I’ve been eating a lot of Domino’s pizza lately.

I’ve been busy, watching a lot of movies and TV shows, reading, and writing. I realized that I need to focus on chewing through all that material, so I simply don’t have time to make meals from scratch.

But I want to. More importantly, my stomach wants to. Processed foods typically upset my stomach, like drunk tourists messing up the place.

Once I’ve finished enough of my piles, I’ll get back to serious cooking. Meanwhile, I won’t feel 100%.

Life’s not simple.

My Mom was never much of a soup person.

She’s always liked soups, but in the same way that people like cocktail peanuts or turf grass. When I think of my Mom’s cooking, I remember her chicken cordon bleu, her strawberry whipped cream cake, her divine chocolate fudge cake, her crusty French bread, her unimaginably soft homemade pasta. I don’t remember any soups. I’m sure she made some, but none glued themselves into my memory.

I’ve never loved soups in the same way that, say, the French seem to obsess over them. Soup’s always operated like a cream sauce for me — tasty, in its own way, but never a main dish.

Then I read Molly Wizenberg‘s A Homemade Life, in which she makes a strong case for soups. In particular, soup for lunch. Suddenly, soups make sense.

I always have a tough time with lunch at work. Offices never seem equipped to properly reheat leftovers, and I find myself eating like a hobo out of a sagging plastic tub. Plus, so many things really shouldn’t reheat at the same temperature; I want my roast beef hot, not the bread and lettuce as well.

(Sure, I could separate them, but then I become That Guy, the one who spends twenty minutes assembling his leftovers.)

Soups, though, are perfect for leftovers. Pop them in a big container, bring it to work along with a bowl and spoon, and you’re good to go. Bring a bag full of sliced homemade bread, and lunch becomes a meal.

Now my problem lies in finding a good soup to make. I’ve picked three tomatoes from my garden, so I’m contemplating a tomato soup. Unfortunately, I’ve never liked tomato soup. But maybe that’s because of my upbringing. No offense to my amazing cook of a Mom, but I think I need to get over my soup complex, and learn to love soup.

My Dad loves clam chowder, but that’s another story.

I first stumbled on iFanboy when I bought my Roku a few months back. I was skimming through Revision3′s offerings, saw a show on American comics, and watched an episode.

I found a show that combines intelligence, experience, and passion. These guys know their comics, they know how to talk about comics in a way that’s helpful for any reader, and they know the limits of their knowledge. They understand that passion can be a highly personal, subjective thing, but that it’s usually indicative of some worth in a work somewhere (the passion grew from something worthwhile). And mining for the passion’s cause reveals useful information about the work.

iFanboy is run by three comic book guys, and one thing I appreciate is the specific attention they provide to each of their productions:

The blog contains miscellaneous posts about recent comic book issues and trade paperbacks, conventions, comic book movies, etc. It’s a great central resource for comic book news and reviews.

The audio podcast is an hour-long weekly show where all three hosts talk about the comics they’ve read that week (mostly new stuff). This is a fantastic window into the current zeitgeist of American comics.

The video podcast shuffles between three formats: interviews with comic writers and artists, individual segments by each host about some interesting series or work, and a sit-down with all three. This last format I like the most. One episode looked back at the Marvel Civil War, analyzing its purpose, high and low points, reception, impact, and the question of whether it achieved its goal. Another talked about Iron Man — his origin, major stories and themes, interesting characters, etc.

I’ve modeled a lot of Otaku, No Video off of iFanboy, as much as I can. It just works.

When the iPad was first released, early adopters rushed to post their initial impressions.

Now that I’ve been using an iPad for a few months, I think it’s important to come back and provide some more experienced impressions.

Here are the apps I use:

• Daily
  • WSJ (Wall Street Journal). I even bought the subscription, so I don’t have to lug my Kindle around with me.
  • GoodReader, a fantastic PDF viewer that can wirelessly transfer PDFs from my laptop with no extra software.
  • EverNote, a note-taking app that backs up all content to internet servers. This is the centerpiece of my Getting Things Done implementation.
• A few times a week
  • TweetDeck, a Twitter client
  • Kindle
  • xkcd, an online comic with a solid app
  • FeedlerRSS, a front-end for Google Reader, in which I read all the blogs I’ve subscribed to
  • WeatherBug, a slick weather app
  • Safari
• Occasionally
  • X-Comics, a comic book reader and store, which sells single issues of comics for US $1 to $2.
  • Mail

I don’t use the iPod functionality. That’s what my iPod is for, and I don’t want to fill the iPad with music when I could use that storage space for apps and data.

The iPad has replaced my Kindle. I still love the Kindle, but the iPad replaces all of its functions for day-to-day use. I’d prefer a Kindle in other situations, like travel (the Kindle has a longer battery life and its cellphone modem for downloading books costs nothing, depending on where in the world you are).

I encountered the dreaded “Re-enter your password” bug, in which the iPad would periodically lose its wireless internet connection and forget the password. I tried a number of different solutions, to no effect. I ended up removing password protection on my wireless network to solve it.

Nevertheless, I still use my iPad every day. After the first few weeks, my usage dropped drastically, and I barely picked it up for about a month. I then got back into it, especially when I started using GoodReader and the WSJ app. The iPad has turned into a practical device for me.

Check in on my Google Wave RPG game, The Legacy of the Lines, a D&D 4E game:

"Circle of Fire" by stephenccwu on Flickr

I’ve been thinking lately about the best way to give feedback to players in my role-playing games.

By ”feedback,” I mean pointing out particularly effective and particularly ineffective behavior, like creative problem-solving, forgetting to update a marker, effective teamwork, or aggressive interpersonal behavior.

I used to essentially ignore this. I’d occasionally reward a creative solution with a quick “Great thinking!” I essentially ignored bad behavior.

This, of course, is ineffective.

I then picked up a feedback system from Manager Tools, which used a four-part framework:

1. Privately, ask if it’s okay to give some feedback.
2. Describe the behavior you’re addressing.
3. Describe the positive or negative consequences of that behavior.
4. Ask if they can do it differently next time.

This model’s intended for managers talking to their staff.  Role-playing’s a game; GMs take on a very different role than that of a corporate manager.  (Though there are many parallels.)

I’ve modified it to this:

1. Privately, tell the person that I have some quick feedback.  For positive feedback, I usually start with a ”Thanks” sentence.
2. Describe the behavior.
3. Describe the positive or negative consequences of the behavior.
4. Reassure that this is just a little note.

It still doesn’t feel quite right. On the one hand, it feels rather apologetic — can a player really not receive feedback unless it’s sandwiched between such deprecating phrases? On the other hand, RPGs are games, after all, and the GM has little power over the players. Sure, the GM can kill a player’s character…and then the player may never come back.

I also struggle to identify opportunities for positive feedback. I suspect that skill will develop over time, but it’s hard to find things to reward when the game’s going along fine.

I suppose smooth sailing, itself, deserves praise. Hmmm.

Screenshot from "Dhoom 2"

I’m having a difficult time figuring out how to describe Dhoom 2. I have such a disparate readership that I feel I’m constantly explaining or defending my hobbies and interests. If I want to describe a Hong Kong action flick or amazing anime series, I feel a need to lay the groundwork necessary for a non-fan to understand what I’m talking about.

Applying standard Western movie values to Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Indian films results in a fractured lens. Foreign cinema values different things.

So. Rather than defend or apologize for it, I’m just going to describe Dhoom 2.

It’s a Bollywood special effects cop film. It’s got shootouts, intense stand-offs, copious explosions, gorgeous actors, and modern musical sequences.

The filmmakers shot the action sequences as over-the-top orgies of stunts, gunfire, and explosions. It’s not realistic; it’s Mission Impossible without quite as much budget.

The musical numbers exist as all good musical numbers should: to reveal character and/or be visually spectacular. The opening credits sequence features the villain singing and dancing to a Stomp-like, nearly synthpop piece of music, surrounded by urban dancers. It’s a music video.

The acting is common for Asian cinema; some over-the-top performances and some subtle performances, usually not from where you’d expect.

And my love for Dhoom 2 lies right there. Two scenes. One involves playful dialogue between a man and a woman on a basketball court in the rain. Subtle one-upmanship. Charismatic acting.

The other involves the same characters, with a gun between them. Guns appear throughout the film; a lot of bullets fly.  But when it’s pulled out for this scene, the gun has immediate weight and terror. This is a killing machine. And its entrance into the scene begins a wonderfully, horrifically intense sequence.

When I finished watching Dhoom 2, I gave it five stars on NetFlix.

Last week, I finally finished and published a D&D 4E adventure, The Goblins of Summerkeep, to DriveThruRPG.com.

It took a while.  There are all sorts of little finishing steps, such as checking for errors, verifying that the generated PDF looks good, uploading to DriveThruRPG, etc.

I’m also working to make it available in multiple formats, and that’s a classic time suck. DriveThruRPG provides a print-on-demand service, but that requires its own PDFs. SmashWords will publish my adventure to the Kindle, Nook, and iPad, but it requires a specially-formatted MS Word file.

None of this is hard; it just consumes time.

It’s also the first of several adventures designed as an interlocking storyline.  Each adventure can be played separately, or strung together into a central story for a Heroic Tier campaign.  Lots of other stories can branch off of these adventures, as well.  So I’ve got plenty more work ahead of me.

It’s exhausting and exhilarating. I’m moving forward.

© Sunrise

In the previous posts in this series, I laid some groundwork for adapting D&D 4E to a mecha universe, establishing some basic stats and skills.

Let’s create some sample mecha units, using the stats we’ve defined so far.

The Stats We Need

If you recall, each mecha has the following stats:

• Manufacturer, which corresponds to race
• Class
• Size
• Speed
• Initiative
• AC
• Fortitude
• Reflex
• Strength
• Constitution
• Dexterity
• HP
• Repairs

All of the above scores will be based off the manufacturer and class, so let’s start there.

Manufacturing a Giant Robot

The manufacturer corresponds to a PC’s race in standard D&D.  So let’s open up our D&D 4E Player’s Handbook and look at the stats for character races.

• Average Height and Weight — Manufacturers don’t standardize on a particular height and weight for their merchandise.  This will depend more on the mecha’s class, so we’ll move this there.
• Ability Scores — +2 to two scores. Mecha have half as many ability scores as a D&D PC, so let’s provide +2 to one score.
• Size — This will be determined by class.
• Speed — Also determined by class (Boeing doesn’t restrict itself to only fast aircraft).
• Vision — Again, class-specific.  Less important on mecha, as we can assume all mecha have advanced infrared and other systems to see in the dark. So, let’s drop this unless there’s a specific need within the universe.
• Languages — Not applicable to a mecha universe, unless you want some kind of translator unit.
• Skill Bonuses — This we can keep, as long as we focus on physical skills.  Makes sense for a particular manufacturer to generally provide the same benefits to all products (“Apple’s products always have excellent UI; Sony’s products are always rugged.”)
• Special Abilities — We can keep this, but to make sense within the world, it needs to feel like a feature that a particular company always puts into its products, like a specific backdoor or consistent password scheme.

Class

• Average Height and Weight – Moved from manufacturer. Pure fluff at this point.  I don’t want to get into weight restrictions a la Battletech just yet.
• Size — Moved from manufacturer.
• Speed — Moved from manufacturer.
• Role — Just like in D&D.
• Power Source — Not useful in most mecha universes.  There are definitely universes within which this would make sense, especially fantasy ones where different mecha are powered by different magic.  But we can typically ignore this.
• Key Abilities — Just like in D&D.
• Armor Proficiencies — We’ll keep this, as we can have a variety of different types of protection: physical, energy-based, and flak-based.
• Weapon Proficiencies — Ditto. We can even use essentially the same weapon classes as D&D.
• Bonus to Defense — Keep.
• Hit Points at 1st Level — Keep.
• Hit Points per Level Gained — Keep.
• Healing Surges Per Day — Yes, renamed to Repair Operations
• Trained Skills — This doesn’t make sense for a mecha — how would a new type of mecha make you better at history?
• Build Options — Keep.
• Class Features — Keep.

Sample Manufacturer

Seinar Systems

Initially a maker of luxury space craft, including pleasure yachts and high-end shuttles, Seinar has branched out into military manufacturing while retaining its trademark elegance and speed.

Ability Modifier: +2 to Dexterity

Skill Bonuses: +2 to Acrobatics, +2 to Athletics

Dexterous Movement: Manufacturer At-Will Power: Minor Action: Shift up to 2 squares.

Sample Class

Freedom-Class Mecha

• Size Medium
• Speed 7
• Role Striker
• Key Abilities Dexterity, Strength
• Armor Proficiencies Energy-based
• Weapon Proficiencies Simple melee, military melee
• Bonus to Defense: +2 Reflex
• Hit Points at First Level 13 + Dexterity modifier
• Hit Points Per Level Gained 5
• Repair Operations Per Day 9 + Dexterity modifier
• Build Options None yet
• Class Features
  • Sure Strike: Class At-Will Power: Standard Action
    Attack: Dexterity +2 vs. AC
    Target: One mecha
    Hit: 1[W] + Dexterity modifier damage.
  • Jarring Strike: Class At-Will Power: Standard Action
    Attack: Dexterity vs. AC
    Target: One mecha
    Hit: 1[W] + Dexterity modifier damage, and target is stunned (save ends).
  • Anti-Ship Prejudice: Class At-Will Power: Standard Action
    Attack: Dexterity vs. AC
    Target: Capital ship
    Hit: 2[W] + Dexterity modifier damage.

There we go. We now have a sample race and class for mecha.  In the next post, we’ll talk about PCs.

This month’s RPG Blog Carnival over at Mad Brew Labs is on Growing the Hobby. I quote:

While I don’t think the hobby is disappearing, by any means, I don’t see it expanding by leaps & bounds either. I’d personally like to see it grow, and I would like to hear what the RPG Blogosphere has to say.

“Blogosphere.” :shudder: I so hate that word. Ah well;  not their fault.

Can It Grow?

"Sprout is now growing up" by BONGURI on Flickr

Not to be negative, but I honestly suspect that there’s little room for growth in the RPG industry. And that’s okay.

I originally wrote half a dozen long paragraphs describing each demographic’s limited potential for RPG sales, then remembered that demographics are a terrible way of measuring anything these days.

So let’s put it this way: What itch does an RPG scratch?

Players get the ability to live the life of a more interesting person, in a way that is deeply interactive and long-form.  GMs are able to create worlds and tell complex stories.

Quick, walk into a sports bar, and find me somebody who wants to put a lot of thought into crafting a long-form story.  Find me somebody who wants to give up one night a week to sit around with a bunch of friends and actively use their imagination.

Most folks just don’t value that. Sure, they’ll watch a fantasy movie — because they’re watching it.

This is not a dig against “mundanes.” Most people just don’t value the same things that geeks value.

How To Grow It?

I can think of a couple of things.

One: The vast majority of RPGs focus on geek settings. I challenge you to find an RPG setting or product that doesn’t assume at least a fantastic or science fiction element.

(I always found it telling that the example shows in Primetime Adventures, which is about creating dramatic TV episodes, skews strongly towards SF/F shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer.)

What if there was an RPG where you play a basketball star?  Or a private investigator?  Or a nurse in an ER?

Two: The systems have to be simpler and require fewer materials. There are only so many people in the world willing to go out and buy special dice for a game. (And since when was that considered an acceptable additional cost of playing a game? Board games don’t assume this; they come with the dice, board, etc.)

Three: The games have to provide a stronger initial punch. Most folks don’t want a multi-year commitment out of their game; they want Scattergories. Character creation (for most) is work with no obvious, direct reward.

Imagine an RPG that comes with two dozen vibrant, pre-generated characters and a dozen well-crafted, quick adventures. Want to play an adventure in an hour or two?  Grab a character and go.

I’m sure there are others. How would you grow the hobby beyond the folks who already play it?