|
Post by DavidGPeterson on May 7, 2016 11:37:11 GMT -5
Has anyone figured this stuff out yet? I've made considerable headway on most of the puzzles but can't seem to solve Short & Sweet, figure out the significance of Perplexle and haven't even tried decoding the map on the back page. Any help is appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by Todd on May 7, 2016 13:30:50 GMT -5
Hello, David, and welcome.
If you create an account, you'll find an entire board dedicated to this issue. Many puzzles have been solved, and some still remain perplexing. Accounts here are free.
I hope you're enjoying Curios & Conundrums, and hope you find the threads in the Member's Area useful.
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Mermaid on Aug 21, 2016 7:45:36 GMT -5
Regarding Volume Three, I just put down Issue One, and am sad to say I was disappointed in its contents, mainly the writing and subject matter. I found several references to a "new regime" at C&C, and unfortunately it only serves to make me fondly remember the old one.
I find the writing in the new volume much less mysterious and engaging than in past volumes, and almost as if the entire publication has been "dumbed down." There is far too much sing-songish onomatopoeia, a plethora of silly addresses like "my poppets," "my dear sweet peas" and "my pretty petals," as well as trying to mix modern slang (like "ugh")into past polite society. There are too many truly outlandish articles that take the level of entertainment from a suspension of disbelief to one of more than obvious and almost juvenile fiction--inserting fictional characters like Lestat de Lioncourt into dinner parties, showcasing a discussion with Death (by G. Reaper--really?) and interviewing Joan of Arc as if she is alive and well in the modern day.
I love MPC, and am proud to be a member--and I really wanted to embrace this new regime of writers, but sadly all it's done so far is make me long for the far more engaging intelligentsia of the former staff.
Regards,
Lia
|
|
|
Post by helenahandbasket on Aug 21, 2016 8:29:34 GMT -5
You might want to do 3.2 before issuing your final indictment
|
|
|
Post by Todd on Aug 21, 2016 8:32:13 GMT -5
You're not alone in your lament on the change of tone of the issues. I, for one, also find Madame Morpheme an excruciating read. On the other hand, I know of some who rather enjoy it, as well.
On a positive note, the puzzles have continued to grow in number and complexity. What, in previous volumes, occasionally seemed to have been made up as we went along, this volume seems to be very well planned on the puzzle front.
Here's hoping that volume 4 finds the balance between the tone, story, and puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Mermaid on Sept 7, 2016 14:40:31 GMT -5
You might want to do 3.2 before issuing your final indictment Unfortunately I found 3.2 only a little better than 3.1, and having just received 3.3, a quick once over and cursory inventory doesn't give me much hope. It looks to be more of the same as what I mentioned previously. At least there are some nice puzzles, and all those fun "extras" that come with the issue. Like Todd, I'm definitely looking forward to Volume 4 in the hope that the new staff are able to hit upon a happy medium between volumes 1 and 2, and Volume 3. Cheers! Lia
|
|
|
Post by hollyhemlock on Nov 26, 2016 13:47:00 GMT -5
Regarding Volume Three, I just put down Issue One, and am sad to say I was disappointed in its contents, mainly the writing and subject matter. I found several references to a "new regime" at C&C, and unfortunately it only serves to make me fondly remember the old one. I find the writing in the new volume much less mysterious and engaging than in past volumes, and almost as if the entire publication has been "dumbed down." There is far too much sing-songish onomatopoeia, a plethora of silly addresses like "my poppets," "my dear sweet peas" and "my pretty petals," as well as trying to mix modern slang (like "ugh")into past polite society. There are too many truly outlandish articles that take the level of entertainment from a suspension of disbelief to one of more than obvious and almost juvenile fiction--inserting fictional characters like Lestat de Lioncourt into dinner parties, showcasing a discussion with Death (by G. Reaper--really?) and interviewing Joan of Arc as if she is alive and well in the modern day. I love MPC, and am proud to be a member--and I really wanted to embrace this new regime of writers, but sadly all it's done so far is make me long for the far more engaging intelligentsia of the former staff. Regards, Lia I know the OP is not registered, but I am so thankful s/he wrote this-- perfectly describes my feelings as well. This baby talk has me about to cancel my sub.
|
|
|
Post by Beckett on Nov 26, 2016 19:14:18 GMT -5
I seem to recall the Company taking a survey about Curios & Conundrums between issues two and three, if memory serves. Who knows - there might be shifts and changes still ahead of us. I will stick to my subscription, the Curios and the riddles alone are worth their price alone, and not all of the articles are quite so grating. If we see a return to the old tone, or a shift in tone for the better at all, I will be exuberant.
|
|