Killer Cyborg's Great Rifts Japan Debate

[Killer Cyborg]

You asked why Kevin would write something that is irrelevant to a conversation that we're having 22 years after he wrote it.

No, I'm asking why he would write something irrelevant to the excerpt started on pg.137 of the RIFTs main book as an intro to said section.

It's not irrelevant to the excerpt, only to our conversation.
Which is what I meant when I stated that the information was irrelevant, and explained why/how.

Why would he tell you it is an except from Traversing Our Modern World, an unauthorized publication disavowed by Erin Tarn if it wasn't relevant to our understanding of the passage?

THAT is an actual question.
As I've already addressed, it demonstrates that Tarn a) has gaps in her knowledge, and b) has the kind of personality where she does not want to publish something that is less than complete (for example, a "world overview" that has zero information on "Australia and the rest of the world."
So it explains why there are large gaps in the "world" overview, as well as sets up Kevin's pet NPC as being both somewhat modest and fairly detail-oriented.

Right. That tells us that Tarn is fallible, as an after-the-fact explanation for why later books (Canada) do not fit exactly what she described.
It does not tell us that Kevin originally intended the information in the main book to be false.

Yep, thanks for the expected sidestep. Because Kevin telling you now it's wrong will never be good enough. We'll need a time machine.

Kevin now telling me that it's wrong now means nothing, except that it's wrong now.
Kevin now telling me that it was always intended to be wrong means that it was always wrong.
That's not a sidestep- it's just how things are.

I'm claiming that the canon was changed, you are claiming that it was not.
In order to determine whether or not it was changed, we need to know what the canon originally was.
In order to know that, we need to know what Kevin was thinking when he wrote it, whether he intended to mislead the readers about the true nature of Japan/Canada/whatever, and later reveal the truth, or whether he intended to reveal the truth, and later changed the truth.

What's truth? What's fiction? It's for the players to discover!

Yeah, it'd be real fun to roll up a SAMAS pilot, then be told by the GM that the suits are non-functioning paper-mache.
Who needs reliable facts, when you can just make **** up when you go along, changing whatever you feel like along the way?

whether or not you agree to have your name on it doesn't affect whether or not what I posted was written by you.
It wasn't.
Parts of it were, but looking at the passage as a whole and saying, "Proseksword wrote this" would be incorrect.
Just as looking at a excerpt from a book and saying that it was written by Erin Tarn, when important parts of it were written by somebody else (with no notation to differentiate between authors, such as editors' notes, etc.) would also be incorrect.

And yet, that's quite possibly what the publishers of Traversing Our Modern World have done. Terrible, but possible.

It's not possible, though.
Kevin tells us in the intro that the section was written by Erin Tarn.
If it was only partially written by Tarn, then that statement would be untrue.

Furthermore, he also tells us that the excerpt that we're reading is the same report that Tarn gave to Lazlo, which also means that it's impossible that it was altered by Lazlo.
If it was altered, then it would not be the same thing.

[Killer Cyborg]

-snip-
I guess that here you are asking why I think that the book should be expunged from canon?
I don't, really. It's not a big deal to me.

I have an 11 page rant thread and several other interjected posts about it that say the exact opposite

What you have is me arguing against an number of people who keep insisting that I'm wrong about things.

If you think that I have recently said that I think the book should be expunged from canon, link to the relevant post, and I'll explain my thoughts.

[Killer Cyborg]

If everything in that entire section was to be taken as fact and fact only then why would it be written in character.

Flavor.

[Proseksword]

Why would he tell you it is an except from Traversing Our Modern World, an unauthorized publication disavowed by Erin Tarn if it wasn't relevant to our understanding of the passage?

THAT is an actual question.
As I've already addressed, it demonstrates that Tarn a) has gaps in her knowledge, and b) has the kind of personality where she does not want to publish something that is less than complete (for example, a "world overview" that has zero information on "Australia and the rest of the world."
So it explains why there are large gaps in the "world" overview, as well as sets up Kevin's pet NPC as being both somewhat modest and fairly detail-oriented.

And yet, that much is explained simply by her refusal to publish it herself, and could easily have been explained by having it been a simple letter to the Council of Lazlo without the framework of unauthorized publication, or she could have been simply apologetic in the introduction herself. The fact that it is an unauthorized publication's excerpt that we are reading, and not the original document, is therefore of enough importance to Mr. Siembieda that he felt the need to write it.

Yeah, it'd be real fun to roll up a SAMAS pilot, then be told by the GM that the suits are non-functioning paper-mache.
Who needs reliable facts, when you can just make **** up when you go along, changing whatever you feel like along the way?

In telling a story, GMs always "make **** up when you go along", that's called role-playing. It requires reacting to players actions and story-telling on the fly. A GM could very easily make a player's SAMAS paper-mache. He'd be a dick, but he could. I wouldn't consider putting a whole bunch of stuff in Japan a dick move, though. I'd call it a pleasant surprise.

It's not possible, though.
Kevin tells us in the intro that the section was written by Erin Tarn.

Originally, yes. It was then published in Traversing Our Modern World, a book Tarn had nothing to do with creating.

[Proseksword]

If everything in that entire section was to be taken as fact and fact only then why would it be written in character.

Flavor.

You cannot write both in character and with omniscience unless the character themselves is omniscient. In order to be "in character" writing is inherently as fallible as the character herself. Further, for the writing to be "in character" as an excerpt from an unauthorized publication, it is inherently as fallible as the unauthorized publication itself.

[Dr. Doom III]

The only out is if you assume that Tarn is incompetent or dishonest.
Which is not a safe assumption.

Actually the fact that she refuses to endorse the book says she's just the opposite.
If everything written in it is known by her to be 100% accurate as you apparently contend there's no reason not to endorse it.

[Killer Cyborg]

If everything in that entire section was to be taken as fact and fact only then why would it be written in character.

Flavor.

And part of the flavor is an unreliable narrator.

THAT depends on the narrator in question.

Also the section is set up with ...

It is an excerpt from the most recent book that
bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World.

excerpt means : A short extract from a film, broadcast, or piece of music or writing.

Now again for all we know the section on japan starts with paragraphs stating, I have never been there, or I heard from Jim down the street that. Or a lovely story about a dog named Pip. We don't have the full book so we will never official know.

I've covered this.
Repeatedly.

The same section states that the World Overview that follows was commissioned by Lazlo and written by Tarn.
Which means that it a complete work.
The World Overview is an excerpt from a later compilation book, not from the World Overview.
It is the complete World Overview.

And like in my previous post, she could have been conned, or mislead, and/or plain wrong,

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Quote a retorical question and ignoring the actual point of my previous posts doesn't convice or sway me, not that I am trying to convince or sway you.

There is a difference between ignoring something and simply not responding to it.
Since your post wasn't addressed to me, I didn't feel the need to respond to it.
Since one part of your post jumped out at me, and I felt like it, I responded to that one part.

I personally never put stock into what Erin Tarn had to say unless it was backed up with actual text written not in character.

I know this will take a bit of time, but do me a favor and reread the original Rifts book.
Let me know how much you find out about the setting if you ignore Tarn's words.

[Dr. Doom III]

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Neither are the things she's talking about.
It's all part of a fictional world.
A fictional world that her character is part of and does not have perfect knowledge off.

Kevin Siembieda wrote the passage as a character who stated that she didn't have complete knowledge of the world.
You taking that as Kevin Siembieda writing an omniscient world overview is just plain wrong.

[Proseksword]

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Neither are the things she's talking about.
It's all part of a fictional world.
A fictional world that her character is part of and does not have perfect knowledge off.

Kevin Siembieda wrote the passage as a character who stated that she didn't have complete knowledge of the world.
You taking that as Kevin Siembieda writing an omniscient world overview is just plain wrong.

Bingo. Erin Tarn, the fictional character, cannot have the omniscient knowledge of Kevin Siembieda, real-world author. Ergo, her account is open to inaccuracies, even if she herself does not realize it. Kevin Siembieda, real-world author, would and did write Erin Tarn in character with that understanding, ergo, she was written as having potentially faulty knowledge.

[Killer Cyborg]

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Neither are the things she's talking about.
It's all part of a fictional world.
A fictional world that her character is part of and does not have perfect knowledge off.

Kevin Siembieda wrote the passage as a character who stated that she didn't have complete knowledge of the world.
You taking that as Kevin Siembieda writing an omniscient world overview is just plain wrong.

I agree, assuming that I think that Tarn is omniscient is very wrong, because that's not what I think.
So, once again, quit making stuff up.

[Killer Cyborg]

Erin Tarn, the fictional character, cannot have the omniscient knowledge of Kevin Siembieda, real-world author. Ergo, her account is open to inaccuracies, even if she herself does not realize it. Kevin Siembieda, real-world author, would and did write Erin Tarn in character with that understanding, ergo, she was written as having potentially faulty knowledge.

Tarn is only as accurate or as inaccurate as Kevin wants her to be.
You seem to think that as the near-sole provider of information about the world in the main book, which was to be followed by only one world book, that Kevin would bother to have Tarn be incorrect about something as interesting as millions of people running around swinging swords at demons in a land that she seemed to think was empty.
Personally, I don't see any logic in that.
It seems much more likely, to the point of being obvious, that the text in the main book was intended to give a brief "world overview" of stuff that would be expanded on in the later World Book.
That's why Kevin has Tarn mention expanding on the interesting parts later.

[Proseksword]

Tarn is only as accurate or as inaccurate as Kevin wants her to be.
You seem to think that as the near-sole provider of information about the world in the main book, which was to be followed by only one world book, that Kevin would bother to have Tarn be incorrect about something as interesting as millions of people running around swinging swords at demons in a land that she seemed to think was empty.....

And yet, I don't. I think that Kevin saw the very obvious need to both:
A - provide hooks for exploration adventures
B - keep his options open for the future

As a result, the entire article was deliberately vague, and the further from North America it got, the vaguer it got, and the less knowledgeable Tarn seemed. I think this was done deliberately, both to make the places seem distant by Tarn's recollection, and to provide an air of mystery and potential about them.

[Killer Cyborg]

Tarn is only as accurate or as inaccurate as Kevin wants her to be.
You seem to think that as the near-sole provider of information about the world in the main book, which was to be followed by only one world book, that Kevin would bother to have Tarn be incorrect about something as interesting as millions of people running around swinging swords at demons in a land that she seemed to think was empty.....

And yet, I don't. I think that Kevin saw the very obvious need to both:
A - provide hooks for exploration adventures
B - keep his options open for the future

As a result, the entire article was deliberately vague, and the further from North America it got, the vaguer it got, and the less knowledgeable Tarn seemed. I think this was done deliberately, both to make the places seem distant by Tarn's recollection, and to provide an air of mystery and potential about them.

Here's the thing: I agree that Kevin saw the need to keep his options open for the future, and that he saw the need to provide adventure hooks.
I agree that the article was deliberately vague in a lot of ways, and I agree that the further from North America it got, the vaguer it got.
But when it comes to Japan, Kevin chose to have Tarn NOT be very vague. He had her state as specific fact that Japan was a quiet little cluster of wilderness islands.

And you have been claiming that she was INCORRECT, not just that she was simply "vague."
Vagueness leaves potential for exploration adventures.
Vagueness keeps options open for the future.
"We cannot trust 90% of the information we have about the game world" just shuts things down, because then there isn't even a real setting, just a bunch of stuff that may or may not be true.

[Dr. Doom III]

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Neither are the things she's talking about.
It's all part of a fictional world.
A fictional world that her character is part of and does not have perfect knowledge off.

Kevin Siembieda wrote the passage as a character who stated that she didn't have complete knowledge of the world.
You taking that as Kevin Siembieda writing an omniscient world overview is just plain wrong.

I agree, assuming that I think that Tarn is omniscient is very wrong, because that's not what I think.
So, once again, quit making stuff up.

Only if you stop since I never said that.

[Dr. Doom III]

Tarn is only as accurate or as inaccurate as Kevin wants her to be.

At last a glimmer of hope.

You seem to think that as the near-sole provider of information about the world in the main book, which was to be followed by only one world book, that Kevin would bother to have Tarn be incorrect about something as interesting as millions of people running around swinging swords at demons in a land that she seemed to think was empty.
Personally, I don't see any logic in that.
It seems much more likely, to the point of being obvious, that the text in the main book was intended to give a brief "world overview" of stuff that would be expanded on in the later World Book.
That's why Kevin has Tarn mention expanding on the interesting parts later.

I can't speak for Proseksword but I don't think that. I think he could have.
The text leaves it open that he did and the later books not following much of what's there say that he at least decided later that it will be so. I don't really care what he intended. Short of him telling us we'll never know. But what I do know is the wrong stuff is wrong and if you want an in game explanation for why it's wrong there's one in print that works pretty well.
Or you can complain how things were changed.
Whatever floats your boat.

[Killer Cyborg]

Tarn is only as accurate or as inaccurate as Kevin wants her to be.

At last a glimmer of hope.

Yes, at last I say what I've been saying all along, and what you've been disagreeing with.

You seem to think that as the near-sole provider of information about the world in the main book, which was to be followed by only one world book, that Kevin would bother to have Tarn be incorrect about something as interesting as millions of people running around swinging swords at demons in a land that she seemed to think was empty.
Personally, I don't see any logic in that.
It seems much more likely, to the point of being obvious, that the text in the main book was intended to give a brief "world overview" of stuff that would be expanded on in the later World Book.
That's why Kevin has Tarn mention expanding on the interesting parts later.

I can't speak for Proseksword but I don't think that. I think he could have.

Hell, he COULD be lying the entire time, and announce in a new book that there's no such thing as the CS at all, nor any of the other stuff he's been writing about for years, in-character and out-of-character.
But it wouldn't make a lick of sense to just assume it, or even to give that theory any kind of credit at all.

The text leaves it open that he did and the later books not following much of what's there say that he at least decided later that it will be so. I don't really care what he intended. Short of him telling us we'll never know. But what I do know is the wrong stuff is wrong and if you want an in game explanation for why it's wrong there's one in print that works pretty well.
Or you can complain how things were changed.
Whatever floats your boat.

I can make up whatever in-game explanations and patches that I want in order to cover changes in canon.
But that doesn't make them NOT changes.
And all I've been saying this whole time is that there HAS been changes.
And you've been arguing against me.

[Killer Cyborg]

No, she couldn't.
She's not real.

Neither are the things she's talking about.
It's all part of a fictional world.
A fictional world that her character is part of and does not have perfect knowledge off.

Kevin Siembieda wrote the passage as a character who stated that she didn't have complete knowledge of the world.
You taking that as Kevin Siembieda writing an omniscient world overview is just plain wrong.

I agree, assuming that I think that Tarn is omniscient is very wrong, because that's not what I think.
So, once again, quit making stuff up.

Only if you stop since I never said that.

You said "perfect knowledge."
If you want to claim a distinction between that and "omniscience," feel free to explain what you think it is, and I'll rephrase my response.

[Dr. Doom III]

I really think at this point the discussion has become pointless. (also takes into account info from other threads)

Side A: The Section was fictional authored by the character Erin Tarn and was written in character. As such the character's writting or the character herself and can be mistaken, wrong, mislead, and has human quality in her fictional writting.
Side Z: The Section was fictional authored by the character Erin Tarn was written as a direct source of correct information from the real author.

Now it is a matter of opinion,
Taste great!
Less Filling!

It also seems to be apparent that nether side is going to change opinion. As such opinions can not really be wrong.
Since it is a matter of opinion nether side can actually prove the other wrong as it all comes down to interpretation of the material presented. Unless Kevin comes in and says "This is what I meant when I wrote this section..." We will never know, what his thoughts were. If I wrote it, I would never say anything like that as I would have wrote it to be up to the reader. So I don't see Kevin chiming in.
Both sides get a draw in my mind. (as for the debate part of things)

Actually side A says it was not fictional authored by Tarn but by someone else and not fictional authorized by Tarn because she knew her own gaps in knowledge because that's what's in print. It's not open for interpretation just apparently to be ignored by side Z.

[Dr. Doom III]

Semantics aside.

it comes down to the opinion of a group that thinks the narrator is reliable and a group that is of the opinion that the narrator is unrealiable.

It's like asking, Do you trust me? Some will, some wont.

based on the evidence provided to both sides. One group doesn't trust the narrator, based on the same information another group does.

Tastes Great!
Less filling!

Except one side can point to something in the book to show that the author shouldn't be considered reliable. Only by ignoring that evidence can anyone say it should be considered reliable.

[The Beast]

What it comes down to is Occam's Razor, which nets out as "the simplest explanation that fits all the facts is the most likely to be true."

In this case, that comes out as "Kevin originally intended Tarn's words to be fact, but later changed his mind."

For those that disagree with this assessment, I would like to ask:
1. What about that claim do you believe does NOT fit the facts?
2. What about that claim do you believe makes it NOT the simplest explanation?

So far, most of the objections seem to rest on an assumption that Kevin is otherwise consistent in his writings, and therefore any inconsistencies in his writings as Tarn must be deliberate, due to the character making mistakes.
But that base assumption, that Kevin is otherwise consistent in his writings, is clearly untrue- these forums are full of discussions about the many inconsistencies in Palladium's games.
Which means that that particular assumption does not fit the facts, and can (and should) be discarded.

IMO, Erin Tarn has never been to Japan, for the following reasons:

1 = As you have been pointing out, she describes them as a "little cluster of islands." Going off of the world map from the RMB I don't see how she could have described them as little. Hawaii could be considered a little cluster of islands, but not Japan.

2 = She describes Delaware as being completely gone. Yet every time I looked at the map of the US in the RMB I can easily make out a good portion of New Castle county remaining. (IIRC, Archie even placed a number of his shemarians in DE, but that's from a later book). Furthermore, not enough of MD, NJ, and VA are underwater if all of DE is (the state's highest point is 447 ft above sea level according to Wiki, and about 40 miles from the mouth of the Delaware Bay).

[TechnoGothic]

Did Erin Tarn have ALL the FACTS. No. Nuff said.

[Shark_Force]

Except one side can point to something in the book to show that the author shouldn't be considered reliable. Only by ignoring that evidence can anyone say it should be considered reliable.

no, not really. the part you point to is overruled.

right before the part where it says the book isn't written by tarn, is a little blurb. this blurb is blatantly obviously written by kevin himself. in this blurb , he (not the fictional author of "traversing our modern world", but kevin) tells us explicitly that the section we have in the RMB is in fact published by erin tarn, willingly, with the implication that unlike the book "traversing our modern world", she considered it to be as complete and accurate as it could reasonably be made.

any evidence you can point to stuff that changed *later* is just that: stuff that was changed later. all that crap about how she didn't approve of the book "traversing our modern world" does not apply to the excerpt we see in the RMB, because all the reasons she didn't approve of the book explicitly do not apply to the document, which is a document which she *did* publish, which she *did* endorse, and which she *did* consider to be sufficiently accurate and complete.

there is no reason to presume the section in the RMB demonstrates an unreliable narrator.

stuff written in later books that contradicts the RMB merely demonstrate changes in the setting. in fact, if you read the RUE version it is updated to reflect what is in the various world books in many cases, which merely serves to demonstrate that erin tarn, in that particular section, IS to be considered a reliable narrator. the latest edition of the rules specifically goes out of the way to avoid copy/paste in many cases and instead provides new information that reflects what the world books tell us. now why would kevin go out of his way to change what erin tarn wrote to make it more accurate if she is supposed to be an unreliable narrator?

at the time RMB was written, the report by erin tarn was the canon for the world. it was changed. that isn't necessarily a bad thing (nor is it necessarily a good thing). some people will like the change, some people won't. but whether you like it or not, it is a change. you can rant and rave and scream and shout and throw a fit all you like, and claim that you've got psychic powers that tell you that even though everything points to erin tarn being a reliable narrator who was providing information that she in character considered to be accurate enough and complete enough to publish to an employer, kevin clearly meant her to be an unreliable narrator, if you want. it doesn't make it any less of a change.

seriously, the thought that kevin would bother to provide an unreliable narrator for the only source of information in the setting is kind of ridiculous. that *might* make sense, except kevin is the sort of guy who tells you to change anything, whether or not it is given as reliable information, to whatever you feel like it should be. this isn't 4th edition D&D where once something is written it becomes something the company expects to hold itself to, and can only be changed by errata being issued for it. this is palladium. where the primary rule is to adapt the game to fit your own play style, and ignore anything published that you don't like anyways. you don't *need* an unreliable narrator to change the setting, because kevin expects people to change the setting no matter what kind of narrator he provides.

do you seriously think that because part of the book was written in kevin's voice, and part of it was written in erin tarn's voice, that the parts written in kevin's voice are intended to be like the words of god, unchangeable by us mere mortals, carved deep into the mountains and put on display to all as a constant reminder of how to avoid having badwrongfun? do you have some sort of concept in your head that if you change a part written in kevin's voice the gaming police will kick in your door and drag you away to some deep dark abyss where you'll be chained up and prevented from spreading your tainted gaming ideas to others? do you think you need a signed permission slip from kevin to depart from what he wrote or something?

an unreliable narrator is not a plausible scenario. the context in the RMB indicates that it is a reliable narrator, and later books clearly demonstrate that it is a reliable narrator, particularly given the fact that what she wrote is ret-conned into being accurate in many cases.

[The Baron of chaos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nehhH9rfnaw

what...ohhh I see what you did right here, but i don't think it does apply to the debate going on here. As in the end it is "KC believe japan should be a desert devoid of everything" and a group of us(me included) that say "No is not" And KC "Yes it is Erin Tarn said so in RMB!" and us "No is not as it was only a partial verison of the facts and she likely never set a foot in Japan, or at least not for long enough to explore it in detail" " And KC" Bull*** is celarly stated she had touched every single continent of the world" and then....
Ok yes we ended in a vicious cycle...as it tend to happen when coming to Erint Tarn (or about if Coalition is evil or not...the most common themes since the no-conversion rule was enforced )

[Dr. Doom III]

Except one side can point to something in the book to show that the author shouldn't be considered reliable. Only by ignoring that evidence can anyone say it should be considered reliable.

no, not really. the part you point to is overruled.

right before the part where it says the book isn't written by tarn, is a little blurb. this blurb is blatantly obviously written by kevin himself. in this blurb , he (not the fictional author of "traversing our modern world", but kevin) tells us explicitly that the section we have in the RMB is in fact published by erin tarn, willingly, with the implication that unlike the book "traversing our modern world", she considered it to be as complete and accurate as it could reasonably be made.

any evidence you can point to stuff that changed *later* is just that: stuff that was changed later. all that crap about how she didn't approve of the book "traversing our modern world" does not apply to the excerpt we see in the RMB, because all the reasons she didn't approve of the book explicitly do not apply to the document, which is a document which she *did* publish, which she *did* endorse, and which she *did* consider to be sufficiently accurate and complete.

there is no reason to presume the section in the RMB demonstrates an unreliable narrator.

stuff written in later books that contradicts the RMB merely demonstrate changes in the setting. in fact, if you read the RUE version it is updated to reflect what is in the various world books in many cases, which merely serves to demonstrate that erin tarn, in that particular section, IS to be considered a reliable narrator. the latest edition of the rules specifically goes out of the way to avoid copy/paste in many cases and instead provides new information that reflects what the world books tell us. now why would kevin go out of his way to change what erin tarn wrote to make it more accurate if she is supposed to be an unreliable narrator?

at the time RMB was written, the report by erin tarn was the canon for the world. it was changed. that isn't necessarily a bad thing (nor is it necessarily a good thing). some people will like the change, some people won't. but whether you like it or not, it is a change. you can rant and rave and scream and shout and throw a fit all you like, and claim that you've got psychic powers that tell you that even though everything points to erin tarn being a reliable narrator who was providing information that she in character considered to be accurate enough and complete enough to publish to an employer, kevin clearly meant her to be an unreliable narrator, if you want. it doesn't make it any less of a change.

seriously, the thought that kevin would bother to provide an unreliable narrator for the only source of information in the setting is kind of ridiculous. that *might* make sense, except kevin is the sort of guy who tells you to change anything, whether or not it is given as reliable information, to whatever you feel like it should be. this isn't 4th edition D&D where once something is written it becomes something the company expects to hold itself to, and can only be changed by errata being issued for it. this is palladium. where the primary rule is to adapt the game to fit your own play style, and ignore anything published that you don't like anyways. you don't *need* an unreliable narrator to change the setting, because kevin expects people to change the setting no matter what kind of narrator he provides.

do you seriously think that because part of the book was written in kevin's voice, and part of it was written in erin tarn's voice, that the parts written in kevin's voice are intended to be like the words of god, unchangeable by us mere mortals, carved deep into the mountains and put on display to all as a constant reminder of how to avoid having badwrongfun? do you have some sort of concept in your head that if you change a part written in kevin's voice the gaming police will kick in your door and drag you away to some deep dark abyss where you'll be chained up and prevented from spreading your tainted gaming ideas to others? do you think you need a signed permission slip from kevin to depart from what he wrote or something?

an unreliable narrator is not a plausible scenario. the context in the RMB indicates that it is a reliable narrator, and later books clearly demonstrate that it is a reliable narrator, particularly given the fact that what she wrote is ret-conned into being accurate in many cases.

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

Anything and everything said after the few short descriptive paragrabhs introducing the "Traversing Our Modern World" section is taken directly from said book. Said book clearly in black and white is stated not to be writen or endorsed by Tarn. Anything and everything said in it is therefore suspect.

[TechnoGothic]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

[Shark_Force]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

this would have some value, except that's discussing the book as a whole, and we know that the specific part which we get to read is something she felt was up to her standards for publication, and which she did willingly author and endorse.

the stuff that she didn't endorse or author is the stuff that we never get to see. the reliability of the information we don't get to see is not relevant. the information that we do get to see *did* live up to her standards, and tells us exactly when she doesn't have certain information. if she doesn't know whether there is something there, she *tells* us that she doesn't know. in the case of Japan, that isn't what she did. she tells us that she does know, and specifies what is there. if it said "i've heard that..." or "there are rumors that..." or "most likely..." or "i suspect that..." or any number of other disclaimers, we could look at that and say "yup, incomplete information". instead, she tells us exactly what is there, in perfectly clear language.

[Proseksword]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

this would have some value, except that's discussing the book as a whole, and we know that the specific part which we get to read is something she felt was up to her standards for publication, and which she did willingly author and endorse.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. What part of the main books says that she wanted the part we read published or that it was up to her standards? We're told it's an except from the book. The questionable, unauthorized book. She might have written part or all of what we're given, but we don't know, and we also don't know how reliable she actually feels the data is. Since we're told point-blank she didn't want it published, we can't expect her to think too highly of it.

[SAMASzero]

I'm going to go over this thread later, but from what I saw of the first and last pages, the problem seems to be thus:

In the original Rifts rulebook, the passages of Erin Tarn's book (excerpted or not) Traversing Out Modern World, she mentions (while admitting her lack of concrete firsthand knowlege) Japan as having been apocalypted back to pristine wilderness.

Then World Book 8: Rifts Japan comes out, and shows that Japan is very much not un-populated. Our OP seems to have a problem with this. Whatever problems he has with the content of the book itself, the main problem seems to be dealing with the fact that either:

A: Erin Tarn's information was, for whatever reason (sarcastic gasp) wrong.

Or

B: Kevin and/or the Rifts' creative team at the time decided that they wanted to do something with Japan after all, and retconned Japan as having Humans (and Oni, and D-Bees, etc...) struggling and living their lives after all.


Now my initial reaction, before reading any more into the thread, is to quote Audrey II and say "Tough Tit-tay!".

Now IIRC, the Tranversing Our Modern World portions all but swore up and down that not all of it was her personal experiences. Some of it was things she's heard of or spoken about. It was designed both to give a basic idea of what the world was like (specifically the extent of the devastation and the changes wrought by the (re)introduction of magic, nonhumans and supernatural beings.) to build further upon, while being vague enough to allow Palladium's writers to make up or change any details as they saw fit. Rifts Japan was not the first time they did this, and was certainly not the last. The two that stick in my mind most immediately are General Rasheen of the NGR (Mentioned in the Rahu-Man entry in the Conversion Book, then World Book 5 showed that the NGR was (nowhere near) as Human supremacist as the Coalition (making the idea of a Rahu-Man being a general rather laughable), then Triax 2 both lightened that up and brought Rasheen back.) and The Republicans (Said to be destroyed in TOMW, then Sourcebook One Revised showed that not to be the case).

I would like to point out to KC, in response to his first post, that AFAIK, KS still has to okay each book, from initial idea to final printing, before it hits the shelves. They did not go behind his back to make Japan or any other book. The man has the right to change his mind, that's why TOMW has so little concrete and confirmed information in the first place.

Now, I'm off to read the thread more fully and see if I've just made a fool of myself.

[Shark_Force]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. What part of the main books says that she wanted the part we read published or that it was up to her standards? We're told it's an except from the book. The questionable, unauthorized book. She might have written part or all of what we're given, but we don't know, and we also don't know how reliable she actually feels the data is. Since we're told point-blank she didn't want it published, we can't expect her to think too highly of it.

the part that tells us, in perfectly clear language, that the passage we are reading is a report she submitted to the lazlo council of learning as payment for services rendered, which was later included in the book (which is clearly stated to be published by the lazlo council of learning, so you can cut the crap about how unreliable the author supposedly is).

or, to put it another way... the part which killer cyborg has repeatedly told you about, over the course of multiple threads.

@ SAMASzero: his problem is that people keep on telling him that there was no change. he gets that there was a change. he doesn't like it, but he acknowledges that rifts:Japan is the new canon. he has said this over and over and over. and over and over and over and over and over and over and... well, hopefully by now, you get the point.

the thing that bugs him is that there's all these people coming and saying "nuh-uh, the Japan world book wasn't a change at all", and *that* is quite frankly nonsense. it is a change. whether it's a popular change or not is beside the point. whether it's official or not is beside the point (he fully acknowledges that it is official). and these people seem to be completely unwilling to bother doing even the most perfunctory fact checking to realise what we actually have in the books.

it is *not* only a passage from "traversing our modern world". like everything else in that book, it is something written by erin tarn, which was then compiled into the book. it had an existence separate to the book beforehand, and that existence was as a report which erin tarn wrote professionally to be used by the lazlo council of learning. she willingly published that earlier document. she submitted it as something which was evidently acceptable to her standards of work for publication. it was then included in a later book, which later book she didn't author and didn't endorse. but the document which we have consists *entirely* of stuff which she herself chose to publish. this is made clear in the introductory section, which explains the origin of the book, and also of the specific passage of the book which we get to read.

the full book is something she didn't want to author. the passage we get to read *is* something that she authored and published herself.

[Killer Cyborg]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

It's not overlooked; I've addressed it repeatedly.
A gap in your knowledge is stuff that you don't know.
Which is different from being wrong about what you do know.
Not knowing what 2+2 equals is a gap in your knowledge.
Thinking that 2+2=5 is simply being wrong.

Considering Tarn states that she knows nothing about Australia and the rest of the world, as well as mentioning other gaps in her knowledge during the World Overview, that pretty well covers what the gaps are.

[Killer Cyborg]

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

Anything and everything said after the few short descriptive paragrabhs introducing the "Traversing Our Modern World" section is taken directly from said book. Said book clearly in black and white is stated not to be writen or endorsed by Tarn. Anything and everything said in it is therefore suspect.

Unfortunately, Doom, you do not have "Complete knowledge"- You are not omniscient.
Therefore, your post, and everything in it, is suspect.

[Killer Cyborg]

What it comes down to is Occam's Razor, which nets out as "the simplest explanation that fits all the facts is the most likely to be true."

In this case, that comes out as "Kevin originally intended Tarn's words to be fact, but later changed his mind."

For those that disagree with this assessment, I would like to ask:
1. What about that claim do you believe does NOT fit the facts?
2. What about that claim do you believe makes it NOT the simplest explanation?

So far, most of the objections seem to rest on an assumption that Kevin is otherwise consistent in his writings, and therefore any inconsistencies in his writings as Tarn must be deliberate, due to the character making mistakes.
But that base assumption, that Kevin is otherwise consistent in his writings, is clearly untrue- these forums are full of discussions about the many inconsistencies in Palladium's games.
Which means that that particular assumption does not fit the facts, and can (and should) be discarded.

IMO, Erin Tarn has never been to Japan, for the following reasons:

1 = As you have been pointing out, she describes them as a "little cluster of islands." Going off of the world map from the RMB I don't see how she could have described them as little. Hawaii could be considered a little cluster of islands, but not Japan.

Because when she went there, the region had been so devastated during the apocalypse that it had been reduced to a little cluster of islands.

2 = She describes Delaware as being completely gone. Yet every time I looked at the map of the US in the RMB I can easily make out a good portion of New Castle county remaining. (IIRC, Archie even placed a number of his shemarians in DE, but that's from a later book). Furthermore, not enough of MD, NJ, and VA are underwater if all of DE is (the state's highest point is 447 ft above sea level according to Wiki, and about 40 miles from the mouth of the Delaware Bay).

Maybe she was wrong.
Maybe the maps were wrong.
Maybe you are wrong.
I can't really say for certain.

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

[Dr. Doom III]

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

Anything and everything said after the few short descriptive paragrabhs introducing the "Traversing Our Modern World" section is taken directly from said book. Said book clearly in black and white is stated not to be writen or endorsed by Tarn. Anything and everything said in it is therefore suspect.

Unfortunately, Doom, you do not have "Complete knowledge"- You are not omniscient.
Therefore, your post, and everything in it, is suspect.

Yes I do.

[Giant2005]

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

That is a great policy to take.
It annoys me to no end when I look at the maps of the Demon Kingdoms in China 1 and see the Demon's lands coincidentally stop precisely where China's current borders end.
Until your "artwork is not canon" speech, I had been trying to rationalize it as the Demons were pleasant enough to respect the borders and limit themselves within, Even if they had no knowledge of them.

[Killer Cyborg]

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

That is a great policy to take.
It annoys me to no end when I look at the maps of the Demon Kingdoms in China 1 and see the Demon's lands coincidentally stop precisely where China's current borders end.
Until your "artwork is not canon" speech, I had been trying to rationalize it as the Demons were pleasant enough to respect the borders and limit themselves within, Even if they had no knowledge of them.

I always thought it'd be cool to try to come up with realistic maps of what Rifts Earth would look like. Figure out how high the sea level would have risen with the reintroduction of Atlantic, and plug it into some map program.
Unfortunately, I know nothing about how to do that kind of thing.

[Killer Cyborg]

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

Anything and everything said after the few short descriptive paragrabhs introducing the "Traversing Our Modern World" section is taken directly from said book. Said book clearly in black and white is stated not to be writen or endorsed by Tarn. Anything and everything said in it is therefore suspect.

Unfortunately, Doom, you do not have "Complete knowledge"- You are not omniscient.
Therefore, your post, and everything in it, is suspect.

Yes I do.

Sorry- can't trust you on that.

[Dr. Doom III]

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

Anything and everything said after the few short descriptive paragrabhs introducing the "Traversing Our Modern World" section is taken directly from said book. Said book clearly in black and white is stated not to be writen or endorsed by Tarn. Anything and everything said in it is therefore suspect.

Unfortunately, Doom, you do not have "Complete knowledge"- You are not omniscient.
Therefore, your post, and everything in it, is suspect.

Yes I do.

Sorry- can't trust you on that.

I knew you would say that.

[The Beast]

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

Maps are always canon.

[TechnoGothic]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

It's not overlooked; I've addressed it repeatedly.
A gap in your knowledge is stuff that you don't know.
Which is different from being wrong about what you do know.
Not knowing what 2+2 equals is a gap in your knowledge.
Thinking that 2+2=5 is simply being wrong.

Considering Tarn states that she knows nothing about Australia and the rest of the world, as well as mentioning other gaps in her knowledge during the World Overview, that pretty well covers what the gaps are.

IF Erin Tarn visited Japan (which i doubt she did) before The mega-cities returned, then she would not have knowledge of them.
If Erian Tarn during her visit only only encountered a few people (who did not speak English, or have language spells, etc..) she could not ask them questions and get answers.
If Erin Tarn actually only visited a few of the out skitted Islands around the actual Island of Japan, she may not have known the difference and assumed Japan was just a bunch of islands now.

So she Reports things, thinking she has All her facts right. But it turned out she was wrong. Because she did not explore the Island of Japan enough, and she should have stayed there longer to learn more from anyone there.

Erin tarn is a Scholar yes. Yet she is been wrong on many things in the past.
Scholars generally do not do Long-Term exploring mission in one place, so they Never get all the detail right or correct. Anyone who commissioned her would be utterly stupid to expect her report to be 100% facts with no possiblity for error.

Way I see it.
RMB we saw "Transversing the Modern World, 1st Printing, printed in 100 PA or before.
RUE we see "Transversing the Modern World, Revised Edition Printed in 109 PA
The REVISED Edition she may have corrected things she saw or now know was wrong in the first/older printings of the book. It would explain why thinnks changed.

[Killer Cyborg]

Also the "LACK OF COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE" is over looked by KC and others.

If she lacked of complete knowledge, it means one simple thing. She May Be Wrong About Things, and Lack "Critical Need To Know Information" (in a Burt Gumer voice/tone).

It's not overlooked; I've addressed it repeatedly.
A gap in your knowledge is stuff that you don't know.
Which is different from being wrong about what you do know.
Not knowing what 2+2 equals is a gap in your knowledge.
Thinking that 2+2=5 is simply being wrong.

Considering Tarn states that she knows nothing about Australia and the rest of the world, as well as mentioning other gaps in her knowledge during the World Overview, that pretty well covers what the gaps are.

IF Erin Tarn visited Japan (which i doubt she did) before The mega-cities returned, then she would not have knowledge of them.

Agreed. This is something that need never be mentioned again, because it is obvious, and I have already agreed to it.

If Erin Tarn during her visit only only encountered a few people (who did not speak English, or have language spells, etc..) she could not ask them questions and get answers.

I disagree.
Rifts 247 describes the Portable Language Translator, which comes standard with the 9 known languages of North America already programmed into it.
Rifts 32 lists Japanese as being one of the 9 major languages in Rifts.

So IF Tarn went to Japan without already knowing the language, and IF she for some reason did not have a guide or companion who spoke the local language, and IF she likewise had no companions who had any translation spells, I find it highly improbable to the point of instantly discarding the idea that she did not think to bring with her a portable language translator, something that comes standard in the basic equipment for any Rogue Scholar (Rifts 80).
And even IF she somehow forgot it, and ran into people that she could not communicate with, I see no reason why that would not be mentioned in her description of the lands.
Again, she mentions the presence of basic villages and other marks of civilization in other areas of the world, but not Japan.

If Erin Tarn actually only visited a few of the out skitted Islands around the actual Island of Japan, she may not have known the difference and assumed Japan was just a bunch of islands now.

Agreed. This falls under the category of "assuming that Tarn is incompetent."

Erin tarn is a Scholar yes. Yet she is been wrong on many things in the past.

Not as of the original Rifts book.

Again, we can conjure any number of in-game explanations of varying complexity in order to explain the change, but the simplest explanation that fits the facts is that Kevin did not originally plan to write a Japan book, and he later changed his mind.
Why this is so radical of a notion that everybody wants to reject it in favor of in-game "what if" scenarios, I have no idea.
If you like Japan, that's bully for you- no need to pretend that Kevin did not change his mind.
If you don't like Japan, then tough for you- Kevin obviously changed his mind.
Why this is still even a mildly controversial subject after 7 years, boggles my mind.

[Killer Cyborg]

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

Maps are always canon.

a) Source?
b) Odd, then that they disagree with one another.

[SAMASzero]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. What part of the main books says that she wanted the part we read published or that it was up to her standards? We're told it's an except from the book. The questionable, unauthorized book. She might have written part or all of what we're given, but we don't know, and we also don't know how reliable she actually feels the data is. Since we're told point-blank she didn't want it published, we can't expect her to think too highly of it.

the part that tells us, in perfectly clear language, that the passage we are reading is a report she submitted to the lazlo council of learning as payment for services rendered, which was later included in the book (which is clearly stated to be published by the lazlo council of learning, so you can cut the crap about how unreliable the author supposedly is).

or, to put it another way... the part which killer cyborg has repeatedly told you about, over the course of multiple threads.

@ SAMASzero: his problem is that people keep on telling him that there was no change. he gets that there was a change. he doesn't like it, but he acknowledges that rifts:Japan is the new canon. he has said this over and over and over. and over and over and over and over and over and over and... well, hopefully by now, you get the point.

the thing that bugs him is that there's all these people coming and saying "nuh-uh, the Japan world book wasn't a change at all", and *that* is quite frankly nonsense. it is a change. whether it's a popular change or not is beside the point. whether it's official or not is beside the point (he fully acknowledges that it is official). and these people seem to be completely unwilling to bother doing even the most perfunctory fact checking to realise what we actually have in the books.

it is *not* only a passage from "traversing our modern world". like everything else in that book, it is something written by erin tarn, which was then compiled into the book. it had an existence separate to the book beforehand, and that existence was as a report which erin tarn wrote professionally to be used by the lazlo council of learning. she willingly published that earlier document. she submitted it as something which was evidently acceptable to her standards of work for publication. it was then included in a later book, which later book she didn't author and didn't endorse. but the document which we have consists *entirely* of stuff which she herself chose to publish. this is made clear in the introductory section, which explains the origin of the book, and also of the specific passage of the book which we get to read.

the full book is something she didn't want to author. the passage we get to read *is* something that she authored and published herself.

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

As for in-universe, the text of Traversing Our Modern World was in fact written by Erin Tarn. Her problem with was that, as you say, it was written for the Council of Learning, and not general publication, as what happened. Somebody read it and figured that everyone would want to read it. Whether for altruistic or monetary reasons, they compiled her findings and published them together in a book. Basically, it was a government document that got leaked.

[SAMASzero]

In general, I guess I'd go with the idea that maps are artwork, and artwork isn't canon.

Maps are always canon.

a) Source?
b) Odd, then that they disagree with one another.

When in doubt, go with whichever is the most recent, unless/until Word of God says otherwise.

[Killer Cyborg]

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

Right.
In order:
a) it is not sacrosanct, but it is pretty clear that Kevin intended her words to be accurate. This is clear because of the time and trouble he goes through to have specific points of information stated as clear fact, and other pieces of information stated as rumors or otherwise qualified and therefore specifically marked as being questionable.
b) Tarn NEVER ONCE states that her information could be wrong, excepting times where she specifies that she is repeating rumors or other information that is likewise marked as being questionable.
All that she actually states is that her knowledge is not complete.
That is not the same as her knowledge being wrong.
She chalks up "Australia and the rest of the world" as areas that she knows absolutely nothing about. That right there is a pretty freakin' huge gap in her knowledge of the world- more than enough to justify an anal-retentive academic from not wanting her work published due to this kind of gap in knowledge.
c) If Kevin wanted to say "nobody knows what's in Japan," he would have said so specifically. How do we know? Because that's what he does with every other place where he wants to say that. He chalks Africa up as "dark and mysterious." He has Tarn flat-out state that she KNOWS NOTHING about "Australia and the rest of the world." The only thing that he mentions about India is that there are rumors of cannibalistic D-Bees there.
IF Kevin wanted Japan to be a blank spot on the map, something left open for future development, he would have done something similar with Japan. He would have had Tarn say "Japan is still the mysterious Orient on the other side of the world!" or he'd have had Tarn say, "I know nothing about Japan, Australia, or the rest of the world." Or he'd have had Tarn say, "The only thing I know about Japan is that there are rumors of...."
But he doesn't do any of these things.
He specifically does not do any of these things.
He has Tarn state as fact that Japan was wiped out by the apocalypse, and that all that's left are islands that are:
1. Small
2. Quiet.
3. Wilderness.

IF Kevin had wanted Japan to even be the kind of wilderness that has demons and significant numbers of villages or other communities existing in that wilderness, again, he would have mentioned it.
How do we know?
Because that's what he did in every other part of the planet.

[Dr. Doom III]

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

Right.
In order:
a) it is not sacrosanct, but it is pretty clear that Kevin intended her words to be accurate. This is clear because of the time and trouble he goes through to have specific points of information stated as clear fact, and other pieces of information stated as rumors or otherwise qualified and therefore specifically marked as being questionable.
b) Tarn NEVER ONCE states that her information could be wrong, excepting times where she specifies that she is repeating rumors or other information that is likewise marked as being questionable.
All that she actually states is that her knowledge is not complete.
That is not the same as her knowledge being wrong.
She chalks up "Australia and the rest of the world" as areas that she knows absolutely nothing about. That right there is a pretty freakin' huge gap in her knowledge of the world- more than enough to justify an anal-retentive academic from wanting her work published due to this kind of gap in knowledge.
c) If Kevin wanted to say "nobody knows what's in Japan," he would have said so specifically. How do we know? Because that's what he does with every other place where he wants to say that. He chalks Africa up as "dark and mysterious." He has Tarn flat-out state that she KNOWS NOTHING about "Australia and the rest of the world." The only thing that he mentions about India is that there are rumors of cannibalistic D-Bees there.
IF Kevin wanted Japan to be a blank spot on the map, something left open for future development, he would have done something similar with Japan. He would have had Tarn say "Japan is still the mysterious Orient on the other side of the world!" or he'd have had Tarn say, "I know nothing about Japan, Australia, or the rest of the world." Or he'd have had Tarn say, "The only thing I know about Japan is that there are rumors of...."
But he doesn't do any of these things.
He specifically does not do any of these things.
He has Tarn state as fact that Japan was wiped out by the apocalypse, and that all that's left are islands that are:
1. Small
2. Quiet.
3. Wilderness.

IF Kevin had wanted Japan to even be the kind of wilderness that has demons and significant numbers of villages or other communities existing in that wilderness, again, he would have mentioned it.
How do we know?
Because that's what he did in every other part of the planet.

d. She says she hasn't been much past the Rio Grande in the South but describes South America in detail without prefacing the description by telling how she came about the information. The only difference in that and the blurb on Japan is the stuff on South America is mostly accurate.
So apparently she uses rumor and hearsay because that's the only way she could know about South America and sometimes doesn't bother to mention when it is such. Or someone edited her stuff for publication and did it.

[Shark_Force]

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

As for in-universe, the text of Traversing Our Modern World was in fact written by Erin Tarn. Her problem with was that, as you say, it was written for the Council of Learning, and not general publication, as what happened. Somebody read it and figured that everyone would want to read it. Whether for altruistic or monetary reasons, they compiled her findings and published them together in a book. Basically, it was a government document that got leaked.

yes, there are gaps. she makes mention of them on a regular basis. "i don't know much about <place>", "i've heard that <place> is <description>", "i've never been to <place>" and so forth. she doesn't say that for japan. she tells us very plainly about japan. she hasn't heard about japan. she doesn't speculate about japan. she doesn't know rumors about japan. she doesn't tell us, as she does with many other parts of the world, that she doesn't know anything at all about japan. instead, she tells us about japan, in the context of describing her personal experiences while traveling around the world.

@ doom: she says she hasn't been much past the rio grande in her description of mexico. ie she hasn't been very far into mexico.

[Dr. Doom III]

@ doom: she says she hasn't been much past the rio grande in her description of mexico. ie she hasn't been very far into mexico.

*Geographic note*
South America is South of Mexico.

Saying she could not have ever been there and then describing the place like she has been is an internal inconsistency.

[Killer Cyborg]

She says she hasn't been much past the Rio Grande in the South but describes South America in detail without prefacing the description by telling how she came about the information. The only difference in that and the blurb on Japan is the stuff on South America is mostly accurate.
So apparently she uses rumor and hearsay because that's the only way she could know about South America and sometimes doesn't bother to mention when it is such. Or someone edited her stuff for publication and did it.

Addressed in the other thread.

[SAMASzero]

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

Right.
In order:
a) it is not sacrosanct, but it is pretty clear that Kevin intended her words to be accurate. This is clear because of the time and trouble he goes through to have specific points of information stated as clear fact, and other pieces of information stated as rumors or otherwise qualified and therefore specifically marked as being questionable.

How can you say that the words were intended to be accurate, when the Author herself says they may not be?

For that matter, how can you say that Kevin intended for Japan to be unpopulated when he approved the creation of World Book 8 in the first place? They did not just sneak into the printing room,and start up the presses late at night while Kevin was asleep like the Republicans did to Archie 3.

b) Tarn NEVER ONCE states that her information could be wrong, excepting times where she specifies that she is repeating rumors or other information that is likewise marked as being questionable.

In other words, when they could be wrong.

All that she actually states is that her knowledge is not complete.
That is not the same as her knowledge being wrong.

If you wanna be picky, we can use the term "incorrect" instead. I'm not tying to say the lady is lying or anything.

She chalks up "Australia and the rest of the world" as areas that she knows absolutely nothing about. That right there is a pretty freakin' huge gap in her knowledge of the world- more than enough to justify an anal-retentive academic from wanting her work published due to this kind of gap in knowledge.

She didn't want it published. They go over this in both Aftermath and the Ultimate Edition Book.

c) If Kevin wanted to say "nobody knows what's in Japan," he would have said so specifically. How do we know? Because that's what he does with every other place where he wants to say that. He chalks Africa up as "dark and mysterious." He has Tarn flat-out state that she KNOWS NOTHING about "Australia and the rest of the world." The only thing that he mentions about India is that there are rumors of cannibalistic D-Bees there.

If Kevin wanted nobody to be in Japan, South America 2 would've been World Book 8.

IF Kevin wanted Japan to be a blank spot on the map, something left open for future development, he would have done something similar with Japan. He would have had Tarn say "Japan is still the mysterious Orient on the other side of the world!" or he'd have had Tarn say, "I know nothing about Japan, Australia, or the rest of the world." Or he'd have had Tarn say, "The only thing I know about Japan is that there are rumors of...."
But he doesn't do any of these things.
He specifically does not do any of these things.
He has Tarn state as fact that Japan was wiped out by the apocalypse, and that all that's left are islands that are:
1. Small
2. Quiet.
3. Wilderness.

Then Rifts World Book 8: Rifts' Japan came out, and that piece of information turned out to be:

1. Wrong.
2. Incorrect
3. Not in actuality.

Or perhaps that wasn't something she wrote. Our Changing World, the version of ToMW that Erin did write with the intent of publishing, both says that Erin has never been to Japan (but she has been to Russia), but recounts rumors (specifically said to be so) that line up with The New Empire, Republic of Japan, and the Zone.

IF Kevin had wanted Japan to even be the kind of wilderness that has demons and significant numbers of villages or other communities existing in that wilderness, again, he would have mentioned it.
How do we know?
Because that's what he did in every other part of the planet.

And then World Book 8 came out. And all of that no longer matters.

This is what is known in the business as a Retcon. Rettroactive Continuity. Something previously said is no longer true (for reasons good or bad). Therefore, Japan was never wiped out (and possibly, Erin Tarn never said that it was).

[Killer Cyborg]

I would point out that the Other Side is saying that Erin Tarn's writing on the subject is: A: not sacrosanct, and B: unconfirmed even in the original document. i.e.: Erin Tarn herself was saying that the information could be wrong, which turned out to be the case. Like I said before, this is why the writing had so much uncertainty and vagueness. It wasn't Kevin saying "Nobody's in Japan", it was Kevin saying "I have no idea/plans for Japan at the time of this writing".

Right.
In order:
a) it is not sacrosanct, but it is pretty clear that Kevin intended her words to be accurate. This is clear because of the time and trouble he goes through to have specific points of information stated as clear fact, and other pieces of information stated as rumors or otherwise qualified and therefore specifically marked as being questionable.

How can you say that the words were intended to be accurate, when the Author herself says they may not be?

Because Tarn isn't really the author- Siembieda is.
And I have yet to hear a good explanation for why Siembieda would, after taking the time and trouble to mention all the times that Tarn is working off of any kind of questionable information, try to add in yet another layer of "but this might not be true!" for a game series that he only expected to write two more books for, one of them being a conversion book.

The simplest explanation is still that Kevin originally intended for Japan to be unpopulated, and later changed his mind.
Nobody has ever, in any way, come up with anything that makes this an unlikely theory.

For that matter, how can you say that Kevin intended for Japan to be unpopulated when he approved the creation of World Book 8 in the first place? They did not just sneak into the printing room,and start up the presses late at night while Kevin was asleep like the Republicans did to Archie 3.

Because Kevin, like anybody else, can change his mind.
When he wrote the RMB, he expected to follow it with ONE World Book that detailed the entire planet. That doesn't leave much room for "let's have secret stuff in Japan!" or other similar notions that he expected to ever do anything with that region ever again.
Then, YEARS LATER, Patrick Nowak approached Kevin with either the idea for a Rifts: Japan book, or a manuscript for it, and Kevin got excited about it and greenlit the project.

b) Tarn NEVER ONCE states that her information could be wrong, excepting times where she specifies that she is repeating rumors or other information that is likewise marked as being questionable.

In other words, when they could be wrong.

Right.
And since Japan was not one of the times that she specified that she could be wrong, that indicates that it wasn't.

All that she actually states is that her knowledge is not complete.
That is not the same as her knowledge being wrong.

If you wanna be picky, we can use the term "incorrect" instead. I'm not tying to say the lady is lying or anything.

It nets out the same.
Having a gap in your knowledge means "I don't know."
Which is not the same as "I know x" and late X is proven to be untrue. That's not a gap, that's being wrong... or incorrect, or whatever you want to call it.

She chalks up "Australia and the rest of the world" as areas that she knows absolutely nothing about. That right there is a pretty freakin' huge gap in her knowledge of the world- more than enough to justify an anal-retentive academic from not wanting her work published due to this kind of gap in knowledge.

She didn't want it published.

Sigh.
That's what I meant.
I'd think that the typo was pretty clear.
It's fixed now, at any rate.

c) If Kevin wanted to say "nobody knows what's in Japan," he would have said so specifically. How do we know? Because that's what he does with every other place where he wants to say that. He chalks Africa up as "dark and mysterious." He has Tarn flat-out state that she KNOWS NOTHING about "Australia and the rest of the world." The only thing that he mentions about India is that there are rumors of cannibalistic D-Bees there.

If Kevin wanted nobody to be in Japan, South America 2 would've been World Book 8.

Believe it or not, those books were published years after the RMB, not while Kevin was writing it.

IF Kevin wanted Japan to be a blank spot on the map, something left open for future development, he would have done something similar with Japan. He would have had Tarn say "Japan is still the mysterious Orient on the other side of the world!" or he'd have had Tarn say, "I know nothing about Japan, Australia, or the rest of the world." Or he'd have had Tarn say, "The only thing I know about Japan is that there are rumors of...."
But he doesn't do any of these things.
He specifically does not do any of these things.
He has Tarn state as fact that Japan was wiped out by the apocalypse, and that all that's left are islands that are:
1. Small
2. Quiet.
3. Wilderness.

Then Rifts World Book 8: Rifts' Japan came out, and that piece of information turned out to be:

1. Wrong.
2. Incorrect
3. Not in actuality.

Depends on how you mean.
If you mean that somehow the existence of that book published years after the Rifts line unexpectedly took off, and Kevin realized that he'd have to write more than one World Book, somehow proves that back when Kevin was writing the RMB he planned to do something with Japan, then you're wrong.
If you mean that the new book retconned things, then you're kind of right... except that the original RMB passage by Tarn most likely doesn't even exist anymore in-game, as Tarn would have no reason to call a heavily populated region a "small cluster of quiet wilderness islands."

Or perhaps that wasn't something she wrote. Our Changing World, the version of ToMW that Erin did write with the intent of publishing, both says that Erin has never been to Japan (but she has been to Russia), but recounts rumors (specifically said to be so) that line up with The New Empire, Republic of Japan, and the Zone.

There is only one version of the World Overview, and I've repeatedly pointed out how and why we know that this is canon.
Either read one of those posts and address it, or drop the subject, because just repeating the debunked "this isn't Tarn's words!" schtick is pretty old by now.

IF Kevin had wanted Japan to even be the kind of wilderness that has demons and significant numbers of villages or other communities existing in that wilderness, again, he would have mentioned it.
How do we know?
Because that's what he did in every other part of the planet.

And then World Book 8 came out. And all of that no longer matters.

So why are you arguing about it?

This is what is known in the business as a Retcon. Rettroactive Continuity. Something previously said is no longer true (for reasons good or bad). Therefore, Japan was never wiped out (and possibly, Erin Tarn never said that it was).

Welcome to the word I've been using for most of this conversation.
I'm glad you like it, and I'm glad that you're catching up.
It might have happened a lot sooner if you'd bothered reading my end of the conversation before wading in.