Café de Nuit

Igor the Henchman wrote:So, in my opinion, the only 'problem' with this format is in that we don't see more of it.

And to make my point clear, my real problem with the format shift is that it seems to have arisen not through a conscious design decision but through the sloppiness of an inexperienced writer working for asleep-at-the-wheel developers. (Which is why only half the book uses that format.)

First of all, understand that I am merely dissapointed with John Mangrum's behavior while working for Arthaus. However, I am not angry or upset. This is because I believe that John did what he did out of what he percieved as the best interest for the line. Allow me to explain my statements again.

Tell me and I'll tell you exactly what I changed and why. I can do so easily -- because at the time, I wrote a file explaining just that and sent it to Arthaus along with my revisions.

Here we come to the crux of the matter. Let us assume for the sake of argument that my entries for Denizens of Darkness were complete and total garbage. You are here admitting that you changed entries on your own without so much as a, "Hello, your entry is terrible." You changed the entries therein as an acting editor. But this was not your role. You were hired on as an author. If you had been my editor, John, I really wouldn't have had a problem with it. It was the way it was done, not what was done.

Because author ego is more important than good books, right?

No, not at all. I have never minded when my work has been altered or changed. My long work with the RPGA taught me to accept changes, as well as the work I put in on my novel that was published back in '96. I have never objected to the changes the editors made to my work with Ravenloft. Indeed, I agree with the changes that you made to my work in Denizens of Darkness. They were appropriate.

However, I disagree with the manner in which you went about enacting these changes. A friendly email would have sufficed. Heck, even an unfriendly email would have been spectacular. The lack of communication is what I'm getting at.

So. Rucht. Did you ever read a VRG before you wrote one? I would consider that a pretty basic step for a professional game designer. Yet your work certainly didn't indicate you'd done so, and your public comments strongly indicated that you had not.

John. As I told you before, I own all of the VRGs. I own some of them twice because they exist in compliation form. I've read them all multiple times. I chose to break away from the traditional format of the VRG on purpose, because of what I saw in the Van Richten's Arsenal.

Remember that it was the beginning of 3rd Edition. Dungeons and Dragons itself was going in a new direction, so I thought that Ravenloft was also taking off in a different direction.

As you said yourself, the fact that VRA was an abberant sourcebook was buried on p. 7, third paragraph. Note the word buried. I missed it. That's all there is to it.

As far as my "terrible writing," I will only say this. Quality of writing is subjective. If you wish to say that my writing is aesthetically egregious, that's fine. I do not share that opinion of your work. I think you are a fine writer in your own right. Your work while you were at Arthaus was top-notch.

I will let others decide if my writing for the line was any good.

Mangrum wrote:The format of a Van Richten Guide isn't determined by the format of books that aren't Van Richten Guides. This includes Van Richten's Arsenal, which even says, specifically, in character, in print, that it isn't using the usual format.

(For the curious, the reference is buried all the way back on pg. 7. Third paragraph, first sentence.)

Thanks for the Clearfication, John. I had assumed the Van Richten Arsenal was just part of the Guide series. Thanks for the note about the reference, since it has been ages since I read that Particular book.

Can any one tell me if the "Van Richten Guide to the Shadow Fey" uses the old or multiple voice format? That is one of the Few Ravenloft Books, I have yet to buy.

Mangrum wrote: I sent him a private message asking him these very questions in a tone that was, I'm sure, impolite. I don't recall getting an answer.

P.S. Yes. I did answer you. And, as I recall, I was polite, then.

Rucht Lilavivat wrote:You changed the entries therein as an acting editor. But this was not your role.

Rucht, if the developers sent him the manuscript for revision, and then used the revisions, it would seem that it was in fact his role, wouldn't it?

EDIT: Also, since you were talking about Denizens of Darkness specifically, I recommend you double-check the credits of that book before telling John what his role was.

Andrew Cermak wrote: EDIT: Also, since you were talking about Denizens of Darkness specifically, I recommend you double-check the credits of that book before telling John what his role was.

Andrew, thank you for pointing that out. Since John Mangrum was a developer for Denizens of Darkness, the responsibility fell upon him to email all of the authors for that book his redlines. As it was, we did not receive them.

To be clear, the comments I posted earlier were to mainly defend the work I did on VRGttWD. I have sat on those comments for a long time, but when I saw the Guide to the Walking Dead berated again, I felt it necessary to say something.

Rucht Lilavivat wrote: Andrew, thank you for pointing that out. Since John Mangrum was a developer for Denizens of Darkness, the responsibility fell upon him to email all of the authors for that book his redlines. As it was, we did not receive them.

I wondered if you'd go there. Decided not to "concede the point," after all?

Nicky and Jackie are also credited as developers (and as the primary developers, otherwise why separate John with a preposition?). Tell me, Rucht, which developers contacted you for the project? Which were you in communication with during the project? Who did you send the drafts to?

It wasn't John, was it? No, it wasn't, because that wasn't his developmental role, as you well know. John didn't communicate with authors because he wasn't asked or expected to.

Maybe you should ask Nicky and Jackie why they didn't tell you they were having John fix your write-ups. I'm used to Nicky and Jackie passing the buck, but I can't imagine why you'd want to do it for them.

Out of topic:

I must confess that I am a bit shocked. I always thought of the Kargatane as the one big *dread* family that brought back the Mists into publication. I never thought that you all had so negative feelings towards each other after the end of your work.

Whatever may have happened then: The books you wrote made others have a good time, whatever critical announcements you may have read here.

Just a note to cool that down a bit... What about a good shake-hands and a beer at GenCon?



*Hope I don't interfere where I am not asked to*

Mmmm…

In my management courses, there were notions about authority lines, whether formal or informal. When there is a grey area in a structure, chances are that chaos will put its nose in it.

From all I’ve read about the way things went, I’m under the impression that there were no clear and recognized authority / leader in the structure, or those who should have the power didn’t use this power, aggravating any malaise or confusion.

Add to the possible lack of communication, and it became messy, for all the good reasons in the world.

Joël

Andrew Cermak wrote:
I wondered if you'd go there. Decided not to "concede the point," after all?

Nicky and Jackie are also credited as developers (and as the primary developers, otherwise why separate John with a preposition?). Tell me, Rucht, which developers contacted you for the project? Which were you in communication with during the project? Who did you send the drafts to?

No, no, I think we are actually making progress here. I do see what you are saying. No, the developers are not blameless here. They should have sent the authors the redlines. So you are correct on that point.

But I would have appreciated it if John had sent us his comments. Sure, it wasn't his "responsibilty" to do so, but it's a courtesy.

In every Ravenloft project I have been involved in, if I saw something that I disagreed with or thought needed fixing, I emailed all the authors of the book my opinions and suggestions. I would have appreciated the same courtesy, but I will concede that John was not mandated to do so in this case.

There were other communication problems that I will not bring up here and will contact you off-thread about. I feel that that discussion would only serve to further demoralize the Ravenloft community.

Again, my main purpose here was to defend Guide to the Walking Dead. I have stated why VRGttWD had the format that it did. I’m afraid that I cannot apologize for it. The fans seem to like it and that’s good enough for me.

Rucht Lilavivat wrote: The fans seem to like it and that’s good enough for me.

That right there is all that needs to be said.

In the end the only one who can say if a book is good or bad is not the deveopers, not the editors and not even he authors, its the fans.


The books creators squbble on and on about little nitpicks but in reality did that stop the book from getting purchised by the fans?

No.

Raise your hand out there if you didn't buy COD or HOL just because it had a bad review? Or stoped using DOD just because the stats were wrong. Or tossed out VRGTTWD because it was written in many voices?

I see very few of you out there.

We don't need rules or stats or format clones of other books.

We need Ravenloft.

We need gothic tales, dark moon lit nights, vampires and golems and things that go bump in the night. We need to see the moon shining over Castle Ravenloft and to feel the dread it brings. We need to feel the feted breath of a Verbekian wolf breathing down on us.

We need Ravenloft.

And dispite every minor blemish you have given us back Ravenloft.

You have given us new stories, new monsters and most important...new life to a once dead world.

Thank you.

Joël of the Fraternity wrote:Mmmm…

In my management courses, there were notions about authority lines, whether formal or informal. When there is a grey area in a structure, chances are that chaos will put its nose in it.

From all I’ve read about the way things went, I’m under the impression that there were no clear and recognized authority / leader in the structure, or those who should have the power didn’t use this power, aggravating any malaise or confusion.

Add to the possible lack of communication, and it became messy, for all the good reasons in the world.

Joël

That was about what I was thinking. All this infighting is terrible for the line...

But, anyway, I have to say that VRA is one of the best RV books around, and it had this multiple voices format - so, why shouldn't it be brought into the guides? I don't have any problem with this.

And I consider Mangrum's tone extremely impolite.

Jasper said it all. Nothing more to add...

Jasper wrote:
We need Ravenloft.

We need gothic tales, dark moon lit nights, vampires and golems and things that go bump in the night. We need to see the moon shining over Castle Ravenloft and to feel the dread it brings. We need to feel the feted breath of a Verbekian wolf breathing down on us.

We need Ravenloft.

And dispite every minor blemish you have given us back Ravenloft.

You have given us new stories, new monsters and most important...new life to a once dead world.

Thank you.

Once dead, or undead?

Desdichado wrote:Out of topic:

I must confess that I am a bit shocked. I always thought of the Kargatane as the one big *dread* family that brought back the Mists into publication.
I never thought that you all had so negative feelings towards each other after the end of your work.

I'm not sure what you mean. The Kargatane are/were me, Andrew, Andrew, John, Stu, Ryan, Chris, and Joe. We all get along swimmingly.

Our relationships with other Ravenloft writers vary from individual to individual, I imagine. I know I didn't work with many besides the Kargatane, so I don't have any feelings toward most of them one way or the other. This thread is probably the first or second time Rucht and I have "spoken" to one another.