Work Stoppage

I know it’s been a couple of weeks since I’ve posted anything.  The reason this has been the case is that my day job has put quite a dampener on my time.  Working in a library isn’t about reading books all day.  I only wish that were the case.  This time of the year is one of our busiest periods for libraries since we’re essentially tasked with the job of preventing the summer slide as much as possible for our school-aged patrons.

Having to do double and sometimes triple duty these last few weeks to make sure everything’s in order means I’ve had to either spend time working on writing, cartography, or this blog.  Given the choice between the three, I went with the two that helped move projects forward.  My burden should be lightening in a bit, so that means I’ll be able to pick up the pace on several fronts.

Figurative Magnifiers and Maguffins

bladerunner 2Cyberpunk is a genre that relies on a lot of details to communicate a world at once strange and eerily familiar–a world that we know is right behind the corner given the prevalence of technology in our lives.  This is deliberate and forces the reader to ask some damning questions: how much humanity do we retain if we let the machines dictate how we live because of our own choices to let them do the hard work for us?

Bladerunner 1Malmart 2090 is no different in this regard.  If you’re familiar with my previous building guides, you know I like to develop a lot of tables–seriously, a lot of tables.  I’ve used this technique for Malmart not only as a way to help me price items that do have ad copy, but also to give the reader the tools to create thousands upon thousands of objects to fill their game world to overflowing.

bladerunner 7Just look at the screen captures from Blade Runner I’ve included here and you’ll see insane levels of detail.  Visually you take this all in and your brain tells you everything you need to know.  But, guess what?  You can’t get away with that in storytelling.  Nope. Nada.  Ain’t going to happen.  You know why?  Because everyone’s seen this damn movie already and if you don’t add details that makes it stand apart while adhering to the genre, you’re dead in the water and nobody’s going to be impressed or remember a damn thing.

Harsh, isn’t it?

Judge Dredd (1995)
Judge Dredd (1995), just to change it up a bit

Well, that’s cyberpunk.  It’s unforgiving and humanity’s been reduced to an insignificant mass while being the biggest thing in history at the same time.  This dialectic needs (dare I say wants) resolution.  Do we just shrug it off and join the nameless ranks; or, like our devices, do we rise above and become one of the few destined to change the course of history?

The overwhelming amount of detail is crucial to capturing the feel of the genre in ways that might not stand out right off.  Why do you think William Gibson spent so much time in Neuromancer detailing how brutal and shitty street life was?  There’s a reason the opening line describes a sky the color of a

Adam and Eve reference
Adam and Eve reference

television tuned to a dead station.  That visual tells you everything you need to know about how bleak the world is and the grotesqueness of the sky back when cosmic background radiation filled our TVs with slushy images of neutral colors and a roaring hiss.

Ever stop to ask yourself why so many of the signs in the city streets are in Japanese in what’s supposed to be Chinatown with a hodge-podge street language cobbled together from a dozen or so others for a film that came out in the early 80s?  No?  Well, if you didn’t, you’re not thinking this out.  It has everything to do with what the Internet means today and what not having a global network did to how artists depicted the future before the advent of the World Wide Web that allows you to access this blog from any point on the globe with a connection to the global village.

And then there’s this little gem:

Bladerunner 3

Why is there fire and an entire cityscape reflected in Harrison Ford’s eye?  Because the eyes, being the windows to the soul show how much humanity has consumed itself just to find an ounce of solace in this monstrosity its created.  The soulessness of the bleak urban landscape is constantly in search of something to consume.  It burns with desire and a deep search for meaning that isn’t there anymore because it’s been replaced with material goods to the point of crowding out every aspect of nature.

There’s no balance.

Authentic synthetic snake license number
Authentic synthetic snake license number

To replace it, there’s replicants out the ass in this film: people, animals, toys that think they’re alive, ads selling dead dreams in the guise of a better tomorrow.  All of them rendered as empty shells of the things they represent.  Platonic forms desecrated until the illusion of safety is reflected in the mirror.  That’s what’s in his eye and throughout the film, and thus the lingering question of whether Deckard is human or not.  Even his name is a twisting of Descartes and hearkens back to the brain-in-a-vat problem.

Everything is magnified to excess in cyberpunk.  It’s too big to take in at once.  That’s why the level of detail is so friggin’ high.  You want to know how to solve this dilemma?  Examine the finest of details, that’s why the eye is so important in that one, brief scene at the beginning of the film.  It, and the Voight-Kampff machine zero in on that one feature above all others while we, as viewers try to take in the entire aesthetic.

bladerunner 4
Running through sex to kill desire?

Authenticity, then, is captured in the minutiae.  It’s these little details that let people find ways to stand out and be different.  For this reason, the snake scale becomes enormously important.  It at once authenticates the world and shows how bereft and full of debauchery (or “sin,” if you prefer) the world is.  Hence the Adam and Eve reference with the snake.  The garden was the balanced world where urban and rural landscape meshed and escape was possible, which is why at the end of the flim, what do you see, Deckard and Rachel fleeing the terror of the cyberpunk world for the unknown of a “lost” paradise in green wilderness.

So, while the overwhelming number of choices in Malmart might seem excessive, they give you the ability to replicate the feel of the dystopian world of the genre.  And that’s why some of the tables generate more choices than you’ll ever need, like well in excess of 100,000 electronic devices.  Because everything’s a plot device and the biggest change can be contained in the smallest item.  Just like the snake scale’s serial number.

General progress updates.

Wrote nearly 1,000 words today.  I know that’s not much, but given the holidays and a few others things, that’s a significant number considering some of the circumstances.  But, it wasn’t just writing words that made today awesome.  I finished a few things:

  • turned in some additional material for the upcoming Republic of Texas book
  • Finished the layout for Castle Builder Reforged, Chapter 4
  • Started working on a new blog post (no, not this one)

So, while it’s not a lot of detail or anything, it’s a good start for the latter half of the month that I’ve managed to increase my writing production to close to 1,000 words a day.  I’m hoping to sustain that everyday going forward.

Stealing a Page from Screenwriters

We are often asked as gamemasters to create a scenario for players that we know is intended to allow their characters to carry the day and claim victory. To do this, we have to imagine the end goal of the adventure and then plan to have the challenges be just difficult enough that the characters when even if they have to struggle for that outcome. One of the tricks that we can use to make our lives easier comes from film and television, and many gamemasters are probably using it without realizing that it is exactly what they are doing.

 

In effect, this is an elevator pitch approach to adventure design known as a logline. The point of the log line is to sum up the main plot of the story in approximately 25 words or less. Loglines are not intended to capture the entire story; rather, they are useful devices that let us focus our intention on the most important elements the story is about. Consider the following example using Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings:

 

“From a place known as the Shire, a reluctant hero, a hobbit named Frodo Baggins, is tasked by the wizard Gandalf the Grey to undertake a journey with a companions on a quest to make it all the way to Mount Doom in Mordor and find a way to destroy the One Ring while avoiding an epic battle that engulfs all of Middle Earth and a host of beings intent on retrieving the ring for their evil master, Sauron, who will plunge the world into eternal darkness if he succeeds.”

 

Now consider this:

 

“The reluctant hero Bilbo Baggins is charged with the task of destroying the One Ring while avoiding fanatical pursuers and the war engulfing Middle Earth.”

 

If you have seen the movies you know there is obviously more detail than either of these two descriptions can encompass. But, which one feels more intense, the one that goes into detail, or the one that cuts to the heart of the story? This is where a logline can help you plot out your adventures.

 

The point here is not to cut out any contingencies, side quests, or wandering encounters. Rather, the purpose of the logline is to help you plan out the eventual goal of an adventure no matter how many distractions or subplots you can stuff in there to your players’ delight. While it takes more time to prepare for such adventures, the logline works for adventures of any length, meaning you can recycle the logline with a few small changes here and there to alter the plot enough to keep things fresh and interesting. Here’s an example:

 

“The adventurers look to rescue the local merchant’s son who has been kidnapped to force the man out of business and cripple the town’s economy.”

 

Now, with a few changes and several levels later, the logline can be recycled with the following tweaks:

 

“The adventurers track down the mysterious group that kidnapped the head of the all-powerful merchant’s guild, bringing the starving city to its knees.”

 

Notice that there really is not that much of a difference in the plot the loglines. The challenges are greater in the latter, but it is all just a matter of scale. Both are stories of struggle for survival and the key role the characters play in saving the day. What makes them different is how they are dressed and all the trappings that go with those implications, which includes subplots and side quests.

If you found this useful or inspiring, consider my Patreon which helps me keep this blog going.

Don’t Tell Me About Your Character

One of the techniques that writing instructors stress time and again is “show, don’t tell.” Yet, no such piece of advice exists for gamers. In fact, more often than not players tell the gamemaster what their characters are doing while the gamemaster tells the players about the world their characters inhabit. It seems weird that something that would bore an audience to tears in a written format is how many players derive satisfaction in the heat of the moment.

Something that strikes me as being just as strange is that when people talk about their most memorable sessions, they show almost as much as they tell. The characters are more alive with details of what they were doing compared to the actual game session. In many ways, their descriptions are like stories of true events. But, again, this is not the most exciting way to tell a story.

What can gamers learn from this? There are ways to interject showing into the descriptions of the events that occur in a game without taking away anyone’s agency. This is why players are able to describe events as a story rather than a report after the fact. But there should be a way we can draw from this to move beyond a report style of gaming.

If you are unfamiliar with the difference between showing and telling, consider the following descriptions of events:

 

“My character walks up to the door and I want to check for traps. I rolled a 16.”

“I walk up to the door and examine it for traps with a result of 16.”

 

The differences are subtle, but one is more active than the other. The first example is a play-by-play report of what the character is going to do and the second is a smoother rendition of the same event that shows. There is nothing inherently wrong with the first method, and this is often the way most game sessions go as there is a need to pause to let people know what is going on in any particular game.

If you trust your players or gamemaster enough, you can show these actions and trust that neither side is trying to circumvent any of the rules. After all, if there are any adjustments due to situational circumstances, there should be little reason to believe the gamemaster is cheating. This also requires the gamemaster shows rather than tells what the world looks like.

In this instance, it requires the gamemaster does not just provide a list of details for what the room, town, or dungeon looks like. A 10’ wide corridor with moss is boring after a while, but if you say that the moss is growing or creeping up the walls, you give a description that feels alive and more active. One of the techniques that keeps descriptions from moving from a showing to a telling is the verbs used. Do the objects interact with one another, or are they just present? If they interact, then you are showing.

Telling is often passive and does not come across as vividly. Veteran gamemasters are often great at doing this, but when players make the transition to the other side of the screen they often tell as that is the mode they have learned to operate from when playing a roleplaying game. Showing is a skill that people have to develop as we are used to reporting what has happened in the past. This is as much caused by how we learn to receive news as it is the way our brains process stimuli and weed out the information it doesn’t think is important, like how things interact with each other unless the event affects the observer.

Another area where showing and not telling comes in handy is in interior dialogues with a character. We might not be able to show the interior of a character’s thoughts, but we can show how he acts as a result of them. Even if the process is mostly in the character’s head, there are a few tricks to help make these moments dramatic and active. Most of these tricks are the same as those outlined above. What is important to remember is that the events have to be actions if you want to retain the excitement.

To make it more mysterious, you can limit who gets the information for what goes on in the character’s head. However, that can lead to other problems with players being left out of some of the action. That is where letting the players see the results without seeing the cause comes in handy. It is just like the movies, only better because it is unfolding in real time.

So, when someone gives a dry description, you can tell them “Don’t tell me about your character, show me.”

If you found this useful or inspiring, consider my Patreon which helps me keep this blog going.

These Teachers Should be Fired (NSFW)

Okay, so while I’m a huge supporter of education.  There’s an article from the Wall Street Journal that is something else.  And it’s not the fault of the article or the reporting.  It’s what the English teachers are doing to their students that I find abhorrent.  It’s downright repellent that these instructors are telling their students that they cannot use certain words that are, in effect, the glue of our common language in a sea of over 500,000 words that make up the English language.

Think about that.  There are over 500,000 words in this terribly fucked-up language we speak.  The history of the language is so convoluted that if you turned it into a story, people would hate you because it would make no sense.  English is the little language that could and it probably shouldn’t have if you look at how many times it came close to being wiped out by other languages.  But, somehow it morphed into a massive mutated multilingual murdering monstrosity maintaining a lexicon of words.

Nobody remembers half of these words anymore, yet they’re maintained in the ginormous catalogue that is the Oxford English Dictionary along with all the variant spellings of words nobody cares about since they’ve fallen well out of favor for no other reason than they just did or someone’s standardization of spelling.  And nobody cares unless they are either English majors or English language historians, and even then these are the people who describe how the language works without telling you how to use it.

So, this is where the problem with these asshats comes in.  They’re telling kids that they have to chuck out all the words that essentially make up the core of good, concise writing for international business English.  You know, the words everyone who speaks English with any level of skill has to know.  These poor kids haven’t even gotten comfortable in their own skins and these fucking teachers have the audacity to tell their students that they can’t use words the teachers consider “dead?”  Seriously?  What in the ever loving fuck is this shit?

These failed writers are telling your kids that they have to be more expressive when they’re still trying to learn the basics of the language.  I’m pretty sure that either these horrible people are trying to live vicariously through the writing of their students or want to make them feel as miserable as the teachers do and want to snuff their dreams in the cradle.  If you’re not upset by this, you really should be.  Just look at this little gem from the article:

Megan Riley, a sixth-grader in Mt. Lebanon, Pa., recently joined her classmates in chanting the words that their English teacher has pronounced dead: “Good, bad, nice, a lot, OK, fun, thing and stuff.” Later, the students were told, they might hold a mock funeral to bury those words.

A mock fucking funeral?!?!  For “dead words” sixth-graders aren’t supposed to use anymore?  These kids are experiencing all the terrible things hormones are doing to their bodies to make them feel self-conscious and awkward as hell and you want to pull out the rug from under them for the words they’re allowed to use?  Who the fuck do you teachers think you are?

Look, I have no illusions that I’m an awesome writer as I’ve been doing this as a profession for 11 years now and buying a website had to be weighed as a monetary decision that was feasible and necessary.  If I was awesome at this shit, I’d have a pile of money I could use to pay for websites without debating whether I should and it’s taken me years to get to the level I’m at.  It was 10 years after high school that I fumbled through shitty draft after shitty draft before I could make a coherent thought artful enough to get paid for it.

Now I get wanting kids to expand their vocabulary, but that’s why we should be encouraging reading everything and anything available.  We want kids to feel they can express themselves and to have all the tools at their disposal to do just that.  This doesn’t encourage them to do so.  It encourages them to be wordy and artistic before they’ve learned how to write the truth of their own observations?  Besides, do you honestly think a business proposal avoiding “dead words” would be taken seriously?

All this purple prose bullshit is arrogance in the extreme.  The students aren’t being taught how to use language effectively, but rather how to call attention to the very artifice that makes bad writing so terrible.  If I proliferated this rant with nothing but profanity or used the largest words I could just to prove a point, there would no value to reading this or justifying the time I wasted figuratively throwing up in your eye holes.

So, here are a couple more gems from this article that should make you want to pressure the schools to get rid of these teachers who are harming their student’s education.

One recent afternoon after school, Josie and Josh agreed to take a stab at editing famous authors, starting with the closing words ofJames Joyce’s “Ulysses”: “….yes I said yes I will Yes.”

Head down, her pigtails brushing the paper, Josie examined the phrase and then suggested a small amendment: “…yes I hollered yes I will Definitely.”

Josh decided to let “said” stand, given Joyce’s reputation. He did, however, insert the commas neglected by Joyce.

No, no, no, no!  This is truly audacious.  The teachers have students “correcting” James motherfucking Joyce!  Does no one understand that the whole of Ulysses is a deliberately designed piece of art that relies as much upon mythic structure as it does linguistic sound qualities?  It seems that the teachers don’t as they’re allowing their students to misuse the very tools they’re trying to instill in their students.

“Said,” “walk,” and other such words are dry and factual and can be overused just like any other linguistic expression (clichés anyone?), but there’s a huge difference between expressing the emotional content in a character’s words as there is in the delivery of those very words.  I don’t need to know that someone exclaimed or ejaculated a string of words if they’re followed by an exclamation point.  I don’t even need to know how angry someone is or that they ambulated their way across the page if it’s clear what’s going on from the context alone.

At best, the words will be redundant; at worst, the writing will be tortured and a clear example of telling, not showing.  And this is what these teachers fail to keep firmly in mind.  They are quite literally failing their students and instilling in them a sense that language is used for reporting, not expression.  Writers have to trust that their readers are smart enough to pick up on the emotional and literal context of their work.

So, when the kids stated:

Second-guessing famous authors was tricky, Josh cautioned: “It’s almost as though they’re given a free pass” to flout the rules. Josie submitted that she wasn’t sure they should get that pass.

Her brother winced: “You’ve got to remember,” he lectured, “most of these guys are dead.”

This shows you exactly how arrogant this practice is and that wince should speak volumes of the discomfort the kids should feel for what they’re being made to do, not to the structure of the literary works of Joyce and Hemingway.  Letting the work speak for itself is what the teachers should be instilling.  Understanding the hows and whys of written works is what you study after you have a firm grip on the basics.