Posts made by Ganymede

@n0q

Maybe try Dream Pod 9's Heavy Gear?

https://www.dp9.com/heavygear

@Jennkryst said in The guy who coded Kishi Kaisei MUX [L5R]:

Then make a game the way it was. I'll be over here, with the fancy Theno dice code I lost, possibly throwing money at him to code new shiney things!

I meant that I liked L5R under its current publishers, with its current system. I play it TT.

@Jennkryst said in The guy who coded Kishi Kaisei MUX [L5R]:

Necros because Fantasy Flight announced a beta test for their upcoming L5R RPG. I'll hop on the forums over there, request official authorization for MU-ing, etc etc. We'll see how zany the dice are for this one.

No. No. I liked L5R the way it was.

@Lisse24 said in How much plot do people want?:

@Taika Isn't that kind of the purpose of goals? (assuming you're using CoD). Players set their priority and what interests them and what they'd like to see happen. Although, not every goal needs STing...

You mean "aspirations," right?

Neither short-term nor long-term aspirations really tell an ST what you're into. For example, if you have the long-term aspiration of "becoming Prince of the City," that does not tell me if you intend to accomplish this socially, mentally, or physically. I can probably guess from your sheet how you plan to do it, but the aspiration alone tells me very little.

And even if you do want to explore a certain kind of RP, how am I to know what it is? How do I know if you like small intimidate scenes over large social ones? Are you a builder or a destabilizer, as a political animal? How do you, the player, deal with NPCs and PCs?

And so on.

Aspirations belong to the PC too, not the player. The player may be well-aware that a PC will never be Prince -- the News Files state, for example, that the Prince will always be an NPC -- but that does not make the aspiration invalid.

I still see some worth in +pitch for plots.

@Taika said in How much plot do people want?:

Apologies. By 'big plot', I meant more 'metaplot' - a big story, over a longer spam of time, that needs smaller plots to get resolutions, that eventually build in a big reveal or a large group effort to bring down/fix, etc. This would be something like... finding out why the Thor Shot went off.

On consideration, why does it matter how the world ended? Will this discovery have any impact on the game?

Honestly, having played on The Descent before, I don't think a metaplot matters. The Descent had the feel of a survival game, and those games eschew grand answers for important goals. For my PC, claiming and holding his territory was his story, and he had absolutely no ambition to figure out how or why the barriers ripped open.

Little plot is a handful of scenes to build up towards (hopefully) a player driven goal. Like restoring power to a chunk of the grid. This could take some salvaging, bartering, running errands for trade in parts, etc, until the goal is accomplished.

This, I think, is the scope you want for plots run by staff. Rather than have it a "player-driven goal," however, it could simply be a problem to solve. Announce the "situation," and then let players try -- or not try -- to fix it. If the situation isn't fixed, make sure there are consequences.

@Arkandel said in The Basketball Thread:

The issue is 2017 DWade isn't 2009 DWade or even 2013 DWade. His defense has fallen off, and apparently Cleveland is promising him a starter position (which probably means it's where he's going), but although he's a considerable upgrade over Shump, I don't see a worst defensive back court than him and IT facing against Golden State... or hell, Boston.

2017 DWade is better than Shump or J.R. Smith, period. One cannot overlook the synergy he had with LeBron when they were in Miami. Stat-wise, he's PPG based on MPG is still good, and his 3-pt. percentage jumped last year when he was playing with Butler. Defense is down, sure, but Cleveland's defense wasn't great when they defeated the Warriors two seasons ago.

With even more drama: the Bulls apparently have agreed to buy Dwyane Wade out, and the forerunner to resign him is the Cavs.

Wade would fill the SG position nicely. Starting Thomas-Wade-James-Love-Thompson would be a force to reckon with, even for the Warriors.

@Auspice said in RL Anger:

And it has to be chicken fingers. Bone-in chicken ruins it.

You're off your chair, girl.

The chicken must be fried, with the bone in. That's what makes it a delicacy. Chicken fingers take no skill to make; fried chicken is an art form.

@Thenomain said in RL Anger:

I just don’t get chicken and waffles.

There is a certain delicacy to the mix of a fluffy waffle and the fried chicken goodness. And some syrup to it, and it can be heavenly.

Most of the time, it's horrifying.

Okay, so the Thunder apparently picked up Carmelo Anthony for McDermott, Kanter, and a 1st-round Draft Pick.

I'm not hot on the deal. Paul George and Anthony both play SF. Kanter was the Thunder's starting C. So, you'll probably have to throw on Cole and Gibson with the other three, giving you a lineup of Westbook-Cole-George-Anthony-Gibson. Undersized.

Then again, Westbrook, George, and Anthony? Yeah, that's nasty.

Anyone care to pick the Thunder over the Spurs for the team most likely to take out the Warriors?

@ThatGuyThere said in The Hockey Thread:

I think it comes down to how do you define awesomeness, in a league with 31 teams, I would put him in the top 6 GMs, Yes below Holland, Lamariello, and Bowman who would be my pick for top GM currently and Top Coach ever. So he is better than 4/5 of those in his position.

Just as a reminder, Stan Bowman is not Scotty Bowman. You're thinking of Scotty, his father, who was a legendary coach, if not GM (he only spent 3 years as Red Wings GM, I think).

If Holland, Lamariello, and Stan Bowman are in the top six, then so is David Poile (Predators), Dave Tallon (Blackhawks/Panthers), and Doug Wilson (Sharks). I might even put Peter Chiarelli up there (Bruins/Oilers).

I'm not saying Stevie Y ain't good, but he ain't brilliant for the reasons stated above.

@TwoGunBob said in RL things I love:

Well, yeah but his tongue got cut out. Hence why he will never speak a word, right?

When fact and fiction meet, there is much confusion.

@TwoGunBob said in RL things I love:

It's Shakespeare, everyone dies by the end.

Except when they don't, like Iago.

@ThatGuyThere said in The Hockey Thread:

No cups in general would be a point against the GM I agree in this particular case I do not.

We're talking about awesomeness, not about mere goodness.

By your logic, Dean Lombardi is an awesome GM. Two Cups (2012, 2014), two conferences titles, six playoff appearances in 11 years. But the LA Kings have known only inconsistency in this time. I'd hardly call him an awesome GM.

What about Mike Gillis? 1 Conference title, 5 division titles, 5 playoff appearances in 6 seasons. Pretty darn good, until you realize he managed the Canucks after Dave Nonis, and is pretty much responsible for the basement status they are in right now.

Let's not forget our good friend George McPhee, most recently of the Capitals (he's now with the VGK). 1 conference title; 7 division titles; 10 playoff appearances in 17 seasons.

You want awesome GMs? Ken Holland, Red Wings. Sure, they missed the playoffs this year, but 20 straight seasons under his eyes in the playoffs? Legendary. Along with 3 Cups.

Lou Lamariello, when he was with the Devils: 5 conference finals; 9 division titles; 21 playoff appearances; and 3 Cups. Right now, he's putting together the Leafs for a long tenure, and seems to be doing a damned good job at it (although, $6.25M for zombie Marleau? Not so sure of that, but the man holds every damned offensive record for the Sharks).

And, of course, Stan Bowman, Blackhawks. 8 seasons, 8 playoff appearances, 3 Cups. Enough said.

Stevie Y isn't in the conversation with the latter 3. With the former 3, he has a similar record. His team isn't a consistent threat. He's also made questionable choices:

1. He traded Bishop for a 4th round pick. The Stars now have him. Bishop was instrumental in that Stanley Cup Final you were talking about. Now, they have to rely on Vasilevskiy, whose record was good enough last year to keep the Lightning away from good draft picks, but not good enough to get into a weak Eastern Conference.

2. The team's scoring forwards lack depth. Kunitz isn't going to help you score points, even if he has a lot of experience.

3. The team handled the Drouin issue poorly in the 2016 season. Thankfully, they handled it better this off-season, picking up Sergachev. Otherwise, Stevie Y's first-round picks have been up-and-down (where's Connolly, DeAngelo, and Howden?).

So, no. I put Stevie Y in the "he's pretty good" category. Not awesome, but not Burke infamous.

@Auspice said in The Board Game Thread:

Let me propose this one: favorite 6+ player game?

I concur with @Jaded; Diplomacy. It is best with 7.

I also like Civilization, preferably with the Advanced add-on. Avalon-Hill game, pre-Sid-Meier fucking around.

Does Battletech count? If so, then Battletech.

Robo-Rally is boss.

@ThatGuyThere said in The Hockey Thread:

Lack of cups does not equate to a lack of awesomeness.

Lack of Cups as a GM does suggest a lack of awesomeness when it comes to being a GM. We're talking about Stevie Y the GM, not Stevie Y the player.

That said, he's still a pretty good GM.

@ThatGuyThere said in The Hockey Thread:

As someone who has hated the Wings for as long as I can remember, I do have to grudgingly agree with this, Steve Yzerman is and always has been awesome.

Last time I checked, Stevie Y has won precisely zero Cups with the Bolts.