Man is a most complex simple creature: see what he weaves, and how base his reasons for doing so.
Like, in traditional DnD, you'd represent Sherlock Holmes with an INT of 20 and a modifier of +4 or so, while the common people are represented by an INT of 9 and a modifier of -1.
In FAE, Sherlock Holmes has a Clever of (+3) because the rules literally state that he is 'The World's Greatest Detective' (it's on his character sheet and has mechanical weight), whereas the stupid criminals he faces are literally good at 'Following Orders (+2)' and bad at 'Thinking Independently (-1).'
ok i know i whine about people on using this thread to whine semi-vaguely about things on tumblr but i'm gonna be a hypocrite for a minute cuz i desperately need to vent.
vent: it doesn't matter what your skin color is, or your gender, or your sex or your sexual orientation, if you make boring art it's boring art and people are not obligated to enjoy boring things, you tasteless buffoons.
ok i know i whine about people on using this thread to whine semi-vaguely about things on tumblr but i'm gonna be a hypocrite for a minute cuz i desperately need to vent.
it doesn't matter what your skin color is, or your gender, or your sex or your sexual orientation, if you make boring art it's boring art and people are not obligated to enjoy boring things, you tasteless buffoons.
ofc if someone is actually making the argument that people are somehow obligated to like art they'd not otherwise like based on the artist being in a minority group, that's different
I have, but they don't seem to quite realize that maybe people who do find said art boring may, in fact, just find that art boring and are not bigoted against minority groups that the artist belongs to.
Because honestly, my first thought was DreamWorks Animation's Home
i have never heard of this until just now
it's a film some people on tumblr seem to like because, as stated the protagonist is black.
It's OK to be excited about representation, but that said, I am probably never going to see the movie because, as Anonus said, it looks very typical DreamWorksy, and I don't really care for their films.
If black children see it and it makes a positive impact on their lives, that's good, but I have no intention of seeing the movie. It's not even for me, really.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
I thought the character designs were pretty, at least
Because honestly, my first thought was DreamWorks Animation's Home
i have never heard of this until just now
it's a film some people on tumblr seem to like because, as stated the protagonist is black.
It's OK to be excited about representation, but that said, I am probably never going to see the movie because, as Anonus said, it looks very typical DreamWorksy, and I don't really care for their films.
If black children see it and it makes a positive impact on their lives, that's good, but I have no intention of seeing the movie. It's not even for me, really.
now that i have googled this thing i am in agreement on all points
I thought the character designs were pretty, at least
I like the protagonist's curly hair
DreamWorks' character design is usually pretty good.
And again that's not something I have to actually see the movie to appreciate. I feel like if I saw it, my thoughts would not change from what they are now, which is "it's good that this exists, but I have no investment in it on a personal level"
also another thing to consider is that when you call something "boring" you're sort of implying that the people who do like it are stupid or at the very least lack taste. Which is rude.
I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
The character design of the movie and its general look appealed to me. I saw the "Almost Home" short that preceded Mr. Peabody & Sherman and it was enjoyable almost entirely for that.
also another thing to consider is that when you call something "boring" you're sort of implying that the people who do like it are stupid or at the very least lack taste. Which is rude.
Not necessarily. One can be technically skilled but still be excessively staid or aesthetically timid. One might also have great talent in one area but lack pizazz or chops in another.
For example: John Kricfalusi is a very talented animator with an interesting approach to character design who kind of trips over his own feet when given too much leeway and resorts to cynical, tasteless humour that is frequently stale at inception.
I would not mean to imply that they are stupid, but the implication of a lack of taste is intended to a degree, as indicated by my very subtle use of the phrase
you tasteless buffoons.
And yes it would be rather rude to tell someone that they lack taste, or to say that someone lacks taste behind their back, but i am simply speaking about a vague group of unnamed persons.
also another thing to consider is that when you call something "boring" you're sort of implying that the people who do like it are stupid or at the very least lack taste. Which is rude.
Not necessarily. One can be technically skilled but still be excessively staid or aesthetically timid. One might also have great talent in one area but lack pizazz or chops in another.
For example: John Kricfalusi is a very talented animator with an interesting approach to character design who kind of trips over his own feet when given too much leeway and resorts to cynical, tasteless humour that is frequently stale at inception.
Those are reasons you think things are boring.
Others might find the technical proficiency an end in of itself, or might just not consider some things (the cynical tasteless humor for instance) to be bad.
I have lately been trying to stop calling things just "bad", "boring", etc. because it implies at least a small level of disrespect toward anyone who likes them.
Whether or not you should also do that is your own decision, but it is something to consider.
Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion discusses "Wobegonics", the supposed language of Minnesotans which includes "no confrontational verbs or statements of strong personal preference"
fun fact: IRL i have three word for describing quality: "good" "ok" and "eeh (wiggly hand gesture)"
Others might find the technical proficiency an end in of itself, or might just not consider some things (the cynical tasteless humor for instance) to be bad.
I have lately been trying to stop calling things just "bad", "boring", etc. because it implies at least a small level of disrespect toward anyone who likes them.
Whether or not you should also do that is your own decision, but it is something to consider.
I prefer to search for good points in things that I dislike and cop to those things while saying upfront that I dislike, am indifferent to, or have mixed feelings about those things. The exceptions are things that I find badly executed and boring or things that morally repulse me.
Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion discusses "Wobegonics", the supposed language of Minnesotans which includes "no confrontational verbs or statements of strong personal preference"
fun fact: IRL i have three word for describing quality: "good" "ok" and "eeh (wiggly hand gesture)"
Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion discusses "Wobegonics", the supposed language of Minnesotans which includes "no confrontational verbs or statements of strong personal preference"
fun fact: IRL i have three word for describing quality: "good" "ok" and "eeh (wiggly hand gesture)"
sometimes something is "pretty good"
It's so weird that this is considered a Minnesotan or Canadian thing. Most people around here talk like that. Or like they're from Texas.
Others might find the technical proficiency an end in of itself, or might just not consider some things (the cynical tasteless humor for instance) to be bad.
I have lately been trying to stop calling things just "bad", "boring", etc. because it implies at least a small level of disrespect toward anyone who likes them.
Whether or not you should also do that is your own decision, but it is something to consider.
I prefer to search for good points in things that I dislike and cop to those things while saying upfront that I dislike, am indifferent to, or have mixed feelings about those things. The exceptions are things that I find badly executed and boring or things that morally repulse me.
well I think that saying that you don't like something, and why, is fine. But just saying that it's bad doesn't usually help anybody.
idk no one here does that that often so I'm not even sure why I'm bringing it up. I'm tired.
Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion discusses "Wobegonics", the supposed language of Minnesotans which includes "no confrontational verbs or statements of strong personal preference"
fun fact: IRL i have three word for describing quality: "good" "ok" and "eeh (wiggly hand gesture)"
sometimes something is "pretty good"
It's so weird that this is considered a Minnesotan or Canadian thing. Most people around here talk like that. Or like they're from Texas.
it's a matter of extremity.
like "ehh" can mean anything from "lunch was kinda gross" to "i've been idly thinking of killing myself for the better part of the day" and there is no indication which of those it is
whereas "good" means something between "nothing notably bad happened" to "THIS WAS THE PENULTIMATE BEST DAY OF MY ENTIRE LIFE SO FAR (the ultimate day earning the 'pretty good' descriptor)"
Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion discusses "Wobegonics", the supposed language of Minnesotans which includes "no confrontational verbs or statements of strong personal preference"
fun fact: IRL i have three word for describing quality: "good" "ok" and "eeh (wiggly hand gesture)"
sometimes something is "pretty good"
It's so weird that this is considered a Minnesotan or Canadian thing. Most people around here talk like that. Or like they're from Texas.
it's a matter of extremity.
like "ehh" can mean anything from "lunch was kinda gross" to "i've been idly thinking of killing myself for the better part of the day" and there is no indication which of those it is
whereas "good" means something between "nothing notably bad happened" to "THIS WAS THE PENULTIMATE BEST DAY OF MY ENTIRE LIFE SO FAR (the ultimate day earning the 'pretty good' descriptor)"
this is also true of how I, and many other people in the Greater Lehigh Valley area speak.
I say "OK" to denote things that are average to above average or too flawed to be good but not actually bad or sub-par. "Mediocre" or "meh" is the flipside of that; "ehhhh..." with the hand gesture is not a good sign at all.
Man is a most complex simple creature: see what he weaves, and how base his reasons for doing so.
Mo: Okay I've looked through my collection, and so far your options are FAE, Risus, and Polaris.
FAE is based firmly on a sort of metanarrative logic. You still punch, shoot, kick people, and they still take damage, but there's pretty much no simulation of anything here.
Risus is a tongue-in-cheek system. Your character is a combination of a number of character classes/"cliches", and you get ten d6s to divide amongst them. Cliches like wizard, biker, vampire, novelist, etc. The GM sets a goal, and you must roll the dice that you assigned to your cliche to overcome it. If you roll against someone or something with a dice pool, the loser loses one of their dice, and the last one standing wins.
Polaris is even more narratively disconnected. You have two stats, one for resolving problems by yourself, and one that is for resolving problems in society and groups. You have a courage/spirit stat that when wears down, goes in inverse, and when at maximum inverse, you must die or become a monster. There is no GM: the player in front of you plays all antagonists, the players to the left and right are the NPCs and judges of the negotiation. Speaking of, resolving combats are done by negotiating; the hero's player and the antagonist's player offer different things with key phrases until both agree, or some other rule kicks in. At the end of the scene, the order rotates, so that everyone has a chance to play as each role.
Man is a most complex simple creature: see what he weaves, and how base his reasons for doing so.
Oh, there's also one of the World games (as in Apocalypse World, Dungeon World), which are very simple and grant great narrative power to the players, but it's also a very "classbook" focused system, and every permutation of the game needs a set of unique classes.
You do things, and when certain events occur (like say being surrounded by policemen), then moves occur. Moves that fight, that talk, that steal, that defend. The player rolls their dice and take the result of the move.
At no point does the GM touch the dice. They only narrate.
like "ehh" can mean anything from "lunch was kinda gross" to "i've been idly thinking of killing myself for the better part of the day" and there is no indication which of those it is
Alright
I laughed probably harder than I should have at this
If I'm not mistaken, he was abusing Xanax, alcohol, NyQuil, amphetamines and oxycodone during that period. All at once.
I recall reading an excerpt from the very end of Cujo and thinking that it was one of the most beautifully, hideously bleak things that King had ever written and I almost cried.
Comments
vent: it doesn't matter what your skin color is, or your gender, or your sex or your sexual orientation, if you make boring art it's boring art and people are not obligated to enjoy boring things, you tasteless buffoons.
/hypocrisy
It's OK to be excited about representation, but that said, I am probably never going to see the movie because, as Anonus said, it looks very typical DreamWorksy, and I don't really care for their films.
If black children see it and it makes a positive impact on their lives, that's good, but I have no intention of seeing the movie. It's not even for me, really.
I like the protagonist's curly hair
And again that's not something I have to actually see the movie to appreciate. I feel like if I saw it, my thoughts would not change from what they are now, which is "it's good that this exists, but I have no investment in it on a personal level"
Others might find the technical proficiency an end in of itself, or might just not consider some things (the cynical tasteless humor for instance) to be bad.
I have lately been trying to stop calling things just "bad", "boring", etc. because it implies at least a small level of disrespect toward anyone who likes them.
Whether or not you should also do that is your own decision, but it is something to consider.
sometimes something is "pretty good"
idk no one here does that that often so I'm not even sure why I'm bringing it up. I'm tired.
like "ehh" can mean anything from "lunch was kinda gross" to "i've been idly thinking of killing myself for the better part of the day" and there is no indication which of those it is
whereas "good" means something between "nothing notably bad happened" to "THIS WAS THE PENULTIMATE BEST DAY OF MY ENTIRE LIFE SO FAR (the ultimate day earning the 'pretty good' descriptor)"
I laughed probably harder than I should have at this
Cocaine is a hell of a drug!
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead