Profile for Kelandon
Field | Value |
---|---|
Displayed name | Kelandon |
Member number | 4045 |
Title | Off With Their Heads |
Postcount | 7968 |
Homepage | http://home.sanbrunocable.com/~tommywatts03/ |
Registered | Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Recent posts
Pages
Author | Recent posts |
---|---|
War, war, war! in The Exile Trilogy | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, May 31 2004 08:49
Profile
Homepage
I have a certain fondness for the sliths. This will be explained/demonstrated when my BoA scenario comes out. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, May 31 2004 08:46
Profile
Homepage
Vent, other than having copied virtually all of the text out of VoDT, I'm not sure what point you were trying to prove. EDIT: Presumably that it was, in fact, a good archeological scenario. If so, you missed my point completely. And yeah, read the Creator's last post again, because I say the same thing. EDIT 2: Now that I have a moment to explain, I will. Every snippet of archeological evidence there answers one question, but raises two more that are never answered. I had not noticed the shade saying, "The School was only given one week to close. For this reason, much virulently poisonous waste was left inside" (and I'm guessing neither had anyone else, because this would be the FIRST bit of evidence that anyone who was making the case that the waste was not cleaned up for lack of time should cite). It convinces me that this was, in fact, the reason in the designer's mind that the School wasn't closed. It still doesn't cohere with the rest of the story, but this was Jeff's reason. Palhatis had time to MAKE AN INTELLIGENT SHADE AND STICK HIM IN THE CONTROL AREA, but he didn't have time to PRESS A BUTTON. And Thuryl's point is correct: pressing the button did NOT release some unknown danger. The mages were familiar with the cleanup system, because THEY BUILT IT. And moreover, the statement, "he made sure that the controls to the waste disposal unit remained. These controls might still be activated," indicates that Palhatis specifically knew what the controls did. The whole time I was reading over those messages, when I played BoE's VoDT, BoA's VoDT, and now, too, I've been thinking, "This is all very interesting, but there is much more to this story." Palhatis's statement, "my speaking out against the evacuation and what we're leaving behind have only made me enemies," seems to indicate that Vinnia hates him and eventually murders him primarily because he wants to clean up the waste. In other words, Palhatis had time to make an entire covert setup for someone else to come along and push a couple of buttons and clean up all of the waste, but there was so little time before the school closed that cleaning up the waste would delay the closing of the school and therefore anger the Empire. This doesn't make sense. Yes, one can make up explanations that turn all of this into reasonable plot material. But a true archeological scenario would not require the player to invent explanations to fill plot holes. The story of what had happened before would become central to gameplay. Having said all of this, I still like VoDT. I don't think these points are critical to the enjoyment of the scenario. I just think it could've been better if more was done with this. [ Monday, May 31, 2004 10:12: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, May 31 2004 08:46
Profile
Homepage
Vent, other than having copied virtually all of the text out of VoDT, I'm not sure what point you were trying to prove. EDIT: Presumably that it was, in fact, a good archeological scenario. If so, you missed my point completely. And yeah, read the Creator's last post again, because I say the same thing. EDIT 2: Now that I have a moment to explain, I will. Every snippet of archeological evidence there answers one question, but raises two more that are never answered. I had not noticed the shade saying, "The School was only given one week to close. For this reason, much virulently poisonous waste was left inside" (and I'm guessing neither had anyone else, because this would be the FIRST bit of evidence that anyone who was making the case that the waste was not cleaned up for lack of time should cite). It convinces me that this was, in fact, the reason in the designer's mind that the School wasn't closed. It still doesn't cohere with the rest of the story, but this was Jeff's reason. Palhatis had time to MAKE AN INTELLIGENT SHADE AND STICK HIM IN THE CONTROL AREA, but he didn't have time to PRESS A BUTTON. And Thuryl's point is correct: pressing the button did NOT release some unknown danger. The mages were familiar with the cleanup system, because THEY BUILT IT. And moreover, the statement, "he made sure that the controls to the waste disposal unit remained. These controls might still be activated," indicates that Palhatis specifically knew what the controls did. The whole time I was reading over those messages, when I played BoE's VoDT, BoA's VoDT, and now, too, I've been thinking, "This is all very interesting, but there is much more to this story." Palhatis's statement, "my speaking out against the evacuation and what we're leaving behind have only made me enemies," seems to indicate that Vinnia hates him and eventually murders him primarily because he wants to clean up the waste. In other words, Palhatis had time to make an entire covert setup for someone else to come along and push a couple of buttons and clean up all of the waste, but there was so little time before the school closed that cleaning up the waste would delay the closing of the school and therefore anger the Empire. This doesn't make sense. Yes, one can make up explanations that turn all of this into reasonable plot material. But a true archeological scenario would not require the player to invent explanations to fill plot holes. The story of what had happened before would become central to gameplay. Having said all of this, I still like VoDT. I don't think these points are critical to the enjoyment of the scenario. I just think it could've been better if more was done with this. [ Monday, May 31, 2004 10:12: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
What Are You? in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 23:46
Profile
Homepage
quote:We're not the only ones. Look at France's last presidential election and tell me there are no ethnic tensions in Western Europe. For that matter, I seem to have heard about a rather dramatic opening of a mosque over in Granada, too. I would guess the ethnic Muslims of Spain consider it a big deal that their ethnicity has gained such recognition. Still, America has had quite a history of racial tensions, probably worse than many places. EDIT: The Zapatistas of Mexico and the Tibetans of China. Virtually every subgroup in all of Africa. Ethnic tensions flourish throughout the world. Your point is well-taken, though. [ Sunday, May 30, 2004 23:48: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 23:37
Profile
Homepage
Okay, well, I'll assume Vent's post was made in good faith, then. That said, Vent, the piece of text that I quoted is the direct analog to the "about 130 years for a dated Empire order" that you found in BoE. It comes from the exact same order, but in BoA. You could at least give me enough credit to know the difference between "loose text" (of which there is very little in the BoA included scenarios) and real game text. About point 2, um, if you just dismiss what I'm saying without giving reasons, I can't really have a discussion with you. I don't really want to discuss this point, though, so it's fine by me if we just agree to disagree here. quote:In my opinion, the very phrasing of this gives away the problem with it: you're listing possibilities that you came up with based on indirect clues. The central issue of pollution is the reason why people pollute. The way to have a scenario that delved into the pollution therefore would be to have extended reasons for the pollution within the scenario that are described at length. By making the reasons for the pollution be so indirect, VoDT makes its treatment of pollution superficial. quote:Again I say: VoDT is not a terrible scenario for lacking in moral depth. But let's be clear here: are you saying that the scenario would not be better if Vinnia's motives were explored more thoroughly? If it truly is an archeological scenario, then let's do archeology! Lay pieces of evidence all over the deserted school, and let the player piece them all together! That would be really fun, I think. About your edited part: as usual, I have no idea what you're talking about. Or rather, I think I do, but it seems rather childish, and the fact that you're "joking" doesn't make it any better. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 23:37
Profile
Homepage
Okay, well, I'll assume Vent's post was made in good faith, then. That said, Vent, the piece of text that I quoted is the direct analog to the "about 130 years for a dated Empire order" that you found in BoE. It comes from the exact same order, but in BoA. You could at least give me enough credit to know the difference between "loose text" (of which there is very little in the BoA included scenarios) and real game text. About point 2, um, if you just dismiss what I'm saying without giving reasons, I can't really have a discussion with you. I don't really want to discuss this point, though, so it's fine by me if we just agree to disagree here. quote:In my opinion, the very phrasing of this gives away the problem with it: you're listing possibilities that you came up with based on indirect clues. The central issue of pollution is the reason why people pollute. The way to have a scenario that delved into the pollution therefore would be to have extended reasons for the pollution within the scenario that are described at length. By making the reasons for the pollution be so indirect, VoDT makes its treatment of pollution superficial. quote:Again I say: VoDT is not a terrible scenario for lacking in moral depth. But let's be clear here: are you saying that the scenario would not be better if Vinnia's motives were explored more thoroughly? If it truly is an archeological scenario, then let's do archeology! Lay pieces of evidence all over the deserted school, and let the player piece them all together! That would be really fun, I think. About your edited part: as usual, I have no idea what you're talking about. Or rather, I think I do, but it seems rather childish, and the fact that you're "joking" doesn't make it any better. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 21:27
Profile
Homepage
I'll let someone else handle this one. He's trying to provoke me again. quote: -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 21:27
Profile
Homepage
I'll let someone else handle this one. He's trying to provoke me again. quote: -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
US Conflict Avatars! in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 17:42
Profile
Homepage
You can read an old incarnation of this topic in the General Archive, page 29. I believe it started over at Desperance (because Djur, who ran it last time, linked to a Desp page that is now deceased) and then migrated here, although I don't know that. I do like the idea of making Alec, under the name "General Custer," into the Sioux Nation. That was rather clever of Djur. -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 10:29
Profile
Homepage
Meh, since this conversation is still going, I will in fact read and respond to this post. I was tempted to say, "tl, dr," but I figured that would be out of line. You didn't find the date that I cited in the BoE scenario because it's not there. I cited the text document and state out of the BoA scenario (which apparently was a part of my post you didn't care to read -- I *did* cite my source). However, Jeff changed the dates between Exile and Avernum, so the comparable node in Exile gives the date that you mention. quote:Do you ever fight Vinnia or attempt to dispose of Vinnia? No. But do you ever fight pollution or attempt to dispose of it? Yes. The term was meant in a gameplay sense, that the player spends most of the scenario trying to defeat pollution, not trying to defeat Vinnia. And heck, if anything, Vinnia and pollution are on the same side. quote:That's more agreeing with his point than disagreeing with it. You would've complained about the scenario having a Point To Make and wouldn't have enjoyed the lecture. The idea is to do it in a subtle manner. And to your archeological point of view: while it is reasonable for the scenario not to give us everything, it is not reasonable for the scenario to give us virtually nothing. A scenario that involves some moral is an argument. It cannot make its point well without making points that link together to prove some eventual thesis. If the component threads don't fit together, then it fails in its argument. If VoDT has anything to say about pollution (which I still don't really think that it does, but let's just assume), it says those things poorly because it does not make an analogy to real pollution -- and it does not do so because of the points that you claim are "merely" plot points. It doesn't have an analogy to real pollution because we have to make up the reasons that the pollution is there, perhaps with a buried hint or two that don't even particularly make sense. But again, we're overinterpreting this. VoDT is not necessarily a bad scenario because its moral is not developed. Whether VoDT is good or bad doesn't really have anything to do with it (and I rather liked the scenario, incoherent moral or not). It is just not the scenario that one would want to emulate in order to write a scenario with a well-done moral, which is what the Creator was saying in the article. BoA's ASR handles morality far better, and certain BoE scenarios do it even better than ASR. [ Sunday, May 30, 2004 10:32: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, May 30 2004 10:29
Profile
Homepage
Meh, since this conversation is still going, I will in fact read and respond to this post. I was tempted to say, "tl, dr," but I figured that would be out of line. You didn't find the date that I cited in the BoE scenario because it's not there. I cited the text document and state out of the BoA scenario (which apparently was a part of my post you didn't care to read -- I *did* cite my source). However, Jeff changed the dates between Exile and Avernum, so the comparable node in Exile gives the date that you mention. quote:Do you ever fight Vinnia or attempt to dispose of Vinnia? No. But do you ever fight pollution or attempt to dispose of it? Yes. The term was meant in a gameplay sense, that the player spends most of the scenario trying to defeat pollution, not trying to defeat Vinnia. And heck, if anything, Vinnia and pollution are on the same side. quote:That's more agreeing with his point than disagreeing with it. You would've complained about the scenario having a Point To Make and wouldn't have enjoyed the lecture. The idea is to do it in a subtle manner. And to your archeological point of view: while it is reasonable for the scenario not to give us everything, it is not reasonable for the scenario to give us virtually nothing. A scenario that involves some moral is an argument. It cannot make its point well without making points that link together to prove some eventual thesis. If the component threads don't fit together, then it fails in its argument. If VoDT has anything to say about pollution (which I still don't really think that it does, but let's just assume), it says those things poorly because it does not make an analogy to real pollution -- and it does not do so because of the points that you claim are "merely" plot points. It doesn't have an analogy to real pollution because we have to make up the reasons that the pollution is there, perhaps with a buried hint or two that don't even particularly make sense. But again, we're overinterpreting this. VoDT is not necessarily a bad scenario because its moral is not developed. Whether VoDT is good or bad doesn't really have anything to do with it (and I rather liked the scenario, incoherent moral or not). It is just not the scenario that one would want to emulate in order to write a scenario with a well-done moral, which is what the Creator was saying in the article. BoA's ASR handles morality far better, and certain BoE scenarios do it even better than ASR. [ Sunday, May 30, 2004 10:32: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 23:53
Profile
Homepage
Yeah, Thuryl said it as far as ASR is concerned. I ended up siding with the Hill Runners, but I felt pretty uncomfortable doing so. Like Thuryl, I don't think that ZKR tried to have a moral, although I'm not sure that VoDT really does either. But that's a different question, one that we haven't really discussed yet, whether VoDT attempts to moralize or not. If we assume that it does, a problem with VoDT is that the moral doesn't make sense. I think it's safer to say that VoDT tries to moralize than that ZKR does, because ZKR doesn't really have anything to do with the relationship between sliths and humans, whereas VoDT does have something to do with pollution throughout the whole story. Really, the sliths are completely unnecessary to ZKR (which is probably part of the reason that people dislike it, as the Lyceum's CSR will attest). If I remember the scen correctly, you don't see the sliths at any point in the scenario. Darn. I go to all this effort to write a well thought-out post, and then I read it over, and I realize that all I really want to say that is relevant to the discussion at hand is that I agree with Thuryl. Sometimes I should just keep my mouth shut. :rolleyes: EDIT: Cut out some of the rambling. EDIT 2: And really, the article didn't call VoDT terrible in its heavy-handedness. It says, "Now, VoDT is hardly the worst offender in these cases." It's not really all that excessive with the preachiness; it just probably could've been improved if the characters' motivations had been developed more thoroughly and the morality explored a bit better. Regardless of whether it's a bad scenario, I don't know that anyone would argue that the scenario wouldn't be better if it went into further depth about why the pollution wasn't cleaned up in the first place, even though all the mechanisms were there. Saying as little as, "We didn't have a power source, and one would've cost money, and we figured that the barrels would hold," would be something, at least. [ Sunday, May 30, 2004 00:13: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 23:53
Profile
Homepage
Yeah, Thuryl said it as far as ASR is concerned. I ended up siding with the Hill Runners, but I felt pretty uncomfortable doing so. Like Thuryl, I don't think that ZKR tried to have a moral, although I'm not sure that VoDT really does either. But that's a different question, one that we haven't really discussed yet, whether VoDT attempts to moralize or not. If we assume that it does, a problem with VoDT is that the moral doesn't make sense. I think it's safer to say that VoDT tries to moralize than that ZKR does, because ZKR doesn't really have anything to do with the relationship between sliths and humans, whereas VoDT does have something to do with pollution throughout the whole story. Really, the sliths are completely unnecessary to ZKR (which is probably part of the reason that people dislike it, as the Lyceum's CSR will attest). If I remember the scen correctly, you don't see the sliths at any point in the scenario. Darn. I go to all this effort to write a well thought-out post, and then I read it over, and I realize that all I really want to say that is relevant to the discussion at hand is that I agree with Thuryl. Sometimes I should just keep my mouth shut. :rolleyes: EDIT: Cut out some of the rambling. EDIT 2: And really, the article didn't call VoDT terrible in its heavy-handedness. It says, "Now, VoDT is hardly the worst offender in these cases." It's not really all that excessive with the preachiness; it just probably could've been improved if the characters' motivations had been developed more thoroughly and the morality explored a bit better. Regardless of whether it's a bad scenario, I don't know that anyone would argue that the scenario wouldn't be better if it went into further depth about why the pollution wasn't cleaned up in the first place, even though all the mechanisms were there. Saying as little as, "We didn't have a power source, and one would've cost money, and we figured that the barrels would hold," would be something, at least. [ Sunday, May 30, 2004 00:13: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
MAJOR Spiderweb News. in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 23:19
Profile
Homepage
God, that's mysterious. I had a piece of code that I could've sworn worked in v1.0.1 that stopped working as soon as I made the switch over to v.1.1, and it started working again as soon as I changed the species_in_party part of it. Now I can't replicate it working in the old version, though, so I must be wrong. *grumbles about the mysterious nature of BoA coding* -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
MAJOR Spiderweb News. in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 23:19
Profile
Homepage
God, that's mysterious. I had a piece of code that I could've sworn worked in v1.0.1 that stopped working as soon as I made the switch over to v.1.1, and it started working again as soon as I changed the species_in_party part of it. Now I can't replicate it working in the old version, though, so I must be wrong. *grumbles about the mysterious nature of BoA coding* -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Hi, nice to meet you in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 22:53
Profile
Homepage
quote:Jeez, is that common knowledge? *blushes* -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Hi, nice to meet you in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 21:40
Profile
Homepage
Because of CW, I also just visited the page. Hey, Cav's kinda pretty... and she's only a teensy bit older than me... ( ) -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
What Are You? in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 21:23
Profile
Homepage
Ethnically, I'm about half Southern European (Spanish and Sicilian), a quarter other Western European (British, Irish, French), and a quarter Northern European (Scandanavian, German), with a trace of Native American mixed in, tribe unknown. Racially, I'm white/caucasoid/whatever un-PC term you want to call it. You know, that Indo-European thing. -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM, newly updated to v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
MAJOR Spiderweb News. in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 16:01
Profile
Homepage
Some changes that I've found: I think species_in_party works differently now than it did in v1.0.1. I had some code that worked fine before, but it gave me trouble for a little bit before I figured out what was going on. Now species_in_party(1) doesn't check for humans. I don't know what it checks for, but we have to do species_in_party(0) to check for humans. I don't know if this affects Khoth's scenario, which is the only one that I know of that uses this call so far, but it was the first thing that came to mind. Also, the call print_num prints in red, "Debug Value:" before the number. I guess it does that because it is under "Debugging Procedures," but it didn't used to. To print a number by itself now, we have to append it to the string buffer, put the string buffer into a string variable, and then print that string variable. Anyone else notice other differences? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
MAJOR Spiderweb News. in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 16:01
Profile
Homepage
Some changes that I've found: I think species_in_party works differently now than it did in v1.0.1. I had some code that worked fine before, but it gave me trouble for a little bit before I figured out what was going on. Now species_in_party(1) doesn't check for humans. I don't know what it checks for, but we have to do species_in_party(0) to check for humans. I don't know if this affects Khoth's scenario, which is the only one that I know of that uses this call so far, but it was the first thing that came to mind. Also, the call print_num prints in red, "Debug Value:" before the number. I guess it does that because it is under "Debugging Procedures," but it didn't used to. To print a number by itself now, we have to append it to the string buffer, put the string buffer into a string variable, and then print that string variable. Anyone else notice other differences? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Hi, nice to meet you in General | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 13:52
Profile
Homepage
quote:Welcome to Spiderweb, Cav! -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
A modest proposal in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 13:18
Profile
Homepage
quote:That is why I'd rather that you not judge me by that thread. I became rather irritated over a period of several hours in a cross-thread discussion with someone who seemed to be trying to provoke me. I'd rather that you judge me by what I say in, for example, the Avernum Trilogy or Exile Trilogy forums, where I help people out by pointing them in the right direction. I can be irritable and disagreeable, but I try to be nice. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
A modest proposal in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 13:18
Profile
Homepage
quote:That is why I'd rather that you not judge me by that thread. I became rather irritated over a period of several hours in a cross-thread discussion with someone who seemed to be trying to provoke me. I'd rather that you judge me by what I say in, for example, the Avernum Trilogy or Exile Trilogy forums, where I help people out by pointing them in the right direction. I can be irritable and disagreeable, but I try to be nice. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum Editor | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 12:48
Profile
Homepage
EDIT: Okay, rewrite. Qualnor, that is not what I think at all. I'm not saying (and I don't think anyone here has said) that all scenarios should have something deep and meaningful to say, even at the expense of them being fun. I'm saying (and I think the point of the Creator's article is) that IF the scenario makes the pretense of having something deep and meaningful to say -- which I'm not sure that VoDT does, but it could be interpreted that way -- then it should deal with the subject well. That, I don't think, is a controversial statement. Its application to VoDT is a bit questionable, but I think it's questionable for different reasons than anyone else has brought up so far. I don't think VoDT has anything to say about pollution. I don't think Jeff wrote it with the intent of making a statement on pollution. I think that's why the scenario treats the issue the way that it does. Thus, I don't think the Creator's points in this article apply. However, if we were to assume that the scenario was attempting to treat the issue of pollution, then we could examine what VoDT has to say about the issue. Assuming that, which I've been doing (with some reservations) all along, then VoDT treats the issue in a rather poor fashion. The most critical issue in pollution is: what are we willing to lose, environmentally speaking, in order to gain some outcome, usually with regards to business or profits of some kind? That is to say, the reasons that we pollute are of tremendous importance to the issue -- and of greater importance than any other aspect of the issue, I'd think. Now, VoDT has virtually no discussion of this. Aside from the one message to which Vent rightly referred, suggesting that the mages didn't have enough time to activate the waste removal system -- which still isn't particularly coherent with the rest of the story for the reasons that Thuryl and I gave -- VoDT does not discuss the reasons that we pollute. As Kyna rightly pointed out, if the explanation of the reason for the pollution is not in the game, or if it is so breezed over -- one hint buried in one message that was, if I remember correctly, in a drawer somewhere? -- that one need almost invent the explanation, then the game has in effect not dealt with this aspect of the issue at all. Since it does not deal with the single most critical aspect of the issue, it cannot possibly be said to have treated the issue with any sort of depth, thus violating the spirit of the Creator's article. I value scenarios for their entertainment value at least as much as, if not more so than, their artistic value -- but I don't know to what extent it is possible to separate the two in the case of a scenario that proposes to deal with a serious issue. I don't really think that VoDT attempted to deal with the issue of pollution, but if we assume that it did, then I think it dealt with the issue badly. EDIT 2: Moreover, I don't think anyone has said that the scenario is better for not dealing with the issue seriously. That would be rather absurd. Some people have tried to argue that VoDT *does* treat the issue with a certain degree of seriousness, and others have argued that it doesn't. At least, that's how I've understood the discussions. [ Saturday, May 29, 2004 13:14: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
Article - The Moral of the Story in Blades of Avernum | |
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, May 29 2004 12:48
Profile
Homepage
EDIT: Okay, rewrite. Qualnor, that is not what I think at all. I'm not saying (and I don't think anyone here has said) that all scenarios should have something deep and meaningful to say, even at the expense of them being fun. I'm saying (and I think the point of the Creator's article is) that IF the scenario makes the pretense of having something deep and meaningful to say -- which I'm not sure that VoDT does, but it could be interpreted that way -- then it should deal with the subject well. That, I don't think, is a controversial statement. Its application to VoDT is a bit questionable, but I think it's questionable for different reasons than anyone else has brought up so far. I don't think VoDT has anything to say about pollution. I don't think Jeff wrote it with the intent of making a statement on pollution. I think that's why the scenario treats the issue the way that it does. Thus, I don't think the Creator's points in this article apply. However, if we were to assume that the scenario was attempting to treat the issue of pollution, then we could examine what VoDT has to say about the issue. Assuming that, which I've been doing (with some reservations) all along, then VoDT treats the issue in a rather poor fashion. The most critical issue in pollution is: what are we willing to lose, environmentally speaking, in order to gain some outcome, usually with regards to business or profits of some kind? That is to say, the reasons that we pollute are of tremendous importance to the issue -- and of greater importance than any other aspect of the issue, I'd think. Now, VoDT has virtually no discussion of this. Aside from the one message to which Vent rightly referred, suggesting that the mages didn't have enough time to activate the waste removal system -- which still isn't particularly coherent with the rest of the story for the reasons that Thuryl and I gave -- VoDT does not discuss the reasons that we pollute. As Kyna rightly pointed out, if the explanation of the reason for the pollution is not in the game, or if it is so breezed over -- one hint buried in one message that was, if I remember correctly, in a drawer somewhere? -- that one need almost invent the explanation, then the game has in effect not dealt with this aspect of the issue at all. Since it does not deal with the single most critical aspect of the issue, it cannot possibly be said to have treated the issue with any sort of depth, thus violating the spirit of the Creator's article. I value scenarios for their entertainment value at least as much as, if not more so than, their artistic value -- but I don't know to what extent it is possible to separate the two in the case of a scenario that proposes to deal with a serious issue. I don't really think that VoDT attempted to deal with the issue of pollution, but if we assume that it did, then I think it dealt with the issue badly. EDIT 2: Moreover, I don't think anyone has said that the scenario is better for not dealing with the issue seriously. That would be rather absurd. Some people have tried to argue that VoDT *does* treat the issue with a certain degree of seriousness, and others have argued that it doesn't. At least, that's how I've understood the discussions. [ Saturday, May 29, 2004 13:14: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |