It Slices! It Dices!

I want to play in a game where...

* ...my character has to make moral decisions that haunt them on and off throughout the campaign.

* ...my character can get involved in serious relationships with other characters, NPC and PC alike.

* ...my character has an investment in becoming a hero, but doesn't start out one.

* ...my character has a responsibility to grow within the campaign.

* ...I start out as a player with some ability to define the world around my character.

* ...magic is real, but understanding how things work is important.

* ...decisions are made not just by the GM, but with definite group consensus.

* ...I as a player am encouraged to study to improve my knowledge of the world, genre, studies of my character, etc.

* ...I am inspired.

Is that too much to ask?

I want to run a game where all of that's possible!

In searching for a copy of 4th Edition Talislanta, our sweetie and I made the journey to four different gamer-friendly locations. This was my first jaunt to local places, so I was also kind of looking for "the" place, you know, the store where I would be spending my time and money...

It's not that I'm a big Talislanta fiend or anything, although I loved their "No Elves" advertising campaign. It's become kind of a joke in our household, though, with both my husband and I fighting over who will get and read a copy of it first...

The first location I had called earlier in the week, and they were "expecting a copy" so I had high hopes. It's a very large hobby shop with an emphasis on board games and card games, with a small miniatures aisle and some anime stuff. The gentlemen behind the counter (one older, one younger) were engaged in fairly animated conversation with some of the customers...mostly about CCGs, but I could forgive them that. The game I was looking for wasn't in, and I got the impression that the RPG side of things was handled by other employees. Their RPG selection was fairly extensive, although the prices weren't any bargain. They did have a good collection of used games at a reasonable mark-down... but nothing that really sparked my interest. They had the three tiers of shelves, with a lot of White Wolf up on top, where I would have been hard pressed to look through it if I had been interested...but I wasn't, so no big loss. [laugh] I expect I'll be back, especially if I get a job in the area.

The second location was mostly an Anime Haven. Lots of videos, figures, and CDs. Atmosphere was not hostile, but we were never asked if we could be helped, and I had a strong feeling that it was kind of a "regulars" place. Lots of people, some watching television. I suppose I'll be back because of my interest in the products, but not for their customer service. RPG selection was laughable.

We were on our way to a third place that I'd received a flyer for when we passed a place claiming to be "owned by," "run by," and "for" gamers. I investigated: it took a few minutes to determine that they actually had RPGs: it was like a convenience store for CCGers, complete with restaurant-style booths in backs populated by little boys.

"Hi, can I help you?"
"I'm looking for a copy of 4th Edition Talislanta."
"Um...what set is that from?"
"Talislanta?"
"Do you know what game it's from?"
"Talis..lanta?"
"Is it a card or a game?"
"It's a...game."
"Is it like a game-game, or a...?"
"It's a...book."
"Oh. Well, I'm just watching the store. If it's a book, it'll be on that case... if it's a game, it'll be over there on that case."
"Thanks."

They had 3eD&D, Star Wars, and a smattering of Shadowrun. Um, needless to say, no such luck there. I had that strange feeling, listening to the background noise, that I was speaking a language ALMOST but not quite the same... where I could recognize a lot of the terms, but not the context.

The fourth place, however, did what I hoped. I was greeted, I was told that a woman had bought their last copy, I was told they were looking to hold more roleplaying sessions (as opposed to tournaments and stuff) in their store, and I was encouraged to look around. I ended up buying a figurine there and giving them my information (alas, they didn't recognize my name) for future reference. Their gaming selection wasn't as extensive as the first store's, but they'll order things, and overall it was a much more comfortable place.

It's a beginning, I guess.

There's a certain amount of bigotry in gaming that confuses our sweetie. She's hung out with CCGers, AD&Ders, and the LintKing and I... and she's seen the inherent prejudices in each group. We discussed it tonight at dinner with some bemusement.

I had been fairly put out by the place that sold CCGs advertising itself so strongly to "gamers." The truth is that I'm clinging to outmoded vocabulary: I guess I should stick with "roleplayers" as both CCGers [collectible card games if you've been wondering] and computer game aficionados have claimed the "gamer" label.

There's a lot of folk who will prejudice themselves for or against folks who primarily play one sort of system...depending on the system's general reputation. [I make fun of RIFTS players. That doesn't mean I don't want to run a fabulous RIFTS game... but I'm um... different. Special.]

When I went up to the last of the four stores I went to on Saturday, I was sized-up. I know the look. The mental tape. "Ah, girl. Gamer. Looking for a specific book, looks conversant with the titles..." I don't know what particular meaning those traits had with him. I'm not going around being psychic.

Chatterbox came up to me after I said I had to get up to see if she was done cleaning up the living room, and she said, "You're not psychic." I blinked a few times. Apparently, I can't see through walls.

I'm being pigeonholed [boy, that sounds dirty. I hope it's the right term...] on-line for all the work I do on Amber. It's fair enough. I am running an Amber game. I work very hard to keep up my Amber stuff, and most of my friends are in the Amber community. It's just... When it comes down to it, I don't LIKE Amber all that much... Even though the campaign I'm designing is Amber-related, it's more habit than anything else.

At least part of it is that I can get people to play Amber... whereas I'm running into a lot of prejudices with other games. Unwritten rules, like women can't GM _Cyberpunk_. They can't be gritty enough... Women don't play high-math games. Women play soap opera styles...things like _Vampire_ or _Amber_...

[sigh]

Hey, any time you want to run a Cyberpunk game, I'm in!!!! It'd be a nice contrast for me, since I *am* that stereotypical girl gamer who prefers soap opera stuff like Amber or Vampire to you-bash-the-balrog.

True story: The last time we had a FTF Amber group here, the GM's girlfriend was a neophyte gamer. My raised-in-Shadow-but-not-new-to-Amber-by-now character was taking Rebecca's babe-in-the-woods character around the City, to get her acclimated. Naturally this involved a moderately detailed description of shopping. I was handling the description myself, since the GM had given me latitude to do so. The GM leaned over to my husband and said "You know, I could let them go on like this for the next hour, and they'd think I was a terrific GM..."

Just like that old article, right?

As a gamer, I belong to a fairly expensive hobby. The books are anywhere between $20 and $40 each, base-price. You can start to factor in the incidentals: my time and creative energy (for which I make my employers, when I'm employed, pay a minimum of $12/hour for), food and shelter costs (approximately $8/person per session food, shelter rolled into mortgage), and physical supplies including paper, dice, pencils, props, music, ink, website space, et cetera.

Gaming books rarely increase in value, so the point in keeping a "collection" is fairly negligible on that account.

It is also the cheapest entertainment on the planet.

You need to transmit, receive, and dream.

...and even the transmission is fairly optional, if you rely on solo scenarios.

One of the regular concerns amongst the gaming crowd is where the price of the hobby increases. There's been a fairly significant jump in the cost of sourcebooks, recently. This has affected my buying habits... no longer will I pick up a supplement despite it being unnecessary but, "for the collection." It means there's probably a lot of good work I'm passing over because I don't need another furry gaming book right now. I'm not running any furry games, and I've got a collection of rules for several different genres and levels of "realism," if I want it. I'm not picking up all of the pirate games I want...because I'm not running any pirates... and I'm certainly not picking up all the zombie stuff I'd like because, well, my sisters are already muttering about how they can smell my spicy brains.

There are a number of places that are starting to charge for gamer participation.

I don't mind paying a small fee for "snacks" when I'm playing at someone's business, or whatever helps defray the general cost.

I was given the shock of my life when at the first AmberCon NorthWest we met adult gamers who gave proper gratuities.

OK, that was a bit cynical. It wasn't the shock of my life, but it sure was a pleasant surprise. Most gamers I knew in my past gaming groups couldn't share a bag of chips, let alone contribute to a potluck environment. Most of them expected the GM to provide everything...gaming space, entertainment, information, props, sometimes even food and beverage. Regardless of the hours/days/years the GM had already put into the game.

No, I don't game with that kind of group anymore.

Now, do I think my game is good enough to charge folks for their participation? I'd like to think so, because I like to think I'm running a good game. I wouldn't, because I'm doing this for me. Would I pay someone to host my game on their server? Well, in some part I already do, but the payments also host everything from my wedding pictures to anything else of my vanity I might wish to promote publically.

Would I pay to play?

Take the prostitution model. Sex is cheap, sex is everywhere...but there are those in the oldest profession that make several hundred dollars a night. Part of it is the advertising: the "look," the "mystique" and "reputation." While I'd love to work something like the Born to Be Kings opener, my game's not a "perfect 10 figure." Part of it is the level of professionalism (or at least amenability to kink) it implies. (Do I ever want to be in a position where someone can say, "I'm paying you for it so you have to do what I want?")

Besides which, I'm married. ...and I'm married to a gamer. (Oh, and have I mentioned that the sweetie has been known to play as well?) So I can have sex AND gaming. [grin]

So, no. Not at this point... but if presented with something fabulous, I reserve the right (as always) to reconsider.

Gaming gets more expensive when you start to mix it with other hobbies. I have (recently) purchased a bunch of art supplies in order to do heraldic badges and family sheilds for a game I am in... and gaming was a big influence on the scanner I bought (for my company - legit'ly - but I bought a choicer model so I could 'play,' too.) When I get a digital camera, that'll be used mostly in a gaming (and family) environment.

You know what. I just realized this. I am beyond a gamer. I am a geek. (Horrors! Hide your chickens!)

Comments by Rikibeth on 2002 Jan 24

You are so right about gaming being both the cheapest hobby around and the most expensive. I have one FTF and several PBeMs. The FTF is a homegrown rule set, so it needs no sourcebooks; the PBeMs are Amber or Changeling, and I bought the main sourcebooks years ago, and feel no need to buy White Wolf supplements. I would be paying for net access whether or not I were involved in the PBeMs, and if we didn't have the FTF we'd just invent some other excuse to travel to visit our friends who play in it. So you could argue that my gaming is very nearly free...

until you got a look at the vintage flash gun tubes that I bid heavily for on eBay, because the FTF is in a Star Wars setting and I wanted my character's lightsaber; or the money I spent buying a videotape of "The Lion in Winter" before it came back into print because I consider it required viewing for new Amber players; or the out-of-print copies of "Swordspoint" that I regularly order for fellow gamers so they can read the "Lucy has five children! Five!" speech in context; or the copies of "American Bungalow" magazine I picked up because Julian's house in Arden looks like that; or the yards of black wool flannel waiting in my sewing room to be turned into Jedi regimentals... you get the idea.

I have gone beyond geek into the lands of "weenie."

Comments by jenn on 2002 Jan 24:

Wooo... I want to see the house for Julian..!

And my other expensive hobby pit is The Rennaisance Festival. I usually work there, and tend to wear the same clothes year after year, but the cool stuff that can be bought there and hardly anywhere else... it's painful.

To draw a fair generalization, gamers (like many other folk of fringe groups) tend to quotations. Not the kinds you find in front of speeches, but action quotes, things that recall humourous situations, or "signature" lines that draw an immediate connection to a shared moment, or the reference itself. It's an "in-joke" that is slightly less exclusive as it can often still be experienced (at least, like knowing the punchline and not the joke, in retrospect.)

An affirmation is a positive statement used to influence your (sub)conscious to assist you in manifesting change in your life.

The concept behind them relies on the suggestion that your reality is a direct result of your thinking, and thus, if you can change your thinking, your reality will change, and affirmations help charge your thinking towards a certain goal.

Most affirmations you'll run into are kind of dorky. "The past has no power over me." "I deserve the best, and I accept the best, now." "I express anger in appropriate ways so that peace and harmony are balanced at all times." Or even, "I am at one with the inner child in me."

Is there a connection between our quoting habits and affirmations?

When I'm saying, "Nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure," am I actually making an affirmation?

The problem with the dorky, "I am in control of my life," affirmations is that they don't speak to me. They're not in the language I use to communicate with myself. But I can ask myself, "What Would Damascus Do?" I can tell myself, "Sorry, I don't give my name out to ugly dungeon fodder like you."

There are a number of things someone can do to rub me the wrong way in a gaming situation, but one of the fastest is to tell me, "Oh, X [my character] is just like so-and-so from..."

I figure a source is just that: a foundation. It's my job to take my skill in sculpting that source to add the little details that change it from the simple fundamentals of someone else's creation into something I can use. It's not a question of mimicry (or imitation being a sincere form of flattery), but my pride in design, my art.

Don't get me wrong: there are characters out there I wish I had created. Their shadows may populate the worlds I create, but they are not my characters, and despite my fondness for fan fiction, if I'm using a character, it's my own character. It might have things in common with "so and so," for there are lasting archetypes that attract gamer minds, but I am not running someone "just like" so and so.

I was embarrassed to play V (from "V for Vendetta") in Bolthy's Luke & Merle Adventure. Or Granny Weatherwax (from TP's Discworld novels) in the Courts of Chaos Con 2001 LARP. And I thought I did fairly well in both cases.

I know there are a number of people who design both characters and plots around existing media. I'm a lot more generous in regards to plots (unless it's too obvious an imitation) but I try not to weave my characters to a common pattern. It's why I'm hesitant to use characters from game to game, unless I know that each new scenario will bring out new aspects of those characters.

After all, life is a learning experience, even for my imaginary lives. [grin]

There's nothing like magic.

There's something primal about shaping energy, about unleashing raw emotion-given-form against and towards, whether it be prayer, pleasure, or purposeful pain.

If magic is will, what better, more addictive feeling is

will fulfilled?

Not the mere finding of dreams that become reality, not wishes granted, but the sweat of desire leading to realization.

The metaphor of magic is that of being awake in a world of dreamers, but what draws the mage out is the idea of being able to shape dreams, to change the consensus reality.

The mage cannot remain constantly awake,
aware, on edge,

even the mage must, at some point, dream.

Mythology maintains that there is great power in sacrifice.

Especially the final sacrifice, the give-it-all and don't expect to make it, the "final strike," the end.

What of the one who survived that?

The one who gave everything, ready to be consumed into final oblivion?

Waking up, the next day, and realizing...
...it's all gone.

What of the old reflexes? Leaving behind the little tricks, the cantrips, finding out what must be done with broom and back-breaking work, rather than an incantation? What of the old deals, the promises for power, the contracts your elementals now can call on? What of the friends who needed your abilities, using you like a tool? What do you have to offer? Who are you now?

You were once a wizard. You once dreamed the dream.

A number of folk have linked to Open Letter to the Gaming Community.

It dawned on me then that as players, we’re in trouble. We will need to censor our gaming in public.

I've walked rounds for Security for various conventions with my father since, well, for as long as I can remember being able to walk. The one thing that has always been strong in my mind, something I've had many confrontations with, is that, "The pretend can appear as strong as the real, without investigation."

It's not quite a koan, not quite pithy enough for quoteability...but it's been a bit of a mantra for me. A reminder that a kid with a toy gun can appear menacing.

It's happened. I've seen it happen. The whole thing: S.W.A.T., handcuffs, flashing lights, shouting, and the tears. The kid was lucky; he wasn't shot.

How about the game of KILLER, where they left a note on the elevator that merely said, "Ka-Boom!"?

Don't do it. It's not funny, just like making jokes at the airport about explosives is Not Funny.

Yes, we can make nuisances of ourselves. This is nothing new.

In line at the bank, the LintKing and I discussed human sacrifice in gaming context. Did we make others uncomfortable? Probably. But so did the screaming kid, and the argument between the two biker chicks around the bend of the cattle spacers.

Do gamers get singled out? Yes, I suppose they must. If you give "gamers" a "look", a style, an iconoclastic idiom which makes them "suspicious," or suggests they might be "troublemakers."

The harassment I’d face in this scenario would be severe, at best. What the media would use for a headline would mortify me.

Are we freaks?

Should I live my life in fear because I have a hobby that most people don't understand? It's always a possibility that some aspect of my life will be placed in the public eye. Trust me, gaming is probably one of the least of my worries.

...if we want to avoid trouble we must face up to it.

I appreciate the warning. I know it was meant with the best of intentions.

If I want to avoid being hit by a bus, I should probably avoid walking down the sidewalk, too. Life isn't about avoiding trouble. Living means accepting that yeah, sometimes you get hit by a bus. If you're walking next to the bus station, the odds get a little higher. Living in this day and age, I might have more of a possibility of being singled out for my opinions, hobbies, or even personality... but I refuse to be ashamed of these things.

Asking me to "curb my behaviour" is really asking me to wear the mark of shame. Who am I to cater to fear?

So, my littlest sister, Chatterbox has become this excellent gamer. I mean, she's just about everything I could want in a player: pro-active, quotable, enthusiastic, fairly forgiving... it'd be nice if she had a slightly longer attention span, but that really is part of growing up.

Rainbow K, on the other hand, has made it Very Clear that she does not want the Chatterbox to play in The Phoenix Exodus Campaign. [Which would also be up to our GM, of course, but it's not even an option for Rainbow K.] Which means that I have Chatterbox begging me to run something on alternate days so she can "Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame."

(We did a five-week or so break over the holidays from the Exodus, and I heard from both the LintKing and Rainbow K fairly regularly that they wanted to "Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame." [sigh])

Chatterbox is going to need a little more schooling for PBeM. (Not so much as you might think, at least from some of the D&D PBeMs I lurked in my youth... [end snark])

Now, Rainbow K isn't allowed to game unless she's gotten her homework done. (The parents have been awfully lenient, but even so, we're going to have to put our feet down on this.) My suggestion was to use:

The Power of Sibling Rivalry.

I was going to recommend that if Rainbow K doesn't get her homework done, she'll have to stay at home and do it, and the Chatterbox can come in and play a character.

I'm not evil. I'm just...um... neutral. That's it.

My boss is an Everquest addict. (She claimed to have been up until 4am, given how happy she is with the PlayStation 2 version. This is not extreme for her current obsession.)

Last night she had to ask, "What's Dungeons & Dragons?"

In order to provide her with sufficient geek credit tonight, I answered a number of questions (including that one) about D&D, how it was played, giving her some sort of assurance that it was the precursor to Everquest... and how D&D was played on-line, to which she said,

"It's just like cybersex, except it's adventure, instead."

She went on to explain that instead of wearing cut-off blue jeans and a halter top, in cybersex you'd say you were wearing a pink teddy, and in D&D, you'd say you were a leather-clad elf hunting orcs.

(Hmmm. You might say that in B&D too, but...)

The last time I explained gaming to someone, it was after the huge Vampire LARP Orgy of, what, `98? The nudge-nudge-wink-winks were distracting.

Maybe I'm not quite explaining this right. [shaking head]

I was musing with the LintKing in regards to the horror genre. In a lot of cases, horror seems to reside in a few concepts, including:

1) mass

The "mass" concept is that of massive odds. Overwhelming use of zombies, for example. (As if you could have too many zombies!) Large numbers of bugs, birds, breadcrumbs...

2) motive

The "motive" concept includes such things as pure malicious instinct (killer beasts), homicidal impulse (the slasher flicks), the innate force of evil (supernatural) and the like.

3) mortality

The "mortality" concept is the idea that there is a firm resolution. That evil stays defeated, once it's down. That even if you have to put the zombie in the blender, it stops coming at you. It's the horror movie "catch," where the hand pushes out of the grave, or you hear the sound of the alien's pod opening just before the credits end.

With these three in consideration, I explained as how I subscribed to the first two in most of the horror campaigns I ran. The LintKing considered for a moment, and then said, "I think what you do is `epic horror.'"

(He says the sweetest things sometimes.)

I run games where such things can be defeated. More through sacrifice than sheer power, but I'm in it for my players to be heroes.

He pointed out that the problem with this is that most systems (TORG being an exception) don't handle epic horror. "You're regular people. You end up defeating these cultists, yeah, but then the cultists down the hall start trying to raise C'thulhu next week."

You know. It's like zombies. "Crunch all the brains you've got, we want more."

I was recently told that a guest appearance I was making wouldn't happen. Disappointed (but completely understanding that Real Life Has Priority), I read on to the line...

"I hope you didn't spend too much time working on a game that you won't be able to use now."

No time working on a game is ever wasted to me. If I can't run this one here, I'll scale it down for the next opportunity. I'll scavenge the best bits and work it into my PBeM. I'll keep the idea hot and ready for another chance to play it out. Hey, at the very least, I'll dissect it here or on my Amber blog, assuming I ever get enough time to resurrect that. I can write it up and submit it as an adventure for pay. I could print it out and fold it into paper airplanes and fly them at a major gaming convention. I could wrap presents in it. I could shred it and put it in as lining for the bird cage, I could...

...I could get very silly with this, but the point remains.

[reconstructed]

"That was one of the meanest things I've seen you do, making her clean up after the zombie like that."

"Really?" Meera beamed.

"That's why people become adventurers. So they don't have to clean up after themselves. If they wanted to clean up after their messes, they'd have stayed on the farm.

"Being an adventurer is kind of the equivalent of forming a garage band. `Hey, we're putting together a group... we've got a mage, a cleric...you want in?'"

Well, rather, it's not the strangers that are incomplete, but the strangeness of the unknown. To some extent there is a theory that we're all strangers to each other because our worlds and viewpoints have a limited ability to overlap. When it comes down to it, though, I think there are broad swaths of similarity.

These broad swaths are what artists (writers, musicians, poets, etc.) use to complete the picture they offer. I get different things out of a scene in a movie than the fellow chewing popcorn on my right, because my experiences are different. He's thinking, "This is a romantic love-story." I'm thinking, "This is a guy's rodomontade about his sexual prowess." It is this point that determines 'success' for many artists: whether or not the viewer appreciates the statement being made with their art. (There are some who deny any statement, although that is sometimes a statement in itself.)

The thought process here suggests to some extent that there is a level of success when the GM is no longer needed; when the PCs can walk around and interact with the world without him or her, you've reached the point where the message of the game environment has been translated efficaciously. At that point the GM's role has changed from a transmitter of the surroundings to choreographer of events, and finally, the director of motives, until, at the end, the GM is merely another actor in the role.

Of course, all the world's a stage, right?

[reposted from my Amber blog]

I mentioned the button Our Sweetie is getting with, "It's Good to Be the GM's Girlfriend." Because I've had indications that people associate that with favouritism, I wanted to set the record straight.

Hah!

Haha haha haha heh heh heh hoo hoo hoo hee hee...cough, gasp, wheeze!
Heh...chuckle...hoo... whoo.

Does anybody REALLY believe this?

No, truthfully, I've seen it in action. I was in a gaming group where the GM's girlfriend was given special circumstances. Nothing so blatant as miraculous escapes, or "cheating" (even as much as cheating is "spoiling the reality consensus" in a game), but there was definitely a level of opportunity given to her that was not accessible to anyone else.

When we say, "It's Good to Be the GM's Girlfriend," I mean that when you're around me, I have more opportunity to express my worldview to you. It's not that I'm going behind the players' backs ("Can you BELIEVE what Faolan and Bleys are up to?") or giving special privileges ("Oh, you want the equivalent of a 64-point Mold Destiny shadow? Sure... just nibble my ear.") Heck, bribery is encouraged...but the bribes I take are more things like, "I wrote up some more Morgenstern smut for you. Him and Fiona...you'll love it!"

By the way, I was just kidding about that last. If you've got a copy of it, keep it to yourself. Please. Oh, and don't go for the ear. [grin]

Frankly, it's not that it's hard to keep secrets (although sometimes I am so blatantly pleased with myself it's hard to not show off some brilliant idea I've had...) The truth is, the LintKing has to work twice as hard to get things done because I'm VERY careful and VERY concerned about favouritism.

It's this simple:

If I play favourites, people may not want to play with me anymore.

Admittedly, I'm not concerned about the LintKing's ability to be that brilliant, (is he cringing yet?) but hey, I married him, didn't I? [grinning]

Just overheard:

"What were you thinking? That you were some sort of gift? Oh yeah, you are a roleplayer."

"Why can't a wizard
be a sword master
when going by rules
of old D&D?

And why can't I have
a level twelve rogue
when everyone else
is just level three?"

Game Balance
Game Balance
That's the name of your pain,
Game Balance...
When the GM has to take a stance
Or never give you half a chance,
that's...
Game Balance.

"But hark," you now holler,
"What of the scholar,
Raised from the squalor
to become the King?

And surely the elf,
was worth more himself,
than the others in
that quest for the ring!"

Game Balance
Game Balance
That's the name of your pain,
Game Balance
For when others take your measure,
Points are worth more than any treasure,
because of....
Game Balance.

"What about fiction?
I have conviction
that the leader is
more points than the rest.

Were the muskateers'
points in some arrears,
or were they equal
at any fair test?"

Game Balance
Game Balance
That's the name of your pain,
Game Balance.
Make a good character and then dismay,
'Cause you can't play him anyway!
Why?

Game Balance.

Overheard last night as the LintKing was talking to Our Precious:

"A submissive assassin is the diametric opposite of a King, I think."

But you could have both in a party of adventurers. That's the beauty of it, eh?

WISH 42 asks:

DO YOU EVER REUSE CHARACTERS FROM GAME TO GAME?

I was looking up some products on the web, when I came across this tidbit:

fresh Alaskan king salmon fillets
$8.99 lb
Troll-caught

I may have mentioned that my boss is an Everquest (PS2 Version) addict. She regularly spends from six to ten (or more) hours a night playing her various characters.

Back to the concept of that "reality" versus "game" switch, it came up that I was able to look at my boss and explain that, well, I had a functioning one with a dimmer switch, instead.

Doyce talks about starting power levels... and I think I mentioned something about this today, but I like his perspective. I think he's right that people like to go through the experience of acquiring new abilities, proficiencies, what not... and I think Randy's right in that there's definitely something about playing the character you intend to play from the beginning.

Is there a middle ground?

Crossing a number of blogs (and other ventures) is a discussion in regards to a shared Amber world framework and the perils of multiple GMs working together with a variable number of players.

I already know I'm antisocial enough that I could never participate in such a thing. (Well, if I did, there'd be a lot of, "I'm glad that guns don't work in YOUR Amber, but if there'd been an Arden Gas Station, Random would have made it to the base of Kolvir..." kinds of silliness.)

It does remind me, however, of an experiment proposed by a number of friends, using the World of Darkness books.

07/06/1993

Litany for the First Level Fighter: [impromptu]

With 6 hitpoints, a dented shield,
and 3 experience, you learn to yield.
With strength 16, and dex of 10,
You beg your DM to roll again.
A kobold here, a dark orc there,
Plenty of enemies, everywhere.
Your healer's exhausted, there's no more magic.
Ratweres surround you, your ending's tragic.
You bury your fighter at the end of the day,
And start at 10th level next time you play.

I don't believe there are any spoilers in this, but if you have not seen the movie(s) and are intending to, you may reconsider following the extended entry.

[cross-posted from my LJ]

Pick a character or pick several characters that you play in a roleplaying game and describe in a few words that character's attitude toward love.

Ricardo Madeira (who seems to have a roleplaying blog of sorts that I am 85% able to translate on my own) wrote the following (quoted with permission) on the Amber Mailing List:

...put a terrible burden on people, especially the GM, and for me that's risky. It's like laying all your eggs in the same basket... I, player, get a bad GM and that's the end. I think it can be improved. Even improv theat[er] [h]as some rules and guidelines so that the actors can create something meaningful, right?

I am not in favour of "rules light" systems.

In a discussion on the Masters' Council (which you have to log in to to read, I believe) we've been discussing the issue of communicating with our players and, basically, keeping them happy while staying happy ourselves. I had some thoughts on this I wanted to explore a little.

Law's Game Style

You scored as Tactician. You're probably a military buff who wants to have the chance to think through complex problems. You want the rules, and your GM's interpretation of them, to match up what happens in the real world or at least be consistant. You want challenging yet logical obstacles to overcome.

I play a lot of diceless, freeform games.

After the bumps in the road are smoothed out, we start to take many of our relationships for granted, forgetting to show how special they are, or how much we love them. I find this to be true of long term campaigns as much as romantic relationships.

Have you hugged your GM today?

We interrupt the current focus for a side note on GMing.

I am not a director.
I am not a storyteller.
I am not an author.
I am not a therapist, mentor, motivator, consultant, or purely a cheerleader.

I am, at best, a coach.

The assorted evils of cultural, class-related, ritual, or gendered assumptions in gaming will not be solved by a bunch of white guys with internet access.

I never thought they would.

I often quote the aggravations of what I call "bookkeeping" in a gaming context. Some of it is literal; last week I put together a conglomerate spreadsheet of all the Elfquest game characters and their statistics. I had a few (example: Glitter and the Glamour) spreadsheets I've used before to run analyses and keep track of the little number details, but it always ends in heartbreakends up meaning administrative details that either consume my time and energy, or being fairly irrelevant.

You'd think this would push me harder to go to descriptor-based systems rather than numbers, but the truth is, I don't like the vagaries of words compared to the hard truth of mathematics. Is "va-va-voom sexy" higher or lower than "knock-out sexy?"

No, I haven't bought/read/seen a page from 4e. I have, however, examined many a discussion headed by the erudite, the enthusiastic, and the exhaustive.

I have slogged through an essay or two, recently, about people who have gone into system design purely to write (as noted in Wikipedia for Houses of the Blooded) something that is, "Anti-D&D."

I find myself torn between two immediate responses. One, the, existential, "Why?" and the second, "But wait, hasn't D&D gone there, itself?"