Post originally by David Sinclair at 2003-07-08 11:13:13
Converted from Phorums BB System

1.) I never said there was anything wrong with black & white. But Palladium hasn't changed anything in their layout design in over 20 years. Considering how many of their books I've bought over the years, I'm sick of looking at it. And it doesn't take a lot to improve the look of the books. They could do something as simple as updating the fonts and using graphical headers for the various sections of the book. Still cookie cutter, but it breaks up the dullness better than the pictures will and introduces a sense of newness. But instead, they continue printing brand new titles that look like they've been trapped in a warehouse lost in time for 25 years.

Incidentally, these two complaints have been voiced by thousands over the last 10 years or more, and they have completely ignored it all that time.

2.) Those damned palladium rules seem like they get reprinted in every last book. It's annoying, a wasteful sacrifice of trees, and if it wasn't there, a lot of their books could be dropped a buck or three in cover price.

3.) If a 9mm pistol had a 3000 m/s muzzle velocity, it would be firing the bullet at roughly Mach 15. You wouldn't ever roll dice with that arm again.

4.) This book is one of countless that defines one gun and better than another through author favoritism or the "coolness factor" of its appearance. There is nothing in the data of Compendium of Contemporary Weapons that gives any clue as to what might make one gun better than another. There are no descriptions to detail that information. And that's not all the descriptions are good for. Descriptions could give the timeline of production for a weapon, inform you as to what organizations it is used by, detail legal limitations placed on weapons, etc.