Subject: Cool. Thanks! (nm)
Author:
Posted on: 2014-05-11 17:46:00 UTC
-
Requesting cameos! by
on 2014-05-11 02:39:00 UTC
Reply
I'm finally starting work on a bit in FicPsych that I've been thinking of doing for ages, but I need several agents whose writers don't mind them being just a little bit, er, poisoned. After eating lunch in the Cafeteria. Don't worry, the effects aren't permanent; you'll get them back in one piece and possibly a touch saner than they were to begin with. They'll need a friend or partner to escort them in the meantime, though. Infrastructure agents (e.g. DoSAT, Finance, anyone who might conceivably get a regular lunch break) are preferred here, but Action is great, too.
I don't want to reveal too much, but e-mail me (neshomeh [dot] soul [at] gmail [dot] com) if you've got a non-human agent and want to discuss the effects of the substance in question on an alien physiology.
Permission is preferred, but not required. No guarantees that I'll use everyone if I get a lot of volunteers.
Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
You can use mine by
on 2014-05-12 05:10:00 UTC
Reply
Just don't mess Seyche and Murder Up to badly. Also please send me the link.
-
Are there descriptions somewhere? by
on 2014-05-12 15:09:00 UTC
Reply
Don't worry, everyone I use will be returned in as good a condition as they were to begin with, possibly a touch better. My nurses take their job seriously. Well, most of them do. No one's really sure about Immac, but her heart's in the right place. ^_~
The story will be announced on the Board when it's ready, which may not be for some time. I'm slow and I have lots of moving pieces to slot into place now.
Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
Sorry by
on 2014-05-12 23:23:00 UTC
Reply
Here are they the descriptions of my agents.
Seyche-a short young woman, with brown skin, blonde hair, and red glasses. Very outspoken, but has no real skills in combat.
Usally wears a white lab coat over a pencil skirt, and a green blouse.
Murder-A young man with bright pink hair and a wide grin. Always wears a pair of broken glasses. Cannot speak, but makes odd gestures that only Seyche can understand
I hope that helps. -
Feel free to use any of the ESAS crew by
on 2014-05-12 00:00:00 UTC
Reply
Iodin is Chiss and Alagos is Noldo as far as interesting non-human reactions go. Depending on your PoV character, it's conceivable that Logan might know them (he does know Nume thanks to the Cafeteria incident in 2006).
Elcalion -
Thanks! by
on 2014-05-12 15:00:00 UTC
Reply
I figure they've been around long enough that most people who have also been around long enough have at least heard of them. {= )
I think Eldarin biochemistry is basically the same as Manish, right? Movie!Legolas notwithstanding? I know nothing about the Chiss.
~Neshomeh -
I do have some Cafeteria Workers. by
on 2014-05-11 22:18:00 UTC
Reply
You can use Nerys and Lisa from the Cafeteria, and Nurse Hearth if you need Medical personnel.
In terms of non-human agents, Eledhwen is also up for this. Well she isn't, but I'm putting her up kicking and screaming anyway. -
Thanks! by
on 2014-05-11 23:41:00 UTC
Reply
I might have Nerys and Lisa questioned with Yoof and Séverine.
Don't you have some DoSAT and Intel guys, too? I'd like to add to those little clusters, if that's possible.
~Neshomeh -
They're free for you to use as well! by
on 2014-05-12 04:56:00 UTC
Reply
Go right ahead. I believe the DoSAT guy is called Neo Webber; he's related to Lisa, and the Intel guys are Officer Rooney and Jeeves.
And for good measure, count Travis and Lexie from A/V in as well if you need any of that. -
Yay! Thanks! by
on 2014-05-12 14:57:00 UTC
Reply
Heh, I didn't even know about Neo Webber (I was thinking of the A/V team). Where might I find a description of him?
~Neshomeh -
He pops up in some of the missions, and in the Blackout. by
on 2014-05-16 01:46:00 UTC
Reply
He's the guy who gets exasperated at the Doctor dropping his TARDIS into DOSAT, and he might've appeared with E and C when he was fixing their console.
He's Black with a red kerchief around his neck and an afro in which things occasionally get lost. -
:: raises hand :: by
on 2014-05-11 16:02:00 UTC
Reply
While my agents have a replicator in their RC, I can picture Briggs meeting someone in the Cafeteria and getting something to eat while he's there.
If you need a spare pair of hands to deal with poisoned agents, I'm working up a free-to-use character in Medical -- long story short, he's a paramedic stranded between worlds when his home continuum got a massive rewrite, who found his way to the PPC HQ. -
Hmm, okay. by
on 2014-05-11 17:46:00 UTC
Reply
I'm probably not going to directly involve Medical much, but I'll let you know if I need people there. Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
You can use Rina, but judging from the volunteers already... by
on 2014-05-11 13:34:00 UTC
Reply
What's really frustrating is I saw this last night right before my mom made me put my phone up, so I couldn't respond. :(
-
Well, it's not first-come first-served. by
on 2014-05-11 17:42:00 UTC
Reply
Like I told Pippa's Ghost, it's more about recognition. Maybe I can have her helping someone else, though. She seems like the type. Plus, it might give you something to add to her journal. {= )
Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
Oh, really? Cool! by
on 2014-05-11 21:11:00 UTC
Reply
And yeah. Anyone gets sick, she'd be there to hand them a bucket and take them to Medical. And it would be neat to have another thing to add to the journal. ;)
-
Volunteering my agents. by
on 2014-05-11 13:04:00 UTC
Reply
I've not written any Infrastructure agents yet, but if you want to add some more Action ones into the mix you can use Skeet and Amy.
-
Thanks! (nm) by
on 2014-05-11 17:35:00 UTC
Reply
-
Put me in, coach! by
on 2014-05-11 13:02:00 UTC
Reply
Specifically Wobbles. She's an ex-bit, and I have some ideas about what the intensive care side of things in FicPsych consists of, particularly with DoA involvement. It makes sense for her to be there.
The Notary would also probably despise coming, because it's not all about her, so that's why Wobbles is dragging her along. Spoilers: passive aggressive behaviour is not cool, kids. -
So, which would you prefer to be affected? by
on 2014-05-11 16:23:00 UTC
Reply
Or do you want 'em both hit, and have a third party drag them? Though, Time Lords definitely work differently than humans, so I'm not sure if the Notary could be affected (though it would be hilarious if she were). I'll have to check into it... I might pull Rule of Funny if I can even remotely get away with it, though. *g*
Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
Oh yeah, Time Lords can be affected by food poisoning. by
on 2014-05-12 00:09:00 UTC
Reply
However, I think it'd be best if it was just Wobbles. Not least because the thought of the Notary gingerly stepping through FicPsych and being thoroughly squicked by all the mess is just too funny to me. =]
-
Aw, okay. by
on 2014-05-12 14:54:00 UTC
Reply
I suppose she would be rather unnerved by it, at that... though I still think it'd be funnier if it were happening to her. ^_~
(Things I've learned: Apparently Gallifreyans can exercise control over their biochemistry at will and have a fantastically acute sense of smell and taste. Fascinating!)
~Neshomeh -
More stuff about their physiology by
on 2014-05-12 20:50:00 UTC
Reply
Radiation affects Gallifreyans so little that their children are given radioactive building blocks to play with in the nursery. They can actually transform radiation into a form safe for humans and expel it from their bodies.
They can counteract cyanide poisoning under the right circumstances.
It's not just smell and taste- they also have really good hearing. But yeah, the tenth Doctor could identify blood type just by tasting it. O_O
Apparently the eleventh Doctor could speak Horse and Baby, and probably more. Don't ask me why the TARDIS doesn't translate for him.
There's also been some debate (and by some, I mean a LOT) about whether or not Time Lords are the same as Gallifreyans, since there've been some contradictions/ different statements in the show that imply Time Lords are like a special 'class' of Gallifrey, made up of Gallifreyans who have graduated the Academy. (I prefer to think Gallifreyans are the same as Time Lords, but I guess that'll be one of those questions that will never be answered.)
Gallifreyans have a bicardiovascular system- they have two hearts. Also they apparently have an insanely strong skeletal structure, considering the height from which the tenth Doctor fell in his last episode. He not only survived said fall (although it looked like it hurt quite a bit), but he managed to get to his feet and foil the Master's plan of the day.
They can change sex during regeneration.
There is at least one species of bacteria that is neutral to humans, but is vital to Gallifreyan life.
750 years old is considered middle-aged- and that's for only one regeneration!
They grow up at about the same rate as humans, but the aging process slows when they hit their late teens/early twenties. 90 years old is still teenaged. (Yikes- imagine me being stuck at seventeen for a century or two!)
You probably didn't even need to know all this stuff, but I still like sharing. ;) -
On the Horse/Baby speaking thing: by
on 2014-05-13 00:38:00 UTC
Reply
That's obviously just a combination of translator microbes and 11th being 11th.
Also, there IS a difference between Time Lords and Gallifreyans... in Classic Who. 7th, being a manipulative sort, was grooming Ace to enrol at the Prydonian Academy and become a Time Lord, largely to shake up the indescribably hidebound nature of the place. Nu Who just did away with it as part of Uncle Rusty's giant genocidal handwave - er, I mean the Last Great Time War. Yeah. That... thing that was definitely a thing. Obviously. Yeah.
As an aside, screw RTD for that and everything else he cocked up. Steven Moffat might have really odd views about women, but he makes better television than RTD ever will. -
I guess the reason... by
on 2014-05-13 02:55:00 UTC
Reply
that the TARDIS's translators don't work for the audience is because of the Law of Narrative Comedy.
I actually preferred RTD to the Troll, but agree to disagree, yeah?
And I've only seen the first Doctor and a little of the fourth in regards to Classic Who, though I am planning on marathoning the rest of Classic Who over the summer. Thanks for clearing that up, though. ;) -
Moffat never made Love and Monsters. I rest my case. (nm) by
on 2014-05-13 10:28:00 UTC
Reply
-
That proves RTD is better! by
on 2014-05-13 12:35:00 UTC
Reply
Not that there's much difference between them. But at least RTD did genuinely weird material, rather than the ersatz weird of Moffat's timey-wimey plots.
-
(high-fives Pippa's Ghost) by
on 2014-05-13 18:47:00 UTC
Reply
Give me RTD's weird and occasionally silly but usually overall entertaining material over Moffat messing up his own time travel rules any day.
Also, I am so absolutely tired of people using Love and Monsters as the big sticking point of "see, this is why _____ is so bad! Because Love and Monsters is part of the _____ group!" Yes, it was a bad episode, but it was a bad episode in major part because it tried to do too many things that the new series wasn't ready for at the same time.(Another reason is because every one of the new characters is a moron, but I digress.) Even though it failed miserably at doing so, I actually see the attempt as commendable. It gave the show's creators the opportunity to look at what they did, see what went right and what went wrong, and improve the format for the future. If it wasn't for Love and Monsters testing out a non-traditional Doctor Who format, we wouldn't have gotten episodes like the well-regarded Midnight and Blink, the latter of which was created by pre-takeover Moffat. Of course, Blink's concept is a little ruined in retrospect now that the Weeping Angels have been put into several stories where they don't belong and warped to fit their new confines, but the original is still a standout. -
Er, are you lot high? by
on 2014-05-14 16:01:00 UTC
Reply
I'm a connoisseur of both Doctor Who and woefully bad SF; Love and Monsters is both, and not in the fun way. The things you bring up as mitigating circumstances for one of the worst episodes ever made (and definitely the worst Nu Who episode) would be fine... if they were actually the case. Are you seriously trying to suggest that Doctor Who just "wasn't ready" for a chase scene at the start of an episode ripped straight from an episode of Scooby bloody Doo? D'you think that we needed time for the series to settle so that fans would willingly accept a monster designed by a nine-year-old? I get that the whole Doctor-lite structure was used to great effect elsewhere, but the episode was an absolute abortion and no amount of misguided "oh, but it had ideas" hand-wringing is going to change that. I'm sorry, it's just not.
Russell T. Davies made the worst episode of Doctor Who that has ever aired. Worse than Delta & The Bannermen. Worse than The Horns Of Nimon. Worse even than Fear Her. The concepts are uninteresting, the episode looks atrocious, none of the comedy works, and I don't watch Doctor Who to see Danny from Hustle playing ELO covers with his sodding garage band. But the worst part?
Uncle Rusty didn't learn from his mistakes. He continued to make episodes that featured boring slapstick, stupid bit-part characters that somehow got an episode to themselves, and atrocious ideas for both monster design and episode themes (cf. the aforementioned Fear Her, another RTD-era episode which features all of these things). He still considered it acceptable to write abject turds like Gridlock and, well, the worst excesses of Torchwood. As a writer, he operates on a vastly lower level than Moffat. If you disagree, fine, but for goodness' sake don't hold up Love And bloody Monsters as an example of RTD's incredible writing talent. -
You seem to be... by
on 2014-05-15 08:24:00 UTC
Reply
mistaking your personal preferences for facts.
Personally, I don't think Love and Monsters is "definitely the worst" anything. It's about average terms of technical storytelling quality, even if it's definitely not average in terms of subject matter.
You see, I have a soft spot for stories that try to do something weird and different and unusual, even if they don't quite succeed in getting all the bits to fit together. (I even love Delta and the Bannermen for exactly that reason.) That kind of experimental weirdness is something that simply doesn't happen enough in modern television, where writers and producers play safe far too often.
You obviously prefer the safer, mainstream, less bizarre approach. It's your personal preference. But that doesn't mean it's automatically better. -
It's not that I think the episode's good. It's not. by
on 2014-05-14 18:10:00 UTC
Reply
Despite the fact that I prefer Russell T. Davies's run to Moffat's, I am not at all claiming that everything in it was anything near the pinnacle of quality. I've mentioned how much I dislike The Idiot's Lantern and The Next Doctor before, for example. Love and Monsters was an abject failure, and I'm not contesting that, but it wasn't a failure because of random sequences that didn't work. You can pick out random unlikable parts from anything, because every show and almost every episode of those shows has random sequences that don't work. The episode failed when it tried to take a risk bridging multiple unrelated ideas and plotlines and couldn't make anything good out of the attempt. I just like the attitude that tried to go in new directions with the show more than the general mentality behind what the Eleventh Doctor's tenure did, which admittedly might have colored my views on the episode itself some, even after taking into account my views that claiming it as the worst episode ever would be greatly overreacting.
Moffat's run doesn't take risks, doesn't accept that the Doctor would have long-term effects on anything, and whenever it looks like the Doctor might have to face up to a difficult decision or deal with some drastic change to the universe or the people around him, someone just hits the reset button so that everything can stay exactly the way it is as though nothing ever happened. Love and Monster's wasn't a display of any sort of talent, but I'd prefer the sort of writers who want to go in new directions with their material even though it might occasionally collapse around them to the sort of writers who want to create the appearance of good storytelling while not actually advancing their characters in any way.
I think the showrunners did learn from at least of few of their mistakes in Love and Monsters. The contest-winning monster design was stupid, so they decided "hey, let's make future contests about smaller and less potentially ruinous things". And the padding... well, there was still plenty of padding in future episodes, let's not kid ourselves here, but at least most of the time it was less obvious than the pointless band sequence.
Some of the problems you mentioned with the episode I don't mind, in part because I suppose everyone goes into a show looking for different things. I don't mind the Scooby-Doo chase scene, because it is obviously a joke. True, it's not a funny joke, because the episode isn't funny, and on that I greatly agree with you, but it's nothing to be upset over. The occasional giving of episodes to people other than the Doctor I see as more of a change of pace than being a stupid choice in and of itself. I actually really like the concept behind Love and Monsters, about people who had met with the Doctor but hadn't quite grasped how dangerous his world was gathering together and sharing their fandom with one another only for the entire affair to be interrupted once part of the Doctor's world forces itself into theirs, and I think it could have been, while not great, quite good, if it hadn't needed to couple itself to the outrageously awful Abzorbaloff and hadn't been shackled with a clutch of bit-character morons who don't even turn around when they hear an ear-splitting scream every time they leave their meeting place. And since I see Gridlock as more unmemorable than bad, but something in the episode appears to have harshly angered you, that suggests an even wider rift in what we might consider good or bad in television. There's nothing wrong with that. -
Wait, that post was a little too meandering. by
on 2014-05-14 20:15:00 UTC
Reply
My initial point, and the main reason that I agreed with Pippa's Ghost that the capacity to make something like Love and Monsters makes RTD superior to Moffat, is that I would much rather have a producer who tries new story paths and takes risks in the name of being entertaining, even if said producer occasionally fails at it and even if those failures are immense, than a producer who forces the story into certain pre-ordained directions, is unwilling or afraid to do anything new or weird with the material, and hasn't got any real connection to how a universe that could produce characters like the Doctor would operate. I wasn't saying that Love and Monsters was a testament of writing skill, but that the fact that it and other, more successful episodes like it were made shows a certain tone for the run.
Any place that creates people like the Time Lords and the Sontarans and the Cybermen and the Daleks is going to be a very strange and occasionally very silly place, but while Russell T. Davies embraced that weirdness, and occasionally embraced it with a little too much force, Moffat tries to drown it out with plot contrivance, pointless drama, and an inability to mesh his stories with one another, much less make them fit the universe as a whole. -
Uncle Rusty never embraced the stranger aspects of Who... by
on 2014-05-15 00:42:00 UTC
Reply
Merely the more camp ones. It's what he felt more at home writing - hence the barrage of crap comedy during his tenure. I do amateur stand-up, so maybe I feel it a bit more keenly than you do, but RTD's near-total inability to tell a decent joke just makes me want to tear my own face off, closely followed by his fingers.
Look, if you want to claim he embraced the weird side... why get rid of the Time Lords and Gallifrey? There's nothing stranger than Time Lord society, and believe me, there's a hell of a lot more potential for stories set there than there is in Love And Monsters. Oh, wait, we know why. It's because RTD didn't want the Time Lords hanging over him so he had the Doctor wipe them all out. And the Daleks, except not really because they're iconic and nobody'd let him get away with it.
And frankly, that's another thing I disagree with you on. Maybe Moffat doesn't take as many risks as RTD, but the risks he takes? They tend to have a much higher success rate. Yes, he screws up, lots of people do, but when he's on, he's really on. Uncle Rusty's approach to risk-taking was to dive head first into a burst sewer main in the hopes of finding a lucky penny; a whole lot of shite for precious little reward. None of the "more successful" episodes were written by RTD, with the exception of Midnight - and that episode's one that I can take or leave, personally. And don't even get me started on his arc writing compared to Moffat's - well, actually, you can't, because he never really did any. He started to, but then he just got bored and wandered off to look at some trees so some poor sod had to turn up and hang it all together with chicken wire and hope.
Uncle Rusty's great mission in his time as showrunner was to make Doctor Who more child-friendly, but you can do that without making something childish. Rather than tell accessible stories well with good, memorable characters, we wound up with flatulent mutant Teletubbies and Victorian kung-fu monks. Every single time he brought up Classic Who references, he screwed it up. For Christ's sake, he made the Macra into the interstellar equivalent of guests on the Jeremy Kyle show! One of the vanishingly few aliens that's actually, y'know, non-humanoid, and he gets it just so totally arse-backwards, we can only be grateful he never got his mitts on the bloody Rutans... guh.
This is just rambling now, so I'll get to the point. Moffat makes television of a higher standard of quality than RTD does. The worst of RTD's asinine campness got thrown out the window as soon as he lost power, and I consider that a good thing. You are well within your rights to disagree, but I still don't think that anyone who makes something as pathetic as Love And Monsters - the episode for which the denouement is "man vigorously and repeatedly rogers a paving slab with Moaning Myrtle stuck inside it" - ought to be defended, particularly since he stands by the episode. I just - no. No, no, no.
I'mma watch The War Games again. And then the Five(ish) Doctors Reboot, because that is how you do comedy. -
In other words... by
on 2014-05-15 08:38:00 UTC
Reply
You personally don't like the deliberate weirdness of RTD's writing so no-one else should be allowed to like it too.
The irony is that RTD and Moffat are both very good writers, very similar in terms of technical writing ability. The only difference is that RTD prefers to write about bizarre, non-mainstream subject matters, while Moffat doesn't. -
I have a question for, eh, Pippa, Outhra, & Iximaz. by
on 2014-05-15 09:51:00 UTC
Reply
You've all (I think) said things equivalent to 'RTD prefers to write about bizarre, non-mainstream subject matters, while Moffat doesn't'. I'm... honestly not sure what you mean by that. There's clearly a fandom consensus on this that I'm not aware of - thank goodness - but can one-or-more of you explain it to me? Because, to literally roll a random dice a couple of times, The Shakespeare Code and Blink don't seem a whole lot less weird than The Lodger and The Name of the Doctor (I rolled 36 & 28 for RTD, 11 & 39 for Moffat, using only the main series' and ignoring all specials - so out of 52 for RTD, 39 for Moffat).
Of course random chance would throw up an actual Moffat episode for RTD... but my point rather stands. Shakespeare Code was 'aliens try to use Shakespeare to take over the universe'; Blink was 'the Doctor makes videos while really awesome aliens try to... er... do not a lot'; The Lodger was 'the Doctor rents a room and a lonely spaceship kills people'; The Name of the Doctor was 'something something timeline something and also River'.
To rephrase my question, and skip the rambling above: what are these 'bizarre, non-mainstream subject matters' which RTD was so good at writing, while Moffat ignores? Can you fill me in?
hS, honestly confused -
It's just an impression I get. by
on 2014-05-15 11:45:00 UTC
Reply
I'm not sure your examples help very much because none of them were actually written by RTD.
If you look at the stories that RTD actually wrote, he seems to love throwing in material from different genres that you wouldn't normally associate with each other, let alone with Doctor Who. (e.g. Farting Teletubbies doing topical political satire; gameshow parodies; Scooby Doo-style chases in a story that's structured like Radio 4's Play for Today; etc.)
Moffat's own scripts don't seem to mix and match genres quite as often or as thoroughly as RTD's did. (e.g. Blink features a gothic-style concept in a gothic-style story. It's very well written and enjoyable. But it doesn't have any genre-smashing weirdness.) -
The perils of random numbers. by
on 2014-05-15 12:02:00 UTC
Reply
After all, if I'd picked and chosen my examples, you could have accused me of... well, picking and choosing my examples!
I can... sort of see your point, though I'm not positive I agree. It feels like you're defining 'material from different genres that you wouldn't normally associate with each other, let alone with Doctor Who' on the fly. How - and now I will pick and choose an example - does 'suit-clad X-Files aliens under the Nixon government' come out as less mix-and-match than the RTD stories? For that matter, why does 'rhino in a hotel' (The God Complex) lose out to 'rhinos in a hospital' (Smith and Jones) - when the former had far more engaging characters (including one who my wife wanted to be a new companion), and a far more complex plot than 'alien hides > police think Doctor is alien > Doctor proves them wrong > Doctor saves day'?
(But, yes, 'God Complex' wasn't written by Moffat, I know. It was still under his tenure, though, and finding direct analogies between stories is hard)
I'm still dubious. I'm also not sure - even if you're right - that it makes up for the fact that I (personally) find Moffat's stories almost across-the-board more enjoyable to watch. Since this is entertainment, that has to count for something. ;)
hS -
Well... by
on 2014-05-15 17:26:00 UTC
Reply
I'm only comparing them as writers for stories they've actually written, not their eras as a whole. Sorry if I didn't make this clear. As show runners, they've both been very good at hiring writers who write the sort of stories that they don't. RTD hired Moffat, for example, and Moffat has hired writers who are good at the unusual stuff.
Anyway, the reason 'suit-clad X-Files aliens under the Nixon government' aren't that weird is because, X-Files aliens and the Nixon administration are both already associated with corruption in the US government. The only weird thing is the suit.
I won't deny that The God Complex is weirder than Smith and Jones. Toby Whitehouse is one of those writers who seems to enjoy genre mixing as much as RTD did. (And he wasn't writing it with the disadvantage of having to introduce the first post-Rose companion in the episode.)
As for why you prefer Moffat's era, it's not surprising. I think your tastes are naturally more mainstream, less weird in general. And not just in Doctor Who. For example, Jay & Acacia created a random bit of weirdness with a telepathic sunflower; you went out of your way to make that sunflower seem less weird, less incongruous (more congruous?) by explaining it with an origin story. -
First time I've been accused of that. by
on 2014-05-16 09:29:00 UTC
Reply
Yes, I explained the Sunflower - by claiming that a sailing ship fell through a natural plothole to a planet where mysterious radiation made the Flowers sentient so they could build a city populated by vegetables and stabilise plotholes and encounter Mary-Sues in the wild. It counts as 'explaining', sure - but I don't think it makes it less weird.
I'm also responsible for PPC HQ being powered by authors literally turning in their graves, for the Department of Intelligence having a Graylag goose on the staff, for Mary-Sues being grown in Factories, for HQ being a six-dimensional structure, for Legal sending messages referencing real world events, for the meta-est message in PPC history, for an agent who is in direct communication not just with her author, but with her narrator... I think you can safely say I'm a fan of weird. (Also, I write for the PPC. We're not exactly normal here)
I think you're conflating two very distinct ideas here: having something explained with having it be sensible. I like to know why things happen, and will regularly drive them right back to their origins. That doesn't mean those origins are any less weird - just that we know what they are. And it certainly doesn't make my tastes 'naturally more mainstream', thank you very much.
hS -
Conflating two ideas? by
on 2014-05-17 17:33:00 UTC
Reply
I'd rather say you're arbitrarily splitting one idea into two.
It doesn't matter how weird something is in relation to the real world. What interests me is whether part of it's weird in relation to the rest of itself. Does everything neatly form a harmonious whole? Or is there an energy, a frisson, that comes from different parts clashing?
Things falling through plotholes would be weird in the real world, but are commonplace in the PPC. You took something incongruous and potentially weird, and explained it in terms of something commonplace for that type of story.
That's what I was trying to get at with the clashing of different genres in RTD's stories. Story ideas that shouldn't belong together, being forced together anyway, and the wonderful weirdness it generates.
After all, in metatextual terms, space-time machine like the TARDIS is really a machine for mixing genres. RTD instinctively understood that; Moffat doesn't. -
In all honesty... by
on 2014-05-15 22:55:00 UTC
Reply
The main reason I generally prefer RTD's episodes to Moffat's is that, while I feel they are both exceptional writers, Moffat has a tendency to write himself into a corner and use some ass-pull to get out of it, instead of developing a plausible reason for whatever Timey-Wimey stuff the Doctor's been messing with.
I'd have to go back and find specific instances if you want examples, but for the majority of the time- majority, mind you- Moffat's episodes are the ones that feel not very well concluded. I say majority because there was one episode (can't remember the name, unfortunately- by the way, SPOILERS) where the Master captured the Doctor and forcibly aged him into a tiny, wrinkly baby-creature... thing. The Doctor was completely fine when Martha managed to coordinate the entire planet to think about the Doctor at the exact same time and caused the Doctor to change back to normal- and the explanation was that he'd integrated himself with the Master's satellite network and recieve the mental signals, or something nonsensical like that.
Tl;dr, I like both writers, but I mostly prefer RTD to Moffat due to his better explanations for the episode's shenanigans. -
Episode comparison! by
on 2014-05-16 09:59:00 UTC
Reply
For the sake of fairness, I won't compare the first episodes each writer did - RTD might not have gotten into the swing of things - nor the last - epic finales, etc. Instead, I will look at the stories they wrote in each of their second series'. (That puts Moffat at a disadvantage, because I really like Doomsday, but we'll see) Conveniently, that's four each. Let's take a look at those endings:
RTD
-New Earth: They cure the zombies by pouring IV medicines over them and telling them to cuddle. They fix the Cassandra problem by... letting her get out of dying, and then she chooses to anyway. I'm not sure either of those follow from the episode, and I'm positive the second doesn't.
-Tooth & Claw: The house is a werewolf trap (despite not being in any way werewolf-proof) and the Koh-i-Noor diamond is used to focus moonlight on it and kill it. Did we see the diamond or the telescope - or any hint that the house was a trap - before the finale? I can't remember.
-Love & MonstersIn the interests of fairness (since we've acknowledged no-one liked it) I'll swap this out for Gridlock from Series 3: A nurse teleports the Doctor out, reveals that the Motorway was sealed because of disease, and then the Face of Boe demonstrates that 'life energy' == electricity enough to open the giant doors. Was any of that foreshadowed? Were Novice Hame and the Face even in the rest of the episode?
-Army of Ghosts/Doomsday: Part One - the ghosts are Cybermen walking between dimensions. That's foreshadowed by the rest of the series. The Sphere is Dalek, which isn't foreshadowed but is awesome. Part Two - the Genesis Ark is a prison with a massive army of Daleks in, and then one Cyberman resists the irresistable programming and cries oil, then the Doctor opens the breach which now has a vacuum on the far side (despite the Cybermen walking out of it earlier), and it pulls both armies in from all over the world despite being preeeeetty small. I'm... not convinced that comes out of the episode, either.
Moffat
-The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon: Part One - There are Silent, like, everywhere, and the little girl is inside the spacesuit that was coming for her. Part Two - 'You should kill us all on sight'. I can't remember to what extent the idea of the Silent planting instructions is in these episodes, though the other factors - not remembering them, that they're everywhere - certainly are.
-A Good Man Goes To War: The baby is Flesh, just like Amy previously was. The baby is River, which comes out of the Gamma Forest girl writing her name; that's foreshadowed by 'the only water in the forest is the river'.
-Let's Kill Hitler: River saves the Doctor by giving up her remaining regenerations. The healing power of regeneration energy is established - in this very story, even - but the actual 'get out of death free card' has no buildup.
-The Wedding of River Song: Letting River kill the Doctor fixes the timeline, which was brought up as soon as they came close together. The Doctor doesn't die because he was inside the Teselecta; we'd seen him talk to it at the beginning of the episode, but we'd also seen his body burnt on a pyre, so that's a bit iffy.
Conclusions
I'm not going to do a 'score' - it's way too subjective for that - but it seems from this sample that a lot more of Moffat's endings come out of the episode than RTD's. Thinking about it, though, what you might be noticing is the tendency for Moffat to give the Doctor a situation he can only fix by dying - 'The Big Bang', 'Let's Kill Hitler', and 'The Wedding of River Song' all jump to mind - and then having him come up with a clever way out. RTD was more inclined to give him a situation he couldn't fix at all - Dalek invasion in 'Parting of the Ways', the cage you mentioned in 'Last of the Time Lords' - and then having him come up with a clever way out. Or, sometimes, having someone else come up with a clever way out - the two examples (the two season finales) I named both rely on the Doctor's companion to work, though the latter was at least the Doctor's plan. Apparently.
hS -
Pulling out the fire extinguishers! by
on 2014-05-15 02:18:00 UTC
Reply
I'd like to stop this before it develops into a flame war, so I'll just say we should all back down and realize that we can like whatever we like and just calm down. It's great the show inspires such passion in people, but arguing about what episodes are better and why is only fun while it remains lighthearted banter.
Both writers have their strong points and weak points. While I generally prefer RTD over Moffat, it doesn't mean I like all of RTD's work and hate all of Moffat's. I really loved 'Blink' and generally stay away from 'Love and Monsters' because the first appeals to me and the second doesn't. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but from reading this thread, it seems like the debate is starting to become a little too heated.
So, can we all be friends again? {:-) -
But it's what Doctor Who fans do. by
on 2014-05-15 08:56:00 UTC
Reply
The current producer/Doctor/whatever is always the worst one ever. He's always hated, and his apologists are always attacked and flamed.
Then when the current producer/Doctor/whatever retires, he instantly becomes a sadly-missed, much-loved, old favourite. The fans who had been attacking him, now start defending him and attacking his replacement who is always much, much worse.
That's how the cycle goes. It's how it's always gone. -
(coughs under the onslaught of fire-suppressant foam) by
on 2014-05-15 04:45:00 UTC
Reply
I was more likely than not going to leave it as it was anyway, in part because I've said all I wanted to say and in part because I really didn't want to turn this into an increasingly petty exchange of one side throwing barbs about their less favored producer in the direction of the other side. It's pretty clear that either of our opinions on either run aren't going to change, so it would be more or less pointless to carry on with the exchange. Especially since it wouldn't have started at all if this hadn't been the second time a post had been made consisting solely of the "RTD made Love and Monsters, which is bad, so he is bad" composition fallacy as a substitute for actual grievances-(ducks under another shot of foam) Okay, I'll stop. I'm sorry for doing that. I guess I just wanted to try to explain myself a little better.
And ugh, did it really sound like I was defending Love and Monsters over Blink? I really wasn't trying to. It's just that Blink is so incredibly well-regarded that anything good that I might reinforce about it has already been praised dozens of times by others, and the episode hadn't been more than partially connected to anything I'd been saying. Even though I didn't jump to instant adoration of Blink like many fans did, I would greatly prefer future nasties to be in the mold of the Weeping Angels than to be like the Abzorbaloff.
Still, though, I agree with you, Iximaz. Let's put this unwinnable conflict aside, pick up our favorite sonic plot device, and join forces in complaining about something more universal to the fandom, like how solidly disappointing the Classic Who selection on Netflix is. -
Well, see, the thing about tha- *KSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH* by
on 2014-05-15 09:51:00 UTC
Reply
whurbglurblgurglegurgleglubbl.
*ka-drowned* -
Isn't poisining more Medical's thing? (nm) by
on 2014-05-11 09:54:00 UTC
Reply
-
Medical is definitely involved, too. by
on 2014-05-11 15:44:00 UTC
Reply
People may react to witnessing the symptoms in different ways, though, and Medical may shunt cases to FicPsych (for bed space if nothing else) if there are enough of them. Which there probably will be. *g*
~Neshomeh -
Hm. Will email you cameo stuff. by
on 2014-05-11 16:03:00 UTC
Reply
You sure on just nonhumans? Lot of the people in this thread are offering human agents.
-
I didn't say that. O.o by
on 2014-05-11 16:14:00 UTC
Reply
At least, I didn't think I said that. You're the second person to be confused, though, so... *scratches head*
Anyway, no, humans are great. Nice and predictable. ^_^ I'll look forward to your e-mail.
~Neshomeh -
Yeah I'd misinterpreted the non-humans note. But email sent. by
on 2014-05-11 16:24:00 UTC
Reply
Sorry if it wasn't super helpful, I had a moment of creative blockage, but it gets the ball rolling. ;)
-
You can have Hild and/or Sean if you like. by
on 2014-05-11 09:20:00 UTC
Reply
It'll give them a chance to actually get involved with things instead of being stuck in pre-Permission limbo.
-
Thanks. by
on 2014-05-11 17:22:00 UTC
Reply
I'm going to favor people my POV character is most likely to recognize (that's why Permission is preferred), but I'll keep them in mind. {= ) Would either of them have spent any time in FicPsych previously?
~Neshomeh -
FicPsych by
on 2014-05-12 00:27:00 UTC
Reply
Hild was a borderline Sue, so could've been treated there when she first joined.
OTOH Sean deliberately tries to avoid the place, because of his history with World One shrinks. But he may have had to go there for tests when he first joined, just because of that history.
Hope that helps. -
You can use Corolla! by
on 2014-05-11 09:08:00 UTC
Reply
Unfortunately I'm afraid I don't have anybody to bring her in (unless this is set before December 2012 HST), but the little crazy Unison Device (mail incoming for effects on her) should be infamous enough that someone from DoSAT meeting her in the corridors would bring het to FicPsych ASAP .
Or I might use one of the "prototype" Agents I never used. -
Cool. Thanks! (nm) by
on 2014-05-11 17:46:00 UTC
Reply
-
Sounds like fun! by
on 2014-05-11 07:25:00 UTC
Reply
Kelok and Unger are in an Action Department, but regularly eat at the Cafeteria (their favorites are the meatloaf that crawls off your plate and the blue pudding-like substance).
Kelok as a Wraith normally wouldn't be able to be poisoned, because the Wraith healing factor is so incredibly high, but his badfic origins and the Nigel he takes to activate his digestive system both lower that factor a lot.
Still, the better bet for getting sick is Unger. He's a D&D 3.5 half-elf, which means he's half-human, and the half-elfs seemed to have generally inherited all of the weaknesses and few of the benefits of each species as far game play went. Also, if physical assistance will be required Unger is half the size of Kelok (though stronger than he looks).
Anyway, they aren't currently doing much of anything, so whatever you want to use them for. They both should know a lot of people in FicPsych since they started out there before getting to work as agents. They were last at the Purim party throwing food (Unger) and getting drunk and singing Irish folk songs with minis(Kelok). -
Awesome. by
on 2014-05-11 17:27:00 UTC
Reply
The fact that FicPsych knows them, and they'd probably choose FicPsych first under these circumstances, is great. Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
Possible Cameos by
on 2014-05-11 05:53:00 UTC
Reply
I kind of don't want Doc and Vania doing too much in the present right now, since I need them to catch up with a bunch of past events. You're welcome to use Yoof and Séverine if you please, though. It might seem weird for a cafeteria worker to eat any cafeteria food, but Yoof is half-dog, after all. (And that's the entirety of his alienness. I doubt we need to discuss any fanciness involving the poison there.)
The pair's only appearances so far are in the Purim role play earlier this year:
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=199610;article=255926;title=PPC%20Posting%20Board
and in this story:
http://doctorlit.dreamwidth.org/3452.html
(Which also features Fr'sst the kitchen cat, who is free for everyone to use! Yes, I stole the idea from Hawkelf, but it was a good idea, darn it, and I wanted us to have a kitchen cat again!) -
Ooh, that could be interesting. by
on 2014-05-11 16:25:00 UTC
Reply
I might actually have them questioned about the incident rather than caught up in it, if that's okay, though.
Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
That would fit them perfectly. by
on 2014-05-12 14:22:00 UTC
Reply
Considering they're rather bad at what they do, even by cafeteria standards.
-
Hehe. Okay, cool. (nm) by
on 2014-05-12 15:11:00 UTC
Reply
-
You Only Need Non-Humans? by
on 2014-05-11 05:38:00 UTC
Reply
If you do have any use for them, you can absolutely use Shawn and Jack. In fact, since you said infrastructure was preferable, you could probably take Jack alone and say the story takes place before he transferred out of DIA's non-action division.
-
No no, humans are good! by
on 2014-05-11 15:38:00 UTC
Reply
Non-humans are good, too, but may not react the same way to a given substance as humans; that's what I was talking about.
The timeline is probably a bit before now, so that's cool. Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
Ooh, sounds awesome. by
on 2014-05-11 04:45:00 UTC
Reply
Lee, Ian, Orion, Agents Mal, Grace, and Alex are all up for you to play with. On the note of alien physiology, Agents Mal (Maeryn/Kaliel) are Tok'ra, so are more hardy than a normal human, but you can treat everyone else as a garden-variety human save for Alex, who tends to have... odd ...responses to things. Nothing that would cause severe anaphylactic reactions, but I'd recommend dosing Grace rather than Alex, unless you're going for rule of funny here, which in that case, go with Alex.
-
Cool. by
on 2014-05-11 16:29:00 UTC
Reply
IIRC, the Tok'ra increases the host's resistance to things, right? Like, it takes them longer to get drunk, that sort of thing...? Or am I thinking of something else?
Re. Alex, odd how? Funny is good. {= )
Thanks!
~Neshomeh - Answers by on 2014-05-11 22:42:00 UTC Reply
-
Also, where can I find Grace and Alex? (nm) by
on 2014-05-11 20:45:00 UTC
Reply
-
I'd love to, but... by
on 2014-05-11 04:23:00 UTC
Reply
This sounds very interesting. Unfortunately, my characters need work done on them, so I don't think it would work if I submitted mine.
I will be looking forward to reading about this, though. Sounds like it will be great! -
Yeah... by
on 2014-05-11 17:34:00 UTC
Reply
I agree, yours are probably a bit too much in flux at the moment. Sorry.
~Neshomeh -
Heyo! by
on 2014-05-11 03:30:00 UTC
Reply
Zerenze is at your disposal for this. 'Sides, watching Eusabius escort them back might be fun. Or Florestan...
-
Clarification: by
on 2014-05-11 04:07:00 UTC
Reply
I meant the affected will need an escort to FicPsych.
Anyway, thanks! I imagine Eusabius would be completely adorable, taking care of Zerenze. ^_^ Z's about as alien as it gets, so I'll e-mail you about that.
~Neshomeh -
Sounds fun. by
on 2014-05-11 03:06:00 UTC
Reply
Consider Gaspard, Harris, Penny, and Yakov at your disposal.
-
Thanks! by
on 2014-05-11 04:03:00 UTC
Reply
And, ooh, one of Gaspard's parents works in FicPsych—his father, right? Could I maybe mention him, and is there a description of him somewhere? (I feel like this is maybe the third or fourth time we've had this conversation. I'm serious now, though!)
~Neshomeh -
Unfortunately, I have not written... by
on 2014-05-11 09:48:00 UTC
Reply
...anything about Gaspard's father yet, but you are free to mention him! I can whip up a description for you real quick:
Physically speaking, he's an abnormally tall (180 cm) 54 year old Chinese man who can trace his roots all the way back to Canton province in the southern part of China. His face is fairly oval with a flat nose and almond-shaped eyes. He wears his slightly greying black hair in a regular haircut. As for his personality, he is very direct and sometimes curt with his patients. He is rather strict with Gaspard and expects his son to always give his 110%-- within reasonable bounds, of course. Burnouts tend to decrease productivity. He has a deadpan sense of humour.
Just a few things I want to add for my crew: if Penny gets sick, then Nasir will be there to support her. If Gaspard or Harris (or both) gets sick, expect Gaspard's grandmother*, Marianne, to drag the boy to someone that can help. Yakov is kinda stupid and will try to Apparate (and subsequently hurl everywhere) by himself to Medical/FicPsych/what-have-you.
- - -
*Grandmother on the mother's side. -
Is this close? by
on 2014-05-12 15:55:00 UTC
Reply
I like playing with that thing. {= ) Also, if it's okay, I'll add him to the FicPsych Personnel page.
~Neshomeh -
Spot-on. by
on 2014-05-12 18:03:00 UTC
Reply
Feel free to put him up on the Wiki!
-
Aaand done! by
on 2014-05-13 17:31:00 UTC
Reply
Feel free to adjust the entry as you see fit. I gave him office C-8 because I've developed a notion that offices 1-10 are the biggest, having actual divided rooms and whatnot except for the Kudzu's. (The other offices are the size of a regular RC.) Since he's living with his wife, they kinda need the space. {= )
~Neshomeh -
Many thanks! by
on 2014-05-14 02:59:00 UTC
Reply
I just tweaked Frédéric's origin a bit: he actually comes from Canada, not France. If you'll just permit the mini-infodump I've been keeping in my head for the past few months:
Frédéric was born in Québec city, Canada sometime in 1960. He was the eldest son of a family of immigrants who left Communist China for Hong Kong, then across the sea to Vancouver, then a long train ride eastward to the province of Québec. He learnt French in school and later became a psychologist (much to the approval of his family) and set up shop in Montréal, where he met Nicole in 1990 and married her in 1993. Gaspard came in two years later, in 1995.
Marianne, however, is born in France: she was born in Paris in 1929. She grew up during the occupation and subsequent overthrow of the Vichy government and later became a journalist. She married a Canadian businessman, Albert Roy, in 1960 and moved to Montréal with him. Nicole Roy, Gaspard's mother, was born in 1965. -
Ohhh, okay. by
on 2014-05-14 14:47:00 UTC
Reply
Sorry about that. I knew France came into it somewhere; just got mixed up. And the rest is good to know, too. Thanks!
~Neshomeh -
My pleasure. (nm) by
on 2014-05-14 19:16:00 UTC
Reply
-
Excellent. by
on 2014-05-11 19:46:00 UTC
Reply
Thanks for the details—that helps.
I take it Yakov gets nauseous when he Apparates?
~Neshomeh -
He's got a remarkably strong stomach... by
on 2014-05-11 20:02:00 UTC
Reply
...but gets motion sickness really easily. He's a really average wizard overall-- spellcasting, potions, flying brooms, you name it-- but he is actually extremely talented when it comes to Divination.
Nobody believes his predictions, of course. The way HQ time works usually makes his predictions happen in some other parallel plane of existence. -
Wow, he and my Alex should form a support group. by
on 2014-05-11 20:35:00 UTC
Reply
Sounds like they have almost exactly the same problem. Alex's precognitions tend to be real, but quite often they've already happened and/or are completely inconsequential.
Maybe I'll set them off at the same time. ^_^
~Neshomeh