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

Electric Wizard's page

426 posts. Alias of Tensor.


1 to 50 of 426 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A load of Giant's poop.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

18: a TRS-80 computer and all cables.

(however, it's doubtful anyone other than a wizard understands electricity
and digital logic. But, if a wizard in the group does get it up and working
then she'll have to know BASIC.)

We can trace it all back to the guy who invented the Nobel prize.


It would suck to die for a barren island.
[url= oil wars]


1 person marked this as a favorite.

word up, hoss.

1. I am a god.
2. I have no idea what I'm doing.


At least according to The Washington Post. But, your iPhone is now encrypted.
The FBI says it'll help kidnappers. [ blog = misleading PR offensive ]

Also, these new security features will help sexual predators, and terrorists,
and will endanger countless lives, all because police will have a harder time
cracking into phones. [ thing = Here’s Why ]

I wonder what the founding father's of America would think. Those guys
were pretty crafting when it came to subverting their British overlords.
Maybe there was less crime back then.


your you

(I don't want to educate your for free.)

We know. You're in a tough spot, and something is causing trouble in your environment.
It's usually a Witch.

Learn how to use full-stack monitoring to find Witches... and burn them!

[ url= Witch! ]


Think of it as something similar to the Y2K bug when we realized using
two digits to represent the year was going to suddenly cause computers
to roll back to the 1900′s.

Over the years, a lot of code has been written to identify two
particular versions of Windows, Windows 95 and Windows 98 by using only
the starting string. So instead of identifying Windows 95 and Windows 98 by
a rather long statement like this:

if (osName.startsWith("Windows")) {
isWindows = true;
if (osName.startsWith("Windows 95") || (osName.startsWith("Windows 98") ||
osName.startsWith("Windows Me"))
return; // win9x/Me cannot handle long paths

Programmers would use the following shorter code which would yield the
same results:

if (osName.startsWith("Windows")) {
isWindows = true;
if (osName.startsWith("Windows 9") ||
osName.startsWith("Windows Me"))
return; // win9x/Me cannot handle long paths

Unfortunately, this meant that calling the new Windows, Windows 9 would
make all the applications still running on this piece of code see
Windows 9 as either Windows 95 or Windows 98, not Windows 9.


Ah yup.

Q wrote:
... introducing a suite of new psychic and occult magics to the game ...

Psionics must be usable by Evil AI Computers and Robots, because Psionics

is "mental magic". These types of game constructs are purely mental,
because they can think but are not alive. To be balanced, some of them
should have 'spell casting' ability.

If this is excluded in the rules, I will avoid it with distaste.


1 person marked this as a favorite.


There is a poll --> POLL:Do You Want A New Edition of Pathfinder. You can vote now.


She Kills Monsters

By Qui Nguyen.
Directed by Randy Baker.
Fight choreography, Casey Kaleba;
costumes, Debra Kim Sivigny;
sound, Palmer Hefferan;
set, Ethan Sinnott;
lighting, Brian S. Allard;
props, Britney Mongold.
With Amanda Forstrom, Emily Kester, Tori Boutin, Seth Rosenke.
About 1 hour and 40 minutes.
Tickets, $20-$30.
Through Sept. 14 at Atlas Performing Arts Center, 1333 H St. NE.
Call 202-452-8497 or visit

Ascalaphus wrote:
You're taking a set of the rules that most people already have a hard time understanding, and you're basically adding more detail.


Ascalaphus wrote:
Also, how well does this port to giant spiders, serpents, squids, bears and so forth, that use very different appendages to grab?

Luckily this is a game of imagination, and you can do anything

you want to. However, in light of your first criticism, I understand
you suffer limitations.

Ascalaphus wrote:
I think we're better off with the more generic current system.

Don't use my rules then. Win-Win. I don't have to explain them,

and you don't have to struggle.


If the Grappler succeeds on a TACKLE, and both the Grappler and Grappled
are prone, THEN begin a 'First to 3 Successes' contest.

'First to 3 Successes' contest:
At the beginning of *each round*, Grappler makes a CMB check vs. the CMD of the
Grappled. If the Grappler wins 3 checks first, then he has
succeeded in getting the Grappled in a rear-naked choke.
If the Grappled wins 3 checks first, he has successfully swept
the Grappled, and the positions are reversed -- at this point,
the *new* Grappler can begin another 'First of 3 Successes' contest,
or choose to stand up, in any adjacent 5' square leaving the other on the ground.

REAR-NAKED CHOKE - Grappled goes unconscious the next round.


> Time Agent < is a fun game.

In Time Agent, each player plays a different race who are going back
through time and re-writing history to ensure that their race comes out
on top. Or rather, that their race was always on top. Anyway, each race
is different, but races have some natural alliances and enemies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Read all these:

o The Cross Time Engineer by Leo Frankowski
o The Hundred-Light-Year-Diary by Greg Egan
o The Time Ships by Stephen Baxter
o Drums of Autumn by Diana Gabaldon
o Timequake by Kurt Vonnegut
o The Dechronization of Sam Magruder by George Gaylord Simpson
o Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus by Orson Scott Card
o Animorphs by K. A. Applegate
o "The Devil on the Road" by Robert Westall
o In the Garden of Iden by Kage Baker
o Making History by Stephen Fry
o To Say Nothing of the Dog by Connie Willis
o Corrupting Dr. Nice by John Kessel
o The Transall Saga by Gary Paulsen
o Island in the Sea of Time by S. M. Stirling

When you're done, you will have a feel for how your game play should unfold for good player experience.


Theconiel wrote:
What else have you used? What other ideas do people have? Are there different starting assumptions?

I recommend using > this magic system < .


Artanthos wrote:
... Poor there has nothing to do with skin color ...

Yes. We have a false premise here, because Orfamay Quest has his statistics backwards.

Nothing to see here; move along. :->


Robot's Even Make Ashtrays now:
[url= htp://ww.wired.c//a-huge-cly-filled-robot-id-1]

But Can A Robot Make Art ?


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Electric Wizard wrote:
LazarX wrote:
You'll find that the answer depends a lot on factors such as the color of your skin, and the relative wealth of the family you were born into.

I bet these factors you mention are highly predicted by: education, household income, unemployment, disability, life expectancy, obesity.

I think you meant "those factors are highly predictive of," unless you're suggesting that the reason a baby is born to a wealthy white family is because she has an advanced graduate degree.

I absolutely see your point. And, my statistics is super rusty.

But, in this study with this data, Race is a Dependent variable and
Education and Household income are Independent variables. So, Race is
being 'predicted' in this case. (For a different data set it certainly
could be the reverse.)

And, there is no "reason"; it can only be Correlation. (unless you are
saying the "reason" why shark attacks increase in the summer time is
because ice cream sales increase in the summer time.)


LazarX wrote:
You'll find that the answer depends a lot on factors such as the color of your skin, and the relative wealth of the family you were born into.

I bet these factors you mention are highly predicted by: education, household income, unemployment, disability, life expectancy, obesity.

And, may be why they chose only these features.


I wonder what it means to 'live hard'?

[ map = colors means something, if you're not color-blind ]

We chose to rank counties based on six factors:
household income,
life expectancy,
obesity <-- ***

[ update = more details due to feedback ]


1. Georgia Tech

2. Two Electrical Engineering classes

3. It seems like the right thing to do.


Freehold DM wrote:
Picture doesn't do her justice. The best Storm I have ever seen.

I think Halle Berry's was better.


You've been slugging it out long enough in a dead end job with a small, floppy pay check.
You are too smart to be bossed around by a douche bag boss, whom you should not physically assault.

This is all you need --> we_can_do_it.


I'm pretty sure my party fought >this< once. It was in a Gary Gygax adventure.
But now they are saying it is real. [ url = legs & spikes ]


Wait... it may have instead been one of >these< .

Grand Magus wrote:



A minimum wage is considered a Price Floor. In other words, it is a
level below which the price of something is not allowed to fall.
(fyi and conversely, a Price Ceiling is a level above which the price of something is not
allowed to rise. Think of rent-control as a price ceiling.)

OK, HERE WE GO ... Take a look at >this< graph of a labor market. AND DON'T FREAK OUT!

♦ The Price of Labor (shown on the y-axis, P) is of course, the wage rate.
♦ The Number of Jobs (shown on the x-axis, is called Q for quantity.)
♦ The point where the two black lines cross is called equilibrium. At this point,
the "quantity of labor supplied by individuals is equal to the quantity
of labor demanded by firms" -- that is, everybody is happy. For this example,
let's say it's 6 mil jobs at a rate of $15 per hour.

Think of the Supply Curve [the one going up from lower-left to upper-
right, labeled S] from your own personal perspective. It slopes upward
because at higher wage rates you'll choose to work more, right? The
Demand Curve [the one labeled D, going down] can be thought of from the
point of view of a firm. It slopes downward because the firm hires more
workers at lower wage rates and less at higher wages.

(All we've done so far is define what we are looking at. NEXT, we'll
use it.)

So it seems like a happy situation - no one is unemployed and the
company has enough workers to meet product demand. Again, the point
were the lines cross tells us at what Price level the labor force is
willing to wake up in the morning and goto work for the man.

Now let's assume that legislation (a minimum wage law) is passed
that requires firms to pay workers $20/hour. (remember the equilibrium
is $15) At this wage rate, the Demand Curve tells us the company (where
you work) only demands about 4...

The Republicans did the right thing. [ url = good move ]


thecursor wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
After all, anyone who hates hobbits can't be all bad.
Hobbits disgust me, is that racist? Maybe but I stand by my beliefs. The whole of LOTR is one long attempt to use propaganda to oppress the noble Orc peoples. Uruk Hai! No justice no peace!

There are many >problems with Dwarves< too.


Aaron Bitman wrote:

And although Heathansson and pres man mentioned "Ringworld" by Larry Niven, no one mentioned the real best idea in it, in my opinion:

223. Ringworld itself. The three-page explanation of the ring around the star provides a perfect example of what makes sci-fi so great.

Is that supposed to be "Page 223." ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.


Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups
representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on
US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest
groups have little or no independent influence.

In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has
little power.

( obligatory picture )


Auxmaulous wrote:

-"1187 hunter-vasser"

"That's the hotel"


"Where I live"

-"Nice place?"

"Yeah sure I guess..."

" that part of the test?"

-"No, just warming you up - that's all"


-" Describe in single words, only the good things that come into your mind about... your mother?"

"My mother?"


"Let me tell you about my mother"


Robots do not have psychology(ies).


Lamontius wrote:
I ate a chicken

How much did it weigh?


G wrote:


Vulcans are now proficient in light sabers.


This is why Lucas had to sell the Franchise.


Erik Mona wrote:
22) Data paints a picture.

Can a computer really make art?


>This< Map Of US And Russian Arms Sales Says It All.
Or, at least some of it.


It turns' out I'm actually employing this theory when using my "Sorcerous Origins" abilities in our 5e game.

Huh ...

Almost everyone would pay more money in situation 1 to remove the
single bullet. The gut feeling is that it’s worth more money to survive
with certainty than to reduce the odds of death in situation 2.

But this is wrong according to rational choice theory! It is logically
sensible to pay more to remove a bullet in situation 2 if you prefer
being alive and having more money. The problem is known as Zeckhauser’s

Let’s see why. Consider the events D = Dead and A = Alive. Also
consider Lx as being alive after paying x dollars and Ly as being alive
after paying y dollars.

If you pay x dollars to remove one bullet from four, then you are
saying the events of being alive after paying x dollars is equal to the
utility for the lottery of playing the game, in which there is a 1/6
chance of death and a 5/6 chance of being alive. (In Von Neumann and
Morgenstern utility theory a rational agent is indifferent between two
lotteries with the same expected outcome. So the value x you are
willing to pay is the one that makes you indifferent–any more and you
are overpaying, any less and you’d prefer to remove the risk.)

Therefore, with a utility function u, we have:

u(Lx) = (1/6) u(D) + (5/6) u(A)

Similarly, when you are willing to pay y dollars to remove a bullet
from four to three, that means you are indifferent in the lotteries
where you play the game with four bullets or pay to play the game with
three bullets. This means the following equation:

(3/6) u(Ly) + (3/6) u(D) = (4/6) u(D) + (2/6) u(A)

We can simplify the above equation to get:

u(Ly) = (2/6) u(D) + (4/6) u(A)

If we take u(D) = 0, then since we prefer to be alive that means u(A) > 0. So we have

u(Lx) = (5/6) u(A)

u(Ly) = (4/6) u(A)

u(Lx) – u(Ly) = (1/6) u(A) > 0

In other words, you prefer to be alive after paying x dollars to being
alive after paying y dollars. But since you prefer to pay less–since
having more money is better–that must mean x is a smaller amount of
money than y!

Therefore, under the Von Neumann and Morgenstern utility theory, you
should be willing to pay more for situation 2 where you remove one
bullet from four.

This goes against intuition, so let us offer a few justifications for the logic.

The main mental block is that people prefer certainty outcomes versus
risk reductions that could have greater impact. One of my friends was
eating a bacon cheeseburger with fries and having a beer. I asked if he
wanted ketchup and he told me he didn’t eat high fructose corn syrup as
it was unhealthy. It was evidently easier for him to remove one source
of risk entirely than to reduce his calories in multiple areas of habit.

The tendency to favor certainty is related to the zero risk bias. In
one study, people were asked how much they would pay to remove a
pesticide that would cause 15 adverse reactions, in 10,000 containers.
People were willing to pay $1.04 to reduce the risk from 15 reactions
to 10, but they would pay more than twice that -- $2.41 -- to reduce the risk
from 5 reactions to 0. The absolute number of lowered cases is the same in
both, but the idea of “zero risk” led people to pay more.

Source: This problem appears in Ken Binmore’s Playing for Real: A Text on Game Theory.


I have to wonder if OnePlus is an American based company, because how did they not know this is wrong.

[ url = article posted on Verge ]

And, apparently it is a start-up company. (I hope this wasn't a thought out plan
to get free advertising, and increase their sales figures.)


Tensor wrote:

1) What is your favorite animal and why (give two or three sentences only) ?

2) What is your favorite color and why (give two or three sentences only) ?

3) Imagine yourself sitting alone in a completely white room with no windows, describe this room in two or three sentences.

4) Imagine a waterfall, describe it in two or three sentences.

1. A bird of prey because it is fierce and majestic.

2. Blue because it is calm and deep.
3. Calm, peaceful, warm.
4. Powerful and wet.


Taliesin Hoyle wrote:




Russian Roulette.

Bear Baiting.


Gladiatorial combat.

Anything thought up by Caligula.



What is Bear baiting?


Terquem wrote:

"material" in this case is not always assumed to be matter

Does something that is made up of "pure energy" of a kind not understood by modern science, have momentum?

If I get to make the game mechanics then, for the moment, let's say Yes.

Now, what are the consequences of this for casting in a zero-g environment
(with a "normal" atmosphere) ?

If you are saying "No" and amped up to fight me, then this thread is not for you.
Please don't troll.


Terquem wrote:
Who said that a Fire Ball has momentum when it leaves your hand?

No one. That's part of the question.

Possible answers can be: 1. Yes fireball does have momentum, or 2. No
fireball does not have momentum. There may be other answers.

I'm computing, or is it calculating (maybe determining), the consequences
of, in turn, both 1. and 2. being actively the case (or state-of-being,
for particular gaming situations, but all specifically in Zero-G).
Answer 2. is most easy, because it's "nothing".

First, I'm going to assume "1. Yes fireball does have momentum." Then, I'm
going to make a list of all spells, in addition to Fireball, the could (if deemed reasonable)
have momentum, and try to figure out what would/could/should be the
consequences in a Zero-G environment.

(Projecting. That may be the word...)

I may get bored and stop doing this.


Terquem wrote:
... the ineraction of material ...

Isn't this momentum?


When will Goblin Works have any results for their Pathfinder Computer Game?
They've been working on it for a long time with no commercially viable results.


If you are in Zero-G and you cast a spell, like Fireball, will the momentum of the fireball leaving your hand push you backwards?
(Fireball is just an example? Some spells, like Sleep, would not have a
momentum kick backwards, but some other spells should.)

I should make a list...


I've heard the new Star Wars movie comes out Dec 2015. I hope
it's better than the last three releases.
Also, the most recent Star Trek movie was Ok (:review) but the
beginning scene with Spok in a Volcano using "cold fusion" almost made me
walk out of the theater.


Since, I'm the lazy, selfish product of an entitlement society, I will
soon be a millionaire (without having to do any work, because I'm
entitled to be a millionaire).
But, I'm still waiting for my money -- where do I pick up the check?
Why isn't it here already?


The market is bottoming out, so it's time to get into writing now and
catch the up swing.

[ url = starting-salaries-at-magazines-fell ]


... microphones? Do people still use these?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Did you see that movie "The Deer Hunter"? That guy risked shooting
until he had enough bullets in the gun to kill the guards.


1 to 50 of 426 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.