I told a low level party that a thunderstorm had started just as they were rolling initiative. I marked a random spot on the map and said that was where lightning had struck. At the start of next turn, I rolled a couple dice behind the screen, counted out to another empty spot on the map near the fighter, marked it as the next strike, and asked the PC what type of armor he was wearing.
The player promptly pulled off his armor. He had a rough time of it after that.
At the top of every round I would roll more dice and then pretend that I was counting out a new location for the bolt. One of the players tried to metagame it by staying away from the last location.
At the very end of the battle the player who removed his armor asked how much damage the bolt would have done if it had hit. That was when they finally figured it out.
I sometime create situations where the players can choose a battle they may not be able to win or walk away with a victory. One time the players were sent to free a captive that had been caught by some slavers. The players caught up with the slavers at the gates of the slaver's fort and managed to get the captive. The players could have stayed and continued to fight whoever came out of the fort or take the captive and pull back. They choose to pull back. (If they stayed it would have been bad.)
If a battle starts to become unwinnable because of luck, I will sometimes fail a few roles. As a player confirming three crits in a row is really fun, kinda sucks when it is the GM.
We got caught in an ambush and just barely fought free and ended up falling back to a castle to regroup/recover at which point we ended the session.
The host stares at him for a moment then reaches across the table and takes the beer.
Well... in theory it looks good on paper. Essentially from what I've pieced together this will disallow internet service providers from "forcing" certain websites to pay kickbacks for better service. To be honest I haven't followed it very closely, but I just do not think more government oversight is going to be good...
Comcast admitted they were deliberately slowing down the internet, so I think this is case of the industry doing it to themselves.
Doug's Workshop wrote:
A few things to keep in mind.Since Congress has not passed a budget or a CR then the only way this could happen is if Obama assumes the power of the purse. (I am sure he can come up with a speech explaining why Congress has left him no choice in matter) So the Obama administration will by and large be allowed to unilaterally write the federal budget until such time has Congress actually passes a spending bill or a CR. Do you really want that amount of power in one set of hands?
Federal government has contracts that are funded by discretionary spending. If those contracts are not paid on a timely manner then under the Prompt Pay Act the federal government must pay a penalty which will be paid with your tax dollars. So in the short run the default will effectively raise government spending because now you are paying for both the contracted service and the penalty late payment amount.
Skeletal Steve wrote:
Then your employer is on a path towards failure
Business 101 – Organizations that give the minimum pay get the minimum effort. Organizations that are only getting the minimum will eventually lose out to organizations that are getting the maximum. This is why I don’t mind being paid less than some of my direct reports and turn the occasional blind eye when I see my people bending the rules. It is the price I pay for having a team that out performs other teams within my division.
Josh M. wrote:
Santa is not the devil, he is a communist out to redistribute wealth from hard working parents to free loading children hence the red uniform.
PR also had a anti-Tinky Winky rant. Apparently a pre-school show was sending messages to turn kids gay. I had no idea that exposure to the color purple could have such a profound impact on childrens' development.
Big Lemon wrote:
I'm a Catholic in exile and my theology is rusty
The way this was explained to me is that believing with your mouth is different from believing with your heart. Belief of the mouth is measured by the number of verses quoted and volume with which someone shouts that they love Jesus.
Belief of the heart cannot be measured in words. It can only be measured in how you treat the person that sits next to you which is why the Catholic church speaks of works not just grace. It is possible to believe with your mouth and not your heart which why people can commit terrible acts however God judges a person by what they believe in their heart not in their mouth. So simmply asking forgiveness for a sin is not enough, a person must regret their actions.
The follow up question is can a person accept God in their heart while denying him with their mouth. The Pope is say yes it is possible.
This arguement was used by Catholics to get around the issue with all non-europeans being denied heaven for 1500+ years of history.
I was at a table with a player like that. The GM response was a curse involving the player's great sword going limp. Needless to say the rest of the table had a few comments.
Celestial Healer wrote:
OK so the lawyer shows up and says something like "My clients are sorry for your loss. Please accept out condolences and this nice python."
Gerrymandering encourages house members to move and stay on the far sides of the political spectrums and push out members from the moderate wings of both parties. The conservative districts send the very conservatives and liberals areas send the very liberal. If a person attempts to reach across the aisle to make a deal they may get pushed out in the next primary. Look what happened to Lugar and he was in Senate. The end result is a body with no political middle ground.
The constitution was designed for government by compromise. By pushing out moderates that could make a deal, the gerrymandering is creating an atmosphere that makes it extremely difficult to address a serious problem such as the fiscal cliff.
Some things are more important than winning the next election, this is one of them. Anyone that does not get that has no business in the oval office.
There is an interview where George Plunkitt from the Tammany hall era spoke about honest graft and dishonest graft. Plunkitt complains that people accused him of stealing money from the treasury which he would never do because there was so much honest graft money lying about for him to take.
Plunkitt gets dinged for being corrupt but at least he was open and honest about how he made his fortune.
Ceres Cato wrote:
Lord protector's daughter and the sequel Lady Protector by Modesitt.
Tell the PCs not to get caught.
I suddenly feel a need to use my annoyed parent voice. The one I used prior to putting up to the toy the preteens were fighting over.
Starbases you need to look at the map - I build economic startbases if there is a cluster of planets I can get inside the radius. Influence bases I will build one right next to someone else's colony that got build inside my sphere of influence to flip it then destroy it. Miltary bases - I build them if there is a cluster of high value planets near a border and then destroy them once the border moves out.
Asteroid mining one thing to check in the middle part of the game is the planet the resources are going to. The closer the better. The AI will direct the resources to the nearest planet when you first start mining. If you get a new planet, even one right next to the asteroid the AI will not redirect the resouces.
I was planning on play Europa Universalis before I got distracted with this game. Unfortunately I am having issues with my economy and it SUCKS. How in the Hell do I get a viable economy without trade routes? I am in a huge galaxy with tight clusters. Any suggestions? I am still new to this game.
Cash flow is a challenge in the early part of the game. Plan to spend some time on the domestic screen tweaking the tax rates and prod percents to keep yourself in the green.
All the races have tech that will boost economic output of a planet (The exact names vary by race) Once you get the tech have at least one economic improvement per planet. If you can designate one planet to be your cash cow. Load it up with economic improvements and then build an economic capital on it.
Other things which boost an economy is influence from tourism revenue and population increases - More citizens the more tax you collect. I make is a point to keep happiness above 70% if possible even if it means slowing production to a crawl. Eventually the population grows past a tipping point and the revenue shoots up.
I notice that with the taxes there is a point where a one percent change in the tax rate will have a much larger than expected impact on happiness.
If there is a skill check roll I don't want the players to metagame, I have them roll a few checks in advance that I can use when needed. I only do this for situations where the PCs would not change what they are doing if they failed the roll for example if the party is being secretly followed. Occasionally I use it for trap finding as well.
The big thing is for the PCs to know at the start otherwise you get into the other GMs do not do it this way conversation.
Sometimes PC die that is part of the game.
Normally when a PC dies in my D&D games it is because they have done something stupid or something heroic - sometimes both at the same time.
There are games that are far more deadly games for PCs.In those games PCs die far more often.
I have done a few arrogant PCs, I focus the remarks on NPCs not the other players. I had a PC that declared that a disease which infected humans but not elves was caused by inferior breeding.
I also give the PC a clear reason why they view themselves as supperior within the backstory.
Players having fun is absolutely necessary. Everything else can be worked around with a little effort.
Wealth can also be inherited so NO IT IS NOT ALWAYS EARNED!
As for the top 10% paying most taxes, what percent of the nation's wealth do they control? What percent of the total wages does that top 10% earn?
The rule is that starfleet personal may not get involved unless it would make for a good show.
The intent of the prime directive is that civilizations need to reach a certain level before they are ready to handle dealing with aliens beaming down and saying "Hi just dropped in to say you are not alone." In TNG there was a story where the planet's prime minister decided that the general populace was not yet ready and told the Enterprise to leave so he and the head of security could sweep the whole thing under the rug.
Congrads but you are not out of the woods yet. If you make pass year 10 the next 10 years are really easy.
As for marriage the problem is that we have turned a religious/social institution into a legal institution. When you change something into a legal institution, things goes wrong.
Just because Texas has a law does not make it constiutional.
If it is federal regaulation then what is the meaning of the phrase "United states and the several states"
The reference is to the goverment formed by the state in admission process but I will agree to disagree
May not grant their citizens special privileges which are denied to citizens of other states.
The refernce is to legal privelges. So Alaska can not pass a law that only people who live in Alaska are allowed to own a car. The Alaska fund pays to people who meet a resident requirement. Since any US citizen can move to the Alaska and meet the requirement it is allowable.
section 10 article 1
"No state shall without the consent of congress lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in times of peace."
The second ammendment uses the term militia which was not intended to be a standing army. Interesting enough the President is the commander of all state militia forces.
The list is quite a bit longer than that. For starters the constiution says that states:May not use religion as a requirement to hold public office. (Article 6 not the 1st amendment)
Must adopt a republic as their form of goverment.
Must abide by decisions of the supreme court.
May not grant their citizens special privelges which are denied to citizens of other states.
May not impose duties on imports not just things that cross state lines
May not grant citizenship
May not enter into a treaty
May not declare war
May not create a standing army unless approved by Congress
Must allow for trial by jury
May not pass an ex-post facto law
I could continue
[My not liking Shakespeare in general is unrelated to my point that there is no reason not to update the language.
The words Shakespeare used and the way he used them is a large part of what makes him a genius and why his plays have endured as they have. There is a beat to his writing. It is one of those things that you have to hear the lines from a talented performer to really get it.
pres man wrote:
Exactly my point. Yet this is what free market control of the healthcare costs would require to be effective. No one is willing to do it nor are we willing to admit that the free market is failing.
The market already decides the cost which is why it is out of control. Consider this every year you file taxes. You have three choices, get the best tax expert available, get a middle price tax person, or do it yourself. Most people given their tax situation can set prices to each option pretty easy and will make few calls to get some rough prices before making a decision.
Now your child breaks an arm. You have the same three choices - Get the best available, get a middle price person, or set the bone yourself (in the middle ages barbers did this). What are the dollar values you assign here? How much time do you spend thinking about costs? How many doctors do you call for an estimate? This in not even a life threatening injury. In fact you could delay seeking treatment for hours without any long term impact to your child. So do you wait and make sure that you are getting the best deal possible?
For free markets to hold down costs, most customers must be acting in a rational manner regarding costs most of the time. With healthcare the higher the cost the less likely the customer is to be acting a fully rational manner.
Like the 300 Spartans
To be a legal duty there must be a law requiring it which I have never seen. This is more a performance standard than a legal one.
The issue is that board of directors are rewarding officers based on short term profits irregardless of the long term cost to the company. The officers get the big bonus then move on to the next company and leave the shareholders to clean up the long term mess they have created.