Category Archives: Criticism

Book Classification

While I like to read – and I most certainly do – I would not describe myself as prolific. After all I do tend to read a lot in a very narrow range of books. I read those that I find interesting and ignore those that do not appeal. I used to feel compelled to finish every book I started. Of course that was back when the length of book was some 80 pages, as opposed to the 300+ pages of many books I read now. With age comes intolerance. Now, I will stop reading a book if I don’t like or I become bored which is most often the case. I cannot count the number of times I have started a book with in this last year only to give up 1/2 to 3/4 through because the plot or characters proved too tedious for my attention span. It is tempting for me to blame the author for poor writing, however, really it is my fault for selecting some very trashy books that I know at the time will not hold up to any literary criticism.

Anyway, I diverge from my original thought. I was perusing Good Reads not so many weeks ago and noticed they have a page dedicated to the best books of the year. Interested, I thought I would see what topped the Fantasy list – my typical genre for reading material. I was flabbergasted to discover that Fantasy is no longer a single category. It has been split into fantasy and paranormal fantasy. Seriously, this is a category?

Not that I wasn’t familiar with the names of some subgenres of fantasy; things like: steampunk, urban, high, etc. But these were little subcategories. They were not entire new genres. Also, what is paranormal fantasy? Really?

Dividing books into genres seems obvious on the surface – at least in some regards. Murder mysteries involve both murder and a detective trying to solve it (hence the mystery). Fantasy involves magic while science fiction uses advanced technology and frequently a post-apocalyptic society. Romances are small, often poorly written stories of people finding their soul-mate in usually bland ways. Historical Romance or Fiction takes place in the past, where the past where the past is defined by anything older than the 1980’s (at least by someone out there). Fiction is a catch all for everything else.

But then you get into grey areas. JD Robb writes futuristic cop dramas – should these be found under the mystery or science fiction category? Sometimes, it is the blending of two ideas that leads to the development of a new sub-classification. Steampunk is a melding of old-world steam technology and a Victorian world setting (fantasy and historical). Though why steampunk also has to include an element of the paranormal/fantastical in the form of vampires, werewolves or zombies I still don’t understand.

Derrek defines cyberpunk as the “near-future science fiction that examines how technology (the cyber half of the name) influences the lives of the lower class and destitute (the punk half), while the upper class reaps the rewards.” Does this make it a class by itself or just a subclass of the science fiction category?

Returning to the category of fantasy where I am more comfortable. What is the difference between paranormal and urban fantasy? Urban fantasy seems to include anything that is fantasy occurring in a modern setting: cars, cities, modern swearing and cellphones. Paranormal is usually associated with psychic powers: telepathy and telekinesis. But I find that the great triad of vampires, werewolves and zombies still crop up regularly in this style of book. So, where do you draw the lines?

Iris Johansen has an increasing amount of the supernatural cropping up in her mystery/adventure books that are categorized as fiction. Should they be relabelled as paranormal fantasy? They don’t have the triad of creatures, but psychic powers feature prominently in some of her later works. And where exactly do ghost fall in these divisions?

For any book there is likely more than one label you could use to describe the book. After all fantasy books may have an element of mystery or romance. Neither mystery nor romance can occur without existing in some other setting: modern, historical or fantastical. Yet we are constantly separating books into different categories so there must be some general consensus.

The next question ask what is the value of distinguish books by category.

The Chronicles of Elantra – Series Review

Leave a reply

Cover of book one in the series.

I have gotten a little behind in my reading of late – an impressive feat as I have been reading continuously as a means of procrastinating other activities. I fear tonight I am not going to reach my word count for the Nanowrimo competition (writing a book in a month). However, I digress. My goal tonight is to comment on a series of books I have been reading: The Chronicles of Elantra by Michelle Sagara.

I am always surprised to find how completely absorbed in a long running series I have become. In fact, I actually own every book to date in the series. With nine books have been written about the adventures of Kaylin Neya in the city of Elantra, this is a feat I think is rather impressive. Though, I suppose if I were to peruse my book shelf, it would bear witness to the fact I have read and own several other series (Harry Potter, Green Rider, and others). In the Chronicles of Elantra, I am have been rereading the entire series – all eight previous stories – before I delve into the newest offering of book nine.

So, what are these books? Well, they tell the story of Kaylin Neya, a private in the Hawks (city police – investigative branch). She has been marked by magic and thus inadvertently finds herself the centre of world defining change. Each book is written as an episode while simultaneously following an overall arc. There is a flavour of a TV series in the way the books are written. Not that each story reads like a TV episode – I have read books like that and they are generally poorly written. Now, Sagara is an author and her stories are well crafted and appropriate to the pages. But there is a lightness, or sense of whimsy, that is more reminiscent of TV than epic high fantasy stories (such as Tolkien).

Cover of book 6 – I just finished reading this one.

The world of Elantra is definitely fantasy. It is a nice mix of almost modern fantasy and the fantastical world building. What does that mean? Well, the structure and morals of the society feel modern. Despite the lack of gun powder or nanotechnology or even cars the world feels more modern than medieval. Women are not shunted away and protected by men. They are not confined to marriage and childbearing – at least not at the low level of society the stories centre around. While the mode of rapid transportation his horse and carriage, and stew has been noted on several occasions, the method of dress favours the more modern development of pants for all both men and women. The discussion of paperwork and pay sheets also feels considerably more modern. Whether this is the author’s intent, I could not say. There are elements of the medieval and the reader’s perspective is highly skewed by the unusual main character.

As for the fantasy side, the most obvious element that readers will mark is the inclusion of dragons. Dragons are just one of the races present in Elantra. The dragons not only rule the empire, they are capable of breathing fire and appearing human in form. They are also immortal. The other races include: Humans, Aerians (humans with wings and the ability to use them for flight), Tha’alani (mostly human with antennae and telepathy), Leontines (humanoid lions) and Barrani (pseudo-elves as they are perfect in appearance, arrogant in manner and immortal).

Generally I am not a fan of multiple races – they always seem a bit silly in print. However, Sagara pulls this off with ease. Perhaps it has something to do with the number or races present. Or the author’s ability to give each race a clear, well-defined place in the overall society structure. They do appear integrated. All the races all have their own cultural history and thus personalities. But while physical differences are clearly described, I find the cultural differences more interesting.

The Tha’alani are interesting in their nearly hive mind and ability to read the thoughts and emotions of others with their antennae. I found in interesting the way the Tha’alani have a very open culture without secrets that humans hold so close. They appear to be a very peace loving, easy going society. Yet, even these harmless people have teeth and they have a history of familiar violence. It gives them a complexity and richness that makes them seem alive.

Cover of book 7 – the one I will start as soon I finish my writing for the night.

Each race allows the author to tackle some different societal ideas. The Leontines have multiple wives. Yet, it is the wives that run the home. They have to get along well together if their family structure is going to work. While not much time is spent dwelling on this different relationship design, what is show, is done well.

It is also helpful there is no sense of forbidden love between individuals of different races. I don’t know how this could possibly work anatomically. So, I am grateful that in many ways race is down played. While the Barrani hold contempt for Humans, it is true they turn their noses down on all mortal races. At the same time the dragons are considered their greatest enemy.

Because this is fantasy there is magic present in the world. It is both common and powerful in many ways and sparse and irrelevant in others. I

guess what I am trying to say is that the magic is integrated into the world. It doesn’t feel like some glaring addition thrown on last minute just to turn a story into a fantasy tale. Nor does it seem that the magic is present to extract the lead characters from trouble. This might have more to do with magic causing the trouble.

There is a sense of integration of magic into the world. Door wards are common. The use of mirrors as communication devices I am particularly fond. Memory crystals (audio-visual recording devices) are also an interesting addition. There are a few instances of big magic, like exploding doors. But even the bigger magics, the shape of towers are done in such a way to seem reasonable.

Not to suggest there are not flaws with the stories. Rereading all the books at once reminds me of one of the great challenges faced by authors of series. How do you sum up the previous portion of the story without it appearing like an information dump? While Sagara might try to spread out some of the information I generally find the first couple chapters to be less griping as she tries to explain what has come before. Really, this is a waste of time. Either the reader has been following your work since book one or they were dumb for jumping into the middle at book. Don’t bother trying to catch them up. If the reader wants a better idea of what is happening, then it is their responsibility to go back and read from the beginning. Otherwise, you are just padding your book with information I already know.

Still, if it wasn’t already clear. I really like this series. I am eagerly looking forward to what the new book has to offer – as soon as I finish rereading books 7 & 8!

Running the Future Part 2

Leave a reply

I like Netrunner.

If you haven’t read Part 1 of this unnecessarily lengthy review, I suggest you do that now before continuing. Don’t worry, I’ll wait.

Finished?

Good.

All intellectual property associated with Android: Netrunner belongs to the artists, Fantasy Flight Games, Wizards of the Coast or someone else that isn’t me.

Netrunner is everything that Magic isn’t. Magic is swords, dragons and planar expanding, epic fantasy. Netrunner is hacking, code gates and futuristic, dystopic cyberpunk. Magic focuses on the exploits of ridiculous wizards in an overly elaborate arm wrestle with roaring dragons and magical faeries as wrist proxies. Netrunner features two asymmetrical sides attempting to win the game on their own terms. Magic forces the players to keep up with an ever increasing pool of cards that focuses on building decks to best utilize very specific combinations. Netrunner has an incredibly small pool of cards with an emphasis on creating more options for the factions that allow them different methods to achieve the same victories.

Most importantly, Netrunner adjusts the emphasis of its strategy on the moment of the game than the construction of the deck. It’s a hard thing to explain. It’s even harder to understand.

My introduction to Netrunner has been spread over many weeks as Derek has slowly taught me the rules of the game and its goals. Supplementing this, I have spent uncounted hours perusing the web to understand its base mechanics. I want to repeat that. I’ve spent hours reading up on the basics of the game. This game isn’t built around surprising your enemy with never before seen tricks that they’ll be unable to counter. On the contrary, Netrunner runs best when its participants are intimately familiar with the full capabilities of each other. And that’s because Netrunner incorporates one of my favourite mechanics – mind games.

My absolute favourite boardgame is Diplomacy and that’s because it is solely based on strategy and… well… diplomacy. There are no dice. There are no components that have to be bought with yearly releases. There is just you and six other players and you have to read your enemy and get inside their head. Through either silver tongue, precognition or open threats you have to force your opponents into doing what you want in order to win.

And Netrunner is similar.

In Netrunner, you take the role of either a Mega-corporation or a Runner. There are four corporations to choose from, each of them specializing in a different market. You have NBN the news agency with global control of almost every aspect of information and entertainment; Haas-Bioroid develops artificial intelligence and cybernetics; Weyland Consortium specializing in resource redistribution and corporate hegemony while creating futuristic expansions into oceans and space; Finally, there’s mysterious Jinteki who dominate cloning technologies. Pulling on cyberpunk themes and motifs, all four corporations are irredeemably evil. NBN channels the attitudes and feelings of Big Brother from 1984 with the grace and aplomb of Fox News. Haas-Bioroid pulls upon themes of slavery and the nature of personhood with the mechanical coldness of an uncaring master lording over sentient AI as well as mandatory implementation of cybernetics into their work force. Weyland Consortium have almost a mythical Illuminati vibe with their integration and manipulation of government bureaucracies couple with Exxon’s love and devotion for protecting the environment. And Jinteki has clones: clones which they fuse into their computers in order to murder anyone without authorization to access their servers. They also use clone fetuses to… I don’t know – be more incredibly evil?

Arrayed against them we have the intrepid Runners. But not every hacker is created equal. First among them are the Shapers. These individuals are more artistically inclined. They run the servers of the Megacorps as a test of their abilities, to prove that they are capable of it or just to look around at what is going on behind the scenes. Next, are the Criminals. These people have more tangible reasons. They’re in the game for the money. Lastly are the Anarchs. These Runners despise the control and moral bankruptcy of the Megacorps and are there to bring their whole system crashing down around them.

A game of Netrunner represents a skirmish between these two sides. One player is the Corporation. His goals are to advance hidden agendas and further the questionable aims of his organization. He sets the playing field by creating the servers that the Runner runs. In order to protect his investments, the Corporation utilizes programs called Ice which act as barriers and programs designed to discourage, disrupt or destroy the Runner’s attempts to breach his systems. All the while, the Corporation is hiding his agendas, hoping to advance them long enough for them to come to fruition before they can be exposed.

The other player is the Runner. Her goals are to undermine the Corporation’s defences and bring to light their secrets. She builds up a suite of tools to crack the Corporation’s base: codebreakers for breaking through Ice, viruses for weakening the system’s effectiveness and modified hardware designed to strengthen her programs into unstoppable battering rams. But the Runner has to always be on her toes for the Corporation is always trying to track her down. If the Corporation can get a strong trace then the Runner may be looking at having all her funds drained, her programs destroyed or even her life forfeited to the bullets of hired mercenaries and security squads.

It’s a game of cat and mouse with predator and prey changing from turn to turn. As I mentioned, the Corporation sets the battlefield, building up servers and installing assets or agendas behind impenetrable walls of Ice. But these cards are placed hidden. The runner can’t know if the Corporation has set down an asset that will help them draw through their deck (referred to as Research and Development), generate money (referred to as credits), trap the Runner and deal damage or if it’s one of the required agendas. There are only two ways for the Runner to win. Either she scores seven points worth of agendas first, or she “mills R&D” which requires destroying the Corporation’s deck until he has no more cards to draw. The Corporation’s win conditions are to advance seven points of his own agendas first or to “flatline” the Runner by forcing her to discard more cards than she holds through traps and covert operations.

Good luck understanding any of this card on your first try.

At first the game is incredibly impenetrable. Between the asymmetrical gameplay, four Corporations, three runner factions and a whole score of different ice, hardware and programs it’s easy for the beginner to feel completely overwhelmed. Thus, my weeks of training. I am nowhere near fully understanding the game but I stand at a pivotal moment in my learning. I am at the point of deck creation.

In my first part, I mentioned how Magic: The Gathering is dominated by its deck building. Games are won or lost almost solely on the creation of the deck before hand. The actual playing of the game is nearly a formality. But Netrunner is almost the opposite. I’ve been playing, and beating, Derek with decks that I did not construct. Victories are won and games are lost on the turn by turn plays more than the cards held in the deck. Almost every game I can think back and go “Oh, if only I had done this I could have won” or “I’m fortunate that Derek didn’t do that or I would have been screwed.” This isn’t to say that building the deck is irrelevant but the emphasis is more on how well you can predict your opponent’s actions. I may not have a Hadrian’s wall protecting my HQ which contains the last agenda needed for either of us to win, but I could play a Chum over an unrevealed Shadow. The Shadow on its own won’t stop Derek from doing the run, but if I reveal the Chum he may suspect there’s something worse waiting for him and “jack out” before snatching my winning agenda.

This requirement to understand your opponent is why it’s so important to bring your adversary to your own level. As any poker player will tell you, it’s almost impossible to play against beginners. New poker players not only are awful at bluffing but they’re terrible at being bluffed since they don’t know what they should be paying attention to. They are unpredictable because they don’t understand how the game is naturally won and lost. Any attempt to obfuscate the information you have is in vain because they aren’t even looking at you to get that information. The same is with Netrunner. You can’t fake playing an Adonis Campaign to mask an agenda on an unprotected remote server if the Runner doesn’t even know that agendas should be protected. They’ll just run it because they don’t know what else to do. Certainly, you can trounce them because they have no idea what they should be doing with their turn but that’s no better than sitting down a bunch of preschoolers at the poker table and winning their lunch money because they’d rather build a house with their cards.

And that’s perhaps what excites me most about Netrunner. While you have your deck that you’re constantly tweaking and playing with, you’ll never develop something that’s unstoppable. Even the best combinations can be undone by an unprepared Runner because you two are playing separate yet simultaneous games. If you have a fast advancing NBN deck, I could still end up milling your R&D before you get all your Psychographics fuelled to instant score your winning agendas and scoop up victory from your unprotected Archives. You’re forced to generalize to a point and to react to your opponent’s play if you ever hope to win.

Netrunner brings strategy back to the game. And I will always pick ‘play to win’ over ‘pay to win’ design any click of the week.

An accurate portrayal of Derek and my match to come.

Now I just need to finish the final touches on this Haas-Bioroid deck so I can crush Derek next time we play.

Dead Reckoning

Leave a reply

Dead Reckoning was the second book I read. It was written by Mercedes Lackey and Rosemary Edghill. Ok, so it was about zombies and I don’t like actually like zombies. They are gross, dead, and ridiculous. There is no explanation out there that makes any sense. And the truth is that this one was particularly bad. It was superstition and magic trying to masquerade as science. Oh beautiful science, how you have been butchered and twisted with each illogical scenario.

Book Cover – I actually found the cover interesting enough to want to read the book – despite the zombies.

I think if one has to do zombies, then really the use of a virus is the best explanation one can give. Not some cocktail of plant derivatives combined with music to make these lovely walking corpses both docile and obedient. I suppose the army of dead was not too bad. It was just silly the way they were made.

The other thing that through me off, right from the very beginning, was the intro indicating the author’s desire to create an authentic historic period. Again, there is nothing wrong with the desire, but it certainly created an expectation that was not followed through. Not when the author then tried to weave magic and steam-powered mechanicals into the telling. Why could they not simply bill the novel as a Western Steampunk?

I can’t really put my finger on the reason I actually finished reading this book. It wasn’t the not-so-very-gripping tale of zombies (though the army of undead did start to grow on me). It wasn’t really the characters either. While I was drawn to Jett, one of three main characters, there was certain flatness to the ensemble as a whole.

Jett appealed most as she was a cross dressing female. The twin sister to a missing brother, she dressed and acted as a rough and tumble, sharp-shooting, card-shark as she tried to locate her absent sibling.

Gibbons was supposed to be everything Jett was not: socially progressive, intellectual and not afraid to be the unconventional female. She was an inventor, creating a steam-powered car; a scientist determined to find a rational explanation about the apparent zombies and courageous as she walks boldly into all situations.

Rounding out the trio was White Fox. As a child four he was rescued by a Native American tribe when his entire family and wagon train were slaughtered. While he may appear to be a white man he has the manners and thinking of a Native. Really, what this boils down to is a closed, emotionally isolated (tough?) and largely silent character.

Jett plays the tough guy, but to be different from White Fox talks and cusses more. Gibbons rambles. Though of course she would hate to be thought of as a girly chatterbox, most of her dialogue falls into the lecture style.

I appreciate the attempt made to craft three unique individuals, but they were really three stock characters. Strangely enough with some much book spent just following their lives over the few short days the novel covers I feel oddly disconnected from them. They should have been an intergral part of the story, with the zombies working in the back ground. While the zombies remain in the background, so do the main characters. Actually nothing about the story really sticks out.

The manner of writing was good, but not great. There was some use of old west slang, but even that didn’t seem fully realized. I am left with a lack luster impression of the entire thing. What would have made this better? Well, more character development – perhaps more character conflict? I could concede the zombies, and I liked the western flare (though that too could be enriched), but why pretend to ground this story in American history when you are changing so much anyway. Create your own world, then the potion for zombification won’t seem so grating the narrative.

Running the Future Part 1

Leave a reply

I hate Magic.

magic_the_gathering_symbols_by_thekagestar-d37388h

The five colours of Magic: The Gathering. All intellectual material associated with the game is property of Wizards of the Coast.

Well, I don’t mean to say that I hate generic magic of the hand-waving, Latin spewing variety. Though followers will certainly know I have a certain amount of disdain for its general deus ex machina application, I do like a certain amount of fantasy and wonder in my stories. No, dear reader, it is Magic: The Gathering for which I hold an especially dire attitude towards. For those unfamiliar, Magic: The Gathering (abbreviated to M:TG though I’ll probably just refer to it by Magic with a capital) is a collectible card game by Wizards of the Coast. Many might recognize its name for it is probably the most successful collectible card game on the market. It is certainly one of the longest lived. As such, it has a long history and thusly I with it.

I got into Magic in those early formative middle school years. My predilections for nerdy endeavours is well recorded and I am not ashamed to admit that one of the biggest draws to the hobby was the art. In my young eyes, I saw an array of menacing dragons, heavenly angels, daring wizards and diabolical cultists. The texts spoke of far off planes and glorious battles between mighty conjurers. To have these wondrous creatures in a game with powers that reflected their design tickled by boyish interest. I hobbled together a deck of my favourites and sought out worthy competition to pit them against.

I don’t know why I liked this stupid looking critter. But I knew I had to run the maximum number I could.

I’m fairly certain my first game was an utter disaster. I’m not sure I even included any land cards which are required to summon your critters to the field of battle. Course, when you’re young, you don’t really care. All that matters is planting that Scaled Wurm and letting it rip into your opponent’s line. In my mind’s eye, I could see the mangled bodies and corpses of my opponent’s useless soldiers slowly sliding down into a monstrous gullet. In time, my collection grew as I sifted through the discard and junk bins of hobby stores looking for the coolest art and best prices. I met some like minded individuals and we would spend our hours battling decks against decks sometimes in chaotic five or more player free for alls.

But then a change took hold one of friends. He was a later adopter, joining us in our small circle to peer with wide eyed wonder and the incomprehensible battle lines drawn between us. With enthusiasm, we indulged his curiosity and showed him the basics of the game. Little did we know this innocuous moment would herald the end. For, you see, this friend was Steve and much like me, he had a very competitive spirit.

Of course, there is a very distinct difference between my competitiveness and Steve’s. I approach any sort of challenge with the intention of winning but through fair application of the rules and masterful strategies. Steve, on the other hand, wouldn’t let something as inconsequential as “fair play” get in the way of his victory. He was an incorrigible cheat, often requiring a keen eye to insure he wasn’t stashing some cards up his sleeves or rigging his deck. As with all cheats, their reliance on breaking rules to gain victory stunts their natural tendency to learn and master the game. Unfortunately, because I alone kept a close eye on Steve’s machinations, he was forced to find other avenues to trump me.

This came along with the development of the Internet. For we were in the throes of the digital revolution. Information was spreading at a faster rate than ever before. The World Wide Web provided an unimaginable wealth of knowledge to those with the drive and persistence to sort through it. While most our age focused their use in forbidden images of erotic titillation, Steve discovered the realm of competitive Magic: The Gathering. Here was a new way to view the game the likes of which none of us had imagined. What was a friendly and casual battle of wits between my friends held a completely alien and dark world beneath. Steve showed up one day to our little circle in the quietest and forgotten of halls, proudly plopping down beside us and gloriously revealing a new deck. We were curious and excited, new cards often being a cause for celebration as we enjoyed what flavour the handful of printed diabolical critters could bring.

What Steve unleashed upon us that day, however, was nothing short of the apocalypse.

All of us fell in turn, even my mighty control deck brushed aside like it was a gnat before an irritated hunter. Steve was out for blood, and it would be ours that would first stain his sword. He hadn’t arrived with a few new cards integrated into the old but with an entire suite of entirely new and baffling rules and mechanics. Now, he didn’t need to cheat to win. His deck would do it for him.

It was then I learned about Magic’s deck-building structure. As with any arms race, I too turned to the Internet to understand this new foe before me. But what I found was horrifying. Untold combinations and competitive decks were listed about. I learned that we had simply been playing a quaint themed game like children holding a match of checkers with Mahjong tiles. There were lists of cards and combos that were banned because of their ability to complete destroy the nature of the game. There were great debates over adjudicating the reams of cards in order to keep an even playing field at the highest level of play. And in order to enter that field, you had to have the expense to acquire any of the legally sanctioned cards on the lists.

In short, I learned that Magic: The Gathering was a pay to win game.

That may be a bit reductionist, but the essence is still there. For me, I approached the game as a hobby. I got my decks from the 25 cent bin over the course of months. Some of the best cards could sell for twenty or thirty dollars a piece and that’s not even touching the out of print cards worth hundreds of dollars. Put simply, I was too poor to play the game. I quickly retired, shelving my cards in a box for years until I found someone to offload them on. Meanwhile, I watched as a slow change came over my friends. In order to keep up with Steve, each one of them begun to buy more and more into the hobby or drop out entirely like I did.

Magic-The-Gathering-Duels-of-the-Planeswalkers-2012

I don’t even know who the hell these dudes are but I suspect they’re probably expensive to get, incredibly important in current deck building and ultimately dominate the focus of the game.

As for Steve, he eventually entered into tournaments. He was the sort of person that would go full throttle into whatever he set his mind into. He borrowed my Mist Dragon – a favourite card of mine that I happened upon by serendipitous fortune. It managed to “go missing” during the tournament. I’m convinced that he lost it in a match, likely holding it as ante before succumbing to someone with some new devious twist of the mechanics.

Course, this long story has nothing to do with what I wish to discuss today. For I have been tasked with creating two decks before Derek returns home from class. But these decks are not for Magic: The Gathering. This is for Android: Netrunner created by the man behind Magic: The Gathering and totally not the same thing.

And on Friday, I will tell you why it isn’t.

Every Other Day – Book Review

Leave a reply

To say I have had some spare time for reading might be overstating the matter. It was more like I procrastinated the oodles of other work I should be doing and sped-read a couple of books.

The first book I am going to preview was called Every Other Day by Jennifer Lynn Barnes. It is every bit a teen book. All the main and important players – well the heroes of the tale are teenagers; high-schoolers. The villains are adults – but isn’t that always the way?

Yup this is the book cover.

The main character, Kali, is your typical, seventeen year old superhuman. She has insanely inhuman super abilities while fighting the myriad of teenage hormones and awkwardness well associated with high school. It was geared very strongly to that segment of the population. While that isn’t a specifically horrible thing, it is off putting for someone who does not wallow in teenage reminiscent. High school was not the best years of my life and I don’t need to relive them.

The other glaringly irritant for me was the use of science to explain the supernatural. Sometimes I can go along with the ideas presented in meaningless jargon. The use of the DNA triple helix however, I found grating. This may have been due to my recent covering of DNA structure and replication. While it is true, the triple helix was considered as a possible structure, it was very early on ruled out. A good thing as replicating three strands would not work in any logical method I can conceive. I also struggle with how the base pairs could conceivable bond together when bases are held together by specific hydrogen bonding. Even the use of a quadruple helix would have made more sense. It is like the idea behind conservative replication. It was an idea that was ruled out through experimentation. Even though it was inconceivable how it would function, it was a hypothesis – but that doesn’t mean we should claim that superpowers arise from that failed idea.

This is the DNA double helix. Where would the other stand attach?

This doesn’t even touch on the inter-dimensional lines that had to be crossed to further the explanation of how every mythical creature known to mankind actually exists – and perhaps a hundred more too. Of course, I don’t need to have zombies and vampires and hellhounds and … who knows what else all packed into one hormone driven story.

In some ways it is amusing the way that ‘fantasy magic’ is replaced with ‘supernatural, paranormal and psychic’ powers or abilities or creatures in the present, science-grounded society. Essentially these two concepts of the wizard and the psychic work much the same. Their abilities are often similar and often endless, growing with each book in a series or each challenged faced by the hero. I suppose you could argue there is often learned, trained, taught while the abilities of the psychic (and other supernatural creatures) are inherited. Though, often wizards are born in the role (even in Harry Potter) and psychics need to train their abilities.

But that is enough of the negatives.

What I liked about this story was the opening sequence. I liked the powerful fighter. Kali starts as a tough girl, well acquainted with her unusual state. When we first meet, we see Kali hunting. It was an interesting and gripping way to start a story, particularly one written in the first person (a style, wholly over done in modern, supernatural fantasy stories). The first person writing worked in this tale. The plot moved quickly, and while there were moments I want to shake some sense into Kali. At least tell her to listen to the voices around her. I thought she was largely believable. The ending was strong, not surprising, but then that could reflect the solid writing more than anything else. The other strength of this novel was that it is a standalone. There is no sequel, no trilogy to follow. It was a strong, single story with some interesting characters, a lot of teenage drama – but a good solid, quick read. And sometimes it is nice to read something straightforward.

Rollplaying Part 2

Leave a reply

Fallout art

When I first started this series (two posts constitutes a series, yes?) I mentioned how I hoped that Derek’s D&D campaign would provide material and inspiration for blog entries.

Here we are one month later and he still hasn’t run a single session. I think he hates me. That, and the rather copious amount of affectionate texts I found on his phone sent to a “Windy Dave” leave me with a vague sense of suspicion and jealousy. Who is this shady character? Has he found another group to roll with? Am I just part of the party that he keeps around out of tradition or obligation while satisfying his dungeon mastering with some other young, more robust and exciting group of individuals?

Or is he just the unending well of disappointment and shattered dreams? More investigation is required.

However, my sister has decided to stop hating me and informed me that she finally read some of my posts. Of particular interest was the first Rollplaying wherein I made some arguments about absolute rollplaying and the conflicts between two opposing ideologies at the game table. Or something. Sometimes even I get confused about what I write and seek solace in luminous distraction.

The Artist’s Studio by Horace Vernet (1820)

At any rate, the reason I began this discussion on the role vs roll dynamic in tabletop RPGs because of a few humorous observations I made when witnessing my sister tackle her first session. They were the same observations I made when I got the pleasure of witnessing Felicia with hers and other new players to the genre. I won’t draw much conclusion from the fact that they have been almost universally women since I don’t believe there’s any correlation between that fact and their behaviour beyond the brief moment I had to make an incredibly sexist remark.

But I didn’t and I wished to point that out. See Kait, see how I grow! I restrained myself!

Ahem.

The thing I find most fascinating with new players is the actions they take. I touched upon it briefly in my own concerns about player and character knowledge and how there’s often a conflict between the two. Whereas a veteran will sometimes know when they possess a deficiency themselves or possibly even when they hold more knowledge than their persona. In the first scenario, the player can ask the DM who can either provide that information or roll it off. In the latter, the unscrupulous player will refrain from acting on that information unless it assists with progressing the session the he may find some clever way to work around his character’s lack of insight in order to bring this information forward. Both results aren’t the most elegant but they provide a smooth enough response that keeps the play going.

Soldier Labourer by Horace Vernet (1820)

The new player, conversely, does not understand this dynamic. They are the most apt to fall into the erroneous belief that their knowledge is their persona’s and vice versa. When confronting a new challenge, they will often express exasperation or bewilderment even if it were common occurence for their persona. They are the most likely to fall for common traps or pitfalls or to follow the most predictable and straightforward path. This really isn’t surprising. As mentioned, the dynamic between roll and role is a complicated one especially at the tabletop. First and foremost these players are approaching a game and they react accordingly. If there is an obstacle in the way, they will often try to fight it. If there is a path to walk, they will follow it. Partly, this reaction could be fueled by the popularity and ubiquitousness of computer games. Being the most popular form of entertainment currently, it is quite likely that new players are familiar with their design. And many computer games pull inspiration from old table top mechanics and design. However, computers are programmed for a limited number of variables and responses. Their design typically follows a “go here and do what I tell you” route that is narrow in scope because of the complexity required for programming. This repetitiveness will instill in a player an automatic response that could be drawn upon in this new situation.

Much like classical conditioning, the player learns that when a quest giver says “go here and do this” the only way to progress is to follow. However, as I’ve said, the power of the tabletop game comes from the flexibility and unlimited possibilities provided by a combination of one’s imagination and the reactivity of the dungeon master. With a game, your only real choice in the situation is either to agree with the quest giver or to turn away from the quest altogether. Rare is it that you could solve the situation through clever means – be it robbing the quest giver, tricking them into a more favourable position, turning them in to the authorities or seeking assistance from their rivals. The list can go on and on.

Furthermore, when sitting down a new player to explain a new game what is it that is almost universally taught? The rules, of course. The player is given the character creation tools and walked through the often bewildering stats, perks, feats, skills, numbers and rules required to create their persona. Sure, there might be a few brief minutes to discuss the finer aspects of their personality but without fail the lion’s share of time is spent understanding the mechanics of the system. This reinforces the “gamey” aspect of the tabletop. I think this is the biggest problem that new players face. They get so consumed by this “system” and all the rules that govern it that they lose sight of what they’re playing. When asked what they want to do, without fail their first response is “I don’t know.” I don’t think this represents a lack of imagination or willingness from the player. I think this just represents his uncertainty of the rules. Most certainly she knows what she wants to do but she doesn’t know how to go about doing it. Does she need to roll? How does he communicate his distrust? Is it possible for her to even attack a basilisk?

The burden of knowledge I mentioned in my previous post is brought to a crippling extreme with the beginning player. They may not understand the finer points between a glaive and a halberd. They might not understand that a chimera can breath fire but a cockatrice can induce petrification. Between the world and the system they can’t separate mechanic knowledge from world knowledge and they’re just left in a confounding miasma unsure of how to extract themselves.

Angel of Death by Horace Vernet (1851)

To bring back the personal touch, I had my history in free-form roleplaying. Understanding the vast possibilities afforded to me in this shared game world wasn’t an issue. My background provided an avenue to come to grips with the “system” for interacting with an imagine world – mainly that there isn’t any. You are allowed to do what you wish to do – within reason. You are sharing a space with others and working together in your play even if in the world you’re on opposing sides. It is much like children playing house. It is the pure, distilled world of fantasy and imagination with just enough structure to prevent chaos from bringing the whole structure down. I was brought into D&D with half the “system” explained and arguably it was the hardest part. Anyone can learn mechanics. Knowing the bonuses a 17 strength provide in an open doors check is rote memorization that can be solved by timely referencing. But it is the strength of one’s creative faculties that provide that greatest advantages in the game and are the hardest to learn.

It comes as no surprise to me that those that often take rather quickly to D&D are those that come from an acting background. For how similar of a system is there than the one on the stage? You must work with a team in order to bring to life a production of various characters and events that, more often than not, carry their own motivations and goals. You must separate your own knowledge from your persona’s, abandoning the realization that you are just a person standing on a poorly lit and decorate stage in order to embrace the ideas and emotions of someone miles and years apart from you. You have to work with your director to understand the world your persona lives in to bring to life their thoughts and reactions to the events unfolding before them.

The stats, skills, powers and what not are just the operational rules that keep the production running. They’re knowing how to “cheat out” and what profile to maintain when delivering lines. They’re the knowledge of muting your motions and behaviour when occupying the background or learning to enunciate and project when delivering a monologue even if it is in supposed silence.

But I think anyone can be enticed into playing tabletop games. They are, after all, the natural flights of fantasy we have whenever engaging in a work of fiction. They’re the amusing “What if” thoughts that float through our head as we work through a favourite novel. They’re the imaginings that give rise to untold fan fictions spread across the Internet. Everyone likes to imagine themselves as the hero in their favourite story. And role-playing games are just the vessel that lets us explore that fantasy.

More of the Same – Fallout New Vegas DLC

Leave a reply

“Ya know sometimes the journey beats the destination, and especially when your spurs go jingle, jangle, jingle and you meet some nice gals along the way.” ~ Mr. New Vegas

Review of Dead Money and Honest Hearts

So, I’m still working my way through a full second playthrough of Fallout: New Vegas. I’ve written before of my love for the game and spoken at lengths with those closest to me about it. It’s a wonderful little piece of design that highlights some of the points we’ve cover on this blog in regards to world building. While I enjoyed Bethesda’s Fallout 3, the expertise and skill that Obsidian brought with their spin-off just can not be rivaled. I like to compare them as such: Fallout 3 is a spectacle but New Vegas is a world.

After its release and my first time running through the deserts of the Mojave, Obsidian released four DLC (downloadable content) packs for the game (technically five but I’ll be damned if I’m going to spend three bucks on a bunch of guns). These are almost closer to actual expansion packs of the nineties style of design. They’re pretty meaty additions themselves, typically sporting a couple of main quests, side quests, handful of NPCs and companions and entirely new locations chalk full of villains and loot. They are, from every angle of design, more of the same. And when I loved the original so much, that is probably the best praise I can give.

However, as they are still the same, both feature very prominent issues. So while most of this post will probably be detailing where things went wrong, I do want to stress that I’ve enjoyed both of them. They exhibit the intriguing thematic driven stories that draws me to Obsidian’s work time and time again with well fleshed out characters and creative transformations of real world locations re-imagined in Fallout’s post apocalyptic world.

But let’s get on with the show.

Dead Money is the first of the released DLC which I chose to play second. After searching the Internet, many people recommended that they be played in order, however as you’re about to start Dead Money it comes with a pretty hefty warning that the add-on was designed with higher level characters in mind. Being below the recommended level, I turned my sights to Honest Hearts first. However, the two are wholly independent so order between them is irrelevant whereas it is heavily hinted in both packs that the latter two DLC (Old World Blues and Lonesome Road) should really be played last.

But I digress.

My first issue with both DLC is their jarring insertion into the game. The moment they’re installed and you load up the game you are given a text prompt that these quests have been activated. Whereas with quests within the game you are required to at least learn about them through some in-game method, whether that be stumbling across clues or portions of the quest on your own or initiating them by an interested NPC who offers you the details and promises rewards. Personally, I would have liked to see both of them inserted in a more natural way. Both have associated radio broadcasts that could have triggered by proximity to their starting locations which would have been enough. Likewise, the end of each DLC features the same slideshow style narration that the main game ends with but it would have been better if they incorporated those slides with the final game’s show.

Of course, they weren’t, because their final design takes into account people who finished the game and just bought the content to play as extra instead of considering it as a part of a greater whole. Which is a shame, since both of them integrate into the greater New Vegas world.

Anyway, Dead Money has you discovering a mysterious broadcast that gives off tantalizing messages of a grand opening for an unheard of casino title The Sierra Madre. The sultry voice of Vera welcomes you to come and explore its exotic streets with an air of old world charm that has faded to all but a memory in the wake of the nuclear war that devastated the world. Seeking the source of the broadcast finds The Courier (the player) descending into an abandoned bunker and towards a radio left curious in a well furnished room. Approaching the device immediately proves to be a mistake as your vision blurs and the walls shake in your vision right before you collapse to the floor.

Queue the blackout.

You awake in a desolate town square looking up at a lavish fountain with the projected head of some old geezer. He quickly informs you of the situation you’re in. Namely, you are going to assist him in breaking into the beautiful building up on the overlooking bluff and your service is insured by the thick bomb strapped around your neck. Elijah then tells you that there are others in the villa with matching bomb collars and all of you are intricately connected to each other. Should one of your collars go off then so will the rest. He then pats you on the bum and sends you on your way to “gather your crew” as it were.

It’s immediately apparent that the game is pulling from the old fashion heist movies. Much of the design for the levels involves navigating twisting and confusing corridors and streets. You need to call upon the unique strengths of the others wrapped in this adventure with you in order to proceed. And along the way you begin to learn more about the other characters. Each has his own motives for being in the villa and they look hungrily towards the casino overhead. Greed and curiosity are thrown together as constant themes throughout the piece and more than once you’re questioned why you came yourself.

It’s all well done with my only complaints being a slight dissonance between the world and the gameplay. We’re informed that the Sierra Madre is a deathtrap, luring in its victims with the sweet promise of honey before clamping its jaws irrevocably around them. Unfortunately, the three characters you are assisting weren’t truly brought for those reasons. Elijah also spends much time complaining about the confounding greed that caused the previous failures with past victims. You have the overwhelming sense that this is a ploy that has been run again and again but with very little success. I would have really liked to see more evidence of that either through more footprints left by the ones before or even having some rival “thieves” still lurking in the dark corners of the villa.

Otherwise, the level design was really focused on their goal. Combat is less emphasized over survival and stealth. The world is designed to make you desperate. The collar around your neck is more than just a pretty souvenir. The transmitter is affected by radios which can set it off prematurely if you spend too much time in their presence. Furthermore, should one of your allies unfortunately fall whether from triggered traps or the swarming “ghost people” that stalk the empty streets then you are allowed only five seconds of frantic despair before your own head is popped like a spring cherry tomato.

Further emphasizing the survivalist aspect is the thick “Cloud” that hangs over the area. This blood red mist is a constant drain upon your health, forcing you to find whatever healing you can. You become a veritable pin-cushion after the number of needles that are required to keep you alive as you explore and perform the tasks needed to break into the Sierra Madre. There are even concentrated areas of the Cloud that will hurt you even faster creating a tough decision of whether the unknown materials lying inside are worth the trade-off of health required to get them.

The ideas and designs are all great. The problem is that the game is running on the Gamebryo engine. Unfortunately, this means that all this stealth/survival gameplay is wasted on a system that can’t really model stealth gameplay all that well. Too often are most situations best resolved by brute force. Once I had a large enough stockpile of munitions, I just fought my way through the ghost people filling the streets. Even more unforgivable, the game had an obnoxious tendency of just respawning more ghost people after completing objectives as if they realized that the stealth aspect was for naught but that these awfully limiting combat situations would be better. The problem is, the game wasn’t designed for such a strict restricting of weapons so my character – who was built around explosives – had to slough through the combats with weapons that were far inferior in his hands because of the way I’d been specializing him. Eventually, I got a weapon that let me two shot the enemies and I just charged them head on after that since I couldn’t be bothered trying to sneak (which I also wasn’t good at even when I was trying to use the items that would help shore up that weakness).

Furthermore, the game was built so that you could only have one companion with you at a time. This is incredibly cumbersome for a heist story, especially given the large focus on the other members involved. The method for breaking in was rather contrived (and remarkably easy when all was said and done which makes me wonder why it took so long for people to perform it). But once you broke into the Sierra Madre casino itself, you and your gang were immediately split up because the game just couldn’t run with all of you together.

The casino section was also aggravating since instead of the mysterious ghost people to deal with you had holographic security officers and a lot more radios. This forced a very “trial by error” approach to navigating the space that seemed to deflate the sense of a grandly schemed heist into a “run into the room, die in order to locate all the guards and radios then reload and repeat until the one exact path is mapped out.”

Which is unfortunate because the story surrounding the casino and its characterful inhabitants was really engaging. It was bogged down by its own game systems which, at times, made it a chore to play and drained the life out of it much like the omnipresent cloud drained your character’s.

Honest Hearts, however, was almost the opposite.

Honest Hearts has you answering the call for guards from a desperate caravan company called Happy Trails. They’re hoping to lead an envoy to the remains of Salt Lake City to re-establish the routes with the settlement of New Canaan that had inexplicably ended. To get there, the caravan master informs you that they are going to travel through the Grand Canyon.

As with Dead Money, your companions are told to go away and you’re informed that you are only allowed a limited amount of your own gear to carry since you’re expected to shoulder some of the caravan’s supplies yourself. It was a cute explanation for the loss of your gear but Honest Hearts didn’t benefit thematically from the restriction. All it did, once again, was make obstacles artificially more challenging because my character was not designed around the equipment they provided in that area.

Anyway, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that once within the canyon your caravan is attacked and everyone is slaughtered by a bunch of rather effective savages called the White Legs. After battling your way from the ambush, you meet a young man by the name of Follows-Chalk who claims affiliation with the Dead Horses (assuming, of course, you don’t gun him down because you first spot him at a distance and he looks really similar to the jerks that blew off your friends’ faces when you first arrive). Follows-Chalk mentions that his warband’s leader, Joshua, would like to speak with you and he becomes your temporary guide through Zion National Park.

Unlike Dead Money, there isn’t as great of an urgency for following the path and you’re given some freedom to wander around and explore the area. The Grand Canyon makes for a rather nice location even if it is swarming with danger in the form of wildly mutated Preying Mantises, Bears and some devil spawned insect called Cazadores. When you finally do meet up with Joshua, you discover that he isn’t some primitive tribal dressed in skins but a heavily bandaged man wearing a bullet proof vest and displaying remarkable skill with pistols.

He also believes in God.

The one curious thing about the Fallout world that I had never given much thought to was its lack of religion. It’s all too typical for science fiction and fantasy stories to shy away from real world faith. Its absence didn’t strike me as anything other than developers not wish to cause offence. Apparently, that wasn’t entirely the case with Fallout where its explained that in the years following the dropping of the bombs, recognizable religion as we know it had almost completely disappeared. The New Canaanites are the only faction to still lay faith in the old believes. This isn’t to say that everyone is an atheist (though many are) but most claims to supernatural or spiritual worship is typically reserved for tribal communities that are seen as far more primitive than the major factions vying for control (though there is a sort of religious reverence towards old technology in the Brotherhood of Steel, it is pretty understated).

As it turns out, Joshua is the Joshua Graham who is mentioned quite frequently in the main game. He was the Legate for Caesar’s Legion during the first assault on Hoover Dam. After their embarrassing defeat, Caesar had Joshua covered in pitch and thrown burning into the Grand Canyon as a warning to others of the cost of failure. And while little else is mentioned of Graham after, it becomes clear that though Caesar doesn’t speak of him again, he hasn’t forgotten him. The White Legs are a tribe of raiders hoping to join Caesar’s Legion and to prove their worth, they’ve been given the task of hunting Graham down.

But the interesting thematic elements are tied to the relationship between Joshua and Daniel. Daniel is a New Canaanite missionary, much like Joshua was before he joined with Caesar. Their conflict is based on the atrocities that Joshua committed while working with Caesar and how that experienced shaped each man’s viewpoint in the canyon. Joshua wishes to crush the White Legs and protect the home of the tribals who currently live in Zion Park. Daniel seeks to maintain their childhood innocence and evacuate them to a place the White Legs will never find them.

And this gets into my complaint of Honest Hearts. Ultimately, the story revolves around the tribals that live in the caves of Zion. The Sorrows Tribe are a rather naive people, even when compared to their contemporaries in the Dead Horses. They have little knowledge of warfare or how to defend themselves and even their survival skills are severely lacking (as Daniel was required to show them simple medicines and procedures to save some of them during childbirth). The interesting thing is that the origin of the Sorrows is explained not by their stories but through the hidden journals of a long dead protector referred to only as the Survivalist. It was an interesting method to convey their history and I found it more rewarding to search the trapped caves for his hidden entries than I was doing many of the other quests in Zion.

Unfortunately, it seems to me that the writers weren’t as clear on their themes and Honest Hearts really lacks focus. It should have been all about the Sorrows tribe and made it clear that the fight was over their proverbial soul. I would have liked to see more debate between Joshua and Daniel, especially over religious matters. Here are two men of the same faith with vastly different views and opinions and I would have liked to see them justify their believes both to the player and each other. There also should have been a greater focus on the effects of your actions and decisions on the Sorrows tribe. Instead, we’re introduced to them halfway through the DLC storyline and you don’t get a lot of attachment to them in the little time left.

I would have liked to see them introduced much earlier. Possibly even have the Sorrows the first tribe you meet in the canyon. They should have presented the player with more quests and these quests outcomes should have affected the beliefs and decisions of the members. At the end of the day, I felt that the proper course for the Sorrows was to not baby them, as Daniel wanted, but to let them grow and decide what they should do for themselves. But that option wasn’t truly available in game. I couldn’t confront Daniel about his need to defend these people’s innocence as a way to justify his faith’s beliefs in a world so hostile to a peaceful religion. I also couldn’t confront the hypocrisy of Joshua’s bloodlust with the rest of his religion when really the personal conflict of the two missionaries should have been the undercurrents of all the interplays between the tribes.

At the end of the day, even with the length that they were, I felt both Dead Money and Honest Hearts had a lot of interesting elements at play. Both of them could have been expanded, possibly into their own full fledged stories themselves. So much of their writing was devoted to universal themes such as salvation, redemption, greed and trust that they had the potential for so much more. Even in their current state, they’re still damn good side quests. I can only hope that the next two DLC are just more of the same.

Storm Glass – Book Review

Leave a reply

Well, work has been horrendously busy for the past month. Between that and other life activities I haven’t had time for reading or posting. However over the past few days I did manage to eke out a little time to finally read something new.

I wonder if this book is as good as I remember? Perhaps I will seek it out for a reread.

So a long time ago – an actual number of years – I read a book called Poison Study. I enjoyed. I remember thinking it was an interesting concept, an engaging character and a pretty solid world. I don’t know why I never read the sequels, other than I had become distracted by other reads. Anyway, I was at the library on the weekend and picked up Maria V. Synder’s latest book called Storm Glass. Scanning the title, I quickly noted this was book one of a trilogy. Well, I didn’t let that put me off.

After three days of reading I thought I would do a review, share my thoughts and impressions – that was and is my intention. However, I am struggling to write anything interesting about a story that was just meh. It was not so terrible to be worthy of raging. It was certainly not good enough to gush about. It was safe, bland, predictable and largely lifeless. It had too many cameos of characters from previous books in this world, which I hadn’t read. For a book that should have stood on its own, it depended far too greatly on the reader being familiar with the world. As a reader not familiar with the world I was left with a very lack-luster description.

Bland blue cover to fit with the bland story; Storm Glass by Maria V. Snyder

The main female protagonist was unapproachable. I was not familiar with her tragic background. Did all these events play out in other stories set in the same world? I don’t know. I do know that her past was supposed to be scarring, life-changing. It should have been the draw that kept me reading. Instead I just wished the character would stop sighing over her background.

Written in the first person, I should have been drawn into Opal’s life. I should have felt her internal struggle. I didn’t. Opal was not engaging. Her shy, disengaged character was played to good effect. It was clear the author wanted the reader to feel sorry for the main character, but her life didn’t seem so bad. She was taunted by her fellow students – but we didn’t see much of that. The one moment, when Opal accidentally steals the magic from one of the next greatest magicians was the closest we came to true emotional conflict and it was swept away with a little hand waving. Really – this could should have been a driving force for Opal’s actions. Instead she is lead or directed from one scene to the next.

The attempt at a love triangle was sloppy. There was no strong attraction between the characters and Opal seemed to like whoever was standing next to her. Really, the author didn’t even explore the conflict of being attracted to two different people at the same time. Everything was further brushed to the side when Opal decided not to explore feelings towards either man because she was afraid of rejection. A very normal thing to do, however when we only have Opal’s internal dialogue to lead us through this world the romantic tension is complete obliterated. Also, the author has already started to twist one of the men into a traitor and thus is killing the triangle – once more we enter a bland, straightforward world.

As concepts go, there was nothing offensive in the plot. I thought it was too unfocused for my tastes. It tried to have mystery which became a tangle of disconnected threads. I would have liked to see more character development, after all it is written first person. Less focus on the travelling, which was not interesting to read. The ending also fell flat as very little was actually resolved. This is book one after all. Perhaps if Opal was a more engaging character her supposed development over the course of the novel would have been a good arch. As it was, it read as poorly edited and half-baked.

I will say that while the author failed to craft a single engaging character she clearly did her research in glass making. It was almost interest to read about the process. Unfortunately it became page filling without serving a solid purpose.

Buried deep within Storm Glass is a decent story idea with potential. Unfortunately all that potential is unrealized in the actual product. The characters, world and plot is flat, boring and often predictable. Storm Glass is not terrible, but it is also not a good read.

Playing to Win

Leave a reply

OK, ladies and gents it’s time for another rant hour on the old blog post. Today, I want to address competitiveness and this nebulous concept of “playing to win.” We’ve all heard it before. Someone will leverage the accusation towards another in an attempt to belittle or undermine their adversary’s performance in some sort of competition. In our modern times, the most common occurrence will be during a game – be it video or otherwise.

Now, it’s no secret that I am a competitive individual. When I enter a contest, I desire to win. I enter with the intentions of trying my best and, should my best not be good enough, I seek to improve myself so that I can perform better the next time I face adversity in said game. Which is to say, I like to win. But who doesn’t? It’s enjoyable winning and unpleasant losing. The very purpose of a competition is to allow there to be either outcome. The better the competition the more the outcome is determined by the skill of the participants within than outlying factors. So, I do play to win. As does everyone.

Now, there are some people who claim otherwise. There are individuals that would say “having fun” is more important than winning. To this, I agree. But as I already established, winning is fun. I’m no philosopher but without the proper education in Game Theory, I’m certain that even if there is no tangible reward the average participant in a game strives to win. It makes sense on a basic level. Why would you participate in a game if you weren’t attempting to achieve the victory condition? I don’t set up a chessboard with the intent of creating the Mona Lisa with my pieces while my opponent is trying to capture my king. By engaging in the activity, we are entering into an unspecified contract to abide by the rules towards a singular victorious goal that is established by the activity itself.

This isn’t to say that these goals are immutable. Often times, games have a simplistic win state (“taking the enemy’s king”) that are complicated by the various aspects of the game (“getting past the pawns”) while avoiding the loss state (“losing my king”). There is no way to achieve victory in chess by your first move alone. Even the shortest win condition of two moves requires a very specific response from your opponent that is incredibly unlikely to occur the more experienced they are. Thus, it is often to my benefit to break down the distant and difficult win state into more immediate and advantageous goals that will make the final win state easier to achieve. My immediate goals could be something like “control the centre of the board” by having more pieces threaten the most squares in the middle while removing or preventing my opponent from doing so. I could also have the objective of “take the enemy’s queen,” a piece that is far more versatile and consequently more powerful than any other piece on the board.

In fact, this deconstruction of the win state is necessary for improvement. If I am only considering the final victory condition and move blindly towards it, I will be ill-prepared to deal with my opponent’s secondary and tertiary goals. I will concede those minor victories to him, likely obtaining little in return and increasing the difficulty of achieving a win as more and more small loses pile up. Furthermore, these secondary goals make incredibly complex games easier to understand and easier to analyze.

Dota 2, which I have made posts about before, is an incredibly complex and strategically challenging game. There is a huge overhead of knowledge required of the player between the staggering amount of interactions between the 110 current hero pool and the multitude of items that can be bought. Furthermore, the design of the game creates an ever changing balance of power between the accumulation of gold and experience on these different heroes with everyone one of them benefiting slightly differently. The win state, however, is very simple. The game ends with the destruction of the team’s “Ancient” – a large, impressive looking structure in the middle of their base. However, if I were to just pick a random hero and charge towards that structure I would invariably lose. Partly because the Ancient is invulnerable so long as it is protected by its tiered towers and partly because I would die well before I got anywhere near the base. This would “feed” both gold and experience to my enemies with each successive death giving them an ever growing advantage over my team that would eventually become insurmountable.

Thus, to succeed at Dota, it is imperative that objectives be broken down into far more manageable goals in order to win. A player needs to focus on their “laning” which requires them to outplay their opponent in the lane during the early portion of the game. Instead of focusing on destroying the Ancient, they’re looking at gaining an early advantage in gold and experience against the one to three opponents sharing the same space as them. If they are unable to secure an advantage themselves, they should look to either call in assistance or seek to help a teammate in another lane on the map. Once an advantage has been raised, whether through better farming of “creeps” for gold and experience or through a kill advantage against their opponent, they can then move on to the next objective of destroying the outer tier 1 towers. This provides more gold for the team and gives them greater influence over the map for them to slowly move in on the primary objective of the Ancient.

This breakdown of the game, as mentioned, also assists with learning. When looking back at a victory or loss, it’s natural to wonder how one team became victorious. If you merely look at the win state, it is impossible to see how it was achieved. Only by examining the secondary goals, their successes and failures, can you really analyze the play and learn where the biggest mistakes were made. The turn five loss of the Queen could have been the move that spelled disaster. The four deaths before five minutes to the enemy’s mid player could have jump started a surge in the enemy’s strength that spiraled out of control. By further breaking down secondary goals, you can see areas where you can improve. Perhaps your poor placement of pawns led to you losing control of the space that led to your Queen’s capture. Maybe your last hitting on the creeps allowed your opponent access to their second spell which gave them first blood and enough gold to purchase a bottle to hold runes in. You can examine these small mistakes and know where you can improve so next time you’re in a similar situation you are prepared with the knowledge of how to win them.

I want to make a few brief closing points on win states. There are some games with nebulous win states but clear loss states. Dungeons and Dragons doesn’t truly have a defined end goal. You don’t necessarily “win” D&D. Generally speaking, there will be an adventure with individual and party goals that you and the players are working towards. But because of its reactive nature, Dungeons and Dragons doesn’t really stop if you achieve or fail those goals. Likewise, even its loss state of death could just be a stumbling block depending on whether your Dungeon Master turns the story into some archetypal myth involving you or your party descending into the underworld to wrestle back your soul from the Lord of the Dead. Consequently, D&D is driven purely by its secondary goals be these a few job posting in pubs or a player’s desire to see the fall of a tyrannical lord.

And there is an exception to the statement that all players strive to win. There is a minority whose win state isn’t the established one of the game. These players are classified as “trolls” and their win state is self determined but usually set as creating as much animosity or grievance in their own teammates. They will do everything in their power to undermine their own team’s chances to win, deriving fun from the aggravation and frustration as they force a loss on their teammates. Consequently, these players are typically banned from participating when identified. Also, it is my personal opinion that these players will partake in this behaviour on throw-away accounts while maintaining a main account in order to participate in the established dynamic of the game but I have no evidence to back that up.

We’ll just call it a strong hunch.