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

bugleyman's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter, 2014 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 6,241 posts (6,338 including aliases). 67 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 16 aliases.


1 to 50 of 471 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

All this silly debate about free speech. It's really simple...just ask yourself one thing: Is it money? If so, then it's speech. Wasn't that easy? :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doug's Workshop wrote:

What does "multiple" mean in your world?

Also, what does "establish" mean? Because if you just ignore what I wrote, it's no wonder that you're wrong.

I frankly have no idea what you're trying to say...it's completely incoherent.

In any event, you have failed to construct and support a rational argument, and I no longer have the patience to hand-hold you through remedial logic in the face of your breath-taking arrogance.

Enjoy your serfdom in the "plutocracy is freedom" theme park. I understand there are balloons.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:
An Obamacare Dwarf or something who comes around and uses Wealth Redistribution when you gain a level to make sure you spent exactly the proscribed amount on consumables? He comes in and takes the extra wealth that sneaky players tried to not spend on consumables and refills up the players who wasted too much. . . right? That happens? (this is a joke, sorry if its over anyone's head or wasn't clear initially)

How about we just leave the politics for the political threads?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Doug:

Until you establish that money is speech -- which you have not -- the rest of your argument is moot. Seriously...you keep rephrasing the same argument and ignoring your debunked premise. Did you think no one would notice? :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
A theory is not "proven science" it's a model, frequently in contest with other models to explain the same phenomena. It's an important distinction.

No, that would be a hypothesis.

A theory is as close to certain as it gets in science. As is often pointed out, Gravity is "just" a theory, too.

"Gravity is not a version of the truth. It is the truth. Anybody who doubts it is invited to jump out of a tenth-floor window."

-- Richard Dawkins


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Davick wrote:
Did he say it was only exciting because it was radioactive? I'm not a doctor, I don't know the relation between its toxicity and radioactivity and which one was at play in the referenced account. But he was making a point that "nuclear weapons" aren't a big deal, using uranium as proxy. I don't think that makes citing cesium disingenuous.

In any event, I don't think most people need help figuring out that the argument "I have touched uranium, therefore private citizens should be able to own nuclear weapons" is suspect. ;-)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Guys, this really isn't hard.

The more money we allow in politics, the more money is necessary to be competitive. Candidates, at least those that aren't sitting on a few hundred million dollars, have to get this money somewhere. It would be stunningly naive to believe people who fork over that kind of money aren't buying access and influence, just as it would be stunningly naive to believe that candidates who accept that kind of money don't end up beholden to their benefactors.

All of the "Why do you hate freedom of speech?" nonsense is a red herring. White noise. Don't take the bait. Instead of fruitlessly trying to reason someone out of an unreasonable "money=speech" position, we should be focusing on how to fix the problem: Money in politics.

You don't stand outside a burning building arguing about whether putting out the fire violates the rights of arsonists.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lincoln Hills wrote:
I dislike the summoner on the basis that there was already a specialist wizard devoted to the same concept; on the basis that its "six spell levels" include spells that are ordinarily 7th, 8th, or 9th (unlike the inquisitor or bard); and because the eidolon, while great for player freedom, didn't strike me as particularly well-balanced.

Seconded. But it's the "taking the conjurer's stuff" that I most dislike.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

0/10. I didn't immediately see a test, and lost interest shortly thereafter. In fact, I -- Oh shiny!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doug's Workshop wrote:
I'm assuming you mean "does not equal."

Correct.

Doug's Workshop wrote:
In which case, you're at odds with multiple decisions from the Supreme Court.

I'm aware of that, but it's beside the point. I'm not debating legality. If all you care about is legality, why are we even having this conversation? The SCOTUS upheld the ACA.

As for which sides spends the most? I don't give a crap. The solution to our problem is to get money out of politics, not add more.

You are advocating for plutocracy in the guise of "freedom."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doug's Workshop wrote:

"Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ."

It's absolutely amazing how some people cannot understand those simple words.

Money != speech.

(though it's unsurprising to see you towing the party line).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Killer_GM wrote:
Amazing how many negative outcomes people can avoid if they make the right choices.

No argument there.

Killer_GM wrote:
Amazing how much many are willing to spend to bail out those who make bad choices, and deem the rest of us clueless and heartless for telling them not to make the unpleasant choices in the first place.

When you have an efficient, effective way to tell who consistently makes bad choices, as opposed to those who got a raw deal, feel free to share it.

Here's a hint: People far smarter than either of us have tried...and failed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
The reason this example fails with a lot of wealthy people is that investing takes little to no effort. It's a process that can just keep going on in the background while they take a vacation. Even though the rate at which new money arrives in their account, it continues to do so and requires little to no additional effort. That's why the Reagan example and concept that the rich would stop investing is false.

Yup...plus what else are they going to do with the money...stuff it in a mattress?

Oh noes, I have to pay as much tax on this money (which I did nothing to earn) as some work working schmuck pays on his wages.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
I can't even tell how you're trying to insult me here.

I can. He's accusing you of shedding crocodile tears while secretly profiting off the suffering of others.

Apparently you're an insurance industry executive. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doug's Workshop wrote:
There are no third world medical conditions for the poor in this country, unless you refuse to use the options available.

Oh no?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Semantics: They're not just for avoiding losing the argument any more. :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Killer_GM wrote:
Why would you want national health care? Are you willing to settle for low quality care, while paying more for it?

The U.S. pays more than pretty much everyone with national health care, and yet gets worse results. The data are quite clear. If you're rich, the United States is the best care in the world. If you're not, you're better off in Canada. Or England. Or Japan. Or France. Or Italy. Or Spain Or Norway. Etc, etc, etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

*shrug*

Sorry, I just don't get the "taxes are tyranny" mindset.

**

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
11:05 The dm hurridly signs chronicle sheets and hands them out with a "go ahead fill them out"

I've been told (in earnest) that this almost never happens, whereas in my experience it almost never fails to happen.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Andrew R wrote:
How much of someone else's money do you need to be "civilized"? How much of what some of us have to sweat and bleed to earn do we deserve to keep? Or in the case of many of the socialist/comies how much will you allow us to keep when you have the power to take?

"How much taxation is necessary?" is a reasonable question.

"None" is not a reasonable answer.

Unless of course you:
1. Don't drive
2. Grow your own food
3. Don't connect to any utilities (water, gas, electric, etc.)
4. Refuse to accept ambulance or fire services
5. Haven't used and never plan to use public education
6. Never call the police
7. Never expect any enforcement of contracts or civil recourse
8. Plan to mount your own national defense

In which case, more power to you. Sounds like a third world hellhole to me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
snobi wrote:
It's correct to assume I don't want my money stolen from me. If taxes were solely voluntary, I might donate.

Yes, yes. Taxes are theft. I used to feel the same way when I was a kid.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:

I don't want PF 2.0

If it comes anytime soon I am out on anything this company ever publishes ever again.

That sounds totally reasonable. Let me try:

"If Paizo doesn't introduce Pathfinder 2.0 immediately and make it just the way I want, I'll burn all my Pathfinder books, and then pull out my own fingernails."

See? It just sounds ridiculous. Don't do it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hmmm...off the top of my head (and with the understanding that no two opinions will be alike):


  • Clean up the rules in language and presentation...make the rules look more like the Beginner Box.

  • Re-organize, banishing the "two books smashed together" feel. Alternatively, actually have two books: a PHB and a GMG.

  • Do a pass over the entire rule-set removing unnecessary complexity. For example: Consolidate conditions. Get rid of full attacks. Clean up the action types.

  • Put another $10 into the binding of the physical copies. I'd happily pay for it.

  • Make the art more traditional high fantasy. More cool backgrounds, fewer 100lb Xtreme!1! swords (apologies to WAR).

Unlike many RPG gamers, I do not have a strong aversion to new editions. If they make for a better game, the sooner the better.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Imo someone who can't commit to the whole session on a regular basis should have the common courtesy to excuse himself. If he doesn't he should be asked to plan to attend the entire session, or plan to not attend. Seems harsh, perhaps, but really the only fair way to handle it for everyone. My $.02.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I generally don't double-check stat blocks in a scenario, as I find I have more effective uses for limited preparation time. If I notice a rule error anyway, unless it is very egregious I usually just go with it in the name of a uniform experience.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Vod Canockers wrote:
So?

So a fellow human took a large step on the road to self-actualization. Maybe we should just be happy for her, and skip the poorly-disguised attempt to turn this into a ideological football?

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go weep quietly over my fantasies of Ellen Page having a secret crush on me. ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Buri wrote:
Their employer pays them for their time. This is an arrangement both parties have agreed to. It's their job.

An arrangement worked out (and indeed, only legal) in the context of tipping as a societal norm.

It's amazing to me what people are willing to overlook to justify their behavior.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Cardinal Chunder wrote:
Also could you sign me up for the alpha test of your set of RPG rules.

Could we please put this one to bed? First, one needn't be an RPG designer to have or express an informed opinion. There simply aren't that many RPG design jobs, and there are way too many people chasing them. Which is a big part of why the pay is lousy. Second, Paizo didn't do the heavy lifting with Pathfinder. Sorry, but they just didn't. So if your litmus test for commenting is that one needs to have designed their own set of RPG rules, pretty much everyone at Paizo fails, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
I will repeat just one more time. It is not the place of the customer to pay an employer's employees. I'm not signing up for that dodginess.

Then simply don't patronize places that pay their employees less than minimum wage. If you don't like the contract, don't be a party to it. But don't stick it to the guys making $2.13 an hour.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Increasing the minimum wage increases the amount people who are earning that wage make relative to people who aren't. Will some prices go up? Probably. But the minimum wage earners still come out ahead, and really that's the whole point.

But I forgot...minimum wage earners have it coming. They're the greedy ones!

*sob*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Abyssal Lord wrote:
I wonder why is everybody so eager to cap the level off at 20th level.

While it is true that "20th level" only has meaning in the context of the system, all the math is built around it. Trying to bolt on bigger numbers after the fact hasn't worked well (see D&D 3rd edition Epic Level Handbook).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Buri wrote:
You haven't been paying attention. The social "contract" goes that you pay for the service you get. The inverse of this is that if you don't pay then you get substandard service. So, it, in essence, becomes a bribe for what should be professional, prompt service. Which, receiving professional, prompt service should be the expectation in any setting where goods are traded for money regardless of any kind of bribe, or "tip," system in place.

When the minimum wage is greatly decreased for servers, tipping is part of the social contract -- whether you believe it should be or not. Happily, you can personally opt out of the contract by not patronizing establishments that pay servers $2.13 an hour.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Democratus wrote:

What qualifies as "clearly terrible"? If combat efficiency isn't as important as thematics then a weak rocket ability might be an awesome option.

I think a point the Dr was making (at least what I was getting from it) was that it might be hasty to assume that the only measure for a class/ability/trait/etc. is weather it is comparable in raw power to another.

For the purpose of serving as a ridiculously extreme counter-example to "a PHB with one class it it"), how about a feat that gives you 1/every 2 levels, but is mutually exclusive with toughness. In other words, clearly and objectively inferior to other choices, better choices.

No one is going to advocate that, just like no one is going to truly advocate a PHB with a single class. We'd all be better served by leaving out the hyperbole.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Fantastic art, just like Deep Forest.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Did not see that coming. You would think that Hasbro would be pretty darn good at making what amounts to small plastic toys without relying on a third party. :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It's a trap!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
Or maybe... just maybe the Fighter is the problem. Since he's entirely to generic and not really good at what he's named for. Rogue suffers from the same issues in fairness.

We're ranging far afield here, but...feats seem to be king (or at least close to it) when it comes to combat effectiveness, so in a sense, fighters are really good at what they are intended to do -- but only because they get so many feats. Full BAB + d10 hit points does not a skilled combatant make -- at least not in Pathfinder. Which is why I think you could give the rogue both of those things just fine. But that's another story.

Then again, the ability to ignore feat pre-reqs (Zen Archer, Ranger, etc.) is pretty darn shiny, too. :)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

As an atheist: That is a truly terrible idea.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
...If someone is both religious AND patient and nonviolent, they are probably willingly ignoring some of the teachings of their religious. This is true at least for the three major monotheistic faiths. You simply can't take everything in the bible/new testament/Koran seriously without being, for example, a sexist as a result. In some cases (Jews) racism is also a direct result of taking the bible too seriously. In all of theses cases some truly violent and abhorrent behaviors are encouraged by those texts.

It seems that way to me, too. But apparently saying so is "religion-bashing."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I know this has shown up before, but it seemed too topical to resist...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Shadowdweller wrote:
You guys all know that guns predate plate armor, right?

I'm totally willing to accept that my subjective preferences for a fantasy world do not match reality. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Shadowborn wrote:
LazarX wrote:
"Taken By A Shoanti"?

*Shagged

Alliteration is key.

Shamed by a Shoanti


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

California Uber Alles

Have no idea what motivated me to post that.

Don't ever post that crap again. ;)

Or better yet...

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
IcedMik wrote:
Got my lucky underwear on.

You don't say?

*scribbles notes for RPG Superstar 2015*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Grand Magus wrote:

HOW MINIMUM WAGE CAUSES UNEMPLOYMENT:

A minimum wage is considered a Price Floor.

You err in assuming most people on these boards don't understand what a price floor is, and that we'd find you recapping day one of macroeconomics a revelation.

You also err in assuming that full employment is desirable if the equilibrium price of unskilled labor is $2.00/hr. That outcome might maximize output on paper, it does't allow the workers to survive, let alone thrive. People aren't machines. Such is the result of trying to solve a complex problem while looking at only two variables.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Pathfinder has a steady influx of new mechanics. In the "chronicles should matter" vein, I'd appreciate it if more items/spells would be held back from general availability and kept as chronicle exclusives.

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Maurice de Mare wrote:

I also downvote dream items, torcs, items that so expensive that nobody will EVER buy them.

And Paizo knows this, because they present to me only those items......

Down-voting something simply on the basis of being a torc seems both unfair and counter-productive. Every year there ends up being a popular item type, but it does seem to be different every year. Why penalize someone's item because it just happens to be the "it" type of the year?

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Treppa wrote:
I've been astonished at how little my taste coincides with the professional judges in any way, shape, or form.

You and me both...I'm never even close.

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Wow, I am now firmly in the "less is more" camp. Just saw an item that started very strong and unraveled into a grab-bag of powers. D'oh.

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TwoDee wrote:
I'm noticing a great preponderance of seed and seed-themed items.

Me too, but don't worry: They grow on you.

1 to 50 of 471 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.