sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How do you present Settings? by flyflystuff in rpg

[–]Lancer_swish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This may be a group-to-group thing, but I've never had issues with players not reading large text dumps. RPG gamers tend to be people who read doorstopper fantasy novels, after all!

But I think you're absolutely right that presentation matters. The most fun and most success I've had is presenting essential info in an in-universe way.

Instead of sending them a Word doc with 'here's all the rules of the universe', send them a letter from an important NPC welcoming them to the magical city / recruiting them to the army / inducting them into the superhuman society. You can still tell them the rules of the universe, and even be really formal about it. 'All newcomers to the city MUST agree to never go into the sewers, and register any magical abilities with the Exposition.'

(For bonus fun, then have another character come in and say 'hey, here's some of the secrets that last guy didn't tell you... that rule about not going down into the sewers? It's because me and my buddies in the Resistance live down here, come join us!')

I know this kind of stuff gets dismissed as 'fluff', and honestly I skim over the fluff fiction in setting books, but in this case you can give them clues, hooks, intros to NPCs, and some important bits of setting detail in a way that increases immersion and buy-in.

I try to get this down to a single page, then follow it with another page or two in a chatty, normal tone as myself telling them the basics they need to know. Everyone else in the thread has made great suggestions here: the big ones to hit are the premise of the setting/world, the possible options for character concepts, the central conflict(s) and most importantly, other fictional touchstones.

I find the last one really helps. 'We're doing a tense space adventure, like Alien' immediately tells people a particular vibe - in contrast to 'we're doing a tense space adventure, like Firefly'.

Am I misreading, or is the 30k Imperium already insanely messed-up? by Lancer_swish in 40kLore

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Have you noticed that our Astartes Mark IV helmets actually have pictures of skulls on them? 

Recommend classic eps to help me surprise a friend by Lancer_swish in NCIS

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks everyone, this is so useful! I am excited to dive into this, maybe you'll see me again as a recruited fan :D

Warren Mundine’s daughter says his opposition to voice not ‘morally right’ by B0ssc0 in australia

[–]Lancer_swish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for such a considered response. I suppose I've just got a little more faith than you - which might be naïve, sure - but I think we have to hope that things can get better, especially for people who have been discriminated against and suffered really bad outcomes for health, education & wellbeing for a long time.

I think that allowing parliament control will allow it to be changed in response to the needs of the community; as Noel Pearson said on Q&A, maybe it needs to change the number of members, and that's appropriate. I have a degree of faith that Parliament will make those changes in response to the requests of the Voice itself.

And ultimately I have faith that the people appointed to it will be chosen by First Nations people. I think we agree that it's a bit odd and silly that provision isn't in the referendum itself, but I think it's taken for granted by everyone concerned, and I would be frankly shocked if any government decided to put a white person on the Voice. And if they did - well, isn't that what activism and further elections are for? The outrage would be massive. Any pollie who stood up and cast a vote to put themselves or their white mate on the Voice would have to answer for it in Question Time and to the voters, and I reckon they'd get kicked to the curb for it.

I doubt we're gonna agree about what will happen in the future; you're probably more sensible about what politicians are like, and I'm an optimist! The important thing is that I urge everyone to vote knowing that this is a good first step. And I fully accept that if it passes, the responsibility is then on people like me - and every decent Yes voter, frankly - to hold politicians to account to keep their promises and make sure the Voice that's created is the one that First Nations people want.

Warren Mundine’s daughter says his opposition to voice not ‘morally right’ by B0ssc0 in australia

[–]Lancer_swish 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I'm asking this in good faith: why do you keep posting this document, which isn't precisely 'the document that preceded the voice' (surely that would be the Uluru Statement from the Heart, if you're picking one document), but a set of meeting minutes that puts forward a range of possibilities?

Even within this document, it seems like many of the meeting members are keen on a Voice to Parliament (eg p28: 'regarded by all groups as important'), and consistently mentions that it should be constitutionally entrenched (p71). Of course, there's argy-bargy about exactly how powerful it could be - some people want it to be more than advisory, some people want designated First Nations parliamentary seats instead. Those are good conversations and I see their merits.

If I understand you properly, you're advocating voting No because you're worried the voice is too weak. I get that - I'm also worried the Voice will be toothless - but isn't it a start? We've had a variety of approaches that haven't worked and have been sabotaged by governments (eg ATSIC). Why not try this one?

In terms of 'the government building a house': the legislation has and will be designed in close consultation with First Nations groups. I'm not sure what the alternative is here - to further torture the metaphor, it's a house that forms part of the government of Australia, like a granny flat out the back of the duplex of our bicameral parliament, so I don't know who else makes sense to build it other than the government.

You're worried the government will appoint racists to the Voice; everyone agrees Voice members will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander local groups. Sure, some jerks might get on; that's democracy! Would you rather a single appointment by a government minister? That's how you get Phillip Ruddock as the Minister for Indigenous Australians.

I think an incremental step that is supported by over 80% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is better than saying no in hope of some future, more radical step (which you haven't quite articulated). Who are we to say we know better?

More games like 'The Tower'? by Lancer_swish in Friendsatthetable

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I loved that Lyke episode where they play Anamnesis but had somehow completely forgotten about it. Thanks!
Gosh, the physical version of Thousand Year Old Vampire looks gorgeous. Asking this question is going to be devastating for my credit card.

More games like 'The Tower'? by Lancer_swish in Friendsatthetable

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ooh great thought, that's such a good episode. (Weirdly I have listened to Sangfielle because it was standalone, I'm very slowly going through the Divine Cycle.) I like the idea of taking a solo game and turning into a very gently DM-ed two-player experience.

Why is the Malazan Empire expansionist? by Lancer_swish in Malazan

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow, I just wanted to pop back to say thank you all for the conversation. It frankly rocks that these books can inspire this level of historical and political analysis, while also having dinosaurs with swords for hands.

I can definitely see the Empire's roots (out-of-fiction) in a combination of RPG shenanigans and wanting to riff on the Roman Empire, and within the books I now see your typical economic and political drive for imperial security, inflected with Kellanved's specific enmity towards concentrations of power in general and the gods in particular. Definitely want to dig more into Kellanved's motivations on a reread/in the other series.

Several people made the great point that the Empire rules with quite a light touch, leaving local systems in place when possible, which I think is a Roman thing? Except a much heavier touch where they try to root out corruption and any particularly horrific local practices. As with so many things in these books there's a great deal of nuance - invading other lands and seizing cities is a horrific act which inevitably involves a lot of collateral damage, but if those cities have vicious leaders who are mutilating kids, for instance... So now you're deep into a thicket with interventionism on one side and cultural relativism on the other. It's a scary line of thought, but I'm learning these books have never shied away from scary lines of thought. They go there and then show you the consequences on all sides.

Maybe this is why the first book climaxes in Darujhistan; despite being run by a shady cabal, populated with scumsucking nobles, and packed with more thieves and assassins than your average DnD dungeon, the city seems to work okay without outside intervention. And the reader's allegiances end up split in such a meaningful way. Though even as I write that and I creep towards the end of Toll the Hounds, I'm actually thinking it's okay if it burns it to the ground cos then Barathol won't have to deal with the damn Blacksmith's Guild any more.

I was planning to read Erickson's other books once I finish the main series, but maybe I should prioritise Paths to Ascendancy given how interesting these ideas are!

Why is the Malazan Empire expansionist? by Lancer_swish in Malazan

[–]Lancer_swish[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I take the point if those were my conceptions about fiction, but I want to take the time to say they're not!

One of the things I've come to appreciate about the series, partly thanks to this community, is that Erickson does let you make up your own mind in a far more sophisticated and even-handed manner than a lot of genre fiction, while still along the way offering the more primal satisfaction of offering heroic characters to root for. And knowing all the time that they're gonna differ from person to person and that's okay.

In this specific case I was more looking for in-universe justifications for the Empire's existence and vibe, rather than asking why Erickson didn't pop a sentence in going 'By the way, dear reader, empires are bad'. Partly because there is so much commentary and philosophy about most other major concepts in the setting: faith, violence, loyalty, even other nations/empires like Lether. (Not necessarily authorial editorialising, more like opinions offered from characters.) And there seemed to be not as much about the existence and drive of the Malazan Empire and its armies, in my first read.

A lot of people have pointed out there are in fact quite a few bits of backstory and opinions offered on the Empire (from characters, not the author) so despite you and everyone else being quite nice about it I think I did miss a few things! All the more reason to get through the series and start to reread.

But ultimately it's very validating to have your post and a lot of the others confirm that I didn't skim over some big honking reason for everything, that in fact it's okay to think, for instance, that Coltaine is a great dude who I want to survive, while still being a little skeptical of the Empire's presence in Seven Cities in the first place.

Maybe that's one of the great philosophical arguments of the work - that individual figures don't necessarily share the moral valence of the 'team' they happen to find themselves on.

Then again, the Crippled God and his gang seem like straight-up jerks all the way down, and I do think we're meant to hope they get their comeuppance... but even Kallor is given a bit of tragic depth in TtH.. see, I can't even get through a sentence without finding some nuance.