





This last is Sasquatch today!
He was dying a lot, and realized I should spend some of my money upgrading his gear.
My online collection of thoughts, opinions and interesting things. Nowadays I'm interested in the Seattle Seahawks (when is training camp?), Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition, comic books, distance running (I completed my first marathon in November 2008) and Battlestar Galactica (I know the series has ended, but I'm still hanging on, mostly through podcasts, the board game and anticipation of future DVD releases).
According to this (apparently scientific) survey, I'm not very interested in the Advancement or Mechanic aspect of play; I'm slightly above average in my interest in Competition; I'm at the low level of average in my interest in the Social elements, including Teamwork and Relationship building; I did score highly on the Role-play, Discovery and Customize categories, and low on Escapism.
No surprises here. Considering that I come from a storytelling based table top rpg, and that I don't use gaming to escape from my problems, it all lines up.
My lowest score was in the Mechanics category. I was around the 10th percentile there. This causes a dilemma, when combined with my high Discover score. I want to see the end game, fun stuff content, but to do that, you have to have a character that can hold his own. To do that, you need to know how the mechanics of the game work, and WoW game mechanics are fairly complicated.
Since 1994, Federal Way-based World Vision has taken the clothes and sent them to impoverished communities abroad, where they are given to needy families who don't think about the Super Bowl, much less Brady and his love life.
I had assumed that this stuff was quickly destroyed: I can imagine some zealous fans might want the alternate versions. It might be vaguely satisfying to have a "Seattle Seahawks XL Superbowl Champions" sweatshirt.
Good for World Vision, and good for the NFL for putting those clothes to good use.
What sort of person would do the things that our World of Warcraft characters do?
This varies depending on which quests and professions we choose, but some things are shared by all. To progress at all, every character is something of a hunter of beasts and enemies. The earliest quests involve killing a number of creatures and collecting trophies of some sort or other. Before long, the killing of creatures turns into the assassination of sentients. It can be argued that many of these assassination requests can be justified in the mind of a certain sort of person. This has a secret agent, “007 meets high fantasy” tone. Sometimes, our characters are asked to do things that are more difficult to justify. One quest in particular, suggested by a member of the Undead faction, is to murder a farmer and his family. Another of the Undead asks for components of a biological weapon to use against the humans. I keep expecting a ‘murder women and children in the Tusken Raider village’ quest. Thankfully, none have gone to that extreme.
It’s all shades of gray. There is a warm-to-cold war going on between the
A character’s life on a player versus player server is filled with uncertainty. In many of the game’s areas, combat between opposing factions is allowed and may erupt at any moment. While this risk is consented to at the point of character generation, there are some behaviors that are downright uncalled for.
Don’t attack fishermen. Fishing is a quiet, non conflict oriented activity. Ganking someone who is armed only with her fishing pole is low and unfun.
Only jerks attack characters who are of significantly lower level. When the level differential reaches a certain point, there is literally nothing to be gained from this battle. There’s no challenge, and no honor points are rewarded. All it does is frustrate the lower level character’s player.
It’s not okay to ‘camp’ at a corpse with the intent to re-kill the character upon resurrection. In fact, repeatedly killing a character is also poor form, in general.
Nora and I have been playing World of Warcraft (WoW) for a few months now, and it's clear there are some things the game and the community built around it do very well, and some things they don't do so well.
The greatest strength is the variety of play. It's easy to go on quests and adventure through the world by yourself, and this is very rewarding in itself. It's also very simple to find and adventure with folks that you already know. Nora and I spend quite a bit of time collaborating in our two person group. When we're up for a challenge, we choose quests that are at or a little above our characters' levels. If we want some quick accomplishments, we go after the stuff we're a little too powerful for. The spectrum is broad here. This is one of WoW's greatest strengths. If we want easy, there's easy, if we want difficult, there's difficult. If we don't want to kill stuff, we can go fishing, or spend time on any of the game's other professions. These professions all have rewards for excellence, and each has its own tone, style and feel.
Blizzard, the company behind the game, has also developed a deep player versus player environment. Again, the power generally belongs to the players. There are specific areas to go if one wants to join a large battle. In these areas the rules are clearly defined (think Capture the Flag and King of the Hill), and one can drop out at any time. The more wins a character accumulates, the greater the rewards. There is also the option to play in a more general player versus player environment. This decision must be made at character creation. If you accept this challenge, you are forevermore allowed into conflict with members of the opposing faction. However, even here there are some rules in place. For example, you cannot be attacked within your own capital city or starting low level starting area, unless you initiate the combat. In neutral areas, however, all bets, and rules are off. Some of us adhere to some general rules of honor, but many do not.
There are some things missing from the WoW experience: I haven't seen any puzzle or musical quests, for example. There's a lot of harvesting, killing bad guys are vicious animals, fetching artifacts usually guarded by bad guys or animals. Aside from those fundamentals, there isn't much variety. The types of adversaries, and the environments in which they live varies, but the activities surrounding them generally don't.
Now that I wrote that, I remembered some a counter examples. During the Halloween season, there IS a special event, and as part of that event, characters must use buckets of water to put out fires caused by the WoW version of the Headless Horseman. In the WoW "Brewfest" there was a quest to ride a ram throughout the city to advertise the beer garden outside the city gates.
Maybe later I'll write my own personal code of honor for player versus player battling.
http://nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html#c
This came about when I noticed an error in an article about The
Darjeeling Limited. This article mentioned that Natalie Portman 'did
not appear' in the film. In fact, she did appear in a cameo near the
end of the movie.
I don't know, does that 'call for correction?'
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/331292_obesezip12.html
An excerpt:
The strongest predictor of obesity rates wasn't income or education but property values, the study found. Each additional $100,000 in median home value for a ZIP code corresponded with a drop in obesity of 2 percentage points.
It's further evidence, experts say, that weight isn't solely about individual behavior and that the environment you live in matters.
"If you have this mind-set that obesity has to do with the individual alone, then ZIP codes or areas really should not come into this. But they do, big-time," said Adam Drewnowski, director of the UW Center for Obesity Research.
********
Let’s not forget that class is the biggest divider in our country today. Race is secondary.
Just a few months ago I thought I’d turned a new leaf. I had grand plans to update this blog a few times a week, and really hardwire a habit of writing for people to read. That hasn’t happened yet, but today is a new day!
This is the first direct to email post. Assuming this works, it should help my productivity. It’s much easier to write and post if I don’t have to go to the trouble of logging in first. I’m having a slow spell at work, but it’s still poor form to be too obvious about blogging from the office.
I started playing World of Warcraft around a month ago. My nephews play, and it’s a way to stay connected with them. At first, it worked pretty well, but there were difficulties. For one thing, they were playing on different servers. While Warcraft is a shared world, dozens of versions of the same environment exist independently. Players on one server (or version of the world) cannot interact with players on another server. It is possible to switch characters from one server to another, but Blizzard charges for this service. One way to manage this is to create one character per server. This allows for some variety of play, since different character types offer different play experiences. For a relatively new and casual gamer like myself, it slows down my character’s development and my own exploration of the game’s depths. I’m more of a pick one and stick with it player than a browse around player.
Then the nephews had complications with their accounts, and I’m not sure what server they’re on or what they’re up to. Meanwhile, my non-gaming wife has caught the WoW bug, and has progressed nicely with her character on our original server. This further complicates things, since I now have three people to coordinate with. Hopefully the nephews will settle on a new server somewhere and I can start an alt (‘alternate character’) there, while continuing to play my other character with my wife.
I will very likely blog more about in-game experiences in the future. This meta-game stuff isn’t very interesting.
Michael Moorcock: After "Right-Wing Women" and "Ice and Fire" you wrote "Intercourse". Another book which helped me clarify confusions about my own sexual relationships. You argue that attitudes to conventional sexual intercourse enshrine and perpetuate sexual inequality. Several reviewers accused you of saying that all intercourse was rape. I haven't found a hint of that anywhere in the book. Is that what you are saying?While I'm still on the Playboy and pro-porn side of this fence, this puts a different spin on what I'd been led to believe.Andrea Dworkin: No, I wasn't saying that and I didn't say that, then or ever. There is a long section in Right-Wing Women on intercourse in marriage. My point was that as long as the law allows statutory exemption for a husband from rape charges, no married woman has legal protection from rape. I also argued, based on a reading of our laws, that marriage mandated intercourse--it was compulsory, part of the marriage contract. Under the circumstances, I said, it was impossible to view sexual intercourse in marriage as the free act of a free woman. I said that when we look at sexual liberation and the law, we need to look not only at which sexual acts are forbidden, but which are compelled.
The whole issue of intercourse as this culture's penultimate expression of male dominance became more and more interesting to me. In Intercourse I decided to approach the subject as a social practice, material reality. This may be my history, but I think the social explanation of the "all sex is rape" slander is different and probably simple. Most men and a good number of women experience sexual pleasure in inequality. Since the paradigm for sex has been one of conquest, possession, and violation, I think many men believe they need an unfair advantage, which at its extreme would be called rape. I don't think they need it. I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality.
It's important to say, too, that the pornographers, especially Playboy, have published the "all sex is rape" slander repeatedly over the years, and it's been taken up by others like Time who, when challenged, cannot cite a source in my work.
"Old Witchcraft Secrets" will show you in detail, how you can cast powerful spells.
Make your wildest dreams come true.
It's NOT your fault that your spells and rituals aren't turning out like you want... YET.
The truth is... you've been misled by self-proclaimed powerful wizards and witches...
and the truth is that 99% of these 'professionals' are DEAD WRONG!
In fact, a lot of what they say will actually diminish your powers.
They don't want you to know the right way to cast spells because if you did, you'd never need
them again and they would lose their power!
You cannot invent 'new' spells like you cannot invent a new tree. Everything is old. But
not everything is known in the right way.
Get 3 Spells just for visiting our site
As you know, many witches and wizards are FURIOUS about this. Why?
Because it reveals the true forgotten secrets of witchcraft. Secrets more powerful than what they
can do through their very expensive services...
Soon, everybody will be able to do this at home,
more effectively, cheaper and faster....
You've seen some ridiculous prices on the internet for
getting a spell done. It's obvious they are
getting rich off of normal people and their problems...
Once you know their secrets, you won’t need to give them your money!
I've personally tested this information, and some of the
old forgotten stuff is mind blowing: it's accurate, effective
and quite easy to do.
Discover The Most Powerful Spells and Secrets
Visit Here
-----------------------------------------------------------
Platinum Success, Inc
Zieglergasse 38/8, A-1070, Austria
Unsubscribe
8550 W. Desert Inn Suite 102-194
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Unsubscribe
I am:Isaac AsimovOne of the most prolific writers in history, on any imaginable subject. Cared little for art but created lasting and memorable tales. |
Orpheus 33% Extroversion, 100% Intuition, 72% Emotiveness, 71% Perceptiveness |
You are an artist, an aesthete, a sensitive, and someone who has never really let go of that childlike innocence. To you, all of life has a sense of wonder in it, and the story of Orpheus was written about someone just like you. When the Argo passed the island of the Sirens, Orpheus played a song more beautiful than the Sirens to prevent the crew from becoming enticed. When his wife died, he ventured into the underworld to charm Hades but, in his naivete, he looked back becoming trapped there. You can capture your unique world view and relate it to others with the skill of a master storyteller. Your sensitivity and creativity make you a treasure to the human race, but your thin-skinned nature and innocence can cause you a lot of disenchantment and pain. What's doubly unfortunate is that, if you try to lose those traits, you never will, and everyone will be able to tell that you're putting up an artificial shell to prevent yourself from being hurt. Famous people like you: Hemingway, Shakespeare, Mr. Rogers, Melville, Nick Tosches Stay clear of: Icarus, Hermes, Atlas |
| Link: The Greek Mythology Personality Test written by Aleph_Nine on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test |
NORWICH (Reuters) - Men may have developed a psychology that makes them particularly able to engage in wars, a scientist said on Friday.While the theory makes sense to me, the study is a little abstract:
New research has shown that men bond together and cooperate well in the face of adversity to protect their interests more than women, which could explain why war is almost exclusively a male business, according to Professor Mark van Vugt of the University of Kent in southern England.
In experiments with 300 university men and women students, Van Vugt and his team gave the volunteers small sums of money which they could either keep or invest in a common fund that would be doubled and equally divided. None of the students knew what the others were doing.Extrapolating a male warrior effect is consistent with the findings, but is a bit of a stretch given the nature of the study.Both sexes cooperated in investing in the fund. But when the groups were told they were competing against other universities, the males were more eager to invest rather than keep their money while the number of women contributing remained the same.