|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Yet at the end when she knows that the Doctor can't save her, Me can't save her and she can't save herself, when there is nothing that she can do except face her executioner, she walks out and does it. She's clearly afraid, but she accepts the consequences of the decisions that she took to save Rigsy. She won't let the Doctor go bad because of it. It is a very brave death.
The Impossible Girl is scattered throughout the Doctor's timeline. They don't need to undo Clara's death to have more of the Impossible Girl and much as I love her I hope they don't. It was a good death and heroic in the way of ordinary people's heroism, facing what has to be faced.
I don't recall old Who generally having series-long arcs except for the Key of Time. It did, however, tend to have 4-6 episode long stories.
American shows tend to have an overarching story which is told over a whole season or several seasons, with little side-trips to explore the development of the character of recurring characters (there's probably a more elegant way to put that). They are very much about the development of the continuing characters and a single story. Dr Who isn't like that. It is a series of individual stories that are tied together by being about or involving one character, the Doctor. Frequently, in fact usually, it is that he stumbles into someone else's story. There are gaps and we don't know what happens to him in them. We just see the interesting bits. It's as if he is a storyteller and he is telling us the stories he has become involved in. In some ways it isn't really about the Doctor at all, it is about a new cast and a new story each time. It's just that the Doctor and (usually) his companion(s) witness these stories and tell us about them. In contrast, something like Stargate is primarily about the main continuing cast and the weekly temporary characters are very much less important.
YMMV, of course.
Otherwise, ranged weapons from long range with use of cover, good separation between people, and disappearing up alleys, through houses, dropping things from roofs, and remembering that part of the plan is to spend every other round moving while your fellows cover you (and that movement can be AWAY). Having someone hiding to hit him over the head from behind as he goes past chasing you while you run away (ready an action).
Or invite him for a drink and make it a Micky Finn.
What did the sister get?
Commercial advantage. They are supplying a refined natural product and they are in competition with each other. As I understand it, elder brother is richest, sister is no. 2 and little brother is no. 3. Mother's inheritance comes from big brother's estate. It will seriously reduce his wealth and power. It is greater in value than little brother's entire estate (which is why he wants it and why big brother doesn't want to lose it). By protecting Jupiter and helping her towards her inheritance (through the nice cheap and easy expedient of just handing her over with a smile to the police when they turn up) she reduces the power of her biggest competitor, prevents the strengthening of the competitor below her, and increases the value of her own assets by putting a large resource out of production (because even if Jupiter does decide to go into the family business, which is highly unlikely, she won't be in a position to be a major competitor for a long time). No need to get into a messy fight with her siblings or the law enforcement authorities. Don't worry about grabbing other people's assets, sit back and watch the value of what you already have increase as they destroy each others'.
The Indescribable wrote:
Eventually you will die of dehydration or starvation.
You appear to be forgetting production costs?
In the UK we had a repeat last week of the last (regeneration) episode from last series so that helped in setting up this one which is very much a "dealing with grief and dementia" story. I liked it.
I also liked the reminder from "The Girl in the Fireplace" that the Doctor doesn't always work out why the things that he is involved in are happening - he isn't as omniscient as he is sometimes painted.
Oh, and the broom analogy reminded me of Granny Weatherwax!
The Omega dying before it is killed is inconsistent with the rest of the film. Admittedly the Omega is different but if the death of the Omega allows it to throw its own consciousness back in time in the same way that the Alphas and Cage and Rita did (which would be consistent), then it would know how it died. The obvious requirement is then to prevent the events that led to its death. So Cage must not go onto that beach tomorrow morning. Or at least not go to Paris in the middle of the night. So the Omega relocates itself and ceases effective resistance while marshalling sufficient of its forces to defend or attack elsewhere. Cage isn't shanghied and he, Rita and J squad don't go to the Louvre. The Omega isn't killed. The Russians and Chinese push forward in the East, the USA, UK and Canada land in France unopposed, push forward carelessly thinking their enemy is finished, and then run into a massive ambush later and are wiped out?
This is consistent with what is shown in the film, allows for endless sequels if it does well, and has only taken me one showing and 2 1/2 days to think of so I'm sure someone else has thought of it before me.
True, but you have to power them up to do that. Helicopters can levitate but most of them have wheels because powering them up every time you want to move them is a bit inconvenient. Now, I grant you that anti-gravity usually doesn't have the downwash and fast-moving parts problems, but it would still be inconvenient, especially if you were doing maintenance on the drive. Battlestar Galactica often had rolling landings in combat but still had skids. So is it just that skids are cheaper and easier to model or is there some other reason?
Given line of sight (the link in the second post gives the horizon distance for a given height) the optical limit of what you can resolve (based on a wavelength of 550nm and a pupil diameter of 5mm) would be about 0.13mm at 1m and would scale proportionately. This is the theoretical limit of optical resolution - in reality the object would probably need to be a bit bigger than that.
So, if a human is about 400mm wide under good conditions you could theoretically be able to resolve them at about 3,000,000 mm or 3km (2 miles). However, as a real life practical example, I can just about make out people silhouetted against the sky on a hilltop at 1.5km (about 1 mile). So, for heroes with brilliant eyesight, maybe 1.5 miles would be the limit to see a medium sized creature/object with sufficient contrast. How far you can make out hills, lakes, woods etc will depend on how big they are.
I'm British and as far as I'm concerned the revolution was a very long time ago (even by our standards :-) ). I'm enjoying the series a lot. I like having a British hero in an American show (even if he was a defector fighting the rest of us - we are usually on approximately the same side again these days) but one of the things particularly tickling me is that not once as far as I can recall has anyone corrected his pronunciation of "lieutenant". I suppose it's a minor irritation while a headless horseman is chopping people up but it's often the little things that rile people and it's nice to see Sleepy Hollow Sherrif's Dept. so tolerant of people's peculiarities.
I also liked the way he threw the pistol down after one shot. :-)
I saw the film last weekend, not having read the book, and enjoyed it a lot. I thought that the young actors were very good indeed, as were the special effects. Some have commented that that the actors are not as young as the characters but for those who have not read the book they are more than young enough to provoke moral disquiet over their use as soldiers and younger actors would be unlikely to have produced such nuanced performances.
This is clearly a film with moral messages but they are dealt with in a way that I found to mesh well with the story and was not jarring. Those that I took from it were:
Movie plot spoiler:
People behave differently towards enemies they perceive as people and those they perceive as unreal: In the final battle, Ender believes that he is fighting a simulation programmed by Mazer. Consequently, he ignores the non-hostile behaviour of the Formics, which he would clearly have paused to analyse and understand in "real life" because this is a tactical training scenario and the purpose of it is for him to defeat the enemy in battle, not to hold a peace conference.
People will tolerate losses in a game to achieve the "victory condition" that they would not tolerate in real life. When Alai protests that his dreadnoughts are being destroyed because Ender withdraws all the drones to shield the main weapon Ender replies "I don't care about the dreadnoughts!" but he does care when there are real lives at stake. This is skillfully built up throughout the film. This is, of course, precisely why Graff and the rest of the command tell Ender and his team that this is their final selection exercise. They want the battle fought in a specific way, resulting in the annihilation of the Formics. Ender and his team are happy to do that in a simulation but Ender, at least, would have tried to avoid that in real life. Also, to them, the entire fleet is expendable provided that victory condition is achieved. Ender will happily expend pixels but he would not have expended real people in that way.
The point at which I realised that the final exercise was actually real was only when Graff ordered the visual feed restored. The dawning horror on the faces of Ender and his team as they realised that what they had done had actually happened in reality and that they had just destroyed their own fleet, a planet and an entire species was an absolutely superb piece of acting.
The ending was quite good but frankly, given that Graff was willing (I was going to write "happy" but I don't think that is quite fair) to sacrifice both his fleet and the sanity of his command team to exterminate the Formics I can't see him letting Ender wander off into space with a Formic egg to start up the species all over again. I think he would have been more likely to grind it under his heel.
I would say this is well worth seeing. This is proving a good year for films that make you think.
el cuervo wrote:
So I'll be starting a RotRL campaign this weekend and I've seen a lot of talk about sin points in my search for hints, tips, tricks, and advice on how to run the adventure. Where do these come into play? I haven't read entirely through PF #1 yet but I haven't seen any mention of them thus far. I'd think if it's a system meant to be part of the adventure it would be mentioned early on in the text.
If you're asking where they are explained in a rules context, it's AP2, The Skinsaw Murders, page 19.
Lord Snow wrote:
It's quite hard to respond to a thread like this because it is mostly about likes and dislikes rather than facts. However, I think that there is something that you have missed about Asylum of the Daleks. It doesn't invalidate your other points about the story but it may make this element make more sense.
Oswin didn't have human body any more than her entire escape capsule (with oven) was inside that Dalek casing. She was fully converted into a Dalek and went mad because of it. She simply imagined that she still had a normal body and was still trapped in her (re-modelled to be more comfortable) escape capsule as a means of escaping from the horror of her true situation. The Doctor didn't see into her capsule when he looked into the Dalek eye. That was why she didn't leave with the Doctor, Amy and Rory; she could have but she couldn't face life as a Dalek so she stayed to die when the asylum was destroyed.
People choosing to die is an aspect of Steven Moffat stories that some people I know have problems with.
The reason an eagle went to Orthanc was not because Gandalf summoned him but because, before going to Orthanc, Gandalf asked Radagast to find out what evil beings were up to in the world and send news there. The eagle was doing Radagast a favour, not Gandalf (OK, the film departed from this).
"'How far can you bear me?' I said to Gwaihir.
Gwaihir took Gandalf to Rohan where he borrowed Shadowfax and rode to Rivendell. No decision had been taken about the Ring when Gandalf escaped Orthanc. There were subsequently no eagles at the Council of Elrond and to reach the eagles a messenger would have had to cross the Misty Mountains.
Bill Dunn wrote:
My main disappointment was the amount of white and lucite on the ship without much of a nod to Trek's dark color palette. Bet the ship is all smudgy-dingey within 2 years of its 5 year mission...
See the article on self-cleaning materials and the futuristc desperado in the Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society at Steve Jackson Games.
Your original post only mentions strength but your heading mentions a "heroine". A character who walks off and leaves others to die when they could do something about it is not a hero or heroine. The audience for this type of lead character is probably quite small regardless of gender.
Freehold DM wrote:
Actually being both Polish and Irish would be quite easy in Britain, especially England. There are significant Irish and Polish communities and since both have significant Catholic backgrounds they tend to mix at Catholic churches. Admittedly Polish communities sometimes have sufficient numbers to have their own chaplain and one or more Polish-language Masses each week but even then they mix with the rest of the parish on social occasions and major festivals and go to the same Catholic schools where those are available. So not really very much "wow" in my part of the world. I don't know where you are though.
Wandered a bit off-topic - sorry.
If he falls 1000ft in a round, by the time he has fallen 1,000ft his round has ended so he would have no time left in which to move.
For a first-person view, look at the opening sequences of Patriot Games and Red Riding Hood. Patriot Games in the cinema made me feel seriously air-sick, Red Riding Hood less so but noticeably. Also the plunge into the pit in Wrath of the Titans was vertigo-inducing.
The first edition of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay had a pad of character sheets that also included a booklet that included this and lots of other background detail generation. Mekton II has the same sort of thing in the main rulebook. I have both somewhere and wanted this last week but unfortunately can't find either of them:-(
Most types of animals require many times their weight in food over the course of their lives; each pound of meat represents 7, 10 even 20 times the amount of resources as the weight equivalent grain. Cutting down on the amount of meat you eat to conserve resources is one of the most profound single things you can do to help the environment. Its on the level of recycling your garbage or getting rid of your car.
There are a couple of points here. Meat is a more energy-intense food than grain so you need to eat less of it. Also, grass will grow in places that grain will not (or at least, in which it cannot be mechanically sown and harvested) so, depending upon how the animals are raised (and I know some are fed substantial amounts of grain), eating meat is not necessarily denying grain to feed people (although it may be). That said, there are still many good reasons to moderate one's meat intake and vegetarianism is a perfectly practical and reasonable choice.
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:
Muslims are not a racial group, they are a religious group. Muslims can be of any race/ethnicity.
You might like to look at either Cold City or Hot War, both from Contested Ground (www.contestedground.co.uk). I haven't played either directly (although I am playing in an "En Garde" style pbem that uses the Hot War background). The games may work well for groups that are imaginative and like to guide the story with the GM but are less into the "acting" aspect of roleplaying as they give the player whose character has greatest success in a conflict (which may be social, intellectual or physical) the right to narrate the outcome and assign consequences (within limits set out in the rules).
Carbon D. Metric wrote:
Wider margins are more comfortable to read, and I am pretty sure that is the main motivation behind it. If they shrunk them much more everything would start to look cramped and wordcount per page would spike dramatically, which impacts the overall price of the book just as much as the number of pages within.
Why does having more words on a page make the page more expensive to print?
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote:
I've read that only 1/3 of english people polledsaid they would even bother to watch it- as an english person still in an economic recession, it is ludicrous to have an additional bank holiday that costs the economy millions just for a wedding for a royal family that can easily afford to finance it themselves (and yet taxpayers money is wasted on advertising it)...
Switch on the telly, see how many people are happy, and see whether that changes your mind.
DM Wellard wrote:
Yes, but millions of us have had a day off (and quite a few of the sourpusses who didn't want it have got overtime rates), got to watch a real wedding on telly (rather than a soap opera disaster), see not only the bride and groom and their families but hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens looking really happy and had a really enjoyable time. Making people smile is a better use of my taxes than killing people - I prefer to keep that in the imagination in RPGs.
As for being a republican, the next President to have a grandchild marry while s/he's in office won't give the US a day off to celebrate but there will still be a significant protection bill. If Britain becomes a republic the same will happen to us, and tourists won't come from the US, Canada and Australia and spend money here to watch the son of President Who? married to offset the bill a bit.
And just why does a republican consider that a shop girl is worth less than any other citizen? Aren't republicans supposed to think that social class is unimportant (or am I missing some significance in the capital R?)?
A game mechanic way of dealing with this, if the player/DM co-operation way doesn't work for you, is to have all the players make, say, ten D20 rolls and write them down on a piece of paper. As an appropriate passive test situation comes up, use the next number on the list for the check and add the appropriate character's modifier. You don't alert the players by calling for a roll or rolling yourself, the random element is maintained, and the players have still made their own rolls (which many prefer to do).