  I have created you as well, to serve me.  IN LOVE, YOU HAVE BEEN BORN INTO ETERNITY; IN LOVE, YOU HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH FROM NOTHINGNESS.  I love you all, and thus I offer you the most precious gift: a choice.”

“What choice is that, Holiest of Holies?” asked Lucifer, the Morning Star.

“The choice to freely serve,” replied God.  “You have the freedom to make that choice, because only a choice freely made can be truly your own.  If another makes the choice for you, that is not love, only slavery.  I WOULD NOT ENSLAVE THOSE WHOM I LOVE.”

“Of course we will serve,” answered the angelic host.  “We love you and we praise you,” they continued.

“There is more to this choice, my children, For I have not finished my work.  Observe the formless void; I will shape it and form it into matter, matter that exists separately from the spirit from which you are made.  Observe, AND BEAR WITNESS.”  Michael looked toward the void and heard the great words of power.

“Let there be light!”

The light that came into being was bright, bright enough to sear the souls of the angels.  And God spoke again, saying, “IT IS GOOD.”  Michael agreed; the light was truly beautiful to behold.  He joined in the chorus of praise as God separated the light from the darkness.  “WE SHALL CALL THE LIGHT 'DAY,' AND THE DARKNESS SHALL BE CALLED 'NIGHT.'” The angels erupted with praises to God, singing, “Hosanna in the highest!' and 'Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might!'

************************

You can check out In the Beginning on Amazon right now.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 39

Page 39’s stuff actually starts on page 38, and we’re discussing ‘special considerations.’ These are some miscellaneous issues with weapons combat. Let’s take a look at them in order.

First, it’s ‘Drawing,’ which has nothing to do with paint or pencils. Drawing a weapon and firing it in the same combat round gives a -3 penalty to the roll. I guess that takes away some of the gunfighter scenarios. And the very next sentence says otherwise, as two people drawing on each other gets described. No surprise that Dexterity is the key factor in beating your opponent on the draw. This is an unusual mechanic that I haven’t seen in these rules yet. Roll two dice and add your Dex score; the higher number wins the first shot. Alright, then.

Then there’s minor accessories: holsters, belts, scabbards, etc. They’re basically weightless, being included as clothing. And they’re pretty cheap, as well, depending on what they are accessorizing. There are shoulder holsters for concealment, as well.

Throwing blades are next; daggers and blades can be hurled at people with deadly accuracy like forks, and again you’re adding your Dex score to the roll, and subtracting the target’s evasion modifier. Oh, and you have to roll 18+ to hit, so you’d better roll well, because an average roll is 7, which means you need a Dex of B or better to hit. Good luck with that. If you do hit, it’s doing 2D-3 damage, so it could be pretty lethal, but on average it’s going to do four or less damage. Stick with the guns instead.

Speaking of which, there’s full automatic fire next, which is just four shots at once instead of one per trigger-pull. There’s a better chance to hit on the tables, and there’s a group-hit rule coming up as well. Of course, you’ll go through ammo quicker. Oh, and you can shoot twice in a single round if you’re doing full-auto, so that’s going to be handy.

Group hits mean that you might hit the people on either side of the target you’re shooting at with the automatic fire. It’s -3 to hit, but you could hit up to two other targets with one burst. Sweet! Except, of course, that you don’t actually have a choice to do this; it’s automatic when you do full auto fire. So, don’t fire your fully-automatic machine gun into a melee fight when your best friend is in there, because you’ve got a good chance of taking him out too.

Shotguns also have a group hits rule. You can hit up to four targets at once if they are in a group, herd, or pack, and if they’re no bigger than a human. If they’re flying, you’re at +2 to hit them for some reason. Hey, I’ll take it. Dinner’s on me, folks!

And that’s it for this page; there’s almost half a page of blank space here. Are we out of rules for this book? Tune in nest time to learn the exciting answer!

Coming Soon...

I'm going to be releasing a new book this week! It won't be the Bard Conley science-fiction book; that's going to be at the end of the month, once the cover is ready. No, as I mentioned in a previous post, this one is called In the Beginning. It's...how do I put this? It's a retelling, of sorts, of the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis. I'm not changing the stories; I'm simply expanding them, adding detail that isn't included in the Bible itself.

Is that blasphemous? I hope not. I don't think it is, anyway. It was an idea I had some time ago to put together a book that would be readable for young people, that would give them a better understanding of the Bible, or at least the beginning of it.

So, to expand on what is already there, I turned to Church sources, including the Church Fathers and the Catechism, to fill in the gaps, as it were. Some of it is artistic license on my part, but I was very careful not to contradict anything the Church teaches, or the words of Scripture themselves.

The nice part of writing this is that I didn't have to worry too much about figuring out the plot; it's already there, laid out in perfect form. I'm not trying to improve on perfection; I'm simply making it more accessible to people, especially younger ones who might not be willing to read the Bible itself. Maybe after reading this, they'll be more interested in doing so.

If this works, I will write more books like it, expanding the story of the Bible with further volumes. These would focus on the historical aspects of the Bible, not the dry, legalistic parts (like Leviticus, for example). The idea is to make the story clear for people who've never looked at the Bible that way before. It's a collection of 73 books, yes, but it's also a continuous story. I think that story needs to be told to a new generation, one that hasn't had the exposure previous generations did, and in a form they will enjoy.

So, I'll have further news on it within a couple of days, hopefully. Until then, check out my other books, including my newest one, The Gilded Age: Awakening, available now on Amazon.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 38

Okay, on to page 38 of the first Traveller book. It looks like we’re finishing up with Folding Stocks, then we move on to Armor. Good; not getting killed by all those nasty things is a good thing to work toward. Let’s see what we have.

As mentioned, the last of the gun accessories is the folding stock, which works on carbines, rifles, and shotguns. It makes the weapon shorter, but less accurate, with a -1 DM at any range when it’s folded. It makes the gun heavier, by half a kilogram, and costs a mere 100 credits to put it on the gun. Well, that’s not much. I’m still not sure it’s worth it, though, unless you’re doing some concealment mission.

Alright, on to the armor. This stuff doesn’t add to your weight allowance, so you can wear whatever armor you want and still move as if you’re unencumbered. Sorry; D&D words are part of my vocabulary now.

So, the first piece of armor is ‘jack’ armor. It’s basically a jacket or a body suit made of leather that might stop a knife if you’re lucky, but isn’t much better than paper against guns. It does have the benefit of being cheap, though, at a mere 50 Credits.

Next up, Mesh, which is basically chain mail with leather backing. It actually does help against gunfire, which is nice. Lasers, however, ignore it. Well, one step at a time. It’s a handy thing to wear if you’re expecting hand-to-hand combat, since it’s better than the jack against blades.

Then we have Cloth armor, or more specifically, ballistic cloth armor. It ‘absorbs impact energy,’ which means it’s going to turn gunshots into bruises. Still painful, but not deadly. I approve of that. It’s noted that it’s versatile and almost the best armor, and the price isn’t too bad at 250 Credits. Sweet deal.

Reflec armor is basically mirrors, I guess. It actually works against lasers, but not against anything else. But you can mix it with other armors, even wearing it under your regular clothes if you want, so it’s good for stealth against guys that you know are armed with laser weapons. Just hope they don’t go for the head. This is a pricy armor, coming in at 1500 Credits. Still, those lasers probably hurt a lot, so it’s good to have a defense against them.

Ablat armor is next, and it’s the cheap version of Reflec armor, costing only 75 Credits. Basically, it’s ablative, being vaporized when it’s hit by laser fire. It will help a little against other weapons, too, but it’s not going to be as good as Cloth. However, as the book points out, it’s easy to find and it’s cheap. So, you’re more likely to see Ablat than Reflec, unless you’re in the pricer part of town.

Ooh, Battle Dress, a.k.a. Robert Heinlein’s dream machine. It costs a whopping 200,000 Credits, and that’s just for the basic suit, with no bells or whistles. Or ammo packs. Also, it’s restricted to the military, and civilians can’t get it. Does that include ex-military? Because I can see them refusing to lend it out to former soldiers who are just out to get a quick buck.

You have to have the Vacc Suit skill from character creation to use Battle Dress, though, which will limit the option to Navy, Marines, Scouts, and the Merchant Marine. And the last two might not qualify as military (okay, merchants definitely aren’t military; scouts might be, depending on the setting). So, practically speaking, this armor is for Navy and Marines only. I would probably rule that ex-soldiers might have access to this stuff, if only because otherwise there’s no reason to put it in the game anyway.

Oh, one more juicy tidbit about this armor: It doubles your personal strength score. It also nullifies your endurance requirements in combat, so you can do this all day. Nice!

At the very bottom of the page are two lines that go with what’s on the next page, so I’ll include it in the next entry.

Why Modern Cartoons Suck

I've been collecting some older cartoons that are in the public domain, including some Warner Bros. and Disney stuff. I'm doing this because my son needs to understand that the stuff that is being spewed out of the Cartoon Network and other channels is pure and utter garbage. Seriously, it's vomit-inducing crap. There isn't a single redeeming feature about any of them. The art is abysmally bad, the 'jokes' are cringe-inducing nonsense, and the reliance on toilet humor makes them utterly unworthy of a moment's attention.

Now, I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, when Saturday Morning Cartoons were a ritual for all kids. We didn't have dedicated cartoon networks; we got what the Big Three networks deigned to offer us, and we lapped it up. But back then, the lack of stations meant that they were only going to put out quality material, or at least material that didn't totally suck. Today...yeah, we've seen what they do today.

I'll give a simple example. Here are two images of the same character. One is from the 1980s; the other is from the current incarnation of the character. I'll leave it up to you to guess which is which.

Anyone who grew up in the 1980s knows the Thundercats. They were sleek, cat-like superheroes who could handle themselves in a fight and who looked damn fine. I mean, look at Lion-O up top; that's a heroic figure. He looks competent, trained, and well-muscled. Compare that to the bottom image. That version of Lion-O wouldn't be a threat to anything more dangerous than a cheeseburger. The art is just atrocious, something that even I could draw. And I failed stick-people in second grade. Seriously, that is the worst possible look they could give him. He doesn't even have a nose! Or any definition on his limbs whatsoever! Who in God's name thought this was a good idea?

There are plenty of other examples, too. The Teen Titans Go! show is a mockery of beloved characters from my youth; Robin vacillates between pining for an oblivious Starfire and trying to out-bro the other two male characters, Beast Boy and Cyborg. And, of course, the art sucks. There's no definition, no style...it's just scribbling.

I realize that I'm ranting about something as unimportant as a children's TV show. But it's not that unimportant when so many kids are watching this stuff. After all, what we watch on TV has a powerful influence on us. And what the modern shows are doing is something profoundly dangerous: They are eliminating the concepts of nobility and heroism. Nobody is going to look up to the modern version of Lion-O, or Robin; they are jokes, designed to ridicule the concepts those characters used to embody. And it's leaving a huge gap in our society as kids who watch this stuff grow up to become adults. What will they emulate? The fart jokes and manic-depressive mood swings of Robin and his buddies? The shapeless and soulless emptiness of Lion-O?

So, I'm doing what I can to fix that. My kids will get to see heroes, and cartoons that are actually funny, sometimes in the same show. But my boys will not grow up unknowing of what man can aspire to at his best. And they won't grow up watching mindless garbage that not only insults their intelligence, but works hard to eliminate it.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 36

Gah...I did these out of order. Let's step back one page...

Page 36, and as promised, more ranged weapons to deal severe pain and death. We begin with the Automatic Rifle, which is basically what you’d expect, shooting four bullets per trigger-pull unless you want to go semi-automatic. It’s hefty, weighing in at 5 kg, and while it uses the same ammo as the regular rifle, it can also use a special belt with 100 bullets that weighs half as much as the automatic rifle itself, so you’d better have eaten your Wheaties if you want to be running around with this bad boy. Oh, and it’s the priciest weapon so far, at a whopping 1000 Credits. Some guys don’t even muster out with that much.

Next up, the shotgun. Perfect for indiscriminate fire and weddings alike, the shotgun is basically what you’d expect to see in a shotgun today. It’s a full meter long, and weighs 3.75 kg. It’s a lot cheaper than the automatic rifle, at a mere 150 Credits. Its ammo is good for ten cartridges, each weight 750 grams and costing 10 Credits. So, a much cheaper weapon. But not as cool as an automatic rifle.

Finally, we find the submachine gun at the bottom of the page. It uses the same ammo as an automatic pistol (but not the same magazines), and fires up to 30 cartridges before needed ammunition. It weighs and costs half as much as the automatic rifle.

I should note that the last five weapons, starting with the carbine, all have a sling option for easier carrying. There’s no note yet on whether or not this makes it easier (i.e., lighter) to carry them. We shall see.

Amazing Stories, February 1927

That's right, it's time once again to delve into the world of Amazing Stories! And just take a look at that cover. No, not the dinosaurs on the submarine; they're cool, sure. But look at those names...

COVER

Three swimming sea monsters and a flying dinosaur menace a U-boat, a German submarine, off a green, rocky coastline. Three insanely brave sailors (tiny compared to the critters trying to eat them) are firing rifles to hold them off.

And that's all we need, really. That, and the names that grace the cover. Perennial contributor H.G. Wells, the redoubtable Garrett P. Serviss, and...the immortal Edgar Rice Burroughs. Oh, yes. His first appearance in the magazine, and since I've already read the book he's contributing to this issue, this first appearance is going to be a doozy.

EDITORIAL

Gernsback gets right into it with 'Interplanetary Travel.' He first compares the problems of interplanetary travel with similar views on powered flight a mere quarter-century earlier. Then he highlights some of the proposed methods for actually achieving it, such as Verne's From the Earth to the Moon, or propeller flight, which obviously doesn't work in a vacuum. He then name-drops Robert Goddard, who was the American pioneer in rocketry, and presciently states that Doctor Goddard's rockets are the only viable way to do it. He also states with confidence that it won't be long before the moon is reachable. And he was right; it was only forty-two years later that Armstrong and Aldrin walked on the moon.

A solid editorial, the most relevant and truly scientific one he's written thus far.

THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT, Part I, Edgar Rice Burroughs

Of course he gets the cover and the pole position. Because he's Edgar Rice Burroughs, people! The absolute master of adventurous science fiction! And here he is, with one of his best stories, the first book of the Caspak trilogy. First published in 1918 in the Blue Book Magazine, this is actually the novelized version that was published in 1924, so it's likely a bit different from the original version. I've only read the novelized version, myself; Blue Book isn't easy to find these days, especially an issue with a Burroughs story.

So, we start off with an ocean liner being torpedoed by a German submarine during World War I. The unnamed protagonist and his dog, Nobs, jump into the ocean to escape the sinking ship; they are among the few survivors. They do get into a lifeboat, along with a young girl. The three of them survive, though they are chilled in the night air, and do get picked up by an Allied tug the next day. The tug, in turn, gets menaced by the same U-boat, which the narrator recognizes...since it's his family that built it in the first place, and he himself had taken it out on its trial runs. Coincidences are Burroughs' stock-in-trade.

The tug crew manage to take the submarine in hand-to-hand fighting, and capture the German Lieutenant in command...who is the girl's ex-fiancé. See the previous paragraph for further comment. The prize crew run into difficulties, with sabotage taking them far to the south. In fact, they end up so far south that they reach Antarctica. That's some impressive sabotage.

There, they find an underwater channel that leads into the continent...and a tropical land inhabited with lots and lots of prehistoric monsters. They manage to take one down, which provides an impressive amount of steak for the crew. They establish a fort on land, there are some more encounters, and some of the crew do get separated. In the confusion, the German prisoners retake the submarine. We end the installment with the narrator, the girl and the British sailors alone and trying to stay alive in this deadly land.

Burroughs is awesome. The book just sizzles with action; the sinking of the cruiser is on the first page, and hardly a page goes by without some sort of action, be it naval, or gunfire, or knife fighting, or whatever. Burroughs is a legend for a reason; there's no wasted words, no philosophical detours, just action, action, and more action. And it's fun, too. The 25 pages just fly by, leaving you wanting more. I can't wait for part two, even though I read it just a few months ago.

ON THE MARTIAN WAY, Captain H.G. Bishop

First printed in Broadway Magazine in November, 1907, this story is only five pages long. And it's quite impressive for such a short length, with a lot of angst, tragedy, and redemption in so few words. The story is actually told in two parts; the first involves the tragic loss of an interplanetary freighter and the resulting incarceration due to negligence on the part of the owner of the ship line, Mr. Winston. Thirteen years later, he's freed and given a chance to start over again, this time as a crewman on board another liner. A navigational error puts the ship in terrible danger, and Winston comes up with a way to set them free, but only at a great personal cost.

Really, aside from the far-future space-travel setting, this story could have worked as a story of an earth-bound ocean vessel. The trap at the end wouldn't have been the same, but the basic plot is generic enough that it could fit in a lot of other times. That's not to say that it's a bad story; it's a very good story. There are only so many basic plots available, after all, and they've all been done a million times or more. It's how the writer treats the plot that makes a story good or bad. Many writers today, sadly, don't write good stories. Captain Bishop, however, has.

THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON, Part III, H.G. Wells

And now, the conclusion. Bedford miraculously finds the sphere just as the lunar night is falling and the temperature is dropping below the possibility of survival. On his way to it, he finds Cavor’s cap and a note that say he’s been injured and won’t be able to avoid capture. Bedford barely gets into the sphere, but he’s alone; Cavor is nowhere to be found. He does, however, manage to take off and return to Earth. Once he arrives, he’s got some of the lunar gold, which gives him an opportunity to reestablish himself financially. Unfortunately, a local kid accidentally takes the sphere on a joyride and is never seen again. Oops.

And that, so I thought, was the end of it. A bit of a disappointing ending, but still, it was an ending. Except that it wasn’t; Cavor did survive, and manages to get some messages back to Earth. However, it’s impossible for anyone to reply, so the remainder of the book is nothing but transcriptions of Cavor’s messages, describing the Selenite culture and how awesome he thinks it is.

This part of the book really brought it down in my estimation; Wells, clearly a socialist, describes his version of an ideal society much along the lines of Plato’s Republic, and it’s boring. The second installment was a lot of fun, but this…no. Cavor’s final message is an attempt to pass on the secret of Cavorite, but the Selenites have figured out that they don’t want humans showing up to mess up their society, and shut him down before he can reveal the secret.

This installment is 24 pages long; it felt like a lot more, and for the last four chapters I kept hoping it would just end. But it just went on and on and on…it was a chore to finish. I know, Wells is a pioneer of science fiction and he’s awesome, but this…it didn’t work for me at all.

NEW STOMACHS FOR OLD, W. Alexander

Okay, then. We go from the moon to a restaurant, and a story about…stomach transplants. Apparently, in the future envisioned by Mr. Alexander, you can trade stomachs with someone else. However, you also trade their tastes and appetite, as the unfortunate Col. Seymore discovers. He gets a stomach transplant because of a stomach ailment (which means that the recipient of his stomach gets the same suffering, I suppose. Not much of a trade, but it paid well). He then finds himself constantly drawn to a particular restaurant in the less-savory part of town. This leads to complications in his life as he can’t resist the delectable Italian food, and everyone else thinks he’s become involved in criminal activity.

Eventually, the other stomach-transplant participant gets arrested for not paying for a meal (because he can’t afford the high-priced food Col. Seymore is accustomed to), and in the ensuing aftermath, they trade stomachs again and Col. Seymore’s tummy is all better afterward for some unexplained reason.

This one’s only about three pages long, and I’ve got to say, it’s a weird one. It’s the author’s first published pulp story, and he would only publish a few more, sporadically, after this, all in Amazing Stories. It’s not a bad story, it’s just…odd. Nothing much really happens, although there is a bit of humor there. At least it doesn’t devolve into a discourse on stomach ailments.

THE ELEVENTH HOUR, Edwin Balmer & William MacHarg

This is the second appearance of Luther Trant, the psychological detective who made his first appearance in the December 1926 issue. This story is another reprint, first appearing in February 1910, in Hampton’s Magazine. It was reprinted twice afterward before being published here. It’s only nine pages long, and I’m sure there will be people who complain about racism because some Chinese characters appear. Tough; it works within the story. Deal with it.

So, it’s another murder mystery; the victim knows he’s going to be killed at eleven o’clock that night, but Trant doesn’t get the message in time to stop it from happening. He does, however, get to solve the case after the victim’s wife is arrested for the crime. He does so using his trusty lie-detector device from the last story. I won’t spoil it, of course; I write mysteries, so I don’t want people knowing the end first. It’s not a bad story, and not nearly as long as the first one. Trant got more efficient at finding killers, apparently.

THE THOUGHT MACHINE, Ammianus Marcellinus

There’s no way that isn’t a pen name. And in fact, it is a pen name; the actual author is Aaron Nadel. And this is his first pulp story; another newbie! There’s hope for me yet! Well, not really.

Alright, so this is an interesting story, one that predicts computers and artificial intelligence, and then provides an excellent example of what life under A.I. would be like (no, not Skynet). Basically, computers take over everything, and eventually humanity forgets how to do anything, since the machines do it all for them. So, humanity devolves into a tribal, primitive race once again; only the ‘priests’ have access to any real knowledge, since they’re the only ones who can still read. Mind you, they can’t understand most of what they’re reading, including how to repair the broken machines, or even better, actually do things manually instead of relying on said machines to do it for them.

The story is somewhat grim; the ending is telegraphed early on, and you know it’s not going to end well. The amusing part is that the scientist responsible for developing these amazing machines does so because of the oldest reason of all: love. His lady-love is, of all things, a flapper, and the author does a good job of contrasting the party-girl mentality with the witless, naïve scientist. Still, in the end, it’s all her fault, because she’s the reason he ends up building the A.I. machines. The story is quick, only five and a half pages, but it packs a lot in there. It’s not the best story in the issue (how can it be, when Burroughs is in it?), but it’s not the worst, either.

Oh, and at the end of the story, there’s a reproduced photograph of an exploding mushroom like the ones described in “The Red Dust” from the previous issue. Very cool.

THE SECOND DELUGE, Part IV, Garrett P. Serviss

At last, we reach the end of this novel. It’s been quite a ride. Actually, this installment isn’t that long, at only thirteen pages. There’s not a lot going on, as it’s mostly denouement at this point. Mount Everest is the last piece of Earth to be submerged, and the Ark is there to witness it. Cosmo estimates that it will take another five years before the water recedes enough for even Everest to peek out.

So, they go traveling around in the ark because there’s absolutely nothing better to do. They end up back over America, and to their utter surprise, the Ark discovers land at Pike’s Peak in Colorado. The explanation for how this is possible, since the Rockies aren’t nearly as high as the Himalayas, seems a bit awkward, and it boils down to ‘America is just that awesome.’ Well, okay then. In fact, there are quite a few survivors in those mountains, almost three million souls to reestablish humanity. The book ends with Cosmo’s epitaph, which credits him with saving humanity. Well, that’s nice.

I enjoyed this book; it’s not as action-packed as A Columbus of Space, but it was a fun read. Serviss is entertaining, and it’s criminal that he’s virtually forgotten today. Still, he didn’t write nearly as much as others like Wells or Burroughs did. I just wish I’d heard of him before starting this project.

BONUS INTERVIEW

Yes, we have a two-page interview with Fred Wells, son of Herbert George. Fred just wants to come to America to make movies, but keeps getting asked questions about his father. It’s a bit of a puff piece, really, but there’s some insight into Wells’ character which is interesting to learn. It also touches on the secret of Wells’ success as a writer: he bases his characters and stories on real-life situations, adding a touch of science, fantastic or otherwise, to make it memorable. It’s a formula that clearly worked for him, and one that all writers should take note of.

I’m not going to describe all the letters like I did last time; there are about eight of them, some loving the magazine, some disliking parts of it. The usual letters column in a magazine like this, really.

And that’s it for this issue. As two serials end, another begins, and we’ll get more scientific goodness next time. Thanks for reading, and don’t forget to check out my own author page at Amazon. There’s more coming soon, including my first science fiction publication, so I hope you’ll take a good look at it.

Let's Read: Traveller, 1977 Edition, Characters & Combat, page 37

Ah, here we go! I was wondering when we’d get the real sci-fi weapons. Everything so far has been something you can find at the local gun shop or military depot in present-day Earth. Now, however, we finally get to the lasers. Laser carbines, to be specific, which have ammo packs that can handle 50 shots before needing to be recharged. Which takes eight hours. Seriously? A Tesla recharges faster than that, and it’s only driving around the block. Haven’t they heard of speed-chargers in the future? And it’s not like this is a small clip that you attach to the gun; no, this is a backpack that plugs into it with a heavy-duty cable! Man, they were not very forward-thinking with this tech. Or maybe that’s what the sci-fi of the period was like. Anyway, this sucker is easily the heaviest weapon so far, weighing in at 5 kg on its own, plus 3 more for the backpack. And it costs 2500 Credits (including the backpack, apparently).

Next up, the laser rifle. Even heavier, but twice as durable with a 100-shot limit on the power pack. You can’t switch from a carbine to a rifle on the same power pack, of course. That would be too easy. The rifle is much heavier, weighing in at 6 kg, plus 4 for the pack. 3500 Credits is the bargain price for this bad boy. Jamie can’t even carry this thing without straining his sciatic nerve. Regular sniper rifle it is, then.

Alright, so that covers the weapons that are in the game. Now, let’s see what options the game has given us to accessorize these toys.

First up, telescopic sights that have something called a ‘DNI,’ which I don’t recall seeing yet. And I just realized that it’s a typo on the PDF file, and it should be ‘DM.’ So, +4 to hit with telescopic sights, which will reduce range penalties. Well, that makes sense. However, they are delicate little flowers, and even the slightest jarring can wreck them, and you won’t even realize it until you’ve missed a few shots in a row. That’s right, if they go out of alignment, you automatically miss every shot. There’s even a night-vision option available that costs a lot more than the regular one. Man, I gotta read some of that 60s-70s sci-fi. The good stuff, of course.

Next up, the silencer. It does exactly what you’d expect it to do; it’s only available on body pistols, automatic pistols, and revol—wait. you can put a silencer on a revolver now? How exactly is that going to work? I’m not a gun expert, but even I know that a revolver’s shot noise comes from the cylinder, not the muzzle. I mean, sure, there are ways to silence a revolver, but this book explicitly states that it’s a muzzle-attachment. Good luck silencing that one. Maybe it’s a more futuristic revolver that works like a not-revolver. Which would make it not a revolver, wouldn’t it? Anyway, silencers aren’t interchangeable, and they weigh up to 750 grams.

After that, we have shoulder stocks, which attach to a pistol or revolver and make it more accurate at longer distances. It takes five rounds to attach or detach this thing, so you’d better have it ready in advance if you want to use it in a firefight. Of course, attaching it means you can’t holster it, so everyone will know you’re looking for trouble.

We will continue with this on the next page.