I mean, D&D character building is actually completely stratified with consistent numerical values, so I'm not quite sure what you mean about that. Unless you mean that the 20-point scale in D&D is arbitrary because it's really only a framework to hang a progression of penalties/bonuses ranging from -5 to +5 ? I'm not sure what the benefit of radar charts is at all... they mostly just feel like an unnecessary visualization for a bunch of conventional numerical values. Japanese media designers sure seem to like them, though. I would go as far as to say it works fine for only a few years in G1, but stops working in relation to the bios written a few years after that. Just to address a couple of lingering points... It didn't come up, but I figured I'd highlight Frenzy's incongruous FIREPOWER 9 as a probable example of an error. I mean, unless it's supposed to represent the power of his sonic scream... it's quite likely that FIREPOWER is a catch all for a character's overall energy projection output. But even so, I doubt that his sonic attack is intended to be as potent as say... Shockwave. Again though... this example stands out because it's so incongruous compared to most of the other Tech Specs from that period. Meanwhile there's the question of those characters who are released twice, with different stats each time. 1986 features what can only be described as rampant stat inflation focused almost exclusively on the 1986 Movie cast. The shift in writing style and willy-nilly stats leave me 98% positive that they were not written by Budiansky (I'm sure this is a matter of record somewhere), which further cements the sense of methodological consistency in his work. What's interesting then, is that in 1987, you get a number of movie characters (the Targetmasters basically) who have a SECOND (perhaps "corrected") set of stats which for the most part are much more moderate, and more in-line with the style of previous Tech Specs. I expect that Budiansky was given the profiles for the second round of Kup, Blurr, Hot Rod, Cyclonus, and Scourge, and basically just tossed out the hyberbolic stats and replaced them with stats that felt more authentic. However, in 1987 the stats really do feel more random, particularly among the Headmasters. There's an unprecedented number of 10 scores. Sometimes they feel like errors (including the likely possibility that Scorponok and Hun-Grrr's graphs were switched) but overall, it feels like the previously-established norms were really beginning to skew here. z
Well even here you are clearly stating that the inconsistencies is what the issue is and really creates the problem about the numbers used and is why I've stated that I don't really see how they can really work to provide a proper comparison between each other. Too bad as if they had approached it differently, they could have taken an approach that would have. Oh well.
Is anybody here saying that the Tech Specs were perfect? NO. Are they a highly detailed explicit unambiguous calculation of every facet of a TF's varied abilities? Also, NO. Are the Tech Specs a holistic system with enough mechanical nuance that you could build a fully functional RPG based solely around them? Not really, although it has been done. However, are there strong consistencies at work in the early Tech Specs that indicate authorial intent and an internal rhyme and reason? YES. Are they just wholly arbitrary numbers randomly assigned to every character with no thought to how they relate to other characters? Definitively NOT. In conclusion, are they somehow meaningful to the characters and how they relate to each other? Unquestionably YES. I don't know why you don't see it. But rest assured, some of us who were paying attention back then do. z
Well, the important thing here appears to be that as long as you can come off as condescending and ignore the point I made, you win! Good for you. I was curious and open to discuss, already stated that I understood your point (and better than you actually do it appears), even brought up that you admitted to most of what I was stating about the inconsistencies and somehow "I" am the one that doesn't get it".. yeah.. ok...anyways now I'm not even interested in pursuing this, it's just repetitive now. Have a good one!
I actually really liked the implementation of tech specs for the fallen toy , There was another tf toyline where they used 10+ as a spec for combiners (I can't really remember the toyline)
@Rodimus Primal So many thanks for the interview plus posting that scan of Budiansky's techspec design. Not only do I love his run on the Marvel comics (my G1), I also loved reading those profiles he wrote. Such an annoyance back then that a) the ealy tech spec cards didn't include the bio's due to having to contain four languages, and b) the Marvel Universe Profile books weren't published locally: only those included in the comics and that wasn't all of them. I've been hoping for years for a reprint, but no. Fortunately, they can be read on-line, but still... @SMOG Great post and I'm on the same page as you. Those tech spec rating, I looked at them and they were important to me. I will admit sometimes having to take a second look in surprise: tiny Gears was stronger than huge Jetfire. But I loved them, accepted them and they made sense to me. In regards to speed, I've also always considered this an average of the speed in all modes. If it was just altmode speed then Megatron and Soundwave should be a speed of 0, being immobile objects. In case of Omega Supreme, that would be the average of a rocket, a tank, a base and a large robot. The rocket is fast, but the rest are not. The robot can take big steps, but his movements in robot mode have always been slow.
Now, hold on here. Who's being condescending here? Who's ignoring the other person's points? Is it actually me? I'm not sure that's a fair and accurate assessment of what's happening here. Up front, I said that if you actually wanted to, we could jump into the deep-end of nerdy nitty-gritty... and I've done that, completely earnestly and in good spirits. I've freely highlighted and acknowledged where there are inconsistencies and imperfections in the Tech Specs, while also emphasizing the evidence of guiding frameworks that make them valid tools for viewing characters in relation to each other in spite of the flaws. I'm not sure why you think I'm being condescending. I'm simply disagreeing with you on this, which is not the same thing. I think you've flat-out stated yourself that you don't see any indication of internal consistency in the Tech Specs... so I'm only acknowledging your own words on the matter when I said "you don't see it". Also, by insisting that those consistencies are not there, the implication is that people like me are simply deluding ourselves into seeing something that doesn't exist, and that it's meaningless because it's all "made up". Additionally, you "understand my point better than I do." Hm... do you think just maybe, that might seem a bit condescending as well? If I've misunderstood you, I'm happy to make things right. You seem to be annoyed that I've ignored the point that you've made. I've honestly tried to address all of your points. Can you clarify what point I've ignored? z
Exactly, yeah! Rumble's and Frenzy's high FIREPOWER 9 to me always seemed a likely reflection of the power of their weapons - including their special abilities like sonic attacks and earthquake generation. This -seems- like the logic that Budiansky applied, but admittedly the term "Firepower" gets a little vague in that case. Also... 9 is still surprisingly high. The cassettes were often treated like pets or jokes on the cartoon, but in the original bio work, it's clear that they were intended to be serious threats. We already discussed Ravage's 1-megaton bombs. Laserbeak also has a FIREPOWER 8... which makes sense, since his high-powered lasers are emphasized in his bio. Buzzsaw has much lower FRP (4). This may be partly because he's more of a melee threat with his beak, but I guess his "mortar cannons" just don't pack a lot of punch. (what's a "mortar cannon" anyway? Is it a cannon that shoots mortars?) z
We only had 2 languages on our G1 packaging, but it was enough to cut out some of the details, sadly. When Marvel first published Transformers Universe on the newstands (yes, people used to get their comics from newstands!) I snatched up all 4 issues and read them to death... but the Tech Specs always felt like they were missing. It would have been interesting to have them all in one place back then, rather than having to read the backs of the boxes of every TF in the toy aisle and commit it to memory! I bought the TFU again when Marvel published it in trade paperback form, and never regretted it. That said, I don't refer to it much anymore, and sites like NTFA.net and botchthecrab.com are such amazing resources for this stuff. In the early days, I found it amusing that the strongest Autobots were often the minibots, though I think the sense of toy scale was not being taken as literally by Budiansky at the time... which explains why Jetfire isn't especially strong (his bio would have been written before the cartoon turned him into a towering giant). Even so, Jetfire's stats are a bit odd. I remember hearing a story that Hasbro had intended Jetfire to be the "leader" toy for 1985, but pivoted back to Optimus Prime. In that context, STRENGTH 6 feels a bit low -- lower than all the Seekers who have (7). It took me a while to make sense of this, but at this point I'm pretty sure Speed is supposed to represent "best speed"... in either mode, which makes sense if you're trying to record how quickly a character covers distance. It explains why all the sports cars have 7 speed, and the slower vehicles have 4-5... and guys who transform into immobile objects are just stuck with their robot mode walking speed. This is why Ravage is a bit quicker, and Laserbeak/Buzzsaw are so fast. I could see Megatron (4) at a sprint keeping pace with a slow truck like Trailbreaker (4)... but I guess poor Soundwave (2) is just not very athletic. Once I started seeing those types of consistencies, I became a lot more convinced that Omega Supreme's slow speed is just an oversight. His "plodding" speed in robot mode is called out in his bio, and it feels like his rocket was just not considered, otherwise it would match orbitals like Jetfire, Cosmos, and Blastoff. Another thing is that some things were basically invented by the cartoons, like Decepticons being able to fly in bot mode. Most "spacefaring" TFs were not imagined by Budiansky to travel at light speeds... they're only ever credited with being able to achieve orbit. Also, the idea that Omega Supreme could magically "teleport" his entire body to wherever his rocket landed is also a narrative shortcut invented by the cartoon. I suspect that Budiansky assumed that Omega would have to split his body to do stuff like that --- which might be why he's not credited with higher speed. When that bio was written, Omega's full body couldn't travel at rocket speeds, so basically the rocket mode was just a tool to launch satellites and stuff (probably). But that's just a theory... it could also just be that he forgot. z
Yeah, we got four languages: English, French, Dutch and Spanish so we got Function and Motto, and that was it. Later, starting with the movie or the -masters it was just Dutch and French, so by then we got a shortened bio. But on very few occassions there was a US release in the batch (Ironhide was one of those, and the only time I saw Ironhide) and I marvelled at the bio included on the techspec card. Also have those links as shortcuts and visit them often. But I seem to recall once reading about a book containing all the G1 techspecs, but not being interested at the time. Don't know if that really exists but if it does I would love to own it. Considering the early Marvel comics drew the minibots at the same size as the regular carbots (Huffer is even bigger than Ironhide), that could very likely be true. Except of course, Bumblebee, who even in the bio's is referred to as small, despite a VW Beetle being larger than several of the carbots altmodes and who wasn't drawn that small in early Marvel. Not sure about that having been a consideration. Jetfire was, however, made Autobot leader in the Dutch market. Can't remember the specifics, but either the name or the toy of Optimus was unavailable to Hasbro (or local seller Milton Bradley) and to still have the Autobot Leader be big and expensive, they went with Jetfire. There was a comic made with Jetfire, Roadbuster and Whirl fighting the Decepticons and Soundwave in the role of Shockwave, while in the regular comics Optimus was called Jetfire. (When Optimus was finally available the confusion didn't end, because while Jetfire and Megatron were "Leader of the..." Optimus was "Commander", so I remained convinced that Jetfire was the true Autobot leader and still on Cybertron, while Optimus was merely the ships commander, like Primal was in BW.) When re-reading the Marvel run in the last two years for the Marvel Read Along, I was reminded of all these things. And I honestly prefer them. All Decepticons flying just never sat right with me. Nor does space TFs being able to travel between stars. Much prefer what Budiansky intended. Although, as I wrote, I've always approached "speed" as a combination of alt and robotmode speed, I can see the merit in this reasoning. The more I consider it, I agree that it's even better. I like that idea and if I had had Omega in the 80's, I likely would've gone that way.[/quote]
Wow, French, Dutch, and Spanish? Where did you grow up?? Maybe one of the collector's guides that are out there? I mean, to get the total package, you really need the long bio + the Tech Specs. The little bios on the Tech Specs card are still too short. Plus the "lost bios" that weren't published anywhere for a long time (Ransack, Chopshop, Venom, Barrage, Roadbuster, Whirl, and a few other strays). They were published over at the Disciples of Boltax blog years ago, and they had some interesting details... like some great tidbits about Chopshop, and a note about how the insect legs on Ransack's arms are supposed to spin like buzzsaws. I was thinking of the early Marvel stuff too. Bumblebee was still small-ish, but nowhere near as small as he was usually depicted on the G1 cartoon. After the comics, the G1 toon seemed especially silly, with all those "mini" vehicles. Which is not to say that Marvel's artwork was exactly consistent of course. They had so many mediocre artists in that run, and only a few great ones. Wow, that is SUPER confusing. I heard it was similar in the Australian market. And of course, you can see that legacy in Jetfire's Tech Specs, because he has RANK 10 which is usually reserved for the big bosses... not turncoat Decepticons. I remember when 1986 rolled around, and Ultra Magnus and Galvatron hit the shelves well before the movie came out in theaters. It was like "who the heck are these guys, and why do they seem to look like Optimus and Megatron? What's a "City Commander"?" And then a friend said he'd just gotten a new toy, the new leader of the Autobots "Roadimus Prime". I flat-out did not believe him, because I thought "Roadimus Prime" sounded too dumb to be real. Little did I know it was actually worse! I think it's ultimately the conflict between quasi-realism, and just having some easy story tools. Budiansky was writing very much for a secret war being waged over the natural resources of Earth... but with so many episodes to fill, it was a whole lot easier to make Decepticons fly away at the end of each storyline, and to give TFs the capability to fly to other planets sometimes. Budiansky also changed things up sometimes, as I recall... I mean, his initial bios for Blaster and Ratbat certainly do not do justice to the characterization he eventually gave them in the comics. Cool! I didn't mean to impose my interpretation over yours, but I definitely came around to that way of thinking gradually after looking at a lot of Specs. It just clicked. I remember on the old Transformers MUSH (online text RPG) of the 1990s, they used the Tech Spec scores as the game stats for the characters, and assigned Speed as the overall agility stat, which never made much sense to me. z
oh man, I spent a LOT of time on the (ironically named ) 2005 MUSH… That’s where I met @Monzo when he was Matthew Sharp. Those were the days…
I'm not sure if I ever played on TF2005. I was SMOG (obviously) on the other MUSH... TF2 I think it was called? The one set on Earth, pre-Movie era. z
Eventually I helped start TF Genesis where it was pre-earth but had all of the G1 characters available. I had fun coding Fort Max and his double headmaster self. I had separate “objects” and macros for Cerebros, Galen, and Gasket and Grommet/Cog.. I had to quit because I spent so much time on it it was hurting my marriage. The point is, it was all based on Bob’s bios and tech specs. He did such a masterful job, it made it easy to build the characters..
IIRC, "10+" first showed up on the Beast Wars Transmetals characters, to highlight their boosted capabilities. After that, I believe it continued to appear intermittently on other "super" characters, like some Combiners where applicable.
Agreed! The bios were especially rich. I can believe how time-consuming it was. I think I remember people talking about TF Genesis starting up, but wasn't involved. I spent a year playing on TF2 a lot with some friends, but I knew some admins IRL and it basically took over their lives on a dysfunctional level. I once had to physically fistfight with a friend to get him away from the computer to come join a holiday gathering. # Just90sShit z
