James Maliszewski's Blog, page 31

Piercer Miniatures?

Today's post about "The Ecology of the Piercer" article got me wondering: have there ever been any miniatures of piercers? Though I've never been a big user of minis, I did own a fair number of Grenadier AD&D figures in my youth, some of which featured a goodly selection of the game's weirder monsters – and make no mistake: the pierce is weird. However, I can't recall any piercers among Grenadier's offerings, at least not those that I owned in the 1980s. Nor can I find any evidence online of any other manufacturers, official or otherwise, that produced a pierce model in those days. 

Apparently, WizKids produces one nowadays (pictured to the left). Looking at it, I suppose I've inadvertently explained why there haven't been any such miniatures before: what purpose would they serve? The intent behind piercers, assuming I can fathom the mind of Gary Gygax (or whoever it was that originally created it), is that its appearance is a surprise. Looking like an ordinary stalactite, no one is supposed to notice it until it attacks. Placing a miniature of it on the table would be a dead giveaway of its presence, thereby negating its one and only purpose. 

On the other hand, there have been a lot of odd Dungeons & Dragons miniatures over the years. I doubt the piercer would have been the oddest. 

REPOST: The Articles of Dragon: "The Ecology of the Piercer"

When issue #72 of Dragon (April 1983) was released, it contained, in addition to the usual assortment of not particularly funny April Fool's articles, a very short article – one page of text plus a one-page illustration – called "The Ecology of the Piercer." Written by Chris Elliott and Richard Edwards, it had originally appeared in the pages of the UK fanzine Dragonlords. That in itself is pretty remarkable, as I cannot recall another Dragon article that was in fact a reprint of something that had appeared elsewhere (though I'm sure my readers will quickly point out many examples that falsify my memories). More remarkable, I think, is how modest an article "The Ecology of the Piercer" is and yet, it was the acorn from which a mighty oak would eventually grow.

The idea of monster ecology articles is now so well entrenched in the minds of long-time D&D players that it's almost unnecessary to discuss the actual contents of this seminal article. More to the point, "The Ecology of the Piercer" is, as I just noted, a very short article, written in the form of an address given by the wizard Pyrex to the Wizards Guild of Kabring, where he discusses the physiology and habits of the piercer. There are no game stats included with the article; instead it focuses on trying to make sense of one of the game's more bizarre creations. This the authors do by postulating that the piercer is a mollusk using a stalactite as protective covering/weapon in much the same way that a hermit crab does with seashells. It's a pretty simple idea but a clever one that goes a long way to lending plausibility to what would otherwise be just a goofy monster.

The response to "The Ecology of the Piercer" was very positive, so much so that nearly every issue of Dragon  that followed it for many years included an "Ecology of ..." article in its pages. These articles were foundational to the Silver Age, being sophisticated (or decadent, depending on one's point of view) outgrowths of Gygaxian naturalism. I think it worth noting, too, that the origin of this series was in the UK, where RuneQuest rivaled and may have even exceeded Dungeons & Dragons in popularity. Among RQ's many virtues was its dedication to creating and presenting fantastically plausible monsters, with 1982's Trollpak probably being the epitome of the genre. I suspect that Trollpak had an influence on "The Ecology of the Piercer," as evidenced by the illustration that accompanied the article. It showed a dissected piercer that reminded me, even then, of the famous illustration of a troll's innards I've discussed previously.

I liked the early "The Ecology of ..." articles more than the later ones, mostly because they were short and focused more on explaining away goofiness in a reasonable manner than in providing the definitive portrait of a particular monster's nature. They were thus much more easily "plug and play" than what came later, which increasingly seemed to rely on very specific presentations of iconic monsters, often to the point where those portrayals became canonical at the expense of earlier alternatives. But then that was one of the characteristics of the Silver Age and, judging from the popularity of these articles, it fed a real hunger many gamers – or at least Dragon readers – had.

REPOST: Forgotten Father

The tastes of one generation are not necessarily those of another and literature is no more exempt from the alienating power of time than any other form of art. Realizing this doesn't make it any less surprising when one encounters an artist wildly popular in his own day but largely unknown in the present. Such an artist was Abraham Merritt, who was born today in 1884. A journalist, editor, and writer, Merritt's short stories and novels were highly regarded before the Second World War. Among his ardent admirers was H.P. Lovecraft, who, in a letter to R.H. Barlow wrote of his having met the man in person:

I was extremely glad to meet Merritt in person, for I have admired his work for 15 years. He has certain defects — caused by catering to a popular audience — but for all that he is the most poignant and distinctive fantaïsiste now contributing to the pulps. As I mentioned some time ago — when you lent me the Mirage installment — he has a peculiar power of working up an atmosphere and investing a region with an aura of unholy dread.

HPL would later, along with Robert E. Howard, collaborate with Merritt on a round-robin story called "The Challenge from Beyond." It's not a particularly noteworthy piece, for any of the writers involved, but it's evidence that, once upon a time, Merritt was at least as highly esteemed as Lovecraft and Howard, two writers whose literary stars have risen since their lifetimes, in contrast to their older colleague.

Today, almost no one, including aficionados of fantasy and science fiction -- genres he helped to develop -- talks much about Merritt. I knew his name, of course, since Gary Gygax included him in Appendix N and often noted that he was one of his favorite fantasy authors. Despite this knowledge, I hadn't read much by Merritt until comparatively recently. Part of it is that his stories are frequently out of print. At least some of them are in the public domain, but, being a stodgy old traditionalist, I like books, meaning that, if I can't find a physical volume of an author's works, I often don't read them. Many older authors, such as H. Rider Haggard, for example, are readily available in inexpensive paperbacks, making them much easier to obtain by those uninterested in trolling used bookstores for obscure novels.

Even so, I don't think that fully explains why Merritt is so poorly known and appreciated in the 21st century. The real answer, I think, lies in his stories, which don't fall into neat, easily marketable categories. Whereas Lovecraft can be crudely called a "horror" writer and Howard a "fantasy" one, Merritt defies such facile classification. More often than not, his stories feature recognizably "pulp" heroes -- men of action and intelligence equally adept at problem-solving and fisticuffs -- but Merritt's style is ornate, even florid, marshaling a veritable army of adjectives, adverbs, and archaisms to describe scenes of remarkable power. Here's just one example from his Creep, Shadow, Creep in which he describes a sorcerer:

I saw that he was clothed in the same white robes. There was a broad belt either of black metal or ancient wood around his middle. There was a similar cincture around his breast. They were inlaid with symbolings of silver ... but who ever saw silver shift and change outline ... melt from this rune into another ... as these did? ... The servants had quenched their torches, for now the corposants had begun to glimmer over the standing stones. The witch lights, the lamps of the dead ... Glimmering, shifting orbs of gray phosphorescence of the grayness of the dead ... Now the buzzing began within the Cairn, rising higher and higher until it became a faint, sustained whispering.

It's not hard to see why Lovecraft was so enamored of Merritt's prose -- or why he accused him of "catering to a popular audience." Merritt's style is neither fish nor fowl, mixing many aspects of pulp literature into a unique elixir that's remarkably intoxicating. As Lovecraft notes above and, as I stated in my review of The Ship of Ishtar, Merritt is a master of atmosphere and setting a scene. He takes the time to describe the environment in which his fantastic tales of lost races and eldritch horrors occur and it's this tendency that truly set his stories apart from those of his contemporaries and successors. Moreso than most pulp writers, Merritt truly transports his readers into another world, using his prose to act as their eyes and ears.

I've still not read the entirety of Merritt's corpus and it may be some time before I do, but it's a project to which I am committed. Merritt's unusual style might not be for everyone. However, his ideas are without peer, which explains his great popularity in the years before World War II. I'm increasingly of the opinion that his stories could find an audience today if they were more readily available. I think he's no less accessible than Lovecraft and, given that his protagonists aren't bookish, mentally fragile antiquarians, they're probably more in line with popular tastes than those of the Old Gent. More than anything, what Merritt needs are some champions who'll do for him what others have done for Lovecraft and Howard: remind the current generation what past generations saw in these great artists.

Emperor of Dreams

On January 13 of this year, I commemorated, as I always do, the birthday of Clark Ashton Smith, whose most famous poem, "The Hashish-Eater" famously begins with the line, "Bow down: I am the emperor of dreams." I've long felt that it was an eminently fitting declaration to appear in a poem by CAS, as his literary work, whether poetry or prose, is indeed oneiric, filled with fantastic beings and vistas and eliciting feelings that are at once strange and familiar. Smith understood the language of dreams well and he used that language to remarkable effect. That's a skill I decidedly lack in my own writing and of which I've always been envious, which probably explains why I hold him in such high esteem.

One week later, January 20, would have been the 79th birthday of another master of the language of dreams, filmmaker David Lynch, who died on the 15th. I know the date of his birth only because of a very peculiar incident that happened to me in 2018. One morning, I woke up after a dream I'd had about meeting David Lynch, who was apparently waiting for me on a street corner. "Where are my suits?" he asked me. "Did you bring them to me?" When I told a friend I'd had this dream, he replied, "You know, today is Lynch's birthday."

Prior to my friend's informing me of this, I'm pretty certain I didn't know this information, so it seemed oddly coincidental that I just happened to dream of Lynch on the morning of his birthday. I'm pretty sure I dreamt about him, because I'd come across a story about him from the year before, when he'd set himself in a director's chair at the side of the road on Hollywood Boulevard to campaign for Laura Dern to receive an Oscar. Oh – and he had a cow with him, because, of course, he did. In my dream, he didn't have a cow or a director's chair, but he was at a street corner. I feel like the connection is pretty obvious – at least that's what I told myself, since the alternative is to believe that there was some mystical significance to my dreaming of the man on the day of his birth.

I'm pretty sure the first David Lynch movie I ever saw was his 1984 adaptation of Dune, which I've always adored for its esthetics, if not necessarily anything else. Lynch hated every released version of the movie and even replaced his name with that of Alan Smithee on a couple of them. In college, I met a couple of guys who were big film geeks who loved Lynch's work and, through them, saw Blue Velvet, The Elephant Man, and Eraserhead. I found Eraserhead particularly arresting and have never watched it again, but I found the other two well made and compelling. Though I didn't realize it at the time, all of them, to varying degrees, possess dream-like (or nightmarish) qualities that set them apart from the more straightforward movies to which I was accustomed up till that point.

I don't think it was until Twin Peaks appeared on TV in 1990 that I encountered many people familiar with Lynch's work. The show was, for a brief moment, a "water cooler show," as they used to say – everyone was watching it and talking about, both because it was so lovingly made and because it contained all sorts of elements that made people question exactly what they were actually watching. Because of network interference, Lynch couldn't make good on his vision for the show (and wouldn't until Twin Peaks: The Return in 2017), but he did release a movie prequel in 1992 that is both very good and very scary – and another movie I've never dared watch a second time. Unsurprisingly, Twin Peaks in all its forms gives pride of place to dreams and their importance.

I haven't seen all of Lynch's films, so I'm not sure I'd call myself a true devotee of the man and his works. That said, I found him fascinating. Every interview with him I've ever read or seen is remarkable. Odd though he was, there was a sincerity, an earnestness to him that I couldn't help but find admirable. There was nothing pretentious about him; what you saw was genuine. Everything he said and did was an authentic reflection of who he was and what he believed. It's hard not to like a guy like that, even if, as I said, a lot of what he actually said and did and believed was downright peculiar at times. 

Ultimately, though, the thing I loved about Lynch was that he clearly understood the language of dreams. I use the word "language" purposefully. Lynch's creative efforts, like dreams, are more deliberate than they seem. There's an underlying logic to them that, while not apparent at first, can eventually be deciphered, at least somewhat. To do that, though, you have to be willing to listen. You have to be patient and learn the vocabulary and the grammar and the syntax of the language of dreams. Do that and you might come to understand what he's talking about. 

Or, just like dreams, you might not. Sometimes, you have to comfortable with not knowing, with mystery. Lynch never elaborated on his own work, no matter how often interviewers tried to get him to do so. He trusted his viewers to do their own work and figure it out for themselves, probably because, in many cases, he might not have fully figured it out himself. Great art, like dreams, sometimes comes without an easy explanation: it just is and that's OK. Not everything has to be easily explicable or reducible to a series of rational propositions. In fact, it's better that way.

For someone like me, who's always lived too much inside his own head, who's much too analytical and deductive, I need to be regularly reminded of this. That's likely why artists like Clark Ashton Smith and David Lynch so appeal to me: I recognize in them remedies to my own deficiencies. Their ready understanding of the language of dreams makes me at once envious and grateful – while the news of Lynch's death makes me sad. 

Wherever you are, Mr Lynch, Godspeed.

"We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives the dream."

Your Safety is Our Proft Margin

As I wrote today's Retrospective post, I wanted to reference something from my Riphaeus Sector campaign, thinking I'd already posted about it earlier. However, a quick search through the archives of the blog turned up no evidence that I'd ever done so. And it f I'm mistaken about this, oh well, it certainly wouldn't be the first time!

During the campaign, the characters acted as covert agents for Imperial Naval Intelligence service of the Empire of Nagoya. They masked their activities by also operating as a genuine mercantile company they called Universal Exports. Here's a fun little graphic one of the players produced in reference to their activities. Since I'm a big fan of player-made materials like this, I thought it'd be worth sharing more widely. It's also a great memento of the campaign.

Retrospective: BeltStrike

Traveller was released in 1977 in a digest-sized box, mimicking the format of OD&D, published just three years earlier. During its first few years of existence, Game Designers' Workshop released several other similarly sized boxed sets to support the game, starting with Mayday in 1978. For a lot of people, myself included, Traveller is strongly associated with digest-sized books, so much so that many of the 'zines and licensed third party support released for the game were similarly sized. (Judges Guild's books were the primary exception to this.)

Beginning with The Traveller Book in 1982, GDW began a shift away from digest-sized books and toward more traditional 8½" × 11" books for the game. I'm not entirely sure why the company chose to do this, but, whatever the reason, there were soon no more digest-sized books to be had. The Traveller Adventure, the various alien modules, and even the Starter and Deluxe editions of the game were all published as standard-sized books – a size every subsequent version of Traveller has used up to the present day.

Around the same time, GDW released new versions of Mayday and Snapshot that made use of the larger size. These were the versions I owned, though I've long since lost and replaced them with the earlier digest-sized versions, because I'm silly that way. These games paved the way for additional boxed sets for use with Traveller, like Tarsus, which appeared in 1983. Then, in 1984, BeltStrike appeared in the same format – two 12-page, staple-bound booklets, four 4-page adventure folders, a fold-out map of Koenig's Rock, and some perforated cards containing the write-ups for a dozen pregenerated characters. Like most Traveller products, there's not much in the way of art beyond David Dietrick's box art.

Like Tarsus before it, BeltStrike devotes itself to the description of a single star system in the Spinward Marches, in this case the Bowman Belt, a planetoid belt located in the same subsector as Tarsus, District 268. As its name suggests, District 268 has not yet been fully incorporated into the Third Imperium, but is instead a colonial territory being developed in preparation for eventual inclusion within the empire. This gives its worlds, including the Bowman Belt, a distinctly "frontier" feel to them – which is saying something, as the Spinward Marches sector itself is something of a backwater sector located on the fringes of the Imperium. 

The first 12-page booklet is the Bowman System Reference Book. It lays out the basic facts of the Bowman system, as well as its major points of interest. There's also a map of both the entire system and of Bowman Prime (a gas giant) and its satellites, so referees and players alike have a good idea of where all the major astronomical bodies are located in relation to one another. Information about Bowman's history and place within the Marches takes up much of the booklet's page count, followed closely by library data and a key to Koenig's Rock, a planetoid settlement with a reputation for lawlessness and vice.

The second 12-page booklet is the Belter's Handbook. As its title suggests, it focuses on creating and playing belter (asteroid miner) characters. There's not only a full career for such characters (which had previously appeared in Supplement 4: Citizens of the Imperium), but also many practical details on asteroid mining, like the ins and outs of prospecting, claims and profits, encounters, and the effects of zero and low gravity. None of these details are exhaustive – the booklet is short, after all – but they're solid enough to provide the referee with sufficient guidance that he could pretty easily make use of them in his campaign. 

Finally, there are the four adventure folders – really just two double-sided pages – each of which presents a different situation that might involve the player characters within the Bowman system. The first one, "Lodes of Adventures," is really just an introduction to the system and its sights. The second, "On the Rock," takes place on Koenig's Rock and its shady inhabitants. Adventure three, "Claimjumpers," deals with fending off rival belters. Finally, there's "Archeology," which allows the characters to find a high-tech base of an alien civilization that's been lost in the belt for centuries. Like everything else in BeltStrike, the adventures are more sketches than fully fleshed out scenarios. While this is fairly typical for Traveller, this might prove frustrating for inexperienced referees.

In my youth, I wasn't a big fan of BeltStrike for precisely this reason. I felt there was too little information to fully exploit its potential. After all, asteroid belts are inherently interesting locales in a sci-fi setting and I simply didn't think the Bowman Belt was interesting as I had hoped it would be. Now, I look on it a little more charitably. I made good use of it during my Riphaeus Sector campaign by repurposing bits and pieces of it in my own non-Third Imperium setting. Both Koenig's Rock and the ancient alien base made great additions to the continuing adventures of the characters as they made their way across the sector. It's far from the best thing GDW ever released for Traveller, but I'm still fond of it (and it inspired me when I took my own stab at presenting an asteroid system for gaming).

Correspondence from the Free States of America

Issued February 29, 2000

To the American People:

Our nation is in ruins. The United States of America, as it once existed, is no more. The ideals of liberty, and self-governance that defined our republic have been betrayed by those who claimed to serve them. In the wake of nuclear fire and chaos, a dying aristocracy clings to the ashes of its power, desperately trying to impose its will upon a people it has long since abandoned.

We will not accept this.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff—unelected, unaccountable, and unwilling to cede the power they have stolen—proclaim themselves rulers in the name of "order." But their order is nothing more than tyranny, enforced by guns and tanks. They speak of stability, yet what they truly seek is dominion, a dictatorship cloaked in the rhetoric of necessity.

The so-called Congress in Omaha is no better. It is a sham, an illegitimate gathering of pretenders who operate without representation, without quorum, and without the consent of the governed. They would have you believe that they are the rightful inheritors of the American government. But their claim to authority is built on a lie. Their president is a man who crawled out of the shadows after two years of silence. Do not be fooled by their pretense of legitimacy. They are no more representatives of the American people than the generals they claim to oppose.

To the people of this land: reject them both. Reject the generals who seek to rule by force. Reject the politicians who seek to rule by deceit. These factions are not saviors—they are relics of the old order, a corrupt and crumbling hierarchy that brought us to this catastrophe. They are parasites, feeding off a system that no longer serves the people.

The Free States of America offer a new path. We are not a government in the traditional sense. We are not a central authority seeking to impose our will upon others. We are a movement, an alliance of free communities bound together by shared principles: that power derives from the consent of the governed, that government exists to serve the people, and that every individual has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We are farmers and laborers, soldiers and scholars, men and women who refuse to be pawns in someone else's game. We do not seek power or conquest. We seek only to reclaim the ideals upon which this nation was founded. The Free States are not defined by borders but by principles. Where those principles live, so too do the Free States of America.

The Declaration of Independence is clear: when a government becomes destructive to the rights of its people, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. This is not rebellion—it is the fulfillment of the sacred contract upon which this nation was built. We did not seek this fight, but we will not shy away from it. The Joint Chiefs and the Omaha Congress have forfeited any claim to legitimacy. Their time is over. The future belongs to those who stand for liberty.

To the people of America: if you are tired of the lies and betrayals, join us. If you believe that government exists to serve, not rule, join us. If you are ready to cast off the chains of the old order and build something new, join us. Together, we can reclaim the promise of America—a promise not of power for the few, but freedom for all.

And to the world: let it be known that the Free States of America are not rebels or anarchists. We are the true heirs of the American spirit, rising from the ruins to forge a future worthy of our ideals. We will not be dictated to by generals or manipulated by politicians. We will stand our ground, defend our communities, and fight for our freedom.

This is our moment. The old order is dying, and from its ashes, we will build something better. We are the Free States of America. We are the voice of the people. And we will not be silenced.

Signed,
Elizabeth Crane
Principal Correspondent of the Free States of America

Statement from the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Issued from Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, April 23, 1999

To the Steadfast People of the United States:

Citizens,

The United States of America is in grave peril. Since the Soviet Union’s unprovoked nuclear attacks in late 1997, our nation has faced challenges of a magnitude unprecedented in its history. In the face of such devastation, the Constitution provides a framework for continuity. Yet the brutal realities of nuclear war have left our constitutional mechanisms shattered. With no functioning executive, no legitimate Congress, and no clear line of succession, we find ourselves at a crossroads.

The recent proclamation from Omaha, recognizing John Broward as President, is deeply troubling. While Mr. Broward served ably as Secretary of Energy under President Tanner, the process by which he has been declared President is fraught with constitutional and procedural violations. The Congress assembled in Omaha lacks the quorum required by Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution to conduct legislative business. Furthermore, many of its members were neither elected by their constituents nor represent their prewar districts. This body, as constituted, cannot claim the legitimacy to appoint a President or legislate on behalf of the American people.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff recognize the dangers of military governance. We are soldiers, not politicians, and we have no desire to wield power beyond what is necessary to preserve the republic. However, in the absence of lawful civilian authority, we have a duty to ensure the survival of this nation. Our actions are grounded in the principle that the United States must endure—not as a collection of fragmented factions, but as one nation, united under the principles of freedom and justice.

Until such time as a legitimate, constitutional government can be restored:

The Armed Forces of the United States will maintain order. We will protect the American people from external threats, internal chaos, and unconstitutional overreach by illegitimate factions.We will facilitate the eventual restoration of civilian governance. This includes aiding in the re-establishment of state governments and assisting in free and fair elections where feasible.We will uphold the rights and freedoms of the American people. This is not a military dictatorship, but a temporary custodianship. The Constitution remains our guide.

We urge all Americans to remain vigilant and united. To the Congress assembled in Omaha, we offer a clear message: Disband until you can meet the requirements of legitimacy under the Constitution. To John Broward, we say: Step down. Your presidency, while perhaps well-intentioned, is unlawful and undermines the principles you claim to uphold.

The history of this nation is filled with moments when the American people rose above fear and division to confront adversity. We are confident that, with patience and resolve, we can navigate this crisis and emerge stronger. Let us honor the sacrifices of those who came before us by ensuring that the United States remains a beacon of liberty and justice.

For the United States of America,

General Jonathan Cummings, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Admiral Samuel E. Dawson, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
General Marcus L. Ortiz, Chief of Staff of the Army
General Robert T. Hawkins, Commandant of the Marine Corps
General W. Charles Oblinger, Chief of Staff of the Air Force
Admiral William F. Harlan, Chief of Naval Operations

Proclamation from President John Broward and the Congress of the United States

Issued from Omaha, Nebraska, April 21, 1999

To the People of the United States:

Fellow Americans,

In these darkest days, we must look to the Constitution as our guide and guardian. Through war, division, and crisis, it has provided the framework for our survival as a nation. Today, I stand before you as President of the United States, confirmed by the reconstituted Congress, to reaffirm our commitment to that Constitution, the rule of law, and the principles of liberty and democracy that unite us.

The nuclear attacks of 1997 decimated our government. The deaths of President Tanner, Vice President Pemberton, Speaker Munson, and so many others left a void in leadership unprecedented in our history. Despite these losses, the Constitution remains intact. It provides the path forward, even under extraordinary circumstances.

When Congress was finally able to convene, irregular though the process may have been, its duty was clear: to restore civilian governance and ensure the continuity of the republic. With the line of succession in disarray, I, as the last surviving cabinet member confirmed by the Senate under President Tanner, was called to assume the presidency. This action, taken in consultation with the reconstituted Congress, honors both the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

To those who question the legitimacy of this Congress and my presidency, I say this: extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures. The surviving members of Congress are not perfect in their composition or representation, but they are guided by the same principles that guided the Framers in 1787. The Constitution does not demand perfection; it demands perseverance. Every effort has been made to respect its provisions, even under conditions that the Founders could scarcely have imagined.

I urge all Americans to stand with us as we rebuild. The principles of representative democracy and civilian authority must prevail, as they have in every crisis we have faced—from the Revolutionary War to the Civil War to the challenges of the last century. Our government derives its power from the consent of the governed, not the authority of arms. This is the foundation of our republic and the promise we must keep for future generations.

To General Cummings and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I commend your service and sacrifice. You have kept this nation together under unimaginable conditions. But the time has come to restore the proper balance of governance. The military exists to defend our nation, not to govern it. I call upon you to honor the Constitution and stand down, allowing the civilian government to resume its rightful role.

To the American people, I pledge this: we will continue to rebuild, guided by the Constitution, and we will restore what has been lost. We ask for your patience, your resilience, and your faith in the enduring principles of liberty, justice, and democracy. Together, we will weather this storm, as we have weathered so many before.

May God bless the United States of America and guide us in this endeavor.

Signed,
President John Broward
The Congress of the United States

The Art of the Cavalier

The first appearance of the cavalier character class in issue #72 of Dragon (April 1983) is something I remember very acutely, in large part because I loved the idea of a knightly AD&D character class. For that reason, I can also remember the three illustrations, all by Keith Parkinson, that accompanied it. Here's the first one, which has a blue background for some reason. Perhaps Dragon was experimenting with color interiors at the time?  

Though I've never been the biggest fan of Parkinson's art, I do like this piece, especially the weird combination of a barbute helmet with the brush like that worn by a Roman legate or military tribune. I also appreciate that the horse looks sturdy enough to carry a man in that kit.

Here's the second illustration, featuring what appears to be the same cavalier, possibly fighting kobolds. I say "appears," because the cavalier in this piece holds his sword in his right hand, whereas the one above holds it in his left. At first, I thought that maybe one or the other images had been reversed by accident – this happens a lot in publications – but Parkinson's signature looks correct in both of them, so I'm not sure what's going on. Maybe the cavalier is ambidextrous? Finally, we get this depiction of a female elven cavalier astride a unicorn. One of the cavalier's abilities is horsemanship. As he levels, the cavalier gains greater skill with his mount, as well as a wider range of possible beasts he can ride. In the case of female elves, unicorns become a mount option for them starting at 4th level, which is cool, I suppose. On the other hand, I'm an obnoxious purist about unicorns. To my mind, they're not just white horse with horns but hybrid creatures with aspects of horses, deer, goats, and lions, so I'm not especially keen about this particular unicorn, but whatever. I still remember this piece more than four decades later, so I guess that's what counts.