soegster

[soegster]

A Bard in the Dark - Volume II

Do you wonder why it's hard to find a square wave playing right above a harpsichord in the same segment of a track? Do you like gothic classical-sounding dance music?

Then you're in luck, because that's a hella niche genre, yet you've just so happened to have found this album and its predecessor (also on the Bandcamp page). Go give it a listen if you're so inclined.

http://thesoegster.bandcamp.com/album/a-bard-in-the-dark-volume-ii

[soegster]

It's a Harrison Bergeron campaign?

As GM, veto any character with any feats, class features or abilities above ten for “being a mary sue”

[soegster]

Local concert pianist ruins mus-ddda-ic forever

[soegster]

Now whenever I hear fellow students blaming the teacher for lost points on an exam, I'm going to chuckle, thinking of this post that articulates my frustration with them very clearly.

Also, that God picture set is pure gold.

“Technically, I did answer the question...”

I’m noticing that this is a problem with some students. Instead of accepting that they did not appropriately complete the assignment or exam, they argue that they technically did answer the question. 

I’m not talking about situations where my question was unclear. When that happens, I give the student full points. Example: “Where was your favorite place to study and why?” (exam for geography class, extra credit freebie question) Answer: “Against the wall, because I could rest my back on it.” Huh, okay, that’s not at all what I expected but I guess that’s my fault that I wasn’t super clear, here’s some extra credit.

What I’m talking about with this post are the “I technically answered the question, why did you mark it wrong?” stuff where students merely reword the question to “answer” it because they didn’t actually know the answer. Example:  Q: “Catholic Christians and Protestant Christians are both types of Christian. If they believe in the same god and same religious text, why did Catholic Christians call Protestants ‘heretics’ and think it was okay to hurt or kill them?” A: “Catholic Christians thought it was okay to hurt Protestant Christians because they were a little different from them.” Yes, of course they were different, the sect differentiation in the nomenclature is literally the indication that they’re different. 

Or a question where I ask for potential solutions to a problem, a student will write something completely unrealistic. “Yeah, but it’s still a solution, right?” I had a student write “Just give all the land to Israel” as a way to solve the Israel/Palestine Conflict, then didn’t understand why that wasn’t a real answer. Keep in mind the student did absolutely understand why it was an unrealistic and nonsensical answer, they just didn’t know why I wouldn’t accept this nonsense, unrealistic answer because they technically provided an answer.

If you’re running into this problem, please understand that your teachers aren’t asking you to redo the homework simply because they hate you. We’re not marking you down because we want to be jerks and we want to see you fail. We’re not accepting this answer because no one ever accepts this kind of answer in real life, not even you. 

Imagine if I did the bare minimum in my class…I show up wearing clothes that are acceptable and then I give you the textbook and tell you to read it. That’s the whole class. Any time you ask me a question, I’ll tell you to Google it. That’s me “technically” teaching you something. 

Imagine visiting the doctor and being sent away without a consultation. “How can you send me away? You don’t know what’s wrong with me! You wouldn’t even see me!” Imagine if the doctor responded, “I am seeing you right now” and pulled open her eyes wider to emphasize that she is able to see you with her eyes.  

Or imagine you haven’t eaten all day. You get home and your stomach is growling. You call out to one of your parents to express the deep level of hunger you’re feeling. Instead of being pointed to food or having some prepared for you, all you hear back is:

Technically, Dad is recognizing that you have said you are Hungry and is recognizing your nickname, so nothing to be annoyed with, right? Food problem solved!

You: MOM! He’s touching me!!! Brother: No, I’m not! Mom: Yeah, technically he’s right. He’s technically not touching you.

That’s what you guys are doing to us when you “technically” answer the question. You know what happens when you turn this into a habit? You get fired from your job because having to explain you “technically” are doing your job means it’s not readily apparent, meaning you aren’t actually doing anything of value to earn money. 

Remember: If I wanted to know how clever you could be, I’d give you a series of riddles to solve. I’m testing your knowledge of the material, not your ability to twist words to do the absolute bare minimum. 

Most importantly, you wouldn’t accept that kind of response/attitude from other people, so don’t give that kind of response/attitude to other people. 

[soegster]

ddᵈa

[soegster]

When you've been on twitter long enough to see as much of those kinds of replies to posts about including any kind of diversity you start to realize anyone like that poster is not gonna argue in good faith and it isn't worth it. They tend to be alt right dude bros just trying to shout out to each other. Debating them is worthless and only gives them more of a platform to try to recruit.

This is in reference to something I reblogged earlier about understanding other peoples' perspectives in controversy. I think it will suffice to leave it at a few ideas.

Even if you don't like someone's tone, don't return their negativity.

As much as I disagree with the alt-right point of view, discourse in bad faith is not exclusively their signature. The OP just showed that.

Furthermore, dismissing a person through generalizations is also arguing in bad faith. If anything, and this is just a comparison, this person's focus on personal freedom is less alt-right in this context and is more libertarian, seeing as they're not furiously denouncing women's capability as their cornerstone. I think it could have been presented less disagreeably, but with what we have, this is a more likely conclusion in my eyes. (I understand that citing personal freedom is a common fallback for the alt-right, but this also is not exclusively their phrase.)

I bear no ill will to anyone who may disagree with my assessment. I think it's good that the anon above wasn't furiously typing a rebuttal with destructive conversation in mind, and I appreciate the chance to discuss this. Have a great day.

[soegster]

Two cents: I've never personally DM'd or played at a table where there were no lady PCs, let alone NPCs, but what this response is content-wise could be construed as a bit of a flippant devaluation of a playgroup or story for which there is no additional context given. I didn't like the casual drop of the swear word either, but this isn't a perspective to just dismiss because it's not progressive-looking enough for some. If anything, at least reach out and ask why they've taken this stance before a passive-aggressive callout. They also didn't mention the specific issue by name, so perhaps it might also be about tolerance of the issue and not just the concept of representation.

I, personally, distribute gender identity and sexual orientation among characters (NPCs or PCs) as fairly as I can. Some people don't see the need to do so. I'd rather have a game with the former camp, but I'm not going to say no to a game with the latter if they're all perfectly good people.

Discourse is more constructive without attempts to ridicule others. Even if you do not agree with the other side, "seriously ask yourself why."

It’s already past midnight at my place and I am so tired I can barely think but anyway: Put women in your game. Both as NPCs, player characters (no your masculinity will not die from playing a female character), and players. If you have no women at your table, seriously ask yourself “why”

[soegster]

@sounddesignerjeans

This is YOUR fault, isn't it, Jeans...

[soegster]

siblings’ comments scorning fictional sibling relationships in reference to forgiveness are a dime a dozen at this point. find some other literary trope to pick on. 

for my part, i have decided to begin laughing on the trope that everything siblings do together that defines their shown relationship must be rooted in some emotional and meaningful backstory. 

[soegster]

perish, google

[soegster]

D&D: On the Sole Survivor Trope

Every group has at least one. The player whose homeland or town was somehow razed. Reduced to dust by bandits, them, or an evil army, setting their character forcibly adrift in the world. You’d be hard-pressed to get into this game and never find one. 

As a DM, I’d long since made jokes about this trope. I’m infamous among certain playgroups for DMing with a Wile E. Coyote-likeness mug at my side. However, in the first session, players can explain backstories to other players as part of introductions. Every time the trope emerges, I take a large, obvious sip out of the mug. Any player may point this out and explain why, and provided it’s the first time this comes up, they get Advantage on a roll of their choosing in that session. 

But one day, I was handed the opportunity for the joke of a lifetime. To say a silver platter would be an understatement. This was like a solid Platinum DM’s Guide, pages and all. 

The new setting for this regular group was ideally a mystery to the players. I had constructed it to be a small island nation-state. It did have its own sovereignty, but there were no more than six major townships on the entire island (one for each player). Soon it came time for Session 0s with individual players. To spare you lengthy, similar explanations...

...four of my six players had the trope in their backstory. 

I started cackling after the final Session 0, out of the players’ earshot. And I mean Lawful Evil, despicable laughing that would give anxiety to any kickable puppies in a five-mile radius. Because I wasn’t just laughing at the trope. 

I was about to play a very mean-spirited joke.

Session One arrived. I didn’t expect there to be another. 

The players all woke up on a familiar island. One they’d thought they’d moved on from long ago. How had they returned? 

Quickly, the players found that there was nothing of note on the shoreline, so they began to move inland. Eventually, they stumbled on a desolate ruin of what was once a peaceful town. I pointed at the Tiefling. 

“You know this place. You grew up here, and you watched the slaughter of its people.” 

The players, to their credit, did well in RP to console the Tiefling player. After a brief skirmish with a group of marauders that was riding by through the jungles, they went on. 

The next village was alive, but in constant fear of bandits. There were no merchants, and any produce of the town was taken as tribute, or the bandits would kill the townsfolk. The players had started to question if the main plot was to restore order to this nation-state and defeat the bandits. They left, being unable to do anything besides wonder at the odd lack of civil commerce of any kind. 

Then came the tipping point. 

The players cleared through the next stretch of jungle, and found another village in ruins. I pointed at the Halfling. 

“You know this place. You grew up here, and you watched the slaughter of its people.” 

I took care to use the exact same words. 

It was at this point that the Tiefling player, whose village was the first one, started to mull something over. I could see it in her eyes. She was so close to realizing. And then she asked me something along the lines of: 

“Hold on. You said there weren’t any more than six villages here. Why are they all destroyed?”

I sneered, ready to deliver the finishing strike. 

“You already know the answer. You destroyed these villages. Each of you. With only six veritable towns on this island, they could ill afford to lose two-thirds of their civilization to malicious raids by bandits. Now the island lies in shambles, and civilization is an anarchistic mess of kill-or-be-killed.”

The remaining third of my players, who had not destroyed their own hometowns in writing a backstory, were snickering. 

“If that doomed the campaign, why wouldn’t you change the setting, then?” One of the players, who had yet to see the remains of the village they had wrecked, protested. “What do you expect us to do here now?” 

“Well, seeing as the bandits rule everything in immense numbers, no one wants to create a centralized economy for fear of being paid a visit by the bandits and having their life’s work sacked, and the easiest way to live is to forsake an honest life and turn to banditry...I guess the best path is to start pillaging, nerds. You wanted villages destroyed? You get everything that goes with it in this situation.” 

I easily made my Dex save against a flying d20, and subsequently sipped my Wile E. Coyote mug loudly. 

“Point your finger all you want. Throw all the d20s you want. Post recaps of this session anywhere you want. In the end, there’s no one else to blame but yourselves for destroying this setting. You already know that I prioritize your characters over railroading you into my plot, and this is just evidence of that. Have a nice week! I’ll see you next time with a different world.” 

So, kids with tragic backstories, be careful about destroying the place you were born especially en masse. There’s a chance the DM might actually make you answer for it. 

[soegster]

I got tired of every ancient dragon being a villain-telegraphing, “eloquent,” and British Smaug emulation, so I decided to make a Mexican one. Like other dragons, he’s wise, but is so much less wordy. He thinks: What good is honor if you’re dead? I don’t care what these puny playable races think. I’m a dragon. I’m going to act like one and just incinerate everything you love along with you if you step out of line. Should I care that you can’t stop me and think this horrendously unfair? Get good. 

[soegster]

probablybadblogidea: Name a moderator "Mod Remember Your Bonuses Before The Initiative Gets Through Three More People And You Choose That Time To Raise An Objection, You Buffoon," by this logic of referencing core assets of adventuring.

Is there a Mod Rock or a Mod Scissors?

We are Pencil and Paper because that’s what you use to RPG (or at least did in the olden days)! If we ever need a third I’m hoping they’ll be Mod Dice - Mod Paper

[soegster]

Banana (2018)

Produced and Directed By: Matthew “itchylavalamp” Nguyen

In this short film, three friends find themselves at each other’s throats in a swiftly-escalating battle for their daily potassium intake. A monument to perseverance on a low-budget in a quest for greatness, this thrilling action comedy keeps a quirky but fast-paced tone throughout the duration. 

Who will emerge victorious? Will Vincent Price ever recover from his emotional trauma brought on by the premiering of this film? Will I, the composer of this score, get sued by John Williams? 

All these questions answered...here, and now! 

[soegster]

Something rhapsodic with a returning theme. It ends in a long Picardy Third. 

As you enter the small saloon, parched from the long, scalding trek across the desert, it is clear immediately that the bartender wasn’t prepared for any business aside from the usual dwindling crowd of farming townsfolk. He’s plucking an unfamiliar melody on a six-string, gentle nylon-stringed guitar, seated on a stool behind the counter. 

“Hm, haven’t seen you around before,” the bartender notes. “Where are you from?”

Not keen on exhausting your short breath on words, even for introductions, you slide a stool up to the counter, and try to get your bearing as the melody continues to sing from the instrument. 

“Not a talker? Well, all the same, welcome to the Star of the Desert, a village whose declining population can be counted on one set of hands, and whose deceased are said to wander the empty reaches of the desert for all eternity. But enough about that...how about a drink, traveler?”

[soegster]

a slow, grating rise to panic as murder-ai in sleep mode reconstructs her machine-learning capabilities faster than they can be disabled or erased during the schematic analysis, seemingly almost from scratch. 

a scream as she starts waking up...

[soegster]

The enigmatic yet ominous awakening theme of Kristya, a technopath android powered by the most advanced processing power and AI developed in her time. She is the long-hidden magnum opus of Viscount Vicious, a “supervillain”-type character. 

Are you hoping for an emergency shutdown? You uninspired minds truly know nothing. I was codenamed the “Final Cognition.” The ultimate will of my creator is woven into my very being. My primary directive is his dream. You see, though there were many seemingly-impossible things he could do...even he could never bring himself to kill his own dream.