posted
I wasn't sure whether this should go here or the creativity (non-canon) forum, but since I'm talking about starships, I'll put it here.
In case no one knew, back in the late 80's FASA had put out their version of the Tech Manual not long after the first season of TNG. Apparently, this book was the reason why TPTB decided to renounce FASA and revoke their license to produce ST items. The reason I'm posting is because there were some things I found amusing about the book.
posted
I have a copy. I ordered it used from Barnes & Noble. I actually liked it as well; I wonder why The Powers took such offense of it. I especially liked the "fact" that Starfleet had two interim uniform designs before the 1st season TNG uniforms. That's more believable than having the red and black movie uniforms as the only pre-TNG uniforms.
posted
I *had* this book. Bought it at a con, then sold it at the same con the following year. Personally, I think the made-up ships are still ugly as hell, regardless of how little information there was at the time. Typical FASA-ness IMO - everyone remember the Keith-class scout?
Granted, the book *did* have some nifty things in it (like the Medusan crew chambers, or the classrooms), but IIRC nearly all of it was eventually contradicted.
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can build two at twice the price?"
posted
The Alaska is nearly identical to the painting Andy Probert did sometime after TMP - a painting that got Roddenberry convinced that this was the way to go with the main ship of the new show. The long 45-degree pylons are there, as is the general nacelle shape and flat secondary hull. Probert had a somewhat less beamy hull, though.
I think that whoever built the Observation Lounge wall display used this painting as the E-C model, and not the later famous and detailed painting Probert did on "Ambassador class" (the one which was turned by Sternbach into the actual Ambassador design).
The Paine curiously echoes the later Miarecki-built Springfield, although with too long pylons; all original FASA ships have pylons of excessive length...
------------------ "Okashii na... namida ga nagareteru. Hitotsu mo kanashikunai no ni." (That's funny... my tears are falling. And I'm not sad at all.) - Quatre Raberba Winner
posted
God, what a shite collection of fanwank bollockships. Now we know the real reason Paramount disassociated themselves from this lot - who would want to canonise anything shat out by this bunch of arsewipes?
------------------ "Businesses used to be like Christianity; if you were faithful and obedient, you could obtain bliss in the afterlife of retirement. Now it's more of a reincarnation model. If the worker learns enough in his current job, he can progress to a higher level of employment elsewhere."
posted
Yeah - their ships would have looked far better if they DIDN'T use cut-and-pasted Constitution-refit saucers and LN-64 nacelles with those wavy hand-drawn low-res secondary hulls of theirs. The contrast between the detailed Enterprise parts and the rest of the mess is too jarring.
Obviously, visual excellence wasn't a prime criterium back when FASA operated...
And what was their deal with needing to stick the nacelles way the hell out on those spindly little pylons?
*shudders*
------------------ "You don't tug on Superman's cape. You don't spit into the wind. You don't pull the mask off the ole' Lone Ranger And you don't mess around with Jim." Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com
posted
This book is NOT the primary reason that Paramount and FASA decided to part company. On Paramount side there was the fact that the FASA products had become increasingly militaristic in tone - which was fine before 1987 but became a problem when touchy feely TNG started. FASA was planning products which included a Federation Ground Forces Manual (infantry, tanks, etc.) and a board game depicting all out war between the UFP, the Klingons and the Romulans.
Paramount also thought that the RPG market was too small to bother with. Which is why they didn't issue another license for ten years.
On FASA's side there was the fact that Paramount were a pain to deal with - they took ages to approve everything (something that also affected LUG much more recently) - and the Trek range was not their best seller, that was Battletech, by a long way. Also the original developers had jumped ship, because they too were not happy with the increased military focus of the products.
The quality of the artwork in the FASA books wasn't really any worse than the artwork in other RPG products of the 1980s. It wasn't until after White Wolf published Vampire: The Masquerade that you regularly got high quality artwork in an RPG product.
The guy who drew the ships did it because loved drawing starships but he didn't understand Treknology. But look at what LUG produced in their TNG Player's Guide. It might be colour with glossy paper but the ships are even worse.
The Alaska class was mentioned in the TNG Officer's Manual but was not illustrated. The pictures on the SSD site come from another, non-FASA, publication.
posted
Yah. LUG's ships suck too. But at least they got presentation down a touch better
------------------ "You don't tug on Superman's cape. You don't spit into the wind. You don't pull the mask off the ole' Lone Ranger And you don't mess around with Jim." Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com
posted
FASA, by the way, is going out of business in a month or two. I was under the impression that Microsoft had bought them, but that was apparently a fevered hallucination on my part.
posted
By the way, does this designer of FASA ships have a name? Although I agree that a lot of the ships are bad, he (I assuming, it's a he) probably does hold some kind of record as the most prolific published designer of movie-era ships. And, as we've mentioned before, not all of the designs suck. If I had to crank out a few dozen ships under a deadline, I'd bet a lot of them would suck as well.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Printer-friendly view of this topic
