Showing posts with label jackasses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jackasses. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

"Travelling"

Apologies, folks. I'm a total jackass.

By which I mean to say, I had originally planned on writing a rather long and insightful (or, at least, entertaining) post, but I simply don't have the time. I am winging off to Mexico tomorrow to spend the Christmas holiday with the in-laws, and I thought my travel time was to begin in the afternoon/evening. Turns out: no. My plane leaves at 9am, which means I have precious little time to get everything packed (and the house in order), before catching a little sleep and getting the kids up, a couple hours earlier than they're used to. I'm doing this on my own, of course, as my wife is currently in Paraguay; we're meeting in the middle.

[my children, while under the age of seven, are veteran travelers and real troopers when it comes to this kind of thing. Unfortunately, they are fuck-all worthless when it comes to packing and organizing or even (with regard to my youngest) dressing themselves or cleaning their own nether regions]

SO...as I am pressed for time, I will simply give you the skinny in bullet point form:
  • I will be out of the country till New Year's so anyone ordering books are S.O.L. until January, when I will fulfill any and all orders in my inbox.
  • Likewise, I will be (mostly) unavailable to answer the various emails and comments I sometimes receives.
  • I am very hopeful that you ALL have a HAPPY and SAFE holiday season. I know that's not always possible, through no fault of your own (observe Monday's tragic Amtrak derailment in my own neck of the woods), but I'll send up a prayer that everyone makes it through to 2018.
  • I've been doing a lot of reading and research on the old Traveller game this last week. And not just ANY edition of Traveller but, specifically, the original 1977, first edition of the game...which happens to be (oddly enough) different in many respects from all the later editions, even the 1981 "re-print" (the only one available in PDF at the moment, as far as I've found). I found an incredibly interesting resource over at the Tales to Astound blog, and have spent at least a dozen hours or so reading through his entire string of "classic Traveller" posts. Very enlightening stuff, especially the relationship of the game (both its themes and gameplay) to the original version of Dungeons & Dragons. Fascinating, and definitely recommended reading for the Traveller enthusiast. Hopefully I'll have a chance to revisit the topic in a future post.
Aaaaand...that's about all I have time for. I'll try to get out a post or two while I'm in Mexico, but if I don't, know that I'm wishing you all a "merry, merry" one...whatever it is that makes you merry this time of year.
: )

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

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 4th 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.

Friday, October 8, 2010

F You, WotC


They say there's no such thing as "bad" publicity. So this post should be a batch of goodness for Wizards of the Coast.

I was down at Gary's today, shooting the breeze and browsing for copies of SpellJammer or the 2nd Edition PHB (for info on arquebuses and smoke powder, dont'cha know?), when Tim said, "hey...here's something for you to blog about!" And handed me a big steaming pile of Gamma World "Roleplaying Game."

[quotation marks added by Yours Truly]

Ugh.

Folks that love-love-love 4th edition are probably really going to get their rocks off on this stinker, but for me it once again filled me with a mixture of loathing and sheer "what the f...?" $40 (plus tax, of course) buys you a 160 page rule, the requisite board game parts (maps and tokens, 'cause that's what an "RPG" is, right?), a couple decks of cards, as well as a "booster" pack.

"Booster pack?" Yeah...you know like Collectible Card Games? Because GW4 (as I'm going to call this shit-pile) is ALSO a CCG. In addition to the Box, you have to buy booster packs...little 8 card packs of random mutations and technological wonders. "Collect all 120!" says the booster pack box. I suppose making players collect random cards is better than making folks buy "splat books"...since knuckle-draggers that play this game can't read.

But, hey, anyone notice what's NOT in the $40 box (I mean, BESIDES a complete rule set or something)...DICE. Dice needed, but not included...says so right on the back of the box! But don't worry. "Do you need dice?" the box asks. Check out the WotC web site to see how you can get a set!

Fuck you, Wizards of the Coast.

Also advertised on the back of the box are the upcoming "expansion packs:" Famine in Fargo and Legions of Gold. No more adventure modules, just "expansion packs." Just recycled from adventure modules. But that's okay, since adventures don't really seem to be part of the equation. This is a game about fighting monsters...mutants or robots or whatever...not about exploration or re-building a civilization on the ashes of the old. And assuming it has the same kind of 4E "healing surges," probably not much of a grim struggle for survival, either.

But GW4 doesn't seem to be a post-apocalyptic game anyway. Instead, it's a cool-action, genre-colored, ass-kicking board came with a CCG gimmick. And just in time for Christmas, kiddies!

Who the hell is this supposed to REALLY appeal to, anyway?

I mean, the Moldvay Basic set was for adults ages 10+. Mentzer's Basic set was for kids ages 10+. I don't remember the age bracket for the original Gamma World, but I know my little brother was playing it (and loving it) around age 10-11. But it was slim enough, and simple enough, that he could pick it up and figure out how to play it (of course, it DID come with dice).

What 10 year old is going to want to pick up and play this monstrosity? Why not just spend $40 on some post-apocalyptic video game like Fall Out 3? That would probably appeal to more kids, ages teen to twenty-five. Probably quicker to pick-up and learn to play, right?

Hey, but what do I know? I'm just a dude with a blog and a chip on my shoulder that the world has changed, I guess. Maybe I'm just hungry...I'm going to go get something to eat.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

3 Days, 3 Games, 3 Different Styles (Part 3)

Spirit of the Century. Now THIS is a game I’ve wanted to buy for a while…pretty much since I read a review on RPG.net about how it’s the best pulp RPG on the market. Or something like that. It’s just that money in my pocket has yet to coincide with presence of book at game shop.

I’ve written before, often enough, that I have something of an obsessive-compulsive psychology re superhero games. The only reason I don’t own more pulp games, though, is because there are more superhero RPGs on the market.

I love turn o the (20th) century pulp. It may be my favorite genre of all time.

And I mean like EARLY pulp…pre-WWII stuff. Yes, yes, Indiana Jones is all well and good, but I am sooo tired of Nazis being the bad guy goon du jour. Give me other craziness, not the damn Krauts AGAIN. SHeesh!

But I’m digressing (sorry)…PULP is where it’s at, IMO. I pick up games like Adventure! and Hollow Earth Expedition (HEX) and Cadillacs & Dinosaurs (post-apoc, I know but…) and Indiana Jones (which I actually returned to the store, as I found it too dumb…as a game SYSTEM, not just because of the Nazis...).

Not that I’ve ever had the chance to play…or run…any of ‘em. : (

But whatever…when I hit the Story Lounge on Sunday, the GM gestured grandly to a list of indie RPGs on the wall and asked what I was interested in playing. With Spirit of the Century on the list, there really was no other choice for me.

Plus, it seemed something of a favorite for Ogre as well (“Ogre” was the name of the GM. He looked about what you’d expect, except younger…about my age. Apparently, he was a bouncer downtown for a number of years, but he assures me his nickname is older than that). Spirit of the Century uses the FATE game system (which I believe is available as a free download on-line) with quite a few adjustments. The authors of SotC are the same folks who put out the recent Dresden Files RPG, another game I have not played (I’ve never read the books, nor seen the TV show, either), but which Ogre lauded considerably, stating the designers had really refined the SotC rules, making them all the sweeter.

Well, I didn’t care about playing “the only sorcerer listed in the Chicago phone book.” I wanted PULPDepression-era pulp. My only caveat:

“No Nazis, please.”

Easy enough.

Besides Ogre and myself, there were two other players sitting at the table. Eric, who was both younger and thinner than myself (making him by far the skinniest kid I’d seen in the RPG section of the convention) might have been in his late teens or early 20s and looked nothing like a shiny vampire. The other player…God help me, I completely failed to catch her name, and couldn’t tell you it even if you held a Luger to my head. Dammit.

Well, it’s not all MY fault…she came in the middle of character creation (or rather, at the end of it) and my head was already elsewhere. Since I can’t just keep referring to her as "the girl," I’ll refer to her by her character name: Walker. Sometimes “Dr. Walker,” sometime “Ula-Ani Walker.” We’ll get to all that.

First, let’s get back to my introduction to Spirit of the Century. Unlike my Traveller and PDQ games, there were no “pre-generated characters” for SotC. Hell, there wasn’t any pre-set adventure either. Like more than a few indie games, the point of play is to have a kick-ass adventure based on the characters you’ve designed specifically for the game…it’s not about exploring some clever scenario or dungeon that’s been dreamed up by the GM. This made the game feel much more free-form and open than either Traveller or PDQ…and yet the game was still very “tight” due to its focus on the player characters at hand.

Ogre explained how the standard chargen works in SotC and how it can take a whole game session in and of itself. For the Con, he used a shortened, streamlined version of the chargen, and it worked quite well for a one-off game. It goes a bit like this:

Every character is composed of three types of traits: Aspects, Skills, and Stunts. Aspects (of which your character has 10) are descriptors that define who your character is and what he does, like “two-fisted heiress” or “Hong Kong action hero” or “has pockets full of money” or “the best shot in all of Africa” or whatever. Aspects were important, as they could be activated, or “tapped,” (through the expenditure of FATE chips) to get re-rolls or bonuses to rolls or impact the narrative of the game. They could also be used as “ins” by which the GM could tempt your character into doing detrimental things. For example, if your character is a “ladies man” and his friends are in a fight outside the bar, the GM can tempt you with a FATE chip to stay in the bar, chatting up the girl next to you instead of running outside to help. When an aspect gets tapped by the GM in this way, you can refuse the temptation (and the FATE chip)…but only by paying a FATE chip of your own.

Skills are, well, skills and there is set list (and thank God it is a SHORT list). Characters get 15 skills total…one at +5, two at +4, three at +3, etc.. Any skill you don’t have is +0.

For the streamlined chargen, we didn’t worry about Stunts at all, and we only picked about half our skills up front (the others were added in play as necessary). As for Aspects, we all still had ten, but we only picked three to start, adding the rest in play as and when appropriate. The three Aspects we needed to choose:

Our High Concept
Something About Us That Gets Us In Trouble
As Played By The Actor [blank]

In hindsight, I can see that my lack of experience made me choose less than desirable choices for these categories. First off, I had a fairly strong concept of a character in my head...and I had a damned hard time articulating it. Take Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca, and have him played by perpetual sad-sack Harry Dean Stanton, and you start to get the idea.

My character was an American ex-pat, probably fleeing at least one if not two ex-wives, working as a smuggler and profiteer...jingoistic about American (e.g. capitalism) values, even while a shiftless double-dealer himself. His "trouble" aspect was "big talker" that could might sometimes help, but often got him punched in his big nose. He had few real "skills" of note...he could lie and swindle (probably mainly women of low self-esteem and uneven prospects at anything better), and was happy to take advantage of drunks and...well, most anyone so long as he could find an "in." So long as he didn't have to work too hard for it.

Your basic jackass, I suppose...though at times a lovable one. In many ways, he was kind of the mirror-opposite of my Traveller character, who had been a "smooth operator."

Oh, yeah, his name: "Buddy" Kowalski. His enemies just called him Kowalski. He introduced himself and insisted that friends and prospective clients call him "Buddy." Most folks ended up calling him Kowalski.

Now as a CONCEPT, this is a fine and dandy character to play in a role-playing game. The hard part with SotC is that the Aspects are actually supposed to be used actively. How and when would I ever use the Aspect "as played by Harry Dean Stanton?" Answer: I didn't. Maybe if I'd ever had a scene with an estranged wife or disappointed child. But such a scene never came up in our session.

By contrast, Eric's Aspect "as played by the action hero Tony Jaa" was useful more than once...generally when kicking ass.

Both Eric and I started with our actor FIRST to determine “who we’d like to play in a pulp film” (I understand the game is more about pulp serial novels, but when you ask for the name of an actor, well…). Before Ms. Walker showed up, we thought it might be some sort of “buddy” story…him with the Asian martial arts guy, me with slightly shady, fast talker dude.

Walker’s player (dammit, I’m just going to refer to her as “Carol;” understand this wasn’t her real name)…CAROL came at character creation with a different approach. When she arrived, we had just decided we were island-hopping, smuggler-types in the South Pacific (a la the old TV show Tales of the Gold Monkey). Carol created her character primarily by WHAT she wanted to play and secondarily by HOW the character would fit into the scenario. Only after that did she try to figure our an actor (and had a semi-rough time of it).

Carol’s character, DR. Walker was some sort of 1920s equivalent of a marine biologist/oceanographer/something-or-other…basically, she was an educated socialite tourist studying and cataloguing island flora and fauna. Dr. Walker was played by Sigourney Weaver (reprising her doctor role from Avatar), and was pushy, no-nonsense, self-righteous, and independent. She had hired Eric and myself to furnish her tourism/scientific excursion.

Erik’s character, Jao, was the hot-shot Thai pilot (I made it clear that Buddy had absolutely no idea how to fly or fix the plane, even though it was his livelihood…a true ne’er-do-well!), who…for some unknown reason, never explored…had teamed up with Buddy. Jao always did the “honorable thing” (this was his “trouble” aspect) was great in a fight (Thai kick-boxing), cool under pressure, quiet and polite.

Buddy, well…is ne’er-do-well too strong a term? Carol and I decided that Buddy and Walker did NOT get along (he was a chauvinist of the true 1920s type without being suave or romantic, and couldn’t take a woman “doctor” seriously). He would often call her Ms. Walker to which she’d loudly correct him…whereas she’d call him Mr. Kowalski despite being told repeatedly to call him Buddy. His relationship with Jao was fairly good. Originally I told Eric I was going to call his character “Jerry” regardless of his actual name (‘cause that’s the kind of guy Buddy is...) but this didn’t pan out. It was just too funny to whine “Jo-oW!” at the poor guy on a regular basis.

In Spirit of the Century, everything gets defined by aspects to a certain degree, which can then be tapped by the players or the GM. This included our plane, which we decided to call “Gold Monkey.” Ogre asked each of us to contribute an aspect to it:

JB: “Second-Rate.”
Carol: “Over-Loaded.”
Erik: “One-of-a-Kind.”

The Gold Monkey was a flying boat. Ogre set the scene that we were tied up to a dock at a small island in the Philippines. Jao was minding the plane, while Buddy was trying to round up some additional cargo to take with us (this was my idea, and probably a leftover from that whole “twofer” deal in the Traveller game). Dr. Walker was at the Doc with Jao waiting impatiently to get underway.

Buddy found another American ex-pat…a retired Navy man and a drunk sitting in front of a warehouse with several cases of rum for sale. I haggled him down to 75% of what would’ve been fair, playing to his sympathy as a fellow American amongst savages, etc. and basically taking advantage of the guy. After money changed hands, Buddy wanted delivery down to the docks. The old sailor wanted Buddy to pay him if he had to haul his rum, too.

“Come on, pal, weren’t we just talking about how hard it is to find good help around these parts? I’m sure you’ve got a couple locals you trust as porters…me, I’d have to hire some guy off the street who’d probably steal from me! Can’t you extend me a little professional courtesy?”

Feisty Coot (incredulous): “YOU were in the Navy?”

“Well, the Merchant Marines…”

I made it clear Buddy had never done ANY kind of military service, ever. But he made his deceit role just fine, even without having to tap aspects, and the old Sea Dog hauled my rum to the doc, gratis.

Where Buddy would eventually arrive to face a fuming Dr. Walker.

MISTER Kowalski –“

Buddy, ma’am, just Buddy.”

MISTER Buddy, how DARE you leave me waiting here when I’ve paid good money to retain your services to Truk…”

“I’m sorry ma’am, but it can’t be helped…things aren’t like the States and we’re on 'island time;' besides we have this shipment of medical supplies that just came in at the last minute…”

“Medical supplies?! What ARE you talking about?”

“Orphans, ma’am…we’re ferrying much needed medical supplies to an orphanage on Truk…JOW! Make sure those medical supplies are stowed safely…those bottles are fragile!”

And so it goes…we finally took off after making sure the “medical supplies” were secured along with Doc Walker’s scientific instruments. And off we flew…almost immediately encountering some sort of tropical storm. While Jao wrestled with the controls, Carol and I decided our characters would “help” by yelling panicked directions at him. Well...Dr. Walker told him how to fly, while Buddy yelled at the Doc to stop distracting Jao (distracting him myself with the argument). Eric had to make several rolls in an attempt to work up from “Crashing with Repairs Needed” to “Landing safely with Repairs Needed.” Fortunately, despite our distraction (for which we both received FATE chips, tapping “independent woman” and “big talker”), Jao managed to bring us in for a landing with only minor repairs necessary.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Throw the Damn Thing Already!

Are Wizards of the Coast retarded or what?

The D20 Star Wars RPG (Saga Edition) includes the special "talent" Throw Lightsaber. Anyone whose watched the films as many times as I have can tell you there are exactly two times anyone "throws a lightsaber" purposefully with intent to harm.

Darth Vader (in Return of the Jedi) - during the fight aboard the Death Star.

Yoda (in Revenge of the Sith) - during the fight outside the Jedi Temple. For those who may have missed it, a CGI Yoda throws a CGI lightsaber at a CGI "clone trooper" impaling the poor bastard through the chest.

So guess which character write-ups in the game don't include the Talent throw lightsaber?

Idiots.

But we knew that already, right? Guess Yoda will be the next write-up. Ah, well...I was going to get to ALL the geezers anyway, but it's still damned annoying. Again, though, it re-emphasizes that there's absolutely no need to buy their source books when the info in 'em is crap.

BY THE WAY: Someone pointed out to me that the original D20 version of Anakin/Vader started his class with the Fringer class, which has since been combined under the Scout class. While adding Scout with Fringer Talents to Anakin would make him heartier (he'd gain 12 hit points and the Shrug It Off feat), he's actually LOSE MORE than he'd gain as the non-heroic class allows a bit more customization (I'd have to blow feats to give him proficiency with vehicular ("Heavy") weapons and skill focuses and such. I'll consider revising my re-writes though...hell, why not re-revise revisions?