I don't want this to tangetialize any further than it has, but I just want to say this:
After more than two years, it disappoints me to think that there are people who actually believe that this was a stupid blunder. I can understand, I think, why there were senior intelligence and law enforcement personnel in the late 90s and early oughts who didn't think terrorism was a serious threat--and look at the way people who did, men like John O'Neill and Dick Clarke, were treated (Yeah, Clarke was the CT czar. He was still also a lone voice in the wilderness, too, and too often). I can understand it, but I don't like it. I don't like thinking about whether my concern was greater than the U.S. government's, and I don't like thinking that it necessitated a catastrophic event to get this country's attention--something far too many people had essentially acquiesced to years ago. But it wasn't a blunder, and it wasn't stupid. It was something so unexpected to the very people who were supposed to stop it, something which in a perfect world it would never have been, that made it possible. Too much CYA, too much institutional complacency, and too much ... This is the same FBI that spent decades denying that the Mafia existed, and spent too long hiring under a virtual "no blacks, no broads" policy, and has always been rather slow and heavy in its investigatory interests to expect that all of the sudden that same bureau would have the ability to prepare for or deal with real terrorism. And this is the same bureau that has done a pretty good job after the fact, but before...
Full Version: How do I introduce a grittier atmosphere?
A bit off topic but possibly useful:
One of the reasons (continental) europeans critisize the "War on terror" is that for us terrorrism is an old hat (IRA, ETA, RAF, KGB, CIA, LfV - Can you spot the wrong one?[1]) and we have come to the following conclusions:
a) Even a rather densly packed and controlled society has enough cracks for subversive/terrorist elements. And the average european state has a control over it's populace that would bring quite a few moderate US citizens on the barricades[2]
b) Even close and aggressive guardship can not prevent terrorism (i.e the RAF assasination of Heerhaus or the IRA bombings of britisch installations in germany, ETA operations in Spain) and it only gets worse if the terrorists receive aids from another state
c) Quite a few terrorists where captured the classical way - long, hard policework and then SWAT! Security was (and is) handled better by special police units than by the military (Good Soldier <> Good policeman[3])
d) Oppression breeds terrorism. Even governments that could (and did/do) with the problem more harsh than the Iran Occupation forces are not able to stop a dedicated terrorist organisation / resistance group. Ask (in historical order) Yugoslavia / Israel / Algeria / Tschetschenia ...
Michael
[1] There is none. All used/employed/participated in actions deemed terrorism (including bombing it's own prison the sneak in an informer). LfV is "State office for protection of the constitution"
[2] I.e. I have to inform the state where I live (and my landlord has to do the same indipendently), I have to carry a ID-card with picture with me all the time, there are central registries for criminal offences, traffic offences, car licence plates etc.
[3] Despite similar equipment police guards are viewed with less suspicion than military ones and they are better dealing with irritating persons. Aiming a battle rifle in the general direction stops even a quite agressive person dead in it's tracks (Mil.Way) but a policeman can actually talk him out of its intend without drawing a weapon.
One of the reasons (continental) europeans critisize the "War on terror" is that for us terrorrism is an old hat (IRA, ETA, RAF, KGB, CIA, LfV - Can you spot the wrong one?[1]) and we have come to the following conclusions:
a) Even a rather densly packed and controlled society has enough cracks for subversive/terrorist elements. And the average european state has a control over it's populace that would bring quite a few moderate US citizens on the barricades[2]
b) Even close and aggressive guardship can not prevent terrorism (i.e the RAF assasination of Heerhaus or the IRA bombings of britisch installations in germany, ETA operations in Spain) and it only gets worse if the terrorists receive aids from another state
c) Quite a few terrorists where captured the classical way - long, hard policework and then SWAT! Security was (and is) handled better by special police units than by the military (Good Soldier <> Good policeman[3])
d) Oppression breeds terrorism. Even governments that could (and did/do) with the problem more harsh than the Iran Occupation forces are not able to stop a dedicated terrorist organisation / resistance group. Ask (in historical order) Yugoslavia / Israel / Algeria / Tschetschenia ...
Michael
[1] There is none. All used/employed/participated in actions deemed terrorism (including bombing it's own prison the sneak in an informer). LfV is "State office for protection of the constitution"
[2] I.e. I have to inform the state where I live (and my landlord has to do the same indipendently), I have to carry a ID-card with picture with me all the time, there are central registries for criminal offences, traffic offences, car licence plates etc.
[3] Despite similar equipment police guards are viewed with less suspicion than military ones and they are better dealing with irritating persons. Aiming a battle rifle in the general direction stops even a quite agressive person dead in it's tracks (Mil.Way) but a policeman can actually talk him out of its intend without drawing a weapon.
| QUOTE (Birdy @ Jan 6 2004, 08:43 PM) |
| b) Even close and aggressive guardship can not prevent terrorism (i.e the RAF assasination of Heerhaus or the IRA bombings of britisch installations in germany, ETA operations in Spain) and it only gets worse if the terrorists receive aids from another state d) Oppression breeds terrorism. Even governments that could (and did/do) with the problem more harsh than the Iran Occupation forces are not able to stop a dedicated terrorist organisation / resistance group. Ask (in historical order) Yugoslavia / Israel / Algeria / Tschetschenia ... |
Close surveillance and security can prevent terrorism. It is when you try to mix democracy and civil liberties with security concerns that you have trouble.
How many terrorist incidents were there in USSR?
How many terrorist incidents are there in Russia now?
The Isrealis are on the right track on dealing with terrorists. Fight terror with terror, bomb for bomb, bullet for bullet. But world opinion is against them, CNN and all that media crap.
Oppression can stop terrorism but only if it is absolute and unrelenting and last forever and ever, until the end of time. Wipe them out, no mercy, no trials, no rights, let God/Allah sort the innocent from the righteous.
| QUOTE (toturi) |
| Oppression can stop terrorism but only if it is absolute and unrelenting and last forever and ever, until the end of time. Wipe them out, no mercy, no trials, no rights, let God/Allah sort the innocent from the righteous. |
This is gritty...
| QUOTE (toturi) | ||
Close surveillance and security can prevent terrorism. It is when you try to mix democracy and civil liberties with security concerns that you have trouble. How many terrorist incidents were there in USSR? How many terrorist incidents are there in Russia now? The Isrealis are on the right track on dealing with terrorists. Fight terror with terror, bomb for bomb, bullet for bullet. But world opinion is against them, CNN and all that media crap. Oppression can stop terrorism but only if it is absolute and unrelenting and last forever and ever, until the end of time. Wipe them out, no mercy, no trials, no rights, let God/Allah sort the innocent from the righteous. |
I hope that was meant sarcastic/ironic. Otherwise you have IMHO a serious problem with your world view. But just in case:
i) The number of terrorist/freedom fighter attacks against Israel is actually increasing
ii) Germany tried total oppression/hostage shooting/village annilation quite recently. The resistance fighters/terrorists continued and even increased their attacks. And even the Gestapo/Stasi/KGB missed quite a few dissidents.
iii) The British forces in Ireland suspended a good many rights in their fight with the IRA. And still the terror did not stop
iv) There's that lil country called Vietnam....
v) Russia has a rather spotty media presence in Tschetschenia and use quite some force (i.e They destroyed a whole town to get one terror leader) And still they can't stop the attacks.
vi) The UdSSR had to take a number of harsh measures to curb the revolutionary tendencies like
a) Stationing RUSSIAN troops in many unruly republics
b) Settling russians all over the country
c) Scattering up potentially dangerous groups be resetteling them
d) Using a massiv security system
e) Suppressing local cultures
f) Being blessed with a population that never new liberties[1]
Add the fact that quite a few of the bigger republics where contend/properly cowed (Ukrain, Georgia) and those rebelling today are rather low-populace fringe republics and you see why the had few (there where some up to 1947) rebellions.
There are more examples. Unless you use saturation-bombing with ground-penetrator nuclear weapons, a population-integrated terror/guerilla/freedom fighter organisation can not be destroyed. And if you use that, the fallout will kill you as well.
Add the fact that once you pass a certain point in control&oppression even moderate people will rebel and that rebellion can take more than one way (read up on Ghandi, Kapp Putsch) Add the loss in production when people react to constant observation and the rising costs and you might get the idea where it fails.
Back on topic:
Total observation does not work. That is why many Cyberpunk worlds have the "enclave" setup with the rich&powerful holed up in the 21. century fortress, protected by SA-style goontroopers and the poor restricted to, often controlled/walled ghettos and riddled with Gestapo-type secret agents and paid informers.
Michael
[1] The big error of Leninism (UdSSR style aberation of Marxism) is the crazy idea that one could jump from absolute monarchie (Zar) directly to Dictatorship of the Proletarians (Last phase before communism). Only Maoism is worse, skipping even the DotP Phase
| QUOTE (Birdy) |
| b) Even close and aggressive guardship can not prevent terrorism (i.e the RAF assasination of Heerhaus or the IRA bombings of britisch installations in germany, ETA operations in Spain) and it only gets worse if the terrorists receive aids from another state |
This happens all to often , even with funding for terrorist activities coming from the "good guys"
You can saturation-bomb with conventional weaponry as well, depending on the size of the target area. Plus, with the advent of fusion weaponry, there will come a day when we can nuke all we want with negligible radiation concerns.
Nuke and pave, my friends, nuke and pave.
~J
Nuke and pave, my friends, nuke and pave.
~J
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| If ye' want gritty architecture, try looking at buildings like Boston's City Hall. Seriously. The entire architectural style is called neo-brutalist. ~J |
Aint noting neo about it. Its first rate 'example in textbook' brutalist. Actually its technically semi post-moderninistic brutilism, but thats just masocistic.
Getting back on topic. I have had the same problem. And I find this topic rather intersting seeing what everyone considers gritty. I think Im gonna take a stab at the what-not-to-do. Most from experance.
Dont let your players take old PCs as contacts. Even if they are retired, people still feel as they own that charcter. When they come to him looking for APDS with enough money to cover the street cost, but dont score enough sucesses to bring the cost down to where they think it is, they WILL pull the "but I know ____ would let us have it for that, cause hes a nice guy" Nice guys dont keep their retirment checks for long like that.
Dont let your PCs EVER call in un-reasonable help. Other runner teams being the prime example. Way around this however. Get one of the help killed. Let your team feel the ramifacations of their actions, a pissed off oposing team, their street rep falls, ect.
And for gods sakes, try your damdest to keep the power level down. If you think you can create a gritty aura to a game where people can ignore anything smaller then an assult rifle, your either very good, or very wrong.
| QUOTE (Birdy @ Jan 6 2004, 11:30 PM) |
| I hope that was meant sarcastic/ironic. Otherwise you have IMHO a serious problem with your world view. But just in case: i) The number of terrorist/freedom fighter attacks against Israel is actually increasing ii) Germany tried total oppression/hostage shooting/village annilation quite recently. The resistance fighters/terrorists continued and even increased their attacks. And even the Gestapo/Stasi/KGB missed quite a few dissidents. iii) The British forces in Ireland suspended a good many rights in their fight with the IRA. And still the terror did not stop iv) There's that lil country called Vietnam.... v) Russia has a rather spotty media presence in Tschetschenia and use quite some force (i.e They destroyed a whole town to get one terror leader) And still they can't stop the attacks. vi) The UdSSR had to take a number of harsh measures to curb the revolutionary tendencies like a) Stationing RUSSIAN troops in many unruly republics b) Settling russians all over the country c) Scattering up potentially dangerous groups be resetteling them d) Using a massiv security system e) Suppressing local cultures f) Being blessed with a population that never new liberties[1] Add the fact that quite a few of the bigger republics where contend/properly cowed (Ukrain, Georgia) and those rebelling today are rather low-populace fringe republics and you see why the had few (there where some up to 1947) rebellions. There are more examples. Unless you use saturation-bombing with ground-penetrator nuclear weapons, a population-integrated terror/guerilla/freedom fighter organisation can not be destroyed. And if you use that, the fallout will kill you as well. |
That is why you must kill them ALL. ALL of them must die. Nuke them ALL.
Just kidding.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| You can saturation-bomb with conventional weaponry as well, depending on the size of the target area. Plus, with the advent of fusion weaponry, there will come a day when we can nuke all we want with negligible radiation concerns. Nuke and pave, my friends, nuke and pave. ~J |
Conventional weapons simply don't seem right. The lack the "end of civilisation" feeling. Nothing beats seeing dropping 20 nukes on an 80x10km piece of country. Your country! And your "allies" doing the dropping. Okay, maybe the knowledge that another allie has a bunch of missiles that can't even make it halfway through Berlin. Tells you how much you are liked
The only thing that beats nukes are rocks! Real big ones (Think Deep Impact/Armageddon[1] - not the puny Footfall / Luzifes Hammer stuff) The only way to make realy sure you gona catch them all. Makes you thankful your allies never managed to put that catapult on the moon.
But back to gritty (Some "Inspirations"):
The second trilogie from Gibson (Virtual Light,...) has some nice ideas on squatters
GURPS:Cyberworld (NERDS er NERCS et all)
Stallones "Judge Dread" can be plundered for a heavy handed police force[2]
Read Spillanes "Hammer" for a depressive New York (rain etc)
Some of the "Known Space" stuff (Involuntiry organ donor, anyone?)
Rollerball (Original) and "The Killer game" for "Bloodsport" [3]
For "slave warriors" read "Spartakus"[4]
A lot of the other alternatives require a even more different background (i.e. more space travel - See Voice of the Whirlwind, more oppression - see Hardwired)
One more thing that is important:
Restrict magic! Nothing brightens up the day more than the mage doing the "wonder" thingies like cleansing food/water, treatments etc. Have it backfire, have trickster "claim" to be magic, restrict spells.
Michael
[1] Aka "Valiant comet saves world from Bruce Willis". Try watching it in a cinema with 1/4 the watcher being miners in a gas-ritch coal mine.
[2] Just drop the chrome
[3] Death is only "accepted" not guaranteed in the games.
[4] More gritty details than the rather nice movie
If you happen to be a Babylon 5 fan, remember Londo Malari's expression as he watched the mass drivers pound the Klingon...sorry, Narn homeworld.
-Siege
-Siege
Glee?
~J
~J
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Glee? ~J |
Actually, it was a horrified look of "Oh frag...what have I unleashed?"
Coming from someone who disliked the Narn as much as anyone, he realized that from orbit, ships were dropping massive payloads on cities, wiping out tens or even hundreds of thousands of civilians per shot.
-Siege
| QUOTE |
| Nothing beats seeing dropping 20 nukes on an 80x10km piece of country. |
Hey, that's not enough. My Protection Field Manual says a tank can survive at 3 kilometers from the Ground Zero of 1 megaton. You'll need at least 1 nuke per 30km^2, or lots more if the nukes are small.
Of course, that tank will be stranded in a 80x10km inferno, everything burning around it, air temperature being 500+ C for a few hours, and enough radiation to kill the crew fast if the environmental seals break.
| QUOTE |
| wiping out tens or even hundreds of thousands of civilians per shot. |
Was the Narn homeworld sparsely populated, or were their weapons really that pathetic?
You will note I said per shot and admittedly, that's a pretty conservative estimate considering Atlanta has a population in the millions and one really big rock could vaproize the city.
And, insofar as I know, they haven't published casualty figures for the tv show.
Granted, nukes would have been more effective but it would have rendered the planet unusable as anything but a target.
-Siege
And, insofar as I know, they haven't published casualty figures for the tv show.
Granted, nukes would have been more effective but it would have rendered the planet unusable as anything but a target.
-Siege
| QUOTE |
| If you happen to be a Babylon 5 fan, remember Londo Malari's expression as he watched the mass drivers pound the Klingon...sorry, Narn homeworld. -Siege |
that's a low blow there siege.
b5 rocked. a friend of mine has every episode recorded, and i've seen them all.
i am supernerd, here me roar.
| QUOTE (fourstring_samurai) |
| i am supernerd, here me roar. |
What's that squeaking noise?
Ok, I'm reaching quite a bit back here but I only stumbled about this thread just now...
The ignorance thing really adds to the gritty feel but I made some bad experiences with it. Many players will try to abuse this. They see how somebody is shot in the streets for a burger, so next time they walk into a stuffer shack, grab a bag of soy chips and shoot the cashier because they don't want to pay the 2 NuYen. And to remain consequent, the GM can do nothing but let it slip. Lone Star won't come into the barrens because a shop owner got shot and no one else will give a shit. One thing that will almost certainly happen is that all the people around will come and plunder the store...
Okay, maybe this was a bad example. The stuffer shacks will hire gangs for protection.
But they could shoot the hot dog vendor for a snack or something. It'll turn them into jaded, stone cold bricks, insensitive to anything that faces them in that world.
Grittiness and the Cyberpunk roleplaying is all about consequences. Don't like your actions to have consequences? Go play AD&D!
In my oppinion, killing a man should have consequences. I myself am not sure what kind of consequences, but I usually try not let killing slide in my games.
The only time killing of the innocent is apropriate or even good is as a device employed by the game master to drive fear into the players. Example:
The PCs have an audience with the local Don or Oyabun or whatever. They come to his (dark and smoked) office in the back of a club he owns through a trash-laden back-alley. When they enter they are stripped of their weapons by two massive goons (maybe trolls or orcs, depending on how racist the organization is). They are told to wait as the Don has an 'appointment' standing in front of the office, guarded by a couple of intimidating, armed goons, they can hear the Don talking inside. He's quiet so they can't understand him, but they hear someone begging and whining. Something about how sorry it was and that it would never happen again and that he didn't mean to offend him and all that. The voice slides into stammering 'please, no, think of my family, my children, no, please, not me, no, no, no...' and ends suddenly with the bang of a gun. Someone falls to the ground. The door opens and two goons drag a body of a poorly clad man out of the room. He has a bullet hole in the chest. Through the door they can see the Don with a totaly bland face signalling you to come in...
Overall suffering should be present. The guy begging to be shot, the mother whoring to pay the food for her kids, the homeless guy eating straight out of the trash. The little children picking trash so that daddy can eat.
The shanty villages.
The woman, draggin of a corpse to strip him of his clothing and use him to feed her family for another two days...
Just be sure to let the players know where their boundaries are. Show them how common-place killing is and they'll kill for because they don't like someone's face or just to get rid of some frustration.
The ignorance thing really adds to the gritty feel but I made some bad experiences with it. Many players will try to abuse this. They see how somebody is shot in the streets for a burger, so next time they walk into a stuffer shack, grab a bag of soy chips and shoot the cashier because they don't want to pay the 2 NuYen. And to remain consequent, the GM can do nothing but let it slip. Lone Star won't come into the barrens because a shop owner got shot and no one else will give a shit. One thing that will almost certainly happen is that all the people around will come and plunder the store...
Okay, maybe this was a bad example. The stuffer shacks will hire gangs for protection.
But they could shoot the hot dog vendor for a snack or something. It'll turn them into jaded, stone cold bricks, insensitive to anything that faces them in that world.
Grittiness and the Cyberpunk roleplaying is all about consequences. Don't like your actions to have consequences? Go play AD&D!
In my oppinion, killing a man should have consequences. I myself am not sure what kind of consequences, but I usually try not let killing slide in my games.
The only time killing of the innocent is apropriate or even good is as a device employed by the game master to drive fear into the players. Example:
The PCs have an audience with the local Don or Oyabun or whatever. They come to his (dark and smoked) office in the back of a club he owns through a trash-laden back-alley. When they enter they are stripped of their weapons by two massive goons (maybe trolls or orcs, depending on how racist the organization is). They are told to wait as the Don has an 'appointment' standing in front of the office, guarded by a couple of intimidating, armed goons, they can hear the Don talking inside. He's quiet so they can't understand him, but they hear someone begging and whining. Something about how sorry it was and that it would never happen again and that he didn't mean to offend him and all that. The voice slides into stammering 'please, no, think of my family, my children, no, please, not me, no, no, no...' and ends suddenly with the bang of a gun. Someone falls to the ground. The door opens and two goons drag a body of a poorly clad man out of the room. He has a bullet hole in the chest. Through the door they can see the Don with a totaly bland face signalling you to come in...
Overall suffering should be present. The guy begging to be shot, the mother whoring to pay the food for her kids, the homeless guy eating straight out of the trash. The little children picking trash so that daddy can eat.
The shanty villages.
The woman, draggin of a corpse to strip him of his clothing and use him to feed her family for another two days...
Just be sure to let the players know where their boundaries are. Show them how common-place killing is and they'll kill for because they don't like someone's face or just to get rid of some frustration.
Me and my Apple Newton see your supernerd and raise you an ubergeek.
~J
~J
My Blue Cold Cathode tubes and ELwire in my 3 window computer chassis call. Let's see em!
*Produces not just one, but two 1992-era PDAs (only one functional, however)*
~J
~J
I'm not a tech nerd but I used to carry around a full set of D&D dice. Just in case...
As for B5, I don't have them taped but I've been hoarding my change to save up to buy the complete seasons on DVD. mmmm, special features....
As for B5, I don't have them taped but I've been hoarding my change to save up to buy the complete seasons on DVD. mmmm, special features....
I would recommend the Gibson short story "Dogfight" in Burning Chrome. It is a perfect example of how to handle a character "winning" in a gritty campaign. If you want a gritty atmosphere, don't make it so they can't win. Just make it so their victories feel hollow. Like the one official adventure where the group rescues a dragon only to have their employees snatch him up. Or have them rescue some refugees, but have a lot of them die along the way. Or have them shoot a brutal pimp, only to see a brand new pimp out there the next day. But like I said, don't overdo it, or you will have callous, murderous characters who simply stop caring.
that story rocked.
for that matter, that whole book rocked.
for that matter, that whole book rocked.
That story is my favourite. Michael Swanwick rocks.
And Kevyn? *Pulls out laptop case, produces bag of D&D dice and brick of 36 d6s*
~J
Edit: For those wondering about my comment about Swanwick, I'm correcting Glyph. Dogfight was a collaborative work, as credited in the book
And Kevyn? *Pulls out laptop case, produces bag of D&D dice and brick of 36 d6s*
~J
Edit: For those wondering about my comment about Swanwick, I'm correcting Glyph. Dogfight was a collaborative work, as credited in the book
I took one of the Clix games that I don't own because they didn't include Duels; if that doesn't count, then strike off whatever fraction of a point one question is worth.
Meanwhile, I rank ever so slightly higher than you, with 69.82249%.
~J
Meanwhile, I rank ever so slightly higher than you, with 69.82249%.
~J
| QUOTE (fourstring_samurai) | ||
that's a low blow there siege. b5 rocked. a friend of mine has every episode recorded, and i've seen them all. i am supernerd, here me roar. |
[TANGENT]
Yes, you'd think the Elves would have done something. Ack: I mean Vulcans! DREK! I'm looking for the word Mimbari amn't I?
Also: Weren't Kilingons just Orcs in space initially?
[/TANGENT]
[TOPIC="ON"]
I try to avoid making death funny (as the "BodyLotto" idea kindof does). Trivial, yes, but celebrated and joked about (as I could imagine happening) sets the wrong tone. (IMHO)
If you need to cut-down on scene descriptions: The word "imagine" is your friend. You can describe every scene to death, but i find that telling players to imagine the scene after the mood is set sparks them to think about it more themselves (or even ask you questions, which I think is a good thing). Telling them to "Imagine a delapidated, impoverished street with the usual scattering of barrens residents and drug abuse. No gangers are in sight right now though" is faster than reading them a novel. You just need to make sure they have the same idea of what a scattering of barren residents is and you can have done that with previous full-scene descriptions.
[/TOPIC]
Oh, damn. I've got only 32.1
| QUOTE (toturi) |
| Oh, damn. I've got only 32.1 |
33.72781% - Total Geek
\/\/007!
What can I say. I used to be geekier but then I came to University and realised that social stuff wasn't as hard as I previously though. (IE: I got drunk and wore a non-geeky shirt)
| QUOTE (Lilt) | ||
33.72781% - Total Geek \/\/007! What can I say. I used to be geekier but then I came to University and realised that social stuff wasn't as hard as I previously though. (IE: I got drunk and wore a non-geeky shirt) |
That test is unfaire, about 1/3 is not doable in germany due to:
Lack of the TV programm
Lack of 5X size T-Shirts
Still scored 32.54438% - Total Geek
Btw, what is this "social life" think you're all talking about? You mean like "meeting normal people"?? <Gasp>
Michael
Scored a lousy 28.something %
Since I started studying Computer Science this year I found out that I'm almost not a geek compared to the guys I meet at the university. But I've improved! I play more games, started programing for fun again, I'm starting to get seriously involved in Shadowrun again and I start reading Tolkien background literature (The Silmarilion).
However, having lived with a total Ubergeek for almost a year while I was in the USA, I have a slight anti-geek attitude.
Well, well... can we take this thread back on topic then?
Since I started studying Computer Science this year I found out that I'm almost not a geek compared to the guys I meet at the university. But I've improved! I play more games, started programing for fun again, I'm starting to get seriously involved in Shadowrun again and I start reading Tolkien background literature (The Silmarilion).
However, having lived with a total Ubergeek for almost a year while I was in the USA, I have a slight anti-geek attitude.
Well, well... can we take this thread back on topic then?
For the comments that you can't have 'gritty' on a sunny day, I disagree. It's all about context.
I know, it's not a classic, but watch Blade sometime. There's a scene where our hero sees the villain standing out in a park on a sunny day, with an adorable little girl next to the bad guy. This could be a calm, ordinary scene, but for a few points:
A) The bad guy is a vampire
B) He's standing in direct sunlight
C) He doesn't have a kid of his own
D) The girl is obviously scared out of her wits, and not staying there willingly
E) Nobody else around knows about points A-D
Our hero knows this is a Very Bad Thing. But there are plenty of other folks milling about with no clue that anything's wrong. And, if our hero acts preemptively, he'll be the "violent madman" in police reports...
I know, it's not a classic, but watch Blade sometime. There's a scene where our hero sees the villain standing out in a park on a sunny day, with an adorable little girl next to the bad guy. This could be a calm, ordinary scene, but for a few points:
A) The bad guy is a vampire
B) He's standing in direct sunlight
C) He doesn't have a kid of his own
D) The girl is obviously scared out of her wits, and not staying there willingly
E) Nobody else around knows about points A-D
Our hero knows this is a Very Bad Thing. But there are plenty of other folks milling about with no clue that anything's wrong. And, if our hero acts preemptively, he'll be the "violent madman" in police reports...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.