Markdoc

Re: Killing Damage in 6e

Re: Killing Damage in 6e

Re: Killing Damage to Normal Damage Guidelines. Not rules. Guidelines. And yes, I've played in a 3-400 point superhero game where people were throwing around 8d6 HKAs and 18d6 AP HAs. Don't get hung up on optional suggestions: what's baseline and what's normal varies from campaign to campaign. cheers, Mark

Re: Paladin Martial Art? It's already been said, but what you want your paladin martial arts to look like, depends on what you envisage your paladins doing. Heavily-armoured guys fighting on foot with greatswords, are going to have different requirements than guys who fight mostly from horseback. In contrast, I've been playing a Paladin martial artist (albeit in D&D) the last couple of years. His martial art is based on high mobility - move fast, hit 'em hard and then move back out of range before they can respond. Jump over the minion's heads to whack the bad guy at the back. Dodge into their lines, pull 'em off balance and knock 'em down, trick 'em into hitting each other ... It is, to borrow a phrase, super-effective, but it's not exactly a style suited to someone in full harness! Any definition of "paladin martial art" really has to start with a definition of Paladin. If you want something that mimics European medieval fighting techniques, we have precisely zero evidence for anything resembling martial arts: I'd just buy plenty of levels in HTH combat and combat riding for your horse. It doesn't help those with martial arts envy, but 20 points spent wisely on CSLs instead of maneuvers, produces a highly effective, if not very flashy, combatant. cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities Yeah, pretty much. And we didn't live out in the country but in a small city of about 35,000. cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities Sigh. That's what I get for making an off-the-cuff comment. OK, in more depth: Sloppiness in one area - in this case biology - is often an indicator of sloppiness overall. At the very least, it should be regarded as a warning sign. And phrases like "The truth is that men may be doomed, not because of their genes but because of their brains. Or to be more precise, the innate biology of males may be at odds with the modern world that they inhabit" are not only garbage biology (where do men's brains come from if not their genes? If this effect is "innate" then by definition it's genetic. If it's not genetic, then it can't be innate) but are, by definition, not US-specific. If these tendencies are innate, they apply to all men, everywhere. Conversely, if they don't apply to all men everywhere - and as I pointed out, they don't - then they are not innate. Like I said, sloppy. And essentially meaningless. My comment about the conclusions of the book not applying generally was inspired by that sort of fluff. Now if the sloppy, meaningless fluff was only restricted to biology, then maybe there'd be more meat here. Alas ... one of the over-riding themes is that this is a pan-cultural (in the US anyway, though the actual discussion is not very nuanced) phenomenon. Statements about how this decline "cuts across all ages, races and socio-economic groups" abound. The discussion is about how women are outpacing men - educationally, at work, in pay, etc. So how do the real numbers stack up? Well, here they are. And they don't match the rhetoric very well. Far from a decline cutting across all racial and socio-economic groups, the ratio of high school graduation rates between genders among whites has been unchanged since they started recording data on the topic. Indeed, the only groups where high school graduation rates have changed are among pacific islanders and Asians (where boys now do better than girls, a reversal from 40 years ago and the exact opposite of what The Decline of Men is trying to say) and Hispanics, who show the opposite trend (more girls graduate high school than boys - also a reversal from 40 years ago). If you look at college graduates, a higher percentage of men graduate than women among whites and Asians, while the reverse is true among Hispanics and blacks. A more detailed breakdown of the 2010 data shows that boys are slightly more likely to drop out of high school than girls, but at college, men are as likely to graduate with a bachelors degree and slightly more likely to get an advanced degree. When it comes to educational achievement, ethnicity, and regional differences prove to be far more important than gender. You can get more data on education in the US than most people will ever want here. So much for "cuts across all ages, races and socio-economic groups". Like I said, sloppy. So what about pay, and employment? Well, now that women are in the workforce in numbers comparable to men, it turns out the same economic forces that have ravaged mens' incomes are now ravaging womens' . So how do things stack up financially? In the end it's all about the benjamins, after all. And here's the numbers Far from "outstripping men" over the last 20 years women have gone from earning 1/2 as much as men, to 2/3rds as much. Yay. Sarcasm aside, I guess that's still progress. You can see why that is: women (regardless of race) dominate the very lowest rungs of the income ladder and men (especially white men) dominate the upper rungs. The breakdown by age suggests that this disparity is age-linked, so things might improve in the future. If you look at the actual numbers, suddenly men don't seem to be in decline at all. But I don't think the book is entirely worthless, because even if it's sloppily researched and most of its claims are dubious, if not spurious, it does reflect the current zeitgeist. The data might say that men - especially white men - are doing pretty damn well. And as a whole, they are. But if you dig deeper into the figures, the terms "as a whole" hides the fact that some men are doing very well, and others not so well at all. Charles Murray, of all people, makes this case (in fact, I became aware the book we are discussing now as part of the huge debate over Murray's book Coming Apart) though he probably didn't mean to. In the US, the working class and lower-middle class male is doing poorly - regardless of ethnicity. So is the working class female, if you look at the numbers, but the difference between those two has been squeezed, so that it's smaller than it used to be. To a guy under pressure economically, the fact that "some people, somewhere" are making out like bandits, may add to his general sense of grievance, but it's also pretty abstract. But when people he can directly compare his situation with - say, the lady next door - are doing better than they used to, even if it's still not as good as him ... well, I can see how that might look threatening. And that group - working class and lower middle class - makes up a substantial chunk of the population. You can see their unease and growing fear in today's politics. So The Decline of Men might be sloppily-researched polemic, but it's an interesting look into the kinds of things that are worrying a lot of men. cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities Because the book itself - as you should know - uses a fair deal of text on the "transferability" of its findings to western culture generally - or given the frequent use of a skewed, inaccurate reading of biology, to men everywhere. People reading it should probably be aware that the cultural findings - despite the author's claims - apply to only some sections of US culture and not at all to most other places. My post was an off-the-cuff comment rather than a detailed critique, but the "biological basis" which is rolled out right up front and which is returned to later in the book, is a mixture of a few facts and a ton of bumfluff. I almost didn't get through the first chapter, because the sensationalism of much of the approach to science was completely over the top. cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities It's also worth noting that it's a very US-specific book: the trends identified there don't seem to apply to Scandinavia, or even Europe as a whole. Edit: and I suspect even less relevant outside Europe/North America. cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities Make a security systems roll cheers, Mark

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested A couple of points. 1. Don't worry too much - at this point - about total combat builds. Lots of low fantasy games start that way, especially when your players are coming from D&D, which is by design, heavily combat-geared. I've repeatedly started new groups and had this problem. Players will naturally spend points where it is beneficial to them, so if you throw plenty of non-combat challenges at them, they will happily start to spend points to cover those bases as well. Characters tend to flesh out as the game develops: especially if the non-combat options allow players to shine. For example, stealth missions require a whole different skill set than straight combat, but are still usually "exciting" for combat-oriented players. If they keep getting ambushed, they'll start to spend points on environmental movement, better PER, etc. If they fall off a few high things, they'll spend points in climbing, etc. If they keep getting whacked by traps, one or more of them will start to develop rogue-like skills ... you get the idea. 2. As a GM, go with your gut in combat. If it seems stupid, there's usually a good reason for that. So no, "daisy-chaining" is not a legit. combat tactic. The phrase "...But if the character knows about or can see an opponent, that opponent can’t get a Surprised bonus just by making a Half Move behind the character before attacking. The opponent might get the bonus if the character is distracted..." I've bolded the important words. If the character knows about you, you're not getting the surprise bonus by making a half move behind him. You might get it if you can approach him unseen - for example, hide and then attack out of his line of sight once he's distracted so that he doesn't know you are there until you attack. However, your players will probably work out the next best thing: dogpiling. This means delaying until one PC stuns an opponent then the rest going for aimed shots while the target's DCV is reduced. That's a legit. tactic. Of course you can use it on them, too cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities You know, I have a really simple answer. Just treat women like people: they are, you know. Don't think about "Ooh, she's woman! What do you say to women? How should I respond?" etc. Treat women the way you'd treat another guy: a normal, polite response never goes amiss. It's always worked for me! cheers, Mark

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities Sadly, this does match many of my own early experiences: I've seen way too many geeks (roleplaying/comics/computer gaming) display exactly that mixture of defensiveness and disdain. cheers, Mark

Re: Race based were-creatures for a high fantasy setting. First and foremost, I'd think about what you want role you want lycanthropes to play. Is it a disease? A Curse? Something that PCs would/could willingly take? Or strictly for monsters? Think about what your cultural aspects will be: as an example, in my last game, the "cultural bad guys" were "Sharkmen" (also called Destroyers). When the players first met them they just basically filled a generic monster slot - really big muscly guys who tried to kill and eat the PCs, on a semi-regular basis. As the game went on, the players discovered that they were part of a cult who worshipped "the Destroyer" - the personification of the concept that all life lived by consuming (literally or otherwise) other life and that the best thing was to be at the top of the food chain. The Sharkman form that the players encountered was actually something that was conferred on the cult's best warriors by a holy ritual, and which they could activate, making them stronger, tougher, more ferocious. The rest of the time they were human .. or humanish, anyway: over time they started taking on more and more sharkish qualities. So to their own people, the Destroyers were heroic warriors: to everybody else, just monsters. That's a lycanthropic sort of thing, but different from your stereotypical werewolf. I don't have lycanthropes - as such - in my game, but I do have many varieties on human animal hybrids and some of those can shapechange, appearing as animal, human or a hybrid, depending on the creature. It can be involuntary or fully under control, again, depending on the creature. And how such creatures are seen, again, depends on the creature and on culture. So I think the basic idea is fine: if that fits your game world. All you need now is a rationale: why do humans only spawn werewolves? Why do Orcs only spawn wereboars? etc. cheers, Mark

Re: Plot Hook News Story: Possible Roman Empire Jewelery Bits Found In Japan.... There is good evidence that the Romans made it to Vietnam: Roman goods (and not just coins and the stuff you could find in ballast, but valuable gold items and glassware) have been found there, and the first recorded visit of a roman embassy to China came (according to Chinese court records) by way of Vietnam. That's not out of the blue: we've known for a while that the Romans had trade colonies on the west coast of India - and one map indicates a roman colony large enough to have a temple on the east cost of India. The Japanese finding can't be attributed to later transmission: the goods were found laid in a tomb that was closed about 1500 years ago. On the other hand, they don't mean that Romans reached Japan: the gold-and-glass technique that the Italians perfected was a much desired trade good, and Roman glassware was traded all over the world (including to China, in exchange for silk). It is quite possible that the goods in the Japanese tomb were traded to merchants in the middle east, who traded them again in India, who traded them further into Asia, to a merchant who eventually sold them in Japan. Or alternatively, that a Roman carried them to Asia for sale ... who knows? cheers, Mark

Re: Increased skill roll resolution I understand the desire for more granularity, but this seems more trouble than it's actually worth (though it's an interesting idea). Another, simpler, suggestion is to simply change the skill roll formula from (9+CHA/5) to, for example (7+CHA/3). So the outcome looks like (to pick 3 examples): CHA.......9+CHA/5...7+CHA/3...4+CHA/2 8..........11-..........10-...........8- 9..........11-..........10-...........9- 10.........11-..........10-..........9- 11.........11-..........11-..........10- 12.........11-..........11-..........10- 13.........12-..........11-..........11- 14.........12-..........12-..........11- 15.........12-..........12-..........12- 16.........12-..........12-..........12- 17.........12-..........13-..........13- 18.........13-..........13-..........13- 19.........13-..........13-..........14- 20.........13-..........14-..........14- etc. If you do this you should also change the 2 point skill level to your "base" level, which is whatever a CHA score of 10 gives you. The consequences of this change mean that in superheroic games, it's easy to get huge skill rolls (personally, I think this is a good thing: If someone has a DEX of 30, I think they should be able to perform superhuman feats of dexterity on a routine basis, but that's just me) If you are playing a heroic game, this isn't really an issue. There, the effect will be that poorer characteristics lead to a roll that is slightly less effective than under standard rules, but characteristics towards the upper end of the human normal range will have a better chance of success than under the standard rules. Combine this with the simple house rule that on a tie, the higher CHA wins, and you have a system where virtually every point counts. cheers, Mark

Re: Infertile Half-Breeds? Actually the "nephew" thing came about not just because of family ties (after all, brothers and uncles were just as likely to want benefices ...) but because it was a convenient way of explaining otherwise embarrassing young men. "So Alexander, who's that young guy who just started in Treasury?" "What? Who? Oh, umm, that's probably Cesare" "Cesare huh? Family member? Sure looks a lot like you." "Who? Cesare? Well, maybe, he's umm... my nephew! Yeah, that's it! Totally nephew" For a long time, having some young guy pop up and be introduced as "So-and so's nephew" meant lots of nudge-nudge-wink-wink-didn't-think-the-old-guy-had-it-in-him-it-wasn't-him-it-went-into-dumbass, etc etc. cheers, Mark

Re: "Neat" Pictures But ninjas are kewl! They flip out and kill people!!! Seriously, I think that's all the thought that went into that transformation. cheers, Mark

Re: Infertile Half-Breeds? All potentially true, all irrelevant. Back in the day, learned men speculated over whether matings between Europeans and Africans would produce fertile offspring (and there were some who asserted that the progeny would be infertile like mules). It didn't stop people making the beast with 2 backs across racial lines at every possible opportunity. I really doubt people in a mock-medival fantasy milieu would be any different. cheers, Mark

Re: Infertile Half-Breeds? I think more to the point, philosophy apart, the purpose of sex, for most people (beings?) is sex. Kids are a potential downstream effect, and the exaggerated care and consideration displayed for them in Western societies is not only specific to western societies, but also a relatively recent social change in those societies. In the relatively recent past, people who knew that their family had a risk for serious and even fatal congenital diseases continued to to make babies. Even today, it is within my personal experience that people do this, when IVF is out of their financial reach. So ... I honestly doubt that the fertility of any potential offspring would have the slightest effect on their behaviour. In fact, based on current and historical human behaviour, we can be pretty much certain of it. cheers, Mark

Re: Cool Guns for your Games

Re: Infertile Half-Breeds?

Re: Paladin Martial Art?