This is the highest praise from the best person to grant such praise.

This is the highest praise from the best person to grant such praise.

Originally shared by Nathan Paoletta

The most amazing email I've ever received.

(posted with permission)

from Who, Series 8, Episode 2:

from Who, Series 8, Episode 2:
"You don't like soldiers much, do you, doctor" - a soldier.
"You don't need to be liked, you've got all the guns" - The Doctor.

Not bad Moffet, not bad. Keep it up and maybe I'll stay interested.

I think I want personal taxes based on profitability, not income.

Am I doing this right? I'm pretty sure.

Am I doing this right? I'm pretty sure.

Last night, I ran Worlds In Peril with Davey Cruz , Jonathan Davis and George Austin . As per usual, let me stress: I have fantastic players.

For this session, I did a bunch more prep than normal. Probably more prep than I've done for any PbtA game. And, here's the kicker: it was still a bunch of fun.

I used Focal Point (http://www.enginepublishing.com/focal-point-the-complete-game-masters-guide-to-running-extraordinary-sessions). This book is fantastic. It has challenges for the GM.

You should buy it and everything they produce. I ... got the book from a friend and now feel bad. Is that stealing? That's probably stealing, and i should buy it.

Anyway, maybe more on my moral repugnance later. For now, here's what I puilled out of this book that made my game better:
1. We started very differently (violent corrupt cops kicked down the door for a midnight raid while serving a no-knock warrant on behalf of a mega corp.)

2. Theme music for the PCs, and some major NPCs. The cops had "Cops!", the villainous Crash Override had "Welcome To Our World", and the gym had "Eye of the Tiger". To inform everyone we were coming to the end, I turned on "The Final Countdown".
 
3. NPC hand out sheets for the players -- a more coherent version of my notes, with less information. Just there to jog memory. There have been several, and the cast continues to expand.

4, The 3/2 rule for NPCs. I didn't do this as much as I wanted to but, hey, there's always room for improvement.

5. I walked around much. While I've used this to great effect in years past, this space doesn't lend itself to it quite the way I want. The table is loooong.

6. "tweeted" recaps -- went around for short "last time on" bits. I've done this before, but the emphasis on it being short is brilliant.

Note: Buy this book.

Even with all this prep, quite a bit was on the spot and indicated I should have had a bit more prep.

For example: Crash Override was leading the cops -- from the rear. He has no super powers, is just a sellout hacker. We discover he can somehow teleport! We don't really know how.

We learn it is through his suit, which is made of computronium, and has a bit of a personality.  This was totally in the moment, and worked really well. He's also really bad at physical violence: our mentalist PC hit him with fists. Twice.

Some really great changes, thanks in part to this book.

My players want even more: a more complicated world, with them being pulled in more directions. There are children starving in Kenya, why are they focusing on Philly?

And we'll get to that. Hopefully next session.
http://www.enginepublishing.com/focal-point-the-complete-game-masters-guide-to-running-extraordinary-sessions

I seem to be doing a Wednesday G+ discussion. Today's topic: Fury Road.

I seem to be doing a Wednesday G+ discussion. Today's topic: Fury Road.

I had the pleasure of watching it for a second time last night, with the amazing Todd Sprang and Stan Smith. We'd all watched it before, and this was pretty great.

Armed with thoughts from Kelley Vanda 's recent G+ post on the subject, I had a very different experience than the first time. Still great, but with additional context floating around my head.

The tl;dr of Kelley's post is that Fury Road fails as a feminist movie because beauty is linked to agency; Mad, Furiosa, and the Wives are all beautiful. Even actor who plays Nux is beautiful. (google it, he really is. Jeebs.)

So, thoughts:
1. Guitar guy is fantastic. Still. He has no agency (very little), and when we see under the mask he is hideous.

2. The mother's that are hooked up the milking machines? They don't get much screen time, but they are the ones who turn the water on at the end. They are not beautiful, but as soon as Joe is out of the way, use their position to free everyone else.

3. I don't normally enjoy action movies. I usually can't follow them, and it just looks like a bunch of blackness. I don't know what happened in the Borne movies. I find it really hard to follow action, but not Mad Max. Maybe because it is so over the top, maybe because things are so telegraphed to the audience, I actually know who is fighting who, what they are doing, and often why. That's a big deal for me, and may color a lot of my view.

4. The use of beauty to differentiate good from bad and what I'll call PC-ness from not is, of course, not optimal. In a movie where so many normal ways to differentiate -- skin tone, gender, capability with a gun, age -- are spread out between the good and the evil, between the PCs and the NPCs, it remains the one differential.

Its true: we never do see a beautiful person lacking moral worth, and we rarely see an ugly person with it. Joe's physical problems are used to help us know he has moral problems. That is, his inability to breathe -- and his crotch guard -- both tell us that he's an asshole. The rotting feet of the leader of Gas Town are a sign that he is failing inside, too.

And I think that's key. And intentional. It isn't ideal, but is a shortcut to inform the audience. In a movie with so few other touchstones to our world, keeping one is probably worth while.

On the ride home, we were talking about how the three strongholds keep themselves in power: bullet farm and gas town are pretty obvious. But The Citadel?

They control the water and everything green. They grow all the crops. This puts them as a evil mirror to the Keepers. 

The Keepers of Seeds had a green space with many mothers; Joe has a defended high citadel with one father. The Keepers practice radical equality; Joe owns people.

Joe's source of power is a positive one; water and growing things. That is, beauty. And yet, this is spoiled under Joe's reign; the beautiful things are kept locked away and used to maintain power.

Which, maybe, brings us back full circle: Joe uses beautiful things to perpetuate his reign. The wives, the mother's milk, the water. Everything that forms the basis of his power is beautiful, and he uses it to create horrors.

There's about where I am. I realize this isn't quite setup for discussion, but hopefully one will break out.

Yesterday, I did a 5k on a treadmill in the morning before going white water rafting.

Yesterday, I did a 5k on a treadmill in the morning before going white water rafting.

Today, I woke up feeling like a truck hit me.

From The End of All Things, by John Scalzi:

From The End of All Things, by John Scalzi:

Aliens with multiple identified sexes discussing humans:
"Humans generally prefer to not be called 'it' whenever possible."
"The things you learn about people while you're on the job!"

An Alien thinking about earth:
"... from the United Nations, a diplomatic corporation that was not actually the government of the Earth, but which pretended to be for situations like this."

That's some fine stuff, from a dude who gets it.

I've attempted to say this in a couple other threads, and I'm not sure if I've said it well.

I've attempted to say this in a couple other threads, and I'm not sure if I've said it well. I'm gonna put this down here to see if it makes sense.  This goes to a lot of how my mind words, the powerful proof by absurdity.

Recently, a tiny little publishing house that has a tiny little industry corner (more or less) pulled a repugnant title from its shelves. There were cries of "Right on!", and ridiculous cries of "censorship".

In discussion with anyone calling it censorship, I would do the following:
1. Grant the premise. -- that is, that DTRPG censored some asshole
2. Ask what activities are under this definition. -- which amounts to choosing what books to put on the shelf.
3. Change domains with an analogy -- if Amazon or B&N does the same thing, is it censorship?

At that point, the asshole has to either bite the bullet (Yes! B&N cannot curate!), have a definition of censorship that has no particular bite, or withdraw the claim.

All three are fine. Which is to say: Go ahead and grant the ridiculous premise. Then follow to where it leads.

So, here's a question. It is ... inspired ... by recent events.

So, here's a question. It is ... inspired ... by recent events.

To what extent, if any, can a private corporation have responsibilities similar to a government?

I'll put my first thoughts in the comments, and will be hoping for disagreement!

The DTRPG fiasco is valuable* at least to the degree that it has made people think about the role of private...

The DTRPG fiasco is valuable* at least to the degree that it has made people think about the role of private corporations in public life.

*Sure, it is also shitty. No question there.