I am back online, self-evidently. 
I'd like to ask for a "Named character thread", as I believe I have my character at Gauntlet down?
I will do that today, Rofrof.
1 Like
Just thought I'd mention it, but I am somewhat uneasy with the use of photographs of real people in the character description, even when they are actors. The right to self-image, copyrights infrigements, and all that...
No worries, I removed it.
I'll remove mine. I'd note for you that if copyright is your worry, you generally a lot better off with pictures from shows or social media than with artwork, even artwork of a non-real person. Usually networks and the like want a bunch of images in the public domain so that they may be used by anyone for advertising, reviews, etc., while created artwork is nearly always copyright protected.
1 Like
Oh, I'm not worried about lawsuits or anything like that. But associating our fictional characters to the image of someone real makes me a little uneasy.
I know it helps us and others visualize our characters, and I have done it myself in the past for those reasons.
As a real example, I have actually seen a photograph of me I didn't realize would be used on the front of a Broadway venue. As someone part of the event being filmed the prior year that I was knowingly a part of, I actually did not have any right to my own image in that case. Now, I was flattered they chose an image of my partner and me from among all the dancers to display on Broadway, so I certainly had no objection anyway. Same thing happened with a magazine cover.
On the other hand, if your image was being used in a political context, or to promote something your object to, I'm sure you would not be pleased.
It is one thing for an actor to have played a role, and another for an image of that role to be used in a different context. If I had an NPC diabolist, would the actor be pleased to have his image associated to that? Can I know what he would find objectionable if he knew about it?
That's why I prefer to err on the side of caution.
We live in a more and more digital age. That comes with a whole lot of ethical issues that did not exist a few decades ago.
l would say that in this DMCA will allow you to delete this image and be done with it easily.
Interestingly, I just noticed that 5th edition moved the Verditius contests by one year: 1180 instead of 1181, for example. I hadn't realized they'd made the one-year shift between editions before.
Two questions for everyone:
-
Maybe I missed it, but I recall being the only one to reply about house-ruling Affinity and Linguist to keep fractions. Any thoughts on that?
-
Are we allowing changing specialties when Ability levels change? That is one of the most common house interpretations from what I've seen over the years.
- Yes. To me that's not even worth a House Rule (it's always been my default), but I can write it down as such to make it clear.
A true House rule would be adding a second specialty when you reach the half-way point between full scores (like score 3 +10xp), then removing one specialty when the score change (to 4). That would simulate the gradual broadening of knowledge and change of specialties.
Ya, that's why I wrote "house interpretation." I don't consider it a house rule. But it's not spelled out in the books anywhere, so I don't like to assume it.
- I don't see a big problem with rounding up but if anyone feels strongly about keeping fractions it doesn't really matter to me that much either way.
It's gotten awfully quiet in here.
Yeah, we've been having a high level of activity for quite a bit of time, so I'm not really surprised.
Gives me some time to work on background stuff for the covenant. 
I had to retype a bit for the reboot. So it took a while between posts.
I did think we moved pretty quickly initially. I'm hoping to get a draft of another post-gauntlet year up tonight still at least.
Not completely offline this weekend, but we have our older grandson visiting, so I will be a bit busy.