Where Is My Wizard Hat?

Lately, I've been running Curse of Strahd, but not with D&D.

That would be too easy.

I'm running it with Mothership.

No, not space vampires, although that would be awesome. This is narratively gothic horror fantasy with the d% rules chassis. I've made a ton of tweaks that are necessary for the genre, like re-flavoring the classes to actual social classes of early modern Europe. Skills, items, etc.

There is one big change I've made recently that wasn't necessary at all: retooling the damage system.

HP-less Damage

So, for those unaware how damage works in Mothership, here's a rundown:

You have HP and also a certain number of Wounds you can take (usually around 20 HP and 2 Wounds)

When you take damage you subtract from your HP, if it hits zero then take a Wound and reset your HP (account for spillover)

When you take a Wound roll on the Wounds Table and gain a special condition based on the damage type (sometimes this results in instant death if you roll real bad)

I absolutely adore the Wound Table in Mothership but I super don't care about the math that gets to it.

So I cut the math. Here's my current procedure:

When you take damage compare that number with the Wound chart (stuff like armor reducing damage still applies)

Take the associated Wound and deal with it's effects

Other Influences

In a word: Warhammer.

I always loved the critical damage tables in Dark Heresy. One time my character's head exploded and everyone else slipped in the blood fountain my body turned into. Good stuff.

The Warhammer Fantasy RP crit tables were a big source of inspiration on mine.

Scaling

Where Mothership was a d10 table, I needed something at least double that size given how much damage monster do. Even with my monster damage dialed back from Mothership standards, right now my table goes to 20 but I should probably expand it to 30.

It also seems important for the chart to escalate like Mothership's can. That is to say, get certain Wounds makes it more likely to get more Wounds later. Where Mothership has Bleeding, I went with something more general that interacted directly with the chart. Also, something to dictate length of injury.

Wound Keywords:

Add - the next time you take damage add X

Temporary - lasts until end of encounter

Ongoing - lasts until resting or treatment

Permanent - lasts forever (unless something dramatic happens)

Okay, Get to the Dang Table Already!

Still working on other damage types, like Fire and Gore, as well as tweaking the existing chart, but this has been a promising start.

During our last fight the party priest was attacked by one of those animated Scarecrows a few times while exploring a swamp. The first cut just made his allies Stressed (Profuse Bleeding) the second made it hard for him to run (Severed Tendon) and the third put him in a really bad spot (Artery Nicked).

This was all extremely dramatic and changed the party's calculation every round. Plus there was very little math. So I consider it a big success.

In Closing

So that's another thing I'm working on.

After all, why bother finishing a project when I can just start another one?

Critical Role: FACES OF THE SALLOWLANDS 💀 🏜️ 🌒

New survivors have arrived in the Sallowlands! Return to the Halcyon domain with Game Master Matthew Mercer this July 9th as he spins an all-new Age of Umbra saga with Laura Bailey, Jennifer English, Abubakar Salim, Victor Ortiz, and Zachery Renauldo.

Character 🎨: Strange_House on Instagram

Obviously I can't speak for everyone, but I reckon you should be at LEAST 18 to go on drastic changes. To actually think, and consider. Because personally, I used to be a "trans-man" back when I was 12-13 or so (big massive quotation marks bc even back then I'm confused), and thank God I didn't get any irreversible big anything because I explored myself a bit more, and found out I enjoy being feminine better.

My point is, irreversible drastic gender affirming care has to be given when you're 18 years of age. Kids can change a lot, so permanent medical decisions should wait until adulthood. These interventions can have permanent effects, they should be restricted to adults who are legally and developmentally more capable of making long-term decisions.

But obviously, minors can make meaningful decisions, but because judgment, risk assessment, and identity development are still evolving, permanent medical interventions should be approached with extra caution, and imo, not at all.

This is how y'all sound. Like, why do kids who think they are cis go through puberty, and trans kids have to fight to prevent their puberty, even if they know. Even though all the research very much shows that the vast majority of trans kids is indeed trans and does not go back and has better physical and mental health outcome if you just let them go through the puberty they actually want, instead of either forcing them through the puberty they do not want - or putting them on blockers for years and with this preventing them to hit typical milestones at the same age as their peers.

My point isn't that irreversible outcomes are automatically wrong. It's that when we're considering intentional medical interventions with long-term effects, the bar for consent and certainty should be high.

I also don't think natural puberty and medical intervention are exactly the same thing. One is the body's default developmental process, while the other requires doctors to actively alter that process. You can disagree with that distinction, but that's why I don't think "then put everyone on blockers" follows from what I said.

That said, I agree with you on one thing: not intervening is also a choice with consequences. For trans youth, going through an unwanted puberty can have lasting effects too. I just think that reality makes the issue more complicated, not that it automatically justifies medical intervention before adulthood.

I agree that 18 isn't some magical age where a switch flips and suddenly everyone becomes fully mature. A mature 16-year-old can be more thoughtful than an immature 25-year-old, but societies use age thresholds all the time because we need workable legal standards. Voting, signing contracts, military service, drinking, gambling, and other activities all have age cutoffs. They're not based on a magical transformation on a specific birthday; they're based on drawing a practical line somewhere.

So saying "18 is arbitrary" doesn't automatically tell us where the line should be instead. If not 18, then 17? 16? 15? A case-by-case assessment? You still need some principle for deciding.

"18 is arbitrary" = fair criticism of a simplistic argument.

"Therefore there should be no age threshold" = doesn't necessarily follow.

People are acting as if trans medical treatment is handed out like candy. Which it is not. Nobody is saying: "Okay, the kid has just said that sometimes they with they were another gender. Now put them on everything we have." That is just a strawman argument. There would still be doctors involved. But trans kids should have the ability to go through their puberty when their peers do - if that is what they want.

And you calling back onto your own experience is kinda weird, given that you clearly in this context never interacted with any medical professionals.

There is also the fact that generally the rates of detransitioners who actually do later think they were fully wrong about it is insanely small. Much, much smaller than the rates of people who grew up thinking they were cis and later realize they are trans.

You basically are saying that the happiness, mental and physical health of the small percentage cis children that wrongly identify as trans, and during their process talking with medical professionals never figure this out, is more valuable than the happiness, mental and physical health of trans children who correctly identify of trans. Meaning that according to you trans kids are less worthy to be happy and healthy than cis children. Which in itself already says a lot about how you think about trans people.

You are discussing a medical case where we do know that Option A greatly increases health outcomes for 97% of people who apply for it, with the alternative for some of those 97% being lethal. And you say that because of the 3% - out of whom mind you, only an even smaller part is very negative about the earlier decision.

Exactly, nobody says that. Congrats on noticing that. I'm just challenging the rhetoric of giving kids free access to that stuff. (WHICH ISN'T TRUE!)

Calling back to my own experience as "weird"

You're calling it invalid. I'm just using my experience AS AN EXAMPLE. I never went to a professional because one, I live in a super conservative country (you'd get killed if they found out you're queer), two, I didn't come out, and three, even if I can get a professional, it's incredibly expensive, and four, even then, this doesn't make my "trans era" (or in this case, exploring my identity) any less invalid, I genuinely loved and was comfortable presenting as a man, but people change, ESPECIALLY during puberty when you're still exploring yourself. Saying that I never went to a professional, implies that you're only valid as a trans person if you went through biologically altering procedures. Raised my eyebrows at that. And I got like, two friends who used to be "trans," but after 13-14 and understand themselves better, what do you know? They present themselves as something else that isn't directly under the trans umbrella (to my understanding). (I use quotation marks bc I'm not sure whether I should call them trans bc they're not anymore) (and saying ex-trans is just icky)

Saying that I prioritize "cis" kids more

No, I prioritize kids' happiness more. It's not about cis and trans. That 3% are REAL BREATHING HUMANS, mind you. Just because the percentage is small, DOESN'T MEAN there isn't any. My point was that, kids during their puberty age, where they're still exploring themselves, are VERY VERY unstable (in a sense that they change minds ever so quickly), what I meant was that, just give them more time and "are you sures," because it's better late than never. I'm not saying you shouldn't go and get surgeries/hormones at all. BESIDES, I NEVER SAID that kids can't transition, they are FREE to counsel and socially transition, it's a part of exploration; exploring your identity as a person. Clearly you never felt regret before.

Knee surgery vs Gender affirming surgeries

THAT IS ASTRONOMICALLY DIFFERENT, The average age for knee replacement surgery is around 65 years old. However, there is no strict minimum or maximum age. Surgery eligibility is based on pain severity, joint damage, and quality of life, rather than just a patient's age. You wouldn't necessarily die or get handicapped or feel severe physical pain just because you didn't get your bottom surgery.

The approach to knee surgery varies significantly across different stages of life, Under 50: Considered young for a knee replacement. Surgery is usually avoided because artificial joints wear out after 15 to 20 years, increasing the likelihood that a second replacement (revision surgery) will be needed later in life. However, younger, highly active individuals with severe, non-responsive arthritis are opting for surgery sooner to maintain their mobility.

This is not about whether or not you really thought you were trans or not. It is about the fact that you are making up a fantasy scenario to be mad about, in which you had gone to a medical professional, said "please, one HRT and one mastectomy" at age 13, and the medical professionals without asking a question would have just done that, and then you would have possibly regretted that.

Which is not what is happening. And it is not what anyone of the people who are for the ability of trans kids to access HRT are actually proposing.

While I do actually think that in general HRT for trans people is overregulated in most places (especially in comparison to HRT for cis people), nobody is advocating for people just accessing stuff without medical supervision.

What people are propagating for is that a) the parents should not be the ones to make this decision, like they should not be the ones who make other medical decisions, and b) that minors should be able to access HRT when their normal puberty would start if they want to - under obviously some medical guidance, like you'd want for any medical treatment.

And that position is based in scientific research.

Because what you are propagating for is that the 97% of living breathing children should either be subjected to a puberty they do not want, or should be forced to delay their puberty until adulthood, despite the overwhelming evidence that this creates medically worse outcomes - both in terms of physical health (bone density), and more notably in terms of mental health.

You are saying that a boy should actually grow breasts, because he could be wrong about being a boy. You are saying that a girl should actually grow a beard because what she is not a girl after all. You saying that either of them should suffer bone health related injuries, because there might be some kid out there who is wrong about it and regrets it later. You are saying that the 97% do not matter, because the 3% are all that is important.

And mind you: if you go on HRT early enough you do not have breasts for a mastectomy to cut off. (And yes, large invasive surgeries are generally less advisable before you have stopped growing for a bunch of medical reasons.)

All you say is that to you all the trans children who say they are trans as kids, and maintain this position into adulthood do matter less than the very rare cases of children who do say they are trans and then do retract this later on.

If we based any other medical treatment on this kind of thinking, we would just let everyone die. About 15% of appendectomies are so called "negative appendectomies", in which it turns out the appendix was not actually inflamed. We still do not stop doing appendectomies, because an acutely inflamed appendix is lethal.

Being a trans kid without access to transition care is lethal as well. Stop treating it as if it was just some elective thing. It is a potentially lethal condition. Stop being mad about fantasy scenarios that both never happened and also nobody actually advocates for and acknowledge the truth in which trans children die and are subjected to abuse than pretty much every other group of children. Especially in regards to parental abuse.

You are just transphobic. Nothing more. No matter how you turn it, your position is "if there is only one person who regrets a medical treatment, then this medical treatment should not be done".

No transphobes allowed, only transborbs.

Check out my stuff!

These two as Saejima and Majima in the stage play is so funny, they look like how I draw them hahahaha

Then I realized I just reinvented the Mako from mass effect.