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

Hitdice's page

2,315 posts (2,525 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 6 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,315 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'll let my individually purchased d3, d5, d7, d14 and d30, and my set of Zocchi dice speak for me, Ross. Not to mention my homemade-from-sculpey d2. :)


Sad news. :(


It's funny. I enjoy the the variety you get from microbreweries (oops, dating myself, they're called craft brews now) but a good amount of the time it seems like there's been no quality control whatsoever, and they're just trying to market a disastrous recipe as the latest thing for hipsters. Of course, there's no accounting for taste, my own included.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
I wondering if Williamson would have been fine at all if he had been speaking privately rather than doing an interview for public broadcast.

He would have. Public performance is a necessary element under the German law, at least as Wikipedia translated it.

That was a typo, actually. I meant to write "fined at all" (as in found guilty), but dropped the D, so I guess it's all my fault if the thread gets entirely incomprehensible. :P


Y'know, thinking about ridiculing nazis, I just went and read an article about stage production of The Producers in Germany. Given that they replaced the swastikas on the posters with pretzels, but kept them in the performance, now I wondering if Williamson would have been fined at all if he had been speaking privately rather than doing an interview for public broadcast.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thing is, I don't think anyone who's posted in this thread is advocating the instatement of such laws here in the US, just recognizing that 1) the law exists in Germany, and 2) First Amendment rights in the US are more nuanced than "I can say whatever I want and nuts to all the legal consequences."

My real issue with this thread is RD's title: The Holocaust is a fact of history, not an accepted truth, and Williamson isn't ignorant about anything, he's speaking with an agenda.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I don't support the bourgeois state's right to legislate historical truth, even against Holocaust deniers.
Oddly enough, that's not what "the bourgeois state" is doing with Holocaust denial laws, any more than the Pure Food and Drug Act legislated recipes.

No? Well, if the government were to pass a law which made denial of a historical event a crime, even if it was the Holocaust, and they asked me what I thought, I'd say, "No.".

Jeez, Doodles, you almost make it sound like you're in favor of voting. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
OK, these are really long, so I'll spoiler them.

I knew you were just in it for the footnotes! :P


Sissyl wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Hitdice wrote:

If we can take a step back, I'd like to ask a question raised by the thread title: Does anyone on either side of this discussion think that Bishop Richard Williamson is being punished for ignorance of accepted facts?

I really, really don't think that's what went on there.

Williamson is a disgusting creep. He knew what he was doing, and why. He deserved suffering for doing it... but he still shouldn't have been sentenced for it, ideally. As it is... a fine isn't going to change much.

This is a real question Sis, not snark. What sort of suffering do you find appropriate?

I'm speaking as WASP-ey as WASP can be US citizen who's needed a trip the hospital after getting in a fist fight with neo-nazis at a party in my own home. Make of that what you will.

Hmmm... if we're meting out fantasy punishments, quite immune to silly rules about cruelty and unusualness, I figure something like a Clockwork Orange Eye-opening Rig (tm), some rope, a chair, a TV, a DVD player, some Teletubbies discs, and a month or two.

Seriously, people like him are a large part of why it can be difficult to speak out for freedom of speech. Well educated ultraconservative fanatics really do say the darndest things. Moreover, people LISTEN to them. I guess what I would really want him to go through is understanding how vile his beliefs are. Sadly, he's a fanatic, and one of the perks of that is not having to doubt yourself.

I am sorry I don't have a better answer. Fining him will probably make him proud.

Hey, no worries; I'm proud of a lot of the immature dumb s**t I did, too. :P

Edit: Or rather, whether or not it makes him proud, he'll certainly use it for political hay.


Sissyl wrote:
Hitdice wrote:

If we can take a step back, I'd like to ask a question raised by the thread title: Does anyone on either side of this discussion think that Bishop Richard Williamson is being punished for ignorance of accepted facts?

I really, really don't think that's what went on there.

Williamson is a disgusting creep. He knew what he was doing, and why. He deserved suffering for doing it... but he still shouldn't have been sentenced for it, ideally. As it is... a fine isn't going to change much.

This is a real question Sis, not snark. What sort of suffering do you find appropriate?

I'm speaking as WASP-ey as WASP can be US citizen who's needed a trip the hospital after getting in a fist fight with neo-nazis at a party in my own home. Make of that what you will.


If we can take a step back, I'd like to ask a question raised by the thread title: Does anyone on either side of this discussion think that Bishop Richard Williamson is being punished for ignorance of accepted facts?

I really, really don't think that's what went on there.


Andrew, man, you're ranting. You've gone from "the nation directly responsible for the Holocaust has laws against denying its existence" to "facts make seizure of firearms from civilian owners inevitable." Just chill, man.


NPCs, but sure, nearly every time I see a mini I like. Whether or not said NPCs ever make it into a game, and whether or not all my efforts are wasted is something I'd rather not consider; RPG prep is a process, not an end unto itself. :P


Aesop's fable? Why the frick would I bother to include a moral? :P More seriously, how is it a planet of hats if it's not all tulips all the time everywhere?

My issue with using real Europe for how well it hangs together is that at a certain point it limits your story options with all the history. This is a particularly a problem with with level based games like D&D and PF; at a high enough level the only way you can reconcile that sort of influence with the historical record is to pull a "I guess everyone's been calling me Charlemagne the whole time, or something?"


Doug, do you think that a first generation millionaire (who could very well be someone who inherited $990,000 after taxes and owned $11,000 of their own beforehand) is even in the top 10%?

That's an honest question, but I've got to say that at this point someone with a million dollars in assets is not riding around in their lear jet and eating lobster every night for dinner. I wouldn't be surprised if they're within the middle class tax bracket, tbh.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Orf, can I ask if you feel you should only use those reference books in a historical setting? I'm asking cause Ars Magica isn't the pseudo-medieval not-europe of Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms, it's Europe. Like, Europe Europe.

Personally, even though my home brew D&D setting is ostensibly somewhere on a planet in the Traveller universe (or Star Wars sometimes, there was a d20 system for that), I have no compunctions whatsoever about using history such as the Dutch tulip bubble of 1637 for world building fodder, because having the continent's strongest economy fail because of over valued flowers is just awesome.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not to mention, labor as in repaving roads so everyone can drive on them, or "labor" as in signing an endorsement deal because you're a media figure. 'Cause one of those actually holds our society together in a functional way, and the other is something we all ignore if we can't fast forward our DVR through it, and guess which one earns the big bucks?


Toldja that wedding would be fun! :P


Those are good points, Three. When I said I was curious about sample size and what not, my (badly phrased) point was that if the 16% of the population come from populations indigenous to environments with venomous animals like the ones pictured in the article, then yes, it's an evolutionary advantage as surely as lactose tolerance is in the northern european gene pool. If, on the other hand, it's a completely random distribution across the entire world's population, it's probably just some weird quirk that doesn't do enough harm to get bred out of the gene pool, like Krensky talked about.


Coriat wrote:

I actually enjoy pulling fairly heavily from real-world cultures. Partially because there is just so much more inspiration to draw from, and especially with religion. So often, fantasy gods are single-faceted... but I digress. This doesn't mean you have to copy real geography I agree.

I don't really have a problem with taking inspiration from foreign versions of other cultures' myths as opposed to originals, though. An upcoming Egyptian/Sumerian/Akkadian/Persian mishmash type of character ( :O Orientalism salad!) is going to be taking as much inspiration from Apuleius as from the Isis and Re papyri.

I don't think there's anything wrong with drawing inspiration from real world sources. Orientalism salad sounds very, very tasty!

I guess at a certain point I do start to wonder if dedicated asian themed supplements do more harm than good. In the case of AD&D, I never felt that the selection of classes in the 1e player's handbook couldn't be used for an asian themed campaign, so having a supplement called Oriental Adventures felt like some sort of misguided attempt at segregation masquerading as open mindedness. On the other hand, I'm pretty impressed by Spears of the Dawn, so maybe I'm just a big fat hypocrite.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:

I am not sure if it is exactly Orientalism, but when fantasy maps always put Africans south of the main adventuring area, Arabs to the east and Asians to the far east, I can't help but feel it is highly unoriginal.

As someone who has built worlds and made maps that is very lazy. I was disappointed to see Golarion did that. Real world ethnic geography doesn't have to be copied!

As I've mentioned elsewhere on these boards, I went through several years of playing Traveller, when I remade my D&D campaign setting under the that system. Since then the three major human ethnicities in my world have been have been much closer Solomani, Vilani and Zhodani than anything historical. Point being, you're right about the maps, but there's no requirement to copy real world cultures, either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Would there happen to be any anchovies served on that pepperoni pizza doused with chocolate sauce? I like anchovies.


Well, given the commonality of poisonous snakes on every fricken single continent, getting spooked by a snake slithering towards you is actually fairly appropriate, evolutionarily speaking.

The question is, are patterns terrifying like poisonous snakes? I don't think so. I think patterns look like a tiled floor and a pile of wood to burn inside it all winter long.


I'm curious about how Cole (oops, the article's author actually, only the first sentence of that paragraph is a quote) describes feeling revulsion at such patterns as a evolutionary advantage, while only 16% of the population feels that revulsion. Doesn't that mean that 84% of us have ancestors who managed to survive to add to the gene pool without evolving said phobia? I'm curious about sample size and whatnot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Hitdice wrote:

I don't disagree with any of your post, jeff, and I certainly can't talk about the specifics of DM's esperience, but if a PC of good alignment decides to kill noncombatants out of expediency, the GM's description of feeling guilty may well be the hint that there should have been a more diplomatic approach, rather than a political correctness fueled guilt trip.

Don't get me wrong, around the gaming table, if it's a choice between subtlety and player comprehension, player comprehension should win every time.

Well it got weirder. Not only were we guilt-tripped, but the dm ended up turning the mothers and children into swarms, so rather than clean it all up and make the region actually safe from the critters, we got rid of the males but left some rather dangerous swarms with memories of slaughter and trauma. At our very low level, it was just too much trouble to get rid of the swarms, and then there was the dm trying to guilt us.

So we went home, mission accomplished, and left the region in danger. :/

PS: I really like negotiation quests and for demihumans to be complex creatures involved in the politics of the region, but the above just got weird.

I think I read about that in an episode of KoDT. :P


I don't disagree with any of your post, jeff, and I certainly can't talk about the specifics of DM's esperience, but if a PC of good alignment decides to kill noncombatants out of expediency, the GM's description of feeling guilty may well be the hint that there should have been a more diplomatic approach, rather than a political correctness fueled guilt trip.

Don't get me wrong, around the gaming table, if it's a choice between subtlety and player comprehension, player comprehension should win every time.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:
I recall a dm wanted to be politically correct once after we had finished a quest. So, kobolds had been attacking caravans, eating people, damaging trade in the region. After we exterminated almost all of them, the dm started trying to play up the we should feel guilty about killing them. It was very weird, but a mark of political correctness and notions of victimhood encroaching on a game with typical quests that were older than the pc ideas. Don't kill the murdering kobolds, their young and wives might feel bad and then you should feel bad now that they are victims. Urgh.

To be fair, PCs were ignoring that sort of moral dilemma for years before political correctness really got going. I mean, Moldvay Basic has a picture of three PCs arguing about the fate of a captive goblin right next to the alignment section.


Werthead wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
(How do people who live on a planet without regular seasons even invent the concept of a year? You'd have to ask GRRM himself.)
They simply count the number of times the moon circles the planet: twelve times makes one year. The jury's out on if this means their year is slightly shorter than ours or if Martinworld's lunar orbits fit the year more exactly than ours do.

Well, but, if they didn't have a regular season cycle to measure the moon cycles against, what sets the common standard of how many times the moon circles the planet. Look, GRRM hasn't even said, maybe the planet's not spherical at all, maybe it's got more of a Pratchett shape to it.

Happy to see the return of Ser Dontos.


James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:

How would feel about a Paizo version of Touched by an Angel? One featuring the angelic empyreal lords?

(I've been meaning to start a thread about that. Best get to finishing it up.)

I'd like to think that the first Paizo TV show would be more like Game of Thrones and less like Touched by an Angel.

How 'bout we split the difference and call it Touched by an Illegitimate, Sadistic . . . y'know what, never mind.


I can't say that old school D&D taught me how tough any given monster was. (Well, not without countless hours spent pouring over the Monster Manual.) It did teach me (like, within three sessions) that attacking every single monster you meet and expecting survive because you're the protagonist and they're the monster is unrealistic.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
We don't know how advanced the citadel has gotten with its astronomy.

On Earth, the neolithic builders of stonehenge were accurately predicting eclipses. The Maya invented a base 20 number system specifically for astronomy, and the Dresden Codex had tables of predicted eclipses, appearances of the morning star (venus), retrograde motions of mars, etc.

Given that Westeros is far more advanced than either of these, and that their survival is more immediately linked to the seasons, it would be absurd if they weren't at least that advanced.

But if long winters are a direct result of magic cold spreading from the White Walkers, for example, then astronomy has no bearing on the seasons and it makes no difference how advanced it is. And given that one of the former moons was actually a giant dragon egg, one shouldn't take actual astronomy too seriously when dealing with ASOIAF.

But they have comets! Something as regularly occurring as a comet suggests a whole bunch stuff in a nerd's brain, astronomically speaking.

More seriously (but not that seriously, cause, y'know, magic) if the seasonal variation were tied to the axial tilt, long summers would be as bad as long winters. Westeros has just been through an 8 year summer, and everyone has spent the whole time growing food to store for the winter because the middle 4 years weren't made up of the sun beating down on drought stricken fields for 24 hours a day.

Did they ever even name Ice in the TV series? I'm not sure they did, but I loved the way the intro left no doubt whatsoever as to what was going on there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what kind of an orbit the planet must have, to have variable seasons on a year-to-year basis. Realistically, there would have to be a binary star system involved, and some kind of weird figure-8 thing going on, but the books don't mention two suns, and even in such a system the progression would be predictable, not random. So the real answer has to be "it's magic," because physics doesn't really allow it.

For a while there I was trying to come up with an answer involving tidal locking, axial tilt and no little orbital wobble, but even an astrophysics neophyte such as myself is fairly sure any planet like that would have torn itself up into an asteroid belt millennia before the Andals had a chance to invade Westeros, never mind Aegon the conquerer. So yeah, "it's magic" works.

Anyhow, I enjoyed last night's episode. Wedding bells next week, fun-fun.


Everyone's younger in the books. I don't have then in front of me atm, but I think the first book is set 13 years after the war. As I remember, Ned Stark's in his thirties in the books, and, nothing against seeing him the role, Sean Bean is most assuredly not at this point.

(How do people who live on a planet without regular seasons even invent the concept of a year? You'd have to ask GRRM himself.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Y'know TOZ, sometimes you're just as willfully unhelpful as I am. Yes, willfully. :P


The thing that made Superman a superhero was all the times he got shot by criminals, right in the chest, and the bullets bounced off!! Popeye was doing that junk years beforehand, and coming back with the pithy line, "Whattya these're button holes?"

I guess I'm saying that super-powers work at a certain level of absurdity that can only really exist in the funny papers.


Okay, sure, so long as you've read Thimble Theatre, I think we're probably on the same page. I just think it's really tough to think of a definition of superhero that doesn't include Popeye, and he predates Superman. Then again, if you want to call Popeye the first superanti-hero, I'm fine with that. :)


I retract my earlier statement, now I think it's going to be called Bastard Sword of Not Getting Your Panties in a Twist. Seriously dude, they've got a techno-magic sword slated for publication, and I doubt the item description will say "...this looks nothing like an energy sword, just to bother Tels..."


Fine, here's a question: Have you ever seen Source Code? Same director as Moon.


When you say earliest Popeye strips, are you talking about when the strip was called Popeye ('cause the character was so popular that Segar renamed it), or have you read it from the beginning, back when it was just about the lives and loves of the Oyl family under the title Thimble Theatre? Thimble Theatre struggled along for years and years, but once Segar introduced Popeye, the world demanded that he rename the comic and license it for cartoons, like, immediately.

Anyhow, my point was that everyone (critics) ignores Popeye in the genealogy of superheroes just the way they (critics again) ignore the Oz books in the development of the fantasy genre.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Man, f**k Storm; I'd still be relevant too, if I stuck around that many white people!"

Classic.


James Jacobs wrote:
Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Paladinosaur wrote:

James,

will the technology guide have some sort of laser sword so I can roll a Paladin Jedi for Iron Gods?

Nope.

Fortunately, there are plenty of d20 compatible Star Wars games to choose from for that.

Or you can just make it a brilliant energy weapon.

How... how can you guys do sci-fi technology and not include an energy sword!?

Easy. By not doing a Star Wars game, and not wanting to make it feel like a Star Wars game.

Don't get me wrong. There IS a magical tech sword in the book. you can see the guy in the Inner Sea World Guide wielding it. But it's not a renamed light sabre.

I think you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot with that decision and you're going to receive a lot of flak over it. It's just, energy swords are so very prevalent in science fictions, it's almost a crime not to have them.

The real reason? I don't want there to be energy swords in the book, frankly. That's not the right flavor for Numeria. Star Wars is not the correct inspiration for it, and an energy sword is SO ICONICALLY Star Wars that it would make it be Star Wars.

There are no "energy swords" in The Road Warrior, or Alien, or Event Horizon, or District 9, or Robocop, or The Terminator, or Avatar, or Moon, or The Time Machine, or any number of countless other excellent science-fiction stories, and they don't suffer for the lack of it.

JJ, you've stolen my heart by mentioning Moon in the same sentence as Avatar. Yes, I'm a very cheap date, with low standards. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aw man, I thought we were talking about about novelizations of the HBO series!

But seriously, I'm not sure it's possible to overstate the importance of the Oz books. It's similar to the way everyone calls Superman the first superhero, and completely discounts Popeye, who's been doing super powered stuff in a newspaper strip (without eating spinach, most of the time) for around a decade before Superman was published.


I did have a bit of a WTF moment when I realized that Paladins and Rangers both had access to Fighting Styles, which I'd thought of as a Fighter class feature. Sometimes it feels as if Fighters are consigned to a "Paladin/Ranger minus options" role whichever edition we're in. Personally I'm with damage on a miss and all the rest, I just want them to be unique to fighters.


Indeed, that was a joke. At no point did I seriously intend for anyone to think there was any level on which the concept of Bastard Sword of Non-Copyright Infringement was an actual part of the design process.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess that depends how much WotC tries to link play style to the mechanics of 5E. Publishing a simple and versatile set of core rules with supplements to suit various play styles seems like a pretty viable solution, but I've also got to admit that I've never found my groups play style dictated by which edition we were playing.


Kirth, if this going to be the last update for a while, I'd love a copy. (I mean, I doubt I'll be able to pull my group away from D&D Next before the release of 5E, but why not try.)

Email:
cfc23@cox.net

Well, jeez Toz, that campaign just writes itself, doesn't it? :P


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven "Troll" O'Neal wrote:
Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Paladinosaur wrote:

James,

will the technology guide have some sort of laser sword so I can roll a Paladin Jedi for Iron Gods?

Nope.

Fortunately, there are plenty of d20 compatible Star Wars games to choose from for that.

Or you can just make it a brilliant energy weapon.

Just in case anyone missed it from his Ask thread, there will be no laser swords in the technology guide.

I feel like someone just kicked my puppy. COSMO!!

But a lightsaber isn't a laser sword. It's plasma held in a cohesive blade shape by electromagnets. In either case I am disappointed. I guess we could just re-spec any of the bladed weapons to do fire/electric damage, I'm partial to the rapier for that one.

Don't worry, JJ has also said there are going to be stats for the technic league captain's green glowing bubble sword, it's just that it's totally not a lightsaber. Like, at all. I think it's going to be called Bastard Sword of Non Copyright Infringement.


Okay, but Next wasn't promised to deliver all play styles in the world ever. The designers said they wanted to create an edition of D&D that would allow groups to play in a similar style of any previous edition of D&D.

Look, you've mentioned Savage Worlds, and I think you'd enjoy GURPs from what you said here; it certainly sounds like you prefer systems which allow much more customization than D&D does, which is fine. Anyone playing RPGs should find a system that suits their preferences, rather than play one that doesn't.

But the title of this thread asks how a new edition could be designed to allow for all play styles, not a system. Given that it's also in the 4E (and beyond) section, we're pretty obviously talking about D&D, with all the mechanics that brings to mind, instead of why we prefer our ideal systems.


Hitomi, I'm not saying you can't enjoy a classless system (although, if GURPS uses classes, that system has changed a lot since I last played it) but there are certain expectations built into the D&D brand, and anyone who has is even slightly familiar with D&D (as in, played for less than 6 months 30 years ago) is going to think of classes when they think of D&D. Hell, given the popularity of the B/X edition, they might be a bit confused about the differences between classes and races, but they'll remember classes.

I'm not saying you shouldn't enjoy RPGs with classless character creation, but continually posting about on a thread about D&D 5E's appeal to fans of various previous editions is about as pertinent to the topic as if I started yammering on about how much I enjoyed playing Classic Traveller, so 5E should be a space opera setting with tech levels, and anyone who wants a standard D&D game can just play on a low tech world; simpler for everyone and objectively better!

Edit: Six and a half hours go by, and I get ninja by Jeremy in the last five minutes; there's no justice.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well Hitomi, no insult, but that probably means you'd rather play a non-D&D system to begin with, right?

1 to 50 of 2,315 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.