Separation of Church & State

This is an ongoing issue so I thought I'd set the record straight here and now.  Christian conservatives won't believe me, and hardcore Xtians such as David Barton have manufactured (read: lied about) quotes from Jefferson and other founders claiming that there was no separation.  I think he's been doing meth with Ted Haggard.

Let's start by examining whether or not America is a Christian nation.  

The Treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1796, states that "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen..."  It is an official document.  They would not have put it in there unless they meant it as true.

From our presidents' mouths:

George Washington: He never mentions Jesus Christ in his letters, and is quoted as saying to the United Baptist Churches of Virginia in 1789 that everyone "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.  A friend of Washington's, Dr. Abercrombie, once remarked that "Washington was a Deist."  


John Adams: Adams wrote, in A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, "It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven...it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses."

Thomas Jefferson: Many of his writings and letters denounce the miracles and such of Jesus and Christianity in general.  In a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, he wrote "You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."  In another letter, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." -- 1802 letter to the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut.  Contrary to Barton's claims, the letter contains no "one-directional wall."

James Madison: Definitely not a Christian.  "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.  What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny... a just government...needs them not." -- Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments (1795)

The argument against a America being a Christian nation comes right from our founding fathers.  

Thomas Jefferson, who helped draft the Constitution and its principles, comes down firmly on the side of separation of church and state.  The letter from which the phrase comes was carefully crafted, and was shown to two others before finally being sent as an official clarification of his policies.

Another founding father, Thomas Paine, wrote a diatribe against Christianity, Age of Reason.

Many of our founding fathers were Freemasons, which included Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and Thomas Paine.  This would explain the Masonic symbolism and design that endures to this day.  From the Architect of the Capitol: "The Capitol's first cornerstone was laid on September 18, 1793, by President Washington in a Masonic ceremony. The ceremony was preceded by a parade and followed by celebration and feasting." Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC), himself a Freemason, took part in a Masonic ceremony recently to commemorate the laying of the cornerstone.  

The cornerstone of the Washington Monument was similarly celebrated at the laying ceremony, with a Grandmaster Mason officiating.

In a streetmap of downtown D.C. you can see the primary Masonic symbols: the Square, the Compass, the Rule and the Star.  

The Great Seal of the United States includes some important symbols of Freemasonry: the All-Seeing Eye, the Great Pyramid, the Six-Pointed Star, the Eagle, the phrases "Annuit Coeptis" and "Novus Ordo Seclorum," and the motto "E Pluribus Unum."

Freemasonry is not Christianity, and many conservative Christians take issue with it.  They must have a beef against the United States, as well.

I hope I have demonstrated some important facts:

1) The United States was founded and influenced by Freemasonry

2) The United States was not founded or influenced by Christianity

3) The United States was intended to have a clear separation of church and state.  

The United States was founded by people fleeing religious persecution, and by people who believed the Monarchy of England was corrupt.  To this end, our founding fathers set down the principles of what they believed would establish a government fair to all it citizens.  In recent times this has been betrayed, as bought and paid-for politicos and religious nutbags continue to sully the good name of America.  

Perhaps something drastic will happen, and we will all band together under New Deal policies and start to take care of each other, instead of the "me-first" monster that we live under today.

RISEN

Risen is the title of an amazing very Gothic-like game by the originators of the Gothic series: Piranha Bytes.

A note of explanation: Piranha Bytes developed the critically-acclaimed but barely-noticed Gothic, the critically-acclaimed Gothic II, which developed a cult following, and the disastrous Gothic III, which was rushed out the door with too many bugs because of deadlines set by their publisher JoWood.  this resulted in their being fired from Gothic development while JoWood retained the Gothic IP.

I've been a fan since Gothic II, and have gone back and played through Gothic I.

Risen is Piranha Bytes' version of a Gothic game, only this time with British and Scottish actors providing the English voices. Also notable is the combat, which they may have finally gotten right. Combat in Gothic I was fairly difficult, Gothic II combat was outright impossible, Gothic III's combat was just button-mashing, until the fan patches were applied.

Risen combat skill consists of 10 levels. Each level allows you to perform a special maneuver, from counter parries to interrupt a foe's attack to a charge attack to break through your foe's defenses. You can knock a blade out of the way, throwing your opponent off-balance to deliver another couple well-timed strikes, and you can block with your blade or shield (much easier with a shield).   You can also "charge" your attacks, taking more time to make your attack but doing more damage if you connect.


This is the kind of combat I like to see in games, where the player (and not the character as much) is king.  Can you connect and duck behind your shield before you hit?  Can you knock your foe off-balance and deliver a quick strike while he recovers?  Will your foe parry and be able to dispatch you when you are vulnerable?  Can you keep up with a foe who dances out of the way and strikes to a side unprotected?


Fantastic stuff, and contains elements I haven't even seen in the much-vaunted Riddle of Steel.  I know I'm going to try putting it into a pen n' paper...


Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the heck out of this game.  If you like challenging combat, engaging quests and freedom to explore, this is your game.  If you enjoy lackadaisical combat, hand-holding, and a smaller sandbox to play in, then this won't be your cup of tea at all. 

Help out a fellow gamer in need

Over at retroroleplaying.com, Randall has a donation-system going to help alleviate his medical bills from his wife's cancer treatments. Not only does my heart go out to him and his wife, I'm sending along a link:

http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/retroroleplaying-cancer-fund-special-downloads

Donate, and he'll send a password to some goodies. I donated, because I don't have insurance either, and I feel for him.

Instead of spending trillions to bail out the banking industry and send our troops abroad, we should be taking care of our own here at home.

The Culture of Pluses

I'm an avowed follower of D&D blogs, particularly old-school ones, and there were a couple things on the Gamerdome blog (link disabled) that struck me.

One was a post on the Sphinx in 4e, and how it was metagamey rather than relying on cleverness, and how you could turn it to a more narrative device like the original source material. Another was a post about how D&D has turned into a "culture of pluses," squeezing every last bonus out of the books to make your characters more efficient. As Propogandroid says in the Sphinx post: "What happened to the days when players were supposed to be clever instead of just relying on dice and character sheets to do everything for them?"

Which has been my problem from the start. The page after page of rule after rule in 3E makes the unified d20 mechanic something of a joke. It's like it was written for 10-year-olds who had never run a game before, by making a rule on page 456, paragraph 3, subsection 7 that farting while moving gives a +.001" to movement. What was even worse was the 3300+ Feats that cropped up, plus the insane amount of Prestige Classes, making it, well, not so prestigious to be in one. Somehow, real roleplaying and storytelling got tossed to the side of the road to hitch a ride on another game.

The Gamerdome's author has done away with the unified mechanic to cut down on the culture of pluses. I propose something a little different. Whether it is more or less radical than Propangandroid's solution remains to be seen.

In Daniel Bayn's excellent Wushu, the players describe what's supposed to happen, then they roll to advance the scene to its end. They have a certain number of successes needed within a certain time limit to end the scene well. From the core rules: "everything happens exactly as the players describe it, when they describe it...The player is within rights to describe never "failing", or to never describe "succeeding", but regardless their character can still advance a scene towards it’s end."

In our re-tooling of the D20 mechanic, you describe your action as well as whether you achieve your goal or not. The bonus you get to your action is based on how well you describe your action. The player's description can be (and often is) more than one sentence. Each cool thing that happens could give you +1:

"The character eases her blade from her scabbard (+1), sunlight glinting from it as it clears the sheathe (+2). She drops easily into attack stance (+3) and prepares to skewer the sweating soldier (+4)."

Then you roll a d20 and add your +4 to it, or however much you gained from describing your action. You could even put a hard limit on it, like level +3 or something.

Handling failure could be more than simply "you missed." It could be something where the character's foot slips while dropping into attack stance, it could also be a gradual thing like damage being reduced, for example, "You missed by 2 so that's -2 to damage."

In my opinion, way better than Feats and Prestige Classes. You use your imagination while fighting, rather than calculating AoO. I've got a way to handle Feats and Prestige Classes,too, but more on that later.

Unfortunately, since I've written this it appears that Gamerdome has been hit with a Trojan, and it's not safe to go there. My avast antivirus gives me all kinds of grief when I try. I wouldn't suggest going there for a bit.

Obama, the scapegoat

The Obama bashing has begun. One year after Barack Obama took the oath of office, the conservatives now are blaming Obama for the problems of his predecessor, claiming that he can no longer pass it off onto Bush. Obama has been made the villain for the mistakes of the Bush administration. But let's put this to the test:

• They turned a budget surplus into a deficit.
• They took us to war on false pretenses, manufacturing a link to terrorism that even the common man should have been able to see through. I did.
• They spent money they didn't have to fight this war, instead of spending it for the general welfare of the people.
• They screwed over the troops, many of whom had to buy body armor.
• They destroyed Afghanistan and then sent troops to die there.
• They ignored and denigrated the Constitution.
• They presided over the weakest economy in decades.
• They had the worst unemployment rate in decades.
• The stock market was more screwed up than it had been in decades.

This is just a partial list of the many issues. A list of 99 problems is to be had here: http://www.campusprogress.org/opinions/2582/99-problems-with-the-bush-administration. To be fair, Obama has had his problems with his administration, too.

• He didn't shut down Gitmo
• He defended the warrentless wiretapping program
• He didn't get us out of Iraq
• He didn't get us out of Afghanistan
• He didn't get us any decent healthcare, and instead of cutting out the insurance companies he cut deals with them.
• In refusing to pull the same crap as Republicans, he makes himself look weak. Of course, an attempt at a show of power (like a suggestion to shut down Fox News) gets him attacked by conservative blowhards.

But, truly, what the conservatives are attacking him for is ridiculous. When you screw up the economy this bad it's time to take some responsibility for it instead of blaming someone else. And yes, I'm talking to you Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, George Bush. All of you helped to fuck up America. Time to take the rap for it and shut the fuck up.

Because I won't.

And I know better than the rest of those morons, and have facts to back it up, not useless conjecture and mindless rhetoric.

Limbaugh & Robertson at odds with Haitian Suffering

Pat Robertson blames Haitians for their earthquake, by saying they had "made a deal with the devil" to free their country from France. WTF? Mr. *koff koff!* er...Reverend Robertson, we know you spewed all sorts of senile and evil rhetoric during 9/11 and you were silenced. But again? When will someone yank you off the air, so you can expire in peace and no one need listen to you anymore? You bastard.

Rush Limbaugh also has taken issue with Haitians, blaming communism for their ills and somehow linking President Obama with racist leanings and policital opportunism there.

Why is it that conservatives seem to be the most assinine loudmouths of this or any other century? Why do they seem to be at the center of the most heinous stupidity ever committed in this country? I think they should require an IQ test in current events and history to broadcast. Then, if you fail, you're off the air, or are never allowed in the first place. I'm willing to place bets that Hannity, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, and other conservative commentators would fail such a test. I'm not saying anyone else would do much better, but at least the airwaves would be quieter.

Spell Points in D&D

I thought I'd share one of the ideas I've had percolating in my mind. It has always occurred to me that spell points aren't broken, as many people say. I just think most D&Ders haven't seen a good one. This one is based entirely on existing 3.5 spells/level. This system is 99% compatible with the spells out of the 3.x rules. The only thing that might be weird is the "falls unconscious from the strain." If you don't like it, don't use it!

Spell Points

If you cast a 1^st level spell it costs 1 pt. If you cast a 2^nd level spell it costs 2 pts, a 7^th level spell will cost 7 pts, etc. Mages will know all first level spells.

Restrictions:

• You can never cast more spells of a given level per day than your main ability modifier +2. That means if you have a 16 Int, you can cast 5 spells per level per day, unless you make a Spellcraft roll. See below. This means five 1^st level spells, five 2^nd level spells, ad infinitum.
  
• You may cast five 0^th level spells per day, until 2^nd level onwards when you are able to cast six.
• You may not cast spells of more than ½ your character level (rounded down), except at 1^st level. That is, when you are a 7^th level mage, you may cast no more than 3^rd level spells. At 1^st thru 3^rd levels, you may cast no higher than 1^st level spells, unless you make a Spellcraft check. See below.
• You may make a Spellcraft check to cast higher level spells. The following table shows the DC:

Level of Spell DC

1 level higher	20
2 levels higher	25
3 levels higher	30
4 levels higher	35
5 levels higher	40

If you fail your Spellcraft DC, not only does the spell not activate, but you also lose the spell points for the spell. So, if you failed to cast a 7^th level spell, you would lose 7 spell points. If you roll a 1, you fall unconscious from the strain.
• You may attempt to cast more spells per day of a given level. You would have to make a Spellcraft roll for each spell. E.g., you are limited to 6 per day, and you want to cast a 7^th one. The DC for this would be 20 for the first one, 25 for the second one, and so on.

If you fail your Spellcraft DC, not only does the spell not activate, but you also lose the spell points for the spell. So, if you failed to cast that extra 3^rd level spell, you would lose 3 spell points. If you roll a 1, you fall unconscious from the strain.
• OPTIONAL: Instead of a Spellcraft check, GMs can opt to have the mage spend twice the spell points for the spell. That means if they want to cast an extra 3^rd level spell, they'd need to expend 6 spell points. If they can only cast 4^th level spells and they want to cast a 6^th level spell, then they'd need to spend 12 spell points.
• Once the spell points are all spent, the mage falls unconscious from the strain.

The following table shows how many spell points a spellcaster would have at each level.

Level Spell Pts

1st	3
2nd	4
3rd	5
4th	9
5th	10
6th	18
7th	19
8th	20
9th	22
10th	26
11th	28
12th	32
13th	34
14th	38
15th	40
16th	44
17th	46
18th	50
19th	52
20th	54