[DL] Re: Colleigum Thought Processes

["John Goff" <johngoff@cavtel.net>]

Hey,

    Just thought I'd drop in and throw out a little backstory on the
Collegium. It seems a few folks aren't thrilled with the final product, and
for that I apologize. I'd like to address a couple of the issues raised as
areas of disappointment so, while I can't make it better, I can hopefully at
least explain certain choices.
    The Doomtown storyline: At the time of writing, Doomtown was still a
viable property. Out of respect to what the Doomtown story team was
developing, we didn't want to blurt out the upcoming plotlines. We had
planned the book to fall between two major releases, where we would reveal
one or two "behind-the-scenes" plots that might not be totally clear from
the cards, but we wouldn't spoil the fun for full-time participants in the
CCG. Unfortunately, Doomtown has now (at least temporarily) taken up
residence in Boothill, leaving most of the plots unresolved. It's my
understanding AEG had scheduled on last release to tie up a lot of the major
plots, but, as I am no longer professionally involved with the project, I
can't say that for certain.
    As to the lack of MS rules: We were pretty happy with the rules for the
MS set forth in the main book, with the few modifications put forth in Smith
& Robards. Unlike the Junkers rules in the HOE book, they didn't need any
major overhauls in my opinion; everyone else at PEG agreed with me.
    Mad Science is supposed to be a good deal faster and looser than Junker
tech, and more subject to Marshal input. Also, the Weird West setting as a
whole is less "mathematical" than HOE; compare hucksters to sykers for
example. While they serve the same purpose, huckters tend to be far less
regimented or...controlled than a syker.
    Instead of tacking on a bunch of rules we didn't really feel the AB
needed, we instead opted to provide more gadgets. This time, if you'll note,
most of the gadget descriptions include at least a couple of paragraphs
explaining some of the "theory" behind them--an integral part in the MS
design step.     Mad Science is more narrative than Junker creation and we
felt a wide variety of examples would be a good way of generating
inventiveness in MS players. In short, the gadget section is meant as more
an idea mine or "muse" for players of MS characters than an actual equipment
list.
    My apologies, again, if this didn't come across. It was my intent to
provide a tool that wasn't quite as "dry" as a simple writer's guide to
making up gadget theories. In retrospect, perhaps I could have been more
clear--perhaps a note in the introduction to that effect...

My thoughts,

John Goff