Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Gods of Tekumel. On another forum I just saw this: (bolding mine)

"For those that may be interested but missed the announcement.
http://www.choiceofgames.com/petal-t...ource=ourgames

Choice of the Petal Throne
by Danielle Goudeau

In the Empire of the Petal Throne�, will you find glory, or a knife in your back?

"Choice of the Petal Throne" is a 124,000-word interactive fantasy novel by Danielle Goudeau, where your choices control the story. It's entirely text-based--without graphics or sound effects--and fueled by the vast, unstoppable power of your imagination.

M.A.R. Barker's world of T�kumel� is a fantasy universe like no other, where South American, Middle Eastern, and Indian cultures collide. The princes and princesses of the Tsoly�ni empire vie for their father's mystical Petal Throne, tearing the nation apart with civil war and political intrigues.

As a captain in one of their armies, will you play as male or female, gay straight or bi? A brave and forthright soldier, a hedonistic intriguer with a heart of gold, or scheming double agent? "

To quote my response, who gives a fuck?

Is THAT what's happening to Phil's world?

This is an example of why people like you are not welcome in the new Sanctioned, Authorized, and Officially Approved Tekumel; you are a cismalecaucasan, and thus guilty of all sorts of things. You need to embrace your inner LGBT self, and support the new Tekumel. I am genuinely surprised that you were allowed to run that "Legions" game, as you don't have the proper credentials for it; were you able to get some sort of dispensation to do it?

It's actually a pretty good game, if you like text-based RPGs; you pay your $5.00, and select one of the six options.

It's all part of the new LGBT Tekumel that several of the Big Wheels need to bolster their real-world political positions as LGBT activists. There's quite the competition between them to prove who's the LGBT-est of them all; see also the internal politics of North Country Gaylaxians and Wis Con.

I used to think that 'inclusveness in gaming' was what Phil did - everybody gets to play. That's no longer how the world world works, I have been assured. See also my rant on my blog:

http://chirinesworkbench.blogspot.co...political.html

Originally Posted by Shemek hiTankolel

Political Correctness strikes again! Funny, I would have thought that Tekumel was already "inclusive" enough (to use the PC jargon). I didn't think that such things needed to be a primary selling point.

Shemek

It is, I'm told. I do have to wonder what Phil would have said.

Originally Posted by Greentongue

May explain why it's not as popular as it could be.
On the other hand, maybe that is what sells now.
=

He shoots! He scores!

Originally Posted by Shemek hiTankolel

Exactly! I used to love playing Panzer Leader and Panzerblitz by AH back in the 80's. I seem to remember that both games had some scenarios whose victory conditions were basically get as many guys off the board as you can. Which I would try and do, often, much to the consternation of some of my opponents. I remember one guy dismissing the result of a game by saying the Germans would never have missed an opportunity to attack, so my refusing to engage in combat was bull, and should result in a disqualification. When I pointed out that the victory conditions didn't call for me to attack my opponent, and that this avoidance of strong points was a fundamental element of Blitzkrieg, he simply muttered stuff under his breath and walked away. When I played war games I always played to win. I used and exploited every opportunity and piece of terrain that I could to achieve my victory. I didn't try and win by claiming a 16th, or a 64th of an inch provided complete cover, or that fragment of ink in a corner of a hex meant that the entire hex provided cover.
I remember once spending 4 turns of an 8 turn game simply moving units in such a way that they would be constantly and completely hidden behind terrain until I could develop a "schwerpunkt" and launch my attack. This was also seen, by another player, as being a "cowardly" way to play. The fact that I ultimately pounded him and won the game was irrelevant to him. I believe he told my buddy "the Wehrmacht didn't go around cowering in the bushes". I always used to look at what the real generals did and went from there.
I just don't get why some people even try and war game when they have this kind of "2 dimensional thinking" when developing tactics. I personally think it's largely because the notion of "trying" is seen as being as good as or better than achieving, and that this has become the mantra for a large segment of society. This is why I no longer have any interest in going to my FLGS and war gaming.

You are in good company. The use of 'real-world' tactics has been viewed as cheating for decades. Refuse a flank? Cheating. Refuse the center? Cheating. Use the terrain? Cheating. Reading and using military history? Cheating.

Guess who doesn't game outside the basement either?

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Some people are simply shitty tacticians and try to cover it up by badmouthing the people who hand them their ass in a bucket.

Bring on The Holy Soup Can Award!!!

(In-joke in Twin Cities gaming.)

Originally Posted by Shemek hiTankolel

I am currently re-reading the Lords of Tsarma and I was wondering if any of the main characters in the novels were one time player characters? Also, did Chirine, the Glorious General, et alia, ever meet Harsan, or Trinesh, or Naru? If so, any interesting stories?
BTW, just out of curiosity why is the Glorious General referred to as being greedy in Flamesong?:hmm:

Shemek

Generally not. We were the 'bit players' who would come on, provide comic relief, and get off stage. The PCs were not included in Phil's over-arching main plot line.

Nope. Phil kept us well away from his novels.

Phil was having a hissy fit with Gronan at the time; the Glorious General had just waxed Phil's ass at miniatures - Third Battle of Mar - and The Saintly Old Professor was pretty cheesed off. I didn't get half the grief Gronan did, and I killed three cohorts of Phil's heavy infantry by myself. Phil, I fear, assumed that we were as incompetent as his usual opponents at the Little Tin, and - it has to be said - we were anything but...

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Even better, do Tekumeli think in such notions? Or is sexuality what you do, and not who you are?

In Phil's Tekumel, no. You are what you are, and society respects that - it's actually formalized that way.

I had a very sad little series of incidents that killed my game group back at the turn of the year. One of my players, who is a Very Big Wheel in the local F/SF LGBT fan group, ran a couple of game sessions using the very nice murder mystery he'd written up. He, however, had made sure to include a lot of LGBT elements in the scenario, and it didn't mesh very well with the high-school-age players - if they'd all been middle-aged gay guys, they probably would have liked it more. The 13-year old girl liked it even less, and all of my warning comments to the GM got blown off - he was going to run his age-inappropriate adventure, no matter what the audience reaction was.

Later on, he brought over his new LGBT game group for a tour of the place, and everything was going quite well (I thought) until he started carrying on about how his PC had been "persecuted" for being gay. I just stood there with me mouth hanging open - I ran those same games, and nothing of the sort had happened. (I have the audio tapes, as well as my journals) He was taking this line to increase his standing with his LGBT people.

*Sigh*.