|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Tanith, I don't mean to be disrespectful, or snarky; I certainly don't think you're doing it wrong, but I'm very curious as to how a marriage between multiple parters would function legally. Same sex marriage never required changing the legal function of marriage, where including multiple partners would. I'm thinking particularly of pre-nuptual agreements and divorce.
I'm not saying multiple partnership shouldn't be accorded legal status, but that I think one of the reasons same-sex marriage gained federal recognition was because it was simply including same sex couples in an existing legal status. Hell, don't ask me, maybe all I'm saying is that getting bigamy decriminalized is the first step.
I read some reviews before I saw the season premier, and was completely unconfused when I watched it, despite having heard only that it was too fragmented and nihilistic for the human consciousness to comprehend. This one has me just as intrigued as the first did, but I think it's important to remember how little the first season premier (that is, just the first hour of season 1) defined. I think the lackluster reviews are a result of reviewers comparing the emotional-closure-gestalt-experience of having seen the entire first season with the vast, open-ended WTF?! of having watched only the first episode of either.
When writing his novel about William Shakespeare, Nothing Like the Sun, Anthony Burgess only used words that appear in texts written by Shakespeare - and he did it on a typewriter.
Did Burgess do that on purpose, or was it just that Shakespeare had used so many words that "vocabularic range" wasn't issue? (I assume the typewriter thing is A historical artifact.)
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Just "it," Orf, just "it."
SCIENCE WILL NEVER BE GENDER SPECIFIC!!
(Sorries to Katie!)
Weird theory: The gods of the north are real. They just happen to be that one wizard looking through the weirwoods. What if the other gods in the series are just powerful wizards, Like Rhlor looking through fires and communicating with his followers?
That is interesting, if only because we've seen Bran warg into a weirwood to receive visions of the past and future. I was as interested to see that when the warlocks of Qarth gave Dany a vision of the iron throne, it was Joffrey's interior decoration, which she had no way of knowing about.
Mel seems to be a pretty unreliable prophet; every time she sees a vision of banners aflame, she assumes it means victory for the red god, whereas given the the track record in Westeros, it's just as likely that everyone's gonna die in a house fire. :P
Remember Elfquest? It had a magnet and magic! But the magic was more like psychic powers, and then at the end it was revealed that the elves were aliens all along, and you knew it was science fiction because in their original form the elves only had one nostril. One nostril!!
Look, it's been like 30 years, I'm not going to spoiler it.
Yes, but let me just say that "rightful" is a fuzzy-edged concept in Westeros, to say the least.
Book and TV series alike, it would appear that the War of the Five Kings has ended rather conclusively in favor of the extant monarch in King's Landing; then again, they haven't really handled the Iron Isles on TV, have they?
Look, don't ask me, I don't trust genre conventions (or even the previously established plot, for that matter) when it come to Game of Thrones!
ZOMG, Dolorous Edd wasn't at the stabbing! Never mind Mel, Edd could, like, stumble over his body and nurse him back to life, and Ser Allister would be so ashamed of himself, that, um, I guess he'd, like, blame it all on Ollie and let Mel burn the kid at the stake, or something?
. . .
Sometimes, it gets sort of hard to find a happy ending for the TV series, but a few more minor characters have survived thus far in the books.
I don't mean to be snarky (well, not that snarky), but weren't you going outside every single existing parameter of the rules when you invented the Thief class back in 1974? I don't understand why a person who invented new material that early in the game's use would be a proponent of limitation rather than experimentation.
I...I don't know what to think about that ending or the EW interviews with the producers and Kit after the episode. I don't know if I am being trolled by the showrunners or if I need to flip every table in Michigan right now.
Given the show's increased body count as compared to the books, I'd start looking for tables. I'd stick to the mitten though; the way I hear it, those yoopers are worse than wildings!
Doodles, Kindred is probably the least science fiction-ey of Butler's stuff. You want the Xenogenesis trilogy, or the Patternmaster series. Actually, wait, if you want something that pinkos can wax [insert whatever emotion you types get off on; socio-economic melancholia, I guess?] try The Parable of the Sower and The Parable of the Talents.
Random(ish) question relating to setting integrity and whatnot: Does anyone here play in a group where different people run games in the same campaign world? That is, with revolving GMs who detail the world? I haven't lately, but I have in the past.
Of course, I'm one of those GMs who gets bored with my world map every couple of years and redraws it, so my setting integrity bar is set pretty low.
I am thinking that we will need a 3 hour episode to wrap up the stuff they need to, cause I am not seeing a single hour being able to do it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I was pretty impressed with how concise the Hardhome scene was. They could have made it a single scene episode ala episodes 9 of season 2 and 4 (The Battle of Blackwater and the Battle of the Wall, in case I've got the numbering wrong), but instead . . .
Episode 8 had new characters (all the wildings who spoke at the negotiation), new information (it's been mentioned as lore in the books, but I think this is the first time valerian steel killing the others just like dragonglass has been introduced as a concept) and plot points (the Night's King [thanks for the info, BNW, I'd forgotten] isn't just some weirdo who transforms sacrificed Craster-sons, he's a dude with an agenda, and probably the BBEG of the whole series).
The TV adaptation did all that in a half hour or so. D&D (and their staff of writers, fine) do a very pithy adaptation. I really wouldn't put it past them to cram a lot into the season finale.
I'm thinking Theon will remember his name in time to help Brienne rescue Sansa and flee to Castle Black. Sansa will tell Jon Snow that Bran and Ricon are still alive. Jon and Sam are all like, "Dude, we know, but Bran's above the wall." Davos, who's still there 'cause Stannis sent him, goes, "I've lost Shireen to that crazy burn-them-at-the-stake witch lady, but never again! Brienne, let's go rescue Ricon, I'm worried about his king's blood liability!!"
At that point, the TV show's plot development will be very close to that of the books. How much they can fit into a single episode depends on the pacing, but I think there's room for a dragon riding Khaleesi in the hour I've just described. :P
I mean, I'd be perfectly satisfied to watch a 3 hour season finale, I just don't have enough popcorn in the house. :)
Just for looks, I think; having Jon show up at the head of the refugee wildings, and get into a 700 foot staring contest with Ser Allister Thorne to open the gate, is much more dramatic than just showing up in Castle Black's courtyard. Speaking of whom, I love what they've done with Thorne this season. It seems like his loyalty to the Watch outweighs his hate of Jon, which, when you've established him as such a sonofab~@*#, is character development gold.
Then again, (and you'll know what this means if you know what it means) "For the Watch!"
I guess it's in the vital statistics section where there's no mention of weight increasing with level? :P
Edit: What's funny is, today's Unearthed Arcana at the WotC site has variant rules for Vitality in place of hit points; I'll be right over here re-inventing the wheel lol.
My problem with HP = meat has always been that characters don't increase their bone and muscle density as they gain hit points, however wacky the physics of the D&D world have to be to account for falling damage. Although, in the time it took me to write the previous sentence, I've decided that I'm perfectly fine with CON = meat, and a house rule allowing critical hits to do the regular weapon damage as Constitution ability damage.
Marc Radle wrote:
In the books, Tyrion hasn't yet met Daenerys face to face; as I remember, he and Jorah are outside Mareen with an army laying siege to the city, when Tyrion, in his last POV section, gets a terrific idea for how to impress Daenerys.
The scene with Drogon in the arena takes place earlier the book. There's at least one scene where Selmy (still alive) is running the city in Danys' name, while the nobles argue that she's portably dead, from being eaten or dropped by Drogon, and he thinks, "I'm pretty sure she was riding that dragon, and Targaryens don't really fall off of dragons." The book ends with a Dany POV section at Drogon's lair out in the Dothraki plains, where Danys says, "The Dothraki really didn't respect me after Khal Drogo died, but I bet a big huge dragon changes their minds."
Sleeping on the couch with your underpants on, though, right? Seriously, it's important an important question if your roommates come home early . . .
You've just reminded me of the first time I saw The Last Samurai, when Tom Cruise delivered the line, "You have no idea what their weapons can do!" That movie purported to be historical, but I was all, "Actually, in that era, I'm pretty sure the Japanese were very familiar with the various uses of gunpowder."
Historical accuracy vs fantasy plausibility is always an interesting proposition, but here in the land of RPGs, I think we should put more value on plausibility than accuracy.
From everything she's said, she's just going to keep writing Foreigner until she keels over in front of her word processor, like O'Brian and the Aubrey-Maturin series. (Though I imagine O'Brian dying at a typewriter, 'cause he's old school.)
I have, since my last post on this thread, manage to get ahold of The Goblin Mirror, which I enjoyed.
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
Video games in middles school?! In middle school, you should have been reading Philip Jose Farmer's werewolf (um, and a lot of other stuff) porn. That's what I was doing!
Sorry, what was that about a lifelong psychological impact? Well, I think I turned out fine, so I guess I don't recognize the premise of your question!
It might only be tangentially related to the thread topic, but reading the last few post I realized something: I was 10 or 11 when I started playing D&D. (Moldvay Basic, if anyone's asking.) It's not that I was some maladjusted social misfit, It's that Idd barely had the experience to develop a personality at all.
But playing RPGs (that, is sitting around a table, engaging with a group of people) is a social activity. D&D is where I learned how to relate with others, and I'm a better person for having played the game.
I guess I'm saying that caring about D&D being nerdy is something you grow out of, but I don't want to turn this into a "It Gets Better' promo.
Does anyone know what the deal is with Destructive Wave? It is listed as a 5th level evocation spell but is not on any class's spell list unless you count the Tempest Domain spells granted at 9th level. I wonder if this spell is really intended to only be available to that one specific cleric domain.
Destructive Smite is listed as a 5th level Paladin spell, but lacks a spell description. I assume they renamed it to avoid confusion with the class ability, but whoever proofread the class lists didn't get the memo. On the other hand, Banishing Smite is called that in both places, so don't ask me.
LazarX, Dragonchess Player, please have this this conversation in the Gamer Life fora, movies or books, your choice. :)
Kobold Press released PF and 4e versions of Courts of the Shadow Fey. In the PF version only the new monsters are listed as open game content, and I haven't seen the 4e version, but I assume that counts as an OGL 4e product. I think Goodman Games may have had a bunch of 4e adventures published using the OGL rather than the GSL, but don't quote me on that.
I don't really think D&D even can have downfall at this point; D&D might be no more popular than cribbage in the next century, but at least D&D has named the genre, if you see what I mean. Let me say, I'd love to see a world where the public recognized "polyhedral dice games" the same way they do "card games," but at this point I feel like it's D&D vs "Things Normal People Do."
James Jacobs wrote:
Do you ever feel like level-based, skill-rank progression is a less than functional way to handle language comprehension? I know I do! (It's not a rules question exactly, but I will never forget the first time I read the Speak Language entry in the 3.0 PHB and wondered, "How is fluency a skill rather than a feat?")
I feel like there's a very quiet genre joke in the placement of the Tinkertown Municipal Waste Disposal Facility over a lava chasm, and the composition of Crystal's death being so similar to Gollum's.
I would have loved to see Crystal and Thog wander off into the sunset to populate the world with a generation of tertiary colored stock villains, but I guess that's just not in the cards.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
No, I'm trying to say that the degree of religious belief that does not allow you to understand the idea of a fictitious deity is not a form of fervor, but a form of psychosis.
I think that degree of religious belief is far more popular (and I use that word advisedly) here in the US than in the rest of the first world. Not to put you on the spot, but can I enquire as to your nation of origin?
Orfamay Quest wrote:
I was thinking of Snorri Sturluson, who recorded a bunch of Norse epics including the Prose Edda, first put forward the hypothesis of Euhemerism, and was murdered in a cellar for all his accomplishments.
New ideas are usually branded as both paganism and heresy by the extant religious powers, and that's the kind of behavior that gets you burnt at the stake. Were you actually doing that when you mentioned Christianity and Homer in the same sentence? No, but I've been watching a lot of Wolf Hall lately, so people being burned at the stake for doing completely reasonable things is on my mind lately.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you're saying more US citizens are psychotic than fervent; I don't necessarily disagree.
EDIT: Full disclosure, I'm a US citizen, born and bred.
I thought you probably had. It's funny how many late 20th century books you can find where a pre-industrial POV interprets post-industrial experience/artifacts as divine. The only one I can think of that goes in the opposite direction is Picnic in Paradise by Joanna Russ.
If you haven't read it, the narrator is a bronze age, Lankhmar-style thief type who accidentally gets included in the Trans-Temporal-Agency's biosphere sample, and is very unimpressed by the barbarians who live in the future. It's one of those books that isn't even 200 pages, but you feel like a different person once you've finished it.
Good Heavens, never mind playing D&D, if I'm an atheist, am I allowed to read "Lean Times in Lankhmar" and laugh my ass off 'cause it's so hilarious? If not, I'm gonna have to read nothing but Ayn Rand, and that sounds like a bit of a bummer. :(
Stuff about an aging customer demographic and realistic expectations.
Do you think WotC is looking ahead to the 50th anniversary at this point? I sort of feel like they must be, and sometimes think that they made such a fuss about the release of 5e in tandem with the fortieth anniversary to set D&D up as the slow and steady, reliable elder statesman of RPGs in 10 years time. Their multi-platform approach certainly seems to be slanted towards growing the brand name recognition rather than total RPG market domination.
Or, what do I know, maybe in 2018 they'll say, "Great news, nerds, we're releasing a new edition every 3 years, so open up those wallets!"
Remember Gygax's description of the khopesh in UA? Where he said it was like a sword with a D (no crossbar) on top, and Egyptian, historically speaking, but totally meant for Druids with all that history, so now it's a Druid weapon? And you were like, "I play D&D all the time, and I have no idea what Gary Gygax is even trying to describe," cause you were only 12 years old ?
I do too, but grognards never accepted the optional UA material to begin with.