Robert’s blog (1.0)

One thing that really bugs me:

Kerry didn't stand up & say invading Iraq would be illegal & immoral. He voted for it.

Kerry still isn't saying it was illegal & immoral. He is not saying that Hussein was not a big enough threat to the US to justify 1,001 of our people killed & 6,916 of our people wounded.

On 22 February 2004, the Orlando Magic beat the Detroit Pistons. Detroit went on to become the 2004 NBA champions. Orlando ended up with the worst record in the league: They only won 21 games, & they lost 61.

Nobody would claim that, because Orlando beat the champions in one game that Orlando had the best team in the league.

Lets look at the record of foreign terrorist attacks within the US prior to 2001:

• 1920: A supected Bolshevist or anarchist attack. (Never solved.)
• 1975: Bombing by a Puerto Rican nationalist group.
• 1993: World Trade Center bombing.

OK, let's look at the record after 2001: Nothing.

Foreign terrorism is a threat to the US. It isn't the threat some people would lead you to believe it is.

One of the most important traits I look for in a leader is the courage to admit they were wrong & change their position. The last thing I want in a leader is for him to stubbornly hold onto a wrong position.

A leader should also be able to understand when two situation that appear similar on the surface require different approaches.

A leader should be able to understand complex issues without over simplifying them. If he is in the US Senate, for instance, he needs to understand that no Senate bill is ever simple. He needs to be able to understand the ramifications of everything in the bill before voting on it. He needs to understand the context surrounding it. He needs to understand that due to changes, it may be best that he vote differently on it than he did on a previous incarnation of the same bill.

Another important quality is the ability to compromise. The greatness of the USA was built by great compromisers.

It saddens me when I see these important qualities of leadership ridiculed.

In the realm of fantasy, one question looms larger than all the rest.

Do balrogs have wings?

But since the answer to that question has been sufficiently proven*, we'll move on to the question looming over its shoulder.

The truth of the matter is that the whole "Do female dwarfs have beards?" debate was started by dwarfs themselves. Its an attempt to cover up the fact that there are no female dwarfs, which is something they're a bit sensitive about.

*If you missed the memo, the answer is "maybe". Disappointing, I know, but there it is. The truth is not always stranger than fiction. Even fictional truths.

Kerry calls for Bush to condemn the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Bush calls for Kerry to join him in condemning all 527s.

Hey, why don't you both withdraw from the race & grow up before asking us to entrust you with our highest national office. The only kind of presidential campaign in which petty bickering like this is appropriate is junior high school student body.

Kerry, just worry about refuting the information if it is wrong. Worry about making your own case instead of worrying about whether Bush is or is not in cahoots with the SBVfT.

Bush, the proper response to Kerry's foolishness is to stand up & either praise or condemn the SBVfT. You're response just makes you look as bad, if not worse than him. I don't care if you're afraid praising them will run you afoul of the McCain-Feingold act. At least stand up & say that if you're too afraid to take a real stand.

Oh, and thank you Senators McCain & Feingold. You're law has really elevated...wait, no. Let's just say its taken the campaigning to a new level.

Many of the NDA restrictions on playtesters of the Castles & Crusades roleplaying game have at last been lifted, so I can say some things about it.

In a nutshell: C&C is not a new game. Despite not bearing the D&D brand, it is essentially an edition of D&D. Of course, it wouldn't make a lot of sense for it to look most like the currently in print & actively supported edition, so it is as--if not more--similar to pre-2000 editions than the d20 editions.

Yet, C&C is a new game. It combines elements from all editions of D&D plus it throws a few new ideas into the mix. It may be just another variation of D&D, but it is a variation.

Rules Light, Flexible, Modular, & Compatible: The C&C Players Handbook will be 128 pages and intends to be the only book you need to buy to play the game. As such, the game is closer to classic D&D than to AD&D or d20 D&D. On the other hand, its selection of races & classes more resembles OAD&D+UA or d20 D&D.

My impression is that the book isn't going to try to teach the game. As, e.g., the Basic Sets did.

C&C intentionally leaves a lot unsaid & to the discretion of the CK. (The referee is called the Castle Keeper.) Also, C&C tries very hard to be modular. Removing or modifying things should generally not throw things out of whack or require a lot of additional changes.

It strives for a high level of compatibility with other editions of D&D, so things from other editions can be easily imported & stuff from C&C can be easily exported.

This also means that classic modules can easily be used with C&C & C&C modules can easily be used with other editions of D&D. Including Castle Zagyg from Gary Gygax & Rob Kuntz.

Attribute Checks: These are used for saving throws, class abilities, & whatever else the CK wants to use them for. The basic formula is:

d20 + class level + attribute modifer ≥ base difficulty + difficulty level

To explain the base difficulty, I first have to explain prime attributes. Each class has a prime attribute. Each character gets to choose an additional prime. Humans get to pick a third. If the relevant attribute for the check is one of your primes, the base difficulty is 12. Otherwise, it's 18.

e.g. A 4th level rogue with a 18 Dex (prime) tries to pick a 2nd level lock.

d20 + 4 (rogue level) + 3 (Dex mod.) ≥ 12 (base difficulty) + 2 (difficulty level)

So the rogue's player needs to roll 7 or better to succeed.

How playtest groups actually handled this in play varied. In some groups, the player would roll & tell the CK his roll & whether his attribute was prime. The CK would then handle all the calculations. Other groups would precalculate a target number for each attribute (base difficulty - character level - ability mod) & they'd tell the CK the how much they exceeded (or didn't exceed) that TN by. (Which is effectively the highest difficulty level the roll beat.) Some groups used a fixed base difficulty of 18 & primes gave a +6 to the roll.

Character Differentiation: Rules-wise, out of the box, C&C characters are only differentiated by race, class, & prime attributes. (And to a lesser extend by attributes & spell selection.) You'll have to rely on roleplaying or house rules to differentiate characters that share the same race, class, & primes.

Miscellanea:

The base game does not include a skill system along the lines of non-weapon proficiencies or d20 skills. There's just the class abilities & attribute checks that are more akin to thief skills from the earliest editions.

There are no feats to be selected. Only class abilities.

Rangers, Paladins, & Bards do not cast spells.

The Races:

• Human
• Dwarf
• Elf
• Gnome
• Half-Elf
• Half-Orc
• Halfling

The Classes:

• Fighter
• Ranger
• Barbarian
• Monk
• Rogue
• Assassin
• Wizard
• Illusionist
• Cleric
• Druid
• Knight
• Bard:

Guess that's it for now.

Just a free tip. Here are some ways not to show support for a candidate:

• Petty theft
• Vandalism
• Misspelling his name

The candidate certainly cannot be blamed for the misdeeds of any immature supporters. I bet, however, that you can guess which candidate the vandals supported. Why is that?

In any case, I am disgusted that in the USA, in the year 2004, anyone would stoop to such illicit intimidation tactics.

I've linked the W3C's core stylesheets into the blog as alternate stylesheets. If you are using a browser that support this feature, you can switch among them & see the blog in various styles. (In Mozilla, go to the "Use Style" submenu in the "View" menu.)

I am so sick of political campaigns being covered as if they were sporting events!

I don't need to know whether Kerry is going to get a bounce in the polls from the Democratic convention or how big it might be. I don't need to know how the Republicans will or should respond. I don't need to know campaign strategy & tactics.

What I need to know what the candidates are saying & thorough, independant analysis about how true it is.

Maybe the best political coverage I've ever seen was a local TV station that did "Truth Tests". They take each statement from a political TV advertisement & tell you whether it was true, false, misleading, &c. & why.

Well...analysis of the strategy is important too. The coverage, however, should be 80% thorough issues & honesty analysis & 20% strategy analysis. Instead we get 80% strategy analysis & 20% lazy issues analysis.

I rented Prince of Persia: Sands of Time for the Playstation 2. (I almost wrote "recently", but I'm a bit behind on my blogging.) It does capture much of the spirit of the original.

I felt they perhaps tried to ease you into the game too much. Also, I thought it was a bit too linear.

The animation is very nice. The prince has some new tricks that are fun.

First thing I do with PoP:SoT is go looking for a 16:9 display option, and what do I find? A progressive scan option! When I bought the composite video cable for the PlayStation, I got the impression that there really wasn't much point. There were no indications that the PlayStation had progressive scan capabilities. There it is, though. It works beautifully.

This game depends upon split second timing to execute moves more than the original. Sure, the original would make you race to get through a gate before it closed, but in this one you have to run along a wall that had saw blades running up & down it & jump at just the right point to reach another platform.

My biggest complaint are the combats that interrupt the running, jumping, swinging action. It helps that the enemies aren't too tough, but its still annoying. Of course, the biggest annoyance is when, in the middle of fighting several foes, the camera decides it'd be a good time to hide behind a large opaque object.

Sadly, I read that in the sequel they intend to expand the combat system, create situations in which you have to use the extra options that I really see no need for, and make the opponents smarter. I don't know why game developers feel that have to put such variety of gameplay into games that there's something for everyone to hate & get frustrated with.