Today I'll discuss one of my favorite topics: Pokémon! Well, just one aspect of Pokémon, really-- and not necessarily my favorite one, at that: pokéballs. (please note: my only source material will be the games, not the anime, manga, or card game, as they are what I am most familiar with)
To be fair, pokéballs are pretty incredible gadgets. They are able to store sentient matter intact; they can shrink in size; they can be stored as data in the Pokémon Box System. How is this?
I suspect pokéballs use a technology similar to Star Trek's transporter technology. In particular, the Next Generation episode "Relics" comes to mind, in which Montgomery Scott is able to survive intact for 80 years-- without aging!-- by keeping himself in a shuttlecraft pattern buffer.
Still Pokémon didn't start out terribly technologically-advanced. From the myths and legends and folk-tales gathered from across the five regions (Kanto, Johto, Hoenn, Sinnoh, Unova), we learn that at first, pokémon and humans lived separately, but that pokémon came and helped humans occasionally. Some humans even managed to befriend pokémon. Though I don't recall it ever being explicitly stated, I'm fairly confident that these first "trainers" didn't use pokéballs; that the pokémon stayed of their own free will; and that battling between such "trainers" was uncommon at best. Sure, I imagine there were farmers who raised Mareep and Flaafy for wool and Miltanks for milk; ranchers broke and raised Ponyta, Rapidash, and Tauros for transportation; people who placed Goldeen and Seaking into ponds as part of a park; ...you get the idea.
In Pokémon Gold/Silver/Crystal, we learn that seeds called apricorns were used as some of the first-- if not the first-- pokémon "capture" devices. When hollowed out in a certain way, apricorns could hold pokémon, with each apricorn being especially effective against a specific kind of pokémon: heavy, fast, able to evolve with a Moon Stone, etc. It's unclear whether they used technology similar to the modern pokéball, but they definitely pre-date the current models by quite a bit!
From the first generation of games, we learn that the box system was recently invented (by Bill), so people either could not have more than 6 pokémon at a time, or they had to carry all their pokémon around with them; though I suppose it's possible pokémon could be stored in physical locations, such as a research facility or at home (and when you needed a pokémon in storage, there was a Poké Postal Service in place).
This brings us to modern innovations: the specialty pokéball. Interestingly, these new pokéballs are inspired from apricorns. They are a sort of revival, much like our own (Western) history of medicine-- where we started by using roots, moved on to synthric medications, and are now at a point where there's a bit of a return to herbal medicine. (this is not to say synthetics re going anywhere, just that we now have these specialty pokéballs as an option)
And there you have it! Some ruminations on the pokéball. There are related topics, such as pokémon capture (relevant to the Pokémon Ranger series); those will be for a later time. For now, I leave you with these images of "Hunson Is Groovy" 's take on the pokéball: http://www.halolz.com/2012/01/25/wtf-is-a-pokeball/
Monday, March 19, 2012
Friday, December 16, 2011
Dungeons, Dragons, and What They're All About
Let me say this at the outset: I am a big fan of DnD (D&D, D and D, Dungeons and Dragons, whatever you want to call it). I play it weekly, and will soon be running weekly sessions of my own apart from the weekly sessions I play. The punchline of this post is going to be "DnD is a pretty cool guy. eh fights draogns and doesnt afraid of anything." (okay, okay, I'll keep meme references to a minimum)
First, of course, is the question: What _is_ DnD? One answer is that it is a tabletop game (like Scrabble or Settlers of Catan) that has players in control of their own characters; these characters, through combat with monsters, by interacting with the people and places of a made-up universe, and other role-playing elements, become more and more powerful, gaining new abilities and equipment.
In short, it's the marriage between video games and board games. It has the avatar aspect of video games with the social aspect of board games (to put it simplistically).
This is all well and good, but that only really deals with the mechanics of the game. What of the substance? The "intangibles," as it were? What of the story of DnD?
Well, all it is, really, is your typical fantasy setting. For instance: I assume you are all at least familiar with the Lord of the Rings stories (or movies). The world in which it takes place-- Middle Earth-- could very easily be a DnD setting (outside copyright laws, I suppose). Perhaps the campaign is that of the Fellowship. Perhaps the group has decided they want to play the role of hobbits fending off the machinations of Saruman in the Shire. Perhaps they wish to play the role of the Rohirrim, guarding Rohan against the invading orcs and uruk-hai while mounted on their valiant steeds.
But the difference between DnD and a purely Middle Earth setting is that in the former, there are things called "power sources". Sure, Middle Earth has that in a way-- Gandalf is a Wizard, so he must draw his power from magic in the world; the elves are very much in tune with the primal spirits of the land; the dwarves, Rangers, and humans rely on martial prowess for their combat. DnD has these, too. So the only things remaining are...
DnD's power sources are as follows: Arcane (magic), Primal (the natural world), Martial (physical training and discipline), Psionic (the power of the mind), and Divine (gods and god-like creatures). As most people don't seem to have an issue with the first 3 (from personal experience as well as what I've heard from others), the problem must be with Psionics and Divine.
What of Psionics? Its key feature is self-reliance. The power a psionic character manifests is due to her own unlocked potential-- the power of her own mind. To be quite frank, that's a big part of American culture; and so there isn't much hullabaloo about this. That may also be because it's one of the lesser-known parts of the game. Actually, that's probably it.
That brings us to the Divine in DnD. The classic character here is the Cleric. He worships a god who, generally, is good; who smiles favorably on those who help the afflicted and smite evil; and who, ultimately, is killable. Then there's the warlock, who has made a pact with powerful beings-- sometimes a member of a high court, sometimes a demon, sometimes a devil-- and derives his power from that patron.
Unsurprisingly, the most vocal opponents of DnD end up being Christians, who see gods and devils and the like and react without looking at it too closely. Because DnD involves a pantheon, it gets a strike against it for promoting idolatry; because it involves role-playing, it gets a strike for promoting escapist fantasies and sloth; because it involves rolling dice, it gets a strike for promoting gambling.
To this, I say: there are a great many things (video games, sports, work, and more) which, when taken to an extreme, can 1) be a cause for sin (idolatry or otherwise); 2) lead to an unhealthy lifestyle (physical, spiritual, emotional); and 3) pave the way for worse addictions.
What is it, then, about DnD that is worth defending? Why is it any good at all? When I think of the time I've spent playing DnD, the images that come to mind are ones of friends, laughs, bonding, and basically a good time in a safe environment. The very nature of the game rewards cooperation and critical thinking, as players' characters (in general) must work together to accomplish their tasks. It's also a great way to present important issues and discuss them in a controlled setting-- for instance, King Mijgraw has murdered leaders of the opposition movement, but with his help, you can stop the threat of invasion by a force bent on the enslavement of the kingdom; how do you handle this situation with your group?
The biggest thing, though, that a game of DnD has going for it is the interaction. When I first joined the campaign in which I currently play, I knew 4 of the other players, and only 1 of them was more friend than acquaintance. Then I got to know the other 2 people in the group, and I got to know the people I knew better, and now that group of friends feels like they're part of my extended family! Every week it's someone else's turn to bring/make food; we catch up on what's going on in each other's lives while eating; then we have a blast playing together, bouncing ideas off each other about how best to solve the issues presented to us, fighting dragons and goblins and otherwise protecting innocent villagers.
Yes, too much DnD is bad for you. As the saying goes, "Everything in moderation." So, I ask you-- would you rather be spending time by yourself in front of your TV or computer screen, or around a table, telling jokes and having a good time with friends?
First, of course, is the question: What _is_ DnD? One answer is that it is a tabletop game (like Scrabble or Settlers of Catan) that has players in control of their own characters; these characters, through combat with monsters, by interacting with the people and places of a made-up universe, and other role-playing elements, become more and more powerful, gaining new abilities and equipment.
In short, it's the marriage between video games and board games. It has the avatar aspect of video games with the social aspect of board games (to put it simplistically).
This is all well and good, but that only really deals with the mechanics of the game. What of the substance? The "intangibles," as it were? What of the story of DnD?
Well, all it is, really, is your typical fantasy setting. For instance: I assume you are all at least familiar with the Lord of the Rings stories (or movies). The world in which it takes place-- Middle Earth-- could very easily be a DnD setting (outside copyright laws, I suppose). Perhaps the campaign is that of the Fellowship. Perhaps the group has decided they want to play the role of hobbits fending off the machinations of Saruman in the Shire. Perhaps they wish to play the role of the Rohirrim, guarding Rohan against the invading orcs and uruk-hai while mounted on their valiant steeds.
But the difference between DnD and a purely Middle Earth setting is that in the former, there are things called "power sources". Sure, Middle Earth has that in a way-- Gandalf is a Wizard, so he must draw his power from magic in the world; the elves are very much in tune with the primal spirits of the land; the dwarves, Rangers, and humans rely on martial prowess for their combat. DnD has these, too. So the only things remaining are...
DnD's power sources are as follows: Arcane (magic), Primal (the natural world), Martial (physical training and discipline), Psionic (the power of the mind), and Divine (gods and god-like creatures). As most people don't seem to have an issue with the first 3 (from personal experience as well as what I've heard from others), the problem must be with Psionics and Divine.
What of Psionics? Its key feature is self-reliance. The power a psionic character manifests is due to her own unlocked potential-- the power of her own mind. To be quite frank, that's a big part of American culture; and so there isn't much hullabaloo about this. That may also be because it's one of the lesser-known parts of the game. Actually, that's probably it.
That brings us to the Divine in DnD. The classic character here is the Cleric. He worships a god who, generally, is good; who smiles favorably on those who help the afflicted and smite evil; and who, ultimately, is killable. Then there's the warlock, who has made a pact with powerful beings-- sometimes a member of a high court, sometimes a demon, sometimes a devil-- and derives his power from that patron.
Unsurprisingly, the most vocal opponents of DnD end up being Christians, who see gods and devils and the like and react without looking at it too closely. Because DnD involves a pantheon, it gets a strike against it for promoting idolatry; because it involves role-playing, it gets a strike for promoting escapist fantasies and sloth; because it involves rolling dice, it gets a strike for promoting gambling.
To this, I say: there are a great many things (video games, sports, work, and more) which, when taken to an extreme, can 1) be a cause for sin (idolatry or otherwise); 2) lead to an unhealthy lifestyle (physical, spiritual, emotional); and 3) pave the way for worse addictions.
What is it, then, about DnD that is worth defending? Why is it any good at all? When I think of the time I've spent playing DnD, the images that come to mind are ones of friends, laughs, bonding, and basically a good time in a safe environment. The very nature of the game rewards cooperation and critical thinking, as players' characters (in general) must work together to accomplish their tasks. It's also a great way to present important issues and discuss them in a controlled setting-- for instance, King Mijgraw has murdered leaders of the opposition movement, but with his help, you can stop the threat of invasion by a force bent on the enslavement of the kingdom; how do you handle this situation with your group?
The biggest thing, though, that a game of DnD has going for it is the interaction. When I first joined the campaign in which I currently play, I knew 4 of the other players, and only 1 of them was more friend than acquaintance. Then I got to know the other 2 people in the group, and I got to know the people I knew better, and now that group of friends feels like they're part of my extended family! Every week it's someone else's turn to bring/make food; we catch up on what's going on in each other's lives while eating; then we have a blast playing together, bouncing ideas off each other about how best to solve the issues presented to us, fighting dragons and goblins and otherwise protecting innocent villagers.
Yes, too much DnD is bad for you. As the saying goes, "Everything in moderation." So, I ask you-- would you rather be spending time by yourself in front of your TV or computer screen, or around a table, telling jokes and having a good time with friends?
Friday, September 30, 2011
what is gamerdom?
Welcome, one and all, to gamerdom! Here you'll find posts on, mostly, games. Surprising, I know. Occasionally, other things. Like too many commas. We'll see how it develops, eh?
But the keyword here is "eventually." If I were you, I'd check back in around 2012.
Cheers!
~ternach
But the keyword here is "eventually." If I were you, I'd check back in around 2012.
Cheers!
~ternach
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)