A Miscellany of Projects - Gaming, SCA Combat, Arts & Sciences, and Travel

As a refresher, Sanderson's Third Law states: "The author should expand on what is already a part of the magic system before something entirely new is added, as this may otherwise entirely change how the magic systems fits into the fictional world." Keep in mind that I believe that you could delete the word "magic" out of most of these, or substitute in "technology" or "social order," and they'd be equally valid - it's part of why the further you get into Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 universe, the less sense it makes and the less satisfying it is, because every time the Monoliths do something, it makes less sense of their previous behavior, and despite Clarke's Law, the Monoliths are very clearly triggered by technology.  Same with drow society in Menzoberranzan - it's a matriarchal theocracy, except then it turns out that there's this guild of male mercenaries that hasn't ever been crushed underfoot, and also there...

 As a refresher from yesterday, Sanderson's Second Law is: "Weaknesses, limits, and costs are more interesting than powers." There are, to my mind, two ways of interpreting this.  First is constraints - that for whatever reason there are left and right limits on how a problem may be solved.  Second is consequences - that the loss conditions are often more interesting than the win conditions.  In either case, I agree with Sanderson that these are much more interesting than "I always win." Let's discuss constraints first.  My experience is that a character who operates under a set of constraints is far more interesting and memorable than a mere assembly of attributes.  The classic example is the old D&D Paladin, who would theoretically lose many of their abilities if they failed to hold to a code of behavior.  This same idea drove the development through the '80s and '90s of hindrances, flaws, and disadvantages, name varying by system.  These ha...

Fantasy author Brandon Sanderson has three laws of magic that might as well be extrapolated to any fictional system, be it martial arts, technology, or even social systems.  These rules are generally expressed as: An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is directly proportional to how well the reader understands said magic. Weaknesses, limits and costs are more interesting than powers. The author should expand on what is already a part of the magic system before something entirely new is added, as this may otherwise entirely change how the magic systems fits into the fictional world. While a great deal of words could be thrown at these (I considered talking about how J. J. Abrams apparently completely lacks understanding of #3, and how this impacts storytelling in every franchise he's ever touched), this post clearly says "gaming" in the heading, so that is where I will be focusing my efforts. I should preface this discussion by saying that I view role-pla...