Two
All day, I've been wanting to go on blazing about how this and that, and this and that, about a certain game world I've been to too long ago. Then I took my medication. I'm feeling so much calmer. I'm also having a full-blown psychotic episode. Calmer while psychotic......
I keep saying that I probably would have sent me there too. It's funny. I had a guy in my life some years ago. I had a, shall we say, confrontation with his daughter. Needless to say he was upset. Some 20 years later, I called him to explain why I did what I did. (And you think me going on about a game world for so many years is bad) When I explained to him why I did what I did, he laughed out loud for a good minute. He didn't exactly say it, but he kind of implied that, if he were me, he would have done exactly what I did in the situation. Even though it was absolutely the wrong response.
What I'm saying is, I don't blame you. It was just a coincidence the subject of that movie. It was also just a coincidence that it was the one and only world which would do that to me. And I probably would have done exactly the same thing, but for somewhat different reasons.
(Doing Therapy)
You've got me curious about the confrontation with the daughter, but I'm not going to pry.
It sounds like the medication is effective. The question is, does it help you deal with your problems or prevent you from dealing with them? But I don't know that there's anyway anyone, except possibly your psychiatrist, could determine the answer to that one.
--M. J. Young
The confrontation with the daughter was nothing more than an exchange of words and a misunderstanding. Nothing serious.
Two
It sounds like the medication is effective. The question is, does it help you deal with your problems or prevent you from dealing with them? But I don't know that there's anyway anyone, except possibly your psychiatrist, could determine the answer to that one.
MJ, do you need a psychiatrist to tell you that something makes you feel better than you were without it? I think I would be the only person in the world really capable of making that determination. You didn't comment about November 19th. I was kind of disappointed. I listened to that recording in its entirety for the first time since I made it. Six years later, the exact same conditions, I'm calm, relaxed, and capable of forming intelligent, coherent thoughts. If you heard it......
Also, I want to be clear about something. I can think something is fair, reasonable and completely my fault, and still think the other person is sadistic for doing it. Kyler told me it's acceptable for referees to lie about dice rolls, so long as it is in the player's favor. Which is just meant as an example of the great many ways he could have saved me from my own stupidity. Just saying is all. And he admitted he took pleasure in it. Was it fair? Absolutely. Was it completely reasonable? Definitely. Was it my fault? Without question. Is Adam still, in my opinion, a sadistic jerk for doing it? Yup!!!!!! And I'm allowed to that. I just wanted to be clear.
(Doing Therapy)
MJ, do you need a psychiatrist to tell you that something makes you feel better than you were without it?
Perhaps then my concern is that I do not think that feeling better is always better for you. If I have pain and they decide to put me on morphine, which will eventually kill me, I do not think that is as good a choice as putting me on ibuprofen, which will not do as much for the pain but will not harm me as much, while they figure out why I have pain and try to fix it. If my house is burning down and the pain from the heat is unbearable, I can take enough Percocet to render me unconscious and pain-free or I can try to exit the building. Immediate comfort may be inimical to long-term benefit.
I know someone who always feels better when he's completely drunk. I'm sure he's destroying his liver, pickling his brain, and shortening his life expectancy. That he feels better does not mitigate the fact that he is killing himself.
You didn't comment about November 19th. I was kind of disappointed.
November 19th was a Saturday. It happens that I had a thought I wanted to post, so I went directly as possible to that thread and posted it; but I saw nothing else on the site that day. By the time I saw the thread it was old news, and I'm not sure what I would have said anyway. I would not have offered an alcoholic toast, since that would have been disingenuous of me--I do not drink alcohol save when forced by societal pressures on very special occasions.
Kyler told me it's acceptable for referees to lie about dice rolls, so long as it is in the player's favor. Which is just meant as an example of the great many ways he could have saved me from my own stupidity.
That's certainly the way some people play. If you'd read the oft-cited articles at Places to Go, People to Be, particularly Theory 101: System and the Shared Imagined Space, you would know that whether or not a referee is allowed to fudge die rolls is part of the system, that is, one of the aspects of the social contract negotiated between the participants through game play. Some referees never do it; some barely even look at the dice because they already know what they want to have happen. I will never say what it is I do, because if I say I never fudge rolls someone will say that that is harsh and I ought to cut the players some slack, and if I say I sometimes do someone will say that in this or that particular instant I (or some other referee) ought to have done so. As referee I already have tremendous power in deciding when there ought to be a die roll; if I have made that decision, I, too, ought to be bound by the results.
And he admitted he took pleasure in it....Is Adam still, in my opinion, a sadistic jerk for doing it?
You are entitled to your opinion, of course, and if the answer is that in your opinion Adam is a sadistic jerk, then it is true that this is your opinion. If it is your opinion that Barrack Obama is a socialist, or Nazi, or communist, or on the other hand that he is the great hope of the future of the United States and the Democratic Party, then this, too, is your opinion, and is as likely to be true and as valuable to the rest of us as whatever went down your bathroom drains today.
--M. J. Young
I know someone who always feels better when he's completely drunk. I'm sure he's destroying his liver, pickling his brain, and shortening his life expectancy. That he feels better does not mitigate the fact that he is killing himself.
I gotta be honest with you. My family has a genetic defect with our hearts. No member of my father's family has lived to see their (51st, I believe) birthday for several generations. Only thing that can be done about it is a heart transplant. I'm not taking a heart away from someone that would really want it. I don't know if I have the defect, I don't want to know if I have the defect. But every time I fall asleep, I expect not to wake up. I'm honestly surprised I've lived as long as I have. My father was only 32. I'm 34. Dying is the least of my concerns.
So, in all honestly, I see smoking cigarettes and drinking as living my life to the fullest. Experiencing the effects of God's creations.
This clay shell will live as long as God intended it to, no more, no less, no matter what I do. If it wasn't a heart attack from being an out of shape chain smoker, I would have got hit by a bus whilst taking my morning jog, ya know?
I would not have offered an alcoholic toast, since that would have been disingenuous of me--I do not drink alcohol save when forced by societal pressures on very special occasions.
I didn't say an alcoholic toast, I said a toast. I don't care if it's ice water. Seriously. It's just a big deal to me is all.
And about fudging the rolls, like I said, I was just saying. I'm sure you will agree that an intelligent, creative referee can save a player from the most stupid of actions. Adam didn't. You could read something into that statement if you chose. I think I would be sorely tempted to. Or at least do it so that the player got some advance warning they were going to crash, do you want to continue? Just saying.
(Doing Therapy)
Two
To me, it was like I didn't make a leap of faith. I've got unconfirmed belief that I might end up in traction in the next world. On the other hand, I might heal. I don't know. I swore I would never warn Pearl Harbor. Do I make the leap of faith, or do I warn them to ensure it doesn't happen? If I had made the leap of faith, I would likely have been killed and healed in the attack.
I swore I would never warn Pearl Harbor. I mean, what are the odds of an oath like that being put to the test, ya know?
(Doing Therapy)
I'm sure you will agree that an intelligent, creative referee can save a player from the most stupid of actions.
Yes, it is always possible for a referee to save a player from his own stupidity and make a story happen that is more to everyone's liking. That's called illusionism, and although there are players who enjoy it most in the hobby consider it dysfunctional play. If you do something stupid, the best way to let you know is to let you suffer the consequences.
As Eric has often suggested, that's even more true in Multiverser, because you don't have to worry about what you'll do if the player character kills himself.
*****
Interestingly, someone sent me a clip about Pearl Harbor that arrived in today's e-mail (along with another of your annoyingly persistent letters on the subject). I thought part of it perhaps would be of interest here.
Sunday, December 7th, 1941--Admiral Chester Nimitz was attending a concert in Washington D.C.
He was paged and told there was a phone call for him.
When he answered the phone, it was President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He told Admiral Nimitz that he (Nimitz) would now be the Commander of the Pacific Fleet.
Admiral Nimitz flew to Hawaii to assume command of the Pacific Fleet.
He landed at Pearl Harbor on Christmas Eve, 1941.
There was such a spirit of despair, dejection and defeat--you would have thought the Japanese had already won the war.
On Christmas Day, 1941, Adm. Nimitz was given a boat tour of the destruction wrought on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese.
Big sunken battleships and navy vessels cluttered the waters every where you looked.
As the tour boat returned to dock, the young helmsman of the boat asked, "Well Admiral, what do you think after seeing all this destruction?"
Admiral Nimitz's reply shocked everyone within the sound of his voice.
Admiral Nimitz said, "The Japanese made three of the biggest mistakes an attack force could ever make, or God was taking care of America. Which do you think it was?"
Shocked and surprised, the young helmsman asked, "What do mean by saying the Japanese made the three biggest mistakes an attack force ever made?"
Nimitz explained:
Mistake number one: the Japanese attacked on Sunday morning. Nine out of every ten crewmen of those ships were ashore on leave. If those same ships had been lured to sea and been sunk--we would have lost 38,000 men instead of 3,800.
Mistake number two: when the Japanese saw all those battleships lined in a row, they got so carried away sinking those battleships, they never once bombed our dry docks opposite those ships.
If they had destroyed our dry docks, we would have had to tow every one of those ships to America to be repaired. As it is now, the ships are in shallow water and can be raised. One tug can pull them over to the dry docks, and we can have them repaired and at sea by the time we could have towed them to America.
And I already have crews ashore anxious to man those ships.
Mistake number three: Every drop of fuel in the Pacific theater of war is on top of the ground in storage tanks five miles away over that hill.
One attack plane could have strafed those tanks and destroyed our fuel supply.
That's why I say the Japanese made three of the biggest mistakes an attack force could make, or God was taking care of America.
So it really is a matter of degree, and the outcome could have been much worse--and probably could have been much better without impacting the decision to go to war.
--M. J. Young
So it really is a matter of degree, and the outcome could have been much worse--and probably could have been much better without impacting the decision to go to war.
We know 100% absolutely without question or doubt that The United States wins World War 2 if Pearl Harbor is destroyed.
We DON'T know 100% absolutely without question or doubt that The United States would win if it wasn't.
That's more than enough reason to let it be destroyed.
(Doing Therapy)
Ah, but according to Admiral Nimitz, it was not destroyed, and thus apparently what we know is that The United States will win if Pearl Harbor is attacked but not destroyed.
--M. J. Young
I saw something similar to that. It "Proved" that the attack on the World Trade Centers was a failure from a tactical standpoint. Similar thinking. Not as many were killed as could have been, not as much damage as could have been done, etc. Did you scare the citizens half to death? Then your TERROR ATTACK was a success, no matter how you slice it.
MJ, there's something that I've learned. If you change the outcome of an event, you are taking responsibility for it. You are responsible. If you do nothing, it's out of your hands.
If I do nothing, and the United States loses, it was in no way my fault. I can rest easy. No matter what happens, I am in no way responsible.
If I warn them and the United States loses, it could very well be my fault. Why even take the chance? Or would you WANT to potentially be responsible for the United States losing?
I don't want to be responsible. For anything.
(Doing Therapy)
Two
To me, it's so simple I can't believe anyone would want to warn them.
Do nothing and you're guaranteed an acceptable outcome. (Or do you not find a US victory acceptable?)
Warn them and possibly screw things up forever. (Say whatever you want. You don't know absolutely that it wouldn't result in the US losing WW2)
How much more simple could non-involvement be made?
Historical worlds are the epitome of reason to not get involved, for this reason above all others.
John, you have several problems with your mode of thinking.
First, landing in Pearl Harbor is no different from landing in TerraNova: there is a world, there is a history, you are now part of it. You cannot know what the future would have been had you not arrived.
Second, even when you are in an "alternate history" world like Pearl Harbor, you cannot know what is different. It might be that the United States will lose the war if you don't warn them. It is not the same world.
Third, if you believe that you are responsible for the consequences of your actions, you must also accept that you are responsible for the consequences of your inactions--that is, it is your choices that matter, whether you choose to act one way or another or to enter a catatonic state for the duration. Not preventing the murder you could have prevented is perhaps not as bad as being the murderer, but it does in some sense make you guilty.
--M. J. Young
First, landing in Pearl Harbor is no different from landing in TerraNova: there is a world, there is a history, you are now part of it. You cannot know what the future would have been had you not arrived.
Ah, but I can and do know that it would have happened whether I was there or not. My presence changes nothing. Contrary to what you may believe, versers are not inter dimensional police officers. Magehammer has become a mercenary.
Two
Not preventing the murder you could have prevented is perhaps not as bad as being the murderer, but it does in some sense make you guilty.
I seriously wonder how many players save the Dancing Princesses because it's what they are "supposed" to do, and not because it's what they feel they would really do. I did what I felt I would really do and I don't regret it for a moment. In that case, I was no more guilty than every other NPC that didn't go to the castle. Even less guilty, really. It's their home. I'm just a visitor. If they don't care enough to do anything, why should I? And I'll tell you the truth, if it had been anything less than hellspawn demons, I probably would have let it continue. Hellspawns have no place in the human world.
(Doing Therapy)
You cannot know what the future would have been had you not arrived.Ah, but I can and do know that it would have happened whether I was there or not. My presence changes nothing.
Which proves you learn nothing from experience. You were in Columbus, Ohio, the city of your own birth. It was not the same place you had been moments before, and the fact that it was a few years in the future did not explain the differences. That should have alerted you to the fact that being in a familiar place does not mean it is the same place, or that the same events will occur or have occurred. For all you knew, the Japanese might already have had atomic weapons, and been planning to obliterate most of Hawaii. Or they might not be coming. Then again, you could be in something like a holodeck simulation, none of it real at all.
You make your best guess and go with it.
You speak of every other NPC who did not go to the castle--by which I assume you mean the aging blacksmith for whom you apprenticed, his wife, the blind beggar in the village, the children. You do not know how many indigs tried and failed, or died, trying to save the princesses. You only know that no one succeeded. That means you don't know how many lives you might have saved had you taken action before you did.
Yeah, maybe there are players who say, "I see the story, let me follow it." But then, even they wouldn't do it if part of that wasn't also "If I follow the story, I might be the hero."
--M. J. Young
For all you knew, the Japanese might already have had atomic weapons, and been planning to obliterate most of Hawaii. Or they might not be coming. Then again, you could be in something like a holodeck simulation, none of it real at all.
You've said that there's a town not far from you where you've had three cars break down, never to run again. You've also said that you are hesitant to enter and even avoid this town if at all possible.
Why is that? Surely a Mensa member and college graduate doesn't believe that the town is cursed specifically to make his cars break down. Rationally and intelligently, you know it's just a coincidence. Yet, you still avoid the town. Why is that? Because it's an irrational fear. No reason based in fact for it, it just is. You shouldn't be afraid to enter that town, no matter how many cars break down there. You know intelligently that the town had nothing to do with it. It's your irrational fear.
Many, many moons ago, I got it into my head that it was a 100% certainty that the United States would lose WW2 if Pearl Harbor were not completely destroyed. After all this time of talking about it, I see that it (probably) has no basis in reality. However, it is still my irrational fear. It's also the reason we're still talking about it.
The point is MJ, I'll think it's a good idea to warn Pearl Harbor the day you fearlessly go out of your way to drive through that town at every opportunity.
Yeah, maybe there are players who say, "I see the story, let me follow it." But then, even they wouldn't do it if part of that wasn't also "If I follow the story, I might be the hero."
"I didn't want to be called a hero. I just wanted to live."
Fernando Parrado, member of the Uruguayan rugby team which crashed in the Andes Mountains in 1972. See also the movie and book "Alive". He was one of the two members who breached the Andes Mountains to get help and save the lives of his 14 remaining friends. In other words, a hero.
Two
You make your best guess and go with it.
Then, by not warning them, I would have been doing exactly this. The USA on our world won WW2 after the destruction of Pearl Harbor. Best guess, this world's USA will too.
Give me one good reason NOT to think that.
You only know that no one succeeded. That means you don't know how many lives you might have saved had you taken action before you did.
I'm sorry, but the adage "If one life is saved it's worth the cost" is completely bogus. How many lives would be saved by limiting motor vehicle ownership strictly to emergency services? Would you think it was worth the cost?
Could I have saved lives by going sooner? Perhaps, but it wouldn't have been worth it to me. They knew the risk of failure was death.
(Doing Therapy)
I have repeatedly said, God helps those that help themselves. My line of thinking is quite clear. I rely on myself, and no one else in life, in the verse where everything is possible, I call apon a God, only in dire situations. I don't think anyone can dispute, that the way I live my life, my playstyle, or my character deviate very much from those tenants. I make exceptions for kids, who haven't been given a choice or aren't old enough to make their own decisions. If you are an adult, I have no obligation to help or hurt you based on anything other than how you treat me.
How many lives would be saved when the surgeon has an accident at work and his on-call replacement doesn't have a motor vehicle to drive to the hospital?
How many lives would be saved when all the people who ordinarily would get a ride from someone else now need to call an ambulance (and wait for it to arrive, which would actually be on average longer due to the fact that there is a higher demand for ambulances)?
How many lives would be saved when we no longer have shipping trucks, therefore medical supplies are no longer shipped?
How many lives would be saved when instead of rushing to the pharmacy to fill the prescription I hadn't realized ran out I need to call an ambulance since I'll never make it in time?
Yes. It seems that limiting motor vehicle usage only to emergency services would save a lot of lives.
We haven't even touched on the fact that just because I can't drive a motor vehicle doesn't mean I won't be in the street. Could be walking, biking, skateboarding, rollerblading, horseback riding -- no matter which I'm doing, it's probably going to take me longer to get out of the way than it would if I were in a car.
Would you propose getting rid of the gasoline generally? If not, it's very easy to hook up a horizontal shaft engine to a bicycle; if so, it's nothing but a thing to alter the engine and brew your own fuel in the basement. And hey, in this alternate reality they'll probably make alcoholic beverages illegal -- think of all the lives that'll save! -- so you can make fuel and sell moonshine.
Maybe you could brew the alcohol from hemp. Hit two birds with one stoned.
Yes. It seems that limiting motor vehicle usage only to emergency services would save a lot of lives.
How many people are killed each year in car crashes? Put that number against what you put down. Even if it was exactly as you describe, I bet the net effect would still be lives saved.
Still not worth doing to save the lives though.
(Doing Therapy)
Two
Maybe you could brew the alcohol from hemp. Hit two birds with one stoned.
Actually, you could make the hemp into fuel, if I'm not mistaken. Run the resin through a fractionating tower. One thing that will come off is called Hash Oil. I don't know very much about it, but I do believe that it's flammable. If it's flammable, an engine can be made to run on it. Be it steam, internal combustion, or something not yet invented.
And the best part is, there's no problem with pollution. Everyone is more than happy to breathe the exhaust.
(Doing Therapy)
Adam, you believe you weren't being sadistic because there was so much worse you could have done. No argument there. I'm sure you could have done much worse. However, the definition of sadism is not how badly you hurt the person, but if you took pleasure in it. You've admitted that you did.
If you use the definition that you could have hurt them even more, then no one is ever being sadistic, because there's really no limit to how badly you could hurt someone. The people of The Spanish Inquisition never hurt anyone as badly as they could have.
I just wanted to clear that up for you.
(Doing Therapy)
I took as much pleasure in hurting your fictional character, in a meaningless game, as you do leeching off of society and smoking weed. When you spend the time you do posting here, making arguments, into contributing to society, I will revisit any statements you make in your pseudo-psychological analysis. Call me crazy, but I don't accept a mental health diagnosis, from a crazy person, thanks. :P
I took as much pleasure in hurting your fictional character, in a meaningless game, as you do leeching off of society and smoking weed.
Then you must have REALLY ENJOYED IT you sadistic bastard.
Call me crazy, but I don't accept a mental health diagnosis, from a crazy person, thanks. :P
How many times do I have to tell you? I'm mentally ill, not crazy. The difference is if you're aware of your own problems. I am aware of my own mental problems. Are you aware of your own mental problems Adam?
(Doing Therapy)
Call me crazy, but I don't accept a mental health diagnosis, from a crazy person, thanks. :P
"Call me crazy? Man, you make my day. My state of residence is disarray."
DC Talk.
(Doing Therapy)
MJ, do you have any idea what it's like to have irrational rage? I really hope not. It's not powered by a lack of understanding. I understand perfectly. It's powered by irrational thinking. Irrational logic. I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING!!!!! It has NOTHING to do with that. It's irrationality. It's blind rage. I really hope you have no idea what it's like.
The irrational side and the logical side are constantly at war. It's irrationality. Not lack of understanding. I know I'm being irrational. Problem is, when you're irrational, you don't always realize it. That's why it's called Irrationality. I UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY!!!!!! The irrationality is overwhelming sometimes. For some reason, knowing you're being completely irrational doesn't help to overcome it.
Understanding and irrationality are at war. There's not much I can do about it. Just take it in stride and know that I don't mean it.
Everyone knows what it is like to have irrational rage. We learn to control it and not act on it.
--M. J. Young
That's what I'm trying to do. I'm sorry. I'd give just about anything to take back a lot of the things I've said to you. It's like, in the moment of irrationality, everything seems perfectly reasonable. It seems absolutely right to cuss out one of your most respected friends. I'm gonna beat this. I'm gonna get this straight. I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING!!! It's irrationality.
It never once occurred to you that it was just a coincidence that Final Countdown was about Pearl Harbor, did it? Seriously, I want to know.
If your only objective was to test my non-involvement philosophy, then perhaps Adam did do the right thing. If I'm in custody, it's easier to warn them than not to. However, if I don't warn them, you still don't know if I'm dedicated. It could just be you picked a world I had sworn not to get involved in. You're no more certain if they're dedicated than with any other opening. In other words, it's not so effective as you're making it sound. And it's certainly NOT the ONLY WAY to put it to the test.
On the other hand, if your objectives were to tell a good story, have a good time playing, make friends all around, not piss off your player, and not still be talking about it years later, then he most certainly did NOT do the right thing.
You can say whatever you want about how the crash was my fault, because I'll probably agree with you. That doesn't change the fact that the crash wouldn't have happened if a different opening had been used. Ultimately, it was Adam's fault. There wouldn't have been a jeep crash if there was no jeep and no MP to crash, now would there? Who likes to get arrested? Who likes police? Who likes having a gun shoved in their face? Who likes having a complete stranger coming out of nowhere, giving them orders and more or less kidnapping them? NOBODY!!!!!!!!
I have very specific reasons for my dislike of police, but there's no one on earth that enjoys being arrested. That's just common sense. Come on, you should have known better than that!!!!! I'm seriously surprised that no one else ever did something like I did. They must not have been playing their characters completely accurately. That's the only explanation I can think of for that. At least I played my character accurately.
Bottom line, I don't see how any thinking, rational person can even try to argue that Adam "Did the right thing." If you still insist that he did, you hereby lose all rights to complain about anything further that happens. By saying he did the right thing, you're agreeing that the continuing arguments are acceptable to you. That wouldn't have happened with a different opening, now would it?
If you reply, you do so at your own risk.
More than one post in a row. Read them all.
God isn't "Perfect" He's just never wrong.
OOS Dextroland.
(More intense psychosis therapy. Trust me, you don't want to know more than that.)
I think the dice are the reason players don't do more incredibly stupid stuff. The dice are tangible. They represent your chances. I honestly wasn't expecting Adam to actually roll. But I do know I would be doing that.
I think actually seeing the dice is what stops a lot of gamers from doing really stupid stuff. In a way, that worked perfectly. Out of character, I never for a moment thought the dice would be rolled. In character, I would have been cocky with the cop, and not realize I could crash it. Worked perfectly to get an accurate character portrayal.
I played my character accurately. For that, credit must be given.
OOS Dextroland.
John, you have to realize your character is just a character and any misfortune it gets is not an attack on you, but on the character you play, which is fictional. Good fiction needs conflict.
And it is sad that you need(ed) to discuss this in two places at once. This is the old forum, leave it be because it's actually an archive.
I will not reply on any reply.
I was speaking in character and out.
In character, (In real life, if you prefer) you're not thinking "50% chance to succeed, 45% chance to fail, 5% chance to botch" Out of character, you see the dice, and it represents that. Maybe it just sounds different to me.
John, this is a long-time issue in gaming. It's probably been a long time since you didn't read my page on ADR's and Surv's, and a long time since I actually read it myself, but it raised these kinds of issues.
In short, any game that simulates combat is likely to include multiple variables based on character choices--how many times can you attack with this weapon, how likely are you to hit, what is the range of damage you would do if you do hit? Similarly, defenses might be divided according to how much damage you can take, whether you have defenses that reduce damage, and whether you can reduce the chance of being hit.
The character makes these decisions intuitively. He has used the long sword, the short sword, the battle axe, in practice and in battle. He has learned from use how fast each weapon is, how much damage it does, how well he can use it. Similarly, even though different characters defend differently, we get an impression of who is more likely to walk away from a fight by seeing what happens when they fight.
The player doesn't have this to the same degree. He sees the dice hit the table; he is given these factors not as intuitively-learned experience but as hard numbers. We might force him to feel it, as it were--learn which weapons are better by seeing how they work in combat, using them over a long period. We can't really give him the practice experience, though, and that's part of it. So instead we give him numbers, and let him work with the numbers--how much more likely am I to hit with this as opposed to that? How much more damage does this do? How many attacks do I get in a minute? If I do the math, which is the better weapon in most situations, and what would make it different?
So you're right: knowing the math is different from having the experience. On the other hand, the player can't have the experience the same as the character can, so he has to be given the math to translate into the experience.
Does that make sense?
--M. J. Young
Actually, I was referring to a specific instances of TK pulsing a certain police officer. Whilst reading that action, you were thinking "Flatline bias, low amateur skill, high chance to botch" and mentally declared it a stupid action.
My character (In real life, if you prefer) knows none of that. He's thinking "At least I can annoy this cop for a few minutes"
Out of character, it sounded too funny to roll for, so I wasn't thinking of dice at all.
Those two produced a realistic situation. In character (in real life) cockiness, coupled with out of character ignorance of the game system. If we had been at a table, I stated that action, and the ref told me to pick up the dice, I would have changed my mind on it instantly. That would have made it more real, and produced an unrealistic situation.
Besides, you said that your characters were always very careful. That means you have NO IDEA what it's really like to be a cocky n00b.
In my mind though, that crash represents the end of my rookiedom as a player.
Oh yeah, and you said some time ago "A hundred other players would have run through that particular scenario better because they would not have taken an immediate dislike for the MP that found them." I'm calling BULL on that statement. EVERYONE who gets picked up by an MP takes an immediate dislike for the MP. They might not act on it, but they do. No one likes getting arrested. No one likes having a gun shoved in their face. No one likes to have a guy come out of nowhere and start barking orders that them. No one likes being kidnapped. The only difference between the MP and a kidnapper is the MP is legal. I am seriously surprised that no one ever did something like that before. The only explanation I can come up with is that they weren't really playing their characters accurately. This was my attempt to explain why they weren't playing their characters accurately. I bet a lot more people would do that in real life than would state it at a gaming table. That's half the reason I think that is a crap opening. NOBODY LIKES POLICE!!!! That's just common sense!!! Come on MJ, use that Mensa brain of yours. There is no one on God's green earth that likes being arrested, especially when they don't even know they've committed a crime just by versing in. The reason that has never happened before is because no one else was playing their character completely accurately.
AT LEAST I PLAYED MY CHARACTER ACCURATELY!!!!!!!!
Besides, you said that your characters were always very careful. That means you have NO IDEA what it's really like to be a cocky n00b.
Well, that might be true. I started my gaming career behind the screens as a Dungeon Master, and it was a few weeks before I had a character in Metamorphosis Alpha. That was a real learning experience, as the referee decided it was easier to give me amnesia than to create a backstory for me. Then a few weeks later I had a Gamma World character, and that is a terribly dangerous fatal game (E. R. Jones ran it one time, rolled a random encounter, saw a player character killed in seconds, and decided it was much to dangerous a game world for his liking--probably a major reason why he came up with the idea of characters versing out instead of dying). I learned to be very careful. I carried that into other games.
On the other hand, I am probably relatively careful in reality, so it's hard to say.
As to liking police, they make me nervous. I've been arrested more than once on various minor problems, and been ticketed more than once. I've also been pulled over for stupid reasons. The most recent was when I was driving out to pick up Evan at his girlfriend's, and as I made the last turn I saw that the car pulling out across the way was a state trooper. When he pulled me over he said that I was hugging the fog line--which I admitted I was, because I knew there was a police car behind me and that it had often happened that police cars pulled out abruptly to pass, so I like to be out of the way--and that my third brake light was out. That latter concerned me, until the next day when I discovered that a '93 Jimmy doesn't have a third brake light. I almost wish he'd given me a ticket for it.
But I've been in accidents, and it's good to have the police on the scene.
And when I've been arrested, I've never fought. I have at times wondered what it would take to commit suicide by police weapon, but that's the kind of thing in which I always worry that I would actually live, and so be the worse for it. So if I am arrested, I generally go quietly and hope I can find a way to fix matters once I'm in custody.
--M. J. Young
You assumed that I knew about the bombing. There's a very small, minuscule, tiny, subatomic, infinitesimal part of me that can kind of sort of maybe see some of your reasoning, but seriously. As much as I talk about guns, as many nonsense emails as I write, as much as I talk about random topics, isn't reasonable, just possible, that I would have mentioned an interest in military history before then? I know you're into gaming. You know I'm generous and here to help. Having someone with a vast knowledge of military history and strategy would be a godsend to a game designer. I just did an analysis of a movie based on Pearl Harbor. I have every reason in the world to babble incessantly about it to no end. If I knew the minutia of the attack, don't you think there would have been a bombardment of emails about the bombing? You still don't know me. You don't know me at all. You knew I was interested in TIME TRAVEL!!!!!!!! You had no reason whatsoever to think for a moment that I knew a damn thing about the bombing!!!! If I was interested in the Pearl Harbor bombing and had a vast knowledge of it, wouldn't I have been flooding your inbox with trivial nonsense about it? It proves that you would rather assume something than go with your known facts!!!!!! You don't know me. If you knew me as well as you seem to think, you never would have for a moment thought doing an analysis of Final Countdown meant that I had an interest in Pearl Harbor. You would have known that I have an interest in TIME TRAVEL!!!! Changing the past is a bad thing. A man I've known as Mr. Young instilled that in me. You had no reason whatsoever to think I knew the attack, and every reason in the world to think I WOULDN'T want to warn them!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW ME!!!!
Seriously, I want an answer. Did it never occur to you that my interest in Final Countdown had nothing whatsoever to do with Pearl Harbor? That it was just a coincidence? Seriously, I want to know. I gotta get this straight. This is my one unanswered question.
Don't get me wrong, I probably would have sent me there too. Inspired by Final Countdown in a different way. I'm surprised I didn't see it coming. The reason you sent me to Adam was because you thought I knew the attack. I might even have looked for a ref that knew the attack, regardless of whether I thought the player knew it. But, if not for that assumption, you might have been running the game. You might have sent someone else to Adam. You gotta admit, if you had been running it, it might not have gone so badly. I don't think sending a completely newbie gamer to an untested ref was the smartest decision, but given the circumstances, I really can see why. I might have done the same thing. Regardless of intent, the result would have been the same. The point though, is that Mr. Young does not know John "A1nut" Cross nearly as well as he seems to think.
You're one of my most respected friends. I'd give just about anything, short of selling my soul and a few other things to take back a lot of the things I have said to you. My mom trusts you enough to let you stay at her house should you ever come to Columbus. I really love you. You're too patient, I think. Makes you a target. You don't get rid of the bullies by being a pacifist. I don't argue with Eric. Not for very long, anyway. He might just be better at explaining things. Or it could be something else. THANK YOU for allowing the transfer!!!! If there exists another world which could screw me up like Pearl Harbor, it was probably Terminator. I keep thinking about how I made Sarah suffer and stuff. I can't wait until I'm reincarnated into the life of the John "A1nut" that completes that world. I love you man. Ya know, I know you think about offing yourself. I do too. Part of me wants to die just so I will no longer be a burden to you. There's a part of you that wants to die so you don't have to deal with me, I just know it. We're soulmates, my friend.
(Doing Therapy)