Hitdice's page

Look, if it weren't for nerd rage, some of wouldn't have any rage at all. :P

Don't feel bad Doodlebug, that's the most realistic ending I've ever seen to a prison break/prisoners of war type-scenario. :P

Shifty, I don't disagree with you about nerdrage and posting on her Facebook page, but from what I understand she was given a dignified out first, and claimed it was all just some wacky coincidence.

My experience is with self publishing min-comics, but just because I've never made enough to cover the booth fees at a convention (sad but true) doesn't mean I can use other people's IP with impunity.

Permits? Stamped books?! What is this, a dictatorship?!?

Doodlebug, just read Picnic on Paradise and you'll see it done right. (But, sadly out of print.)

It depends who holds the actual copyright on said map (or who actually painted the painted the fricken painting!) The thing is, as IP law works these are pretty simple questions: Just because theres a map from decades ago doesn't, like, put it in the public domain, automatically.

Some f**king coincidence though, right? Using other peoples paintings just totally undermines that legal defense.

Well, speaking as an amateur cartoonist, using other peoples's artwork is a Douchebag Move {tm}

You should, at the very least, be able to draw a new map and give all the zones (duchies, principalities or whatever) new names. That's, like, Fan Fiction 101 right there!

Pippi wrote:

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

Pippi, would it offend you if I said that my empathy for the aggrieved woman sci-fi author declined significantly when she opined "and if I helped strengthen the sisterhood and made other women feel better, then it was all worth it"?

I mean, how is that not sexist? Does that clue you in on what I mean by "wanting to have it both ways" and the rampant hypocrisy so often on display?

I wouldn't be offended, but I'd be a little confused at how this seems to be hypocrital? What exactly is hypocritical about it? I hope this doesn't come off as confrontational, I just honestly don't see it.

It makes me wonder how you define "sexism", too. There's no corallary that states "if women feel better, men must feel worse" or, "if sisterhood is strengthened, bortherhood is weakened".

So do a little replacement Pippi. Let's say the original authors said "If I helped strengthen the brotherhood [of male sci-fi writers] ...." would that give you pause?

Would that ever even need to be said? The Brotherhood of Male Sci-Fi Writers needs no strengthening, like, whatsoever.

On the other hand, I miss Forry J Ackerman.

LOL, I love all this constant hyper-analylsis of our "misogynist" tendencies in any number of hobbies, genres or whatever. The cries of "misogynist!" run rampant when any photo or picture of a girl is created that drips with raw sexuality. "That's not fair to women!" I hear. "Women don't want to be presented that way! We are more than just sex objects!"

Then I go to the beach and look around.

Right. Sure.

AD, this was your first post on the thread. It talks about a bunch of things that aren't all that connected with the thread topic.

@ Doodlebug:
Dude, I think you just double ninja-ed me! :P

Hitdice wrote:

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

Werthead wrote:

This appears to be a logical fallacy. A woman not wanting to be treated like a sex object is fully compatible with the fact that, on a beach on a really hot day, they may also not want to wear fur coats. One is about objectification and the other is about comfort.

Yes, it is obvious that in the area of outdoor comfort we are restricted to wearing tiny little butt-floss thongs with postage stamp sized boob-covers or else we must wear a fur coat.

Your logic is infallible.

AD, is that seriously the only thing you see people wearing on the beach?

Of course not Hitdice. But I see plenty of it. Especially among women in their late teens and early twenties, which just happens to be when most people (man or woman) are considered the most attractive.

If you think I notice this stuff, you should hear my wife and daughter...

Besides, that was my point anyway Hitdice. A woman can wear a wide range of bathing suits of varying degrees of modesty, but a very large fraction of young women choose to wear the most revealing suits possible. Why anyone would wear something that makes them look butt-naked from the back is a mystery to me, but I see a lot of it on the beach.

That was my point too; I don't think bathing suits and magazine contents (vs covers) have all that much to do with each other. No insult, but it just seems like you can't far enough past your own sexual repression to have a clear headed conversation about the thread topic.

(Yes, I'm the one who invoked Doodlebug's name to make a weed joke.)

Werthead wrote:

This appears to be a logical fallacy. A woman not wanting to be treated like a sex object is fully compatible with the fact that, on a beach on a really hot day, they may also not want to wear fur coats. One is about objectification and the other is about comfort.

Yes, it is obvious that in the area of outdoor comfort we are restricted to wearing tiny little butt-floss thongs with postage stamp sized boob-covers or else we must wear a fur coat.

Your logic is infallible.

AD, is that seriously the only thing you see people wearing on the beach?

It is also possible that it's a promotional photo taken before she actually learned how to use a bow? (I guess I'm asking IC if she was bothered by the the dwarven archery in the first movie.)

Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Radbod Jarl wrote:

A case of the original being more progressive than the update...weird.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure of that. I haven't read that particular Howard story, but I haven't read much in his ouevre that would lead me to believe it's "progressive."

"The Vale of Lost Women" and all those stories with monstrous-looking "Negroids," I'm looking at you.

I read it years ago and don't recall it too clearly. Given the setting it's probably got some bad Turkish stereotypes.

OTOH, the whole "woman warrior given great skill by the goddess after being raped, which she'll lose if she ever has sex with someone who can't beat her in a fight" thing is just wrong on so many levels.

"More" progressive is definitely a relative thing.

Seriously Jeff, find the Alyx stories if you can. There was a collection called The Adventures of Alyx, and a short novel (less the 200 pages, included in said collection) which I mentioned above called Picnic on Paradise.

She's a terrific response to everything about Red Sonya you've got a problem with; also, she got in on with Fafhrd at one point (no, seriously, here's her wikipedia entry).

@ Doodlebug: Samuel R. Delany's Triton would certainly chart somewhere on that line.

As re the who Red Sonja thing, that's why I get sad about how the Alyx the Adventuress stories by Joanna Russ are out of print. If you can find Picnic on Paradise anywhere, read it.

'A Clash of Kings'

- I read 'A Game of Thrones' a while back when the TV series first came out (I wanted to read the book before watching it's adaptation), yet the first book I found terribly boring. About a week ago I ended up finally watching the first season of the TV series and it got me hooked again. Since then I have been plowing through 'A Clash of Kings' and I am loving it!.

'The Black Company'
- Being a huge fan of Steven Erikson (Malazan Book of the Fallen) I picked this one up after he commented on it being an influence to him. To be honest, I am a third of the way through and not really enjoying it... just has not grabbed me - I suspect it is the characters. I just do not find them engaging.

'The Dark Tower'
- Started reading this because everyone seems to rave about it. Nearly finished it and I do not think I will pick up the sequal(s). I guess it is just not my cup of tea. Anyone else have a similar experience?

'The Bone Hunters'
- Love Steven Erikson. Love the Malazan series. Books 1, 2 and 3 were particularly excellent (which fan doesn't say that?). However, I also really enjoyed book 4 and somewhat book 5. I had a break mid-way through book 5 (series fatigue I guess) but finished it a few months back and want to get back into it. Started 'The Bone Hunters' today.

'ScareCrow'
- I picked this up as a freebie to burn some time... and before I knew it I had churned through the first 40 pages and was hooked. Easy read. Candy for the brain and full of action. After doing some quick research I found it is the third Matt Reilly book for the Scarecrow character - but it reads like a stand alone. I should be finished it pretty quickly. A fun time filler.

On the Subject of The Dark Tower: I read that book when it was first published as a series of novellas in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction back in the 80s, and actually thought the series went downhill after the first book. I'm not trying to change your mind, but the later books are different, and you might give them a chance on their own merits.

Guy Humual wrote:

Okay so I was watching the Daily Show tonight (my only source for US news) and I see the crazy folks over at Faux are dumping on this guy . . . and when you start sounding like the crazies at Faux news it's time to walk away from the argument. So no more questioning the source of this leak for me.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, but you should still get a new clock instead of waiting until 7:37 to check what time it is. :P

Doodlebug, can I ask what type of guns you own, and which you worry about being confiscated by the Plutocracy? (I find this is a topic where hypothetical questions and statements do more harm than good.)

I myself have two rifles (a .22 and a .30-06) and a shotgun, and nothing I've seen from any administration to date has lead my to believe that confiscation will ever be a concern.

I wasn't saying that was the thread topic at this point. A little old lady scared off a burglar with a weapon well within the limits of any current gun control.

How does that relate to the topic at hand? It's just my own preference, but this incident would seem to support gun control.

pres man wrote:

Gun toting grandma stops intruder.

With a revolver, I notice.

Not to pile on, but given that it was a legally purchased and registered revolver, from which a single shot was fired, I don't understand how this story relates to the thread topic.

When the game (GM-ing in particular) gets stale for me, I start looking at other stuff for inspiration. Read books and watch movies, and don't be afraid to adapt extra-genre stuff into an RPG scenario. One time I made my gaming group play Breaking Away the RPG, and they never even knew what I was doing.

Also, if you're feeling burnt out, don't be afraid to turn the GM reigns over to someone else, running a PC takes the pressure off. :)

George R R Martin with some spoilers from the Conan show.

I'm not that surprised, it's a commercial world; Kingslayer sounds like a pretty awesome band though.

I'm happy to hear your aunt survived the experience, whatever that may count for in the grand scheme of things. . .

That's paid labor.

I'm saying, a dude who cooks in a five star restaurant, that's a chef, and that thar is salaried labor. Going by my experience, though, the paycheck isn't worth the stress.

meatrace wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Also time and effort aren't the same thing. Doing Laundry or mopping the floor isn't nearly as hard as mowing the lawn.

Of my friends and relatives that own homes, none of them consider the stuff they do outside housework because it is recreational. My friend Dennis, for example, fixes cars as a hobby so working for 14+ hours over a weekend to fix his or his wife's car is like an opportunity to work on a project. Same with gardening.

My dad is the same way. He elects to do almost all the "yard work" which includes tending multiple gardens and about an acre of prairie because by hobby and by profession he's a botanist/horticulturalist whereas his wife is a financial planner.

I don't mean this to disagree with you, IT, just in answer to your question.

Would you consider cooking a household chore?

Not if it's a dude in a five-star restaurant. :P

That just means you aren't reading hard enough!

Speaking seriously, I agree with you on the progress vs fear scale, but reserve the right to decide the difference between the two; YMMV :P

Has anyone here read Uncharted Territory by Connie Willis? It's a very short book that seems relevant to the last four posts.

Sissyl, have you read The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson? It's interesting, but we're not there yet.

Set wrote:

Exactly how far 'winter' goes was never really clear to me. Does it cross the sea and affect that southern continent? The flat-roofed architecture and skimpy dress suggests they've never seen snow, despite having cities that brag about being around for centuries.

The Summer Isles seem to be permanently tropical, but we've never been there to know for sure.

** spoiler omitted **

I really need to pick this series up again.

'Cause it's so user-friendly ?

Y'know, I'm going to be talking around corners now (no spoilers!), but given GRRM's early work: Fevre Dream, Armageddon Rag, and last but not least "The Monkey Treatment," it's funny how many of his completed works end on a very upbeat note, despite everything you've read up until the last sentence.

Hitdice wrote:

My post did relate to last night's episode, pretty directly.

Well, unless I misread (in which case, I apologize) but you refrerred to not being able to wait to see something that clearly wasn't in last night's episode. Meaning (to me) that this was something that you knew was coming because you had read it in the book.

Hitdice wrote:

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but if you're trying not to spoil the first book for yourself, you probably shouldn't read the thread where we're talking about the dramatization of the third book in the series; it seems to me the entire thread would need a spoiler tag.

Ok, I should have been clearer. I am watching the show, and am current up to last nights episode. So I would be comfortable reading any spoiler related to the show. I've not read book 3 (and am only partway through reading book one) so i would stay away from any book related spoiler so as not to ruin future episodes for myself.

If I wanted to be a jerk, since this is a TV forum, I'd ask all discussions of the book to relocate to the book forum. But I'm not going to because I know there is a very logical reason to include them here. I'm simply asking those that have read the books to identify when they are spoiling something that has yet to be aired so those of us who are only watching the shows can know which spoilers to avoid.

That's all. I kinda thought I was being reasonable.

Greg

Oh, gotcha; Sorry, I completely misunderstood the nature of your complaint. What can I say, once you've read the whole series thus far, you're keeping back so much junk that something's bound to slip though. :P

Hitdice wrote:

Sebastian wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Gotta love that Roose Bolton, though; dude's a survivor.

Can we have a way of identifying and separating show spoilers from book spoilers, please? Just read your spoiler thinking it related to tonight's episode. And I'm only 1/3 of the way through reading the first book.

Greg

My post did relate to last night's episode, pretty directly.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but if you're trying not to spoil the first book for yourself, you probably shouldn't read the thread where we're talking about the dramatization of the third book in the series; it seems to me the entire thread would need a spoiler tag.

** spoiler omitted **

Gotta love that Roose Bolton, though; dude's a survivor.

The elves grow to physical maturity at about 20, but then spend the next 90 years sitting on their parents' treehouse couch, playing ElfBox 360 (or FeyStation 3).

Is that platform available at BestBuy? :P

OOH OOH, The Northern Girl by Elizabeth A. Lynne has a full on lesbo protagonist. At the end of the book, she even goes to a castle in the north and saves a princess from a fate worse than death; it's awesome!

EDIT: it's the third book in a trilogy The Chronicles of Tornor, and the first two are a little bit all over the place, but still very emotional.

Comrade Anklebiter's Fun-Timey Reeducation Through Labor Supercenter Campaign, Pt. IV

Nevertheless, the party won and revived Pieter (who didn't seem terribly put out at the loss of one of his limbs)

Yeah, you definitely need a sanity/trauma mechanic . . .

It was a very chilling moment.

. . . Or maybe you don't.

Y'know Doodlebug, once upon a time I was thinking about making an adventure based on Chicken Run (Yes, the claymation movie), but it sounds like you've outdone me before I ever got there.

They're allowed to advance in NPC classes, though, so it's not that they can't do anything.

Mind you, I'm not saying the aging rules model the differences between races that take 14 years to come to maturity and races that take 110 years to do so. But then, there aren't any races that take that long to reach adolescence in the real world, so we'll never know.

Still and all, Otto of the Silver hand was pretty good kid's book, and that's a good enough reason to play a young character for me.

Limey, I know I'm always blathering on about it, and may well have mentioned it to you before, on this very thread, but if you're looking for a female antidote to Conan's thud and blunder check out the Alyx the Adventuress anthology by Joanna Russ. Totally worth it, but sadly out of print..

Black Moria wrote:

_Cobalt_ wrote:

In the Alignment section, it includes phrases that might be said by someone of that alignment.

Chaotic Neutral has the phrase "You only live once." Given that phrase's current standing among youth as "YOLO," is this saying something about today's youngsters? That they are Chaotic Neutral?

Really what I want to know, was it an intention cultural reference?

It is an anthem for each generation, not necessarily the current one. I can remember the saying 'You only live once' was popular when I was a kid ... 40 some years ago.

You'd be surprised how long some phrases have been around. I saw the phrase "Where do they hang out?" in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court ... published in 1889.

You wouldn't think of 'hurly-burly" as Shakespearean language, but read Macbeth, and there it is.

Sad news. :(

I heard he split his play sessions between Runequest and Traveller, actually. :P

...And, dove-tailing back into the thread topic, do you think Dungeons and Dragons (including every other RPG out there since 1974), or Pat Robertson's xenophobic idea of Christianity has destroyed more lives?

"Preventive surgery"--if the idea has even the slightest appeal to you, you may not be in touch with what the rest of us call reality.

Does your idea of reality not include genetic testing for a predisposition to breast cancer?

"Joy Division this, you fascist!!"

You playing with sanity checks, or any sort of psychological trauma mechanic, Doodlebug?

What if said Spire Defender takes medium/heavy armor proficiency as feats before 7th/13th level?

Rynjin wrote:

phantom1592 wrote:

However, it's foolishness to say D&D and other forms of 'RolePlaying' are NOT dangerous.

Nearly ALL things are dangerous to different people. Just skim the forums... listen to the horror stories here.

Like any other activity, gaming can become OBSESSIVE. People spend thousands of dollars on this 'hobby'.

That's not an issue with the game being dangerous, that's an issue with the person.

The game doesn't force anyone to do anything. It doesn't make people become obsessed and waste their lives, nor does it make people listen to the voices in their heads that tell them to kill people and eat them.

Those things are already there in those people and if it were not triggered by this it would be triggered by something else.

It's an outlet that most people can handle responsibly. Like alcohol or drugs or gambling.

Some people can not.

To those people the game is dangerous and should be avoided at all cost. For that matter. If you do not KNOW if you can handle it... you should avoid it.

THAT is the advice that Robinson's quote gives. If you have to ask 'is it ok for me to play games glorifying magic and violence... when I don't believe in magic or violence... then no, you probably shouldn't play.

Same way if you have an addictive personality you shouldn't drink. It doesn't make alcohol inherently evil... but it can be dangerous.

Given your reasoning, is there anything in the world that can't be dangerous? I heard about a guy who choked to death on a cotton-ball.

Don't be afraid to include an apostrophe here or there.

I struggled through the BotNS my first year of grad school, and it was kind of a waste of time.

A painful waste of time. At least it was slightly more lucid than Tooby and Cosmides. :-P

SmiloDan, I know we've talked about it before (as relates to The City and the City), but Kirth, you should really read Wave Without a Shore, you will love that s+&+. :)