Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in The_Fallen's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Wednesday, March 21st, 2007
9:19 pm	[whine] Sick of feeling tired all day, no matter what I do. Sleep test showed I have issues when I sleep on my back, but I don't anymore, so I should be ok... But I'm not... Alas. And I pulled my hamstring... [/whine] (1 Comment |Comment on this)
8:39 pm	Today's topic: Granularity and Subtle Contrast In a rush to be easier to use, I feel that many game systems (LARP, tabletop, computer) try to lump things in to bins that restrict creativity. At some level this is just plain obviously necessary, unless some form of subjective authority is arbitrating all actions. This ALMOST works for tabletop, where a GM is already deciding a good many things, but fails miserably in other mediums, since a LARP GM can't be everywhere at once (nor can 5 GMs... scaling isn't feasible to solve this), or computer games since a computer can't be programmed to arbitrarily decide anything (and I'm not going to quibble semantics about this). I always find most interesting competitions with contrasting styles... Haggler-Leonard, David-Goliath, Sparta-Hollywood, or the Musketeer vs the Troll. How does a system allow for an equal "point value" fencer or finesse character to have an even-odds chance to defeat a brutal brawler, while not getting into some crazy level of special-case hell, convoluted collection of indices, or "break out the calculator" madness? Ultimately, the basic gist is a corallary of "risk vs. reward"... The finesse based fighter must be able to "affect" more often, but have less specific effect each time. Perhaps it comes down to "hit more often" vs. "hit harder". However, given "damage resistance" this isn't balanceable to any reasonable level. Perhaps "resist damage" and "don't get hit" can be categories here, but they almost have to be in pairs... Someone with large expenditures towards either "hit more often and hit harder" becomes the proverbial howitzer-eggshell... They can likely cause massive damage to a comparably pointed character, but are vulnerable to damage in return. Someone with large expenditures towards dodging and resistance is an even worse case, where they aren't that likely to affect their foe, but can be largely immovable... Commonly called a "meat shield" this can be more like a "giant blob of stasis" in a gameworld. From experience, it's just not a lot of fun. Is it possible to balance expenditure in two pools: harder vs. more often dodge vs. resist such that there's actually not an obvious "best case against everything"? Does restricting a character to having only one of the items in each pool help? Does restricting a character to having only one pool help as well? Do these restrictions so compromise the issue as to cause no actual creative input value density (creative input to added complexity ratio)? Many systems simpy allow the addition of a "stunt" or dialog explanation of the action, either for a small reward or simply for the sake of doing. In tabletop games, this can work, and does fairly well in the Exalted series and a few others. In computer games, it's infeasible and thrown away as *hack* *cough* RP. In a LARP, this almost seems feasible, except there are likely to be a decent few people and combat is already often deemed slow in groups over 5. Having everyone contribute 3-10 (a VERY conservative maximum) seconds of dialog frequently will likely frustrate the other participants, leading to a net loss. It's been proposed that a skill could be taken that allows the character/player to describe their actions. This is perhaps a good idea, but begs two questions... One, why must a player pay points to roleplay? Two, is the intent to provide granularity or the illusion of it? Stepping back from my mathematician roots to consider the core here, the game designer profession, regardless of genre (except for "serious" games that intend to teach/train), is intended to entertain. In a LARP every player is both audience and actor/actress. One could quite effectively argue that illusion IS reality. Thus I'd vote "yes" for the second question above, leaving simply the first question (why be required to pay) and the requirement that the audience not be frustrated and bored. Combat is a character "type" or "avenue". Like "doctor" and "engineer", it basically opens up a particular form of dramatic event for the character/player's participation. There are already skills which guide the competency of these characters within this dramatic scene. They form how good at combat the character is intended to be. As such, I believe they should also gate how frequently and to what level the player should get the spotlight. I'd purport a system whereby the "in use" combat-governing skills are averaged, and for each point above this, the character/player may describe in detail one action they take in the combat. Perhaps this average could be bumped a point at 6, 10, 15, 20 people to ensure larger combats (in which the average participant is less likely to be a "combat thrud") have less individual "screen-time" and move more quickly. (48 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, January 13th, 2007
3:21 am	Cessation of my Unemployment Thursday was a rather productive day... 6:00 drove from Hagerstown toward Fairfax 8:20 returned rental car finally 10:00 doctor's appointment 10:30 called guys at drfirst.com to start things as requested. Was told they'd call me back with a time for a phone interview. 11:00 lunch 11:45 short nap 12:20 waited at dentists office for 1:00 appointment 12:45 drfirst called back, said my conversation with Brenland qualified for the phone-screening part, and that they'd like to bring me in for an interview... Asked when I could come by, I said I'd be in Rockville this afternoon. They said come in at 3:45. 1:00 root canal... Novocane ftw. 2:15 got lost on way to lunch, muchly 3:15 arrived at my 2:30 lunch with ravenrose... oops. 3:55 got to interview, left side of face completely numb. 6:00 given a tech test on SQL 6:30 met the senior management of the company 7:00 toured the office 7:20 given a job offer (3 Comments |Comment on this)
2:40 am	Respect, Yo... Reply to this post, and I'll tell you at least one reason why I like and respect you. We don't necessarily offer positive reinforcement to our friends and neighbors, so this should be cool. Feel free to steal this idea, in a similar way to how I stole it from another. (9 Comments |Comment on this)
Friday, January 12th, 2007
6:20 am	Player Motivations in Gaming So like most, I have theories... Mine come from experiences primarily with online games, so I've been interested in how they apply to LARP and in what ways they apply differently. Here's my most basic theory about gaming of all types (tabletop/online/LARP), borrowed and expanded from an outside source. Types: Players experience games for a variety of reasons, but most of these fall under four main types. Socialization - desire to connect with other players and form lasting connection Exploration - desire to find and explore the world, find the edges and boundaries both of the world and the systems that make it work Achievers - desire to be respected, fulfill goals, and "win" "Killers" - desire to be powerful and generally better than others Most players are a combination of these drives, but are predominantly controlled by one. The difference between Achievers and Killers is similar to the difference between golf and boxing. Achievers are driven to accomplish great things in the world. Killers are driven to beat the other players. Interactions: The interactions between these drives form the basic dynamic of shared experience. Understanding these interactions is key to designing a world that sustains itself, can continue to grow, and will foster positive feelings in the players. Socializers don't much get along with Killers, but are generally tolerant of Achievers Explorers tend to be largely self-sufficient and generally keep to themselves Achievers generally can either drive plot by organizing and involving others or stymie it by hoarding information into a private stash Killers generally drive things but inevitably frustrate everyone else, including other Killers... Design Conclusions: The challenge for the staff is thus a matter of world creation, run timing, and impulse control. World - Must have breadth enough for explorers to find interesting secret places, yet deep enough and with enough challenges for the Achievers to pry at. Generally these two tenets combine to set the required level of "content". My experience indicates that explorers are difficult-to-impossible to ultimately keep sated, since no two want to explore the same places (both in terms of genre/type and literally, as it limits the "newness" when another person or few have been there). Providing a series of significant major "epic" plot points is generally more possible and gives more bang-for-the-hour in terms of development time. Timing - Must be enough downtime for socializers to engage each other, disseminate information and consider meta-plot, without being sedentary enough to bore the Achievers and Killers. Impulse Control - Must be enough opportunity for Achievers and Killers to compete in various controlled ways, without being so competitive that Socializers and Explorers are frustrated. Even in a universe without direct player-vs.-player combat, there may and must be ways for players to directly compete. Without this outlet, one of two things will happen -- either tension will mount between certain subsets or individuals and eventually burst, or the playerbase will end up in a generally agreeable herd controlled by a cadre of strong personalities. At first glance this seems fine, but in practice it proves poor; the average player feels somewhat irrelevant and powerless and is often doing things just because the herd is moving that way rather than due to actual personal interest. In my limited LARPing experience at MIT, Legends (boffer LARP in Mass), and in the Virginia/Maryland area, these tenets seem to still apply with some caveats... LARPing has some significant design advantages over computer games, most importantly in scale (50 players are easier to play than 100k) and run-time (the world doesn't need to be up 24/7). I believe the battle of breadth (for the explorers) is more tenable, as the universe can be specifically reactive in certain spots (the GMs can occasionally freelance create and manipulate the world as players push at the sides of it). Scale helps here, as individual attention can be paid to a much larger degree. The depth (for Achievers) is a more difficult situation. I believe the expectations for plot moments are much higher in LARP. The players' personal involvement is higher, and the game experiences are fewer and further between. However, I think these expectations are manageable and meetable. However, the most important change in my estimation is that of the NPC. I really relish the fact that people are willing to come in and play the NPCs with ardor and zeal. This allows the game to live at a much higher level. I'm still unsure how player patience levels compare across genres (how quickly they drop games or become disillusioned). (12 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, December 27th, 2006
4:54 pm	Catching up a bit on old memes Lions and tigers and the_fallen, oh my! Which movie was this quote from? Get your own quotes: (Comment on this)
Thursday, December 14th, 2006
4:37 am	Dear diary... Huh... Anxiety is assuaged more by dealing with things than by denial and evasion. Whoduthunkit? Lesson for the arbitrary-period-of-time: Don't let fear of where the ship's sailing prevent you from seeing the beautiful scenery. Corallary: If you're going through hell, keep going... (borrowed from Winston Churchill, who can't complain due to being otherwise dead) To Do list is long, but some things haven't turned out too badly, and I'm only one lucky break from generally overcoming an episode of the "aaah, too much to deal with" with only minimal permanent damage. (Comment on this)
Tuesday, December 12th, 2006
3:20 am	My Xmas Stocking ( my xmas stocking ) (Comment on this)
Friday, December 8th, 2006
12:31 pm	Thread Character baseline Borrowed (ok, completely ripped off shamelessly) this idea from auror's journal. She gave implicit permission, in that I mentioned I might borrow it and she didn't shoot me. PS. (especially to sjo) This doesn't in turn mean I'm giving people implicit permission to shoot me when they disagree with my plans... "No" works... really. This is a list of things that PCs frequently do during games: Combat, Action, Investigation, Underworld/Smuggling, Supernatural, Hard Sciences & Engineering, Historial Sciences, Diplomacy, Medicine, Pure Roleplaying, Other. Combat: I want to be able to participate in Airsoft, and I have a plan for both defensive and offensive forms of combat. In other words, I have some things in mind to throw at the bad guys, and a number of tactics and skill-concepts to avoid getting myself kill't. That being said, I don't want a character who's known primarily for this. Let's say 20-25% of character points pushed into this. Action: Yup, this is just something I tend to do. If there's something bold, daring, stupid, and interesting, I'm likely to want to go. I don't care about being first, and I sure as heck don't want to be the ONLY one going, but I enjoy adventure. I'm also reasonably decent at coming up with plans and executing them pretty well, with the caveat that these plans are usually fairly straightforward. Investigation: I have a single idea here that I'm still working on, and getting permission for. This particular meme feeds into my character's personality, so I hope it works. Investigation is very situational. Sometimes there's a lot of work for this role, and other times it's just not called for. I suppose in a way it's a complement to "action". Traditionally you "figure it out" and then you "stomp on it". Underworld/Smuggling: I figure my character will have a skillset and mentality that makes him a decent tag-along here, but this isn't a planned forte. I love to bargain and negotiate, but I generally consider that there just isn't a lot of room in this niche. Supernatural: As mentioned in the posts that enumerated these choices, it's often the perception of power that overrides the actual power. People go to "Bob the mystic from day 1" because he's "the mystic", not necessarily because he's demonstrated massive increasing power. As such, I've identified two moderate sub-niches within this area I plan on being adept in. They're not all-powerful, and they're very situational, but when the appropriate situations occur they should allow me an interesting moment or few. Engineering: Eh, I do this in real life, f*ck no... Historical Sciences: Another field in which I have in mind a few sub-niches, mostly relating to particular regions or cultures. I really don't see breadth here being very useful in most engineering or knowledge-based fields. Yes, you can assist sometimes, but in my limited experience I haven't seen that much of a calling for a "fifth best engineer". My reaction is to find small areas to progress deep into, and leave the rest to more interested folks. Diplomacy: I'm moody. Sometimes I really enjoy this, especially in situations in which the parties involved can clearly and concisely state their goals and are willing to work for a most efficient cooperative solution. When people are just wanking around, can't state what they want, aren't willing to compromise, or just want to whine about the lack of a perfect plan (or point out the imperfections in every proposed plan), I'd rather just ignore it. Honestly, in those cases I'd rather identify the small group of reasonable people with the authority and mindset to solve things, sneak them off into a corner, help reach a solution, and then propose it to the main forum (sometimes as a proposal, sometimes simply as "the plan"). This is all somewhat moot. The character I have in mind isn't the champion of a particular cause currently. It's also my realization that many people really LIKE to whine about things and feel like they're being really diplomatic and such... Like members of Congress. Hell, I'm an engineer, I just want the motherf*cking snakes off the motherf*cking plane, dude. We can figure out whose fault it was and who to bill for it later. Medicine: I'm devoting some points to this field, but I've been led to believe it's not likely to be as meaningful a genre in Threads. However, I've also heard that another GM has been trumping the amount of medical research puzzles and plots. As such I'm not sure how far I'll go into this field. Pure Roleplaying: I'm a goal-oriented person. Tis just a fact. I have a character with a mindset and personality I think will be interesting to play, but at heart I want to solve puzzles and plots, and get things done. While I have stage acting experience, I'm unlikely to play something far out of my norm, because I'd be likely to forget about it when I got into the enthusiasm of a good hunt. Part of the reason I enjoy casting is that the "win" conditions change so frequently with each new part, and most "wins" are cooperative. I can make players games interesting, make things go more smoothly, and have fun doing it. I really hate thwarting other players. I'm not a ruthless person, and I really don't enjoy "win by making him lose" goals. Other: Yeah... totally... dude... I'm all over this... Mr. Potpourri, that's me, with a side of miscellany and a smidgeon of random. I'm sure I'll have some minor schticks, but I'll change them up until the last week before game 1. (5 Comments |Comment on this)
11:50 am	Insidious and Stupid corporate slogans Exhibit 1: In a Holiday Inn lobby, a big colorful poster (two, actually) with the slogan: Our towels have a tale to tell... This is just... ew... Maybe there's a reasonable point to be made, but this just sounds wrong. Exhibit 2: Copied down from the wall behind a McDonald's drive-thru window... McDirty Words: 1. Is that it? 2. Is that all? 3. What size? 4. Is there anything else? I can vaguely see the point here, in a vein similar to hostage negotiation. Things said denote attitudes and evoke mindsets... But really, this ISN'T hostage negotiation... We're dealing with hungry people, not sociopathic people. As usual, there's no real point here... (Comment on this)
Thursday, December 7th, 2006
11:56 am	Ricky Bobby... Silly, stupid, disturbingly watchable movie... And a tour du force of amusing quotes, as well as a new "random line" I shall adopt. -Yep, I guess things are just about perfect... it's making me feel kind of itchy... -How 'bout we go get kicked out of an Applebee's? (Comment on this)
Monday, December 4th, 2006
9:09 am	Sometimes they get it right On the way home from the roast after-party, I followed an obviously drunk driver down route 32. Single lane, so I had ample time to be annoyed. We passed a cop who'd stopped someone on the other side. The other driver, with an obviously guilty conscience and paranoid attitude, abruptly stopped on the side of the road, as if considering a quick u-turn, then gassed it and went past at a high rate of speed. The cop's window was open, so I slowed up to say, "The guy in front of me is obviously drunk." He said, "I'll be there in a few minutes." This seemed unlikely, so I sighed as I drove past. Right as I was about to turn onto route 70, and just a bit after this car had, the cop car passed me (some 5 minutes later) with lights off. He took a position a bit behind the drunk driver, observed him for 45 seconds or so, and then turned on his lights and pulled him over. It just felt... right, I guess. Like sometimes the bad guys get caught, the good guys get a moment to rejoice, and the system occasionally does in fact work. (Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 28th, 2006
7:02 am	Potential It once was potential, Promise of a bright future. Soon it's disappointment, Spoiled talent or allure. Later it's regret, A life undeveloped, impure. And then it's too late, Prodigy wasted, obscure. As I hit 30, I look back on the times I was told the sky was the limit... I could be whatever I wanted to be. Now I realize that doesn't predicate that I can succeed without effort. I kept looking for a golden brick road with no obstacles, and as such I never went very far along any road without getting discouraged and turning back. Perhaps things being easy at times made it seem much harder at other times than it really was. For this decade of my existence, I'm going to try to be much more persistent, and try very hard to push past obstacles and keep my eyes on what I want and need. Most good things come through working at them, and I've been lazy too long. (Comment on this)
Monday, November 27th, 2006
7:56 pm	Goodbye 20s... 30... Wow... I'm so not "adult" enough to be 30. (4 Comments |Comment on this)
Friday, November 24th, 2006
2:17 am	You scored as Miyamoto Musashi. You're considered a sword saint, whatever the fuck that is. You don't give two hoots what weapon or tact people come at you with, as your solution is a steady grip on a sharp blade and it tends to work. You're never going to be defeated in battle, but you are going to die of Cancer. </td> Miyamoto Musashi 92% Sigmund Freud 75% C.G. Jung 75% Adolf Hitler 67% Dante Alighieri 58% Friedrich Nietzsche 58% O.J. Simpson 50% Steven Morrissey 50% Elvis Presley 42% Jesus Christ 33% Mother Teresa 25% Stephen Hawking 17% Hugh Hefner 0% Charles Manson 0% What Pseudo Historical Figure Best Suits You? created with QuizFarm.com (Comment on this)
1:33 am	Good things starting with S... In a specific, predetermined random order... 1) Stars (the giant burning, far away from Hollywood kind) 2) Spoons (they get yummy foodstuffs from plate to mouth) 3) The Superbowl (I'm a football fan, but even I watch it mostly for the commercials) 4) Songs 5) Socks (my fun fuzzy friends) 6) Spades (fun card game) 7) The South (it's got its problems, but I missed it when in New England) 8) Sports (giving out of shape males something to whine about for centuries) 9) Skittles (taste the rainbow... wink wink, nudge nudge...) 10) Sex, duh... (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Thursday, November 23rd, 2006
6:06 pm	Hoopla for the Holidays Hope everyone had a tremendously super Thanksgiving. (5 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, November 22nd, 2006
7:26 pm	Sports conversations for the Leet... So, when interacting at Thanksgiving, I've noticed that in most families there's at least SOME "traditional male sports contingient". Though tardy, I've tried to put together a quick reference guide for reparte with these strange people, being one of them. Topic: NFL Football Comments: "I think the Cowboys look really dangerous with Romo at the helm." "I'm still not sold on the Bears, their offense is suspect." "I can't help but root for the Saints. Drew Brees and Reggie Bush have them moving in the right direction." "Those Patriots are still dangerous." Topic: College Football Comments: "I think USC's gonna make it into the BCS Championship, but Ohio State's going to win anyway." "Don't you think it's about time they made a playoff system?" (this will spark fierce debate, and cover a quick retreat) Topic: Baseball "The Cardinals are the worst World Series champion ever." "I think Pujols got robbed. He should have been the MVP." Topic: NBA Basketball "The Heat aren't half what they were last year. They're just brutal to watch." "I think the Spurs are the team to beat. They're really playing well." "Dallas is turning it around after that slow start. Nowitski (know-WIT-ski) is unbelievable." "I can't believe Utah's playing so well!" "The Lakers may well be good this year. Andrew Bynum's really playing well." Topic: Nascar "I'm glad Jimmy Johnson pulled through. He deserves it." "I'd watch out for Tony next year, he's gotta be ticked off about missing the Chase." Topic: Thanksgiving Sports "Good football games on today. I wonder if it's fair to keep these atheletes from their families, though." (Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 21st, 2006
7:16 pm	He may not be the most evil, but OJ Simpson's in line for most disgusting person. Heebie-jeebies galore. (Comment on this)
Sunday, November 19th, 2006
8:03 pm	Politics of the masses Disclaimer: The following is an untargetted somewhat political rant. It's often lamented that elections are hostile and mean-spirited. It's often lamented that our politics are guided far-too-much by alterior motives, especially of availability of oil. These may be perfectly well true, I believe them to be. However, I believe the problem to be deeper. We're a society dominated by the voices of the angry, from Rush Limbaugh to Jon Stewart. From toddler-age, we're taught that well-behaved and satisfied is akin to silent (hence the term "pacifier"). Satisfied people may vote, quietly and efficiently. Angry people MUST vote, and will attempt to convince all their friends to. We lament our dirty elections, yet popularize bumper stickers such as "f*ck bush". Elections are hostile because they work better that way. They work better that way because our society is largely apathetic, prone to short-term decisions based on emotional response, and tending to share the opinions of those close to us. We're also a society of MASSIVE consumerism. We consume far more than our share per-capita, based on the usage rate of most other populations, yet we have relatively little actual resources. We don't produce much for ourselves. According to Teddy Roosevelt, "The object of government is the welfare of the people." Governments typically fail to outperform the morality of their societies, and this is definitely not an exception. Our government attempts to allow us to continue as a flawed society. I don't believe our government to be more corrupt than most, and if it is more materialistic or myopic than it should be... Well, so are we as a people. Our government magnifies and shares our faults. I'm not disillusioned and disheartened by my government, I'm disillusioned and disheartened by the collective entity of the American Public. There are many good people, and many more decent folk, but as a whole unless we're motivated by a passion or fear I just wish we were a more thoughtful species. I used to think the Orwellian populace of 1984 was unrealistic. Now, I worry the only thing lacking is a more controlled press. (The best thing about America may well be that our founders were cynical enough to prohibit this sort of power, even from themselves). Current Mood: contemplative (3 Comments |Comment on this)