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

Hitdice's page

3,314 posts (3,563 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 6 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,314 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

How does the divorce rate excuse their hypocrisy?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's not what Comey said.

Turin the Mad wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
I'm gonna wait, like, another 85 days or so to even begin posting on this thread, and probably won't really start giving my opinion on what happened until we're staring down the barrel of the 2020 primary. :P
If you haven't already decided who you're voting for in 2024, you're behind the times.
I do hope that was meant in jest. :)

What, you hadn't heard? Cyborg, time-traveling Bill Clinton, in a robot body with all the oratory powers of Michelle Obama, endorsed by a matrix of first spouses! I know, it sounds weird at first, but you've gotta admit, that candidate would nail the likability factor across party lines.

To be fair, the only person who's ever beat her in a primary is Obama, who won both terms.

Pillbug, can I ask which NPR station you listen to? WGBH hasn't been bad, imo.

Turin the Mad wrote:
;) Might be looking like a quaint discussion in 4 years.

I hope it does; I sincerely hope that, in four years, I'll look back at this thread and say, "I can't believe we were worried about that picayune nonsense."

And, I mean, not 'cause we'll be fighting for survival in the rubble of the cities once known as Huh'Murica. Mad Max is not inevitable!

I'm gonna wait, like, another 85 days or so to even begin posting on this thread, and probably won't really start giving my opinion on what happened until we're staring down the barrel of the 2020 primary. :P

thejeff wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Here's a sort of disturbing article I read a while back. Regarding the other possibility.

Yeah. There's another problem with ramping up the vitriol so much.

If Clinton wins, it's not just the disappointment of your candidate losing, it's the known criminal who everyone hates, who should be locked up or hung, who obviously must have rigged the election since everyone hates her and there's no way she could have won fairly.

It's gonna be ugly out there.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but remember all the threats against Obama when he was elected? It's been ugly before, and we survived the experience.

. . .

Um, just to be clear (and I hope this clarification isn't actually necessary) I'm not endorsing assassination threats as de rigueur in politics.

Oh, don't misunderstand me: I think Trump is very dangerous, I just think he can completely ruin the US without declaring himself dictator for life. (Not that he wouldn't, given the opportunity.)

For all my criticism of the US government, it's a pretty resilient system. I think (honestly think, not hyperbole) that if the coup-d'etat-leading-to-state-of-emergancy-leading-to-presidency-as-dictator ship were going to happen, it would have happened with Cheney, the who selected himself for the post of vice president, and then treated the office as a co-presidency.

I like the idea of being about to swap specific proficiencies awarded by race and class, but wouldn't warrior types just have proficiency in the renaissance weapons to begin with, since they're listed as martial weapons? Or are you thinking swapping proficiencies as a downtime activity for stone age characters? (I'm assuming you're not requiring the understanding alien technology table to use firearms in a steampunk setting.

Elves are trained in firearms because their society places great importance on dueling as a means of conflict resolution. Y'know, like the Atevi legal system, but elf-ier.

thejeff wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
We don't need to. It was all out in the open in with #NeverTrump. They actually fought to change primary/convention rules to prevent Trump from getting the nomination.
If that was out in the open, there was worse behind the scenes. It's never all out in the open.

Also, who exactly is "they" in that scenario? I feel like everyone who rails against the #NeverTrump movement conveniently omits the part where they accomplished exactly nothing at the convention.

Meanwhile the DNC has decided to re-evaluate the super delegate system. Why would anyone who didn't want to waste their vote in the primary choose Trump over Sanders, exactly?

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I know Kaine's feelings are complicated. I wish they weren't. I wish he took a stronger stand on these issues that are important to me.

Meanwhile: God, the Clinton versus Trump debate could so easily be disastrous. I'll be watching that between my fingers.

God, tell me about it; I keep remembering the 2004 presidential debates, when every commentator out there agreed that Kerry won the debates decisively, but Bush won, y'know, the presidency.

I am feeling fear.

Nor had I, GreyWolf, and the BBC America website makes no mention of the series going subscriber only. I think we're safe for now. :)

Subtle Spell overrides needing to wiggle (demi-)human fingers, speak through (demi-)human lips or manipulate material components, which seems to cover all the reason you can't cast when polymorphed. YMMV.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Progressives were hoping for a VP that indicated that Clinton was moving away from the business as usual model for the party. They were hoping for a Warren, a Booker, or perhaps even a Sanders. The choice of Kaine was a choice made by someone who was ignoring them entirely.

I'm a little irritated that some on the far Left have elected themselves gatekeepers on who is sufficiently Progressive or not. :/

But ok:

  • Warren has said from the beginning she wasn't interested in the job, because she can do much more from within the Senate than as Veep. Also, if she was Veep, the Republican governor Charlie Baker would appoint a Repub replacement to her Senate seat. Whomever would be the DNC nominee for PotUS, she or he would need every single Dem in the Senate to get anything accomplished legislatively. And you know, confirm SCotUS, other judges, and other administrative appointees (Merrick Garland is far from the only appointee still waiting... and waiting... and waiting).
  • Booker would probably take the job. But again, the Republican governor Chris Christie would appoint a Repub replacement to his Senate seat.
  • Sanders wouldn't take the job. And again, he's far more important getting legislation and regulations passed in the Senate.
It's about thinking long term and big picture.

And Kaine, while not dull, is the kind of VP pick that conveys that Clinton doesn't need (or want) a flashy, maverick-y veep; she wants someone experienced and competent, which Kaine is.

It also leaves the more decisive VP choices outside the ticket, where they can go full HAAM without besmirching Clinton's dignified gravitas.

Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Randarak wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Maybe as a pilot, her call sign was "Marvel"
I was uncertain of my memory, and had to look it up, but her call sign was "Cheeseburger" :-D
I know it doesn't fit her canon comics background, but I'd love if Danvers was post-combat tours and now a test pilot in the mold of Yeager.

Aw, I thought the link was gonna be to Yeager. (Just read the book, you'll get the joke.)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What did Robert B. Parker say? "No, it wasn't a fair fight. In a fair fight against a guy my size, he would have had a baseball bat."

I agree with all of that, but I didn't say any of it. :P

thejeff wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

I just won't let it go, but I'm willing to spoiler it:
Jeff, you don't have to speak in the hypothetical. The difference you're describing is the difference between Claremont's character and the one in the first movie. My point is, Rogue is a stronger character in Claremont's comics than she is in the movies. That's not a complaint about her characterization so much as about the number of characters that had to be included in any movie titled X-Men.

Though, full disclosure, I just saw Avengers: Age of Ultron this weekend, and by the end of it I felt like it should have been titled Avengers: Wait, All of Them? That's Too Many Cameos, whereas I found Ant-Man pleasantly limited in scope.

Yes, I watched the Comic-Con Geekend on Starz Encore, so sue me.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Spoilered for the sake of those who don't want on topic geekery diluted with conflicting flavors of geekery:
I don't know, granted I'm speaking as a Claremont reader, but all the things that made Rogue a cool character in her own right removed the need for Wolverine as a big brother type surrogate parent. Kitty was young and inexperienced when she joined the X-men and Rogue just wasn't.

Of course, given that they've replaced the entire cast of X-men with a younger generation of actors, I'd love to see a younger Rogue show up and have that relation ship with Mystique, but, y'know, X-men grognard.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Hitdice wrote:

She was a co-lead in the first movie, but Singer & the writers started shifting her to background ever since. I like Rogue, but the X-Movies don't do her or the non-Mystique heroines justice.

Edit: In the first movie, all she really does is 1) act as an anchor to humanity for Wolverine, and 2) act as a MacGuffin to borrow Magneto's powers for his plot. She has very little in common with the beloved Rogue from the comics.

Indeed she does; from the moment she climbed into Wolvie's truck I was all, "That's supposed to be Kitty. Kitty Pride has that relationship with Wolverine," but no one listened. :(

I don't think Rogue showing up to steal her powers in a remote possibility, it's just totally weird that Quicksilver is the only character to show up in both movie series. Beast is supposed to join the fricken Avengers, okay?! :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
Somehow I think if Trump actually tried to launch a nuke, the Military would probably refuse his order. It's not like they are a mindless robot army or anything.

Okay, I really don't want to see a president elected where we have rely on mutiny to avoid nuclear war. We might as well just start campaigning for a military coup immediately on Trump's election, you know?

I won't say he exactly laid an egg on Batman: Year One, but Mazzucchelli's illustrations for the comic were so stylistic that I found the animation very, very bland in comparison. Otherwise a winner, though. :)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not to put words in anyone's mouth, or impugn their motives, but it's important to remember that Sanders is popular with under 30 voters who, given their age, have only had the experience of their candidate beating Clinton in the primary for the nomination in 2008, followed by his running as the president in 2012. If you're an under 30 voter who supported Obama, this is the first time you've experienced your favorite primary candidate not winning the nomination against Clinton. Not that that excuses blaming primary winner for actually winning, but, y'know.

Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!

I don't know about Emily Blunt. I still feel faint every time I think of her doing yoga in Edge of Tomorrow; watching her wiggle around in a skin tight super hero costume might just be too much for me! :P

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given the way this presidential race seems to be shaping up, I suggest taking the quick, painless way out with the aneurysm. :P

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I actually favored Hillary over Bernie. While I would prefer Hillary to be a bit more progressive on some issues, I think she can actually get a lot of what she promised done. I feel that if somehow Bernie did get the nom and then won the election, Bernie would have a much greater difficulty working with congress and wouldn't be able to follow through with a lot of his campaign platforms.
I don't think that working with congress is a thing that happens anymore with a democratic president.

I'm not saying you're wrong BNW, but given the reaction to Merrick Garland's nomination, I think that's more on congress than the democratic president.

That's politics for you, Doodles!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I, for one, don't "actually" know anyone in this thread.

I do know a bunch of labor activists, mostly paid staffers oddly enough, who are Hillary supporters.

Now I'm sad 'cause Anklebiter doesn't think our friendship is "actual." :(

thejeff wrote:

I've been doing Hugo voting reading:

Ancillary Mercy, which I liked quite a lot. Wrapped the series up nicely, with a cool space battleish bit and some tense personal confrontations.

SevenEves, by Neal Stephenson, which was certainly interesting, but really dragged. Near future, humanity's attempt to ensure some survivors of an apocalyptic storm of meteors resulting from the destruction of the moon. Cool premise, some cool characters and plotlines, but all of it embedded in way too much orbital mechanics and technical detail. At some points running a couple pages of exposition before we get a page of people doing stuff, then back to more exposition. Then 600 pages in, we finish the prelude and jump 5000 years forward. And spend about 100 of the remaining 200 pages describing the new society and the cool things they've built.
It's been awhile since I've been able to enjoy a new Stephenson book. This didn't change that. Shame, because I really liked Diamond Age and Snow Crash.

Also, for the 1941 Retro Hugos:
The Ill-Made Knight (part of the Once and Future King) Far more twee than I remembered it. Too many asides to the reader, somehow both condescending both to the reader and the characters.

Currently in the middle of Slan, one of the classics that I'd never read. Holds up pretty well as an adventure story, if nothing else. I suspect a lot that was new and exciting at the time is now kind of stale, but it still reads well.

You thought SevenEves dragged? I thought it read like an edge of your seat, worldwide extinction level event techno-thriller. And then the last section got all the more awesome!

I guess I'm just saying I totally appreciated the way Doctor Doob's point-of-view narration personalized the first two sections, and really enjoyed the OSR hex crawl of the third section, but no harm, no foul if you liked a different book more. :)

Kaladin_Stormblessed wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Kaladin_Stormblessed wrote:
As far as the mind control thing, by the rules and the intention of the setting, it's not evil. Many people can think that, but there are a lot of enchantments that don't have the Evil descriptor. I do think some of them should, notably Murderous Command, but the point is, very few do. Charm Person? Not evil. Suggestion? Not evil. Dominate Person, not evil. You're free to disagree, but it's not just my opinion you're disagreeing with. Kinda hard to argue that I'm wrong for agreeing with the game itself.

Just because they don't have [Evil] next to them doesn't mean that using them willy nilly isn't evil. Just not inherently evil.

After all, Fireball isn't [Evil], but chucking it around the town square on market day certainly would be.

All I'm trying to say is that I think a simple Mass Suggestion of "drop the flowers" would be a sufficiently LG solution in this case.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it sounds like you're speaking in the hypothetical while Grumbaki is describing an experience he had while playing at the table, you know?

It's also been explained several times by several Paizo staffers that Mengkare probably isn't Lawful Good, no matter how gold a dragon he is. (Though I think "monsters of LG" Is a more interesting way to handle the character, personally.)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't call any of the OP's actions unlawful or ungood, but I'm also one of those annoying people who think that players and GMs should have a conversation about alignment before play begins.

I don't know about investment being off topic; I bought some eldar shadow hunter escorts off Ebay UK for a cool $40 as compare to $70 on Ebay US, thanks mostly to the drop in value of the pound. That's the only way the Brexit has any effect on my life, outside entertainment value. (No offense UK readers.)

Edit: Whoopsy-daisy, wrong thread. It's still factual though, so l'm editing instead of deleting. :P

Wait, has this conversation taken a turn where the libertarians who hate big government are in favor of the federal government dictating the items state government can and can't tax?

Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Jessica Price wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:

With today's kids, I wonder how many of them will get the name reference much less understand the relation of it to the movie.

I think the naming could be quite thought provoking considering what the original Birth of a Nation was about and the results of Nat Turner Rebellion was.

It is a way to give reflection, and in that reflection, consider how much we have changed today, and yet how much we still have not.

"Today's kids"?

As likely to recognize the name as the Baby Boomers or anyone born after them. Possibly MORE likely, given that the internet exists.

Kids today, the world has gone mad today and good's bad today and black's white today and day's night today! I wonder how many of today's kids will even recognize the song I'm referencing, much less understand its place in the show it is a part of. Probably not many, given that the show opened in 1934 and today's booming babies were all born between 1943 and 1960.

And Anything Goes is still more recent than Birth of a Nation.

Okay, but you're mixing the lyrics of "Kids" from Bye Bye Birdie with "Anything Goes" by Cole Porter.

I can't imagine there will be much media discussion of this movie without a reference to the first.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The quote by the French Home Office isn't substantiated by the article, though. His father says he wasn't religious, but that he had been medicated in the past because of his violent behavior. If there's evidence of his radicalization, that is what it is, but killing 84 people by driving a truck into a crowd isn't evidence in and of itself.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

From the reports I've heard, there's no evidence of ideology playing any part in this aside from Daesh claiming credit for the attack. I'm not saying we should deny evidence when it's there, but let's not assume a very troubled guy who committed suicide by cop had any other agenda.

thegreenteagamer wrote:

When 2/3 of the people don't vote because they're dissatisfied with the two options in front of them, I'd say 3rd parties have a place in our system. So many people say they don't vote for a third party because they can't possibly win - but considering how many Americans are independent, they actually can.

Whether in the long term they will remain, frankly, I don't care. (Okay, I do care, but not nearly as much as I care about this particular election having a third option.) All I care about is right now, I have two choices in front of me that are, to be blunt, horrible, and I absolutely, vehemently, and totally refuse to give a vote to either one of them. I'm absolutely not going to vote for someone I find a villain just because their opponent is a super villain.

The 2/3 were primary turnout numbers though, right? I just feel like primaries are a totally craptasijc model for the general, you know?

Edit: That's right, I spelled craptastic with a J, for the sake of my eastern european kith and kin. :P

Brain Blessed was always the version in my head, but he's getting a bit long in tooth at this point. Also, a calm considered Brian Blessed, who wasn't spitting all over everything all the time like Boss Nass.

Kryzbyn wrote:
How about we don't charge sales tax on food/groceries?

Already there in Rhode Island.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not to be a dingus, but everyone reading this knows the difference between a Fiduciary and a Financial Counselor, right?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
"Some kind of change" doesn't necessitate privatization, though, does it? You could just as easily raise the retirement age as hand the whole thing over to the private sector, right?
I, for one, don't want to be f!%~ing 80 by the time I can retire. My parents generation already had it bumped back, and they keep bumping it back more and more.

I don't want it either, but I'm willing to put in the time I have to keep the system functioning, you know? As Iron has pointed out, raising the retirement age isn't the only option.

My point is that privatization is a horrible idea. The private entity is only there to skim profits off the top of your nest egg.

"Some kind of change" doesn't necessitate privatization, though, does it? You could just as easily raise the retirement age as hand the whole thing over to the private sector, right?

Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Wow. Did the Trump/Pence campaign staff design their new logo in WordArt or MS Paint? All it's missing is a cameo by a Mike Judge character.
The jokes just write themselves.

Seriously, whoever designed that logo was not a Trump fan. Or maybe Pence was the issue, but you get my point.

MeanMutton wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
ChucklesMcTruck wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
As a skilled chef you could get any result you wanted from filet mignon to burnt to a crisp.
That actually makes a lot more sense to me. You'd be skilled enough to fake being terrible.

As a lifelong cook, I'll have to politely disagree, and go with the "Bluff" crowd.


Because it's not just about making something taste bad, or cooking it too long. It's about handling the knife poorly. About bumping into people, and pretending you don't hear the "music of the kitchen". It's about being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and pretending that you don't know where to look to find an ingredient, or pretending you don't even know what the ingredients are.

In my mind, to my somewhat-trained eye, the difference between watching a professional chef pretending to be bad and a true novice would be palpable and obvious. But it's because I know my way around a kitchen.

I'd give the professional chef a significant bonus to his/her Bluff if none of the observers had "Profession: Cook". +4 maybe?

If no one is watching you, you're telling me that you can't make an over-spiced chicken breast that's burnt on the outside and raw on the inside with some over-boiled veggies and under-cooked potatoes?

And then there was the time one of the waitresses at my restaurant (work at, not own) said to the cook, "Hey Charles? I just got another complaint about the tuna, but I think they just don't know what "seared" means; comp their drinks?"

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I bet it is, Icy, I bet it is. It's a pretty fricken strange thing to watch from the perspective of a US citizen, too.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, instead of calling Clinton by an epithet, we should just call her "Rodham"? :P

1 to 50 of 3,314 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.