jocundthejolly's page

A human being lived and died. I'm sure, like the rest of us, she did some good things and some bad things. She happened to be in a position which gave her greater scope for either/both than most of us get. Was she as great as her family says? Probably not. Should we lay at her feet every bad thing Britain did over the last 70 years (or more, as some want to)? Also no.

Really happy Paizo managed to not trip over the incredibly low bar they just stepped over. I imagine they would have no longer had a business if they had decided against recognizing the union.

Here's hoping things work out for all the team members and free lancers.

I think that Paizo would survive. I doubt that most of their customers care about any of this. More likely there's an overrepresented vocal minority in these threads that cares very much about Paizo's employment practices, trans rights etc. This is true of consumers generally. We want the product. Our interest doesn't extend much beyond that.

Huzzah from CWA Local 1031 out here on the right coast.

#CWAStrong

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Andy Brown wrote:

Just wanted to say thanks for the support on the other thread.

It's actually a bit weird to be using this name when discussing trans issues, I think I've always done it from a non-male-presenting point before.

Oh! That's a little funny--the only Andy I know IRL is a girl! I didn't assume anything. Can I ask what you prefer to be known as here?

Andy's fine. My friends mostly just call me Jester (a name I've had for as long as I've been online), and if I'm presenting more femme, it'd be Angie. On here, it's probably better sticking with the name on the profile to reduce confusion.

Quote:

Also, I find myself in a funny place in conversations about monster races, especially kobolds. I'm actually probably a bit more old-fashioned than I used to be. Kobolds make great mooks, and if you aren't running them as underdogs, why call them kobolds? That's not to say they shouldn't be a threat, but I think they always need to have a bit of vulnerability to them. Otherwise, they aren't the kobolds I originally fell in love with.

As you've said, they tend to be sneaky rather than really smart, so the tactics won't necessarily be the best, but they won't be the stupidest either

I think of it like someone who knows how to play chess but doesn't understand the game well, only knows a few tricks and traps.

To be fair, getting into the mindset of even a different culture is hard, as any perusal of science fiction or fantasy books should tell us. Especially ones from a while back where there's enough distance between us and the authors that the unconscious assumptions stand out.

The old Trek problem: alien races are pretty much human (except that all 10 billion members of a species have the same personality traits), since we have no idea what sentient aliens might really be like.

Curious what people are doing in their games to inspire horror or terror, not influenced by Lovecraft. What are you doing effectively that doesn't involve slimy, stinking otherness, horrifying orifices, etc? It can feel at times as if everything meant to be scary is derivative of HPL/CoC. His influence is so pervasive and, uh, tentacular.

Pine is an A-lister, right? So spending big money on this movie means it won't be nearly as terrible as any of its predecessors.

Looks like Hugh Grant will play the bad guy. Is that impossible casting?

If the caffeine theory turns out wrong maybe he knows something we don't?

HG can play a good villain. There's always demand for English actors because American audiences love them doing The Gentleman Villain trope (SW repeatedly, Hannibal Lecter, Alan Rickman in multiple roles I think).

A dog is essentially a wolf that lives in perpetual puppyhood. Its why their ears are all floppy, they're not nearly as aggressive, their faces are rounded and most of the males are neutered.

Imagine an alien showing up with a pet human who's body language is completely off, no hair, purple and pink blotches on their skin, and the head of a toddler and no well..... You'd be a little bit worried about what kind of weirdo had invaded and what they were goint to do to you next.

Similar phenomenon in modern humans though we kind of domesticated/neotenized ourselves.

IMHO, Jar Jar was not meant to be a racist portrayal of black humans. If Lucas was really like that, he wouldn’t have made Mace Windu stronger than Palpatine (he confirmed in the director’s commentary that if Anakin hadn’t interfered, Palpatine would have lost the fight).

I don't know, people are complex, and change over time. Lucas is married to a black woman. He has also shown attitudes that are less than enlightened. See Lando Calrissian, space pimp, and also comments he made while making Raiders that non-Nazi villains should be "Third World local sleazos, whether they're Mexicans or Arabs or whatever".

jocundthejolly wrote:

BS Evolutionary Anthropology, MFA Poetry

Can we get a poem about the invention of fire?

The Flame

One body,
we cup six palms against the night.
Coax this, ask this, urge this to fill our hard hands
curl into every crevice
grow to cause pain.

Perhaps there is a spirit here
an anima with which we three can
imbue this thing of heat and light.
This thing we would see wax fearful.

BS Evolutionary Anthropology, MFA Poetry

Horrifying. Praying for everyone.

Literally everything ever anywhere is political. Any idea you present in the context of fiction is automatically political as you are either not commenting on the thing (thus establishing it as "normal, ordinary, not worthy of comment") or you are making some sort of comment on it.

Sure there's a difference between explicit politics (e.g. "vote for Kodos!") and implicit politics (e.g. in SimCity your citizens have a very low tolerance for taxation), but the latter is still political.

I mean, even your bog standard RPG plot of "the mayor has put some bounty on the local bandit lord, so the PCs go and kill the bandits" is political because:
- this assumes the mayor can just arbitrarily put kill orders on people.
- that the populace of the city will just go along with this sort of system of law and justice.
- that the mayor's moral and legal standing is worth more than the bandit lord's (i.e. we *could* have a Sherrif of Nottingham situation here)
- that "giving money to itinerant mercenaries to kill people we dislike is an appropriate use of city resources."
etc.

The refrain of "I don't want politics (such as players kneeling during the anthem) when I turn on the game, I just want to watch my sports." really means "I want the politics I'm used to when I turn on the game, which I don't even perceive as "political" because they're the air I've breathed my entire life."

Particular Jones wrote:

...I just find that saying that people are racist without realizing it seems another way imo to claim that everything and anything is racist.

I have heard people use racial slurs without realizing that they were racial slurs; they just thought the term was a general insult and used it playfully and without malice.

I don't think that guy was racist. But what he did in that moment was part of the problem that is racism. When he was informed as to what those terms actually mean, he apologized profusely and avoided using those terms in the future.

Similar to people tossing out "g-y" and "r-tarded" for generic derogation, often intended humorously. I doubt most people doing this have any malicious intent toward sexual minorities or the developmentally disabled, and yet, as we know, using that language can be deeply hurtful.

Carefully?

Currently there's no way to have an 18 Con at level 1 without rolling, because you can't get a boost to it at the class step. What class could use Con primarily? Should a class be able to do that?

Makes me think of the Tough Hero in the old d20 Modern.

http://www.d20resources.com/modern.d20.srd/classes/basic/tough.hero.php

:denim joke:

Paradozen wrote:

Not a perfect time comparison, but each action takes about 1.5-2 seconds. You spend 1.5-2 seconds thinking about the thing you are recalling knowledge about because it could be a lot of things and you could easily get things mixed up about the creature. Especially in an inherently hectic and confusing environment, such as a combat where you need to constantly be prepared to avoid attacks and look for openings to move and attack yourself.

For instance, let's say you are fighting a blue-grey creature 3' tall with tentacles and a football-shaped head. Could be a Grindylow or a Mutant Goblin, one of these can shoot ink and swim super fast and the other is drawn to fire and pickles, it might take a second to determine what the creature is and which features it possesses. Now, if you are a lifetime expert on goblinoid physiology you can probably do this more reliably (using Goblin Lore) and faster (using Automatic Knowledge) but if you are just a travelling wizard who knows a lot of things about a lot of things, it probably takes a moment.

Yet the listed free actions take just as long...including casting some spells and speaking; drawing a weapon which could certainly take longer than the synapses in your brain firing; speaking. Besides, it makes sense that adventurers are "trained" (not in the technical use of the word) to think quickly in combat- hence no facing, too. Just like horses can be combat "trained" to maintain some semblance of control. I don't really buy the cost of recalling knowledge when the PC is basically just thinking. It's not like they're doing a math problem or counting from 1-100.

I think concentrating on a spell is even a free action!

Doesn't bother me. "Just thinking" isn't that simple. Supernormal folks like Ken Jennings and Jeopardy James might have Automatic Knowledge. The rest of us typically need a bit of time and effort, especially under pressure, to dredge up the right information in response to a random stimulus.

I seem to play large-bodied casters. A very fat human wizard, a half-orc cleric, a centaur druid. A psychoanalyst would probably have something interesting to say about it.

Okay, I’ll look for that then, Thankies Crystalseas.

Thankies, John and feytharn, *hugs*

Be well, Rysky. I want to let you know also that sometimes a psychiatrist can give you free samples if they know you don't have much money. One doctor of mine maintained me like that for quite a while. Also sometimes you can find a sympathetic pharmacist who can help you. I was getting ripped off at CVS for a while, paying like $200 a month for antidepressants, but I tried a different pharmacy where they were willing or able to use a discount card (?) so it was less than $20 for the same amount. I know how hard it is trying to find things and navigate the system when you feel wretched (it's hard enough when you feel well) but you can search out opportunities and find people who give a hoot and will meet you where you are.

I like the adaptation of Susan Hill's The Woman in Black, starring Daniel Radcliffe. If you prefer more subtle, atmospheric, old-fashioned ghost stories to monsters and gore, I recommend it highly. By all means read the book, too, since Susan Hill is one of the premiere contemporary purveyors of the English ghost story. Worthy heir to the literary tradition of MR James and co.

Bring an umbrella.

He was a B-lister through and through. Yeah better known than most.

Oh, you are too young to have had Iron Man Underoos. Believe me, for guys who grew up in the 80s, Iron Man was not insignificant.

jocundthejolly wrote:

Have to see movie of course but I'm uncomfortable with the implied sexual violence in the Snoke-Rey scene.

Wow, I definitively didn't see that! In fact, I just watched the trailer again (for about the twentieth time :) and Snoke is pretty clearly torturing Rey - she's in physical agony. I certainly don;y see any kind of "sexual violence". I think you might be reading something into that which isn't there?

It's possible I am, sure. I think the positioning of her body (nearly supine as she's being blasted) especially tripped my alarms.

Have to see movie of course but I'm uncomfortable with the implied sexual violence in the Snoke-Rey scene.

It seems like a cool Thread, but I can understand why Paizo will probably lock it -- too many potential problems if one day something gets out of hand/ inappropriate and Paizo has no idea what the posts are about.

I recommend to the OP to start a Thread in Gamer Life, in English, with the same post. Just because one can't (sadly) post in his or her preferred language doesn't mean one can't post an invite in English for other folks in a specific group can post together.
....I'm sure that if I moved to Norway or Belize or Greece or somewhere I might start a Thread like that: 'Bulgarians of Paizo Unite' to talk about gaming and such in Bulgaria.

Yah, one thing I love most about Paizo peeps (and the gaming community in general) is that we're diverse and inclusive, but I understand why the board guidelines have to exist.

The Raven Black wrote:

GreyWolfLord wrote:

I'll start by saying, despite any fallibilities or any problems, I love the US. I think it is the greatest nation on earth (as an American, if you are from another nation I would hope you wouldn't think that and would think your own nation is the greatest nation).

Actually I believe it is a very American thing to think that one's nation is the greatest nation :-)

And indeed many non-Americans also believe that the US (rather than their own country) is the greatest place on Earth ;-)

I kind of think that thinking of your country as the greatest nation on earth is just weird.

There's definitely some great stuff about America, but there's also some pretty horrendous stuff in our history and even our present. Other countries have some pretty awesome stuff too. Getting locked in the "we're the greatest" mindset makes it harder to see the flaws and improve them or to adopt new ideas from other countries.

You can love your country certainly and I hope you do, where ever you live, but it doesn't have to be the greatest for that.

I mean, isn't that part of becoming an adult? When you're a kid you're completely self-centered, you just assume your family and your crew and your town and your country are the greatest in the world and the standard by which everything is judged. When you grow up you realize you're just another one of zillions, many people do things better than you, or at least differently, and you're not special.

Rysky wrote:

Yeah, there's no way a 357 Mangum can make a shot at that range. [/sarcasm]

Which is why i said idiot. He's a gun person, he always has his gun on him the same way i usually have a knife in my pocket , he doesn't think there's anything odd about campaigning, or campaigning with a gun. I'd like to use his head to look for tachyon particles but i don't think he was trying to scare anyone

Maybe but you're responsible for not being a scary idiot. You're responsible for understanding norms and for understanding how people will perceive you and react to you, especially if you're around the polls during this troublous and jittery election cycle, whether or not you think it's reasonable. Also the law is a minimal standard of behavior. If the law says 40 ft and you say "I'm 41 ft away, my right!" you're being a jerk. You're being antisocial. It's not OK.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Nohwear wrote:

Now then, maybe I have been living a sheltered life, but is there really a need to fight for asexual rights?

Not really. No one notices us, we don't really need anything special from society, we don't threaten anyone elses... well anything.

I don't buy erasure as a problem or any form of oppression. Oddly enough most writers are heterosexual because most people are heterosexual. To get an asexual character you need

1) a writer that's even heard of it

2) A writer that either gets it (drumroll) or can fake it

3) To do it WELL you need to show it in the script.. for some reason. How do you bring this up in a way that feels organic? For example, is rocket raccoon asexual or does it just never come up in the movie? These days you need to show it at least twice: If a male hero turns down a beautiful woman the assumption is that he's gay or married. You'd need a second scene where they turn down some other kind of advance. Showing this on a heroine would be even harder, as "get lost" is usually a default response for any proposition.

4) You're willing to forgo an easy plot device hook. It is entirely plausible that people will do anything for love, which if you have a zany plot you're probably going to want to use as a rationalization for the character NOT saying "yeah, i've been slimed, bitten by a giant bat suspended over a waterfall and had a space wizard cut me with a laser sword.. i'm going the hell home.

5) a writing team and production staff that finds such a character plausible. Reality is unrealistic.

OTOH, I've talked to people who, when growing up, were overwhelmed to find some representation. Some acknowledgement that what they were living with was a real, if rare, thing and they weren't alone and screwed up and weird. "There's a name for it?"

Fiction can be great for that.

It doesn't need to be in every story of course. In every adventure flick or comic. But common enough for people to come across it and...

I'm sure it would meet with the familiar chorus of "STOP SHOVING YOUR AGENDA DOWN OUR THROAT."

jocundthejolly wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

jocundthejolly wrote:

Skill monkey annoys me and should be retired from RPG parlance as one of those terms of derogation which have been discussed so much recently on these boards.

Wait, you've seen it used as a derogatory term? Really? Huh. I've only ever seen "_____-monkey" used as a shorthand for meaning that your abilities are focused heavily into whatever thing comes before the word "monkey". Can you provide an example of how it was used negatively? You've got me fascinated and curious. :)

I perceive -monkey as disparaging, not neutral. First, I don't like terms that seem to reduce a character to certain (game) mechanical choices. Second, to me -monkey means that someone does certain low-status tasks repetitively and mindlessly, e.g., A trained monkey could bag groceries, mop floors, what have you (I would never talk that way about people who do those jobs, I'm just adducing examples). Irina Krush once complained that fast time controls chess players to "clock punching monkeys". No one refers to a thoracic surgeon as a scalpel monkey or to the head chef at a Michelin starred restaurant as a kitchen or cooking monkey.

It may tie back to background such as growing up with an uncle who called himself a grease monkey (a mechanic for anyone who doesn't know) . But like Jiggy I have never heard ____ monkey used derogatorily. I have used monkey used that way just not with a qualifier.

That's interesting, thanks for pointing that out. No one so far shares my viewpoint so maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine (my perception and emotional response).

jocundthejolly wrote:

Skill monkey annoys me and should be retired from RPG parlance as one of those terms of derogation which have been discussed so much recently on these boards.

Wait, you've seen it used as a derogatory term? Really? Huh. I've only ever seen "_____-monkey" used as a shorthand for meaning that your abilities are focused heavily into whatever thing comes before the word "monkey". Can you provide an example of how it was used negatively? You've got me fascinated and curious. :)

I perceive -monkey as disparaging, not neutral. First, I don't like terms that seem to reduce a character to certain (game) mechanical choices. Second, to me -monkey means that someone does certain low-status tasks repetitively and mindlessly, e.g., A trained monkey could bag groceries, mop floors, what have you (I would never talk that way about people who do those jobs, I'm just adducing examples). Irina Krush once complained that fast time controls chess players to "clock punching monkeys". No one refers to a thoracic surgeon as a scalpel monkey or to the head chef at a Michelin starred restaurant as a kitchen or cooking monkey.

Reading a couple of my favorite Susan Hill tales. Have fun and be safe, everyone!

My impression is that Milo just hates third wave feminism (or feminism of any contemporary kind, really), PC culture (whatever that is), Islam, and BLM. Because Trump is a shining beacon for antisocial behavior and the whole alt-right theme of "restoring rights to oppressed white males", Milo backs him. Sure, Pence has some pretty scary anti-LGBT things going on, but it seems more like Milo is more interested in the reactionary spirit of their campaign platform on those particular issues, a la "Shrieking feminist harpies are swooping down to take away free speech and artistic freedom; Islam is a hateful religion that can't coexist with modern cultures, Striving for equality is really being discriminatory against white males, etc."

It's all intolerant nonsense, and his arguments really don't hold up upon close scrutiny. However, he does have a following so I will say he's pretty good at making a name for himself.

Yes, hating or bemoaning "PC" typically means hating other people's PC and being oblivious of one's own.

I listened to the news coming out of Paris...

That's my eventful Friday the 13th...

Fortunately word is that all Paizonians in the area are safe and accounted for, though the PaizoCon events scheduled for the weekend have, understandably, been cancelled.

As a poet I would cite poor Geraldine (1790s) as the grandam of weird lesbian romance, in English at least (though Coleridge never specifies what manner of being she is).

Oh definitely. Many low-voiced instruments struggle to overcome a buffoonish reputation.

Freehold DM wrote:

Kthulhu wrote:

SKR was at times a massive jerk. I presume you will be selling off all your D&D and Pathfinder products?

there's a difference between a jerk and an active bigot.

There's also a difference between things written by a jerk and works that actually contain bigotry. There's even a difference between works written by a bigot and works that actually contain bigotry.

Case in point Richard Wagner. This is a little different because his works were appropriated by the Nazis 50 years after his death, though he is hardly responsible for that association. In any case, it is generally agreed that he was a vile person. I don't believe, however, that his operas feature any anti-Semitic content, though performing his work in Israel has still been controversial.

manwolf wrote:

The only things that make the news are sensationalism stories to make you watch the news. It would be cool to see more stories of how the majority of Muslims denounce the extremists that give them a bad name.

Its hard for people not to notice that less than 1% of the population is committing half of the terrorist attacks (once you exclude things like tree spiking or spray painting SUVS where no one gets hurt as terrorist). All of the good press in the world isn't going to counter that.

It bites that the vast majority of are going to be painted by the actions of a small minority but its the events themselves and the way dramatic events stick in peoples minds thats going to leave the impression, not the media.

Yes, although it is hard to escape circularity, i.e., terrorism is the word we use when Muslims, usually Arabs, do something violently disruptive of what we perceive as a non-violent zero-level (borrowing words from Zizek here). Violent acts committed by Israel or the United States, for example, would not be called terrorism (at least in this country).

We're old school like you but I don't know if there is modal fantasy gaming anymore.

Ramsay Snow might be another one.

I would say Iago is the archetypal CE you are talking about. He is an individualist who is a master schemer and manipulator, can function in a hierarchy if that suits his purposes but has no sense of honor, lives to create chaos and ruin other people's lives ("motiveless malignity"). Unlike the typical lawful evil, he has no interest in power. Being at the top of a hierarchy wouldn't interest him.

First off, just want to point out that there is nothing, anywhere, even HINTED AT in the Code that prohibits drinking or prostitution. Feel free to get drunk and whore to your heart's content.

Second, as long as the deities are aligned, I see no issue. Worshiping multiple gods is something that should be common in a world with hundreds of them.

Re prostitution: theoretically, yes, but the details matter. I agree that the moral currency of paying for a friend could be the same as that of paying someone to mow your lawn or clean your teeth. But in practice that transaction is often dishonorable, exploitative, if not downright abusive.

Shibboleth might be a useful word for you.

thejeff wrote:

Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:

Sissyl wrote:

Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.

I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a!#!&@@s that they are.

While I agree it's probably counter productive, I'm not sure what the alternative is. Israel has shown itself in the past to be quite happy with the status quo, quietly expanding settlements and dividing Palestinian territory further with Israeli controlled roads even at the lowest points of Palestinian violence. As far as I can see the only thing Israel wants from the Palestinians is more land for settlements and an end to violence.

Things are almost certainly worse for Palestinians now, but there's never been any sign of a long term solution. The only bargaining chip they have is stopping the violence and that's always been a precondition for any real negotiations. So "Give us what we want and then we'll start talking about making a deal."

Meanwhile, while everyone moans about how evil the Palestinian terrorists are, far more Palestinian civilians get killed than the other way around.

The alternative is to lay down weapons and go to the table and actually discuss things like mature boys and girls.

And do you think that maybe the reason palestenian civilians die is because they are being actively used as shields, not because they are being actively targeted?

I guess it depends what that entails. I do not believe Israel will ever come clean about its open secret nuclear weapons and its chemical weapons (they have used white phosphorus; it's safe to assume they have an arsenal of ugly stuff), allow inspections, give up the stuff that no country should have, sign the NPT like Iran has.

Claxon wrote:

Also, stealing isn't definitively evil. If anything it's chaotic, but not really evil. Unless you're stabbing or threatening people to get it.

No, it's Evil as a baseline. You are f#@@ing over people who have done you no wrong to benefit yourself. That is the very definition of evil. It's the shallow end of evil, and you can get away with a lot of stealing before losing your Neutral or even Good alignment, but it's still Evil.

But most heroic thieves are either subsistence thieves (Aladdin), where actual survival is the motive, not gain at the expense of others, or community champions fighting an oppressive regime (Robin Hood).

I think context is required. Cleaning out a poor person's few coppers for fun or just to be sadistic is evil. Stealing trifles from a rich person to feed a starving kid, not so much. I think there is a difference in kind there, not just a difference in degree.