The unbelievable popularity of the PMFD Board Games has led me to create yet another: Aren't They Dead Yet?
Have you ever been at a cocktail party and heard a name pop up in conversation, only to think to yourself, "Shit, I would have sworn that person had died"? Or worse, have you ever mentioned someone in conversation, only to have someone else say, "Didn't you know, that person died six years ago?"
Well, let your faux pas be our board game. The rules are simple: 1. pick a category (celebrities, politics, sports, family, etc.); 2. name a person that everyone within the group should have heard of (Cher, Gerald Ford, Mikhail Gorbachev, Castro, Billy Martin, Ariel Sharon, Billy Idol) but that you are not sure is still alive; 3: the group then votes after which you look up the person to see if in fact they are dead or alive. The winner is the individual who selects the most celebrities who have died with the least number of people realizing it.
If this seems too simplistic, you can also limit yourself to entire casts of sit-coms (Gilligan's Island, Diff'rent Strokes, The A-Team, etc), or at family reunions, how about "Cousins."
Live Long and Slaughter
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
A RIGHTEOUS KILL
A number of readers have complained that killing is getting to easy. Walk down to the local pawn shop or gun show, toss down $50, step outside and POW, dead person. Even the art of the perfect kill only involves a little bit of effort and planning. A homicidal malaise is spreading.
One individual reached his crisis of faith, and asked, "What would make a kill righteous again?"
Dear Soren:
I wanted to say that killing an evangelical would be a righteous kill, but I don't want to make light of a serious issue. And so, the following is my well researched and contemplated response:
Killing is too easy. And it's rarely fair. Too often killers shoot unarmed individuals, or large men kill smaller individuals. To return murder to its origins, Cain the Vegetarian killing Abel the Carnivore, we must balance the field of battle.
1. You shall not kill someone who is not equally sized (or larger).
2. You shall not kill someone who is not armed equal to you (or better)
3. You shall not ambush someone unless that person has 24 hours notice and you adhere to the first two commandments.
4. You shall not kill from afar; you must be close enough to feel the soul leave the body.
I would add that for a truly righteous kill, you should fashion your own weapon or use your bare hands. Our society has become so automated that we no longer take time to enjoy the simpler pleasures. Murder should be one of them. Go outside and find a good stick or rock and make your kill that way. Then, write me and let me know how much better you feel.
BE RIGHTEOUS, KILL OLDSCHOOL.
One individual reached his crisis of faith, and asked, "What would make a kill righteous again?"
Dear Soren:
I wanted to say that killing an evangelical would be a righteous kill, but I don't want to make light of a serious issue. And so, the following is my well researched and contemplated response:
Killing is too easy. And it's rarely fair. Too often killers shoot unarmed individuals, or large men kill smaller individuals. To return murder to its origins, Cain the Vegetarian killing Abel the Carnivore, we must balance the field of battle.
1. You shall not kill someone who is not equally sized (or larger).
2. You shall not kill someone who is not armed equal to you (or better)
3. You shall not ambush someone unless that person has 24 hours notice and you adhere to the first two commandments.
4. You shall not kill from afar; you must be close enough to feel the soul leave the body.
I would add that for a truly righteous kill, you should fashion your own weapon or use your bare hands. Our society has become so automated that we no longer take time to enjoy the simpler pleasures. Murder should be one of them. Go outside and find a good stick or rock and make your kill that way. Then, write me and let me know how much better you feel.
BE RIGHTEOUS, KILL OLDSCHOOL.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
WHOM WOULD NO ONE KILL: HIGH SCHOOL REUNION BOARD GAME
Please, don't stop reading. I am NOT advocating peace and love. Quite the contrary. I am asking, who is so worthless that you'd not even waste a bullet on them.
Now, every school has its drama. The nerds hate the athletes, who in turn had the band geeks. Everyone hates the preppy squad, who in turn hate the poor kids. Everyone except the athletes hates cheerleaders, who hate the punks and goths. Any member of those groups is expected to want to kill (or actually to kill) its nemesis.
What makes this game so exciting is that you have to remember the utterly forgettable kids whom no one cared enough about to like or hate.
If killing a high school nerd raises the curve, then s/he does not qualify.
If killing a cheerleader allows you to make the squad, she doesn't qualify.
If someone is just so annoying or smelly that other students will thank you, s/he does not qualify.
Basically, you are looking to kill someone so invisible that even that kid's home room teacher won't notice his/her absence.
But of course, since that person is effectively dead already, that is WHO YOU WOULD NOT EVEN HAVE TO KILL.
*NOTE: In all likelihood, that person knows s/he is effectively dead and will formalize the matter before graduation.
Now, every school has its drama. The nerds hate the athletes, who in turn had the band geeks. Everyone hates the preppy squad, who in turn hate the poor kids. Everyone except the athletes hates cheerleaders, who hate the punks and goths. Any member of those groups is expected to want to kill (or actually to kill) its nemesis.
What makes this game so exciting is that you have to remember the utterly forgettable kids whom no one cared enough about to like or hate.
If killing a high school nerd raises the curve, then s/he does not qualify.
If killing a cheerleader allows you to make the squad, she doesn't qualify.
If someone is just so annoying or smelly that other students will thank you, s/he does not qualify.
Basically, you are looking to kill someone so invisible that even that kid's home room teacher won't notice his/her absence.
But of course, since that person is effectively dead already, that is WHO YOU WOULD NOT EVEN HAVE TO KILL.
*NOTE: In all likelihood, that person knows s/he is effectively dead and will formalize the matter before graduation.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
WWJK: WHOM WOULD JESUS KILL?: THE MYTHOLOGICAL BOARD GAME
Given the immense popularity of TPMFD's first board game, "Who Would You Kill?: The Historical Edition," I have decided to release a second game, sure to be even more challenging than the first.
"Whom Would Jesus Kill?" is designed for to push the limits of theology. While novices and evangelicals might erroneously assume that Christ would simply kill all the sinners, a close study of the New Testament might suggest otherwise. Christ suggested turning the other cheek and told the rich they would not make it into Heaven. Thus, would not Prosperity Gospel folks and televangelists be top on the list. Jesus Kills Billy Graham, move ahead ten spaces. Or better yet, Jesus Kills God the Father--you win. Why would Jesus kill God? Good question: if mythology has taught us anything, it is deities are never satisfied with their power--they all want to usurp the ultimate power. History and Shakespeare teach us the same thing. Why do you think we have such terms as deicide, regicide, patricide? Or maybe Jesus kills the Holy Ghost out of jealousy? The Age of Jesus passes with Paul and Pentecost. And poor Jesus: we can blaspheme the shit out of Jesus and it's forgiveable, but noooo, blaspheme the milksop Holy Ghost and it's unforgiveable. Did the Holy Ghost have to become human and get executed? No wonder Jesus wants him dead.
For Non-Christians, we also have:
"Whom Would the Dalai Lama Kill?" (Hint: he has a lazy brother in Tibet who sells cheap t-shirts with his brother's image on them, and the DL does not even get royalties.)
"Whom Would Allah Kill?" (Hint: it's actually not the decadent West.)
"Whom Would Jehovah Kill?" (Note: This game is also sold under the title: Whom Wouldn't Jehovah Kill?"
"Whom Would Darwin Kill?"
"Whom Would Krishna Kill?" (See Note for Whom Would Jehovah Kill?)
"Whom Would My Dead Ancestors Kill?"
"Whom Would the Buddha Kill?" (Hint: if the Buddha meets itself on the road...)
"Whom Would The Great Spirit Kill?"
We are also considering other titles in the "Whom Would ... Kill?" franchise. If you have ideas, and we deem them marketable, please let us know and you'll be able to share in our riches.
As always, two-thirds of the points are awarded for the explanation and your ability to convince your playmates of the righteousness of the kills.
LIVE LONG AND SLAUGHTER!
"Whom Would Jesus Kill?" is designed for to push the limits of theology. While novices and evangelicals might erroneously assume that Christ would simply kill all the sinners, a close study of the New Testament might suggest otherwise. Christ suggested turning the other cheek and told the rich they would not make it into Heaven. Thus, would not Prosperity Gospel folks and televangelists be top on the list. Jesus Kills Billy Graham, move ahead ten spaces. Or better yet, Jesus Kills God the Father--you win. Why would Jesus kill God? Good question: if mythology has taught us anything, it is deities are never satisfied with their power--they all want to usurp the ultimate power. History and Shakespeare teach us the same thing. Why do you think we have such terms as deicide, regicide, patricide? Or maybe Jesus kills the Holy Ghost out of jealousy? The Age of Jesus passes with Paul and Pentecost. And poor Jesus: we can blaspheme the shit out of Jesus and it's forgiveable, but noooo, blaspheme the milksop Holy Ghost and it's unforgiveable. Did the Holy Ghost have to become human and get executed? No wonder Jesus wants him dead.
For Non-Christians, we also have:
"Whom Would the Dalai Lama Kill?" (Hint: he has a lazy brother in Tibet who sells cheap t-shirts with his brother's image on them, and the DL does not even get royalties.)
"Whom Would Allah Kill?" (Hint: it's actually not the decadent West.)
"Whom Would Jehovah Kill?" (Note: This game is also sold under the title: Whom Wouldn't Jehovah Kill?"
"Whom Would Darwin Kill?"
"Whom Would Krishna Kill?" (See Note for Whom Would Jehovah Kill?)
"Whom Would My Dead Ancestors Kill?"
"Whom Would the Buddha Kill?" (Hint: if the Buddha meets itself on the road...)
"Whom Would The Great Spirit Kill?"
We are also considering other titles in the "Whom Would ... Kill?" franchise. If you have ideas, and we deem them marketable, please let us know and you'll be able to share in our riches.
As always, two-thirds of the points are awarded for the explanation and your ability to convince your playmates of the righteousness of the kills.
LIVE LONG AND SLAUGHTER!
Sunday, February 5, 2012
SUPER BOWL IS NOT VIOLENT ENOUGH
Football is so boring. And since many of you would-be assassins reside outside the United States, consider these comments equally applicable to soccer/football.
I've heard people consider footballers to be modern day gladiators, but come on? When was the last time one team actually KILLED the other? When was the last time the fans were actually asked if they wanted the loser to be executed? Personally, when the Rams were in Los Angeles, I can remember countless times wishing that the visiting team would be merciful to us and just kill them off; fortunately, the team moved to St. Louis, but I'd still have preferred seeing them executed at mid field.
And as for Premier League Football (soccer), instead of being relegated to a lower league, why not just execute the bastards. It's probably more humane--honestly, after Relegation, isn't death the only honorable option. Who wouldn't pay to see Blackburn or Wigan or QPR slain at midfield? Toss in the coaches and owners as well and the towns might actually make enough money to buy some better players?
So how do we make the games themselves more exciting and violent? Weapons.
Now, lest everyone run off and buy Uzis, to make this more sporting, each athlete must fashion his or her own weapon. Swords, clubs, spears, maces, bows and arrow, Molotov cocktails. Just imagine the complexity of the game as a player must try to pass or receive the ball at the same time that s/he must also try to deflect real blows. No more diving--any player stupid enough to hit the turf would have to jump up immediately or risk decapitation! And no subtitutions--only the dead can be hauled off the field (although I'd prefer leaving the dead on the field to maximize the psychological effect).
Oh, and for American football--NO PADS. What is the point of a brutal sport if you are covered in pads and protective gear? Enhance the VIOLENT ASPECTS of the games. No helmets, no pads, no cups.
And, we can all take a few lessons from the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail: if you have a limb or limbs cut off, play on: "It's just a flesh wound."
I've heard people consider footballers to be modern day gladiators, but come on? When was the last time one team actually KILLED the other? When was the last time the fans were actually asked if they wanted the loser to be executed? Personally, when the Rams were in Los Angeles, I can remember countless times wishing that the visiting team would be merciful to us and just kill them off; fortunately, the team moved to St. Louis, but I'd still have preferred seeing them executed at mid field.
And as for Premier League Football (soccer), instead of being relegated to a lower league, why not just execute the bastards. It's probably more humane--honestly, after Relegation, isn't death the only honorable option. Who wouldn't pay to see Blackburn or Wigan or QPR slain at midfield? Toss in the coaches and owners as well and the towns might actually make enough money to buy some better players?
So how do we make the games themselves more exciting and violent? Weapons.
Now, lest everyone run off and buy Uzis, to make this more sporting, each athlete must fashion his or her own weapon. Swords, clubs, spears, maces, bows and arrow, Molotov cocktails. Just imagine the complexity of the game as a player must try to pass or receive the ball at the same time that s/he must also try to deflect real blows. No more diving--any player stupid enough to hit the turf would have to jump up immediately or risk decapitation! And no subtitutions--only the dead can be hauled off the field (although I'd prefer leaving the dead on the field to maximize the psychological effect).
Oh, and for American football--NO PADS. What is the point of a brutal sport if you are covered in pads and protective gear? Enhance the VIOLENT ASPECTS of the games. No helmets, no pads, no cups.
And, we can all take a few lessons from the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail: if you have a limb or limbs cut off, play on: "It's just a flesh wound."
Friday, February 3, 2012
NRA SUCKS
Why, you are asking, do I not love the National Rifle Association?
Well, now that you ask...
First, this is the Perfect Murder for Dummies, isn't it. If you are trying to get away with murder, why tell everyone you are in favor of easy access to guns for toddlers?
Second, the NRA is a bunch of panty-waists (no offense to you women readers, I hope), who insist they need multiple guns, Uzis, AK-47s just to feel safe in their homes. Those Pansies. A real man or woman could protect him- or herself and family with a rock and a knife like our cave-ancestors did.
Third, I believe in killing, but the NRA does not have the guts to actually say what it wants. If it really believes in the 2nd Amendment as its founding document, then put the entire amendment on their bumper stickers and explain the militia clause. But if the NRA is really just a bunch of hillbillies who want to shoot up cans and minorities, then they should put that on their bumperstickers instead.
Finally, I just plain think they are a bunch of redneck morons who should spend more time killing each other and less time annoying the rest of us. To the NRA (if any of you can read): take your guns and a few six packs, and go play commando in the woods with your friends.
Well, now that you ask...
First, this is the Perfect Murder for Dummies, isn't it. If you are trying to get away with murder, why tell everyone you are in favor of easy access to guns for toddlers?
Second, the NRA is a bunch of panty-waists (no offense to you women readers, I hope), who insist they need multiple guns, Uzis, AK-47s just to feel safe in their homes. Those Pansies. A real man or woman could protect him- or herself and family with a rock and a knife like our cave-ancestors did.
Third, I believe in killing, but the NRA does not have the guts to actually say what it wants. If it really believes in the 2nd Amendment as its founding document, then put the entire amendment on their bumper stickers and explain the militia clause. But if the NRA is really just a bunch of hillbillies who want to shoot up cans and minorities, then they should put that on their bumperstickers instead.
Finally, I just plain think they are a bunch of redneck morons who should spend more time killing each other and less time annoying the rest of us. To the NRA (if any of you can read): take your guns and a few six packs, and go play commando in the woods with your friends.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
DEATH OF A SALESMAN: PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE
Having tried my hand once at retail sales--I sold Classical Music CDs in Houston--way back when CDs had just hit the market, I can tell you that Death cannot come quickly enough for a Saleman (I assume this is also true of Saleswomen). I was fired before any disgruntled customer could eviscerate me--evidently I rolled my eyes at the manager when he told me to vacuum the floor.
So the point is, take pity on the poor schmuck trying to sell you some crap you don't really want--don't buy the crap, that only helps the rich owner get richer. Put the bastard out of his (or her) misery with a bullet to the brain. Willie Loman did not accidently kill himself. He crashed his car on purpose. His triumph is that he escapes the world while his family and boss are damned to live.
Willie Loman is the Great American Dead Hero.
No Salesman wants to live (especially travelling salesman, but that will be a later post). Be Kind, Kill a Salesman (or two).
So the point is, take pity on the poor schmuck trying to sell you some crap you don't really want--don't buy the crap, that only helps the rich owner get richer. Put the bastard out of his (or her) misery with a bullet to the brain. Willie Loman did not accidently kill himself. He crashed his car on purpose. His triumph is that he escapes the world while his family and boss are damned to live.
Willie Loman is the Great American Dead Hero.
No Salesman wants to live (especially travelling salesman, but that will be a later post). Be Kind, Kill a Salesman (or two).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)