I found the master list on January 3rd, so I started late. And aside from the one hiccup, I managed to post daily, even when I had other things to talk about. My goals were to: 1) increase readership of my blog, 2) be forced to post regularly, 3) reveal stuff about myself as a gamer, and 4) use the momentum to keep blogging regularly. I definitely met the first three goals. We'll see how goal 4 goes.
Most of the questions were good, but some were stinkers. My lamest post was the one about NPC creatures, but that's mostly because I thought it was a dumb question. I'm sure it was meant to be playful, but it just didn't do anything for me at all.
Posting daily was a huge pain in the rear sometimes. I mitigated some of it by answering multiple questions at once, when I could, and just scheduling them out on their respective days, but I still found myself scrambling to write a post here and there.
In addition to my goals I got to take multiple trips down memory lane and learn a bit about myself. And that was a Good Thing (TM).
Overall it was a good experience. I don't think I'd do this again, but it was fun.
We now return you to my regular ramblings on this blog. Hopefully they will be more consistent.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
@ReverbGamers Master List Number 31
#31: How would your life be different if you'd never gotten into gaming?
Everything would be different. I have a gamer wife (and now a gamer daughter), most of my friends game, I podcast about games, I'm designing three games... See the point here?
I might have more money. I don't even want to think about how much money I have spent on games since that fateful day in 1984 when my friend Tony showed me AD&D. Of course is the money spent indicative to gaming or just part of my personality? Would I own a couple muscle cars or a dozen high-end radio controlled cars if those hobbies had stuck? Who knows?
I don't think I'd be as socially comfortable as I am. I think I became a gamer because I'm social, but I think I've excelled at the art of talking to people because I'm a gamer.
These "what if" questions are always so weird...
Would I go back and change it if I could? Oh, hell no!
Everything would be different. I have a gamer wife (and now a gamer daughter), most of my friends game, I podcast about games, I'm designing three games... See the point here?
I might have more money. I don't even want to think about how much money I have spent on games since that fateful day in 1984 when my friend Tony showed me AD&D. Of course is the money spent indicative to gaming or just part of my personality? Would I own a couple muscle cars or a dozen high-end radio controlled cars if those hobbies had stuck? Who knows?
I don't think I'd be as socially comfortable as I am. I think I became a gamer because I'm social, but I think I've excelled at the art of talking to people because I'm a gamer.
These "what if" questions are always so weird...
Would I go back and change it if I could? Oh, hell no!
Monday, January 30, 2012
@ReverbGamers Master List Number 30
#30: What lessons have you taken from gaming that you can apply to your real life?
I think this question is worded poorly, so I am going to have to answer it twice.
Is the question meant to be: "What lessons have you learned in-game that you've applied to real life?"
To answer it this way, which is the way I think it's meant, I'd have to say sort of. Roleplaying is a very social activity for me. So I've learned how to be more social. I've learned to take chances. And as a GM, I've been semi-forced into looking closely at why people do things and how do different people think. These are all useful things in "real life".
Is the question meant to imply that people who game are not experiencing "real life" when they do so?
I hope this is just a poorly-worded question because otherwise it would be a little insulting. To imply gaming isn't part of real life would be wrong-headed and ignorant. Roleplaying is a part of my life. I roleplay with friends, typically. When I roleplay in public--stores and cons--I make friends. So for me--at least partially--gaming is an activity I take part in as a vehicle for hanging out with my friends. It's very much real life. Have I learned things about "real life" while doing it? Sure. Because I'm talking with people.
I think this question is worded poorly, so I am going to have to answer it twice.
Is the question meant to be: "What lessons have you learned in-game that you've applied to real life?"
To answer it this way, which is the way I think it's meant, I'd have to say sort of. Roleplaying is a very social activity for me. So I've learned how to be more social. I've learned to take chances. And as a GM, I've been semi-forced into looking closely at why people do things and how do different people think. These are all useful things in "real life".
Is the question meant to imply that people who game are not experiencing "real life" when they do so?
I hope this is just a poorly-worded question because otherwise it would be a little insulting. To imply gaming isn't part of real life would be wrong-headed and ignorant. Roleplaying is a part of my life. I roleplay with friends, typically. When I roleplay in public--stores and cons--I make friends. So for me--at least partially--gaming is an activity I take part in as a vehicle for hanging out with my friends. It's very much real life. Have I learned things about "real life" while doing it? Sure. Because I'm talking with people.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
@ReverGamers Master List Number 29
#29: What does the word "gamer" mean to you? Is that different than what other people seem to think it means?
I'll answer the second question first. The meaning of the word has changed within my lifetime. So I'll give the progression here.
When I was a kid, the word typically meant a person who plays RPGs and/or, to a lesser extent in the '80s, wargames (in the '70s there was a lot more overlap, I'm told). It was used to self-identify by gamers, and it was used in a derogatory way by non-gamers. "Oh, he's a gamer." I think it was derogatory, mostly to people who didn't understand it.
Today, the word has been co-opted by video games. If you self-identify as a gamer, people typically assume you play a lot of video games. I don't think being labeled a gamer is as negative as it used to be (geek chic and all).
I've taken to calling myself a tabletop gamer or pen and paper gamer or roleplayer. Then I have to explain it. I've also found people who play primarily board games use the term among each other. So essentially, if you are a gamer, and you're not a video gamer, you probably have to explain yourself--that is assuming it matters enough to you to explain.
I'll answer the second question first. The meaning of the word has changed within my lifetime. So I'll give the progression here.
When I was a kid, the word typically meant a person who plays RPGs and/or, to a lesser extent in the '80s, wargames (in the '70s there was a lot more overlap, I'm told). It was used to self-identify by gamers, and it was used in a derogatory way by non-gamers. "Oh, he's a gamer." I think it was derogatory, mostly to people who didn't understand it.
Today, the word has been co-opted by video games. If you self-identify as a gamer, people typically assume you play a lot of video games. I don't think being labeled a gamer is as negative as it used to be (geek chic and all).
I've taken to calling myself a tabletop gamer or pen and paper gamer or roleplayer. Then I have to explain it. I've also found people who play primarily board games use the term among each other. So essentially, if you are a gamer, and you're not a video gamer, you probably have to explain yourself--that is assuming it matters enough to you to explain.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
@ReverbGamers Master List Number 28
#28: Do you have any house rules when you game? What are they, and why do you use them? If not, why not?
There are two house rules. The first one is pretty common. I believe the second one is becoming common.
1) Floor dice don't count. If the dice hit the floor they get re-rolled. This rule is an old one for me. I think it comes from worrying about people cheating when they pick up their die. I'm not so much worried about that today--if cheating is what floats your boat, and it's not negatively affecting the other players, go for it. These days, this rule is just tradition.
2) This rule is completely non-negotiable. Those who play in my house must be kid friendly. This rule is about eight years old at the time of this writing. My wife and I have a daughter. She can be loud and obnoxious. She's been known to interrupt the game on occasion. And we don't apologize for her. If this is a problem for you, you may game elsewhere. Our current weekly game consists of mostly parents and one kid friendly non-parent. The other parents bring their kids too. The reason for this is pretty simple. We want to game. And we would like for our daughter to look at gaming positively. To encourage this, we don't ship her off to a relative or babysitter when we game. It's just something that happens in our house.
Heck, these days, we game with out daughter on occasion.
There are two house rules. The first one is pretty common. I believe the second one is becoming common.
1) Floor dice don't count. If the dice hit the floor they get re-rolled. This rule is an old one for me. I think it comes from worrying about people cheating when they pick up their die. I'm not so much worried about that today--if cheating is what floats your boat, and it's not negatively affecting the other players, go for it. These days, this rule is just tradition.
2) This rule is completely non-negotiable. Those who play in my house must be kid friendly. This rule is about eight years old at the time of this writing. My wife and I have a daughter. She can be loud and obnoxious. She's been known to interrupt the game on occasion. And we don't apologize for her. If this is a problem for you, you may game elsewhere. Our current weekly game consists of mostly parents and one kid friendly non-parent. The other parents bring their kids too. The reason for this is pretty simple. We want to game. And we would like for our daughter to look at gaming positively. To encourage this, we don't ship her off to a relative or babysitter when we game. It's just something that happens in our house.
Heck, these days, we game with out daughter on occasion.
Friday, January 27, 2012
@ReverbGamers Master List Number 27
#27: If you were an Ent, what kind of Ent would you be? Or, what other NPC creature would you be? Why?
If I could be a creature it would be a dragon, only I wouldn't have a compulsion for gold. I'd rule a large swath of land with benevolence. I'd fight off armies and protect my people.
And that is all.
If I could be a creature it would be a dragon, only I wouldn't have a compulsion for gold. I'd rule a large swath of land with benevolence. I'd fight off armies and protect my people.
And that is all.
[Fuse Friday] System and Magic Duels
Fuse is a game setting I plan to publish. I’ll be talking about it most Fridays.
I recently mentioned I haven’t committed to making Fuse a Savage Worlds setting. The reason I haven’t cemented my system choice is twofold: 1) the setting is more important to me than the rules, so I want to make sure I’m not giving anything up when designing the system; and 2) I have concerns regarding the value of having Fuse with rules included, which I can’t do with Savage Worlds. That said, I will be presenting a lot of Fuse stuff with Savage Worlds in mind, since I’ve been heavily entrenched in the system for almost nine years. It’s what I know these days.
And speaking of which...
Kristian Serrano and I were chatting about magic duels the other day. It turned into a brainstorm session. Kristian is a Savage like me, so the rules we discussed were in that context.
I’m of two minds about duels at this point. On one hand, I think a magic duel could happen in the blink of an eye. Two practitioners lock eyes, they match wills, and one of them relents or falls. It would all happen in an instant--a single action in a combat round. On the other hand, it could be a multi-round thing that could be interrupted by the environment or other combatants. Let’s take my ideas in turn...
Instant Duel, Just Add Eye Contact
Both characters agree they’re dueling; neither duelist may move nor take any other action this round. The character with initiative holds his action till the slower practitioner is up, and then they begin the duel. There may be a +1 bonus on the first roll-off for the practitioner with a higher initiative card. This is an opposed Spirit contest. The loser takes a level of Fatigue, two if the winner got a raise. Repeat this roll until one practitioner falls. Incapacitation does not kill the loser, unless the winner calls for a Finishing Move. All this happens and resolves during a single round. No one in the combat sees anything, but the eerie eye contact of the practitioners.
Another possibility is an opposed Dramatic Task, first to five successes wins. Character death would still be a choice for the winner.
Protracted Duels for the Nosy Onlooker
These could work like the above two methods mentioned, but it would occur over multiple rounds. This would allow for more complications in terms of environment and the other combatants.
Edges and Hindrances
In either of the above cases, Edges and Hindrances would be created to allow players and GMs to create expert duelists.
I recently mentioned I haven’t committed to making Fuse a Savage Worlds setting. The reason I haven’t cemented my system choice is twofold: 1) the setting is more important to me than the rules, so I want to make sure I’m not giving anything up when designing the system; and 2) I have concerns regarding the value of having Fuse with rules included, which I can’t do with Savage Worlds. That said, I will be presenting a lot of Fuse stuff with Savage Worlds in mind, since I’ve been heavily entrenched in the system for almost nine years. It’s what I know these days.
And speaking of which...
Kristian Serrano and I were chatting about magic duels the other day. It turned into a brainstorm session. Kristian is a Savage like me, so the rules we discussed were in that context.
I’m of two minds about duels at this point. On one hand, I think a magic duel could happen in the blink of an eye. Two practitioners lock eyes, they match wills, and one of them relents or falls. It would all happen in an instant--a single action in a combat round. On the other hand, it could be a multi-round thing that could be interrupted by the environment or other combatants. Let’s take my ideas in turn...
Instant Duel, Just Add Eye Contact
Both characters agree they’re dueling; neither duelist may move nor take any other action this round. The character with initiative holds his action till the slower practitioner is up, and then they begin the duel. There may be a +1 bonus on the first roll-off for the practitioner with a higher initiative card. This is an opposed Spirit contest. The loser takes a level of Fatigue, two if the winner got a raise. Repeat this roll until one practitioner falls. Incapacitation does not kill the loser, unless the winner calls for a Finishing Move. All this happens and resolves during a single round. No one in the combat sees anything, but the eerie eye contact of the practitioners.
Another possibility is an opposed Dramatic Task, first to five successes wins. Character death would still be a choice for the winner.
Protracted Duels for the Nosy Onlooker
These could work like the above two methods mentioned, but it would occur over multiple rounds. This would allow for more complications in terms of environment and the other combatants.
Edges and Hindrances
In either of the above cases, Edges and Hindrances would be created to allow players and GMs to create expert duelists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)