Jump to content

RDU Neil

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    3,931
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by RDU Neil

  1. https://io9.gizmodo.com/spider-man-will-no-longer-be-shared-by-marvel-and-sony-1837416155?rev=1566332112242&utm_medium=socialflow&utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_facebook&fbclid=IwAR39NBisvBHg5RRL4y2MzvoK0qbrO2gfpllJxqqvMG3KfcOjDg4k5QxQHF0 Whoa... this could suck... big time.
  2. You know James Bond is Time Lord... right? https://www.tor.com/2012/11/16/skyfall-proves-that-james-bond-is-a-time-lord/ It really is the only explanation that works.
  3. Have you read Jason Aaron's The Mighty Thor? With Jane Foster? It is one of the best Thor runs ever, and I've been reading 'em a long time. Hands down some of the best writing and art ever, and is a perfect use of the "sick/lame human becomes a god" schtick that started it all back in Journey Into Mystery... since the entire mythos is built on "Whoever holds this hammer..." bit.
  4. Please tell me John Ostrander is still alive to reap the rewards of this.
  5. This is very true, and why I've all but abandoned HERO for actual play. The fact that it became a system for engineers and coders to play around with how sophisticated their builds could be... and not really an RPG for actual play... has eventually worn me out. I'm actually writing a PbtA style RPG for supers that rejects this mentality completely... and embraces the above. Mechanical sophistication and complexity is often the bane of a good game.
  6. I'm confused. It sounds like audio from a couple years ago? A glimpse at Infinity War at SDCC? Why is it labeled 7/19/19?
  7. Totally agree with this... and maybe one of the reasons I have knee-jerk issues against "immersion" which I used to love. Too many times, players did disruptive things and just wrote it off as "in character" which may have been true... but the point is, the play group and play dynamic is what is real and important, not the character. If being "in character' messes with the play dynamic, that is wrong, no matter how "in character" the behavior is. Hopefully, some regular metagame discussion minimizes the situations where things go 'too far.'
  8. I was referring very specifically to Spence's version of backstory... the player showing up with a preconceived tome they are emotionally attached to and expecting it to be accepted into play by the group. I prefer players to be arriving to the game, and even during play, in an open state of mind to who their character is and how they will play out. Sure, I have a Secret ID, but I didn't work out every detail about why or how... and if during play it turns out this doesn't really fit, or needs to change, or it takes on a different form, based on the way the story is unfolding... ok then, make
  9. Yes. That's my point. I should have opened communication with the other players before going on being all "immersive." On this point, have any of you played with the "X" card? This is usually used in Con games... where it is just a card sitting in the middle of the table with a big black X on it. Everyone knows that if someone reaches out and taps the card, play stops... whatever was being done is rewound until we are at a point where the offending bit started, and play goes in a different direction from there. The player tapping does not have to explain why, just that "I don
  10. yeah... it is unfortunate that RPGs have turned "character development" into "leveling up." I still think of it from a literary POV, where character development is the whole point... to experience the growth of the characters, changes in their values, mores, expectations and beliefs, through the fictional events. I've seen some RPG related quotes about "Character development is bullshit. Character growth is what is important." Again... a shift in the meaning of terms based on context. A discussion of leveling up vs. growth could be fun, but actually a different thing altogether than what w
  11. Funny... but seriously... I hate this stuff. Backstory is awful... it should be developed in play. Nothing I'm talking about has anything to do with backstory... which is just a pre-play form of solipsistic "role play".
  12. Yes... of course this COULD happen... and that is the whole point of what I'm talking about... that if you don't encourage some meta-play, you might be grinding along for a while before it really gets ugly! All because people have not been encouraged to communicate and explain their actions. What you say here, " I would have thought that we would have figured out the group had different goals for the game many sessions ago, frankly." is exactly what I'm getting to. How else do you figure out the group goals unless you encourage this communication as part of play? There is no way to have clear
  13. I agree with this... but what is interesting, is that immersion can just "happen" for moments when the group is in a groove. It is transitory... fleeting... but cool. I think the big issue was, in the past, most gaming tried to "force" this by "STAY IN CHARACTER!" or whatever... with the idea of sustaining those immersive moments. My take is that this is impossible, and what you want is a trusting environment where slipping into those moments is possible... and perhaps un-intuitively, that comes from LESS immersive play... MORE meta-play. A focus on player agency and communication can actu
  14. This a thousand times this! Have their been wonderful "in character" dramatic moments that might have been spoiled if someone broke character immersion? Of course. Those are wonderful when they happen, but they are rare, and they absolutely only happen when there is a level of trust between the players. Miscommunication happens WAY more often and derails WAY more games than "going meta" ever harms immersion. And on the plus side, meta discussions have driven way more "oh cool!" moments than ever happened organically in immersive play. Believe me, I'm old enough and old school eno
  15. Seriously. I mean... watching that 16Bit video I posted actually makes me sniffly. Just say, "On your left..." and I start to choke up. I'm not just saying it... it happens, every time.
  16. Part of this is the tone... not telling you how to play your character, but asking "Would your character really leave me to bleed out?" because hey, maybe you'd forgotten about he "owe me" thing... or maybe you had, and yes, this is clearly your character reneging on a debt, and dramatically we should understand that. If a player describes a character's actions and it seems odd, out of character, or out of place for the scene, messes with expectations... it is totally legitimate for others to say, "Hold on... that seems odd. I wouldn't have expected you to leave him their to die. A
  17. I'm surprised you don't see how problematic this is. BlastMan Play the character: "I storm off. You are all idiots! I'll take on Destructo myself!" (huff grunt, slouch in chair looking pissed) (Question on everyone's mind... is this acting or is BlastMan's player really pissed?) Other player 1: "Uh... ok then... so what do we do?" GhostGirl Emotional Player 2: "I go running after BlastMan. I hate when people are upset!" SmartGuy Tactical Player 3: "**** him! Jeezus... we've got an attack plan we have to prep. Now everything has fallen apart.
  18. My wife (very little superhero comic lore) looked at me right after the cold open with Fury, Hill and Gyllenhaal... and said, "Is he going to be bad?" I just shrugged... "I dunno..." even though I did. Second time he shows up, she's like... "Oh... he's totally going to be bad." She still really enjoyed him as the villain, even though the reveal was not a big surprise. She saw it coming, but liked it. We talked afterward how it was a pretty honest updating of the basic villain concept from the comic, and well done even for someone like me who knew he'd be the bad guy.
  19. This does seem to be something Feige and the rest should be smart enough to begin dealing with. One of the reasons villains become interesting is that they are recurring characters like everyone else. Loki would just have been an entertaining footnote from Thor if he'd never returned in Avengers and afterwards. Having villains come back simply gives them time to become more interesting. I can't believe they haven't thought of this, so I'm wondering what is standing in the way. Now, in movie making, dealing with stars and their contracts can certainly make this a lot ha
  20. Does Spider-Man: Far From Home significantly change my rankings... not really, but it does crack the Top 10, just barely. Very good, entertaining movie, but uneven enough to knock it down a few pegs. 1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier 2. Avengers: Endgame 3. Captain America: Civil War 4. Black Panther 5. Spider-Man: Homecoming 6. Ant-Man & the Wasp 7. Thor: Ragnarok 8. The Avengers 9. Iron Man 10. Spider-Man: Far From Home 11. Iron Man 3 12. Captain America: The First Avenger 13. Avengers: Age of Ultron
×
×
  • Create New...