Amaranthine:
- Of, relating to, or resembling the Amaranth
- Eternally beautiful and unfading; everlasting
Though she grew old and her body turned frail, her spirit and love were amaranthine.
~ lm
August 18, 2011
Word of the Week: Amaranthine
August 16, 2011
DM Notes: Exposed to Opportunity Attacks
I’ve been a DM for years and by far the most rewarding campaigns have been the ones that I ended up creating “myself”. Although, a good portion of that was done by presenting many options and reacting to the players, so it’s not truly “myself”. This has led to many challenges where I felt like I was the one who had been exposed to opportunity attacks. Here’s a few of those moments:
- The party that goes off the edge of the map. There was one campaign I ran (one of my first) which involved the party navigating a large labyrinth. I had traps and riddles and monsters planned the whole way through. But at that time, I still held to the belief that DMs shouldn’t make anything impossible. You just make the DC check really high for whatever the player wanted to do. Well, this party decided that navigating the labyrinth would be a waste of their time. They wanted to break down wall of the labyrinth and pummel the little gnomes who locked them in. So I set the DC to 40, thinking it would be high enough that they wouldn’t break down the wall. Well, the one leading the charge rolled a 20, had a strength modifier of +13, and four party members assisted and each got their +2s, making the final tally 41. I was so shocked they had actually done it that I said so out-loud only to hear cheers from the players. So much for altering things on the fly.
- The stubbornly silent party. At the core to every D&D game is the players and the characters they make. The downside to this is sometimes you’ll get a party full of people who are quiet, sullen, and quite frankly, emo. They won’t talk to each other. They won’t help each other. Your healer won’t care if they die. Sometimes, taking away certain freedoms in your player’s character customization is a good thing.
- The unexpected traitor. There have been times where I’ve pulled a member or two of the party aside for some 1 on 1 with the DM encounters. A couple of these involved a character getting kidnapped and/or imprisoned to have a double replace them when they rejoined the party. The player would continue to control their character and would act as if nothing had happened until that climactic moment when the truth was revealed. However, there was one campaign where a couple of players decided to turn traitor- without informing me. They started sabotaging other players in the party, whether through the misuse of skills or by accidentally “tripped” a party member. It finally culminated in a battle where the two actually turned on their “allies” and started using their skills against them. This included a turn in which the healer performed a coup de gras on the controller. I prefer to play off my players and find that it makes for a better campaign, but in this encounter, even the DM was surprised.
- The XXL party. Contrary to mainstream belief, I’ve found that D&D is actually somewhat popular. Or at least there are a lot of people I know who enjoy playing it. There was a campaign I ran once with involved ten people, besides myself. A normal campaign consists of 4-6 players plus the DM. Here, we decided to split up into two teams and have both teams run the same campaign. Not duplicate campaigns- the same campaign. Planning the session times was a bit of a nightmare, but essentially there were 4 sessions on the odd months and 3 sessions on the even months. Assuming our teams were Red and Blue, we ran Red-Blue-Red-Blue-Red-Blue-Combined and then switched. This ran for 6 months, not counting the kick off or the conclusion sessions, both of which included everyone. For the storyline, it was basically a race for the two teams to get to an artifact. They split and joined forces a few times and at one point, a couple people switched teams. In the combined sessions, the players would fight both each other as well as a few obstacles that I threw at them. There were two downsides to this campaign: time, and complexity. During combined sessions, we could sometimes use an entire session to go through even just a minute or two of game time. The final encounter was an epic battle containing both parties, numerous traps, an army of kobolds and dragon hatchinglings set in the ruins of a sky sanctuary. The players seemed to love it. But the complexity was ridiculous. I had to use an excel spread sheet for the initiative order as well as the HP values for all the mobs and traps. That sheet had a good 35 entries on it.
- The party that knows the world better than you do. This is my current situation. I’m in the process of creating a campaign based off the worlds of Disney. This is partially by request of my players, but it’s also something that I’m rather enjoying. However, as much as I’m a Disney buff, some of my players are much more. Some of them know the movies and worlds much better than I do. So how do I go about making a world they can explore when they already know more about it than I do?
~ lm
August 15, 2011
Firefox and Javascript
Feeling like a Firefox/Javascript noob right now. Apparently, you can run scripts via bookmarks:
- Write your script.
- Create a new bookmark with the script as the “Location”
- Add the bookmark to your bookmarks bar.
- Click said bookmark to run it.
Makes some of my testing and setting/altering my cookies much easier.
~ lm
August 12, 2011
The List Check-in: Photo Journal Launch
14. Create a photo journal.
This is one of those items that’s difficult to blog about here, mainly because it’s continuous. So, last Friday, when I kicked off the rest of my list, I set up a partner blog for this photo journal. I’ll try to keep the pictures coming on Mon/Wed/Fri, but we’ll see if there are really those thousand words I feel like capturing three times a week.
That journal can be found here.
I apologize for the less than stellar quality on the photos, but I’ve been using my phone to take the pictures. It’s got a 5 MPxl camera in it, so it’s not too terrible, but it’s far from being on par with the professionals. Maybe if I really get into this, I’ll invest in a better camera.
~ lm
August 11, 2011
Word of the Week: Aesopian
I’m trying something new. As part of my list, I’m learning a new word each week. I’d like to share them with you. Here’s the first:
Aesopian: conveying meaning by hint, euphemism, innuendo, or the like.
While my posts all have a surface message to them, I hope that some of them are a bit aesopian to those of you who know me well.
~ lm
August 10, 2011
Bad Movies: Moby Dick 2010
I love Netflix. It’s relatively cheap and very convenient for the tv shows I need to catch up on and for the movies I feel like I should watch but have never really gotten around to (Bond, the classics, etc.) It’s also nice for it’s instant queue, providing a vast array of movies on anything and everything and things you never knew a movie could be made about.
Now, I’ll blame this on a former roommate of mine, but I’ve developed a taste for bad movies. I don’t mean to say that I only like bad movies or that I think bad movies are good, but for some reason, but I do find something inherently amusing about bad movies.
Not too long ago, I was browsing through the Netflix instant queue and a title jumped out at me, 2010: Moby Dick. Back in high school, I read that horridly long book and once getting past the chapters on how to boil whale blubber, I rather liked it. Mind you, it’s not something I would just pick up for a light summer’s afternoon read in the park, but the overall story can make a good movie if you take out the boring padding bits.
Keyword in that last sentence: “can”.
I rather liked the 1998 version of the film starring Patrick Stewert, but that version actually made sense. Had I been in the mood for a good movie that day, I would have been disappointed with this most recent film. Luckily for me, it was bad movie day.
First off, the film is set in modern day times. Ishmael, the vagabond sailor, has been recast as none other than Michelle, a female oceanographer who essentially talks to whales. Instead of looking for a ship to go hunt whales, she is abducted by captain Ahab in his submarine from the middle of San Diego Bay. It turns out that Ahab is a jaded, renegade, Navy Submarine Captain who is obsessed with revenge upon the White Whale.
The movie then goes through a series of odd encounters of the whale wrecking havoc and Ahab being, well, insane. The whale destroys ships and even manages to leap across the sky and pull down a plane (or it could have been a helicopter, it’s been awhile since I watched the film) from the clouds. Ahab leads a chase across the globe with him in pursuit of the whale and the military, including one of his old shipmates, in pursuit of him. Oh, and the lady Ishmael and rest of the crew are unaware that Ahab is AWOL so when the torpedoes are aimed at them, it’s a surprise.
After the bulk of the hunt, entailing torpedoes, nukes, close encounters, and nearly sinking, Ahab and co. have Moby Dick cornered in some sort of bay. The captain and a couple small boatfuls head out in pursuit and the first mate, Starbuck, closes the net with underwater mines and prepares the torpedoes should the hunting party prove unsuccessful.
If things weren’t odd enough already in the film, here they sink to new lows.
First, there’s the proportions. Moby Dick is a gigantic whale, yet he can fit in this bay? He’s supposed to be over 500 feet in length. While he may be able to get in, it should prove incredibly difficult for him to maneuver. Plus, the topology of the bay floor must be unlike most bays I’ve encountered. Not only can the whale stay fully submerged, but he can stay fully submerged close to shore. So close in fact that in one scene, a crew member walks out on top of the whale without noticing it.
Then, you have the unbelievable feats of this super whale. Larger than life? Sure. Swims really fast? Sure. Snatching planes out of the sky? It’s a movie, so I’ll give you that one. Wiggling across the land of the island at high speed? Umm, what? But yes, apparently this whale can come fully out of the water (so he might have been in a foot or two, but he was effectively beached) and wiggle himself from one side of the island to the other in the blink of an eye.
But for all his super powers, the ending of the movie is not without tragedy. Moby Dick escapes his little prison, dodges both the minefield and incoming torpedoes, and destroys the sub. The survivors from the landing party sit on the beach and enjoy a last smoke because you “can’t outrun a torpedo”. The Lady Ishmael calls them crazy and proves that you actually can outrun a torpedo and is left alone in the water waiting for the rescue helicopter because apparently the torpedoes completely destroyed the island.
Moby Dick and modern movie magic? I think you guys missed the boat on this one.
~ lm
August 9, 2011
What’s in a Name?
What’s in a name? Your phone number, address, friends, credit card info, level of education, likes and dislikes, food allergies, medical conditions, marital status, employment status, social security number…
Facebook has been around for awhile. Google+ has been introduced recently. We live in the glass house age of social networking. These two companies in particular seem to have the stance that not only should your house be made of glass, but we should build them on stilts too so that everybody can see.
Among their supporters is the common mantra of “If you have nothing to hide, it shouldn’t be an issue”. But is privacy such a bad thing?
The trends from both companies seem to be a resounding “yes”. Facebook makes it’s changes, touting “We’ve made things better!” while silently adding little things like making your phone number public to everyone, or allowing people to tag you in a photo without being logged in, or even allowing people to “tag” you in the real world. If you look at when Google first released Buzz, they published just about all of the information in your gmail account to the web, including all of your contacts.
Quite frankly, there are things that the world just doesn’t need to know. For example, if you suffer from a medical condition, and you communicate with your doctors and specialists over email, should Google be allowed to publish this information? Given the recent problems with the Mug shots in Florida (including people that weren’t convicted, some of whom could in fact be innocent), is it that inconceivable that things such as tags in Facebook photos could be taken out of context? Imagine an up in coming site: AreTheyResponsible.com. Say the company behind this site mines Facebook for images of people “drinking”. If they are found drinking, they are then flagged on the site as irresponsible and this list passed to employers, dating websites, Alcoholics Anonymous, the police, etc. A site like this might be helpful for say, a background check for a government position. I remember when a friend of mine was applying for a government job and they sent out a guy to interview me as a character reference. Alcohol consumption was one of the things I was asked about. A site like this would have saved him that trip.
But, how do you make the distinction as to when to flag someone and when to not? If they are tagged in an image that also contains some form of alcohol, does that make them irresponsible? Do they have to be holding it? Drinking it? Passed out? Puking? Just like the Florida Mug Shots, there is no context. We don’t know if this person is on their first or on their tenth or on their twentieth. Maybe, they’re the designated driver and not drinking at all, but holding the beverage for someone in the bathroom. Maybe it’s an isolated event, such as a 21st birthday party, or a bachelor party. Or it could just be an old photo from wild college days and this person doesn’t drink anymore.
While something like this may be appropriate to share with friends, it’s not always appropriate to share with others (friends of friends and employers, for example). So where do you draw the line?
This is the part where I feel that Google and Facebook fail. Generally, you are automatically opted in with the loosest privacy settings. There are also so many spam emails, from Facebook in particular, that any notifications of these changes are often unseen.I believe that people would be much happier with Google, Facebook, and similar companies if they handled things slightly different:
- If you roll out a new feature, either force the user to manually opt-in before it activates for them or if you must automatically activate it for them, do so with the strictest privacy settings.
- If you are planning on rolling out a new feature, give your users a better heads up about it before hand. Let them know what your introducing before it hits so it’s not such a shock when it does. You may even allow them to “pre-customize” their installment of the feature, including those ever so important privacy options.
- Allow people to fully opt-out of a feature.
Really, this only scratches the surface, and there will always be people on both sides of the argument. The biggest issue that I’ve seen with it is that privacy is not in the control of the user, it’s in the control of the megacompanies. These companies have your information and manipulate, transform, and publish it in ways they think you’ll like.
Although I currently have no love for Google nor Facebook, I don’t think they’re intentionally being malicious. It’s more of a case of massive shortsightedness and lack of concern for how some of their users think. They have good products, for sure. But much like a house, the one who lives there should have the final say on what can be seen from outside the windows.
~ lm
August 8, 2011
Disney Endorses Cannibalism
I’m currently undergoing a project that involves a lot of research into Disney films. As such, I’ve taken to listening to soundtracks on my way to work every morning. This morning, it was Beauty & the Beast.
I’m sure you’re all familiar with the story. The Prince is selfish and spoiled and as punishment is turned into a hideous Beast. Likewise, all of the castle occupants are turned into various enchanted objects. So, it seems it can safely be assumed that anything in that castle that can sing or dance was in fact human at one point.
So listen again to the song “Be Our Guest”
Singing Pork, dancing Veal,
What an entertaining meal!
Eeep!
~ lm
August 5, 2011
The List: Revamped
“The List” is part of the Day Zero Project, an endeavor to turn goals into reality. You start by creating a list of 101 things you wish to accomplish in the next 1001 days. This is a little over 33 months and not quite 3 years. If you followed my blog a year ago when I was still updating it regularly, you’ll know that this project is something that I try to take part in.
I like the thought of this more than a “New Year’s Resolution”. Although most people kick their lists off around New Year’s, it’s more of an ongoing process than a yearly ritual. I know that the New Year’s Resolution is supposed to be this big commitment to do something in the next year, but from what I’ve seen, one of the few resolutions that is actually kept is to break your new year’s resolution. While the 101 in 1001 runs the same risk, it has a larger scale to it. My thought is that the larger scope will give it the impression of requiring more attention, which in turn will mean more of the items getting crossed off.
My old list was scheduled to end within the next year, but I’ve decided to scrap it and kick off the new one early. Looking back, I actually completed most of the things I had set out to do. Although I’ll admit I was terrible at the upkeep and accountability portions what with the blog falling into disuse and the actual list page not getting updated in over a year. But all in all, I think I did rather well on it. Hopefully take two will run a little better.
The one big thing that I noticed was that in the time that I first wrote the old list and now when I’ve been writing my new list, is that many of my priorities have changed. Things that I was dead-set on doing before seem trivial now and conversely, things that I couldn’t conceive of doing before are incredible important now.
In light of this, I’ve left a few slots blank so that they’ll be filled in at yearly check-points. Is this a cop-out for not finding 101 actual items to put here? Maybe. But I’m looking at it as a it’s own goal- to always be on the lookout for ways of self improvement.
The other major change between this 101 and the previous 101 is that this year, I’ve left some of the items off the internet. Sorry, but these things are dealing with my own personal demons and really don’t have any business being on the internet. But I will be working on them and I’ll be sure to cross them off if/when I can.
So here it is. August 5th, you are my personal New Years.
~ lm
August 4, 2011
The Inner Crazy
I like to think that all of us are a little crazy. Some people are just better at hiding it than others.
About a month or so ago, I went out to lunch with a friend of mine. On the way back to her apartment, we passed by a small lawn area. It may have been a mini-park, but it may have just been a vacant lot. Either way, it’s a nice spot for a picnic or game of horseshoes or the like.
But as we drove by, it seemed to me that there was something, well, off, about this little park. I politely asked if we could circle the block quickly and make another pass before stopping at her apartment. So we circled back and there it was: an older gentleman was standing in the middle of the lawn, with no water around, about 3 or so blocks from the river, fly fishing.
Now, I’ve never been much of a fisherman (fisherwoman?), especially when considering my aversions to eating fish, but it seems to me that one would catch more fish when casting into the water than onto a lawn. Had he simply cast his line and then reeled it back in, I would write it off as practicing his cast. However, his casting seemed fine and the two times I saw him cast, he paused before reeling in, as if hoping for a bite.
Regardless, I’m sure he had his reasons. It makes me wonder how often we take things out of context and generally just don’t know what motives are behind what actions. It’s easy to jump to conclusions from your own perceptions and your own little bubble of detachment. It’s much harder to draw the correct conclusions, if they even exist.
Or maybe I’m just off-base and this is just how you catch bait.
~ lm