Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Ameiko

Aranna's page

2,195 posts. Alias of Min2007.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Because most (not all) racism has vanished... they still discriminate against the poor and probably always will. Profiling happens because there are certain things police think are good indicators of criminal behavior like dressing in a gangsta fashion or covering yourself in tattoos and driving a fancy car while looking like that is something I am sure they train officers to look for. While the man in a pricey car but wearing an expensive suit often gets a pass because he has the money to fight back legally even if he is speeding. They also don't hesitate to pull over all poor people if they are breaking the law because it's easy money since they probably can't or won't fight back legally. Kids are often unfairly targeted to for a similar reason. I lived near a school for years and the cops would set up at the end of that street and ticket all the kids as they sped past. Kids don't fight back legally either.


It's hard not to admit racial profiling... My boyfriend in high school was black, he got pulled over just for being black; I was there for one of the stops. Although the cop let him go with a smile and a warning when he realized he was a football player.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Here's what you fail to understand:

Given equal circumstances, a black person is more likely to get pulled over than a white person. true, many police do profile
Having been pulled over, a black person is more likely to be searched than a white person. Not entirely true. It is the angry or belligerent driver who is FAR more likely to get searched. The cooperative and nice driver is far less likely to get searched. So unless blacks fall into the former category there shouldn't be more.
Having been searched (and found to be in possession of something illegal), a black person is more likely to be arrested than a white person. False. Once police get this far AND they found something, then you are going to prison, black or white.
Having been arrested, a black person is more likely to be convicted than a white person. Misleading lie. A POOR person is far more likely to get convicted than a rich one. If for no better reason than they can't afford high priced attorneys.
Having been convicted, a black person is more likely to receive a longer sentence than a white person. Same as above being poor is the determiner here. The system assumes a poor person will repeat offend so they issue harsher sentencing.


Lord Snow wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

Looks like Adrianne Palicki will be popping up in season 2 as ** spoiler omitted **

Lucy Lawless, Nick Blood, and Reed Diamond are also on board.

it got renewed?!?!

Yes, and Whedon will be directing all of season 2.

** spoiler omitted **

Ohhh is it true Whedon will direct the whole season? That would rock!


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Why don't we take peoples guns away for public safety then?

Many cities do this very thing. Or at least they used to... not so sure now after that supreme court case ruled it illegal.


I like an immersive experience; everyone stays in character and the world is consistent and real seeming.


Doesn't there have to be a trial in any shooting? justified or not?

And I presume the family of the boy is pressing charges... aren't they? I mean if the family isn't pressing charges and the police don't... then maybe they would have to let him go. But I can't imagine charges haven't been filed.


A crime reporter from StLouis Post-Dispatch is saying that so far the witnesses are supporting the police version of events in this shooting... and I did see one video online of a witness saying he saw the teen charge at the officer before he was gunned down. I wish the police would release ALL the information they have it might even help quiet the mobs if they hear what witnesses have to say...

assuming this reporter is correct?
we may not get all the facts till the trial...


David with a flashlight at his face.


While surfing again I came across an interesting article on Time. I have always believed that what most people see as racism was something else even deeper and this article does a wonderful job of shaping those thoughts into a concise idea.

The race war is really a class war.


yellowdingo wrote:
Aranna wrote:

No sorry yellowdingo I don't own a black leather body suit.

awwww! Phooy...

If it's any consolation I do own a kevlar motorcycle body suit.


No sorry yellowdingo I don't own a black leather body suit.


Actually as far as the police vs gun carrying is concerned I don't think it's race at all. I am fully licensed to carry a handgun and I was driving across the state to meet some friends and admittedly I was speeding because I was a little late. A small town cop pulled me over and I turned over my gun license along with my usual papers as is required by law. And the cop freaked out. I swear he had me on the ground at gun point he then removed my weapon and unloaded it before searching my car without a warrant. I was crying by that point thinking he was going to take me to prison or something. And after about 20 to 30 minutes of pure terror he finally wrote me a C/I for disobeying an officer even though I fully complied and then let me go after a long angry lecture about having a loaded weapon... I was going to point out to him that as a licensed CPL holder I had every right to carry a loaded gun. But I was terrified by that point and did everything he asked. I am a white girl with a fully legal permit to carry. I think cops just treat everyone who owns a gun outside of the police as public enemy number one... and combine that with the stupidity of some cops and you have a truly terrifying mix.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Aranna wrote:
My guess is that the officer encountered an angry and belligerent teen and decided to arrest him for... I have no idea (probably jaywalking) since he didn't know about the crimes the boy was a suspect in. As the teen was being placed in the cruiser the teen foolishly decided to fight back and at some point they struggled over the officer's weapon which was fired into the cruiser. The teen ran and in the heat of rage the officer gunned him down.

When was the last time you saw/ heard of a white teenager placed in the back of a patrol car for jaywalking?

No there have been cases in other cities where jaywalkers were beaten by police, none of them were black. Just being put in a car sounds a LOT gentler.

Jaywalker beaten by police


~sigh~
TheAntiElite... where to start with that? That post is dripping with paranoia, I truly hope you can see that. I would rather trust people and fix the root of the problem in the first place. A murder was done and justice will be served. The more I read the more I think it's that lack of trust that caused this tragedy in the first place.

My guess is that the officer encountered an angry and belligerent teen and decided to arrest him for... I have no idea (probably jaywalking) since he didn't know about the crimes the boy was a suspect in. As the teen was being placed in the cruiser the teen foolishly decided to fight back and at some point they struggled over the officer's weapon which was fired into the cruiser. The teen ran and in the heat of rage the officer gunned him down.

We had two people who clearly didn't trust each other and it ended in violence and death. Was the boy behaving badly? probably. Was the officer profiling? probably. Was there needless escalation from both of them? obviously. Now two families are devastated and both men won't be going home... one is dead and the other likely headed to prison. THAT situation is over. We now have a new one with unrest and looting.

As for the Confederate flag and the police chief... That flag means very different things to different people. I would have to ask the man about it to know which of the meanings it has for him? Is it his symbol of southern pride? Is it his symbol of racism and slavery? Or is it his symbol of rebellion against an oppressive government? Those are the big three meanings it has for different groups. Can you be sure it is the chief's declaration of support for racism? And if it is that to him it seems silly to hang it up for everyone to see... like he is proud of it... like maybe it means southern pride? Just maybe? Since he is part of the government I think we can safely rule out the third meaning. Although I am no expert, maybe he is proudly displaying his love of racism? And if so... why not elect some one else in this black community? I mean I struggle to see why anyone would vote for a proud racist to be head of police in a black community.

Shouldn't we try now to see all the sides (and there are more than two) and work to rebuild trust? If the sides cling to distrust then this will happen again at some point.

---

thejeff may be more right than I was initially when I started this argument. But even I can see that the police probably didn't shoot looters because they didn't want to be accused of racism and murder.


I think the initial SWAT style response was the local police chief. But this new curfew situation was from the State Governor.


"Does everyone's prices increase in lockstep?"

That is the key to your argument... And the answer is sometimes yes and sometimes no. You are right in that price increases often fail when only a small part of the market goes up. Those pressures toward the lower priced alternatives keep things in check... but look at fast food. After years and years of failed price increases at a certain point suddenly they all went up. Same with groceries. All because of the pressure of about a dollar more in fuel costs. While we will likely not know for certain how quickly wages will increase costs I think the past is a good indicator that they will go up at some point maybe not all at once. But nature will seek it's new equilibrium. The middle class will spend a little less and the working poor will spend a little more. Business will go on. Nobody will starve under the new equilibrium. This is probably the real reason it's opposed by the Republican party. The Republican middle class demographic will lose spending power while the Democrat lower class will gain spending power. This means more revenue for the Democrat party and less for the Republican one. The rich are an integral part of both parties and so you can be certain the rich won't truly be targeted by such legislation.


Ohhhh!!! Ok language differences per region maybe? That sounds like a delicious fish wrap sandwich recipe. Yeah I usually envision that hard tortilla shell when you say taco.


A minimum wage increase will not destroy the economy... not even a $3/hr one. It will just create a new equilibrium.

Business is all about maximizing profits. If you suddenly increase labor costs of some businesses then they will have to adjust their balance sheets somewhere. This will mainly impact minimum wage employers at first. Who are the minimum wage employers? Mostly firms that need a lot of unskilled people ... fast food and retail sales being the biggest, but it also includes any narrow profit small business who also needs unskilled help. Lets look at fast food. They employ a LOT of people below $10/hr and are the examples we see on the news. These companies make huge profits largely on the massive volume of food they sell. But if most of the people at the local McDonalds suddenly made $3/hr more what would happen to that McDonalds? At a top earning store the owner drops from about $1.5million in take home pay to about $1.2million. So clearly this isn't going to put a big chain like McDonalds out of business... what it IS likely to do is increase the prices you pay for a Big Mac in order to compensate the owner you may be paying 50 cents to a dollar more per visit. I mean lets face it these guys can afford the pay cut but they aren't going to take it unless they have to. So they pass the costs to you the customer. Now expand this across the entire service industry (these are the people who hire at low wages) and you can see costs of the stuff you buy will rise in price to accommodate the new wages. The people in skilled positions won't see any more money but their costs will go up while people in unskilled positions will be earning more than enough to offset cost increases. This won't hurt business... it will hurt the middle class.

So the real question is: do we want to make the middle class pay to improve the incomes of the poor? I guess your answer will depend on your own income bracket.


eh? The point was to watch the street interview, not to look for who else reads a page I found while surfing for new news? I think it highlights the trouble here. On one side are the people who are aghast at the police violence and on the other are people who clearly think the looters deserve some. And this is just inside the black community.

Clearly this community needs help. They need to unite against crime and hire a police force they can trust to make the right calls. If they don't do both then this won't end with a dead teen and a jailed officer.


Oh I love fresh fish caught on Lake Michigan and anywhere else I suppose (I had some great fish in Texas). But on a taco shell?


TheAntiElite wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:

And now, after another round of looting the police are being criticized for not doing more. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Also, a curfew has been imposed on the city.

Interesting that the looting is mentioned but not what happened in response to it on the part of the protesters .

You know, like how so many people complain about not happening ever?

Not everyone is of one mind not even in the black community as seen here where one photo shows a sign saying "don't shoot" while the video under it has a black man asking "Why didn't the police shoot those looters?"

street interview


I never understood fish tacos? I can't even imagine how that would taste but it sounds horrible...


I wasn't blaming every demonstrator just the criminal ones. I already said i am praying for the protestors who were unjustly gassed and bruised by the police... as far as I have heard the police haven't killed anyone during the riots so you can take your straw man and leave him at your place where he belongs. And as a victim of crime myself I can tell you it is NOT as simple as filling out a form and sweeping up the glass when dealing with insurance agencies. I got back pennies on my dollars after they took away the deductible and reduced the value of my damages by declaring massive devaluation for the stuff having been "used" and accepting only the lowest possible bid on repairs. These poor people are out tens of thousands of dollars AFTER insurance. And on top of all that there is the very real fear you face for years and years after the attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Also, speaking of political correctness, I don't really get the line "this is only news because he's black." My buddy was attending community college during the Trayvon Martin thing and he said all the young white kids kept saying "It's just 'cuz he's black."

Of course it's just cuz he's black.

If he wasn't black, he wouldn't have been shot. That's the point!

I'll favorite this, but I got the feeling that Zimmie could have shot anybody of any color. But it's just a hunch.

Again I agree with Comrade Anklebiter... Zimmie would have shot anyone. He certainly didn't strike me as racist during all that... just a loose cannon.


I have to admit there is a LOT of media bias out there Comrade Anklebiter... I still wonder why I didn't hear about the police shooting dead that vagrant while I hear from every source about this shooting.

thejeff... so much crime goes unpunished it's frightening. I really doubt most of the racist officers OR the race rioters will ever see any punishment. They will be free to do this again next time.


Hmmm... stripped of PC we get the following:

[PC off]Black criminal murdered by white cop. Riots and an abusive police crackdown to follow.[PC on]

And yes I am going to pray for BOTH sides. Because when each side decided to get evil then it is the innocent on both sides that get to suffer. The peaceful protester tear gassed and shot at with bean bags, the hardworking shopkeeper watching helplessly as people destroy his shop. And with each act the supporters for the other side grow until we end up with the raw violence of evil mob fighting evil mob. And at the end of the day most of the offenders on both sides will walk away free of any charges. Ultimately the cop will face the FBI and be found guilty or innocent but until then lets all behave like frenzied barbarians or jackbooted thugs.


My apologies. Comrade Anklebiter has made a solid point. I concede that I didn't realize our police forces in many cities had grown so... wrong in pursuing ... justice? I wonder now. I withdraw my contention about the racial preconceptions; I clearly have something to think about.

As for thejeff, really? Must everyone be politically correct to the point of absurdity? If it pleases you then by all means add alleged criminal to your reading of my post. I have always been a supporter of victims rights and often this over eagerness to offer every possible defense to those who commit crimes even going so far as to even prevent people from even referring to them as a criminal does nothing but help turn the law against victims.

In this case however I am not kidding when I say let the FBI find the truth; THEN if the officer did do what witnesses say he did then THROW THE BOOK AT HIM. Abuses by the police make me sick. If that is what society has become then maybe we need to find a better way to enforce laws. We definitely need a better way to recruit officers. But destroying the livelihoods of innocent shopkeepers in a riot is just as bad as the police abuse that followed.


TheAntiElite wrote:
Kevin Mack wrote:
TheAntiElite wrote:

Originally I attempted to give the commissioner benefit of the doubt - he kept coming across as slightly bewildered, a little Mr. Magoo-ish, unsure why one of his boys would act out in such a fashion but sure there is a logical explanation.

Then he went on Hannity and blew that out of the water.

what did he say on Hannity?

In full candor and disclosure I have no idea.

I don't watch the show, what clips I've been subjected to in the past nearly provoking apoplectic fury that rendered me incoherent. Hannity has a voice and face combo that is an incitement to ire and the choice to appear on said show, especially given its target demographic, says more about the Ferguson chief than I would like.

I thought the prior chief was the one with the stars and bars thing as well as the theme days, AKA 'let's have a black day, let's stop everyone with a tan today'. If what you say is true, thejeff, I will feel like I wasted good will and fair-minded thoughts as I tried to be so in spite of his being in law enforcement - something that I generally don't do due to my own experiences with police.

Oh my word! Your not angry over anything said since you didn't listen... NO your angry because he appeared on a popular TV show?! AND only because you hate that show?! I don't have words to express how wrong that is.

Again I argue calm... does any one think there would be ANY of this craziness if the ethnicity of the teen or officer were changed? Would there be riots if a black cop shot a white criminal? (And yes the felony of assaulting an officer turns you into a criminal regardless of whether you already were or not) NO there would be no riots. What if they were both black or both white? Nope no riots. That means MOST of the hysteria is in peoples preconceptions about race NOT in the actual events. Let calmer outside heads sort out what happened and deal justice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well this is a total mess. People should calm down until the FBI gets to the truth. Riots turn your side into the bad guys... mass peaceful protests would have done the job much better.

Personally I have heard so far that the black criminal attempted to take the white officers weapon in the car injuring the officer in a non-life threatening way and then the officer fired at the black teen in the car at least once and after the black teen fled on foot he fired at least twice at the fleeing felon. Witnesses say the teen then tried to surrender but that the policeman gunned him down anyway.

{IF all of this is true; that is a big IF since this is racially charged and people are probably lying on both sides to a greater or lesser degree.} Then the policeman should either be arrested for aggravated murder. Since up until the point the teen surrendered the officer was within his rights, but NOT after he surrendered. OR if the witnesses are lying and the boy was shot to death either in the car or while trying to flee then the officer should go on desk duty till people calm down.

The officer's innocence will be determined by the FBI. My prayers go out to those who are suffering on both sides right now.


A good quality chilled chocolate like Toblerone and an ice cold glass of milk.

Tortilla chips with melted cheese and a spicy salsa

Orange floats.

And last but certainly not least is Breyers all natural mint chocolate ice cream.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find the problems with TET don't come from maturity or play style; the problems come from expectations and boundaries being very different between players. Take the typical way this sets up with a good aligned group with that one guy who thinks it will be fun to be the only evil guy. The bad guy player expects to be able to get away with evil acts while the good guy players players expect to be out there doing good deeds and punishing evil. Regardless of the role play at some point the evil guy is going to commit an act of evil and the good guys are going to have an issue with it. This is where most games devolve into PvP. But even when they don't you typically have upset players. It is interesting to note that in TV, books, or movies the TET usually has a lovable side and usually backs down in the face of working with good team mates allowing the group to continuing to function even during an impass. Now if a TET player can do the same then things might go fine, but most players I have seen who have such an interest in playing this type of character also don't want to have to back down at all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
Aranna wrote:

So much intolerant atheism in here, sad.

More like intolerance if intolerance. And the source of that intolerance has been identified (correctly) as religious doctrine.

Nonsense, the source of that intolerance is intolerant people with crazy ideas, not religion. They may like to pretend it's something else but it's all on them.


meatrace wrote:
Aranna wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

Protestant: WTF?!?!? Can we get over the "God hates" thing already? God loves everyone. As long as they believe in God. If they don't, then God hates 'em.

This isn't accurate by the way. I mean the first part is... God does love us all. But the second part isn't. God promises all our misdeeds will be punished... This is a death sentence for everyone on earth. But he loves us and so he sent his only begotten son to die for us and give us a second chance at heaven through him... we only need to believe, nothing more.

But you don't just have to believe, you have to believe and also rigorously follow a 2000+ year old moral code or you will be tortured for eternity.

No. If you believe then you will be saved. Following the Christian code isn't required. However if you do believe then you will do your best to follow the code anyway. If you fall along the way then you aren't doomed. Jesus will help you back up and you can try again. If you get some stuff wrong but still believe then likewise you are still saved. You will just get corrected in the after life.


Yeah I know I am weird.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So much intolerant atheism in here, sad.


:p
@ Blayde

One of these days I will buy a case of energy drinks and watch a marathon of Appleseed kicked off with Buckaroo Bonzai. And if I still fall asleep I will cry...


The funny thing about Appleseed... every time I try to watch it I fall asleep. I have no idea why, it's not like the show is boring. I get the same effect from Buckaroo Banzai those shows are a true cure for my insomnia, kind of freaky.


thejeff wrote:

And if the actual story is as lame as "We'll ... we'll ... we'll just say he's a woman! Dea ex machina, as it were." then I'll fully agree with you.

But we don't know the actual story yet. We don't know how they'll do it or how whether it'll make any sense.

"We'll ... we'll ... we'll just say he's a woman! Dea ex machina, as it were."

If the story is THAT bad they might just bury the Thor comic franchise. We will have to wait and see. I for one think they wouldn't do this lightly. That they will build a character we will care about and that we will enjoy reading the adventures of the new Thor.


Pan wrote:

DDO when it launched had to be played as a group. Game was simply too damn difficult to solo. It was also default hard mode. A few years into its life and then came free to play and all its changes. Suddenly its no longer desirable to play with strangers so the game now has a solo mode. Curses and blindness are no longer perm but have timers. Resting areas that were one shots that served as pacing mechanics became mutli-use so people could be reckless and blast away. Hell they even added spell point potions to get around the unique system that DDO had going for it. Its a shame really.

When did this happen in DDO? Last time I played you HAD to be in a group. And it was nearly impossible to find a good group. Want to solo up a couple levels? Sorry we will flatly kill you dead if you DARE enter a dungeon as a solo player EVEN if you are 5 to 10 levels higher than it. That was when I quit DDO... even the guild I was in wasn't interested in helping a lower level member catch up... I just got left behind and the game kicked me to the curb hard. That and leveling got to be such a grind even with a group... play the same few dungeons over and over and over seemingly endlessly till you finally get to level. That's probably why nobody ever wanted to group with a lower player they had already played that content 50 times themselves and they were mighty sick of it.


See I love PvP as long as I can control when it happens. Lack of safe areas would drive me away from a game. But PvP is a valuable tool I can use to help learn advanced strategies... I just have to accept that I will die a lot till I can master them.


Hey I am different this time... I edged over that line into LG now, but somehow became a half elf in the process?


No his post was indeed a joke... I just felt like clearing that one up just in case someone who didn't know read it and got the wrong idea. You never know who might read it out there with internet searches.


Nope.

There are many kinds of societies in this country. I was the product of a very religious one rather than an entitlement one.

Oh, and I am not selfish... as for lazy? We all have our demons and mine seems to be procrastination.


NobodysHome wrote:

Protestant: WTF?!?!? Can we get over the "God hates" thing already? God loves everyone. As long as they believe in God. If they don't, then God hates 'em.

This isn't accurate by the way. I mean the first part is... God does love us all. But the second part isn't. God promises all our misdeeds will be punished... This is a death sentence for everyone on earth. But he loves us and so he sent his only begotten son to die for us and give us a second chance at heaven through him... we only need to believe, nothing more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

It felt good watching it burn. Especially when the cathode tube made a loud pop, and the phosphorous inside caught fire.

Also, my grandmother's reaction was priceless. Especially when my mom (the one who bought me the books and hunted them down) told her :"Serves you right".

I would never have gotten away with that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wonder why MMOs want you to log in and grind for hours replaying dull content? It makes no sense, they don't earn any more from keeping people grinding instead of giving them what they want instead... right? Why not hire story writers and have an evolving setting with a constant supply of fresh adventures or challenging multiplayer PvP or PvE? Isn't that what people want? It is no wonder so many MMOs fail.


I don't think Emo Philips has any real understanding of God or religion...


The black raven wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Anyone want to explain to me why the latest fashion trend happens to be player-bashing?

I've seen it come up a lot more than before. Do we all really have to assume that a DM is never wrong?

Yeah this isn't new... players vs GMs and vice versa is as old as the game itself.

And I really don't think anyone assumes a DM is never wrong. Was that line an attempt to troll up a response or some sort of straw man?

Well, the majority of early posts I have seen in any such GM vs Player thread tend to be of the "GM is right, player is wrong" variety.

I was not aware of any recent spike in such activity though.

I think the GM is right / Player is wrong ideas are simply a misunderstanding of the rules. While it is true in RAW that the GM's position as final arbiter makes him always right... that is literally ONLY in his own game and certainly isn't even final there either. A GM can certainly be (and many frequently are) wrong in everything from understanding the rules and building a good story to motivating his players. It takes a lot of skill to run the perfect game... fortunately even though players are often just as flawed as their GM they (most of the time) overlook the GMs flaws in order to enjoy the game.


Icyshadow wrote:

Anyone want to explain to me why the latest fashion trend happens to be player-bashing?

I've seen it come up a lot more than before. Do we all really have to assume that a DM is never wrong?

Yeah this isn't new... players vs GMs and vice versa is as old as the game itself.

And I really don't think anyone assumes a DM is never wrong. Was that line an attempt to troll up a response or some sort of straw man?

1 to 50 of 2,195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.