Deleriad said:As I said elsewhere I am biased but I like the level of content in S&P. I found the fluff that had been creeping in (gamer movie reviews I'm looking at you) to be not only uninteresting but actively irritating. This S&P looks meaty and full of goodness, especially for RQ.
Danforth said:Good to see some Paranoia love - two issues in a row now! - but how long have you had that R&D article sitting around!? The treason damage rules and page references are for the 2004 edition!
Mongoose Nick said:GAH! It is a pretty recent submission. Darn it.
Mongoose Nick said:Paranoia is pretty hard to get articles for, alas, hence the lack of love in the past. I am trying to remedy this...
Danforth said:Mongoose Nick said:Paranoia is pretty hard to get articles for, alas, hence the lack of love in the past. I am trying to remedy this...
Your efforts are appreciated, citizen!
Hmmm, maybe if I expended the energy I currently use to bleat on about Paranoia support on this forum... to write a Paranoia article or two myself... that would be more beneficial. I'll see what I can do for the cause...
Mongoose Nick said:Danforth said:Hmmm, maybe if I expended the energy I currently use to bleat on about Paranoia support on this forum... to write a Paranoia article or two myself... that would be more beneficial. I'll see what I can do for the cause...
Please do. If you want to contact me the e-mail on the Signs and Portents contributions page is best. Then we can discuss things which can be added... (I'm interested in more than just scenarios (althoughs are greatly appreciated as well).
Thank you. That was the first thing I submitted to S&P. It was fun to put together. Glad you spotted the Doctor Who cameo, too.JRoss said:The new scenario makes this American wish that he had access to Quatermass. Nice TARDIS shout-out.