Doctor...who?

Dear god was I just disapointed.

But be warned, SPOILERS ahead.

There I was, thinking that with so many millions of pounds, a year to plan and produce, thousands of fans...neigh, millions of fans, and all the BBC could come up with was....that.

I'll admit, the first for any new assistant is a trial. Your getting used to loosing a "friend" - the relationships change, something is lost. Call it chemistry.

Not that we're going to have here. From the end of the episode...

"And for the record, I'm not remotely interested. I only go for humans."

What a lovely, presumptuous thing to say to a man you've only just met, who she didn't believe wasn't human till it was confirmed by another alien.

However...even the first episode of the new series - Rose - 2 years ago - was shaky. It was a start, with all those wonderful "girl power" lines..but eventually we had a proper assistant.

The role of the assistant is not to be eye candy. Not to be smart, not to be quick, or strong or even nice.

The role is to help us, the audience, understand what's going on. To ask those silly questions. To be that little bit thick, without being moronic.

This new Miss Jones...presented to us as being smart - a doctor, almost - yet she lacks a certain something. Most doctors in training would ask, on being presented with a patient with highly abnormal heart rhythms (aka two hearts) if the patient had a heart condition or any sort of history.

She diagnoses cramp.

She spots that if you've got a limited amount of air, you're going to have a problem. But she doesn't understand that it'll cause people to suffocate. That's left to the doctor to explain. We can't possibly have an assistant who understands consequences, can we?

The Rules - Hugging in public

Whenever I see people interacting, I always seem to be looking for rules. Mainly because I never quite seem to understand them, what they are, or who sets them.

Take the example of hugging other people in public.

Hugging in public is almost totally controlled by women (and/or girls).

No - really. Watch the people who initiate the motion - it is almost always a women. About the only exception to this is fathers with small children, when they pick up their little girls.

Further more, its usually continued until one of the parties becomes uncomfortable. Again, this tends to be the women. (As far as I can tell, most men don't object to the physical contact.)

What brought this up? A rather odd scene I saw today, where a young man was hugged (almost assaulted!) in public. She was over him like a tropical rash, and he was clearly uncomfortable with the attention. What was really interesting was that he had no apparent way to end it - until the red-head decided she'd had enough.

He tried everything short of unpleasantness and physical violence - but he had no control.

My question to you is - what other rules are there?

Who rules the roost when two women hug?
Ditto, men?
Who are you "allowed" to hug? When?
Are there exceptions to the "women starts it" rule?
Would it be a crime for a man to hug a women, if she wanted it to be? (I'm thinking sexual assault here...)

Ju jitsu? I'm going to learn ju jitsu?

After a month of carefully looking, I finaly got down to a local jitsu club in the Kelowna area. A small place, run by an instructor who certainly seems to know what he's talking about.

However, the content was...different to what I'm used to. The styles I know are more or less classical, in that they have throws, locks, pressure points and an assortment of nasty things to do to people.

This style is, however, somewhat more modern - which is fine, but has a downside. A large number of classical locks and holds have very little effect on me. This style seems to care much less about inflicting pain to incapacitate. Instead it pays strict attention to the legal code of Canada, in respect of "reasonable force".

In the UK, you can only reply to assault with reasonable force. Breaking his arm for swinging once, drunkenly would be looked down on. It might be reasonable, it might not. But throwing them around, inflicting extreme pain...these might not be.

Except in Canada, where you can do what you like as long as he is a "threat". So a throw, broken arm and a few strikes (all in 5 seconds or so) would be acceptable. If, when you stood back, he still appeared to want to fight - then continue.

As long as he wants to fight, you can damage him.

Isn't that enlightened law? (Or enightened?)

Stargate - The End

Stargate has been going for a very, very long time now, and has finaly come to an end.

Its been 10 years, and in that time we've had ups and downs. The crescendo of the defeat of Anubis, the crushing depths of the Ori war...and the last episode.

The show ends with one of the best episodes they've done. Certainly top 5 - out of a 200+ episode run. It was well written, well acted and the soundtrack is the best I've ever noticed on an SG episode. "Have you ever seen the rain" - beautifully done. It managed to touch me, if no one else.

It does not run around, wrapping up whole plots as fast as possible. It doesn't include a huge dues ex machina (aka Admiral Janeway). It wraps up only a single - yep, only a small single plot, that's run since season one.

What it does do is say goodbye, with a tear in your eye.
--
I want to know, have you ever seen the rain?
I want to know, have you ever seen the rain
Comin down on a sunny day?

The Accent

I've got a puzzle for you all today, and comments are definitly invited.

It goes like this, you see...

In Canada, an English accent sticks out a mile - and people do really seem to like it. Which is all fine and dandy.

However, every now and again I tend to be asked "My friend really likes your accent...she wants to know where's it from?"

Hmm. Your "Friend". Who's blushing, probably about 17...oh, and did I mention that they'll both be girls/young women, wearing...well, you know what youth fashion is like.

But why is it always pairs? Is there some secret hidden meaning? Am I missing something here?

The Budget

Because I'm a thousand miles away or more, I feel safe and confident in predicting this years annual budget by our Overlord Brown.

Lets see...it'll start with a load of waffle - targets met, milestones achieved, this sort of thing. Self set targets, milestones that don't measure much of anything. Just enough to put off the average listener till he gets to the "good parts".

He'll increase military spending to cover ongoing operations - because if he doesn't, he'll have to pull them out even faster then they already are.

"Families" will get something - some small pittance, that will do next to nothing for the average family because its means tested, assessed or otherwise "targeted".

Fuel duty will wise - again - because its such a good source of ready cash for the government. Everybody needs transport, after all. But he won't reduce tax on biofuels. That would just be sensible.

He'll claim the NHS has had problems, but is bravely overcoming them, with new financial prudence measures (aka firing nurses, closing wards and downgrading capabilities).

Taxes on those nasty rich people (aka everyone earning more then 15K or so) will increase, but he'll throw in something for the "first time buyers" in the housing market.

And just look out for the measures designed to change society. "50% of children in university". Extra programs for the disadvantaged. You know the type...

All in all, he'll take "less from those who can't afford it", do "more" with it and help "those who help themselves".

Or, run through a "double plus bad doublespeak translator", he'll tax us more, waste more and hurt the economy by fiddling with it more then he has too.

Anyone want to bet against me?

Fear, uncertainty and doubt

This picture is what I found in the paper this morning. Its purpose is to encourage people (mostly parents, I'd imagine) to goto a website and support some form of child protection Thing.

Possibly not a bad idea. After all, we most protect the children from- no, stop.

Lets look at the add. Look at that number - 19%. Wow. What a high percentage. But - get this - 100% - and I mean ALL - parents will have a photo of their children by age three. In todays modern age, there's a vague chance that not only do they have the children on digital, moments after the birth, but they've got the whole thing record on tape, birth, screams and all. (Women, think of the blackmail potential. "I went through this much pain for you....").

So that 19% is about as useful as chocolate poker. Great, till you try and use it. So does that mean every parent is a nasty person, destined for that special hell (also shared by those who talk at opera)? Nope. 99.99% of such photos are almost certainly completely, totaly and utterly harmless. Aides to memory, and to tease the kids with when they grow.

Nope. This add is trying to spread fear. Mike has that picture of his daughter in his wallet. Uncertainty - maybe I should report him. Doubt - should I really let him meet my two angels...?

The odds of any givern child being involved in that sort of thing is less then the chance of winning the lottery. Hell, the lottery runs twice a week, 52 weeks a year...

So why do we obsess about this so much? No, wait.

Its for the children.

Arrggghhh!

Flight back

Because I can't think of anything better, welcome to "flight back" - where I'll answer things from comments that might otherwise be overlooked.

Luke, since you like PC David Copperfield, I suggest you - and everyone else - go have a look here. Some of what he writes really alters how you read the news. Once I might have believed that some things politicians say about crime might be true. Now I've come to look at it through a twisted, blackened telescope. And it never looks the same.

As to Trudy's latest book....I'll say Hmmmm. Maybe I just read it to fast, but I wasn't as impressed as I was with some of her other work. Maybe because...damn it, thats a spoiler. I think you'll just have to read it.
--

White Wolf Stuff

As an open question, if I was willing to run something non-vampire (but white wolf(ish)) would I be able to scrounge up some players? Might even be able to offer god like powers for all players....
--


Anyone (or thing) that I've missed?

What people wear

While working over the last few days, I've spent a not inconsiderable amount of time people watching. Which can be an amusing past time.

And during this time, I've reaffirmed a basic conclusion I came to long ago, which I think I should share with you.

It's been said that men don't understand women. Ok, fair enough.

But its also true that women don't always understand men, or that they lump 5% into a group and forget the rest of us exist.

What leads me to this conclusion?

Well, it goes like this. Women (girls, ladies, teenagers, matrons...what ever label you want to use) usually either dress up to attract male attention - or not. While there is a middle ground, its not that big. For example, womens jeans are either comfortable or tight and sprayed on - or sometimes tight, sprayed on and start somewhere below their hips.

Now, women dressing to attract men do tend, from what I've seen, to believe less is more. That, since if you walked down the street naked you'd get the maximum possible attention, the less you wear the more attractive (or attention grabbing) you are.

Combine this with the belief that underwear is attractive, and the more it shows the better...and what you get is modern fashion.

Its almost always tight, leaves acres of skin exposed, isn't tasteful, or stylish (even what little I know about style screams NoOooooo!!) or even very attractive.

You've all seen it. The twenty-odd year old girl in a short t-shirt, really tight shorts and a g-string. You know its a g-string because everyone in 30ft can see most of it. And it'll probably be a contrasting colour to her shorts.

Just in case you missed it.

When a women wearing more - say a skirt to her knees, a blouse and a smile will get more - and better - attention most days of the week. And it doesn't scream "Oh look at me, I want you to LOOK AT ME." "Look at me" will get you attention - but probably the wrong attention.

The slut look may be good for the bedroom, but out in the street, day to day?

And see here for a comic that shows this so much better, with far fewer words.

Laughable

While listening to the UK news in the last day or three, I've heard a lot about this case, here.

Its the tale of a drunk, violent women who smashes up a car, is thrown out a nightclub and then resists arrest.

Go watch the video - its on the BBC website.

What I want to know is simple. Why is this news?

From here, it looks like its turned into a huge "Oh my god, the poor women....that evil police officer..." controversy. But looking at the video I can really believe the officers story. She really puts up a struggle, vs a bigger and stronger person.

The footage shows Ms Comer, from Sheffield, writhing around on the ground, which she said was due to an epileptic fit. Police said she was trying to resist arrest.
(BBC news story)

Maybe I'm just a cynic, but from here it looks more likely that she was drunk and violent - like a lot of men - and did her best to resist.

An epileptic fit? Really? Brought on by what, violent flashing lights in the club? Excess alcohol consumption? Just in time to be arrested by the police? Right...

So she kicks up a media fuss, about the poor black, female epileptic subject to police brutality. Because of this, its all over the media (poor women!), the officer has been taken off active duty and is subject to an "independent" investigation.

For doing his job and restraining a drunk.

Mystery of the missing pens

Most of you have heard of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter bunny and Santa.

But there are many, many other figures you probably haven't. The Soul Cake Duck, Old Man Trouble, Kaos and The Lady.

There is also one you should fear - the eater of pens.

It exists. It must.

I came to Canada prepared. I had four pens. Two decent ballpoints for usage at home, and two scruff biros I could leave anywhere, even buried in someone's throat, and not really mind loosing.

It started with the ballpoints, one disappearing in the first few days. Then the scruff biros, till I was left with my Parker. Then this to disappeared. It vanished between one evening and the next. Left, attached to a clipboard and form - but gone in the light of morning.

It has reached the point where I considered - yes, I, he who walked around the East of England showground for an hour and left with a kilo of pens - yes, I considered buying pens.

This I contemplated for an evening. Till I remembered that the bank hand been kind enough to give me some.

I'm even sure they might have meant it.

They handed them to me and everything.

White wolf rambling

As David has asked, here's my view on the White Wolf System.

Now here I must ask you to remember one thing. I'm not talking about Vampire: The Masquerade, or any specific game setting - just the system.

The system itself is much better then I first thought, given the terrible things I've heard about it. It doesn't eat babies, burn dice or sacrifice lambs to the Gods of Hack. They are all unkind rumours.

The basic mechanic is something like this.

Decide what your doing (I'm picking this lock)
Work out the relevant statistic (It's a dexterity thing, so thats.........3)
Add your skill level (I've got 2 points in larceny, so thats 3+2=5)
Describe what your doing (And if its really atmospheric, you may get an extra +1 to +3..)
Roll your total in 10 sided dice.
Count up your 7s, 8s, 9s and 10s.
Count your 10s again!
Tell the person running the game your total, and start praying...

This is very similar to the d20 system we all know and love. Work out your skill ranks, add dex bonus, add extra modifiers and roll a 20 sided dice and add them all together.

But its better in a number of respects.

First, no matter how many dice you roll in White Wolf (WW), you can still fail. There's no "I add 23, so there's no point rolling". There's always risk.

Secondly, the skills arn't quite so specific. Larceny covers everything from mugging granny to picking the lock on the Grand Vizier's treasure horde - there's not hundreds of little skills, just big ones. After all, whats the point of separating out the ability to sneak around quietly and the the secrets of hiding? Arn't they really the same thing??

Thirdly, in white wolf, if you want to learn "a bit" of something, its quite straightforwards. Go find a teacher, spend a little xp, train a bit, and hey-presto! There's no artificial "Your a wizard. Wizards can't cook" limit, and you won't be charged double to learn. A little more...but not much.

Forth, in WW you can learn a little bit of a skill easily, without big penalties. Want to learn to swing a sword enough so you don't cut off your nose? Sure, no problem. As in real life, you've got the option of being an amateur.

Fifth, in most games you have a level. You can be stuck at level 8 for ages, and see no progress. Or you can level up and gain....nothing. (See rangers, paladins, fighters, rogues....). But with WW you can spend 1 point of experience. Or 3. Or however much you have, within limits.

In conclusion, the system itself isn't Bad. For some games, it could be really Good. Big, epic games where you've got a purpose, power and the desire to do something.

Good enough that I'm pondering how to convert something for my return.

I'm also sure the system has downsides. Anyone think of some?

Bad Day

Everybody has bad days.

I appear to have gone through this months quota (two days per, 4 by special arrangement).

No point going into details, all though, thankyou Lisa for cheering me up this morning.

RPGers - the same Everywhere

Where ever you go, they are there.

You can't see them at first, for they hide. Deep in the dark cracks of society, hidden from the burning light.

Tracking them down is near impossible. They admit their secrets to few trusted friends and lovers, sulking in the shadows. With skills and habits less socially acceptable then crack cocaine, more frowned upon then methamphetamine, linked with satanists, blasphemy and violence...

They are the roleplayers.

And I've run into a few.

On finding they're agreeable, likable fellows (one even has a long term gf!) I was loaned a copy of the rules, flicked through them, and made a character. Was given a little experience, to bring me up to the level of the others...

So I joined the game, known as Exalted. Unlike most Role Play Games (RPG), you don't start as powerful as a small child, frightened by a potted plant. (Even MY plants. Potted or otherwise.) Nope, you start as, well, Exalted. Not quite godlike, but better then any three normal guys at the things you want to be good at.

So I made Elan Morin Tedroni (and they didn't catch the reference!). Because my dice rolling is simply atrocious (over a thousand d6 rolls in a star wars campaign, I averaged 2.6, well below the "average 3.5"), I decided to be as good at killing things as possible. So I wouldn't just die by accident.

So I got +17 to hit, and I aquired away to get 4 attacks a round - pretty good, I thought.

However, I forgot a fatal, fatal flaw in my logic. It was a white wolf system. So there I was, surrounded by guards, who I couldn't bluff my way past. Eventually things got nasty.

I decided to use 4 attacks, at +17 each. At this point I found out I didn't have +17, but that I had to roll 17 dice (10 sided dice) 4 times. Thats 68 dice, for one round of combat.

I had three dice. Just three.