Bumblebee Boy

Welp, finished up my Supers one-sheet micro-game and am considering uploading it to Ye Old MediaFire for wholesale download by the masses. In fact, I might as well since games are meant to be played and yadda-yadda-yadda.

The only thing that brings out my paranoia is my proprietary DMI system being so blatantly present in the one-sheet. On the other hand, who cares?

And really, who does? It seems like a lot of folks (including several regular role-players I know and with whom I game) are not big fans of the superhero genre...for a variety of reasons. Me...well, I grew up taking long road trips with my family before there was such a thing as laptop computers and portable DVD players: the parents would simply buy a bunch of random comics and toss 'em in the backseat with my brother and I, and we'd read them all the way to Montana, thrilling to the likes of Daredevil and Ghost Rider and The Avengers.

Last night, my two year old son was running around the house wearing a cape and pretending to be a superhero. Why? Not because of his weirdo papa or his games or comics or superhero DVDs (all of which are kept well out of reach...Star Wars and show tunes are enough "bad influence" from the Old Man). Nope...the nanny took him to the library yesterday and he came back with a a big picture book called The Amazing Adventures of Bumblebee Boy, a story about a young boy dressing up as a superhero and being pestered by his younger brother until he finally relents and adopts the munchkin as his heroic sidekick. It's a cute book filled with the fun of make believe and echoing the experience of older brother childhoods all over the world.

Anyway, D wanted a cape so he could be "Bumble-Boy," too. I tend to be indulgent when my child shows interest in my own interests.

But my boy is not your average 20-something gamer (he's got a couple decades to go) and to a lot of younger folks who didn't grow up with the Silver Age (or even Bronze Age) of superhero comics they really don't get what all the fuss is about. The movies might make pleasant diversions (or not) but their initial point of reference is more likely to be a cartoon than a comic...the former of which I find to be a pale knock-off of the original medium, nice voice acting or not.

So anyway, just in case I haven't mentioned it, I AM working on a supers RPG for which this micro-game provides a nice little abstract. And the full-blooded RPG already has more that a few pages written for it, though it's far from complete. Here's a couple paragraphs culled from the introduction of the full RPG that (I hope) kind of sums up my reason for bothering to spend time designing a game for this tired genre:

Why Superheroes? 

Fantasy role-playing games exist in a variety of genres including swords & sorcery, super spies, and science fiction. All these games allow players to enjoy the fantasy escape of pretending to be someone different from ourselves, and to experience adventures from the safety and comfort of our gaming table. People in real life don’t get the opportunity to explore strange planets or fight monsters with spell and axe or single-handedly end the Cold War with the help of a few James Bond-style gadgets; role-playing games allow us to do these things, at least in our imagination.

In some ways, playing a superhero is the ultimate in wish fulfillment fantasy. The superhero genre doesn’t take place in a faraway galaxy or some Ancient Time inhabited by dragons…it takes place in the here and now of the 21^st century. And the powers available to superheroes…winged flight or super strength or magical might or incredible inventions or whatever…are limited only by one’s imagination. Comic books provide a huge range of diversity, from aliens to playboy millionaires to sorcerers to living plants to mutants to demigods to super-soldiers to robots, all interacting with the normal folks walking the streets of Any Town, USA.

That’s pretty cool.

In addition, people familiar with the comic book genre know that much of the game revolves around fighting foes and villains that no one else can; adversaries that will, left unchecked, run roughshod over everything good people hold dear: life and love, truth and justice, public and private property. It is the responsibility of superheroes to provide that check on the Forces of Darkness…and in general that means going out and kicking ass. In real life, the problems of the world – poverty, exploitation, tragedy, natural disaster – can’t be solved with a punch in the mouth. Pretending to be superheroes can, at least for an evening’s play, allow us to imagine a world where problems are so easily solved.

And that’s pretty cool, too.

Look, I am fully aware that designing superhero games...especially a game not based on the intellectual property (and built in fan-base) of an established comic book line...is a pretty lost cause. Table-top RPGs themselves are already a niche market, and a "generic hero" game is going to be two stages more "niche" than that. But I find I just cannot help myself sometimes. Just let me at least put together something that I can finally say satisfies my personal biases and design sensibilities; let me just do that and then I can stop messing around with the thing altogether. And I'll go back to working out the details of D&D Mine (something I hope to be writing more about later this week, by the way).

Play-testing is going down on Thursday. Depending on how things go, I'll have something available for public consumption shortly thereafter. We'll see if it's working.

[just BTW, Blogger tells me this is post #1313, which is of numerological significance...to me, anyway]

Ruins of the Undercity

The new micro-game is coming along swimmingly...usually, I can knock one out in a day, but I didn't have as much time to work on it Friday as I wanted, and my entire weekend was taken up with Good Ol' Family Time (Happy Birthday, D!)...and the problem with doing a one-page Supers game is figuring out how (or if) to list a good enough slate of powers.

Anyhoo, right now I'm taking a break from that because, well, because I've got other projects on my mind. Several have been bouncing around the cranial sphere of late (i.e. the last year) with progress occurring on 1st one, then another, then a third...often with results that end up causing me to go back and modify (or even re-write) an earlier project. Not necessarily because I'm "wishy-washy" (though I admit that may be part of it) but because my thought on game design continues to evolve.

Recently, I've been rethinking about delving back into D&D Mine...something that's been on-hold since I started bouncing around the three-way triangle of dinosaur pulp-space opera-superhero fantasy games I've been working. I just haven't been in much of a "D&D mood" of late for a number of reasons, two of which are:

- my growing dissatisfaction with even B/X D&D (leading me to write D&D Mine), and
- the lack of a rule set that can do what I want it to do

The latter of which is one of those terrible circular traps: I'm out of the mood of writing D&D because I'm frustrated with the lack of a good rule set for D&D because I haven't completed the writing of my own rule set for D&D because I'm out of the mood of writing D&D. See what I mean?

In fact, I just spent an hour or so blowing off steam on the subject with an employee at the local game shop...which sucks for my readers, of course, because (having already vented my thoughts out loud) I have little left to write on the subject.

But PRIOR to that, I did take the time to read a game supplement someone has recently published and sent me requesting a review. That someone is Kabuki Kaiser and that supplement is Ruins of the Undercity. While I am generally slow at getting to (and often less-than-complimentary) this kind of thing, I've decided to make an exception and say a few words on the book...possibly to avoid making a decision on what other writing I should be pursuing at the moment.

Ruins of the Undercity is compatible with Labyrinth Lord (the B/X-retroclone) and provides a Random DM-less  Dungeon Generator for One Player or More. It does this mainly by adapting the old random dungeon generation rules from Gygax's 1st edition DMG, putting them in a specific game world/setting and updating them to be both LL friendly and compatible. Those of you who, like me, owned the old DMG and used the random dungeon generator for solo play on days when you didn't have your regular game group available and couldn't get enough D&D will remember those old random tables generating quirky maps with twisting corridors and ill-fitting and strangely shaped rooms. I'm not really interested in talking about THAT part of the book...it may be done fine or not, but it's not terribly original (save that Kaiser adds additional random town tables for both before and after a delve). Instead, I want to talk a bit about the setting specific stuff.

Actually, let me back up a bit...I want to talk about D&D Mine first. Those of you who recall me blogging about that project (5 or 6 months back) will recall I was having some frustration with reconciling the fantasy setting with the basic tenets of D&D, namely how to to reconcile the background setting (an ancient Arabia/Persia setting) with the basic conceit of the game (going into holes looking for treasure). Or perhaps you DON'T remember, because perhaps I never got around to discussing it. Well, suffice is to say it WAS frustrating for me...D&D in its most basic (i.e. primordial) form...doesn't do well with the idea of wandering free-booting adventures because it's original incarnation (after Chainmail) was with the static delve site of Arneson's Blackmoor. And Gygax's Greyhawk. And whatever-it-is Rob Kuntz called his basic mega-dungeon. The rules and regulations, the mechanic limitations of the game, were created for a particular type of exploration...and don't work as well once you pull the PCs out of the dungeon and start expanding their "fantasy world." Since the time players got bored with the initial premise and started looking "outside the box" designers (both the Founding Fathers and their descendant designers) have been tweaking and adjusting and modifying trying to find away to "make it work;" the subsequent evolution of the game has done some good things and many, many bad things ever since.

[that is REALLY abstract and over-simplified, but it's not the point of the post and I just want to get on with it, not rehash earlier blog thoughts]

In the end, I figured the only way to do my D&D Mine in a way that even VAGUELY resembled D&D (and still make sense) was to factor a similar "ancient mega-dungeon" into the game's setting...an Arabian Nights inspired fiction containing both the post-Islam Bagdad and the mythology of ancient Mesopotamia. And the way to do that would be to set everything in  one huge and fabulous city of ancient origin (like Sinbad's Bagdad) built upon the site of an earlier ancient and awful (and necromantic) ruin and city. GMs would still have full leeway to design the dungeon (entrances would be dotted all about the town), but would have justification for the adventuring action of professional treasure seekers. It wasn't what I had initially wanted, but it would be a possible "out" for me.

Still it was frustrating, and I never got around to writing it up, instead adapting old AD&D modules (like Dwellers of the Forbidden City) to the new game rules for play-testing. Figured I'd finish making sure things worked before bothering to write up the setting.

So now we return to Ruins of the Undercity, which basically beats me to the punch.

The premise of RotUC is remarkably similar to my own Big Fat Idea...an ancient and huge city, built upon the ruined heap of an older, more ancient ruin, providing all the "home base" stuff up top (not to mention places to work one's standard D&D endgame scenarios) with a huge "adventure complex" (to be randomly generated) underneath. RotUC also has a similar "flavor" to it, skipping the more Western Europe flavored monsters in exchange for something more Middle Eastern or east Indian (love-love-love the magic turbans). Even leaving out the random dungeon generation stuff (and rules for "solo play") it's a tasty game setting, and one I wouldn't mind stealing from...absolutely adored the "lich thieves" (though their metal masks was a little to Frank Miller 300 for my taste).

A lot of his monsters (Kaiser provides a fairly fat bestiary) are recognizably cribbed from the Fiend Folio, though it would appear he only took his favorite ones that might do well in the setting (two thumbs up from moi). He adds a few of his own, setting-specific ones, however, and is happy to change the modify the original FF critters to suit his purpose...he also provides combat tactic lists for the non-straightforward monsters (the better to use them in solo play; very serviceable), which is a nice little default to have on-hand.

However, there's nothing absolutely special about the first 64 pages of the book...most anyone with a Fiend Folio and DMG could come up with something similar (including the random town events) with a little mental effort and the time and energy to put it all together (most anyone could do it, but I haven't seen it in such a nice little compilation before; it makes for a good supplement/setting book). What IS impressive (to me) was what came AFTER those first 64 pages, specifically the Appendix A with regard to campaign play, specifically with regard to a codified system of personal objectives for player characters. Long term game goals is something I like to see (and encourage) in my players, but it's something I rarely encounter: most players are too busy learning the game rules, are trying to stay alive or finding gold coins to bother thinking about such things. Kaiser puts together a specific list of high level goals (many of which can be accomplished prior to achieving Name level) for adventurers, as well as the specific mechanics required for accomplishing these objectives. Some examples include: becoming a high priest of the city's patron deity (available even to non-clerics), becoming a member of the city council or even the city's ruler, founding or taking control of a guild house, becoming a city folk hero, achieving immortality through undeath, or wedding a king/queen in a distant country. All of these are cool and will appeal to different personalities (and might evolve out of random events); some PCs might accomplish multiple long-term objectives (I don't think any are mutually exclusive) and they all provide role-playing rewards outside the normal D&D "box" without breaking the D&D game system. That's cool and new and I wish I'd thought to do it first.

[well, I HAVE thought of similar goals/objectives, but I haven't codified them like Kaiser has; and certainly not in such a way that they work directly with the campaign setting for which he's created them]

So that was cool. Coupled with the nice game setting, the sensible monster lists, and some out-o-the-box magic items (fairly pulp fantasy stuff with good and bad benefits of the kind usual to folklore and NOT found in modern D&D editions) this is a nice little book to pick up and run a campaign. The random dungeon creation and solo play rules are fine, but nothing I'd proclaim as a reason for getting the game (my days of solo gaming are long behind me...I don't have time for that anymore!). I did like the random town events (easy to use and more sensible than a lot of the tables I've seen on the internet the last couple years), and Ruins of the Undercity is probably something I would use...if I hadn't already decided to re-write the rules of D&D to my own personal purposes.

But I'll certainly be checking out parts of RotUC if and when I ever get back to finishing up my version of D&D Mine...especially the rules in aforementioned Appendix A.

[Ruins of the Undercity available for purchase here]

Missing the Mark

I’m feeling the need for a new micro-game.

[we’ll come back to that in a second]

How O How did I miss the new television show featuring one of my all-time favorite superheroes? That would be Green Arrow, about whomI've blogged before. The new TV program is called ARROW (duh) and is running on the CW (I thought that was the Country-Western channel?), but I couldn’t tell you when it normally airs because I am the parent of a small child…unless shows are running late at night, I’m generally only watching them “On Demand.”

So having newly discovered Arrow, I’ve been trying to catch up on all the shows I’ve missed. It’s not awful (which I feared) and certainly a step up from The Cape…has kind of a J.J. Abram’s feel to it (what with the flashbacks and the mysterious past/hidden agendas and the castaway-island-weirdness stuff) which is generally a good thing, if not terribly original. On the other hand, the casting for Oliver Queen just seems so YOUNG. Though I suppose the idea of the older gentleman, play-boy (read: creepy chauvinist-womanizer) doesn’t work as well in the 21^st century as it might have in the 1960s (see Mad Men). The reinvented Queen is a young Hollywood in the tabloid style of today’s n’er-do-wells (see Paris Hilton, Jack Osborne, etc. for examples).

My how the world turns.

I also like the Longbow Hunters-style archery (of course) and the reinvented “Speedy” (Queen’s crank-snorting younger sister in this show…ha!)…and the hood, too. Warms my heart, it does. I’m not too keen on the green leather jumpsuit and the romantic interest looks like she belongs on one of those WB shows…but otherwise, it’s enjoyable throwaway action-TV and really has some potential to go to some of the dark places worthy of Green Arrow (as opposed to simplistic PSA-style, “One To Grow On” moralizing).

[“Speedy” = crank addict. Ha! Every time I think of it, makes me chuckle]

You know, it’s funny (interesting)…I know there’s a lot about Green Arrow that echoes the Batman character, which isn’t all that surprising as they’re both knock-offs of Zorro (invented 20 years before Batman, thank you very much)…wealthy socialites during the day and grim masked men of justice at night. The secret hide-outs, the gadgets, the M.O., the sidekick, the character-themed vehicles, the acrobatics, etc. all make them seem like mirror image characters, other than the color of their costumes.

However, it’s the minute differences of personality that (for me) makes all the difference in the world, catapulting one onto my Top 5 or Top 3 all-time list. And no, it’s not just the fact that GA has the beard and uses a bow instead of a Batarang. I mean, let’s just draw the clear distinction right here and now:

[and, yes, this will get back to gaming in a moment, really…]

Batman IS an interesting character…as a child I read his comics, watched the old Adam West show, saw the cartoons, saw that first Michael Keaton movie a dozen times or so, and own all the Christian Bale films (for whatever reason, I never got around to watching the in-between films). I owned the whole Jason Todd/Death in the Family series at one point, as well as the Frank Miller post-apoc Dark Knight Returns graphic novel. I like Batman, but after mashing all these sources together, here’s how I see Batman (minus the ninja training):

-          A man with a keen, detective mind; armed with gadgetry purchased by wealth; driven by a childhood trauma, but with an unshakeable resolve regarding preservation of life even with his relentless pursuit of justice.

Compared to Green Arrow who is:

-          A man with the hunting skills developed from his castaway experience; driven by a desire for social justice forged in the years of isolation and contemplation; owing more to the Law of the Wild than the Kantian philosophy of Batman (the issue of wealth and gadgetry varies depending on the GA series/portrayal).

Leave aside the fighting ability both characters possess: “Who’s a better fighter” is a pretty moot point in comic books (and their ilk) when nearly all (male) characters are scrappy and fight-worthy and have as much brawling power as is necessary for the story/plot at hand. Instead look at three things:

1. What motivates the character (origin of their heroic impetus)
2. What is the character’s method (power that sets character apart)
3. What is the line the character won’t cross (self-imposed limitation)

The last is perhaps the MOST important part of a superhero…at least one that is well developed…because while folks are always quoting the “with Great Power comes Great Responsibility” line from Spiderman, the unsaid part about being greater than other mortals is “with Great Power comes Great Temptation.” The question is important because without a line, nothing stops the character from using their abilities for selfish and self-aggrandizing purposes. Doing THAT drops the character from the ranks of what we call “heroes.”

For example: Nothing physically stops the She-Hulk from intimidating the hell out of normal people (she might do so on occasion for a laugh, or because she’s annoyed with someone, but generally she attempts to put people at ease despite her strength and power). Nothing stops Steve Rogers from pursuing a lucrative career as an underwear model and living a life of debauchery with fame and fortune. Nothing prevents Spiderman from becoming the world’s greatest cat-burglar or from Reed Richards using his scratch-built spacecraft to ferry the rich and famous into orbit for a hefty fee.

But the threshold of self-imposed limitation varies from character to character. She-Hulk MIGHT intimidate someone for amusement, but Superman would not despite having the same (or greater) power…at least not while in uniform. Spiderman will happily knock the teeth out of some mugger in a dark alley, but he generally stops short of psychologically scarring and inflicting mental torture on an individual like the Batman will. The line a hero won’t cross comes to define the character as much or more so than anything else…compare Wolverine to his fellow X-Men in the 1980s as a stand-out example.

And while Batman is all about inflicting fear and terror and rough justice on the street criminal, his own code of ethics stops him short of bleeding someone with an edged weapon…unlike Green Arrow. Sure, it’s a fine line but it IS a line: the Bat is perfectly capable of giving some guy a concussion or sending ‘em to the hospital with a rupture, but piercing someone’s femoral artery or spleen runs the risk of putting someone in the MORGUE. That’s a decided difference between the two. GA doesn’t rank in the same category of the Punisher (who sets out to murder criminals in the name of “justice”) but he is one of the more flagrant and reckless of masked vigilantes, judged solely on his methods, at least since the Longbow Hunters.

[compare Green Arrow to non-Ultimate Hawkeye who continues to use non-lethal “trick arrows”]

So while there are superficial similarities between the GA and Batman, for me they are extremely distinct based on the answers to those three questions: motive, method, and limit. And the Arrow’s answers to those questions make him one of my favorite characters while Batman’s answers (respectable though they are) do not.

Okay, so what does all this rigmarole have to do with gaming?

Welp, last night I was back in play-testing mode with the wife back in town from business and BECAUSE of the all the Arrow TV watching and comic book contemplation, I decided to run my Supers game rather than the new Space Opera setting. Longtime readers know how easily my mind wanders from one subject to another with only the vaguest inspiration, so I realize none of you are all that surprised.

The most recent iteration of DMI Supers has quite a few differences from the last version (play-tested with Will a few months back), and this time I even had a pretty serious adventure mapped out for the thing (cribbed from a prior adventure I’d written for Heroes Unlimited). Unfortunately for Greg (the sole player to show up…more on THAT in a separate post), I discovered the fast-and-loose style of DMI does not lend itself well or easily to the “scripted adventure” and we never got past “Chapter 1” nor did the game have the chance to show off its strengths.

ALSO, as with my Lost World game there were serious issues of motivation that just ended up “falling short.” The DMI system provides a versatile, visceral, and expressive system that is not only fun to play, but helps define your character within the play itself…I haven’t found the thing that JUMPSTARTS play. What gets you INTO it…what creates an impetus in players to be PRO-active as opposed to RE-active?

[in case I forgot to mention this in an earlier posting, this proactive player stance is important for a richer role-playing experience, but I don’t want to get off topic just at the moment]

Old school D&D is excellent at this, for example: character advancement is tied to treasure acquisition and the characters are (by definition) treasure hunters by trade. Consequently, players have an impetus to self-motivate in looking for treasure (and being creative in how they recover it), immediately immersing themselves in the game at hand.

The best version of DMI so far (by which I mean, the most EFFECTIVE version) has been my post-apoc-mutant-style game MDR. In MDR, character are presented with an immediate situation and goal (by design and by character definition) and thus have an immediate impetus to “get on it.” But the Lost World game and the Space Opera game and Supers game all have a more “open format” that is supposed to be built and based on the characters’ personal motivations, which is nice in THEORY…but then the players end up sitting back and waiting to REACT (using their proper motivation) to whatever the GM throws at you.

As opposed to being proactive.

SO NOW (going back to the original sentence) I’m starting to think I need to write a new micro-game. It’s been awhile since I’ve done one of these one-sheeters and maybe I need to go back to that format, at least briefly, in order to fix some of these issues. The micro- format forces me to be short, sweet, and elegant and really distill down the basic elements of a game…giving me a parsed version that can be elaborated on as necessary (and/or appropriate) if the stripped-down, basic version is at least FUNCTIONAL. I think the last one I completed was, in fact, the first version of DMI (for the Out-Of-Time game)…but that worked well enough that it led to the two-page version of MDR which worked so well that I started incorporating the basic DMI engine into other genre games. But the difference between OOT and MDR and the later versions of DMI is that those earlier games had set, specific victory conditions (so to speak)…and the later versions do not.

I’ve come to the conclusion that I’ve got to return to the basic parameters of DMI first if I want to develop it into a full-blown game engine…and I’ve got a feeling/inkling that (with regard to the Supers game) the key might be to revisit those three distinctions I’ve listed above: the motive, method, and limitation that really differentiates one street-born vigilante from another. That might actually be more important for such a game than the power list I so diligently slaved up.

*whew!* That was pretty random.

; )

Word from Hobbiton

If you had asked me in the 90s who my favorite filmmaker was, I probably would have said Quentin Tarentino. Not only did I find his movies immensely enjoyable, I found they really spoke to my sensibilities (if that makes any sense)…maybe one Gen X’er communicating with another through their visual craft. And perhaps he still might be my favorite: I haven’t seen Django but I hear it’s pretty good.

However, having NOT seen Django, I was willing to pass the title of “favorite filmmaker” to Peter Jackson after seeing his latest film, The Hobbit. Simply put, Jackson creates beautiful films.

And I don’t just mean visually beautiful (which they are…stunningly so). His films are filled with beautiful SENTIMENT. And it IS beautiful…it is "heartfelt." Even District 9…you feel for the protagonist despite him being a rank bastard. But especially with movies like King Kong and The Hobbit, Jackson just finds ways to put beautiful little nuances of sentiment on the screen. And (to me) it’s wonderful to see. 

I liked The Hobbit, and I liked it a lot. Even though he took liberties with Tolkien’s words, for the most part (we’ll get to that in moment) he used those liberties to communicate the sentiment and themes Tolkien was trying to communicate. Sure it was perhaps a trifle heavy handed (Gandalf’s council with the elves), but it’s pretty tough to communicate the themes of a novel into a film, when you have to use exposition to explain what is communicated through the inner monologues of an author’s characters. Especially when you’re breaking up a single novel into multiple movies (and yet want to echo the same theme across each installment…): you can’t just have Thorin on his death bed saying “yeah, maybe we should value good cheer and simple pleasures over hoarded gold,” with nothing of the sentiment in the first film.

[sorry if that’s a spoiler: I just figure most of my blog readers have read the book in the past]

What I also greatly enjoyed was the elaboration Jackson brought to the film. I saw The Hobbit with my buddy Steve-O who said “that was cool how they connected the quest against the dragon with the threat of Smaug allying with Sauron.” But this wasn’t a Jackson invention: Gandalf’s motivations with regard to the dwarves’ quest is discussed at length in the appendix of Tolkien’s later book Return of the King. Including this information in the film not only shows P-Jack (or his screenwriters) have done their homework, it also helps tie the film to his earlier (LotR) films.

Meanwhile, Jackson’s portrayal of Thorin’s anti-elf sentiment (which IS present in the book) gives new meaning to the feud while shedding light on it. Of course the proud dwarf bears some resentment to the pointy-eared folk for their lack of aid to his people…it’s not a radical interpretation, it’s a LOGICAL interpretation. Reading Shakespeare’s plays, one finds a surprising lack of stage directions considering all the on-stage action that takes place…the actions and character motivations must be interpreted from the dialogue…and Jackson does the same thing with Tolkien’s words.  Same with other characters (like Radaghast the Brown).

Other “liberties” are just the necessity of film adaptation: why is Thorin the hero at the gates of Moria instead of Dain? Because Dain isn’t a central character to the main story being told (his role is combined in Thorin’s character, just as Glorfindel was combined into Arwen in the Fellowship film). Why does Jackson stage this elaborate chase/warg fight (following the troll scene) that is never found in the book? Because it enables the filmmaker to drive Thorin & Co. into Rivendell (when it’s been established that Thorin will have nothing to do with the elves). Why do the trolls end up eating the horses (instead of the goblins in the mountains)? Because of the complexity of filming ponies on a mountain pass. Why is Bilbo the troll trickster (as opposed to Gandalf as in the book?)? Because the film-maker has to show a bit of Bilbo’s ingenuity, courage, and cunning which (prior to later chapters of the book) are otherwise only present in the character’s inner thoughts at this point in the story…if Jackson doesn’t SHOW something of this, visually (film being a visual medium), you end up with a very passive and non-factor protagonist.

In a book, there’s nothing passive about Bilbo’s role…told from his point of view the story features his inner struggles throughout the book (with whether he wants to be a hero or not, or take the tough road or not). There is an inner conflict of the Everyman character which (while dramatic in a novel form) needs to be reinterpreted for a different art form. And Jackson does a good job of it, in my opinion.

NOW, having said all that and heaping praise on the film, I have to voice my main gripe:

What’s with all the goddamn fighting?

Much as I enjoyed the film, much as I liked Jackson’s interpretations and liberties and creativity, the martial take and action sequences nearly killed the whole deal for me. Not because I’m a bleeding-heart liberal commie-socialist…I ENJOY action and violence in films immensely (just picked up a Blue-Ray copy of John Woo’s Hard Boiled the other day). Films and fiction (and role-playing) are for me, the only deserving place FOR violence and fighting, not the real world.

No, my issue is how out-of-place the martial attitude was. Not only was this NOT “true to the books” (in this way the film went WAY off the rails from Tolkien’s sentiment), it also did little (if anything) to contribute to the story being told. For me, it DETRACTED from the story.

There was SO much focus on combat and fighting that comparing the Hobbit film to the Hobbit novel (or even the earlier animated film) is like comparing 4^th edition D&D to the old TSR editions. It’s like it misses the f’ing point for the sake of catering to the lowest common denominator. Or (to put my rant a little differently) it’s like Peter Jackson suddenly decided his target audience was too stupid to enjoy the film without throwing in a bunch of LotR-style fight scenes (LotR is, after all, a war story, but it’s not the fight scenes that made it a great film).

No, I’m not upset that visually the dwarves look like characters from a Capital One commercial (“What’s in YOUR wallet?”); being based in part on Nordic myth has always made Tolkien characters seem a little Viking-esque. And Thorin IS a warrior-noble type (the main fighter of the group) and his nephews (Filli and Killi) are cut from the same cloth (at least, judging by their particular end…sorry again for the spoiler) as well as old Balin (his lieutenant) and by reasonable assumption Dwalin (Balin’s brother).

BUT (for example…and here there be FILM spoilers, FYI)…BUT when the hobbit gets caught by the trolls and the dwarves launch a frontal assault leading to an elaborate set-piece combat, it just about made me want to retch with disgust. Those who have read The Hobbit five or six times (like myself) will remember that the dwarves come looking for Bilbo and get popped into the troll sacks except for Thorin…who comes later, is sneakier, and manages to bash a troll upside the head with a log from the fire before being caught. This establishes a couple things:

-          Tone setting (danger and jeopardy)

-          Character development (dwarf loyalty, good-heartedness)
-          Character development (Thorin’s cunning and fight-worthiness)

Instead, the film gives us a ridiculous fight scene that establishes nothing except that dwarves seem to be spoiling for a fight at every opportunity (even the stupid slingshot guy…I mean, how stupid is that dwarf? What happened to “discretion being the better part of valor?”). The dwarves are still captured and look dumb in the process. Thorin is not shown to be “a cut above the rest.” And we learn nothing new about the dangers of Middle Earth…I mean wouldn’t you already get Big Scary Danger + Drama & Tension if the scene were filmed as written? Don’t you want to contrast these particular dwarves in comparison to the heroic companions of the Fellowship of the Ring (whom, one might recall, have a fight with a troll in the Mines of Moria. Thorin & Co. look  like they’re on par with Aragorn, etc. and that the only reason for their defeat was that they faced THREE trolls instead of one).

The same happens again with the wargs in the plains…and then again with the goblins in the Misty Mountains. They’re captured fighting and then they fight their way non-stop over miles of subterranean scaffolding (what’s with all the wood in the goblin caves? The orcs sure don’t look much like carpenters to me…a major, glaring plot point to my eyes).

It’s as if Jackson decided, ‘well the film’s not really exciting enough’ or ‘it’s not visually stunning enough.’ It IS exciting enough, it IS a visual delight for the eyes, it DOES carry nuanced character development besides “we like to fight” (and I mean, JACKSON’s film has character nuance, in many ways more so than Tolkien’s book). Frankly, I found it boring and tedious…I found myself waiting for each elaborate fight sequence to end so that we could get to the next cool thing about Middle Earth…Rivendell, or Gollum’s cave, or the flight of the Eagles, or the house of Beorn or whatever.

Instead, I got long, empty minutes of elaborate sword fights. Yes, I get the point Mr. Jackson: your dwarves are really tough and quick to draw down on someone. Enough already.

HOWEVER…having gotten that gripe out of the way, I want to reiterate that I otherwise greatly enjoyed everything else in the film. Everything else was a delight and very much in the spirit of Tolkien’s most whimsical novel of Middle Earth: Radaghast and his rabbits, the White Orc and his albino warg, Elrond and his brethren in their mail (though why O why are there statues of warriors guarding the bridge to Rivendell? I don’t remember the elves celebrating their martial pride at the Last Homely House!), the Necromancer’s stronghold, the prelude/montage showing the sack and burning of Dale and Erebor. The music was good (though I sorely missed the goblins’ wicked songs!), tasteful and well-done, and as said, the whole film was quite beautiful. I am excited to see the next installment, and hope that we’ll continue visual feast as we see Mirkwood and the halls of the wood elves and Lake Town and all the rest.

But I also hope that there’ll be a lot less fighting. At least when it comes to fighting that is superfluous to an already excellent and entertaining story.

The Finality of the Play-Offs

Raiders of the Lost Ark may be the best action/adventure movie of all time. Even with the passage of time (30 years?!) the film is superb, with great sequences, well developed characters, and special effects that have lost none of their luster (perhaps because they didn’t rely on old-tech green screen techniques nor require stop-motion monsters). I was up till two or 2:20 in the morning last night watching the ol’ DVD and was astounded by the beauty of the thing: the cinematography, the writing/directing, the acting. There’s a lot to take away from a movie like Raiders…I’m sure that much of my interest in “pulp” fiction has to do with my exposure to this film at a young age.

Why was I watching Raiders at two in the morning? ’Cause it was going to be a long, sleepless night after yesterday’s Seahawks loss regardless. Plus I wasn’t done drinking.

I have often thought (and stated to people who cared) that it’s too bad someone has to lose these games…though generally only when it comes to games that didn’t involve my team. I mean, I would have had a little sympathy for Tony Gonzalez had the Seahawks sent him packing with yet another play-off loss on his resume...but certainly not enough that I would have traded a Seahawk win and a continuation of the team’s fairy tale season. Unlike a lot of locals who today were walking around spouting optimism about how great our team is going to be “next year,” I have no such delusions. Not anymore: I felt the same thing at the beginning of 2006 (after our Super Bowl loss) only to watch the team crumble year after year without ever making it back to the NFC Championship game again, let alone the Big Dance. Optimism for the future is bullshit when it comes to the NFL…ask Dan Marino about optimism. Or Donovan McNabb. Or even Peyton Manning. This year was special…surprisingly special due to a conspicuous lack of injuries and unexpected big plays and quite possibly some underestimation of our ability on the part of some opponents. Personally, I believe we were set-up well to run the table at the end…but we couldn’t close the deal in Atlanta. And while the Falcons might beat the Niners (who are favored by Vegas odds) I don’t think they can beat either of the teams left in the AFC. Not that they shouldn’t be given the opportunity to try, mind you…

Ugh. It’s just the unnerving FINALITY of the game that bites. The game ends and you wish it ended just a little differently. And they play the highlights on the news and ESPN and you’re watching, knowing what will happen, but hoping this time the re-play will show something different…and of course, it doesn’t. And no amount of wishing or venting or second-guessing or wild eyed gnashing of teeth is going to alter the outcome in the slightest. You’re just left with a result that comes up just a little short. Like the Titans missing the end zone by a yard in the Super Bowl.

Oh, and I know there are fans of other teams that will tell me to quit my bitching, that Seattle has little to complain about compared to, say, a Chicago Bears fan who watched their team start 7-1 and miss the play-offs despite ending with double-digit wins. I’m sure Buffalo Bills fans would trade their lot for ours, having missed the play-offs every year since realignment in 2002 whereas the Seahawks have been to the post-season seven times in the last eleven years; a veritable embarrassment of riches compared to most NFL teams.

And, hey, it’s only a sporting event…with all the real tragedy and death that’s happened in this country over the last few months, the loss of a football game and the end of a season is NOTHING by comparison. Let’s have a little perspective, here.

But for Yours Truly, who tends to get emotionally entangled in his passions with embarrassingly little effort, it’s still a tough one to swallow. I was having a hard time focusing on anything besides football the last couple weeks…well, apart from my boy, but certainly I was worthless for anything work-related. Heck, I made it a point to go see The Hobbit Saturday (more on that later) specifically to turn my football brain OFF for three hours the other day…and it was a much needed break.

So in a way (though it’s challenging to find a silver lining) I suppose it’s for the best that the ‘Hawks are going into the off-season. I will almost certainly be more productive with less investment in the outcome of the next couple weeks’ games. But it’s tough. I’m kind of a putz about these things.

[and one last Blood Bowl related side note: I ran a mock match Friday night between the Orkish ‘Hawks team and Skaven Falcons to see who would win and the game was TIED at the end of regulation…due in part to the rats scoring a last second TD on the final turn of the match that made it 2-2. The orks actually went into half-time with a 2-0 lead after a dominant first period (in a strange mirror opposite of the actual game) and kept the skaven from scoring until the final quarter (last four turns) of the game. However, I didn’t bother playing out the over-time period to a final end result because

A)     It was super-duper late (and I needed to get SOME sleep before a 24 hour stint of single-parenthood on Saturday), and

B)     I was a bit disgusted by the skavens’ ability to get behind the Seahawks secondary and tie it up in three turns and, frankly, was (superstitiously) afraid that an OT win in my Blood Bowl match might have some correspondence-voodoo effect on the actual outcome of the game. And I wasn’t confident in the orks ability to stop the rats if they won the coin toss and received the ball first.

Okay, that enough of that. I’m sure there’ll be more Blood Bowl silliness in the future, but right now I’m going to take a break from all football-related ANYthing. All apologies for my self-indulgence.]

Now, if you'll excuse me I see there's a new episode of Downton Abbey awaiting my attention.

; )

Yes, More Blood Bowl...

One of my New Year’s resolutions (to myself) for 2013 was to devote more time to the blog…in fact, I’ve got a whole strategy I’ve been working out in my head to enable regular posting. Of course, I haven’t yet implemented any of it, as things are still unsettled on the homefront due to child care woes, business travel, holiday “extravaganzas,” and all the usual headaches (taxes, clogged gutters, beagle ear infections, etc.). And, of course, football.

That’s of course football.

I have a much harder time concentrating/focusing on ANYthing during the football season, but especially if my team is doing well just because, well, ‘cause I’m a homer and a super-fan and have been since my parents got me a little Zorn #10 jersey many, many years ago (he was a QB for the Seahawks back in the 1970s). I never played football myself (that’s its own long, not-so-interesting story), and during the drought of the 1990s I did find myself rooting for the Cowboys on occasion (I shared the same height as Emmitt Smith), but I did continue to go to (at least a couple) Seahawks games every year, even through the bad years. That’s MY team, and the NFL is MY spectator sport…much more so than the NBA or the MLS or baseball.

[the World Cup, by the way, is an awesome show as well…my wife has made me as a big a fan of THAT tournament as I have made her of the Seahawks…however, I only get to watch it every four years and it’s a lot shorter than the 21 week NFL season]

So the Seahawks are doing pretty good this year, and I haven’t felt this good about the team since 2006 (when we discovered the loss of Hutch had rendered our running game garbage and the chance of a repeat Super Bowl appearance nigh impossible). And the way we’re playing defense, even on the road…I mean, we haven’t seen this kind of football since the 1980s in this town. We’ve almost always played good at home, of course (which is why the #12 jersey was the first one retired by the Seahawks, decades ago), but the feeling that we can play with ANY team, that we had a chance in ANY game, even away from Sea-Town…well, that’s something I haven’t felt since Dave Krieg was our QB. And while I still can’t quite bring myself to believe whole-heartedly (I’m not the kid I once was, but an old, jaded fan approaching middle age), I’m getting close to it. I can tell you this: I want to play Green Bay again. I like the play-off road ahead of us. For me, this is the perfect road to the championship, even though we have to play away from our home field advantage. Washington and Atlanta were the only NFC play-off teams we hadn’t had the chance to play (and beat) during the regular season…and Green Bay and Seattle deserve a rematch with regular referees. And it’s fine by me to have it on their turf...if the Pack can beat the Niners they’ll go back to the same seeding position (and homefield advantage) they would have had if they hadn’t lost in Seattle. That’s fitting. And personally, I’m not afraid to take ‘em on: the Seahawks are a better team now than they were when we faced Green Bay earlier.

But that’s putting the cart before the horse: we’ve got Atlanta to face.

In Blood Bowl terms, I’ve always seen the Falcons as a SKAVEN team. Partly it’s because they play in a domed stadium (generally signifying a nocturnal-type team); partly it’s because of monikers like “the Dirty Birds” or the stories of Jerry Glanville and his coaching style; partly it’s due to they’re explosive, fast-style of play on that fast-style turf of theirs. Julio Jones and Roddy White are speedy gutter runners (just as Neon Deion was when he played defense for them), and the ageless Tony Gonzalez is a storm vermin with the skills Pro, Catch, and Nerves of Steel…possibly with a +1 to AG (agility) and Leadership. “Matty Ice” is a thrower with both Strong Arm and Accurate…but does he have the Nerves of Steel? Has he acquired the Leadership skill? The lack of success in the play-offs would seem to indicate something is lacking…though in Blood Bowl terms, that could just be a lack of team re-rolls.

[on the other hand, perhaps his nickname just comes from the type of beer he enjoys]

The Seahawks will be bringing an ork team (sans wa-agh) to the Georgia Dome. Last Sunday’s match-up with the (pig-faced!) ork Redskins team settled the issue of which greenskin team is the best this year (no other ork teams remain in play-offs for either conference…at least by my reckoning). This week’s match-up will be a VERY different challenge from the last one. When orks scrum with skaven the match is generally decided by how many points the rats can put up before the trogs but ‘em in the dirt. We’ll see how that goes.

I admit, I’m not incredibly knowledgeable on the Falcons, but they’re team seems a little depleted this year from how “stocked” they were in previous seasons. They’ve lost pro-bowlers Mughelli and Weems, Brent Grimes is on injured reserve, and Michael Turner (another storm vermin) seems a bit diminished from his former stout self. Tyson Clabo is still playing on the O-line, but John Abraham hurt his ankle in the last game of the season (though with two weeks to heal, he should be ready to go). And the Falcons still have their real weapons: Jones, White, and Gonzalez. Will that be enough? They dropped their last game of the season (at home!) to division rival Bucs, even though they were playing their starters (?!). The Bucs are a Chaos Dwarf team, similar to an orkish one (though not as versatile), so perhaps that’s a good sign for the Seahawks. They ARE beatable at home...but then nearly all NFL teams this year (the sole exception being that little team up in the Pacific Northwest).

But it’s the play-offs: I’m sure Atlanta will be bringing their “A-Game.” They ARE favored to win the game…though not by much.

Personally, I have a feeling the Atlanta-Seattle game will be a blow-out…though I’m not sure which team will be blowing out the other. But that’s how a real Blood Bowl game between an ork-skaven match usually goes…either the skaven put up 5 or 6 touchdowns, or there’s a big pile of dead rats in the casualty box and the orks are walking it in for easy scores. Last week’s game looked like a typical ork match-up (close, tight, and scrappy) for most of the game…we’ll see if the trend holds.

Just for fun, here’s the way I’d write up this year’s Seahawks as a (3^rd edition) Blood Bowl team. It’s tough because BB teams are only allowed 16 players on their roster (and those players go both ways) and the positions are more limited. For some roster spots, this means “doubling-up” players, but not all (for example, Brandon Mebane and Red Bryant have fairly interchangeable skill sets, while Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson are unique characters). Still, I’ve given it my best (and a fairly modest) shot:

#3 Russell Wilson (goblin*): add Block, Pass, Leader, Strong Arm

#15 Matt Flynn (thrower)

#18 Sidney Rice (goblin): add MA +1, AG +1, Catch, Sprint

#24 Marshawn Lynch (blitzer): add ST +1, Break Tackle, Dauntless, Sure Hands

#25 Richard Sherman (blitzer): add MA +1, Catch, Dauntless, Pass Block

#29 Earl Thomas (goblin): add MA +1, ST +1, Block, Catch, Pass Block

#51 Bruce Irvin (blitzer): add MA +1, Mighty Blow

#60 Max Unger (black ork blocker): add Block, Pro, Stand Firm

#76 Russell Okung (black ork blocker): add ST +1, Block, Stand Firm

#39/31 Browner/Chancellor (blitzer): add Mighty Blow, Pass Block

#50/54 Wright/Wagner (line ork): add Block, Pro, Tackle

#86/26 Miller/Robinson (line ork): add Block, Catch

#89/81 Baldwin/Tate (goblin): add Catch, Diving Catch, Nerves of Steel

#91/68 Clemmons/Giacomini (black ork blocker): add Block, Dirty Player**, Tackle

#99/79 Branch/Bryant (black ork blocker): add Block, Tackle

#4/9 Ryan/Hauschka (line ork): add Kick

*I understand it may seem unkind to label Wilson a goblin instead of a thrower; clearly he is a tough individual despite his diminutive height. However, his speed and elusiveness goes more with the goblin skill set (including Dodge and Stunty, i.e. the “Fran Tarkenton skill set”). Give him Sure Hands if you like (the only Thrower skill he’s lacking).

**I don’t mean to imply Clemmons or Giacomini are DIRTY players, but they are big strong guys who have (during the season) drawn more than their fair share of penalties: Clemmons for roughing passers (ouch!) and Breno because…well, ‘cause he’s kind of a dirtbag o-lineman with a mean streak. But, hey, sometimes you want a dirt bag or two on your team.

; )

All right, that’s enough for now…fun little waste o time that it was. I’d encourage other Blood Bowl/NFL enthusiasts to stat up their own favorite teams and play a few games. Don’t get cute: yes, Rogers, Manning, and Brady probably have six or seven skills, but even multiple pro-bowlers probably don’t have more than 4 or 5 skills, unless they’re destined for Hall of Fame greatness.

[mmm…one more thing: I really do hope RG3 recovers okay from his injury. I know it doesn’t look too good, but he IS young and those young bodies heal a lot better than the old ones. Certainly, no one wants to see the man’s career end before it’s really begun…even his competition. The good news, I suppose, is the bionic rebuilds possible with 21^st century medicine (see Adrian Peterson). My stats for those two rebuilt stars:

#10 Robert Griffin III (Washington Redskins; team type: ORK)

Thrower: Add MA +2, AG +1, Side-Step

#28 Adrian Peterson (Minnesota Vikings; team type: GOBLIN)

Goblin: Add MA +2, ST +1, AG +1, Side-Step, Sprint, Sure Hands

Note: serious injuries (which in Blood Bowl can sometimes lead to a reduction in stat lines) are only taken into account with noticeable reduction in player effectiveness. The fact that A.P. (excuse me, "A.D.") can run for 2000+ yards in a season indicates NO noticeable drop-off in effectiveness). We’ll have to wait and see how RG3 recovers.]

Orks on Orks

Some folks may have been surprised at my lack of Seahawks/NFL/Blood Bowl posts of late. Rest assured...I am aware of what's going on in the world of American football.

In fact, I'm a little busy today. I may have some words to say after the conclusion of "Wild Card Weekend" but it may not be till tomorrow, depending on my relative sobriety.

Go 'Hawks!