tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-55073450550516802342024-03-13T09:45:58.490-07:00Dungeons, Doctors, and DreamsRPGs, video games, sci-fi, and other geeky thingsDeath Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-30812626373065167312015-04-19T06:25:00.001-07:002015-04-19T17:06:45.709-07:00A Tale of Two Farm Simulators: "Harvest Moon: the Lost Valley" and "Story of Seasons"Before I say anything else: if you like farm simulators and have a 3DS, both "Harvest Moon: the Lost Valley" and "Story of Seasons" are good games and worth trying out. They each have strengths and weaknesses but are overall fun and interesting each in their own way.<p>
I'm here to review them both briefly, but also rant a bit about how gamer fanwank ruins everything. <p>
There are a lot of farm simulators, but one ruled above them all, at least if Nintendo was your platform of choice: <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i>, produced by Marvelous Games in Japan. Waaaay back when this series started and the first <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i> was produced I believe for the original GameBoy, the relatively new and small Marvelous hired another game company to do localization and distribution in the United States: Natsume. Natsume chose to title the US-English version of the series "Harvest Moon" and obtained and owned the trademark to this name as well as some other related titles and phrases. <p>
Over the decades, Marvelous grew. They hired a different company, XSeed, to localize <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i>'s sister series <i>Rune Factory</i>. Eventually they were able to purchase XSeed to make it an in-house subsidiary. Marvelous made a pretty standard video game company decision: it would be cheaper and more efficient for them to use their now in-house subsidiary to do all of their localization work. So Marvelous decided they would no longer hire Natsume, still successful and independent in its own right, to localize <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i>. Marvelous did not offer to buy the <i>Harvest Moon</i> trademark, and instead opted to distribute future English versions of their game under a new trademarked name: <i>Story of Seasons</i>.<p>
This left Natsume with the trademark but no game. They are a game company just like Marvelous, and just like Marvelous, need to make business decisions based on issues of efficiency and profitability. To recover from their loss of work from Marvelous, and because they already owned the trademark to <i>Harvest Moon</i>, they would make their own <i>Harvest Moon</i> game. <p>
People who are reasonable, sensible, mature, and generally happy people decided to take this as fabulous news, because it meant they would get two farm simulation games for their Nintendo devices rather than one. <p>
People who spend most of their time being grumpy and miserable on the Internet in between occasionally actually playing games have decided this is the worst thing that has ever happened in the entire universe, that the world might as well just END, and that most of all, even though this was all sparked by a business decision made by Marvelous, the whole situation is for some entirely incomprehensible reason, Natsume's fault. I recognize these people are irrational, insane, and inconsolable and nothing I say will convince them to change their minds on this. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I'm just taking note of how STUPID this is, and how unncessarily DAMAGING this is to the franchises. <p>
My biggest gripe about the ensuing gamer fanwank is that many, if not most, online fan reviews of both <i>Harvest Moon: the Lost Valley</i> and <i>Story of Seasons</i> are entirely unreliable and unhelpful. Many of them were written before the games were even released, and the details (or lack thereof) in such reviews reflect that even many post-release reviews are written by people who haven't played the game at all or, if they did, only played for about an hour or so (and experienced simulation gamers know it takes several hours to get a feel for how such a game will work, especially since the first hour is usually tutorial). Many <i>Lost Valley</i> reviews contain general hyperbolic "This is not the real Harvest Moon!!!" ranting without useful or accurate information, and many also feature misinformation if not outright lies about what the game contains (my favorite example is one where the review claims that you cannot care for any animals in <i>The Lost Valley</i> right next to an obviously stolen screenshot from the game featuring the main character tending to his livestock that are, clearly, obviously available in the game. Likewise <i>Story of Seasons</i> gets mostly positive reviews simply because it is Marvelous's game and not because of outlining any particularly good, useful, details of what the game does and does not accomplish. This means new players and old ones alike can't get a good sense of what the games are really like--even a positive review can do harm if it is inaccurate, because if a buyer purchases it based on false expectations, he or she can only then be let down. <p>
Somewhere in this nonsense I think is a matter that some longtime <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i> fans didn't like some of Natsume's localization work, but none of this has to do with the work EITHER company is doing now. Further, most of the biggest localization issues are from games 10, 20 years ago--the most recent games Natsume were just fine. The whole situation seems to be largely fueled by ancient, pointless, grudgewank that is entirely irrelevant to the current situation. Yes, it's annoying Cute had censored content. It was also a really long time ago. <p>
If anyone happens to find this page in the vast sea of junk on the Internet: I own both games. I've played <i>Lost Valley's</i> plot to completion but am still unlocking/experimenting/making things; I've played <i>Story of Seasons</i> for not as long but still through a few seasons to get a good sense of the gameplay. I have no especial loyalty to either Marvelous or Natsume. For whatever it's worth, this is what I think of both games:<p>
In short, <i>Story of Seasons</i> is better for story and characters. <i>Harvest Moon: the Lost Valley</i> is the better farm simulation. The former is better for playing with economics; the latter is better for experimenting with crafting and planting methods. If you want to play a cool story with a large cast of characters and a town that is pieced together with some farming simulation and time management game play, play <i>Story of Seasons</i>. If you want to play a game with a heavy central focus on your farm and land management and want to get into more robust planting mechanics and crafting, then play <i>Harvest Moon: the Lost Valley</i>. If both sound up your alley for different reasons, play both. And indeed, the more good farming sims and the like purchased, the more we'll see more of such things for the Nintendo 3DS and other platforms. <p>
In detail:<br>
<i>Story of Seasons</i> takes place in a town which is trying to boost its agrarian economy and you have been hired to help. As with other previous games by the developer, farming isn't just about farming's sake, but also about helping a nearby town boom and assisting its residents. As you are successful, they also become more successful. As in prior games in the older franchise, each character is very deeply well developed and there are lots of bachelors and bachelorettes to romance, with some complex dialogue options. Town life is its own part of gameplay connected to but different from life on your farm. Even the farming becomes social, because in this particular game you have to compete with other farmers for additional land to cultivate, and this competition also is geared toward not helping your farm's success but also helping you develop deeper relationships with your friendly rivals. The farming simulation aspect is as good as it always was but--at least as of this writing--there's nothing new they haven't done before, and it's pretty simplistic. Crops only grow during their season, animals have a set personality and while their products improve as they grow to like you they otherwise don't change, unlocks are based largely on sales and the passage of time, and pretty much as long as you water your plants there's not much you can do to change things or mess things up. There's, as you get later into the game, crafting of products. There's honey making. There's bug collecting for when you want something else to do, and fishing and the all new mechanic of swimming, which is basically fishing where your character gets wetter. It takes a very long time to unlock other animals besides cows, although horses come pretty quick, although if you're good at milking the system (*cough*) you can get there faster. The game uses <i>Harvest Moon: A New Beginning</i>'s crafting and building system for your farm (maybe you can edit the town later but I'm not sure). There is good character customization, and as with <i>A New Beginning</i> clothing and hair unlocks for all genders. There's a new trade system that on one hand makes buying and selling most interesting, but on the other hand, ordinary shipping is taken away so you can't make money every single day until perhaps late in the game when more traders arive. What makes it most fun, for me is the town and story and how everything connects together. Absolutely the farming aspects are fun and it is good gameplay, but it is not where I find the most interesting challenges and intrigues. <p>
I like: Some of the trade system, the character and stories, the town, the romance system, the variety of activities, and full customizability of your main character. <br>
I dislike: The hugeness of the world--there's a lot of schlepping even with the horse, little change/challenge/variety in the simulation aspects, how long it takes to unlock or access certain things, there is very little resource mining.<br>
I am "meh" about: "Conquests" i.e., fighting over public land with your farmer rivals. <p>
<i>Harvest Moon: The Lost Valley</i> is heavily focused on a young farmer and the land he acquires in the Lost Valley, pretty much by passing out on it and being handed the "deed" to it by a Harvest Sprite. The farmer must grow a variety of plants and raise a variety of animals to energize the land and find a way to break it from a curse of eternal winter. The "town" of this game is offscreen; rather, residents come to the Lost Valley to trade and interact with the farmer and explore the Lost Valley as the farmer brings it back to life. The premise of the plot--the land is cursed to be eternally winter and the farmer must gather artifacts to bring back the seasons--is intriguing if fairly standard for a harvest-based fairy tale, and brings an interesting time management challenge to the world, but it is frankly, a bit shallow. It usually takes the first in-game year to fully complete, which isn't that long; the final challenge to "beat" the plot is annoying as it requires the random appearance of certain items however, which is annoying. There are fewer characters and while they have some cute personalities, they are not as well developed as in the <i>Bokujou Monogatari</i> games, and there are far fewer marriageable candidates. Some characters do get some interesting backstories but it takes a very long time to get through them. Rather, the focus is on the farm itself and what you do, with the townsfolk largely being to some extent, entertaining window dressing. The farming simulation aspects are where the game shines. You are able to edit terrain--people compare it to Minecraft although that's more for the blocky appearance of the terrain, but the point is less random building and more altering the terrain to both access places like mines as well as, moreover, to affect how your farm flourishes. This game really pays attention to important things in farming: land altitude, irrigation, time of year, fertilization types, and soil drainage. Your plants not only thrive in different seasons, but also in different soil/irrigation types and land elevation. Moreover, beyond helping plants thrive in this way, you can also cause your plants to mutate! Ergo, unlocking seeds is not simply a matter of sales or a certain amount of time passing, but your own ability to experiment and work within the system to get new plants. Planting spinach in watery terrain yields savoy spinach; planting strawberries in winter gets white berries, chili peppers transform into jalapenos when in ideal heat and well drained but not dry soil. While plants will still die at the end of a season, you can actually plant all plants every season, and doing so also affects mutation results. You create not just fertilizer but different kinds of fertilizer and these things too can affect growth in different way; fertilizing something with just manure ("compost" in the game--but it's awesome that your livestock raising also helps you raise your plants better) is different from mixing compost with berries, or fish, or what-have-you--which adds interesting incitement to experiment and try all kinds of things. Raising livestock is also a little more complex in a good way, in that you can craft custom feed for your animals, and the different kinds of feed affect both the quality of your products as well as the personality traits of your animals--you of course still have to be good to them too, but the feed and training adds a new aspect to the game that is welcome. There are fewer animal types in the game but you "unlock" them fairly easily and quickly which allows you to get to product and food production faster, which I like a LOT. You also chop, mine, and fish, and ALL activities you do feed into one another nicely (you can turn fish and compost into fertilizer, you can use crops to make special animal feed, and of course eventually all things can be cooked into useful dishes). Mined materials and all farm products are also used to build and craft as usual, and you can edit your property extensively beyond the terraforming function. You could play the game for a very long time just getting your farm the way you like it and unlocking as many seeds and products as possible. <p>
I like: The increased challenge/complexity of the farming system and that you can do more with your animals; the customizable terrain (and that that also has an effect on your farm), that you don't have to waste time on artificial pacing crap like upgrading your tools, that you spend your time on your farm and don't have to schlep all over the place to do things (the land you work on is pretty big on its own)<br>
I dislike: The shallow plot, the 3D movement making some of the context sensitive menus work wonkily, less customizable MC.<br>
I am "meh" about: Hiring harvest sprites to help you farm, getting requests for hard-to-mutate items at the wrong time of year, etc.<p>
What both games have in common: festivals, fishing, gardening, livestock, making products from your livestock's items, crafting, building relationships, a slow start, and a cruel random number generator (all of which are typical for these types of games).<p>
If one sounds more appealing to you, cool--just get that one. They are both good games, IMO. I think there's great room in the world for both of them so those with different preferences each have a game they might like and/or can play both for different reasons. I just hope future games from BOTH developers are both collectively approached with open minds and reasonable expectations.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-10281269559013373582014-06-26T08:45:00.002-07:002014-06-29T06:45:06.194-07:00Game Miniature Hobby Tips: Where to Find Affordable Basing and Terrain Materials<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
If you've gotten into miniatures for roleplaying games or wargames, you have hopefully realized part of what makes the difference between a good and great mini is a nicely composed base. A miniature's base is to a mini as a frame is to a painting: not strictly necessary, but the right one compliments and makes your paint work shine brighter than it can on its own, while the wrong one or a poor one can ruin the composition. Bases are especially important for wargames minis, as unified looking bases helps even a diverse army look like a cohesive unit; this concept can also be applied to RPGs--different bases (even just painting the rim a different color) can help you discern between baddies, friendly NPCs, and PCs.<strike><br />
<br />
</strike>Fortunately, basing itself is pretty easy: glue on a little sand or grit, paint it a nice complimentary neutral tone, and glue on a little turf or static grass, and you've got a good, simple base that sets off your mini nicely. Getting those or similar materials can be a challenge, though, especially if you're on a budget.<br />
<br />
The "problem" is, of, course is a gamer's first instinct is to check gaming sites and stores for supplies. Sure, these sites have them--Citadel, Gale Force 9, and Army Painter all have solid, respectable lines--but they're a little pricey. A tiny tub of static grass or sand may retail for $5. No, that's not terrible, but how much is sand really worth to you? It also adds up very quickly if you want a wide variety of materials or are doing a huge terrain project.<br />
<br />
As hard as it is, move away from the game stores (you will still support them by buying your minis and games). Time to venture into a broader world: craft stores and, of course, the outside (yes, that strange place you've heard of with the fresh air and stuff). <br />
<br />
<b>Craft stores, such as Michael's, A.C. Moore, and Joann Fabrics are your friend. </b>You can scour the whole place for ideas and supplies, but here is where you especially want to look:<br />
<br />
<b><i>Floral display supplies</i></b>: Yes, you heard that right. This is the BEST place to go. This section of the store includes supplies for what they call "filler"--stuff they can put into pots and vases to make their potted plants and fake flowers look prettier (for exactly the same reason we base our minis). Much of this "filler" includes things like sand, pebbles, lichen, and moss--stuff that is phenomenal for terrain and bases. Compare:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.michaels.com/M10998222.html?dwvar_M10998222_color=Tan#start=3">Michael's Ashland Coarse Decorative Sand: MSRP $2.99 for 1/75 lbs.</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=287&CategoryID=13166&PageIndex=2">GaleForce9's Grit: MSRP $5.00 for a small container</a>.<br />
<br />
GF9 does not post the volume or weight of their materials, but I would say roughly you're getting roughly twice to three times as much sand from Michael's for $2 less.<br />
<br />
Now, I should pause to note before I tempt argument: GF9's grit is not actually sand--it's a somewhat porous substance. They claim it is better for not flaking off than sand. This is sort of true: if you glue sand onto a base with standard PVA glue (such as Elmer's White Glue), sometimes not all of it will stick--UNTIL you paint on top of it. When you paint over sand, sometimes it might stick to your brush and get into your paint or primer, and then sand gets stuck to other bits of your model. The easy solution is either to use spray primer (which is enough to seal in the sand), or if using brush primer, don't glue sand to your model until after you've painted the figurine. Then paint over it using a crappy brush to prime and base coat it. Some loose sand may get into your crappy brush--and that's why you use a crappy brush--but once the paint dries, it seals and holds down the sand and none of the rest flakes off. I have dozens of 10+ year old sand-based models that have never lost basing material once painted. Plus I prefer the sand precisely because it's NOT porous--it won't soak up glue or paint. That means it looks nicer unpainted (in which case I just seal it with extra glue or brush on sealer) and takes on color without soaking it up. It is less uniform in size, which also helps make the base look more natural and interesting. <br />
<br />
But if you really want "grit" -- get it from the train section of your craft store or hobby website instead, where it's called gravel or ballast. There, you still get more for cheaper (if not as cheap as sand). Example:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.micromark.com/scenescapes-medium-gray-gravel-350-grams,10372.html">Scenescapes Gravel for $3.45 at Micromark</a><br />
<br />
You might get sand for bulk even cheaper at construction/home improvement stores if you have a place to put it, and accept that it's probably not as clean as the craft stuff.<br />
<br />
Sand's just an example. Floral sections in craft stores also have huge bags of lichen, pebbles, and other useful terrain stuff that is much cheaper for quantity than what GF9 or Citadel will sell you for exactly the same stuff. They also have glass beads and other neat things which you might find a use for if not for bases and terrain, then for tokens (although the glass beads and fake gems may be perfect to fill out your alien landscape). Most of the fake flowers, vines, and grains are too big for miniature products, but depending on your project, you may find other stuff useful in that category as well. I even saw at A.C. Moore the other day big sheets of what I would call "terrain paper": basically, thick backed paper covered in turf or static grass or other "terrainy" patterns. I presume they use these to decorate the bottoms of certain kinds of fake flower displays. For miniature hobbyists, I imagine you could use them as a quick and dirty start for adding terrain to your table or cut them out to glue to bases. Finally, this section carries foam in interesting shapes for cheap that may be useful for larger terrain projects. <br />
<br />
But don't quite see what you need here? Then move on to the... <br />
<br />
<b><i>Diorama Section: </i></b>More and more craft stores dedicate at least one aisle for diorama creation, usually intended for kids to make school projects. However, you know what wargame terrain is? Basically a diorama (or a start of one, at least). All the stuff you use to make dioramas is exactly the same stuff you use to base minis or make terrain. There's usually lots of good basing material here, including turf, flock, static grass, etc. as well as things like polymers to make water effects, and sculpting materials to help build up scenes. I bought a tube of "realistic water" for a project for $8, whereas at a nearby game store I would have been charged $15, and it was exactly the same stuff. What's nice of course is the actual diorama kits as well if you don't already have a lot of basing supplies--for $12 you can often get grit, flock, and other useful materials that is enough for several minis (compare to the $18 terrain kits at GF9). The how-tos that come with the kits may also be helpful if you're trying your hand at terrain design.<br />
<br />
Now, you do need to check your prices here. There's a reason I sent you to
the floral section first--often, you can find lichen, sand, etc. in the
diorama section too--but it's more expensive. Yes, even in the same
store. If you find an item that might have a multi-craft purpose, such items may exist in different places throughout the store at different qualities and prices, so take time to look around. <br />
<br />
There's also often some neat "toys" in this section as well: miniature people, buildings, etc. They are almost never the right scale for gaming (most wargames and RPGs use 25mm or 15mm scale, whereas most everything else in the hobby world uses popular, entirely different, train scales like N or HO). Still, it's worth plumbing for useful terrain extras (crates, barrels, boxes) as well as monsters (the "wrong scale" toy spider may be a perfect giant spider for an RPG). Oh, and there's usually loads and loads of miniature trees--very handy!<br />
<br />
And on that note, need more unusual stuff for bases or decoration? Or some tools, maybe? Next place to go:<br />
<br />
<b><i>Jewelry-Making Aisle</i>: </b>Lots of crafters are increasingly getting into beading and jewelry making, and these store sections are full of stuff useful to miniature hobbyists, especially if you have a more unusual project. Many shells and beads might be useful for an alien or unusual landscape. The steampunk craze has hit jewelry makers hard and you may also find cool useful terrain accents like miniature gears, clock parts, etc. (great especially for a WarMachine project). Chains and wire in many gauges of course also abound--and again are much cheaper than the wire a miniature supply retailer is going to sell you.<br />
<br />
You can also find useful hobby tools here: jewelers use the same wire cutters and needlenose pliers we often use for our projects, for much the same reason: they manipulate and cut soft metal. Likewise, here you may also find stuff like table magnifiers and such. Sometimes the prices you can get for these tools are much better, although if you're a stickler for quality you may want to do some brand comparisons. <br />
<br />
If you still haven't found what you're looking for due to a specialty project or what-have-you, don't be afraid to look around the rest of the store. The woodcarving section can be really helpful, for example, selling other bits and pieces good for terrain building (especially if you want to make buildings as part of your terrain) as well as wooden tiles that may serve as a large base. I've had trouble finding stuff in exactly inch-scales for D&D scale minis, but sometimes you can find wooden tiles, both square and round, that are the right size for RPG miniatures and, depending, they may be cheaper than an official base of the right size. <br />
<br />
The mosaic and sand art section may be useful for more sand, as well if you want to have "tiled" bases or something similar. <br />
<br />
Most of this stuff you can buy online, but I suggest hitting a brick and mortar store if you can; not just to support brick and mortar stores, but also to look at what you're getting and making sure it's what you want. Once you get a sense of what you want you can order online and find the price that's the best deal.<br />
<br />
If your budget can't even accommodate craft stores or bulk bargains, however, there's always plan B: <b>found items from around the house and outdoors. </b><br />
<br />
This section comes with a BIG caveat, however: if you're working with anything that is either degradable or ANYTHING outside, you need to make sure it is as CLEAN and DRY as possible.<br />
<br />
For example, I've heard of miniature hobbyists using used tea or coffee grounds for terrain materials--great idea! But if that stuff is at all moist, you can end up with a moldy miniature. Yuck. Stuff like that should be baked in the oven at a low temperature until it is very, very, very dry. Check on it so it doesn't burn.<br />
<br />
Going outside you can of course find dirt, sand, sticks, and so on. Stick to what is the least rottable--it may be tempting to use real moss, but that invites ick. If you want to use sand like sand from a beach or playground, you need to sift it and make absolutely sure it is free of bugs and trash (don't glue broken glass to your mini unless you really really mean to). I would avoid dirt if at all possible, and if you really want to use it, I'd use potting soil or something else you can feel pretty sure is sterile.<br />
<br />
Sticks can be useful for terrain, especially for larger miniatures or other projects--for example, I have a dragon sitting on top of a "log" (a big stick I found) for one of my miniatures, to help show off its features. When I found the sticks I wanted, I chose very dry wood and made sure to rub off any flaking or rotten wood, carving off anything questionable with a knife if needed. I then actually soaked the sticks in water mixed with a little bleach--this was to be sure any little bugs or microrganisms chewing on the wood were gone--and let them dry in full sun (to drive away lingering molds and fungi). Then of course makings sure they were completely dry, I added them to the terrain, and also fully painted and sealed them for good measure (I wouldn't use bare untreated wood--I'd always paint or seal it, for the very same reason we paint and seal most wooden items).<br />
<br />
You can get creative here too, of course: if you like to go beach combing, you could of course bring home driftwood, interesting stones, and shells to add to your minis. You could take a dancing girl figurine and put her in a real scallop shell and behold! Miniature Aphrodite! Just as always make sure to clean and dry them thoroughly. I highly recommend the bleach treatment here--there's all kinds of stuff that lives in the sea, and it should not become part of your space marine army. <br />
<br />
If you take this route to find terrain items, always be careful, and do not loot materials from other people's property--yes, even if it's junk. Be aware of any toxins or other unpleasant stuff -- is that pile of sand a dog's favorite pissing spot? Wash your own hands and all the stuff you get when you get home thoroughly.<br />
<br />
Now get out there and get to basing your miniatures properly! It's cheap to get the supplies for it and it makes a world of difference in helping your miniatures look as amazing as possible. </div>
Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-82270156722775551822014-06-07T11:17:00.000-07:002014-06-07T11:17:37.844-07:00An Arrow/Black Canary/Laurel rantI am hoping at some point to do a rewatch of the first two Arrow seasons and write something resembling thoughtful analysis on them, but I keep making the mistake of reading fandom forums and seeing people say stuff that I let get to me, even though I know it's the Internet, where everyone else is always wrong, and I should just leave the wrongness be. ;) I also really want to react less to fandom anyway, but well, good luck with that, me. Because here I am going to have a rant, that is based on what I see as stupid shit being said by the Arrow fandom, on stuff revolving around Laurel Lance and the comics character Black Canary. <br />
<br />
So: Laurel Lance is a contentious character. She's contentious because she is a very different, alternate universe take on Dinah Laurel Lance, who is the crimefighting Black Canary II from Earth 2 and Earth 0* in the DC Multiverse (if I've even got that right). (Also the DCAU, I think.) She's also contentious because she's been inconsistently written, as the writers can't figure out if she's a 1) love interest, 2) a damsel in distress, 3) a smart associate who aids the hero with her areas of expertise, or 4) just kind of the series broken bird/woobie. (HINT TO THE WRITERS: IT SHOULD BE #3.) <br />
<br />
(And yes, some people just don't like the actress, but for the purposes of this essay, that is neither here nor there.)<br />
<br />
Clarifying note: for the purposes of this rant, when I say "Laurel" I mean Dinah Laurel Lance from Arrow, and when I say "DLL" I mean Dinah Laurel Lance from the Earth 0 DCU Comic Books. <br />
<br />
A lot of the fighting over Laurel and who she should be or what she should do is based on arguments over what they THINK DLL is about.<br />
<br />
First of all, given Arrow very firmly twists EVERY comic book reference it uses on its head, assuming Laurel should be any one thing "because comics" is ridiculous.** If you're not furious that Merlyn's first name is Malcolm instead of Arthur, if you're not furious that we have Thea Dearden Queen instead of Mia Dearden (and who background wise, by which I mean rich brat, is actually more a sneakily worked in Kate Bishop), if you're not furious that Moira Queen is actually a character who just didn't start the story as a dead background note (but instead died later), then you don't get to be furious about how Laurel is different from DLL. <br />
<br />
But even that, there's a lot of false or at least heavily distorted assumptions about who DLL is and why Laurel should or shouldn't be that way. These are the ones that bug me the most:<br />
<br />
1. "DLL is the ONLY Black Canary and ONLY DLL can be the Black Canary!"<br />
Many superhero titles are passed around to other generations and successors, and Black Canary is one of them. The Black Canary title started with Dinah Drake, later Dinah Drake Lance. DLL is her daughter, who took on her mother's mantle.<br />
<br />
There are also other "Canaries" in the comics continuity: White Canary, a member of the Leage of Assassins, and Jade Canary, a handle Lady Shiva took on when swapping places with DLL during a Birds of Prey storyline. Both of these women are incredibly, capably trained assassins (DLL, while a very capable fighter, is not an assassin). Just something to think about if you're worrying about where a certain Arrow character who is called the Canary (with no color attached) might actually fit in in terms of comic references. <br />
<br />
DLL has also sometimes been identified by other names; in the alternate future storyline "Kingdom Come" she wears all white and uses a bow and arrow like Ollie and is unofficially referred to as White Arrow (she is only called by her real name in the comic). Lady Shiva calls DLL Paper Monkey (Lady Shiva's a little weird).<br />
<br />
If you look at other continuities, we've got the Birds of Prey TV show, where the Black Canary was a woman named Carol Lance (her daughter, Dinah Redmond, was a lead character on the show, but had an entirely different, Jean Grey-like skillset).<br />
<br />
So, DLL is not the only Black Canary, and a woman named Dinah Laurel Lance is not "destined" to become Black Canary just because of her name, and could have other names. That's a word out to both people who insist Laurel MUST become Black Canary (no she doesn't), and to the pearl-clutching haters who fear the very world will crumble to pieces if she does become Black Canary--because she doesn't have to be the only kickbutt girl with a Canary-related title. Black Canary is not Highlander. There does not have to be only one. <br />
<br />
2. "But Black Canary is DESTINED to be Oliver Queen's ONE TRUE LOVE!!! She was DESIGNED to be his LOVE INTEREST!!!!"<br />
<br />
Black Canary and Green Arrow existed in the comics as separate, independent entities for a long time before they became romantic interests. Black Canary was NOT "designed for" Green Arrow, nor anyone else. Especially as the original Black Canary from 1947 was Dinah Drake, whose love interest was Larry Lance (the conceptual forbear of Quentin Larry Lance on Arrow). It's also worth noting that in the current New 52 Continuity, DLL doesn't exist, and Black Canary Dinah Drake Lance who is married (? I can't keep track) to Kurt Lance, and she barely knows Oliver Queen. And in the New52, since Dinah Drake Lance and Oliver Queen are contemporaries, if she and Kurt ever have a child Dinah Laurel, she will be much too young for Oliver. Like, seriously, ew. <br />
<br />
DLL and Comics Ollie's on-and-off again romance began when they both joined the Justice League. They fought for a long time before they dated. They went through several periods of being together and apart; Ollie cheated on her and broke her heart several times. They did, eventually, get married for awhile. Oliver died temporarily, as one does for awhile, and when he returned, he revealed he had murdered a villain and wanted to be left alone. Dinah separates from Ollie and returns to single life. <i>The Earth Zero/Post Crisis Universe's story ends with DLL and Oliver Queen being broken up. </i><br />
<br />
Let me repeat that: <i> </i><i>The Earth Zero/Post Crisis Universe's story ends with DLL and Oliver Queen being broken up. </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
So if you want insist that what is true in the comics MUST be true on Arrow, then Ollie and Laurel's destiny is to ultimately remain apart.<br />
<br />
Someone once argued to me the "destiny" comes from the Kingdom Come universe, an Elseworlds/possible future of Earth Zero--but note in Kingdom Come, where Oliver and DLL are married, they get brutally killed together. So I'd really rather not count on that as being "destiny." <br />
<br />
I also want to emphasize that DLL is really her own character. She does not "belong" to Oliver or the Arrow family per se. She HAS often been involved with the Arrow family--and has also been very close to Mia, Roy Harper, and Connor Hawke, being a stand-in mother/big sister to all of them. She has often worked as a partner to Ollie. But she began her life as a solo heroine and then member of the Justice League (which in some variants on continuity, she helped found). And she was a longtime member of the Birds of Prey--whose monthly and title ran for years and years longer than, say, Green Arrow/Black Canary, and in which members of the Arrow family rarely appeared only as guest stars. Arrow didn't have to necessarily include Laurel, and if you did a show called "Black Canary," the creators shouldn't have to feel beholden to including Oliver Queen. They are two very complete characters on their own, who also happen to share large chunks of history together. <br />
<br />
Personally, I think the less the Arrow writers focus on a romance between Ollie and Laurel and the more they just build her as a friend and associate, the better the writing for the show in general and the character in particular should be. Ollie needs to hang up the chick habit, go celibate for awhile, then find someone after he gets over some of his other trauma (he uses sex like Laurel uses prescription painkillers to escape--and it would be cool if she pointed that out to him). Maybe McKenna Hall can show up with a bionic leg. She was a nice girl and didn't put up with his shit. <br />
<br />
3) "Laurel is NOTHING like DLL!"<br />
<br />
When people say this, they mean Laurel isn't very good at martial arts. Because apparently "knows martial arts" is a personality trait and should be the key defining feature of a human being. It is true, Laurel isn't very good at martial arts. The writers even screwed her over by making her reasonably competent at self defense in early episodes, based on her dad teaching her, but then the sexist asshole writers took most of that proficiency away from because they decided she was more narratively useful if she was helpless all the time. And yes, that is annoying.<br />
<br />
Sadly, sadly, oh so sadly, making Dinah Laurel Lance helpless so Ollie can save her is not an Arrow specific thing. One of the worst things about DLL becoming Ollie's love interest was that she was frequently made a damsel in distress for Ollie, and it was indeed all the more nonsensical because of how capable a fighter she was supposed to be. One big example was the Longbow Hunters, where she gets captured and brutally tortured (such that she loses her Canary Cry for awhile), and Ollie has to save her. But that's only really the most memorable example. So, sadly, Laurel being a damsel in distress for Ollie is really not all that different from DLL after all. But of course that's not a personality trait either.<br />
<br />
Who is DLL personality wise? This is my sense of her, from having read every issue of Birds of Prey volume 1 (plus the preceding miniseries): DLL is a passionate, moral woman with a strong sense of justice. She values family deeply, and is very protective of her family members, tries to honor her mother and father in her work, and her protectiveness extends to close friends whom she thinks of as family. She loves spicy food, loves takeout, and can't cook. She loves and protects kids. She has awful taste in men, and is drawn to bad boys (she dated Ra's al Ghul once, both of them not recognizing the other at the time). She is doggedly persistent, and will often throw herself into incredibly dangerous situations that she may not be able to handle alone just because she is insistent on getting the job done. While she can do what it takes the to get the job done, she favors ideals over pragmatism (once, Oracle asked her to get these files Oracle was going to use in a somewhat dirty way to stop some bad guys; DLL destroyed them and told Oracle they were lost because she didn't like the methods Oracle wanted to use, even though the methods would have been effective, just a bit corrupt). On the rare occasion she does start to feel hopeless, she can however fall into a self-pitying rut and be sloppy and self-destructive (this is the state she was in when the Birds of Prey first formed, where she was still reeling from the events of the Longbow Hunters amongst other things; one of the reasons Oracle specifically hired her was to help DLL get her confidence back). She is more able to work herself out of self-destructive tendencies by being shaken out of isolation and working with close friends.<br />
<br />
I really would describe Laurel Lance exactly the same way. <br />
<br />
Personality wise, I think they have an incredible amount in common. <br />
<br />
What different is the background. DLL was raised by a superhero, her mother, and was influenced by her mother's superhero friends from the Justice Society, who also trained her to fight (Ted Grant, Barry Allen, etc.). The life she built for herself was to take after her mother. IIRC, Larry Lance died before Dinah Drake did (both of DLL's parents are dead), and thus DLL was much closer to her mother than her father. <br />
<br />
Laurel's mother is an academic, not a superhero, and Laurel was not raised by any superhero friends. She did spend more time with her cop father, and was taught some things by him. Laurel's mother left, and Laurel grew much closer to her father than she was to her mother. Laurel was inspired by her father's dedication to the law, and pursued a career in law. Laurel in short is an Elseworlds DLL where DLL took after dad instead of mom. <br />
<br />
But personality-wise, they are very much the same person.<br />
<br />
Compare: Sara Lance, for what is worth, personality wise is very little like DLL. Sara is a more reckless and ruthless. She has a party girl background. She is pragmatic--very willing to just take the kill shot on the bad guy than find the best moral solution. Actually, her personality is a lot like the comic book version of Helena Bertinelli, minus the sorority girl stuff--which would explain how she and her sister can butt heads but still care for each other (DLL and Comics-Helena are good friends). Sara and DLL have little in common, background or personality wise, save for her protective streak and a weakness for Ollie. Note this does NOT mean Sara shouldn't be the Canary character that she is (she can and should be, IMO). It just means that Sara Lance is NOT a proxy/expy for DLL.<br />
<br />
While I don't like how inconsistent the writers (and editors, for a lot of Laurel's good scenes end up on the Deleted scenes of the DVDs) treat Laurel, I'm cool with where she is on the show. She does not have to be exactly like DLL in terms of background or destiny. (I think DLL would think it's amazing there's a version of her somewhere that graduated law school.) I think it's better the less she is pushed as a love interest for Ollie (the writers may disagree, sadly), because it means she is more likely used as a character, not as a plot device.*** <br />
<br />
I think she can and may become a crimefighter, but it's not going to be in the same way DLL did--it CAN'T be. There's no Justice Society to train her. Her mom apparently doesn't know jack about fighting (sadly). She'll find her own path. Ollie may train her. Her dad's police friends may train her. Maybe Sara will return and train her. Or she'll find a new mentor (which could be a cool storyline). With her law background, she may be more like Manhunter (Kate Spencer, whose Arrow counterpart just died), and that's cool. Elseworlds where Dinah Laurel Lance becomes Manhunter. I'd read that comic book. She may well become Black Canary, but it's very clear the show is taking its own slow path toward that route, and I'm not going to waste energy worrying about how it's not like a series of comics that, in fact, are outdated and no longer part of current DCU comics continuity anyway. <br />
<br />
I also don't think Laurel's existence or journey to becoming whatever she becomes precludes or overtakes the existence of her sister Sara. Sara Lance is a great character with a great story, and they actually serve each other well by existing alongside one another and acting as foils to one another. Seeing Sara live to see another day at the end of Season 2 gives me hope interesting stuff is in store for both characters. The two should not be pitted against each other, nor should Laurel be pitted against her comics counterpart who has decades more history and an entirely different background. It's only fair as with all characters to first and foremost see her in the medium she is in alone, and trace her evolution from there, without letting alternate continuities muddle up character interpretation.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">----</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">* Post Crisis on Infinite Earths, Pre-Flashpoint, AKA the comics between roughly 1987 and 2010, AKA the "Iron Age." I believe we're in the "Silly Putty Age" now. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">** Hell, the only character I am frustrated with because she isn't more
like the comic book version is Helena, because the HERO who is in the
comics is one of my favorite HEROES in the DCU, and I hate that they
made her a two-dimensional psychopathic villain because of some stupid
fiance death, rather than the woman who lost her entire family and swore
to shut down all organized crime because of not only what she went
through, but because of the evils her family represented. And that's
just because the comics Huntress is a much cooler character than the lameass vengeance
junkie on the TV show. But I digress.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*** I think that's actually why so many people "ship" Felicity Smoak with Oliver. Because Felicity is a real-feeling human-like entity, with her own personality, and she is consistently written as such, and not as a plot device. Laurel they can't seem to reconcile her personality/back story and with the love interest idea and then she just gets turned into some doll they need to have thrown around to give Oliver something to react to. Everytime Laurel becomes love interest, she loses all uniqueness and self-agency. I'm not an "Olicity" fan but I dig why people prefer that relationship. They want to see a relationship between two people, not one person and a human-shaped object. </span>Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-18592638826527403352014-03-23T12:21:00.001-07:002014-03-23T16:34:10.158-07:00A message to my teenage self in the 1990s about comic booksDear My Teenage Self,<br />
<br />
Thanks to not only a childhood of picking up comics whenever you could despite living in the middle of nowhere, but also to Lynda Carter, the Superfriends, and the Burton Batman films, you recently have decided to become a comic book junkie. You have decided to read JLA and Wonder Woman. You have decided to collect everything with Helena Bertinelli in it, because, after a letter DC wrote TO YOU in the lettercol of an issue of Detective Comics explaining the difference between Helena Bertinelli and Helena Wayne, you decided that, despite Helena Wayne being an icon of your childhood, Helena Bertinelli was waaay cooler. You have everything with Catwoman in it, and will for a long time. You have decided, even though you loved Spider-Man (and his Amazing Friends) as a kid, and read all of your family friend Eric's Fantastic Four issues he would allow you to get your hands on, you really are a DC girl. You believe you will be a DC girl forever. Though articulating why is difficult, there is <i>something</i> that pops out to you on the page in DC's books that doesn't in Marvel's. To you, DC's darker and grittier books are more relatable and compelling, and their paragon supers are just more your role model types, especially always and forever Wonder Woman. And that for whatever reason, you just have trouble penetrating and understanding what the hell is going on in many Marvel books (and frankly, I am sorry to say, that is still true at least for the X-Men comics, no matter how cool the idea of the X-Men is). Part of the big reason why you're not all that into Marvel, as that you have trouble finding female characters, rolemodels, heroines, that you desire to look up to. You kind of like Rogue, but again, the X-Men titles are impenetrable, and you liked She-Hulk as a kid when she took the Thing's place in F4, but you're not sure what she's up to now. While Marvel has other superheroines, no one else for whatever reason stands out for you. You can't find your <i>personal </i>equivalent for Wonder Woman or Huntress or Oracle (enjoy her while she lasts) there, for example. <br />
<br />
I know you are going to be mad at me, because as of May, I will not be buying any DC Comics. My DC collection has slowly dwindled for a long time. I won't say "never buying them any more," because I've learned not to say things like that. Just "not right now, and probably for a long time." <br />
<br />
You may even be shocked to hear that I consider many of our childhood heroes, the ones that made you utterly declare yourself a DC-head forever and always, effectively dead. Some of them are not technically dead (no one ever technically dies in comics, as you are quickly learning, and don't worry, Superman and Wonder Woman will be out of those stupid costumes soon). Other DC heroes won't stay dead that you probably couldn't give a crap about (I think you and I agree there is no point whatsoever to Hal Jordan). But our heroes are dead in spirit.<br />
<br />
See, a couple years ago DC did a reboot beyond reboots of all reboots (we did accept the Crisis on Infinite Earths as a probably necessary thing, but also foolishly thought something like that would seldom happen again). And this reboot just makes my once familiar fictional friends and heroes feel cold and distant to me. Other heroes, like our beloved Ms. Bertinelli, and other heroes you have yet to meet, are now nonexistent. (A consolation: Helena B IS on TV on a show about Green Arrow, which sounds cooler than you think.) This reboot is really confusing, too, where some old continuity is real but other parts of it aren't, and IT has become the impenetrable thing I suddenly don't understand. I have tried to keep an eye on it, I have tried to flip through on occasion to see what's new or changed. But there's just frankly few people in that universe anymore I can find it in me to give a damn about. And all of those role-model-heroines... gone or changed, in a way that I cannot see in them what I related to or loved anymore. <br />
<br />
The last title I am reading from DC was in fact all new heroes: the heroes of <i>The Movement</i>. You'd love it, it was all about young superheroes fighting deeply corrupt system in a decaying city (much like the city I live in, frankly; yes I live in a city, you'll have to forgive me on that too, country girl). <i>The Movement</i> is by a writer you haven't heard of yet but once you do, you will never put her--yes, her!--work down (she also writes Helena Bertinelli amazingly, look forward to that when the time comes). <i>The Movement </i>is being cancelled after a year because it wasn't selling enough. In my opinion, it wasn't marketed enough. It's new characters. It needs time for people to have heard of it and to latch on to the new people--you can't make a new Justice League or Team Bat overnight. But I can understand--they need to make money, they can't spend money on something that doesn't put them back into the black. Maybe it wasn't the right format for it, or the right time. But <i>The Movement</i> was the last chance for me to have current heroes in the DCU I loved for now. So I'm leaving it. <br />
<br />
And here's the worst part: please try to hold down the sense of betrayal you may feel. But... I am increasingly buying a large number of Marvel titles. Future Foundation is done now, but it was AWESOME, and it was a lot of what you liked about Fantastic Four but better, because it didn't have Reed Richards in it. AND now that it's done, She-Hulk who was in it has her own monthly again! And it is so far, utterly phenomenal. She is as fun as you remember her, and better--smart, funny, strong. Carol Danvers has her own book too... I know you only know her as "that chick Rogue stole her powers from and is in a coma," but she's amazing, and she's called Captain Marvel now. Now yes, I think that name is stupid too because when you hear the words "Captain Marvel," you, too, hear your dad shouting that name in childlike glee in reference to his childhood hero Billy Batson from DC Comics, but she's--I call her Captain Carol--a great character. Her backstory is very interesting, and she is warm, and nice, and kick ass, which is all the things you want in a heroine. There's a new Ms. Marvel too who is amazing--can you believe, a young Muslim superheroine? Hawkeye who you never heard of at the time is also a great title, really right down your alley in terms of a lot of slice of life as well as some grey-area superheroing, and has a guy and a girl archer in it whom you would both love. So many great female superheroines (at the age of 37, I still plan to grow up to be them some day), and so many great heroes in general regardless of gender. A lot of these are having easy to access entry points--the new #1s I care less about per se than just being able to jump on and know what's happening (DC's new #1s some how had the opposite effect on me). Somehow, without really trying, I have began to make mine Marvel. I'm not seeking their books out, really; the books on the shelf are just calling to me and they are being amazing. <br />
<br />
And, well, there're indie books doing that too. You're going to be reading some great pulp fantasy and other fun stuff. Image is a good publisher now that they've stopped trying too hard to be edgy. There's other good publishers too. You'll have a lot to choose from.<br />
<br />
And I want to be oh-so-very clear: there doesn't have to be a binary. I know you've been raised on Pepsi vs Coke taste test commercials and think you have to have product loyalty to one and not the other. That's really not how it works. In fact, oh honey, oh how I wish I could help you understand in many deeper things than comics, that it really is okay and normal to love both. But you'll get there.<br />
<br />
Anyway, this ISN'T about having to love ONLY DC or ONLY Marvel or ONLY any one thing and eschewing all others. This is not Highlander, there does not have to be only one. It's just that... I have left DC because it is no longer a home for those I consider my heroes. In Marvel (and Boom! and Dynamite): that's where my heroes are now, and I hope you will accept that and forgive me.<br />
<br />
Do not fear, however: we will always, always, always love Wonder Woman. We may not see the Wonder Woman we recognize in the comics at the moment, but she will be there, smiling down from the awesome action figure collection I have now (oh, yes, you are jealous) and the posters and the back issues and the video recordings of the 1970s show. And her kindness and <i>warmth </i>and courage and integrity and the way she just exemplifies showing us we can be whatever our potential can carry us to--the things we both know are what make her Wonder Woman and still make her our ultimate hero--are things we will always carry in our hearts to try to live up to in our own nerdy, frumpy ways.<br />
<br />
And that's the real thing I wish for you to understand: our heroes are ultimately in our hearts. In the comics and other media we seek out, we do that only to <i>remind </i>us what we hold hold most dear in the depth of ourselves. Well, And so we have an excuse to buy awesome action figures. We can do these things anywhere we need to go, and we do not have to stay where we are no longer fed. At this point, the journey is simply marvelous.<br />
<br />
Love (and really, honey, <i>love</i>), You, in about twenty yearsDeath Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-30977787601855512382014-01-25T18:19:00.006-08:002014-01-25T18:19:51.998-08:00Multi-device Woes for a Would-Be Game DesignerNote to self: when transferring different versions of same files from separate devices to one main file, make doubly sure the version you keep is the newest.<br />
<br />
One of my pet projects is a revamp of d20 Modern. The main purpose of this project is masochism. The secondary purpose is to have a revised, Pathfinderized, playable d20 based game for cinematic contemporary, sci-fi, and urban fantasy games.<br />
<br />
I have been writing up a new "psychic" class and vastly revising the spell list. I've realized the only version I have now is an old one, with several new revisions lost--and some of which are forgotten.<br />
<br />
My interest in attempting game design is relatively recent. Oddly, if this were a story I were writing, I feel like I wouldn't make this mistake. But then, I tend to only write stories on one computer. There is a lesson in here somewhere. Anyway, live and learn. Here's hoping the new, new psychic is better than the old new one. Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-88390794434583664042013-11-04T12:13:00.001-08:002013-11-04T12:26:03.813-08:00Doctor Who Retrospective: The Doctor Who CookbookAllons-y! Into the world of cooking with Doctor Who. That's right, cooking.<br />
<br />
When I graduated from high school in the early 90s, I asked for one thing as my graduation present: plane tickets to Great Britain. That summer I toured much of England, including a day trip to the Longleat Estate, which at the time housed a well-loved Doctor Who exhibit. After passing through the rooms of models, costumes, and monsters, we arrived at a modest gift shop window, and I considered what to add to my collection that would not break the bank, and asked the matronly shop clerk for advice. "Well, it may seem a bit unusual, but this is really my favorite," she said, holding up a paperback featuring a Cyber-maitre d', Dalek waiter, and Yeti chef on the cover. Its title? <i>The Doctor Who Cookbook</i>. Sold. As both a longtime Whovian and collector of recipes, to date it is one of my favorite possessions, let alone <i>Doctor Who </i>collectibles<i>. </i><br />
<br />
I know, after promising a look over Classic and New Who in its evolution talking about a cookbook seems strange. But given my erratic and distant updates, let's have some fun. (I had another update discussing the evolution of the Cybermen, but that seems to have been lost in Cyberspace. You and your retrospectives belong to us. They shall be deleted. I blame Mercury retrograde.) To the meat of the matter:<br />
<br />
<i>The Doctor Who Cookbook</i> was published in 1985 by Gary Downie, at the time the production manager for the show. He apparently wrote to every person that he knew somehow was connected to <i>Doctor Who</i> since the beginning and asked them for recipes. What resulted was a phenomenal collection of recipes submitted by actors, producers, directors, and crew members who all at some point in the last 22 years had worked on <i>Doctor Who</i>. Every contributor has their own bio, making it valuable to any Whovian, even a non-foodie, for the nice blurbs on the lives of those connected to the show, and nearly every page is adorned with glorious hand-drawn cartoons by a woman named Gail Bennett of the Doctor, his companions, and his foes. Marvel at Leela swinging down on a vine to throw some veggies into the stew simmering below, Lexa serving Meglos's head on a platter, or Tegan seething at Adric for eating all of the tasty hors d'oeuvres she'd just made. They really are very charming. There's an insert of full color photos of the some of the current cast of Doctor Who testing recipes. By "current" I mean of course "current" in 1985: Colin Baker, Nicola Bryant, and special guest Fraser Hines, who had reprised his role of Jamie in "The Two Doctors" serial that had aired relatively recently. Director Fiona Cumming oversaw taste-testing of cake. <br />
<br />
A lot of the recipes were granted some Whovian flare where possible. Many recipes were named punnishly, incorporating in character and creature names, such as Maureen O'Brien's "Vickissoise," Nerys Hughes "Todd in the Hole," and Patrick Troughton's "Vegetable Soup with Dalek Krotons." (The latter might be a bit obscure to suss out: garlic croutons.) Others played on titles in other ways--the first Romana submitted "Time Lady Tzatziki" and the second "Extra-Terrestrial Terrine." Some played no games--Janet Fielding wanted full personal credit for "Fielding's Favorite Souffle" (but I have to wonder how Oswald's compares?). Others went full tilt, suggesting alien ingredients, like longtime <i>Doctor Who </i>writer Terrance Dicks informing the reader to only substitute in prime rib of beef if a proper Gallifreyan banjixx cannot be procured and butchered. The best recipe of course is producer Barry Letts' recipe, titled only "?"<br />
<br />
I hope the Downie estate will forgive me if I reproduce part of ? here. This recipe follows a description from Barry Letts, who claims to have learned the recipe from an obliging Venusian caterer (adding that sulphuric acid rain was terrible on the location crew's equipment): <br />
<br />
=====<br />
<b>? </b><br />
from Barry Letts, published in the <i>Doctor Who Cookbook</i>, copyright 1985 Gary Downie<br />
<br />
<b>Ingredients</b><br />
3 oz/85 g per head of blim tree worms<br />
4 oz/113 g per head of runcle grease<br />
1 oz/28 g per head of nossy bulbs<br />
Grated snadge, to taste.<br />
<br />
<b>Method</b><br />
Boil the worms <i>al dente</i> (15-20 minutes). Crush the nossy bulbs and fry lightly in the melted runcle grease. Stir in the worms, season to taste, and serve with a sprinkling of grated snadge.<br />
=====<br />
<br />
The book suggests substitution with more easily available terran ingredients but I'll let you figure out for yourself what they might be. I will note however that at least when I have boiled blim tree worms or their equivalent, they seldom take as long as 15-20 minutes to get to the point of being al dente. I would follow the instructions on the packaging. The cookbook also contains a recipe called Mena's Tachyonic Sauce which would be excellent with this fine example of Venusian cuisine.<br />
<br />
As a fan of all food everywhere, I just love the cookbook for its variety. While it contains fairly simple recipes like ? and what is apparently an "exotic" American specialty, corned beef hash, there are also some fairly elaborate or exotic dishes, like the above mentioned E.T. Terrine and Fielding's Ocker Balls, which involve pastry and a filling involving oysters, roe, and other rich things. It's also nice as a British cookbook, as while we sometimes like to make fun of British food, it includes useful, easy versions of British dishes that really are quite tasty and worth trying, like Toad in the Hole (well, Todd) and Sticky Toffee Pudding. Of course there's also Russian, Polish, Greek and other largely European cuisines, a few Indian-inspired dishes as well, and some homebrewed concoctions. One of my favorites is Louise Jameson's "Leela's Savage Savoury," which is sauteed red cabbage, zucchini, and bell peppers, seasoned with ginger and chili, and doused with cream--yum. <br />
<br />
So why discuss this, beyond sharing with you the contents of a likely very hard to find <i>Doctor Who</i> collectible? Besides the fact that my second favorite topic of discussion is food.<br />
<br />
First, this book came out at an interesting time in <i>Doctor Who</i>'s history. I don't think Downie knew it when he first solicited recipes, but it ended up getting published around the time the show went on its first hiatus. I have no idea how well it sold, but its publication and presence showed that people were interested in <i>Doctor Who</i> at a time when the BBC was seriously considering letting it go (this first hiatus ended, fortunately, not too long after. The second in 1989, however, kept the show off the air for 16 years). It is as I say a treasure trove of many of the personalities who contributed to the show over the years, and in its own unique way helped celebrate the show's history at a time when some very much undervalued it.<br />
<br />
Secondly, recipes are often rather personal, even if they do not reveal what is necessarily private (and thank goodness!). Recipes frequently come with stories attached (some of which are included in the book), and the recipe a person chooses to submit helps reflect their personality, their lives. The food we love is often attached to memories of family and friends. And not only does the book feature a vast array of <i>Doctor Who</i> cast and crew, it features submissions from many people who now have passed away. (Sadly, Richard Hurndall, who played One in "The Five Doctors" died only four days after he had sent his recipe to Gary Downie.) How lovely to have a record of what is a little piece of them, even if it's just a nice dessert recipe someone served to their kids on Saturday nights.Or at least amusing to learn things like the apparent fact that Mark Strickson at that point in his life needed recipes gentle enough to prepare when hung over. <br />
<br />
Finally, it is the utter bizarreness of this book--a <i>cookbook</i>--that is what makes it awesome as a collectible. We can have buckets of action figures and series encyclopedias, but this really is something a bit different.<br />
<br />
I admit, my friends, there is a part of me that unfortunately has a bit of a old-fogey-meets-hipster attitude about <i>Doctor Who </i>fandom. I liked <i>Doctor Who</i> before it was cool, and you young nuWhovians can get off my lawn. I walked into Barnes and Noble yesterday and front and center there was a great big Doctor Who display, featuring encyclopedias, novels, DVDs, plushies, toy sonic screwdrivers, and so on. Truly, part of me was excited--how <i>cool</i> to see something I loved be displayed front and center! But another part of me felt disappointed. It largely looked like a pile of cookie cutter merchandise, identical except in branding to the <i>Twilight</i> or Marvel's <i>Avengers</i> or <i>Harry Potter</i> stuff before. When I was a young Whovian in the 80s and 90s, I would scour store shelves for anything <i>Doctor Who</i> I could find. It really took a lot of looking and work, but finding this Peter Haining retrospective or that Target novel felt really <i>special</i> because of how much time it took. There was enough of a <i>Doctor Who </i>fandom in my area, thanks to my local PBS station at the time, that you could find stuff, but it did take some dedication and whatever you found really felt like a treasure. To have it in mass abundance is at one hand, a well-deserved acknowledgement of just how great this show is, how long it has lasted. But it also kind of means that's been massively commercialized, and there's not a lot of room for individuality, for the really weird niche doodads like the <i>Doctor Who Cookbook</i>. <br />
<br />
Or... maybe I'm wrong. Honestly, I think an idea like this is long overdue for revisitation. How <i>does</i> Oswald's souffle compare to Fielding's? Is it high time we got an official recipe for fish fingers and custard in print? Anyway, folks, let's get creative.<br />
<br />
And if you want some fun recipe ideas for a 50th Anniversary Party.... drop me a line. Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-10996910369893342432013-08-10T12:20:00.001-07:002013-08-10T12:22:53.066-07:00Doctor Who Retrospective: The First Doctor, Fear, and the Nature of the Companion“Fear makes companions of us all, Miss Wright.” — the First
Doctor, “100,000 B.C.”<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The new (2005–present) series emphasizes the Doctor’s
choice to travel with companions because he enjoys seeing the universe through
his companions’ eyes. The Doctor takes great glee in showing them how beautiful and
diverse the cosmos is, and we may mistake the Doctor's search for a sense of wonder as his only motivation. We forget that the Doctor’s journey began in fear—fear of going
home, fear of never going home, fear of being discovered by the wrong people,
fear of the endless dangers of traveling through time and space. Even so, this
fear led him to taking on companions, and benefiting from companionship. And indeed, to
this day, his companions often reflect some aspect or another of the original
TARDIS crew, their presence as much a security blanket as it is a source of
joy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Doctor and his granddaughter Susan ran away from
Gallifrey. The exact reasons why are still amongst the core mysteries of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Doctor Who</i>; we know that they refer to
themselves as “exiles.” We learn much later
that the Doctor not only stole his TARDIS in their flight from Gallifrey but
also an astral engineering device known as the Hand of Omega. The Doctor possibly objected to something the Time Lords were going to do--or perhaps to their refusal to do something. Whatever the reason, the Doctor and Susan cannot go home; they are afraid of going home. The Doctor
is also afraid of being discovered—revealing Time Lord technology to less advanced societies
could expose people to things they are not ready for, and could expose him to
the people he and Susan are running away from. The Doctor is afraid of harm coming to
Susan, likely the only living family he has (the Second Doctor in “Tomb of the
Cybermen” suggests his family is “sleeping in his mind”—in other words, they
exist only in memories he dares call on only occasionally). And thus, the
Doctor is in fact <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">afraid</i> of Ian Chesterton
and Barbara Wright when they turn up looking for Susan in the Totter’s Lane
junkyard. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some fans, especially newer fans, are critical of how nasty
the Doctor is to Ian and Barbara in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Doctor
Who’s</i> first story, “An Unearthly Child.” Used to an outwardly friendly Doctor
who loves humanity, these fans are perplexed by a Doctor who does not trust and
is even verbally abusive to human beings. One must absolutely bear in mind
two things: first, the Doctor you see in later stories <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">had to get that way somehow</i>; the beginning of the story shows the
start of that process, and trust is not only usually earned, but also learned. Second,
the story clearly sets up Ian and Barbara as the heroes—after the pan
shot of the junkyard to establish its mystery, Ian and Barbara are introduced,
and their personalities, interests, and concern for Susan are what drives them and the story; it is their quest to help Susan that is the plot. The Doctor is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i>
the protagonist; he is in fact, technically, the show’s first antagonist, because he is the obstacle Ian and Barbara must overcome. Ian and Barbara's eventual triumph is that he joins the
protagonists’ side. The show is called “Doctor Who” because it is the mystery
of this “Doctor” which causes the heroes Ian and Barbara to get into the
adventures they get; he is a driving force, a focus. Not till later does the Doctor also become the primary hero (in my opinion, however, that the best <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Doctor Who</i> stories are those where
TARDIS team, as an ensemble, are the protagonists, not where the Doctor alone
is set up as the sole hero and the companions are the plot devices). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Most importantly, though, you have to accept and realize
that the reason the Doctor is being a jerk is because he’s scared out of his
mind. Look at it from his point of view: two adults have followed his teen granddaughter
home. This alone is a little creepy, and he does not truly know why they have
followed Susan (he does not know they are her teachers until later in the scene). He is trying to keep them from entering his ship, the knowledge of
which he is afraid will cause them to contact Earth's authorities. For all he
knows, they may be scientists or government officials tracking down his device
(such as the proto-UNIT-like organization seen in “Remembrance of the Daleks,”
which takes place in Earth chronology a few days after “An Unearthly Child”).
He doesn’t <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i> Earth or humanity very well yet. Susan is
still the new girl in school; she has been at best there a few weeks, maybe
months, and she has done most of the interacting with other human beings. Not
to mentions, we humans have often proven to ourselves, let alone the universe,
that we have a very ugly dark side. His goal isn’t to be mean to Ian and
Barbara for no reason; his goal is to protect Susan and the TARDIS and from those
who would fail to understand them and might hurt them or misuse knowledge of the
TARDIS’s existence for their own gain. He takes off so Ian and Barbara won’t
tell anyone about him, Susan, or the TARDIS. He is too frightened to take the
chance that they would just leave it alone. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Soon enough they find themselves 100,000 years or so in the
past, and at the mercies of the tribe of Gum. He realizes that first, Ian and
Barbara are capable, and second, that Ian and Barbara have a vested interest in
keeping each other <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">and Susan</i> safe.
They are not selfish, and they are allied with his family. He comes to the
right conclusion: he needs to stop bickering with them, and start using his
incredible knowledge to help them. Barbara questions him—he had been
irritatingly irascible until then, and he explains his helpful actions honestly with the quote
above. He will work with them, because he is afraid not to. Fondness, respect
come later, but soon. His fear forces him to work
with them—and then he sees what they can do. Earlier he fights with Ian about who is
“leader” of their group; later, the Doctor elects Ian to the position—and while
the Doctor probably sees himself as head of their team in truth, he realizes
Ian better serves as their spokesperson under the circumstances. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Doctor turns to Ian and Barbara as allies because they
help protect him. They do things he cannot—he may be brilliant, but he does not
have Ian and Barbara’s empathy or at least their willingness to rely upon it as
a benefit rather than a curse. In their third adventure, “Edge of Destruction,”
Barbara accuses him of lacking both gratitude and common sense. The tirade
takes him aback—he only then realizes how much they have contributed to their survival
over the course of their adventures. Barbara is the one who shows him the
TARDIS’s telepathic capabilities—he wasn’t aware of their extent until she
deciphers the “message” the TARDIS was trying to tell them. So learning to see
things through others’ eyes is a good thing, yes—suddenly, a dormant sympathy
awakens in him.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
BARBARA: "What do you care what I think or feel?"<br />
DOCTOR: "As we learn about each other, so we learn about ourselves."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Doctor apologizes for his behavior. From “An Unearthly
Child” through “Edge of Destruction,” we actually see one of the best emotional
journeys the Doctor ever goes on, in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">any</i>
of his adventures—one where he learns to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">stop</i>
being afraid of companionship. The Doctor’s journey to trust is one that is
relatively slow, but is appropriate, and all the more valuable for its subtle but profound effect on the stories that follow. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the same time, the journey had to begin with fear. He never would
have opened up to them were it not his own fear <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">of </i>them—leading to their capture—and fear of being <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">without them</i>—fear of death at the hands
of mutual enemies. And he realizes, traveling with the people who become his
friends makes thoughts of exile less cold and dark and frightening. His brief encounter with the “Meddling Monk” notwithstanding,
the Doctor learns to forget about Gallifrey for a very long time, not until
they capture him much later in the final Second Doctor story, “The War Games.” By
then, he is less afraid and more outraged of "home" asserting its existence—the only fear there ultimately,
is of Zoe and Jamie forgetting him. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Doctor is still afraid. Now in a later part of his journey, he is afraid of losing people as
much as he is afraid of facing the universe without them. Such is the "curse" of learning to benefit from friendship. The Eleventh Doctor’s
dance between traveling with Amy and Rory but trying to leave them home between adventures reflects
this strange attempt at balancing this fear. But he travels with people not
just because he enjoys their company, or even because he enjoys seeing their adventures through
his friends’ eyes, but also because <i>they </i>protect <i>him</i>. Their insights and
bravery have saved him as often as his amazing abilities allows him to protect
and rescue them when they need it. And he does so, because he knows a universe without companions scarcely bears considering. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unsurprisingly, nearly all the companions have traits
originally found in Ian, Barbara, or Susan (many of the individual traits
listed cross over between each other). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ian: Bravery, strength, willingness to fight, rationality, scientific
curiosity. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Barbara: Emotional bravery, emotional/social curiosity,
kindness, and willingness to speak up against wrongs—especially when the Doctor
is wrong.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Susan: Brilliance coupled with innocence, youthful
stubbornness, an openness to learning about new people (the Doctor learned this
from his own granddaughter before it became his own trait), has a youthfulness or vulnerability
that sparks a protective instinct in the Doctor.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Doctor needs all of these traits in his companions in
some combination to balance out his own brilliance, arrogance, curiosity, and powerful
sense of justice. So he has someone to bounce ideas off of, someone to teach,
someone to protect, and someone to, in the words of one of Barbara’s
successors, “stop him.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">But most of all, he needs them so he doesn’t
have to be afraid.</span>Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-60065444428817395542013-06-18T08:33:00.000-07:002013-08-10T12:22:38.228-07:00Doctor Who: The beginnings of a retrospectiveWhen I was about 4 years old, during a family vacation, a teen friend of the family insisted flipping on PBS on a certain day and hour, to watch something with weird swirly credits and a dapper man in an old fashioned outfit, who was very intent on stopping an infestation of giant maggots (ew). This vague memory of <i>Doctor Who</i>'s "The Green Death" imprinted itself on my mind, with both its horrific and fantastical aspects. A few years later, my sister and I rebelliously stayed up late Saturday nights to watch <i>Doctor Who</i> on PBS, which at the time was showing Tom Baker and then Peter Davison's episodes. It seemed like fantasy one moment, such as with the castles and vampires of "State of Decay," and amazing science fiction the next, such as with the alien ark on "Four to Doomsday." And though I am not always a fan of horror, the horrific elements were what really drew me in--specifically, watching Tegan be slowly seduced and possessed by the Mara in "Kinda" reeled me in and transformed me from casual watcher to complete obsessive. Tegan was eventually freed from possession; I was not at the age of 11 and still to this day at 37, am not. I have relished my "Whovian" status throughout.<br />
<br />
<i>Doctor Who</i> is, as you very likely know, on its way to celebrating its 50th anniversary in November; we also have about 36 seasons plus a series of specials and one TV movie, which is ground- and record- breaking for a science-fiction series. There is much to be celebrated and admired, and all because someone had the brilliant idea for the series: "grumpy but amazing madman in box can travel anywhere." Absolute emphasis on "anywhere." I love the line very early in the series that mentions the Doctor's TARDIS being able to travel "forwards, backwards, and sideways" in time and space. The very idea of "sideways in time and space" is brilliant, and frankly the potential of that last bit still has been barely untapped. <br />
<br />
I have the grand intention of writing a retrospective series; having ADD of the type that helps me be an expert and dedicated procrastinator, what I actually accomplish related to this is questionable, to be frank. But we shall at least have this introductory piece, yes? Perhaps I will manage later to fold time sideways and get all my other intended actions in eventually. <br />
<br />
Anyway, what I wish to do is explore <i>Doctor Who</i> from the beginning, exploring a few key chosen episodes of each Doctor, and as the muse speaks, perhaps some of the companions, foes, and other major elements of the series as well. Because I am a longtime oldschool Whovian, I will get tetchy and critical of seemingly unimportant minutia, as that is a requirement for the job. But I will also endeavor to express my deep love for the series whenever possible, and at length--and moreover, to point out the silver linings in clouds sometimes mocked, if not for their darkness, then for their shoddy craftmanship and purported shallowness. <br />
<br />
A critical thing to accept when enjoying <i>Doctor Who</i> through its half a century of existence is that it, like the Doctor himself, is ever changing and evolving and looking and acting just a little bit different. At the beginning, it was a children's show with the intent to educate about science and history folded within its imaginative premises. In the 70s, it went from near military-action-drama to horror series, to a light hearted-sci fi with satiric elements. When I became a fan in the 80s, in the United States at least it was seen as a cult show for largely nerdy teens and adults (even if the BBC increasingly outdatedly classified it as children's entertainment, even when it wasn't really majority children who were watching it worldwide). Perhaps we can agree (although that's unlikely, given Whovians seldom agree on anything) that it is now a science-fiction dramedy, written with the intent to appeal to littles and bigs alike. I think it's rather a great fallacy to point at one era and say "Now <i>that's</i> <i>Doctor Who!</i> But that, that bit, that isn't at all"--to do so would be like pointing at Matt Smith and saying he is the Doctor, but that Tom Baker never was. <i>Doctor Who</i> is a huge and changing and sometimes a confusing timey-wimey ball of stuff, but it needs to be accepted for all that it is to be appreciated fully. This doesn't mean we can't dislike or disagree with it at times, but all of its times and relative dimensions must be taken in and accepted as part of the greater whole. What is truly amazing about the series is that for as old as it is and as much of it has changed, how much we can still recognize its commonalities, its unique and otherwise indescribable "Doctorness" that makes it the magical series that it is.<br />
<br />
This last bit I point out in particular because of course Matt Smith has announced that he will be passing on the Doctor's mantle. This of course has already led to the wailing and gnashing of teeth and clutching of pearls that NO ONE will ever play the Doctor as well as Matt Smith, forgetting that exactly the same thing was said about David Tennant and Christopher Eccleston and Paul McGann (check out his Big Finish audios if you can) and Sylvester McCoy and... well, you get the idea. And inevitably, just as they've done <i>probably</i> since 1966, or at least 1969, speculated that the Doctor will be a woman, or a person of color, or an actual alien, or be played by a felt puppet worn on Stephen Moffat's hand. When it most likely turns out to be a white British (most likely English with a passing chance of Scottish) male somewhere between the age of 25 and 50, I will not be able to find it in myself to be outraged, let alone surprised. But here's the thing, whether the Doctor is the white British male or, say, a 78 year old Lakota woman, for example, I trust that the showrunners will have evaluated the actor first and foremost for "Doctorness." And that the one with the most "Doctorness" will win the part. And I don't really care what he or she looks or sounds like as long as that is the primary criterion.<br />
<br />
As I may inevitably be asked, who is my favorite Doctor? For the record, Joanna Lumley.<br />
<br />
(And if you do not get that, PLEASE do yourself a favor and Google the "Curse of Fatal Death.")<br />
<br />
My favorite companion is any and all of them who tell the Doctor off when he needs to be.<br />
<br />
My favorite enemy is the Rani, and I frequently pray for her return. My favorite alien race... a harder item to pick, but I think I'll go with Alpha Centauri's race from the "Peladon" episodes back in the Third Doctor era. I used to like the Weeping Angels, but I got a little tired of them.<br />
<br />
And for the record, Daleks, with few exceptions, have and I expect always shall utterly bore me to the point of narcolepsy. If you consider this a blasphemy, I may outrage you in future installments. If you can forgive me, and I do get around to talking about <i>Doctor Who</i> more, read on next time.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-26920160822002071222013-04-28T13:56:00.003-07:002013-04-28T13:56:31.652-07:00Playing aroundI am hoping (we will see) to update this more, and am playing around with the theme and such, so on the offhand anyone happens to be looking here, mind the dust. Also hoping to post fewer walls of text when I do post, but knowing me, that's unlikely. Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-18534108452726743342012-12-23T18:06:00.001-08:002012-12-23T18:08:42.883-08:00Fallout: New Vegas doesn't railroad you at the beginning (rant)Okay, I know it's at least two years old at this point, and in video game dog years is thus an ancient game, but I want to talk about Fallout: New Vegas for a minute.<p>
Fallout: New Vegas is one of my very favorite computer RPGs ever. It's up there with Torment and Baldur's Gate 2. I really really really love this game. It has an interesting story, ample opportunity to explore (despite some delusional gamers' claims to the contrary), and it is one of few games where I truly feel like I go where I want when I want, and my decisions have real consequences. Plus lesbian monk punching monsters for the win. <p>
I realize not many people love the game like I do, and I accept that people have different tastes and different preferences in games. All I ask is that if you dislike the game, dislike it for reasons that are not just plain wrong.<p>
One of the wrongest reasons to dislike Fallout: New Vegas is the claim that the game "railroads you" because the characters and world design encourages you to travel east instead of north from your starting location. A good friend, whose opinions I usually respect, made this claim just recently, even stating it was a reason he never finished it, which makes my heart break, because if you like good RPGs, it is a game so very worth finishing. He said, "It forces you to follow the main plot and won't let you go straight to New Vegas." (Spoiler: New Vegas is what lies straight to the north of your starting point.) <p>
Here's the thing: if you go straight to New Vegas, you TRIGGER THE PLOT FASTER. There is a reason why certain major plot characters are in New Vegas (your first hint that this is going to happen: the game is called Fallout: New Vegas), and you can very easily skip past early elements of the main plot (which are largely inconsequential) and suddenly find yourself right smack in the middle of the main plot before you are actually ready to be.<p>
The truth of why the game strongly suggests (but does not force) you to go south or east instead is in fact, to encourage you to explore the game and get a feel for the world. The closer you get to New Vegas, the more you get wrapped up in the goings on in the world. If you are the kind of person who likes Fallout games because you can explore and find weird locations and fight monsters and talk to people in little towns and get a sense of what's going on in the world before you get involved, it's actually better to follow the game's advice and go any direction but north. It's in fact much easier to leave the game's main plot by hanging out in that central eastern/southern region and discovering the very many areas around there and doing the very many sidequests you find there.<p>
But the thing is, you want to dive straight for New Vegas, you can! Yes, the game design does border the northern roads with several swarms of giant death flies, to discourage you from going that way. The game ALSO puts not one but TWO Stealth Boys in easy reach of you in the area you start in. You do the math. If you're determined to go north, you can do it. You have to be careful, you have to be observant, and you have to have good timing, but you can do it, and it's not that hard, because I did it, and I am the farthest from leet ninja game maneuverings as you can be and still be able to play video games at all.<p>
I am in a game right now where I have a 4th level character hanging out in Freeside. She got that way by going straight north from Goodsprings and being careful. Levels 3 and 4 were earned in the New Vegas vicinity. She has a crappy Stealth score, for the record, as her frequent head injuries inflicted by Fiends with plasma weaponry will show you. But she is there, and she's alive, and she's slowly gathering the friends, caps, and supplies needed to do the various quests she's picking up in and around there. She's not ready to charge Fiends in head on quite yet but she's getting there (she can certainly pick off stragglers easily enough). And I'm sure someone who plays ballsier than me could be past the Vegas gate by now. <p>
Could they have designed the game where you started in a different starting point so you'd have to travel far to get to New Vegas, forcing you to explore on the way one way or the other? Sure. But I think that'd actually be more railroady. Interesting thing is, this way gives you a choice--take the hard but fast road to get to the plot (and bigger guns and such) faster, or take the slow and easy road and take in the sights along the way. I guess if they made a mistake, it's that they didn't make it clear enough that this was in fact a choice, not a railroad. At least, that's how I see it, and I'm living proof you can play the game however you like.<p>
I can count on my hand the times I felt deeply railroaded in F:NV. Once was through a single particular plot late in the main plot, where you are forced to give up an item and not given options to try and sleight of hand it or whatever. The other is through the majority of the Dead Money DLC, and especially the way the endgame works (there's a character who is unkillable until a certain trigger, and there's no good reason for it). (Mind, I loved Dead Money, but it is what it is.) Most of the DLCs by their nature are also "railroady" because you have to get to the end before you're allowed to return to the main game area, but that's also kind of the nature of the beast anyway. <p>
But it was definitely not in the beginning. <p>
So: hate on F:NV if that's what tickles your fancy. But not because the "beginning railroads you" -- because it doesn't, and you're wrong. And if you don't like it, I'll send Veronica in to punch you, so there. <p>Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-87604127081753109702012-09-14T19:40:00.001-07:002012-09-14T19:41:11.149-07:00Slayers d20 RevisitedSo, one of my long time projects has been taking <i>Slayers d20</i> and doing a massive revision of the mechanics, which includes "Pathfinderizing" the rules. <p>
<i>Slayers d20</i> was of course Guardians of Order's attempt at making a D&D-esque ruleset starring Lina Inverse and general fantasy mayhem. <p>
I can't rewrite Slayers d20 with IP, but per the OGL I do have access to the mechanics, so that's what I've worked with, turning it into a system I call Insane Fantasy.<p>
You can access the alpha draft of the rules here:<p>
<a href="http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6ebl?Slayers-d20-Pathfinderized-do-you-wanna-see-it#22">http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6ebl?Slayers-d20-Pathfinderized-do-you-wanna-see-it#22</a><p>
Yes, that is a link to a Paizo forum post, which in turn links to the items on GoogleDocs. Apologies for linking to a link that links to links, but I'd rather direct everyone to the same place. Comments are enabled on the documents themselves so you do not need to comment on the message board--and of course you could comment here as well.<p>
If I am ever happy with Insane Fantasy that I'd want them to be totally public, I'd probably post them to some kind of game wiki for free here. This project is entirely for fun and not profit--although I'd still like it to be GOOD, so feedback is much appreciated. Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-49666882238004082972012-06-25T08:44:00.001-07:002012-06-25T08:50:52.104-07:00Pathfinder RPG Advanced Race GuidePaizo's latest add-on to its collection to its Pathfinder RPG line is the <i>Advanced Race Guide</i> (ARG). This is not a book for DIY would-be dictators to guide the master race to take over the world, but rather an in-depth exploration of the various character races available in the Pathfinder RPG and setting lines. I find it an interesting supplement, although not necessarily a must-have for everyone. GMs who want to tinker with their races for their homebrew worlds will definitely want a copy, as will players who want some more unusual race options (provided their GM allows the book of course). For those who largely stick to core material or don't do a lot of homebrewing or want to use unusual races, it may not be worth the expense (if in doubt, get the $10 .pdf). There is some degree of repetition of older material, as the ARG is to an extent a compilation of races featured in previous Paizo publications, although the purpose of the book is also of course to expand in depth upon them all. And of course there is an extensive section on how to build brand new races as well. <p>
The ARG builds upon concepts originally introduced in <i>Advanced Player's Guide</i> (APG), and I would say that Paizo largely expects you to own and use the options in the APG if you want to use the ARG. The ARG uses alternate racial abilities, alternate racial favored class abilities, and archetypes, all introduced in the APG first, and the archetypes available include archetypes for the APG base classes as well as the base classes introduced in Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat. I take this as a blessing and a curse, a sign of "supplement bloat" to a degree. If you own and use all the options in the APG, then you'll have no problem further supplementing your games with the ARG. If you don't, the book may be largely useless to you. My own personal dilemma comes from the fact that I do not use any supplementary base classes in my home games, so all the archetypes that reference the APG, UM, or UC classes are useless to me and I feel like I have less content available to me. I realize there is a rock and a hard place situation here--if no prior supplementary material is referenced, then those who do use those materials also feel short changed. I will give Paizo credit that they explain what all the new concepts are so that if you don't own the APG you will still understand how the various alternate abilities and archetypes work, but this book, more than any other supplement to date, has rung to me as "you must have collected all four to be able to use this book properly." This situation is very much YMMV, and I point it out simply so that others may be aware.<p>
The book is divided into four sections, the first three of which are basically variations on the same theme. Every race depicted in these three sections gets new alternate racial abilities, favored class abilities, archetypes, as well as race specific feats and equipment. There's also extensive flavor text for all races, and lovely art to accompany it. <p>
The first section looks in depth at the core races, dwarf, elf, gnome, halfling, half-elf, half-orc, and human. It expands upon their description text from the core rulebook, and it adds more alternate racial abilities and favored class options than what are listed in the APG, although what is listed in the APG is also repeated. Every core race now has a unique favored class option for every core and base class available in the game. Core races also get three new archetypes per race. I appreciated the extra detail in this section, although I did feel to a point like I was re-reading stuff I had already in the core rulebook or APG, but the new material is also valuable. I especially enjoyed most of the new feats and equipment.<p>
The second section basically does the same thing for non-core but popular races for both PCs and NPCs, such as familiar "savage" humanoids like goblins, kobolds, and orcs, as well as the various races oldschoolers would collectively refer to as "planetouched," like tieflings and aasimar. This section goes into a little less detail--although what is there is still comprehensive, and each race has only two archetypes and less new material. Likewise the third section repeats the formula for very uncommon races, including a number of "animal-folk" like catfolk and tengu, as well as some unusual planar influenced races like the suli (jann-descended) and the wayang (shadow-descended). My understanding is a lot of these races originally appeared in Pathfinder setting material (I don't usually buy from the Companion or Chronicles lines so I can't speak to how much new is introduced). These uncommon races get only one archetype and again less information in general, but are still presented with well written descriptions. I did feel short changed on the amount of abilities--in particular, I think at least the races in the second section could have used more racial abilities and favored class options, to match the first chapter. I would have been willing to sacrifice some archetypes from the first or second chapters for the extra space. In fairness, for racial options, I generally prefer the alternate abilities to race-specific archetypes, but that's in part because I grew tired of racial class restrictions as far back as the 80s, and it's a concept I have no desire to see return to the descendants of AD&D. <p>
The final section is the race builder, a system to allow GMs to build brand new races from scratch. It uses a point based system to build races, with "standard," "advanced," and "monstrous" races as categories for how many points you should use to build a certain race and how many abilities they may be able to have. The system includes a strong caveat that the race building rules are guidelines, and that the entire section is to be used at the GM's will and with the GM's discretion, which I do think must be borne strongly in mind by any and all users. I participated in the ARG playtest and review and I think the designers did take some of the most important feedback to heart -- for example, that not all core races needed to be shoehorned into a 10 point build, when obviously some core race abilities were truly more or less valuable than what the developers originally tried to assign them to be to make them fit a mold that they'd never been put into in the first place. This makes some of the point costs and assignments more sensible than they were than in the playtest, and at least I am fine with the fact that some core races come out to more or less than 10 points. From what I recall from the playtest, I think few will protest. <p>
Still, I wish more player feedback from the playtest had been taken into consideration for the final product. My particular, though minor, peeve is that there are too many too-specific abilities -- a racial ability that grants you the ability to work with stone, but no such thing for working, say, with metal or clay or leather. Of course you can substitute in such things yourself, but I would have preferred many of the choices to have been made more generic to begin with, rather than force us to wing it in a system that already presumes a fair amount of "winging" to start with. <p>
Nonetheless, it is a solid system that will give race tinkerers a lot of content to work with--again as long as all is taken as firm guidelines than laser-etched rules. I also like that the section provides some advice for how to deal with races of different power levels. Since Pathfinder did away with the problematic "level adjustment" concept from 3.5, the race builder rules offer different alternatives for having very racially "mixed" adventuring parties. The basic rule of thumb is generally to take a powerful race and remove abilities so that they match core more closely, or alternately to use the race builder to add abilities to weaker races so they are better balanced with stronger ones. Some may not like the idea as much as I do, but I appreciate firmly getting away from the character level issue entirely.<p>
Production-wise, the book matches the high standard of quality that other PFRPG hardcover books meet. It is a good length, printed cleanly and clearly on glossy pages with beautiful artwork that enhances but does not distract from the text. The spine is solid enough, and I ordered mine from Paizo directly, whose dutiful golems placed corner protectors all over the book so there was no chance of it getting battered in shipping. My one layout nitpick is that for each race listed, the standard racial abilities are listed in a separate box at the bottom of the page. The way the pages are designed, it is very easy to read the race's description and then go straight into <i>alternate</i> racial abilities before you've managed to read the standard racial ones first, and makes it hard to cross reference between the two. <p>
The ARG is a very nice supplement, with a well-organized and vast amount of information on Pathfinder character races. While I wouldn't consider it required reading, if character racial options are what's up your alley, then it's THE go-to sourcebook for Pathfinder.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-3858924665256593382012-03-29T06:58:00.002-07:002012-08-01T07:23:19.304-07:00Brian Fargo plans to make Wasteland 2 backed by KickstarterIf you've never heard of <i>Wasteland</i>, it was a video game produced in the 1980s and was THE seminal post-apocalyptic RPG which sired the <i>Fallout</i> series of games. <br />
<br />
Veteran game developer Brian Fargo of <a href="http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inxile/wasteland-2">inXile Entertainment has launched a Kickstarter project</a> to fund a sequel. Rather than <a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116552-Wasteland-2-Creator-Decries-Awful-Developer-Publisher-Relations">deal with the utterly abysmal way publishers treat developers</a>, let alone the fact that few mainstream games get proper QA testing before release these days, he's gone straight to the fans to provide the backing needed to get the project rolling. The response has already garnered over $1.6 million, with 18 days left to get even more. The original goal was $1 million with any additional funds going to expanding the game further; it also is part of the Kicking It Forward program, which means some of the profits will go toward other indie projects. <br />
<br />
(Fargo, for the record, wrote and produced the original <i>Wasteland</i> and was co-lead on the original <i>Fallout</i>, and has a generally impressive list of games in his design portfolio.)<br />
<br />
People have some reservations about patronage projects like this, and I understand those reservations. Anyone should think carefully about whether they want to contribute. But the mainstream video game world is getting riddled with issues of publishers nickel-and-diming players for bits and pieces of the game as they go along, and laying on the hassle of stunts like <a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116537-New-SimCity-Will-Require-Always-On-Internet">requiring famously single player games to be online-only</a>. This is exactly the kind of situation where I think it's incredibly valuable to be able to put your money where your mouth is and be part of helping realize what should be a great project. As opposed to, say, pre-ordering a product you can be guaranteed will be full of bugs and incomplete on release.<br />
<br />
And yes, I've put money down to back this. For $50, I get not only a digital copy, but a boxed copy with disc and real live actual game manual and other "feelies" that have been long forgotten in contemporary video game distribution. And all of it DRM free. All that for $10 less than the average MSRP for a mainstream RPG these days, which are usually guaranteed to be buggy and incomplete on release. (You can donate as little as $1, and for $15 you get a digital copy of the game.) I know I'll have to wait to see the final result, but I am happy to wait to see a final, complete, well-designed product. I realize I can't be guaranteed of such a thing until the game comes out, but I'm willing to take the chance this once, as I feel under the circumstances it's a good chance to take. <br />
<br />
(crossposted to my dreamwidth and livejournal blogs)Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-46044960297097927392012-02-03T11:19:00.000-08:002012-02-03T11:19:17.480-08:00Harvesting FunAfter Dragon Age, with its wrist-slittingly bleak outlook on storytelling, I decided to go look for something with sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. And nothing is more like the video game manifestation of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkZ2_nKo7II">a cheery Lesley Gore song</a> than the Harvest Moon series.<br />
<br />
Well, actually, I'd never played Harvest Moon itself before. I'm a huge fan of its fantasy cousin Rune Factory, which is in fact a really brilliant fantasy series for the DS (I believe there is a version or two for the Wii as well). But Harvest Moon actually came first, and is a series of farming games. Yep, farming. You play a newcomer to a town, you sow crops and raise livestock--and you also try to befriend and even woo townsfolk and participate in town shenanigans like various festivals. It's a simple simulation but quite addictive. Rune Factory adds dungeon crawling, monster fighting, and item crafting to the table, and as a fantasy gamer I thus prefer this, but Harvest Moon in its simplicity has its appeal, even if its cows and chickens don't look slightly and awesomely demonic.<br />
<br />
The particular Harvest Moon game I got is "Tale of Two Towns." I'm led to understand this is a pretty entry level version of the game. Its gameplay is largely as in Rune Factory but without the monster hunting bits. You plant crops, raise animals, fish, scavenge in the wilderness, cook dishes, and chat with people and do quests for them. The gist of the story is that you move into a mountainside area occupied by two towns, who have been bickering for generations. They bicker over which empty farm of theirs you get to occupy, and you have your choice of either (and you can move back and forth between the two); one is better for raising crops and the other is better for raising animals. You have to raise the towns' friendship over time by participating in cooking festivals, which is how the towns "duel" each other. And that's pretty much it.<br />
<br />
It's a very slow paced game, and I have a feeling I may not have picked the best example of the series out there, but it's a nice break from dark and dreary RPGs (though I will probably go back and do a replay of Fallout: New Vegas soon, or crack and buy Skyrim even though I said I'd wait until all the DLC came out first). There is a simple pleasure to be had in figuring out growth cycles and how to befriend your animals and learning recipes and so on, plus engage in the difficult matter of how to earn the most profit with what you produce or find (the mechanical goal of the series is to maximize profits, interaction and romance and town plotline aside). The music is decent, the graphics bright and pleasant, with lots of lovely little details painstakingly worked into the background. <br />
<br />
It's a Japanese game, and for some reason every Japanese game I've ever played come with a degree of the "Guide Dang It" philosophy (to borrow a phrase from TV Tropes)--you really have to at some point look at a walkthrough to figure out certain things. But such things as they are. Some things in the game could have had a little more thought put into it -- you can have a pet owl that flies you from the top of the mountain to one of the two towns, but no way to quickly get TO the top of the mountain, so the owl is kind of useless (I wish I hadn't bought him). The inventory is waaaay too small... I get inventory management is part of the game's challenge but it's frustratingly so; inventory management is NOT fun and it's the one big thing that detracts from the series (Rune Factory has this problem as well, though Rune Factory 3 was better about it). I think if they put all your tools in a separate inventory that did not take up backpack space, that would be a godsend. The quest system is a little too random--often you receive requests for stuff that you can't possibly achieve (not till much later in the game). But ultimately, there's a lot of fun to be had.<br />
<br />
If you like simulations and have a DS, and you're in the mood for a nice quiet game, check it out--or other Harvest Moon games. And if you like Japanese fantasy games, definitely get the Rune Factory series (3 in particular was brilliant--phenomenal story AND you are a WERE-SHEEP. Yes, a were-sheep. How can that not be awesome?). Its next installment is coming out frustratingly only for the 3DS. I may have to give in and trade in my lite for it (but generally, hate the whole 3D mess, so it may not be worth it).Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-51052328896331147592012-02-01T16:42:00.000-08:002012-02-01T16:42:14.915-08:00Dragon Age leaves me wanting to move on from BiowareI think I'm giving up on Bioware games for awhile. Mind, I've been trying to get away from buying anything published by EA--the company's practices do not endear me to them--but Bioware was always a big kicker. I'm a big fan of Bioware's earlier stuff--I've played the <i>Baldur's Gate</i> series, <i>Neverwinter Nights</i> and all its add-ons, and <i>Knights of the Old Republic</i>. I missed <i>Jade Empire</i>, and I missed <i>Mass Effect </i>and <i>Dragon Age</i> on release because my computer couldn't handle them at the time. But I picked up <i>Dragon Age: Ultimate Edition </i>for cheap on Steam relatively recently, and my delight with catching up with what Bioware was up to (even if still a year or two behind) quickly faded.<br />
<br />
What it comes down to is the following:<br />
- Good story moments and interesting choices offset by other moments of feeling utterly railroaded <br />
- God, the awful cutscenes which would pull nonsense like pull your entire party into the center of a room before you got ambushed. What made that especially lazy is that there were wonderfully challenging fights that didn't have to resort to such cheesy cheating tactics. As I've noted elsewhere, if Dragon Age were a TTRPG (well, it is also one, but bear with me), and the GM suddenly picked up my miniature and moved it to a spot to his advantage, I'd grab my mini back from him and shove it up his nose.<br />
- Others have waxed on this more than I, but it DOES feel like I've played this game several times before... with the only significant differences being that it's more gory (whatever) and I like fewer of the characters<br />
- God the bugs. And I got this game late and fully patched, remember. The one where the game pulls the hideously boring and cliched "you find yourself in a dungeon with none of your stuff" was just so <i>enhanced</i> by the fact that the game actually deleted my belongings permanently. Lovely. <br />
- So much of it is bleak and depressing, without reprieve. I've just come off finishing Awakening, where there is not one but two sidequests which end in you finding someone's lover having committed suicide. What? Why? Why is this necessary? It's not like they were even very interesting sidequests with otherwise rewarding results (okay, one might have been if it wasn't hideously bugged, but still). Not to mention that the whole storyline is that you're pressed into service into an organization where you must either let yourself be murdered or taint yourself with demon blood, the result of with will, guaranteed, doom you to a life of nightmares and eventual insanity and death within a few decades. Lovely. I feel so heroic.<br />
- Not interested in endless "cinematic" dialogues; voice acting isn't <i>that</i> important to me, but they seem to be emphasizing that and other shallow stuff rather than, say, good combat design (see above about the cutscenes). <br />
- And that's the biggest thing. I play RPGs often, to feel heroic. Grey areas and difficult moral decisions are good, but I want to feel like my player character chose to do good things and good things came of it. I felt often through much of the game like maybe just letting the world end might have been the kindest thing to do. Even trying to play heroic, I didn't feel it. And I often felt the most important choices were taken from me--or not adequate options were offered me.<br />
- There was a point where I kept playing just to see how it ended, not because I was having fun.<br />
<br />
TL;DR: I stopped having fun.<br />
<br />
Mind, when I say the stuff about depressing and not feeling heroic--the last game I played before this was Fallout: New Vegas. Shiny happy, black and white morality, rainbows and bunnies Fallout: New Vegas. Well, that's how I seem to remember it now, even though I know there was hideous death and brutality and slavery and difficult decisions, but somehow, <i>they</i> made it fun. <i>Dragon Age</i> seems to be about showing how awful and bleak and dark and gory it can be for the sake of being awful and bleak and dark and gory. The <i>Fallout</i> series (I've played all of them but <i>Tactics</i>) is darker and bleaker and gorier, but it isn't the <i>point</i>; it's about how people deal with that and still come out on top. Plus the humor's better, in my opinion. But I digress.<br />
<br />
And ultimately, I think I want to step away from Bioware is because when I stop and think about it... when I think about what was the best Bioware game EVER... for me, it was <i>Baldur's Gate 2</i>. Which, by all means, is one of the best computer RPGs of all time, and that's not my opinion, that's fact. :)<br />
<br />
But I think they hit their peak early, and I haven't seen much but downhill since. I'm sure <i>Mass Effect</i> has its own good stuff going on, but at this point, I don't think it's worth my money to find out.<br />
<br />
Ah well, lots of other good games out there to play. And I look forward to that, certainly.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-28833269457187965502011-11-09T10:49:00.000-08:002011-11-09T10:54:05.002-08:00Fallout: New Vegas: Lonesome Road - An Informal ReviewSo Dead Money was Fallout's take on survival horror, Honest Hearts was straightforward wilderness adventure, and Old World Blues was an especially awesome and often hilarious dose of retro sci-fi horror, Lonesome Road follows as Fallout's take on... a dungeon crawl.<br />
<br />
And don't get me wrong, as a dungeon crawl, Lonesome Road is exceptionally well designed. You have dark dank tunnels to run through, traps to disarm, phat l00t to find, undead and constructs and aberrations to fight, and a big bad who taunts you through magic messages. That the "dungeon" is a devastated military facility and nearby town, and one exceptionally built at that, is just fabulous. If I were to set out to build a dungeon crawl game and I made it similar to Lonesome Road, I'd have done a great job. <br />
<br />
But Lonesome Road is also supposed to be the essential finale to the Fallout New Vegas story. Sure, we all know the actual end to the story is the end to the main game (all of the DLC stories take place before the story's end). But if we played the game plus DLC in order of release, Lonesome Road is last. It's the big shabang everything was leading up to. The Big Bad gets name dropped early on in the main game, and most of the DLC all mention Ulysses and/or the Divide and the Courier's inevitable showdown involving that man and that place. For months, the hype has been built: what's going to happen at the Divide is going to be mind-blowing, reveal-all, amazing.<br />
<br />
And instead of a mind blowing finale, we get a dungeon crawl.<br />
<br />
The story is a loose blob of cryptic messages that strings together your purpose for traveling through the maze of twisty passages, all alike. There's only one human person in the story, and his sole purpose is to taunt you so that you remain annoyed enough to traverse the Divide so you can shoot him in the face before he sets off a nuclear missile strike (which he could have done without inviting you for the show). And that's it. You don't learn very much--Honest Hearts gave better insight both to the history of the Legion and important characters in New Vegas's backstory as well as shed light on life at the edge of the apocalypse. And it's easy to miss a lot of the clues there are. I found them, but it still doesn't fill in many blanks, and in some cases just leaves open more questions and seeming discrepancies (for example, Ulysses seems to imply the Courier accidentally wrecked the Divide, but evidence you find suggests it's always been an unlivable hellhole ever since an earthquake went off before the Great War started).<br />
<br />
Ultimately, because the story is both piecemeal and contradictory, the point of playing through Lonesome Road feels much less like bringing history to a close and revealing more about the Courier, and more like an excuse to go hunting deathclaws in a post-apocalyptic ruin. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with hunting deathclaws in a post-apocalyptic ruin, but it shouldn't have been marketed as anything more than that, and it shouldn't have been the finale.<br />
<br />
Purely gameplay wise, Lonesome Road is solid. The environments are exceptionally well built--there are a lot of toppled buildings and you have a lot of freedom of exploration (with minimal risk of falling through the infrastructure like Fallout world design tends to incur). If you're the kind of person who plays Fallout mostly for the shooter aspects of the game, you'll love Lonesome Road--fantastic areas to go hunting monsters in. I'd say Lonesome Road is even most enjoyable when you ignore Ulysses' ramblings and just explore and kill things.<br />
<br />
I did experience some memory/slow down issues (on a brand new computer), although some of those were resolved after a graphics driver update. So make sure you're up to date on everything before you play. I didn't encounter many gameplay bugs.<br />
<br />
The mechanical add ons are a mixed bag. There's a handful new weapons and armor, and you'll be very happy in particular if you like heavy weapons (my pistol toting light armored sneaky gal had less to make use of). There are several crafting recipes I wished I had about 30 levels ago, and there are several perks I'd wished I'd been able to build my character up to (there are notable exceptions in the form of a set of perks only available at level 50, which are very cool perks at that). This further makes Lonesome Road frustrating as a capstone piece--most of what it has is great for low-mid-level characters, but it's a high level adventure that came out when most who've bought it first have played through the game and are going to use their highest level characters to play through it. I seldom do multiple playthroughs, although Fallout New Vegas in general has high replay value, so I imagine the most I will get out of Lonesome Road is not the adventure itself, but the perks (literal and figurative) it will offer to new characters.<br />
<br />
Oh yes, of course, there's also ED-E. You encounter a similar eyebot and can upgrade him (of course, by the time you finish upgrading him, you lose him). Any upgrading you do to Lonesome Road's ED-E transfers over to your companion back in the Mojave, if of course you weren't one of the people, like me, who had him randomly disappear in the middle of the Wasteland and never come back. I guess it's cool to get ED-E's backstory, but to me he'll always be a floating bucket of bugs more than anything else, and being a floating bucket of bugs with extra perks isn't much better. I'm also a very character-driven RPG player and I prefer the humanoid companions anyway. And on that note, frustratingly, ED-E also gets a perk which makes Veronica's workbench perk redundant (I guess maybe it's fair because Veronica also gets an "upgrade" perk from Dead Money... or it would be if her bonus perk applied to her actual preferred mode of combat).<br />
<br />
In summary: the designers deserve a lot of credit for environment design and providing a lot of opportunity for both action and exploration (something which is hard to balance). Gameplay add-ons are a decent touch. But story and character-wise, Lonesome Road is far and away the weakest of the Fallout New Vegas installments. If you play the game for the story, you can skip it without losing much. Honest Hearts was a less bland foray into adventuring and had more main-game plot relevant. Dead Money was much more tense and terrifying, and Old World Blues was far more entertaining with an infinitely better set of antagonists. If you can only afford one DLC, make Lonesome Road your lowest priority. If you have all the DLC or are planning to get the Ultimate Edition in February, play Lonesome Road as soon as you can (which is still not until level 25) and save the better DLCs for later.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-62591461819776600152011-09-29T17:50:00.000-07:002011-09-29T17:50:18.948-07:00Fallout New Vegas: Crowning Moment of Awesome... for VeronicaHello, neglected blog. I needed a place to nerd out about video games, and then I remembered: here you are. <br />
<br />
While I have grand plans to do a comprehensive review of <i>Fallout: New Vegas</i> (a year later, why not?), I decided to wait till I finish <i>Lonesome Road</i> first. <br />
<br />
In the meantime, I want to share my crowning moment of awesome for my favorite F:NV companion. The following contains spoilers:<br />
<br />
<br />
So, there we were, having infiltrated the Legion Camp, and I (Jinx, the Urban Space Cowgirl, AKA "Courier") was about to face <strike>Darth Vader</strike> Legate Lanius himself. I had read about how tough he was on the Internetz, how the very best at tactical fighting and FPS type players were killed over and over by him, how he was a BEAST. While I was very high level (44?) I am not the very best at combat, and was going for drama in terms of equipment (Joshua's armor and pistol). I thought, I've got Speech out the wazoo, hopefully I can talk him down.<br />
<br />
Marching behind me were my backup: a bunch of creaky-kneed retired Nazis in power armor, and Veronica Santangelo, also <a href="http://pics.livejournal.com/couldmakeucare/pic/000029z5">clad in Enclave armor, courtesy of Arcade Gannon</a>. <br />
<br />
I talked to the Legate. I passed speech checks! But I got saucy with him anyway, and he decided to attack.<br />
<br />
Except he <i>ran past me</i>, toward my backup crew.<br />
<br />
Veronica stepped forward, sending an uppercut to his masked jaw that would have made a Deathclaw weep. He was thrown into the air, landed, turned around, and ran back toward me as if to scream, "Mommy."<br />
<br />
I caught him in VATS: he was below half hit points. I finished him off with a shot to the arm courtesy of a Light Shining in Darkness. <br />
<br />
The giant cazadors in Zion gave me four times as much trouble. And probably? Because I couldn't take Veronica with me. <br />
<br />
The moral of the story: bow down and worship the lesbian techno-monk, fools. All hail Veronica.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-31769338710280604932011-02-20T15:00:00.000-08:002014-10-12T07:39:55.884-07:00Suikod20: Overview and RunesFirst of all, I realize I should probably provide an outline of the general stuff that is being or will be worked on in this project so you can see how it all goes together. It is here (copy-paste the link):<br />
<br />
[Sorry, the link is broken. If you know me, you know how to contact me for the documents should you want to look at them. If you don't know me, for privacy purposes I am sorry I cannot help you at this time.]<br />
<br />
Second of all, I have finished a new draft of the Runes and Rune Spells Document. This document contains only spell runes at the moment. It is almost 50 pages. Holy heck.<br />
<br />
[Sorry, the link is broken. If you know me, you know how to contact me for the documents should you want to look at them. If you don't know me, for privacy purposes I am sorry I cannot help you at this time.]<br />
<br />
This system is largely the crux of what will—or won’t—make “Suikod20” work. I already wrote this up once and then thoroughly revised (my long suffering comrade-in-game-system-scheming Allen had a look at an earlier draft—much is changed since then). Believe it or not, the system I had earlier for how you determine caster progression and caster level was more stupidly complex than it is now.<br />
<br />
Caster progression still needs to be fixed. I think overall, everyone needs more spells per day (because I realized that while there’s some nice flexibility of the runes, even the best spellcasters will only be able to have “12 known spells” at a time, effectively (if 3 spell runes are equipped, right hand, left hand, and forehead). The advancement also needs to be adjusted so that 2nd tier spells can’t be cast earlier than 4th/5th level, 3rd tier spells till 6th/7th level, etc. You’ll see further notes on this in the section. Ideas for an algorithm to determine this—or hell, take a crack at it yourself (PLEASE, I can’t add 2 and 2)—are very welcome.<br />
<br />
As for the runes and their spells, I figured out very quickly that if there was a discernible pattern to how Konami determined what made something a high or low tier spell or how a rune balanced with other runes, I certainly couldn’t find it. As you will note, I took a basic guideline for what a given rune spell’s comparative spell level to PFRPG spells was and ran with it. I am far more concerned with comparable balance—maybe too much? I don’t know. Read through and see.<br />
<br />
Most spells for runes were done this way:<br />
1. Look up what the spell did in Suikoden <br />
2. Determine rough comparable spell level<br />
3. Look through core and APG spells. If found very appropriate analogue, used that, with edits where necessary.<br />
4. If no existing spell, try to make a spell that mimics the video game spell’s abilities as reasonably as possible while also working well with PF game mechanics and seem of the appropriate spell level. <br />
<br />
Note that I tried to remember to note on spells if they were of a descriptive subtype, like “fire” or “death”—and frequently, I forgot. If you note something should have a noted subtype (to help determine whether someone is resistant to it), please write it in. <br />
<br />
I have copious notes in the whole section about where I derived a spell from (the APG came out between the first draft and this draft, and kindly provided lovely spell sources I didn’t have before) and loads of uncertainty about how a spell should play out. Ample feedback desired.<br />
<br />
This is a lengthy document so I do not expect fast turnaround; anything you can offer is much appreciated.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-72886181700653288092011-01-31T06:28:00.001-08:002011-01-31T06:28:43.113-08:00Comment posting fixedIf all two or three of you were having trouble posting comments, that should be fixed now (comment box will now appear in a pop up window)Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-5093428257926006202011-01-24T07:22:00.000-08:002014-10-12T07:38:28.412-07:00Suiko d20 Project 1.I am working on a system called "Suikod20"--which is an attempt to make a tabletop ruleset for games set in the universe of the <i>Suikoden</i>series of games. I am using the <a href="http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd">Pathfinder Reference Document</a>, an OGL-based system, as the backbone for the rules. The power level of core Pathfinder classes and races and unique-to-Pathfinder systems such as combat maneuvers I feel suit well this project (and I really like the Pathfinder roleplaying game).<br />
<br />
I do not own the IP to <i>Suikoden</i> so I can't just up and claim this all as mine and OGL and whatnot, but this is a fan work with no effort as being proprietary and no profit is being made from this. I've done my best to avoid referencing IP-specific material as much as possible so you could take anything that is not obviously IP-stamped and use it for your own purposes.<br />
<br />
As I work on the documents, I am posting them here for reference and comment. This is VERY alpha/beta and all suggestions are welcome.<br />
<br />
We start with the races.<br />
<br />
<b>Suikod20 Races</b><br />
<br />
Suikod20 uses the following races. Other races, from the PRD or elsewhere, are not available without the GM’s permission.<br />
<br />
<b>Beaverfolk</b>: Described in the document below<br />
<b>Duckfolk</b>: Described in the document below <br />
<b>Dwarves</b>: As written in the PRD, with a change noted in this document<br />
<b>Elves</b>: As written in the PRD, with two changes noted in this document<br />
<b>Humans</b>: As written in the PRD<br />
<b>Kobolds</b>: Described in the document below; NOT the Kobolds in the PRD<br />
<b>Lizardfolk</b>: Described in the document below; NOT the Lizardfolk in the PRD<br />
<b>Merfolk</b>: Described in the document below; NOT the Merfolk in the PRD<br />
<b>Nekobolds</b>: Described in the document below<br />
<b>Wingers</b>: Described in the document below<br />
<br />
A note on languages: No languages/bonus languages are noted in the following racial descriptions. The games which inspired this write up seldom worried about language barriers, save for very ancient languages, and I have no basis upon which to base possible languages. If you wish to use a language system, assume a different language for each race (and/or major region), and that everyone can speak a common human tongue.<br />
<br />
<b>Beaverfolk</b><br />
Beaverfolk are squat, very furry humanoids with buck teeth and an affinity for craftsmanship and engineering.<br />
<i>+2 Constitution, +2 Intelligence, -2 Charisma</i>: Beaverfolk are sturdy and absolutely brilliant planners and engineers, but they are also isolationist and eccentric.<br />
<i>Small:</i> Beaverfolk are Small creatures and get a +1 size bonus to attacks, Armor Class, and a +4 bonus to Stealth.<br />
<i>Slow Speed:</i> Beaverfolk have a base speed of 20 feet.<br />
<i>Low Light Vision:</i> Beaverfolk can see twice as far as humans in conditions of poor illumination.<br />
<i>Dam Good Swimmers:</i> Beaverfolk have a Swim speed of 20 feet; see the description of the Swim skill for more details. They can also hold their breath for 3 rounds per point of Constitution rather than the usual 2.<br />
<i>Beaver Blood:</i> Any effect with the word “Beaver” in the description applies to them.<br />
<i>Weapon Familiarity:</i> Beavers treat any weapon with the word “Beaver” in the title as a martial weapon. <br />
<i>Busy as a...:</i> Beaverfolk are tremendously talented woodworkers, and get a +2 racial bonus to Craft checks related to working with wood, and a +2 racial bonus to Appraise and Knowledge: Engineering checks related to wooden items or construction. If four or more beaverfolk work on a wooden construction project together, they halve the time it takes to produce the final item.<br />
<i>Bucktooth Tempest:</i> Beaverfolk can chew through wood (though they do not eat it) and can cut or damage wood with their teeth as if they were using a weapon or tool to do so.<br />
<br />
<b>Duckfolk </b><br />
At first glance, duckfolk indeed appear to be unusually big white ducks—until one notices they are wearing clothes and speaking. These humanoids are practical folk who dwell in marshy areas and are surprisingly good at defending their territory. While their arms have a wing-like appearance, they cannot fly, and these limbs end in functional, if feathered, hands.<br />
<i>+2 Constitution,+2 Wisdom, -2 Dexterity</i>: Duckfolk are hardy, sensible, and alert. Their wing-like arms and short webbed feet prevent them from great feats of agility, however.<br />
<i>Small:</i> Duckfolk are Small creatures, gaining a +1 size bonus to Attack and Armor Class, and a +4 size bonus to Stealth.<br />
<i>Slow Speed:</i> Duckfolk have a base speed of 20 feet.<br />
<i>Able Swimmers:</i> Duckfolk have a Swim speed of 30 feet; see the description of the Swim skill for more details.<br />
<i>Down with the Ironheads!</i>: Used to defending their lands from human conquerors, usually knights who are heavily armored and mounted, duckfolk have learned how avoid harm and exploit such enemies’ weaknesses. They get a +4 dodge bonus to Armor Class and Combat Maneuver defense versus mounted opponents. They also gain a +2 racial bonus to trip, disarm, and sunder attempts against opponents in heavy armor. <br />
<i>Marshdwellers:</i> Duckfolk get a +4 to all Survival checks in marsh terrain. <br />
<i>Duckfolk Blood:</i> Any effect with the word “Duck” in the description applies to them.<br />
<br />
<b>Dwarves</b><br />
Dwarves dwell deep underground all over the world, mining the world’s rich mineral resources.<br />
<br />
Their stats are as they are in the PRD, with the following exceptions:<br />
- Remove the abilities Defensive Training and Hatred<br />
- Add the Stoneworker and Expert Digger abilities, described below:<br />
<br />
<i>Stoneworker:</i> Dwarves are known for their superior craftsmanship when it comes to metal and stone works. Dwarves with this racial trait receive a +2 racial bonus on all Craft or Profession checks that create objects from metal or stone. <br />
<br />
<i>Expert Digger:</i> Dwarves are constantly digging out new mines, and are as excellent as destroying old structures and clearing paths as they are at building new things. They gain a +2 bonus to Strength checks and Sunder attempts when breaking items made of stone or iron, and they can dig in earth or stone at twice the rate any other humanoid can. <br />
<br />
<i>Elves</i><br />
Elves are the world’s aloof forest guardians; they can make excellent allies and fearsome enemies.<br />
<br />
Their stats are as they are in the PRD, with the following exceptions:<br />
- Remove the abilities Elven Immunities and Elven Magic<br />
- Add the Forest Guardian and Oaken Will abilities, described below:<br />
<br />
<i>Forest Guardian:</i> Elves are alert scouts and silent protectors of their home forests. They get a +1 racial bonus to Initiative checks and +2 bonus to Stealth checks; these bonuses double when in forest terrain. They additionally get a +2 Climb bonus when climbing trees. <br />
<br />
<i>Oaken Will:</i> Stubborn in the extreme and impatient with younger races that do not understand their slow way of thinking, the steadfast spirit of the forest has imbued elves with resistance to all sorts of mind-influencing magic and other effects (and to new ideas). Elves get a +1 racial bonus to all Will saves. <br />
<br />
<b>Kobold</b><br />
Kobolds are about the same size and build as humans, except they have canine heads and are covered in short, soft fur. They seem to have many “breeds” as dogs do—some kobolds have stout faces and crinkled noses, others have floppy ears and long noses, with many different fur colorations and markings. They are social, loyal, and hard workers. (<i>Obviously not to be confused with the lizard-like kobolds in the prd</i>)<br />
<i>+2 Strength, +2 Charisma, -2 Intelligence:</i> Kobolds are powerfully built and very “pack” driven, but slightly lacking in analytical skills.<br />
<i>Medium</i>: Kobolds are medium-sized creatures and do not gain any bonuses or penalties due to size. <br />
<i>Normal Speed</i>: Kobolds have a base speed of 30 feet.<br />
<i>Weapon Familiarity</i>: Kobolds make excellent soldiers, and many have trained in the local army or mercenary legion. They can choose one martial weapon in which they become proficient, on top of any other proficiencies they gain from their class.<br />
<i>Low Light Vision</i>: Kobolds can see twice as far as humans in conditions of poor illumination.<br />
<i>Keen Noses</i>: Kobolds get a +2 racial bonus to Perception checks, and they have the Scent creature ability.<br />
<i>Pack Mentality</i>: Kobolds naturally think in ways how they can help each other and their allies. When they succeed on an Aid Another check, they add +3 to the bonus rather than +2. <br />
<i>Kobold Blood</i>: Any effect with the world “Kobold” in the description applies to them.<br />
<br />
<b>Lizardfolk</b><br />
The Lizard Clan defends their cave homes with great zeal. They have a strong code of honor, and are very quick to anger and to violence.<br />
<i>+2 Strength, +2 Wisdom, -2 Intelligence:</i> Lizardfolk are very strong and quite alert, but they are not tacticians. <br />
<i>Medium:</i> Lizardfolk are medium-sized creatures and do not gain any bonuses or penalties due to size. <br />
<i>Normal Speed:</i> Lizardfolk have a base land speed of 30 feet.<br />
<i>Low Light Vision:</i> Lizardfolk can see twice as far as humans in conditions of poor illumination.<br />
<i>Weapon and Armor Proficiency:</i> All lizardfolk are proficient in the longspear, halberd, and glaive.<br />
<i>Tough Hide:</i> The lizardfolk’s reptilian scales give them a +2 natural armor bonus to Armor Class.<br />
<i>Reptilian Talons:</i> Lizardfolk have clawed fingers and toes. These are not usually honed enough to use as natural weapons (and lizardfolk prefer the art of weaponry anyway) but they are good for gripping onto rock and wood, giving the lizardfolk a +2 racial bonus to Climb checks.<br />
<i>Balancing Tails:</i> Lizardfolk use their tails to help keep their balance, and get a +4 bonus to Acrobatics checks to cross uneven ground or narrow surfaces without falling. They also get a +4 racial bonus to Combat Maneuver Defense versus Trip and Overrun attempts.<br />
<br />
<b>Merfolk</b><br />
The elusive Merfolk live deep in the oceans, and while they often prefer to keep to themselves, gladly offer assistance to other races in times of crises. They are beautiful creatures, with delicate limbs covered in colorful scales and fins. <br />
<i>+2 Dexterity, +2 Charisma, -2 Wisdom</i>: Merfolk are swift, graceful, and charming, but are also naive and unobservant.<br />
<i>Medium</i>: Merfolk are medium-sized creatures and do not gain any bonuses or penalties due to size. <br />
<i>Slow Speed</i>: Merfolk’s legs are adapted more to swimming than walking. They have a base speed of 20 feet.<br />
<i>Darkvision</i>: Merfolk can see in the dark up to 60 feet.<br />
<i>Aquatic</i>: Merfolk have the aquatic subtype and swim at a speed of 50 feet; see the Swim skill for more details.<br />
<i>Amphibious</i>: Despite being aquatic creatures, merfolk can breathe underwater and on land with ease.<br />
<i>Water Dependence</i>: Although they can survive on land, merfolk need to be submerged in water for at least an hour a day or their scales dry, giving them a -2 penalty to all Constitution and Dexterity based checks until they can soak in water for at least an hour.<br />
<i>Protective Scales</i>: Merfolk have a +1 natural armor bonus to Armor Class.<br />
<i>Weapon Familiarity</i>: Merfolk are proficient in the light and heavy crossbow, the trident, and the net.<br />
<br />
<i>Nekobold </i><br />
Nekobolds are human sized with proportionally sized heads very similar to those of domestic cats. They are covered in soft fur and have small, retractable claws at the ends of their fingers. They are friendly islander folk, and valuable on ships where their many skills come in handy. <br />
<i>+2 Dexterity, +2 Charisma, -2 Wisdom</i>: Nekobolds are as swift as other felines, and are attractive and amiable creatures. They are very impulsive, however. <br />
<i>Medium</i>: Nekobolds are medium-sized creatures and do not gain any bonuses or penalties due to size. <br />
<i>Normal Speed</i>: Nekobolds have a base speed of 30 feet.<br />
<i>Low Light Vision</i>: Nekobolds can see twice as far as humans in conditions of poor illumination.<br />
<i>Keen Senses</i>: Nekobolds have excellent senses and get a +2 racial bonus to Perception checks.<br />
<i>Kobold Blood</i>: Any effect with the world “Kobold” in the description applies to them.<br />
<i>Catlike Grace</i>: Nay-Kobolds get a +2 racial bonus to Stealth checks and to Acrobatics checks related to balance. <br />
<i>Ratcatchers</i>: While they are much larger than true cats, Nekobolds are excellent at finding and destroying vermin and creatures often found invading food stores. They get a +2 racial bonus to Perception, Survival, Attack, and Damage rolls when dealing with any creature of the vermin subtype as well as with the following animals: mice, rats, and dire rats. This bonus may be extended to other rodent-like creatures at the GM’s discretion.<br />
<i>Retractable Claws</i>: Nekobolds have tiny claws which they can release and use to fight with as natural weapons. However, the little claws do less damage for their size than other medium sized creatures, dealing only 1d3 damage per claw attack. Extending or retracting the claws takes a swift action. If the claws are retracted, Nekobolds are considered unarmed.<br />
<br />
<b>Winger</b><br />
Wingers appear to be human, save for the long, dark wings sprouting from their backs and their taloned feet. Rare creatures in the world, they are proud of their differences and relative uniqueness. <br />
<i>+2 Dexterity, -2 Charisma</i>: Wingers are agile, but come off as arrogant, eccentric, or creepy.<br />
<i>Medium</i>: Wingers are medium sized and thus have no bonuses or penalties due to size.<br />
<i>Normal Speed</i>: Wingers have a walking speed of 30 feet.<br />
<i>Wings</i>: Wingers are aptly named, and have a fly speed of 50 feet (average maneuverability). See the Fly skill for more information.<br />
<i>Fast Talkers</i>: Wingers get a +2 racial bonus to Bluff checks.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5507345055051680234.post-32990924113142285492010-07-30T12:50:00.000-07:002010-07-31T10:38:05.007-07:00Greetings and the Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player's GuideHello, my name is DeathQuaker and I am a gamer geek. Like many of my fellow gamers, I like being able to mouth off about games and other things I like, and thus this blog has come to be. My hope is to use it to publish occasional thoughts and articles on my gaming experiences and reviews of game products I've enjoyed (or not, as the case may be). I do have a livejournal (<a href="deathquaker.livejournal.com">DeathQuaker Has an Opinion</a>) but decided to put my gaming materials over here specifically. <br />
<br />
And to start off with a bang, I received my .pdf of Paizo's <i>Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide</i> this week! And WOW is it amazing!<br />
<br />
By way of prologue: I have been playing the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game since its open beta, and loving every minute of it. I was one of the gamers who loved D&D 3.0/3.5 but agreed it needed some tweaking--but at the same time, I was disappointed by the direction Wizards of the Coast chose to take with 4e. Paizo made the changes I was particularly looking for in its Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, a revision of 3.5 that focused on boosting and re-leveling core race and class power, rebalancing and adding new feats, and overhauling the skill system to make it even easier to build the fantasy characters I envisioned. By no means will I say Pathfinder is for everyone, but the system serves particularly my fantasy gaming needs extremely well, and I've been delightedly running a high-level Pathfinder game over the past year. <br />
<br />
The <i>Advanced Player's Guide</i> is Paizo's one-book answer, in many ways, to the "Complete" series of 3rd Edition. Overflowing with alternate abilities and builds for races and classes, new classes, new prestige classes, feats, spells, and other mechanics, it allows experienced Pathfinder players to take their game to an even higher level of character customizability and complexity than even what the core rulebook provides. I think this is the first time I have found that the advertising copy didn't hyperbolize the content of a gaming supplement--if anything, the marketing understates what is in this book, if only because describing how very much is in this book is very difficult to do. <br />
<br />
Most Pathfinder players are already aware of the six new classes in the book, as Paizo ran an open playtest of the Alchemist, Cavalier, Inquisitor, Oracle, Summoner, and Witch classes presented. The final versions take the originality of the beta classes and have successfully polished them to an effective shine--they are potent classes on their own, and will work well in many settings along with the core classes; they also help fill niches for more exotic fantasy settings where, for example, your pointy-hat wizard seems out of place, but a pact-magic witch would do just fine. <br />
<br />
I have to say though, that the new classes are the least of what I'm really interested in for the APG (well-written though they are). My current campaign works with the core rules and the new classes don't have much of a place in my homebrew setting for right now. However, the APG spends a great deal of time taking what is core and also throwing it into all kinds of new directions, which is both more useful and very interesting to me. Every core race gets alternate class abilities (your campaign world has dwarves who war with elves rather than giants? Swap out "Hatred" for "Ancient Enmity" and be done with it). This allows for a bit of customization for campaigns and concepts without needing to rewrite whole new races. It also helps overcome some of the minorly annoying issues I've had with some of the standard racial abilities--for example, while I love that half-elves are good at multiclassing because of Adaptability, but what if I want to play a single class half-elf? There's a racial feature that's no use to me--the APG fixes that by offering a number of abilities to trade for that one. <br />
<br />
Likewise classes get a number of alternate paths, trading a few class features for whole new ones. While the overall feel for the classes are unchanged, this allows trickier concepts to be built--without unnecessary and overwhelming class bloat. Want to play a swashbuckler, but the core Fighter/Rogue/Duelist didn't cover it for you? Both fighters and rogues have finesse and swashbuckling paths that make that a lot less fiddly. Want to play a monk of the "Drunken Master" style? Done. Want to abandon the disciplined monk entirely play a powerful brutish pugilist? There's a barbarian path that's perfect for you. Those who wanted to see the bard turned into more of an arcane warrior will be pleased, as will those who have been begging for an antipaladin. My only "problem" (and it's not really a "problem") is that I'm very tempted to call these alternate paths "kits" (if you don't get that joke, then you're probably much younger than I am). <br />
<br />
I am disappointed by a few of the core class adjustments. While many of the classes get myriad new paths, Clerics and Wizards get left a bit in the dust. Perhaps that's only fair--they're pretty powerful and somewhat adaptable classes to start with. What they DO get is pretty neat--subdomains and subschools. Both of these swap in specific themed abilities into standard domains and arcane schools--for example, a cleric in an ancestral worship religion with the Repose domain can take the Repose "subdomain" of "Ancestor," swapping out one of the standard Repose abilities for the ability to speak with the dead. I like these, but these subdomains are all they get. Particularly for clerics, I would have liked to have seen some alternatives maybe for channeling energy. It would look less out of place, if, say, Barbarians only got new rage powers, but Barbarians get both new rage powers AND new alternate paths. Regardless, all the stuff that IS included is really exciting. <br />
<br />
The APG also introduces several new mechanics--new combat maneuvers, like the dirty tricks maneuvers; Hero Points, which work a little like d20 Modern's Action points; and Traits. Well, Traits aren't exactly new--Paizo has used them in their campaign products for a long time now. The APG brings Traits officially to PFRPG--basically, they are "mini feats" that help customize your character further according to their history, religion, and home region. They aren't powerful, but are great ways to help reflect a character concept more thoroughly and effectively. On top of that, there are new feats, spells, and magic items I've only barely been able to pore through--many of which are to provide extra support for the new classes and alternate abilities presented in the book. <br />
<br />
The only part I'm really disappointed in are the Prestige Classes. While I am not one of those people who wants a billion prestige classes, I do like to have a few meaningful ones to choose from when it seems appropriate. Prestige Classes help fill niches, and I'm personally not especially interested in the ones many of the APG PrCs provide. We have the Battle Herald, the Holy Vindicator, the Horizon Walker, the Master Chymist, the Master Spy, the Nature Warden, the Rage Prophet, and the Stalwart Defender. <br />
<br />
The Horizon Walker is an update of the 3.5 core PrC--a class I'm not sure anyone needed an update; they beefed it up a little but the terrain mastery that is iconic to the Horizon Walker still seems very circumstantial. Likewise, the Stalwart Defender is a race-free update of the Dwarven Defender, and while statistically, it rounds out the class nicely, it's a little redundant to abilities available elsewhere. The Battle Herald is a Prestige Marshal, sort of a battlebard, which is cool, though again, I could probably build a Bard or Cavalier that does much of the same thing (indeed, I think the real purpose of the Battle Herald is to have something for the Cavalier to Prestige into, which seems antithetical to Pathfinder philosophy--base classes should be cool on their own, and you shouldn't need a prestige class for everyone). Likewise, the Master Chymist is just a prestige Alchemist and has no broader purpose. <br />
<br />
I am most disappointed by the Holy Vindicator--it's a "holy warrior who is not a paladin" Prestige Class. It could be cool, but its key feature, stigmata--the class literally bleeds its powers--are a bit off-putting to me. Maybe it's just because I've never been able to find the perfect PrC for my Fighter-Cleric of the Goddess of Love, maybe I'm just taking it a bit personally. Or maybe it's that it's evocative of a particular religious imagery I'm not comfortable seeing mixed into fantasy. I'm not sure, to be honest; all I can say it sets me the wrong way.<br />
<br />
The Nature Warden and Rage Prophet on the other hand are pretty cool, and allow for some unusual character types. My favorite of all of them by far is the Master Spy, which accomplishes what many roguish PrCs tried and failed to do: make a great infiltrator/investigator PrC. <br />
<br />
What is also blindingly disappointing is that there are still very few prestige classes for sorcerers, wizards, and clerics that want to focus on spell casting, but want a little more flavor/specialization than the standard single class route can provide. I assume they're saving those for their PFRPG Magic book I know is in the works, but it would have been nice to have one or two things in the APG, especially as more are likely to buy the APG than the specialized Magic book (or maybe that's just me). And especially in place of lame ducks like the Horizon Walker. <br />
<br />
All that said, the book is astoundingly full of wonderful things to learn and try, and is probably the best RPG purchase I've made this year--and I say this as a GM who tends to prefer "fluff" far more to "crunch"--but I think I even like this more than the <i>Game Mastery Guide</i>.<br />
<br />
I do have to make one huge caveat--which is not a <i>complaint</i>, mind. The <i><b>Advanced</b> Player's Guide</i> is called that for a reason. While the options offered are astounding--they are also massive, many, and overwhelming. I do <i>not</i> recommend this book to people just starting PFRPG, especially if they're relatively new to d20-based systems in general. It is a lot to take in, and I warn GMs to review it thoroughly before they decide to incorporate it into their games. Again, this is not a negative thing in and of itself--complexity is good and I am sure many Pathfinder players will delight in the new options the APG provides. But just be warned to take the title fully into account before you dive in.Death Quakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15693470441403568346noreply@blogger.com