Traverse Fantasy

I’ve mentioned in passing my haven rules for my homebrew heartbreaker Cinco! but never took the time to describe it in much detail. Remember that I don’t really fuck with wealth; instead, each item of treasure just has the value of “1 treasure”, and you spend that during downtime to do an activity ( this is outdated, but you get the idea ). One of those activities is havencraft where you invest 1 treasure to build a town and populate with your favorite NPCs you’ve met and recruited throughout the game. These are called lackeys. Cost Type Population Ability Lackeys 2 Hamlet 100 +1 1 6 Village 900 +2 2 12 Town 3,600 +4 3 20 City 10,000 +8 4 Each season (generally speaking, or unless I fuck it up, a play-session), lackeys can either do a downtime activity on behalf of the governor or embark on an adventure. In the latter case, they can either accompany the crew on their own adventure and basically act like a back-up character, or they can be sent...

Well. How quickly did you expect an update? When I ran my inheritance simulation , I also calculated the Gini coefficient of the population’s wealth distribution. The Gini coefficient expresses relative inequality within a population, where 0% represents total equality and 100% means basically one individual holds all the wealth. Partitive Inheritance Land has a Gini coefficient of 15%, while Primogeniture Land has one around 45%. Modern capitalist societies (and, as far as I can tell, most developed class societies) have Gini coefficients of ~80% with respect to wealth and around ~40% with respect to income. I calculated it by dividing the relative mean average deviance in half, but the typical method is by taking a Lorenz curve and doing some calculus bullshit. I don’t want a Lorenz curve necessarily but I want to know what it means for a Gini coefficient to be such and such. Here’s a solution: draw a square and bisect it along the diagonal. Then, in the lower right, draw a smaller s...

I’ve been procrastinating on Resourciv because I couldn’t come up with a demographic or economic framework (or perhaps meta-framework, since I really want to support different modes of production and distribution and so on) I was happy with. So I made some scripts to simulate different social dynamics in the hopes that I would land on a way to represent them without giving myself or the player a headache. Inheritance My least favorite of the two is an inheritance simulator. I read a couple books by historian and social scientist ( stricto sensu ) Peter Turchin, who’s most famous for his concept of elite overproduction, but I was struck by a point he made that inequality would emerge even in egalitarian societies if the society practices inheritance because families with less children divide the parents’ wealth amongst less recipients. I simulated a society at three sexes (for the purposes of reproduction: F, M, or X) and three age levels (young, adult, or elder) with each individual...

I mentioned earlier I was using Gus L. and I’s dungeon from Fantastic Medieval Campaigns so I could be lazy and not have to prep much for my home campaign’s alien arc —isn’t that the point of a prewritten module, come to think of it? It turned out okay, but I didn’t write a session report because I felt dissatisfied. Everyone had fun, we had good moments, but from my perspective there was friction between the experience we were having and the thing we kind of passively accepted that we were playing. The skeleton of the dungeon is already not the ‘right vibe’ for the campaign but, where at first I was able to make it work because of characters’ own motivations, I struggled because the new characters lacked a reason to be there at all except that the ‘crew’ as an abstract unit had been heading there. The advice sometimes is like, players should invent their own characters’ motivations for being at a place or doing a thing, but I don’t subscribe to a framework of play centered on the se...

Joseph B. Tyson argues in  Marcion and Luke–Acts: A Defining Struggle  that the canonical version of Luke's gospel and the heretical gospel of Marcion, which was supposed by some proto-orthodox writers to have been a mutilation of canonical Luke, in fact both derive from some earlier proto-gospel from which Marcion omitted some things and to which the author of canonical Luke–Acts added other things as a polemic against Marcionite theology. Based on the book, which I found mostly compelling and an interesting companion to James R. Edwards’  The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition  (which argues that Luke is based primarily on a now-lost gospel written in Hebrew, rather than being a synthesis of Mark and the hypothetical sayings compilation Q), I tried my hand at reconstructing what a draft n -1 of Luke's gospel might look like . It was a fun exercise and one which resulted in a very satisfying and thematically cohesive gospel narrative. I...

The phallus is masculine in the same way a penis is masculine. I wrote a primer on Lacan’s concept of phallic desire a month ago, and I realize—although my blog is mine and my target audience is one at least superficially familiar with concepts from Marxism and Freudian psychoanalysis, so I don’t feel particularly motivated to write introductions for people totally new to those fields of discourse—I kind of did that XKCD bit about how familiar the average person is with niche obscure bullshit. Again, it’s not my problem necessarily, but then people talk about how literal or abstract the phallus notion is supposed to be from Lacan’s mouth or my own. Is the phallus masculine (to quote WFS ) “the way a horse [think equus in Latin] is masculine”? Is classic D&D more “literally phallic” (by way of being masculinely horny) than I had “intended” in my critique of it ? Is usage of the word “phallus” a mere birthmark of a discourse originally grounded in bioessentialism from which it...

The vocabularies of certain Indo-European languages encode a memory of a social taboo against speaking the name of the bear. Germanic languages famously (although not quite accurately) are thought to refer to the bear as “the brown one”. Slavic languages seem to use a term derived from the phrase “honey-eater”. Baltic languages call them “hairy ones”. D&D retroclones operate on a similar principle. They avoided speaking the name of the devil (that is, whichever particular D&D edition is being emulated) for license reasons, but signal euphemistically to the reader which edition is being lifted. Old School Essentials in one printing refers to itself as being “styled after the beloved games of the 1970s and 1980s” but it’s very specifically a retroclone of the 1981 D&D Basic/Expert rules. My own Fantastic Medieval Campaigns is “a new version of the ruleset for fantasy wargaming campaigns, first published in 1974”—but “the” ruleset in question is the original 1974 D&D...