megaplayboy

https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/science/a-mysterious-radio-burst-is-sending-signals-to-earth-every-16-days/vi-BBZQWl5?ocid=spartanntp

What would we do if we figured out there seemed to be some kind of intelligent pattern to the signals but we couldn't get close to figuring out the contents?  Try signaling back?  Or would there be a whole layer of discussion around what to do next?

Romney's vote puts a different cast on the whole proceeding.  Romney, Jones and Manchin all showed courage in voting to convict.  

55 minutes ago, Badger said:

 

I will admit, I found the whole VA going to the Dems was an overrated victory.  Federal workers have been spilling into Northern VA for 20 years.  It was a bluish purple state that finally went completely blue.  Right or wrong*, it is kind of frustrating that 8-10 counties in the northern part of the state, gets to decide your fate, when their needs and wants have very little to do with yours.  It is what it is though, and I doubt unique to one state.  I just know the only part of my life politically I have  left with the feeling of any actual say over is who represents me in the House of Reps.  So, that does make me nervous.  If that does get dramatically altered, I fear there is no real use for me to ever vote again.

 

*I sometimes agree with them, and I have nothing against them voting for their interest.  But, at the same time, it is hard to swallow that you don't matter at all (except for Tax Day of course. )

 

Edit: I can already tell you all the minute details of how the November election will go in VA, if you want.

Imagine how citizens of color felt about the government's attitude toward their interests for the period from 1619 to about the mid-60s(and beyond, in many cases).    

My general preference is for a resumption of the expansion of the House, as was discontinued 100 years ago.  Under the original constitutional formula, we'd have around 6000 congressmen right now.  Imagine the difficulties in lobbying that many!  I'd like there to be around 900 to 1000 members of the House.  

It would likely take some new revelation regarding something even more serious for Trump's goose to be fully cooked.  

On 1/28/2020 at 7:15 AM, SteveZilla said:

 

An interesting take on the problem.    Though to function like an "umbrella" (i.e., covering more than just the character's person), wouldn't it also need "Protects Carried Items"?  And to protect against the rain/snow/sleet from actually contacting the body would it not need Impermeable as well?

Yeah, that could work.  

We're going to need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to expose all the misdeeds of the current administration, even if it's only limited to one term.  I will be furious if the next administration just quietly drops all pretense of holding them accountable.  

On 1/20/2020 at 8:07 PM, Iuz the Evil said:

Pretty much, except instead of Frex, huge geographic areas of California are really pretty pissed off about the lack of representation their population translates into. Doesn't really make the news outside the Golden State, because who cares about a handful (few million) folks living out in the sticks anyway. And we need their water and resources. 

 

I generally find their platform and positions ludicrous, but then I would. I live in the SF Bay Area so i'm by definition part of the region oppressing their representative government with my own regional values that don't align to theirs. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state)

 

It's an interesting dilemma, but I'd vote against what they want. And so it won't come to pass, because 2.3M < 36M humans. But it is still a problem for them getting their voice heard. 

That's what coalition politics is all about--make a deal with other groups, give a little to get a little, etc.  

My take:

In practice, when you give a demographic minority not just disproportionate political power but strategically important political power, they will use it for "rent extraction"(i.e., to get stuff they want, including "extra stuff", if possible).  They can also use it to "stuff" the majority, blocking anything that might be proposed, for naked partisan gain.  I'm speaking specifically of the US Senate, where two facts obtain:

1) The 15 largest states, mostly blue and purple states, represent about 2/3 of the population but only have 30 seats in the Senate

 The 35 smallest states, a mix of red, blue and purple, represent about 1/3 of the population but have 70 seats in the Senate

2) The legislative filibuster amplifies the power of small state senators immensely, since you only need 41 votes to block legislation from going forward

We have a situation where legislation of immense importance to majorities living in urban areas lies fallow in the Senate after passing through the House, because small state senators see little benefit in spending money on urban areas or doing things that primarily aid urban areas.  This, to be blunt, is dysfunctional as hell.  Dystopian, even.  

There's also the matter of "maker" and "taker" states:  in practice, large and/or wealthy states wind up "sending" some of their federal tax revenues to smaller, more rural "taker" states.  

70% of the US population live in communities of 50k+ population(i.e., urban or dense suburban), 10% live in communities between 2500 and 50k(suburban/exurban, dense rural), and 20% live in communities smaller than 2500(rural).  Demographic trends point in the direction of this disparity getting more pronounced over time.  

I understand the argument about local vs state politics in big states with large urban areas and significant rural population, but, again, my advice would be to network with other "out" groups and form coalitions to get things they need.  

Too soon?

2 hours ago, Badger said:

Mostly, in the interest of knowing exactly where everyone's thinking is:

 

Anyone for the elimination of states altogether?

No, but...I would like for a few things to be passed to the federal level, to be more centralized and more consistent...specifically, public education curricula and funding.  An equal quality education everywhere in the country.  It's frustrating to hear that, say, Mississippi ranks 48th or whatever in public education, and for people to be perfectly fine with that kind of disparity existing between states.  

3 hours ago, Starlord said:

A Presidential election by popular vote election counts the vote of each citizen of the US equally.  I've heard all the arguments for the EC and they are all nonsense IMO.  A vote in Rhode Island should count equal to a vote in Texas.  He/She should be the President of all the people, not of electors and/or variably weighted states.

True.  My suggestion was that it's far easier to just increase the number of representatives, diluting the distortive effect of the EC, rather than getting 2/3 of the House and Senate and 3/4 of the states to pass an amendment that would reduce the electoral power of small states(of which there are more than 12).  All you have to do is overcome a filibuster. 

The one major change I do support is passing a new Apportionment Act, substantially increasing the membership of the House of Representatives(and, by doing so, increasing the size of the electoral college and diluting the population distorting effect of adding two electors per state for the Senate).  It reduces the likelihood of a "fluke" EC win and popular vote loss while making the House more representative of the diversity of the population.  Third party candidates would also have a more meaningful chance of winning, running in smaller congressional districts.  And I'd package it with provisions for non-partisan, independent redistricting commissions to cut way down on partisan gerrymandering.  

The trial of an overwhelmingly guilty president who everyone expects to be acquitted anyway starts next week.  

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I was right. The End Times.

 

If anyone thought Tucker Carlson's ego was insufferable before this happened...

 

But this tweet transcript from the linked website, from Matthew Gertz, is most salient to me: "Do you feel safe knowing that the only thing standing between the United States and another major war may be whether the president finds the most recent monologue from Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity more compelling?"

Tucker has basically transformed into "Richard Spencer with a primetime Fox show".  

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

This one nearly floored me: Tucker Carlson criticized the Trump administration for Suleimani killing.

 

Carlson dissing the White House? Actually making sense? This may really be the End Times.

He thinks it takes away from fighting the invasion of brown people from the south.  👻*

*not a ghost

15 hours ago, Badger said:

Perhaps.  I do think the worst thing they can do is sit on it, as has been suggested, the last day or 2.  Regardless, of how genuine the motivation,  it looks like a obvious political stunt if it never goes to the Senate.  For me, it feels like it will be a hollow statement without substance, if not seen through.  

I think they're going to withhold it just long enough to make their point about the fairness of the process in the Senate.  

10 hours ago, DShomshak said:

Incidentally, I've seen/heard a few news articles about how some Dem activists are unhappy there won't be any people of color on the next debate stage.

 

I'm a little surprised myself, but it does put the lie to a longtime Republican accusation: That the Democratic party is the party of identity politics. So far, black voters pretty strongly favor Joe Biden instead of the candidates who "look like them," Booker and Harris. And Hispanics didn't propel Julian Castro into the top tier, either. Mayor Pete's being gay seems largely irrelevant in his pitch to voters.

 

Republicans seem to be the only ones focused on ethnic/religious identity and cultural grievances. The news reports I've seen about the recent Bevins/Beshear dust-up, and the race in Louisiana, say the Dem candidates talked policy and the GOP candidates talked They're Not Like Us anger and loyalty to Trump.

 

I invite any Republicans who still think policy and governance matter to jump over to the Democratic Party. Whatever you advocate, I suspect you have a better chance among Dems than you would in the Party of Trump.

 

Dean Shomshak

Trumpism is fairly unambiguously white identity politics.  Or "white grievance politics", if you will.

Well, life support can protect one from temperature extremes, and environmental movement can negate penalties for being in water, it seems like one could suss out the net benefit of protection from precipitation.  You could do it with a 1 PD Force Field, 0 END, 2 points active, only to keep precipitation off character, real cost 1 point.  

45 minutes ago, Solitude said:

 

It's 2019.

Even boardgames are using apps to do the math and upkeep.

It has made a tremendous difference in trying to market heavier games like Mansions Of Madness.

 

The phone I am typing on is not a premium phone.

But it's as powerful as the computers that the hero software was designed to run on.

 

Why not have apps for the tablets and phones that most players probably own instead of gutting the math for people who don't want to or cannot do the math in their heads?

We have Hero Designer.  It does "the math" for you.  But if I'm a new player, it's still 100 pages of character creation(4th edition) or 200-400 pages(5th/6th).  The math is only a portion of what makes character creation complicated.  There are dozens of powers, each with at least a half page writeup/explanation, some with a multipage explanation.  There are dozens of power advantages and limitations.  There's over 100 skills.  Martial arts is replete with options.  All of these have their own text descriptions and explanations.  Ditto for perks, talents and so forth.  Nobody looks at a 2 inch thick rulebook on character creation and thinks "oh that looks easy to learn".  

Pre-gens are helpful.  We still get to the question of "maybe the character creation section of our universal rpg system should clock in at less than, say, 400 pages".  Like, 40-60 pages.  Could we simplify the system to keep most of the flexibility while losing a lot of the verbiage and a layer or two of math?  We might have to burn the whole thing down and start over using first principles.  

In terms of the learning curve...the basics of combat, yes, you can pick up in one session.  Character creation, you're not going to get all of it in one session, but enough to be able to read your sheet and make a very basic character.  Building to concept without GM assistance?  That's a matter of weeks or months.  Character creation is the most complex part of the game--I mean, that part of 6th ed is like 400 pages long.  Combat is relatively straightforward by comparison.  "Simplifying" or "Streamlining" Hero is primarily about finding a way to streamline the character creation process, which is the one aspect of the game that can be intimidating or daunting for new players, especially if they come from a D&D type background, with a basic set of character classes, races, etc to choose from, stats to roll up, and a basic selection of equipment, skills, etc. that are basically handed to the player.  In Hero you start from scratch.  So, yeah, by comparison, it IS more complicated than a lot of traditional systems like D&D or simplified systems like Storyteller.  

3 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

This, I expect, is just one of the many differences between you and me. 

 

No, seriously.  I don't know what the deal was with me and math.  I am as good at it as anyone else, but I had two major hurdles on life:

 

I was in acellerates classes from third grade (skipped second) on; I was primed for algebra in fifth, and that's when math stopped making sense.  I flat did _not_ get it. 

 

Not only did I not get it, but while still taking higher and higher courses in every other subject, I retook basic algebra three times. 

 

Then one day it just kind of "clicked.". I hate to phrase it that way, but that's really the best descriptor:  I was well into the school year, staring at a test that at that point, I actually - recognized_-- and not because I knew what was going on, but because it was the same test I had taken two years prior: I mean the _exact_ same test (fresh mimie, though). 

 

I had run out of room to doodle on the first two pages and had turned to the third (I had just given up after the first page: it was like taking lessons in Swahili then being handed a test in German: I really had no damned idea what this gibberish was). 

 

The second problem on the third page (which I only noticed because there was a "0.0" in a number that I was trying to incorporate as a pair of glasses into a doodle) when suddenly I realized I knew how to find the answer. 

 

I'll level with you: I couldn't, at that time, tell you the _correct_ way to find the answer, but I knew _a_ way.... 

 

So that one I answered. 

 

And the minute I did that, every damned bit of Algebra made perfect sense.  I mean right then and there, in that tiny specific moment, I knew Algebra, after three years of it filling me with dread as the only thing I not only wasn't good at but absolutely _sucked_ at at!  I went back and (erasing doodles where I had to) answered all the problems. 

 

I will remember that test forever: when I got it back, I scored a 48.  You know: out of one-hundred.  I had gotten the answers incorrect on 8 of the problems, and only got half credit for all the others because I was using the wrong this or that or the other to achieve those answers, but that 48 was the highest grade I had made in that class in three years. 

 

From that moment on, though, I understood everything, period.  The rest of my tests were all in the high 90s and I finally got out of algebra. 

 

Calculus was a similar experience, in spite of being repeatedly told how much easier it was than algebra.   As far as learning it, it was Algebra all over again.  I'm sure this will net me nothing but disdain and insulting diagnoses from all the AMGs that people this board, but Calculus didn't snap into focus for me (and it was, in complete honesty, the exact same exoeriencw: fail it for a couple of years, then "BAM!" I went from possibly retarded to having no clue why just anybody couldn't do this--why _I_ couldn't do it even five minutes prior to that moment of clarity. 

 

For what it's worth, I have ducked trig my entire life, because I am not willing to risk that same experience all over again.   Granted, that locked me out of computer and software design, but I was shooting for medical anyway, so it's all good.  

 

So go ahead, folks: brand me.  I straight-up do not care what loss of peer standing that little story will bring.  Why not? 

 

Because it gave me patience.  It also made me realize that teaching should not be a one-size-fits-all thing.  I mean, today that's understood in every other subject: different people need different approaches: find out what works for them. 

 

But not math.  We don't do it (at least not in the US), because "math is math!  There is no other way; just throw formulas and make them regurgitate them!". I am here to tell you that this is a load of crap? 

 

Can I do math?  Yes. 

 

Can I do calculus?  Yes. 

 

Do I have trouble with them?  No. 

 

Do I enjoy it?  No.  Not at all.  And I never will, because I have too many flashbacks to failing to grasp something that was, to me, completely indistinguishable from every thing around it; too many associations to the humiliation of being publically chided for being a three time failure at a school subject-  to much distaste for how little  variation it would have taken to get it through to me the first time (I understand now why I didn't get it before, and it would have been so simple to change a sentence here, an example there) yet no consideration was ever given to anyone not in the top half of the class (personally, I think this is one of the evils wrought by standardized testing) - 

. Shirt version:

 

No.  I will _never_ enjoy doing math.  Even though it's a daily part of my job, and something every human being will do forever, I will _never_ see it as anything more than an unpleasant, horrible thing you have to endure to achieve a goal: like cleaning an infant's butt during a diaper change.

 

I expect this has a lot to do with why I teach Champions the way I do: downplay the math, and make it part of a celebration: any math done for my games is going to be done as part of something fun and enjoyable. 

 

 

 

For the most part, that's all HERO is asking for.  You multiply what?  Twice per modified power during character generation?   Multiply a couple of small whole numbers (at least in older editions) if you want to modify a characteristic.  Figured are a bit more involved, but not much. 

 

No; I am not downplaying the amount of math involved; I am suggesting that the complexity of that math is consistently overplayed in any "Let's make this game more attractive!" conversation. 

 

 

Well that's more or less the subject at this current turn of this conversation, at least as I understand it: a system that can be grasped relatively easily.  If you don't mind saying, which edition were you learning, and how long did it take you to get a good grasp of it? 

I started with Champions 2nd edition(the box set), then got Champions II and III fairly quickly thereafter(this would have been 1984, I guess).  I got Espionage, Danger International, Justice Inc, Fantasy Hero 1st ed, and Robot Warriors before the Big Blue Book came out in 1988 or 89, at which point I was in college.  So my first campaign I ran in HS was 2nd/3rd ed, I started running 4th edition in college, and when I joined a regular group in 1992, we played 4th, tried Fuzion for a while but the group was split on it(the long time Hero players preferred Hero System, but the newer players liked the speed and simplicity of Fuzion), played 5th for a little while.  I moved to DC about 15 years ago and played one campaign with a 5th ed setup, and later ran one with 6th edition.  My general sense is that if you gloss over the complexities of character creation and focus on them learning the mechanics of skill use and combat first, it's easier to bring someone on board.  If you start out trying to create a character or recreate a comic book superhero things can get over your head pretty quickly.  Figuring out how to keep a character "within budget" was my first big challenge as a new player.  The second was figuring out how to model powers and abilities which weren't simply a 12d6 EB or 30m of flight.  

I think one somewhat valid complaint about Hero is that it's TOO generic.  Even the campaign universe stuff can be a little bit on the bland side.  

8 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

In all fairness, if you want to teach people basic math skills in a single game session, there is no real hope of finding _any_ solution.  I'd wait until they had five or years of elementary school, at least, then teach them the game.

 

 

[EDIT:  the moment I posted this, I realize it might be interpreted as dickish commentary on your math skills at the time you learned to play.  

 

It was _not_ intended to be.  It was intended to be a small joke about age-appropriateness of using fractions in a game]

 

I did fine in calculus.

But most game systems don't really require the player to do ANY math(or, at most, just basic addition and subtraction), and it adds a layer of complexity to the game.  The whole system of advantages and limitations adds a layer of complexity to learning the rules.  Once I learned the system I could write up a character in 10-20 minutes...unless I had some idea for a new power or a complicated way of writing up a power.  Then it could take a couple hours.