FLEB

On Vox: [RPG BS] Concept Notes: Television Heroes

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:49:48 GMT

The notes may be a bit disjointed and terse, but I'm writing on my lunch break, trying to get a few things down. More later.

The new idea is Television Heroes. Characters are television and movie character stereotypes from any range of shows-- the cop on a mission, the sitcom dad, the infomercial huckster, the cartoon rodent, the embattled reporter, the blustering televangelist, the sportscaster, the person who keeps smelling their fabric in the commercials... any manner of TV personality.

These people all existed in their own little worlds... until things started to come apart. The channels started to change. Now, the characters find themselves thrown together, from channel to channel, into strange worlds and situations, as they jump from station to station, trying to find the way back home from the one person who can put everything back the way it was-- the Network Program Director.

Characters have unique powers from their roles: The infomercial huckster can mysteriously raise crowds of mindless followers. The cop on a mission can track down suspects and use that "enhance" thing to find information from photos.

Todo: It needs a bit more of a clear antagonist and quest examples. A mechanism should exist for the creation of immediate advancement goals. Immediate advancement goals will likely be based upon completing a plot synopsis or other pre-stated goal to advance out of that channel. Another option may be a "find all the pieces of the puzzle" game where gatekeeping information, needed to contact the Network Program Director, is scattered throughout the story.

Ack. Gotta get back to work.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: The Case of the Missing Tree

Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:30:06 GMT

So get this...

My big tree in the backyard that hangs over where I park my car...

Gone. Sawed off.

Someone stole my tree!

Nicole had been talking with tree removal people, but hadn't gotten to the point of actually scheduling the appointment... well, it would appear that they took things into their own hands. I came home and noticed the clear blue sky where the tree was, just figuring that Nicole had set the whole thing up, and I'd forgotten that she told me the date or something. I jokingly mentioned that "Someone stole our tree", and she did a double-take.

We're figuring the tree folks we were talking to just didn't get the idea that she had yet to set up an appointment. As long as they don't try to charge for removal (which we were going to turn down), or it isn't one of the higher-priced placed pulling a fast one, we're fine.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: [Glass and Steel] Character sheet, developing play method

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 18:35:25 GMT

Link: Character Sheet

Player, Character: Name of the player and character.
Concept: Basic character concept
Personality: Three-element description of your character. Select each personality element, and mark the primary driver to your character's personality.

Consideration: ACTion or CONtemplation
Vision: OVeRview or DETail
Interaction: SURvivor or REScuer*

Type: Descriptive type adjective derived from your character's three-element type
Breakdown: What happens when you run out of Composure. Determined by your primary Personality element.
Composure*: Your ability to "hold it together". Can be spent to expend effort or go against your innate nature. When this is depleted, you go into Breakdown.
Health: Self-explanatory. When this is depleted, your character is dead.
Attributes/Mode: Attributes (Athletics, Endurance, etc.) range in strength from 1 to 3. The Mode is the primary specialization of the attribute is. For example, Athletics may have a Mode of "Strong" or "Fast". Any action that uses the Mode gains a +1 modifier.

Athletic: Physical strength, speed, and dexterity.
Endurance: Physical resistance against battering, poisoning, and exertion.
Knowledge: Knowledge about a subject or area of expertise.
Wits: Thinking or acting under pressure, and the ability to invent or come up with ideas.
Persuasion: Ability or personal attributes which allow you to influence others.
Perseverance: Mental fortitude, ability to "keep on" or cope in the face of difficulty.

Coins: "Two-sided" attributes that either are a help or a hindrance depending upon the situation. The Effect column tells the systemic procedure used to implement the Coin.
Fate Cards: This is a place to note which Fate Cards you have drawn, and what the messages on them were. Lines are included for folding the paper to hide the information from other players.

Any given conflict is solved by a 1d8 roll, against a set difficulty (usually target 8). The value of one Attribute, as well as any Coin modifiers are added to the roll to determine success and degree thereof.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: Glass and Steel r2: Coins

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:57:22 GMT

The more I work on it, the more I'm getting geeked to actually play Glass and Steel. I might just have to cobble something together on a d10/pool system and go for it for the immediate time.

I've been thinking of a central merits/flaws sort of system called Coins, as in "there's two sides to every coin". It consists of opposing benifits/detriments of the same general trait, taken as a pair. In some cases it would be a help, in others a hindrance. Characters could take either one 2x Coin (usually something supernatural/metagamey or at least powerful) or two 1x Coins.

The "Feats" at the end are less constant modifiers than usable extra abilities. They still fall into the same pile, they're just used a bit differently.

Loved/Concerned 1x
You are a kindhearted, nice person, and people have grown to know and love you. You will command the assistance and sympathy of others, but you will be compelled to help others in need, even to the detriment of yourself or your goal. System: Allows rolls for outside assistance, but requires a roll or deferment whenever someone else is in trouble.

Attractive/Vapid 1x
You're a bimbo or musclehead. People swoon or lust over you, but when the chips are down... well, you really aren't the most important one in the room. Gain a point in persuasion abilities when in a non-crisis situation, but lose a point when you are.

Stature/Resentment 1x
You are a person in a position of power, but your management style has made people secretly hate you, or find you incompetent. Roll a threshold roll when using commanding abilities to determine whether you gain or lose a point.

Born Leader/Miserable Failure 2x
You can lead people into action and bolster their confidence, but if your intended action fails, they become disheartened and lose all confidence in you.

Motivated/Dependent 1x
You are motivated by someone or something in a precarious position (loved one, belief, motive). Gain a point toward any action taken toward your goal, but lose a point on any action if the goal is destroyed or rendered impossible.

Empathetic/Sensitive 2x
You have the ability to sympathize and "read" people very well, but your emotional connection also makes you vulnerable. You have the ability to ask any player to truthfully reveal a general question about their emotions or feelings, but you are helpless in the face of others' suffering. (System rules for "helpless" TBA)

Single-Minded/Tunnel Vision 1x
You have the ability to go into "tunnel vision" mode, and gain a +2 bonus to any action relating to an immediate goal or plan at hand. However, any conflict that is not part of the goal or plan gets a -2 resistance.

Wise/Misunderstood 1x
You have the ability to ask the GM meta-game questions about the situation, threats, or strategies. However, it is very hard to convey and convince others of your ideas.

Organized/Impatient 1x
You can form plans and stick to them very well, even motivating and enhancing others. You recieve a +1 bonus to any action in the service of a detailed plan. However, if a plan fails or "goes to hell", lose a point on any actions coping or recovering the plan.

Connected/Affected 2x
You are connected on a supernatural level to the events happening around you. This is both a good and a bad thing. You get two rolls at the end of each round for cards. If you get a card your first roll, you take that card. On the second roll, if you get a card, you may take that as well. However, if you did not get a card (you rolled a number you already have), you can read any other player's card of that same number, if they have it. The downside is that you are adversely affected by supernatural effects and the effects of Degradation.

Specialized Intelligence/General Ignorance 1x
You are a single-subject geek. You gain a +2 to Intelligence tests regarding things in your field of knowledge. However, you gain a -2 to Intelligence tests on any other nontrivial subject.

Meditative/Tumultuous 1x
You have the ability to clear your mind and think on a task. Gain 4 extra spendable points when you stop in a quiet position and meditate or think. However, your normal life is internally quite noisy, which leaves you at a -1 disadvantage for any mental tasks.

Fearless/Risky 1x
You are devoid of fear, even when the situation demands it. You can disregard a test against fear or paralysis, but you then gain a "stupidity point" that you have to bleed off. You can bleed this off by either declaring it, than going ahead with a risky action, or the GM can force your character to take an action that they would normally have the sensibility to resist.

Fast Regeneration/Rushed Regeneration (Feat) 2x
You regenerate more quickly than anyone else, and have additional play time before the rest start. However, you must forfeit the ability to take a card that round to use the ability.

Belief Ability/Catastrophic Failure (Feat) 2x
You have the conviction to shape the world. Be it a religion, a firm insistence that "this can't be happening", or some other self-believed method of control, you have the ability to shape the supernatural elements of the situation unfolding around you. However, if you fail your test, you do so catastrophically, often reversing the intended effect or causing collateral damage.

Recover Innocence/Confusion (Feat) 2x
When you converse, empathize, or come in contact with a person to the point that they become more than just a "bystander" to you, it means that they are vulnerable to permanent death or injury, just as you are. Recover Innocence allows you, with a feat of concentration, to recover their "bystander" status from your intervention only. However, it involves stopping, meditating, and completely clearing your mind to the point that you come back confused and disoriented.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: Glass and Steel: Back by popular demand, I suppose

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:32:54 GMT

Well, there seems to have been a flurry of interest... or at least a consistent background of interest that I just finally tapped into... Or... well... there's interest, okay-- in the Glass and Steel RPG system. For those of you who don't know and don't care enough to backtrack, here's the idea as it stood:

Every PC* snaps to awakeness in the late-morning of an ordinary workday at some large firm that does something, in a modestly-sized office building downtown. The day proceeds pretty well as per normal, until a truck-bomb rips through the building. (How's that for subtlety?)

After the bombing, the characters try to make their way out, until-- after a set period of time, they all lose consciousness and wake up... back in the late-morning of an ordinary day.

The back-story is that all of this was an event in the past, being relived through some manner, either explained or unexplained (i.e. TBA). In the original event, one of the PCs didn't make it out alive. In order to stop the cycle, that PC must die, either by accident or outright murder. At the end of each round, players have the opportunity to get "recollection cards" that reveal their fate in the original event.

NPCs generally reappear after each scene, even if they die, unless the PCs make a connection to them and "flesh them out" to more than just a background player. (This mechanism is handled by the GM.)

The problem as it existed was that there was little systemic impetus to perform in any particular manner in the game. In short, the game had no point, no reason, no motivation. Although there was the general goal of finding out the doomed person, there was no system-enforced morality, and it was all to easy to end up playing the game like a disinterested type of Clue.

That was where it left off, and it's just been rather stagnant for a while. However, talking to Jeff, it sounds like the Ann Arbor group is interested, and I believe Stefanie's into it, although Josh wasn't feeling it. In any case, I'm picking it back up again as a prospect, and made a little headway on the problem.

After playing a couple games of Hunter (old-school) with Josh GMing, I picked up on the whole Virtues and whatever the other thing was called-- I don't own a book-- that tied your character's traits and alignment quite directly to advancement and abilities. Now, I'm not going to go and copy that verbatim, but it got me back to the idea that, well, it doesn't need to be that complex to tie motivation to reward. At the moment, I'm thinking of selection of traits and values, which leads to the selection of an archetype, which then grants specific extraordinary abilities or modifiers if one plays to their archetype. Not supernaturally extraordinary, just more along the lines of increased or decreased confidence, drive, focus, or effectiveness when making actions consistent with the character's traits.

I've worked up the initial parts of a traits-selection system. This would be the first step, then you would use this information to narrow down to a single class or archetype of character. The initial selection is similar-- but not ripped off from-- a Myers-Briggs style "pick sides" classification:

ACTion versus CONtemplation (Do you think things through first, or spring into action and work with what comes to you?)
OVeRview versus DETail (Do you pay more attention to grand plans or implementation details?)
SURvivor versus REScuer (Do you put yourself or others first?)

ACT	OVR	SUR	Go-getter, commander, conniver
ACT	OVR	RES	Organizer, activist, charity race-runner
ACT	DET	SUR	Worker, technician, specialist
ACT	DET	RES	Salesman, sports-player
CON	OVR	SUR	Architect, designer, engineer
CON	OVR	RES	Visionary, manager, planner
CON	DET	SUR	Bookworm, expert, scientist
CON	DET	RES	Host, planner, psychoanalyst

Each of the three elements would have two degrees each way, as such:

Action O O | O O Contemplation
Overview O O | O O Detail
Survivor O O | O O Rescuer

You could only, optionally, take the second level-- called the "to a fault" level on one trait. This is an extreme, extraordinary disposition toward the trait-- sort of an "all of one, none of the other"-- and would come with both both a bonus and a negative.

I'm also going to have some sort of sanity/humanity/willpower/whatever pool to gain and lose. I'm still not set in stone as to what sort of "thesis statement" I want to attach to that, whether it be burning Conscience points when you let someone die, or having to burn Sanity or Willpower points to get through the tough spots... although I just thought of an interesting twist that might work.

(Unrefined brainstorm here:) While most games have you losing abilities and effectiveness with the loss of "willpower", it might be an interesting idea that your personal traits become more extreme. They're not necessarily more helpful-- in fact, I may have the benefits wear off as the traits become more extreme. It's just that as the pressure rises, you show your "true colors" more, and are compelled to irresistably act upon your traits, even at the expense of doing well.

So, to those of you who care, expect to see a bit more from the Glass and Steel angle. Now I just have to dredge up all those old notes.

*PC: Player-character, NPC: Non-player Character

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: [QQ!] Know when to hold 'em, know when to kill 'em and raid the corpse...

Sun, 13 Jul 2008 04:16:36 GMT

I'm calling Questy Quest! pretty much a failed experiment. It makes an interesting exercise, and stands well for the first 30-45 minutes, but today's playtest shows that it falls apart when given any decent length of play. I'm pretty well scrapping the idea. A few of the core concepts that made the system what it is were, to my mind, fatally flawed, and it would be too much effort, likely wasted, to try to sand out the imperfections. I'll probably keep it in my arsenal as something fun to break out, but continuing to write and polish the rulesheet is wasted time.

The big fault? GM-switching play just does not work for an open-ended game, and gets worse when characters have no united goal. Temporary GMs don't have the longevity to implement a plan of any overarching effect, plus they are often hesitant to apply negative effects. As such, the "action" tends to mill about the single initial scene, and focus on more and more trivial actions. It's a great system for more intense action, but there's no neccesary impetus to the plotline. There were a few good and interesting aspects to the system, but the things that would have had to change were the elements that uniquely composed Questy Quest!.

Now, I suppose it's on to Head (characters inhabit someone's mind), The System (fantasy bureaucracy a la Brazil with magic), or getting Days of Madness runnable again (fast-zombie post-apocolyptic campaign, in which I seem to be the only person not really interested).

This "innocent dead take the bodies of the living" idea I'd been toying with might have some merit behind it, although I think it really needs some basic structural investigation to see whether it has the latitude in it to be a playable story.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: Questy Quest!: Rules for Play

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:40:28 GMT

Questy Quest! ("P.T. 1" edition)

If anyone has any feedback, finds anything unclear, or actually playtests it and has some notes, I'm looking for all I can get. I've played it with a group of four, which I would call about the minimum number, and I'd like to see how it works with larger groups, especially considering the round-robin turn order.

Questy Quest! is a game that explores the great unsolved questions: Who are you? What are you doing here? Who are these people? In this game you play someone, who is striving... who is Questing, to beat all the odds, and do something. Gripping, isn't it?

Character Sheet

The first thing you'll need to do is make up a character sheet. This should be done rather secretively. It's simple, though, so you won't spend all your social time huddled in a corner, snarling at your compatriots.

The sheet itself should have the following information (with convenient examples):

Your character's name: Bob D. Rilo
Their concept: Intergalactic Salvage Collector
Their Quest: Hunt down the rival bastard that made off with your ship's cosmonautic converter for scrap metal.
A small, medium, and great positive about them-- their Upsides

"Teflon" personality
Slings a mean ray-gun
Uncanny ability with electronics

An "achilles heel" negative. Their downside.

Alcoholic

Five boxes for hit points.
Your player number. Number off within the group.

First moves

You should have a die of equal or greater sides than the number of players (at least one number for each player). Someone (anyone, it's not important) rolls this die to determine the first GM. The first GM sets the scene, then pauses for introductions.

All characters should introduce their name, character concept, upsides, and downsides. Their Quest does not necessarily need to be introduced. It could be hidden, or revealed in-character.

After introductions, the first player acts...

Play order

Initiative is a pain, and there aren't any points anyhow, so the group should agree upon a starting player and a round-robin direction. If you're too competitive to do this on your own, this isn't the game for you. After the first player, play continues in a round-robin fashion, irrespective of who the GM is. (We'll get to "What if it's the GM's turn")

Procedural Rules of Speaking Order

(This is in title caps because it's important. Without these rules, the game devolves into... more chaos than is necessary.)

In normal play, the player first acts within the scene given them, then the GM reacts to the player's action.
There are only two situations where the GM speaks before the player:

In the first scene, the first person to speak is the initial GM. They may set the scene and perhaps introduce NPCs or create a conflict. After that, the first player acts, and the GM reacts to them and goes on.
The GM also speaks first in the case of a conflict roll. The GM determines success or failure, narrates the consequences of the action, then the next player is allowed to act.

How the game is played

Someone rolls a die. The person with that number is the inital GM. (If you roll a nobody— a "6" on a five-player group, for instance, roll again.)
Roll again. That person is the first player. (If you roll a nobody, or you roll the GM's number, roll again.)
The initial GM describes the scene, then pauses for introductions.
Players (including the GM) go around the group introducing their character— name, concept, and upsides/downsides.
The GM may wish to interject to reiterate or further clarify the setting at this point.
The first player describes an action.

If another player wishes to oppose this action immediately, they may interject and force a conflict roll, but the second player's opposition should be "defensive" or "reactive" in nature— not a "turn" in and of itself,and the floor and play order still remains at the first player.

The GM reacts to the player's action, describing the results, playing any nearby NPCs, and determining whether a conflict roll is necessary...
If the action is trivial, and does not require a conflict roll, the focus moves to the next player, and the GM does not change.

The next player always describes their action first, with the scene as it exists after the GM's last narration.
In this case, if the "next player" is the GM, then the GM rolls to select a new GM, who can be anyone except themselves.

If the action requires a conflict roll, the player rolls the dice to select a new GM. The new GM may be anyone who is not invloved in the conflict. The current GM may continue if their number is rolled.

The newly-selected GM then narrates the success or failure of the action, as well as consequences, based upon the general likelihood of success,the character's upsides and downsides, and the new GM's whims and inclinations. Success is completely based upon that GM's decision, not upon the number of the die roll or any other such factors.
Play then continues with the next player taking their turn, and the newly-selected GM dictating scene.

The duties and rules of the GM

The current GM...

...when called upon as the result of a conflict roll, determines and narrates the success or failure of the action, as well as any resultant consequences.
...otherwise, speaks second. The GM should not dictate scene until after the player has made their move. The player acts with the scene as it exists, and the GM then reacts, and sets the scene as it continues.
...determines when a player's turn is over. To keep the game moving, especially with the enforced "round-robin" ordering, a player's turn should generally only consist of one complete action or short conversation.
...determines when a conflict roll is necessary. A conflict roll is necessary...

when a character's intended action is opposed by a present NPC, force, situation, setting, or other player
when the action requires more skill or ability than a common, casual action
when the GM decides to add a "hitch" to the action

...has final discretion over the scene. Although players may rely upon assumptions to an extent, the availability of objects, the details of a situation, and the details of NPCs do remain the domain of the GM. Players should generally ask, not dictate, that certain non-character details are true.

The duties and rules of the player

The current player...

...speaks first when it is their turn. The player (and their character) acts first, using the scene as it stood after the GM's last description.
...plays their sheet. You should always keep your Concept, Upsides, Downsides, and Goals in mind when playing.
...asks the GM. Although you control your character's attributes and holdings, within the realm of reason, the GM has authority over the setting and scene details. If it's something you can readily assume (the bedroom has a bed and a door, the people are wearing clothes, the fish tank is full of water), you may, but for all other things, ask the GM, to be sure.
...waits for their turn (okay, so I guess this isn't the "current" player). Play continues in a round-robin fashion. There is no "initiative", and there's no "casual orderless play in non-combat". (Why? With the GM also being a player, it tends to muddle roles and introduce more confusion than is necessary.) The most you can do is interject and force a conflict roll if you wish to stop a current player's action, and even this should be kept to a minimum.

Calling "Bullshit!"

In the unlikely case that the current GM makes a decision that is wildly unjust, unbelievable, or inconsistent, any player may call "Bullshit!" and challenge the ruling. The player calls "Bullshit!", explains their position, then all players may vote on whether or not they agree that the decision was, in fact, bullshit. If the decision is decided to be bullshit, the GM must amend their narrative from the point at which the bullshit began. Note, however, this can only be used for the immediate action by the current GM. "Bullshit!" calls should not be used, for example, for a malevolently clever and intricate plan which results in an unwanted situation— the call should be saved for decisions which are unjustifiably inconsistent.

Although it is recommended to keep the original terminology, if you find that you are playing among children or prudes who cannot hear or use the word "bullshit", you may wish employ a similar, more acceptable replacement term. A replacement term is, likewise, strongly recommended if you are playing with a group that can hear and use the term "bullshit", but cannot do so without tittering. Tittering just embarrasses everyone involved.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: [Questy Quest!] Playtesting. It's key.

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:31:13 GMT

Well, they're right when they say "playtesting is key". Sure, it was the first time I'd ever tried a system that I'd made, mechanics and all, but the "mechanics" were so simple that... what could go wrong?

The game was Questy Quest! (Formerly known as Bullshit! RPG. We were going to call it Quest: the Questing, but upon rethinking, I'd have to say that ripping off White Wolf name schemes is a rather tired joke.) The rules as they first existed were pretty simple:

OLD RULES:

Everyone creates a character with a name, a concept, 3 positive stats, and two negative. Character types can be from any type of setting, and the setting is not determined beforehand.
Players number off.
Players take turns being GM for a round. The first GM is the most important person in the room, as they determine the actual setting of the game.
Instead of chance conflict resolution, players roll a die, and the player whose number comes up decides whether the winner of the conflict.
If the GM makes a call that is wildly implausable, a player can call "Bullshit!". A vote is taken, and the action can be overruled.

The intent was kind of a light, fun game. Somewhat chaotic, and challenging to fit their rather randomly generated characters into a randomly chosen setting.

As it played out, it started chaotically for all the wrong reasons:

I realized that in a "no permanent GM" game, the procedural rules had to be well defined and firmly stated, otherwise everyone had questions, and there was no authority to answer them. Things such as turn order and speaking precedence had to be far better defined.
Along the same lines, the GM's duties and abilities needed to be firmly and explicitly stated. Since the role was skipping around so much, players were making GM-ish decisions as the GMs fumbled.
Speaking order, and the question of "who controlled the current reality" had to be explicitly dealt with.

Also, there were a few more story-centric changes I'd realized had to be made:

Aside from just a concept, characters needed to have a goal (a.k.a., their Questy Quest!). A GM for one or two turns is-- let's face it-- not going to be able to sustain a challenging story arc, especially since they are, in a sense, playing both GM and character. With a goal, everyone is working toward something, even if it's a divergent goal.
2 downsides ended up being too many, and in post-game wrap-up, we all decided that only one downside was really necessary. With 3 upsides and 1 downside, it becomes more a definition of the character than a stat sheet, and it's simpler to remember and roleplay a single Achilles Heel.
Players shouldn't reveal their characters until the GM makes the initial scene. For the sake of interest, the GM should not be trying to accomodate the other players' character types. The characters have to deal with the setting, not the other way around.

I might be getting together again this weekend to re-try the game, so here's the latest rev of the rules...

(see the next post)

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: TRAITOR!: Another day, another crispy half-baked LARP/Mystery Game idea...

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 04:26:18 GMT

After putting some time into refining some other games, I was bumbling around the Forge, hitting some links, looking at some other ideas, and I came up with what I think could be quite a fun one-session, indoor-friendly LARP situation, somewhat akin to the "murder mystery dinner".

The scene is a war planning room: everyone in the room are high-ranking officers, deep into planning an advance in a fictional land war. However, not all of you are fighting on the same side, and nobody knows who the double-agents are! You have to save or disrupt the war effort, all while surreptitiously "bumping off" the enemy.

The details:

Every person is given (or creates) a character description. Each person also rolls a given die and notes the number. Then, the die is rolled again, and all persons with that number are to play traitors.

The players may wish to be sure that there is a traitor in their midst, and that the game is not all for naught. If so, create 2 slips of paper for each person-- one which says "TRAITOR", and one which says "LOYAL" (written by the same person so as not to give away the game by handwriting). Each person puts their slip into a hat, and discards the other. A designee draws slips, and when they reach the first "TRAITOR" (or differing slip, if you wish to assure a mixed game), stop drawing and begin the game. If all slips are drawn, and everyone is on the same side, try again.

The purpose of the traitors is to lead the troops into an ambush situation. No one except the traitors should know of the ambush. To be sure of this, place a closed folder with a map of the battlefield in a seperate room. Each player should enter the room while a referee counts down from 20. If the player is a traitor, they may open the folder and mark the map with the details of the ambush. If the player is not a traitor, they should not open the map folder. Every player should stay in the room for a full countdown. Traitor players may have access later in the game to show the map to others, although they will be quite readily found out and likely lose the game if they show a loyalist!

Every character is armed with a sidearm, plus whatever seems reasonable (poisons, garrottes, knives, etc.). Conflict should be settled by common resolution systems, keeping in mind checks for silence, success, and fatality. In other words, resolution system is TBA, although the old LARP standby of Paper/rock/scissors would probably work.

Optional rule: To keep everyone playing, a more informal game may institute an "underling" rule. If an player-character is killed, a lower-ranking officer in their employ may move up to take their position, played-- curiously enough-- by the same player. The new character should have the same loyalty, but a different name and back-story.

Ultimate success is determined once a war plan is reached, as to whether or not the troops overcame the ambush. Furthermore, tally up the number of traitors versus loyalists found out/jailed/killed.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: Independence Haul

Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:00:01 GMT

It was a really good day today for yard sales-- a lot of people were taking advantage of the three-day weekend to stay open late, and a got a fair amount of "desperation and fatigue" deals, I think, given that I made some of the best hits after noon. Not much bargaining-down going on this time around, but that was mostly because people were giving me great ask prices out of the gate.

Assorted LPs and record case (I really just bought it for the case-- I miss my old box.), $5 (Asking price). Probably the least appealing deal of the day. I got sentimental over having an LP case again. There are a few novelty K-tel comps in there, but it was mostly stuff I'd never listen to. The guy had a nice Dawn of the Dead (new version) framed poster I was eyeballing, but he wanted $25 for it. It was probably worth it, but I don't have any space in my house that will do a $25 poster expendeture justice.
PC Games of the 90s. 25c ea. (Asking price) I haven't played them all, but four games for a buck can't be a bad deal. They even came with manuals!
Pile of cables, connectors, crap: $1. If there's one thing never to buy retail, it's cables. Get a few drawers and start collecting at garage sales. A buck will get you a pile of what would be $5-15 apice cables, retail. Granted, I think I need to start offloading some of my Coax TV cables. If anyone needs one, give me a holler.
An old Consumers Power hardhat with earpieces. It had the old "CP" in the circle logo, which I thought was neat. I picked that up with some other cables and ephemera for two bucks.
An old "Electrical Calculations" book. $1 (Asking)
A miniature Michigan state flag. 10c (Asking)
Three 6'x4' and one approx. 10'x6' U.S. flags with 48 stars. $4 (Asking) This was the big find of the day. The only thing more amazing than finding four rather large, heavy canvas American flags with only 48 stars was that the woman running the sale only wanted a buck apice for them. Ebay has the small ones at $9, although I'm not going to sell them. I'm giving away one or two and keeping the others. Unlike the modern, crappy-screenprint flag, these things are heavy fabric with tough stitching. Only minor wear, and a discoloration that isn't unpleasant, although I'm still debating whether to throw the big one into a delicate wash to get rid of the spots. I'm leaning against.
5200 postage stamps. $2 (Asking price bulk, $13 ala carte) This was a big find. I came upon a box of used postage stamps from all times and countries, all bagged in sets of 100, for 25c apice. I was drooling over them, trying to see how many bags I could afford in order to placate my greed while not insulting with my stinginess. Before I put together an offer, though, they blew me away with theirs-- two bucks for the lot! Counting them (assuming the 100/bag was correct) I found 52 bags-- 5200 stamps.
An over-the-campfire grill. $1 (ask $2) For Nicole.
2 gigantic boxes of postage stamps. $2. Ask the universe for postage stamps, and it delivers, I suppose. After finding the first batch, another sale had me rooting through two large boxes (a standard sort of copy-paper or shipping box size) of stamps and mail parts. The seller just said they wanted to get rid of them, and would take "a couple bucks". Two dollar coins, and I now have far more cancelled stamps than I will ever use for anything, ever.
2 "Soaker Hoses". $1.50 (Ask $2) Also for Nicole. These are the hoses with the holes in them that let you easily irrigate plants.
Jars of old nails, screws, and such crap, 3 rolls of preprinted price labels from no later than 1970, the remainder of a box of alcohol swabs, a half book of "Next Oil Change" window stickers from the '50s or '60s, a Bechtel hardhat, a pair of needlenose pliers, the remainder of a roll of yellow line tape for the middle of a road, a wood saw, and a roll-up projection screen (with some noticable mold or such discoloration). $5 (Ask: Who knows?) This was an estate sale clearing out the home of a man who'd just gone into managed care, and there were relatives unloading box after box of strange old crap, with no desire other than to get rid of stuff. I loaded up on wood screws and the like, since I'm still building my garage supply, and found some other unique and interesting items on the way.
Two padlocks and a book about AT&T. $1.10 (Ask $4.10)

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: RPG Musings: HEAD play mechanic

Sat, 05 Jul 2008 05:59:48 GMT

I was musing on a Power 19 for HEAD (the game where you play demons, schizophrenia, and others stuck in someone's head), and it got me really thinking more innovatively about a resolution mechanic. I think I'm going to do something with static bonus modifiers and playing cards-- red are for offense, black are for defense. Each player can hold three cards and has two (one offensive, one defensive) in play. Players leave in-play cards face down until a challenge is made, and can switch active cards only between turn rounds. I'm also thinking of a tactic called "half-tapping", where if a card is laid horizontally, only half the value is used, and half is saved for the next round. "Half-taps" can be stacked upon each other, allowing a character to "concentrate" on a difficult task. The downside is that the half-taps cannot be undone-- if a character is backed into an offensive action, they must spend their entire half-tap stack.

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com

On Vox: Home Again...

Fri, 06 Jun 2008 05:07:58 GMT

I'm home. Travelogue to follow... later. It's 1AM in Michigan, midnight in Iowa, and 11 PM in Wyoming. I don't know what time it is, except to say that it's too late for all the detail I wish to dedicate.

My penis is ENORMOUS!

Fri, 14 Mar 2008 04:01:25 GMT

75 minutes of music (28 WAV files) converted to archival-quality MP3s (VBR, qval=2 (second-best), 32-320kbps) in 4m17s, while listening to MP3s and browsing the Web. No hitches, no skips, processor never got above 35 deg. celsius, and I don't even think I was using the latest version of LAME, nor was I running 64-bit.

I luvz my new compy. Eeeeeeee!

Plus, after boldly tempting fate and forthrightly picking up where I left off, it looks (preliminarily) like this motherboard can successfully play The Lives of Others (or Das Lieben der Anderen, for you German folks out there) without attracting fatal levels of soft drinks.

It boots!

Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:35:09 GMT

Well, I finally have my suped-up tower computer back up and running. The parts came in the mail yesterday, and I carefully assembled them when I got home, connected all the cables, hit the switch... and...

A small flicker of the power-meter light, and nothing.

Being a practical sort of fellow, I wasn't outright thinking that I was going to have to rip the whole thing apart and RMA it-- at this point, it was only a short-circuit somewhere, probably against the case. Grumble-grumble, so I prepared to rip the whole thing apart and... just to make sure... flipped the power-supply switch and tried the button again.

IT BOOTS!

Apparently, the power supply was off, and only supplying about a half-second of power from its capacitors. I just had to turn it on.

So, now, dear reader, I'm typing this out on my screamin' dual-core AMD 2.8GHz box with 2 gigga' RAM... and it screams.

I actually had to reinstall Windows, and decided to wipe the system drive in the process. Going to a completely different motherboard, processor, RAM... and basically everything short of the hard disks... makes Windows freak out, and consequently blue-screen. Luckily, I still have my laptop, and was able to burn a Bart's PE disc that allowed me to boot in and move everything I wanted to keep off to other drives. So, I could wipe the drive and get it running that much faster. Luckily, I keep my apps and data, for the most part, on two separate drives, and I have most of my install CDs ripped as ISOs to boot, so it was a simple matter of grabbing the few scattered data and config files, and moving the lot off to an unused swap drive, installing Windows, then moving them back. I actually got the system up to a "Familiar" state in only about an hour. (GeoShell running, Explorer destupidified, SP2 installed, Office and Adobe CS2 installed).

Now, it's just a matter of shuffling through my DVDs-full of "Downloaded Files" and installing everything I need. I'm sure I'll run into a couple forehead-smack moments where I realized I accidentally deleted something-or-other, but since the laptop is cloned, to a large degree, from the old desktop machine, I can keep it all together all right.

And I'm never drinking Sierra Mist near my computer again.

FLEB's Movie Reviews: Cloverfield / The Golden Compass

Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:59:49 GMT

May contain spoilers. Half the fun is in the journey. Deal.
Double-feature at the second-run theater tonight-- last things first.

Mountain Dew.
Theater Popcorn, Large.
Bacon Cheeseburger.
French Fries.
Amber Ale, Tall.

Challenge: Now, attempt not to run the list backward in the theater bathroom while watching the movie Cloverfield. My stomach was already sour going in, and after about half the movie, the non-stop jittery camera-work up on the big, full-field-of-view screen, made me actually have to put my hands over my eyes (in a pose reminiscent of the Facepalm technique).

The basic: We're watching a tape of some guy's going-away party, when all hell breaks loose, and some oversize reptile/arachnid thing starts attacking Manhattan. (The trailer tells you about all you need to know.)

Here's a tip for the cinematographer on that one-- moderation, moderation, moderation. If I'm following the premise correctly, the entire movie was supposed to have been "recovered" from a hand-held camera-- the rub being that it apparently lacked any sort of modern vibration-reduction features, and was being piloted by a series of people suffering from debilitating nerve damage and complete lack of basic visual composition skills, or knowledge of how to zoom correctly. The entire movie, even the "calm before the storm" slice-of-life stuff suffered from this wobbly, ill-zoomed treatment. Now, blow this up to about 200x for the big screen, and it's a vomit-inducing ride for anyone whose brain makes any sort of relationship between their inner ear and visual system. In fact, if you weren't a bit queasy after watching this one, it'd probably be worth getting a checkup.

As a simulationist, forger, and examiner of reality at heart, I've wanted to make this movie a hundred times over, and I did enjoy that many of the scenes, actions, and devices in the movie tended toward the realistic, believable, and (this is a big one) didn't get hokey in an attempt to "intensify" the reality. However, the times they did seem to drop the ball were in the lulls, which are precisely the type of times when you don't want to-- there's no action to cover up the blips. The thematic introduction of the movie had a rather hokey treatment...

We're treated to a bunch of bandied-about Department of Defense jargon (when I'd imagine DoD folks would just get on with the damn tape). The number of overlays, pre-roll information, and such was overkill to my mind.
The time is down in the corner for the first 15 minutes or so, for no real reason. It looks like they attempted to mimic the camera feature that puts the time on the tape, but did so poorly-- the typography and compositing was too slick for an in-camera time-code. By any measure, it was added post-recording. However, it blips forward with each cut, which couldn't be accomplished by anything but an in-camera time-code. Perhaps I'm being too picky-- hell, I know I'm being too picky for most people's tastes-- but if you're going to dedicate yourself to simulating realism, go all the way and do it right. Go out, get a cheap camcorder, and see how it renders the date. It's homework, and not that difficult.
Speaking of the introductory scenes, the entire exposition feels as if it was filmed by a professional trying to look like an amateur.

The first couple minutes have cuts in odd/expected places... which is to say they'd be expected places if you were watching an edited movie, but odd places to see if you were watching an uncut tape. Record for a couple seconds, pause, then move to the other side of the room and hit Record again? No, it was camera 1/camera 2 with a cheesy camcorder overlay on it.
After that, in the party scene, it looks less like an amateur cameraman than a stumbling dipshit. Perhaps I'm wrong, but consider: Someone hands you a camera at the party and designates you the "camera-man". You're making a video for a friend, and you'd probably have the personal dignity and minimal dedication to at least frame your shots in a boring, amateurish, but at least palatable sense. Even if you lacked any sort of artistic eye, you'd at least default to putting people in center-frame full-zoom, and just holding it. Nope, this camera was handled by a drooling subsimian who apparently couldn't zoom out to fit the person talking into the picture, or had to absently, scratch--obviously-- point the camera at his object of affection instead of the person talking. Yes, I realize you're setting up the character development, but some of us here like some logical realism with our gritty "realism".

It was okay how it was, but I think they could have done with less footage. There were points where the person should have logically put the camera down and, for instance, gone to help someone else.

Just cut the damned power already. Lights are flashing and sputtering throughout the movie while all hell is breaking loose outside. Wasn't this the city... no, state... that went dark when some power lines in Canada sparked?

On the upside, it had some very good-- I'd call it Lovecraft-style-- horror, where the lack of information was the driver to the fear and tension. Through the first half, three-quarters of the movie even, there was quite a bit of tension and fear without having to resort to cheap "wait... wait... JUMPOUTATYOU!" tactics. It was genuinely gripping. Also, the fake news graphics were impressive. I've seen enough good concepts ruined by shitty fake news reports to give credit for that.

But then, of course, they tended to ruin it by shining the camera right up "the monster"'s asshole, collapsing the tension into a heap of "oh, okay, so that's what it was." About the only "question mark" by the end of the movie was the abrupt ending, both in story and style, as the tape cuts out in an explosion at the end. We're left not knowing what happened to New York or the world, or where the "thing" came from. However, we know what happened to all the protagonists, and we've seen enough proctological photos of the beast to mostly demystify it, so the abrupt "cutoff" ending was less a dramatic device than a transparent attempt at one. Everything was all wrapped up. (Want a look at how to do the "cutoff" ending right? Fail Safe from 1967. One of my favorite movies, and an example of how to do a tense ending right.)

I'd like to see the movie on the small screen, to see how it fares. On one hand, the motions shouldn't be as jarring, leading to less nausea, but I don't know if lack of big-screen 'splosions will reveal deeper flaws.

I have to give this movie two separate overall ratings-- If it hadn't made me so ill that I had to close my eyes for the last half, I'd give it a B+, perhaps even a low A-. It accomplished tension and fright without resorting to any of the simple tricks, and that's difficult and impressive. On the other hand, I'm still sick to my stomach, so I have to dually rate it as a C- as well.

...

Before that, The Golden Compass.

The best I can say about The Golden Compass is that it held my interest adequately through the entirety. It wasn't bad, but like all such magic-and-fantasy movies, it wants to be epic, mystical, a bit larger than life. The Golden Compass didn't really hit the mark on those accounts-- it strove, but merely ended up at "entertaining throughout". One major deficiency-- and one the rest of the movie can be credited for overcoming-- was the dearth of plot points. From start to finish, the entire plot got no more complex than three or four major conflicts. Subplots popped and sizzled enough to keep an adequate level of action going, but when the story ended, you look back to find that the meat of the matter could be summed up in a few sentences.

Also, the premise behind most of the antagonists was cardboard-cutout at best, unsupportable at worst.

Plus, the story, through-and-throughout, seemed like a push toward a sequel. The story lacked adequate resolution on its own, and the movie ended with a straight-from-the-cliche-bin "Okay, we're ready, let's all get on this airship and head off to... Roll credits, see you next time."

It is, though, a testament to the moment-to-moment writing, acting, and other aspects of the movie that it even managed to pull itself together into an enjoyable few hours, given the absence of underlying story. I'd have to give it a B-.

Now, this movie brings up a bit of an old question with me: Why is it that any magic-using society tends to cease development at around the 1920s? Okay, perhaps you can blow-dry your hair with the tilt of a wand, but would it be that much of a travesty to drop in some 110v lines and an electric stove? Ornate golden clockwork carrier pigeon, or pick up the phone and dial? Give the mythical animals a rest! Take the bus? Okay, I know that everyone is taken in by the ornate styles of the past times, and a lot of classic fantasy was first laid out around those times, but let's pop the crutch here and try something new for a change.

Geektastic triple-shot!

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 02:35:23 GMT

1.) Woot! My networked printer (the slow and smelly HP LaserJet that time forgot) works again! It was a bad network cable, it seems. I can print!

2.) Since the weather's been so unbelievably drab of late, making my budding photographic hobby a bit difficult, I've thrown myself back into the RPG biz again, further toasting the most crispy golden brown of the half-baked ideas I've come up with so far, Head.

In this game, PCs play a range of autonomous creatures that live in the head of the central character (the Head, also a PC). Characters include spirit guides, demons, ghosts, imaginary friends, schizophrenic delusions. The individual PCs fight for control and toward their own goals, while the Head just tries to stay sane and get rid of all of them.

Each PC has a Goal, a specific end to which they are working toward, as part of their character concept. Reward points (redeemable for stat increases, more chips, or a windbreaker with the logo on it) are given by the GM, who assesses characters' roleplaying and advancement toward their goal. Although the game is GM-arbitrated, it is primarily player-driven, with players often acting against one another.

Aside from doling out points, the GM sets scene and plays any outside characters.

Notes...

Character Alignments

[G]ood

Primary Goals should align with the Head, or work for the Head's protection.

[N]eutral

Goals and motivations are driven with little regard to the Head.

[E]vil

Goals are driven toward the corruption of the Head, or using the Head as a means for malicious purposes.

Characters

[PC] The Head

The player-character.
Goals of a Head generally consist of "neutralize the other players and hold myself together."
Games should only include one of this character type.

[G] Fairy Godmother/Guardian Angel

Upside: Can temporarily neutralize [E] elements. Able to produces some effects in the real world.
Downside: No direct control or dialogue with the Head's mind.
Goals consist of protecting the Head from harm, and possibly advancing them toward a healthy or positive action.
Games should only include one of this character type.

[G] Spirit Guide

Upside: Able to uncover and neutralize MDP rational phobias. Able to subtly alter chance in the real world.
Downside: Has few Muting abilities.
Goals consist of protecting the Head from harm, and helping them to gain strength and insight against other PCs.
Games should only include one of this character type.

[N] Imaginary Friend

Upside: Very resistant to blocking of manifestation.
Downside: Few overall goals.
Goals are general, random, and scattershot.
Games should rarely include more than one of this character type.

[N] Ghost

Upside: Can affect the physical world, NPCs, etc. Can possess the character with extreme effort.
Downside: Must leave the Head in order to manifest physically. No hallucination abilities or access to memories.
Means and tendencies may fall toward the G/E ends of the spectrum, but the overriding goal of the Ghost has no bearing on the Head. Generally, goals are looking for revenge, closure, or some effect on the real world. (If the Head is the enemy of the Ghost, it is a rare case that the ghost's goals may be [E] in intent. If the character is to be aligned [G] or [E] to the character, consider a Spirit Guide or a Demon, respectively.
Games may include many of this character type.

[E] Demon

Upside: Can affect NPCs, completely possess the Head, easier possession abilities than Ghost.
Downside: Must leave to possess NPCs. Supernatural physical abilities limited to higher-order possession events.
Demons are similar, but more universally malicious than Ghosts. Goals may consist of simply destroying or corrupting the Head, or using the Head to perform evil deeds. Demons are never out for specific revenge-- for that, the player should consider a Ghost.
Games may include many of this character type.

[E] Multiply Disordered Personality

Upside: Can introduce rational phobias, very easy total possession.
Downside: Easily dominated.
Goals for MDPs should be driven by a Dark Secret, which influences the MDP's personality. If an MDP's Dark Secret is revealed to the player, they are extremely vulnerable. However, they have the defensive mechanism of taking possession of the Head whenever the subject comes up.
Games should rarely include more than one of this character type, and numbers should always remain small.

[E] Schizophrenia

Upside: Can generate fleeting hallucinations, delusions, and voices quite easily, and longer-lasting delusions and hallucinations with expenditure.
Downside: Limited autonomy and abilities by virtue of not being a full-fledged character.
Goals for Schizophrenias should center around solidifying its core delusions, rituals, concepts or actions, or enacting long-term delusional goals.
Games may include many of this character type, but players may wish to confer so as not to intrude upon the same areas.

2-an'a-half.) Aside from the plot, I'm also using this game to try out (what I think is) a rather unique conflict resolution system. Instead of relying on static statistics or chance (or a marriage of both) to determine a victor, conflict resolution depends more on active player preparation before a scene. Stat values are determined by small tokens-- poker chips or small change-- stacked on the stat (or "stack"). The player has a number of minimums and maximums they have to abide by, but for the most part, their statistics are determined by a pool of chips they can place where they wish before each turn.

Let's say we were using this system in a more conventional RPG. If you were to rush into combat, guns a'blazing, you might place most of your chips into Firearms or Melee. However, as you have a limited supply of free chips, you would have to take them from things like Alertness, which would mean that you would be susceptible to sneak attacks or someone coming from behind. Then, determining a victor and degree of victory is simply a matter of comparing who has the larger stack in the relevant abilities. Rather than the usual RPG conflict resolution, which depends primarily on chance (with probability provided by stats), this system (I believe) would allow a more realistic type of achievement, where success is achieved by raw stats (the mins and maxes) and how much of your attention you are willing to dedicate to that task.

3.) Reading around various indie-gaming forums, I also thought of a type of casual game that could be interesting. It's basically a more formalized version of that "continue the story" campfire game, only played with RP nerds on a mission.

Bullshit! RPG: A generic, mutational, democratic, casual, multi-GM roleplaying game

Required Materials

Paper for character sheets.
1d(x), where (x) is equal to or greater than the number of players.

Setup:

Nothing is discussed.
Number off
Everyone fills out a character sheet.

Your number.

Your character's name.
Five unique abilities or qualities about your character. Simple facts.

Play Starts

During any die roll: If your own number comes up, or if a number greater than the number of players comes up (if you're using a d6 in a group of five, for instance), re-roll.

Someone rolls the die. The person whose number comes up is the first player.
That person rolls the die. The person whose number comes up is the first GM.
The GM narrates the scene. It can be any type of scene whatsoever... the rest of the players just have to play along.

Play Continues

The player takes one action or turn.
The GM says whether their action succeeded or failed, and narrates the event. This is completely up to the GM's discretion, and not based on any sort of dice rolls, checks, or stats (except that the player may mention one of their five extraordinary stats).
If any player thinks the GM is unfair in their judgement, they can call "Bullshit!", for a vote-of-no-confidence. After calling "Bullshit!", players raise their hands if they agree, and a vote is taken of all players present. If the majority believes that the GM's move was bullshit, the GM must replay the reaction in more agreeable terms.
After the player's turn (be it contested or uncontested), the player rolls a die, and that number is the next GM. The die is then given to the next player (Round-robin, decide on a direction. I don't want to hold your hand through all of this), and we continue from Play Continues...

Play note: Players should save their "Bullshit!" calls for truly unbelievable decisions, and other players should vote on that standard as well.

Don't microposts piss you off, too?

Thu, 21 Feb 2008 05:06:03 GMT

Dammit. My computer's acting all flaky, and all I want to do is drop some photos down on Flickr and go to bed. This thing gets weird, it seems, when you plug in a second monitor without the proper arcane and ancient ritual.

That and it's generally a piece of crap. I'm going to be so glad once I get my desktop machine back up. Mmmm... dual 2.8GHz and 2GB RAM. (And I'm not blowing it on Vista!)

I'm going to have to go over there and tell them to turn it down.

Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:53:03 GMT

The Christians are back at it again, and louder. It sounds like someone's singing heartfelt hallelujahs into one of those comb/wax-paper kazoos in the next room over.

Eclipse pics.

Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:33:25 GMT

Went out, froze my ass off, got some half-decent eclipse pics.

Lost and Found

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 05:51:06 GMT

Here's a site I'd seen some time ago, but lost the address to: Dark Side of Phobos. It's a (free downloadable) album of remakes of the music from the original Doom game. Novelty aside, it's all pretty decent (if a bit 1990s-industrial-techno feeling).

That's it. I need to learn to play the (electric) guitar, if only so I can make the kickass rendition of the M.U.L.E. theme I've been dreaming of.

Wait... so... snow?

Thu, 07 Feb 2008 00:34:01 GMT

Tonight

Areas of blowing snow. Snow...then a chance of snow overnight. Snow accumulation 2 to 4 inches. Lows near 15. Northeast winds 15 to 20 mph becoming north 5 to 10 mph overnight. Chance of snow near 100 percent. wunderground.com

God help us, they've engaged the Tunablaster.

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 01:24:16 GMT

I think Flickr's going all haunted and I-love-bees-like. Cat pictures tiled all over the page. A big dump of error/status strings with

// // tunablaster: ENGAGED // all string outputs are defined in the object declaration and contained in the format_strs...

at the beginning. That or my laptop's going wonky... or I'm asleep and dreaming about bitching people out on Flickr.

Flickr

Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:42:43 GMT

For the record, I'll probably be quite a bit more active in my Flickr account. I've joined a couple groups, posted a few old photos, put down $25 for the Pro account. New pix are on hiatus pending less completely awful weather. Recent old pix are on hiatus pending computer repair. If you're on, bounce a message.

The Caption Contest...

Sun, 30 Dec 2007 22:24:36 GMT

More photos here...

Sanity, sanity

Sat, 29 Dec 2007 04:40:07 GMT

Okay, first things first. Before I go off blowing a big wad of money on a new proc and mobo, I suppose I ought to look at things a bit more systematically. Considering that most of the soda did fall onto the video card, and I haven't tried it with a different video card (that's one thing I don't have a spare of), I suppose I should go to CompRenew and pick up a ten-dollar beater of a video card to see if that's the problem. Or, perhaps, does anyone out there in TV-land have an old AGP video card they wouldn't mind lending me?

Although I'm holding out hope, I'm not getting my hopes up too far, since I wasn't getting any manner of telltale beeps from the box when I booted it without the vid card. Perhaps the BIOS is just abnormally quiet.