 | | Re: mech legalities —Matthew Gerber
|
| | | I'm sorry...was that meant to be witty or scathing? Either way, you seem to have missed the mark... (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: mech legalities —Bill Fitzgerald
|
| | | | Actually, I believe that the term Mech is derived from Mecha. Mecha I believe is a Japanese word for machine. If this is the case, there can never be a copyrighting of the word. Another term used is herc; this being derived from Herculian(sp?). This (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | (...) I'm not sure about HERC, as it's an acronym used in that universe. It is derived from Herculean but it has its own provenance as well. Not to say that a company won't stick "TM" on it just to scare the unwary or uninitiated; TSR did this with (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Kenneth A. Drumm, Ph.D.
|
| | | | | | Speaking of TSR are they still around? -- Kenneth A. Drumm Ph.D. <snip> (...) <snip> (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) After a disastrous overproduction of really, really sub-standard fiction, resulting in a huge return of stock by such low-visibility companies as B. Dalton and others, TSR teetered on the brink on non-existence for between 6 and 12 months. (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | (...) You mean, *more* substandard than what was already coming out of millions of AD&D gaming sessions around the world? Whoa, that sucks. :) (...) Hah! TSR swallowed by an amoeba! How fitting. (...) You know, I sometimes can appreciate justice. (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | (...) TSR was once the Amoeba that swallowed SPI, so it has a certain circular irony to it. (for the non-intialized (initiated on initials): Tactical Studies Rules and Simulations Publications, Inc.) (...) Which is now a subsidiary of Hasbro. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Isn't Avalon Hill, too? (...) My RPG FoTW (not this week, but it happened during *a* week): I was in a local Goodwill store, yet again finding no LEGO (for that matter, I have *NEVER* found even a single LEGO in all my trips to a bunch of (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Yup. (...) Good deal! Thrift stores are terrible on Lego, but they can be great on games. Of course, Traveller one can argue that Traveller as a game is over-priced at 75 cents... :-O Bruce (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Maybe... But I also got Ogre and Car Wars in the deal. 8^) Dave! (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) If you ever want to make a die-hard grognard cry, mention the Sad Fate of the Late, Great, Avalon Hill Games Company. It's pathetic what happened--they were acquired by Hasbro Interactive, which basically sits on all the great intellectual (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Really? I always thought GURPS was simpler to learn and use, because the overall structure was simpler. Everything is right there on the character sheet, so even if you don't know all the possibilities, you can still play a character pretty (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Oh no, the learning curve is extremely steep with GURPS - you have to be familiar with a lot to design a character. With D&D just roll a few dice, and maybe read the first level spells. The rest you can learn as you go along. I could get (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) OK, I see what you mean. You're right - building characters in GURPS usually takes one entire session. Hopefully, the *first* game session. ;) But I like the results of having a characters which is translated into GURPS terminology, rather (...) (24 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | The Gygax Legacy (was: mech legality) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) Having worked in a hobby/gaming for an annoying length of time, I've been exposed to far too much garbage nee fantasy fiction. Ed Greenwood tops the list of awful book producers (I hate to call him a writer), closely followed by everything (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Gygax Legacy (was: mech legality) —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah, GURPS is different. I think it's partly because the source material is so ... generic ... the writing is umm, maybe 'bland' is the word I'm looking for? Anyway, I also think it's because it's very easy to modify GURPS into a different (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —John Aronson
|
| | | | To be really correct...Mecha is the the japanese equivalent or rough translation..mecha would be written in katakana i belive and would be meka in romanji-this is just what i get from takeing japanse class and reading to wierd things... -John (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | (...) It is spelled with a "ch" because it is derived from a non-japanese word (hence it being written in katakana). It is probably derived from mechanical, but I don't know that for sure. :) Jeff (24 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Mike Broam
|
| | | | | Being a nerd I have always fallen back on the acronyms. I have always used Mechanically Enhanced Combat Heavy Armor for MECHA. Although I have never seen this in any other source (anime etc..) it seems to work for me. Mike out (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —John Aronson
|
| | | | (...) Yea the ch is for the true english spelling..it does come from our word for mechanical..basically romanji is the english generalization of japanese words each character/sound being written as english sounds. either way mecha will always stand (...) (24 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —Mladen Pejic
|
| | | | Right on John! I too use the term "mech" only when referring to those FASA-made excuses for mechanized robots. BTW John!!! When is your website going to be done! I am DYING to see clear pictures of that cool four-legged mecha that was on your (...) (24 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: mech legalities —John Aronson
|
| | | | I would have to say the only "FASA" designs I liked were the rippped off Macross ones ie the LAM's and old versions of many mechs suchs as the shadow hawk and rifleman...but any way my site is on the way..evidendtly its going quite diffrent then it (...) (24 years ago, 16-May-01, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| | | | |
