Conditional Reality

Look, I just don't think he could realistically swing a sword of that size...oh, yeah, I'm totally comfortable with the dragon...why do you ask?

Fiction is an art form and as such does not have to imitate life exactly.  In fact, most people prefer that their fiction does not imitate life too closely.  If we stop to consider the nature of what would be required for a man to run at close to the speed of light and then snatch up a villain without breaking the villain's neck, well the Flash just becomes a logistical nightmare.
Be that as it may, we do have our own set of personal rules as to what we are and are not willing to accept with a piece of fiction.  There are no hard and fast rules to this that I can divine, rather each person makes the decision for themselves based upon diverse factors including mood, 'scientific knowledge', and genre of work.  Authors, for example, create their own realities for their works, again taking genre into consideration.  When readers look for a work to enjoy within a particular genre, they too have a set, probably undeclared, of expectations that they bring with them.
A characteristic of this applied rules set is that it is unique to the individual such that each person has certain things they consider concrete with respect to reality and over which they are not willing to compromise.  I call this phenomenon Conditional Reality.
Here then is a practical example of Conditional Reality:
A player is playing a tabletop role playing game that is suspiciously familiar, we shall call it Castles and Giant Carnivorous Lizards.  The player, having just been hit by the 'electric breath' of an Azure Dragon, argues that it is unrealistic to have been hit (the player was no doubt killed by this 'breath attack') as the warrior standing next to him covered from head to toe in a skin of steel is a far more conductive target and the breath should have arced over to him instead.  He further ignores any arguments by the warrior to the plate being a Faraday Cage.  Now, let us observe that the player is willing to accept the following things that are not 'realistic':
1. Azure Dragons exist
2. That anything at all can 'breathe' electricity
3. That his Burglar is able to add more 'life' by gaining 'experience points' in a hierarchical level system that somehow makes him immune to arrows
Yet demands rigid application of reality to the notion of how this unrealistic lizard breathes its unrealistic breath.
That's conditional reality at its most egregious.  Usually I find it is more subtle, but at its most basic this illustrates the situation.

Conditional Reality is not strictly genre determined, but genre plays a significant part in how a person's Conditional Reality is determined.  The fantasy genre, whether it be in film, gaming or the written word inherently defies reality (although not as much as the Superhero genre), mostly through the use of magic and mythical monsters, but the fans and creators still employ a set of rules to keep things 'grounded'.  Any given person may decry something as being particularly unrealistic while totally ignoring the several other unrealistic things, hand-waving them as being 'magic' or 'poetically justified'.  Compare this to the Horror Genre.
The Horror Genre encompasses quite a range from simple thrillers to fully supernatural works, and therefore I can not provide a hard and fast rule any more than I could with fantasy, but by examples we can fathom a difference.  Most slasher films start with the initial premise that the antagonist is human.  This was certainly the case in Halloween, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Friday the 13th.  By the 4th installment of the Friday the 13th franchise the plausibility underlying the antagonist was being stretched.  By the 6th film Jason was officially the walking dead, leading up to his being a body hopping snake-slug monster in the 9th film.  If one accepts that the villain is a reanimated walking corpse then one should also have no problem accepting some of the other less than realistic elements of the films, yet we find that viewers will often complain about an 'unrealistic' action on behalf of the victim or unrealistic 'kill' all while accepting the existence of a masked walking dead killer.  Similarly, the tone of the work sets up the conditions for reality, but personal expertise can alter perception.
When an author, screenwriter, game designer or other artistic creator type sits down to create, they set the rules for reality in the process.  The writer determines what is reality for the creation, but ultimately each person who experiences the work makes the individual decision of what to accept and what not to accept.  This may seem petty but it is part of the human condition.  I blame several factors, including personal experience, education, and expertise.  Expertise is probably the worst culprit.  By expertise, I mean something about which an individual, rightly or not, considers themselves an authority, if not the foremost authority IN THE WORLD.  Personal taste must also be considered, as there are times when we forgive something that normally we would not simply because the genre or work is pleasing to us on the whole.  Some arguments I have heard concerning this phenomenon also include the nature of the work itself.  Cartoons are particular in that they are immune to such Conditional Reality arguments.  People simply say "It's a cartoon" and assume that this nullifies any arguments to the contrary.  It does, actually.
Conditional Reality is neither right nor wrong, it simply is.  As I have stated previously it is a part of the human condition brought about by a number of factors.  Because fiction of any type requires that we willingly participate in the alternate reality of the fictional work, it is to be expected that the individual perceptions of those perceiving the fictional work can clash with both the intentions of the creator of the fiction and the perceptions of the others perceiving the work as well.  Let us say, for example, that I am an expert in a very small segment of history, such as the history of soda machines throughout the American historical landscape and someone else is an expert on diners.  We might both be completely willing to accept the existence of time travel via a nuclear powered sports car, but balk at presentations of 1955 in the Michael J. Fox classic, Back to the Future. 
So is it a problem, this Conditional Reality?  Well, yes it is, but only insomuch as it pertains to human interactions.  I don't mean to suggest that Conditional Reality makes one person better or worse than another, but rather that it is part of personality clashes and further that it seems confined to fictional concepts.  I suspect we can apply it outside of fictional concepts, but then we are talking about an entirely different post.  As stated above, we participate in a shared fictional reality when we read a novel or watch a non-documentary film.  This Conditional Reality can be a problem during heated debates on, say, the Internet.  Nothing is more brutal than two fans who are having a disagreement over some piece of lore from a fictional body of work.  When two such fans begin arguing it becomes apparent to an outsider that Conditional Reality is heavily involved.  In any such argument logical attempts are ultimately doomed as the nature of fandom is fanaticism, which requires no logical basis whatsoever, yet it is part of the human condition that we put great effort into justifying, scientifically, logically, or otherwise our unrealities.  If you have any doubts about this think only of the numbers of technical manuals written for Star Trek and Star Wars properties, or any of the number of Wikipedia articles that explain the science behind fictional concepts.  The problem arises only when individual perceptions clash to the point that the participants engage in uncivil behavior, in which case we see that the Conditional Reality of the individuals involved does become a factor leading to the increased bad feelings.  When one person claims with all sincerity that another person is an idiot because the second person fails to accept the logical position of the first person when the first person is failing to realize that they are forcing their own Conditional Reality onto someone else's fictional concept, well that's when human perception is indeed a problem.  This is also a problem in RPGs when two people have a rules dispute over one person's supposed 'expertise' on a subject, usually amounting to bad feelings and dice throwing.  Again, perception is, I believe, at the root, as we all have our own views about reality and what we are willing to accept in a shared reality such as a fictional work or game.  We look for internal logic and consistency and we will allow style to override logic when it is good style or particularly entertaining.  By understanding that such Conditional Reality exists we can, hopefully, circumvent its pitfalls when we are faced with it in overwhelming amounts.
But hey, it's all a bit of fun, right?

Pirates of the Caribbean

I was reading Amazon, looking at reviews of the Pirates of the Caribbean edition Game of Life...and discovered something disturbing.
THERE ARE STUPID PEOPLE IN THE WORLD.
Of the reviews I read, before my own lungs came up to throttle my brain to save me from madness, I noticed a disturbing trend of people who had, as their chief complaint, the 'fact' that the edition I was viewing had "nothing to do with POTC".
I sussed it quickly.  These people seem to think that Pirates of the Caribbean is a movie franchise.  Amazing how quickly Disney built that bloody ride after the unexpected, runaway success of Curse of the Black Pearl, innit?
A few facts, just to clear the air:
The Pirates of the Caribbean is a dark ride that was first opened in Disneyland, in California, in the year 1967.  It featured a humorously lusty crew of audioanimatronic pirates sacking a Spanish town.  The only named character that can be verified is the mayor of the town, who is referred to as "Carlos" by the woman, presumably his wife, in the upstairs window as he is being dunked in the well.
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl is a film, based upon the ride(s) that premiered in 2003 and was a blockbuster to the joy and surprise of the Walt Disney company.
The edition of POTC Game of Life to which these reviews were appended was, essentially, the theme park edition, not the film franchise.
And just so we are clear, there really were pirates in the Caribbean centuries before either the rides or the films.  I cannot verify the existence of Spanish mayors named Carlos, but it seems plausible.

So to anyone on Amazon who wrote or will write a review demonstrating such seeming ignorance, as much as I enjoy the film franchise and Johnny Depp's work, please, understand that the world did not begin when you woke up and 'discovered' it.  Got that, Columbus?  Good.

Next Gen MMO...who you gonna call?

Ghostbusters!

Or, rather, I wish that were the case.

I would very much like to see a Ghostbusters MMORPG.  Given the sorry state of MMOs today, we need a paradigm shift to reach the next gen.  Yes, DCUO has a next gen combat system, but I want more.  I'm greedy.

I have the basics down for this game.  First your character would be a new employee in a Ghostbusters Franchise operation.  If you remember the film, Dr. Venkman says to Dr. Stantz, "The franchise rights alone will make us rich beyond our wildest dreams."  This idea was later picked up by West End Games in their Ghostbusters RPG (2 editions) where the players were employees or owners of a Ghostbusters franchise.  Here is where my MMO idea starts.  You can have any number of players, they work for a franchise outfit.

Classes and levels:  No need.  I want to see a shift away from the Gygax paradigm with scaling levels and scaling difficulty.  Skill gaming, or rather, games that use skills to define the player, sometimes called 'classless' gaming are where I am looking.  You wouldn't need 'races' as Ghostbusters is a game about being a human struggling against the supernatural world.

Magic, healing, and so forth would certainly fit.  No matter how scientific (or pseudo-scientific) you get with regard to ghosts, magic is just a part of the whole supernatural experience.  Mages in Ghostbusters?  Why not, as long as it doesn't become a fireball throwing Gandalf-man you should be fine.  Healing?  Isn't that what an EMT, doctor or combat medic does?  Of course it is.  As Rikalonious said, "out of combat" healing though.

PVP:  I enjoy PVP.  Many people do.  Lord of the Rings Online (LOTRO) had PVP in the form of Monster Play.  A character could enter the monster play zone at about level 40, if memory serves, but once a player had a level 10 character he could enter as a "monster" that was level 50.  I envision the same thing.  A player can enter PVP and choose to play a 'ghost' or 'monster', thus giving a strong PVP zone to the game and allowing a player the freedom to be both a hero in PVE and monster in PVP.

I realize that licensed material carries certain pitfalls, including the annoying use of franchise characters.  Well since every game features a 'training zone' these days, I say here is the chance to game with Egon, Ray, Winston and Peter.  Your first few 'training zone' missions would be in NYC training under the company owners, just so you don't ruin the company name by breaking things as a green recruit, then it is off to your home city once you are through with the training days.

These are just my initial thoughts on this.  Some company, cough, Atari, cough Mythic, should jump on this stellar idea.

Next Gen MMO failure

A term often bandied about in MMO circles is "Next Gen".  I have asked my wife, who has years more experience in MMOs than me, "What makes a next gen MMO?".
No good answer has be produced.  We just don't know.
If any MMO sub-genre needs the Next Gen treatment, it is superhero MMO.  At present I have played 3 Superhero MMOs (I have also played 3 supers table top games and read many more).  Each superhero MMO (SHMMO) has failed on some key point.
City of Heroes/City of Villains (COH/COV) had much to recommend it in character design, especially given its age.  I found the missions to wear thin after a while, however and the template or metaclass system is not superhero appropriate.
Champions had the most attractive and robust paperdoll of any MMO I'd ever played.  A SHMMO needs a vast, and I mean VAST, amount of colors, costume pieces, and body styles.  Super is all about costume and powers.  Champions, however, had uninspired gameplay.  It promised far more than it could hope to deliver.  It originally seemed to eschew the metagame templates, but as of Free-Play it is restricted to the same tired metaclasses.
DCU Online has mediocre costumes at launch and the color palette leaves a little to be desired.  The power sets are not ideal (Superman is an 'ice' hero), but it's choice to separate the 'powers' from the 'combat skills' was great.  DCUO comes closest to the superhero feel by having EVERYONE be a damage dealer, then tacking on the metaclass.
Just to be clear, by metaclass I am speaking of TANK, HEALER, DPS, RANGED DPS, CONTROLLER, etc.  These roles simply do not fit the super hero mold.
Superman is often seen as a PROTECTOR or DEFENDER, which is superhero MMO METACLASS speak for 'TANK'.  He absorbs damage, protects the hard hitters and controllers.  Sure, of course he would step in front of a bullet to save Batman, but he is also a VERY HEAVY HITTER.  Do laser beam eyes and the ability to move the planet not equate to DPS somehow?

MORE THAN ONE WAY TO SKIN A CATWOMAN
Anyone who grew up on tabletop RPG knows that problems are not always solved by simply doing damage.  A thief sees the world differently than does a cleric or a wizard.  When presented with a problem in a tabletop campaign a thief looks at his skills to survive and succeed, while a wizard looks at this spellbook.  Unfortunately years of uninspired MMO programming and dull-witted children playing the games have led to the current state of gaming.  The MMO does not provide multiple solutions to a problem, just multiple classes seeking the same solution: kill it.  The stealther, the tank, and the nuker all need to do the same thing, which is outdamage the foe, they simply approach the goal in predictable, but different ways.  When put together into a group they automatically fall into their role or fail.
Comic readers and fans of the genre know that there is more separating Flash, Batman, Spiderman and Superman than simply strength and roles.  They think differently from one another.  If a smilodon, brought through a time portal, was let loose in THE CITY, each would solve the problem differently.  Batman would use a gadget to capture the beast, then spirit it away to the Batcave's Bat Prehistoric Menagerie Wing.  Flash would use his speed to baffle the great cat, maybe fun off, get some bait, and lead it away from the public, tricking it into a zoo cage.  Spidey would just web it up, but then the writers would forget how strong his webs are supposed to be and the sabretooth would just cut free.  Supes wouldn't even get winded dealing with this.  He'd probably fly it back in to the past as well.
In a standard MMO (fantasy mostly) the nuker would nuke it, the stealther would sneak up and use a set of combos and the tank would take a long time to kill it.  No inspired gameplay.

SHMMO deserves a next gen treatment.  Looking at the older DDO we saw a game where, through instanced gameplay, the DnD 3.5 classes actually used their 'skills' not just their line of damage abilities to solve problems.  There were also puzzles that the player actually had to solve or suffer.  There were traps for the rogue to disarm and locks that required a specific 'stat' like Charisma or Wisdom to undo.  All of this made for a 'tabletop' experience.  Bioware's Neverwinter Nights was capable of the same through networked play and modding.
SHMMO deserves such a treatment.  Certainly the popular image of comics is the 4 color slugfest.  Muscled men and buxom women duking it out in mindless violence.  Every true comics fan knows that this image is false.  Comics are varied and exciting with characters who eschew violence as much as bellicose pugilists glorify it.  Shouldn't the Next Gen MMO be the SHMMO?
At present the SHMMO has fallen into the same boring MMO rut as the extant fantasy games.  The metagame is still the same, with the metaclasses unchanged, save for the names, and no hope of inspired gameplay waiting in the wings.  Things are looking grim for Star Wars: The Old Republic as well.  SWTOR is being produced by Bioware, the company that brought the world two iterations of Neverwinter Nights and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.  SWTOR deserves to be THE NEXT GEN MMO, but will it?
According to my sources, no it will not.  Success in this business is determined by subscriptions.  Bums in seats.  Thus the designers must give the people what they want.  The sad truth would seem to be that the people say they want fresh, new, and Next Gen, but demonstrate through forums, beta tests and their purchasing dollars that they want more of the same.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it; what if it never worked in the first place?
The first MMOs grew from the love of the (tabletop) game, yet computers were just too limited to provide the full tabletop experience, which is one of possibilities and human interaction.  The tabletop game featured game controllers who could and would fudge a die roll to save the story, who could adjudicate a situation not covered in the rules book (programming), and who were capable of shifting the pre-programmed adventure to suit the needs of the consumer.  When presented with a cat that needed skinning, the tabletop GM could be convinced that perhaps the cat didn't need skinning after all.  When presented with 4 standard ways to solve the problem the human GM could handle that new, innovative and slightly insane 5th way.  None of this is part of the MMO.  To make it mass market and profitable the designers needed to focus on doing one or two things well.  Those things were combat related.  Since that time MMOs have been defined by COMBAT and the esoterica of tabletop, such as Stats, Skills, and Choices have all given way to an action bar full of ATTACKS, SPELLS, and BUFFS.  This is great in a wargame sense, but is not good enough for SHMMO and certainly not the path to Next Gen, unless, as failed evolutionary science teaches us, the Next Gen is just more of the same, parent to child to grandchild.
With such a shallow and polluted gene pool as we currently have in this post-Blizzard MMO world, how can we expect Next Gen to be any different from This Gen?

The relationship between Sci-Fi and Horror: The Creature

Recently I have been pondering things like the fact that Jaws is still a great movie and how much Science Fiction and Horror go together.  Going back to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and possibly before, there has a been a relationship between Sci-Fi and Horror that works well.  The two genres are not, I believe, wholly distinct from one another.  If we look at them as existing on a spectrum there is significant overlap.  Consider the aforementioned Frankenstein.  Written using the science of its day and possessing social commentary aplenty, the story was also a Gothic ghost story of great skill and interest, spooking readers then if not now.  In the 1950s in the United States comics, magazines, films and television shows all got into the Sci-Fi game, leaving behind the thoughtful writings of Wells and Verne for the Atomic powered horror of giant bugs, alien invaders and pod people.  Still the science was contemporary (for popular purposes) and the subtexts were apropos.  Overt alien invaders from Mars stood side-by-side with allegorical Communist Pod People in the cinematic worlds.

Into this new era of Science Fiction stalked (and swum) the Gill-Man, or, if you like, The Creature from the Black Lagoon.

The eponymous Creature (who I will refer to as Gill-Man for the remainder of this article...probably) is a pre-historic throwback, a leftover missing link between man and fish.  Obviously there is no such thing, nor would there be, but this does not stop Gill-Man from being one of the best Universal Monsters of all time.  This is very important, actually, because Gill-Man is a Universal Monster.  If you do a quick Google search for "Universal Monsters" you will see that the classic team lineup is Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, The Wolf Man, The Mummy (in bandages), the Bride of Frankenstein and the Creature (from the Black Lagoon).  Save for the Wolf Man and the Creature, all of these classic monsters come from the 1930s.  Wolfie was 1941 and Creature was 1954.  What is especially telling is that the Gill-Man is considered one of the gang despite his younger age, lack of 'historical' or 'literary' basis and despite the fact that his movie is really more Sci-Fi than a 'monster' film.

I love the film and I love the character.  The film marks a departure from the norm for a 50's film from a company like Universal, in that it freely speaks of evolution.  The leading man and leading lady, Richard Carlson and Julia Adams, respectively, are a couple, but unmarried and living together, a not uncommon reality any time in history, but not something shown often on the big screen, save when viewing morally inferior 'villains'.  The film was not a typical alien invasion movie or supernatural thriller, but a script about a fish-man that falls in love with a human woman and is attempting to protect its home from invaders.

The Gill-Man is a great movie monster, plain and simple.  An anthropomorphic fish, or a hybrid fish-man, either way the creature is an imposing figure with claws (not present in any known fish), fins and a bass-like gaping maw.  Admittedly his head does appear a bit like a middle-aged dude with a 'skullet' but let's try and remember that he is a fish-person.
Fish people are an interesting choice for movie monster because they automatically look alien to land bound mammals like ourselves.  Consider Admiral Ackbar, everyone's favorite lobster man, or Kit Fisto, whose creature shop genesis is anybody's guess.

Seriously, what the fuck are you?  Squid eyes, catfish chin tendrils, lobster hands...orthopedic shoes...seriously, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU?

"Yeah, mon, me gots the Space Rasta ting goin on"  Head tentacles.  This is all so wrong.

See, the aquatic provides a sense of alien mystique and cool points.  Except for the lobster man.  There is nothing cool about Mon Cal.  Ever.  And they have breasts.  Mammaries?  On a lobster-catfish-squid?

So cool is the Gill-Man that Macfarlane toys, the experts in when too much is not enough, made not 1 but 2 different sea-creature toys.

Here we see the first one, part of a series (two series to be exact) of monster sets.  Each featured a monster, a setting and either a victim, opponent or supporting cast member.  This was perhaps the most 'high concept' of the monster sets as the "playset" portion uses "wooden" poles to support a plastic 'water' under which the sea creature can be found.  The old diving helmet and diver, armed with a harpoon, completes the scene.  This creature is definitely human in design, evoking the Gill-Man imagery, but is oddly draconic as well.  It is a fine sculpt.

Here is the later sea creature from the later, larger scale Macfarlane line.  This line features sculpts that 're-imagine' the monsters even more, including a very batlike vampire and the most grotesque werewolf sculpt in the history of toys.  Another fine sculpt, this time with hints of alligator in the face and a translucency to the fins.  This creature is also huge.  The severed human head on the hook gives a sense of 'scale' to the beast.

There are many reasons to like the Gill-Man, not the least of which is the fact that I just really dig sea monsters.  Of the classic Universal Monsters, Gill is a great example of what a classic Universal Monster was all about.  He's sympathetic, frightening and photogenic.  The Gill-Man's story is one of doomed love, with his motivation being not the destruction of life, or the unnatural prolonging of his undead existence and in this respect he reminds us of the Mummy Imhotep who sought to bring back his reincarnated love.  Yet Gill-Man is somehow purer than Imhotep.  He only wants the human interlopers to leave his world alone until he meets the girl of his fishy dreams, and it is this smitten fish boy that is the tragic hero of the piece.  Still, he remains a monster through and through with his alien body and mind.  He thrilled audiences for three pictures before leaving the scene for good at the end of The Creature Walks Among Us, but his legacy lives on.  Among the U-Monsters he is unique, for while Frankenstein's Monster and Dracula demonstrate great physical strength and the Wolf Man demonstrates savagery, it is the Gill-Man who alone resides in the water.  He is like the Aquaman of the monsters, but is not the butt of lame jokes on websites the world over.  He also received his own pinball game and was a feature member of the Monster Bash pinball machine from Williams.

Monster Bash backglass

In the Universal Monster band Gill-Man plays saxophone and you will note is the only member with a groupie.  Even in the pinball game the Creature displays his aloof and alien manner, turning down multiple requests to join the band.

As a character that is both a Sci-Fi classic and a Horror icon from the Universal stable, I think that the Creature (from the Black Lagoon) is the perfect iconic figure to represent the genre overlap at its best.  Of course, he is one of my faves, so I'm biased.

Creature from the Black Lagoon available on DVD, 4 stars, go watch it today.
Until next time, keep your Tiki lit.

Damn it's cold

As the actress said to the bishop...

But seriously, folks.  It's cold.  I don't like it.  I'm sick of it.  I want to be somewhere warm, beachy, drinks with umbrellas in...

Not happy.  And for the record, neither is the wife.  She, despite being a native of Virginia and having lived here nearly all of her life, is so over cold weather.  We aspire to move south a bit, Gulf Coast perhaps.

The Caribbean.  Swimming Pools.  Pirates.  Drinks with umbrellas in.

So today I decided that I feel sci-fi nostalgic again.  I was going to talk about The Creature From The Black Lagoon and how much I enjoy that film.  But really, sod it.  A bloody classic that manages to be both a sci-fi classic and a Universal monster classic.  Yep.  Fish man.

Why is it that fish men, clearly lacking external genitalia, are so keen to mate with human women?

I bet Admiral Ackbar would taste yummy if boiled alive and dipped in drawn butter.  In fact that is probably the best way to torture a Mon Cal for information: dip him in drawn butter and then watch him try to eat himself.  (Lobsters are highly cannibalistic, and I don't care what the name is {Squid Man...Mon Calimari} those guys are bloody lobsters)

Many Mon Cal ate themselves to bring us this information.

I mean, if you had four Mon Cal stuck on a life raft together after a shipwreck they would waste no time getting to the part where they eat one of the group.  Probably before the supplies ran out.  Because they are going to need drawn butter.

This marks the fourth time I've used the words drawn butter without any clear notion of what makes it drawn. Butter I understand, but the rest of it...meh....as long as I get to go to Red Mon Cal for dinner.

"Would you like to hear about our specials today?"

"Shit.  Why not, sweet cheeks?"

"Today we have potato bisque for soup, a lovely Ceasar ranch salad.  Our fresh catch is Mahi."

"How's the Mon Cal done?"

"Boiled alive and served with drawn butter.  A dandelion green salad on the side."

"How is it caught?  Humanely I hope."

"Oh, it's a trap."

I am a Wizard...and I sword!

Ahhh, wizards, those mysterious weavers of magic, those glass cannons of RPG fame, those pointy hat sporting, dress wearing, broomstick soccer playing, making some limey tart a multi-billionaire figures of fantasy and folklore.
Mr. Gary Gygax and Mr. Dave Arneson forever cemented the imagery of wizards into our minds with their little game, you might have heard of it, just a trifling thing, Dungeons and Dragons and in so doing completely bollocksed the whole wizard concept.
Thanks to these two gentlemen wizards in popular media, especially gaming, are woefully ill-equipped to defend themselves from aggression.  They can't use/don't carry swords.

Swords are common in fantasy, perhaps far more common than they ever were in history.  It seems that the default weapon of any European-inspired fantasy world is the long sword.  By this I mean that not only is the long sword the 'go to' weapon for uninspired DMs and fantasy writers, but it is also the baseline for 'damage' calculations.  DnD long swords, for example, have always been 1d8 damage, which is the same as the hit die for a 0 level human 'commoner'.  Thus this weapon is dangerous but not some WMD of Medieval proportions.

So common is the long sword in fantasy lit/gaming that even thieves and bards could use them in 2nd edition AD&D.  Yes, friends, the sneaky sneaky gits and the poets could swing long swords like a champ, but not the wizard.  Why?  Oh, good question.  According to the DnD guys it is because a wizard spends the majority of his life studying the arcane and getting little exercise, so he doesn't have the time to learn to use swords or wear armor.
Uh huh.
It's actually a misguided attempt at 'balance'.  See, the magic guy can summon fire without flint or tinder so he doesn't need a cool sword.  These guys also made sure to limit that fire summoning drastically.  So that famous scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail...the one with Tim...

Well that just won't happen.  Tim doesn't have that many spells per day.  Or maybe he does and he just used them all up being impressive, which is why he doesn't help with the vorpal bunny. (Shite, ubernerd alert, I just used 'game logic' to explain something unrelated)

So the remedy?  Warhammer.  Well, Warhammer Quest anyway.

Now that's a wizard, yes?
Let's just do a run down:
Pointy Hat?   Check
Robes with sigils?  Check
Staff?  Check
Long sword?  Check
Beard?  Check
Bag of scrolls and assorted paraphernalia?  Check
Waitadamnminit....
Long sword?   Yeeeessssssssss

Now elves have long been candidates for the multi-class fighter/mage role, which means of course that they get to have more 'hit points' than a wizard and use fighter weapons and can fight well enough and still throw a fireball when they want.  Not the poor humans, nope.  Well sod that, I say.  Warhammer gave me a wizard with a sword and for that I thank them.

My name is Gandalf, and I like to hold my sword in public.

Ahh, yes, the original badass in a dress with a blade.  Seriously, look at this guy.  He went by many names including Mithrandir, which is Sindarin for 'Elderly man with whom , emphatically so, it would be most wise for you to not fuck'.

And here's one more, from Wizards, Warriors and You, just to illustrate MY point.

Pointy hat, robes, cape and...wait for it...MAGIC SWORD!

A wizard with a sword is a wonderful thing.  Let go the old, outdated notions of wizards being restricted and let the swords swing freely.  It all comes down to game system, I know, and the game systems that realize that the wizard does not need 50 penalties to make up for his 1 advantage (spell casting) get my vote.  Especially since those damned clerics seem to just cast all day wearing armor.  Ah yes, wizards and armor...well, that's for another time.  A simple system like Warhammer Quest offered (and Advanced Heroquest before it) or simply realizing how foolish it is to lock a 'class' out from a weapon that is being treated as something as commonplace as a baseball bat in modern America, is the solution to this irrational prejudice against spellcasters.  For Gygax's sake, haven't they suffered enough with their low hit points, poor combat profiles and less than manly dress code?

Now in your average MMO this is all pointless as wizards are simply nuke machines that lob distanced damage spells or control battlefield conditions and use some sort of recharging mana system.  They don't need swords.  But then most of those games are shite anyway.

Until next time, stay lit.