Drive Time

By David

My youngest son is taking driver training and practicing his skills in the family vehicle. Helping him to put the training book rules into practice is a challenge sometimes; it has required me to do some intentional thinking about how I drive. What are my driving habits? What do I do--subconsciously--as I navigate the streets?

I used to play a boardgame called “Car Wars,” (pictured above) a game of cars with mounted guns trying to outmaneuver other, similarly armed, cars. The game provided a template you set next to your piece; decide how sharply you want to turn and the template showed where your vehicle ended up afterward. Obstacles, and other cars, were easy to see (not always easy to avoid.)

Out on the real streets things are not so cut and dry. Analyzing my own driving habits led me to a pair of recurring actions: I check the rearview mirrors almost constantly--for lane orientation and blind spots--and I spin the steering wheel back at the halfway point in a turn to avoid overcorrecting. I shared these habits with my son, I don’t know if it was the last one, but lately his turns have improved.

Often, we clash over the book (information in the driving manual and what he has learned in the class) and the street (experience with other drivers) The rules don’t always interact well with the traffic on the road. For example, he stops 5-6 feet away from an intersection. Now, I think he should be pulling forward closer to the corner for better visibility, but he does not. Was this instructed to prevent new drivers from stopping too short? It can make for some frightening situations when a tree or other obstruction prevents seeing traffic more than half a block away: either he pulls out without a clear picture of what is coming, or he hesitates too long and misses a window into traffic.

Note: Despite my above questions, we are happy with the driving school we chose. We picked this particular one as it only hires police officers to instruct classes. It is important to start them out on the right track. (And to my children’s credit, they have not had any tickets or accidents so far--two of them have been driving for eight years, combined time.)

Thinking about how I drive led to a discussion at home about “metathinking.” Literally, thinking about thinking. How do we analyze what we know or the way we do things in order to teach others? Breaking processes down into their component parts to make them understandable and comprehensive. The math sentence 2+2=4 seems easy until you think of what is involved in getting to that point. You have to know what a number is, that it means quantity (visually, it is much easier to explain this concept; teaching it verbally requires teaching vocabulary as well.). You have to be able to read the sentence, which means you must know that the symbol “2” means “two,” which means a “pair” of things. Likewise, you have to know the symbols for “plus” and “equals” and the meaning of those terms. You need to know your numbers at least up to four. That is a lot of background just to get to something so simple, don’t you think?

Now, what if the person you are teaching learns differently than you do? You have to be able to present it in a way they will understand and process the information to get the most out of your instruction. How do you approach helping someone to understand and learn something you know? Do you think about such details, or am I overthinking it? (Mega-meta-thinking)

D & D, the 1d4 edition

By David

Dungeons and Dragons turned 40 this year and a new edition was released. It is being called simply: D&D or Dungeons & Dragons. No number added, no advanced moniker. A starter box is being sold to provide a start up point for new players (it covers just some introductory rules with pre-made characters so a group of players can jump in and try it out before committing to something more. The Basic Rules is available as a free PDF download here. Anyone can take a look, read it and even play it before deciding whether to invest in the printed books (which contain more character options and other extras.) All of this is very encouraging in tone and intention, and I have read many articles and blogs by all sorts of gamers giving the new edition a read and/or try. I have also read many who give it a qualified thumbs-up. Comments range from this being their new system of choice to: its okay, but they are going back to “You can insert other system or edition here.”

Like many, I followed the public playtest--an unprecedented event (at least, it was to D&D’s parent company) and I was impressed. The rules were intriguing, the idea of having a voice in the development was appealing and it seemed they were trying to follow through with the promise of drawing from D&D’s rules history and player feedback to create a game for nearly everyone, even promising rules modularity (player groups can add to, or take away pieces of the rules set to suit individual play styles.) This design, if carried out, would be a formalization of something from the beginning of the game. The oldest editions can be pulled apart, sections altered or rewritten, and played without the entire game collapsing. The original rules were not elegant, but they were very customizable.

So, in theory, one could play the new version of D&D as if it were:

Edition 1 (Advanced, or AD&D) Formalized and comprehensive rules (even though every rule was handled with a different mechanic), intended to provide consistency of play even if you played with different groups. Characters were very individualized, everyone did something special or unique.

Edition 2 (Second) A few tweaks to the AD&D rules, including more survivability (the beginning of adding “plot armor” to the player characters, so no one would feel they “lost” the game.) And more character options (a booklet for every class and race!)

Edition 3 (3.5) Lots and LOTS of crunchy rules (a rule for everything; no arguments, unless it was over rule-interpretation.) Although, most were handled with the same simple die roll: easy to remember which dice to use.  Also, more character options (create nearly ANYTHING you can imagine.)

Edition 4 (4E) Boardgame-like rules. Epic characters (players are unquestioningly the HEROES, complete with full “plot armor” and a menu of options and cool maneuvers (with names, like “Falling Star Strike” and “Rub Some Dirt On It”!)

I like this notion of being able to play your way as a concept; I love tinkering with game rules to run things the way I--and those I play with--enjoy most. I also like several aspects of the new rules set:

Advantage/Disadvantage a simple mechanic for modifying any die roll: most challenges are decided by rolling a single die; if you have advantage, you roll 2 dice and pick the best, disadvantage means you roll 2 dice and pick the worst. In other editions there were, literally, pages and pages of +1, +2, -3, etc., modifying various die rolls for various conditions. The advantage mechanic is a convenient “on the fly” rule simplifying things during play.

Optional special abilities As characters progress, they gain new benefits and features; this can be handled as simply or as complex as a group wants. This is evidence of the modularity they spoke of in the beginning. I like this as a limiting factor in the menu options at the table; I want players to be able to do whatever they imagine, not feel limited to just what is written on their character.

Ease of creation for the referee 4E did this really well and it seems to have carried over to the new edition. There is a lot that goes into a session: trying to give each player a chance to shine, providing challenges, making it all fun (for both the players and the referee) It shouldn’t feel like work to prepare for a night of D&D; this new set seems to understand that for the most part.

What I don’t like is the execution in some areas of the new rules (admittedly, these rules could be removed or altered):

Superhero aspects of the system.

Healing. I understand it is no fun to lose a character; especially when you put a lot of time and creativity into it. And I am not suggesting that characters should be easy to kill. But there is something a little too super about the way characters can recover from near death wounds in this edition. Jeopardy is what makes us care about a character; immortality becomes tiresome.

Magic. Even basic spells are phenomenal. Apprentice wizards are a little more like Nicholas Cage and a little less like Mickey Mouse.

Character advancement and improvement.

Characters begin with too many special abilities--in my opinion. It is far more satisfying to begin simply and gain in power than to begin powerful. Of course, it is a matter of taste. Would you rather be the commoner who aspires to kill the dragon? or the dragonslayer who seeks to slay another?

Monster presentation

The stat block for monsters has too much mechanical detail (it looks very much like 3.5, which pushed me away from that edition and keeps me away from Pathfinder) I don’t want to memorize--or even refer to--a single monster with its own character sheet, especially when I may need to juggle five or more different monsters in a single session.

As an overall complaint, I don’t see the promised modularity of the system yet. Currently it is as customizable as any edition has been, so it may be a non-complaint so far. And the modularity may be something yet to come, but if this is the base from which to decide what to add from here on out, I am not satisfied that it is basic enough (since I would want to remove parts to run it my way.)

Finally, despite the niftyness of the Starter Set ($20) and the convenience of the basic rules with promised updates (all free), I am very discouraged by the price point of the printed books (Player’s Handbook, $50; Monster Manual, $50; Dungeon Master’s Guide, $50; $30 each on Amazon.) Even considering inflation since I purchased my old edition AD&D books (1980’s, $20 each), that is too much money to invest in a rules set I will not use in its entirety.

I think I will sit this edition out and instead stick with the nostalgia of my classic (Moldvay) version.

What Kind of World Do You Want? Part 2

By David

What Kind of World Do You Want? Part 1

A little basic sociology

In the first part of this post I talked about the hooks, or points of relevance, distinguishing my created fantasy world--Archaborea--from other fantasy environments. I also mentioned how the method to my creation came from a series of articles called “Dungeoncraft,” by Ray Winninger. He had a short list of rules for creating successful worlds which I also choose to use in my process.

Rule #1: Never create more than you must.

Rule #2: Whenever you create something important, create at least one secret tied to it.

Setting the stage for my creation’s adventurers (the players,) I look at the second entry on my list of hooks: The Bad Guys Rule. The evil empire is alive and well on Archaborea. However, due to the nature of the environment (remember that grinning cactus?) even the tyrants have their limitations. So there will be a tyrannical, despotic government but it will be balanced out by the savagery of the natural flora and fauna. I am thinking I may give my heroes a choice to start in a small village under the rule of an ogre-lord “regional governor” or a small village in the wilderness (sort of a pioneer village surrounded by packs of predators and other natural hazards.) They will have a small, manageable homebase, but also some kind of instant challenge, either natural or political.

Along the way, I am aware of potential plotlines and adventure ideas. That is what this process really does, it helps to set things in place and spark ideas, stimulating my creativity. My hope is that my players will feed off of this creative energy as well and together we can build a compelling story within the game, resulting in fun for everyone.

Using rule #2, I have established that the evil rulers of the world (although called “ogre-lords”) are not actually ogrish. They will be beastly in appearance, looking more like minotaurs, with bovine heads and horns, and bulky, hirsute bodies--not fur-covered, just hairy. The secret of their heritage will be something I want the players to discover over the course of the campaign and may include other, unknown villains they will not expect.

My hook established the ogre-lords as conquerors in a war long ended. The length of time I am not sure of yet; somewhere between fifty and one hundred fifty years sounds about right. Enough time for society to have settled a bit, established some norms and traditions in the wake of war, but not so much time that no one remembers the conflict, perhaps lost a parent or grandparent. This being a fantasy realm, its also possible for some long-lived race to have members who actually fought in the war. The war will be a quasi-taboo topic: some want to forget and move on, some want to start it again, hoping for a better outcome.

The village homebase for my players will be a combination of races living and working together. This will allow for the players to be able to choose any race they wish. I don’t want to limit my player’s choices of a character too much because I will be limiting other things as a result of the environment. It is really all about balance, trying to balance what can and cannot be. The village itself will be small, not more than a few hundred at most, with roughly ten to twenty percent of that number belonging to the village militia or guard. When it is decided whether the village will be a pioneer village or an ogre-lord village then that will inform the disposition of the guard.

The village will also be relatively isolated because the nature of the world limits population centers. Nature plays a big role in this world; it will be as much of a challenge as some of the humanoid foes the players will face. A later post will cover this environmental aspect, but for now I will concern myself with some names and personalities the player characters may encounter: the leader of the village, the captain of the guard, a few townspeople (a tradesman, a shopkeeper or two, and maybe a couple farmers.) I will outline the village: a list of major buildings (in alphabetical order for ease of reference.)

Maps will come later, but next part of this series will be religion: god(s) and myths.

A Game of Dejarik (Dreams and Suppositions) part 1

By David

Dejarik, holo-chess, the Star Wars chess game. Less than two minutes of screen time and it has obsessed my thoughts for years. I realize it is largely set dressing: distracting background for the scene in which Luke practices the ways of Force-Sense. The animators of the chess pieces probably had the barest of internal logic in mind when they animated the scene. I am sure no rules were written down for the game, it just had to look credible and interesting. I always wanted to own a set of my own, perhaps even learn to play it.

That dream finally had a chance at reality when I discovered the company producing miniatures for Star Wars miniatures games had produced miniature versions of the dejarik pieces! I acquired them by trading some other gaming material I had--but no longer needed--and made a homemade board from wood. Now that I had the physical parts, I needed rules…

My search online resulted in several variations, which all seem to have vanished from the internet, except this one: Holochess by Mike Kelly, But even this one didn’t really seem accurate compared to what I knew from watching the movie. The rules I found seemed like variations on checkers more than chess. When it came down to trying it out, the game moves from the movie could not be duplicated with the fan-created rules available. I decided I would have to do it myself.

I have watched the scene many times over--as I said, I am obsessed--and a gradual pattern began to emerge. There is a definite turn order and even specific moves that vary for each piece that changes position. Some pieces never move, some move off screen (they can be seen in different positions as the scene progresses.) All that remains, in my own thought process, is to determine if an internal consistency can be applied where one might never have existed at all.

I start by mapping the progression of the pieces through the scene. Beginning with the initial placement and the board layout and marking each piece’s changed position as it is shown. The pieces start near to each other on the exterior circle rather than exactly opposite in the board. This suggests either the pieces have already been moved before we see them, or that the placement is not like traditional chess. SInce the pieces are lined up on the outer ring and the action seems to occur mostly on the inner spaces when we see it, I feel safe in assuming what we see is the start of the game.

Next I look at the individual pieces, making notes I hope will help me later in identifying patterns and perhaps pinning down what the pieces represent. The pieces of earth chess are idealized versions of a medieval court, why couldn’t the dejarik pieces be similar stylized avatars or icons?

Next time, I will break down the individual pieces.

Next. Part 2: Meet the players (or rather, the pieces.)

The Consequences of Parenting

By David

Becoming a parent is easy; the follow-through of BEING a parent is the hard part. I have an acquaintance (lets call him Ward.) Ward has five children, aged elementary up to high school. I have four, from elementary up to college. Now, I don’t consider myself a better parent because I have been at it longer, but..(you knew that was coming, didn’t you?) I like to think I’m more successful at it because I follow through.

Children learn through practice; it’s like the scientific method:

1. Observe

2. Make a guess

3. Try it out

4. See what happens

5. Return to 2., using those results, repeat.

Consistency is a key factor. If the results are always different, they get stuck in a loop leading to either boredom or frustration. When you say something, children will trust you, until they see different results for themselves. This may be by simple observation or by testing the limits. (For my own children, testing the limits occurred during the even years; the terrible 2’s, 4’s, 6’s,...18’s, 20’s, you get the idea)

So, when I tell my children, “don’t go out of this yard or you’re coming in the house!” They expect to come in if they step out of the boundaries. If I do not follow through with the condition, they may not believe me next time, my credibility and authority will sink.

By example, Ward was packing up his minivan, getting ready for a camping trip; his children nowhere to be seen, except the youngest (8) who is on the side of the house hitting a piece of wood with an aluminum bat.

“Knock it off!” Yells Ward..

“Okay.” the boy stops, watches his father return to the van, and resumes his testing of what the wood does when he smacks it with the bat.

Ward pokes his head out of the van again. “I said knock it off! Go inside and get your blanket. I want to get packed so we can get out of here!”

The boy doesn’t respond verbally, but waits for his dad to resume packing, then he resumes hitting the piece of wood.

Ward steps out of the van and approaches the boy, who stops, lowers the bat, and looks a little sheepish.

“That’s it,” Ward yells. “You are not going camping with us. You’re staying home!” He takes the bat and hurls it aside, returning to the van. The boy just looks on, appearing to consider his next course of diversion.

Now, Ward had already told me they were all going to be gone and the boy was obviously too young to stay by himself. It is an empty threat that he has no intention of carrying out. And this is not the first; Ward doesn’t follow through even when he makes a reasonable threat. He simply sighs and walks away. It’s too much effort for him to spend the time carrying out the punishment. He wants to move on to something else more enjoyable. The boy knows it, I know it, and the rest of his kids know it.That is why they don’t really listen to him unless there is something in it for them.

Where is June (his wife) while all of this is going on? Usually, whenever real parenting needs to happen she disappears, and when the coast is clear she reappears. Ward and June practice what my wife calls uninvolved parenting.

Every parent has probably overheard (or even said) things that would never happen in an effort to urge kids to follow directives. But that is where the consistency matters. If you always use ridiculous threats and promises, the children will see no benefit to following authority. The first time they see something actually happen, with consequences, it will probably make them step back, dumbfounded or possibly angry.

As parents, we have a responsibility to ready our children for the outside world. They need to be able to determine potential consequences of their actions and whether someone is bluffing or being genuine. It’s a matter of simple survival. An empty threat now and then is okay because it provides a contrast to the real ones. Helping to build the child’s judgement by giving them comparisons. That punishment is ludicrous, the child thinks, there is no way they can back that up, why would they say that? Now they have to think, consider what you might really have meant, read between your words.

By the same token, parents need to be prepared to back up what they say when necessary. Then, when it happens, the child will think about it next time: That promise sounds like it could actually happen; do I really want to risk it?

This way, they learn to think on their feet. When they are on their own, they will have to predict the consequences for themselves and weigh the risks. If all your threats are without meaning, what will they expect? That nothing will (or should) happen? What about when another person, or adult, says something (and follows through)? Will the child feel betrayed? Will they think it unfair, even if it was perfectly reasonable?

We have to learn consequences if we are to survive and cope with the world. Follow-through as a parent is a big part of teaching that. What do you think?

Summer Reading?

I have seen several reading lists recently and it made me think about the concept itself. Kids can be very quick to get “bored” in the summer. Personally, I hate this term; it seems like a weak excuse to put the onus on another to entertain you when you can’t bother to find something to do. Also, after the summer teachers must spend the beginning of a school year refreshing students memories on the previous year’s lessons.

So a reading list can provide ideas for things to do, it can serve as a source of entertainment, and it can help keep the brain active so its easier to get back into school after Summer break.

I see the reading list as an opportunity to catch up on reading goals. I had many books I wished to read either because I had heard good things about them or because I was familiar with the subject material or the author. A big one for me is any book which is referenced in other media or in pop culture; I want to know where it comes from so I can appreciate the reference better.

So I thought I would create a short list of books I thought everyone should read at least once. These are the books that really affected me, or gave me a comfortable impression, or a book I continue to reread once a year because they are just that entertaining. The list is almost entirely fantasy, but that is a lot of what I read.

World War Z, Max Brooks

This one drew me in because it was about zombies, but what captivated me was the depth of real human nature and engaging political analysis (not as dry as it may sound.) This one could serve as a documentary of any global natural disaster.

Red Sands, Paul B. Thompson and Tonya R. Carter
Arabian themed fantasy tale; light toned and fun. I have replaced this title in my library three times and I just can't explain adequately why this book draws me to read it at least once a year.

Empire Strikes Back, Donald F Glut

Even though my favorite movie is Return of the Jedi, this novelization is very well written; Don Glut paints pictures with language.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams

An incredibly funny classic of Science Fiction, this has been translated to live action at least twice, but you have to read it to really appreciate the humor.

Coraline, Neil Gaiman

I used this novella as my read aloud lesson when I student-taught 6th Grade. It is captivating, thrilling and fun.

Dragonlance Chronicles, Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman

A post-apocalyptic fantasy world with governments and religions in upheaval, idealistic characters (some of which actually die; the second book is a tearful read) and a very touching sense of humor.

Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien

THE epic fantasy series. If you have only seen the movies, you are missing some amazing language, mythology and story structure.

Belgariad, David Eddings

A five book, epic fantasy “trilogy;” this series actually covers the growth of its hero from child to man, contains fantasy “races” that are human and distinguished by their cultures (not bearded, short or pointy-eared), it also has a unique magic philosophy that really sets it apart.

The Sleeping Dragon, Joel Rosenberg

A fantasy story that challenges many of the cliches and has many mature topics regarding social behaviors.

As I said, it is a short list. I may add to it from time to time.

Better yet, give me some suggestions in the comments below! What books really affected you? Tell me why, if you want, or just give me a title and/or author. Thanks!

Her Glass Slipper was by Converse: Being an intentional Dad

Teacher, Trooper, Gamer, Dad readers ~ Join me over at Whatever Girls for this weeks post:

follow link below

Her Glass Slipper was by Converse on Whatever Girls