|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
"But "I am woman, hear me roar" has already gotten old. Time for Aaron to move on with his story."
He kind lost me at the silly scene with Titania and Thor... It made NO sense. Hopefully we will see no more of that. In a way I am wondering if he isn't just toying with his readers a bit with some of this... hopefully.
On the fist part. Yes I would hope that if I was acting all crazy a man I loved would have the fortitude to slap me across the face. It ISN'T an attack, it does no damage, except to the ego of the recipient. And such a thing by someone you respect or love should have the effect of causing you to step back and reconsider what it was you were doing.
As for the fan club... if I am mistaken here it is at least partly the comics fault. I am a new reader so I can only go on what I have seen so far; Thor tells his mother yes they can have an army... because she has the bifrost and he has his list... I assume it's the same list from earlier of women who might have kissed him. Hence my confusion.
Do we know that things don't pop out of the ball? R2's third leg is safely tucked away inside his trunk when he's not using it (and he concealed his rockets so well that for the entire original trilogy, we didn't know they were there), so who's to say the ball droid doesn't have stair-climbing legs that pop out (or rockets)?
This is a setting with cars that float on the air... Perhaps it can do the same or even just roll up the stairs. It's not like the technology can't easily make it happen.
Well I have no idea HOW Odin is supposed to act. BUT he really DID need to be slapped and if his WIFE can't slap him then the marriage was a lie.
All those ex-lovers of Thor banding together seems unlikely in the extreme. Have NONE of them any feelings? They might help individually but all together like some crazy fan group?! Weird.
Sadly JJAbrams has proven he doesn't understand Star Trek. His plots were abysmally bad, ignored the canon which is one of the better sides of Star Trek, and featured action which was never what Star Trek was all about.
I really wish they had chosen someone else to do a new Star Trek trilogy...
BUT JJ does make good movies just not Star Trek.
JJ Abrams and Joss Whedon suffer from very polarized fan groups. Almost like the fans of the directors blatantly deny all the weaknesses of their man and this drives the people who don't like them into a frenzy of hate. Silly I know.
Looking back the main strong point of Star Wars was the intense action and the story. JJAbrams has a proven record of making dazzling action films ... Ok he may be pretty bad when it comes to plot, but he IS going to blow us out of our chairs with action and so we know that he is perfect for at least half that formula. If he is careful with the story we might have one of the best Star Wars films ever.
Stopping Your Own Optimizing and Auto-Rules-Lawyering (or "What do I do when I know more than my GM and his lack of knowledge frustrates the hell out of me")
Ahhh... Rules Lawyers. Doomed to forever cling to the razors edge of "being right" vs "disrupting the game". Vilified by all because they fail twice. First by "being right" since nobody seems to like being told they are wrong. And secondly by "disrupting the game" and pulling everyone out of the moment and into the crunch.
As a GM I kind of like rules lawyers, well I do when they are truly right and not just think they are right but are actually wrong. Because they can help me learn something new. They say "Wait! It works like X" I stop for a moment and consider how sure I am that it works the way I thought it did... If I am at all unsure then I go with his way, If not then I keep my way. I make the call and play continues. No more discussion about that till after the game. And after the game I will curl up on the sofa with some rule books and learn it completely myself. Right or wrong we will be doing things the right way next time.
Whatever did happen to the international council that controlled SHIELD? I can assume since they had enough clout to give SHIELD authority in every nation that they wouldn't just go to prison when the organization was betrayed. If anyone could remake a legitimate SHIELD it would be those people... the ones who hired Fury in the first place.
I don't disagree at all. That is all part of Rule 2 Know your Players.
Well rule 4 and 5 are more advanced:
4- Know the Balance: It is one thing to simply run a game it is quite another to keep your players on the edge of their seats. When you know how to balance encounters and challenges to your players you can tailor the pace of the game to provide that nail biting challenge at just the right time. This is a complex skill to learn, it isn't JUST CR ratings it is knowing just how much your team can handle before becoming just another TPK. One thing to remember however is NOT to keep the pressure dialed all the way up or your players may burn out. Pace the game with less challenging encounters and dial it up when you want an epic battle.
5- Know your Creative Side: Once you have mastered the previous four it is time to play with more creative things. Designing new items, adjusting house rules for your players, building your own adventures/campaigns/settings. This is the fun and rewarding BUT keep in mind both balance and how your stuff will interact with the existing rules. This is often the funnest stuff for GMs, but it is super easy to misjudge the effect your new toy or rule will have on the game, making this the most dangerous one for killing the game's enjoyment. DON'T be affraid to roll back changes that were poorly thought out, in the long run your players will thank you.
DM under the bridge personality and motivations are a big part of what I was talking about with making NPCs come alive. Accent and mannerisms aren't as necessary but CAN make interacting with those NPC memorable if the GM is skilled at it.
As far as the open carry link: Most of the country considers it illegal to open carry unless you are an officer or agent of the government. And even some places where it is legal to open carry (like my home state of Michigan) you will still be arrested for doing so. You will probably either be held and released with a warning or charged with disturbing the peace.
I think maybe only in Texas or Arizona can you open carry and the police won't care. Hmmm also probably states like Montana or Wyoming would view open carry without concern.
Ok have you seen the levels of arms and armor a PC wears? In a real life setting these people would be doing their daily business in full swat gear and bristling with advanced weapons and equipment. Sure as Federal agents they can get away with it... but I know I would be shocked at someone dressed like that walking into a shop or restaurant.
As far as the topic is concerned...
I did have one player character who went around introducing himself as an assassin for hire. But then this probably got him into just as much trouble in the fantasy game as it would in real life.
I guess the biggest weirdness would be them running around town heavily armed and armored and expecting no one to notice.
Most of these make little sense.
- at least my players tend to be the good guys so while they may commit murder and assault it will likely end in charges of vigilantism... Any bad guys who ran will likely also be facing charges.
- in some cases my PCs are agents of the Law, in which case that infamous blue wall where police protect their own would prevent any murder or assault charges.
- robbery would likely go unpunished as well. Since there are not likely to be any survivors who would press charges, being criminals themselves.
- grave desecration is NOT what would be on peoples lips if there were undead crawling out of those graves. The PCs would likely be heroes... unless they started looting the dead, then yes they would likely face charges if caught.
- In a modern society my players would likely register their weapons and be legally agents of some authority or otherwise allowed to carry them in public. The few who aren't would be good at concealment.
- I don't believe I have had any PCs in any setting who committed drunk and disorderly or resisting arrest offenses.
I used to be... but really I don't PbP much at any more. I grew very tired of the glacially slow pace of the games, the unreliability of the players and GMs, and the helplessness of looking at dozens of stories like they are trapped in amber unable to ever see resolution.
However I digress. You asked how to not stay addicted? I suggest the binge till you can't stand it anymore approach. join EVERY game till you have no more time for anything else in your life. You will quickly reach a breaking point and suddenly the games won't have the appeal they once did.
Confirming what was previously revealed by Stan Lee, Feige said that the studio is indeed playing around with the idea of bringing the Inhumans into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but that the the brother-sister superpowered duo won't be their way in
They won't be inhumans that much has been revealed.
Aranna's top three rules of good game mastery would be a good place to start.
1- Know the Rules: a game master who is solidly versed in the rules is an asset to be admired. BUT the best game masters know that they can never know everything. Keep learning and keep your ego in check, if a player knows more about a rule than you do learn from him rather than shutting him down. BUT don't rest on his interpretation either. Go curl up on the sofa after the game and read up on the rules you weren't familiar with and learn them for yourself.
2- Know your Players: This seems silly but most problems in a game come from differing expectations during that game. Getting to know your players and what they want even if they don't know themselves is the hallmark of a amazing GM capable of tailoring the game experience to exactly what will make her players have fun. Just don't forget to have fun yourself as well or you will burn out and no one will be gaming. One thing however that I have found that seems to be universal in what players want is structure. A GM who is fair, consistent, and rock solid in their role as game master. Nothing alienates players faster than a door mat GM or a wishy washy one.
3- Know your Story: Yes this IS one of the big three. To have an immersive game you need to know a lot of things about the story. First you need to know what your villain plans are, what they are capable of doing or equally important what they are willing to do to achieve their goals. You need to understand how they will react when they face opposition. You need also to understand who the player characters are what motivates these fictional people to be the opposition and by all means make them PART OF THE STORY. Many GMs forget to make the PCs part of the story, and end up with story time where the game moves forward along predetermined lines with the PCs as bystanders or flunkies. Now I don't mean kidnap their family in every or even ANY story arc. What I mean is make them PART of the community (depending on backgrounds) have the baker wave to Vanessa Swiftblade as she passes by and inquire about her mother. Or have the barkeep buy Garret Darkmagic a drink on the house for handling that rogue necromancer last month. Make the NPCs they meet into living breathing interactable people, NOT just scripted quest givers or background extras.
I know Skye is in a bit of shock with the roller coaster she is on... but her Inhuman caretaker has been lying all along. It was obvious the moment he tried to bond with her. "I was going through what you were. Till they brought me here." but didn't he also say "Nobody has done it this way. There is a waiting list while you are prepared for the transformation." They couldn't both be true. Either he was prepared ahead of time and chosen for a gift. OR he transformed and was lost and out of control until they brought him to their secret city. People tend to treat change according to their predisposition toward it. He wouldn't have been afraid of his gift if he had been prepared and trained to accept it ahead of time. In fact his transformation would have happened at a prepared facility with people standing by to help him.
I LOVE quizzes!
But... being an athletic girl means I can't score very high.
BUT I do get 15 points!
PS: I could up that to 20 by adding my d30 to my dice case... except it doesn't fit and has no real uses...
I bet I own a die none of you own however! I have a d14 made for fun and given to me by a guy in shop class.
The guy I kicked out of my game. While I did not give a hug. Did everything in my power to motivate to get into the game. It went nowhere. Sometimes one has to just walk away from a losing and soul sucking battle. Some people will not change and despite your best efforts and being friends or family the solution is to walk away. Life is too short.
I wasn't there, so take this with a grain of salt. But I once had a player who just sat there and never seemed to be excited about my game, I did everything I could think of to involve him. But week after week nothing... Eventually I had a long conversation about his participation and I will never forget what he said, he said he didn't want any special attention in the game, he was happy just to be one of the players, he didn't want to be the big hero he want to be with his friends, his goal was to support his buddies. I no longer saw him as uninvolved, I saw him as just what the others needed a helping hand who made everything go smoother. And now I smile when he gets to play. Sometimes we are so caught up in our own perspective that we don't get to understand that other person. We don't ask the right questions or we assume something negative. What's done is done with him but hopefully this story will be on people's minds if they run into difficult players.
GM Tribute wrote:
To be fair wasn't 4d6 drop low made official (not optional) right at the very start of new school systems (3e)? And it continues to be the core stat generation or one of the core ones where point buy is made available. It is a feature of new school games and a huge improvement over the old 3d6 method. It may have been an option and a house rule back in old school times but it is a feature of new school.
Vincent Takeda wrote:
Even though I am not a grognard I also have dice older than he is, I raided some old board games from the 70's I think for d6s back when I was new. My parents never missed them.
Maybe he is a PbPer, they can often have dozens of simultaneously running games?
I remember a time I played with a group of grognards...
It was autumn and we were in a bit of a gaming dry spell with new classes and such. That is when lovable munchkin invited me to this great group he also plays with on occasion. It was a group of really high level grognards playing 1ed AD&D of all things (the game they refuse to give up because NOTHING better was ever made). I of course was given an unholy amount of XP and gold to create my character. So I set about building a wizard (the most broken class I could think of in AD&D at the time)... WOW was I wrong. I sheepishly had my princess of power to the GM and he just laughs. Now I was convinced he was going to berate me for making such an unstoppable power, but he said instead she wasn't strong enough to even face the butler at the dungeon entrance... I was stunned I had used every trick hadn't I? NOPE. Munchkin helped me remake her using dual classing tricks and classes like Ninja (yes these existed in 1st ed apparently) and psionics. Now I had this... inhuman human who could shake the very heavens with raw power while ignoring any damage sent her way (mostly). Satisfied the GM let my now barely able character into his game. I died a LOT in that game... a LOT. And yes the damn butler at the door was the first one to kill me.
My theory is that they don't want to EVER stop playing their favorite character. So they stay in that edition forever just getting stronger and stronger.
This is why I think you are overreacting to the Law. It is just a push back against all the protections being given to everything BUT religion. A LOT of people just want assurances religion isn't going to become the big legal target for anyone with an issue and this helps protect them. Religion is at least as deserving of protection as skin color is. All you out there waving flags saying a new wave of runaway discrimination is sweeping the land are ignoring many many facts to reach that conclusion. Look at the lists of states and communities where this is already law, is there any more discrimination than before? Nope. So since this REALLY isn't about stopping a new surge of discrimination what is this about? Maybe this is really about wanting religion torn down.
Thanks I will read this over. I had always assumed "born eunuchs" were asexual people... I hadn't considered they might be gays.
And once again I ask... Why should this particular rule be allowed to go against the law? There are many examples of acts condoned by the bible that would not only be ilegal, but also considered hedious by any sane person in thos age...
Are you picking and choosing your Laws? This IS now the law in many areas. I suppose if one law is in conflict with another law it is up to the high courts to decide the issue. Although I can't imagine any judge taking racism seriously.
And yes there are many questionable rules from the now out of date part of the Bible that refers to ancient Jewish law. I don't seriously expect anyone to live by ancient Jewish customs... not even the Jews.
Then I pity the legal teams for this looming court battle (if it ever does and wouldn't it have by now since these laws have been around for a while). And having read the wiki... doesn't this logic also exclude a rather large portion of the white population that has no Jewish ancestry or include blacks with a mixed heritage that does have Jewish ancestry? Their logic seems terribly flawed.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
That honestly wasn't even my point. I was saying just because Christianity didn't consider being black as sinful, what if other religions did? Should they be able to discriminate against black people under the guise of freedom of religion? Are you only allowed to discriminate against gays or are Christians the only ones allowed freedom of religion?
Of course you seem confused, Freedom of Religion means freedom of ALL religions. Fortunately for the poor legal system I know of no religion that counts your race as sinful. If an Islamic shop turned away a Christian customer for violating some Muslim tradition I would equally support them in doing so.
As for being gay being sinful... I am personally on the fence on that issue. I have seen the text in the Bible, and I know that it is in a part that doesn't hold sway any more... But one of God's original commandments was to breed and create many children. Isn't being gay ignoring that part of God's message? My gay friends tolerate my indecision and I don't hold it against them either way. After all IF this is a sin it is certainly one that doesn't hurt anyone other than the person themselves and so it is no business of mine to condemn it. There ARE faiths that accept it and they are no less faithful than I am, I have to accept that we each find our own way to God's love and know that "faith alone in Jesus Christ saves us from hell" if a gay man can have faith then I know he will stand by my side in heaven and although many faithful would be shocked. I have done things that are sinful, Be Wary faithful for ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Should someone from a faith that believes gay is sinful then let him find his own way to the truth whether he is wrong or right is God's call. Trust that he is faithful in his own way and just wave to him after judgement day when he stands next to the gay man he refused service to. On that day Jesus will tell us who was right and who was wrong. The ones who were wrong will repent and accept the truth because their faith is strong.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Oook? Why would anyone who is from a denomination OR religion that doesn't believe LGBT is sinful have any reason to deny a gay service?! As for Roman Catholics denying service to divorced people... ok that is their right. But considering how many marriages end in divorce they may be turning away a lot of customers. If they can stay in business then whatever... it doesn't hurt anyone. If I ever get divorced I will shop elsewhere no big deal (other than the brief annoyance at having to go to a better competitor). Heck my b&***ing about it to just my friends would probably cost them 8 more customers (based on a Pepsi Co. study) and possibly many many more if I take it to social media.
The religious reasoning is obvious. Nowhere in the Bible does it say being black (or any other race) is being sinful against God. It does actually say that about Gays. I am not saying I agree with refusing gays service. But one of the core principles of the nation is freedom to practice your religion. All this law does is keep that ideal safe. It is a good law. Let public outrage work against the tiny few who would take advantage of the law to actually discriminate. I trust that good will win in the end.
Lord Fyre wrote:
If that is what this is about then there is no real need to worry, the Hobby Lobby decision ONLY applied to closely held companies NOT big corporations. So no McDonald's in Indiana is going to refuse to serve gays, even if the Ma and Pa Deli next door does refuse them.
Also none of the big hospitals are closely held companies with religious leanings either so no worries over health care either.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
That is not the purpose of the law, someone already explained the history of the law, stop trying to be trollish.
And since you asked I face sexism all the time, and occasionally attacks on my religion as well. If you want to factionalize the country into protected groups fine but don't complain when religion gets protected as well.
pH unbalanced wrote:
Wow. I had it all figured out and you had to go deflate my bubble by making sense. You are right of course that religious gays are completely overlooked in my split. I guess in light of this it makes little sense at all to divide marriage. But that still doesn't solve anything. I guess maybe I am over complicating it. You know maybe the answer is right there, why not marry gays in a chapel where being gay isn't a thing. All fixed. Service with a smile.