Messages

121

RPGs / Re: Game Fodder / Story Fodder

« on: July 24, 2013, 03:52:15 PM »

An untouched genre of... what?

What do you people think I do with my time all day? 

Dear god, the next game I write needs to be more lighthearted. I'm building a rep.

122

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: July 17, 2013, 12:05:01 PM »

The "back" is an illusion. They rolled back a version, but in updating the security settings Ross and I managed to completely lock ourselves out of the system. The hosting service has no idea how to fix it yet. And we'd yet to delete all the malware before we got locked out.

Yeah...fun times over here in Caleb land.

123

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: July 16, 2013, 09:47:18 AM »

I don't know. Thanks for the head up though.

I can get access to Wordpress just fine. All my files are there, and the security package I downloaded after the last hack hasn't recorded any changes. But no matter what I do, I can't get anything except that stupid Bosnian to show up.

My current theory is that something is going on with my webhosting, so I've emailed tech support. I guess we will wait and see.

Man, I knew running a website would be complicated, but in all the steps of this Kickstarter process that is the one that has baffled me the most. I almost spend more time trying to get the damn website to work than I do writing the scenarios.

124

RPGs / Re: Horror: How Far is Too Far?

« on: July 14, 2013, 02:18:55 PM »

You're fine. It just brought some things to my awareness. That's what the thread was for.

125

RPGs / Re: Horror: How Far is Too Far?

« on: July 14, 2013, 11:33:24 AM »

I guess first of all I want to say that this might come out kind of harsh because it's an emotional topic for me but I want to make it clear that I think Caleb is really cool!  He seems like a good guy and I don't think he thinks rape is okay or anything.

Thank you for starting with this. Your response makes me feel like a pretty big tool, but it certainly helps to know that you aren't hating me from afar.

When rape shows up in fiction, especially if it isn't handled sensitively, I am reminded of being raped.  It isn't a gigantic panic attack thing but it makes me feel uncomfortable and sad and sick and I am immediately taken out of whatever story for a while.

I cannot express how sorry I am for this. That was never, ever my intention. I apologize.

It is worse in games for a couple reasons: Games are improvisational things, so it's harder to have things happen in a tasteful way.  You usually identify more with a character you control than a character in a book (players say "I slap the mayor", not "Doris, champion of Pelor slaps the mayor").

This seems to be one of the general themes of this discussion, and it might be my take away from the experience. I'm unwilling to say these subjects can't be dealt with in fiction at all, but maybe the collaborative and improvisational experience of an RPG can't exert enough control over the story to handle the topic well.

The argument against that being important would be something like "That sucks for you, but you can't expect the world to change for you."  But I don't think reactions like mine are rare.

I would never, ever say something like that.

So why is murder less offensive?  Well, rape happens a lot more.  To be blunt, murder victims aren't around to be offended.

I don't think it's less offensive at all. I agree that it's less common. But the victims of a violent crime aren't just the deceased: they're the parents and children and brothers and sisters and friends. I agree with you that the frequency (which is just depressing as shit to think about) makes rape a more sensitive topic statistically, but if something triggers someone personally I don't think the degree would be lessened any by violence.

If you're raped, at best you get pity and at worst you are blamed.

Rape culture sucks. I agree that it is an issue that American culture has not yet symbolically "redeemed" one for suffering such a crime, false as such redemption may be. For instance, I don't think there is such of a thing as "a blaze of glory," and no on holds out under torture. But this is about the perception, and you're absolutely right on that front.

I guess to be honest it kind of bothers me that it shows up so often in your writing.

Again, I'm sorry. I don't write to bother people, especially to this degree.

Like, the Know Evil episode where the women were being forcibly impregnated was way too hard for me to deal with (and it kind of bothered me that the only thing people wrote about it in the comments was along the lines of "haha, pretty grimdark"), it kind of sucked to not hear Thad as Hunter S. Thompson because I figured out that scenario was related to Lover in the Ice and stopped listening.

Okay, I guess here is where I try to "defend" myself, though I no point am I saying bidoof is in anyway wrong to have these feelings.

In my mind, I don't separate rape from violence. It is sexual in nature because of it's location on the body and the cultural shame brought with it; the act itself is pure, unjustifiable violence. When I included the rape in the pirate stronghold, I did so because a) I'd read about it as a tactic of Somalian Pirate communities and wanted to ground the adventure in something real and b) according the setting, I couldn't figure out how a bunch of flats still existed in EP. Or for that matter, people that steal physical goods. I couldn't figure out how any of those villains could exist in a universe of exo-wombs, and I thought the inclusion of that detail would place horror in a scenario from an unexpected direction (the horror of what humans can do to each other rather than the horror of TITANS).

In the case of Lover Before the Ice, much like Lover in the Ice, no one is actually raped. . The humans merely use sex as a lure, then they kill people, every time. Unless you count the Amanta as a human (it's not), the act is symbolic. I'll admit the symbolism was an intentional attempt to invoke that body horror, but its also a very good reason to kill something with fire. Furthermore, the brothel in the prequel actually existed, just as Altamira and the TransAmazonica actually existed. There just weren't alien parasites to blame for the violence that no doubt occurred there.

All of that very well may have been in bad taste, and I'm sorry it made people feel uncomfortable. I just wanted to unpack my thinking and make sure everyone knows it didn't come from an intentionally harmful place. I was trying to add realism and create worthy antagonists, but I should have thought longer about how do to it in a less offensive way.

There was a game Drew ran where your character was threatening to rape someone's wife, and it kind of sucks hearing someone you like say those kind of things.  It's like hearing your sweet old grandma be really racist or something.

I don't even remember saying this. I don't even remember Drew ever running a game. I'm not saying you're lying; what would possibly be the motivation for that? I'm just deeply ashamed that I would do something like this and horrified to think I could do so without realizing it. I'm so, so very sorry.

I guess what I want is:  If you're going to include rape, have a really good understanding of what it is and how it might effect readers, and label it so people who need to can avoid it.

I will make more of an effort to label such things in the future. As far as understanding though, I don't think it's possible. If I'm being honest, I knew that any mention of rape at all, in any context, could trigger negative emotions in some people that underwent such an experience. I knew that when I wrote the scenarios, but underestimated the scope and scale of the interaction. I understand that rape is an awful, terrible thing. I understand it is an act of violence, and perhaps the single most common act of violence in our world. I understand it needs to stop, as well as the culture that's shaming its victims, and as such I put it in a place where murderhobos could shoot at it.

But that's as far as my understanding is ever going to extend as a person lucky enough to have avoided such an experience. And I'm not sure that's every going to be enough. Does that mean we can't ever talk about it in fiction? Like issues of race and religion and all that other touchy stuff? For me, dealing with those topics in games and stories is more productive than talking about the bald, offensive facts...but that's coming from my limited understanding.

What I'm saying is that I feel irresponsible just ignoring the possibility of sexual violence as conflict at all. Turning all characters in every setting into neutered Ken dolls that murder neutered Kobolts feels offensive to me in its silence and denial. But the level of understanding required to deal with the situation tastefully is (thankfully) forever beyond me, so I feel like it's my only choice.

Also I've heard "It's a horror game, you should feel as uncomfortable as possible" and that's silly.  It's a game you're playing for fun with your friends, not a tribal manhood ritual. You're not a worse gamer because you have limits.

I wouldn't make this argument. "Too far" is implied as a possibility in the title.

Thank you for your thoughtful and brave response bidoof. You've given me a lot to think about. Again, I'm sorry for any pain my writing or playing may have caused, and I'll endeavor to do better in the future.

126

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: July 10, 2013, 06:53:45 AM »

I do think it is a very well written scenario and not gratuitous but it is by its very nature going to be a lot more disturbing to most folks than Calebs other work.

Thanks, Tim. And I do think that is a very valid point. Being held down and violated by something is a far more primal fear than the Fisher of Men. Though I would argue that that there is a cosmic horror element to Lover in the Ice (Characters exist in a universe that would allow such a creature as the Amante to exist...eww), I'd agree it's definitely not the main focus. I think not inviting your friend without knowing more about her as a player was a good idea, but I'd like to think the same would be true for male roleplayers as well. I hope Hebanon has other stuff out there you can use with your newer players.

I suppose what I'm commenting on here and in this thread (http://slangdesign.com/forums/index.php/topic,1718.msg38415.html#msg38415) is that its weird where that "too close to home" line is placed. I find people get a lot more uncomfortable about the sex thing than say, the risk of being attacked by an animal, even though the latter can happen in the real world as well. I mean, as a person who has had close relatives that suffer from some of the disorders that can be rolled for in a CoC sanity table, I can attest there is nothing adventurous or fun about schizophrenia. The possibility of mental illness is also a very real, very scary real world proposition, yet I hear very few people complain about sanity mechanics in games, even when the very offensive "you see a shoggath so now you have a debilitating genetic brain disorder" situations come up. Its usually just recognized as Horror fiction is intended: a safe place to work through otherwise uncomfortable subject matter. But the sex stuff always seems to bump up closer to that limit despite, in my opinion, having equal competition in terms of relatable real-world fears.

Anyway Tim, thanks again for running the game and your comments. It's given me something that's useful to think about.

Caleb Stokes: an advocate bugging girls' panties.

False. For the record, the character of Haru Kano is an advocate of doing what is necessary to get the job done. His antics have only just begun. In addition, he technically bugged a man's pair of panties.

One of my great regrets is that I could not back the kickstarter. Also I think this discussion has produced yet another good answer as to why Caleb would not want his face associated with his scenarios.

Exactly. I'm not ashamed of anything I've done with RPPR (quite the opposite), but this is a policy I won't see changing in the future. I don't think anybody that puts out as much unfiltered content as RPPR is going to make a run for public office anytime soon.

127

RPGs / Horror: How Far is Too Far?

« on: July 09, 2013, 08:11:13 PM »

I'm going to explain the specifics about how I came to the question I'm going to ask. There will be SPOILERS for some Hebanon Games releases. If neither sound appealing, you can just skip to the bolded question at the bottom. I'd appreciate hearing some other peoples' thoughts on this.

So I've been thinking about this awhile, but it kind of came to a head today. Tim wrote a very nice summary of his running Lover in the Ice for his group. They called it "disturbing" (yay! it worked!), but then made a joke about him being a freak for backing it on Kickstarter (not so yay). I've also gotten reviews of the scenario like this one: http://diehardgamefan.com/2012/11/22/tabletop-review-lover-in-the-ice-no-security/

And while I think the review above is overall positive, I have to admit I was a little disappointed that DieHard GameFAN didn't care for the scenario as much as the others in the No Security pack merely because of the sex angle. I'm not angry, and I get that the topic is hard to touch on even briefly for some gamers, but

Add all this with my writing today. I'm working on the monster for The Wives of March. The description sort of ran away from me and reached the level of short story, but I just rolled with it. Anyway, I was plugging along for awhile before I realized I was kind of squicking myself out. I took a break, Sara snuck in an read it, and now she's giving me a look that says I-just-realized-our-7-year-relationship-is-an-elaborate-ruse-to-torture-and-kill-me.

Part of me feels like this is a good thing: if it can't scare me, what chance does it have with an audience? But I'm also doubting myself. I think its probably a good thing that a MONSTER is scary and disturbing, but I don't want to make people too uncomfortable at the table. I mean, when I came up with the Amante, it literally never occurred to me that people would be made so squicky by it. I actually worried it would be boring because the whole conflation-of-sex-and-death theme would be too trite to be scary. But I've heard suggestions that it actually makes people too uncomfortable to play. I don't want that at all.

But on the flip side, I also want to call bullshit. I think I write games that are clearly R rated, and that you shouldn't teach your kids how to play RPG's with Cthulhu-esque horror games. That is to say, people know what they are getting into with Hebanon Games.

I also think that sex, reproduction, and many other factors in life beyond violence are scary as hell, and I don't know what horror gains by avoiding those topics -- so long as negative actions within those contexts are treated as realistically terrifying rather than exploitative. So long as it serves the narrative at the same time, horror is supposed to transgress and make people uncomfortable, isn't it? If monsters can't have babies, but it's totally cool if they eat your face or suck your soul into a non-Euclidian hell dimension, isn't that just to serving the weird American disconnect between violence vs. EVERYTHING ELSE the culture finds offensive?

To use an example, Skip Mill's house gets mentioned a lot in playthroughs I've been told about. Players get grossed out by the porn covered walls. Good -- that's the point -- but hardly anyone mentions his mother's chewed remains in the bedroom or the blind, taloned monkey-thing crawling around the attic. Why not?

 How is the Amante lifecycle any more disturbing than man-sized puppets that bait you into being prey for an alien god (Bryson Springs), obese carrion eaters festering beneath your feet (Red Tower), or inescapable hell-grubs that can manifest from another dimension at any time and without explanation (Fall Without End)? Is it creepy because some people that aren't infected with hell parasites decorate that way in the real world? Is the sex angle somehow intrinsically too exploitive or sexist? But if so, how specifically? My monsters are equal opportunity harbingers of destruction, and I don't think I for one second fetishized how fun an Amante attack was (or at least I hope no one read it that way...that's genuinely scary to think about).

Despite the urges used to drive them towards new victims, Seeders are NOT trying to rape anyone; they are trying to murder them, though I will admit that the primal fear of violation is something I was trying consciously to tap into. The Amante is NOT doing anything that could be called sex; the fact that's it has an animal definition of its action that doesn't intersect with the human perception is where the scary comes from. I mean, I was consciously going for an Alien vibe, but the scariness is what people remember about that brilliant film, whereas I worry I'm falling short and just landing in "pervy." Obviously, this wasn't my intention, and it's something I'd like to prevent in the future whether its due to the subject matter or just my inability to pull it off.

So yeah, here's the question that all this brings up: How far is TOO far in a Horror Game? What can't be done in a story at the table, and is it the same list for Horror films or books? I think I know when something transforms from terrifying to tasteless, but my definition differs from others. Clearly, that difference of opinion is always going to exist, but what really worries me is that I don't have any kind of vocabulary for addressing that limit, nor do I know what I should do when that border comes into view. Should I attack it? Steer clear? What makes for a better story and game in the horror genre?

You folks are cool, and the extra cool ones are familar with my work . Plus, many on the forums are more widely read in the genre than I. I'd like to hear what everyone has to say.

128

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: July 09, 2013, 07:00:21 PM »

I'm glad your group had fun! Sorry if they think you're a perv now 

I get a lot of comments like that about Lover in the Ice (disturbing etc). I don't think they're unfounded criticisms, but I'm not sure I entirely understand them. I think that probably is for another thread though.

Anyway, thanks a lot for playing the game. I hope you enjoy the other stuff as it comes out.

129

General Chaos / Re: Is Lovecraft existential or merely a common misconception?

« on: June 27, 2013, 09:42:50 PM »

They are literally worshipped. Isn't that sort of the definition? I mean, can't you be a god and a physical law at the same time, assuming you don't define God as something that inherently doesn't exist in the world? Aren't gods, by definition, alien?

I see what you're saying, but I think if you're arguing that Lovecraft was an existentialist, it's an argument based on semantics. And since he used both terms fairly often, I'm not sure how semantics can seal the deal there.

Still, you are certainly more versed in the mythos than a noob like myself. I just fail to see how anyone in the Lovecraft universe is making their own meaning as a reaction to the despair of a meaningless universe.

130

General Chaos / Re: Is Lovecraft existential or merely a common misconception?

« on: June 27, 2013, 11:07:21 AM »

I've never read any Dostoevsky, but I waded through enough Sartre in college that I can agree that Lovecraft is NOT existentialist literature.

I think, in the broad sense, he gets labeled as such because "existentialism" is a big word that sounds fancy and means something that's really smart but kind of depressing, right? Like postmodernism, the term is a bitch to explain to people who haven't read the thinkers that coined it, and even then it depends on which book they read. Lovecraft was very smart and equally bleak, so I think he gets labeled existentialist as a form of shorthand. Sadly, my estimation is that this actually works most of the time. It conveys to the laymen (who likely also doesn't understand existentialism's definition as a school of philosophical thought) a better understanding of the writing's tone than, say, "cosmic horror" (what's that mean? fear of Carl Sagan?).

In a more optimistic light, the confusions could come from the fact that the Mythos does fit certain components of the existential cycle, just not all of them.

0. Existence precedes Essence: This is the most obvious reason Lovecraft is not an existentialist. Essence precedes human existence, and that essence is composed of Shoggoth shit. The Lovecraft universe couldn't be farther from atheistic; it absolutely teems with gods, all of which seem to hate each other and humanity. The weird little bastard may have been a misodeist (God-hater), but the fiction doesn't present a situation where man has any control of his nature. There is a clear hierarchy in existence, and it is unshakable.

1. ANGST: Existentialist ANGST occurs when an individual realizes they have total freedom. I'm not sure this sees much representation in Lovecraft's work either, but it could be argued that this is the choice that investigators make between sanity and madness. The insane cultists and sorcerers are essentially closer to the Truth in the Mythos: they realize the constraints put on their behavior by morality and law are artificial. But after realizing that, they don't make their own meaning; they succumb to the will of Great Old Ones and Elder Gods. The " atheistic position" requirement still isn't met.

2. Consciousness As Reality: Again, Lovecraft gets half-way there but falls short of existentialism. Protagonists often go into painstaking details about the fallibility of human senses and the limits of the understanding. However, rather than reaching the conclusion that there is no objective reality at all, they develop an absolute faith that a REAL Truth that hides behind their muddy human perception. I suppose this faith is justified--that hidden reality is usually trying to eat them at the time--but it isn't existentialist metaphysics, Jack. There's no greater Truth at all back there, not even one that is cold and alien.

3. Despair: Existentialist despair occurs when the previous two realizations destroy one or more Truths that previously served as a pillar of one's identity. To my mind, this is the central them of Lovecraft's fiction; you have based your life on a lie, and you have no choice but to continue to do so. I think this is where some of the existentialist confusions comes from, as the Mythos is rife with this Despair (also the "Elder Things killed all my buddies" type of despair, which is sad too, I guess).

4. Absurdity: Lovecraft's universe is certainly absurd, but not for the reasons that would qualify him as existentialist. Existentialists realize there are NO RULES: there's no good or bad, no god or devil. Every choice is a random guess and utterly pointless because it achieves no end.

Lovecraftian existence is absurd because it is fatalistic. There are rules, but they are fucking INSANE. To understand those rules is to become so crazy that you essentially become someone else. This negates the self, so for all intents and purposes, the rules are as unknowable as they are immutable. There is a both a God and Devil rolled into one in the form of Azathoth, and the absurdity comes from the fact that this tentacle-waving monstrosity that constantly rocks out to flute music determines the fate of the universe. And there ain't shit you can do about it, son! Azathoth is all out of fucks to give.

So, there's more room for confusion: existentialist philosophy and the Cthulhu Mythos both treat existence as a ridiculous self-perpetuating farce, but they arrive at that conclusion by very different routes.

5. Crisis: The Existentialist has to decide what to do with these newfound revelations. The three options are Nihilism, Hedonism, and Existentialism. You could almost argue these exist in Lovecraftian fiction, but the comparison doesn't quite hold up. Nihilism, of course, would be represented by those broken by depression in the wake of witnessing the Mythos or those that kill themselves in a fit of hysteria. Hedonism is a tougher fit, unless you regard cultist sacrifice and fish sex as pleasurable to the senses (I do not). The protagonists that "kill it with fire" could be existentialists, but they never really arrive at a new vision of reality crafted by themselves. They refuse the despair and death of Nihilism after learning the absurdity of their existence, but they do so out of nothing more than a biological compulsion.

Authenticity: The ultimate goal of existentialism is to live authentically, to be true to one's conception of one's self and treat that conception as the ultimate good. This is why existentialism, despite risking the inevitable destruction of nihilism, is so against suicide; suicide negates the self, and in order to achieve good (even a subjective good) ONE MUST PERSIST. That's why Camus called suicide the last philosophical problem. That's why existentialism is essentially optimistic and humanist in character, despite arriving at those positions through a lot of scary, depressive thinking.

Lovecraft's characters don't achieve this authenticity, and that makes his Mythos altogether bleaker than Existentialist thought. There is no consolation prize after the Crisis stage in Lovecraft. Characters die, go insane, or return to ignorance. Thus you get the tragedy of Delta Green PC's, forever moving through the stages of existential realization but never quite getting anywhere (unless they get torn apart or start performing blood sacrifice).

So yeah, Lovecraft doesn't come off as an existentialist in his fiction. I'd argue he's a Fatalist even though the stories don't always suggest the future being immutable. Certain events are, however, inevitable. It doesn't fucking matter what investigators do; Cthulhu is going to kill everybody. When they succeed, they only put off their doom for...some reason? That's the question that haunts protagonists more than the continued threat of monstrosities: why bother going on at all? I could also argue that Lovecraft was a misodeist who dealt with his objections against the world as created by a Judeo-Christian God through the safe, symbolic, sellable stand-in of a hostile cosmology of his own design.

Welp, that got away from me. Let me condense.

I AGREE WITH YOU.

There, that's better.

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to know your opinion on this matter. Do you think that Lovecraft's literature can or should be classified as existential? I would argue no! I think that the existential label is widely misunderstood by the majority of the populace and therefore is widely misused. I recently read Jean Paul Sartre's essay titled "Existentialism is a Humanism" and have been thinking of this subject for a couple months now.

To simplify things, all quotations are from Sartre's essay "existentialism is a Humanism" as translated by Mairet, unless stated otherwise. (I figure I will cite the Grand Inquisitor chapter of the Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky at some point as well).

So to start things off let us define "Existentialism." Sartre's essay is actually devoted to this purpose but I will paraphrase and present some key points.

Sartre says that "Existentialism is nothing else but an attempt to draw the full conclusions from a consistently atheistic position." Existentialism, according to Sartre, holds that existence precedes essence; that we make our soul by forming our own destiny. "... there is no human nature .... man is responsible for what he is." Existentialism, under this perspective holds then that man is ultimately in charge of his own life, his own destiny. To be a man under an existentialist view is to be free: "man is free, man is freedom."

I feel this notion is summed rather well in the Brother's Karamazov when one of the brothers says "..everything is permitted."

So, in regards to Lovecraft I consider his works to present a view of the universe where hope is certainly lacking, but a universe where the human race is ultimately subject to the whims of the powers at be. Humanity is certainly not free. Humanity has, perhaps to some extent, some choice influence on their destiny, but it is rather negligible. You may temporarily prevent the goals of Nyarlathotep, or great Cthulhu, but you can never thwart them.

So, just curious as to what your opinions may be. Where do you fall on this topic? Am I wrong?

131

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Night's Black Agents: Tribes of Tokyo

« on: June 24, 2013, 10:18:08 AM »

I thought there was a thread for this, but I guess not. I'll go ahead and start one even though we are near the end of the campaign.

I needed to warm-up for writing today and couldn't stop thinking about Haru. Specifically, I couldn't figure out why he wanted to figure out the damned conspiracy so much, why he didn't just take the money and run. I wrote a little short story about it, taking place between tonight's game and the last (the raid on Wisdom Laboratories). Thought I'd put it here.

SPOILERS FOR THE CAMPAIGN AHEAD, OBVIOUSLY

Haru swayed but was not lulled to sleep. He was crammed into the dining alcove aboard a ship stolen from a thing he’d defenestrated, immolated, crushed, and shred with an entire clip.

On the table lay the file folder and the laptop. It’s charging light made the dark cabin pulse a dull green.

Haru never slept much anymore. He had to piss too often, and his slightest waking was as complete and total as the deathly exhaustion that could actually put him to bed. Most of all, the others said they’d been visited in their dreams, and though he was loath to admit it, he would not risk carrying the war to that front. Not yet.

Shinji had already rewired and connected the hard drive before bed. He’d used the task to distract himself from Kazuo’s screams as they’d dug shot from the boy’s shoulder by moonlight: still no stomach for blood even this late in the game. They all sprawled out on the bloodstained deck after, exhausted and spent after days on the hunt.

But it was all there for Haru now, the answers finally ready. He just had to open something and start reading. 

Haru did not want to look.

He splayed his hands out on either side of the intel. The calloused old fingers drummed rhythmically, in the way that had driven his life’s every partner, sexual and professional, mad at some point. He thought about how each finger tap meant he’d have to sink this place to hide the prints. He thought about the cordite and blood that stained him up to the wrists, the rasp of detonation wires that had so often of late kissed the fingertips. He thought about all the bones and throats he’d felt give way under those hands in the past month, about the way he could still force those hands to stop shaking as he feigned calm as he walked away from murders.

His life had built to this orgy of bullets and explosions in a terrible, discordant crescendo. A life spent living in vans, watching over bastards, learning to sharpen his eye with contempt like a blade to whetstone. It had served as foundation to these past few months. Even his failures – the drinking, the forced retirement – seemed worth it now.  Who else would keep these green troops alive? Who else would stop this, whatever it was?

Even losing Sachiko and the girls to that man up north – that soft bastard who was better than him for all his weakness – it could all be redeemed now. He just had to lead his boys home and close the door behind them.

He did not want to read the files.

Because he knew he was not thinking right. He knew he was old, nostalgic, and desperate. He knew that in some sick way he wanted all this as a validation, and he knew the enemy would use that desire to gut him. He was thinking like an amateur insurgent in a game that rewarded only the patient and the cold.

And they were playing against the most patient, cold thing Haru had ever seen. He could feel the strategy slipping from his control. Whatever was in the files would make the decision for him.

In the one drumming hand, he placed the possibility that after reading the files he’d no longer be able to fool himself. There would be no more comforting suppositions about black ops, confidential biotech, or false flags. He’d have proof they faced actual Oni of legend, and that would cast him in the role of samurai sworn to save the innocent. He’d start thinking like a zealot, and his boys would get martyred in the process.

On the other hand, the files could confirm his cynicism. It would all be about money and misdirection; it always was. Instead of monsters, they’d be facing the usual greedy bastards, distinguishable only by their fancy new drugs. The whole travesty would be just another job. It would mean so many had died for nothing, for no reason other than he was too proud to admit he’d gotten too old. He’d run away and die years and leagues away as just another broken spook, senile and shitting himself in a hospital bed.

Haru did not want to look at the files.

He emptied his pockets, looking for it. The Miroku revolver hit the table first, followed by the ID’s of a dozen men that didn’t exist but shared his face. Shiny new credit cards with fake names scattered, each fueled the money of a deluded madman who would likely see them all in prison even if they succeeded. A flier for the Empty Five floated out, the cover that may have overwritten the man. Finally, he clutched what he wanted and brought it to the dull charging light.

It was a small bottle of Yamazaki whiskey: a plastic, overpriced hotel sample. It had been the last drink he never took, the one he’d been saving for later the night he got recruited for the security firm. He’d switched loyalties that night, from the bottle to the man who gave him another chance and the boys in his care. But the bottle was always with him, always accepting, desirous of his return. And each day he didn’t pop the lid was a day he still had power. Just looking at it calmed him: the unbroken seal, the full-to-bursting little neck. His fingers stopped their drumming.

Refusal was his power. It always had been. He laid the golden-brown bottle on the file: it was the third option.

Haru took stock. They had enough money, and he had the resolve to get whatever other resources would be needed, provided enough time. They had the patron and his armies. There was the promised pardon upon the victory condition, a new life prepared and capable of shepherding the rest to safety.

He’d long ago recognized the shakes in young Kazuo, noticed the hungry eyes of a junkie every time they mentioned the drugs. Haru couldn’t blame the boy after what he’d been through, but he refused watch it eat him. Still, an addict would do anything for a fix, and one last binge might prove necessary.

Ito was a lost cause, too in love with the killing, too willing to follow orders, too old and worn for his age. That yakuza would keep in the game until he went bust, but he’d stay a good soldier throughout. Good soldiers always had their uses.

Shinji needed out, whether he thought so or not. Too soft. He’d mold the boy into a soldier just long enough to see him freed of the job. He’d ensure he’d survive and hope the boy could become human again afterwards.

Shiro wanted gone. This was not his country, and he was finally realizing that his smile couldn’t keep the shrapnel away. A man would always push harder, the finish line in sight.

Finally, Haru had himself. He had his refusal.

When he’d taken up that bottle, he did so knowing he would one day drink it. With certainty, he would fail. But each day that passed that was not that day was a victory.

Like the drink, he would refuse death. Despite all that faced them, he would survive. Their enemy, whatever he was, would pray for his failure. He’d make them beg for his death with the same desperation as his own ever-present thirst. And Haru would say no, again and again

They’d imagine him hunting forever, leeching their eternity away with paranoia, a thing as persistent and relentless as themselves. They’d grow frustrated, impatient for his inevitable death. They would try to hurry things along. They’d make mistakes.

He would break the decadent immortality of these monsters with the stubbornness and spite of an old man.

Haru took up the Yamazaki, glared once more into its amber swirls, and returned it to his breast pocket.

Then he opened the files….

132

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Better Angels Campaign: The Spared and the Spoiled

« on: June 22, 2013, 12:58:21 AM »

So, the campaign rebooted. We retconned the first episode a bit and started up with episode 2 with some new characters. Two sessions and a total of seven hours later we finished the first objective with the team holding a brewery hostage, irradiating the beer by turning a man's arm into uranium, and holding a shapeshifting clydesdale hostage.

All in all, a rousing success.

133

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: June 20, 2013, 09:46:24 AM »

I finally took the plunge and started a twitter @HebanonGCal. Help me out by following me so I can keep in touch with y'all; I only know forum handles.

134

General Chaos / Re: GenCon 2013 & The 4th RPPR Fan Meet-Up

« on: June 19, 2013, 12:25:14 PM »

Well, we don't have to drink. That's just the only game that I have that can accommodate 12 people and still be fun. And I'll drink anything.

So if we're going high class, Stag?

135

Role Playing Public Radio Podcast / Re: Caleb is a mad genius (or Yet Another Fan Club Thread)

« on: June 19, 2013, 01:03:35 AM »

http://oglaf.com/caveat-emptor/

I'm just going to beat everyone to the punch and put this here.