Road Rage Incident

Last night, someone in a super-sized white pickup-truck with license something like 0203 (more I couldn't discern on account of darkness) slipped a mental gasket about something that remains unclear to me, and began a series of aggressive maneuvers designed to either hit me, run me off the road, or make me swerve.

Yeah, exactly.

Thankfully, I daily witness far more positive human traits than that displayed by the random dirtbag of last evening. 

How I do Google+ RPG Hangouts

I've tried many things with G+ RPGing, trying to get just the right mix of interaction and utility around the virtual "table." A friend recently asked me what I'd settled on.

Some people swear by 3rd party add-ons, including the excellent folks at .  (UPDATE: Since I wrote that last bit, I'm afraid Tabletop Forge is no longer your best bet, as they've gone away.)

However, I discovered that for my needs, less is more.  

Here's what works best for me:

Ahead of time, I gather art references, as available for a particular dungeon or session for the adventure in question, and put them in SkyDrive (Microsoft's free cloud stoarge service), which allows you to link individual pics via a public URL. (Dropbox and other services offer similar public links.)

I don't use minis, virtual or otherwise, but I do rely on sketching while describing settings and RPG battles; as a DM, I use pseudo Theatre of the Mind, with sketches as an aid.

I make such sketches on white board at my back while I play. Sometimes I cheat and use one at the office where I work, but I bought one at the store for around $18 for my home. I use the whiteboard to sketch the adventurer's progress in a dungeon (or other) setting, careful to make it large enough that A) it's visible through the g+ interace, and B) I can easily add general monster and PC placement if it becomes necessary to understand how a fight is progressing.

During play, everyone rolls their own dice, which requires trust  I suppose, but allows people to use the dice they love, and doesn't require me to force everyone to go through a dice emulator.

As play proceeds, I drop URLs of interesting pics (that I've uploaded to Skydrive, which creates public links), poems, or other pieces of text into the chat window.

I do use the Lower Third add-on, which some of my players also use, which is a great place to add the character's name and class, and even a picture.

This all seems to work like a charm! Even for casual gaming with my old high school friends who aren't game professionals.

I've gotten fancy in the past by logging in with a second computer/phone so that I could display a map on that, but frankly, the amount of juggling that required was a pain--the white board solution is, like Russian pencils in space, more robust.

I hope this inspires you to try a few g+ hangout games if you've been thinking about doing so. Good luck!

#SFWApro

Car Insurance Model for Guns (with tweaks)

From http://laist.com/tags/gunbuyback

No one blinks at the idea of liability insurance for our cars. If fact, most of us have been the beneficiary of mandatory liability insurance, after we’ve been rear-ended at a stoplight or suffered some other traffic mishap.

It’s not much of a stretch to imagine that our guns should also require liability insurance. In fact, we believe mandatory gun insurance is something that both responsible gun owners and non-gun owners alike could get behind. Why? Because of how it would work.

Just as with cars, this plan would require annual registration and liability insurance renewal through private insurance companies. And guess what? There’s already a precedent: the National Rifle Association offers liability insurance to members. (The problem is, the NRA's insurance is not universally mandatory.)

This solution offers many advantages that all well-meaning people on both sides of the debate can appreciate. For example, the insurance market is a proven expert at weighing risk. If they don’t already exist, a gun insurance mandate would quickly generate reams of actuarial tables devoid of anything but solid, dry, actual odds of a particular gun or a gun in a particular situation being used to hurt someone, and find an associated liability price.

Just as car insurance premiums are based on both the driver and the vehicle, so would gun insurance premiums. So someone from South Dakota who’s hunted during deer season for years without an accident would have a much smaller premium than a first-time buyer looking to own an assault rifle.

And just like with insurance, taking comprehensive training, owning biometric gun safes (or owning guns with trigger locks, or even smart guns), and not possessing more than one or two guns would decrease premiums. Other factors would include the magazine size of the weapon, the age of the gun owner, how many children the owner has living in the same home, previous criminal record, and so on.

All of this means that if someone wants an arsenal of semi-automatic rifles, they can still have it. But the civilization they’re part of will disincentivize that kind of bunker mentality through the hand of the market.

And of course, like regular liability insurance, gun liability would provide some restitution for those hurt by guns. (This is liability insurance, so it wouldn’t replace stolen or damaged guns--that's homeowner's insurance.)

We also believe that stiffer penalties for unreported gun theft would be useful. Just like with cars, all guns would have be registered so they can be tracked if they’re used in a crime. We suggest that if your weapon is lost or stolen, you have 24 hours to report it. If you fail to report it and your missing gun is used in a crime, your mandatory gun liability insurance rises steeply. Any shootings involving a weapon registered to you that you have not reported missing/stolen results in a punitive fine (and even higher insurance rates). In addition, a civil suit could be brought against you if firearms registered to you are used in the commission of a crime. But, your gun insurance would help you deal with such a possibility. Specifically, it would pay out to cover damages leveled against you if your gun is used in a crime, by anyone, to pay for your legal defense and for any fines or civil liabilities against you.

As an aside, introducing mandatory gun liability insurance doesn’t mean we can’t continue to enact other sensible measures designed to moderate gun violence. Another front should include closing loopholes in current law that allow private individuals to sell to one another online or at gun shows, at least not without some sort of simultaneous proof-of-insurance requirement. Yet another way to stem gun mayhem would be via a national gun buyback program, similar to the Australian policy, which would prove especially useful for people who come into the possession of guns they didn’t seek, such as when people who discover they’ve inherited several guns after the death of a relative, but don’t have the interest or means to deal with them.

Those hoping for an easy solution should be patient, because as with any realistic answer, gun liability insurance (and other measures noted above) will take time to enact, and more time for their effects to spread to all corners of the nation. But this is a start. And over time, mandatory gun insurance would lessen the likelihood of both parking lot gun aggression by adult against adult, and more importantly, mass killings of kindergarten children in their classrooms.

(The foregoing policy recommendation evolved following the events at Sandy Hook and other recent mass shootings, and incorporates the feedback from my social network and friends. If you think it is viable, do what I've done, and contact the vice president and your representatives with this proposal.)

Morality Guide

I love this Tom the Dancing Bug comic. It's funny; funny in the sense that if I didn't laugh, I'd cry, I suppose.

The graphic isn't really a morality guide, as many of you already fully appreciate. It's a behavior map most of us follow naturally, courtesy of our genes. Which isn't morality; it's our pre-programmed baseline. Moral acts occur when we choose to act differently than our DNA prompts, by expanding a "Who We Are Nice To" category.

The End.

If you're curious about my reasoning, read on. However, just to forewarn you, I fall back on a few SAT words.

For someone to make a moral act, he or she must recognize their own baseline, gene-driven inclination, then choose to broaden a category from Tom's guide. For example, by broadening those we view as part of our Community to encompass a larger fraction of Outsiders, we've made a moral decision. Likewise, by shifting pets and primates, and other mammals and animals up some faction of a category in Tom's guide, we've determined to act morally. (As with anything, if category expansion is taken to extremes, you could go from making a moral decision to making a commitment for a stay at the funny farm.)

All that said, none of us decide how we'll act in a vacuum. The culture in which we are raised is bursting with ideas on ways to behave. However, you can look at them through the filter of ideas that cajole us to broaden these categories, and through a filter that that demand that we keep to category baseline, or even push outsiders into a lower category.

You've heard of the Golden Rule, most likely, which is a major driver of category expansion. Many religions teach some form of this. However, you've probably run up against various "fear the foreigner" meme, which drives category contraction.

Anyway, you've probably incorporated some of these category expansion ideals into your own behavior. Whenever you act according to the Golden Rule in a category outside what your genes demand of you, you're making a moral act. By my lights, it doesn't matter whether you chose to act this way or your culture inculcated you to act differently and more benevolently--that's the benefit of living within an evolving culture! On the other hand, and again by my lights, if you've inculcated less benevolent memes, that's an immoral choice, regardless of what your culture expects. "When in Rome," or "just following orders" doesn't cut it, when you're defining morality.

Otherwise, I agree with Tom the Dancing Bug, broadly speaking, being "nice" is being moral, but only if you've somehow broadened your "Who You're Nice To" category beyond what brute instinct would have you act to preserve your own kin and kind.

PAX 2012

In addition to walking about geeking out on Saturday, I'm appearing on a couple novel-related panels at PAX this weekend. You can bet that many of the examples I cite will be from Sword of the Gods and it's sequel, Spinner of Lies.

 2PM Saturday (9/1): Making Magic Work: Designing Magic Systems for Games and Books moderated by pro editor and Amazon columnist Susan J. Morris, with special guest New York Times Bestselling author and game designer Rich Baker, award-winning game designer and author Bruce R. Cordell, and award-winning author Erin M. Evans.

8PM Saturday (9/1): How to Craft a Damn Good Fight Scene for Games and Books moderated by pro editor and Amazon columnist Susan J. Morris, with special guest award-winning game designer and author Bruce R. Cordell, award-winning author Erin M. Evans, and author and game designer Erik Scott de Bie.

The Future of "Small" Solar

Military action requires power and energy. This traditionally means transporting the necessary power over long distance to where the action lies. In the USA's last two elective wars, this "expensive and dangerous transport of  gasoline and batteries took place in areas where the sun is beaming down unfathomable quantities of free energy. That fact has not been lost on the Pentagon."

Which means that like "the computer, the internet, the mobile phone and GPS" which all had a leg-up by the Pentagon, the military's latest fascination with "small" solar could mean, ironically, a boon for everyone down the road.

(oh, and btw--sign me up for an Electree!)
http://www.houzz.com/ideabooks/3624288/list/Small-Solar--Big-Home-Tech-Trend-in-the-Making

Planetfest Mars Curiosity Rover Coverage

If you're not watching the Planetary Society's coverage of the Mars Curiosity Rover landing coverage, why not?

Here you go!

http://new.livestream.com/planetarysociety/planetfest

And, while you're listening, play with this too: Eyes on the Solar System! It's is a great way to see Mars. Check it out:

http://eyes.nasa.gov/index.html

And of course, there's this minute-long explanation of the whole kit-n-kaboodle!

Half-Orcs

Half-orcs have been part of D&D since 1978. Have you ever played one? What'd you like about it, and if not, what's kept you away?

If you'd like to answer, click here!

High Level D&D Pitfalls

What're some of the pitfalls of "high" (11th+) D&D tabletop level play you've encountered, either as a player or a dungeon master?

For me, it was spending more than one round stunned, petrified, asleep, or otherwise out of the game without any possibility of relieving that condition.


If you'd like to comment, join the conversation here!

Spinner of Lies DOT COM!

As of yesterday, I was the proud new owner of SpinnerOfLies.com. As of today, the DNS has propagated across the net, and it actually works. That ought to be worth a couple geek points, right?


Truth to tell, the website existed before yesterday, and swordofthegods.com points there too. But with the purchase of the url and a tweak of the banner, it's clear that I'm talking about 2, two, TWO novels!

http://www.spinneroflies.com

You Can Find Me on g+

I am trying out the "g+ diet" in that most of my blogging, at least my entries that are not specifically for D&D Next, can be found on my g+ site: -https://plus.google.com/105764963452202246224/about

The Advantage of Rolling Dice

Advantage (and disadvantage) debuted in the May 24th D&D playtest as a game mechanic simulating a creature having an edge (or a hindrance) to an attack, task, or other effort. Prior to the playtest release, the design team experimented with several methods of achieving advantage/disadvantage. Each had their strengths and weaknesses.

Ultimately we decided we wanted to test an aggressive version with the initial rules: When you have advantage on an attack or other suitable d20 roll, roll twice and use the higher result. (Or, roll twice and take the lower result if you have disadvantage.)

One of the potential drawbacks we worried about was the mechanic’s novelty. Was it too wild a twist on player expectations? And, possibly too significant an actual mathematical bonus (or penalty)?

On the other hand, possible strengths of the mechanic include the very same two points: it’s a novel, exciting way to model having some kind of an edge (or hindrance), and the effect is big and meaty enough to really matter when it does apply.

An even more important strength of the roll-twice method is to reduce on-the-fly math at the table. A numerical mechanic requires a player to add at least 3 numbers together with each roll: the roll result + an already-calculated attack bonus (or ability modifier) + the advantage bonus (a +2 or +3, say). Everyone can do this sort of math of course, but each additional number that’s added or subtracted makes the calculation slower, and over the course of play, slows the game. Math is hard.

Finally, an obvious strength of the current advantage system is simply that it’s fun to roll dice.

Now the playtest is out. Those of you running Caves of Chaos and the pregenerated characters are using the mechanic. A surprisingly high number of you (our survey pros tell us) filled out and returned the survey included with the release (thank you). We were excited to see a greater than 70% approval rating for the current mechanic.

Of course it’s early days, and this is a playtest after all. We already know we need to tweak advantage/disadvantage a bit. At the very least, we need to very carefully think about appropriate places to apply it, and more importantly, places where its application is just a bad idea. In fact, that later point is important. While dice rolling is fun, too much dice rolling isn’t.

For instance, consider a spell that could inflict blanket disadvantage to a creature for a minute. What if that creature has a claw/claw/bite attack routine? Is suddenly becomes too many dice to ask the DM to roll. Imagine if that same spell applied to a group of monsters for a minute. Even worse. Likewise, awarding blanket advantage to monsters encountered in large numbers can also quickly become a pain.

Going forward, a design and development rule of thumb might be something like (what Rodney Thompson said to me over the cube wall between our desks): a player or creature should (generally speaking) expend an action to gain advantage or bestow disadvantage. I couldn’t agree more. In your playtests, try that as a guiding principle, and see how it works out.