The Octaguide

[Grey Hunter Ydalir]

More a guide to what they see as important in IA writing and development, but yeah. Plus any particular tricks they've picked up individually - I don't think I've seen anyone else suggest reading an IA aloud, for example, so that sort of thing.

 

Actually that's something I used to advise all the time and even started my own thread in which I asked people to give their own advice on how to avoid making mistakes when writing a DIY IA, and then listed my own. It's probably off galivanting around one of the latter pages of the archive by now.

 

Edit: Not to blow my own horn or anything......

 

The reason it hasn't been said of late is that I haven't noticed the same mistakes in IA's posted here recently that are needed to prompt me to give that particular nugget of wisdom.

 

A more recent trend is better grammar but more forgetting Telveryon's guide that advised 'less awesome and more cool', to paraphrase and it's rather disconcerting to be honest. I can more easily deal with bad grammar, but the overabundance of 'mychapterisawesome' just annoys the living hell out of me.

[Octavulg]

Actually that's something I used to advise all the time and even started my own thread in which I asked people to give their own advice on how to avoid making mistakes when writing a DIY IA, and then listed my own. It's probably off galivanting around one of the latter pages of the archive by now.

 

Three thousand new words, and you reply to the weeks-old ones. ^_^

 

A more recent trend is better grammar but more forgetting Telveryon's guide that advised 'less awesome and more cool', to paraphrase and it's rather disconcerting to be honest. I can more easily deal with bad grammar, but the overabundance of 'mychapterisawesome' just annoys the living hell out of me.

 

Speaking personally, I find people not agreeing with me irksome (dammit, I'm right EDIT: That's a JOKE, people. A JOKE. :TIDE). On pretty much any subject.

 

But people disagreeing with me about anything of any regard to writing when they make basic mistakes in spelling and grammar...

 

Let's just say folk aren't allowed opinions about architecture until they can be trusted to stack two wooden blocks and leave it here...:P

[voi shet magir]

New section is great. It could stand on its own, even.

 

I wish you would rethink the homeworld section though. It is very cheap to say that squid chapter is from squid world so they think of themselves as a giant squid and have to kill squid all the time. You are not saying that, but still do not make a clear argument for moving away from the Fenris, Nocturne, or Chogoris model. Many homeworlds were involved in the Primarch's personal narrative, like Caliban, Kor-Phaeron-Land, Macragge, Chemos, and as you convincingly cite, Nostromo. However, those are about the Primarchs' development - not only as individuals distinct from their legions, but before they even lead legions. Captain DIY is always part of a chapter, and space marines do not have continuity between childhood development and being marines. I might not mind some novice or squad member being stranded as the only survivor of whatever army, being rescued and centuries later building a new chapter based on whatever he did to survive in extraordinary circumstances. You do not say that, however, and it makes the founding-cadre story even longer, an idea which I find needlessly complicating already.

 

The remaining Legion homeworlds (wait, it's culchis isn't it? I will change that shortly) mostly function as places for their Primarchs to be found on, since not everybody can be Dorn or Alpharius, although the whole point of Alpha Legion is that they have no homeworld. Baal does not even have any relationship to the Chapter it hosts, except a contrasting one.

 

Of the three post-first founding official IAs, the Templars have no homeworld, the Crimson Fists' is not important except it happened to be where their castle got blown up, and the Blood Ravens do not talk about theirs.

[Ecritter]

Sadly I find it best to ignore 90% of what Octavulg has to say, I feel life is easier that way. I have specific examples of course, but I'm sure (with reasonable certainty) that he does really care anyway.

 

In the end he is a help, I'll give him that much.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Sadly I find it best to ignore 90% of what Octavulg has to say, I feel life is easier that way.

 

All well and good, but if you're going to make a statement like that then you need to justify it.

[Ecritter]

Sadly I find it best to ignore 90% of what Octavulg has to say, I feel life is easier that way.

 

All well and good, but if you're going to make a statement like that then you need to justify it.

 

Okay, you want an example (even though I told you he'd didn't really care), fine.

 

When I was working on my White Hand Chapter, I was told I had to change the name cause chapters weren't named in that way. What would people call them? Fact is several GW chapters are named in the exact same way. Genesis Chapter and Aurora Chapter just to name a couple. I relented, to my regret.

 

Another, why didn't they kill the SMs (from Word Bearers Legion) even though they'd just helped defeat the heresy? It's standard policy to kill SMs from traitor legions on site. Fact is there was no precedent for this, before the Horus Heresy no primarch or legion had ever turned to chaos against the Imperium, so its highly unlikely a procedure was in place for when they did. Again I relented to my regret.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++

 

All I'm saying is stick to your guns, just because someone claims to know everything ... doesn't mean they do. History has several example to that.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Another, why didn't they kill the SMs (from Word Bearers Legion) even though they'd just helped defeat the heresy? It's standard policy to kill SMs from traitor legions on site. Fact is there was no precedent for this, before the Horus Heresy no primarch or legion had ever turned to chaos against the Imperium, so its highly unlikely a procedure was in place for when they did.

 

Lack of precedent does not mean lack of logic.

[Ecritter]

Another, why didn't they kill the SMs (from Word Bearers Legion) even though they'd just helped defeat the heresy? It's standard policy to kill SMs from traitor legions on site. Fact is there was no precedent for this, before the Horus Heresy no primarch or legion had ever turned to chaos against the Imperium, so its highly unlikely a procedure was in place for when they did.

 

Lack of precedent does not mean lack of logic.

 

What logic? We were told for years that the Soviet Union was evil ... so in turn all Russians were evil. Was that true and logical, of course not.

 

You forget the fact that right at the end of the heresy, practically no one knew exactly what had happened. It would have taken months or years to really understand the causes and results of the heresy. It would have taken even longer to disciminate all that data to the masses.

 

++++++++++++===

 

But we're not here to discuss my opinions, I was just giving examples to explain my first comment. So back to the madness that is Octavulg.

[Octavulg]

When I was working on my White Hand Chapter, I was told I had to change the name cause chapters weren't named in that way. What would people call them? Fact is several GW chapters are named in the exact same way. Genesis Chapter and Aurora Chapter just to name a couple. I relented, to my regret.

 

What I said:

White Hands chapter would work a bit better. Fits with Iron Hands and all that kinda scheme.

 

Plus, that way an individual marine is a White Hand, instead of a marine of the White Hand Chapter.

 

I said that it would be easier to talk about and more conventional. Not that you couldn't name a chapter that.

 

Furthermore, you changed the name of the chapter to "The White Hand", which did absolutely nothing in that direction. I suggested the White HandS, because then an individual marine is "a White Hand" instead of "a marine of the White Hand Chapter". Which I had explained twice at that point, and which you evidently still didn't get. When you changed the name, I assumed that you had decided you knew better and had done something you liked instead of what was suggested. It would hardly have been the first time that happened.

 

Another, why didn't they kill the SMs (from Word Bearers Legion) even though they'd just helped defeat the heresy? It's standard policy to kill SMs from traitor legions on site. Fact is there was no precedent for this, before the Horus Heresy no primarch or legion had ever turned to chaos against the Imperium, so its highly unlikely a procedure was in place for when they did. Again I relented to my regret.

 

Again, I did not say that. I said simply that the Imperium'd execute them rather than imprisoning them. I said nothing about standard Imperial policies - I addressed this occurance, specifically, and later asked for an explanation of why they would survive. Which you still haven't provided, by the way. Indeed, I offered an argument for why they would not let such people survive.

 

What logic? We were told for years that the Soviet Union was evil ... so in turn all Russians were evil. Was that true and logical, of course not.

 

No. But that would pass for logic in the Imperium. Furthermore, that was not the logic I used.

 

Why imprison them conventionally? Far easier to just drop 'em on a marginally habitable world and leave them.

 

Or even just execute them. Imprisonment is resource-intensive in a way las-bolts to the back of the skull never will be.

 

Unless they're used as slave labor or something.

 

Imperial Guard Penal Legions - prisoners serve the Emperor. Dumping people on a planet consumes resources, time, and a planet. Putting them in facilities on a planet consumes more. Killing them consumes less of all those things, and provides valuable fertilizer for His Imperial Majesty's loyal agri-worlds. You still have not explained why the Imperium would bother letting these people survive, and if they did why they would not put them to work.

 

Also, I notice you still have them building a cathedral on Terra after the Emperor decrees that the Word Bearers are not to worship him and are to get on with the conquering.

 

You forget the fact that right at the end of the heresy, practically no one knew exactly what had happened. It would have taken months or years to really understand the causes and results of the heresy. It would have taken even longer to disciminate all that data to the masses.

 

So what? They'd had these prisoners since when the Heresy immediately began - plenty of time to decide what to do with them. The masses would not make this decision. The important decision-makers of the Imperium would.

 

But we're not here to discuss my opinions, I was just giving examples to explain my first comment. So back to the madness that is Octavulg.

 

Oh, we're here to discuss your opinions now. You could learn a lot from this guide, if you would bother to read it or thought you had anything to learn from it. But, I suspect, you will not do the first, and I know how you feel about the second.

 

I do not enjoy working with you, ecritter. I do it because I am something of a professional and somewhat stubborn, but I find it an unpleasant experience.

 

You either do not read replies to your work carefully, or you do not comprehend what is in them.

 

You seem convinced that the White Hand Chapter is a brilliant example of DIY craftsmanship that lacks flaws, and that any flaws which do exist are the fault of others, not yourself. You also seem convinced that the idea of loyalist traitors was original, and that you have executed it better than any who came before.

 

Your primary goal on this forum seems to be the development of your own work above all else. You also seem to think that helping you develop your work should be the primary goal of everyone else.

 

You continually make spelling and grammar errors, and confuse and misuse words.

 

You do not seem to approve of criticism of your work, reacting sullenly to it and ignoring as much of it as possible until it becomes clear you have to do something, at which point you do the minimum necessary. You seem to be uncomfortable with the whole idea of other people telling you things could be better if they were different, or with the idea that other people might have read something you have not.

 

I must ask: why are you here? A website would meet your needs much better than a forum. No one would be nagging at you about perceived problems with reasoning, or fluff, or spelling.

 

I must also ask: Did you read the guide? Did you think about it before you posted here?

 

Or did you decide you knew best?

 

I resent you showing up here, claiming that 90% of what I say is pointless, and not even having the courtesy to point out examples from the guide that are such. Nor do I appreciate you saying I said things I did not say. I worked hard on this guide, and will continue to. I worked hard on your chapter, for all the good it did me. I take pride in what I do here.

 

If you don't think that has anything to offer, that is your business. But I would appreciate it if you approached my work with the amount of respect with which I approached yours. I read your work before I commented on it, I made no sweeping general attacks upon you, and I continually provided accurate explanation of my points. I would appreciate the same courtesy.

[Wolfbiter]

Another, why didn't they kill the SMs (from Word Bearers Legion) even though they'd just helped defeat the heresy? It's standard policy to kill SMs from traitor legions on site. Fact is there was no precedent for this, before the Horus Heresy no primarch or legion had ever turned to chaos against the Imperium, so its highly unlikely a procedure was in place for when they did.

 

Lack of precedent does not mean lack of logic.

 

What logic? We were told for years that the Soviet Union was evil ... so in turn all Russians were evil. Was that true and logical, of course not.

 

You forget the fact that right at the end of the heresy, practically no one knew exactly what had happened. It would have taken months or years to really understand the causes and results of the heresy. It would have taken even longer to disciminate all that data to the masses.

 

++++++++++++===

 

But we're not here to discuss my opinions, I was just giving examples to explain my first comment. So back to the madness that is Octavulg.

 

 

I disagree with your comments strongly, eCritter, and especially your recommendation to ignore most of the guide above.

 

Octavulg's criticism is very, um, sharp. He doesn't pull punches if he doesn't like something. But he also explains clearly why, and I generally find his reasons are sound. And he doesn't pick on things just for the sake of picking on them. He backs up what he says. Even if its a personal preference, he prefaces that by saying, "My personal preference is X because..."

 

When I was first writing the Astral Hawks, Oct hit several points in my IA hard. I thought he was ripping my writing to shreds, and didn't like what I heard and told him so. But after I talked to him by PM a bit, and took a look at what he said, I found my IA was significantly improved by his input. And today I'm pretty darned proud of it.

 

If you have a a confusing, unusual or questionable idea for an IA, people will call you on it. You're going to have to have a strong justification, and I think Oct really strives to make people look hard at what they write and work to make it better.

 

When I read IAs, there is nothing that breaks suspension of disbelief more than when the author blatantly contradicts established background or employs an overused or clumsy cliche. I'd rather have someone call me out on that so I can correct it rather than publish a subpar IA.

 

Think of Octavulg as the drill sergeant of the Liber. He's not here to be liked. (I'm the nice one when it comes to IA critiques). His purpose is to put your IA through the wringer. But I believe his criticisms come from a genuine motivation to make IAs better, not from inherent snarkiness.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Think of Octavulg as the drill sergeant of the Liber. He's not here to be liked.

 

Thats the only bit I disagree with as what has popularity got to do with someone trying to be helpful?

 

Octavulg has more than one Chapter in the Librarium, IIRC, so kind of knows what he's talking about no matter the "tone" used when criticising.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

What logic? We were told for years that the Soviet Union was evil ... so in turn all Russians were evil. Was that true and logical, of course not.

 

Bad example. Go and read The Gulag Archipelago. The policymakers saying that may not have known what they were going on about (and so couldn't formulate a logical argument), but that didn't do anything to change what was actually going on in there.

 

You forget the fact that right at the end of the heresy, practically no one knew exactly what had happened.

 

The people that mattered knew. Garro & Co. had rolled up and told them so.

[Octavulg]

Thats the only bit I disagree with as what has popularity got to do with someone trying to be helpful?

 

One school of thought has it that pleasant, gentle, popular criticism is more likely to be effective.

 

I myself am from the short, slightly sarcastic, but hopefully well-explained shock school of thought.

 

Octavulg has more than one Chapter in the Librarium, IIRC, so kind of knows what he's talking about no matter the "tone" used when criticising.

 

Nope. Only one. And they only went in a few months ago.

 

Then again, my favorite Chapter is probably flintlocklaser's Steel Ghosts, and they're not in the Librarium at all.

 

As I've said before - the Librarium is a minimum standard, not the be-all and end-all of IA writing. You can be very good and not in it (if only because you're not done). Standards have changed over time and with various Lexicanii. Getting in is an accomplishment - it doesn't mean you're better than everyone who isn't in there. Nor does not being in it mean you're worse.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

I like to think I'm in the camp of "very good at other things, but not IA's" :P

[Wolfbiter]

Think of Octavulg as the drill sergeant of the Liber. He's not here to be liked.

 

Thats the only bit I disagree with as what has popularity got to do with someone trying to be helpful?

 

Octavulg has more than one Chapter in the Librarium, IIRC, so kind of knows what he's talking about no matter the "tone" used when criticising.

 

Clarification: I was responding to persons criticizing Octavulg's tone, or who are being dismissive of his guide. He doesn't sugarcoat his comments, but I think they ARE constructive, and he presents reasons to back up what he says.

 

I was not saying "Octavulg needs to be less sarcastic." It would take away the Essence of Octavulg. <_< If my comment was unclear, I apologize for the confusion.

[Ace Debonair]

Sadly I find it best to ignore 90% of what Octavulg has to say, I feel life is easier that way. I have specific examples of course, but I'm sure (with reasonable certainty) that he does really care anyway.

 

In the end he is a help, I'll give him that much.

 

Steady on! <_<

If someone said they'd prefer to ignore 90% of what you say, how would you react?

 

 

 

Back on topic, that guide is pretty darn hefty now - another good reason I don't plan on doing one!

But at the start, you have this:

Letters and replies to the effect that I am not the boss of you so you don't have to listen to any of this will be dissected for logical inconsistencies and replied to with corrected grammar and spelling.

And the bolded part is also one of the sub-titles to one of your sections. It just seemed odd to see it twice, so I thought I'd bring it up in case it was unintentional.

 

Also in the "overgilding the lily" section there's a 'd' missing off one of the 'and's.

 

 

And that was it for mistakes and oddities I detected - this is very well written, and very informative!

It's certainly more than 10% useful. :wub:

[Octavulg]

And the bolded part is also one of the sub-titles to one of your sections. It just seemed odd to see it twice, so I thought I'd bring it up in case it was unintentional.

 

I like the phrase. :) A lot. :D

 

Also in the "overgilding the lily" section there's a 'd' missing off one of the 'and's.

 

:cuss

 

And that was it for mistakes and oddities I detected - this is very well written, and very informative!

It's certainly more than 10% useful. tongue.gif

 

Thank you kindly. :) It'll likely be growing again in a month or two.

[Ecritter]

I DID read the guide and as I said it was helpful.

 

I DID NOT suggest anyone ignore Octavulg, I simply said I did.

 

I find him condecending and arrogant. As ex-military, I have had my share of drill sergeants ... he is not one.

 

I go back to my original statement. I CHOOSE to ignore 90% of what he says, I DO NOT suggest others do the same. I DID find his guide helpful for the most part, once I ignored all the arrogance woven within it.

[Grey Hunter Ydalir]

greasy and oily Liberites

 

...

 

A good example is Octavulg himself. While he can be quite abraisive and opinionated and perhaps sometimes a little concieted (no offense intended, we've had this discussion before) he is generally right on the money and I value his opinion no matter how he gets it across. While we may heartily disagree on some points and have and do argue on certain subjects. He is neither Oily nor Greasy I'd say, annoying sometimes, perhaps, but I think you've gone and chosen the wrong terms to classify us with.

 

I'll quote myself here I think, I don't often get the chance to do that either. :lol:

Yes good old Octavulg can be more than a little annoying in how he goes about giving his opinion, but that doesn't make it invalid because of the tone in which it is given.

 

I find him condecending and arrogant. As ex-military, I have had my share of drill sergeants ... he is not one.

 

It was a comparative metaphor used to differentiate his method of giving advice to the standard fare. Not to be taken literally.

 

Yes he can be condescending and arrogant at times, but you shouldn't get so worked up consistently over something said over a web-forum.

 

I DID NOT suggest anyone ignore Octavulg, I simply said I did.

 

By stating your opinion you are implying that other people should take into account what you say, and if what you are saying is that you tend to ignore ninety percent of what Octavulg says then you are implying that others should take your opinion into account when they read the guide.

 

If you had not meant to imply such a thing you would have simply said something less offensive, "I tend to take Octavulg's opinion with a pinch of salt." Which in reality is how you take all criticism when it is aimed at a key point of your article.

 

You say he is arrogant and condescending? So is giving yourself subtitle of 'the wise old man'. Octavulg and most of the people jumping to his defense at your remarks (including myself) have been here a lot longer than you. This is a web-forum, wisdom is not based on actual real-world age, nor your own inflated opinion of yourself, so much as it is on the quality of your work and your ability to help others.

 

He may be abraisive but the quality of his advice is far above-par and that is what counts. Everyone initially seems to have a problem with blunt advice and when I was new here I was fairly aggressive in my defense of my own chapter from such sharp remarks of the type that Octavulg and a few others who have since left our illustrious ranks used to give.

 

You get used to it and you learn to see the truth in his words. Once you stop bickering and actually listening to what he has to say and responding as such he actually tends to be a lot more amicable.

 

Everyone has something to contribute here in the Liber. If you do have a problem with the way someone acts posting in their thread, especially one of this nature, is not the correct way to go about altering that. It's more of a code of curtosy, you might not like the man but at least give him the same level of respect that he has obviously afforded you in the past. He might not always be likeable, but you have to respect his opinion, as you do everyone elses.

 

We communicate via a text-based internet medium and the medium itself necessitates certain codes of conduct. One of those rules is giving everyone a fair go. This is not a typical message board, flaming someone elses thread (no matter how mature or intellectually you go about it) is not appreciated.

 

To put it concisely and to stop me rambling on and on and on:

 

You have something to offer the forum Ecritter, so does Octavulg no matter what you may think of him.

[Ace Debonair]

You have something to offer the forum Ecritter, so does Octavulg no matter what you may think of him.

 

Nice little summary of the last few posts, really, and ties in with the part of the guide that says all opinions are valid.

 

Rather than debating the nature of the author, perhaps we ought to keep our discussion to his work?

 

It'll save the moderators from warning everyone again and also set a good example for everyone else.

[Ferrata]

You guys cannot be trusted. I disappear for a weekend a look what happens. First, even if you ignore 90% of what Octavulg says, he writes that much that the remaining 10% is more than most people offer ;)

 

Now, Ecritter do not come into a thread and post one or two lines that add nothing to the topic. Coming in and saying the tone is bad is fine, offer ways to improve it. Coming in and saying you disagree with a certain point is fine, as long as you explain it. It is not okay, however to come into a thread a tell everyone to ignore it the post simply due to the author.

 

Everyone else, I'm quite happy for you all to defend people who you think have been mistreated, but Octavulg can handle himself (jokes aside) and can you guys not make yourselves look like a lynch mob - you leaving mud all over the place :D

[Captain Juan Juarez]

....can you guys not make yourselves look like a lynch mob...

 

Hides flaming brand and noose

[Grey Hunter Ydalir]

I suppose a belated "stacks on!" wouldn't be appreciated at this stage would it? :D

 

Often. People read IAs in order, and if you mention things without explanation, people will start to think they've missed something, and go looking for it in the bit they've already read. If they don't find it, they're not going to be happy. Likewise, explain things well - do not describe a battle against Orks and then mention "and then the mountain which they'd been fighting next to this whole time fell on their heads". People will wonder why this mountain wasn't mentioned before.

 

This is very relevant especially in a few recent arrivals in the Liber. People are seriously forgetting to qualify their work for the reader, that we can't read their minds. I know this is older work but I just thought I should point it out once more for posterity.

 

Understand what the Codex is and isn't

 

It also might well be totally redundant, but not everyone has a clear idea or concept of what a contemporary military text is to compare to the Codex Astartes.

 

Perhaps a line or two comparing it to say Sun Tzu's The Art of War would help? Most 40kers are familliar with the military and its facets, but not everyone knows what texts you are likely to study during Officer Training.

 

 

In closing perhaps you could add something on the particulars of the ages of potential aspirants for becoming a marine? It is so annoyingly common for a new IA to pop up with grown men being inducted into a chapter left right and center.

[Octavulg]

This is very relevant especially in a few recent arrivals in the Liber. People are seriously forgetting to qualify their work for the reader, that we can't read their minds. I know this is older work but I just thought I should point it out once more for posterity.

 

The vast majority of the guide is common sense (as is this bit). And yet...:D

 

It also might well be totally redundant, but not everyone has a clear idea or concept of what a contemporary military text is to compare to the Codex Astartes.

 

The problem is that there isn't one. The recent quotes from it in the Codex: Space Marines make it seem like vague, ancient arcane knowledge, which hardly meshes well with the actual descriptions of its contents, which make it seem both more modern and far more insightful.

 

My old essay on diverging from the Codex is likely to be pressed into service in a future draft. It had a fairly thorough explanation of what the Codex was and (more importantly) how Chapters would look at it. At that point, the guide will likely acquire a table of contents. It may also end up split into sections at some point.

 

Perhaps a line or two comparing it to say Sun Tzu's The Art of War would help? Most 40kers are familliar with the military and its facets, but not everyone knows what texts you are likely to study during Officer Training.

 

I kind of did, didn't I? Perhaps not the way you mean. Explain a little further?

 

In closing perhaps you could add something on the particulars of the ages of potential aspirants for becoming a marine? It is so annoyingly common for a new IA to pop up with grown men being inducted into a chapter left right and center.

 

Actually, I kinda don't like the published numbers on aspirant ages. They don't make much sense if you think about them for any real length of time. I should do a thing on it.

[Marshal Rohr]

Understand what the Codex is and isn't

 

It also might well be totally redundant, but not everyone has a clear idea or concept of what a contemporary military text is to compare to the Codex Astartes.

 

Perhaps a line or two comparing it to say Sun Tzu's The Art of War would help? Most 40kers are familliar with the military and its facets, but not everyone knows what texts you are likely to study during Officer Training.

 

Sun-Tzu is a book on strategy and is fairly allegorical, given that most of what he says can be directly translated into modern military principles, you can tell the book was meant to be philosophical and not tactical. The Codex will have sections like that, but it will also be a field manual. The whole idea of Codex Adherence is a joke really, as unit SOPs supersede FMs EVERYTIME. If what you and your soldiers do works and keeps people alive, DONT CHANGE IT.

 

Anyone ever seen the Ranger Handbook? You can buy them at most surplus stores or online if your really into it. Personally, I hate it, but mostly because of over exposure/force feeding, but none can deny its effectiveness. ANYWAY, ( :P ) It is a good example of FM wrapped in a Textbook with a slight helping of anecdote and allegory.*

 

For our brethren in the UK, I think I have seen something similar that the SAS puts out, but I have never read it, and coincidentally would LOVE one if you wanna hook a brother up :D.