Yes, Sara, the "old" one.
I've a physical and PDF copy of the current one, but (especially after reading Gods and Magic) I'm interested in seeing how the content of the campaign setting has changed from the "older" OGL material to the current, fully Pathfinder-ready material.
Thanks for any help you can provide (as well as your on-going efforts!).
Greetings Customer Service folks.
A while back I ordered a hard copy of a Pathfinder thingy from "firstname.lastname@example.org".
Alas, it never made it to me ("Estimated delivery: October 28, 2010 to November 16, 2010").
I can forward e-mails ... suffice it to say I think it was out of stock.
I just put something in my sidecart, and recalled reading this.
I'd *really* like this version. I need some help. :D
I hope I'm not taking you out of context by just quoting parts of what you've typed / said. If I am, call me out.
Communication is difficult, but it's still the only way to improve a bad situation.
Testify. All we can do is make the best of a "bad situation."
The world is a dangerous place.
Testify. It's a dangerous place, but here we are.
And it's a dangerous place, but there's beauty.
Anyone can be hit by a bus any day.
I totally hear you, testify.
If you walk out of a safe area, you may get hit by a bus. Even in a safe area, a meteor may fall on you. An earthquake might happen.
Solar flare. Super-nova.
You can take precautions, and most do, but once you let your fear intrude into even relatively normal situations, that is what your entire life will feel like.
Fear is the little death. We humans make stuff up about being afraid, but I suspect like most games we humans play ... we're either having a blast or working through our own personal difficulties.
Limiting normal behaviour because you want to feel respected won't improve anything.
Testify. I think if you are looking outside yourself to "feel respected" there's already "trouble."
Much less room for improvement ("Normal" can always be nudged towards "better-than-average," right?).
Feel free to flame me for saying it.
Naw, I'm good.
Umbral Reaver wrote:
I can't find the link for it, but a while ago a tablet was unearthed in the Middle East, dating from Babylonian times. It described a father's woe at his children and others of the new generation being so useless that he feared civilisation itself would end.
I can't find a decent link either Umbral, but honestly I'm not sure how much ancient Assyrian content's been properly re-purposed for the intarwebz.
Tough times in Babylon the past few years. Everything old is new again. :(
But I recalled reading something similar (here's a link). I was more struck the first time I read it that the author was not just decrying the behavior of youth ... he was also complaining that everyone wanted to write a book. :D
Roberta Yang wrote:
The best way to draw kids into a hobby is to rant angrily about how much kids these days suck and things were so much better back in my day. I can't imagine why my general strategy of waving a cane angrily at any child with a gameboy who passes by hasn't made them realize how much better I am than them and how they should really play my game.
As much as I smiled reading this thread up until this point, I laughed aloud here reading your post.
I'm glad I read this rant, because I got to see your post. I fav'd it, but that doesn't do it justice.
Again, I'd hope someone offering a position or hypothesis as a possibility would be willing to say "I think this is true."
If your position is bat-s!@+ crazy, I'd hope you'd offer some links helping me understand how a sane person could reach that position.
I'm even willing to entertain your direct life experiences (anecdotal as they may be to support) your position.
I'm not giving you "flack" (I think the kids call it "frack," btw. BSG and what-not), I'm telling you I don't understand you.
Darkwing Duck wrote:
I was thinking of the Spartans.
Yeah well I think even the ancient Greeks looked a bit askance at the Spartans.
Those folks were hardcore. "Come back with this shield.
Or on it."
My Mom told me that I'd ... well I'd go Sparta on her ass. :D
Regardless, the Spartans lasted a good long while, so all the "if evry1 was gay, no budy be around cause no babies" thought process is pretty much moot.
Hey Sissyl. I'm sorry to quote you all over the place, but I would like to make a point / emphasize something.
At a high level, sexual preferences are just that, preferences.
Okay, I can agree. All human beings have "preferences."
Flavors they like. States or conditions they'd "choose" to be in, versus conditions they'd find less favorable or "choose not to be in."
I'd prefer not to be on fire, given the choice (for example). I've totally a preference for "not being on fire." (I'm hot, I know that, but that's not what I mean :D).
Whether it is homo- or heterosexual, zoophilia or pedophilia, fetishism, sadism or necrophilia, you did not choose your orientation, and should never be judged on the basis of it.
Sissyl, how did you jump from "preference" to "orientation?"
It's a really, really big jump.
I think your heart is in the right place.
I just don't understand how you get from "humans have a spectrum of sexual behaviors" (which I agree with) to "Hey, if you want to have intercourse with a dead puppy that has ballet shoes on (while wearing a tutu/tuxedo), that's all cool. I'm not gonna judge you on it." (which I'm pretty much against.)
(1) I've never heard "QUILTBAGPIPE" ... ever ... applied to human beings.
(2) The two P's are redundant (but then, you don't remember "precisely", so it's okay).
(3) Once you go "Everyone," the "LTGT(possibly Q) Community" might just decide "meh."
The QUILTBAG community sounds like something my grandma who is really into sewing would be a part of.
I can really see you sewing right alongside her, Dogbladewarrior.
Not that that's a bad thing. :D
Judy Bauer wrote:
Wowsa. I've never seen QUILTBAG before, but it does look like it'd be bandied about.
Starts off with QUILT. Quilt's a great word, and I like quilts. AIDS quilt (+), a bunch of old ladies in a quilting-bee (+).
Then again, "Quilt." (-)
AIDS (-), a gaggle of old ladies (-).
BAG, that's just ... hard.
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the term "Bag" as part of an acronym I'd self-identify with or promote to others. (-).
So I'm not sold on this one, Judy.
You've heard it bandied about, do you use it? You self-identify as a "QUILTBAG," or tell those you love "Hey, it's okay to be a QUILTBAG?"
I keep responding to your post, but the quote levels get all messed up. I'm going to read "Robert J. Sawher's Neanderthal Parallax Trilogy," regardless.
I'm not sure humans need to invoke Science Fiction to imagine
a species that only does hetero sex for reproduction, maybe only in an estrus period, but uses homosexual activity for pleasure and social bonding.
I'm looking at Ancient Greece here, reading that.
I think the Ancient Greeks had a lot sex for pleasure and bonding. I think it happened between men, men and women, women and women.
I also think they realized that sex sometimes led to little Greeks.
So there's that, too :D
I think we're on the same page, but reading different paragraphs. I think words inside those paragraphs are causing some communication difficulty too.
In order of import.
I don't want to read any study where women are injected with large amounts of testosterone / androgens in order to determine the gender bias of their potential offspring (whether the women agree to participate in the study or not).
REGARDLESS of trends.
I think sometimes if an individual doesn't b%#*+ about how things are "trending," they become co-conspirators to the trend. And sometimes "trends" steamroll folks, crush them, make them hurt.
I won't accept any "trends" I find morally objectional, and I'll complain about them when I see them.
It's why I can call myself a "flaming liberal" and still very-easily relate to my right-leaning brothers and sisters (and somewhere-in-betweens) when they spout off at the mouth / keyboard.
I appreciate and admire fervor as long as it's based in thought and love for others. As I typed, I like to consider myself Chaotic Good. :D
Its quite possible neither or both or true.
I didn't check the links you offered. If you've read them and still can type "it's quite possible neither or both or true," I don't think they're note-worthy.
If they can't convince you, and you're offering the hypothesis, they won't do much for me (I've taken the position your hypothesis is lacking).
A quick parse of this thread indicates I'd like to read it in more detail soon. Hence, "•."
Love the title too. I think "Epic-ness" should be approached with humility. This looks like a good read, I'm looking forward to spending time with it soon.
You typed it, but I'd reorder it.
This isn't the Rubicon I'd want to cross. YMMV.
I don't want to see this Rubicon crossed, much less cross it myself.
Ayep, np. As far as modern acronyms and political correctness go I’m always a bit behind the curve in most things it seems,
Yeah, peace. I'm going on nearly 50 years this life I'm living. I can certainly see how young-lings such as yourself have trouble keeping up. :D
I'm fine with acronyms between friends or professionals, but I don't do "political correctness."
I try to remember all my Queer and Questioning brothers and sisters and somewhere-in-betweens when I type "LGBTQ," just because I recall how much I've been hurt in the past when as a gay man I've heard folks say and type things causally like I didn't count or I don't matter.
So it's not political correctness, for me at least. It's more like extending a courtesy towards others I'd appreciate having extended towards me.
Kindergarten stuff. Be nice, share your toys, etc.
As I typed, I try to type "LGBTQ" when I remember to, because I remember being hurt when I didn't feel like I counted. :D
I’ll prolly add a Q in my personal terminology from now on as my friends have recently started doing so as well.
Meh. Do it because you've thought about it and have a desire to do so.
Not because it's totally in fashion or all ur friends r doing it.
Or because someone TOLD you to.
That's just being "politically correct." hehe
I was surprised to see you type this ...
The link to male homosexuality with older brothers may come from a mother who's had lots of boys developing a resistance to testosterone. Less testosterone in the womb, less masculization of the brain, less mental drive to be attracted to girls.
I've read more than once that some studies have shown it's the reverse.
So the thinking goes, HIGH levels of androgens "over-masculinize" males (such that "mere" girls don't work as far as attraction goes, only BUTCH, UBER-Manly-man-MEN will do); females are biased towards being "more-masculine" (hence they "naturally go for girls," and end up lesbians).
And I've never, ever read (other than this post) that a woman could "develop a resistance" to testosterone.
I'm not sure I'd want to read a study testing that hypothesis, either. Because ... well I think I'm Chaotic Good and want to stay that way. :D
What's up Doc the Grey? :D
doc the grey wrote:
... to be honest I don't think you could resist letting out the wtf chuckle at the one on the right and harsk's reaction.
Yeah, I've always thought Hill Giants were so dumb you could shoot them in the head and they'd keep tossing rocks at you until the "Hey, I am have sharp stick in muh think-box!" thought caught up with ... "Ooops I r deaded!" hehe
In commenting on the art in this campaign setting, I was just saying I considered some of it up there with some of Todd Lockwood's best stuff (see Third Edition Draconomicon,) or the Brothers Hildebrandt's Tolkien work from the late 70s-early 80s.
An illustration I could look at for three or four minutes and enjoy, then wonder about the back story, then enjoy.
And Jason, the words in it aren't too shabby either! I'm planning on posting a review this weekend.
I'm still reading my PDF (I've just the Tiaga giant to finish), but I just had to type I think the illustrations of the Storm Giant on page 52 and the Frost Giant on the cover / last recto page are two of the finest examples of fantasy illustrations I've seen.
Either there's something particular about my brain's structure which allows this to happen, or there's other factors involved.
I'm pretty sure you've got a particular brain, Meophist. Unique, in fact.
I think there are other factors involved, as well.
So I suspect you're stuck with your brain, and it's structure. And all the other factors.
I may end up being eternally curious as to what precisely is the case.
You may indeed.
One of my old players, a medical doctor, once stated that it is normal for medicine students to self-diagnose themselves with lost and lots of afflictions during their studies as they learn about them - and the same applies to mental conditions for psychology students as I was told by fellow psychologist (hopefully soon to finish her doctorate).
Self-reporting is a very dangerous condition, but it's the human condition.
Most of us either over-report ("OMG! It NEVER stops hurting!") or under-report ("meh. It doesn't hurt. much").
I'm glad I'm not a physician. Most I've met would rather patients presented themselves unconscious and non-responsive.
Hella' lot easier to diagnose and treat when the patient is not telling you what's wrong with them.
As I said, i read the article. I wasn't especially eager for another live action tour of the Klan's more popular current spinoff. But I have watched it now.
k. That's what I was wondering about.
And I understand, time's a precious resource in life.
The presentation is certainly impressive.
Yeah. She's working hard.
This is all normal homophobe rhetoric. It's essentially the same stuff the FRC and the like say, without all the careful euphemisms.
Off the top of my head, I'm not sure who the "FRC" are (much less what I'd call "normal homophobe" ... I'd just type "hateraid" and be done with it).
But if they carefully clothe themselves in such obtuse rhetoric as that crazy-lady did, I'm worried.
Hey again Todd.
Todd Stewart wrote:
It's not really an opinion so much as it's a statement of where the scientific literature is at, and it's virtually onesided at this point that sexual orientation is biological in nature (what amount is genetic influenced versus in-utero developmental by exogenous factors is what's in flux at the moment).
I'm sorry, but I think in your earlier post you expressed an opinion.
If you think you were just reporting a statement of evidence, well "good on ya" as the Aussies say.
I'm glad you are open to "really good research" that points in a direction other than your opinion. Even if you have to climb a mountain, that's the scientific method.
I'm waiting for scientists to tell me what dark matter is. I think human sexuality and sexual expression are a bit more complex, at times.
Lord Snow wrote:
about genetics vs. enviromental, I think the answear is kind of obvious. look around at the natural world. Humans are most comparable to other mammals, and homosexualty in those other species is scarce to the point of near non-existance.
hehe @ that
Lord Snow, same-sex funtime behavior is well-documented in many animal species (both in captivity and in the wild). A quick google-search reveals circa 2004
"If [sex] wasn't fun, we wouldn't have any kids around. So I think that maybe Japanese macaques have taken the fun aspect of sex and really run with it."
Lord Snow wrote:
I would dare say that humans *are* in fact more sophisticated and complex than most animals and therefore homosexuality, a human phenomenon, is derived from something deeper and more complex than gene structures.
I dare say same-sex behavior is well-documented in several animal kingdoms, and sexual activity is not always directly linked to reproductive ends.
Sometimes it's just sexy funtime.
Andrew Turner wrote:
Can you provide direct links for these citations?
I checked out the New England Journal of Medicine for all of February 2011 (February 3, 2011 Vol. 364 No. 5, February 10, 2011 Vol. 364 No. 6,February 17, 2011 Vol. 364 No. 7, and February 24, 2011 Vol. 364 No. 8) and found nothing on the "Xq28 chromosome."
The Science abstract I could get to did state
"a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced."
My next concern / question would be, "how many chromosomal subtypes influence sexual orientation?"
Todd Stewart wrote:
Social factors play pretty much zero influence here, though they can make someone suppress an orientation to whatever is socially expected,
I strongly disagree with you here.
I don't think humans know enough about fundamental brain functions to type "Social factors play pretty much zero influence here" ... about just about anything about how human beings behave.
Much less sexual orientation / expression / gender identity.
Todd Stewart wrote:
but upbringing doesn't alter brain structure.
I think how a person is raised / up-brought / socialized most likely affects brain structure and functioning (q.v. something as "simple" as language acquisition).
Discounting the fundamental, physical, and easily-measurable affects of environmental factors (such as nutrition), at least one other person thinks
"psychological trauma resulting from childhood physical abuse induces a cascade of physiological effects, including changes in hormones and neurotransmitters that mediate development in vulnerable brain regions." cite.
To reduce something as complex as sexual orientation to in-utero factors just seems silly to me. I think each of us "is / happens-to-currently-exist" as a unique conflagration of genetic predispositions combined with environmental factors and specific social settings.
Each of us also has a history, which impacts our current state-of-existing.
Todd Stewart wrote:
That's my professional opinion on the topic, based on the bulk of literature that's out there on pubmed.
Well I'm not a scientist, a physician, a psychiatrist, a social worker, nor a person with access to pubmed. I'm really not a "professional" in any of these senses.
But with all respect, to whatever profession(s) you enjoy, I think your opinion is wrong.
The causes only seem to matter to people who object to certain sexual orientations.
I don't really "object" to anyone's sexual orientation (straight/bi/gay), any more than I "object" to a person's gender, or a person's race, or why some folks have a predilection for wearing plaid garments.
However, I'm sincerely interested in the mechanics of how gay and bi people seem to "happen," and then choose to express their orientation in the face of so many societal pressures to conform to norms.
I don't think it is at all important.
I'd love it if a person's sexual orientation "wasn't all that important," but as long as people suffer discrimination as a result of such, I think it's very important to think about, both as an individual and as a member of a community / culture / society.
I believe that, sometimes, life just sucks.
Sometimes, life's total awesome and I'm surprised we don't catch on fire from smiling.
To topic ...
Next time I have a really horrible day (and they happen, don't let anyone tell you they don't), I"m going to think about how I feel right now and smile some more.
Hey Samnell. :D
Well it's been over a year since I got frustrated with my attempts to communicate with you.
You self-identified up-thread in this post that you'd self-diagnosed a "state-of-being" that partially explains to me some of the frustration I've suffered with you in the past.
I don't trust people who perform a self-diagnosis to accurately report to me their medical condition. A good friend of mine (who's a general practitioner) once told me that anyone who performs a self-diagnosis on a medical condition has an idiot for a doctor.
He was addressing me directly as his patient. I presented myself to him, offered him a self-diagnosis, and (for bonus points!) offerred him a treatment plan he could implement at his earliest convenience.
He shot me down, hard-core but with love.
So if you'll indulge me ... when you typed
Everything I read in the article I've heard before, except the Whitney thing. These people are for real.
did you watch the video associated with the link, just read the article, or both?
You'll always have my highest regards,
Sometimes I'm embarrassed for my entire species.
I'm pretty good about presentation and body language:
Very very. She wrote stuff down, on paper. She's got a list!
Or she's the very very best "real-life" troll I've ever watched. :D
Either or, I think she'd benefit from at least one trip to Ru Paul's Drag U.
She's got style (the hat), but not much taste that I can see (the hat). Ru can help with that, but she may need multiple trips. She's pretty far gone.
I accidentally clicked the (29 new) link instead of checking my forum tracking list for this thread. Dangit.
Ah well, I'll go through these 29, then head back up to my tracking list.
I concur with Freehold DM, Dark_Mistress, and Lady DeathQuaker here Ringtail. Differing sentiments and what-not, but to truth.
Big picture, not having that person in your life is probably best for you (both in terms of playing a game for entertainment, and living your live as you've got to try and live it). You def don't need to have such an entity as a Facebook "Friend."
It's tough, but it's a fact of life that not everyone's going to like you in this life you're living (regardless of how awesome you probably are).
I do my best to preview my posts so I don't come off completely ignorant / stupid / crazy, and I couldn't help smiling at the "Facebook Friend" / "not everybody gonna' LIKE you in this life" riff I just typed ... but it's true. We don't walk around with "Like" buttons floating over our heads in the physical world.
Point-of-fact, many non-awesome folks go out of their way to dislike / hate on folks they perceive as more-awesome than themselves. So there's that, too. :D
I'm sincerely sorry personally, and on behalf of my species, for any hurt you experienced over this.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
(My stealthy thread-dotting skills continue to improve. Alas, FaWTL and my thread-parsing / responding skills continue to lack grievously.)
Cosmo, thanks for your prompt reply.
Now that my scheme to save three bucks has been blown, thank you for explaining what's up. : )
Paizo's one of my preferred vendors, and if I could have purchased a license here (sans physical media), I'd have done so.
And as I really don't need another CD laying around (Yeah, that's it! It's not that I need to play with HeroLab right now, it's that I don't want to mess up the environment with a compact disc that'll end up in a landfill in 100 years!), I think I'll just head over to ya'll's website now and purchase a license.
Thanks for your time, and your efforts on HeroLab. I'm jazzed it's finally available for my OS of choice.
Howdy, you Customer Service folks!
I just posted this over on the HeroLab Product Discussion page.
Once I read it I realized it's more either a Customer Service question or Website Feedback question.
I'm walking out the door right now, or I'd delete that post and put it over here.
Thank you very much.
I'm pretty anal about parsing entire threads here on the Paizo messageboards before I chime in, but tl;dr this one.
I've been considering a purchase of HeroLab for a good long time, and I see it for sale here at Paizo. The other two Lone Wolf Development software tools offered for sale here are clearly labeled "CD-ROM;" this product isn't.
I've downloaded and installed the program from here, and it's running fine on my iMac running OS 10.7.4 (yay! the Mac OS version's what I've been waiting for).
So I've two questions,
I'd love to save the 3 USD I'd score purchasing HeroLab here at Paizo versus Lone Wolf Development's website. I've waited this long, if it's a CD I can just get it tossed into my side-cart for next month's subscription.
On the other hand, if it's just a license, I'd be in business with it sooner.
On someone else's hand, I'm suffering a bit of sticker-shock looking at the prices for some of the Pathfinder "packages" I think I want.
On someone else's other hand, I'm just glad this product's finally available for my preferred OS.
Thanks for your time!
Callous Jack, please call me Andy!
Callous Jack wrote:
The next set is done and should be posted soon. I think it is the biggest set I have ever done!
Reading that, you can also call me "excited!"
This here thing over here has shown up early (says "PDF available May 23" but it's also in my downloads ... that's Paizo for you!) but I don't think I'm going to download it until I can see your Paper Minis.
Hurray! I'm excited! Exclamation points all over!
Vic Wertz wrote:
... there's unfortunately nothing we can do to directly address that shortcoming in Apple's PDF rendering engine.
I'd not considered Apple's wonky PDF rendering engine was misbehaving, thank you.
I downloaded and installed Adobe's Adobe Reader X for mobile for my iPad a few minutes ago (v 10.2.0), and the "page of concern" rendered perfectly (albeit slow as molasses).
If I come across any Paizo PDF pages that act persnickety for me in the future on my iPad, I'll just fire up the Adobe Reader X app and give them a look-see there.
Thanks again for all your efforts!
"l'enfer, c'est les autres," "Hell is other people," or some-such.
I do concur, lynora, there are times an emoticon or a quick "LOL k thx bai" is better than a bunch of spoken words (or even typed ones).
I think you're correct though, the folks most in need of receiving feedback are the ones least likely to be open to it. :D