PingosHusband

Note to all: This is not what her voice sounds like. The voice on the video is missing a number of harmonics that her live voice has. I'm not saying that the video contains undead Pingo... The video, however, is really good. Chocolate covered Kale? That's the most evil thing I've heard that wasn't about politics.

Congratulations and mini happy days to come.

This mini inspired an NPC in my Exalted in World of Darkness campaign: Lunar Werelynx who is captain of a pirate ship in the Hollow Earth. The PCs met her at the end of the last adventure and she's now conveying them (at their request) to an extremely dangerous place for adventuring purposes. Somehow, Pingo's minis keep inspiring me to make my games riskier for the PCs (including her).

We're going to see Captain Marvel tomorrow afternoon. All the reliable reports seem to be in its favor. Here's hoping.

Very nice.

Saw Aquaman a few days ago. It was a lot of fun, but very tropish. On the other hand, a batch of reviewers have pointed out how many standard tropes were swapped in it so that the good guys have the evil tropes and vice-versa and yet the good guys are clearly good and the evil are just plain evil.

Nice. That Fairy dragon looks like it's modeled from Tenniel's illustration of the Jabberwock. It looks great in your forest setting.

I program for a living. All programming is algebra. I also use advanced math in my writing (including writing about math).

Almost, but not quite, the plot of Bored of the Rings. 5'11"s your height. 180's your weight. You cash in your chips. Around page 88.

Danger in games can sometimes act like "Raising the Stakes" in writing. It can create a deeper involvement, but it can also be done gratuitously because the GM or writer thinks it's necessary and that without it everything will be boring. But often the opposite is the case. One of the games I'm playing in now is a variant of Shadowrun. The first adventure of which was extremely bloody and dangerous. Since then we have worked very hard to avoid direct battles in the game. The GM will set up a dangerous objective and we will spend most of the session working out ways to accomplish a goal that is close enough to the goal or solves the underlying problem of which the goal is only one possible solution without getting anywhere near what he's set up. Sometimes the GM expresses frustration with this, but he enjoys doing this, and besides, we learned this lesson about him many years ago. <Digression> The same GM was running a game of Champions a long time ago. He also loves making mazes. He came to the session with a huge maze full of enemies and traps. And we kind of felt obliged to go through it because of the work he had done. It turned out that the whole thing could be circumvented easily and he had just made the maze for the fun of it. <Digression within Digression> As a player he's been known to do the same sort of thing. Again, years ago I was running a high fantasy type game with home brewed rules. His character was fated to marry a particular NPC, but his family and hers (both deep magical lineages with non-human ancestors) had been feuding for centuries. So her relatives set him a fairy tale style quest to obtain the materials for and make her wedding dress. He dutifully wrote down the long, complex, mythic requirements they had set. Then he turned to his bride to be and said, "Would white satin do?" and she replied "That would be lovely." Best short-circuit ever. </Digression within Digression> </Digression>

I have run both kinds of games. Recently, the games I've run have had little to no character death, because the game is about the players having fun through their characters interacting with and affecting and being affected by the world. On the other hand, it's been a long time since I've had the kind of player who would try to take advantage of that.

Great job. I love this.

I'm more than happy to concede that all of her good qualities come from you, and all the problematic ones come from me.

I've used Psionics a number of times in D&D games. It can be fun having both systems in play at the same time. But I think it's important to have the flavor of each be kept distinct. So, I've always made sure that the backgrounds and goals that go with each point the characters in very different directions. The last time I did this (running D&D 3.5) I had magic as being derived from the memory of the world and psionics from the thought of the world. Memory was much older so magic had been around for a very long time. Thought was more recent so that psionics were only developing during the course of the game.

Sounds great. Are you going to post the work as it goes on?