hasty...??

Yes, and doubly so, since you're now referring to material the board hasn't even seen, yet...
Suspect you're very close to the mark in various places (and in previous comments, above).

(heh. now I can't edit out the previous message, either...)

Later,
David.

stormber wrote:Your posts take the tone that I am engaged in some sort of nefarious chicanery. That is the furthest notion from truth. I brought this material to the collecting community as a collectable, that's it. Steve and I decided that whatever happened to the materials happened. He invested much of his time in it and has since moved on to other pursuits.

My previous posts suggested that you had been careless with Steve's legacy, given your lack of research into how all the material meshed together.
You were the one who indicated that the collection had been broken apart, at least in part to maximise the dollar return...
(And also made a comment to the effect that you disliked people sharing copies of the material (regardless of reason?) as doing so "devalued" them).

Even if that one page of the Cupric Text relating to the Mystic class had somehow become separated, it should not have taken long to find it's proper place. The header and footer are both in Steve's "standard format" for that publication.
Looking back at the auction, it took me only a few seconds to realise where the sheet had come from, even given a low-res image; hence my interjection to Ian.
*
Yes, I am sure Steve is 100% correct that the rest has been "lost to time" (with regards his /original/ outline for the Mystic), but not in the context of the archive. Sorry, you gave no indication you were quoting Steve, in the auction description.

stormber wrote:Remember, this stuff is still his intellectual property, regardless of whom may have the physical artifacts.

With regards the Cupric Text material, Steve's cover note states "Unless otherwise noted all material herein may be used by anyone for any purpose".

Regardless, I would obviously prefer that Steve is fully credited even in non-commercial context and would prefer that he could help guide in the manner in which this is brought back together again.
However, the Mikes (from whom I've heard nothing) and Ian have the publishable material; and much of that will, no doubt, stand alone- even without the extra hints and directions in Steve's underlying developmental framework.

improvstone wrote:

harami2000 wrote:
With regards the Cupric Text material, Steve's cover note states "Unless otherwise noted all material herein may be used by anyone for any purpose".

Paul, both your comments and Steve's own words seem to contradict each other. So, rather then discussing on this forum could you please PM me Steve's contact details. I would like to have a chat with Steve directly with regard to IP prior to persuing the development of the Manual further.

David, please note that even though I have been quiet I have still been listening (just very disappointed with the amount of noise on this forum recently). As I stated awhile ago I am undertaking an assessment of the material prior to any decision to publish.

You should go a bit easier on Paul. I don't believe he intended any malace.

Just to add some controversy ... after viewing the material I believe one of the biggest reasons for the manual not being published was NOT Gary leaving TSR but rather Gary's procrastination with regard to its publication.

All, to date the interest I have received on this forum with regard to releasing the Manual has been minimal (A big thanks to those who did say they wanted one). A greater show of hands (please) would help convice me that this is a viable venture.

Well, Count me as one who would definitely be interested in it if it is in fact produced. I would also offer any possible help that may be needed in the project. I am not sure exactly what would be needed to be done or how I could help specifically, but the offer still stands even if it is simply just getting the word out about it.

I concur that most of us here will buy one, but whether that justifies the expenditure for a mass market print copy is debatable.  A PDF might be the wise initial route so a lot of money isn't sunk unprofitably.

FoulFoot wrote:I would think most of us here would be up for buying a copy. Though I wouldn't think it'd be a factor in whether it's published or not -- if it's going to be a professionally-made hardback manual cranked out on a commercial press, we're talking thousands of copies. Maybe 10,000 as a minimum order. So I'd think that it's a much bigger business decision than just a few dozen orders from The Acaeum.

Now, if we're talking about a PDF release or something on that scope, that's a whole different story.

Based on what I've heard about the various mss., I don't believe that anyone's going to be printing thousands of copies unless they're being underwritten somehow:  products in the market just don't sell to that level of scale any longer.  

Tadashi and I are still more than willing to assist with the publication of the the planar materials, and have discussed them extensively at our last few meetings.

mbassoc2003 wrote:There are editorial notes and corrections made to City of the Revenaunt, deletion of 'house rules', recommendations that 'passage comments be moved to the back of the module', and other errata.

Steve had his own "house rules" which would have to have been deleted/amended for "official" D&D tourney play.
"Moved to the back of the module" is interesting, although would be just as possible that referred to standardising the tourney "whole" from Steve's work (it is his paper stock, not someone else's...); and not necessarily for any particular publication effort.

I'd still like to know who the (stated/implied?) other "hand" at work is, since this was clearly used before Steve got back in touch with Gary.

mbassoc2003 wrote:I am trying to determine whether the manuscript was playtested and amended with notes (late '78 early '79 from discussion on another board with Steve), and then edited/reviewed by Gary (or another editor) for comment on meeting Dungeons & Dragons module publication criteria (possible during 1980?).

That doesn't tie in with the genesis of the Revenaunt, but there's still that gap and "other hand" I can't figure out; in order to turn it into a proper tourney.

No idea as to Gary's possible interest at a later date. Certainly not impossible since Steve was over there for his "summer job" and wouldn't necessitate screeds of letters to-and-fro.
I could understand why Steve might be somewhat cagey to discuss all that, however.

Am kinda blind on this, for some reason, Ian!

=

Re. previous note:
"Steve indicated that he DM'd this City as a tournament module, and as a feature City within his ongoing campaign during '78 and'79."
(The latter half of that sentence in interesting; don't know whether you can take that totally in the manner you did, above).

(Thanks, Ian)

mbassoc2003 wrote:Steve said that he used it in his campaigns quite a lot, and that he DM'd it himself as a tournament late in '78 and during '79.

Now that is more like it. Yes; a world of difference with that small change in emphasis.
Agreed.

*bangs my head off the wall a few more times, frustrated at the original auction mis-description*. Yup, exactly as expected but the only "catch" was that later paper stock.
Suspect that's a possible re-edit/re-working/re-packaging (??) or enhancement for tourney play, etc. (??) by Steve, although you only have photocopies which is a pain....

Would really need to compare the rest of the "package" as well, but am pretty sure you've got older material in there, too (in fact I could quote you a precise date for the "genesis", but hopefully our research will meet in the middle somewhere along the line, and is useful to have you check with Steve for confirmations to tie those in).

"Plugs and recommendations" sounds like someone (not necessarily Gary) has had their paws on it... I /think/ that would be more likely TSR than Judges Guild, given the date- although it's pretty close.

mbassoc2003 wrote:This module would appear to have been developed for Steve's own campaign universe (and house rules/gameplay style)

"module" is perhaps slightly the wrong word in that "campaign" context perhaps...

*whistles innocently*
Well, would you have put in a high bid if you knew it was nothing to do with Gary Gygax at all?

mbassoc2003 wrote:....and at some point in this manuscript's history, it has been thoroughly edited with a view to being published as a D&D module (and by someone with good spelling and grammer).

*chuckles*. Know exactly what you mean... Grammar and spelling are definitely useful "markers" for authorial purposes, though!

mbassoc2003 wrote:At what point I do not know, but it would seem to have occurred after play-testing, as some editorial comments refer to playtest notes.

(or campaign notes; with further work in the context of the tourneys?)

mbassoc2003 wrote:The date of 'possibly 1980' was a blind stab in the dark by me.

Is as good as any, but is very time-sensitive in the context of JG vs. TSR (check the copies of the Dungeoneer and you'll see what I mean; aside from the correspondence I've got here).

mbassoc2003 wrote:I would like to know more about the life of this module though, and I suspect only Steve has the answers.

Had a fairly good idea and nothing to contradict that, thus far.

You keep saying "module"...
That's kinda like saying "orange spine" in the context of the Planes material!
(Although you have slightly more justification, perhaps).

All the above JM 2 cents, of course!

mbassoc2003 wrote:How would you refer to the content or the manuscript? Suggestions?

"Scenario" sounds fine to me. Is generic enough to cover campaign scenario or adventure scenario.
(Later used/revised/reworked for tourney play(?).... but am still looking for firm evidence that you've got both "old" and "new" material in there beyond the 1977 Cupric Text extract).

"Module" similarly has too many implications in terms of design and intention, IMHO. (Was a useful sales pitch, though).

mbassoc2003 wrote:I think I would have paid what I paid for the manuscript regardless of whether Gary was involved in it's development or editing.

*g*. OK. Suffice to say you'd've had much tougher competition, then...

mbassoc2003 wrote:It is tied directly to the development of Steve's concepts of the Planes of Existance, and if I had had the opportunity to snipe on that auction, the end price would have been higher.

Yes, the Revenaunt is a branch or offshoot of that, via the Cupric Text campaign, and from a critical time period (even if not right back in 1969/72/75/whatever).
Suspect any poor sod who'd just won the auction at "face value" would have had difficulty working that out...

mbassoc2003 wrote:Besides, unless Mayfair have the original squirrelled away somewhere, or Paul took photocopies, this manuscript is unique. I think the odds are in my favour.

Don't know whether Mayfair ever received a copy of this in the first place.
(Also don't know whether Steve got his stuff back from them; and if so, would have thought all of it must have come back given the tone of his letter!).

Not sure why Paul would want to take a photocopy of a photocopy...

improvstone wrote:Not always ... still working on the world peace thing ....

I refer you to the editorial note above... 'Some form of divine intervention would be required.'

harami2000 wrote:"Scenario" sounds fine to me. Is generic enough to cover campaign scenario or adventure scenario.
(Later used/revised/reworked for tourney play(?).... but am still looking for firm evidence that you've got both "old" and "new" material in there beyond the 1977 Cupric Text extract).

Scenario it is then. With regard to dating the various elements of the work, I do not have any frame of reference with which to draw comparisons. I also do not know the individuals concerned, or the history of TSR and the other key RPG figures of the time.

I agree. The included extracts of the Cupric Texts appear on the surface to be the oldest elements within the text of the scenario. I doubt there is anything here from before 1977 (assuming that is when the Cupric Texts were written. Can anyone confirm this date?).

harami2000 wrote:*g*. OK. Suffice to say you'd've had much tougher competition, then...

What does *g* mean? It illudes me.

So perhaps I could have had it cheaper? Well, thems the way the dice fell... I am far more contented with my Revenaunt purchase than my PoVQ But with such a splendid exchange rate at the moment, I lose no sleap over PoVQ either.

harami2000 wrote:Don't know whether Mayfair ever received a copy of this in the first place.
(Also don't know whether Steve got his stuff back from them; and if so, would have thought all of it must have come back given the tone of his letter!).

Steve implied in a similar thread on Dragonsfoot, Pied Piper, wherever, that his manuscripts were not returned to him following Mayfair's colapse. He indicated that he was heartily displeased at this, as he had spent much time re-draughting the Planes of Existance into a more complete and presentable manuscript/package, and that it's loss resulted in much offpissness. This seems to have been the death knell for the book.