magicaddict | I Almost Missed Out On It...

...I just came this close to forgetting that it's the Eurovision Song Contest this Saturday.

This is a crime. I haven't missed one since 1992.

The British entry this year is touted as being one of the favourites, along with Germany, Greece and Sweden, but while I think it could be (a little) worse, I can't see it getting very far. I do, however, agree with the British guy's attitude. He thinks that the UK hasn't put anything decent out since 1997. With the possible exception of 1999, I think the UK entries since then have been variations on a pile of steaming turd and this isn't particularly far off.
The Finnish entry looking interesting as well, as long as they get through the semis - hot on the heels of the larp crew that won the 2004 conpetition, we have another one in altogether better costumes. Nice to see Lord Errtu (second from the right) branching out in his interests for once.

Tomorrow I have to speak in front of the final year PhD's, the second year PhD's, and the entirety of the departmental staff. Am I wrong for thinking "the more, the merrier?"

Is there anyone, at all, that thinks Kenneth Brannagh's 1996 version of Frankenstein was remotely scary? I'm trying to convince people to allow me to show it tonight, but they're paranoid.

I've been told interesting snippets about next year's TL campaign structure. Looks to me like what I was categorically told was not possible for this, that and the other reason being brought out in a low-fat variety and mirculously accepted, but it does remain a step in the right direction.

If I get on with work now, I might get finished by five. Hmm...that's a good idea.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm first to admit there are a whole bunch of similarities between the proposed campaign setting for next year and bits of the current setting. Some that spring to mind.
1) Some campaign NPCs
2) A campaign chain of command
3) over arcing plot

but JamesW has given Ruth and Myself a bit more rope to work with. We're going to let our NPCs write their characters. We've got a framework geography, but it's up to players to decide whats in the gaps. We've got a framework timeline, but it's upto players to submit details of events important to them.

It's not going to be a campaign world, until we add players. And I've no idea how difficult it's going to be to be.

The only other thing to add is that, without the current year's stuff, the next year's stuff wouldn't be happening.

My point centered around the following:

I wanted a map. I was told there couldn't be a map. Now there's a map.

I wanted a timeline. I was told there couldn't be a timeline. Now there's a timeline.

I never made any indication of who I thought should write them, except where it was mentioned that people wouldn't have time to create it themselves. Now people are writing it themselves.

Whether or not it stems from this year's campaign or not isn't particularly important. I wouldn't expect direct copying and it doesn't look like it is, from what I've heard. My problem lies with what I was told couldn't be done being done as soon as I stop being the one trying to do it.

My point centered around the following:

I wanted a map. I was told there couldn't be a map. Now there's a map.
but not of the barony. Or the kingdom. A (very) small part. About 3 days across.

I wanted a timeline. I was told there couldn't be a timeline. Now there's a timeline.
Again, of a very small part of the barony. Local history only, with no major events beyond, 'A hundred years ago, the kingdom of exiles...'

I never made any indication of who I thought should write them, except where it was mentioned that people wouldn't have time to create it themselves. Now people are writing it themselves.
Don't know about that. We aren't going to ask our NPCs to write anything beyond a name. The rest will be up to them.

Whether or not it stems from this year's campaign or not isn't particularly important. I wouldn't expect direct copying and it doesn't look like it is, from what I've heard. My problem lies with what I was told couldn't be done being done as soon as I stop being the one trying to do it.
I think the main difference is scale. We're stating from the start that the campaign area (both time and geography) is small and sketchy. Malliable.

And hopefully by presenting it before the end of term, we won't get too many kneejerk reactions of 'but I've already got my character for this year sorted.'

the differences are small but significant, and it does help that I've wound up being one of the more regular GMs.

Wanna come monster on sunday?

but not of the barony. Or the kingdom. A (very) small part. About 3 days across.
It would have been nice if someone had offered me even that at the time.

Again, of a very small part of the barony. Local history only, with no major events beyond, 'A hundred years ago, the kingdom of exiles...'
It would have been nice if someone had offered me even that at the time as well.

I never cared who wrote the NPC backgrounds. I was asked to, so I did. Had someone else been asked to, they'd still have been there.
The point I was making about "writing it themselves" is the timeline and the map. The first beef people had with it is the loss of flexibility - something I refer to as vagueness. The second was that people wouldn't have enough time to maintain them. Now it's suggested that everyone writes something about them and people are happy with it. What happened to "not enough time to maintain them?", let alone the loss of flexibility?
What if I wanted my character to come from the exact area that is being mapped, but have the homeland with different geography to what is being frameworked? Simple - get over it and fit it into the framework provided, which I can't help feeling was suggested beforehand and summarily refused.

No thanks. I can experience walking stats with a table and dice. If next years campaign shows signs of growing beyond that, I'll get in touch with you.

I think that you weren't offered the chance to scale down because people perceived an arrogance to the set up that they're familiar with from others who aren't allowed to run games anymore - consequently you were slotted into the same category and treated accordingly.

Please note: perceived.
Please note: no personal statement of perception, and speculative nature of comment.

I thought the compartmentalisation of people by others who don't fully know them was precisely the sort of thing that larpers tend to unite against - faced with public opinon that they're freaks in most derogatory sense of the term.

Evidently, they're just as shallow as everyone else in such matters.

uniting against something is the first step in becoming a clique.
And Larpers do like their cliques. (As do tabletop roleplayers, techies, actors, and academics)

Forming a clique is also a defensive mechanism.

I find TL GMing (and campaign-running) is all about getting the right mix of Forward planning and improvisation.

Cute.

A clique is a co-operative of people who work together in order to wield more power than the people they are opposing. Techies and actors do this to put upon each other - depending on which is stronger one or the other rules the production. Academics do it in order to wield more power than another field and gain more funding - I give you inorganic catalyst chemistry.

Tabletop roleplayers and larpers will never wield more power than those who believe them to be freaks. Does that still mean it's still a clique? Or is it more of a pressure group?

However, that points adressed, it still doesn't cover up the fact the people made an assumption about me without knowing me, and that pisses me off.

I know its a long shot, and you probably won't be able to make it, however I feel it is my duty to inform you that on Saturday night we will be screening the Eurovision song contest in the pub. On a big screen.

I would if I could...

Peach is coming down for the weekend to build the new computer, so we'll be watching at Calton Walk, I'm afraid.

You're screening the ESC? Kudos.

Send him my regards :)

I Almost Missed Out On It...

Campaign

Re: Campaign

points addressed

Re: points addressed

Re: points addressed

Re: points addressed

Re: points addressed

Re: points addressed

no subject

no subject

no subject