For anyone passing through with nostalgia for CnC Renegade’ multiplayer mode (which was a first-person take on the parent series’ base building) give the fan made remake Renegade X a look. I played several games with full servers when 1.0 launched and it scratched my nostalgia itch like no one’s business. They have the link to the download in the description of the video.

Is SR3, ShadowRun 3rd edition? I’ve never played, beyond the tutorial of the revival cRPG from years ago, but I recall being similarly aghast at the plethora of options in the character creator. It’s a shame, because the premise is awfully enticing. Ah well, as someone else in here mentioned, it seems like learning new systems has some inertia to it. The more you learn, the easier it is to learn more, since there only so many ways to roll a die lol. Maybe Shadowrun can be a project for future me.

Your points about getting a baseline understanding of the flow and adding crunch in as GM and players get comfortable is well taken. My initial strategy was to focus on only one mechanic (in this case, firing a ranged weapon), but to know that mechanic absolutely front to back. However, in this system, firing a ranged weapon interacts with almost every mechanic in the game, so I was still trying to drink from the firehose. Thank you for taking the time and sharing your input.

Could be I’m just dumb and unfamiliar with crunchier RPG systems, I’ll freely allow for that, but man, I feel like you and I have a different definition of “simple” lol. Considering this is a flowchart for adjudicating a single Ranged Combat roll, to say nothing of any other mechanic in the game. Granted, this is particularly egregious, but it’s also the main thing most characters will be doing in combat.

I suppose the old adage holds true. How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice, practice.

Aye, I’ve been following their uploads and it has been helpful from a general observation perspective. I wish they were a little clearer about the rules they are navigating, but I recognize it’s not a teaching cast either. I will say it’s been illuminating how free-wheeling the Ref is with the NPC rules, which has helped me conceptualize the flow a bit better.

I’m not sure believability had much to do with it, as opposed to the flair for the dramatic. At the end of the day, Dr. John Ostrum, the paleontologist that both Crichton and Spielberg consulted for their projects had this to say:

Q: Is Steven Spielberg’s version of dinosaur’s accurate? A: I think he’s a really talented man who can put these creatures on the screen so they look real. Steven Spielberg created this image based on a story written by another extremely clever person, Michael Crichton.

[…]

The name I gave it was Deinonychus, which comes from the Greek and means ‘terrible claw’. And Michael Crichton, in an apologetic way, explained that in the novel he decided to use the name Velociraptors, that I had said was the closest relative to the animal I had found. He said, ‘It’s more dramatic.’ And I said I recognize that most people are not familiar with Greek. Velociraptor everyone recognizes.

Then again, if you mean “believable” in the sense that Spielberg didn’t believe accurately sized velociraptors would be scary (as opposed to ‘i literally don’t believe these creatures existed’), then I’m just making your point again, but worse.

archive link to the rest of Dr. Ostrum’s interview, if anyone is curious.

No problem. Of the two, I think I also prefer The Favourite, but I truly believe there was an element of misogyny which plagued the consensus response to Coppola’s movie upon release. I’m not sure I completely agree with Ebert’s 4 star assessment, but I do find an element of truth in what he wrote here: “Every criticism I have read of this film would alter its fragile magic and reduce its romantic and tragic poignancy to the level of an instructional film.”

I mean, I feel you’re short shifting Marie Antoinette a little bit here. It wasn’t just the soundtrack that was anachronistic, everything about the presentation is meant to encourage audiences to view the subject through a modern lens, from the lead performances all the way down to the production design. Recall that this is the movie that has a pair of hi-top Converse All-Stars included in Antoinette’s closet. If you don’t feel like it was as successful as The Favourite, that’s totally valid, but it wasn’t due to limiting the scope of its central idea to the soundtrack.

Good eye sniper! I was wracking my brain trying to think if there was some obscure predecessor to Blood Wake that I wasn’t aware of or something.

Any particular reason? I don’t mean to pester, and if you’re not comfortable sharing, I’ll press no further. However, like I said, it’s an idle fascination of mine, and this is the first time I’ve come across someone with firsthand experience ‘in the wild’, as it were.

I know that theres a legacy of oppression that is frequently hushed behind the monarchy’s foreign investment solicitations, and the majority of the population remains poor and isolated, both of which I can imagine being problematic.

You’ve visited? What was your impression overall? Bhutan is an idle fascination of mine. The willing abdication of the previous monarch, top-down initiated democracy, the Gross National Happiness concept, etc. it’s all incredibly interesting to me.

Thank God for SPT. Modding away so many frustration points, no cheaters, improving AI… Makes it a lot more enjoyable, at the cost of running even more like ass than usual.

dons a beret and produces a Tiparillo I love the choice not to show any glimpse of the target. It creates a little bit of tension, like you’re looking at an image of a rubber band just about to snap. An illustration of potential energy, where the potential is effectively infinite due to the context being withheld. doffs the costume

Cool pic!

That doesn’t sound right, but it’s been long enough since I watched 48 Hrs or Tommy Boy that I can’t dispute your findings. Time for a double feature!

You know what the chain of command is? It’s the chain I beat you with until you follow my ruttin’ commands!

I agree. As you mentioned, the quality of Statham’s filmography varies wildly, but I don’t think his performances are ever the determining factor in what the final result is. Idk, if someone wanted to call the 6th consecutive movie where he plays a gruff guy with a checkered past mixed up eith some baddies on someone else’s behalf a ‘slop movie’, I guess I couldn’t fight them on that. However, given that genre is a perennial favorite of mine, I’m not looking for a wide emotive range from that experience. I want cool fight choreography, inventive cinematography, and badass stunts. If I get that, but Statham gives a wooden performance, I’m still going to think well of the movie (not least of all because it’s largely the same performance as what he gives in his ‘good’ movies too lol).

I guess when I think of the prompt, the actor that comes to mind is like a Ben Kingsley type. Someone who won awards for their acting prowess, but who wound up shoveling out direct to video crap in the twilight of their career.

I don’t know. Blaming Statham for Ghosts of Mars feels like blaming a waiter for the Titanic: he was just along fir the ride.