|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Liz Courts wrote:
Each player gets "at least 12 cards," so you should have enough to go around for a standard four player group. However, this limits the variety of options at your disposal (as some mechanics allow for more draws), so each player with their own deck is ideal—but not required.
Thanks Liz. The number explains it. We only allow 4 cards per player (I allow them to swap out and replenish back up to 4 at each new level). But as I said the Dork20 deck can be a bit higher powered than this seems to be (but it would be nice to see some more examples... :)
Are there official rules for using it that explain the 1 deck/person idea? I play 3.5 and use the "Dork20" deck (its a similar idea - its pretty silly and sometimes a little overpowered but my group likes it) and we use only one deck for the whole group.
What about this deck makes it 1/person rather than 1/group? Are there not enough cards to go around?
Andrew R wrote:
But what if they happened to get a job that was very short term (say a week or so) and they got paid cash? Don't they have the right to treat themselves for working hard? Even if it was for a very short time and they have to go back on welfare afterward?
Or must poor people always lead a life of misery until they can get solid employment, regardless of the circumstances?
Forcing someone to be miserable sure seems like an infringement of their right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
My point is they are publicly acknowledging the shortcoming as they are "helping" their customers make up the difference. They are already showing "the goodness of their hearts". Just in a way that doesn't affect their bottom line. And by acknowledging that they are paying their employees poorly but not actually increasing their pay shows how transparent their "goodness" is.
This kills me. If Walmart understands that they don't pay their employees a living wage, why don't they pay them a living wage?!?!?!?
(I know the answer - it'll cut into profits!)
Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
Not exactly. Up to 12 weeks of family leave, if your company is big enough to come under FMLA. It's unpaid, though.
So first time parents need not apply?
Here it's "unpaid" as well, in that the company doesn't pay parental leave. Its paid by the government as part of "EI" ("Employment Insurance"). You get paid at 55% of your salary up to a monthly cut-off. (Dont remember what that is.)
It's not actually hyperbole; it depends on if you're male or female and what the company's policies are. A week is actually pretty high for a male to get; it's not unusual for them not to qualify for leave at all.
Yikes! My brother works in Cali, thats probably where the residual memory information came from. But I was sure I was miremembering...
What I find the most puzzling about this is that it is actually in the employer's best interest to provide contraception in health care coverage because access to contraception means less unexpected pregnancies and that means less maternity/paternity leave. Of course in the US, I think you guys get all of a week or two* of parental leave so maybe its not a big loss?
*hyperbole - I know its more than that, but I don't know the exact number and I do know it doesn't even come close to the 52 weeks we get here in la belle province...
I think its starting to look more like a longhouse.
You do realise that its the existence of those "foaming reactionaries" which pretty much dooms socialism from ever taking hold in the US.
(Or rather, the general public reaction to said reactionaries - the fear that they are right.)
and their are still all the holes in the ozone layer, it's a natural phenomenon.
No it's not. The reduction of ozone into individual oxygen atoms by UV is, (O3 + UV -> O + O + O) but left to its own devices the individual oxygen atoms will recombine to reform ozone. That's how it protects us from UV light. It absorbs the UV but reforms afterward.
When you add chlorofluorocarbons (man-made!) into the mix, they are also broken up, but then the individual chlorine atoms grab ahold of an oxygen atom, and leave only 2 oxygen atoms to make O2 thus depleting O3. O2 doesn't absorb UV so we now have a hole in our UV protection where there didn't use to be.
The ozone hole is not natural. It's caused by us.
"Heesa no good to meesa dead."
Would it be possible that those who have seen the movie identify their spoilers as being about the movie, please? I know I'm already somewhat spoiled because I'm watching Agents but I would like there to be some surprises when I eventually see the movie.
(It's like the Game of Thrones thread all over again...)
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Oh, she wants to see it almost as much as I do. So do my kids. But the two oldest sons are in spring hockey leagues, so weekend matinees are tough to schedule.
And if I were to go see it on my own there would be a sizable mutiny, I think...
Yeah, I wouldn't watch this week's SHIELD without seeing Cap2 first.
Y'know, MARVEL really shoulda had this warning in big red letters with a loud siren or something going off at the start of the episode.
Haven't seen Cap2 and won't for a least another week or so, in all likelihood.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
The thing about the Clairvoyant is that he's not a team player, and has committed many acts of evil... he is in the true sense of the word, a villain. I doubt they will redeem him or take a Marvel hero as a template for the Clairvoyant...
Well, Box was taken over by Jerome Jaxxon in AF #12 to kill Guardian, so he has been a "villain".
But yeah, to introduce him as a villain is probably stretching it.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
So what other Marvel character used to be human but is now a machine, other than Arnim Zola? there's sooooooo many Marvel robots it's not funny.......
Well, there is Box. And then the reference to Department H wouldn't be as throw-away.
But that's wishful thinking...
Isn't it??? :)
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Yes confirmed: Brad Dourif was the fake clairvoyant.... I only hope he downloaded his consciousness and we'll see him again on a BIG ROBOT CHEST SCREEN ;)
I can't imagine they'd hire Brad Dourif and then use him in a throw-away role. They will use him again.
Also, "Department H"! If they manage to introduce Alpha Flight, I'll piss myself. (Yeah, I know, fat chance. Still, I can dream can't I?)
Quit bringing facts into it. This is a discussion about overzealous nationalist pride.
There's no place for facts here.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
We'd become the nicest country that loves to start wars.
As an aside, there is absolutely no correlation to the fact that we Canadians are overly polite and that Obama went on an "apology tour" of Europe. Absolutely none.
Nor is there a correlation between his desire to have socialized medicine and Canada's medical system.
He is not, I repeat, he is NOT a Canadian mole.
I mean it.
As you were.
Don't blame us for your inability to do what needed to be done.
The threat was only hypothetical and not yet deserving of drastic measures. Sure there was the rash of unexplained suicides in his immediate location, and in hindsight, more than circumstantial, but believe me when I say that we had no clue as to his true potential until it was unleashed.
The smitter wrote:
As a production Brewer at a microbrewery I am offended by this talk of America beer being sub par. I have drank beer from all over the world and would put American craft beer against in beer in the world. I well not sign this until I get a fall apology.
I' m sorry you are offended. However while you may be a craftsman you live under the shadow of Bud, and Pabst and other so-called "beers". You must clean your own house first, then we will discuss terms of the treaty at the first "Molson Summit".
We will agree to the merger but we would need some assurances first:
1) The national passtime would be curling.
That is all.
2 dogs - a 3 yr old Burnese mountain dog; and an 8-year old mix. We think there is some Burner in the mix, but at the vet one time another dog owner said he saw some Australian (?) wolf hound in him. (Although not sure if that's really a breed.)
Both are pretty much carpets, and the Burner especially will let you do darn near anything around him and not even flinch.
I just saw Ep 1-3 on Fri night (missed them the first time through) and I completely missed the green house photograph. What was the context of him photographing it again? I can't remember the scene. I'll take that one back, then.
And since they talked about him still seeing things as they were on the way out to the house, I assumed the "wormhole" was Rust hallucinating.
How so Greg? I found it perfectly in keeping with the previous 7 episodes.
it just left so many questions unanswered. Who were all those people on the video? Was the final killer even one of them? How were the Tuttles related to this? Were those them in the video? I know they were looking into Dora Lang's killing, but shouldn't bringing those in the video to justice be important too considering how deeply terrifying it was? Why did they have a second photo of that green house? Aside from the painting connection, which they didn't have until after they compared to two photos, why would they even that photo? How was the meth cook related to the final killer? Were they friends? Did they work together? I accepted a while ago that the Yellow King and Corcosa were not going to play a big part in the finale, but in the end it was all throw-away. Why use that? Why not use Satan worship? Why be that obtuse? He had to know that there would be people out there that had read or at least heard of the Yellow King. Why didn't Rust pick up on the literary reference? What about the black stars in Audrey's art work? The drawings she drew as a kid that got her in trouble. The posed dolls on her bedroom floor? They made a point of lingering on a photo in Dora Lang's mother's house showing Dora as a child in a mask in front of 5 horse riders in masks. If it was just the lawnmower man, was that just a throw away? Or is there more.
I realise we are supposed to assume that the Tuttles are prime movers here, but how can Marty and Rust even be remotely satisfied - and how can we even assume the story is over - if they are still out there doing what they are doing?
It was just deeply unsatisfying. He was "just" another serial killer.
I understand that the writer was probably wanting to write a character piece primarily, and while I appreciate well written characters (I loved Mcconaughey's 1997 Rust - amazing) I like stories. And as a story, this one just ended so flat to me. All build up and no pay off. Too many unanswered questions. Its like he drew out the story so he could have 8 episodes to show of the characters but in the end just didn't care about what he had built up.
At least thats what I saw. And I passed up the first episode of COSMOS for this (no PVR...)
I guess the legality of their breaking in depends entirely on whether or not SHIELD has the authority to enter and seize the drug they came for. It has been shown already that SHIELD trumps local police and military forces. Coulson did identify to the guards that he was operating with the authority of a SHIELD agent. But since we know nothing about this base and have only circumstantial evidence of SHIELD's authority here we can only assume that since both SHIELD teams cooperated in this that SHIELD did have such authority. And if they DID have the authority then the crime here was done by the guards for resisting with lethal force.
Which is why I don't label their actions as "evil". Morally ambiguous, more like.