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

meatrace's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,061 posts (7,064 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Pathfinder Society characters. 6 aliases.


1 to 50 of 954 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:
Ipslore the Red wrote:
Loads of options for builds and it's got all that full-caster goodness. It's pretty nearly impossible to make an oracle that's actually bad, and only moderately difficult to make one good at a specific concept.
Really? They're a spontaneous caster. All you have to do is not take the right spells and you're useless. There are a number of curses that will completely wreck your character if they're enforced.

Pro Tip 1: Don't take the wrong spells.

Pro Tip 2: Don't take the bad curses.

I mean, this is like arguing that the fighter is awful at dealing damage because he could spend every feat on Skill Focus. Don't do that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
meatrace wrote:

Those flying medusa heads from Castlevania.

F$%@ those guys!
*dramatic sting*

Yeah I know, but those things aren't nearly as bad as the CV ones.

If they had an AC of 24 and automatically paralyzed on a touch attack then maybe they'd be close. Also paralysis is 1d4 rounds and they hunt in packs of 2d6.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Those flying medusa heads from Castlevania.
F#!~ those guys!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey TL, it sure would be neat if you favorited all my posts.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:

I have been binge watching Community and Abed is always eating buttered noodles...I was also reading a food blog about bad customers and people kept complaining about people that ate buttered noodles. I checked out Google and buttered noodles appears to be just butter and noodles. ... Is just throwing a bucket load of butter in noodles a main meal in the U.S.?

I had imagined it to be something like butter chicken....

The Italian deli I used to work at has buttered noodles on the menu, but it's REALLY garlicky garlic butter, and you typically put a ton of parmesan on it and eat it with a hot sausage. Good eats!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oops!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
out on bail, cops fire back regarding Gray's knife

That's like epically missing the point.

DA: "We contend that the police arrested Gray illegitimately then proceeded to beat him so severely it broke his spine which eventually lead to his death."

COP: "That is a HORRIFIC, slanderous LIE. I did nothing of the sort!
It was a legitimate arrest ."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:

Obviously we're going to have to agree to disagree on this.

I think the protection of other people's property (and welfare, though as of YET nobody has been hurt) is more important than you being able to continue protesting all through the night.

I certainly think it's a better alternative than coming in with teargas and billy clubs to arrest large groups of people at once.

You disagree.

You're being disingenuous.

In all cases that I've seen, riots form from protests AFTER police are called in in riot gear. They escalate. Sure, maybe there's some excess littering or traffic is inconvenienced or even a rare car bashed up, but it doesn't warrant ESCALATING the situation with police violence.

You'll note that the curfew doesn't just affect protesters. You're abridging individuals' rights because of what someone else has done. Unacceptable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Snow wrote:

Not really. Both liberalism and conservatism are theories, a way to look at the world. Either could be implemented in different ways - as an extreme example, fascism is an implementation of conservatism and communism is an implementation of liberalism. They both ended up looking remarkably similar back there in the previous century.

I mean, the names are just labels plastered over incredibly broad arrays of approaches to a vast number of subjects that sometimes interlock and sometimes don't.

In either case, it is borderline absurd to claim that conservatism is more grounded in reality than liberalism is. Do conservatives unanimously have more experience than liberals? since both camps are so broad that it is virtually impossible that one is on average...

You've earned the following achievements: Epistemic Nihilism, Missing the Point Entirely and Interpreting Something to Mean the Opposite.

You'll notice that nowhere in my post did I mention liberalism. I'm not making this statement on some fictitious scale of left vs. right, nor am I talking about the British conservative party, or Israeli conservative party. I thought it was pretty clear from context I was talking about American politics.

Also, I'm saying that CONSERVATISM is unempirical. I'm not sure how you even misinterpreted that.

Conservatives in America, aside from being decidedly anti-science, like to make big bold claims about what will happen if we do X, Y or Z. Then, when that outcome fails to appear, they refuse to admit they were wrong and instead invent a new bugaboo. Sometimes they just keep beating a dead horse (Obamacare is bad, mmkay? What's that? You LIKE your insurance?).

Beyond that, though, progressive policies have a transparent end goal: improve the quality of life of our citizens. This is something that is testable. "Liberal" policies are based on science, social science, and math, given that the goal of government should be to work on behalf of and for the benefit of its citizens.

Conservative ideology is either purely reactionary (social conservatism, which I don't think there's a place for anymore) or based on debunked economic theories (for the most part) which are themselves unempirical (i.e. Mises, Hayek, et al). The only reasoning they can provide for these policies is nebulous ideas like natural rights.

Property rights say that if you own something legitimately no one can tell you what to do with it, and that you can transfer it to someone else.

Someone like myself might say "well, hang on, that just gives rationale to pollution. property isn't as delineated as we'd like and there are externalities. Furthermore, allowing someone to transfer their own property without regulation leads inexorably to the accumulation of wealth among a chosen few. Money is power, and power corrupts; the first priority of those in power is to stay in power. Without a check on this accumulation it leads to an oligarchy (or even aristocracy). Maybe we should enact policies that prevent that from happening."

Conservatives: "STOP TRYING TO ABRIDGE MY RIGHTS YOU COMMIE!"

Politics is a lot like systems design. Garbage in garbage out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
I've never heard a conservative talk about police/fire unions, other than in a specific context (like a mayor of a city in the middle of negotiations). They seem to mostly pretend that those unions don't exist, instead focusing on similar language that they use to describe the military (brave men and women, honor, duty, etc).

Here in Wisconsin, when they were crafting Act 10 the union busting bill from a few years back, they specifically exempted police and fire/rescue unions. When the next round of attacks came, they were exempted once again, and in fact the police were given raises rather than cuts.

To conservatives, property "rights">human rights in all cases.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cthulhu automatically wins because Gojira is fictional.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
Glad I moved back to Florida.

You win the prize for creating a sentence never thought or uttered by another human being before you. Congrats!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the right answer is "Stop asking questions and keep digging"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:

The purpose of the law is twofold: to override and eliminate the laws passed by individual counties and municipalities in Indiana that have added sexual orientation as a protected class on which basis it is illegal to discriminate; and to make a political statement that gays are bad mmmkay.

All these people arguing that businesses should have the right to discriminate: I'm guessing you've never been discriminated against for your race, sexual orientation, or religion. It's not just a matter of "oh well, whatever". It's really dehumanizing.

That is not the purpose of the law, someone already explained the history of the law, stop trying to be trollish.

And since you asked I face sexism all the time, and occasionally attacks on my religion as well. If you want to factionalize the country into protected groups fine but don't complain when religion gets protected as well.

Religion isn't being protected. Nothing is keeping these people from exercising their religion. Refusing service to someone has nothing to do with their religion; show me where in the Bible/Koran/Torah it says "thou shalt not make cakes for homos, for they art icky."

And also, this is plainly and obviously the purpose of this law: to override local/county laws that provide protections for such people and to pander to the Republican base aka homophobic bigots.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

So here's my proposed solution.
If you're part of a discriminated class, and a "private" business refuses you service, you should be able to get a refund on all taxes that go to fund that business, and its owner's services (post, road, police, fire/rescue, etc).

Of course, this will mean that the taxes will go up for everyone else, to make up the revenue. And since you can't tell if someone is gay by looking at them then, realistically, anyone could be discriminated against.

So, therefore, everyone EXCEPT these businesses should get a tax break, and the businesses should see a commensurate tax increase.

We can call it a Bigot Tax.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I prefer frozen custard. Vanilla.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Pfft. I've been posting about The Wire my entire time here. Came up in the first politroll conversation I ever entered, back with Comrade Derek back in '0whatever.

As for Wire, the band, c'mon, Comrade Meatrace. I've got ten years working in used record stores under my belt.

I'm cooler than all of you!

Listening to Grateful Dead undoes all other cool you may have earned.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:
Now, I'm of the firm belief that there are a lot of people who are medicating when they really shouldn't need to. Around 70% of the population on some form of anti-depressant? Are you kidding me? Sounds like a bunch of people who can't deal with reality and want to spend time in happy la-la land.

I'm not going to scold you or anything, because I used to feel the same way, but now I'm on zoloft.

My parter of 10 1/2 years abruptly left me in the middle of the night with no warning and left me holding the bag on a myriad of things. I needed help. I'm dealing with reality, and I'm hardly in la-la land, I'm just not having the near daily panic attacks and breakdowns that typified the first 6-8 weeks after she left.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tangible Delusions wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Are there unnecessary or even bad regulations? Certainly.

Are there needed regulation that are not in place? Certainly.

Does either of those imply that we have either too much or too little regulation? No. It implies we have some wrong regulation.

Anyone talking about too much regulation in the abstract is likely trying to get some good regulation removed under cover of there being too much. Bad regulations can be pointed out and removed on their own. Good ones have to be snuck out. No one actually argues that we need more regulation in general, though plenty of people argue for specific regulations they think are needed. Again these are often opposed on the grounds of "too much regulation" when they can't be opposed on their own merits.

I would argue that unnecessary and bad regulations would be the definition of too much regulation.

*eyetwitch*

Also, if one person breaks the law egregiously (murder foe example) that's proof we have too many people. People can't be rehabilitated just like laws can't be amended. Riiiiiiiight?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Krensky wrote:

The reason most people use Windows is because it's what most computers have loaded and because Office is the standard in business.

BSD is the province of semi-embedded systems and, in its OSX form, Apple fans. Linux is popular on the server side, but not so much on the consumer on the PC side due to all sorts of usability issues. OSX is also far more expensive than Windows due to Apples inflated hardware prices.

People have been dating that Windows will loose market share due to major revisions for a decade. They've also been wrong for a decade.

I built my computer and I run Win 7. It wasn't pre-loaded or packaged with my machine, but I want to be able to play games on it other than solitaire. Though I hear Mac is getting Diablo II soon.

I also don't use office suite, I use open office.

I really like linux. I like the open source ideology and the fiercely loyal and talented community. But the first time I try to put a game on my machine and it fails to work, I *flip table* and install Windows, because ain't nobody got time for that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Really not doing anything for my view that math is just a bunch of pointless numbers shuffling with no attached meaning at levels most people reach.

If you define what is useful by what most people can understand, you'll quickly find that nothing is useful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
Many of my interactions with people who have a problem with "social justice" end up complaining about "censorship" and "reverse racism" and feminism ruining discussions. So, they clearly believe privilege exists, they just think that women, minorities, people with disabilities etc. have too much of it, and white, heterosexual males have too little.

This. So much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Coriat wrote:
I want a vote too! This is New England, not Old England, but let's not be ageist.

Do I get to vote in French elections since I live in what was once New France?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Falantrius wrote:
Seranov wrote:
Paizo probably didn't want to give too many specifics about covens, so that the DM can just make them as they please, instead of being like IT MUST BE LIKE THIS.
Not sure what I can say about most of the comments but I am totally with you what you are saying. We have tried to create decent witches and we just end up creating our own classes. We just hate to do that - I'd love to be part of a group that updated the witch - but based on comments - not sure that would ever happen.

Wicca as a religion is less than a century old. It was created out of whole cloth by Gerald Gardner. It's bunk.

There's no such thing as magic in the real world.

This is a fantasy game. The witch class is based on witches in fantasy literature and popular culture.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Millions of years of evolution, only to be foiled by a dirty gym sock.


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

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

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

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

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

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

Please try again, this time with less personal attacks.


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

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

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


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
Oliver North gets book deals and employed by Fox News.

Or, ya know. G. Gordon Liddy, for a long time one of the most successful conservative talk show hosts. Successful author, FOX contributor Actually went to jail as one of the men who broke into the DNC headquarters in the Watergate Hotel. Some of you might remember the scandal.

G. Gordon Liddy wrote:
Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." … "They've got a big target on there, ATF. Don't shoot at that, because they've got a vest on underneath that. Head shots, head shots.... Kill the sons of b!$#%es.

Liddy encouraging people to disobey the law and kill federal law enforcement officers, coaching them on how to more effectively do so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vod Canockers wrote:


Lots of peaceful protests that didn't involve illegal activities in the '60s.

Yeah, and those peaceful protests were STILL met by riot police.

When the law is wrong, fighting for what is right is illegal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When did we start living in a Judge Dredd comic where the cops have the duty to execute unruly citizens?

It's not "innocence until proven guilty...or you die in which case you probably deserved it you scum."


4 people marked this as a favorite.

That's one of the areas that needs serious reform: where fines and taxes go to. This is a good example, why on earth would the money from traffic tickets go to the police to hand out the citations? Shouldn't it go to the state DOT? Same with criminal forfeiture. It just creates perverse incentives for police.

Another example is in education. In most states (if not all?) that I know of, public schools are financed by property taxes at a local level, meaning regions with higher property values get better schools/better equipment/higher teacher:student ratios, etc. Which is, of course, the reverse of what it should be where the poorer children need more individual attention. Even if you don't think that progressive policy is right, I can't even fathom the argument that justifies anything other than a flat $/student across an entire state.

I apologize if that derails it, but I see similarities in those policies.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Live cop doesn't protect anyone either.
Live cop eats donuts, gets paid 2-3 times the median American income, and shoots to kill if they feel "threatened".

F!%% the police.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:


It's not a real problem until it affects you personally.

I'm pretty sure that's written in the Republican party charter somewhere.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:


Look at the brutal suppression of Occupy. It's also about whether you represent a threat to the system. For all their anti-government rhetoric, the Open Carry folks don't. Occupy did, just like unions and labor agitators used to.

I had to reread this several times because my brain kept parsing it as "labor alligators". Which I think is way cooler.

Adult-onset dislexia?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Because it is relevant, and because it is local (to me anyway) I figured I'd post this piecethat has been circulating my social media.

Granted, this story is one man's side and doesn't cite sources a whole lot (he's a layperson father of a murdered son) but I think it highlights the realities of the situation.

I tend to think that, now that Fergusen is getting national attention and scrutiny, that things might actually get done. The problem is that this sort of stuff happens every day and not every incident gets the light shone on it that it deserves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To extend the metaphor, the story about the murdered youth being a suspect in some other crime is the police's attempt to use Bluff, but with the -20 penalty for saying completely unbelievable.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Common sense is what tells us the world is flat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

Protestant: WTF?!?!? Can we get over the "God hates" thing already? God loves everyone. As long as they believe in God. If they don't, then God hates 'em.

This isn't accurate by the way. I mean the first part is... God does love us all. But the second part isn't. God promises all our misdeeds will be punished... This is a death sentence for everyone on earth. But he loves us and so he sent his only begotten son to die for us and give us a second chance at heaven through him... we only need to believe, nothing more.

But you don't just have to believe, you have to believe and also rigorously follow a 2000+ year old moral code or you will be tortured for eternity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:


I was calling into question inaccurate statements from someone else. I don't care if someone else said something, that's not attributable to me. Just because I'm pointing out Meatrace's inaccuracy, does NOT mean I'm disagreeing with his overall sentiment, just that I find some of his "facts" to not actually be facts.

No, you were pitching a fit because you continued to willingly misinterpret what I said. Something no one else seems to have had a problem understanding.

I never said Arab Israelis were disenfranchised, I said half the population of Israel, of which I am counting the population of Palestine. Or at least the territory of palestine entirely surrounded by Israel.

Feel free to continue to represent my rather clear statement though if it makes you feel superior. Seems to be your only motivation for being on these boards anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
Well, voting is a legal matter. If you aren't legally part of a country, why should you vote in it?

Well, when you live in an area under military control by a power that won't recognize your state's sovereignty, and you commute to Israel every day for work for your entire life, yes you should be able to vote.

By your logic, all the US would have to do is declare minority neighborhoods in the US to be part of a different country to disenfranchise entire swaths of our country. No dice.

There's NO WAY you would tolerate a policy that granted citizenship to US residents based solely on their heritage.

I find it telling how willing you are to take the imperialist side of this argument.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Arab citizens are allowed to vote, though they do face other restriction. I suspect, especially given the "more than half" bit, that he was referring to the adult population of the whole territory Israel controls. Both Israel itself and the Occupied territories.

That's correct. Israel doesn't recognize the state of Palestine, and thus the population of Palestine is de facto part of Israel. They are not citizens of Israel, of course, because that would be democracy and the racist war-mongers in the Knesset would be voted out in a week.

Can you imagine if the US decided that all Native Americans (probably the closest analogy, but you'll forgive since there isn't a perfect one) were not US citizens and were denied the franchise? Being able to pick and choose who among your population are considered "citizens" and thus allowed the privilege of participating in democracy is fascism at its most pure.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The 5 steps to running a low-magic campaign

1) Don't give your players any useful (magical) treasure.
2) Watch your players flail helplessly against the weakest enemies with DR, or become frustrated when they need to sneak in somewhere and (surprise) the warrior isn't maxed in Stealth.
3) Cackle maniacally and rub your hands together as your players are slaughtered.
4) Wait for your players to drop due to frustration, and find a new group.
5) Repeat


3 people marked this as a favorite.
zauriel56 wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
zauriel56 wrote:
I disagree with the stance of the business but not the ruling. Why should rights be infringed upon because they own a business?
Why should a employee's rights be infringed upon because they have a job?

As someone previously stated you don't have to have sex. So women have a right to not get pregnant right? You know how you can do that? Don't have sex. If you want your cake and to eat it too you're gonna have to pay. Why is it there job to pay for something elective?

Look I'm a libertarian. I believe individual rights are paramount and I believe people should be allowed to do whatever they want so long as it does not infinite on another's rights. And glad to provide some diversity.

You don't have to eat, so why should insurance cover lipitor.

And by the way THEY ARE PAYING!!!!!!!!!!111eleven
WHen you say "you gots ta pay" they are PAYING by exchanging their labor for a compensation package that includes comprehensive reproductive healthcare.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can't call your business christian and accept credit cards (usury).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quark Blast wrote:
meatrace wrote:

95% of the population couldn't have been land owning white men. I'm guessing 50-ish % were women and a significant portion black.

You should stop lying.

HA! Silly old bear. :D

The answer to your self-induced conundrum would be 95% of people were represented by those who were eligible to vote.

Similarly, in an autocracy/monarchy 100% of citizens are represented by their king!

But seriously, representation is determined by ability to vote. Women, poor and nonwhites couldn't vote and thus were not represented. If representation meant as you define, colonists were represented in parliament.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Crisischild wrote:

I don't really see the problem. It's a few specific products, they still cover all other forms of female birth control. Also the birth control not covered generally costs less in-store than the co-pay for many of the forms that are covered.

Why is this a world ending issue? Do I not understand because I'm a sexist racist patriaricle capitalist pig?

Because your medical care should be between you and your doctor, not your employer, and this sets precedent for far worse intrusions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:
Electric Wizard wrote:
Watch it and you realize nobody can understand what they are saying.

Except mathematicians.

Quote:
And think about it, adding positive numbers can never be negative.

Ah, yes. The old "Just think about it!" counter. Right up there with "But it's common sense!" and "But I totally saw it on Facebook so it must be true!"

Quote:
It is just a propaganda video put up by String Theorists.
I don't think you know what "propaganda" means.

Except that it IS bullcrap. 1-1+1-1... is a non-converging series, which means it does not sum to 1/2. Without that bit of mathematical misdirection the whole calculation falls apart.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

And I'm pretty sure there are two movies called "The Gate".

I'm talking the one where the kid used a model rocket (no, I am not kidding) to kill the demon and save his sister.

That's the one.

It's awesome. Nuts to you.

1 to 50 of 954 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.