Why isnt art cannon?

[Bood Samel]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon? In my campaigns I've always went by the little things in the art, like Perez including the necronomicon and one of the books of Solomon (which implies both exist stiff in rifts).

[Svartalf]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

There are cases of non canon art, like when a picture appears next to something, but doesn't fit the actual game facts, or when art that wasn't made for Rifts, but just fits the atmosphere is used (like many early Rifter covers). However, a piece of art that depicts a specific aspect of Rifts, and was commissioned for use in the book, odds are that it actually is canon (or it would have been rejected. NO! we want it that way, do over)

[Cinos]

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

[Bood Samel]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

There are cases of non canon art, like when a picture appears next to something, but doesn't fit the actual game facts, or when art that wasn't made for Rifts, but just fits the atmosphere is used (like many early Rifter covers). However, a piece of art that depicts a specific aspect of Rifts, and was commissioned for use in the book, odds are that it actually is canon (or it would have been rejected. NO! we want it that way, do over)

Yea but some of the writers have chimed in on here that art isn't cannon. I'd like to see it made so, though the issue of recycled art could mess things up. IMO Palladium does recycle art too much. Maybe if the art in question was made for the text at hand, that would make sense. Like the little details in Perez's art for FOM that I mentioned, with various objects and books in the background of a few images.

[Spinachcat]

I don't believe in following canon as a GM for any RPG setting, but "Why isn't art canon?" is a VERY good question.

[Bood Samel]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon? In my campaigns I've always went by the little things in the art, like Perez including the necronomicon and one of the books of Solomon (which implies both exist stiff in rifts).

coz the artists dont rly have much to do with things past Kev sayin 'here is a character class, draw it!' or 'thats a kewl monster, i will stat it!'. art direction is just one of them things where pally doesnt seem woried about keepin everything tight & preplanned & focused like a lot of newer rpg companies that put more value in presentation

ur never gonna see somethin in a pally game like Exalteds big cast of recurin signature NPCs that represent all the main stats & keep cropin up everywhere in the art to help ilustrate a lotta points

Which is anothering that alienates potential new customers.

[Dog_O_War]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

How's about a HUGE PILE OF EVIDENCE where the picture contradicts the facts.

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

None of the art work is canon.


Look at the following examples of just how off the artwork is compared to the actual items in-question, starting with my personal favorite;

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 111, the Iron Bolt Missile Vehicle.
"Weapon Systems
1. ML-12-Long Range Missile System(1): This box launcher holds two rows of six missiles, which can be fired in any order the gunner chooses...."
The picture has two rows with only five ports, yet amazingly you can still bang off missiles 11 and 12, despite not having a port for them.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 125, the Personal force fields section.
"N-F10A Light Force Field
...is worn as two crossed belts..."
That crazy, as well as the guy he is attacking are clearly not wearing any of the Naruni force fields, the only force fields described in the section.
So why then is the picture there? Hopefully not to showcase exactly what these force fields look like.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 132-133, the Juggernaut - Heavy Hover Tank
"Weapon Systems
3. Mini-missile Launchers in Turret(8): These launchers come four on each side of the turret..."
There are eight ports on one side. Clearly this is not a picture of a Juggernaut.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 138, Nomad Scout Robot
"Weapon Systems
1. Rail Gun Turret: ...The weapon can rotate up 180 degrees..."
Was that a typo? Did they mean "up to" so the thing can turn around?
"...allowing it to track airborne targets."
Nope, they meant up, even though none of that sentence is correct, given that there is no way that gun can even point up, much less 90 degrees, let-alone completely flipping itself over for a 180.


Enough picking on Rifts Mercenaries, let's see what a minor glance at other books yields...

Rifts New West
pg. 185, Wild Weasel SAMAS
"Weapon Systems
Arm Mounted Short-Range Plasma Ejectors(2): Mounted on each forearm is a small laser..."
...but I thought they were plasma ejectors... (this is a clear case of typoid, which the writer contracted. He escaped before he could be euthanized)

The big one though comes from the cover art:
That horse is ejecting casings from its mouth.
That (a machinegun) is not an available option for any of the robot horses (pg.196 Special Robot Features). As well, I'm gonna doubt that it has infinite bullet casings (which would be a feature that went undescribed) to eject when it fires its unlimited-shots energy weapons.

Rifts: Ultimate Edition
Here's the big one that goes to show pics aren't canon.
pg.73, the Glitterboy statistics state that it holds 1000 rounds for its boomgun.
The size of a boomgun shell is 2 inches in diameter by 7 inches in length.
This translates to: pie times radius squared times height (3.14x1[sup]2[/sup]x7)
That's 21.98 cubic inches.
times 1000 = 21980 cubic inches.
divided by 12 = 1831.67 cubic feet.

The room I'm typing to you from is about 9 x 9 x 8 feet, or 648 cubic feet. That's about 1/3 the area the boomgun's shells take up, and the Glitterboy is only 10'5".

That, gentlemen (and ladies) is why pictures are not canon.

[keir451]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

How's about a HUGE PILE OF EVIDENCE where the picture contradicts the facts.

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

None of the art work is canon.


Look at the following examples of just how off the artwork is compared to the actual items in-question, starting with my personal favorite;

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 111, the Iron Bolt Missile Vehicle.
"Weapon Systems
1. ML-12-Long Range Missile System(1): This box launcher holds two rows of six missiles, which can be fired in any order the gunner chooses...."
The picture has two rows with only five ports, yet amazingly you can still bang off missiles 11 and 12, despite not having a port for them.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 125, the Personal force fields section.
"N-F10A Light Force Field
...is worn as two crossed belts..."
That crazy, as well as the guy he is attacking are clearly not wearing any of the Naruni force fields, the only force fields described in the section.
So why then is the picture there? Hopefully not to showcase exactly what these force fields look like.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 132-133, the Juggernaut - Heavy Hover Tank
"Weapon Systems
3. Mini-missile Launchers in Turret(8): These launchers come four on each side of the turret..."
There are eight ports on one side. Clearly this is not a picture of a Juggernaut.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 138, Nomad Scout Robot
"Weapon Systems
1. Rail Gun Turret: ...The weapon can rotate up 180 degrees..."
Was that a typo? Did they mean "up to" so the thing can turn around?
"...allowing it to track airborne targets."
Nope, they meant up, even though none of that sentence is correct, given that there is no way that gun can even point up, much less 90 degrees, let-alone completely flipping itself over for a 180.


Enough picking on Rifts Mercenaries, let's see what a minor glance at other books yields...

Rifts New West
pg. 185, Wild Weasel SAMAS
"Weapon Systems
Arm Mounted Short-Range Plasma Ejectors(2): Mounted on each forearm is a small laser..."
...but I thought they were plasma ejectors... (this is a clear case of typoid, which the writer contracted. He escaped before he could be euthanized)

The big one though comes from the cover art:
That horse is ejecting casings from its mouth.
That (a machinegun) is not an available option for any of the robot horses (pg.196 Special Robot Features). As well, I'm gonna doubt that it has infinite bullet casings (which would be a feature that went undescribed) to eject when it fires its unlimited-shots energy weapons.

Rifts: Ultimate Edition
Here's the big one that goes to show pics aren't canon.
pg.73, the Glitterboy statistics state that it holds 1000 rounds for its boomgun.
The size of a boomgun shell is 2 inches in diameter by 7 inches in length.
This translates to: pie times radius squared times height (3.14x1[sup]2[/sup]x7)
That's 21.98 cubic inches.
times 1000 = 21980 cubic inches.
divided by 12 = 1831.67 cubic feet.

The room I'm typing to you from is about 9 x 9 x 8 feet, or 648 cubic feet. That's about 1/3 the area the boomgun's shells take up, and the Glitterboy is only 10'5".

That, gentlemen (and ladies) is why pictures are not canon.

No arguments at all, instead I'd like to add one; The Shemarrian Railgun is stated to always be destroyed w/the Shemarrian, yet in Vampire Kingdoms there is picture of a person w/a Shemarrian railgun propped against the building next to him.
Basically most vehicle depictions are probably meant to be canon, but the rest is most likely fluff or filler.

[The Galactus Kid]

1) because Kevin says so.
2) because the text blocks are canon and artwork is artistic depictions of canon material (see above)
3) because it isn't.

[Misfit KotLD]

Because it's why Psi-Stalkers all now look like Powder.

Need we more reason to make art non-canonical?

[Killer Cyborg]

Because it's why Psi-Stalkers all now look like Powder.

[Grafsburg]

I sort of figured the art wasn't canon ever since the beginning. There's no way people would survive running around Rifts Earth wearing what they do without some serious esoteric protection.

[Killer Cyborg]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon?

Because a cannon is piece of artillery that used explosives to launch projectiles.

[Misfit KotLD]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon?

Because a cannon is piece of artillery that used explosives to launch projectiles.

Mythbusters can make a duct tape cannon. I bet they can make a paper and canvas one too.

[Killer Cyborg]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon?

Because a cannon is piece of artillery that used explosives to launch projectiles.

Mythbusters can make a duct tape cannon. I bet they can make a paper and canvas one too.

There is an art to making cannons, but that does not make art itself cannon.




(And yeah, they could!)

[slade the sniper]

<sarcasm> Judging by the general lack of knowledge PB has about weapons and cool guy technology in general, I think that the descriptions are not canon either. The pics look cooler than the silly descriptions anyway (especially the old stuff my Kevin Long) so if there is a difference between the pic and the description, I will go with what makes more sense or is more "cool"... </sarcasm>

-STS

[Vrykolas2k]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

How's about a HUGE PILE OF EVIDENCE where the picture contradicts the facts.

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

None of the art work is canon.


Look at the following examples of just how off the artwork is compared to the actual items in-question, starting with my personal favorite;

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 111, the Iron Bolt Missile Vehicle.
"Weapon Systems
1. ML-12-Long Range Missile System(1): This box launcher holds two rows of six missiles, which can be fired in any order the gunner chooses...."
The picture has two rows with only five ports, yet amazingly you can still bang off missiles 11 and 12, despite not having a port for them.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 125, the Personal force fields section.
"N-F10A Light Force Field
...is worn as two crossed belts..."
That crazy, as well as the guy he is attacking are clearly not wearing any of the Naruni force fields, the only force fields described in the section.
So why then is the picture there? Hopefully not to showcase exactly what these force fields look like.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 132-133, the Juggernaut - Heavy Hover Tank
"Weapon Systems
3. Mini-missile Launchers in Turret(8): These launchers come four on each side of the turret..."
There are eight ports on one side. Clearly this is not a picture of a Juggernaut.

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 138, Nomad Scout Robot
"Weapon Systems
1. Rail Gun Turret: ...The weapon can rotate up 180 degrees..."
Was that a typo? Did they mean "up to" so the thing can turn around?
"...allowing it to track airborne targets."
Nope, they meant up, even though none of that sentence is correct, given that there is no way that gun can even point up, much less 90 degrees, let-alone completely flipping itself over for a 180.


Enough picking on Rifts Mercenaries, let's see what a minor glance at other books yields...

Rifts New West
pg. 185, Wild Weasel SAMAS
"Weapon Systems
Arm Mounted Short-Range Plasma Ejectors(2): Mounted on each forearm is a small laser..."
...but I thought they were plasma ejectors... (this is a clear case of typoid, which the writer contracted. He escaped before he could be euthanized)

The big one though comes from the cover art:
That horse is ejecting casings from its mouth.
That (a machinegun) is not an available option for any of the robot horses (pg.196 Special Robot Features). As well, I'm gonna doubt that it has infinite bullet casings (which would be a feature that went undescribed) to eject when it fires its unlimited-shots energy weapons.

Rifts: Ultimate Edition
Here's the big one that goes to show pics aren't canon.
pg.73, the Glitterboy statistics state that it holds 1000 rounds for its boomgun.
The size of a boomgun shell is 2 inches in diameter by 7 inches in length.
This translates to: pie times radius squared times height (3.14x1[sup]2[/sup]x7)
That's 21.98 cubic inches.
times 1000 = 21980 cubic inches.
divided by 12 = 1831.67 cubic feet.

The room I'm typing to you from is about 9 x 9 x 8 feet, or 648 cubic feet. That's about 1/3 the area the boomgun's shells take up, and the Glitterboy is only 10'5".

That, gentlemen (and ladies) is why pictures are not canon.

No arguments at all, instead I'd like to add one; The Shemarrian Railgun is stated to always be destroyed w/the Shemarrian, yet in Vampire Kingdoms there is picture of a person w/a Shemarrian railgun propped against the building next to him.
Basically most vehicle depictions are probably meant to be canon, but the rest is most likely fluff or filler.

That person might well be an android.

[Svartalf]

If the art gets approved and sees print why isn't cannon? In my campaigns I've always went by the little things in the art, like Perez including the necronomicon and one of the books of Solomon (which implies both exist stiff in rifts).

coz the artists dont rly have much to do with things past Kev sayin 'here is a character class, draw it!' or 'thats a kewl monster, i will stat it!'. art direction is just one of them things where pally doesnt seem woried about keepin everything tight & preplanned & focused like a lot of newer rpg companies that put more value in presentation

ur never gonna see somethin in a pally game like Exalteds big cast of recurin signature NPCs that represent all the main stats & keep cropin up everywhere in the art to help ilustrate a lotta points

dunno, when I see some of the art that was published in wotc products, I'm not sure even the big and modern companies keep things that tight and focussed... Some of those "artists", I'd have blackballed straightaway, and any number of illos by artists I can at least respect would still have been rejected, and probably ordered from somebody else with a more appropriate style.

[Svartalf]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

How's about a HUGE PILE OF EVIDENCE where the picture contradicts the facts.

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

None of the art work is canon.


Look at the following examples of just how off the artwork is compared to the actual items in-question, starting with my personal favorite;

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 111, the Iron Bolt Missile Vehicle.
"Weapon Systems
1. ML-12-Long Range Missile System(1): This box launcher holds two rows of six missiles, which can be fired in any order the gunner chooses...."
The picture has two rows with only five ports, yet amazingly you can still bang off missiles 11 and 12, despite not having a port for them.
OK, a common problem with Breaux pix is that the only places where the pics were consistently accurate was in Aliens Unlimited and such places where the matter was actually a Breaux creation. So maybe we should look at artist as part of a bunch of evidence?

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 125, the Personal force fields section.
"N-F10A Light Force Field
...is worn as two crossed belts..."
That crazy, as well as the guy he is attacking are clearly not wearing any of the Naruni force fields, the only force fields described in the section.
So why then is the picture there? Hopefully not to showcase exactly what these force fields look like.
that illo does not make sense as a force field illo, so how about it being there as a cool, and fairly canon combat illo that has nothing to do with the fact it's next to the force fields ?

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 132-133, the Juggernaut - Heavy Hover Tank
"Weapon Systems
3. Mini-missile Launchers in Turret(8): These launchers come four on each side of the turret..."
There are eight ports on one side. Clearly this is not a picture of a Juggernaut.
Breaux being unable to interpret a description to depict it accurately?


Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 138, Nomad Scout Robot
"Weapon Systems
1. Rail Gun Turret: ...The weapon can rotate up 180 degrees..."
Was that a typo? Did they mean "up to" so the thing can turn around?
"...allowing it to track airborne targets."
Nope, they meant up, even though none of that sentence is correct, given that there is no way that gun can even point up, much less 90 degrees, let-alone completely flipping itself over for a 180.
Breaux


Enough picking on Rifts Mercenaries, let's see what a minor glance at other books yields...

Rifts New West
pg. 185, Wild Weasel SAMAS
"Weapon Systems
Arm Mounted Short-Range Plasma Ejectors(2): Mounted on each forearm is a small laser..."
...but I thought they were plasma ejectors... (this is a clear case of typoid, which the writer contracted. He escaped before he could be euthanized)

The big one though comes from the cover art:
That horse is ejecting casings from its mouth.
That (a machinegun) is not an available option for any of the robot horses (pg.196 Special Robot Features). As well, I'm gonna doubt that it has infinite bullet casings (which would be a feature that went undescribed) to eject when it fires its unlimited-shots energy weapons.
a) I don't know if Zeleznik actually makes his arts to specs, since he's usually hired only for covers
b) given that the covers are usually ordered and delivered looooong before the book is even properly in production (remember how the cover for 3 Galaxies is obviously the one they ordered when there was supposed to be an actual Cosmo Knights book?), it's unlikely that Zeleznik had any kind of in-book stuff to draw inspiration of, so he just did a generic SF/western picture

Rifts: Ultimate Edition
Here's the big one that goes to show pics aren't canon.
pg.73, the Glitterboy statistics state that it holds 1000 rounds for its boomgun.
The size of a boomgun shell is 2 inches in diameter by 7 inches in length.
This translates to: pie times radius squared times height (3.14x1[sup]2[/sup]x7)
That's 21.98 cubic inches.
times 1000 = 21980 cubic inches.
divided by 12 = 1831.67 cubic feet.

The room I'm typing to you from is about 9 x 9 x 8 feet, or 648 cubic feet. That's about 1/3 the area the boomgun's shells take up, and the Glitterboy is only 10'5".

That, gentlemen (and ladies) is why pictures are not canon.

Actually, you got that wrong...
a) you sure it's 1.000 rounds? my ROE says only 100, which is more logical, since a boom gun round is a cartridge holding 200 normal railgun flechettes
b) there's 1728 cuinch per cufoot, not 12
so even taking your inflated round count
21980/1728 = 12.72 cubic feet
Given that this volume should be covered by a box roughly 2'x2'x3', which seems not incompatible with the one I can see on the picture of a Glitterboy's back on p219 ROE, it means that the picture actually IS canon and either you misread or RUE accumulated typos that were unknown in previous versions

[Armorlord]

When it comes down to it, there's a long history of artwork that is at best 'inspired' by the subject. At worst they put a picture that's sort of on topic nearby.
Examples range from the absolutely awesome looking cover to Pantheons of the Megaverse that doesn't match to the Thor in that book, to T-Rex robots with crotch lasers, to pretty much all the Glitter-Girl art.
Art is meant to look cool, but it isn't always technically accurate.

No arguments at all, instead I'd like to add one; The Shemarrian Railgun is stated to always be destroyed w/the Shemarrian, yet in Vampire Kingdoms there is picture of a person w/a Shemarrian railgun propped against the building next to him.
Basically most vehicle depictions are probably meant to be canon, but the rest is most likely fluff or filler.

That person might well be an android.

Indeed. I'm now wondering if that bit of Shemarrian Nation wasn't inspired by that piece of art.

[The Beast]

it isn't cannon because people don't agree with what is depicted in spite of complete lack of evidence that the picture contradicts world facts.

How's about a HUGE PILE OF EVIDENCE where the picture contradicts the facts.

Most of the art work is cannon, it's just when they get a bit recycle happy things can start to break down.

None of the art work is canon.


Look at the following examples of just how off the artwork is compared to the actual items in-question, starting with my personal favorite;

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 111, the Iron Bolt Missile Vehicle.
"Weapon Systems
1. ML-12-Long Range Missile System(1): This box launcher holds two rows of six missiles, which can be fired in any order the gunner chooses...."
The picture has two rows with only five ports, yet amazingly you can still bang off missiles 11 and 12, despite not having a port for them.
OK, a common problem with Breaux pix is that the only places where the pics were consistently accurate was in Aliens Unlimited and such places where the matter was actually a Breaux creation. So maybe we should look at artist as part of a bunch of evidence?

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 125, the Personal force fields section.
"N-F10A Light Force Field
...is worn as two crossed belts..."
That crazy, as well as the guy he is attacking are clearly not wearing any of the Naruni force fields, the only force fields described in the section.
So why then is the picture there? Hopefully not to showcase exactly what these force fields look like.
that illo does not make sense as a force field illo, so how about it being there as a cool, and fairly canon combat illo that has nothing to do with the fact it's next to the force fields ?

Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 132-133, the Juggernaut - Heavy Hover Tank
"Weapon Systems
3. Mini-missile Launchers in Turret(8): These launchers come four on each side of the turret..."
There are eight ports on one side. Clearly this is not a picture of a Juggernaut.
Breaux being unable to interpret a description to depict it accurately?


Rifts Mercenaries
pg. 138, Nomad Scout Robot
"Weapon Systems
1. Rail Gun Turret: ...The weapon can rotate up 180 degrees..."
Was that a typo? Did they mean "up to" so the thing can turn around?
"...allowing it to track airborne targets."
Nope, they meant up, even though none of that sentence is correct, given that there is no way that gun can even point up, much less 90 degrees, let-alone completely flipping itself over for a 180.
Breaux


Enough picking on Rifts Mercenaries, let's see what a minor glance at other books yields...

Rifts New West
pg. 185, Wild Weasel SAMAS
"Weapon Systems
Arm Mounted Short-Range Plasma Ejectors(2): Mounted on each forearm is a small laser..."
...but I thought they were plasma ejectors... (this is a clear case of typoid, which the writer contracted. He escaped before he could be euthanized)

The big one though comes from the cover art:
That horse is ejecting casings from its mouth.
That (a machinegun) is not an available option for any of the robot horses (pg.196 Special Robot Features). As well, I'm gonna doubt that it has infinite bullet casings (which would be a feature that went undescribed) to eject when it fires its unlimited-shots energy weapons.
a) I don't know if Zeleznik actually makes his arts to specs, since he's usually hired only for covers
b) given that the covers are usually ordered and delivered looooong before the book is even properly in production (remember how the cover for 3 Galaxies is obviously the one they ordered when there was supposed to be an actual Cosmo Knights book?), it's unlikely that Zeleznik had any kind of in-book stuff to draw inspiration of, so he just did a generic SF/western picture

Rifts: Ultimate Edition
Here's the big one that goes to show pics aren't canon.
pg.73, the Glitterboy statistics state that it holds 1000 rounds for its boomgun.
The size of a boomgun shell is 2 inches in diameter by 7 inches in length.
This translates to: pie times radius squared times height (3.14x1[sup]2[/sup]x7)
That's 21.98 cubic inches.
times 1000 = 21980 cubic inches.
divided by 12 = 1831.67 cubic feet.

The room I'm typing to you from is about 9 x 9 x 8 feet, or 648 cubic feet. That's about 1/3 the area the boomgun's shells take up, and the Glitterboy is only 10'5".

That, gentlemen (and ladies) is why pictures are not canon.

Actually, you got that wrong...
a) you sure it's 1.000 rounds? my ROE says only 100, which is more logical, since a boom gun round is a cartridge holding 200 normal railgun flechettes
b) there's 1728 cuinch per cufoot, not 12
so even taking your inflated round count
21980/1728 = 12.72 cubic feet
Given that this volume should be covered by a box roughly 2'x2'x3', which seems not incompatible with the one I can see on the picture of a Glitterboy's back on p219 ROE, it means that the picture actually IS canon and either you misread or RUE accumulated typos that were unknown in previous versions

IIRC, it was always 100 rounds until the Chaos Earth series came out. That book placed the rounds at 1000. Then RUE came out and it was back at 100. Then someone asked which it was suppossed to be, and Kevin said it was always suppossed to have been at 1000. Then people on the Board started doing the math and said the GB would need a pair of refrigerator-sized ammo cans on its back to haul the ammo around, and a bunch of other internet stuff that I didn't pay much attention to. I just go with the original number because it matches the artwork better.

[keir451]

When it comes down to it, there's a long history of artwork that is at best 'inspired' by the subject. At worst they put a picture that's sort of on topic nearby.
Examples range from the absolutely awesome looking cover to Pantheons of the Megaverse that doesn't match to the Thor in that book, to T-Rex robots with crotch lasers, to pretty much all the Glitter-Girl art.
Art is meant to look cool, but it isn't always technically accurate.

No arguments at all, instead I'd like to add one; The Shemarrian Railgun is stated to always be destroyed w/the Shemarrian, yet in Vampire Kingdoms there is picture of a person w/a Shemarrian railgun propped against the building next to him.
Basically most vehicle depictions are probably meant to be canon, but the rest is most likely fluff or filler.

That person might well be an android.

Indeed. I'm now wondering if that bit of Shemarrian Nation wasn't inspired by that piece of art.

Which part of Shemarrian Nation, the Male Shemarrians or the gun?

[Armorlord]

Which part of Shemarrian Nation, the Male Shemarrians or the gun?

The Shemarrians being sent into Mexico to learn more about the vampire threat over the last several years or so, teaming up with vampire hunters and such. Was rereading it the other day and caught that part, managed to slip my notice before.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you take the gun away from the Shemarrian before they self-destruct, it isn't destroyed with them.

[Svartalf]

Is that official? Nothing to prevent Archie from booby trapping the gun so it self destructs the moment its linked Shemarrian is destroyed (like, it requires a radio signal to delay the self destruct charge every few seconds... no more signal, no more gun)

[The Galactus Kid]

Is that official? Nothing to prevent Archie from booby trapping the gun so it self destructs the moment its linked Shemarrian is destroyed (like, it requires a radio signal to delay the self destruct charge every few seconds... no more signal, no more gun)

There is nothing preventing ARCHIE from doing that, but in canon KC is right.

[Zer0 Kay]

I think the major reason is because the writer that does the PA and stuff don't get to approve the art that is used to depict their write up. Do you think Brandon said "Can I have that guy, that draws technology all blobby like it is organic, do the stuff in Triax 2?" Art isn't always canon even when it is "accurate" to the write up because it is still the artists interpretation. The original GB art... Kevin describes the gun's storage as "When not in use, the gun is flipped back and stored in a upward position. When needed for combat, the GB's operater simply reaches back, grasps the handle and pulls forward." The iconic art for the GB is WRONG it's cannon is stored vertically NOT "upward". Which makes the retreival different as well as the GB's pilot has to activate something (which could be activated by reaching up and back) so that the gun rotates upward first which can twist the ammo belt. That is why it isn't canon but an artists representation and can be used as a guide to get ideas but OFTEN isn't 100% inline with text, so its not canon.

...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

[Svartalf]

Is that official? Nothing to prevent Archie from booby trapping the gun so it self destructs the moment its linked Shemarrian is destroyed (like, it requires a radio signal to delay the self destruct charge every few seconds... no more signal, no more gun)

There is nothing preventing ARCHIE from doing that, but in canon KC is right.

Canon? as in, it's specified in SB1 (old or new version), or in Shemarrian Nation, or as in "it's not mentioned so I'll make up any **** I want to"?

[Killer Cyborg]

Is that official? Nothing to prevent Archie from booby trapping the gun so it self destructs the moment its linked Shemarrian is destroyed (like, it requires a radio signal to delay the self destruct charge every few seconds... no more signal, no more gun)

There is nothing preventing ARCHIE from doing that, but in canon KC is right.

Canon? as in, it's specified in SB1 (old or new version), or in Shemarrian Nation, or as in "it's not mentioned so I'll make up any **** I want to"?

As in: "There is officially a self-destruct device in the robot, but there is NOT one in the gun, not unless the GM makes up some **** just because he wants to."

[cornholioprime]

Would not the simplest exlpanation for the phenomenon be, possibly, that the production of the Book, and the production of the Artwork, are done in two separate areas of the Palladium Books compound -or perhaps even commissioned by Kevin to 'Artist X' long-distance, and which are then mailed in?

I, for one, cannot envision a scenario in which Kevin, or Carl, or any other author would ask an Artist to make a drawing of "??" and the artist gets every single aspect of the creature 100% correct.

Not to mention that Kevin (or whoever) might start off by asking a given artist to do X,Y, and Z, and then in the creation/testing/flavor text appeal process of creating this new person, place or thing.....then makes changes that the Artists don't know about and which might very well cost Palladium Books even more money to give to the Artists if he asked them to redraw them?


Those of you who write these books: do most of you ever get to see the Artists at all, and vice versa??

[Bood Samel]

I've a done a bit of comerical art designing CDs and tattoos mainly, and in my non-professional effort I did what was asked of me and followed the guidelines. I don't see how drawing something with in the context of a text at hand is that hard to do. It seems maybe people just draw stuff with in a loose theme and KS just squeezes it in. That works well with books like FOM, because magic itself is vague and nebulous, but with tech material, like all the examples above, is just seems inconsistent.

[cornholioprime]

I've a done a bit of comerical art designing CDs and tattoos mainly, and in my non-professional effort I did what was asked of me and followed the guidelines. I don't see how drawing something with in the context of a text at hand is that hard to do. It seems maybe people just draw stuff with in a loose theme and KS just squeezes it in. That works well with books like FOM, because magic itself is vague and nebulous, but with tech material, like all the examples above, is just seems inconsistent.

I'm no saying that the task is a hard thing to do for the Artists; I am saying that it might very well be the case, in some instances, where Kevin in his faraway offices (I don't assume that everybody who works for him, lives in Michigan) changes his mind for some reason or other.

But by then, [The Police].....many miles away.....[/The Police] you as an Artist have already completed the task set before you.....and unless I was a very good friend of the Books' Authors, I wouldn't re-do the drawing without getting paid some more.

(One assumes that even in the best of times, Kevin didn't have tons of money to spend on the incredible number of Artist renderings and re-renderings that you see in, say, your average Video Game just to get to the basic final design for a single character. I figure that Kevin gives the Artist a basic description, pays the Artist one time and one time only, and hopes for the best.)

[Bood Samel]

I'd hope at least that the artists get sent the texts their drawing images for before hand. If so it shouldn't be too hard to draw based on what you've read. I know I talked on here before with Perez before about how while his art was great sense that he himself didnt play some details were lost and that his great art would be better if he had a more subtle understanding from playing. For instance who would raid lone star in tank top only?

[Svartalf]

When it comes to drawings supposed to illustrate specific pieces of tech, I'd assume so...
though knowing Kevin's methods, I might want to apologize to Breaux for dissing him

[rat_bastard]

You really want art to be Canon? What about Joseph Burles?

The upper left retarded looking tumor on the skelebot has 26 mdc and a heat sensor with a range of 500 feet, the middle left tumor on the robot has 20 MDC...

[Subjugator]

[color=#0000FF]Actually, you got that wrong...
a) you sure it's 1.000 rounds? my ROE says only 100, which is more logical, since a boom gun round is a cartridge holding 200 normal railgun flechettes

Positive. The 100 round capacity was a typo from the very beginning, as per Kev.

b) there's 1728 cuinch per cufoot, not 12
so even taking your inflated round count
21980/1728 = 12.72 cubic feet
Given that this volume should be covered by a box roughly 2'x2'x3', which seems not incompatible with the one I can see on the picture of a Glitterboy's back on p219 ROE, it means that the picture actually IS canon and either you misread or RUE accumulated typos that were unknown in previous versions

Each round is 22 cubic inches. That would result in a box 2.33 feet on a side.

/Sub

[Dog_O_War]

OK, a common problem with Breaux pix is that the only places where the pics were consistently accurate was in Aliens Unlimited and such places where the matter was actually a Breaux creation. So maybe we should look at artist as part of a bunch of evidence?

That of itself is the reason pictures are not canon. Other artists are also capable of making mistakes; that is why we must trust that the writers got it right.

that illo does not make sense as a force field illo, so how about it being there as a cool, and fairly canon combat illo that has nothing to do with the fact it's next to the force fields ?

That is the second reason why pictures are not canon. They are not labelled as "this is the <____>, as written about below". Thus, without a label, it's impossible to tell if the picture is supposed to be related, especially given cases where mistakes are blatantly obvious.

Breaux being unable to interpret a description to depict it accurately?

This is reason number three; the artist may not understand exactly what the writer has indicated with for the item in question. That is why we always defer to the writer, and not the artist.

a) I don't know if Zeleznik actually makes his arts to specs, since he's usually hired only for covers
b) given that the covers are usually ordered and delivered looooong before the book is even properly in production (remember how the cover for 3 Galaxies is obviously the one they ordered when there was supposed to be an actual Cosmo Knights book?), it's unlikely that Zeleznik had any kind of in-book stuff to draw inspiration of, so he just did a generic SF/western picture

Oh, I must have missed that clause in the book where is says that people who do cover-art are given some slack as to how canon their drawings are...

Seriously though, what you have stated is yet another reason why art isn't canon.

Actually, you got that wrong...
a) you sure it's 1.000 rounds? my ROE says only 100, which is more logical, since a boom gun round is a cartridge holding 200 normal railgun flechettes

I made a typo; I meant R:UE.

b) there's 1728 cuinch per cufoot, not 12
so even taking your inflated round count
21980/1728 = 12.72 cubic feet

I made a math fail. Sorry.

Given that this volume should be covered by a box roughly 2'x2'x3', which seems not incompatible with the one I can see on the picture of a Glitterboy's back on p219 ROE, it means that the picture actually IS canon and either you misread or RUE accumulated typos that were unknown in previous versions

Well, there is another way of figuring it out;
at 2 feet deep, that can accommodate 3 rows of rounds.
at 3 feet wide, that can accommodate 18 rounds side-by-side.
at 2 feet tall, that can stack 12 rounds.
12 x 18 = 216.
x 3 = 648.

That pack would have to be nearly double the size in order to accommodate 1000 rounds.

Basically, it is not even close to canon.

[Svartalf]

Well, the Zeleznik picture is just a scene of the New West... the fact that no robot horses with muzzle machinegus are described in the book does not in any way mean that no such bots exist, nobody said that cover depicted a specific model, did they?

And my beef is the types who say that "no art is canon, ever". sure, not all art is. Now, if you guys intend to drag every instance of non canon art, that won't make your evidence any less anecdotal. there's also plenty of it that just is... like the bits that are specifically captioned, meaning that they are approved, or those that actually are the source of the written canon.
Art should be judged case by case, not blanketed in ignorant dumb statements.

and you made another math fail. assuming each round occupies the full space of a parallellepiped its dimensions (2"x2"x7"), and assuming a box 2'x2'x35", I can fill it with 720 rounds, and that's not counting that the rows could be staggered to cram more ammo in, so the box does not need to be that much larger, if at all.

Plus, if the original artwork of the GB is not cannon, given that that one too was inspired by Long's drawing, it means that it's Kev that failed, not Long.

[Dog_O_War]

Well, the Zeleznik picture is just a scene of the New West... the fact that no robot horses with muzzle machinegus are described in the book does not in any way mean that no such bots exist, nobody said that cover depicted a specific model, did they?

That's just it though; my reference was not to a specific model, but to available options for all models. There is no option for machineguns in the face of the horse.
What a guy does to customize his robot horse is an entirely different situation.

And my beef is the types who say that "no art is canon, ever". sure, not all art is. Now, if you guys intend to drag every instance of non canon art, that won't make your evidence any less anecdotal. there's also plenty of it that just is... like the bits that are specifically captioned, meaning that they are approved, or those that actually are the source of the written canon.
Art should be judged case by case, not blanketed in ignorant dumb statements.

See, what people are getting at is that art may be accurate, sure. But it does not take precedent over the written description; it is not canon even if it is an exact to-specs depiction for the afore mentioned reason.

Art does not supercede the writing. That is why art is never canon.

and you made another math fail. assuming each round occupies the full space of a parallellepiped its dimensions (2"x2"x7"), and assuming a box 2'x2'x35", I can fill it with 720 rounds, and that's not counting that the rows could be staggered to cram more ammo in, so the box does not need to be that much larger, if at all.

This is not my concern; there is still 280 rounds left unaccounted for. Also, my math is accurate for the stacking method I used. Mainly because I don't trust that the rounds are actually stacked in the manner you're suggesting, based purely off that drawing (and where the belt feeds into the hopper).

[Subjugator]

Well, there is another way of figuring it out;
at 2 feet deep, that can accommodate 3 rows of rounds.
at 3 feet wide, that can accommodate 18 rounds side-by-side.
at 2 feet tall, that can stack 12 rounds.
12 x 18 = 216.
x 3 = 648.

That pack would have to be nearly double the size in order to accommodate 1000 rounds.

Basically, it is not even close to canon.

It requires a cube that is 2.33' on a side to fit the projectiles if they fit perfectly into the box with zero wasted space. Since they are cylinders, it requires a bit more. Either way though, it doesn't have to be as big as you are saying (if you are disagreeing with Svarty).

I agree that art is in no way canonical (e.g. the SDF3 is not in Splynn City, guaran-frickin'-teed), but the dimensions on the Glitter Boy ammo box do not need to be the size of a fridge, as some have said.

/Sub

[Subjugator]

Well, the Zeleznik picture is just a scene of the New West... the fact that no robot horses with muzzle machinegus are described in the book does not in any way mean that no such bots exist, nobody said that cover depicted a specific model, did they?

And my beef is the types who say that "no art is canon, ever". sure, not all art is. Now, if you guys intend to drag every instance of non canon art, that won't make your evidence any less anecdotal. there's also plenty of it that just is... like the bits that are specifically captioned, meaning that they are approved, or those that actually are the source of the written canon.
Art should be judged case by case, not blanketed in ignorant dumb statements.

and you made another math fail. assuming each round occupies the full space of a parallellepiped its dimensions (2"x2"x7"), and assuming a box 2'x2'x35", I can fill it with 720 rounds, and that's not counting that the rows could be staggered to cram more ammo in, so the box does not need to be that much larger, if at all.

Plus, if the original artwork of the GB is not cannon, given that that one too was inspired by Long's drawing, it means that it's Kev that failed, not Long.

I think what they're saying is that when there is a conflict between the art and the text, it is the text that holds to be factually true. It's not that art is not exemplary of the 'reality' of Rifts, but that the text is authoritative over the art and not the reverse.

...and remember, this is coming from the Rifts art freak.

/Sub

[The Beast]

...I agree that art is in no way canonical (e.g. the SDF3 is not in Splynn City, guaran-frickin'-teed)...

Of course not. The SDF-3 was built as a normal starship, not a starship that could transform into a giant robot. That would be a duplicate of the SDF-1 guarding Splynn.

[Cinos]

An art director would be a fantastic idea that will likely never happen. Though I'd assume Kevin is either their official or unofficial art director, but between the fifteen other jobs he feels he should also do, I doubt he'd have time to deal with it super well.

[Svartalf]

Well, the Zeleznik picture is just a scene of the New West... the fact that no robot horses with muzzle machinegus are described in the book does not in any way mean that no such bots exist, nobody said that cover depicted a specific model, did they?

That's just it though; my reference was not to a specific model, but to available options for all models. There is no option for machineguns in the face of the horse.
What a guy does to customize his robot horse is an entirely different situation.

And my beef is the types who say that "no art is canon, ever". sure, not all art is. Now, if you guys intend to drag every instance of non canon art, that won't make your evidence any less anecdotal. there's also plenty of it that just is... like the bits that are specifically captioned, meaning that they are approved, or those that actually are the source of the written canon.
Art should be judged case by case, not blanketed in ignorant dumb statements.

See, what people are getting at is that art may be accurate, sure. But it does not take precedent over the written description; it is not canon even if it is an exact to-specs depiction for the afore mentioned reason.

Art does not supercede the writing. That is why art is never canon.

and you made another math fail. assuming each round occupies the full space of a parallellepiped its dimensions (2"x2"x7"), and assuming a box 2'x2'x35", I can fill it with 720 rounds, and that's not counting that the rows could be staggered to cram more ammo in, so the box does not need to be that much larger, if at all.

This is not my concern; there is still 280 rounds left unaccounted for. Also, my math is accurate for the stacking method I used. Mainly because I don't trust that the rounds are actually stacked in the manner you're suggesting, based purely off that drawing (and where the belt feeds into the hopper).

Actually, there's an option for horsebots to have machineguns in the head, it does not have to be on top.

And you're taking things the wrong way around. IF the art was commissioned for that purpose (as opposed to buying rights on an existing piece one found extremely appropriate), and if it's been approved and published as representing a specific thing, then it's canon by default unless it demonstrably doesn't fit the higher canon of the texts.
It's generic stuff and recycled art that may not be canon; and incorrect art that cannot be.

and if you refuse to take into account the reality of trying to stack as many cylinders as you can into a given space, as opposed to stacking bricks, that just tells me what I needed to know about your IQ, goodbye.

[The Galactus Kid]

Determining the number of cylinders you can fit into a given ammo container is actually irrelevant to the argument, since you have no clue to the actual dimensions of the container, the shape of the container or feed mechanism of the weapon.

Since the dimensions of the round itself and dimension of the flechette is known, wouldn't a far more relevant argument be to think about the mass/weight of the ammunition.

So lets look at one flechette, the rounds outer dimension is ~2" (~5.1 cm) and holds 4 stacks of 50 flechettes per stack (200 flechettes total). Lets use some easy numbers for the flechette size that would fit inside the case, say 1/5" diameter (.5 cm) by 1" length (2.5 cm), using equal circle packing we come out to a inside diameter of ~1.6" or 1 and 3/5" (~4cm) required to contain the flechettes with minimal spacing, which leaves 0.4" (1 cm) for the outer case and items internal to the round.

(swapping to SI units for ease)
Using the .5cm by 2.5cm flechette we can calculate the volume to be 0.4910714 cm^3 (~.5 cm^3). so the total volume of the flechette material used per round is ~100cm^3.

Now lets say that the boomgun's flechettes uses a high density material that are durable enough to not to fragment, such as Tungsten Steel (has to be of high density to deliver maximum impact for the relatively small size of the round and you don't want them to splatter upon impact with the target).

A good grade of Tungsten Steel is 18.5 g/cm^3, so the total mass of the flechettes alone is ~1850 grams per round (~4 lbs). So the total mass of the flechettes required for 100 rounds would be ~400lb, for 1000 rounds it would be ~4000lbs.

Use simple napkin math just for some idea of the forces involved. When firing a APFSDS round (~32 lbs of fin-stabilized penetrator) the M-1 Tank's main gun (muzzle velocity ~mach 5) has about ~8 times the potential energy of ~4 lb mass if leaving the barrel at the same velocity. If you go lighter on the flechette material, the rounds potential energy would drop, if you go heavier on the flechette material the mass is gonna climb.

[sarcasm]When are you going to work out the math on Zombies and Magic?[/sarcasm]

[Svartalf]

Niiice, he was batting for your side, did you notice?

[Subjugator]

Determining the number of cylinders you can fit into a given ammo container is actually irrelevant to the argument, since you have no clue to the actual dimensions of the container, the shape of the container or feed mechanism of the weapon.

Since the dimensions of the round itself and dimension of the flechette is known, wouldn't a far more relevant argument be to think about the mass/weight of the ammunition.

So lets look at one flechette, the rounds outer dimension is ~2" (~5.1 cm) and holds 4 stacks of 50 flechettes per stack (200 flechettes total). Lets use some easy numbers for the flechette size that would fit inside the case, say 1/5" diameter (.5 cm) by 1" length (2.5 cm), using equal circle packing we come out to a inside diameter of ~1.6" or 1 and 3/5" (~4cm) required to contain the flechettes with minimal spacing, which leaves 0.4" (1 cm) for the outer case and items internal to the round.

(swapping to SI units for ease)
Using the .5cm by 2.5cm flechette we can calculate the volume to be 0.4910714 cm^3 (~.5 cm^3). so the total volume of the flechette material used per round is ~100cm^3.

Now lets say that the boomgun's flechettes uses a high density material that are durable enough to not to fragment, such as Tungsten Steel (has to be of high density to deliver maximum impact for the relatively small size of the round and you don't want them to splatter upon impact with the target).

A good grade of Tungsten Steel is 18.5 g/cm^3, so the total mass of the flechettes alone is ~1850 grams per round (~4 lbs). So the total mass of the flechettes required for 100 rounds would be ~400lb, for 1000 rounds it would be ~4000lbs.

Use simple napkin math just for some idea of the forces involved. When firing a APFSDS round (~32 lbs of fin-stabilized penetrator) the M-1 Tank's main gun (muzzle velocity ~mach 5) has about ~8 times the potential energy of ~4 lb mass if leaving the barrel at the same velocity. If you go lighter on the flechette material, the rounds potential energy would drop, if you go heavier on the flechette material the mass is gonna climb.

The problem with your hypothesis MT, is that you're assuming modern and existing materials (i.e. tungsten). Don't assume that the materials are what you're expecting or of the volume you're expecting.

/Sub

[The Galactus Kid]

Niiice, he was batting for your side, did you notice?

hahaha. yeah i did. It was a playful jab.

[jaymz]

Considering the ammo is fed single file at somepoint they would take up the space of a rectangular space and not a cylindrical space.

At 22 cubic inches that is approximately 78 rounds per cubic foot. 1000 rounds takes up 12-13 cubic feet. That is still tehsize of a bar fridge as oopsed to what is shown so the art cannot be canon IF the 1000 rounds is canon and I have my opnions on thatmatter regardless of what Kevin says since the so called typo was made over how many reprints and other books before all of sudden being declared such?

[Shark_Force]

The problem with your hypothesis MT, is that you're assuming modern and existing materials (i.e. tungsten). Don't assume that the materials are what you're expecting or of the volume you're expecting.

/Sub

actually, railgun rounds (including boom gun flechettes) can be made in an ordinary machine shop, even through the dark ages. this heavily implies that no mega-damage tech is involved, and that most likely the materials involved are in fact pretty much the same level of technology as what we have today. they might have a slightly different composition, but overall, it's gonna be pretty close to identical.