Sigh. My knee-jerk response is to cut off the "In my other game" lament with "That's nice, but this isn't your other game."
Which isn't really an helpful impulse.
Once more, this seems like an "enhance communication" issue. I.e., sitting down and discussing the expectations -- yours, theirs -- and trying to reach a place where the slow accumulation of magic doohickeys is OK, or (maybe) spitting out a few more expendables to sweeten the pot for them, with the assurance that they'll get to more magic later? YMMV...
I waffle between athiesm and agnosticism, myself; I tend to go with atheism as an identifier more frequently, because there are more of "us" that way -- and atheists are generally fellow-travelers so far as being proponents of Reason as raison d'etre.
But my family is pretty faithful, and are awesome about my sexuality, always supportive, want to meet the new bf, etc. And >ahem< "some of my best friends are faith-based."
I think there is a disconnect regarding the schismatic nature of religion in this country (U.S.), and a tendency to want dumbed-down, black-and-white, binary descriptives doesn't help.
Before we can really examine the "faith vs. LGBT" thing, we really need to look at just how different various faiths are, and recognise that -- like alignment -- religious faith is not a straightjacket. There are LOTS of religious folks with whom I consider myself allied, and they're as irked by the "right-wing," "funamentalist" types as I am -- or moreso, since I don't have to worry about the antis presuming to speak for ME.
This has been terribly good information to be receiving; just found out a close friend of mine is on the trans* spectrum (somewhere -- we haven't really had a lot of time to hang out lately, so we haven't had more than the bare exposition).
But I feel like I'm much better-prepped to hear about it, grasp what I'm told, and ask questions that don't make me sound like a dweeb when I need clarification. So, thanks again, guys, gals, and others!
Best description of the attraction I've ever found was in the Guardians of the Flame series (by Joel Rosenberg).
In the opening chapter of the first book, a player is reflecting on his gaming habit, and his take is something on the order of,
"You can say, 'I heft my axe, stride across the room, and bash an orc' and everyone reacts exactly as if you had done it."
No works of OSC can be found in my house. That is all I can say of my opinion of the man without violating forum rules.
See, I'll still own and read Xenocide. But never again Songmaster. And if you've ever read Treason... let's just say the guy seems a little conflicted and leave it there.
Not pointing fingers of shame, here; I refuse to have anything to do with Margaret Weiss and Tracy Hickman. Their "Rose of the Prophet" trilogy left me almost trembling-furious.
"It should be obvious..."
I'd have to disagree on that one; while I've grown a bit more obvious as I've grown older (less patience with the social anxieties of the conservabubblers, etc.) I've been a stealth fairy most of my life. Beginning with a conscious act while in the closet, but continuing as a part of the "leave me the hell alone" vibe I tend to give off. Which, it seems, translates into "straight, aggressive, possibly-violent if approached" guy.
Now -- obviously (heh, wordplay) -- if we're looking at a TV/movie character, their orientation needs to be... ah, call it "discoverable;" the audience needs to be able to figure it out. But I don't know that "obvious" is really a perfect choice, given how I, and those like me, slip through the average day without pinging anybody's gaydar.
But depending upon the setting (work, friends and family, public spaces, etc.) it's conceivable that a LGBT character might not exhibit their orientation/queerness/whatever -- at least not in a fashion that anyone not already in the know would notice.
Eh. I'm just glad that there are more of us showing up; the sterotypes make more of a splash, yah. But I do think that sterotypes are often all we can expect from mass media: they're playing to the lowest common denominator.
Given that it's nearly impossible to get any two handsfuls of people to agree what are "modern values" -- in the Postmodern era, it seems (to me) a little ridiculous to try to decide whether or not they have a place in fantasy gaming. YMMV.
How about just deciding what values are in place and not nitpicking about whether they're suitably "fantastic."
And go pick up a Dresden Files novel: "modern" and "fantasy" aren't mutually exclusive...
Took me a while to get comfy with the Alchemist's Discoveries (after getting there, love the class).
And figuring out some of the more obscure (to me) Feat chains, and absorbing Feats out of the supplemental (non-Core) books has been challenging, but I've found there are things I absolutely love out there. With the Eldritch Heritage (Arcane Bloodline) Feat, even my Rogues can end up with an Imp familiar! Too awesome.
There are [established] races which I enjoy playing, and others I wouldn't play with someone else's dice. Likewise, tinkering with the cultural "norms" of said races can produce either intriguing or repulsive results.
But I'm failing to see the problem, especially now that the ARG is out; if you can't stand standard races, spend a half an hour statting out a new race and then a day or two cobbling a history and culture together (or skip that if you're in an RP-lite campaign).
Simple twists on old stuff can be fun:
Elves are fascist bastards who think being the last people to have had face-to-face conversations with the gods makes them inherently-better-suited to run the world than everyone else, and should let them tell everyone what magic they can and cannot use.
Dwarves are still in the midst of a race-wide migration, nomads, thanks to an elven intervention that sank their homeland beneath the sea. Still gruff, bitter -- like standard dwarf stereotypes -- but now they actually have a good reason to be that way.
Gnomes and halflings are subspecies of each other, essentially. Best entertainment ever, watching a gnome and a halfling try to one-up each other in any field. They will band together to deal with threats from the Tall Folk when needful, but generally try to avoid having to deal with each other, while convincing the other races that THEIR branch of the family is best, and the others' is full of inbred halfwits.
...and so on.
I tend to nix the half-breeds. Though Orcs are a perfectly acceptible race, so the Orcish genome is still available. (REPRESENT!)
And humans, well... it's all a matter of cultures, since they're kinda the baseline by which other races get measured. And that's fine, imo.
Its despite never varies; it ALWAYS reacts the same way to everyone: rather lawful (orderly, habitual, reliable) displeasure. And it hasn't displayed anything that would (to me) indicate a bias on the good/evil axis. I mean, if you CATCH it sacrificing orphans to inflict curses on people who bother it, maybe...
1. I think so, though this is based on Richie, a character from the TV show.
2. Stop asking logical questions, it's a nasty habit.
But I DO have a theory: cutting the head off of a "dead" immortal might not transfer the [power/mojo/Quickening/whatever] to the decapitator; maybe only killing a live immortal gets you the juice.
3. Imma vote Gilgamesh. No show/movie-based reason, just feeling Gilgameshy.
Hope this suggests some useful directions for you. And how's that 5e treating you?
I don't use electronic simulators and I don't like it when others do; if I'm running a game, it's real dice only, so sorry. I just grimace a lot when I'm playing in a game where electronics are allowed.
But then, many of my friends take a perverse pleasure in referring to me as a Luddite, so take my objections with a grain of Lot's wife, I guess...
Eh, I always think it'd be best for a sentient garrote...
I've included a lot of named weapons in various campaigns, and some of my players have taken up the theme, naming their own.
The problematic thing, with the constant upgrading of gear, is the question, do you just assign the name to whatever you're currently wielding, or do you have a succession of different weapons with different names? Usually, it seems like we end up with only high-level items getting names -- once it seems like it's something that won't get replaced for a while. YMMV.
Captain Brittannica wrote:
...and people wonder why I love the English language. >sigh<
Just wanted to mention how glad I am to have this thread, and all of you in it, as a part of my virtual life. It's really great to be able to come here, with news, or when I'm bored -- or when I need a break from the relentless pace of life. I always get what I need here. So thanks.
ACK! THE FURNACE IS BROKEN!
I live in Anchorage, for those who may have forgotten (or didn't know) so this is a rather crucial piece of household equipment. The furnace mechanics are coming back Wednesday. I'm going to a friend's house tomorrow, to wait out the repair hiatus in something approaching warmth!
Curse you, winter demons!!
Eh, if you're rambling, you manage to ramble around the point rather well. Yeah, conversation will be needful. >bleah< Why can't things just work right without having to talk about them?! [/male cowardice]
On the... well, not really plus side... but "easy," we haven't seen each other since my initial post on the subject, so I haven't had to have the confrontation yet. I think he finally "got" that the intial weeks post-surgery just aren't a good time for rabid weasel sex.
PS to Jessica:
Thanks for the kind wishes. Aside from healing up from surgery, we (my docs and I) are concentrating our efforts on reigning in my blood sugar levels -- not off the charts, but perniciously-high. Had my first post-op appointment today, and we're raising my insulin dosage (as well as adding several blood-sugar level tests to my daily routine, to track it a little more closely. It's an excellent thing I don't suffer from aichmophobia [fear of sharp things]).
Anyway -- appreciate the support.
Ah, I'm just irritated -- with him, with myself, with the basic situation. "It seemed like a good idea at the time..."
I try -- I try really hard, against my own inclination in the matter -- to accept peoples' self-identifying in the matter of orientation. Started as a desire to avoid wasting time and energy chasing "straight" guys. Figure, my gaydar aside, if they want to i.d. as heterosexual there's little but heartache to be had in trying to seduce them against the grain of their own persona. Sometimes, it turned out I was right about their actual orientation -- but it is ALWAYS better, in my experience, to let someone figure out and accept that about themselves than to struggle with their self-closeting.
In this specific case, I was actually completely blindsided by his "conversion;" he'd been straight well enough, long enough, that when he decided to jump me, I was well and truly bushwhacked. And under the circumstances, his insistence on being straight was -- initially -- No Big Deal, to me. Even now, it's just mildly annoying: the frequency and stridency of his insistence, like he doesn't think I'll believe him or something.
Which begs all sorts of questions about what he actually thinks and feels on the subject; I mean, I have to admit that I'm being made skeptical of the claim because, trumeted so often, it rings brassy and hollow.
But this is tangential to my main problem, which is his turning into a psycho hosebeast/turboslut/I'm-not-even-sure-WHAT-to-call-it.
As has been mentioned by several wise people, obviously some conversation is in order. I'm trying to determine a good angle of attack -- to avoid tripping the switch on what I suspect to be an extremely-tense bundle of inner conflict. I really don't want to have him melt down or huff up because I'm trying to brush him off a little.
And trying to decide how much or even IF I want to pursue a continuing liaison with him. Kinda depends on how he takes my request that he chillax a bit with the constant demands for sex, I guess.
And at THIS point, I really don't trust him to react rationally and reasonably, because he's like a textbook case of "adolescent emo dramabomber."
Arg. I'm just gonna find a Dionysian monastary to which I can retire.
The irony of this thing is palpable: I'm CERTAIN I would be finding this HILARIOUS if it were happening with someone else's lust-life in the focus.
So, I have an unusual problem.
A little background:
It's getting to the point that I'm regretting ruining a pleasant friendship.
So, has anybody got one of those Men in Black flashy-things, so I can make him forget this ever happened?
Arg. Not really expecting anyone to solve this: distinctly "own damn fault" event, as well as "not fixable" kind of affair; no way to unf*ck things, him, our friendship. Just in case anyone needs it, remember to be careful what you wish for...
Just wanted to complain a little to sympathetic audience; can't really talk to anyone in hometown, since on top of everything else, he's completely closeted. :/
Freehold DM wrote:
About to run my darklight sisterhood game today.
Oh, wait: you said RUN. For a second, I READ "ruin," and thought "Why are you ruining your game?"
Then my brain caught up with my eyes and I saw you were running your game, which makes much more sense.
I blame percocet.