Things have been in-flux in my world. My latest cushy work assignment has made it all but impossible to Role-Play Online for the past year, which is frustrating because I spent the last 4 years cultivating the contacts to do online play because I was unable to game at home. Now I've got the ability to play at home but it took me a while to understand this and develop a player base that was interested. It looks like I have that now so I'm going to attempt a real-world game very soon.
And it's going to be a new one. Alpha Omega.
Alpha Omega excites me. That's the highest praise I can probably give any RPG. Every time I look through the books I get ideas, and I want to unleash them. Not game them out - but blast them forth like gushing pornstar.
Yes. Dwell on that mental image for a second. My gift to you. You're welcome.
Early on I was quite critical of Alpha Omega's dice mechanic (to put it mildly), and I've yet to test it in play but my opinion has lightened somewhat. It's got good probability curves, a nice even scale of capability and the only point it really slows things down is in Character Creation where you're having to reference the dice to the trait rating and write it on the character sheet.
That's just the start of what I like. It's also got a lot of little rules that I wrote myself for Hardkore (rolling multiple skills stands out) that I considered rather innovative when I did them. The fact that they're doing the same things means were on the same page in a lot of ways. I've made several characters as well and I'm really pleased with how each of the different species has a distinct feel but also a lot of diverse options and isn't shoehorned into any single approach. Not even Exalted has this degree of diversity available. For all of Exalted's infinite options most of the classes or castes or aspects have only one or 2 viable builds.
The difference between Exalted and Alpha Omega's diversity comes from it's power and capability structure. Exalted has effectively 4 traits that offer variance to the character. Attributes, Abilities, Backgrounds and Charms. In most cases Abilities (or Attributes) derive charms, and pretty much everyone gets those 4 things in roughly similar amounts across the board.
Alpha Omega on the other hand has Core Qualities, Abilities, Genetic Deviations (2 kinds), Skills, State Shifting, Weilding (3 kinds), and Augmentations (3 kinds). Not every species is able to take all the different options. In fact no species is able to take all of everything. It's these availabilities and inavailabilities that give each species class a unique feel while allowing tons and tons of customization. This allows me and my players to really go nuts on building a concept that we want to make with a lot of leeway to do so, but still enough guidelines that we're not feeling overwhelmed. Character Creation is still pretty daunting at first, and one issue I have is that there isn't much in the way of guidelines regarding what an amateur, professional and master would have for a rating in a given skill. However after playing under a few GM's who forced me to justify every faucet of my character's education regarding his knowledge base to my intense frustration; I think I'm just gonna go with this and simply not care. It's a game after-all.
As for the 2nd book, The Encountered, I find I'm having to stifle tittering like a schoolgirl every time I open it up. The Encountered does a fantastic job of taking existing Tropes from other sources, (Zombies that Shamble, Mutagenic Diseased folks from I AM LEGEND, Imps...) that immediately resonate but have a unique twist. Then there are the truly unique creatures that make me wonder if I can get some of the shit the developers were smoking at the time. They're often bizarre but not implausible and that's the holy grail of game monsters to me.
Anyhow, I'm still ongoing and haven't played anything yet. I'm sure there will be issues I'll have, but so far the impressions are quite positive.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Modern Pop Culture Myths
As the 2000's is coming to a close I'm starting to think of what trends and myths were prevelant this decade. I spent my high school years in the 90's, and graduated in 2000 and the thought of 90's music being like the 60's and 70's music I'd hear in my childhood fills me with the kind of dread that you get when the hot-new coworker assesses your musical taste with the words; "I think my dad listens to that stuff.
So I'm starting to reflect on what popular modern myths were in the 90's and this decade (still not sure if it should be called the "00's"), and potentially what's coming up post-2010. In the 90's the big upcoming game publisher was White Wolf and they succeeded by having an almost-uncanny grasp of what crazy myths gamers wanted to explore. They got in with the Anne Rice crowd with Vampire the Masquerade and built a great line of games off of it. Werewolf succeeded because they made the focus on environmentalism and stemming corporate exploitation of the planet when that was big news (before "carbon" became evil, and climate change became the catch-word for environmental sensationalism).
But Mage was a truly special case. The 90's was home to the rise of new-age paganism and people began wondering if there really was something to all that. It had mystique and offered interesting alternatives to the comparatively stale religions the previous generations. Alongside that there was some speculation that "virtual reality" would be the next big thing. These two concepts combined with a bit of "Men in Black" conspiracy theory gave rise to the Mage mythos and then was amplified into a brilliant corona when The Matrix came out.
I think we all have certain Movies, shows or pop culture offerings that we identify with to the point that in a small way they define our preferences for years to come. The Matrix was one of those for me. But more than that it was proof that back then White Wolf had an almost uncanny understanding of what was the new thing was going to be culturally. I don't think they have that understanding to the same extent today, and it makes me wonder who does?
Certain games capture the undertones of what a culture is interested in. In the 80's I'd say it was Cyberpunk, in the 90's Vampire and Mage were in there, now what is it? War in the Middle East? In many ways I think that Call of Duty Modern Warfare is so successful right now because it offers a bit of narrative closure to the events of the last decade. After 9/11 a lot of us honestly expected another attack to occur at some point... but none really came, the world did not fall apart and the Iraq war seemed like directionless flailing in response to the 2001 attacks. CoD Modern Warfare and MW2 offered a look at the concept of terrorism and war in a scenario that felt more justified than it did in reality, at least it seems that way in retrospect.
Lately I think there is once again a surge of interest in ergonomics, competition between mobile computing platforms like the iphone have all but replaced the CPU processor wars of yesteryear. More and more people want new and innovative ways to interface with technology which I believe will renew interest in cybernetics. Where virtual reality was the interest of the last decade, the prevalence of MMO's have made that notion common and it's lost the mystique. Now the mythical question is as we improve interfacing with our mobile gadgets and enhance our ability to network and assimilate information what will happen?
A friend of mine once gave his take on the whole 2012 furor. He speculated that we're becoming so interconnected and gathering information so much faster than before that at some point there may be a shift in our collective consciousness. I know that we definitely live in exponential times. Networks that previously took over a decade to develop are now exploding to a billion users within only one or two years.
I'm sure the results of these changes will end up being far more mundane-seeming than the speculation is right now, but that's the point isn't it? Because the myth is always more compelling than the reality.
So I'm starting to reflect on what popular modern myths were in the 90's and this decade (still not sure if it should be called the "00's"), and potentially what's coming up post-2010. In the 90's the big upcoming game publisher was White Wolf and they succeeded by having an almost-uncanny grasp of what crazy myths gamers wanted to explore. They got in with the Anne Rice crowd with Vampire the Masquerade and built a great line of games off of it. Werewolf succeeded because they made the focus on environmentalism and stemming corporate exploitation of the planet when that was big news (before "carbon" became evil, and climate change became the catch-word for environmental sensationalism).
But Mage was a truly special case. The 90's was home to the rise of new-age paganism and people began wondering if there really was something to all that. It had mystique and offered interesting alternatives to the comparatively stale religions the previous generations. Alongside that there was some speculation that "virtual reality" would be the next big thing. These two concepts combined with a bit of "Men in Black" conspiracy theory gave rise to the Mage mythos and then was amplified into a brilliant corona when The Matrix came out.
I think we all have certain Movies, shows or pop culture offerings that we identify with to the point that in a small way they define our preferences for years to come. The Matrix was one of those for me. But more than that it was proof that back then White Wolf had an almost uncanny understanding of what was the new thing was going to be culturally. I don't think they have that understanding to the same extent today, and it makes me wonder who does?
Certain games capture the undertones of what a culture is interested in. In the 80's I'd say it was Cyberpunk, in the 90's Vampire and Mage were in there, now what is it? War in the Middle East? In many ways I think that Call of Duty Modern Warfare is so successful right now because it offers a bit of narrative closure to the events of the last decade. After 9/11 a lot of us honestly expected another attack to occur at some point... but none really came, the world did not fall apart and the Iraq war seemed like directionless flailing in response to the 2001 attacks. CoD Modern Warfare and MW2 offered a look at the concept of terrorism and war in a scenario that felt more justified than it did in reality, at least it seems that way in retrospect.
Lately I think there is once again a surge of interest in ergonomics, competition between mobile computing platforms like the iphone have all but replaced the CPU processor wars of yesteryear. More and more people want new and innovative ways to interface with technology which I believe will renew interest in cybernetics. Where virtual reality was the interest of the last decade, the prevalence of MMO's have made that notion common and it's lost the mystique. Now the mythical question is as we improve interfacing with our mobile gadgets and enhance our ability to network and assimilate information what will happen?
A friend of mine once gave his take on the whole 2012 furor. He speculated that we're becoming so interconnected and gathering information so much faster than before that at some point there may be a shift in our collective consciousness. I know that we definitely live in exponential times. Networks that previously took over a decade to develop are now exploding to a billion users within only one or two years.
I'm sure the results of these changes will end up being far more mundane-seeming than the speculation is right now, but that's the point isn't it? Because the myth is always more compelling than the reality.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
On Morality, Piracy and Sticking it to the Man
DISCLAIMER - This isn't a legal debate but a moral one. The laws are defined by people more powerful than me. When I'm in a position to do something about the laws I'll start making those debates.
Admittedly I have been known to pirate certain things, some of them I feel a small twinge of guilt in doing so, some I feel no guilt whatsoever, and in a few cases I feel my actions are not only warranted but I feel an obligation to encourage others to do the same. I wanted to touch on a bit of this to help work out my feelings on supply, demand and creation.
Music - Since the advent of itunes I have almost stopped pirating music altogether. I can buy songs I like on an individual basis, it's quick and easy for me to support artists I like, and I can download a song at work to listen to on my ipod on my way home. I've heard (but not verified) that artists get a bit better percentage for their works from apple which makes me more inclined to want to use that as well.
I generally hate the RIAA and how it was exploiting recording artists and generally diminishing music as an art form by favoring engineered beats that are designed to get stuck in your head. This arguement has it's flaws I realize but it's an opinion, not a fact. I also didn't care to pay $20.00 for a CD which I only liked 2 songs on. itunes has fixed that, so I no longer have the inclination or feel morally obligated to pirate music.
PDFs - The only PDF's I actively use are RPG PDF's, and admittedly when I pirate these I do feel a bit guilty for doing so. I do a few things to assuage this guilt though. Games that I actually want to play or end up playing will enevitably be bought in dead-tree form by me, and games that I'm enthusiastically involved in I'll usually buy the PDF on the day it's released and then order the dead tree from the bookstore when it becomes available. I don't complain about this, however companies that offer some way for me to get a PDF as a bonus for purchasing a book have my gratitude.
Most PDF's I do actually pirate are games that I just want to peruse, like leafing through one on a bookshelf. Not justification I know, but I feel that perhaps it's a bit better that the book got out there a bit because otherwise I'd have never taken that look.
Warhammer - This is a subset of RPG's that deserves special mention because I feel morally obligated to pirate the shit out of their miniatures. I have a friend who casts silicone molds and though some of the finer warhammer miniatures aren't castable, there's a lot of stuff that is. If he actually had the capability to mold an entire army-line of miniatures I would probably start playing Warhammer again just for the satisfaction of knowing that I was screwing them in my own small way. They over-priced their product long ago, and frankly I find their business model offensive. Given the lack of a viable way to pirate their stuff, I'm more than happy to boycott them, even while living within a block of probably one of the best venues for playing Warhammer in the northern hemisphere.
Movies - I go to the theatre, I buy movies on Blu Ray when they're available, and DVD if they're truly exceptional, and would support them more if more blu ray titles were available where I live, regrettably they're not. TV shows I feel should be legitimized on the torrents complete with advertising. They're easily trackable so ad revenue is simple to get. It's not my fault that the studios aren't capitalizing on this opportunity.
Programs - I don't pirate computer games anymore. Steam makes them quite accessible. Certain microsoft products like older versions of Office seem justified for piracy (older versions of lots of things really). There is still a small black pit of hatred in my heart for antivirus software that I would pirate if I could... but that's an excercise in futility. If you own a PC you have to pay for antivirus, anything less and you're asking to be screwed.
Adobe is another one of those special exceptions. While their creative suite software is extremely expensive, I can't say if it's overpriced or not, I know that I can't afford it, but I like to use it. A slight moral justification is that the pirated versions are teaching me how to use their products which may eventually lead to me buying a legitimate copy. Acrobat however I feel very strongly that EVERYONE should pirate! I really like interactive PDF's for character sheets, but without Acrobat Pro, interactive sheets can't be saved with their changes which is a deliberate withold of functionality that I just cannot forgive. If Adobe included the ability to save interactive PDFs in their reader, my stance would change.
Most of my opinions are independent of quality of product or my opinion of the business ethics of the company. They're strictly based on if I think the product is available easily and for a fair price. Apple I know has some very harsh mandates on it's employees and it's ipod app approval process is bordering on despicable but I will continue to give them my money because they offer a product that meets my expectations for a reasonable price and make it accessible easily.
Lastly, from a moral standpoint copyright infringement is not theft. Theft is taking something from someone so that they don't have it anymore. Copyright infringement takes nothing from anyone and in 90% of the scenarios where the product was pirated, I would have never have payed for that product anyways and of that remaining 10% probably 5% was simply me demoing the product before buying, so it is a very rare case where I've actually deprived any creator of cash they would have otherwise gotten.
I'm interested in hearing what other people's personal stances are on the whole issue. Some of my friends are content creators out there and are trying to make a living doing so, they're people I wouldn't want to hurt by depriving them of cash or creating holes in their business model. There are also questions of availability. If pirated content is easier to obtain than legitimate, isn't that a case of poor market availability?
Admittedly I have been known to pirate certain things, some of them I feel a small twinge of guilt in doing so, some I feel no guilt whatsoever, and in a few cases I feel my actions are not only warranted but I feel an obligation to encourage others to do the same. I wanted to touch on a bit of this to help work out my feelings on supply, demand and creation.
Music - Since the advent of itunes I have almost stopped pirating music altogether. I can buy songs I like on an individual basis, it's quick and easy for me to support artists I like, and I can download a song at work to listen to on my ipod on my way home. I've heard (but not verified) that artists get a bit better percentage for their works from apple which makes me more inclined to want to use that as well.
I generally hate the RIAA and how it was exploiting recording artists and generally diminishing music as an art form by favoring engineered beats that are designed to get stuck in your head. This arguement has it's flaws I realize but it's an opinion, not a fact. I also didn't care to pay $20.00 for a CD which I only liked 2 songs on. itunes has fixed that, so I no longer have the inclination or feel morally obligated to pirate music.
PDFs - The only PDF's I actively use are RPG PDF's, and admittedly when I pirate these I do feel a bit guilty for doing so. I do a few things to assuage this guilt though. Games that I actually want to play or end up playing will enevitably be bought in dead-tree form by me, and games that I'm enthusiastically involved in I'll usually buy the PDF on the day it's released and then order the dead tree from the bookstore when it becomes available. I don't complain about this, however companies that offer some way for me to get a PDF as a bonus for purchasing a book have my gratitude.
Most PDF's I do actually pirate are games that I just want to peruse, like leafing through one on a bookshelf. Not justification I know, but I feel that perhaps it's a bit better that the book got out there a bit because otherwise I'd have never taken that look.
Warhammer - This is a subset of RPG's that deserves special mention because I feel morally obligated to pirate the shit out of their miniatures. I have a friend who casts silicone molds and though some of the finer warhammer miniatures aren't castable, there's a lot of stuff that is. If he actually had the capability to mold an entire army-line of miniatures I would probably start playing Warhammer again just for the satisfaction of knowing that I was screwing them in my own small way. They over-priced their product long ago, and frankly I find their business model offensive. Given the lack of a viable way to pirate their stuff, I'm more than happy to boycott them, even while living within a block of probably one of the best venues for playing Warhammer in the northern hemisphere.
Movies - I go to the theatre, I buy movies on Blu Ray when they're available, and DVD if they're truly exceptional, and would support them more if more blu ray titles were available where I live, regrettably they're not. TV shows I feel should be legitimized on the torrents complete with advertising. They're easily trackable so ad revenue is simple to get. It's not my fault that the studios aren't capitalizing on this opportunity.
Programs - I don't pirate computer games anymore. Steam makes them quite accessible. Certain microsoft products like older versions of Office seem justified for piracy (older versions of lots of things really). There is still a small black pit of hatred in my heart for antivirus software that I would pirate if I could... but that's an excercise in futility. If you own a PC you have to pay for antivirus, anything less and you're asking to be screwed.
Adobe is another one of those special exceptions. While their creative suite software is extremely expensive, I can't say if it's overpriced or not, I know that I can't afford it, but I like to use it. A slight moral justification is that the pirated versions are teaching me how to use their products which may eventually lead to me buying a legitimate copy. Acrobat however I feel very strongly that EVERYONE should pirate! I really like interactive PDF's for character sheets, but without Acrobat Pro, interactive sheets can't be saved with their changes which is a deliberate withold of functionality that I just cannot forgive. If Adobe included the ability to save interactive PDFs in their reader, my stance would change.
Most of my opinions are independent of quality of product or my opinion of the business ethics of the company. They're strictly based on if I think the product is available easily and for a fair price. Apple I know has some very harsh mandates on it's employees and it's ipod app approval process is bordering on despicable but I will continue to give them my money because they offer a product that meets my expectations for a reasonable price and make it accessible easily.
Lastly, from a moral standpoint copyright infringement is not theft. Theft is taking something from someone so that they don't have it anymore. Copyright infringement takes nothing from anyone and in 90% of the scenarios where the product was pirated, I would have never have payed for that product anyways and of that remaining 10% probably 5% was simply me demoing the product before buying, so it is a very rare case where I've actually deprived any creator of cash they would have otherwise gotten.
I'm interested in hearing what other people's personal stances are on the whole issue. Some of my friends are content creators out there and are trying to make a living doing so, they're people I wouldn't want to hurt by depriving them of cash or creating holes in their business model. There are also questions of availability. If pirated content is easier to obtain than legitimate, isn't that a case of poor market availability?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
New Systems
This weekend I finished up working on Hardkore, I'm a bit sad by this because it's entirely without fanfare and I'm not sure my work will ever see the light of day. Despite this I'm moving on with new ideas. I want to create my own game and the prospects of doing so on my own terms excites me.
So I've been working on a system that's very different from Hardkore's principles of simulationism. This one is about accessibility and is designed to use familiar tenants and systems to attract new gamers. This is my first attempt which you may critique.
The foundation of the system is 3d6 and a Texas Holdem-style poker Mechanic.
I'll explain.
Characters have
Stats (standard faire Strength Dex Intelligence etc... ) ranging from 0 to +3
Skills (Also standard, Melee, Archery, Stealth...) ranging from 0 to +5
Equipment (That provides mods) ranging from 0 (no equipment) to +3 (awesome magical stuff)
Basic Action
A basic action is resolved by a 3d6 + Stat + Skill + Equipment Die Roll.
A Resisted Action
A resisted action adds in a Poker-Style Mechanic, here's how it works.
Terminology:
A Turn is a segment of time in which a single rolled action is conducted.
A Round is 4 turns in which a game of holdem poker determines a result in addition to the die roll results of the Basic Actions.
The Action Pool is the modifier number of the basic action the character is doing (Stat+Skill+Equipment) represented as individual points, players draw points from the pool to place bets each action.
The round consists of:
1. The Deal. - 2 Cards are delt to every player involved. The Ante is announced. The ante is the situational difficulty of the conflicts in question and is chosen by the GM. For example, a duel on a slippery rooftop in the rain will have a higher Ante then a duel in an open field. Players pull points from their action pool to place their bets and then the die roll for the action is rolled with the remaining modifiers from the Action Pool.
2. The Flop - 3 community cards are layed down by the GM. The players can again bet a portion of their action pool (minimum of the Ante, but not a multiple of) before rolling their 2nd Action.
3. The Turn - The 4th community card is laid down and another round of betting commences before the players roll their actions.
4. The River - The final community card is laid down and players that have not folded have a showdown, the winner recieves the pot of bets.
Folding means that the PC goes on the defensive for the rest of the round, they get +5 to their Defensive Pool, but cannot take any offensive actions until the Round is over.
During the round any players can choose to flip one of their pocket cards to add the value of that card to their die roll. (Aces = 1, Jacks =11 Queens = 12, Kings = 13). The card remains flipped and in-play assuming the player doesn't fold.
If one player bets more than another player's action pool and the underdog wishes to remain playing the round, she can go All-In (using all her Action Pool and rolling her unmodified Die Roll for her actions), but must go All-In for the remaining actions in the round unless her opponent who forced the All-In folds.
The winner of the round gets the pot. Each subsequent action that PC spends the pot to add a bonus to her die rolls. The number of points spent, (and thus the bonus) is dependent on the winning hand.
High Card = +1
Pair = +2
2 Pair = +2
3 Of a kind = +3
Straight = +3
Flush = +3
Full House = +3
Four of a Kind = +4
Straight Flush = +4.
Health levels at this point will start at 18. If a PC is brought to 12, then she loses a die to all actions. If brought to 6 she goes down to using one die on all actions. At zero she's incapacitated and at the mercy of the GM/other players. Damage is equal to the remaining modifier from an attack after defense is subtracted.
Defense. Weapons will have an offensive and defensive modifier. Defensive actions are unrolled and are 10 + Defensive Pool. If the player folds a round that goes up to 15 + Defensive Pool.
There's the rudiments of my system idea. Comments questions and ideas are always welcome.
So I've been working on a system that's very different from Hardkore's principles of simulationism. This one is about accessibility and is designed to use familiar tenants and systems to attract new gamers. This is my first attempt which you may critique.
The foundation of the system is 3d6 and a Texas Holdem-style poker Mechanic.
I'll explain.
Characters have
Stats (standard faire Strength Dex Intelligence etc... ) ranging from 0 to +3
Skills (Also standard, Melee, Archery, Stealth...) ranging from 0 to +5
Equipment (That provides mods) ranging from 0 (no equipment) to +3 (awesome magical stuff)
Basic Action
A basic action is resolved by a 3d6 + Stat + Skill + Equipment Die Roll.
A Resisted Action
A resisted action adds in a Poker-Style Mechanic, here's how it works.
Terminology:
A Turn is a segment of time in which a single rolled action is conducted.
A Round is 4 turns in which a game of holdem poker determines a result in addition to the die roll results of the Basic Actions.
The Action Pool is the modifier number of the basic action the character is doing (Stat+Skill+Equipment) represented as individual points, players draw points from the pool to place bets each action.
The round consists of:
1. The Deal. - 2 Cards are delt to every player involved. The Ante is announced. The ante is the situational difficulty of the conflicts in question and is chosen by the GM. For example, a duel on a slippery rooftop in the rain will have a higher Ante then a duel in an open field. Players pull points from their action pool to place their bets and then the die roll for the action is rolled with the remaining modifiers from the Action Pool.
2. The Flop - 3 community cards are layed down by the GM. The players can again bet a portion of their action pool (minimum of the Ante, but not a multiple of) before rolling their 2nd Action.
3. The Turn - The 4th community card is laid down and another round of betting commences before the players roll their actions.
4. The River - The final community card is laid down and players that have not folded have a showdown, the winner recieves the pot of bets.
Folding means that the PC goes on the defensive for the rest of the round, they get +5 to their Defensive Pool, but cannot take any offensive actions until the Round is over.
During the round any players can choose to flip one of their pocket cards to add the value of that card to their die roll. (Aces = 1, Jacks =11 Queens = 12, Kings = 13). The card remains flipped and in-play assuming the player doesn't fold.
If one player bets more than another player's action pool and the underdog wishes to remain playing the round, she can go All-In (using all her Action Pool and rolling her unmodified Die Roll for her actions), but must go All-In for the remaining actions in the round unless her opponent who forced the All-In folds.
The winner of the round gets the pot. Each subsequent action that PC spends the pot to add a bonus to her die rolls. The number of points spent, (and thus the bonus) is dependent on the winning hand.
High Card = +1
Pair = +2
2 Pair = +2
3 Of a kind = +3
Straight = +3
Flush = +3
Full House = +3
Four of a Kind = +4
Straight Flush = +4.
Health levels at this point will start at 18. If a PC is brought to 12, then she loses a die to all actions. If brought to 6 she goes down to using one die on all actions. At zero she's incapacitated and at the mercy of the GM/other players. Damage is equal to the remaining modifier from an attack after defense is subtracted.
Defense. Weapons will have an offensive and defensive modifier. Defensive actions are unrolled and are 10 + Defensive Pool. If the player folds a round that goes up to 15 + Defensive Pool.
There's the rudiments of my system idea. Comments questions and ideas are always welcome.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Bad Games
Lately I've been playing only bad games. (except DIRT for the PS3, which was well worth the $11 I payed for it at EB games) By bad I mean really BAD, especially on the RPG front. Today I want to talk about 2 games specifically because I think they're bad for opposite reasons, Vampire Wars and (all) the RPG games my best friend runs.
To those of you who aren't familiar with Facebook and it's plethora of "apps" which simultaneously ammuse and irritate the majority of it's users, Vampire Wars is a facebook App Game where you "play" (very loose term there) a Vampire. By play I mean that you create a unique vampire character by giving it a name, and then dressing it up in the very tiny handful of clothing options they give you. Then you get a handful of actions to do with this vampire you've just created. You can do "missions" which is basically click on a link and get a reward in exchange for spending a pool of various stat-points that automatically replenish over time. There's no risk in the missions, and nothing fancy or entertaining about them, simply click the link, get the feedback/reward. The missions even have these imagination-inspiring names that make you wish you could actually have your vampire do them a little, like "Defeat a rival vampire." or "Infiltrate the Spider Queen's lair" but after the first 15 seconds you stop looking at their token attempt to dress up which is essentially a slot-machine mechanic without any chance or potential for meaningful reward.
The other main action is "combat" which is more link clicking, but this involves some chance. The factors to win are how many people you've sucked into playing this stupid game with you, and how many little graphically illustrated "abilities" you've managed to accumulate through gameplay. The more of both the better. You fight other players to steal some of their stuff and get bragging rights that's represented by a numerical value.
That's basically all there is to Vampire Wars, they have a revenue generating mechanic that lets you buy a certain kind of rare currency to purchase some of the cooler stuff, but it doesn't change the core gameplay which is so sparse and pointless that I'd laugh if I hadn't been playing this stupid game for 2 weeks now.
The thing is, Vampire wars does one thing for me that keeps me logging on a couple times a day, it inspires my imagination. The game makes me remember the old LARPing days of Vampire the Masquerade when me and my fellow players were trying to plan and execute our schemes to hurt other vampires, influence and feed on mortals and protect our sleeping havens. We had to describe and role-play our actions before our arbitrating GM who would sometimes oppose our attempts and thus we went away unsuccessful as often as not. But it was fun. Vampire Wars reminds me of those fun escapades where we'd screw around and try to pull off things without getting our precious characters killed.
On the other end of the spectrum are the RPG games my friend tries to run, which I've all but sworn off of, despite the fact that he's my best friend, and I really really want to play more games right now. His games are steeped in complexity but for all his efforts they don't inspire anything in me but frustration. Where Vampire Wars is simply an advancement of an avatar that's conceptually so flimsy to barely even be there, his games are entirely concept with hardly any mechanical structure to gain purchase to. His games are all story, but the story is meant to be made by the players, but he doesn't like to give the players the means or inspiration to strive for anything, because those would be things that we could exploit, and exploiting things is the death of all RPG's it seems. I'm sure he'd say that I'm way off base, but I've spent the last 5 years trying to understand his games and that's the best I've figured.
I wish I could combine the strengths of both of these bad games and get to play a good game, but my magic lamp and genie is taking it's time arriving. Maybe I'll figure something out in the interim.
To those of you who aren't familiar with Facebook and it's plethora of "apps" which simultaneously ammuse and irritate the majority of it's users, Vampire Wars is a facebook App Game where you "play" (very loose term there) a Vampire. By play I mean that you create a unique vampire character by giving it a name, and then dressing it up in the very tiny handful of clothing options they give you. Then you get a handful of actions to do with this vampire you've just created. You can do "missions" which is basically click on a link and get a reward in exchange for spending a pool of various stat-points that automatically replenish over time. There's no risk in the missions, and nothing fancy or entertaining about them, simply click the link, get the feedback/reward. The missions even have these imagination-inspiring names that make you wish you could actually have your vampire do them a little, like "Defeat a rival vampire." or "Infiltrate the Spider Queen's lair" but after the first 15 seconds you stop looking at their token attempt to dress up which is essentially a slot-machine mechanic without any chance or potential for meaningful reward.
The other main action is "combat" which is more link clicking, but this involves some chance. The factors to win are how many people you've sucked into playing this stupid game with you, and how many little graphically illustrated "abilities" you've managed to accumulate through gameplay. The more of both the better. You fight other players to steal some of their stuff and get bragging rights that's represented by a numerical value.
That's basically all there is to Vampire Wars, they have a revenue generating mechanic that lets you buy a certain kind of rare currency to purchase some of the cooler stuff, but it doesn't change the core gameplay which is so sparse and pointless that I'd laugh if I hadn't been playing this stupid game for 2 weeks now.
The thing is, Vampire wars does one thing for me that keeps me logging on a couple times a day, it inspires my imagination. The game makes me remember the old LARPing days of Vampire the Masquerade when me and my fellow players were trying to plan and execute our schemes to hurt other vampires, influence and feed on mortals and protect our sleeping havens. We had to describe and role-play our actions before our arbitrating GM who would sometimes oppose our attempts and thus we went away unsuccessful as often as not. But it was fun. Vampire Wars reminds me of those fun escapades where we'd screw around and try to pull off things without getting our precious characters killed.
On the other end of the spectrum are the RPG games my friend tries to run, which I've all but sworn off of, despite the fact that he's my best friend, and I really really want to play more games right now. His games are steeped in complexity but for all his efforts they don't inspire anything in me but frustration. Where Vampire Wars is simply an advancement of an avatar that's conceptually so flimsy to barely even be there, his games are entirely concept with hardly any mechanical structure to gain purchase to. His games are all story, but the story is meant to be made by the players, but he doesn't like to give the players the means or inspiration to strive for anything, because those would be things that we could exploit, and exploiting things is the death of all RPG's it seems. I'm sure he'd say that I'm way off base, but I've spent the last 5 years trying to understand his games and that's the best I've figured.
I wish I could combine the strengths of both of these bad games and get to play a good game, but my magic lamp and genie is taking it's time arriving. Maybe I'll figure something out in the interim.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Understanding Power
Power. A lot of people don't understand what is real power or how to attain it. If you ask most people what makes you powerful, they'll tell you "money".
"Money is Power" we've probably all heard that mantra at one time or another, but it's not true.
Not true power. Money is an illusion created by the truly powerful to control people, it's a goal for regular people to strive to so they don't actually see what causes others to have true power over them. Money is only a bi-product of power, and it is in the best interests of those who actually have power to keep people striving to attain it.
There are actually 7 paths to true power. These paths are rooted in the basic needs of humanity, control any one of these paths, even a small bit of one and you control people. Control all of one whole path and you effectively have control over all people. A being that controls all 7 paths can only be a god.
1. Information
2. Food
3. Sex
4. Land
5. Water
6. Energy
7. Death
You won't find that list in any manual for global domination, but nonetheless it's the truth and it's been that way for thousands of years. There are a few points to consider about each of these keys.
- Controlling information controls how people think, but also grants a form of omniscience as well as omnipotence.
- Controlling food allows someone to eventually control life and how it evolves and if it survives. There is far more genetic modification happening in the food we eat then most people realize.
- Absolute control of sex has proven difficult it generally controls us more than we can control it. Control of reproduction is possible and done so in many alarming ways, but controlling the drive for sex without catastrophic consequence has proved much more elusive.
- By and large, governments control Land they use this control to have power over the citizens.
- Water is far easier to control than most people would believe. It's necessary and disturbingly easy to withhold from people but also easy to add drugs and chemicals to as well. It is increasingly difficult to find water without fluoride in it.
- Energy comes in many forms starting with gravity and the sun. The types that people can control grant massive amounts of power to those who do.
- Death is far more of a necessity than most believe. It is both essential and inevitable, and every spiritual organization ever conceived of has existed to control it.
Those of you who want power best study these 7 paths and work to master them, but also guard against those who would master too much of any path. More on these paths, and those who follow and abuse them in future posts.
"Money is Power" we've probably all heard that mantra at one time or another, but it's not true.
Not true power. Money is an illusion created by the truly powerful to control people, it's a goal for regular people to strive to so they don't actually see what causes others to have true power over them. Money is only a bi-product of power, and it is in the best interests of those who actually have power to keep people striving to attain it.
There are actually 7 paths to true power. These paths are rooted in the basic needs of humanity, control any one of these paths, even a small bit of one and you control people. Control all of one whole path and you effectively have control over all people. A being that controls all 7 paths can only be a god.
1. Information
2. Food
3. Sex
4. Land
5. Water
6. Energy
7. Death
You won't find that list in any manual for global domination, but nonetheless it's the truth and it's been that way for thousands of years. There are a few points to consider about each of these keys.
- Controlling information controls how people think, but also grants a form of omniscience as well as omnipotence.
- Controlling food allows someone to eventually control life and how it evolves and if it survives. There is far more genetic modification happening in the food we eat then most people realize.
- Absolute control of sex has proven difficult it generally controls us more than we can control it. Control of reproduction is possible and done so in many alarming ways, but controlling the drive for sex without catastrophic consequence has proved much more elusive.
- By and large, governments control Land they use this control to have power over the citizens.
- Water is far easier to control than most people would believe. It's necessary and disturbingly easy to withhold from people but also easy to add drugs and chemicals to as well. It is increasingly difficult to find water without fluoride in it.
- Energy comes in many forms starting with gravity and the sun. The types that people can control grant massive amounts of power to those who do.
- Death is far more of a necessity than most believe. It is both essential and inevitable, and every spiritual organization ever conceived of has existed to control it.
Those of you who want power best study these 7 paths and work to master them, but also guard against those who would master too much of any path. More on these paths, and those who follow and abuse them in future posts.
For Those Who Hate Twitter But Haven't Tried It...
I was there with you, didn't see the point, hating the idea of a digital leash, a bunch of online stalkers stalking each other... I thought, "Nah! I like blogging, I enjoy conversing with people online but Twitter... that's too much, that shit's for crazy folks."
Here's the thing, contrary to first impressions, Twitter isn't a peep hole into everyone's private lives. No one I follow Tweets "Eating now" or "Bored at work", if they did I wouldn't follow them. They tweet interesting things, or if they're not interesting, they make them interesting by adding personal insight or humorous quip, or something else that makes the post dynamic and interesting enough to waste the 2 seconds it takes to read it. If the tweet strikes a chord with someone, they might @reply you and a conversation is started.
Pretty creepy huh. Fuckin stalkers.
A couple of my old Vox peeps amuse me with their adamant avoidance of Twitter, it's amusing because they're exactly the sorts of people that enjoy Twitter the most. They carry on huge threads of conversations in the comment space below their blogs, engaging nearly everyone and making them feel like they're interesting and contributing something too. These are the great social butterflies of the internet that I will strive to be like, making people feel good to be in their presence, happy to call them friend. These people always seem to be able to make time for even the geekiest introvert, and for that they deserve the praise they inevitably receive.
Twitter embraces these sorts of people, they're the best contributers to the network and take the most from it, it's not a one-way relationship, if it were no one would use it.
I don't criticize people who don't use twitter, not everyone is meant to, just like not everyone is meant to blog, or write, or draw, or be a public speaker. Some people would get a lot out of it but simply don't have the time, or can't afford yet another distraction, I can't fault anyone for that either. But for those who see it as a senseless waste of time they'll get bored with, when they write the best blogs and interact heavily in comments; they I can only educate, and after being shown what they're missing they're only missing out on a way to reach and interact with more people. If you want to keep things small and intimate, then yeah, don't use Twitter, but if you want to reach a wider audience, meet more people, get more information about the stuff you're interested in and have a better network of contacts and friends... then you owe it to yourself to give it a try for at least a few months.
...and if and when you do, follow me.
Here's the thing, contrary to first impressions, Twitter isn't a peep hole into everyone's private lives. No one I follow Tweets "Eating now" or "Bored at work", if they did I wouldn't follow them. They tweet interesting things, or if they're not interesting, they make them interesting by adding personal insight or humorous quip, or something else that makes the post dynamic and interesting enough to waste the 2 seconds it takes to read it. If the tweet strikes a chord with someone, they might @reply you and a conversation is started.
Pretty creepy huh. Fuckin stalkers.
A couple of my old Vox peeps amuse me with their adamant avoidance of Twitter, it's amusing because they're exactly the sorts of people that enjoy Twitter the most. They carry on huge threads of conversations in the comment space below their blogs, engaging nearly everyone and making them feel like they're interesting and contributing something too. These are the great social butterflies of the internet that I will strive to be like, making people feel good to be in their presence, happy to call them friend. These people always seem to be able to make time for even the geekiest introvert, and for that they deserve the praise they inevitably receive.
Twitter embraces these sorts of people, they're the best contributers to the network and take the most from it, it's not a one-way relationship, if it were no one would use it.
I don't criticize people who don't use twitter, not everyone is meant to, just like not everyone is meant to blog, or write, or draw, or be a public speaker. Some people would get a lot out of it but simply don't have the time, or can't afford yet another distraction, I can't fault anyone for that either. But for those who see it as a senseless waste of time they'll get bored with, when they write the best blogs and interact heavily in comments; they I can only educate, and after being shown what they're missing they're only missing out on a way to reach and interact with more people. If you want to keep things small and intimate, then yeah, don't use Twitter, but if you want to reach a wider audience, meet more people, get more information about the stuff you're interested in and have a better network of contacts and friends... then you owe it to yourself to give it a try for at least a few months.
...and if and when you do, follow me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)