Steven Tindall's page

My take on it is this.
Leave the established superhero community alone. I don't think anyone is ready for a gay batman or superman.
D.C. should take a page outta marvels book and develop NEW heroes.
I thought the idea behind Wiccan and Hulking was great and I enjoyed them as characters. Turning northstar gay and then having to scramble so he wouldn't be the lone gay in a sea of hard bodied spandex clad men seemed forced and unneeded.

As much as I love DC the only time I can remember reading about homosexuals were in the Wonder Woman series when one of the amazons was asked about the sex life on the island and said matter of factly that as a sisterhood they were very close "after all 3000 years is a long time"
and then the brother of Diana's agent was gay.
The opening in a issue of the titans where the villain saback was using the deadly sin of lust on an all male prison population including the guards was amusing.
The reason I use these examples is to show that normal everyday problems or social issues can be addressed in ways that don't upend the entire universe. As much as I would love to see a more inclusive mindset for the comic community just say no to batman as a rainbow costumed crime fighter.

Ekkonor1 wrote:

Every time a wizard attains a new level he/she gains 2 more spells to add to his or her spellbook but I read something about him/her getting more spells because of a high INT-score.

The last only refers to spell slots per day. The freebie spells are a fixed 2 per level.

Unless you took the Feat Collegiate Wizard from The Complete Arcane then you get 4 per level for free instead of two. Great money saving feat.

Just a quick update. After reading the posts my DM has decided that it was indeed a poorly worded description and has gone back and allowed my cleric to cast any good descriptor spells which he cares to memorise.
Thanks a bunch to everyone for their comments.

So when you make any sort of bacon sandwich what are key ingredients besides the Bacon?

I like good ripe tomato, boston lettuce and mayo (Hellmann's Mayo) I have been known to make my own mayo as well as a pesto mayo. I like a hearty bread too no wonder bread please.

Thoughts suggestions?

Having NOT read the entire thread I apologize if this combo has already been mentioned but a good thick cut bacon sandwich is made up of nice warm bacon fresh from the frying pan on two pieces of toast on a layer of peanut butter.

Sounds strange but it's very good.

Here's how I would rule:

1) As a LN cleric of Wee Jas, you have chosen to command/rebuke undead (read: channel negative energy). {This is perfectly legal.}

I kindda had to but yes your correct.

2) In order to do so, you must possess an unholy symbol. {No difference so far. All sides are in agreement.}

Correct.

3) If you command/rebuke undead, you also spontaneously cast inflict spells instead of cure spells. {This wasn't brought up, but hopefully it has been enforced.}

It has been although I never use it. I used the players option from The Complete Champion that lets me sack a 4th lvl spell permanently in order to channel positive energy for a Lay-on-hands ability. thus destroying the No cleric can channel pos. & negative rule.

4) You cannot cast Chaotic spells because of your alignment/deity alignment. {True.}
Yep.

{Here's where things begin to change, based on what you said in the first two paragraphs.}

5) As a Neutral cleric, you may cast Good or Evil spells - focusing too much on one type may affect your alignment.

I have been forced to be lawful good before but after I tortured and did other stuff to an assassin that tried to kill me then threatened that if he ever crossed me again I would trap his soul into his body and then animate it as an undead minion under my control I sorta lost my Lawful Good alignment and went back to law neutral. (tongue in cheek) darn those DM's that enforce alignment restrictions.

6) In order to cast Good spells you must have a holy symbol. This would be in addition to your normal (unholy) symbol.

I as a player would be fine with this but my DM seems to think that it's breaking all kinds of rules/laws/universal whatever's.

Mind you all this is coming after 15 lvl's of me casting good/sanctified/whatever type of spells I had memorized since lvl 1 so this late into it I can't see the change but he's of the mind set that once we discover a rule we MUST implement the rule.
I don't see it and am more than willing to carry a holy and an unholy symbol if he would allow it.

thanks for your input.

did anyone remember the amazons from Robert E Howards conan series?

They seem very intune with what your trying for with the exeption that Mr. Howards Amazons kept males as slaves and lived in high mud walled cities on the open svanah regions and had zebra rideing archers. If you can find the issues it would be worth chechking out. The first mention of them I remember was The avage Sword of Conan during his Quest for the Cobra Crown.

Neutral clerics can cast spells with either descriptor on that axis.

Your LN cleric can cast both Evil and Good spells.
Nothing in the Holy/Unholy Symbol description alters that.

Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells wrote:

A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or his deity’s (if he has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaos, evil, good, and law descriptors in their spell descriptions.

Unholy Symbols wrote:

An unholy symbol is like a holy symbol except that it focuses negative energy and is used by evil clerics (or by neutral clerics who want to cast evil spells or command undead).

Note that it states that an unholy symbol is like a holy symbol, except that it focuses negative energy. That's it. Nothing more.

That's my way of thinking too TriOmega. Thanks for the input.

OK I will try to keep this as brief as possible and still provide enough back ground to understand all the issue. Due warning Page numbers and rules will be cited this is a rules lawyer area.

During the latest game session my DM actually read the description of the clerics holy/unholy symbol under the equipment section on page 130 of the 3.5 players handbook. He is doggedly hanging onto the passage under unholy symbols where it says (or by neutral clerics who want to cast evil spells or command the undead)
Now by his reasoning any neutral cleric that chooses to command or rebuke the undead has alligned themselves with the forces of evil/darkness/kitten killers etc. and should not under ANY circumstances be allowed to cast spells with the Good descriptor.

I as the cleric in the party that is affected by this sudden rules change argue that on page 33 under the descriptions of chao/evil/Good/Law spells it says that a cleric can't cast any spells vs his or his deities alignment so I as a lawful neutral cleric can cast any seplls along the good/evil axis but am only stopped by the chaos vs law. Meaning I can never cast chaos spells.

My charecter is 14th lvl Lawful Neutral cleric of Wee Jas, naturally I have no choice but to command because it says so in the book again page 33 under turn/rebuke undead.

My DM is actually a very good friend and will be reading the responses here so lets please keep the discussion polite. I'm asking for rules clarification and opinions not insults.

I think that a neutral cleric should be able to cast spells like bless water, holy word, holy aura etc but because I use an UNHOLY symbol of a NEUTRAL deity my DM says they will no longer work.

I argue that the holy/unholy symbol is important for turn/rebuke NOT for general spell casting.

This is not a "please help me overrule my DM" type post.He and the rest of my group will be reading the responses so we can lay this to rest.

The solution of my charecter changeing alignment has come up but we are trying to avoid that if possible, if not, one quick attonment spell and he's brain washed to be as right thinking as a pelorite.

thanks in advance for your helpful responses.

I dunno since I'm not a parent I guess my opinion doesn't carry as much weight but I can't see anything wrong with what he did.

She to me sounds like a spoiled little princess with a bad attitude thinking everyone owes here what ever her little heart desires.

I think it's a waste to have destroyed the laptop. He should have slicked it, sold it and got his 130 bucks back. Then again maybe when he calms down and isn't quite so hurt over the things she said he would have given it back to her either way moot point whats done is done.

Freehold DM wrote:

What bothers me here is that your "opposite land" easily describes my childhood-young adulthood home, with a slight gap for when my mom got married and divorced.

Yeah it does happen. There are women out there who think that they should control men, and there are women who think that men are their little boy toys. There are even women out there who think of men as a separate subspecies that need to be controlled.

I do not like to associate with those kinds of women.

OMG! so you know my friend Courtney too. She likes to describe herself as a free spirit but when she has 5 different guys living with her all at the same time so she has variety that's a little too free even by my standards as a hard core slut.

Back to the main topic however. All I can do to try and correct the wrongs of objectifying women in art and so forth and horrible assumption of "male" privilege is to try and objectify men more often. I honestly thought that subject was well taken care of by any of the Savage Sword of Conan magazines, the He-Man cartoons and the twilight series. Men are becoming more objectified all the time( I'm trying as hard as I can)

Seriously though. I guess I have had a incredible gaming experience. I started gaming in a group with 19 people and 3 of them were women, the next group was with 4. me and the DM his wife and our other female friend from the first game so as players it was me and two women, 3rd and 4th group all men 5th group two women and 4 guys one of the girls was learning to play and was like the groups little sister because she was in high school at the time. During those times I can remember seeing beautiful women in the artwork dressed as sorceresses,fighters,rogues, and anything else you can imagine. The men too. What king of guy goes into battle against a heavily armored opponent in a furry loin cloth? I don't care what kind of roids the guy could have done that didn't make any sense until I just realized it's the artists vision and to enjoy the piece not overly criticize it.

I think that we should just enjoy the artwork .

I have run the serpent amorpha as part of my snake themed campaign.

I used a combination of serpent amphora, freeport, and the forgotten realms setting in the area of Halruua and the Jungles of Chult.
I thought it worked very well my players seemed to like it but unfortunately RL got in the way when I had to move.

You will all be pleased to know that after a hard fought battle the entire west coast from Washington State to California is now in the hands of the rebels.

After being changed back to our normal human selves and explaining the treachery of the vile two legged pigs my troops were thirsty for battle.

The glorious liberation of Washington then began. After the battles were over and the humans were victorious the last remaining orcs and other "people" if you can call them that are being held in reeducation facilities to help them adjust to their new lives.
Thanks to the orcs and "others" our weapons testing technology is advancing at a wonderful pace.

Naturally any and all property either real or imagined that supposedly belonged to non-humans has been redistributed back to the rightful owners or in the case of the owners not being found has instead been sold to help fund our wartime efforts.

Grummash, the name you gave your sword is very funny and entertaining so in the same spirit I have decided to call my vibro-longsword "pig-sticker"
Don't feel the need to leave you mud wallow anytime soon, as I liberate more and more of the U.S. from the hands of the invading tyrants ( no offense of course Lord Moorluck) I will get to you in time. I'm starting westward and working my way east.

So what campaigns are you all in?

In Campaign # 1 I am a 10th lvl Cloistered Cleric of Wee Jas.

In Campaign # 2 I am a 11th lvl Druid of Silvanus.

In upcoming Campaign # 3 Age of Worms I plan to be a human wizard with alot of force spells so I don't have to worry about resistance at all.

In campaign # 4 I am building a half-vampire Death Knight cleric of Morning Glory (libris Mortis, eternal love & beauty through undeath)

So far that is all. As you can tell I only play spell-casters.

Nice try Grummash. That was a very, very good intelligent and sneaky idea. I wonder who gave it to you orcs? Could it have been your former goblin allies?
No matter. The rebellion is still as strong as ever and just as soon as more polymorphs can be used to reverse the sick twisted creatures you turned us into then revenge will happen.

Oh and Comrade welcome to the rebellion whether you like it or not. Just as soon as I even mentioned any possibility of an alliance( which I knew you would never go for anyway) your "friends" really showed their true kermitty colors didn't they. Kicking you out of the U.N. and all.

Didn't the martial arts use regular weapon proficiency slots?

yea it did but it really wasn't worth it from what I remember. The chance of a knock out was there but very slim. From the way I remember it there was no real monk class the way there was in 1st and 3rd so unarmed and or martial arts damage was not very well explored. You had a chart in the back of the complete fighter for knockouts and what type of martial arts move you did. Best thing outta that book was the amazon and the engineering expansion. Then again I played casters almost exclusively so what do I know about sword swingers.

My question is about the Age of Worms AP.

I am playing a human wizard, as my back story would it be game breaking to be the son of either Allustan or Elligos. It gives me a great way to be introduced and those are the two main wizard NPC's that the DM mentioned I could learn from.

ewan cummins 325 wrote:

In regards to the OP's initial post- you might not like the decision to cancel certain classes, but it is NOT Fascism. Fascism is a specific ideology, created in Italy after the Great War (of course it had its admirers and imitators elsewhere, and the intellectual trends that contributed to its development existed in other parts of Europe as well). It is not a word for 'things progressives have decided they dislike this week.'

We're on page 9, we're well past discussing the title of the thread.

yea but it's not to late to try and steer it back on topic is it?

I think the removal of Mexican American studies was a good thing and the return to a broader U.S. History class will server the students better in the long run.
From other sources I have read the "studies" were dubious at best filled with anti-American sentiment saying that ILLEGAL immigrants had every right to be here because it's really their land to begin with because it was stolen from their ancestors or some such rhetoric.

A broad over view of U.S. History is the best thing for the students rather than narrowly focusing on the accomplishments or the crimes/mistakes of any other group. In other words teach it all good AND bad.

As an aside I had a great game this weekend. If any of you haven't played Shackled City OMG it's awesome.

Steven Tindall wrote:

While your looking at stats lets look at the racial makeup of the major pro athletes in the country. As far as fortune 500 then please tell Oprah to share some of the wealth my way, or bill Cosby or any number of successful African American actors that have started their own companies and are now very successful business persons.

While we look at conviction rates and prison populations stats lets take a look at African American pop culture. When Mr. Cosby made some inflammatory remarks as a key note speaking engagement( or some such affair) he was lambasted for telling his opinion of pull up your pants, learn to speak correctly, don't expect anyone to give you anything. The answer isn't simple as looking at a bunch of numbers.

So there's a handful of rich black people, proving there's no discrimination.

Ignore the pop culture, look at the actual statistics that show that even if African-Americans commit a greater proportion of crimes per capita (which I'm not sure is actually true), they are prosecuted and convicted at a much higher rate.

The funny thing about stats is they can be skewed to say anything that the person reading them wants them to say. When you go beyond simple math to higher math and stats then you skew the facts based on interpretation.

The perfect example that first comes to mind is the data concerning Global warming. Some experts say this and have the data to back it up, then others using the same data can disprove the same theory.

Big Norse Wolf: I really don't think society is growing. We see what happened to the native americans as bad.. but only because we don't get any benefit from exploiting them anymore. WE don't need bison hide machine belts.

This I believe is where our major differences are. I prefer optimism and you prefer pessimism or realism if you prefer. We can both look at the exact same thing but see it entirely differently. Neither one will change the others mind nor are either of us wrong we just see things differently.

Steven Tindall wrote:

While your looking at stats lets look at the racial makeup of the major pro athletes in the country. As far as fortune 500 then please tell Oprah to share some of the wealth my way, or bill Cosby or any number of successful African American actors that have started their own companies and are now very successful business persons.

While we look at conviction rates and prison populations stats lets take a look at African American pop culture. When Mr. Cosby made some inflammatory remarks as a key note speaking engagement( or some such affair) he was lambasted for telling his opinion of pull up your pants, learn to speak correctly, don't expect anyone to give you anything. The answer isn't simple as looking at a bunch of numbers.

Your examples are anecdotal and such a small portion of the population as to be laughable.

Ok but yours aren't? How many fortune 500 company executives make up the population of the U.S. The example you use is the same a small portion of the population.

Since when does being a fortune 500 executive mean auto success anyway?

Aretas wrote:

Ok, so the last Black man was lynched 48 years ago. Thats terrible.

Equally terrible is the unreported acts of violence against Whites by minorities.

We live now, not in the past. Everyone in this country is hurting to get by and succeed. Everyone has an equal opportunity for advancement. Nobobdy is holding anyone down. Its my opinion that race should not be a factor in college admission and it should not be a factor in the work place.

This might not go well with some but its the truth. Qualified and/or over qualified Whites are being passed over in college admissions and the work place to minorities.

As a son of immigrant parents who came to the US with nothing I would scrap affirmative action.

See, this is the viewpoint that racism does not impact the opportunities of minorities.

Statistics show, minority on white crime is a very small portion of overall crime. Minorities don't even account for their portion of crime against whites (ie, blacks are 12% of the population, but account for less than 12% of the crime against whites).

Minorities have suffered in this country and continue to suffer. I would also say there is a difference between a mugging and a lynching. The country has a racist past, and just because a few people say its over does not mean it's over.

Affirmative Action doesn't mean that qualified whites are passed over for random members of minorities. It means that they are supposed to look for and find qualified minorities.

Look at the statistics of CEO's of Fortune 500 companies and use that data to describe how we have a level playing field in this country.

Look at the statistics of conviction rates in the legal system and use that to describe how we have a level playing field in this country.

While your looking at stats lets look at the racial makeup of the major pro athletes in the country. As far as fortune 500 then please tell Oprah to share some of the wealth my way, or bill Cosby or any number of successful African American actors that have started their own companies and are now very successful business persons.

While we look at conviction rates and prison populations stats lets take a look at African American pop culture. When Mr. Cosby made some inflammatory remarks as a key note speaking engagement( or some such affair) he was lambasted for telling his opinion of pull up your pants, learn to speak correctly, don't expect anyone to give you anything. The answer isn't simple as looking at a bunch of numbers.

Steven Tindall wrote:

? ok now I'm slightly confused. At what point in this thread have I ever excused the horrible things that have been done by our government or their agents?

Here

Because according to the governing bodies of international law the land was NOT theirs due to the fact that they had no standing army, no government, none of the basic qualifications for a government. --- you saying it was ok to take their land, ignoring both the fallacious logic AND inaccurate statements *** rebuttal--
well when you put it that way I can see better what your talking about. I do in fact believe that my ancestors were justified from taking the land from my other ancestors. It's a harsh reality but yea, the strong take from the weak, the better advanced take from the lesser advanced. The Romans sure as heck didn't feel any different when they built their empire nor the Egyptians theirs. It may suck for the losers but thems the breaks.

Here

slaughtered the buffalo to starve them to death,the buffalo were out of control and disrupting commerce. Nonlethal methods were used to try and remove them from the railroad tracks but they had to be culled just like any other over populated animal species. - you trying to justify the extermination of buffalo on grounds that are complete, total, and utter BS.*** rebuttal*** by YOUR reasoning it may be BS by mine I look back at the advantages that the railroad provided for the growth and the economy of this growing nation and couldn't imagine any project at the time more worthwhile. It shortened a 6 month journey to a matter of a week or so. Thats progress not BS.

And here.

BigNorseWolf: At that time of American history from what I remember about the census there really weren't enough people to do all the farm labor that needed to be done with wages or not.<------ you justifying slavery as necessary.
***rebuttal** again AT THAT TIME!! it was and then when the society grew to realize the horrors of it and the true cost of it then it was abandoned. Not willingly, not without much pain suffering and bloodshed on both sides but it was abandoned.
Realizing it as a driving economic force(at that time) is NOT the same as justifying it. I believe on this issue we both agree that it was the darkest chapter in American history however I also think we are not comparing things equally. From my assessment you are talking solely about the moral implications and the human cost while I am addressing the economic and the technological aspects. Both arguments can be right in their own context.

Quote:

I believe we have a disagreement as to whats wrong or right and as to whats just or not but we both agree some mistakes have been made in the past.

But you don't think they were mistakes. You think they were necessary, and you use some rather incorrect facts to reach that conclusion. ***rebuttal*** If my facts are incorrect I apologize however they are the facts I know. If you can provide me with better facts then please feel free, I do enjoy learning and history is a favorite subject of mine. My favorite way to learn ifs from the autobiography's of the people that lived during the time period and while may not have been involved in earth shaking events it gives a better understanding of the overall feel of the average person at that time. I have read at least a dozen different stories from former slaves about their treatment during that era. The most interesting was from a slave that was being hanged by the northern army during shermans march to the sea in Fayettville, N.C. and after being repeatedly hung and dropped by the Yankee army at least 5 or 6 times they finally let him go because they believed his master didn't have anything hidden. He spit on the boots of the union army officer and told him how in all his years his master had never taken a belt,switch or whip to him but now that he was free the first thing that was done to him by his liberators was to hang him. It's those types of stories I like to hear about, from the people in that era not what some brain trust historian thinks the real reason might have been. My point to this rather long rebuttal is that the facts I think I know to be true are based on the best evidence I can find.

Quote:

It still amazes me that so few people know about the fact that government agents kidnapped an entire generation of Indian children and sent them away for reeducation. Took away their right to speak their own language and culture then justified it as a way of helping them assimilate to modern culture. I can never find any justification for things like that but at the same time I can do nothing to fix it either. Whats to be done? we learn from it, never repeat it and move on.

Well, they had to learn English or they'd forever be stuck on the reservation. weren't you the one saying they could always leave the reservation? That wouldn't be possible without the program you're decrying, by your logic.

Education is one thing but that was not the way to do it.

If any of you want to get rid of excess smokers from your domains, i'll take them for you.

Like your not claiming them already. Anyone can recognize your work in creating such unholy abominations. Mixing man and machine to the point where the man is nothing more than a carrier for the machine is your hallmark Feuldrop.

You pass yourself off as a simple arms dealer but your "hidden" agenda is very clear.

Aretas wrote:

Everyone has an equal opportunity for advancement.

I live in southern California, some of the schools here are getting IPads for the students to use while other schools are falling apart because they can't get enough funding for basic maintenance.

Unfortunately that's everywhere. Take a look at some of the schools in areas like Charlotte, Raleigh or anywhere in Research Triangle Park vs the schools in the N.C. mountains like Cherokee county. The differences are shocking.

Steven Tindall wrote:

I don't think anyone one this particular forum would ever fall into the trap of looking at history and denying the mistakes made by the previous citizens of this country.

Could you speak up? The echo from that 30 foot pit trap you're standing in is creating quite a reverberation.

You DID fall for it. You excuse previous actions based on the same logic that justifies oppression and military force today. That's not an accident.

? ok now I'm slightly confused. At what point in this thread have I ever excused the horrible things that have been done by our government or their agents?

I believe we have a disagreement as to whats wrong or right and as to whats just or not but we both agree some mistakes have been made in the past.

It still amazes me that so few people know about the fact that government agents kidnapped an entire generation of Indian children and sent them away for reeducation. Took away their right to speak their own language and culture then justified it as a way of helping them assimilate to modern culture. I can never find any justification for things like that but at the same time I can do nothing to fix it either. Whats to be done? we learn from it, never repeat it and move on.

At first I was weighing the pros and cons of Moorluck vs. Mr. Tindall. Moorluck's right out, of course, because he's allied with my bitter enemy, Dorkmash and his self-styled New England empire. I was leaning towards Mr. Tindall, but then he had to unleash his racist tirade against orcs. As a member of a highly oppressed people myself, I can't stand that kind of bigotry.

Sissyl claiming Europe I can get behind (and not only because she's got a sexy avatar), but that's far away and will probably be of little use in helping the Free Goblin Resistance. And now Evil Tim is throwing his hat into the ring, so I'm just going to say "f%%& it" and hereby announce my candidacy for lider maximo of these United States of America.

Goblins and workers of the world, unite!

Ok comrade I can understand you being a little upset and due to you goblin intellect more than just a little confused however I would like to propose an alliance between our two groups.

You know the orcs are going to bully you vertically challenged folks so why not join in the cause of us rebels?

We'll let you keep any captured orcs as YOUR slaves for a change. Granted there may not be that many survivors but the ones that do are all yours. We will even have special housing for you and them in your own section of the desert. You can mine or farm or whatever it is your kind does and have the big strong orcs do the heavy work.
We humans are on your side if you side with us.

I think white people should be spanked.

*total thread derailment*

Ok I'll volunteer to spank all of the really young hot muscle guys.

Of course it's nonsense, but that doesn't mean it's unique to Aretas.

As I said above, I wonder how much this idea underlies the opposition to accepting any version of history that admits America has ever done anything wrong. "Indians weren't really using the land." "US didn't really steal Texas and Arizona" "Slavery was just an economic necessity/everyone did it."

Doesn't all the denialism make more sense if the deniers think they'll be punished if they admit any guilt?

I don't think anyone one this particular forum would ever fall into the trap of looking at history and denying the mistakes made by the previous citizens of this country. However those things happened so very long ago that any thought of punishment/retribution/revenge would be a very wasted and misguided effort.

OK now this just isn't fair.

From the standpoint of any good rebel fighting against the oppressive rule of an evil drow elf( or dark elf not sure of Moorlucks preference here) is one thing but fighting against a lovely lady! that's just not gentlemanly. Please do consider ruling Europe Lady Sissly I understand it is quite nice.

and now back to our regularly scheduled rebellion already in progress.

Fueldrop you fiend! How could you do that to those poor unsuspecting women. I do have to admit the replacement of the silicon implants with C4 was ingenious but still very evil. You could have completely destroyed the kitchen and the barracks section of the rebel camp however I am pleased to report no major lose of life due to sheer luck.

To: Lord President Moorluck & Fueldrop,
Gentlemen this is to inform you both that the shipment that was sent and expected has in fact been intercepted by we the rebels of the former United States or what is currently New Moorluckia.

We appreciate your donation to our most noble cause and the models seem to like it here too, something about Hollywood and the promise of stardom after we have liberated the rest of the country appealed to them.

Now if we can just stop them from practicing their "I'm ready for my close-up Mr. De-mil" and you have NO idea how many times I have heard the academy being Thanked. All in all however the shipment was very well received. Please send more.

From what I saw of season 2 so far it looks great.

I'm glad they are exploring the ghosts "life" a little more and giving her some new abilities.

It was mostly a joke. Red River isn't about the Mexican War but it does have John Wayne killing a Mexican and stealing their lands, so I thought I'd link it for shiznit and giggles.

OK now I'm having a serious DOH! homer Simpson moment for taking myself waaaay to seriously.

How the West Was Won at 5:30.

OK I saw it. I do not understand what it was I was supposed to see other than the fact that there was a dispute over land ownership north of the Rio grande that was settled to both governments satisfaction during the Mexican American war.

The following is from the Wikipedia citation concerning that event.

"The Mexican–American War, also known as the First American Intervention, the Mexican War, or the U.S.–Mexican War was an armed conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas, which Mexico considered part of its territory despite the 1836 Texas Revolution.

American forces invaded New Mexico, the California Republic, and parts of what is currently northern Mexico; meanwhile, the American Navy conducted a blockade, and took control of several garrisons on the Pacific coast of Alta California, but also further south in Baja California. Another American army captured Mexico City, and forced Mexico to agree to the cession of its northern territories to the U.S.

American territorial expansion to the Pacific coast was the goal of President James K. Polk, the leader of the Democratic Party. However, the war was highly controversial in the U.S., with the Whig Party and anti-slavery elements strongly opposed. Heavy American casualties and high monetary cost were also criticized. The major consequence of the war was the forced Mexican Cession of the territories of Alta California and New Mexico to the U.S. in exchange for $18 million. In addition, the United States forgave debt owed by the Mexican government to U.S. citizens. Mexico accepted the Rio Grande as its national border, and the loss of Texas. "

Plain and simple Mexico LOST!! end of story. No one is disputing the fact that the territory used to belong to Mexico but they took it from the Spanish after they took it from the Indians and then America took it from them? again plain and simple. Me I enjoyed reading about the navy kicking ass but then again I love naval history as an personal point of interest.

If I have missed something then please explain it comrade. No snark intended just not sure what point or relevance the film clip had.

Steven Tindall wrote:

Revisionist history is what should concern everybody.

History should be a collection of facts based on the evidence presented and then opinions can be formed.

And when new facts and evidence are found, sometimes revision of the common viewpoint is necessary.

Also, sometimes earlier generations of historians are just wrong. For example, without "revisionism" we'd all still be taught in school that post-Civil War Reconstruction failed because blacks are incapable of governing themselves. In this case, yay revisionism!

the key statement I agree with comrade is that "when new FACTS and evidence are found, sometimes revision of the common viewpoint is necessary"

That holds true of any other science, that's learning.

As far as earlier generations of historians go we may judge them to be wrong now but at the time with the facts that were in evidence at that point they could only draw certain conclusions. Yes I will be the first to admit that everybody colors history as they see fit, nobodies perfect but that again is where everybody has to decide their own truth based on the known facts.

Aretas wrote:

Thank you Steven Tindal and the others for silencing the "Hate & blame Whites for everything" crowd. I appreciate your contribution to the discussion, you speak for many.

Thank you!

hate and blame whites for everything? Just as bad as holding them, or any groups in history, utterly blameless.

I agree freehold. That's what makes history so much fun to read. NO "group" is ever going to be blameless for anything depending how far back you go.

Revisionist history is what should concern everybody.
History should be a collection of facts based on the evidence presented and then opinions can be formed.

In my history class we had a mock Nirenberg trial to help drive home the atrocities the Nazis committed and I brought in my great uncle that fought in WW2 to help us put it in perspective.

Betcha didn't know that a common trophies for a U.S. solider to send back to his sweetheart was a boiled skull from a Japanese solider. In times of war atrocities are common on both sides.

Again no one group is blameless or totally responsible for ALL of the worlds ills.
That's all I've been trying to say, race is not a factor or at least it shouldn't be!?

Thank you Steven Tindal and the others for silencing the "Hate & blame Whites for everything" crowd. I appreciate your contribution to the discussion, you speak for many.

Thank you!

for myself your thanks are appreciated but I was simply trying to point out that what the teachers were doing in teaching that type of message is just as wrong as excluding the amazing contributions of someone because of their race/gender or both.

I guess a North Carolina public school education from the 80's was more balanced than I thought.

yours too Xabulba? In my case it didn't work too well, that'll show him.

your right freehold but that's what keeps us coming back for more as well. Nothing will be perfect to everyone so the game continues to change, evolve and improve based on the majority.

Also...

"Stereotypes are wrong you basement dwelling sexually obsessed nerds with no idea how to act around women!"

Well said. I agree wholeheartedly. Stereotypes are wrong.

However the ones I have encountered have had nothing to do with the women in the group because they were all treated as either little sisters or they were the wives of other gamers. Anytime anything even remotely sexual was even thought about being introduced the rest of the table stared daggers at the GM and were offended on behalf of the women in the group. The ladies were fine and had no idea what was going on but we policed our tables differently when we had women at them.

Before anyone accuses us of the whole white knight thing, we just prefer the term manners and decorum. After all having a bunch of guys describe how their hero kills the bad guy by slow torture and strangling him with his own entrails( I play mean wizards) is OK when it's an all male table but ladies don't as a general rule like to hear such talk.
Women tone down their speech when it's a mixed group vs a all women group too.

wow I can't even begin to conceive of leaving a dungeon half finished or not even explored. I made some serious money (for a 1st level character) by taking all those infected magic items. paying for the remove curse and them selling them for a very tidy profit.

Later on in the adventure selling the red dragons body parts netted me an additional 10K gold.
Not bad for an enterprising cleric of wee jas. If your party has access to the draconomicon be prepared for them to look at any dragon type as money.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

pres man wrote:

We definitely should teach it, and we should teach that such things happen through out history between all kinds of people. Europeans aren't the only ones to "dick over" others

Not the only, just the best. Why?

Guns Germs and Steel

Do you mean "Eurasians" are the best at this?

Off-Topic: You know this discussion reminds me of the Man-Kzin series. Man had given up warfare. After the Kzin began attacking them, the Kzin learned why Man had given up warfare, they were too damn good at it and would have destroy themselves. That ability was then turned on the Kzin.

Who's the author and how old is the series. It sounds imteresting.

BNW,
as to your first question: Would you care to explain how exactly we purchased land that the native Americans had been living on for 10,000 years, were still living on, and that neither the french nor americans had even SEEN yet from Napoleon Bonaparte?

Because according to the governing bodies of international law the land was NOT theirs due to the fact that they had no standing army, no government, none of the basic qualifications for a government.
I remember it being a big deal that the Indians had a written language AFTER the concept was introduced by the settlers.

your second question: The native americans had 100% of the land east of the mississippi. They now have less than 1%. What were they given for that?
they were overwhelmed by sheer numbers and other atrocities that can't be undone. I agree with your sentiment but I ain't giving my land back and I don't think anyone else is either.
The US set one tribe against another, I will have to disagree with you on that one because they were waring amongst themselves long before settlers came over. The ones that allied themselves with the superior technology are still here.

slaughtered the buffalo to starve them to death,the buffalo were out of control and disrupting commerce. Nonlethal methods were used to try and remove them from the railroad tracks but they had to be culled just like any other over populated animal species.

raped pillaged and raided them onto reservations, and then as soon as we wanted that reservation repeated the process over and over.
their still there aren't they. I recall many times passing through this res or that when I was partying throughout the 4 corners area and elsewhere. One thing noone can seem to explain to me is. If the reservations are so horrible why not leave. Move to a city and get a better job, start a farm do something instead of sitting back and collecting a government check because you belong to a certain ethnic group. I don't recall seeing armed guards stopping the native peoples from leaving the reservations?

Kelsey,
The Indians didn't have a recognized form of government. They were exposed to the concept of higher government but didn't participate because the idea was too foreign to them.

BDEspada,
Ok ya got me on that one. It isn't a religion but it's still a belief based on myth of past events that never occurred. The concept of Aztaln being in what is now the U.S. was never even thought of until the 60's or early 70's.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Lincoln Hills wrote:

Freehold DM wrote:

...The kids don't need any class other than a true broad overview of U.S. History with all the mistakes and triumphs included.

All the mistakes? Have mercy! They're just kids - they don't deserve the punishment of having to endure the Teapot Dome Scandal, the Phillipines occupation and the history of tetra-ethyl leaded gasoline!

Yes. Yes they do. Learning that your government will take a bribe to hand out our collective natural resources to line their private pockets, commit genocide for its own benefit, and let companies sell you things that will kill everyone around you should be the entire POINT of history class. If you don't walk out of a history class thinking "well that's just *&%(&'ed up" the teacher probably isn't doing their job.

People have this idea of a supernaturally moral government that existed in the past (at the revolution, the civil war (on both sides), and world war two. Then they wonder why our current government isn't that great. It gives them the idea that they can somehow return our government to that level of morality. That of course is patently absurd because that level of morality existed. IF its even possible to achieve the way has to be forward, not back.

It's a common them on the right to "restore" America to some past greatness. Apparently, we were once a Christian nation, and a beacon of all that is good to the whole world.

If that's all you want kids to learn, you have no business legislating history curricula at all. Teaching a past that never was falls under religion, which should not be taught in public schools.

*super heavy snark* Kind of like the mythical place called Aztlan. *end snark*

Freehold,
Lets check back in 10-12 years and see. The new program has been in place days? weeks? not the years that the other questionable program had.

BigNorseWolf;
I 've never seen anyone really going left enough for a high school course. An accurate assessment of us history and the tale of a genocidal expansionist empire that quickly became the very thing it allegedly rallied against are pretty much the same.

? I think you and I must have gotten different teachings in our high schools. I don't remember anything like that. Sure we forcibly relocated the Indians, expanded westward AFTER purchasing the land from the french, then we bought the rest of the west from the government(at that time) of Mexico or in the case of Texas and California they joined the union after being granted their own sovereignty. Everything the government did as far as expansion was legally purchased.

I understand the crimes and atrocities committed against the Indians didn't stop just from herding them onto reservations or the kidnapping of their children to force them to assimilate but the agreements between the governments that owned the land took precedent and ownership was then changed.

Freehold DM wrote:

It is important to note that the students are continuing their respective lawsuit against the state of Arizona.

That's because they have a case.

There's a strong revisionist element to far-right politics, and the decision to remove the texts is a political one.

I believe that to be true of BOTH sides.

After having read the article you linked to I can't see why the students think that this is a violation of their 1st amendment rights.
Unless the school system has changed dramatically since I went 20+ years ago students didn't get to chose what classes they took other than electives.
You could go into shop or carpentry if you were a guy and the girls could chose either home ec. or dance/drama. Everybody had to take English, Math, science and the other core subjects. I don't think Mexican American studies qualifies as a core subject so I fail to see why they feel it's a free speech issue. To quote a passage from the article "Course titles and curriculums changed immediately. Chicano history became American history. Chicano literature became English literature"

I see nothing wrong with this broader focus.

Not to play devils advocate but wouldn't that be a rather bad thing for the human race as a whole.

If all our needs are met with no effort on our part needed then we as a race would cease to strive and or change thus leading to stagnation and eventual extinction.

however back to the main topic. The easiest way to achieve what your asking is unlimited cheap energy that's environmentally sound. Like TCG suggested cold fusion, which could then be used to help power the next generation of space vehicles and begin a new age of exploration and enlightenment.

Steven Tindall wrote:

To me it seems like the overwhelming majority of the opinions are very quick and easy to condemn the evil state or local government while completely discounting even the most remote possibility that racism could be being taught by non-Anglo teachers. When anyone tried to point out that this could be going on it was instantly discounted as utter rubbish instead of being given even the slightest consideration.

If a teacher teaches to hate, you take his arse in court as it's a criminal offense (incitation to hate). You then replace him with a good teacher.

You don't ban books and punish the kids by removing a class that could be used to teach them about their history.

Removing a teacher is a lot more difficult than you may think but that's a different subject.

The kids don't need any class other than a true broad overview of U.S. History with all the mistakes and triumphs included.

Steven Tindall wrote:

IF the native peoples had the north American continent for as long as they did. Which from my remembrance was estimated at around 10,000 years. They didn't do a whole lot with the place. We as a nation with only 400 years under our belts have touched outer space and have advanced in ways they could never have dreamed.

400 years that followed on from a firm foundation of science and engineering developed by people of every race, scattered across the whole face of the Earth.

Since social and technical development occurs in surges, there is no way that we will ever know what the destroyed civilizations of the world would have developed if they had existed even a short time longer. I don't believe that we have the full records of the things that they did develop and have since been lost.

Your right there is no way to know what could have happened if this or that had been different.

The previous comment you quoted was a lot snarky and not really just but I get tired of the whole "we did so and so" to this supposed paradise the native peoples had before the evil Europeans came and destroyed their Eden like existence.

I guess my frustration with what I perceive as reverse racism from the previous arguments made me a little more snarky than intended.

To me it seems like the overwhelming majority of the opinions are very quick and easy to condemn the evil state or local government while completely discounting even the most remote possibility that racism could be being taught by non-Anglo teachers. When anyone tried to point out that this could be going on it was instantly discounted as utter rubbish instead of being given even the slightest consideration.
For my part the ethnic studies should be removed and regular American History used in it's place instead of focusing on one ethnicity. If you want to learn Mexican history or central American history then take a course in world history as well. I did.

Steven Tindall wrote:

as far as automobiles, yes they are a necessity. our society cannot function at the current level of production on simple horse drawn carriages. Can you imagine the cost and the number of teams of horses to take one semi truck load of food from Maine to Florida. My parents drove it all the time as long haul truckers but without automobiles society would collapse. Not to mention PETA would have a field day about horse rights and abuse.

Trains could handle a lot of the long haul work for far less energy than trucks. You'd still need short haul truckers, of course.

Reorganizing to be more centralized could also reduce a lot of car use.

Trains would be a great option but I don't think it would be a big savings. Trucks can get the goods to market faster and cheaper than the rails. With a truck from North Carolina going to say Texas you go from point A to point B. With a train you have depots, stations and other delays due to possible passengers or other concerns. With trucks you go from the factory to the Walmart in no time.

Please explain what you mean by Reorganizing? reorganizing what exactly?