GentleGiant's page

Gailbraithe wrote:

Oh my, an abortion debate. These never go anywhere, everyone rehashing the same opinions. Here's an opinion I can never seem to get out of pro-life people:

If abortion should be criminalized, which is what I assume the pro-life position to be (otherwise you would be pro-choice), what should the legal punishment for abortion be? Many pro-life people argue that abortion is murder. Should a woman who seeks out an abortion and the medical provider both be charged with murder? In many states the pre-meditated murder of a minor will warrant the death penalty. Should women who seek abortions be executed?

I used to consider myself pro-life, but I have since revised my position. In all truth I never felt that all abortion should be criminalized because there are certain medical and psychological instances where an abortion is needed. Today I describe myself as holding a position that I describes as being "pro-choice, but I hope the choice is life." My biggest concern with the rest of the pro-choice movement is that there seems to be a vocal minority among the movement that gets irrate when any other option then abortion is considered. For instance the groups that tried to get the FCC to label an ad featuring Tim Tebow's mother promoting the idea that pro-choice means more than just abortion as hate speech. My position is that we need to make abortions that are performed as a convienience as rare as possible and ensure that everyone understands all the options before an abortion is performed.

I fully agree with David on most points here. Like I mentioned further upthread, I haven't personally met or talked to a pro-choice person who didn't hope that it was the last resort.

I didn't find the Tebow ad to go into hate speech territory, I just found it distasteful, manipulative and untruthful (not to mention CBS's hypocritical stance on running the ad).
An informed choice is always better than a less informed one, so clearly a pregnant woman should have all the options explained to her and that information should be available to all.
Unfortunately, even though other options might exist on paper, they might not always be feasible in real life (because of social or financial limitations etc.).

Weight-loss surgery was all the rage in my office about two years ago. Our insurance carrier felt that it was a justifiable expense, especially on morbidly obese employees, rather than treating them for diabetes, heart disease, and any of the other obesity-related ailments.

There were literally about 30 women (no men that I know of opted for it) in my office that started rapidly shrinking over the span of about 6 months.

Interesting, though, now a few years later, some of them are starting to fatten-up again. I guess even a shrunken stomach can be streatched out if you don't maintain self-control in your eating habits.

It's not unusual to put on a little weight after a few years post surgery. It's not so much a stretching of the stomach as it's bad diet. You might not be able to eat much, but if you eat and drink high calorie stuff (juice, alcohol, ice cream and chocolate - i.e. stuff that goes "liquid" and just runs through the smaller stomach) then you'll start gaining weight again.

It's not a "magical pill" to end weight problems, it's a tool you have to use properly to help control your weight.
So yeah, I can see some of your co-workers starting to gain weight again if they don't keep up with the proper diet plan.
Also, look at someone like John Popper of Blues Traveler. He had gastric bypass surgery but has started getting bigger again.

Lot's of turbines where I live in China. Weihai. One of the windiest places in China. I think they're up to 10% of their local electricity from wind.

The engineers they brought to inspect the Chinese mills weren't exactly all that impressed it seemed. Something about them being leaky, with sand and rain getting into the gears, and the crawlspace underneath the gears being full of mud (sand + rain).

GentleGiant wrote:

Bitter Thorn wrote:

GentleGiant wrote:

Bitter Thorn wrote:

link

link

link

Who's the mill producer?

GE 1.5 MW turbines

Ahh cool. I was just curious because I know someone who works for Siemens Windpower. :-)

The Siemens nacelles seem like they would be tougher to walk on at height. What does he do manufacturing or field work?

Neither actually. He's one of the fancy smancy guys upstairs, doing financial analysis and business planning for the European and Asian markets. His "field work" consists of things like a trip to China to help look at a possible merger with a factory over there (and tasting the local cuisine... mmm, cow throat, cooked jellyfish and chicken feet... o.0).

GentleGiant wrote:

Bitter Thorn wrote:

link

link

link

Who's the mill producer?

GE 1.5 MW turbines

Ahh cool. I was just curious because I know someone who works for Siemens Windpower. :-)

Good luck to you man. I know you're going down a hard road and I hope everything goes right for you. Btw, when is the date for your surgery. Do you know yet?

Thanks Gary!

Week 18 is the closest to a date I have, so between May 3rd and 9th. Unless I drop the required 8% weight fast enough to get on a cancellation list, then it might be sooner.

link

link

link

Who's the mill producer?

Thanks for writing Quandary, you bring up a lot of good points and questions that anyone in this situation should reflect upon. I'll address them below. :-)

I want to ask, you seem set on this surgery already, exactly why is that? Was this something your doctor brought up, or was it your own decision that this is your only recourse at this point? I just wanted to clarify and not just assume based on what you wrote.

I made the decision on my own, after thoroughly researching it for several weeks, and my doctor agreed that it probably was my only feasible option left.

It certainly wasn't an easy decision to take either. It's pretty invasive surgery (with all the possible complications that might entail) and I weighed the pros and cons a lot for a while before making the final decision.
I'd also like to make it clear that the above post is just a quick run-through of what I've been through.

I can sympathize with your 'shifting diagnoses' experience with psychiatry, but I think you shouldn't necessarily just passively accept whatever the latest diagnoses is, or rather just use that as a "blinder" on how you see and approach your own situation. I mean, if working with your psychiatrist and their presriptions is helpful, by all means continue, but you yourself probably have the best insight to your own issues and what is behind things like the binge-eating you mention, which sounds somewhat distinct from your over-all issue of obesity, but one that sabotages anything you do to overcome that main issue. What other sort of support do you have in your life, have you worked with anybody like a psychologist or do you rely on family on friends? Or are you a stoic, self-reliant individualist? :-) (I probably tend toward the latter, myself, unfortunately)

I feel that my present diagnosis is much more fitting than my earlier one, since I lack the constant lowered mood "required" in a dysthymia. I am currently not taking any drugs and is working with a psychologist (who also confers with a psychiatrist). I'm also attending an out-patient day treatment, which entails things like group therapy and exercise. The psychologist and out-patient program are all part of the local hospital, so there's plenty interaction between the two parts.

On the surgery front, I'm also part of a great support group here in town for pre- and post-op people or anyone who wishes to know more about the surgeries. The group meets once a month and there's also a great weight-loss surgery association that covers the entire country.

That aside, yeah, I know that there are psychological reasons for part of my weight-gain. I have very low self-esteem and have used food for comfort. Part of the low self-esteem does stem from my overweight, though, so I hope that part of it will get better. :-)

I think the fact you're diagnosed as in the diabetes spectrum leads me to question whether it's all about "the hard part being losing weight", and "maintaining a strict and healthy lifestyle" afterwards being do-able once you have lost the weight... which it sounds like you HAVE had some success in at various points, it just comes back.

Have you tried no-carb/low-carb diets? Those really seem to work for alot of people, and my family who does them (successfully) seem to be consistently benefited by them, by not just instantly going back to their 'normal' diet, but slowly re-introducing some foods with carbs, and 'stabilizing' on a diet with less carbs than they ate before they started the program.

I hear what you're saying. I've studied physiology and nutrition as a sort of hobby for many years (in connection with weight lifting), so I have all the technical knowledge I need when it comes to dieting and exercising. The problem is my lack of satiety, which completely overrides the logical thinking behind a diet plan, when your gut is screaming to be fed. It's the same battle that happens in many people on a psychological level when their emotions overpower their logical thinking and they do things that they wouldn't normally do, if rationality had anything to say about it.

Also, what happens physiologically when you put on a lot of weight is that the body starts to accept this new weight as the norm after a while, thus it's hard to shed the weight again, because you're fighting against your own body which is trying to get you back to "normal" again.
There's a reason why, sadly, up to 98% of all overweight people cannot sustain a prolonged weight-loss by diet and exercise alone.
So you'd have to drop all the extra weight and maintain that weight for a couple of years before the body would adjust "down" to the new normal.
Furthermore, I have no illusions about it being a smooth ride after the surgery. I know it's going to take a lot hard work on my part, the good thing, though, is that I cannot physically gorge myself like before. The stomach just isn't going to be big enough to do that (plus you risk feeling very, very uncomfortable).

Alot of food products that we are now inundated with, often wheat-based and with too much sugar or sweeteners (the worst being corn syrup), I think are simply not a good match for many people's body chemistry's, as seen by the many "native peoples" where obesity and diabetes are epidemics after their own culture and lifestyle was destroyed and they shifted to high-carb diets which proliferate in 'modern society'. Zero (or almost Zero) Carb diet to lose weight and slowly re-introducing a LIMITED amount of SOME carbs, while continuing to avoid big sources of Carbs (and NO corn syrup) also using products like stevia and mesquite while doing everything else you can to support the healthiest lifestyle for you, I think is actually capable of accomplishing alot. I think working with a Chinese Medicine practitioner, whether with acupuncture, herbs, or dietary consultation could also help you alot, along with some of those native foods/herbs I mentioned. Probably all of that applies just as much whether you go thru with the surgery or not.

I don't know if any of that was helpful, but if you have any questions about it, I'd be glad to share what else I know.

Like I said above, I know that there are quite successful ways of dropping weight, the problem is maintaining the weight loss. :-)

One of the problems I have, is that I have a hard time making elaborate healthy dishes, not because I don't know how (I also have some great cook books with great dishes in them), but because I can't muster the energy and drive to do it (that's the simple schizophrenia kicking in). That's why my diet plan after the surgery is going to be very simple, yet still healthy.
I think one of the biggest things I'm going to miss afterwards (besides eating whole pizzas on game night) is the sugar in my tea... I still haven't found a substitute that I find palatable. :-)

Again, thanks for posting. If you, or anyone else, have more questions feel free to ask them. :-)

Okay, I'm going to tap into that dreadful stereotype of most gamers being overweight and see if there are any fellow "sufferers" out there.
I'm curious if there are any other posters who have had or are considering weight-loss surgery (whether gastric banding, bypass, sleeve etc.)?
I'm currently in the run-up phase to the surgery (gastric bypass) and you can never have too many supporters when it comes to life-altering surgery.
I know it's a touchy subject with a lot of people, whether from personal pride or the social stigma that still follows it around. It's often viewed as "the easy way out," which, if one would do just a little research, cannot be further from the truth. It's a tool that can help with the hardest part, losing the weight, while a very strict and healthy lifestyle must still be maintained afterwards.
I also know that, especially for those of you in the US, it can be a struggle to even get approved for the surgery, if your insurance is even going to cover it, or to find the money for it on your own.
But I want to share a bit of my story, maybe someone else can use it in a productive manner. :-)

I've always been a big guy. Not in an obese way, but I'm 6'6" and built solidly, with lots of natural muscle mass - the guy people came to first when they had to move heavy furniture around or to help move to another place. I've also been very active in sports, from soccer over European handball and basketball to American football most recently.
After a longer period with problems staying focused on my studies, stemming from my then undiagnosed psychiatric problems, I finally hit rock-bottom with a major depression back in 2002.
Stayed in bed for 3 months before finally dragging myself off to my doctor to have her confirm the depression.
Then followed several years where I tried a variety of psychopharma to, hopefully, help me out of the depression. Unfortunately, as anyone who has dealt with psychopharma knows, the drugs all had a common side effect... Severe weight gain.
Even though I still played football I continued to gain weight (not that my coach complained that much, I played offensive lineman, so I just became harder to get through ;-) ).
I've beaten the depression now, but have been given a new diagnosis, simple schizophrenia.
I've most likely had that for a long time and the symptoms can sometimes be mistaken for chronic depression disorder called dysthymia - which was what I was being given drugs for, even though it wasn't necessary.
Another side effect of my long-term use of the drugs is the fact that they have pretty much smashed my feeling of satiety, or at least have pushed it so far that I rarely feel physically full. The consequense of that is, of course, over eating (with frequent binge eating episodes).
I've tried to lose weight lots of times and with the most common methods. I've been to a life-style camp (yes, we called it fat camp! ;-) ) twice and lost 40 lbs each time, only to gain it all (and more) back again within 3-6 months.

So, last fall I decided that enough was enough. I thoroughly researched the whole spectrum of weight-loss surgeries and through my doctor got an appointment at a dietician (I also knew from my visit to the life-style camp that the scales at my doctor's office wouldn't be able to weigh me), which also happened to coincide with my doctor telling me, after some tests, that I was in the pre-stage of type II diabetes...
Yay! :-(
Got to the dietician and "jumped" on the scales... 378 lbs!
Yikes, that was 67 lbs more than when I was weighed last time, at the time of leaving the life-style camp back in the summer of 2007.
No wonder all my joints were aching and my back kept kicking me every time I had to walk more than 200 yards.
As I said above, I'm now in the run-up phase to the surgery, where I have to lose 8% of my heighest body weight (the 378 lbs above). I have to lose it before week 18, where my surgery is scheduled. I'm trying to lose it faster, though, because if I do I can be put on an emergency/cancellation list if another patient decides to bail or hasn't met the surgery weight goal at their appointed time.
I'm down 17 lbs so far... still another 15 lbs to go to be on the safe side.

More hot milfs today, too.

Picture evidence required, you hear that you lazy sunbathing bugger! :-p

Well, what can you say, it's the same IOC who won't let women ski jump.

Hey Jenny. I have to say I was skeptical that you were THE Jenny Poussin, the one who models the clothing line that sells best in my stores. I have seen many of your pics, many of them hang in our store, Body Zone is our main clothing line. The fantasy art is cool though.

Considering the pictures are in a special Paizo folder on her site, I'd say that validates her. :-)

Grats on the new store again, btw. :-)

ThanX Gentlegiant! :-)

yikes i didnt know i wuld start a big adult discussion thing here!
dats the one thing i like about RPG it gets me away from that part of mi work!
i guess i shuld have found a totally seperate place 2 upload my fantasy pictures!

and BTW dont get me wrong i m veri proud about wat i do and love showing off my body but 4 me RPG is about playing characters, acting and all that!

A lot of people, unfortunately, cannot differentiate between a person and their job. Luckily, roleplayers are generally a much more accomodating bunch, so you've picked up a great hobby in that respect (plus the hobby itself is, of course, great too!).

But it also shows the great diversity within the hobby, it attracts people from all runs of life and hopefully we'll be able to welcome all newcomers with open arms. :-)

Stebehil wrote:

Interesting that the content filters in the office judge the site as p0rn... I guess this is quite exaggerated :-) I will have a look later today.

Stefan

Hmmmm... well, although the pictures are fantasy art, if you take the folder away, the site home webpage is a porn site. Sorry, calls em like I sees em. Anyone who can get fired over looking at "porn sites" at work probably shouldn't click the pics.

Nudity =/= porn. While Jenny's site probably can be classified as an "adult" page (i.e. it contains nudity), it isn't porn.

Nice pictures btw. :-)

Actual footage of Bob Marshall's speech.

Ross Byers wrote:

I'd rather this thread not turn into a political shouting match. Keep things civil.

Don't post angry, don't post 'us vs. them' arguments, and don't be a jerk.

My advice is just to lock it, Ross.

Abortion is the worst-case controversy: there is no possible compromise, and both sides think the other side is morally bankrupt.

I'd also like this to not devolve into a pro-/anti-abortion argument. If anyone is interested in that, there has already been a long discussion about that before, just search the site for all the sides weighing in on that.

I know I responded above to a question about abortion, which I probably shouldn't have in hindsight.
I'm more curious about the aspects of acceptance when it comes to religious beliefs affecting politics in the US in 2010 qua the questions I posed above.
Also, whether it's acceptable to base politics on some religious beliefs but not others and if it's okay to impose these politics on people who might not share the same religious beliefs.
Should politicians work for the common good of ALL people or just those who voted for them and thus might agree with them on issues that shouldn't necessary have anything to do with politics (such as religious beliefs).?

GentleGiant wrote:

Is this mindset acceptable in US politics in 2010?

Acceptable to whom? To secular pro-abortion people like me? I'd say it wasn't acceptable in any nation's politics at any time in all of history.

To large portions of the voting populace? Acceptable is an understatement. This kind of thing can be mandatory and wildly popular.

Acceptable to anyone. Is it okay to base regular politics and how they affect large parts of the population on religious belief? Would any religious belief be okay or just Christian doctrines?

Does it sit okay with everyone, regardless of political affiliation, to cut back on some rather basic rights for a part of the population, rights which were already in the books, because of religious beliefs?
Is it okay to move backwards in how far the country has progressed?
IS it a move backwards, if not why?

(all of the above are general questions to the entire thread)

Most people use the term "pro-choice" because it sounds less bloodthirsty and doesn't remind people as much that an inconvenient life is involved. But hey, if you're pro-abortion that's cool, too.

As opposed to all the pro-life people who will scream and shout about "baby-killers" (even if what might be removed is just a cluster of cells) and so on, while after the baby is born they don't seem to care what happens to it and its mother? All the while also supporting the death sentence and war in foreign nations.

I have yet to meet a pro-choice person who doesn't wish that abortion wasn't necessary, they just want the option to be available if that's the hard decision that has to be made (myself included). That's why it's called pro-choice, not pro-abortion.

Link to tv segment here.
So, according to an elected official, republican Bob Marshall, children with disabilities are born like that because of the wrath of god over abortion and, based on that, state support for health clinics should be removed.
Also, Virginia governor Bob McDonnell has used an executive order to cut text that banned discrimination against state workers for their sexual orientation.

Is this mindset acceptable in US politics in 2010?

This is going for 128.99 over on Amazon. Hah!

It's now at $242.61 minimum... that's just crazy.

are loans taxed as income there?

Not as such, but the interest on the loan is a deductible, which is why it has to be mentioned. On the other hand if YOU loan a friend some money and get interests on it, you are taxed on those interests as income.

EDIT: Keep in mind that I'm by no means an expert on taxes. I've only had low income jobs or been on welfare (including student payments... yes, we get paid to study over here), so my tax returns have been very simple and most years I don't really have to do anything as I have no changes to the already filled out papers.

Except that, as I understand it, Denmark has higher taxes than the United States does.

From the OECD Database:

"Denmark is currently the most taxed country in the OECD and the world with an income tax of up to 59%"

The key words here in the OECD quotation are "UP TO" - while some do pay what amounts to close to 60% in taxes (made up by regular taxes + extra taxes for very high income people - can't remember the cut-off line), most people pay around 35-40% income tax (my current income is taxed at 39%, but I also have a large deductible because of debt).

When comparing US and Danish taxes remember to calculate such things as US health insurance too (since we have universal health care).
Now, I have no first hand experience with US tax forms but I think most Danish tax forms are much simpler (going by the typical images of Americans slavering for days over their tax forms around April).
Obviously small business owners, some consultants (who might work for several different companies) and such might have slightly more complicated forms, but if your income doesn't really change from year to year it's a relatively simple matter of filling out your tax form (if at all, it lists your general income and such, so you only have to put in extra (or less) income, new loans (well, their interests as deductibles really), new large purchases (cars, boats etc.)).

A little extra help from overseas!
March on you guys! :-)

GentleGiant wrote:

So nothing on this scale since McVeigh in Oklahoma.

Which, of course, is a good thing!
I was just curious about whether someone had felt pushed to similar extremes that might have escaped my attention in recent years.

Depends on how you rate your scale...

There is the man who tore down his house rather than let the bank foreclose on it.

It will probably get worse in the near future.

Between the feeling of pressure due to the economy, combined with the "newfound" audience, I expect to see at least two more stories like this before next year.

Now, if there was an easy way to find out how many happen that don't get any coverage...

Yeah, I stumbled on that one too.

That's a "safer" way to protest, though, if we're talking cost of lives.

Kirth Gersen wrote:

On the other hand, if you sincerely want to defend the Church, there are better ways of going about it.

You're probably right. I never claimed to have a monopoly on virtue. In fact, I'm much less inclined to suffer bigots nicely. OTOH, if someone wants to actually seek to understand (but not agree), I'm more than willing to discuss the Church, warts and all.

I also have a really great newsletter. :D

Urizen, for example, has done an admirable job of seeking alternative points of view. This stands in sharp contrast to people who scream "Abortion" or "Mother Teresa" and then complain they're dismissed by some Internet jerk.

To get this remotely back on topic, the Church strenuously condemns flying airplanes into buildings as a form of protest.

The view must really be extraordinary from up there. Is it a stallion or a mare you're riding?

Clearly you're not interested in discussing anyone with dissenting opinions yourself, so I'll not belabour the point anymore.
And no one was screaming anything... oh look, you actually used a real strawman argument.

GentleGiant wrote:

Most protests over here have been by large rowdy groups. I'm curious if anyone else has blown up buildings or something similar over taxes (in more recent times)?

I'm not familiar with any violent actions or protests over taxes in the modern age. Usually we get protests that are similar to what you get in Europe, which is loud and sometimes rowdy crowds that make their voices heard and occasionally small scale fights do break out. The last time we saw something on this scale from a home grown terrorist was in 1995 and that was because a group of radicals believed that the government oversepped their authority during the seiges at Ruby Ridge and the Branch Davidian complex. Most people dislike the IRS, but only someone with truely nothing left to loose goes to these extremes.

So nothing on this scale since McVeigh in Oklahoma.

Which, of course, is a good thing!
I was just curious about whether someone had felt pushed to similar extremes that might have escaped my attention in recent years.

GentleGiant wrote:

Ahh, so because people disagree with you about how great the Catholic Church is they are not "reasonable adults capable of exchanging different points of view" and their views are "craptacular nonsense" and "stupid quips."

No, when people blather "Abortion" as if that word alone means anything without context, then we're talking about craptacular nonsense. Likewise, since I've not made any attempt to paint the Church has nothing but "shiny and unblemished," there's even more craptacular nonsense being typed, all wrapped up in nice man-shaped package of straw.

Indeed, those who are familiar with my writings about Church history know that I don't have a tendency to whitewash.

IOW, if you had something substantive to say, you've have said it rather than posting a semicoherent string of incomplete sentences. This applies to pretty much any topic in any discussion ever.

I simply put down the key words for brevity instead of writing a long rant on the subject.

I don't know what else you'd call it than painting the church as "shiny and unblemished" when you write "The Catholic Church has done and continues to do more for the world's poor than any other single institution, and it has been doing so for longer than any other single institution" with no mention of the at times horrible way the church tries to "help" anyone (my key words of Africa, AIDS and condoms - also Mother Teresa and her "help" in India).
Furthermore, my "semicoherent string of incomplete sentences" are just some of the more wellknown stances of the church where it clashes with a lot of people. It's view on Abortion being a big one, which crops up all the time, like not that long ago in Brazil with a young girl (9-years-old!) was raped and the church excommunicated her and the doctor who performed an abortion on her (the pregnancy would have killed her).

GentleGiant wrote:

I'm curious about whether anyone has gone to these extremes before regarding taxation?

Americans have a long history of violent protest against taxation and other government acts/powers. We're the country that got founded in part because of a tax on a breakfast beverage, and we're not even talking about coffee. The Sons of Liberty were part philosophical society, part street gang.

America's not alone in this regard either. Much of Europe was regularly disturbed by violent protest throughout the entire 20th century, for example.

Most protests over here have been by large rowdy groups. I'm curious if anyone else has blown up buildings or something similar over taxes (in more recent times)?

Urizen wrote:

Not as much as I'd thought there would be. It's Tiger that's dominating the gossip circuits. The ACTP may not be having the effect that he may have desired because 1) lives loss were very minimal (which is a good thing) 2) he wasn't Muslim, and/or 3) deep down inside ourselves we may condemn the act, we may share his frustration with the IRS/taxation based on our own experiences and the current state of the economy.

Oh well. It's probably for the best. I am reminded of the introduction Dalton Trumbo wrote to the reissue of Johnny Got His Gun that I have. In part, he talks about how the exploitative coverage of the Vietnam War, et cetera, jaded Americans to the point where we can read about 10,000 people dying at the same time we spread jam on our toast, all without batting an eye or spoiling our appetite. Archbishop Fulton Sheen spoke about this coarsening of the public conscience after WWII, taking the tact that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, pretty much anything was permissible.

I think there's more than a grain of truth in there.

I've completely forgotten where I read it, but there's also some studying/thinking going into how we are emotionally affected less and less as the distance from ourselves increase. It might seem obvious, but there are actual data about how we are less affected when something horrible happens on the other side of the world. Also, even though we might be very emotionally affected by something, it also fades faster if it happened far away.

GentleGiant wrote:

Yes, you are right. Let's completely disregard the dark side of the Catholic Church....

Xabulba wrote:

Religion and common sense never see eye to eye.

Urizen: This is the kind of craptacular nonsense that keeps me away from the Catholic Answers forums. Then, on the other side, you've got folks of various religious faiths who post similarly stupid quips about their favorite whipping boys. All in all, the discourse tends much more toward the level of children reading bumper stickers than reasonable adults capable of exchanging different points of view.

Sad, huh?

Ahh, so because people disagree with you about how great the Catholic Church is they are not "reasonable adults capable of exchanging different points of view" and their views are "craptacular nonsense" and "stupid quips."

Gotcha.
I'm glad you were able to address and refute the points I made, you know, like a "reasonable [adult] capable of exchanging different points of view" would do.
Sorry, but when you try to paint the Catholic Church in a shiny and unblemished light, I'll gladly point out the dark and ugly underside.
If you'd like another point of view, I'll gladly point you to this delightful clip with Stephen Fry.

So, regarding Airplane-Crashing Tax-Protestor, have there been any recent developments. I barely pay attention the news nowadays.

You are, however, right that the above is actually a derail of the original thread.

I'm curious about whether anyone has gone to these extremes before regarding taxation?

What about advertising for RPG publishers?

* Third party publishers wishing to advertise their Pathfinder Roleplaying Game-compatible projects in Wayfinder #3 are welcome to advertise as well. Space is available for 1/4, 1/2 and full page ads.

* Email me for questions about pricing. Email is in my profile - be sure to include "Wayfinder #3 Advertising" in your subject line.

Urizen wrote:

Pope Benedict may not necessarily own much, but he is not without want or creature comforts. Make the Vatican as a hostel for the poor and give them a taste of the same and perhaps I wouldn't be as cynical. *shrug*

Cynicism is fine when it's based on something solid. The Vatican is a sovereign state, not a concierge service. That aside, the Vatican does run hostels and much more. The Catholic Church has done and continues to do more for the world's poor than any other single institution, and it has been doing so for longer than any other single institution.

Yes, you are right. Let's completely disregard the dark side of the Catholic Church. Here are a few choice key-words:

Rampant misogyny.
Africa + AIDS + condoms.
Mother Teresa + "virtue" of suffering + poverty + abortion.
Abortion.

Yup, it's feasible.
Take a look at example #2 here:
LEAGUE OF THE ONE TRICK PONY

Weee! Subscribed!

I'm guessing Vic is alluding to the rebranding of the Companion line to Pathfinder Player Companion (as expressed by Erik in his blog post), thus making this line entirely player focused (vs. the GM focused Chronicles line). Some future titles might even shift from Chronicles to the (Player) Companion line and vice versa.
Actually, the whole Chronicles line might get renamed to something with Campaign Setting or maybe Golarion in it.

I studied knife fighting back in the 90s. It was more than just knife fighting but also included elements of other martial arts. We learned how to trip a person with a knife. But realistically you aren't actually tripping the person with the actual knife. You are tripping the person with your leg and sticking them with the knife when they lose balance.

I also studied Kenjitsu and I wouldn't call that tripping with Boken. That more bashing someone in the leg. Sure they go prone but if you had used a katana you would have remove their leg. I can see how you could trip with a lot of weapons but that's not what the weapons were designed for. But nothing should stop you from doing so but I don't see how weapon training would apply or weapon focus as that would be applied using the weapon properly. The magical bonus would also enhance the use of the weapon's proper technique. So even though you could use a long sword to trip you wouldn't apply the bonuses on that weapon.

This is just my opinion though.

On the other hand, take a look at some of the weapons which are given the "trip" descriptor. Sickle, Kama and the Scythe. None of these weapons were designed as specific tripping weapons (only the Kama comes even close in some forms of its use) and all of them "hook" with the sharp edge of the blade. Thus you'd just as likely shear someone's legs off with a Scythe as you would with a sword (which you could actually turn to use the flat of the blade to hit someone over the knees with)

try this.

Strange that it didn't show up when I searched for it... oh well, I've joined now. :-)

The sollution is called "Friendly Local Game Store", and is great alternative to online shopping. But, I'll probably buy less books this way, and I won't get PDFs for free.

Btw, a few people admittet to being from Denmark in this thread. You guys should join our Pathfinder Society Denmark group on Facebook.

Couldn't find such a group...

GentleGiant wrote:

Neithan wrote:

It seems that you can only buy something in the Paizo store with a credit card and that you can't buy Paizo products at RPGNow. Is there a way to get the pdfs without a credit card?

You can also use debit cards, e.g. VISA Electron, if you have such a card. Most people should be able to get a hold of such a card even if they can't get a credit card.

Unless their bank only approves them for a savings account and not a checking account. :(

Get another bank (I know, not easy in these economically troubling times). ;-)

Sorry if my response wasn't the one you were looking or hoping for. Fortunately, you can run your game however you want if the rules don't work for you. But as far as I can tell by reading the rules... they're pretty dang clear.

You can't trip with a weapon unless that weapon has the word "trip" listed under its special.

So, going with this ruling I then have a problem with the weapons that have the "trip" special descriptor.

If the criteria is that it can be used to "hook" or "ensnare" the opponent's legs, then there are a lot of extra weapons that would fit those criteria. Off the top of my head, axes, hammers, picks (heck, even a crossbow in melee).
Also, if another criteria could be "sweeping" i.e. a leg sweep, which you used as an example, then things like hammers, maces, clubs, spears and quarterstaffs would certainly fit too (to knock or "sweep" away an opponents legs).
If the list of "trip" weapons was expanded I'd feel much better about the ruling.

GentleGiant wrote:

So, you have only 10 weapons with which you can trip...

And you can trip any time regardless. I wouldn't get hung up on the lack of trip weapons when the ruling is you can trip your opponent, but if you want to use your weapon to do so, you need a trip weapon.

Yes... at a much lower CMB than with a weapon, though (unless you specifically make characters who only use one of the 10 "trip" weapons).

James Jacobs wrote:

My take:

When you want to trip a foe, you don't normally use a weapon. Similarly, you don't normally use a weapon to bull rush, grapple, or overrun a foe...

Now... SOME weapons (not all) allow you to use the weapon to trip a foe, thus giving you a slight advantage since if you mess up the trip attempt, you can just drop the weapon to "counter" the trip that comes back at you.

Basically, 'what the book says'.

And so the debate was finally over. : P

Actually, it's also what the book DOESN'T say (i.e. it isn't explicitly written in the Trip section), namely that you can only use "trip" weapons to trip.

So, you have only 10* weapons with which you can trip (I categorized the flail and its heavy and dire versions as one as they're basically just variants of the same weapon) of which one is a non-leathal weaon, two are exotic weapons (three if you count the dire flail) and one is a ranged weapon. Not sure how to classify unarmed attack since it isn't designated as a "trip" weapon.
I have to say that I find that way too limiting. Trip just became way too situational to use unless you specialize in it. Way IMO, of course.
(Yes, I used "way" way too much in that paragraph)

* Sickle, Flail, Flail, heavy, Guisarme, Halberd, Scythe, Kama, Whip, Chain, spiked, Flail, dire, Hammer, gnome hooked, Bolas

Fake Healer wrote:

I am arguing not because I disagree with you guys but because it isn't clear what a trip is.

Please explain exactly what part of the rules are unclear, and I would be willing to bet that we can find the solution.

To recap the aforementioned rules:

voska66 wrote:

Referenced under Equipment Weapons: "Trip: You can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the weapon to avoid being tripped."

This points out that you can use this weapon in a trip attack. If the weapon doesn't have the trip quality you can't use it in a trip attack.

Referenced under Combat Combat Maneuvers: "When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver."

This points out that any bonuses you apply must applicable to the weapon used or the attack. So if the weapon used is trip weapon you can trip and the bonus applying to that weapon are used in that attack. They are applicable. If the weapon doesn't have the trip quality then the bonus specific to that weapon are not applicable.

Referenced under Combat Combat Maneuvers Trip: "You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack. You can only trip an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Trip feat, or a similar ability, initiating a trip provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver."

You can trip place of any melee attack. This doesn't say you use whatever weapon you are wielding to trip. It just says you can trip. That's the action you take instead. It's not a unarmed attack but it still provokes an attack of opportunity.

I'd like to disagree with the summary above.

As I read it you can trip with any attack/weapon you have handy (no, the gauntlet/longspear combo doesn't work, you only have reach because of the longspear, thus you can't attack an enemy 10' away with your gauntlet, that's just common sense) - "trip" weapons only bestow the ability to drop it to avoid the result of a bad CMB check.
The CMB description and the Trip section clearly spells that out.
IF the above summary should be true, then I'm baffled why it isn't spelled out in the Trip section that you can only use "trip" weapons (or a monk using Flurry of Blows - since Unarmed Attack isn't designated as a "trip" weapon) when making a trip attempt.
I can see that the "You can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks." line causes a lot of confusion (and I'd also like to make another point from a post in the other thread, namely that it says "can use" not "must use"). I believe it's a superflous sentence - or a descriptive only sentence at best.
So, the way I see it (depending on whether an official ruling is forthcoming and what it is) one of two things is "wrong" in the rules:
1) The "You can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks." is superflous and should be stricken (because you can use any attack/weapon to Trip).
2) The Trip section is missing a clarification that you can only use "trip" weapons to perform a Trip maneuver.

It seems that you can only buy something in the Paizo store with a credit card and that you can't buy Paizo products at RPGNow. Is there a way to get the pdfs without a credit card?

You can also use debit cards, e.g. VISA Electron, if you have such a card. Most people should be able to get a hold of such a card even if they can't get a credit card.

Not to highjack Entropis thread, but the vat is ok to me, it is the fee from the custom service that is way to hígh, as it often doubles the price for the book shipment.

Definitely. I don't mind paying our 25% VAT (the books are still cheaper coming from the US). It's the $28.50/€21 handling fee that's the problem.

Our customs duty for books are also 0%.
Any imported goods from outside the EU worth more than $14.75/€10.75 (including shipping costs) are subject to Danish VAT.
So, even if I get a shipment of just one book, e.g. a Companion book that's less than $10 (with the Pathfinder Advantage), with shipping it's most likely going to go over the $14.75 limit, I still have to pay the full $28.50/€21 handling fee, instantly doubling the cost of the book (even before VAT is calculated).
Unfortunately there is no practical way for us to calculate and pay the VAT ourselves. There is a way to do it, but it requires handing in forms to the customs bureau with a detailed list of what's being shipped to you (not the hard part), its exact price (not a problem either) AND when exactly it'll arrive at a Danish border/customs control (THAT is the problem).
That's usually not a problem for big importing companies, but it's a problem for common people like us.

I will admit to having only read the last page so some of my confusion might stem from that.
I don't really see what the problem is...
You can trip with whatever you like, your leg, your weapon, your tongue etc.

You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack.

I think Louis IX explained it quite well above. Feel free to think that you can only trip with "trip" weapons, but that's not what the rules say. They just give you the option of avoiding being tripped back by a failed trip attempt (if you let go of the weapon).

It's the same way that an adamantine weapon gives you an edge when sundering items because it ignores hardness (less than 20).

Just did a google image search for a Carbuncle... and discovered that it's also a medical term. Nasty, nasty pictures then appeared on my screen. *shudder*

I find that this video addresses the issue quite well (apply it to all situations, not just racism):
How to tell people they sound racist.

I'm officially stoked!
But... there's always a "but" isn't there?
What about international shipping? I'm used to getting my subscriptions in the flat cardboard packaging, which isn't going to hold a 300-page paperback, so I'm dreading a hike in shipping costs if I subscribe to the fiction line.
I guess I have the same fears when it comes to the updated campaign setting (Inner Sea), which is part of the Chronicles subscription.
Anything to address these concerns?

Le Bump.
No one with lots of tablet experience?

GentleGiant wrote:

Zaister wrote:

I think that can be arranged by reworking statblock5.html to use BBCode instead of HTML mark-up. I'll check this out over the weekend.

Any progress?

I just found this on ENWorld, not sure who ghostcat is but they designed two.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/talking-talk/271416-dnd-3-5-character-generato r-sheet.html#post5075704

Thanks, had a look at them. Unfortunately they seem somehow incomplete or at least lacking a lot of info you get from some of the other sheets. Also, I'd really like something similar to statblock5.html.

It looks like I might have to look into it myself... if I can collect my thoughts long enough to get it done.

Yup! Sounds about right... :) That's just because you have one yer self.. ;)

Tru dat!

Also, check out this article on deviantART:
Ask Cerena: A Quick Guide to Graphics Tablets

You know, this thread should probably be in the Tech Section of the messageboards, oh--that section seems to be missing...

See, I told you!