|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Paizo Pathfinder® GameMastery® Planet Stories® Paizo Games | |||||||||||||||||||
| About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
Social Darwinists essentially believe that we only encourage societal decay by maintaining those that aren't fit to pull their weight, physically, financially, and mentally. With generally the "physically and mentally" parts being waived, so as to provide extra emphasis on the "financially" part. And since the #1 predictor of a U.S. citizen's financial success is his or her parents' financial status, social darwinism unfortunately most often (note: NOT "always" or "in all cases") boils down to a genetic craps game.
Shameless self-promotion: THIS is what I did with the monk.
That's what she said.Ram it down, why don't you! :PYou drunken goat. ;-)The drunken goat looks better. No; that's what WE said!
Unfortunately, I'm afflicted with a terminal case of heterosexuality. My condition prevents me from answering that one. But if I were a chick, I'd totally shudder at Sean Connery, so I guess one of the other two would win.
There's so much to be taken for granted with regard to trying to dissect emotion and/or intent when interpreting fonts on a computer monitor. Amen to that. My biggest gripe with the forums is that I can't watch people's faces to tell when they're kidding, and when they're lying, and when they're sincerely telling the truth.
A long-ago guilty pleasure was Midnight Madness, with a verrrrrry young Michael J. Fox. I LOVED that movie! Especially the giant football players in the tiny VW bug labelled "Meat Wagon." Most beautiful piece of treasure from a movie? The jeweled egg in Octopussy. Which Bond babe was hottest: Carole Bouquet, Diana Rigg, or Michelle Yeoh? (I have to ask, because they're my three favorite and sometimes it's hard to decide!)
Also, if we can go down the path of lucid deduction, what leads you to believe that Mal woke up? Maybe because that gives the movie a nice moral -- not to get too self-involved -- instead of it just being a generic action flick? Dunno. Any thoughts on why the train didn't wake them both up and why Mal's subsequent death would've woken her up if the train didn't? They were in too deep for just any dream death to do. Her "suicide" was intentional, with the express intent of waking herself up. I'm foggy on the train (it's been a while since I've seen it), but I don't recall anything about it an that context.
No, it was a typo. I am perfectly imperfect, remember? Thanks for pointing it out so I can correct it. Again, there's that humor thing. Instead of accepting it for what it is (an attempt to reach out to you as a fellow human), you apparently choose to view it as an accusation of some kind? That speaks of a fairly serious persecution complex that you might want to get some help with.
Or read the post above, where "even if it's fun" is added to the observation that attacking the practice of religion is pointless, but not to the same observation regarding homosexuality. (Apologies to that poster--I am not trying to call you out, but that is a good example of what I am talking about.) I am that poster, and no apologies are necessary, but please let me take an opportunity to explain something -- it's easy to make fun of people who take themselves too seriously, and sometimes it's helpful to them (it is to me). My gay friends make fun of each other, and me, all the time: I might say something like "Hey, dude, I ordered the rose wine for you -- it's a FABULOUS shade of pink!" and get a reply along the lines of "Oh, now he's noticing colors! What's next?!" It's OK in that context because (a) they realize I have zero antipathy towards them, or their orientation, and vice versa; and (b) they know I've got their back when push comes to shove; and (c) they appreciate that I can laugh at myself, and everyone else, and so can they. Same thing with my Christian friends, who call me an "immoral, godless heathen!" -- but when we need to go on a beer run, I retort, "Why bother? Can't you guys turn water into wine?" The minute someone chooses to become offended by all this, that's a sure sign their letting their grandiose ideas of self-imporantance as "cause messiahs" interfere with their humanity. It's a wake-up call. It's one I personally would be grateful for, and have been in the past. So why call it out in a post for one and not the other? So far, the homosexual posters on this thread haven't been the ones being totally humorless.
So do you or do you not see the difference between an attack on people and an attack on a practice? Personally, for me it would depend whether the practice acually abridges the rights of others. But of course, the idea of "unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others" is an Enlightenment concept, not a religious one, so never mind.
Also, are all the sub-sections under the Variations in the Core Rules (Introduction p. 5-7) considered optional rules or just some of them? Critical Failures and Critical Successes specifically mention that they are optional rules, but not the othe sub-sections. EVERYTHING is considered optional rules -- that's the whole point of this project. Some rules (those sub-sections specifically called out as such) are even "more optional" than the rest -- in other words, "you really, really should discuss this with your group before implementing."
I'm assuming there's enough space inside a body to hide a parasite, although the original Body Thief entry causes the Devourer to shrink in size to fit inside the host. Yeah, a Small creature won't fit inside a Medium one. I had envisioned something more like Heinlein's The Puppet Masters, where the critter rides on your back but extends a tendril into your nervous system.
Do you plan to update the game with new rules? Expansions, so to speak? In my home game, I allow just about anything if it can be modified to fit the basic mechanics and general intent of the existing rules. ("You want to play a Pathfinder Summoner? Lemme look... yeah, it's fine. Approved." or, "You want to play an Inquisitor? Look, start with cleric and the Inquisiton domain, then multiclass cleric/rogue or cleric/ranger or cleric/rogue/ranger -- it'll get you to the same place, in the end.") I'd encourage others to do the same. The rules posted are to show people HOW we go about modifying things; they were never intended to represent all possible options.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
