薔薇語

I wonder how they would feel about a collect call from Japan... Better yet, one from DIMENSION X!!! (echo!). La Rose.

Villains or Heroes and in what numbers? Any other special requirements? La Rose.

So, does that mean that RB needs to choose the next one? So,what shall we work on next? La Rose.

The Mongol King: Long ago there was a legend much similar to Romulus and Remus in Mongolia and China. Two brother, each commanding a great army split the land in two. One travels south to modern China and the other north to modern Mongolia. Each establishes a great and powerful kingdom, yet a kingdom that despite its power could not survive past their kings' deaths. In time, their efforts and legacies were all but forgotten by history; only folklore past down through the ages still accounts for them. But not now. A would be necromancer stumbled across the Great Mongol King and seeking to add him and his essence to his collection tried to bring in back. But the Necromancer's magics were no match for the sheer force of will the Great Mongol King possessed. Soon he found himself bending before the might of his new God-King. Now the newly resurrected King seeks to reclaim what was rightfully his family's. He has used his new thrall of a necromancer to raise a slavishly loyal army for him. La Rose.

I vaguely recall seeing this over a year ago (or two). Is this the same game where someone had mentioned having HyperSpace beasts that got suppressed by the Nav com signals in Hyperspace but eventually broke free and help kick start the Dark Ages by destroying the Nav-Com system? Anyway, it seems like a neat idea. Good luck with it! La Rose.

I really wish I could respond in-line under the current system as easily as before but alas, with change comes new adjustments. Hitting on your first point: I do not believe I have watched the video linked in the linked article. While I have watched a good number of her videos and videos about her (from all sides) I have not done so in a while. But given the overall quality of video she produce and the fact that she stole work from other people, I do not like the idea of generating extra traffic for her. Onto your second point which I think houses the biggest trust of your point. You comment on how a game will continue on even if the male lead doesn't save some female character. But once again, that is exaggerating things. How so? Because it is limiting us to only concerning ourselves for the female NPCs. If the male lead fails to save almost any character the game will likely continue. That isn't a feature exclusive to women. But adding to that, what is the tone of a game after a male or female NPC dies (or is otherwise unfavorably dealt with)? More likely than not the loss of any female character is going to be major. It is going to be something that will be noted as changing some aspect of the game's setting, mood, etc. But the same can not be said for the loss just any male character. As to the second half of your comment about how most people would prefer to play as the character whose actions actually matter, I think that is absolute common sense and I 100% agree. But the discussion isn't about "are there enough female leads", it is about various NPCs having harm befall them. Those are two wildly different issues. And oddly enough, I agree on both - more women being leads is a good thing and casual violence against people ought not be so popular - but I don't want to draw any false distinctions between violence against men and women in the major games industry. Coming around to your third point, I am glad that you can agree in so far that the disposable male feature of games is not exactly kosher. But your further point about how MRA and such don't seem to care about that issue is not on the ball. That is an issue to MRAs. It is an issue that does come up. I can agree with you to the point that I have never seen an MRA rally or protest highlighting male disposablity in games. I have seen the topic of male disposability come up in other realms, though. That is the running theme and undertone in a lot of issues in the MRA movements as I see it. Next your comment regarding the nature of my post and how it relates to other MRA comments misses the point of my post. Given that I am responding to an article about violence against women, it is only natural that I bookend my comments to that initial post. Thus the opening paragraph and finishing paragraph focus on what I think is a failing in the entire 'violence against women in games' movement. But of note is that the VAST majority of my post is concerned with male disposability, not with the flaws I see in any other social cause. That is also one of the reasons I tried to denote the two sections as being distinct by referencing two points. The second of which focus on a problem men face and occupied the majority of my post. On the issue you bring up in the first two lines, I think you are right and making a strong point. Violence against men is not often sexualize (at least in my limited experience). Male sexuality is normally not something that is attack - just the men themselves. Assuming both questions in your third line are relevant to GTA (I think they are, but the wording of the first half is a bit vague to me), I can not give you the answer. I generally do not find games like GTA interesting and have absolutely no desire to play the role of some scumbag running around town shooting people. It isn't my cup of tea. But I would assume the answer is 0 male rapes occur or other such violence against men. But I think your question highlights an interesting point, in my experience playing games (which is perhaps more limited than yours, especially AAA games), male deaths and violence against men are not often used as motivations. My argument for that is this: no one cares if a generic male NPC is injured or killed. And if no one cares, it isn't going to give rise to an engaging game. But everyone will care about a brutalized female NPC. And lazy writers are going to choose to use the one that gives the most emotional bang for the buck. It is unfortunate in terms of that says about how we view men and of the quality standards for game writers. As to your next point about people coming out and stating that violence against men is acceptable, that is a bit of a strawman. First, I am not worried about such people because I know (or at least hope) that they are extremely few in number and don't think such people are worth the time to confront. But that wasn't my point. I wasn't talking about people actively saying violence against men is okay, but rather the society that condones casual violence against men as an acceptable standard; that is our society. One where the death of male characters is hardly noticeable. As to women being decorative in games, I can agree with that much the same way I agreed with Ranxerox above. But agreement on that issue does not somehow effect this issue. A general desire to have more female leads does not concede that casual violence against any group is acceptable. Anyway, it is going on 3 am for me and that is most certainly past my bedtime. Good night, all! La Rose. PS: I feel it is at least slightly important to note that while I have talked about MRAs and even commented about "Putting on my MRA hat" as it were, I am not an MRA. While there are things in the movement that I agree with, there are things I don't and keep me from wanting to self ascribe as such. It is much the same reason why I don't self ascribe as a great my things.

Okay, so I am going to put on my crass and cranky MRA-ish hat on for a bit now. First, the problem with "the casual cruelty" against women is that people seem to think that just because the problem affects women that is important and seem to be ignoring that it is a feature that is pervasive and non-discriminating. By ignoring half of the equation we deny ourselves any chance at real progress. It is like saying "The problem with lung cancer in women" Second, the existence of casual violence is not new. Indeed, we have all watched countless times as people whose sole reason for being is to die dramatically, die. Indeed, so much so that we have given given this troupe its own name: RedShirt. But if we were to really look into the pure numbers of characters who are violently dispatched (killed or otherwise) in media (TV, Movies, Games, etc) we would likely find that men by FAR are the majority. Yet despite it happening all the time to men it is not an issue. And why is it not an issue? The simple answer to the above quandary is this: women have inherent value for existing and men don't. Why is it that there exist a trope of doing harm to a female character? Because people find such acts emotionally evocative and in a way that the mere switching of genders would greatly lessen. Why? Because women have value in their existence. It is an accepted state of affairs that by merely existing a woman has some kind of basic value that ought to shield her from terrible outcomes. And that is a good thing. It is something that should exist. But it is something that should exist for all people regardless of sex. But sadly it doesn't. We live in a society where woman have value and men must earn it. What makes the death of a male character important is the fact that that character did, is doing, or reasonably could do something important. Indeed, his life is never given importance, only his actions. That is why we don't care about no-name RedShirts - it was their role to die and in performing that action, they attained the only value they could earn. Lets bring this into a bit of a trivial but hyper game related example: Why is any death of Mario important? Because if he dies, the princess can't be saved. Not because some person is dying, but because some deed can no longer be accomplished; thus the disposibility of man. Why would the death of Princess Peach be important? Because P.Peach is important in and of herself. Enough so that the death of countless male-commoners and the perils of our titular heroes is not enough to outweigh her value from purely existing; again, only the actions of the heroes are important, not their lives. This is why when we hear of some tragedy where people die, we always feel the need to highlight the number of women and children who die. Because doing so evokes greater emotional connection - Men die, such is life. About the only way a man gets highlighted is if he has done something worth noting like being a father. And now that we have some outcries to protect women from casual violence in video games and other media, I can't help but wonder where the concern for humanity as a whole is. And given that it is an issue being raised by people who would like to claim they are fighting for equality, I can't help but find their interest purely self-serving and demonstrably out of sync with their own stated goals. Anyway, that is my rant for the night. Just remember, just because it is a man dying doesn't mean it isn't important. La Rose.

More likely than not, our invoices will get lost in the void... La Rose.

Manta Rays are sea creatures that look like they should fly. So how about "Void Rays" as a general name for all vessels with various classes of ships being named after various aquatic animals (that also look like they should fly). La Rose.

Aethercraft port-portals light-riders glistening gliders void vessels space ships

Jokes on you! I only have a defense of 2! La Rose

I think maybe you read a bit more into my comment than was warranted. I wasn't saying that one needs those kinds of toolkit solutions to solve some KA or ND defects but rather that if there were issues with them, it would be easier to fix them bit by bit than fix them while also worrying about an extraneous abstractions that is the Hit Locations chart. At the end of the day it is always about our individual experiences with the system. Having never used the chart (minus when doing actual called shots), I never seemed to notice a big problem with ND vs KA. It could have been the way we built characters was somehow different, the levels of DC we used, or any number of other independent or compounding factors, but it was what it was. Obviously we are going to have different experiences. But at the end of the day, I think of the chart as being wholly optional and not needed to make the game playably better. If one encounters small issues, I think those issues can be resolved in more simplistic ways than adding on another chart to roll against. But of course if that is the flavor of experience you or your gaming group desire, it is there for a reason. La Rose.

The day's deeds are done, Sweat cascades off his brow, Tears flow from his heart. A restless night awaits him, Countless faces now haunt him. --- Dawn's light reveals all, The faults of man obscene, Souls reach out to him, Etched in his heart their names, But in time all names are lost. --- The roses are red However, violets are blue I'm La Rose, not you. La Rose.

For me now, I am listening to some Yoshida Kyoudai: Daishi Dance "Revolution" and Mirage (Shinkirou) - The latter is great for relaxation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljSXKRl1V0&channel=yikki La Rose.

Let's not forget all the other great songs from that series: It's just love: Rhythm Emotion Last Impression https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1PQEZyXOl8&channel=joevic42 That was one of my favorite shows as a kid! La Rose.

The first one seemed the best of the two because the second one does look very close to a swastika. Another options (although I guess it is too late) is to just have four tilted "4"s in a circle / box. They would create a diamond shape with the opposing corners being linked. If you wanted to really get the F icon in there, you could also slip an F into the dead space and have them slightly rotated. La Rose.

To resolve any confusion that came up upthread about which rules book is considered official, Steve has made an official announcement: "Each GM is certainly free to decide which book he wants to regard as authoritative for his campaigns, but for purposes of official rules answers provided here, I don't even consider looking at CC. The 6E core rulebook is the one and only source of official rules information for my purposes, and any answers I provide here should be considered as adding to or expanding upon what it says." La Rose.

As someone who never uses the Hit Location charts, I can gladly say that I am thankful for that now. The level of craziness that seems to spring forth from it would seem to be as much as a hassle as it looked initially. All in all, if you avoid the thing, then things become more streamlined and it is easier to account for things. Are Killing Attacks too powerful: Up the R.Defense on characters. Are Killing Attacks doing too much STUN: Buy higher Defenses - maybe even slap on "only vs KA" Both of the above: Cap the DCs for KA in general Same goes for Normal Attacks. No muss, no fuss. ^^ La Rose.

I think some of these are kind of missing the point. Men and women are different and that shouldn't surprise anyone. Nor should the fact that men and women and more importantly the idea of masculinity and femininity are portrayed differently. The fact that they are portrayed differently doesn't seem shocking nor bad. Now, we could and should argue over how any given portrayal is bad and not just that men and women are not portrayed in the same way. How does that relate to the Cracked article (By the by, who uses Cracked for anything other than off-beat humor?): #31 - men are not judge so much on the clothing we wear as it compares to someone else wearing the same outfit. We are judged by it all the same as it is a sign of our wealth, class, and prestige. #28-26 - These three have a running theme of making men look like sex objects for female amusement. This is somehow suppose to be shocking but seems to forget that men are already portrayed like that - Have you seen any number of underwear or diet-soda ads? Men are blatantly sexualized all the same. #25 - So, the issue here is that women are assumed to not be handy with cars. I can understand the trouble that can cause. But lets be real, men are assumed to be incompetent with: housework, children, tests, directions, decision making, dealing with emotions, and a plethora of other issues. Indeed, the Hyper-Competent mother and Hypo-Competent father is the most basic troupe of modern family-sitcoms. #24 - Male tits are not sex objects yet female ones are: Oh the humanity! Okay, I get it, we don't want to over sexualize a fairly basic part of our body - especially one not needed for procreation anyway. But the not being able to show breasts bit has been laxing more and more every year and we are likely to see it not being so taboo in my generation. Yet still, men can't go around showing off our groin section - which is the male equivalent. Once again, the gotcha pick fails to understand that men and women are different and so our sexualization will be displayed differently. #20 - There are male strip clubs and dining establishments that cater to female audiences. For those interested in seeing some beef-cakes on display, feel free to visit Chippendales. #17 - There are countless male characters who are purposely designed to be modern Apollos. #15 - Spreading awareness about the potential of sexual violence is good. I think the ad, as they have it, is a bit too in your face but perhaps that is a good thing. Secondly, spreading awareness should not be limited to one group alone as both sexes can be and are victims of sexual violence. ------------- All in all, I think we have issues to solve but this "if it were men" ads are stupid and meaningless because they don't get the point. I think places like Cracked are the perfect place for such things because these 1 for 1 swaps ought to be relegated to where they belong: cheap comedy. La Rose.

Ninja Bear, I agree with you in thinking that they are optional rules (which they are) and needn't be used in order to have an enjoyable game. Indeed, I don't think I ever played in a game where they were used. Even in our non-supers games we never used them. That said, I can easily see myself using them and think they can add a lot of flavor to the system but that is a far cry from being a necessary component. La Rose.

There are several benefits to doing this all in Japanese: no articles, no need for pronouns, no need to use plurals, and verb stems are just as good as fully expressed verbs. Granted, because they count moras and not syllables there is less room. La Rose.

Though the heat we learn All the joys of a cool breeze A seed is planted Mountains glowing red A tussle of the cool wind One leaf's journey Snow falls silently What lies beneath is unknown Sparks of life await Strong is their desire Patiently they have waited All will see them now A reprieve they give The sun's heat you needn't know A love given form La Rose.

I think that might be because what we consider a Haiku in English not not really a Haiku. First, we say 5/7/5 syllables but syllables are not actually an important feature in Japanese; moras are. To illustrate the difference lets take a simple 1 syllable word that is actually composed of two moras: "I". This word is the combination of the two distinct sounds of [a] and . Each component accounts for a single mora and, had they not been put together, could count as a single syllable on their own. But as they were put together, they count as a single syllable in English. This, however is not true in Japanese. They would still be counted as being two distinct moras. So, the 5/7/5 rule is a rule for moras, not Syllables. Next, we also think of the Haiku as always being 5/7/5 but this is only half true. The original form is 5/7/5/7/7 repeated. There are also various other forms but that one (those two) are the more popular ones. As to the modern western take on them being far to light hearted and joking, that I think is both true and not true. Now a days I don't think anyone in Japan creates Haiku as a real past time but in the early days the 5/7/5/7/7 was actually part of various drinking games. People would get into contests while drinking to continue a Haiku and one-up the previous person. It would normally be 1 person creating 1 line or 1 half (5 vs 5/7/5: 7 vs 7/7). And they would continue this until someone could no longer think of one. I know there was a famous author (I don't know his name) who collected a variety of these in a travel book. Some of which are a bit lude but almost always funny or "poetic". Another famous one was Matsuo Basho but I don't think I have ever read any of his work: Wiki for Matsuo. Intrigued he was to quench his thirst the google he sought answers a plenty there were but what question do they match? the wiki was grand many details without end where do the lies lay? La Rose.

To be honest, I think your final sentiment is right: HERO may not be the best system for this. That said, I don't think any system would be that much better. While I have not actually run the game I am about to describe, I had an idea for a game similar to this and in general the following is what I was going to do: I was going to have the players design their simple characters and they could choose a few limited things they always wanted to do. In your case, that might be a fire-based elemental girl who can always light a campfire or a telepath who always has a general empathic awareness of her surroundings. Then I was going to tell the players that they all had extra hidden powers and abilities that the PLAYERS had no access to. But would all be themed together. Thus I needed a concrete theme they wanted to travel down - this relates to your addendum above about the characters being linked to something. Lastly, I was NEVER going to build any powers and just play it by ear. Everyone's pool was going to be limited to a certain number of DCs of effect and as time when on I would increase those. The ultimate goal was to get the players to be inventive and more involved with the store and less with the mechanics. If I noticed a theme in what they chose to do, I would start to write up those powers and those powers alone. Lastly, when I thought the CHARACTERS had a real sense of mastery, I would take away the activation rolls and give the PLAYERS the full range of powers I noticed them use over the course of the campaigns. And probably with a VPP so they could continue to adjust things as they wanted on the fly. I feel perfectly comfortable with never writing up a power and just playing things by ear. If you and your players are equally comfortable with that, then you can take my idea above. If the players want to have or need to have a more concrete notion of the mechanics at play, though, then the above style will likely not mesh with them. For example, I had a friend who was devoted to the eternal re-write. Every time he reached perfection with his character's build, he noticed something needed changing or something could use tweaking. As such, he was never that comfortable with me controlling things for him. So if he was in my gaming group, then I would most certainly not do it the way I described above. All that said, though, if you are willing (or your players are willing), just using a VPP would be sufficient. Advise them on how to build things and to have several builds at various power levels ready for each game. Those will constitute the normal switches and only be subject to the normal activation rolls. Any NEW powers will be allowed but must be done quickly and will suffer from additional minus. This should help encourage variety without bogging everything down too terribly much. La Rose.

First, I think you took issue with the exact and pedantic nature of the Luddites. While I am sure that there is a wealth of minucia that is of note on the issue, it wasn't the tiny little bits that I was trying to invoke by using their name. Being overly concerned with the esoteric bits of any given reference ignores the objective of using a cultural reference point: delivering a broad sense of information with minimal input. Second, when you criticized the volume of driving you compared apples with oranges. 300,000 miles without an accident ought not be compared to X miles without a FATAL accident. Indeed, I have been involved in a few accidents in my life (be they my fault or others) and have yet to ever be in a fatal one. And being generous and saying I have actually driven 300,000 miles (Probably haven't), I would only have needed to be involved in 1 accident of any kind to have proven the value of the Google car on this point. So, I think your criticism on this point is a bit unfounded. Next, I am not saying the current Google car is good to go. There is still work to do. But your translation which would seem to be implying that the project is impossible. That is far, far too pessimistic and ignores the advancements we have made in technology and specifically with driverless car tech in the last decade. La Rose.