I'm just going to flat out say this...
Jul. 21st, 2009 07:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Anybody should feel free, when I'm blogging obsessively on a subject in the middle of the day and there are no stories out yet, to leave a comment saying words to the effects of, "Do you realize how much time you're spending on this?" or "Um, shouldn't you be writing?"
Because the answer may very well be no on the first and yes on the second. My reminders-to-self only work if I pay attention to them, and if I get really focused on something I may not notice them, or I may tell myself "I'll spend five more minutes on this", which might work if not for the fact that if I could tell when I'm spending "just five more minutes" I wouldn't need the reminder regimen.
There's no reason to be nasty about it, but you don't have to do a lot of bowing and scraping about it, which is probably going to come off with the opposite effect of what you intended. Just being upfront. I'm trying to be upfront about the issues I have. I won't snap and bite anybody's head off for noticing that I'm distracted and giving me a short and simple reminder.
Because the answer may very well be no on the first and yes on the second. My reminders-to-self only work if I pay attention to them, and if I get really focused on something I may not notice them, or I may tell myself "I'll spend five more minutes on this", which might work if not for the fact that if I could tell when I'm spending "just five more minutes" I wouldn't need the reminder regimen.
There's no reason to be nasty about it, but you don't have to do a lot of bowing and scraping about it, which is probably going to come off with the opposite effect of what you intended. Just being upfront. I'm trying to be upfront about the issues I have. I won't snap and bite anybody's head off for noticing that I'm distracted and giving me a short and simple reminder.
no subject
on 2009-07-22 12:26 am (UTC)no subject
on 2009-07-22 12:43 am (UTC)words to read
on 2009-07-22 12:52 am (UTC)That being said, I read your journal for the entertainment value as well. I find you have some interesting LGBT stories, and random other things. When blogging about your life, you put an interesting writer's spin on it, so I don't mind that either.
The one thing I do NOT enjoy reading about is D&D. This is my personal opinion, but maybe others share it. Please... don't turn your blog into a D&D editorial! If it's like one or two, of course I can just skip it. 7 blogs, though!
I can has moar non-D&D words? =/
Re: words to read
on 2009-07-22 01:54 am (UTC)Re: words to read
on 2009-07-22 02:17 am (UTC)But the more I look at it, the more I feel like nostalgia ain't what it used to be. Original D&D was something that was only fun for me in spite of the system... in spite of the non-sensical magic and magic items rules that had nothing to do with any kind of fantasy I'd ever read or dreamed of, in spite of the "roll the right number or die" mechanics for poison, traps, eye beams, etc., in spite of the paper-thin heroes who died the first time they got into a fight, in spite of the arbitrary limitations on who could hold what kinds of weapons...
I think it's a testament to the power of the imagination that so much fun was milked out of it.
Re: words to read
on 2009-07-22 04:36 am (UTC)Oh boy does that ever take me back to my first game with my older brother and sister. My Thief got taken out early. I'll admit the original game had some huge holes in the rules. I liked AD&D a bit more when it came out. But like any game, it's the players who really make it or break it. My friends and I use to treat the rule-books much like Capt. Barbossa treated The Code: "They're really more like guidelines anyway." The DM (yeah, this was before everyone started calling the person running the game a Game Master (GM)) was the ultimate authority within the world they created. If they decided they didn't like a rule, they changed it. And naturally those who were fair and impartial became popular DM's, while those who were tyrannical couldn't pay players to game with them. It wasn't perfect, but it worked.
And yeah, imagination was a major part of the gaming experience. And as the years wore on the people I played AD&D seemed to loose theirs. By the time I was 14, the people I was playing with were so boring and unimaginative that I really lost my interest in it. I missed having a DM who was a storyteller, weaving together their descriptions in such a way that a player could close their eyes and see the world around them. I missed having other players who were actors, immersing themselves in their characters. Without imagination, games went from epic fantasy adventures to rolling dice and "You are in a 10 foot by 10 foot corridor that runs roughly North to South. You see nothing withing the radius of your torch."
I remember my older brother really use to tell a story with his games. "You see irregular walls of rough hewn grey stone periodically shored up with masterfully carved collumns and lintels that betray the work of dwarven stone masons. The dust of ages lays thick upon the ground, showing you are the first living creatures to walk here in a millenia. The air is stagnant and filled with the sickly sweet scent of decay. From somewhere beyond the light of your torch, water drips and echoes amongst the walls in the darkness."
I've always thought that a good Game Master must possess creativity and imagination, be a superb storyteller able to draw their players into the world they have created, be a bit of a tease giving just enough treasure and XP to keep them coming back for more, but not "Monty Haul" a campaign and make it so easy there is no challenge. Maybe it's not the old rules I miss, so much as the caliber of players that I use to know when I lived back in Colorado that I lost when my family moved to California.
Who knows, things just ain't like the use to be.
Re: words to read
on 2009-07-22 02:14 am (UTC)(And incidentally, 3 Seas is very short... each update is about one printed page's worth of words. So it's not like it would be a huge timesuck. All the cool kids are reading it, and it will make you feel super groovy.)
So random
on 2009-07-22 01:00 am (UTC)When googling this, I can't find any evidence of it. Being a mildly nerdy, I find this interesting... Have you heard of such rule changes?
Re: So random
on 2009-07-22 01:57 am (UTC)Re: So random
on 2009-07-22 02:11 am (UTC)"Last night I met my fiance's parents, the president of the United States[,] and a hooker."
Without the comma after the second item, it might read a bit differently.
But I am of the school that contends that if a comma is not the standard practice then the ambiguity remains because we'll all be using different standards to figure out what is or isn't ambiguous.
In my quote (which is a song lyric by Liz Phair), the qualities of "vulnerable and luscious" aren't paired together any more explicitly than "vulnerable and cool" or "tall and cool" or any other combination. I can't think of a single good reason to group them together by omitting a comma.
Re: So random
on 2009-07-22 05:39 am (UTC)Re: So random
on 2009-07-22 07:42 am (UTC)"I split $3,000 between my son, my daughter, and my wife," means each gets $1,000. "I split $3,000 between my son, my daughter and my wife," means the son gets $1,500 and the daughter and wife each get $750.
Note that the rule of leaving out the comma comes from newspaper articles (where space is at a premium). It's never been completely unacceptable to leave it in.
no subject
on 2009-07-23 07:33 am (UTC)*goes back to her sort of RPG, the kind with lots and lots of words and a forum.*
no subject
on 2009-07-24 06:32 am (UTC)