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

Caineach's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 4,966 posts (4,971 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,966 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hama wrote:
HE'S STEALING BATMAN'S GIG

Honestly good. Not everything awesome needs to go to the most over the top superhero ever.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:
Coriat wrote:

Quark, "diploma mill" would typically be used to refer to an institution without accreditation or with fraudulent accreditation, which it does not seem is the case here. Similarly according to Wiki they tend to lack personnel and often not offer actual teaching (or if so, from teachers with bogus degrees from the same place). Also does not seem to be the case for this university, which, according to Google, has teaching standards and partnerships with major physical universities.

What makes you think it is a diploma mill or similar to one?

Because no one proxies the test assuring that the one who receives certification is the one who sat for the exams.

The amount of money being made limits the ability to formalize the degree earning process. Lack of formality is a hallmark of bogus degrees.

The degrees are extremely limited and "meh" degrees at that (cf BTDB's latest comment above).

That makes it Diploma Mill-esque (thx BDTB :), no?

Uh, sorry to break it to you, but it is very easy to cheat in college. A lot of professors never learn the faces of their students, especially with some students never going to classes, or professors not even showing up to exams and just letting their TAs run them. Not once did I see a professor check ids.

Not to mention colleges and universities that offer degrees entirely online.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
meatrace wrote:
Krensky wrote:

Per his war stories, when asked why you can't divide a number by zero the response he got from someone applying to teach college mathematics was "Because it would anger the Math Gods." Not "it's undefined", not "you can't take X things and divide them into no piles". "Anger the Math Gods".

I'm amazed he doesn't drink more.

To be fair, that's what my friend tells his students, and he teaches AP Calc. Math teacher humor is an acquired taste.

Yeah, to me that sounds like the standard response you would get from any math major I knew in college. Just because the guy has a sense of humor and would rather show that than answer a question that is quite frankly beneath someone applying to teach math, does not mean he is dumb.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
meatrace wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
meatrace wrote:

Or just make college free here to citizens and aliens alike, then you'll massively brain drain the rest of the world as all the smart folks come here.

Germany did something similar recently and I'm sure they're working the same strategy.

Germany is also very selective about who they admit into a regular university type setting. They don't let just anybody get free college. If you don't have the academic chops you don't get to go. Period. No remedial classes for illiterates in German universities. That seems to be an American thing exclusively.

Any halfway-decent school in the US is just as selective.

I mean, sure, any old boob can get into University of Nebraska at Bumf$%#, but you'll probably get about the same level of education as a community college.

I've never heard of classes for illiterates at university though, so you'll have to elucidate me.

I've heard of them. Some colleges do remedial HS stuff. They just count towards certificates and not degrees.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Who is floating in the background with a yellow cape?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
RainyDayNinja wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
I'm currently working my way through The Rithmatist, by Brandon Sanderson. Between that and Elantris, it seems that Sanderson can create magic systems like nobody's business. Is this constant throughout his writing, or does it flare up at some times and not others?
Sanderson's hallmark is rigorously defined magic systems. In fact, he coined "Sanderson's Law" of fantasy writing, which states that the ability of magic to resolve conflict is directly proportional to how well the reader understands how that magic works.
Furthermore, I'd say that the magic systems in Elantris and The Rithmastist are among his weaker ones. For the magic system that is absolutely the best, I'd check out Mistborn.

I just finished reading the Mistborn trilogy. I have been recommending to most of my friends. It is so excellent. I will need to pick up more of his stuff. I love how well he can layer things, and how no one plays idiot ball, they just get legitimately outplayed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A couple days ago my friends an I were discussing Gurren Lagann and came to the conclusion that the hero should have been a duck. Nothing in nature beats the male duck's spiral power.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
I personally don't like a Peggy Carter match up. There are too few episodes to waste time on this.

If they don't tie her life up with a bow in the final episode, it leaves room for future segments, such as another eight episode run next year during the Agents of SHIELD winter break.

No reason to shut all the doors, after all. She could have had many years of adventures as a founder of SHIELD before settling down, and I for one am not watching Agent Carter to find out who she plays housewife with or the exciting adventures of her learning how to cook and sew and vacuum floors.

What makes you think she would choose a man who would make her do any of those things?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GregH wrote:
Dum Dum Dugan was in the Hydra POW camp when Cap rescued him in First Avenger.

Your right. I was thinking of, different character, Jack Thompson, who in the last episode was eyeing her quite a bit.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Die in a fire.

That's a you problem (point at the person while saying it)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GregH wrote:
Based on the way they were looking at each other, is it possible her husband is/was/will be Dum Dum Dugan?

Dugan was in the Pacific theater and I'm not sure Cap ever was.

Sousa is the only character introduced so far that makes sense with the Cap saving him reference from Winter Soldier, since we don't know how he got his war injury, and they have shown him crushing on her pretty much every episode. He also seems to be one of the few people Peggy fully respects working with.

Edit: with that said, I personally do not like the Peggy-Sousa match up. It is a little too Mary Sue to me, despite how much I love that actor for his performance in Dollhouse.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
havoc xiii wrote:
Soooo.....my wife just had me watch Grave of the Fireflies for the first time ....... Hmmm ..... yep I have sunk to the lowest depressiony depression that ever depressed [Expletive Deleted].

My roommate in college used to cheer at that movie. He loved watching people suffer for their own stupidity.

At some point I need to finish watching Now and Then, Here and There.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Neat


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Is it worth watching for anything other than the visuals? The preview makes everything else look terrible.

I saw the preview and had no interest in it.

Then I saw Jessica Price's comment on it and I think I have to see it now.

Ok, so the previews are accurate and I should just go looking for special effects and ignore the plot I will most likely despise. More or less what I expected.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Is it worth watching for anything other than the visuals? The preview makes everything else look terrible.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
Quark Blast wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
...GPA padding in affluent neighborhoods is common place, and the immigrant is far more likely to have a life event disrupt their GPA. Even if that student comes back to class after failing a semester they can achieve content mastery but a semester full of F's will trash even the best GPA....
If you receive an "F", then when you retake the class the new grade replaces your former grade. Or it ought to. Hence, no impact on long term GPA.

Yeah, your institution may do that for the purpose of your internal GPA, but if you want to transfer or get into a post grad program then they will want a full transcript with a full accounting of courses, including retaken.

Same reason EVERY college wants your high school transcript, they want to see the skeletons. They assign your acceptance GPA based on their own criteria which will often include everything.

Also, sometimes you have a bad semester and part of going back is reevaluating what you are studying. Why should an F in Animal Phisiology have an impact on an entrance application for an Art History program?

Depends on the school. My full college transcript has no mention of the classes I failed, as the college has a policy of not recording anything below a C. That semester it just looks like I took one fewer classes than normal.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
There is nothing really unique about RWBY, but it does the things we know so well and with such zest that you can't help but enjoy it.

Honestly, I think this is true of the plot, but I feel like the fight scenes are better than all but a few series I have seen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:
Since Spider-Man is based in New York, they're going to have to address what he was up to during the events of the first Avengers movie. Will they retcon him in, saying he was fighting the Chitauri somewhere else in the city? Or maybe the Battle of New York spurs him to move beyond fighting purse-snatchers and seek out SHIELD so he can make a real difference?

I think he will have been a kid who has grown up in the aftermath of the destruction of a major part of NYC. If he got his powers shortly after, he will have had at least 2 years to develop into an Avenger recruit.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
I gotta be honest, I've been watching RWBY slowly since the main appeal is in the action scenes for me (which goes to show how much Monty really brought to everything he worked on). Does the rest of the show get better? I'm gonna keep watching it no matter what, of course. It's not like it's that bad now. Just less my scene.

Season 2 picks up a lot, and I get the feeling season 3 will be practically 1 fight scene.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've said it before and I will say it again. I hope Marvel does not get X-men back, or if they do that they do not try to integrate them into the MCU. Far too much of the existing MCU continuity would be ruined by the historic existance of mutants for decades.

Powerful people like Stark have not heard of mutants before. They may be able to do a story where they are just starting to appear. But for that, you can't have the huge numbers that a lot of the X-Men depictions seem to have, where 10%+ of the population seems to be is mutants, and mutants have been publicly visible since the 70s. Honestly, I think it could be interesting to a story of a young Professor X set in modern day - a modern reboot of the franchise. Then again, I think it would be more interesting to sideline some of the higher tier characters early and let some of the lower-power mutants shine.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
How many more people live now than in the 1840s?
Is that the point you want to make? I'm genuinely curious if that is actually a thing you really want to say or if you just opened your yap and it fell out on accident. I wouldn't think any less of you if you retracted it, seriously, you should think about that statement and try again.

Why? I think enslaving a much smaller percentage of people is better than enslaving a larger percentage.

Just like nearly everything else should be looked at per capita rather than in absolute numbers. You wouldn't compare murder rates or crime rates in absolute numbers, why slavery?

None of which is to say it's fine, we're talking relative degrees here.

Not to mention he seems to be comparing slaves to both slaves and people who live in slavelike conditions. It's not like the second group magically appeared after slavery was abolished. You had slaves of circumstance who were not legally slaves 150-200 years ago too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alzrius wrote:
Caineach wrote:
I just noticed RWBY on Netflix last night.
I saw that too. They've (very cogently) made each "volume" of the first season into a single episode - meaning that they're essentially presented as two movie-length features.

Awe, but that means you don't get to sit through the awesome intro song until it is stuck in your head :(


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:

Please. You wouldn't want my wife. She's a smart ass and enjoys mocking things you enjoy.

hugs UC Gundam DVDs

Is that supposed to diminish his request somehow?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just noticed RWBY on Netflix last night.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm guessing we will see a new actor but not a new origin story.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Caineach wrote:
So the Daring Infiltrator archtype says it's Bonus Feat ability replaces things at 2nd, 10th, and 18th level but the base swashbuckler only gets feats at 4th, 12th, and 20th. Considering how much underpowered the 2nd level ability is compared to what it replaces, is there supposed to be an additional bonus feat as well, or is this a typo?

I just realized I put this in the wrong forum. It is a 1st party rules question.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So the Daring Infiltrator archtype says it's Bonus Feat ability replaces things at 2nd, 10th, and 18th level but the base swashbuckler only gets feats at 4th, 12th, and 20th. Considering how much underpowered the 2nd level ability is compared to what it replaces, is there supposed to be an additional bonus feat as well, or is this a typo?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
If you're going to say, 'no game sells as well as ______', please at least list a game in the top 10 most sold. Madden isn't even on that list, and the best Call of Duty has ever placed is #14.

Call of Duty:Ghosts was number 2 in sales last year according to this site. Though that is not end of year numbers.

This site has call of Duty as the top selling console fanchise domestically in 2011, 2012, 3rd and 6th in 2013 (GTA beats it), and 2nd, 4th and 6th in 2014. It splits it by console. Switching to a global view and only a few games sneak in above it. It is in the top 10 for all consoles it is available for each year.

You must be looking at all time sales numbers or something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:
mechaPoet wrote:

Btw, sorry if it felt like I baited you so I could make my response, but I felt that y'all's dislike for the term was due to a misunderstanding of its definition and use (determined by asking you to explain why you disliked it).

Again, I'll be the first to admit that bandying these terms about willy-nilly can be less than useful. But I don't think that a misuse of the term (and here I'm wary of drifting into the dreaded realm of prescriptive linguistics) as an ill-conceived "catch-phrase" or "buzzword" (if indeed such a thing happens) should be taken as the first and foremost understanding of it. I would also encourage that anyone who is not part of a given oppressed group have a little leeway with how that oppressed group describes their experiences. It's more important to try and understand where someone is coming from than to dictate how they should express themselves.

I think you misunderstand me. I have no problem with the definition. I have a problem with its use. It gets used to describe behavior as being aggressive that is in no way such. It gets used to describe every possible behavior someone can take that isn't strictly towing the feminist line, and even sometimes then. If a guy shows any sign of interest in someone, I've seen it somehow labeled a microaggression. The term is being used as a sledgehammer to say any non-puritanical male thoughts are somehow oppressive, regardless of how he acts on them.

Forgive me, but I feel sex shaming is a bad thing. The US is too puritanical society as it is.

Of course sex shaming is overwhelmingly directed at women, but we must fight any hint of it targeting men. Even when it's not actually sex, but harassment.

Are you claiming the concept is inherently invalid and should be dropped entirely? Or just that "microaggression" is applied overly broadly - to any expression of interest, as you said?

I think some groups are applying it properly, but that there is a significant, vocal group that screams that any possible thing a man can do is bad. I think some of the popular feminists right now, like Anita Sarkeesian, skirt the line.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sissyl wrote:

MechaPoet: Game reviews are a true swamp of misery, and ceased being useful for any purpose ages ago.

My point about TV was merely that complaints can very easily become problems the companies do not want to deal with. Thus, if you want to improve things for real, complain about the things that are not redeemable.

And IIRC, AAA title players are not just mostly male, but overwhelmingly so. Perhaps someone has data?

Last I saw was over 70% male for the Call of Duty franchise.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
mechaPoet wrote:

Btw, sorry if it felt like I baited you so I could make my response, but I felt that y'all's dislike for the term was due to a misunderstanding of its definition and use (determined by asking you to explain why you disliked it).

Again, I'll be the first to admit that bandying these terms about willy-nilly can be less than useful. But I don't think that a misuse of the term (and here I'm wary of drifting into the dreaded realm of prescriptive linguistics) as an ill-conceived "catch-phrase" or "buzzword" (if indeed such a thing happens) should be taken as the first and foremost understanding of it. I would also encourage that anyone who is not part of a given oppressed group have a little leeway with how that oppressed group describes their experiences. It's more important to try and understand where someone is coming from than to dictate how they should express themselves.

I think you misunderstand me. I have no problem with the definition. I have a problem with its use. It gets used to describe behavior as being aggressive that is in no way such. It gets used to describe every possible behavior someone can take that isn't strictly towing the feminist line, and even sometimes then. If a guy shows any sign of interest in someone, I've seen it somehow labeled a microaggression. The term is being used as a sledgehammer to say any non-puritanical male thoughts are somehow oppressive, regardless of how he acts on them.

Forgive me, but I feel sex shaming is a bad thing. The US is too puritanical society as it is.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sissyl wrote:

I am honestly curious about some things in this topic:

First, if half of gamers are women, does this mean women consume the same types of games as men? Because I was under the quite distinct impression that women were a far smaller percentage of those who play the A-budget titles, with most female gamers focusing on app games or at least far lower budget projects. This, in turn, would deny the idea that A-budget titles should be designed equally with them in mind. If they WERE as many as the male gamers, I believe we would see a pretty strong proliferation of studios willing to make A-budget games about shirtless werewolves. And of course, it is a given that low-budget games won't go too much into titillating subjects, given that it's typically a costly thing to do, what with heavy graphics and so on.

Second, if feminists cast any game that doesn't have a female protagonist as sexist (due to ignoring women), and any game that has one as sexist (consider Ms Pacman, if you will, seen as THE WORST example of sexism in gaming by some...), what do they hope will happen? If even the obvious protests against sexism are judged to be sexist crap, like Watchdogs, it is getting difficult. If you want someone to change, it's usually seen as pretty useless to condemn them whatever they do.

I believe most people are sensible if they take the time to think about things. That certainly doesn't mean all of them are. Some are too fixated on their protests that they lose sight of their goal. Hopefully, that goal is to make gaming a vibrant, interesting scene where everyone can be welcome, where people can give us interesting stories and characters, that breaks new ground, and even possibly change people's minds about some things. That certainly isn't where we are today. Most of the money in the industry is poured into stupid military propaganda games, and everything else tends to follow suit. So, if we want to change the industry for the better, it is far more important to point out the good than the bad. Otherwise, if...

The closest character I have ever heard of being described as a positive video game female character is Jade from Beyond Good and Evil. Of course feminists still attacked her for being physically unrealistic, despite the fact that I personally know women with her, or more extreme, proportions. I've also seen her get attacked by feminists because she takes care of the other children in her orphanage and is maternalistic.

As a side note I find it really amusing that my spell checker has paternalistic but not maternalistic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
mechaPoet wrote:
LazarX wrote:
mechaPoet wrote:
Caineach wrote:
God I hate the term microaggressions.

What you rather we call small instances of racism, sexism, and ableism in the form of oppression-normalizing jokes and "innocent" remarks? I can't think of anything catchier.

EDIT: Oh! We could call them dick-jokes! Not to be confused with phallic puns and innuendos, dick-jokes are what we call mean jokes told by racist and sexist dicks!

Call them what they are, and stop fixating on catch-phrases. In the end, they do far more harm than good.
Honest question: how?

Microagression as a term implies that a behavior is consciously designed to be aggressive, and applies no distinction to levels of behavior. Many of the times it is used are in fairly benign applications, lumping them in with much more serious problems. In this thread we have examples of a guy sitting with his legs spread apart naturally on a mostly empty subway and a guy silently doing a doubletake of a sexily dressed woman being labeled the same thing as a guy actively crowding the people next to him making them visibly uncomfortable and a guy stalking a woman for 5 minutes after she refused to talk to him. Lumping these types of things into the same category results in people not taking them seriously.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

God I hate the term microaggressions.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Gendo wrote:


On the other hand, I VEHEMENTLY HATE the idea that a college education, even a 2-year degree becomes just one more ENTITLEMENT program for a country that has WAY TOO MANY ENTITLEMENT programs already. I was raised on the foundation that nothing in life is free, nor is anyone (excluding anyone under the age of 18), anywhere, entitled to anything. I worked to put myself through school, held down two jobs while I did. So my perspective is skewed.

BTW, I don't know when you did this, but the world has changed. Costs for college are much higher, especially relative to low end wages. It's much harder than it used to be to work your way through school.

Yeah. I would love to see the job you could work while in school that gives you 10-20K surplus to spend on the degree. Even after graduating, you wont find that in most fields.
10-20k? That won't even cover a year at Rutgers, these days. You can't found college on a paper route any more.

Well, I was thinking about state schools like SUNY, and you can get federal loans for some of that.

That being said, a year at my alma mater, WPI, is now over 60K.

Rutgers is a State School. It's full name is Rutgers SUNJ. The problem with states cutting so much funding to state colleges and universities, they've been making up the shortfalls in tuition hikes. Rutgers for example hikes it's tuition on an average 20 percent per year.
Rutgersis still only 25K for on campus tuition. While 5-6K more than NY, after federal loans, it will still be in my estimate.
That's 100-240k for a four year program not even counting other expenses, such as books, food, housing. A much greater proportion of that...

I love how this all came out of me saying that finding a job that gave 10-20K extra a year after living expenses while going to school would be next to impossible.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Gendo wrote:


On the other hand, I VEHEMENTLY HATE the idea that a college education, even a 2-year degree becomes just one more ENTITLEMENT program for a country that has WAY TOO MANY ENTITLEMENT programs already. I was raised on the foundation that nothing in life is free, nor is anyone (excluding anyone under the age of 18), anywhere, entitled to anything. I worked to put myself through school, held down two jobs while I did. So my perspective is skewed.

BTW, I don't know when you did this, but the world has changed. Costs for college are much higher, especially relative to low end wages. It's much harder than it used to be to work your way through school.

Yeah. I would love to see the job you could work while in school that gives you 10-20K surplus to spend on the degree. Even after graduating, you wont find that in most fields.
10-20k? That won't even cover a year at Rutgers, these days. You can't found college on a paper route any more.

Well, I was thinking about state schools like SUNY, and you can get federal loans for some of that.

That being said, a year at my alma mater, WPI, is now over 60K.

Rutgers is a State School. It's full name is Rutgers SUNJ. The problem with states cutting so much funding to state colleges and universities, they've been making up the shortfalls in tuition hikes. Rutgers for example hikes it's tuition on an average 20 percent per year.

Rutgersis still only 25K for on campus tuition. While 5-6K more than NY, after federal loans, it will still be in my estimate.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

Also, those targets moved, and actively tried to avoid being hit with arrows.

Although with the lack of power he's demonstrating, anyone with a reasonably thick coat should be fairly safe.

As seen above, he's adapting to the targets. He has the accuracy when he needs to hit arrows shot towards them (those are moving targets), and when up against the chainmail dummies, he used enough power that even if the chainmail was substandard by Medieval standards, a heavy coat still wouldn't stand up to his arrows (unless your coat is linothorax).

Yes, but he is comparing himself to people that are shooting consistently with accuracy and power and saying he is better because he can fire faster, then when he tries to match their accuracy and power fires slower than his other demonstrations.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Caineach wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Gendo wrote:


On the other hand, I VEHEMENTLY HATE the idea that a college education, even a 2-year degree becomes just one more ENTITLEMENT program for a country that has WAY TOO MANY ENTITLEMENT programs already. I was raised on the foundation that nothing in life is free, nor is anyone (excluding anyone under the age of 18), anywhere, entitled to anything. I worked to put myself through school, held down two jobs while I did. So my perspective is skewed.

BTW, I don't know when you did this, but the world has changed. Costs for college are much higher, especially relative to low end wages. It's much harder than it used to be to work your way through school.

Yeah. I would love to see the job you could work while in school that gives you 10-20K surplus to spend on the degree. Even after graduating, you wont find that in most fields.
10-20k? That won't even cover a year at Rutgers, these days. You can't found college on a paper route any more.

Well, I was thinking about state schools like SUNY, and you can get federal loans for some of that.

That being said, a year at my alma mater, WPI, is now over 60K.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Gendo wrote:


On the other hand, I VEHEMENTLY HATE the idea that a college education, even a 2-year degree becomes just one more ENTITLEMENT program for a country that has WAY TOO MANY ENTITLEMENT programs already. I was raised on the foundation that nothing in life is free, nor is anyone (excluding anyone under the age of 18), anywhere, entitled to anything. I worked to put myself through school, held down two jobs while I did. So my perspective is skewed.

BTW, I don't know when you did this, but the world has changed. Costs for college are much higher, especially relative to low end wages. It's much harder than it used to be to work your way through school.

Yeah. I would love to see the job you could work while in school that gives you 10-20K surplus to spend on the degree. Even after graduating, you wont find that in most fields.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alzrius wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Currently, some other anime forums are expecting a season 3 in winter of 2016 or spring 2017, because of the rate that they are going through the material in the manga.

That'd be nice; the story felt unfinished, even if it came to a decent stopping point.

Caineach wrote:
Also, I felt like season 2 focused more on Aladdin and Alibaba was more or less forgotten about. Interesting how we came out with different perceptions.
Are those different perceptions? I thought that was basically what I said.

Yeah, we agree. I was just dumb and got the character names mixed up while reading your stuff.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alzrius wrote:

So I initially wasn't going to post my thoughts on Magi: The Kingdom of Magic, as it's a continuation of Magi: The Labyrinth of Magic, which I've already reviewed. However, after giving it some consideration, I have some further thoughts on Kingdom that I felt like sharing.

What struck me most about Kingdom of Magic is that this is where the show largely stops pussyfooting around with regards to whom the main character was. In the previous season, it seemed to be trying to portray both Aladdin and Alibaba as being the main characters - with Morgianna awkwardly added as a third wheel - in a sort of Merlin and Arthur (or perhaps Doc Brown and Marty) relationship. This was a presentation that the show never seemed completely comfortable with, as Alibaba kept vacillating between insecurity and incompetence; while the show was clearly trying to show us the "zero" side of a "zero-to-hero" arc, the "hero" part never materialized.

In Kingdom, the show dispenses with the pretense of multiple main characters altogether, and puts Aladdin front and center.

The main reason for this is that the three characters split up early in the season. While Alibaba is given a quick arc that frustratingly cuts away just as he starts to show some personal growth, and Morgianna is all but forgotten after a single episode devoted to her, Aladdin gets the lion's share of the series devoted to his exploits. He essentially hogs the spotlight all to himself.

This isn't to say that the show doesn't have a large cast. It does, but the vast majority of them are a wide array of new supporting characters that round out Aladdin's story. It almost feels like a different show, simply because of how much of the cast from the previous season is pushed to the back-burner.

That said, the show does retain its focus on machinations happening across the world stage. War is brewing, and we get quite a bit of intrigue regarding how its shaping up.

This is more interesting than it first appeared, because here the show draws more...

Currently, some other anime forums are expecting a season 3 in winter of 2016 or spring 2017, because of the rate that they are going through the material in the manga.

Also, I felt like season 2 focused more on Aladdin and Alibaba was more or less forgotten about. Interesting how we came out with different perceptions.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BlackOuroboros wrote:
Fergie wrote:
BlackOuroboros wrote:
Stuff

I apologize BlackOuroboros. I used the term, and included a link to its historical definition, for the reasons I had stated in the original post, not for shock value. I feel that Malcolm X's explanation of the term is very relevant to almost any non-equal power structure.

Also, I'm not trying to silence anyone. I fully encourage people to disagree with me. I wouldn't really bother posting stuff if everyone agreed with me all the time.

Again, sorry if I offended you.

I came on a bit strong as well, so I apologize about that. I've seen the "you don't agree with me so you don't get a say" statement made in earnest enough times that I have a knee-jerk reaction to it.

I found this article a couple of days ago and it sums up a lot of my feelings towards the current culture. I don't fully agree with everything he says, but I feel a lot of the observations are accurate.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fergie wrote:
Caineach wrote:
]You obviously don't have connections to feminist blogs on twitter or tumblr, where the term originated. ...

True.

EDIT: I should add that I am not a woman, or what I consider a feminist. I believe in equality, but don't tent to identify with groups that have the "ist" suffix.

So... "some blogs" is the best you got? Then Huffpost and other "news" organizations talking about what some blog wrote? Is there perhaps some organization? Oprah? Anything with a shred of credibility?

"Some bloggers" created something. Trashing "Feminists" over it is the textbook definition of strawman. I think you are being fooled.

Tumblr feminists blogs are a fairly well defined group. Just because they are not one you are familiar with does not mean they are some imaginary straw man. Just like Paizo messageboard posters is a defined group, but most people would have no idea who we are.

Quote:


NOTE: There was also a "don't be a jerk" transportation campaign a while back, but there is no government policy against being a jerk. Advertisment does not equal policy.
Define: Policy - a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual.

I said it affected policy. It affected how they spent their budget. That is by definition affecting policy.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
mechaPoet wrote:

It is impossible to be sexist toward men in the same way that it is impossible to be racist toward white people or classist toward the ruling class. Please note that I'm using these "-ist" terms in the context of their existence as oppressive systems, not as simple prejudice.

EDIT: fruitless inb4 wild misunderstanding and misconstrued backlash against this.

All I'm saying about that particular article's summary of one of Engels' points is that the particular conception of Neolithic gender is most likely based in an understanding of history from the viewpoint of Engels' contemporary conception of gender. Humans have a degree of sexual dimorphism, sure, but it's much less pronounced than in most primates. Also, the very concept of "two sexes" is a product of biological classification. And I'm not saying that there aren't sexual differences between given human bodies (duh), but rather that our classification of them is still just a product of culture (fun fact: the sciences are cultural institutions, as much as some people like to assert that they're somehow outside of, or objective with regards to, culture).

When you try to use a specific specialized definition (that many people don't agree with) of a term that has many different ones, and you don't specify until after the fact, don't be surprised when people misinterpret your argument.

Personally, I think the idea that you can't be sexist against men or racist against white people to be b%!**&!!. 1. The systematic definition you are using is not the one people will colloquially use. 2. It ignores the idea that power dynamics can be different within different areas of a culture.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fergie wrote:
Caineach wrote:

1. The author was a woman.

2. I'm sorry, but when a group goes on a crusade (it has made national news and influenced government policy) against people sitting with their knees a foot appart claiming it is sexist, they don't get to use "but we are assaulted more" as a defense against mockery, unless they can somehow show a good correlation to guys casually sitting on subway cars and assault.

1. In black/white racial issues, there is the term house negro* for those who serve the master at the expense of their own. I'm not sure what the term is for women, but throwing your own under the bus for profit/privilege has never been cool except in the eyes of the master. It is why Coulter, Palin, Crowley are tolerated, but no woman who stands up for other women is allowed in the boys club.

2. Just to be clear, what national group are you talking about specifically? I have heard Fox "news" bend over backwards to say "manspreading" over and over, (it was pathetic to view that) but what "group" are you referring to. Also, to be clear, there is NO GOVERNMENT POLICY related to how you sit on mass transit. It might not be legal to take up more then one seat, but that has next to nothing to do with an advertisement campaign related to "courtesy". You are being distracted by a circus sideshow.

The entire point is that this whole thing is a strawman whose purpose is to mock "the dumb femnazis" while ignoring actual issues. It is rather sad to see so many people fall for it. Keep talking about how people sit on the subway, then wonder why women's paychecks are smaller then men's.

** spoiler omitted **...

You obviously don't have connections to feminist blogs on twitter or tumblr, where the term originated. I first came across manspreading on a Huffington Post article talking about how terrible it was. I've seen it talked about on msnbc. It's not just Fox news talking about it. They mocked something after it became news when the transit authority put out advertisements against it, they didn't create the thing whole cloth.

How the government spends money is government policy. Funding an advertising campaign is spending money.

Feminists created the term and championed the cause. Mocking them for its idiocy is not somehow attacking a strawman. It is attacking the ridiculous cause they created.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fergie wrote:

~Shrugs~

My main point was that REAL problems of inequality exist, and result in all kinds of horrific real world consequences. Making the discussion about some strawman fringe argument (and/or making fun of that argument) isn't very funny when women are getting raped/assaulted on a very consistent basis. (It probably could be funny, but that article Fergug brought up didn't appeal to my sense of humor)

Liberals are not afraid of being made fun of, but when the joke is at the expense of people who get the short end of the stick and suffer real world consequences, it is about as funny as blackface whites making fun of silly negros.

1. The author was a woman.

2. I'm sorry, but when a group goes on a crusade (it has made national news and influenced government policy) against people sitting with their knees a foot appart claiming it is sexist, they don't get to use "but we are assaulted more" as a defense against mockery, unless they can somehow show a good correlation to guys casually sitting on subway cars and assault.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fergurg wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Brox RedGloves wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Yeah, hiding this now. Some of this crap being bandied about is disgusting.
Honestly curious about this one...
National Review is about the lowest level of "journalism" you can get, and various 'isms are just beneath the surface. It gives me a good perspective on the ideas of people who read/post links to it however.
Of you could just try reading the article linked and realize it is written with tongue firmly in cheek.
Wait... You mean someone took that article seriously?!
Ann Coulter made an amusing claim in her book, "Godless", which I'm going to misquote because I haven't read it in almost 10 years, but it goes something like this: liberalism's greatest achievement is its inability to be made fun of. No matter how ridiculous and over-the-top you try to satirize it, there are going to be liberals who will, or already have, seriously proposed your satire and genuinely believe in it.

I think that is the first intelligent thing I have heard attributed to her.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fergie wrote:
Brox RedGloves wrote:
Of you could just try reading the article linked and realize it is written with tongue firmly in cheek.

I did read it. The joke is that women (feminists) are just upset over silly stuff that is really trivial. See girls, boys will be boys, don't get all b!$++y about it. Go with the flow, smile, and don't forget your rape whistle!

I'm all for some good humor, and enjoys some very non-PC stuff, but when you are the dominate group, you have to try harder then having the underlying theme be: just suck it up and deal with it. If the article is 10 ways whites oppress blacks, it is going to require different jokes then 10 ways blacks oppress whites. The Onion is good at this, the National Review comes off as A-holes.

Sidenote: I have no idea what "manspreading" really has to do with feminism, (and I'm not that interested) as it is a silly term from a NYC transportation advertisement group that has done a really bad job in the past, and in my opinion is a total waste of tax money. In NYC killing people with your car is 100% legal, so spending money to go after subway riders for sitting some specific way is kind of an insult to begin with.

Manspreading is a term the NYC transportation groups took up because of complaints from feminist groups who coined the term.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Caineach wrote:

Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics

The response itself is pretty terrible.

* If you do the math using fumbles per play instead of plays per fumble, you get a different number, yes. You find out that the odds are "only" one in 300 instead of one in 16,000 that the Patriots simply have been having good luck with fumbles.

* By-position analysis shows that the Patriots quarterbacks don't fumble very much, that the Patriots running backs don't fumble very much, and that the Patriots receivers don't fumble very much. All of which are independent (compare the NYG, who had the worst running backs, but the second-best receivers).

So even the reanalysis actually shows that, yes, there's definitely something there. The Patriots are systematically better at not-fumbling across the board in a way that transcends any one player or position and that is probably not due to chance.

This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....

Yes, but 1 in 300 is not outside of what you would expect from a team that has a lot of money to pick out top tallent and has been successful at doing so. It does not put it in the "only explanation is cheating" category that the original article implies. By random chance, with 32 teams, you would expect a team like this to pop up about once every 10 years (assuming teams were not linked data, which we know to be false since the same key players are on them from year to year). The ability of skilled coaches to manipulate the team would make it more frequent if the coach is above average for the league.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
gamer-printer wrote:

I've commented on this video in other forums, but, while Lars trick shots are indeed impressive, I find many discrepancies in trying to derive specific archery mechanics based on his demonstrations. Several things to consider are: he is using a practice bow with a very low pull strength and he is barely doing a half pull each time. If he were using a full strength war bow (I'm not even considering the extreme pull of an English longbow which is considerable higher than most bows of war), Lars couldn't possibly release so many shots in such short duration, let alone pulling more than half the distance the string allows. Most of his shots are less than 20 feet distance from the target, yet the arrow barely passes the paper target, perhaps going 1/2 inch into the target straw backing - which is not deep enough to kill. So I find his demonstration questionable. Also sticking a tipped arrow into a non-tipped arrow is a cool way to show his accuracy, but a tipped arrow will never split another tipped arrow - it only works against non-tipped arrows, so is almost meaningless beyond an interesting trick shot.

If Lars used a full strength bow (even with training) and pulled the bow string to its fullest extent, there's no way he could loose arrows as effectively as his demonstration with a practice bow (its almost a toy compared to the real thing.)

I completely agree with Lars historical point that archers did hold several arrow in their draw hand as one technique to be faster at loosing arrows than pulling each from a quiver. However, just as often archers placed arrows vertically stuck in the ground around his feet and could feed his bow almost as fast.

Define war bow for me?

I personally think he is using a bow in the 40-55lb draw range. That would put him at the low end for what many non-european cultures used, and at the point where you can reasonably kill medium game (deer, humans). The fact that he is not drawing back the bow to proper draw length is killing the power though.

1 to 50 of 4,966 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.