Prev: Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question Next: Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question

Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question

From: Happiness is a belt-fed weapon <KOCHTE@s...>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:57:58 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question

>> I tend to agree with Scott on this.	Being a parent I really notice
it
>> now with kids wanting Batman toys with 20 different uniforms and
weapons
>> which were never used in any comic or movie or All the Beasties
>> characters that are not in the tv show.  Basically it's a matter of
>> coming up with different ways to make money on something so we'll
invent
>> a product we can put a name to and sell.  Maybe this is too sinister
to
>> attribute to AOG but I won't be buying any of their ships which I
>> haven't seen in the show.  Especially when you get things like the
new
>> Narn Battleship when the clear implication of the tv show is the
G'Quan
>> is their biggest ship.  If they had bigger ships why weren't there
any
>> when they sent their main fleet to Gorash 7	when all they showed
were
>> G'Quans.  By all means people can buy the ships and use them but let
the
>> "purists" be.
>
>	Errrrrr.... didn't you people read my post.  THE SHIPS ARE
OFFICIAL!!! 
>JMS APPROVED THEM!!!  You guys sound like a couple of bible-thumpers
>denying that something that is proven scientific fact simply because
>"it's not in the bible."

Mark, chill, do not speak of thumping the book of...of...of Him. It is
disrespectful. And don't hafta burst a bubble; you'll need your
capillaries
for Finals Week.  ;-)

For those who may have missed it in the past, JMS has been asked by
people
'what about the other ships in the various races' fleets, do they
exist?',
and he has said, yes, they do, but for purposes of the show, we don't
see
them because they do nothing to make the *story* progress. We see only
what
we see to move the story along.

If you were to go to a harbor (oh for instance, the Baltimore Inner
Harbor :),
and decided that whatever you see there is what represents the Real
World,
you would be sadly off your mark. We see a number of frigates come
through
here, some cutters, a destroyer or two - but we don't see cruisers,
carriers,
or anything of that ilk. So if you based your sampling of naval ships on
just
what you saw in this one area, you would be *way* off the mark of what's
out there. This is basically how JMS has run his B5 story. We see some
ships.
Not all of 'em. But they exist. In some way, shape, or form.

Personally I don't care what anyone else wants to play with, as long as
*they're* happy. If you want to play with *only* the ships you've ever
seen, then so be it. If you want to play with a more rounded-out fleet,
then so be it. I decided long ago when I first came up with my own
rendition
of B5 rules for FT to expand the fleets to cover ship classes we hadn't
yet seen. No one seemed to complain too much when I ran a few scenarios
using 'em.  :-)

So, now, how do we get this fully back onto an FT topic?  :-)

Mk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 
"Well, you could do that. And I could nail your head to the table, set
fire
to it, and feed your charred remains to the Pak'Mara. But, it's an
imperfect
world, and we never get exactly what we want. So get used to it."


Prev: Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question Next: Re: EFSB new ship comment and old ship question