Mace In The Mail: 7 months later

A few days ago, I got some new photo’s. The Mace In The Mail project started on July 1st, 2010. I’d mostly given up on it since the updates had stopped flowing in. Out of the blue, the original cucumber mace recipient sent me a few pictures about the same time the host situation hit the fan. As Kevin can attest, our collective luck with timing, and many other things, tends to run closer to getting keel hauled than enjoying a nice sailing trip.

The mace made the cross country trip from New England to the west coast of the U.S.

I suspect the picture below came from the original recipient but am not entirely sure. Updates are sporadic and slower than I envisioned. No shock on that front.

Continue reading »

RPGs in the Judicial System: Watters v. TSR

Fox News recently published an article regarding D&D in prisons citing the Geeks are Sexy Blog. The case was argued on September 18, 2009 and the decision ruled on January, 25, 2010. Old news but far from contentious.

The case in question was an appellate decision, Singer vs. Raemisch where the ruling was in favor of the Raemisch, the defendant. Essentially, in January 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a decision allowing the prison system to confiscate and withhold gaming materials from the plaintiff, Singer, who was incarcerated in Wisconsin’s Waupun Correctional Institution.

The judgement in Singer vs. Raemisch references a number in cases in favor of the defendant. Like many, I do not agree with the decision and furthermore, I do not appreciate the context of the quotes referenced in the opinion. I am not a lawyer and never will be but I can now read the cases referenced once it has become public record with ease.

Drilling backwards, one of the first cases against role playing games is Watters vs. TSR, Inc. Given the references, in Singer vs. Raemisch, one would believe it was a black mark against the industry. Based upon the opinion of the court in Watters vs. TSR, it is not.

The Watters lawsuit against TSR is a heartbreaking situation. Sheila Watters sued TSR alleging the wrongful death of Johnny Burnett due to playing Dungeons and Dragons. It was not disputed that Johnny took his own life. Suicide is tragic without question. The basis of the lawsuit was:

This is a wrongful death case in which the plaintiff appeals from an order granting summary judgement to the manufacturer of a parlor game called “Dungeons & Dragons.” The plaintiff alleges that her late son was an avid player of the game, and that it came to dominate his mind to such an extent that he was driven to suicide. She asserts that the defendant violated a duty of care in publishing and distributing the game materials; that the defendant violated a duty to warn that the game could cause psychological harm in fragile-minded children; and that the boy’s death, which was caused by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, was a direct and proximate result of the defendant’s alleged wrongdoing.

The appellate court’s opinion continued with:

TSR’s Dungeons & Dragons game is one in which the players assume the roles of characters in “adventures” suggested in illustrated booklets. These adventures, set in an imaginary ancient world, are narrated and orchestrated by a player known as the Dungeon Master. The results of various encounters between characters are determined 380*380 by using dice in conjunction with tables provided in the published materials..

The rules of the game do not call for the physical acting out of any role. The game is usually played at a table or in some other comfortable setting. We have seen no indication in the record that the game’s materials glorify or encourage suicide, or even mention it. It does not appear that the materials allude in any way to guns. Many schools and libraries use Dungeons & Dragons as a learning tool and as a means of promoting creativity. More than a million copies have been sold, according to TSR’s records, and this figure does not include sales by the several other companies that produce and sell other role-playing games

And again from the decision text,

The plaintiff’s complaint alleges that the defendant violated its duty of ordinary care in two respects: it disseminated Dungeons & Dragons literature to “mentally fragile persons,” and it failed to warn that the “possible consequences” of playing the game might include “loss of control of the mental processes.” To submit this case to a jury on either theory, it seems to us, would be to stretch the concepts of foreseeability and ordinary care to lengths that would deprive them of all normal meaning.

The defendant cannot be faulted, obviously, for putting its game on the market without attempting to ascertain the mental condition of each and every prospective player. The only practicable way of insuring that the game could never reach a “mentally fragile” individual would be to refrain from selling it at all — and we are confident that the courts of Kentucky would never permit a jury to say that simply by marketing a parlor game, the defendant violated its duty to exercise ordinary care.

With this, TSR was legally not liable. However, I must extract one more quote because it is notable.

Johnny Burnett was certainly one of the class of people whose use of the game could reasonably have been anticipated, and there is no contention that he or his mother, Mrs. Watters, knew of any danger in using it. (An affidavit executed by Mrs. Watters indicates that she knew the game was often played at the public library; that Johnny and his friends played the game constantly after school and on weekends over a period of several years; and that never, either before or during the period when he and his friends were immersed in the game, did Johnny cause his mother any problems.) But if Johnny’s suicide was not foreseeable to his own mother, there is no reason to suppose that it was foreseeable to defendant TSR.

This tragic case is cited in case law on too many fronts. Singer vs. Raemisch being one of them. From within that case, the quote is:

Watters v. TSR, Inc., 904 F.2d 378, 380 (6th Cir.1990) (describing a teenager who committed suicide as “a ‘devoted’ Dungeons and Dragons player who became absorbed by the game to the point of losing touch with reality”).

You are not bound by illusion, TSR was found non-liable. Still Watters v. TSR is cited as case law by the defense in the judgement against Singer noting he failed to respond to the prison officials’ assertions that there are valid reasons to fear Dungeons and Dragons influence on rehabilitation.

The prison officials pointed to a few published circuit court cases to give traction to their views. We view these cases as persuasive evidence that for some individuals, games like D & D can impede rehabilitation, lead to escapist tendencies, or result in more dire consequences.

The quantity of available case law to reference must be quite thin to offer Watters v. TSR as giving traction to the views of the prison officials. I fail to see how the case is supportive or relevant to the Singer case. My viewpoint is shared by the Court of Appeals in the Watter’s case:

As far as the record discloses, no one had any reason to know that Johnny Burnett was going to take his own life. We cannot tell why he did so or what his mental state was at the time. His death surely was not the fault of his mother, or his school, or his friends, or the manufacturer of the game he and his friends so loved to play. Tragedies such as this simply defy rational explanation, and courts should not pretend otherwise.

References:

Singer vs. Raemisch
Watters vs. TSR

Review: Weight of Blood

I’m not one to write reviews of fictional works. Personally, I just do not take the time to critically analyze writing. This book is completely abnormal to common fantasy fiction. So different, I decided it was time to undertake something different as well.

I discovered David Dalglish after I self-gifted myself a Kindle after determining my house didn’t need additional physical books. I must say I am very happy with the purchase of the Kindle because I have found a number of new authors I likely would have passed over. The self publishing capability allows for aspiring writers and the ability for them to get the work in front of readers. A chance they may never have been given within the traditional publishing framework. For $3.99, I got not just Weight of Blood but also the second and third in an omnibus volume for the Kindle. I likely wouldn’t have taken the risk for a $9.99 single volume paperwork.

Dalglish opens the Half Orc series in Weight of Blood by introducing two half-orc brothers in the midst of coming of age in a brutal world. In many ways, the story seems based on a D&D campaign as many reviewers have mentioned. It may be, it may not. What is wonderful is that he doesn’t adopt the main characters as protagonists. In fact, on many occasions I wanted to root against them based on the decisions they make. Harruq and Qurrah Tun are far from normal main characters. They defy categorization and I applaud the author for taking the road less travelled.

If you enjoy fantasy as fairy tales and happy endings, Dalglish is not for you. If you like dark fantasy intermixed with disturbing choices by the characters, read the sample provided. Even his choice of blood heritage for the Tun’s is unusual – half orc / half elf. I applaud his decision and the back story intertwines nicely.

I am in agreement with many reviewers on several topics. At times the plot seems forced. Decisions are made by the Tuns without much effort to explain why. These lapses also reinforce others opinion that Dalglish is writing up a gaming session from his past. However, the text is one of his first. It’s raw, gritty and sometimes unpolished. He’s not working with a professional editor and publishing house to identify and fix the mistakes. Instead, he’s chosen to provide his story to us as he wrote it.

Characterization has a few holes. As a reader, I was presented with a number of times where I wondered why the character chose how he did. I wished to delve deeper into the history so I could understand and perhaps sympathize with the choice. It was not to be. In reflection, I honestly can say I’m glad he didn’t expose too much detail on some of the decisions. By avoiding it, the characters became more realistic. People make oddball, bizarre decisions all the time. Many of mine I cannot explain even to myself. They just happen.

The bulk of the work is fast paced and wonderful to read. I overlooked the gaps and read for the enjoyment. After all, that is why many of us read fiction. If you enjoy fiction where the main characters are flawed and prone to morally objectionable decisions, you will likely enjoy reading the book. If you aren’t comfortable picking up a text with a necromancer as a main character, skip it. At times, the book made me flinch. Refreshing.

Spring Beckons, Hops Call

Brewing, my friends, is not wife friendly but the sweet smell of hops in my house can only mean one thing….. Get ready.

Top 5 Fantasy Cringe Worthy Creatures

You probably thought this was going to be a list of creatures that put the fear into a party. Nay! Rather, these are the creatures when I determine what they are, I just get this gut feeling. The feeling isn’t about the DM or her abilities. The pit of my bowels just think ‘Again?’ couldn’t I be eating a slice of pizza or downing a beer rather than sit through this again. Each and everyone of them I’ve seen presented as excellent encounters and many times not so much. Gut things are hard to define but I just want to say “meh” when they come around.

My top 4 show up in to many campaigns for an encounter or series of encounters. Personally, I would be happy if DM’s would exclude the following from all new campaigns:

1. Orcs
2. Kobolds
3. Goblins
4. Bandits

Nothing is new about them. When I encounter them as a player (not character), the brain just stops and wonders why something more imaginative couldn’t have been presented for play. Honestly, I think everyone resorts to them only for the purposes of levelling up a party and moving them along in a plot or campaign. Gee, what are the options for a 1HD monster? Best toss a few of those at the party.

My #5 is “Undead”. Here comes the graveyard / temple / etc. Undead are what prompted me to think about how overdone so may things have become. Considering the amount of material available, undead are this apparent go-to default for too many game masters. Sure, it can be new and interesting twists or it can just be the benchmark for what is coming in the campaign.

I recognized my jaded thoughts for what they were. So I shot Kevin and email to see what his list was. He’s more up to date on much of the gaming scene than I am His list overlapped mine at the start but took it further. His brief comments are in italics.

#1: Orcs (I swear these guys are the classic mooks of every fantasy world)
#2: Bandits (Like Orcs… only human – play this encounter just like #1)

How about we just agree and say that if you planning a new campaign you find something other than bandits, orcs, or any other 1 hd creature to use as fodder? Is that fair? I think it is.

#3: Dragons (’nuff said)

I cannot disagree with him. Seems like many game masters think these things breed like rabbits. Not to mention, there’s that whole Dragon thing in the title of many of the books. Best toss them out there and let the characters overcome a couple. Have to underplay a few things but yeah, they will be able to win. No worries about that. Huh, do you think that’s going to have repercussions?

#4: Vampire / Lich (or some other undead BBEG who is part Lestat, part Strahd, and part Demi-lich)

Again, pretty hard to disagree. Glancing through a monster manual states this creature is a bad ass. May as well use him for a “sorry arc”….err story. My bad, typos, they show up everywhere.

If I see another feeble lich or vampire, I may vomit. C’mon folks.

#5 Drow (I swear they’re the fall back nowadays)

Yep, great elves you want to hate. Except I don’t. Started with the whole Underdark series that seemingly has no end of repetition. Certainly dull, overdone, and overplayed but I have no ill will against them.

So what brings that little pile of bile to the back of your throat when you encounter them?

Leather Mugs

Welcome back to the Leather Network. All leather, all the time. I’m fixated on it for the moment but that will change soon. I actually swore to myself I would not do another leather related post unless there was other content. Well, I failed.

If you have admired a leather mug at a Ren Fest and wondered how they did it, Angster on LeatherWorker.Net published a great tutorial on how he constructs them. The step by step instructions are very easy to follow. I was essentially out of leather so had to scale it down to a mini-cup which is more shot glass than mug but the construction technique is the same.

Amid the great consumerism, my leather topics are not that interesting. No fear. I have some other ideas to present but just haven’t focused on writing them up. Perhaps I’ll get there in the next few weeks.

Inspiration Realized

When you are inspired by odd things, I find it is best to strike rather than delay. My original intent was to just utilize the pizza pan as a shield as identified by Kevin and Randall. I didn’t really have the materials on hand to just convert the pan into a shield with a bit of paint and design work. I did have a bunch of leather laying around from prior projects. I’m also a bit fixated on leather for some reason. Maybe its because I finally understand, albeit marginally, how to make it transform into the products I’m interested in.

Continue reading »