canyonwalker: Roll to hit! (d&d)
I've been writing about a D&D adventure I created and DMed recently, The Collector's Menagerie. I shared in my last blog that a player noted the names/types of rooms in the mansion setting— The Hall, The Library, The Conservatory— and remarked, "This is like a game of Clue!" And how I quipped, "With monsters lurking in the rooms waiting to kill you, it's like Cursed Clue!"

The Collector's Menagerie, a D&D adventure I created (Feb 2026)

You might wonder, given the setting in a dead guy's mansion and the (twisted) murder mystery element to the story if I conceived this adventure as, "It's like Clue, but things in every room are trying to kill you." Frankly it would be awesome if that's how I came up with it. Alas, I did not. Not this time.

I have, in the past, created memorable adventures that started with the simple idea, "What if X, but also Y?" Or to be more specific, "What if something culturally familiar to us players in the modern day were the setting of a swords-and-sorcery fantasy story?" and fill it with in-jokes to see how soon the players figure it out. My greatest hits in that vein have been "The heroes traverse a magical Gate to a Renaissance Faire circa 1995 (pre-cell phones) but think it's actual early Renaissance" and "All the traps in the lich's lair form the lyrics to The Eagles' Hotel California." 😆🤣🤘

Yeah, it could have been epic if I started with "Cursed Clue". But I think it is kind of epic even though I only kind of backed in to the story being Cursed Clue.

My kernel of an idea for this adventure was simply, "Monsters are in a city mansion". I used AI to flesh out the idea. That got me to the point of it being a variety of exotic monsters (read: magical beasts and aberrations) that had escaped their cages after the owner of the house, a reclusive collector, died recently.

For the mansion itself I already had a map of an actual English city mansion I'd used as a setting in a previous game. I grabbed that to use again here. The names of the rooms on the map reminded me of a mansion map I know well from my childhood....

The board game Clue, 1972 edition

Yes, Clue! And it was because of the maps that I made the connection. The real-life mansion floor plan had rooms marked Hall, Ballroom, Conservatory, Drawing Room, etc. Those reminded me of the rooms in Clue. BTW, the Drawing Room is the Lounge. The terms are basically interchangeable in historic wealthy Western homes, indicating room a full of lavish but comfortable furniture for withdrawing to after a meal to impress guests.

Once I made the connection myself I thought about how to lean into the idea of "This is Cursed Clue". I tried to think of a way to stash treasure items, some analogue of the candlestick, rope, knife, etc., in various rooms that the heroes would need to recover to complete the challenge. Ultimately I punted that because it seemed too complex. Simplicity was one of the things I was after with this adventure idea. But I did put in some ridiculous secret doors connecting rooms on opposite sides of the map. Shh, the players haven't found those yet!


canyonwalker: Roll to hit! (d&d)
In a comment on one of my recent posts about my Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) game someone remarked, "It's all Greek to me!" I get it, a lot of times when we fans talk about tabletop roleplaying games (TTRPGs), of which D&D is a classic, we use so many specialized words and phrases it can sound like a foreign language. For example, who else remembers THAC0? Not to mention, a lot of what we might be talking about is elaborate rules and calculations.

If you're not careful, games like Dungeons & Dragons can be more about rules and calculation than fantasy storytelling (Feb 2026)

The remark, "It's all Greek to me" kind of stung, though. That's because I strive in how I write about my D&D games here to avoid citing rules and math and esoteric terms and instead write descriptively. I want to tell a story the same way the author of a science-fiction/fantasy novel would, or the way you'd describe a scene in a movie.

My purpose here isn't to complain about the remark (note I'm not naming anyone) but to illustrate the difference between how I like to describe D&D scenes versus how esoteric real "It's all Greek to me" descriptions can be. In the famous words of naval hero John Paul Jones, "I have not yet begun to Greek!" 😂

Let's take what's going on in this scene as an example:

Ryuu-Han, a character I created for my Durendal D&D game (Jan 2026)

This is an initiative card I illustrated with the help of AI. It depicts, roughly, something that happened in one of the scenes in my D&D game recently. Here's how I described it in the journal entry I posted the other day:

Ryuu-Han posted up several paces back from the fray, at the foot of a grand staircase. This is where he could be most effective. He traced a pattern with his fingers in the air as he spoke words in an ancient language, compelling invisible energies of the universe to create fire. A scorching ray shot from his outstretched finger as he complete chanting the words of power, searing through the air and burning the owlbear's hide.


That's not speaking in tongues, is it? That's descriptive. It's cinematic. It's storytelling.

Storytelling is what I strive for TTRPGs. Yes, it's hard with the "crunchy" games; the games like D&D that have a lot of detailed rules and arithmetic to resolve what's happening in a situation.

How bad can crunchy get? How much like Greek can it seem? Consider this abbreviated transcript of how this scene played out at the table:

Ryuu-Han entered the great hall, using up most of his 30' Move Action to reach a square at the bottom of the stairs. It was a safe spot well beyond of the owlbear's Threat Range. Ryuu-Han has weak AC and Hit Points so can't risk Melee combat.

Ryuu-Han checked the stats on Scorching Ray, one of his better spells. It didn't require a Material Component— a good thing, because it  meant he didn't have to spend another Move Action fishing something like powdered sulfur out of his pack.

Ryuu-Han also checked the spell's range. "Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)" meant 35 feet. And the owlbear was just 25 feet away. Perfect!

Ryuu-Han cast the spell then made a Ranged Touch Attack roll. That's a d20 roll +3. The +3 bonus includes his +2 Base Attack Bonus and the +1 he gets for his Weapon Focus (Ray) feat. He rolls a 12 on the d20, for a  total of 15.

The owlbear's Touch AC is lower than its normal AC because Touch AC excludes Armor and Natural Armor but includes Dexterity and Dodge bonuses. The owlbear's Touch AC is 10, so Ryuu-Han's 15 is a hit!

Next Ryuu-Han rolls damage. Scorching Ray does 4d6. Throwing 4 dice and adding up the result yields 16 HP damage. And there's no Saving Throw, so the monster takes full damage. Boom

Good lord, that's tedious, isn't it? Was that like trying to read The Odyssey in the original Greek? This is what we sign up to go through at the gaming table when we play rules-heavy games D&D. But even at the gaming table, let alone when I'm retelling the story later, I like to summarize the outcome of all the rules-checking and math with a storytelling narrative like in the first quote above.

canyonwalker: Roll to hit! (d&d)
The title of the D&D adventure I put together most recently is The Collector's Menagerie. This became evident to my D&D players only after the initial combat encounter in the adventure. They'd defeated an owlbear in a wealthy person's mansion. After killing the monster they rescued the man in the tuxedo who'd called for help... and they got to him just in time as he was nearly dead. Kiarana came through with a cure spell just in time to revive him. Then they learned... the rest of the story.

The Collector's Menagerie, a D&D adventure I created (Feb 2026)

The man in the tuxedo was not the lord of the manor. He was Jenkins the Butler. The lord of the manor, Lord Eito Asano, had died recently. In questioning the butler— who was alive but very weak— and adding in some knowledge from two PCs who knew a bit of background about Asano, they determined:

  • Lord Asano died some number of days earlier. According to the butler, he died of old age; not an injury or foul play.

  • Jenkins and the household staff were keeping mum about Asano's death as it had been his wish to summon his sons from the capital city before publicizing his death.

  • Asano was "old money", having inherited wealth 50+ years ago from a now-defunct noble family. (That family was House Sujin, rivals of Ryuu-Han's ancestors, House Hannam.)

  • Asano had a penchant for collecting exotic things— particularly exotic creatures.

  • Asano reputedly had "bangin'" parties when Otonio Tashara was a kid and too young to attend but has been a recluse for the past 10-15 years.

  • Asano employed some kind of magic that fortified the cages his monsters were kept in. The magic seems to have lapsed, or been countered, or something, as the cages all opened at the same time recently.

  • Several household staff are still in the mansion, hiding from the monsters and trying to stay alive.


Especially with other house staff alive and under threat, the group resolved quickly that they needed to conduct a room-to-room search. The butler told them that a few staff were holed up downstairs, in the kitchen. In addition to that bit of info they heard a few noises as clues: a deep male voice begging, "Help! Help me!", coming up from a servants' stairwell as if in the distance; a loud chirping, as if from large birds, coming from the direction of one of the rooms on the main level, and the sound of wood scraping as if something heavy was dragged a short distance on the floor, coming from another room on the main level.

The party let the butler go and lined up to investigate one of the rooms.

Yes, in the mansion of a whodunnit murder mystery, they let the butler escape after the first scene! 🤣
canyonwalker: Roll to hit! (d&d)
I've written recently that I'm getting a D&D adventure started. Sometimes, though, getting started is hard. Like, I have an idea of the theme or setting upon which I want to base the game, but I'm not sure what the story should actually be. Other times I've got the kernel of an idea, and it's elaborating it into a storyline with plot points and multiple encounters that's difficult. I figured generative AI could give me a hand at these challenges.

I used Google Gemini to assist with fleshing out two adventures. In one I described the basic setting and prompted "It should include undead among the monsters" and asked the AI to elaborate the major plot points and encounters of the adventure, and to detail the villain. In the other I described an initial encounter I imagined and asked what it might lead to.

In both cases AI was very helpful. It came up with creative ideas for encounters and summarized them as key points in a storyline. The AI even prompted me to ask it followup questions, like "What might be the villain's motivations?", "What help could a key NPC provide?", and "What are some unique magic items involved in the story?"

While the AI was helpful it also made mistakes. When I described this to a few friends recently, one jumped in with, "It's important to proofread what AI gives you!" That's true but it's not the problem I had. While we've probably all seen fails reposted online where a student copy-pasted an AI answer including the prompts, thus revealing that they were so lazy in using AI they didn't even read what they copied, there are failure modes in AI that go well beyond what can be solved with basic proofreading. These projects demonstrated that using AI requires you have significant domain knowledge to check its output.

The errors I caught were ones where the AI cited D&D rules and had them wrong. For example, it listed the wrong Challenge Ratings (CRs) for about half the monsters it put in the adventures. CRs are simple data lookups from monster stat blocks. It shouldn't be hard for AI to get them right. But they were wrong— and deadly wrong in at least one case. If I didn't know so many CRs by heart I might have taken an encounter with a recommended monster way too tough for the party.

In another instance, the AI assured me that the party of the 4th level characters (a detail I specified) would have key spells like Fireball and Cure Disease to overcome specific challenges. Well, those spells are both too high level for 4th level characters to get. When I challenged the AI on how 4th level characters would get such spells, it initially offered me a spirited— and completely bullshit— defense of its creation. When I challenged it a second time it admitted that it made a mistake.

"Okay, now go back and revise the encounters to correct this mistake," I prompted it. And, to its credit, it did! But the problem remains that I had to have significant domain expertise to fact-check what the AI was giving me.

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
I've kind of lost interest in finishing Better Call Saul. I havn't watched an episode in... checks calendar... five weeks. And I'm just two episodes from the end of the series!

BCS switches gears after episode 5.09. That was the one where Kim leaves Jimmy. Arguably that emotional loss is what tilts Jimmy into going all-in as Saul Goodman. With that the essential character arc of the series is complete. Jimmy has full transitioned from "Slippin' Jimmy" the small-time conman, to "Johnny Hustle", the hardworking young lawyer trying to carve out a career amid various people who won't give him a chance, to Saul Goodman, the no-ethics lawyer who'll break any law to make a buck, as long as he can get away with it.

The writers could have ended the series with ep. 5.09. Yeah, it would've been a ragged ending. We viewers would've wanted some kind of closure, some kind of coda that ties the story back in to Breaking Bad.

The writers give us more than just a wrap-up or coda, though. Like El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie told the tale of how Jesse Pinkman escaped to a new life post- the events of Breaking Bad, they want to tell us what happens to Jimmy post-Breaking Bad. The last 4 episodes of the series switch gears— and years; jumping the timeline from 2004 to 2010— to do so.

And that's where the series lost me. I watched the first two "Jimmy post-Breaking Bad" episodes. They aren't bad per se; they're just... tiring. Not fun. I paused the second to last episode after the opening credits because I realized I'd rather do something else than continue to watch. I paused it, got up from the TV, and walked away. That was five weeks ago now.

There's a saying in writing. Okay, maybe it's not much of a saying. I think one of my friends coined it 30-ish years ago. I call it "The 7 Deadly Words". Those words are Why do I care about these characters? I call them the seven deadly words because when audiences start saying them, it's the death knell for a series.
canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
It's been a few weeks since I've written about Better Call Saul. I've been busy with travel and catching up on work and other stuff after returning home. I'm actually not done with the series yet. Almost! Just a few more episodes. But I do have a few episodes I've already watched but haven't written about yet.

I've invoked what I call The Star Wars: Rogue One Rule several times in writing about Better Call Saul. A major character introduced in the prequel who doesn't appear in the original is doomed. Else, how do writers explain why that character wasn't in the original, without creating massive story discontinuity? While I've invoked that rule several times musing about one of BCS's protagonists, Jimmy's BFF and later girlfriend then spouse Kim Wexler, it also applies to the villains. And in episode 6.08 we see why Lalo Salamanca, head of the Salamanca branch of the drug cartel and Gus Fring's chief rival for two seasons, isn't part of the story in Breaking Bad.

Spoilers! (click to open) )
canyonwalker: Roll to hit! (d&d)
I saw an interesting article on Gnome Stew, the (roleplaying) gaming blog, last week: Meeting The Villain— And Letting Them Live. It's about the challenge GMs face in a roleplaying game in creating a compelling villain the players don't just mow down in a few rounds of combat. "Well, just make the villain more powerful," is the simplistic solution. But if the villain's too powerful, then what chance do the players have? The story's hard to make compelling if the players can't score any kind of win.

I've made a lot of compelling villains in my D&D games. I know they're compelling because of how the players respond to them. And part of my success has been that my villains have staying power. They remain villains across a story arc, possibly a long story arc; but they're aren't unbeatable. The players always have some way to find victory in the end, even if it takes a lot of time and effort. Here are Five Things I do to make compelling villains with staying power:

1) Do they even know who the villain is? There's a familiar trope from TV and film that the villain appears to taunt the protagonists, twirling an oiled mustache or swirling a black cape while saying something witty. It's definitely okay to play that trope for fun— I often do!— but it doesn't have to come first. I often introduce the villain's story not by showing the villain but by showing the results of one of their plots. The PCs arrive in town just in time to avert an attack by minions, or are called to a scene to help the survivors of a disaster nobody understands the cause of. They investigate and determine that someone is behind it; they just don't know who. Yet.

2) The villain moves fast. One way to block the party from engaging the villain in combat right away and chopping him/her/it/them down in 3 rounds is to give the villain mobility. Think of it from the villain's perspective: a smart villain doesn't loiter at the scene of the crime to be arrested or killed. They're there to see the results of their dastardly planning and escape before facing much risk. Mobility could be as simple as having a fast horse or being a creature, like a dragn, who can fly away. Or it could involve magic or supernatural effects, like teleporting, or turning invisible, or being able to shapeshift and blend into a crowd. In a scifi game, mobility could mean a fast spaceship or transporter technology that's beyond the garden variety bad guy's means. Seeing the villain and seeing them escape really hooks the protagonists' desire for justice.

3) The villain works through minions. Pretty much no self-respecting villain is a solo act. 😅 Even mad egotists who regard no one as being up to their level will still use grunts and patsies to carry out some of their dirty work— and defend them from trouble. The villain's escape á lá #2 is likely enabled by minions keeping the good guys at bay just long enough. The protagonists can still score a partial victory in scenes like this. Defeating minions chips away at the villain's power and is a necessary step toward the ultimate victory (see below); plus maybe they arrived on scene early enough to thwart the villain's dastardly act even though the villain lived to villainize another day.

4) The villain's lair is protected. Going straight at the villain is a simple idea many players will come up with. While as a GM you can't just saying "No" to a player idea, you absolutely can make it clear, through storytelling and action, that this is a tough, uphill battle. The villain's lair, or wherever they hang their hat, is going to be protected. Whether it's magical wards or high tech traps, the front door isn't just open for anyone to come in. There'll be minions here, too, as guard. Oh, and possibly the local law protects the villain! The PCs may well come at the villain this way— and they may well succeed, too— but to do so they're going to have to use a number of different skills and have a plan to whittle down the villain's defenses.

5) The villain is strong— but not insurmountably so. I pretty much always create the villain as being more powerful, even stripped of all their minions, than the PCs can defeat in a fair fight. At least initially. The protagonists have to earn their victory. In addition to finding/identifying the villain, defeating their minions, disarm the traps, etc., they have to decipher what else gives the villain and advantage— and how to neutralize it. That often involves gaining a level or two while pursuing the villain and also figuring out some sort of magical/technological mystery, like how to overcome the villain's weird power armor or antimagic aura. It could also involve convincing reluctant allies to join the fight.

When the group decodes the final pieces of the puzzle, it's time for the big fight— and then, if they're lucky and good, the villain goes down in 3 rounds.

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
I've written a few times now that the character Kim Wexler in Better Call Saul is a bit of a puzzle. She's a hardworking attorney who, after suffering unfair setbacks in early seasons of the show, is finally seeing her career take off. That's satisfying. But what's her end game in the series? And we know it is an end game because of what I call the Star Wars Rogue One principle: When a prequel introduces a major character who's not in the original, we know that character is doomed.

At the end of season 3 it seemed like Kim's doom might be physical. 😰 She had an accident, but survived... and recovered. As Jimmy and Kim grew apart in season 4 I wondered if her end would be emotional.... Would she and Jimmy just become so different that they broke up? The way they worked together to con the district attorney in ep. 4.08 embodies both the highs and lows of their relationship. Kim was apprehensive about getting involved in one of Jimmy's scams and wanted to do it the by-the-books way first; then she actually proposed a scam to Jimmy and was exhilarated to be part of it; then she seemed to realize how much she'd jeopardize her own career with it.

Jimmy apologizes to Kim for involving her in a scam... and she says, "Let's do it again!" (Better Call Saul, 2018)

In fact it's Jimmy who brings up the risk of all the ways the scam could've hurt her. Kim's immediate response after winning the case with the help of their con was elation. She cornered Jimmy in a courthouse stairwell and kissed him passionately. The next day Kim stopped to talk to Jimmy on the street when she saw his car parked there. One glance at the stern look on her face and he started apologizing for involving her in the scam. He rattles off their offenses— "Ex parte communication, contempt of court. I mean, what, talking about a couple hundred counts of mail fraud?"— noting it would destroy her career if it came to light.

What does Kim do?

I expected her, at this point, to say something like...

"You know, Jimmy, you're right. I can't keep going like this. Getting the win in that case was fun, but if any of the things we did ever come to light, even a fraction of them, it'll end my career. I've made partner now. I've got way too much to lose. We can't keep working together. Or even seeing each other anymore."


Instead she said something totally different. "Let's do it again." 😳

That was at the end of ep. 4.08. In the next episode Jimmy and Kim indeed do run another scam. At least this one is to benefit Kim's career, not Jimmy's. But at this point I'm thinking Kim's doom is self-destruction.

Here's my new guess for where Kim's character arc goes from here. She enjoys the thrill of the caper too much that it blinds her to the magnitude of the risks she's taking. Already we've seen her thrill-seeking-risk-taking a few times, and she's taking bigger risks each time. It's going to spin out of control on her. The Rules of Writing dictate she's going to face her comeuppance. Some scam she participates in with Jimmy will get exposed, and it'll blow up on her. It could be the fake-letters one from 4.08, it could be the one in 4.09, it could be a scam she hasn't done yet. She loses her job, her career, everything she's worked hard for for the past 10 years. Discredited and disheartened, she moves away and never talks to Jimmy again.

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
One of my questions early in the Better Call Saul series was, Who's Kim? Specifically, what's her relationship with Jimmy? It was obvious from the start they're friends... but not clear at what level. There was a close camaraderie almost like they were best friends who grew up together, but there was also a sexual tension that was unresolved. Were they exes who'd stayed amicable? Just good friends? Just good friends, but Jimmy was looking to get in Kim's pants? Friends with benefits (already)?

Their relationship did become sexual back in (I think) season 2 and matured from there into one of partners living together. But as it turns out the best description of their relationship is that they're each other's ride or die. And that makes it extra sad that their joint story arc in season 4 is one of growing apart.

The showrunners tell the story poignantly in a split-screen montage at the start of episode 4.07.

Jimmy and Kim grow apart in a split-screen montage (Better Call Saul ep. 4.07)

Jimmy and Kim are shown going through the mundane motions of life, brushing their teeth in the morning, eating dinner in the evening without talking to each other, and lying down separately to sleep in the evenings. Occasional shots of dates on paperwork show months are passing. Jimmy and Kim still live together, but in most of the clips they're not together together; they just happen to share an apartment.

BTW, many critics and fans criticize the showrunners' use of flashbacks, flash-forwards, and time-is-passing montages. This show and Breaking Bad have used these devices frequently. The complaint is that there's an over-reliance on such devices. It's true, the creators seem to like these devices. But what the "too frequent" criticism misses is that these showrunners routinely do it well. This opening montage in episode 4.07 is one of the most compelling, and saddest, time-is-passing montages I've seen. (The only sadder one, frankly, is the opening minutes of Up!. OMG what a sad way to start an animated feature.)

What's going on here is more than just mundane routine such as eating meals. Jimmy and Kim have actually been growing apart all season, as their careers develop in different directions. The montage shows clips of this, too.

Jimmy and Kim grow apart in a split-screen montage (Better Call Saul ep. 4.07)

A big part of Jimmy's story in season 4, as I've noted a few times already, is dealing with the one-year suspension of his license to practice law. He finds a job selling mobile phones— but turns it shady and gets into hot water with it. Meanwhile Kim's law career is taking off. She does stumble for a bit early in the season as she questions her purpose in helping regional bank Mesa Verde, her sole client, grow bigger. In her search for purpose she starts doing pro bono work for the public defender's office. It distracts enough from her banking work, though, that it jeopardizes her relationship with Mesa Verde. But she goes to Rich Schweikart, head of Schweikart & Cokely, and offers to bring them a new banking division with Mesa Verde as its first customer. Rich hires Kim as a partner at his respectable firm and makes her manager of a team. So while Kim and her team are working with a senior partner and a bank owner to review plans (left panel above), Jimmy (right panel above) is hawking phones to criminals out the back of a van in a dirt parking lot.

It sure seems like Kim and Jimmy are headed in different directions professionally... and, ultimately, personally. Are they headed to splitsville by the season finale?

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
Finally, after 35 episodes of Better Call Saul, titular character Saul Goodman appears. In episode 3.06, the 36th episode of the series and just past the halfway point of the third season, Jimmy McGill uses the pseudonym Saul Goodman for the first time.

It's not what you'd think, though. Saul Goodman appears not as Jimmy's ambulance-chasing lawyer persona but as a TV producer who helps local small businesses create TV ads.

Why did it take so long?

Jimmy creating his Saul Goodman persona 36 episodes into the story comes down to the showrunners needing to set a deliberate pace. I found the slow pace frustrating at first in the first few episodes but then realized it's necessary for good storytelling. The showrunners need to present their main character as a whole person. If they attempted a fan-service prequel, one where Saul-the-corrupt-lawyer is already Saul-the-corrupt-lawyer, they would have exhausted interesting storylines after just a few episodes. That's how The Book of Boba Fett fell apart after 4 episodes and became season 2.5 of The Mandalorian.

Why now, in the 36th episode?

Jimmy creates the alter-ego Saul Goodman in the 36th episode because he's hit bottom as a lawyer and needs to change. After a trial before the state bar in the previous episode, the verdict arrives: Jimmy isn't disbarred, but the board does suspend him from practicing law for one year.

As news of the suspension sets in Jimmy scrambles to shore up his finances. His income from specializing in elder law wasn't all that great to start with, and lawyers in private practice have a number of expenses. One is a series of TV ads he's paid for. They're not "Better call Saul!" though. He hadn't starting using that name yet. His latest slogan was "Gimme Jimmy!"  He tries to get his money back for the unaired ads— it's thousands of dollars— but can't.

Jimmy gets the idea that if he can't get a refund he can run somebody else's ad in his slot. The TV station contract prohibits him from selling the ad time, though... so as a conniving lawyer he gets the idea of selling his services as a TV commercial creator and throwing in the ad time for free.

Why "Saul Goodman"?

Somewhere in Breaking Bad Jimmy quips that he changed his name to Saul Goodman because (slightly paraphrased) "It sounds Jewish, and clients trust a Jewish lawyer." That explanation always sat poorly with me because I'm related by marriage to a Goodman who's a lawyer— and he's not Jewish. And, moreover, I'm married into a Jewish family, and my Jewish relatives shake their heads at Jimmy's claim that "Goodman" sounds Jewish. Rosen, Katz, Siegel, Lieberman, Goldberg; those are a few common (Western European) Jewish surnames. Goodman is very Anglo.

Anyway, in this episode where Jimmy creates the character, he offers a different explanation for "Saul Goodman". As he explains to his girlfriend, Kim, who asks, he picked it because "Saul Goodman" sounds surfer-cool like, "It's all good, man!" 🤙

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)

The first few episodes of Better Call Saul season 3 continue to tell a fascinating story about supporting character Mike Ehrmantraut. In my previous blog I wrote about how Mike turns the tables on mysterious adversaries who are following him since the season 2 finale. He traces them to the fast food restaurant Pollos Hermanos— which we fans of Breaking Bad know is owned by drug trafficker Gus Fring— but doesn't yet know who's behind this gang.

In episode 3.02 Mike continues staking out Pollos Hermanos to figure out who the bag man is handing off the bags of drug money to. He enlists shady lawyer Jimmy McGill— the titular character who hasn't yet changed his name to Saul Goodman— to pose as a restaurant patron and watch what the bag man does inside. The bag man enters, orders, sits down with the bag at his feet, then leaves— taking the bag with him. Jimmy checks the trash can after the mysterious man leaves, thinking maybe he made a dead drop, but finds nothing. And Gus Fring intercepts Jimmy, asking if he needs help as he rummages through the trash. Gus and his gang are now onto Mike/Jimmy, and the tables turn again.

Mike's tracker device shows that the beacon he planted in one of the money bags is moving from the store. He tails a driver in a black SUV to the desert outside of town. When the beacon stops moving on an empty desert highway, Mike realizes he's once again the mouse, not the cat, in this game of cat-and-mouse.

Mike's cat-and-mouse chase reverses again in Better Call Saul (2017)

Mike approaches the beacon carefully, stopping behind a crest in the road and then rolling forward slowly. He sees in the middle of the road the gas cap he planted his beacon in. Sitting on top of it is a cell phone. As he approaches on foot the phone rings.

I've gotta stop right here to say it is amazing that this show— a not-animated, not-science fiction/superheroes, not-James Bond level spy movie show— successfully uses the trope of "Protagonist finds a cell phone in a crazy place and answers a call on it from the antagonist". It's amazing how they make this believable. It took a lot of damn fine plotting and writing to build up to this scene.

The great writing continues as Mike negotiates the call from his adversaries. They inform him they're going to approach him and ask him not to try using a gun. But Mike is ready with one of his acerbic quips.

Mike asks Gus, "Care to elaborate?" in Better Call Saul (2017)

The adversaries roll up in two black SUVs. Gus Fring, whom Mike doesn't know yet, emerges from one. There's an enforcer on each side of him; but Mike is unbowed. He holds up the hand-written note from his windshield in the season 2 finale— "DON'T"— and prompts Gus, "Care to elaborate?"

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
Recently I wrote about Better Call Saul episode 1.04, where Jimmy rescues a construction worker from a billboard and makes the local news as a hero. While most characters in the episode take the story at face value, Jimmy's rival, Howard Hamlin, sneers that it was staged. That it's a fake, a scam, from a known con artist.

In Better Call Saul 1.04 Jimmy rescues a construction worker dangling from a billboard

In the moment Howard seems like a total asshat for calling Jimmy a scammer when everyone else is lauding him as a hero. But was Howard right? Did Jimmy stage the accident and rescue for publicity?

Some fan sites treat it like it's not even a question. Jimmy staged the billboard accident, they state. But does their matter-of-factness  come from a reveal in a later episode where Jimmy outright admits it was a con (note: I'm posing this as a hypothetical, not a spoiler!), or is there enough evidence right there in episode 1.04 to support a firm conclusion?

Showrunner Vince Gilligan and his team are sneaky at the craft of writing scenes that appear one way when watched initially but are revealed to be the opposite on further consideration. I'd say they're even too sneaky. Consider their ham-fisted post-facto evidence that Walt poisoned a child in Breaking Bad. Plus, American TV audiences are not accustomed to having to figure things out. We're (sadly) used to morality plays written in such heavy-handed fashion the villains practically walk around with lighted "BAD GUY 👇" signs flashing over their heads. 😅

That said, I believe there's enough evidence in episode 1.04 to conclude Jimmy's daring rescue was a scam. It's not beyond-the-shadow-of-a-doubt level proof, but it's fairly convincing. Five Things:

  • We know Jimmy's a scammer. This was part of his character introduction in the pilot, where he catches a pair of young men trying to scam him and invites them to work with him to up their game.

  • Jimmy's been a scammer for years. In a flashback at the start of this episode we see him in his "Slippin' Jimmy" mode years earlier scamming bar patrons in Chicago. Running scams was how he supported himself for years.

  • The construction worker was up on the billboard catwalk for quite a while. He made a show of starting to tear down the vinyl multiple times, stopping each time as if waiting for a cue from Jimmy, who was having trouble getting the makeshift camera crew to set up the shot correctly. Clearly there was some level of coordination between Jimmy and the guy on the catwalk to stage a scene for the cameras.

  • When Jimmy pulled the worker to safety, the man scoffed, "It took you long enough!" That points heavily to it being planned. A construction worker in a real emergency would probably be effusive in praising the person who rescued him, especially if it was a Good Samaritan who rushed in at risk to himself before emergency responders with training and equipment like the fire department arrived.

  • Jimmy hid the newspaper with his front-page hero story from his brother, Chuck. While it could be that he didn't want Chuck to think he earned success from anything other than his legal acumen, Chuck is also well aware of Jimmy's "Slippin' Jimmy" con-man days. Chuck rescued him from a con gone wrong, and his requirement for helping was that Jimmy go straight. Jimmy seems afraid that Chuck would see the rescue a new "Slippin' Jimmy" scam.

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
Recently I watched episodes 4-5-6 in the first season of Better Call Saul. On the one hand, watching 3 "hours" at a time feels a bit like bingeing. On the other hand, these "hour" long shows are actually 42 minutes— the standard run length for a program that fits in a 60-minute slot with ads. Watching them largely without ads means I can watch 3 episodes in the time it used to take to finish 2. And watching TV for just two hours isn't bingeing. 😅

Anyway, bingeing-or-not-bingeing is not the main thing I wanted to write about here. It's my disappointment that the slow pace of the show across the first 3 episodes continues in the next 3 episodes. Yeah, we've seen some seeds of the to-be Saul get planted, like how Jimmy McGill first met members of the Salamanca drug gang— spoiler alert: he tried to con the gang leader's grandma with a staged traffic accident, and thing went sideways, badly— but it's just moving so slowly.

Episode 6, titled "Five-O" does get really interesting— but it does it by telling the backstory of supporting character Mike Ehrmantraut. It's like my frustration with the crappy writing of the Star Wars spinoff The Book of Boba Fett. The writers couldn't sustain a character-driven narrative around Fett, and they rescued the show by adding in The Mandalorian hero Din Djarin— or, as I dubbed the series at that point, Boba Fett Writes a Book About a More Interesting Character. Here it's Better Call Saul turning into Better Call a More Interesting Character: Mike.

Keep reading
Mike's fascinating back-story in Better Call Saul 1.06.

canyonwalker: Better Call Saul starring Bob Odenkirk (better call saul)
I've taken the plunge into watching Better Call Saul on Netflix. It's a prequel spinoff from the highly acclaimed Breaking Bad series, which I thoroughly enjoyed watching over the past few months. (Note I'm watching these shows belatedly. Breaking Bad aired between 2008-2013, Better Call Saul ran from 2015-2022.) After watching the first 3 episodes I'm... disappointed.

Better Call Saul: Season 1 (image courtesy of Amazon)

Nothing's wrong with the show. The characters are believable, it's well acted, well written, and the production values are high. So many new shows I see on streaming services fail one or more of these points. So to say "Nothing's wrong" with it puts it ahead of the curve. But at the same time, yes, I'm absolutely damning it with faint praise. To be worth watching a show needs rate better than merely "not stupid" or "not fatally flawed". It needs to actually be interesting. And so far this show is not interesting.

Why is it not interesting? It's not interesting because it's too slow. Three episodes in, it feels like nothing has happened.

What am I expecting? Well, similar to how Breaking Bad was conceptualized as Walter White's transition from Mr. Chips to Scarface I've been expecting Better Call Saul to answer the question that struck me at Saul's first appeared in Breaking Bad S2E8: How did this ambulance-chasing lawyer become a drug-gang consigliere?

Directionally, I'm confident that's where it's going. But it's taking way too long to get there. In the first three episodes Saul (played by Bob Odenkirk) isn't even Saul. He's still using his given name of James McGill. He's a down-on-his-luck young lawyer. His office is in the back of a nail salon, and his only work is taking on Public Defender cases to scrape by. A lot of time is spent on McGill's supporting his mentally ill older brother, pursuing an ambiguous relationship with a lawyer at a big-dollar firm who might be an ex-girlfriend, and his personal rivalry with the managing partner at that big-dollar firm. Oh, and the running gag twice each episode of him fighting with the parking lot attendant each time he's at City Hall and doesn't have the right number of validation stickers on his parking stub.

Compare this to Breaking Bad where, all in the opening episode, Walter White went from mild-mannered high school chemistry teacher to cooking his first batch of methamphetamine and killing at least one rival drug dealer to protect himself. Clearly that show didn't dwell very long on introducing the character and the context. While that's the point of Act I of Shakespeare's 5-act structure, Breaking Bad wisely understood setup can't be 20% of the series.

So, what keeps me watching? Primarily, one, it's my optimism from so many fans of Breaking Bad who recommended this show that it's going to get better soon. Two, it's that at least it doesn't suck right now. And three, it's that running gag with the parking validation. The parking lot attendant McGill constantly butts heads with is Mike Ehrmantraut (played by Jonathan Banks). In Breaking Bad he's a hit man and drug gang lieutenant. Thus as much as I'm watching to enjoy the character arc of ambulance-chasing, sad-sack lawyer James McGill becoming drug-gang consigliere Saul Goodman, I'm eager to see how the guy who'll become a drug-gang lieutenant and hit man is hiding out as a quiet parking lot attendant.


canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
In the series finale of Breaking Bad, Walter White dies. I say that without revealing spoilers because we all knew from the first episode that's how the story would end. The character has lung cancer, and even the two years he's made it in this episode is a lot longer than he was originally expected to survive. Plus, he's involved in a dangerous criminal enterprise, as a drug kingpin— and now a most-wanted fugitive from justice. You know that if the bad guys don't get him first, the good guys will. Or the cancer will.

One thing I wondered was whether Walt would go out with a bang or a whimper. It's a trope of crime gang stories that when the kingpin is the protagonist, he goes down in a blaze of glory. But the shift in tone late in the series to empire shattered suggested Walt may go out not with a bang but a whimper. Ultimately the finale is a bit of both.

There's plenty of action in episode 5.16 as Walt acts to tie up loose ends before he dies. We've already seen from flash-forwards in earlier episodes that he returns to Albuquerque and buys a machine gun from an illegal arms dealer. Then he visits his old house, now empty and vandalized, to remove the vial of ricin poison he'd hidden inside. Now that the timeline has caught up we see that using these weapons isn't the first thing Walt does in Albuquerque.

Episode spoilers (click/tap to open) )
canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
I recently finished watching the series Breaking Bad, the final two episodes, after taking a break from watching for  a few weeks. Why a break? For one, the holidays were coming up, with travel and stuff. And two, the events of the previous two episodes, 5.13-5.14, marked a shift in tone of the series. We saw the climax where Walt's empire crumbles around him and everyone he cares about turn to hate him. That's the climax in the Shakespearean tragedy sense. What comes next in Shakespearean structure is Act V, the moral, where the story counts the wages of sin. And for all the sinning Walter White has done... well, the count is going to be grim. I took a break before watching.

Indeed, in episode 5.15 the tone of the story switches from action and violence to grief, loss, and impotence, and toothless rage.

Episode 5.15 Spoilers (click to open) )


canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
The cataclysmic last episode of Breaking Bad season 4 ended with a clue that Walt had poisoned Brock, the child of Jesse's girlfriend, to manipulate Jesse. Online fan sites mostly stated it as a fact that Walt did this dastardly deed. I pushed back in a journal entry I wrote, explaining that the clues were very scant, hardly at all probitive, and that important links that were missing were how Walt could have stolen a key item from Jesse (the two were estranged and got in a fist fight immediately the one time they saw each other) and given the poisoned item to the child (whom he also saw only briefly). Well, in the first two episodes of season 5 the writers show plenty of evidence that, yes, Walt did it.

The new evidence goes like this:

  • When Walt's cleaning up evidence in his house from murdering Gus Fring, he throws his potted plant, lily of the valley, in the bag with the bomb-making equipment he's disposing of. Lily of the valley was what the child, Brock, had ingested.

  • Saul gives Walt the ricin-laced cigarette Walt made for Jesse to give to Gus. Indeed, Walt had had no opportunity to take it back from Jesse without Jesse knowing. Saul says, in a bit of expository, that his security goon, Huell, had pick-pocketed it from Jesse.

  • Walt takes the ricin cigarette back to plant it in Jesse's house, as Jesse is freaking out that it went missing from his pocket.

Okay, the writers want us to know that Walt did this evil thing. It makes sense as a new low for his character. But the circumstances still don't make much sense as writing.

  • How and when did Huell pick-pocket Jesse? Huell is a physically large man portrayed as a bit clumsy and totally unsubtle. He'd have to perform not one but three sleights-of-hand. One, to pilfer the pack of cigarettes from Jesse's pocket. Two, to remove the ricin cigarette (and know which one it was). And Three, to put the pack of cigarettes back in Jesse's pocket. The writers' explanation of how this happened strains belief.

  • And how was the poisonous Lily of the Valley given to Brock? Did Huell do that also? What, like some big intimidating stranger comes up to a kid and says, "Here, kid, eat this candy," and the kid eats it? The show is set in 2010, not 1970 when 10 year old kids might have been naïve enough to gulp down candy from strangers.

  • Oh, and the whole cigarette switcheroo wasn't even critical path for the poisoning. It was a red herring to get Jesse agitated. And there was no guarantee it would've worked. One, Jesse had to notice it at the right time. And two, the point was to get Jesse suspecting Gus. That was a very tenuous link (as I explained in my previous blog on the topic), and Walt could've made the argument just as well without the red herring of the missing cigarette.

Again, I get it, the writers are making it clear that Walt poisoned the kid. It's their story, and what they say, goes. But as an audience member it's my prerogative to point out it's lazy, poor writing.

canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
After a hiatus of a few weeks from watching Breaking Bad while I was traveling I'm ready to come back to it. I finished season 4 before the break, so I'll start with the season 5 opener. Although season 5 finishes the series, in many ways season 4 seemed like it could have wrapped up the story.
With the antagonists all defeated and the means of action (factory, gang network) all gone, it seems like a natural conclusion to the narrative arc. Indeed, the last line of dialogue in the season 4 finale is Walt telling Skyler, "I won."

That sure seems like the end of a story. To continue past that would be to write a sequel. A reboot, even, where new antagonists and new means of action have to be introduced.

Yet there are unresolved elements of the story. Enough, certainly, to push viewers to clamor for another season— and to push studio execs to fund production to satisfy those viewers.

  • The biggest unresolved element is a character arc. The show started with Walt getting a terminal cancer diagnosis. We're told he's going to die. In terms of dramatic writing, this is an instance of Checkhov's Gun. A well-written narrative introduces a key element only if it will be used. This story is not complete until Walt dies— either of natural causes or by being killed for criminal activity.

  • Walt's character arc is actually a dual unfinished element. Will he get more evil? Season 4's ending left this vague. After what happened he could walk away from the drug business— or at least try to. But circumstances and other people are likely pull him back in. The story's not complete yet until that plays out.

  • Mike Ehrmantrout is one of those characters who can pull Walt back in. Sidelined during the end of the season events while recovering from a gunshot would, Mike will want to conclude things with Walt— either by pulling him deeper into the drug trade or by killing him to prevent him trying to go clean.

  • Finally, what happens to Jesse? While Walt is the main character of the story, Jesse is a critical supporting character. Dealing drugs is really all he's ever known, and without Walt (or someone) putting some structure around his life he's likely to spin out of control.

It'll be interesting to see how the writers pick up the pieces in season 5.

canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
The season finale of Breaking Bad's season 4 was an epic episode. It was full of drama, tension, suspense, action, and— most importantly— plot resolution.

Several episode back main character Walt decided he'd have to kill drug lord Gus, played by Giancarlo Esposito. Walt had crossed Gus too many times (even once was too many) and figured out, accurately, that Gus would kill him as soon as he could do so without jeopardizing his business. Now, Gus is a stone-cold killer, so you know that as a matter of narrative art, Gus's death at Walt's hands would have to be dramatic.

Walt, the chemistry wiz, builds a pipe bomb in his kitchen. He conspires with Jesse to lure Gus into a face-to-face meeting and places the bomb under Gus's car while Gus is in the meeting. Gus somehow senses that something is amiss when he returns to his car, pauses to look around, and leaves the area before getting within 50' of the car.

BTW, while this scene makes for great tension, it seems too artificial that Gus sensed something wrong. Did Walt screw up and leave a clue? The episode does not show that he did. This tension would have been better if it were revealed that there was something there there, instead it just being Gus getting a magical spidey sense tingling.

The failure of bombing Gus's car leads Walt to an even more dastardly plan. He finds out that Hector Salamanca, a former drug cartel capo, is in a nursing home in town and that Gus goes to visit him occasionally... to taunt him, as the two men are enemies. Hector is no friend of Walt's, as he considers Walt to have betrayed his nephew, resulting in his death. But Walt figures that Hector hates Gus even more, as Gus orchestrated the deaths of everyone in his family. Walt approaches Hector with a murder-suicide offer, and Hector agrees.

To bait Gus into coming to the nursing home in person again, Hector puts on a show of becoming a DEA informant. He comically wastes the DEA's time, but Gus doesn't know that; al he knows is that Hector appears to have turned into a cooperating witness. Gus decides he will kill Hector, personally. And the trap is set!

Gory scene - including still frame from video )

Gus, ever the stone-cold killer, straightens his tie one last time before he falls to the floor, dead.

canyonwalker: Breaking Bad stylized logo showing Walter White (breaking bad)
As I've been watching Breaking Bad midway through Season 2, one thing little thing bothers me about the series. It seems like almost none of the characters are sympathetic.

Yes, it's a story about a main character who becomes a villain; Walt's transformation from Mr. Chips to Scarface. And along the way he works with a lot of criminals, so there are a lot of bad people in the story. And, of course, the point of the narrative is to get us rooting for at least some of the bad folks. But it's a principle of writing that there should be character we readers can feel genuinely good about cheering on. Here it's not clear if there are any.

The first place one might look for a good person in this story is the protagonist's wife, Skyler. She's not involved in Walt's criminal enterprise. He's keeping secrets from her and treating her brusquely. But while she's the aggrieved spouse she's not without fault. She shows little sympathy for him as he struggles to accept a diagnosis of inoperable lung cancer. She's not interested in his opinion about it. She feels she knows better than him how he should feel and what he should want to do. When she does literally ask him what he thinks, it's actually a bad-faith effort to get his family to gang up on him. Then, as Walt becomes distant from her and seems to suffer a memory lapse, she responds not by attempting to understand what he's going through but simply by giving him a taste of his own medicine, walking out of the house on him repeatedly and refusing to share where she's going. "Do unto others the shit they do unto you" may be cathartic but it is not how you improve a struggling relationship. In fact it's generally how you take joint responsibility for killing it.

Skyler is hardly the only supporting character who might've been a breath of fresh, good-person air but isn't. Sklyer's sister, Marie, is a narcissist with a shoplifting habit. As part of her narcissism (just one example but not the only one), when Skyler confronts her after almost being arrested at a store for possessing a necklace, Marie absolutely refuses even to acknowledge she stole the necklace. She instead reverses victim and offender (a classic narcissist trait) and faults Skyler for being rude to her.

The cops in the story are another place you might look for a good person. Walt's brother-in-law, Hank, is a DEA agent. He and his colleagues are out there busting drug dealers. But Hank is a blowhard who frequently makes racist jokes about Hispanic people.  Perhaps Hank's partner, "Gomez", is the one good person here. He is a Hispanic man who quietly puts up with Hank's racist ribbing. Though he does go along with all of Hank's racially motivated decisions.

Walt's ex-fiance, Gretchen, might've been a sympathetic character, too, but isn't. She's married to Walt's grad school buddy; and together, she and that buddy have become wealthy building a successful tech company based on research Walt's conducted as a grad student. Who's responsible for their relationship failing? Who's responsible for Walt getting cut out of the riches from his own work? Sure, some of it is Walt, but though Gretchen sees herself as a saint, she isn't. In confronting Walt about his lie to his family that he's taking their charity when actually he refused it, she demands to know the secret he won't tell his family. "You've involved me in the lie now, so you have to tell me everything," she says. That may sound reasonable... but let me translate it like this: "You're keeping a secret from your own family, and I, as your ex from 16+ years ago, assert I have a right to know what it is." How about, no?

The one regular supporting character who's left as a sympathetic person is Walt's son, Walt, Jr. Or "Flynn", as he's told his friends to start calling him. Flynn hasn't really done anything wrong. I mean, he got busted by an off-duty cop for asking him to buy beer for underage kids... but I'm not going to call him bad for that as underage drinking is something almost everyone in the US has done.

There's also one minor character who's done nothing wrong... yet. That's Carmen, the principal at Walt's school. I say "...yet" because I wonder, when does the other shoe drop? Since "nobody's genuinely good" is apparently a theme of Breaking Bad, when will Carmen be revealed as a bad person? Does she hit kids in the school? Does she have a drug habit of her own? And what about Walt, Jr./Flynn. Is he going to... break bad... at some point?

Profile

canyonwalker: wiseguy (Default)
canyonwalker

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 2021
22 23 24 25 262728

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 27th, 2026 02:31 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios