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

ShadowcatX's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 4,950 posts. 9 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,950 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:

Would you equally object to a doctor giving someone who was bleeding out (say from trauma) a transfusion if they had a braclet saying they opted not to take another individual's blood for religious reasons? We'll even say the person is unconscious so you can't simply ask them.

Eta: Or, to avoid the religious topic assume they are under the influence and cannot consent to a life saving, emergency, procedure.

Presumably they were of sound mind when getting the bracelet.

That doesn't mean they weren't coerced into getting it.

Andoran

Honestly I like the idea but I'm not sure about the execution, experienced combatants are going to be able to read their enemy's movements and react to even minor changes on the fly, your system doesn't allow for that much. Beyond that penalizing martial characters by making full attacks risky is bad.

Andoran

I'll usually try and ignore it, but if I can't I will say something once, after that I'm going to go get the staff. It just isn't worth it to confront people now days, you never know when someone is one comment away from pulling a knife or a gun.

Andoran

Despite the down playing of very serious side effects and some very barbaric lines of treatment, keep in mind, these medicines generally (not always of course, but much more oftten than not) are very good for the people that need them and often lead to a signifint improvement in the quality of a person's life.

Would you equally object to a doctor giving someone who was bleeding out (say from trauma) a transfusion if they had a braclet saying they opted not to take another individual's blood for religious reasons? We'll even say the person is unconscious so you can't simply ask them.

Eta: Or, to avoid the religious topic assume they are under the influence and cannot consent to a life saving, emergency, procedure.

Andoran

Freehold DM wrote:

I was wondering when ECT was going to be brought up.

Yes, it exists. I have two people on my caseload who have had it done. Both had it done voluntarily in the 80s(they aren't spring chickens). One utterly hated it. The other disliked it, but stated it actually worked on his diagnosis for months- roughly as long as he could ride on the med-go-round- without the ugly sexual side effects he hated. To my knowledge, it still exists, but it isn't done that often. There's also some work that has been done in electrical stimulation(not shock) via leads to the brain on the head, and other things, going as far as the idea of a pacemaker for the brain, which requires surgery and has produced some positive results. I have never personally witnessed ect, and while I could be wrong, but noone in my place of business does it, and that's the lens I see things through on a daily basis. There is a world outside my four walls, though, so if anyone wants to share, please do.

The person whom I got my information on ECT from received it less than 2 years ago. And saying that person hated it, is not nearly strong enough language to describe how the person felt and still feels about it. To this day the person experiences anxiety simply plugging something into an electrical outlet, to say nothing of the damage it caused.

Quote:
With respect to antidepressants, Yeah, there is a suicide risk attached. There is also a weight gain risk attached. The suicide risk has given most meds in that category a considerable and deserved black eye, as that particular type of med(can't remember the exact category) was providing energy to counter the lethargy associated with depression while doing little to help with the actual depression. There's also a dosage related issue there, but that is something that leads to arguments more often than not, so I'm not really going to go into that.

My point wasn't to try and say that anti-depressants (or any psychiatric medications for that matter) are bad, far from it. I am, however, trying to show that they can and sometimes do have SERIOUS side effects that don't deserve to be waved off with "a pound or two" and "inability to achieve sexual release, which you probably weren't doing anyways cause you're depressed" type comments.

Quote:
Forcing someone to take meds? I know in the State of New York, you have to go to court to prove that, and at the end of the day, someone can decide to NOT take meds at all, and deal with the consequences on all levels. That can be a long path, and if there's a whiff of violence you could find yourself committed involuntarily. Things have changed a great deal since my first day at work to today in that area, and while I think things have improved, I don't think they are perfect yet, I do think they are moving, glacially, in a direction where everyone involved- patient, family, medical staff- has a voice and a part to play in the decision.

It isn't just going to court. It is court, doctors visits, and quite possibly other consequences (as you mention), none of which are cheap or easy. And here in Oklahoma, I'd say things are a long LONG way away from being perfect.

ETA: I am not a health care professional.

Andoran

@Sissyl: You know (or should know) that I respect you, but I think you are seriously downplaying the risks associated with medications and forced treatment. Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of the following.

@Everyone Else: The following is not the norm, however, I'm going to discuss it because it does exist.

Let's talk about depression, Sissyl mentioned the side effects include gaining a pound or two. First, "a pound or two" is possible, but going from a normal, healthy weight to morbidly obese is also possible, and can bring its own serious health (both physical and mental) risks. Second, one of the biggest risks in anti-depressants is an increased risk of suicide (usually in the first week or so of treatment) when people are regaining their motivation to act, but their vision is still colored by a lack of hope.

But there are treatments far more distressing than being forced into anti-depression medication. Say the anti-depressants don't help (and they don't help everyone), you may get to be graduated to ECT* which has a whole host of permanent side effects including permanent brain damage (which is actually the goal of ECT) and permanent nerve damage.

*ECT

Spoiler:
If you don't know what ECT is, you might know it by its more common name, electric shock therapy, aka. where they strap you to a table, face down so you don't choke on your own vomit, and try and destroy enough of your brain so you're not depressed any more.

Also, the process of getting someone declared incompetent against their will (which is what the whole force them into medical treatment relies upon), is neither easy nor cheap (especially if you want it to be done quickly, which if there's serious problems you would want). You'll have a leg up if the person is an immediate relative, but if the person is functioning (which many people with depression and mania are) then you're in for a serious struggle and you're not guaranteed to win, even if you're right.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with this. People are born the way they're supposed to be

What supposed? According to whom? Deity? Biology? Sociology? Existentialism?

Biology is a cold, harsh and uncaring mistress to the individual. It makes gravity look nice. All biology cares about is that the DNA keeps on getting to reproduce, and its motto is "close enough for state work". If some individuals only live a short life filled with nothingbut pain and misery who cares! there are reserves.

BNW and I agree on something. The world has gone mad.

Andoran

3 people marked this as a favorite.

From where I sit, Scott has been very reasonable. If you'renot inteested in discussion on this topic why are you in this thread?

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
xn0o0cl3 wrote:
Can anyone explain what a piece of "honest" game journalism would look like? I honestly can't really conceive of it. What can a game review actually be except for an extension of game advertising? Are honest game reviews supposed to be objective or something? How would that even be possible if the review is literally just the opinion of the journalist? What else could it possibly be?

Go to endzeitgeist.com and read some of his reviews of third party products for pathfinder.

Andoran

Scott Betts wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Welcome to the real world. This (and much worse) happens. A lot. In every industry. The food you believe safe, the drugs you believe will make you well, the brake pads that will protect you and your loved ones, even our precious table top rpg community, they all have flawed and outright bad people working on them. Trust no one.
Should those people be exposed as "outright bad" when the opportunity arises?

In a perfect world where everything is simple and provable in court and won't interrupt on going police investigations,then probably. But here's a question, why is it being exposed? I watched the first few minutes of the first video, you know what I got? That a woman had sex with some people outside of her relationship and the vlogger doesn't care. Don't know who the guys were, don't know if they pressured her into it or if she offerred in exchange for something, etc.

Andoran

Ok, ignoring the fact that there is no solid evidence this happened beyond the word of an extremely biased source...

Welcome to the real world. This (and much worse) happens. A lot. In every industry. The food you believe safe, the drugs you believe will make you well, the brake pads that will protect you and your loved ones, even our precious table top rpg community, they all have flawed and outright bad people working on them. Trust no one.

Andoran

CR 5 ish encounter for a party that's ECL 7 or so. They should manage just fine, though as always with axes there's a chance of Crit, you're dead. (Not a high one, with 4th level characters, if they were smart enough not to tank Con, but it is there.)

Andoran

The race builder is very, VERY, badly balanced. I would not use it to try and make a balanced race, nor allow my players to do the same. Instead, use it as a starting off point, and then make tweaks to balance as necessary.

Andoran

Simon Legrande wrote:
They say 1:68 children has some form of autism, am I the only one who sees that as utterly ludicrous? Am I the only one who thinks too many people just want a drug to make the problems go away?

What are your qualifications to make that decision, because you are going against hundreds, if not thousands, of doctors, and thousands of hours of research.

Andoran

I ran a soul thief for a bit and virtually all my feats went to expanded knowledge so I could steal the best powers from other lists. Boat loads of class features, and the best (and most spammable) powers = winning combination. That was a while ago and the vitalist might have been updated since then however, not that having energy missiles or astral constructs is ever a bad thing.

Andoran

Fixed my link. And yeah, not quite sure what Algeria was going for, though I do admit, it has a certain appeal to it. . .

Still a better photoshop job than the second U.S.A. pic.

Andoran

Rysky wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
In China it is illegal to reincarnate without prior government approval.
Illegal for the one being reincarnated, or the one being reincarnated into?

Given that they're the same person, does it matter?

Also, the idea of beauty is very different across the globe, as seen here.

Andoran

I would probably rule that he can no longer summon his eidolon at all. If I thought this wasn't an attempt on his part to game the system, I might offer im a one time conversion to a normal summoner.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Am I the only one bothered by the fact that the assesment has a 31% pass rate?

That aside, basic algebra is extremely useful in every day life, but it is so second nature to most of us we don't even think about it. (I have 50 dollars to spend on concert tickets. Concert tickets are $10. How many can I buy? = [10x=50, solve for x.])

Andoran

Regular mounts as animals. Animals do not have class levels. Experience is only used for advancing class levels. Ergo, mounts do not gain experience.

Andoran

BigNorseWolf wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
In which case you can't argue that Israel doesn't have a right to invade and kill every member of Hamas they can, if one is at war, they both are.
Yes. I can. Simply declaring a state of war does not create moral parity. Israel is the aggressor taking Palestinian land. They have been doing so steadily and repeatedly for 50 years. Fighting to prevent that is more just than fighting to continue it.

Then we're going to have to agree to disagree, because IMO: If someone is trying to kill you, you have every right to try and kill them back. The fact that they might have a legitimate reason to try and kill you doesn't invalidate that. Everyone, man, woman, child, soldier, etc. has a right to defend their own lives.

Quote:
Quote:
Eta: If the food isn't being given away it is no different than any other contraband.

Ok. Stop.

Go look in the mirror.

Repeat out loud

There is no need to try and make this personal, drop with the attacks.

Quote:
Holy HELL man.. CONTRABAN? Contraban? I'm sorry, big brother israel thinks you can use that chicken sandwhich for TERROR CALORIES! If you're not on the brink of starvation they you could fight back! And we can't have that! You must be starving or the terrorists might almost put up a fight!'

What do you think happens to food that gets smuggled in? Do you think it goes to the poor who wouldn't otherwise get it, starving children perhaps? Or do you think it goes to the people who can afford it (and who wouldn't be going without anyways) or who are willing to do whatever it takes to get it, basically allowing Hamas to make slaves of their own people?

There are two reasons to smuggle, humanitarian and for profit. If Hamas isn't doing it as humanitarian aid, then it is for profit, and it doesn't matter what is smuggled, all it amounts to in the end is dollar signs (and that very likely translates to rockets fired at Israel).

Quote:
No. It doesn't. Its ok to smuggle because NO ONE, no government, not your own, and certainly not the militaristic expansionist government of your occupiers, has the right to tell you that you can't have a damned sandwhich

Governments do it all the time my friend. "Sorry, your population is getting too fat, no more selling large sodas at ball games." "Sorry, raw chicken is deadly you can't serve it." (Its only deadly because we don't enforce standards to make it safe.) "Sorry, milk has to be refrigerated, you can't serve it warm." (Again, proper pasteurization techniques would allow milk to be stored on a shelf without problems.)

Andoran

meatrace wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
I supose as one of Israel's supporters generally I should mention that I think this land grab is a ridiculously bad idea and that nothing good will come from it.
Then why did you defend it upthread?

I never defended this land grab. I think you misread something.

ETA: I know what you're talking about. I was referring to the creation of Israel as a whole, not this particular land grab. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in my previous posts.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Are Palestinians arrested by Israel all given due process, phone calls, lawyers and bail?

That's why I made the comparison. When Hamas does it, it's kidnapping. When Israel does it, it's arresting. But it's the same thing.
If you have evidence they aren't being given basic human rights after being arrested I would like to see it.

Amnesty International

"Administrative detentions". Not to mention torture.

Bleh. Six of one, half a dozen of the other then. Thank you for the link.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Please note the tunnels your article discusses are the ones going into Egypt, not the ones going into Israel. It is a lot easier to smuggle in a country that isn't quite as hostile, and much harder to use tunnels that go away from your foe to attack said foe.
Which so far have all been military targets, which the palastinians have every justification for doing.
In which case you can't argue that Israel doesn't have a right to invade and kill every member of Hamas they can, if one is at war, they both are.

Two points.

1) They are not at war. They cannot be at war. War exists between states. Israel is an Occupying Power, holding control of the Palestinian Territories. As such they have far more responsibility for protecting civilians under that control than they would in a normal state of war. Hamas is a resistance movement in occupied territory.

2) That said, Israel does have the right to kill or arrest resistance fighters, which would include Hamas's military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades and arguably the senior leadership of Hamas itself. Not, "every member of Hamas", which would low-level bureaucrats and other government officials. However, they do not have the right to disproportionate use of force or excessive civilian casualties. They do not have the right to collective punishment of Palestinian civilians.

But that's all legal niceties and doesn't really matter. Practically, Israel has the right to do damn near anything it pleases to Palestinians as long as it doesn't upset the American public enough that the US government has act on it.

And Hamas "resistance fighters" have a duty not to involve civilians, yet it happens. They have as much responsibility for the deaths of their people as the Israelis.

That said, you're right about the practicality of what happens. What Hamas really needs is a damn good PR departmment in the EU.

And "every member of Hamas" was a terrible choice of words.

Andoran

BigNorseWolf wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
I supose as one of Israel's supporters generally I should mention that I think this land grab is a ridiculously bad idea and that nothing good will come from it.

Ok, now the hard part.

What can the palastinians do about it, what should they do about it, and what are they morally allowed to do about it?

If you are asking me is it a justification to attack Israel, then sure, but they will lose, and cause more of their own people to die. This will also ensure the loss of land is permanent, and likely what Israel wants.

Honestly, what they should do is appeal to the U.N., and to Israel's courts. But if they go that route, any violence is going to ruin their claim, not that it is likely to be honored anyway. Maybe they could bbuy it back, a kind of rockets for land deal. Sucks to have to buy what you should already own, but it is probably their best chance.

Personally, I'd want to salt the entire thing and tell them to choke on it, but that would be a huge waste of resources and probably go over less well than rocket attacks.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:
No, I'm pretty sure Hamas is a terrorist organization, the question is would they exist if Israel hadn't been so aggressive in it's seizure of land and restrictive control of imports and exports?
Why are you so sure that Hamas is a terrorist organization? They don't seem to be behaving any differently than the Israeli government and most people don't call the Israeli government a terrorist organization.
Do you have proof that members of Israel's government capture and kill Palestinian teenagers, because Hamas has admitted that the kidnappings were the work of their members? If not, I assume you'll be retracting your comments.

Of course they don't kidnap Palestinian teenagers. They arrest them. There's a huge difference.

When they don't just shoot them, that is.

Do you think the teenagers Hamas killed would rather have been kidnapped or arrested?
I'm sure they would rather not have been killed. Other than that, there's not a lot of difference.
Do you think the kidnapped victims were given due process? Were they given a phone call you think? Allowed access to a lawyer? Given bail?

Are Palestinians arrested by Israel all given due process, phone calls, lawyers and bail?

That's why I made the comparison. When Hamas does it, it's kidnapping. When Israel does it, it's arresting. But it's the same thing.

If you have evidence they aren't being given basic human rights after being arrested I would like to see it.

Andoran

BigNorseWolf wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Please note the tunnels your article discusses are the ones going into Egypt, not the ones going into Israel. It is a lot easier to smuggle in a country that isn't quite as hostile, and much harder to use tunnels that go away from your foe to attack said foe.
Which so far have all been military targets, which the palastinians have every justification for doing.

In which case you can't argue that Israel doesn't have a right to invade and kill every member of Hamas they can, if one is at war, they both are.

Eta: If the food isn't being given away it is no different than any other contraband. Claiming that it is okay to smuggle it because it is just food implies it is being done as a humanitarian thing, not a for proffit which is used to buy weapons thing. To me, at least.

Andoran

I supose as one of Israel's supporters generally I should mention that I think this land grab is a ridiculously bad idea and that nothing good will come from it.

Andoran

Please note the tunnels your article discusses are the ones going into Egypt, not the ones going into Israel. It is a lot easier to smuggle in a country that isn't quite as hostile, and uch harder to use tunnels that go away from your foe to attack said foe.

Never the less, I don't disbelieve that some food travelled through them, smuggling anything is big money. Including slaves, or brides, as your article so delicately puts it. Just because food got smuggled doesn't mean it was given away.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:
No, I'm pretty sure Hamas is a terrorist organization, the question is would they exist if Israel hadn't been so aggressive in it's seizure of land and restrictive control of imports and exports?
Why are you so sure that Hamas is a terrorist organization? They don't seem to be behaving any differently than the Israeli government and most people don't call the Israeli government a terrorist organization.
Do you have proof that members of Israel's government capture and kill Palestinian teenagers, because Hamas has admitted that the kidnappings were the work of their members? If not, I assume you'll be retracting your comments.

Of course they don't kidnap Palestinian teenagers. They arrest them. There's a huge difference.

When they don't just shoot them, that is.

Do you think the teenagers Hamas killed would rather have been kidnapped or arrested?
I'm sure they would rather not have been killed. Other than that, there's not a lot of difference.

Do you think the kidnapped victims were given due process? Were they given a phone call you think? Allowed access to a lawyer? Given bail?

Andoran

meatrace wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
You're the one making the claim that the terrorist organization that was using the illegal tunnels into enemy territory for humanitarian purposes, the onus to provide proof is on you. I don't have to disprove anything.

No, I'm arguing that the democratically elected government of some-odd million people is using tunnels to do illegal things that INCLUDE both humanitarian aid (smuggling of contraband i.e. food and medical supplies) as WELL as using them to coordinate rocket strikes on Israel.

What you're saying is preposterous, that tunnels (how many are there? dozens? hundreds?) are used SOLELY to ferry militants into areas to conduct rocket attacks, which happens relatively rarely, and are NEVER used to actually smuggle anything of any kind ever ever ever period.

Oh really? I said that huh? How about providing a quote of me saying that? That would be awesome.

Andoran

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Israel takes more land.
Quote:
Hamas has said the teens were abducted by Hamas militants.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:


No, I'm pretty sure Hamas is a terrorist organization, the question is would they exist if Israel hadn't been so aggressive in it's seizure of land and restrictive control of imports and exports?
Why are you so sure that Hamas is a terrorist organization? They don't seem to be behaving any differently than the Israeli government and most people don't call the Israeli government a terrorist organization.
Do you have proof that members of Israel's government capture and kill Palestinian teenagers, because Hamas has admitted that the kidnappings were the work of their members? If not, I assume you'll be retracting your comments.

Of course they don't kidnap Palestinian teenagers. They arrest them. There's a huge difference.

When they don't just shoot them, that is.

Do you think the teenagers Hamas killed would rather have been kidnapped or arrested?

Andoran

Pink Dragon wrote:

The things brought in through these tunnels is neither contraband nor done through smuggling. The tunnels themselves are not illegal.

The tunnels do not lead from Gaza to enemy territory. The lead from Gaza to Palestinian lands that were stolen from them at gunpoint and now occupied by Israelis.

Hamas is only a "terrorist organization" because that is what they are labeled by those who wish to vilify their efforts in defending their lands from occupiers who are stealing the lands at gunpoint.

Territory that they, themselves stole from the Israelis, who stole it from the people who inhabited it before them, etc. What makes Palestinian claim to the land more legitimate than Israel's?

Andoran

Pink Dragon wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:


No, I'm pretty sure Hamas is a terrorist organization, the question is would they exist if Israel hadn't been so aggressive in it's seizure of land and restrictive control of imports and exports?
Why are you so sure that Hamas is a terrorist organization? They don't seem to be behaving any differently than the Israeli government and most people don't call the Israeli government a terrorist organization.

Do you have proof that members of Israel's government capture and kill Palestinian teenagers, because Hamas has admitted that the kidnappings were the work of their members? If not, I assume you'll be retracting your comments.

Andoran

Dungeon World.

Andoran

meatrace wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
meatrace wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
And once again, everything is Israel's fault and Hamas can do no wrong. My bad. Much better to spend your efforts making tunnels that will get your people killed than to spend those same efforts saving your peoples lives because, obviously, if you can't make everything perfect for anyone you shouldn't try and make anything better for anyone.

I know you like to talk about how evil Hamas is, but remember that Israel has an effective blockade set up and an admitted policy of only letting enough food and supplies in so that the population of Gaza is always on the edge of starvation.

Maybe tunnels so you can sneak in contraband (i.e. food) is also important.

I'm sure that's what the tunnels were for, sneaking food into the country. Right. . . If you believe that I've got some ocean side property I'll sell you on the cheap.

Beyond that, I wonder, was the gain worth provoking Israel and forcing their hand and the thousands of people who have died from such?

"Oh I'm just like SOOOO sure" doesn't approach the level of discourse I expect from adults, let alone count as evidence to the contrary.

Please try again, this time with less personal attacks.

You're the one making the claim that the terrorist organization that was using the illegal tunnels into enemy territory for humanitarian purposes, the onus to provide proof is on you. I don't have to disprove anything.

Andoran

meatrace wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
And once again, everything is Israel's fault and Hamas can do no wrong. My bad. Much better to spend your efforts making tunnels that will get your people killed than to spend those same efforts saving your peoples lives because, obviously, if you can't make everything perfect for anyone you shouldn't try and make anything better for anyone.

I know you like to talk about how evil Hamas is, but remember that Israel has an effective blockade set up and an admitted policy of only letting enough food and supplies in so that the population of Gaza is always on the edge of starvation.

Maybe tunnels so you can sneak in contraband (i.e. food) is also important.

I'm sure that's what the tunnels were for, sneaking food into the country. Right. . . If you believe that I've got some ocean side property I'll sell you on the cheap.

Beyond that, I wonder, was the gain worth provoking Israel and forcing their hand and the thousands of people who have died from such?

Andoran

By RAW, yes it would not work for a wizard because it says spells known. Wizards do not have spells known.

That said, anyone that . . . Particular about RAW has much larger concerns.

Andoran

Pendagast wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:

You all realize that he constantly rubs people the wrong way, enough so that they are constantly trying to kill him?

And low intelligence? The guy who figured out that the west didn't drop off a cliff, and who spent his time learning a second language because he had the knowledge and forsight that it might be useful has low intelligence?

As to him being a slayer, that's out of bounds, O.P. specifically said Viking, which fits.

Originally, In 1E hitler was given in the description of 'Charisma' as having an 18. PLENTY of people not liking hitler and trying to kill him.

/sigh. Ok. Hitler could motivate people by speaking to them. He could rally them to his cause against their better judgment and well, they were happy to kill for him (less happy to die for him, I suspect, but they still did it and did it in droves). The people aren't fighting and dying for Ragnar the majority of the time, they're fighting to amass wealth. Do you see the difference?

Quote:

One can learn a language without having a high intelligence.

Ragnar did know, or study or learn that there was a west anything.
He went on gut instinct, the willingness to take a chance, and spirit of adventure (charisma)

Ok, first off, go actually read the definition of Charisma, because "gut instinct, the willingness to take a chance, and spirit of adventure" is not even remotely close to it.

Second, one does not need to study and learn to have a high intelligence. Education and intelligence are not the same thing, heck they barely even live in the same house.

Quote:
The compass thing was an invention of the TV show and wasn't used by the original viking explorers. Who navigated on instinct, luck and a whole lot of hope.

What's your point? It doesn't matter that the TV show isn't 100% accurate, we were requested to build the guy off the TV show. In the TV show he is smart.

Quote:
It was a complete gamble/gut feeling and also based on rumor from others who had done it long ago.

So from studying history? Oh look, another skill point I missed. Thank you. Yet another reason for him to have a high intelligence.

Andoran

Tried to update my post above, but was 1 minute too late pushing submit and lost everything. :(

As to skills Rragnar would have profession farmer (because he is, you know, a farmer), probably profession sailor as well, knowledge of religion, geography, local, and maybe tactics, diplomacy, sense motive, perception, and of course, linguistics.

Compare that to the skills of the average person in his group / tribe / whatever. He is significantly more knowledgable and more skilled. Hence, above average intelligence. If anything, I might have shorted him on intelligence, maybe that is where his second racial bonus should go if you go that route.

As to charisma, people aren't following him because they love him, he doesn't make speeches that make their hearts break out in song. They follow him because he is what they want in a leader and he brings them wealth.

Spoiler:
Compare that to Lagartha, who after she murdered her husband in front of his people they put her, a woman and an outsider, up as their earl rather than some man from among their own. That is charisma. Ragnar doesn't have that.

As to his brother's stats, I'd dump wisdom, drop intelligence, to raise his strength and con higher, and definitely put the second racial bonus in a physical stat.

Andoran

Gambit wrote:

His ambition isnt backed or driven by a superior intellect or pure logic. It was faith that sent him west.

And anyone, even a guy with a 10 Int, can put a point into Linguistics to learn a new language.

I dont want you to think I was trying to say that he is stupid or unintelligent, hes not. What I am saying though is that his mental scores go in the order of Int<Wis<Cha.

Regarding charisma, I dislike Obama, but even I will admit that the man is charismatic. Ragnar rubs people the wrong way because he is a radical, because he upsets the status quo.

Lots of people in the show have faith, but no one saw what Ragnar did. Beyond that, it wasn't faith that got him across the sea these several times, nor faith that planned the successful raids. I hope you're not trying to say he can't be smart because he has faith.

And yes, anyone can put a point into linguistics, but you should notice nobody else actually did but Ragnar, again, foresight and planning, halmarks of intelligence.

Ragnar doesn't really upset the status quo, going west was a biggie, for sure, but after that he's done mostly what was expected of him. Not like being ambitious was considered heretical or anything.

Andoran

Secret Wizard wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
You all realize that he constantly rubs people the wrong way, enough so that they are constantly trying to kill him?

High Charisma does not mean people like you, it means that you form stronger bonds with people who do like you.

I am finding it really hard to think of any charismatic leader without enemies.

I'm not sure I agree with your definition of high charisma, but even by your definition let me say:

Spoiler:
Like his wife who left him or his kid who went with his wife? Or his brother who betrayed him?

Andoran

The bloodline is probably weaker in a straight comparison, however, I would never allow it due to the summon monster being much more limited.

Andoran

You all realize that he constantly rubs people the wrong way, enough so that they are constantly trying to kill him?

And low intelligence? The guy who figured out that the west didn't drop off a cliff, and who spent his time learning a second language because he had the knowledge and forsight that it might be useful has low intelligence?

As to him being a slayer, that's out of bounds, O.P. specifically said Viking, which fits.

Andoran

What they are saying is that a 2 handed weapon is a specific subset of weapons in the rules, not simply weapons that require 2 hands.

Andoran

on topic

Andoran

I'd probably go:

Str 16
Dex 15
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 12
Cha 8

It may not seem that impressive, but when you thinkabout the fact that most people top out at 13 before racial, then you see he's pretty tough. I might even trade my feat in for another bonus somewhere. (Racial is already in str, con maybe?)

Andoran

Can I make a suggestion for a rule in future editions of the rule book?

"If you cannot ask a rules question with a straight face, or if the DM laughs so hard on hearing it s/he can't breathe, the answer is no." I can't help but feel that would take care of so many rules threads that pop up just because the writers assume that everyone is smart enough not to try and twf with a bow.

Andoran

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
meatrace wrote:
A very good Cracked article about Fergusen, fully sourced and attributed, with reams of video evidence.
Holy hell...

What he said.

1 to 50 of 4,950 << 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.