Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wayfinder

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Washington, United States
  1. Silly and outdated? How? And, so what? Men and women are different. If you are a man and aren't a risk-taker, a maverick, or whatever, you are feminized. That isn't good, and isn't really what women are looking for in men. And women who adopt masculine qualities do so probably because there aren't enough real men in the world for them to find.
  2. I didn't say Hollywood was lazy. I said they're running out of creativity, and this is, in part, because they have no moral compass and are somewhat detached from reality. Of course, Hollywood hasn't had a moral compass since the 60s, but it's only recently, at least since the 90s, have they been detached from reality. Without either, you end up making a lot of films with tons of holes, flaws, and bad narratives, mainly because they're trying to appeal to so many people and dangle shiny objects in our faces rather than tell compelling stories. When 95% of the movies made nowadays are remakes, reboots, or television adaptations, you know something is terribly wrong in La-La-Land.
  3. Wait...what? You mean every movie character and their development has to follow pre-defined gender paths? Ridiculous premise and...haven't you seen *those* movies already? I didn't like the line or the delivery in this trailer. I didn't like the setup. (Some cool fan things, like Mon Mothma, I could look forward to, I'd love to see more of her development.) They did some of this in the Guardians of the Galaxy trailer, which made me not want to see the movie. Boy, was I ever wrong! I hope I'm wrong again. Well, it works when they do follow gender paths. Because men and women are different. If you make a man or a woman follow a different gender path, you have to show the audience why. Take, in an opposite example, the movie Tootsie. It's about a man who's an actor hoping to find a job, and finds that he has to pose as a woman in order to get that job. So he has to act like a woman, and in so doing sees things from the female perspective, and this changes his attitude toward women. This is a Feminine Journey, taken by a man, who overcomes an external obstacle and, in so doing, takes internal action to change himself. We will not soon care for Rey (unless something happens in VIII), or Katniss, for years to come, because they are not interesting characters. They don't inspire, because they're not compelling. Ripley, on the other hand, is very compelling. She's more relatable in a way Katniss isn't, and men like Ripley, because here's a woman who didn't need to show up the men around her, the men didn't have to be incompetent wusses around her (which is what is often done these days with female action leads - they dumb-down and render incompetent every man around her so she comes off awesome), and she had to change because of the situation.
  4. You got all that from a 30 second trailer? I sure did. Hollywood has very little creativity left. They take whatever's selling right now and try to adapt it to their projects. And it works. Mainly, though, I was being a little facetious about The Hunger Games reference. I could've just as well had said Divergent or even The Force Awakens and it would work as well for my illustration.
  5. Personally, I'm not bothering to see this one. I've already seen The Hunger Games, and I still want my money back. Why should I see a repeat? I do have a problem with a female lead that is pretending to be a man. It doesn't work. Women can be action heroes, but it has to be done right. They can't just start out like Rey or Katniss, but have to have the internal struggle first that forces them into action, like with Ripley in Aliens. This is because Men and Women are different. Men are mavericks and loners, risk-takers and adventurers in a way women aren't. Women are nurturers, caretakers, networkers, diplomats, talkers. They rely on others to provide for and protect them, and until that changes in a serious way, no woman in her right mind would willingly decide to do something that she knows could get her in trouble, or worse. Ripley, in Aliens, had to reconcile the fact that the Marines may not be able to protect her, so she had to make a change in order to protect both herself and rescue Newt. We can believe Ripley. We can't believe whoever this new chick is in Rogue One, who might as well be Rey. What I described up there is called the Feminine Journey, which is an internal struggle, first and foremost. Masculine Journeys are external struggles, where there is a challenge to be overcome and the hero must act in order to overcome it. A feminine journey is about self-change. While you certainly can mix or swap the two to respective sexes, you have to be very careful to suspend disbelief. A woman who is a bad-ass starting out, and is the protagonist, comes off as a Mary Sue. A man who commiserates over every little thing too much comes off as a whiner. Both are either unbelievable or unlikable. So I'm not going to see Rogue One. I've already seen it.
  6. My advice is to give the PCs more XP and cash starting out, because in a mixed setting they're not supposed to be a bunch of losers starting out. They could be, but then you'd only be setting them up for failure. In my current mixed game, I gave everyone an extra 100XP and 500 credits starting out, and a small, lightly armed shuttle. Because the developers of this game seem to think that the best way to start this game is as though you're woefully undertrained, underequipped (to say the least - 500 credits doesn't give you enough to buy a decent blaster and clothes!), and have difficulty doing even the most mundane things (according to the beta version of AoR, mounting a sleeping tauntaun is "Average" Difficulty). While you may start out okay in some regards particularly with a 4 in Agility (Characteristics is more important), it sort of undermines what a lot of players have in mind when they make a character. They may not necessarily expect to be as awesome as Han Solo or Boba Fett starting out, but they don't want to be worse than Luke or Leia in A New Hope either, and the game, as written, starts you out worse than a naked meth-addicted Special Olympian. Okay, that's a slight embellishment, but you get my point. So an additional 100XP to get over the "Average" hump, and another 500 credits (plus 1,000cr if they want to spend all their starting Duty or whatever) for a total of 1,000cr, so they have the equipment they need to function. At least, that's how I roll.
  7. When I run my games, I give my PCs more XP and cash starting out so they don't feel like a bunch of schmos, and I have to be very generous with both Setback and Bonus dice. The game, at least in Age of Rebellion Beta, is particularly interesting with what they regard as "average" difficulty, which I tend to ignore because I don't want my players to feel like they're playing kids just out of diapers and suddenly they have to go into combat. My current game gave everyone starting out an extra 100 XP and another 500 credits. Also, I gave them a little and lightly armed ship.
  8. Personally, after watching the new Star Wars Rebels shows, I'd love to play the Imperials just so they can have some competence, for crying out loud! Except for Vader and some of his Inquisitors, the Empire is ran and operated by nincompoops. It doesn't make the plight of the heroes of the Ghost all that serious when they completely outmatch entire squads of Stormtroopers, complete with walkers and fighter support. They may have Jedi, but all that means is that the Empire are the real underdogs! It seems to me that Vader and the Emperor, and their Inquisitors, are trying to save the galaxy from these superhuman malcontents!
  9. The jerk-ass told this one chick I was putting the moves on that I had space-crabs, a venereal version of Tyranids. I really hate him. I think he's trying to arrange the union between our dynasty and Armengarde's. If he is, telling people I got Tyranids on my crotch isn't going to work.
  10. When we use attack craft, we outfit them for the mission. Ground attack will have shields and weapons meant for that, naturally, and space-attack and air-attack will have them accordingly. We now have four gun-cutters, each optimized for a specific job. We made one to drop troops behind an Ork encampment while another dropped in our Guard troops while their Chimeras teleported in with our Teleportarium. The Orks didn't stand a chance, and I only had one casualty because he shot himself with his own las-rifle.
  11. I might've read my rules wrong. I just achieved Rank 6, but do I have to wait to qualify for Rank 7 in order to take this? Technically, I've met all the other requisites, having a Fel of 60 and a Int of 58, and our PF is hovering at 70. We have done three Grand Endeavours, and have seven ships in my fleet, plus a whole star-system, several trade routes, I got a large statue of my Rogue Trader on Damaris, and Calligos Winterscale and Karrad Vall now hate my guts. Still haven't got a concubine or a wife to my name yet (**** you, Hollister!), but maybe that's my next Grand Endeavour?
  12. I finally made Rogue Trader Rank 6 and I'm thinking of taking the Legend of the Expanse alternate Career. Is it worth taking? Or should I hold off later?
  13. I've gone almost eight months of game play without a single visit from an Inquisitor, and I'd like to keep it that way. Frankly I'd rather not have him show up and say, "Have you been comparing your gilded toilet to the Golden Throne?!"
  14. Well, what he's got so far looks rather like a strange rail-road spike. He's using clay to get his proportions and structures down. From what we've read, there could be some ambiguity from ship to ship; after all, it's not as though these ships are mass-produced in factory precision. One of our concerns is the snout, and the aquila on the front. We have an Armoured Prow on there; should that be taken out in place of a more "armoured" looking prow to reflect that component? Also, we have a Port-side Hold Landing Bay and a Starboard-side Jovian-pattern Landing Bay; would either of those be located in the ventral structure near the keel?
  15. Personally, I rather like the idea of these ships having so much crew aboard. It fits with the universe of 40K in the sense that human life has become incredibly cheap, and various aspects of it reflect that. It even makes some logistical and tactical sense, but I tend to think that 40K goes a bit overboard and inconsistent with the notion that much of technological knowledge is lost and only the Adeptus Mechanicus knows everything there is to know about everything technical. Humans are incredibly adaptable, and one way or another ordinary people can do extraordinary things if given the time and the impetus to use their ingenuity. Not that I would change it myself for my Rogue Trader campaign, but at the same time it does run into the ridiculous. I tend to remind myself that this universe is not set in our own universe, and that the humans here are not the humans that reflect us both as a species and our history in general.
  • Create New...