Angel wins for S5 alone.
I cant even watch Buffy anymore. Especially past S4.
Firefly is alright and I do like Dollhouse especially once they start exploring the other more malign applications of the doll tech.
But Angel for me is the best Whedon show and has the best ending.
I've been with my present group for the past 4 years or so and they are some of the most fun well adjusted and nicest players and people that I've ever gamed with.
I love them all to bits.
The final fight in ENCOUNTERS OF THE SPOOKY KIND.
I kinda notice that people on the internet take great pleasure in crapping all over things that they're supposed to be enjoying in the name of supposedly "trying to make it better". There's a way to pose criticism in a way where you don't come off sounding like an obnoxious jerk.
unfortunately most internet posters are either willfully ignorant of it or just prefer to be jerk's about it to seem edgy and cool. but in the end they just look like jerks.
I also notice that threads praising something are alot shorter than the negative ones criticizing something. Which is just fricking sad.
I think Landon Winter above me says it best though:
"But I'll be over here enjoying your game rather than arguing about it on the internet."
Choice is always a good thing.
For example the only thing that I'm personally going to fund on that list is the Reaper Kickstarter. I dont care about anything else on that list. But that doesnt mean that someone else does and that's great.
Other peoples choices aint all about me.
Even though I am one in a sense, I dont like nerds. While I love my hobbies I really do dislike the fandom for the most part.
I find my fellow gamer/anime/comic book fan to be for the most part (with a few exceptions of course) to intellectually dishonest and narcissistic, with a propensity for killing fun rather than just enjoying what they enjoy. For the most part because they can't relate to certain experiences they find them inferior or not important. They lack the ability to balance common sense with their "vastly superior" intellects. Most times, especially on message boards where they cant be held accountable for what they say or do, they come across as functional sociopaths.
I love my hobbies. LOVE THEM. But sometimes I really, REALLY cant stand the fandom.
Everyone who has commented above on 0 level spells has proven my point. None of you use them RAW. You either tell your players 'its not appropriate' or you try to 'distract' them from doing it. Regardless, you are circumventing the rules to make your games better. I say, lets just FIX THE RULES. We all know unlimited 0 level spells is silly, you have all just said so in your own ways as you don't allow it in your games in one way or another...and why? Because it is annoying as all H**L.
I have said NOTHING of the sort. Again, why do you get to be the arbiter of the right way to play for me and my group or anybody else's group but your own?
Because there is no ONE SIZE FITS ALL.
What works fine at my table might not and probably wont work at yours.
You are effectively saying that because you think something works well at yours you want it to work at EVERYONES. And that's not the case. I'll just end up house ruling it out anyway.
I like RPG's BECAUSE of the flexibility and that no two games(even using the same system) are ever going to be exactly alike. This is why I wont play in living campaigns and Pathfinder Society. The uniformity is not my bag. People have fun with it and that's awesome. I'm all for more fun. But it's not for me.
Did I mention Detect Magic??? My Druid never met a room he didn't cast detect magic in. He used it like a flash light. Its ridiculous and silly.
One of my players is a sorceress who uses this spell frequently. And honestly? I DONT CARE THAT SHE DOES. That's why it's there. She took it so that she could do EXACTLY what she's using it for.
But there have been a few times where she's been in a room using Detect Magic and I've had something crash into the room before the beginning of the 3rd round. Granted they usually are able to drive off and or defeat whatever shows up but then she has to start over again from scratch to find out what something is.
"The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it."
Again I dont get why this is a problem. Do you get upset at the fighters for using their weapons to smash, slice, stab their foes? No?
John Kretzer wrote:
It is just my nature when I hear about a problem to just fix it than to sit around and complain about it.
Yeah, this is really more my speed right here. Pathfinder isnt a perfect system and I do think different games better suit different play styles.
Ive been running a COTC AP game for the past 3 years. We dont get to meet often and tend to take summers off but we're a solid group and my players are great. We run into issues but nothing even remotely close to game derailing as some of the stuff we hear about on these boards. When I have to make a call I tend to stick as close to the rules as written and fair as possible. That's it. Are there house rules? Sure.
But half the time when I see people going on about how "this" thing is broken and "that" thing is broken I seriously start to wonder "Am I playing the same game as these people?" "Am I doing it right?" Should I be more nit-picky? Does it get me a smoother running game? No? So then I need to stick with what I'm doing.
My game runs smooth mostly because I dont have antagonistic players who are trying to break / abuse the system. I have one or two players who create very efficient builds that are a challenge to deal with. But theyre not doing it to be UBER. Theyre doing it because that's how they visualized their PC and they tend ot self police when they see a build is really abusive or bad. I dont think I've EVER told one of my players to tone down a build.
Anyway, maybe I lucked out because I have really good fun and fair players.
I also know how to challenge the hell out of them. I know when I need to change an encounter or a monster to make things tough. I also know when to leave things be so that they can steamroll through an encounter. To let them show off their badassedness.
I dont know, I think that there's a large human element to being a DM rather than the rules just being programming code that a DM complies and spits out.
I run most of my Pathfinder Game (in terms of using rules as reference) from my 128GB Retina display iPad.
I have Goodreader loaded with most of the Pathfinder PDF's that I'd need (Core, APG, UM, UC, Bestiary 1-3, UCampaign, ARG, UE and NPC codex).
I also have PRF and PFRPG rd (well as DM Tools, Summoner, DMDJ, iCrit, iFumble, PF Battle and Hero Lab Play) loaded which are easier (and quicker) for me to use when I have to look up something.
As the DM I travel to my games and lugging a bunch of books with the game to me is not cool. My iPad cuts that down significantly. And as soon as there's a full featured (or close to full featured version of Hero Lab for the iPad I'll get that too...
I like being able to customize monsters and having really strong guidelines for doing so. So constructing a monster using roughly the same method as PC construction works for me in a big way. Being able to slap Class levels on a monster is one of 3x's greatest strengths. The other great strength is the PFSRD and the ability to cut and paste what you need into an encounter or monster stat block. Hell I'm able to do it on my ipad or sometimes my phone while I'm at work or on the couch.
While I liked the 4E statblocks I didn't really care for the customization rules (they were too loose for my tastes).
Basically, 3x is a complex system but I make it easier for myself to prep my games from almost anywhere as long as I have access to my phone, tablet or laptop. Even when I don't and I have an idea for modifying a monster or encounter I'll still write it out then plug in what I need from the actual rules later.
So in short, yeah I guess I'm not one of the "most GM's" that you mention above. I dont want anything that's too simple and less customizable. Sorry.
I'm just really thankful for the ignore script that was created by...I forgot the d00d's name but THANK YOU whoever you are.
I agree with Patrick Harris, if I didn't have this ignore script I'd definitely frequent these boards alot less than I do.
I don't care if someone disagrees with me. I do care if their being a d**K about it. There's nowhere, NOWHERE where it says that I have to tolerate someone elses mean spiritedness. Bottom line if this were meatspace they'd probably be more polite and if not there would be words and a confrontation, which is something I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with.
Basically what I'm saying is, I have no problem listening to another viewpoint. But don't give me a reason NOT to want to listen to you.
It's funny but I realized that I've seen all THREE Riddick movies in screenings.
I saw PITCH BLACK at a screening when it came out and I knew who David Twothy was from THE ARRIVAL but knew nothing else about the movie and wound up loving it.
I saw CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK at another screening that I barely got into but I really wanted to see this movie. I was fine with it not being a complete repeat of the last movie and felt that it was kind of refreshing that they didnt do that. Once I realized I was watching a Conan movie set in the Warhammer 40k Universe (in terms of set design and costumes...) I was able to enjoy the hell out of it.
I fell assbackwards into passes for RIDDICK and when I heard that they were moving back into PITCH BLACK territory due to budget constraints (actually what I'd heard was that Universal wanted them to bring this in as a PG-13 but Twothy and Dissel wanted to be unfettered in terms of content. They basically told Universal that let us do the R rating and you can cut the budget. Universal agreed and that was that.) I was a little concerned.
But the movie I got was good. I feel like it was the first part of a longer film. You'll see what I mean when you see it. I still enjoyed though.
I saw this in a screening here in NYC about 2-3 weeks ago.
It is closer to PITCH BLACK in tone, but it's also kinda hit or miss. Overall I liked it but felt that it was setting up the further adventures of rather than just being it's own movie.
Golarion can advance. But it's up to each GM to decide how it advances, they aren't chained to something that Paizo puts out.
It's one of the reasons I got really turned off to FR so early on. With the fiction and the setting books playing with certain players was impossible. It was like if you made ANY changes it was like "You cant do that!" "That's not the way it happened in *insert book here*" or "well you do know that *Insert Powerful NPC here* is in this city and would probably not allow that to happen"
I hate that. More than almost anything in RPG's. The writers and the creators of the game world aren't at the table. If I don't want Elminster or some other NPC in a game that i'm running that's my prerogative. If you, as a player, have a problem with me OT having a slavish devotion to the canon of the books? Then you're not a player I want to play with.
Part of the reason I really like Golarion is that the world is built around the players in the form of the modules and the AP's. Not because a writer or the company says THIS is what's going on now. THIS is canon. And then the fans of the setting bow their heads in supplication and curse anyone who doesn't have their game fall in lockstep with that. UGH. NO.
Yeah and I was one of the people who said that.
I'm not exactly certain what issue you have with me saying that. Especially since I prefaced this with the fact that there are very few things that would make me walk away from Pathfinder as a game and Paizo as a company. I wasnt issuing a threat of any kind, TO ANY ONE.
Listen, if a company starts making a product that I have no interest in? I should what? Keep giving them my money? Because YOU LIKE IT, I should keep giving them my money? Really?
I've walked away from both HERO games and WOTC because they started making products that I was no longer interested in supporting. I have no illusions that me walking away is going to effect their bottom line. I wasn't threatening them with what I would do TO THEM. I was saying simply what I WOULD DO. Understand?
You know exactly what I meant when I said that.
EDIT: I had a less than polite response initially so I'm replacing it with this - It's fairly obvious that I equate Pathfinder with being closer to 3.5 than 4E. Hence "I'm playing Pathfinder BECAUSE 3.5 is my preferred ruleset".
You weren't asking a clarifying question. It was ALMOST an accusation. And if I'm remembering correctly you're someone who doesn't care for Pathfinder and is a 3.5 "purist" (not to be confused with that other guy...). So there's that.
Lord Twig wrote:
OH DEAR GOD NO.
You mean go the FR (and to an extent Greyhawk route)?
I always say that very little will pull me away from Paizo. The two caveats are if their product becomes too expensive for me to keep buying it and the other is if the start screwing the pooch by making changes that I really, REALLY don't like.
This thing that youre talking about? I'd drop Paizo in a heartbeat if they did this. The only other thing that I could think of that would make me leave faster is if they changed the ruleset to resemble 4E. That's not a swipe at 4E. I'm playing Pathfinder because 3.5 is my preferred ruleset and I'm not a fan of 4E. So yeah, out the door.
I stand when I GM for the most part so I don't mind the portrait nature of the screen.
Also the screen is made of sturdy stuff and is pretty durable. I bought mine when it first came out and I still have an it's in great condition. Like New actually.
Just wanted to give a counterpoint here. I like the screen as it is so IMHO you guys don't need to change a thing.
I gotta say, this is my first pathfinder subscription, and it may be my last. I'm VERY unimpressed. My FLGS has had the first part of Wrath of the Righteous in their store for a week, and I haven't even received a shipping notification, which means its still probably ANOTHER week away. I don't care about GenCon, or the other excuses, yes, excuses, for delays. If Gencon was going to be an issue, why didn't we send the subs out early, instead of late? Then, when I called, the person I spoke to was very unhelpful. Customer service, folks, its what its all about.
That's weird because I usually get excellent and prompt customer service by posting right here on the boards. I think because of the kind of shipping that I chose I ALWAYS get my hard copies AFTER my LGS gets it. But I get access to the material (via PDF) before they do so I actually dont mind.
If there is no way to placate you and getting the material in your hands is more important then maybe you should just consider doing just that. I've been an AP subscriber since the beginning so the whole Gen Con thing is something I'm used to by now. But that's just me. I'm patient. I know I'm going to get what I paid for and dont care if a get it in a week or two.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Thanks for the follow up Lisa.
I've never been a card game person. EVER. I have so many unopened free Magic starter decks from Cons that I've been to and have never played Magic or Pokemon. So the fact that I'm interested in and waiting for this particular card game is a big deal.
Still, while disappointing I totally understand why the need to wait and make sure everyone gets it at around the same time. After all it's only a week.
I like Paizo BECAUSE it's a small company and not a publicly held one.I like Pathfinder because it's a 3.5 variant and I love the Adventure Paths
I dont care about WOTC or D&D anymore so that doesn't even factor in.
If RPG's are going to lose me to anything right now it's boardgames. Which are easier to setup and get started on the fly. I just dropped something like $160 on Super Dungeon Explore and Zombiecide on Amazon. A few weeks ago I purchased Pandemic. I'm dusting off Munchkin, Settlers and (ironically) the 3 D&D Adventure Boardgames for a series of Game Nights in Sept, October and August.
Still I've been a AP subscriber and a RPG subscriber since the beginning. I have faith in Paizo. I love their product. I love the direction that they're going in. I intend to follow them until they truly screw the pooch or I cant afford their product anymore.
I agree with you that there are a few fans who are using Pathfinder as a placeholder game. I'm not one of them. I'm also willing to bet that most of the people who frequent the board are actual Paizo and Pathfinder fans and not fairweather fans.
I have no interest in D&DNEXT / 5E or whatever it's going to be called. The last time I spent money on a WOTC Product were the adventure games (Castle Ravenloft, Wrath of Ashardolon and Legend of Drzzt) which on their own were kinda fun. But they've effectively lost me as far as RPG's go.
And honestly I ABHOR the Realms. Granted I still have my original Grey Boxed set materials and the Realms articles in Dragon were great. But once fans started becoming obsessed with it and the literature and cannon became so invasive. BLARGH. I have no inclination to ever play in or run a Realms game. I like Golarion because it's exactly the type of game world that I'd put together if I could. and also the world isn't defined by the literature it's defined by THE ADVENTURES. I'll take that any day over any of the other settings (except Greyhawk, love Greyhawk...).
You can have the old TSR settings. I'm not going anywhere. Again here's the thing that I don't understand: I've been playing D&D since Red Box basic. I've literally spent THOUSANDS of DOLLARS during 3rd Edition alone never mind the editions prior. WOTC lost me with 4E. And I have no interest in 5E or NEXT. Should I be on WOTC's boards telling them how much I don't like their game any more?
I'm not hinting that you shouldn't be here. I'm saying: What's the point of being here if your sole purpose seem to be telling Paizo that they're going to lose their fanbase because their game sucks.
Yeah, in the same way that 2nd Ed D&D was a dressed up 1E Retroclone?
The OSR revival has been going on for YEARS. People have been saying "Ugh. 3.5 is TOO MUCH I want something simpler" FOR YEARS. Second verse, same as the first. That's fine. If you want something simpler you should GO DO THAT. I can't tell you what's fun for you.
The rest of us who like Pathfinder will be right here running and playing the game that we like.
It's weird, because somehow I can dislike other games without going on their boards and trolling them about how much their game and material sucks. Live and let live I guess.
Very much looking forward to picking this up, unfortunately my lo all shop is being told by alliance, their distributor, that they don't have the game in stock yet to send to stores. Are you aware of any delays or is this a random issue for my shop? Thanks as always.
Nope, it seems to be more than just your shop.
At the Compleat Strategist here in NYC they were told that they're not getting it until next WEEK.
Which is more than a little disappointing.
Jess Door wrote:
Yeah I agree with Jess here.
I'm not a fan of 4E or D&D or WOTC that much these days. After being off of D&D since 2008 I don't see myself going back. What I've read of NEXT isn't wowing me or winning me over so there's that.
Do I want them to fail spectacularly? or do I want some sort of crazy battle royale between Paizo and WOTC? HELL NO. I want Paizo to continue with the quality material that they've been putting out. They should be focusing on what THEY want to do and their fans and not competing directly with WOTC and D&D.
Back in 2007 - 2008 I saw a lot of what I'm starting to see now in regards to 3.5. People starting to crap all over Pathfinder saying it's bloated, there's power creep, it's broken BLAH BLAH BLAH. D&D NEXT is simpler, streamlined, elegant. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. Here's the thing that I never got from these so called fans: you can like two or more things at the same time. You don't have to crap all over one to profess your love for the other. Especially when you know that you're going to be complaining about that new system eventually.
I don't play games that I don't care for. I don't spend time crapping all over them either. 4E wasn't MY cup of tea. But It is SOMEBODY'S cup of tea and if you cant tell me what's awesome about something you like without crapping all over something else? It's not that something else that's faulty and broken. IT'S YOU.
Matthew Morris wrote:
And since I was reading and following the book at the time I don't recall their being as big of a backlash as there was for Miles Morales.
I've been reading pretty much the same comics that you guys have been reading since I was six or seven so I understand wanting to see the characters close to the same as I read them.
But that's not what I was talking about in the OP and you guys bringing that up almost seems to be excusing the utterly vile stuff that Donald Glover took for even suggesting a black Spider-Man. There's no excuse, NONE, for racist crap that was thrown his way.
I wasn't blaming all of the opposition on racism.
But the racism that came at Donald Glover and Brian Michael Bendis were very real and as a longtime comic book fan really damn hurtful.
One of the things that white (or non-black) comic fans always bring up when it's even suggested that their favorite characters race is going to change is "Why dont they create a NEW character! Don't mess with mine!!"
Miles Morales IS a new character. He's NOT a black Peter Parker. It's a Marvel Legacy character with someone being really inspired to take up the mantle of someone he REALLY admired. But to a lot of people that was wrong. And you cant tell me with a straight face that if they replaced Peter Parker with an alien, mutant or woman that the venom would have been the same. It's wouldn't have.
I received mine about a week and a half ago.
I didn't stress the whole communication thing. The Kickstarter updates were enough for me. They get here when they get here and they got here an MY GOD WAS IT GLORIOUS.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many minis. WAY TOO MANY.
Even my 11 year old who helped me unpack them and set them up on our folding table turned to me after they were all out of their plastics and assorted boxes and said: "Dad, that's a lot of minis."
This is right before he took the Ebonwrath and the sci-fi Marines that I ordered for him and retreated to his room.
My excitement about the Miles Morales (announcement) was dulled very quickly by the DELUGE of racist, hateful crap that poured out on message boards, twitter and Facebook. Please don't do that thing where where the racism gets downplayed as just coming from a fringe portion of fandom. Even if wasn't the majority of fans there was more than enough of it to be an issue.
You say this as if there isn't precedence for character death in the Ultimate universe.Most of the characters that we know of in the 616 universe? Their counterparts are DEAD in the Ultimate Universe. I've been reading Ultimate Spider-Man since issue #1. I have all of the hardcover trades (except ironically the last huge Death of Spider-Man one, but I have the single issues). I really, REALLY liked Peter Parker as he was portrayed in USM. BUT with everything that was going on in the Ultimate Universe there was NOTHING that made me think that he was going to be exempt from death.
The Ultimate universe is NOT the 616. Things change there ALL THE TIME. It's so very different than the 616 that I dont even know how you can justify saying that "While they change stories, it always seems respectful to their own source material". Really? So Ben Grimm murdering Doom is respectful of the source material? Reed Richards becoming a villain is respectful of the source material. The Blob EATING the Wasp is respectful of the source material?
Bendis (the writer of the book for almost 10 YEARS) has a multi-racial family. One adopted African girl, one adopted African American girl and two children with his wife Alicia. This is also the guy that put an interracial relationship between Luke Cage (Black Male) and Jessica Jones (White Female) front and center in an Avengers book. I think him wanting to put a non-white and especially a black male (yes I know he's half Puerto Rican but when people look at him...) front and center in a "mainstream" book. So the whole publicity stunt thing is not something that I buy.
People say create a "new character" there are two big problems with that. One white readers will not support the book. People can make excuses about the art being bad or the story or writing being lame but if a book like Christopher Priest's BLACK PANTHER run cant survive in the comic book marketplace because people wont give it a chance? (And the ONLY reason that it survived as long as it did was because Joe Quesada loved that book and kept it alive.)Then there is NO hope for an original black character to do so.
Research and as I said more than a few friends who have suggested that I read his work with caveats.
And THANK YOU JEFF, for not automatically assuming that I'm a complete idiot. And I mean that in the most honest and least sarcastic way possible.
When nerds try to say that they are more tolerant than others being a black guy that's been playing and running RPG's for about 30 years and have been into comics even longer?
I can say unequivocally that that's BS.
I just listened to Ryan Costello Jr and Reaper Bryan make that statement in one of the recent Know Direction podcast and became enraged. ENRAGED.
I just read the OSC thread here where posters basically blow off racisim as not that big of a deal compared to gay rights while some of them IN THE SAME BREATH cite the fight for gay rights as the same as the fight for civil rights. As a straight black male who actually doesnt see any difference between the fight for gay rights and the fight for civil rights or any difference between homophobia and racism it feels like a betrayal. It doesnt change my views but I cant help but be a little angry.
Anyway this is just a reminder for those who just love to say that racism is dead or just not that big of a deal or than no one sees black people (especially black men) like that:
Blayde MacRonan wrote:
Yeah. I dont read Lovecraft and refuse to read any Lovecraft. But I cant begin to tell you how many fanboy friends of mine tell me I should really just "look past" the blatant racism inherent in the mans work because they enjoy it so much and how good some of the stories are.
I dont care if the man is long dead that's NO EXCUSE. People are still consuming the material. New people are consuming the material. There are people HERE, NOW in the present who share similar views to Lovecraft. But just because the book was crafted in the past I'm supposed to over look it.
I have a feeling if he were as virulently homophobic and vile toward the LGBT community he would be tolerated less.
Intersectionality my behind...
Bill Dunn wrote:
RPG's are predominantly a white male/female hobby. Never am I more reminded of that when a topic on race (especially and specifically about blacks) rears it's head on an RPG message board. Even one as "progressive" as Paizo's. To clarify: that wasnt a slam @Paizo writers, developers or editors. It was a slam at the community. Especially those who, in this thread, resorted to the old canard or "well I'm not offended by it so you must be thin skinned and looking for something to be offended by." which is obviously fine to level in terms of race but if someone had said this about women and or the LGBT community? The offenders would have been shouted down in an EPIC (or should I say MYTHIC *wink wink*) thread of no less than 30 pages.
I understood what the OP was getting at. I also disagreed with it as I'm a little more well versed in the geography and populations of Golarion than he/she was. I could also see that how someone from the outside might make those connections based on OTHER pulp or fantasy correlations of Black people = some sort of beast or animal. Granted it wasnt accurate in this case but instead of people just coming out and saying so (which some of you did - so THANK YOU for that ) others thought it best to resort to the old "You saw it as racist so that means YOURE RACIST" canard that I've seen many times on RPG message boards. It's an attempt at silencing and shaming the speaker and no less offensive than when guys do that sort of thing to women on boards like these. Except that it's more accepted. Because there's probably a higher ratio of women to black gamers in the hobby I think.
Anyway just wanted to chime in on this thread.
One of the reasons that I'm pretty firmly in the corner of Paizo and Pathfinder is their level of inclusion in terms of representing different people. I like that the (original art) for Sheriff Hemlock resembled a black man or the image of Seelah a black woman in full plate. When I'm looking through my Pathfinder Books and my 11 year old son looks through them over my shoulder he can see people that look like him. For a kid that's kind of important and something that I notice a lot of gamers take for granted. Heroic representations of black people in the media (especially boys and men) are very, VERY few and far between. So when we DO see one we tend to hold it near and dear. That wasnt a call for Paizo to create a Black Male iconic. But we (my son) and I do appreciate the fact that you guys make the effort.
Thank You Paizo Staff.
I've been running a Curse of the Crimson Throne game with my players off and on for about 3 years now.
We use the Paizo Critical Hit and Critical Fumble Deck.
They have been the recipients of critical hits and they have been the recipients of critical fumbles. I dont have confirm rolls for either. In three years there have been about 4 character deaths one of which was a player making a conscious decision to put her PC in an almost certainly fatal situation to save the life of another PC.
None of those deaths have been the direct result of a critical hit or fumble.
On the other hand one of my players critted and one shot killed an enemy with a critical hit card.
And despite the time where I as the GM rolled something like 8 criticals in ONE during the duration of one session and me rolling something like 10 critical failures during another? It didnt ruin the game nor were my players ready to revolt.
Has a result from a critical fumble card made things difficult for the PC's during a combat? Absolutely. Has it done the same for my NPC's or monsters? You betcha.
There's also the fact that any spell cast that requires a to hit roll can be a critical hit or fumble as well.
I'm so thankful for my players. I REALLY am.
Well all the people complaining are right.
Reaper should have fulfilled their responsibilities to those people who gave them money for the Kickstarter in a timely fashion. For whatever reason they havent yet and people are upset.
Me personally? It was still so great of a deal and I'm not that impatient that I'm not willing to just simply wait to get my minis. Having worked in retail and done some shipping myself I know it's not as easy to get out that many orders as people think it is. I know that customers generally dont care about details and logistics and they want what they want and they want it now. I get that.
But to say that Reaper should have cancelled their con in order to get the Kickstarter orders out was...special. Renege on their responsibilities to one group of customers to fulfill obligation to another? Yes, because that always works.
If I were a different kind of person and dissatisfied with how Reaper is running their business I'd send them a strongly worded e-mail and ask for my money back and be done with them. I'd do THAT instead of going on a message board and laying into them in a public forum.
Hey wait that's EXACTLY the kind of person I am. Not so much with some others though.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I find that no one really appreciates the work that goes into something until THEY have to do it.
This is true with almost everything.
pH unbalanced wrote:
You better BELIEVE that it counts. I think that fact that you GM for your kids counts MORE. If you have a boys their first GM was their MOM. If you have girls their first GM was their MOM. Their mom is passionate about this creative endeavor there's a high likelyhood that they will at least be interested in the hobby.
That counts for a lot. At least it does where I'm standing.
Yeah, definitely subjective. This type of discussion came to the fore recently in a discussion I had with a Harry Potter fan about Severous Snape:
Movie and Book Spoiler:
who posthumously became one of my favorite if not my favorite Harry Potter character. Talk about sacrifice. When you realize what he was actually doing and the fine line that he had to walk to get the job done? I have waaaaaaaaaay more respect for him than I do for Dumbledore.
But still to some people he just boils down to "Meh. He was doing it for his old crush."
So for me in light of those revelations Snape became a very compelling perhaps the most compelling of the Potter characters next to my other favorite, Neville Longbottom.
Contextually there's a big difference between that and say casting white actors to play Latino/a parts in something like House of the Spirits or West Side Story. Tropic Thunder was done in good natured humor. Poking fun more at the actor who would so to the extremes that Kirk Lazerus (Robert Downey jr.) does for the part than the ethnicity of the character. People understood that and there wasn't a black person that I know, family or friends, who were offended by RDj's performance or the character.
On the other hand for all of the people who like to complain about color blind casting the OVERWHELMING majority of parts cast for feature films are white actors. Solid black parts are pretty few and far between still. Granted, it's better now than it was 20-30 years ago.
Again there's context. Casting Brad Pitt as the patriarch of a black family isn't going to work sight unseen unless there's some sort of in film explanation. Likewise for casting Morgan Freeman as a fictional member of an IRA terrorist cell. But casting Brad Pitt as the adopted child of a black woman, can and does work. Just like casting Morgan Freeman as a "generic" jaded older detective in a nameless city works.
Basically context matters. Is blackface still acceptable? No. But you cant deny that Laurence Olivier doesn't give a powerful performance as the moor Othello (1965-6?). Was there a black or Middle Eastern actor who could have played that part? Of course Paul Robeson comes to mind, but white audiences felt more comfortable with a white man (in black face playing a black man. I know hard to wrap your head around it but that's the way it was and for some still is. It's why R&B, Souls and Pop albums with black singers had white people on the album covers at first...) and please dont bring up the Wayan's Brothers "WHITE CHICKS" as a counterpoint as if everyone loves and accepts that movie. It's a piece of buffoonery at best and might be excusable as satire if it were actually, I dont know, funny? But it's crap. I wouldn't wipe my butt with that film.
Blayde MacRonan wrote:
Yes he's right about this Netflix NEVER had the full run of FMA:Brotherhood up. I know this because my 11 year old became a huge fan of the show and blew through all of the episodes and was waiting for the rest to show up on NEtflix.
When they didnt he watched the rest of the series on HULU. But the last time I checked they had even fewer FMA:Brotherhood episodes. They had the full run of the the original FMA though.
Her character arc in the first movie is more obvious and youre able to really empathize with her and this short lived but intense bond she has with Kyle Reese.
The second movie? Yeah she's buff yes she's tough and bad assed but she might as well be a robot herself in that movie. I felt no compassion for her as a protagonist and would have been fine with her dying during the course of the film. When the KILLER CYBORG is looking at you sideways at the cold way you talk to your child? Something is wrong.
As an action film the set pieces are larger and well executed, but emotionally as far as where the female protagonist goes T2 is kind of a step back. It's a good film though.
In ALIEN Ripley is pretty hard nosed before they realize that they're dealing with something that is really, REALLY over the Nostromo's crew's heads. You see it in her dealings with Parker and Brett in engineering. She doesn't back down from Parker one inch in their exchange. You also see it in her refusal to let Dallas, Lambert and the now face-hugged Kane back on the Nostromo.
Once she and Parker stumble across the fully grown Alien dragging Brett into to the vents, EVERYONE (with the exception of Ash) is shaken up and scared. Once things grow even more hopeless (Dallas failed attempt to lure the Alien out of the vents, Ash's revelation about his real motivations) the remaining survivors are in a state of BARELY restrained panic. And when it's just Ripley and Jones left it's her in full on scared out of her mind mode.
So I dont get where her behavior is inconsistent with someone being in a situation that she's in. As the situation gets more dire, she gets more scared. Seems realistic and simple enough to me.
And lest we forget that in ALIENS she very clearly DOES NOT WANT TO GO BACK OUT THERE. It's only the persistent nightmares and her realizing that she needs to somehow face the threat again and get past it that pushes her to join the marines and Burke on the Sulacco.
Even when on LV-426 she's in in survivor mode and pretty jumpy. The Marines and Burke aren't jumpy because they have no idea what they're dealing with. Even after the first encounter with the aliens, what does she suggest doing?
"...Take off. NUKE THE SITE FROM ORBIT. It's the only way to be sure."
That's not a tough gal talking. That's a PRAGMATIC gal talking. She DOES NOT want to be face to face with these things if she can help it.
As things get more and more dire she goes in the opposite direction that she did in ALIEN primarily because she has something to protect more than her own life and that's Newt. Even without the the missing scene of Ripley mourning her own daughter, the mother/daughter dynamic is still very much in the forefront in this movie. That missing scene drives it home a little more but was hardly necessary.
In fact the only other time that you see Ripley in a near state of breakdown and panic is when she thinks that she's lost Newt in the sewer.
Ripley: They dont kill you! They dont kill you! She's alive! She's alive....
When she jumps into the powerloader at the end to face the Queen Alien its not just to have some tough gal fight fest, it's pretty specifically to PROTECT NEWT.
Of course Ripley realizes that she cant let this hutch survive and torches it anyway which sets the Queen off to come after Ripley and her Cub.
All in all I think that Ripley is my favorite female hero BECAUSE of her pragmatism and because she gets afraid and she over comes her fear not soley for personal reasons but for something greater than herself. She's awesome.
Who makes up the majority of people in prisons? Black Males
Who makes up the majority of people who commit violent crimes? Black males
Who makes up the majority of people least likely to go to college and most likely to end up in prison? Black Males (actually I think Latino males may be catching up here...)
and none of the above has EVER stopped the majority of white america from viewing Black Males negatively.
Yes even today. So lets be real here people lump other people into GROUPS because it's easier to do and less messy and in some cases (like the aforementioned black and latino male) it's more convenient to dehumanize the "other".
And the vast majority of the police force in this country is made up of white males. The fact that they are poor or middle class means nothing when they are harassing a group of young dark skinned males for no reason while a group of white guys from the local collage are walking across the street with OPEN BEER BOTTLES.
When white men have to deal with the stigma of being viewed as a criminal and treated as such for no reason on a semi-regular basis or being seen as unemployable because of your skin color on a semi-regular basis or basically the blame for everything that's wrong with civilization on a regular basis then talk to me about fair.
Women definitely have a viable beef and have since probably THE BEGINNING OF TIME, the LGBT community has a viable beef as well.
Yeah, sorry I can hear you over the sound of YOUR OWN DEAFENING DOMINANCE OF THE WESTERN WORLD.
I'm not trying to undermine you here, but I live and work in NYC. In fact I work just off 34th and Park Avenue. I walk from Penn Station every day. I live in Queens along the E & F line and I'm sorry but the overwhelming amount of homeless people that I see are MALE not female.