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

Irontruth's page

4,682 posts (4,684 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,682 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

LazarX wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Crellan wrote:
Marc Radle wrote:

I agree such things are beneficial and it's great when publishers provide them.

However, make no mistake - the additional cost and effort required on the publisher's part is far from negligible!

We are talking about simply taking art they already posses electronically and make a second version available for download. If the charged a reasonable amount (maybe 10-20% of the .pdf price) then they would certainly make a profit.
The OP has decided that, for him, this is a condition of Paizo making profit on the primary product.
The sheer economic reality is that Paizo can't afford to lose control of it's artwork just to please one customer.

There's actually not a lot of factual evidence to back up that claim.

There is a lot of evidence though that expanding your customer base to fulfill as many of their needs as you can is good for business.

VTT use is expanding. The companies who cater to the needs of VTT users are going to see better sales to those people. The companies that don't meet their needs are going to see reduced sales. Ease of use is just one need (adventure quality, art quality, product predictability are all valuable aspects to the customer also), but it's still a need.

The OP didn't say he's going to stop playing Pathfinder. He's saying he's going to go with adventure publishers who fulfill his primary need of ease of use.

Adventure prep can be time consuming. Spending 1-2 hours per session just getting the graphics right can be a big chunk of time, particularly for a GM with a job, spouse and kids. For most GM's, that time would be better spent reading the adventure, learning it well and making modifications necessary for their group... to the adventure. Not the image file for the map.

Other companies are already making money off providing easy to use products for VTT gamers. Paizo is free to ignore this aspect of the market. I'm sure that right now it's actually a pretty small slice of the overall pie.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The other aspect of mechanics is that you can and should separate yourself from the character. It's okay to admit that you are making decisions for the character. The trick is to switch modes, between making a decision for you and the game and something the character would decide on their own.

Some mechanics don't represent conscious decisions by the character, but rather manipulation of odds to represent statistics within the game.

Let's say I'm a Fighter and have an ability which lets me automatically declare a critical once per day. Why don't I declare all my hits crits? Well, because my character isn't actually choosing to make this one a crit. Sure, he really wants it, but within the fiction it's more of a lucky coincidence. He really wanted a crit and he happened to get it.

Outside the fiction, I am making the decision to spend the resource because it's in my character's interest. A critical based Fighter is probably going to score crits. We also all remember those special moments where a crit was needed and happened at the right time. This would just be an ability recognizes that probability and inherently bakes it in as an option to choose to manipulate the odds.


David knott 242 wrote:
I think one issue is that, while many martial tricks might better be represented as "per encounter" than either "at will" or "X times per day", a certain other game company made extensive use of the "per encounter" mechanic in non-OGC material -- which means that Paizo would have to tread carefully to avoid violating the OGL. It can be and has been done, but it is tricky.

It can be done and quite easily. Suing over copyright of rules is notoriously difficult and nearly impossible. As long as you aren't using art and specific names, it's fine.

13th Age uses "per battle" quite liberally.


There are more than a few games that violate rule 1. It does have consequences though and it gets into the nature of how defined a system is and what that means.

In a highly defined system, every thing is it's own discreet thing. Fireball is different from Lightning Bolt is different from Magic Jar. Each aspect gets highly defined and interactions get worked out. This allows for a broader scope of mechanical possibilities. Individual options can "break" the rules in certain ways, because it's been defined and understood how that happens and does so in a controlled manner.

In a less defined system you don't pre-determine what individual actions of magic can do, but rather define what is possible within the scope of magic. Imagine it like this...

A wizard takes proficiency in Evoking magic. He can deal damage to his enemies and create force effects. You define how much damage at what levels, maybe how large of an area as well. Then when the player casts the spells, he's free to narrate and choose how the spell manifests on the fly. There are still rolls associated, but that spell could be a one-time thing, or serve as inspiration for future castings.

I've played a few games that use a method similar to that, they define the mechanical effects of magic, give inspiration for the color, but leave the specifics to the GM and player. These are usually games with fewer definitions of actions in general (they just tell you how to attack, no specific rules for grappling/disarming/tripping/etc) allowing the GM and player to add specifics as the narration of the story demands.

Both methods are good IMO, but produce different results. One of the neat things about a defined system is that it creates restrictions and boundaries you have to work in, which often produces very creative results that are really interesting. A less defined system on the other hand gets out of the way and relies only on your creativity to create situations that are interesting, which works great when you are "on".


Like a lot of "craft" whiskey's right now, they're both distilled by MGP Ingredients. It used to be a Seagram's distillery that has changed hands several times. One of the notable things right now is that they distill various spirits and sell them to bottlers. I think something like 80%+ of the various brands that have appeared in the past 15 years are actually distilled by these guys.

Companies buy the whiskey, maybe do another year of aging, make a blend out of it, add whatever else they're going to add and then bottle and sell it.

Bulleit has a bourbon and a rye. Both are inexpensive ($20-25 range). It's fine. There aren't many whiskeys at that price that I would classify as perfect for sipping in general anyways. I think they're great for mixed drinks though.


Skeld wrote:
Pan wrote:

Actually my favorite moment is

** spoiler omitted **

I liked that part, too. Honestly, I ended up liking Drax much more than I thought I would. The only one that I didn't like was Gamora. She was just... I don't know... Boring?

** spoiler omitted **

My two observations about Gamora...

Spoiler:

1) She doesn't really go through much development. Things get revealed about her, but she doesn't change. The revelations don't really get driven home either or feel that major.

2) A lot of her dialogue deals with moving the plot forward. Basically she speaks as a way to introduce the next scene or remind the audience about what is going on.

She's a (potentially) interesting character and I think Saldana did a decent job with her, but it was flawed writing about the character IMO.


lucky7 wrote:
well, this is just nuts.

I tree what you did there.


It is interesting. I highly doubt it'll happen. Despite all the evidence that suggest freeing your IP is good for business, no one wants to relinquish control.


Fabius Maximus wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Gruumash . wrote:
lately as I find drink it more as the air grows colder. But I think I will want to pick some up soon as the Fall is upon us.
That's VERY interesting to me, because I notice the opposite -- I crave bourbon a lot more during the cold months, and only really like Scotch in the summer and spring.

Speaking of Bourbon: I tried Elijah Craig a while ago and found it too sweet for my liking. It worked quite nicely in Highballs, though.

Are there any Bourbons that are not as sweet?

One of the distinguishing characteristics of bourbon (compared to scotch) is that it is sweeter. They shouldn't be syrupy, but that hint of sweetness (and compared to a scotch, a hint is a lot) should be there.

If you don't like the sweetness, try some rye whiskey instead.

Bulleit makes a decent rye for about $20-25/bottle. Nothing exceptional, but it'll give you an idea of what you're in for without costing a lot.


241 - Count Zero by William Gibson: “And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human.”


MMCJawa wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Ant-man is being co-written by Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish.

Wright: Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Scott Pilgrim, The World's End
Cornish: Attack the Block

Those are some very well-written movies.

My big reservation is that Wright worked on the movie for 8 years, and just this summer suddenly left over creative differences, and is being replaced with Peyton Reed...whose filmography is...less than inspiring

Granted Winter Soldier was amazing...and the Russo Brothers had only done TV before that, so maybe I shouldn't be concerned...

Hadn't heard about that.

Will have to wait and see. Reed did do like 12 episodes of the Upright Citizen's Brigade.


If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend Attack the Block.


Ant-man is being co-written by Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish.

Wright: Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Scott Pilgrim, The World's End
Cornish: Attack the Block

Those are some very well-written movies.


Have you tried the cappuccino flavored chips? They're okay, but a little strange on their own. I think if you made a light whipped cream/marscapone dip though, it'd be a little amazing.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
thejeff wrote:
But yes, if they have a stupid contest and remove the sexist rule and the sexist promotion, then it's not sexist any more.
I think that's what I'm trying to express. It's not fundamentally a sexist contest, as apparently even the voters recognized, based on Kthulhu's post. It's more like a perfectly innocuous contest, but then some pinhead in the Marketing department added a sexist rule to it, and then the promotional writer turned out to be a toad-like neckbeard. It still seems like there's a lot that could be salvaged, if you eliminate just those two things. Kind of like you don't have to immediately throw away onions with brown spots; you can just cut them out and the rest is still usable.

From a marketing standpoint, you want people to forget as quickly as possible that the onion with brown spots ever existed, that way no one thinks about the brown spots.


SeeDarkly_X wrote:

As to Irontruth: You mentioned how "marketing" built up some expectation. I don't see it, and I doubtless watched the same trailers as everyone else.

I did see sub-seminal sources build hype based on erroneous and unsubstantiated claims of what to expect. But nothing direct from Marvel did.

I'm not telling you how you saw the movie. I'm telling you how I saw it. You're free to your opinion, I'm not saying you can't have it. But that means I also get to have mine.

For me, the plot twist failed and left a bad taste in my mouth. It reduced my enjoyment of the movie.


SeeDarkly_X wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

I've never read any of the source material. I'm just judging the movie on its own.

The movie was really about Tony Stark and his struggle of relating himself to the suit, figuring out what it meant to him. Then they layered a convoluted plot of bait and switch on top of that that just felt pointless.

The problem is that they spent this time building up the Mandarin, both in marketing and then in the story line. To pull the rug out from that on the AUDIENCE gives similar feelings of betrayal and mistrust. For this kind of movie, to remove my feelings of trust is a bad thing. Now I stop being invested and care less for the characters on screen, because the director has shown me overtly that he's toying with me.

Toying with the audience works for a lot of films. Inception is a movie built on the concept of manipulating perception and concealing the truth from the viewer (both in the movie and out). There, it works and is even expected. IM3 is not that kind of movie and going into that kind of area is dangerous and can backfire. It certainly did with me.

I still liked the movie, but only a little bit. I wasn't that interested in going back to the theater and haven't really cared to pick it up since it's out on DVD.

Let's make a distinction between "marketing" and "op-ed news-pieces."

Because for all the advertising and official statements Marvel made... I know I saw nothing that built up or guaranteed anything other than a "mystery" or "mystique" of the Mandarin. They never showed him in an action scene. Never showed or discussed the use of rings. Always left his presence vague.

I'll give you an example... in one interview Feige said of the Mandarin, "Assuming that he’s the one responsible for what happens to Tony’s house, no other villain has been able to strike that fast and that hard at one of our heroes." Note that he didn't say "When he attacks Tony's house." He says "assuming" which leaves possibilities wide open because all we'd seen in...

You must be confusing me with other people.

I have no idea what rings you're talking about. I guess he wore a lot of jewelry, but honestly, I have no clue what their significance is.

I saw trailers that hyped a villain. I saw a movie that hyped a villain and then did a bait and switch. The left over story-line of the actual villain was very bland and I didn't really care.

You can tell me why I should care about that villain, but the truth is it's the movies responsibility to make me care and it didn't.

I'd have rather seen a 90 minute movie of Tony Stark and the kid he befriended. No sarcasm.

I am not a marvel fan boy. I really don't pay attention to all the stuff you are assuming I pay attention to. The only movie/show I have ever relied on interviews to help me understand the movie/show was The Wire.


Two of my favorite events:

Tracy Hickman's Killer Breakfast
It's a comedy show, part gaming, part show. People have a lot of fun with it.

Games on Demand
If you are into indie games at all Games On Demand is very cool. They only accept generic tickets, that means you can't pre-register for it, but it also means it is first come, first serve. I've played and GM'ed previous years and always had a really, really good time.


Solusek wrote:


And who could forget,
Postmodern Jukebox (feat. Puddles) - Royals (Lorde Cover)

I hadn't heard of Puddles before, he's amazing.


SeeDarkly_X wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Except I don't buy that because for the vast majority of the audience, the Mandarin meant nothing.

That being true, why would anyone expect the classic interpretation of the character?

It goes without saying most films do not 100% match the core material. If you acknowledge that before even going to see it, why would this one be any different? In most cases, you're better to expect changes and be surprised and appreciative of anything that connects well to canon.

I still say it's a solid film and story on its own and brilliant in its ability to build mythos for an even greater story over time.
In the end... you don't know that you WON'T eventually see a more classic version of the character face Stark on screen.
Given that in most MCU films the villain dies, I'm happier that this story has the potential to fill more than one movie and this was a good a starting point as any because now... well none of us really know what to expect, do we?

I've never read any of the source material. I'm just judging the movie on its own.

The movie was really about Tony Stark and his struggle of relating himself to the suit, figuring out what it meant to him. Then they layered a convoluted plot of bait and switch on top of that that just felt pointless.

The problem is that they spent this time building up the Mandarin, both in marketing and then in the story line. To pull the rug out from that on the AUDIENCE gives similar feelings of betrayal and mistrust. For this kind of movie, to remove my feelings of trust is a bad thing. Now I stop being invested and care less for the characters on screen, because the director has shown me overtly that he's toying with me.

Toying with the audience works for a lot of films. Inception is a movie built on the concept of manipulating perception and concealing the truth from the viewer (both in the movie and out). There, it works and is even expected. IM3 is not that kind of movie and going into that kind of area is dangerous and can backfire. It certainly did with me.

I still liked the movie, but only a little bit. I wasn't that interested in going back to the theater and haven't really cared to pick it up since it's out on DVD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

Well, not every move they make will be good. Give them a break. Their track record thus far is pretty damn amazing. Not a single bad film of the whole lot. Some, granted, not great, but none bad.

That is quite an accomplishment.

They do make a lot of good movies, which is why I trust them and spend the money to see them in the theater.

That said, it doesn't matter if a different movie is good. Each movie is judged on it's own and whether or not it delivers an entertaining experience.

I left IM3 excited on opening night, but partly that was the lingering excitement from expectations. The next day I felt let down by the movie and started to figure out why. The Mandarin plot line is one of those reasons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had an Irish dog for the past 12 years who just died. He was a Kerry Beagle, a very rare dog breed. To celebrate his life, I bought a bottle of Middleton Very Rare, which is distilled in Cork county, adjacent to the county that gives its name to the dog breed.

I shared some of it with friends last night. The remainder will be reserved for me, to sip, savor and remember.

It's also by far the best Irish whiskey I've ever had. Very smooth, mellow. Lots of sweet notes, both in the nose and the taste. Toffee, vanilla, a light oakiness. It really lingers too, letting you enjoy it. This is a 2013 bottle and a blend, but the number of casks used is so small that there are variations from year to year. They only produce about 5,000 bottles or so every year.


SeeDarkly_X wrote:
thejeff wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Bringing it back to Marvel...I don't think Guardians had the fanbase of other Marvel properties, plus there have been so many iterations that it's pretty easy for Marvel to pick and choose there storyline or how the characters were portrayed. But man...compare that to say Iron Man 3 and The Mandarin. I know a lot of people that completely lost it (in a bad way) about the Trevor reveal, and I can't say I blame them.

Yeah, the Mandarin is a good example. It wasn't a bad movie in a lot of ways, though I had other issues with it. But there was no point in using the Mandarin the way they did.

The only people who'd care that the supposed villain was the Mandarin were the comic fans who were also the most likely to be upset by the reveal. For anyone else, any other name or even a less classic Iron Man villian would have worked just as well. But no, you get people excited about one thing and then twist it into something else, you're going to get upset about it.

The Thor 2 Blu-ray Marvel One-Shot tells everyone what they need to know about "The Mandarin."

Personally, I thought what they did with the Mandarin was brilliant. And finding out what the One-Shot reveals knocks it out of the park!
The fact that NO ONE saw it coming... astounding.

You have to remember... not a single promotional image, trailer, or legitimate news piece EVER revealed that "Mandarin" would possess and/or use 10 rings of power. Almost certainly they left that in the dark for good reason. Because IM3 wasn't a story about the head of a terrorist organization with super powers... it was a story about FABRICATING a terrorist in order to achieve another goal.

In the end, most movies "based on" or "adapted from" are going to change things significantly in one way or another.
What matters to me is the story. These days they are able to accomplish just about anything they want to with effects... but if the story doesn't hold then it's worth considerably less to me. Marvel has...

The problem with this is that I shouldn't have to watch the Blu-Ray extras from a movie that came out 6 months later, to make the earlier movie more enjoyable.

The movie I'm watching now should be enjoyable all on it's own.

IM3 was okay, but lacking. Particularly in the area of the twist, it was a let down.


16. That guy just took your gold.
17. That guy just collapsed in front of you, stretching out a hand with a scroll he says "You must find her" and dies.
18. You see and orc. And a pie.


Lakes can be an option for swimming too. Particularly if you prefer the outdoors. There's only a few things comparable to sunrise swim on a perfectly calm lake.

Right now I'm taking a break from chopping spinach, making a Moroccan spinach salad for gaming tonight.

Spinach
Cilantro
Paprika
Cumin
Cayenne
Lemon juice (with a little pulp)

Someone else is making fried chicken and I like the idea of southern style collard greens, but I've never actually liked them that much. Hoping this serves as replacement.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Slight tangent...

Anyone else annoyed by pre-credits credits? Guardians didn't have them and I was thankful.

Also, I'm kind of over the concept of the after scene. Shawarma was fine, the guardians one was fine and a few others, but overall I'm starting to find them annoying.

We all know sequels are coming. Let us enjoy THIS movie, without having to tease us for the next one.

/rant

I don't think the post-credits sequence was really teasing a new movie.

** spoiler omitted **

Note the bolded portion of my post. I said the Guardians one was fine.

If the after scene is mandatory (which at this point for Marvel movies, it is), I prefer ones that wrap up something that happened in the movie, or explain something that happened just a little bit. The post-credit scene was good, it had a little humor in it and importantly it told us

Spoiler:
(the viewers) that the Collector was still alive. He's playing a vital connecting role that helps tie different stories together, but his survival had nothing to do with the Guardians story, so it didn't deserve a full scene in the regular part of the movie.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
An Inglorious Basterd wrote:
I don't wash my clothes. Ever.

You're not supposed to wash blue jeans. If they start to smell, you're supposed to turn them inside out and put them in the freezer for 2 days. Or spray them lightly with vodka.

Denim musical interlude


Slight tangent...

Anyone else annoyed by pre-credits credits? Guardians didn't have them and I was thankful.

Also, I'm kind of over the concept of the after scene. Shawarma was fine, the guardians one was fine and a few others, but overall I'm starting to find them annoying.

We all know sequels are coming. Let us enjoy THIS movie, without having to tease us for the next one.

/rant


meatrace wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Made me think of a thing....

Harry S. Plinkett wrote:
The Phantom Menace is the most disappointing thing since my son. I mean how much more could you possibly f&~% up the entire back story to Star Wars. And while my son eventually hanged himself in the bathroom of the gas station, the unfortunate reality of the Star Wars prequels is that they'll be around.... forever. They will never go away. They can never be undone.

Oh hey, another RLM fan!

My favorite is that he re-released the review in 3-D.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Groot wrote:
I AM GROOT!

I disagree, I think the strong showing in an August release is still an anomaly. Studios that think their movies are high quality but don't want to risk competition might push more movies to late summer, but I don't think we'll see an increase overall.


Made me think of a thing....

Harry S. Plinkett wrote:
The Phantom Menace is the most disappointing thing since my son. I mean how much more could you possibly f#%~ up the entire back story to Star Wars. And while my son eventually hanged himself in the bathroom of the gas station, the unfortunate reality of the Star Wars prequels is that they'll be around.... forever. They will never go away. They can never be undone.


Artanthos wrote:
lucky7 wrote:
Lazy? No. Productive? Yes.

Interesting article.

I only use a clothes dryer because I now live in a city and don't have access to a clothesline.

I used to live on the hillside in the country where we had almost 200' of clothesline strung up between the trees. Unfortunately, there were no jobs there.

But did you wash your clothes by hand?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They weren't saying the two were directly link, but rather that "if you enjoyed this.... you might also enjoy this...." kind of thing.


Really, the internet should be in charge of making a Deadpool movie.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
feytharn wrote:

Actually, *beeping* his remarks, blurring his gestures and him becoming even madder at that could be a hilarious way of making the movie pg...

Or in an R-rated movie, you could have the bleeping and blurring, until he gets so pissed off he walks off the set, kills whoever is doing the censoring and goes back into the movie.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Saw it a second time. I love the cast. Groot, Rocket and Quill each steal several scenes, sometimes from each other even.

Drax is pretty solid, but falls flat a couple times.

Gamora though bothered me and I finally realized why. About 1/3 of her dialogue seems focused on reminding the audience and the rest of the cast that they need to proceed on to the next plot point. The other 4 characters all go through some sort of transformation (or at least audience perception changes), but she doesn't feel like she changes at all. It's an inherent problem with stoic warrior types, but not insurmountable.

Rocket is amazing though. Bradley Cooper does an amazing job as the voice. The animation is so good, that you stop noticing it. The character doesn't really participate in any slapstick, which I think is important for lending him gravitas as a character. He was predominantly a dialogue character, not a visual one.


I thoroughly enjoyed it. I cried too, but I also had some things in real life happen this weekend that have put me in a crying mood in general. The movie hits a couple of really cool features IMO...

-It's hilarious without being a comedy
-Tons of action, but it all serves to further the plot
-Music selection and pop culture references are great without being overbearing
-A long movie, but the pacing and cohesive nature of each act were great

There were a couple of scenes that I felt were weak. I love Glen Close, but the writing/editing/directing of the Nova Prime scenes in particular felt forced. They felt like they were from another movie and cut to make them look like they belonged.


Daily Show gives a quick run down of US arms sales in the Middle-East.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HarbinNick wrote:

-So I'm trying to run a ravenloft game, except I've got a problem. One of the players is playing an atheist. Now, I don't know about you, but knowledge religion and divine casters are pretty much your definition of a light shining in darkness...a hope against madness...

-So what gives...well the character is well RP'ed that isn't the issue, the setting is the issue. You don't walk into an inn and call the local priest a superstitious rapist. At the same time, I hate DM's who punish the players. I offered a campaign switch but the two players say they like it.
-So here is what gets me....how do you run gothic horror without devout serfs, and superstitious people in Barovia...

For purposes of this conversation, a more complete description/definition of 'atheism' within the context of the game would be helpful...

A) Does he believe the gods are figments of peoples imaginations

or

B) Does he believe that people's worship of the gods is misplaced

If it's (A), I would challenge the character. Not overtly, but when the divine is encountered, just look at the player "How does your character explain this?" Not to put them on the spot and make them feel alienated, but to give them an opportunity to roleplay, and I would make this clear.

If it's (B), I would give them situations where the gods purposes and interest in mortals can be called into question. Situations where the healing magic available isn't enough... but the believers still believe in the benevolence of their god. Does the character try and turn them from their beliefs? See it as proof that the gods don't really care for mortals?

In Ravenloft, I think villagers who did worship a good and benevolent deity, might interpret the atheist as an agent sent to destroy/harm them. In Ravenloft, deities are one of the major sources of power to destroy undead (difficult as it might be), someone who comes along and appears to threaten that tradition could we be an enemy.


Edit: I'm done with this thread.

I feel like I'm the only who actually tries to look at more than one side of this conflict. I understand there are other people trying to look bigger parts of this, but you guys don't TALK like you are. It makes me really frustrated.

I have to sound like a zionist, because people only seem to want to heap blame on Israel, but I'm far from it and heavily disagree with the very concept.

I'm really, really opposed to the atrocities committed by Israel, but that's all you guys want to talk about. As if nothing else is going wrong over there.


Krensky wrote:

Sorry. I don't see how accepting Israel being a theocracy and apartheid state and giving up rights and claims against the government that drove them from their homes and cramed them into ghettos and claimed everything of value in both Israel and the West Bank is reasonable.

Perhaps it's a new definition I'm unfamiliar with.

Because you're connecting dots that aren't connected.

The insistence on a Jewish state is one of protection, because in every other country in the Middle-East, Jews have been stripped of their property, deported or murdered, to the point that essentially there are no Jews living in any country in the region except Israel.

Israel took Jewish refugees from every country in the region.

Why not have all those countries take a proportionate number of Palestinian refugees?

And before you jump on me for supporting this (cause I don't really), this is just pointing out what the stumbling block to negotiation is. Israel FEELS like it is constantly under siege, even if it necessarily isn't any more. The only way to get them to lower their guard is to make the region more tolerant and less militant against them.


thejeff wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:

I read a piece written by a Danish member of parliament today, which in some ways sums up the situation for the Palestinians.

I've quickly translated it for everyone to read:

Quote:

"It's all the fault of Hamas!" That's something you hear often in these days. Hamas is a terrorist organization - and there's some truth to that. "As long as Hamas rules in Gaza there will be no peaceful solution. The Palestinians must elect moderate leaders - not until then can they live in peace."

Just a hop on over to the West Bank where Fatah - the more moderate Palestinians, rule.

What has Israel done to demonstrate to the Palestinians that moderate leaders make all the difference?

Here 2.7 million Palestinians live clumped together in an area the size of Funen (Danish island). You see, it also needs to house the 500,000 Israeli settlers - and, of course, safety zones, walls and such lovely things. Over the last 20 years more than 15,000 Palestinian homes have been removed to make room for more than 50,000 new Israeli homes. UN reports that boys aged 12-14 are being detained/incarcerated. Israeli military has a massive presence and a frightening wall more than 400 km long cuts through the area. It separates Palestinian villages, cuts people off from their farm land and forces people to subject themselves to military examination and even life threatening delays at check points. In the Danish debate it's not unheard of to describe the situation in the West Bank as apartheid-like conditions.

That politician's statement contains an error which is pretty big. There are no Israeli settlements in Gaza. None. When Israel unilaterally decided to withdraw from Gaza in 2005, they forcefully removed all Jewish settlers.

Even at the height of Jewish settlement in the strip, there were fewer than 7000 Jews living in Gaza, not 500,000.

There certainly are still lots of settlers in the West Bank.

No error. He's describing the West Bank, not Gaza. He's...

Ah, I got confused then... cause he starts off talking about Gaza and Hamas, then talks about the West Bank to make a point about Hamas in Gaza... I get it... I think.


GentleGiant wrote:

I read a piece written by a Danish member of parliament today, which in some ways sums up the situation for the Palestinians.

I've quickly translated it for everyone to read:

Quote:

"It's all the fault of Hamas!" That's something you hear often in these days. Hamas is a terrorist organization - and there's some truth to that. "As long as Hamas rules in Gaza there will be no peaceful solution. The Palestinians must elect moderate leaders - not until then can they live in peace."

I deeply wish for a peaceful solution, so let's dwell for a moment by the results the Palestinians will accomplish by electing more moderate leaders. We don't have to move far away. Just a hop on over to the West Bank where Fatah - the more moderate Palestinians, rule.

What has Israel done to demonstrate to the Palestinians that moderate leaders make all the difference?

Here 2.7 million Palestinians live clumped together in an area the size of Funen (Danish island). You see, it also needs to house the 500,000 Israeli settlers - and, of course, safety zones, walls and such lovely things. Over the last 20 years more than 15,000 Palestinian homes have been removed to make room for more than 50,000 new Israeli homes. UN reports that boys aged 12-14 are being detained/incarcerated. Israeli military has a massive presence and a frightening wall more than 400 km long cuts through the area. It separates Palestinian villages, cuts people off from their farm land and forces people to subject themselves to military examination and even life threatening delays at check points. In the Danish debate it's not unheard of to describe the situation in the West Bank as apartheid-like conditions.

My question is then: Is this the Promised Land that Israel seeks to entice the Palestinians with, if only they turn their backs on Hamas and become more moderate?

I can certainly understand if Palestinians have a hard time seeing life in the West Bank as a promising future. Roughly put the choice stands between war in Gaza and

...

That politician's statement contains an error which is pretty big. There are no Israeli settlements in Gaza. None. When Israel unilaterally decided to withdraw from Gaza in 2005, they forcefully removed all Jewish settlers.

Even at the height of Jewish settlement in the strip, there were fewer than 7000 Jews living in Gaza, not 500,000.

There certainly are still lots of settlers in the West Bank.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Well.

As I've repeated multiple times throughout this thread, I'm no expert, but after listening to Rabbi Siegman, I think I am more pro-Hamas than ever.

From the Hamas charter:

Quote:
“The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: ‘The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’”


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:


And now, for your delectation: radical feminists vs. trans activists.

Transcending the Norms of Gender: The Left Hand of Darkness by JULIAN VIGO

I was a little disappointed this didn't have a reference to Ursula K. Le Guin's book of the same name. Which I enjoyed when I read it... probably 20 years ago.


thejeff wrote:
]It's hard evidence of rocket fire, of course. It's not hard evidence that they're shooting from schools, hospitals or other protected areas. Which is what is disputed.

Video of rocket fire from the Abu Nur school.


Again, pointing out that Hamas endangers their own civilians is NOT to place the blame on Hamas for their deaths. Israel is to blame for the bullets it fires, the missiles it launches, etc.

Rather, it is to show that Hamas has a stake in continued fighting instead of being an agent of peace.

Israel needs just enough civilian deaths to hold up to their people and say "This could be your son or daughter, will you vote for us to do what is necessary?"

Neither side is looking for peace. They both want victory over the other, to drive them into the sea as it were.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Hmm, well, I'm nowhere near looking through all of the links yet, so it is quite possible that I am falling victim to Islamist propaganda, but I'll link them anyway:

Five Misconceptions About the Israel-Palestine Conflict by Hessam Akhlaghpour

In particular, I was interested in the assertions in Point 4:

Misconception 4. Hamas uses human shields.

** spoiler omitted **...

The Palestinian Interior Minister disagrees.

Last week, a vacant UN school was found to be storing rockets. It was directly in between two other schools that were being used as shelters for 3000 civilians.

Putting civilians in danger is a matter of inevitability though, whether Hamas puts rockets near them or not... because there's no where else to put them. So then it comes down to the simple fact that the very act of resistance means that civilians are endangered.

Just curious, does your worker's revolution have a plan for abolishing religion in the region?

1 to 50 of 4,682 << 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.