Backfromthedeadguy's page

If you want to see the perfect example of Paladinhood watch Camelot the musical. The scene where Lancelot wills a fallen knight back to life at the jousting tournament is the purest 'laying on hands' example you could want.

To me it brings to mind parasites boring into your flesh and laying eggs. Then having to watch them wiggle around in the holes as they devour you from the inside out.

Rephrasing the question: Are all multiverses the same AGE. I'm not sure if there is a real difference but consider that universe A is simply a billion years older than universe B. BUT it's still a reflection of our own, just a billion years off. This was the basic gist of my original question in regards to "going sideways" into a parallel universe that simply started before or after ours but still followed the same basic course. But considering that a universe that was a billion years ahead or behind would still result in a ME that was confronted with the same basic life choices, does that lend weight to the concept of "predestiny"? I guess a lot of this depends on whether the big bang is the birth of only our universe or the multiverse in general.

The great thing about dwarves is that they can take this abuse and shrug it off. Elves would be crying in their wine cups by now.
Dwarves are the mountains that take forever to grind down. Elves are dandy clouds and a light wind will blow them away.
Why do you think elves are always trying to leave to their secluded eleven hide-a-ways? Because their feelings are so easily hurt that they feel the need to sulk without all the tougher races watching them.

For the sake of this question, let's assume that the Multiverse theory is true, that there are infinite number of possibilities, and that there are many different versions of "you".
But is "time" consistent across all these different universes? Is it 2014 "everywhere"?
And if time is NOT consistent, then would it be theoretically easier to visit "an age of dinosaurs" in another universe instead of traveling back through time in our own? And if we were to do that, what are the ramifications of purposely creating another universe by simply traveling to an alternate one?

Taking a page from Max Brooks' book, if it's a viral outbreak, the virus' imperative is to spread itself to new hosts. Already infected creatures don't count.

There's zero intelligence involved in the spread of a virus. A virus adapts to environmental conditions, there is no "imperative".

As long as people stayed out of the way the infected would attack each other. Thus we have very little to fear from so-called herds we see see in the movies and TV.

Something has been bothering me about the impending zombie apocalypse. It's the zombie's assumed team building skills. Every zombie movie ever made has been an 'us vs them' scenario. But is this realistic? I can understand the "undead" variety where they simply shamble around biting anything that doesn't smell dead. But what about the diseased kind from 28 Days later and Zombieland? Wouldn't they be just as likely to rip each other apart as a normal human? Them teaming up is the equivalent of dogs in the later stages of rabies forming a pack to go after healthy dogs. I just don't see a bunch of diseased types having the intellect or instinct to form harmonious packs of hunters when they can just as easily kill each other.

I thought the actress playing Waller did a great job. And I don't want to hear about how older incarnations of Waller were "big". I'm glad they went with the actress they have now. She's hot AND menacing.

Pan wrote:

Sebastian wrote:

I'm really enjoying this season - I'm happy to see them finally out exploring the post-apocalyptic zombie world. I think this season may be my favorite so far.

I also attribute much of the enjoyment to the lack of Rick, who is, by far, the worst leader in the history of history. Why anyone follows his whiny, indecisive, sometimes insane ass around is the greatest mystery of the show.

What do you think of this seasons pacing? For me its been inconsistent but I am really enjoying the character development. To be fair to Rick he realized hes not good at being a leader and tried to give up the reins. Nobody is stepping up tho.

I haven't had a problem with the pacing because I keep getting my post-apocalyptic fix. One of my all time favorite shows is Life After People, which is a plotless pseudo-documentary style show about what would happen to all the things humans built if the they were to suddenly disappear. 75% of the reason I watch TWD is for scenes where the characters explore the shell of the post-zombie apocalypse world, and as long as I get that, I don't mind slow or odd pacing.

"Some people just want to watch the world burn".

I thought it before and this episode confirms it: they need to start thinking about a Suicide Squad spin off.

So this chick thinks fitting into college life means joining a D&D group? What college is this? Miskatonic University?

Sound like good alternatives. Thanks!

It sounds to me like you don't want an AP. I might suggest looking into a module trilogy, or a supermodule of 100+ pages. There are plenty of good examples of both.

Sounds like a good idea.

Does anyone else feel that APs might be a little too long? With problems like players always dropping in and out, scheduling conflicts, and the fact that most have a hard time making story connections that span more than a few sessions, I'm wondering wether the players and story wouldn't be served by cutting these APs down by half. I'm not saying that APs are never finished successfully, I'm just saying it gets very tough to keep up the momentum to a satisfactory conclusion over all.
As a personal example, I've been running RotRL and almost made it through Fort Rannick (25 game sessions to get to this point) before yet another player rotated out. I have only two players that have stuck with me from the beginning. Who knows when we'll pick it back up.
Personally, I would like to see APs down to 3 chapters. I think that's long enough to get a good story in without exhausting the players and GM.

Dude, don't even bother. The deck is stacked against you and nothing but grief will come of this nightmare scenario. And if you bring your grievances to the table they WILL resent you (especial because one of the issue is family). Even as a player I would bail.

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Derek Vande Brake wrote:

@Backfromthedeadguy - cool, I'll get in touch if we can get some more folks. :)

@Kirth Gersen - yeah, I noticed a few, but they all seemed to be in Central Houston at a minimum, or often north Houston. I'm kinda trying to stay between Gessner and Avenue D (in Katy) East to West, and between Jarvis Rd. (in Cypress) and Beechnut St. North to South. I'm close to 30 miles from Asgard games - not a trip I want to make often until I have a source of gas money, lol.

Okay. But do me a favor and keep it small. I hate large groups. I'm fine with only one or two other people playing.

How do you define large? I prefer four or five players plus a GM. Six players in a stretch, with nobody playing pet-focused builds, but would hate a game with seven. I actually don't enjoy games with only one or two players and the GM.

To me smaller groups are better (three players and a GM). Btw have you looked in your private messages? I sent you my contact info if you want to discuss things in more depth.

@Backfromthedeadguy - cool, I'll get in touch if we can get some more folks. :)

@Kirth Gersen - yeah, I noticed a few, but they all seemed to be in Central Houston at a minimum, or often north Houston. I'm kinda trying to stay between Gessner and Avenue D (in Katy) East to West, and between Jarvis Rd. (in Cypress) and Beechnut St. North to South. I'm close to 30 miles from Asgard games - not a trip I want to make often until I have a source of gas money, lol.

Okay. But do me a favor and keep it small. I hate large groups. I'm fine with only one or two other people playing.

I live on Gessner and I-10. I don't really have time to run another game but if you need a player lets talk. I already run games on roll20.net but would like an "in person" game. I can play Pathfinder, World of Darkness, Mutants and Masterminds and various other games.

Random negative comment of the week;

Did not like Slade's gaping eye-hole. Looked fake and weird (admittedly, I don't know what a gaping eye-hole is supposed to look like, but I would expect it to look less the inside of a grey ball of twine).

Normally you wouldn't leave the eye empty like that, but Slade is a different circumstance because of his healing abilities. His "socket" healed perfectly (not regenerating the eye of course) and he doesn't have to worry about infection. Plus, if you want to intimidate or gross out people, that's the way to do it.

So basically it's not a concern about offending "religions" as a whole, just "religions" that matter.

Most people don't take the fringe and revivalist religions seriously enough to worry about offending them. Take Asatru for example. It's a recognized religion in Norway but you don't see mass protests about Thor's depiction in the Avengers. Gods like Thor have lost their divinity in the eyes of the world and are simply mythological figures used for entertainment. Maybe the Abrahamic religions will be like this someday, but not now or in the near future.

Rynjin wrote:

Matters of the heart muddle your head and all, especially in a tense situation like that.

Ever tried coming up with a witty comeback when someone's punching you in the face?

Oliver had a long time to think about it. A LONG time. He didn't, and it ended up stupid.

Quote:

Plus the impression I get is that the Mirakuru will focus on pretty much ANYTHING to twist your head into a psycho.

Already covered in my post. Yet still unconvincing, and worse - lame. Mirakuru makes you an idiot? Ooooookay... that's not very interesting or fun to watch. Bad writing.

Now his entire arc and villainy motivation is sullied by this. A villain who has no coherent motivation whatsoever is the definition of uninteresting.

I don't get your complaint.

Arrow related:

"Full" picture of the Flash in his new suit.

Looks great! I was dreading that they were going to put him in a red hoody.

Local is local. Think about where you live: you know the local personalities, politics, short cuts and even ghost stories that no one who doesn't live there would even know about. For example, someone with local knowledge Magnimar would have more insight into the inner working of the city vs someone that was born and raised in Riddleport. Making it "all encompassing" ruins the intent and spirit of the skill.

Besides 7 years in the Navy...
Process server (think Pineapple express). On my second delivery the guy came to the door with a gun. The next day I had to hide in a rose bush to ambush an old Asian lady who, up until then, had dodged every other server that went after her.

I think Diggle is fine where he is--he's a good character but I don't see him as one that needs to take the foreground any more often than he does. By his nature he's the guy who stands in the back and is quietly looking after everyone--narratively he's also often going to do the same thing. I think either emphasizing him more or taking him away entirely would be a mistake -- if the former, look, there's only so much you can do with a "rock" like character, he is designed to be support and if you try to make a support guy the focus, you're not going to sustain tension (the occasional highlight story on him as they do is fine). If the latter, the team loses their foundation, the solid earthy guy who keeps everyone else grounded, and then chaos ensues. The "problem" is just being the "earthy guy" you don't get a lot of plot focus. But IMO that's okay.

No, I think while sometimes there have been some episodes where his absence is inexplicable--which is likely due more to bad editing--and that is frustrating, usually they use him at about the right rate.

I see him growing to be more of a tactical manager amongst the group and continuing to be the cooler head amongst several hotheads (Oliver, Sara, Roy). I

Besides, the Suicide Squad episodes may be all about setting him up for a whole other arc.

I'd rather not see the guy if he can't live up to his potential. He's starting to remind me of Angel from Buffy seasons 1-3. In those seasons Angel is supposed to be this badass vampire but because he wasn't supposed to over shadow Buffy he was constantly being held back. It was only when he got his own show that his true potential was let loose. And because I know Diggle himself has so much potential his current role isn't satisfying in the least. Hopefully the Suicide Squad episode will turn things around.

The episode "The Promise" was pretty good, but I'm here to talk about Diggle. I know that the upcoming episode "Suicide Squad" is going to be Diggle-centric, and that's great...but is it enough? I think Diggle is worth more that a couple of episodes a season. The rest of the time he is either getting his butt handed to him or he's playing the "Magical Negro" (an actual cinematic term). I'm starting to think that there just isn't a lot of room for his character as written. What I think they need to do is either 1) have him leave for a spin-off Suicide Squad series or 2) give him the superhero makeover in Arrow and have him standing right next to Oliver in more battles (and even on his own). If done right Diggle could join characters like Batgirl (first appearance was the 60's Batman TV show) and Harley Quinn (first appearance Batman Animated Series) who didn't start in the comics but carried over. I really like Diggle too much to see his character going to waste.

So does this include the woman in terrorist organizations? And what about children? Or any disenfranchised class from all cultures? There are people suffering all over the planet for different reasons so maybe we should make them citizens as well? And even if this somehow passed, how would it help unless they came to this country to benefit from being a citizen? This is a joke petition that doesn't address the real issues and won't solve anything.

Geekgasm overload!

Arrow: Full Circle 3 minute extended trailer.

That was sweet.

Well if wikia says so ...

Like I said, they were drawn the same size, people counted it to the pixel back when JLA/Avengers came out.

Try to READ the comics. They're more than pretty pictures.

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Hama wrote:

So, Gotham is on the east coast...didn't know. Never understood DCs obsession with never using real cities.

They do use real cities. Chicago, New York and every other real world city exists along side Metropolis and Gotham. The main difference is DC Earth is bigger than Marvel Earth. But Marvel has its own share of made up places like Madripoor, Wakanda and Latveria (to name just a few). The problem with Marvel is almost every hero is based either in Los Angeles or New York, so at least DC spreads their heroes out and in places where the writers can have more creative freedom. I mean, how many times can you have a battle on top of the Statue of Liberty without it becoming old hat?

Except of course when the two Earths were drawn as the exact same size during the JLA/Avengers crossover.[/nerdage]

http://marvel.wikia.com/DC_Universe

So, Gotham is on the east coast...didn't know. Never understood DCs obsession with never using real cities.

They do use real cities. Chicago, New York and every other real world city exists along side Metropolis and Gotham. The main difference is DC Earth is bigger than Marvel Earth. But Marvel has its own share of made up places like Madripoor, Wakanda and Latveria (to name just a few). The problem with Marvel is almost every hero is based either in Los Angeles or New York, so at least DC spreads their heroes out and in places where the writers can have more creative freedom. I mean, how many times can you have a battle on top of the Statue of Liberty without it becoming old hat?

That new trailer (well, most recent) has me hyped, or at least cautiously optimistic! I can see how Pacific Rim played a lot into the making of this one, and that has me even more excited. Also, there was no Godzilla movie during the '90s... REALLY! (One can pretend)

Godzilla 2000 came out in 1999. And it was pretty damn good.

About that psychotic community thing, well, um, happy safe places don't sell comics, or get ratings, so, um, yeah, sorry.

That shows lack of imagination (not directed specifically at you, just a general statement). And the show is starting to lose all sense of hope, which is depressing, not entertaining. I want to see new types of stories besides everyone having to flee yet another destroyed community. I'm tired of seeing dirty people run blindly through the woods only to have a walker pop up out of nowhere. It's time for humanity to get organized already. I mean let's get real, if people would just get a little organized the walkers could be taken care of pretty easily. They need to start being proactive instead of reactive. I want to see more tangible goals that have nothing to do with infighting and power plays.

I'm just hoping that this next community isn't psychotic is some way. If it is, I'd just assume everyone get eaten.

And I think they should have waited on the reappearance of Carol, maybe find her already at the community. I don't understand why she decided to go back to the prison in the first place. If it wasn't for the Governor's attack Rick would have revealed to everyone what she did. Unless she was planning to kidnap the girls or something crazy like that, because there's no way they would have been handed over voluntarily.

The perfect solution is to simply have Sara start training Laurel as a re-bonding experience between the two. I'm almost finished re-watching season 1 on Netflix and rediscovered the potential that Laurel has had the entire time. On several occasions she demonstrated her toughness and fighting skills so she's really not that far off. Season 1 Laurel was actually a well written character. I think the band wagon hating was mostly due to people's love of the idea of Olicity (which I am against) VS. something Laurel specifically did. Season 2 Laurel is different: they started making her into baggage and putting her in too much in opposition to both Arrow/Oliver. Her being apart of the prosecution team against Moria and going after Arrow were dumb moves by the writers. So if the writers can get their heads out of their bums Laurel could easily be a valuable part of Team Arrow by the end of the season.

I don't like the idea of Oliver and Felicity hooking up. They need to stay friends and that's it. Set brought up Smallville which had the exact same dynamic: people wanted Clark to drop Lana for Chloe. I'm glad the writers resisted that trap and I hope they don't get pressured by what I feel are short sighted fans to do that in this show. I thought Felicity and Barry Allan had real romantic chemistry. What she has with Oliver is a deep friendship/crush.

Oh wow, I totally didn't recognize her. I liked her Ruby way more than the next actor they got to replace her...

The second actress to play Ruby is married to Jared Padalecki (Sam Winchester). Personally I felt both actresses brought something to the table.

Marik: Sweet.

Gentle Giant: I see what you're saying about the disjointedness. One thing for me is the Lance Family Flashbacks felt a little jerkily inserted into the flow of events.

Set wrote:

With shows like this, we saw Oliver Queen first return to Starling City as a killer vigilante, who would not only one-shot, one-kill people shooting at him, but snap the necks of people who knew his secret. Cue fan uproar. And then, he changes. He's hit with a pretty anvilicious in-your-face example of the path he's on, with Helena Bertinelli, who takes his casual disdain for life to the not-entirely-un-logical extreme of killing any cops or civilians who get in her way.

And so, he grows. And yet, he doesn't just automatically get it right, just because he's the protagonist and every choice he makes has to be confirmed retroactively by the writing as the right choice. Instead, he goes a bit too far to the other side, swearing an oath to deadTommy that he's not going to kill, only to have that prove an unrealistic swerve in the *other* direction.

In a show not written as well, whatever choice he makes, no matter how over the top, would end up being 'proven' to be right (and, even a *badly* written show, anyone who disagreed with his choices would have their noses rubbed in how terrible wrong they were).

Good analysis and good point. They've even put him in situations where he's ended up killing (such as that one time to protect Felicity) after his oath--and he needs to be challenged like that. It does make the whole journey feel more genuine. If he just had some magical epiphany that just fixed everything it wouldn't work.

Quote:

Arrow seems quite a bit better written than that, and so, in the case of Laurel, I'm prepared to see her spiral-of-destruction leading *somewhere.* They already smacked down some assumptions about Ollie-as-killer, and, while I don't care for the amount of screen time this particular arc is taking (just as I didn't initially love the flashbacks, or Roy,

...

The writers better be careful because by the time they get around to building her up, no one will care. And if she ends up replacing a better received character like Sara then the backlash will be even bigger. I personally want to see Laurel take her place along side Team Arrow but I'm afraid band wagon hate is going to run her down before she can. I really feel sorry for Katie Cassidy who got stuck being the punching bag of the show. Unfortunately, many people have a tendency to not be able to separate an actor from their character and the dislike transfers over. I've seen her act in other shows (like Supernatural for a season) so I know what she is capable of.

Oh, don't get me wrong, someone threatens my life, or the life of someone close to me, and I will put them down in a second. I will feel terrible about it though.

I believe they make cops go through therapy whenever they have to put someone down. I would talk to someone as well just to vent. Though any emotions still wouldn't be sadness.

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Hama wrote:

Killing should never be empowering. No matter what for it is done, it's still taking a life.

That's just being self righteous. Some dude in a leather mask (or anyone) tries to murder me, my friends or my family I wouldn't waste a tear on them. Their life would mean zero to me.

Easy to say on a message board. You might feel differently if you actually had to do it.

I'm no advocate of violence but I know 100% that I wouldn't feel bad about it. Besides, my whole adult life has either been in the military or doing some kind of security work, and though I've never killed anyone I have had guns drawn on me. My simple philosophy is to never start trouble but if someone tries to victimize you they deserve whatever you have to dish out. I save my sympathies for the victims not the victimizers.

Killing should never be empowering. No matter what for it is done, it's still taking a life.

That's just being self righteous. Some dude in a leather mask (or anyone) tries to murder me, my friends or my family I wouldn't waste a tear on them. Their life would mean zero to me.

deathquaker wrote:

or if this is something she's also going to struggle coping with as we see her spiral downwards in the next episode or so.

I would not be surprised if the next episode or the one after didnt have a scene where Laurel has a bad dream involving the killing followed by her waking up startled. If nothing else just o show that she was affected.

Also you are most likely right about the scene, I haven't seen it yet, I was just pointing out that spraying bullets is sometimes tactically viable.

EDIT-edited due to poor wording.

If the killing was 100% justified why feel bad about it? Killing a psycho trying to kill you and your friends would be empowering. I would get annoyed if they found yet another excuse for Laurel to "break down". She's supposed to be Black Canary material so I want to see backbone, not tears.

Action is definitely amping up. I think this was a strong episode although I feel like a few things were left out. I'm also wondering what Moira and Isabel are up to and hope we get a chance to catch up with both of them at some point (but I can also understand not including them).

Spoileriffic thoughts:

** spoiler omitted **...

Concerning Oliver and Sebastian Blood: since Oliver kinda agreed with him why would Oliver hold a grudge? If anything Oliver has been trying to impress the guy since day 1. That's why he's been reluctant to believe Laural's story and was relieved when Sebastian wasn't under the mask.

I loved the episode overall but the scene when the swat guy came in guns blazing was a little over the top. I hope the guy gets reprimanded for all the city files he destroyed.

2 GMs 1 mic is a great general rpg pod cast.

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Ivan Rûski wrote:

Charlie Bell wrote:

...I actually like Tolkien?

Can't actually say weather I like or dislike him. I tried reading Fellowship back in 7th grade, and couldn't get through the first chapter. I've been meaning to give Tolkien a go again, since that was 15 years ago now, but between keeping up with various things on the web, a myriad of video games, GMing one game, playing in another, and reading other books, my plate is pretty full.

I seriously don't get this Tolkien hate. I devoured the Hobbit and LotR when I was ten years old. At one point I knew more about ME than the real world. I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the fact I'm seeing this opinion more and more doesn't sit well with me. Most of the so-called fantasy people are reading today is the equivalent of trash romance novels; and what's worse they mistake them for quality stories.

Not to reply twice to this topic in short succession...but pretty much see my post above. I love Tolkien, but I get it. Tastes have changed for starters many dont want to waid through something so densly packed with detail, but beyond that it is a flawed work in many ways, most of which is forgiven because it is a seminal work to most anything that came after it.

The only flaw I see comes from the ADD personalities that want to put the blame on the work instead of their own shoulders. By every definition the works of J.R.R. Tolkien are and will always be MASTERPIECES of fiction. As long as civilization endures it will be the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings that will studied by literary scholars, not these overly glitzed cartoons with their BESMs.

In my English classes, Lord of the Rings was actually used as an example of how not to write a book. In particular, how it is he forgot conservation of detail and went overboard a few times (this is actually one of the primary criticisms...

So your English teacher was an idiot.

Godzilla's defeated abominations (Hedorah), quasi-immortal star dragons (King Ghidorah), goddesses (Mothra), cyborgs (Gigan), a double-team of robot and dinosaur (Mechagodzilla and Titanosaurus), etc. Hell, he's had a black hole dropped on him and walked away.

Cthulhu's been beaten by a freakin' boat, so ... get a grip, Cthulhu fan-boys. Your little squid is fightin' out of his league.

(Oh, and Godzilla says he was really tasty with that marinara sauce.)

Game ... over.

Godzilla's atomic breath alone would tip the scales.

Backfromthedeadguy wrote:

Ivan Rûski wrote:

Charlie Bell wrote:

...I actually like Tolkien?

Can't actually say weather I like or dislike him. I tried reading Fellowship back in 7th grade, and couldn't get through the first chapter. I've been meaning to give Tolkien a go again, since that was 15 years ago now, but between keeping up with various things on the web, a myriad of video games, GMing one game, playing in another, and reading other books, my plate is pretty full.

I seriously don't get this Tolkien hate. I devoured the Hobbit and LotR when I was ten years old. At one point I knew more about ME than the real world. I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the fact I'm seeing this opinion more and more doesn't sit well with me. Most of the so-called fantasy people are reading today is the equivalent of trash romance novels; and what's worse they mistake them for quality stories.

Not to reply twice to this topic in short succession...but pretty much see my post above. I love Tolkien, but I get it. Tastes have changed for starters many dont want to waid through something so densly packed with detail, but beyond that it is a flawed work in many ways, most of which is forgiven because it is a seminal work to most anything that came after it.

The only flaw I see comes from the ADD personalities that want to put the blame on the work instead of their own shoulders. By every definition the works of J.R.R. Tolkien are and will always be MASTERPIECES of fiction. As long as civilization endures it will be the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings that will studied by literary scholars, not these overly glitzed cartoons with their BESMs.

Charlie Bell wrote:

...I actually like Tolkien?

Can't actually say weather I like or dislike him. I tried reading Fellowship back in 7th grade, and couldn't get through the first chapter. I've been meaning to give Tolkien a go again, since that was 15 years ago now, but between keeping up with various things on the web, a myriad of video games, GMing one game, playing in another, and reading other books, my plate is pretty full.

I seriously don't get this Tolkien hate. I devoured the Hobbit and LotR when I was ten years old. At one point I knew more about ME than the real world. I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the fact I'm seeing this opinion more and more doesn't sit well with me. Most of the so-called fantasy people are reading today is the equivalent of trash romance novels; and what's worse they mistake them for quality stories.

Orik and Verik's dad appears in Second Darkness. And HIS misfortune is directly related to Orik's little problems with a certain alchemist. ;)

I've seen several games decide to have Orik join the rangers at Fort Rannick. I think THAT would be the icing on the cake (in having him be a fourth survivor of the hillbilly ogrekin).

This is what I did. But they won't find Orik until they encounter Lucrecia. She's using him as a plaything, both sexually and just plain torture. I still haven't decided whether he's going to be totally brainwashed or not.

I've always envisioned Caloline Blakiston (played Mon Mothma in Jedi) as Mayor Kendra Deverin.