King of Roses

Riskbreaker's page

96 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Does anyone else feel that Anakin is actually so whiny you never thought of him as a hero in the first place? I mean, the kid in the first movie was kinda cute, in the podracer and all, but I don't count that. Plus he gets Mace Windu killed. So he's more of a protagonist.


William Pall wrote:
Azzy wrote:
See, I pictured Valeros as straight--and completely sexually frustrated. The way I see it, Merisiel sees him as a brother. Kyra and he have been (very platonic) friends for a long time (he doesn't think of her in the romantic fashion, plus her crusader aspect is little difficult to get past). Seoni, would be a prospect, but between cultural differences, her mysticism, bizzare personality traits, etc. he can't figure her out--or decide if he should even try. Hitting on barmaid never works either because either he get guilt trips from the girls or the barmaids think he's a complete playboy with his own harem and won't give him the time of day. Sometimes having a gaggle of female friends is a real detriment to one's sex life.

Who's to say that it's always going to be this group of four iconics grouped together? Once all of them have been released, Paizo might mix and match the groups depending on whatever whims they choose. Val might not always be paired up with three women.

But, I guess for the course of RotRL . . . I like it.

There are also four iconics so far, but six covers that need making. They could do Karzoug, but that still leaves one cover wanting (plus they used Karz on the alternate volume one). Maybe more will be coming sooner rather than later?


CourtFool wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
I guess I just didn't get where the original poster of the barber thing was coming from.
Fort Hood, Texas.

Ha, well, there it is then!


Dragonmann wrote:

Found another nice resource (not blocked at my job yet)

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/default.php

Cool, thanks. This looks helpful. I like the (not blocked at my job yet)

part, too.


CourtFool wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
Lots of barber shops around here (Northern California) have non-gay male barbers. I haven't heard that they get much attention with anyone thinking they're gay.
Yes, but as Sebastian likes to point out, have you play-tested your theory?

Did my post get deleted or something? I don't see it there any more, even though I see this reply.

Anyway, yeah, some of them are married and stuff, and one of them (that I know of) is gay. I guess I just didn't get where the original poster of the barber thing was coming from.


Moff Rimmer wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
He was talking to a country full of assumed-believers, after all, not those of us in the modern world.
I don't know that he was talking to "assumed-believers". The "believers" of the time really didn't like him at all. I think that he was trying to teach people things regardless of where they were at. He used examples and situations that made sense to them at the time. Even today, if I were to talk about 'heaven' or 'hell' everyone here would have some kind of mental picture that would have a number of similarities. And not everyone here would consider themselves a "believer".

I meant believers in God and followers of the old testament, not necessarily believers as we might call people in our countries today. Israel was built and run on not only a belief in God, but a belief that they were God's chosen and that God led them there and gave them that land and their laws. I assume they still had non-believers, but Israel then and the modern world now aren't really comparable as far as a basic belief that God exists and that our law is his law, etc. Atheism and philosophy have come a long way in establishing alternate world-views, not to mention those of other religions not touched on by Jesus .

Moff Rimmer wrote:

As far as the 'modern world'...

If the Bible is 'just' a relic of the times, then I really don't see much reason in putting much more faith/belief in it either than maybe some names, places and a few events. Because if we take your stance, then NOTHING that Jesus/God said applies to us at all in the "modern world" -- and I'm not sure that I buy that either. And you could say the same thing about anyone in history. (But they were talking about 'those' people -- not us.)

I'll stop now... :-)

I don't mind, and I get where you're coming from. But I don't see it hard to put Jesus's audience at the time into context and consider that he was talking to a bunch of people with certain inherant understandings and misunderstandings which may be different from ours today.

For a believer, that doesn't necessarily cheapen the basic concepts that Jesus came, was the son of God, performed miracles, died for our sins, and will come back one day.

What I meant was actually geared more toward what you were saying rather than establishing a stance of my own, in that we in the modern world can still focus on the ideas Jesus was trying to get across without getting confused by some of the contexts, a lot of which no longer apply, since many of us are no longer ancient world Middle Easterners.

We can study his reference of the Eye of the Needle, for example, and get the basic point of what he meant without already knowing what and where the Eye of the Needle was. That point is no less valid for us today as it was then, similiar to the idea of loving one's neighbor as yourself, turning the other cheek, and many other core Jesus points.


Moff Rimmer wrote:


The passage in question was a story of sorts told by Jesus. There were a number of points that Jesus was trying to get across by telling the story. From reading the passage, I get the feeling that he was not trying to convince the crowds whether or not Heaven or Hell existed. He seemed to be talking about it as though everyone already accepted this as though it were true. I get the feeling that Jesus' main point was that there will be a large number of people that will be surprised about the afterlife.

My point in mentioning the passage was showing where some of the idea that 'Hell' is about fire and brimstone and suffering, etc. A lot of what Jesus said could very well have been alagorical. However, He took what was believed to be true and didn't discount it as being false.

That makes a lot of sense. I think you're right in focusing on the intended point rather than hanging on every word, as it were. He was talking to a country full of assumed-believers, after all, not those of us in the modern world.


Sean, Minister of KtSP wrote:
I had a great Saudi barber for a while, who was very upset. Apparently, in Middle Eastern countries, being a barber is a very respected male profession. Now, he's moved to the states, and everybody thinks he's gay because of his job.

Lots of barber shops around here (Northern California) have non-gay male barbers. I haven't heard that they get much attention with anyone thinking they're gay.


Moff Rimmer wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
I have a pretty hard time believing in hell as a place. Someone once told me that proper translation for the word used in the original Greek simply means 'death' or 'the grave', so in actuality (if you believe in that sort of thing), people don't burn forever in a fiery pit; they just die, almost as atheists think of death. Anyone else heard that?
Wow. This is starting up again? Not a problem.

Sorry, I admit I didn't scan the thirty-some-odd other pages, but if this particular bit has been discussed, I'll see what I can find. I sort of assumed it hadn't, apparently naively.

Moff Rimmer wrote:

The ancient Hebrew language tended to leave a fair amount of room for interpretation. Especially with regards to the Old Testament.

There are a number of passages in the New Testament that talk about Hell in a different light --

Luke 16 (NIV) wrote:
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

There are also a number of places in Revelation and more than likely other places as well that I can't think of off the top of my head.

But if you don't believe in the Bible, I'm not sure why heaven would exist either.

There are just so many interpretations of things, I wanted to see if anyone knew much of the original translated word. It's tough because specific references can be taken to mean a lot of things, like how the rich man in your example could just be metaphorically suffering and communicating. Gets me all /confused.


Mike McArtor wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
I find myself being pretty weird about scheduling my time around switching up my training. I'm soon going to lose internet for 3-5 days and the first thing I thought was 'Oh no! That's really going to be inefficient for training!'
lol, that's the time to train up to level 5 in a skill. I have a few that will take 7 days to train up all the way, so if you have similar skills it sounds like a good time to train them! :)

It's sad that I might not have thought of that before the net goes down. No better time to learn learning lvl 5, I guess!


Matthew Morris wrote:
oh, and as to the 'kids who want to know advanced math would be taking calculus' I know many parents, and teachers, who have snuck math and spelling and writing and other skills in under the noses of those same kids with D&D. I have to reject that arguement then. The kid who thinks 'Math is hard' can learn something from calculating their AC (or THAC0 for us old timers)

For me, simpler is better because I can get more friends to play. Not many of my friends are hardcore gamers, so if I can get them to play without confusing them with 20 years of rules add-ons, that's at least a few more people in the hobby that otherwise wouldn't ever consider it.

That may not be a direct response to what I quoted, but it's true that the basic 3.5 system is far from being for everybody and isn't easy to learn. When I try to introduce it to people who aren't kids, they pretty much respond with 'why would I want to play that, it seems way too complicated'.

Maybe I'm out of my element and I should stick with playing this type of game with people who want to play a complex game with a complex rules system, but it seems better for the hobby overall if they can simplify at least character creation, so I can teach people the nuances of the game slowly instead of making them feel way in over their heads at the start.

That's why I like, for example, the Star Wars SE skill system. It accomplishes the same thing without being intimidatingly complicated to a new player.


I have a pretty hard time believing in hell as a place. Someone once told me that proper translation for the word used in the original Greek simply means 'death' or 'the grave', so in actuality (if you believe in that sort of thing), people don't burn forever in a fiery pit; they just die, almost as atheists think of death. Anyone else heard that?


Mike McArtor wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Everyone got kicked - for some reason, Tranquility decided to have itself an aneurism or two today.

I just got kicked. Trying to log back on gives me this:

"Proxy not connected to sol servers"

Whatever that means.

I don't care if it is down right now, as long as it comes back up in the next 20 minutes or so, so I can change out my training skill. ;D

I find myself being pretty weird about scheduling my time around switching up my training. I'm soon going to lose internet for 3-5 days and the first thing I thought was 'Oh no! That's really going to be inefficient for training!'


Disenchanter wrote:

I admit that I didn't read the Jedi Counseling reports before, but I find the following:

Sebastian wrote:
...the truth is that our objective from day one has been to streamline the rules, for two reasons. First, we wanted to speed up gameplay so it's less plodding and more cinematic in feel. Second, we wanted to speed up the "bookkeeping" part of the game so you could spend more time actually playing and less time auditing character sheets.
to be a mighty bold statement considering everything they were aiming for, WoTC stripped from the D6 WEG version when they went D20.

I might not have all the facts straight, but I believe Bill Slavicsek has overseen most of the Star Wars rpg for WotC, which he also did for WEG, so one gets the sense that maybe they just wanted change for change's sake (along with supporting the d20 system) when they originally took over for WEG, then handed the d20 product off to others who had their own ideas.

I could be wrong, though.


The Eldritch Mr. Shiny wrote:
BeneathTheEarth wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
"Klaatu barada nikto," is the command given to the robot from the old black and white movie "When the Earth Stood Still" (I think - the one with Michael Rennie as the benevolent Martian chap and his considerably less benevolent robot). So a reference within a reference.
Klaatu and Nikto are also the names of alien species in the star wars universe...well they appear in rotj anyway.Not sure if barada is in there.Ofcourse, im sure he got the names from the day the earth stood still.
There is a Klatooinian sail barge guard in RotJ named Barada.

Klaatu is actually a character as well, I believe. A nikto.


Sebastian wrote:
Tambryn wrote:

If you would Sebastian, please point me in the direction of these articles examining the design decisions behind the changes to Star Wars for SWSE.

Thanks.

Tam

This is all stolen from ENWorld. They're really the best source for 4e news.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview1
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview2
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview4
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview4

Oh. My link is different, but still cool. So... there it is.


Tambryn wrote:

If you would Sebastian, please point me in the direction of these articles examining the design decisions behind the changes to Star Wars for SWSE.

Thanks.

Tam

Here is what I think you are looking for, numbers 100 and up. Pretty cool, actually. I have and enjoy Saga Edition (insofar as it compares to previous WotC editions).


Fatespinner wrote:
Another thing we don't really have: Commanders. This actually falls under the 'entreprenuers' heading, but it focuses on leadership and team-enhancing skills. Commanders are able to bestow passive bonuses on other ships in their gang, coordinate strikes against enemy targets, maneuver groups through and around various star systems, and all that jazz. They lack a lot of the combat potential on their own, however, but that weakness can be overcome with time.

Seems like this path would be rather difficult to handle solo. How do they get money and handle themselves before they really get going on commander skills? Would it be best to just sort of sponsor one among us to be a commander by giving guild support to their character? I'd be down with helping out with that.

To be honest, I'm not really sure exactly how I help the corp on my own. Someone mentioned loyalty points somewhere, and I don't know what that means. Also guarding miners, but I'm not sure of schedules for everyone yet, or how much time I can devote to it, or at what point I'll be tough enough to do some damage.


I'm pretty sure Samyk Risker is gonna end as recycled goods. Vacuum Jack, however, is here to stay, and he's Minmatar all the way.


I still miss official Dark Sun releases. The "points of light" stuff would work well all over Athas!


Azzy wrote:
Oh, please. I'm just trying to point out that the Realms will keep chugging on--despite all the "end-is-nigh" tidings going on. Sure, big change up front (again), and in the next few years it'll seem like nothing at all (just like last time). Just stop the doom-saying for a bit and wait and see--it might be a good change. Let the setting evolve.

I think he was reacting more to your negativity than your point. Some people really, really like the Realms and are sad that such an important part of their hobby might be getting seriously messed with by a big company who puts money before loyal fans.

I've been arguing for a while about how it makes sense what WotC is doing from a business standpoint, but I'm starting to understand how strongly people feel about this and I think the best thing we can do is not react negatively to people who are losing something that means more to them than it does to us.

In other words, if they're venting about something we don't care about but they do, why give them a hard time about it? Just move to the next thread, or maybe offer some supportive critism instead of negativity.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
catdragon wrote:
Drow Ninja Pirate Dinosaur Riding psionic assassins...

Impossible. Ninjas and Pirates are the two defining forces of action, the Yin and the Yang of excitement, if you will. The two cannot be mixed in any single being, or it would be ripped apart. Not even Chuck Norris could handle it. (Well, has he ever played a pirate? Has he? Didn't think so.)

COnsidering that, and the title of this thread, we desperately need Ninja and Pirate domains.

I think this is my favorite post. Out of all posts. Everywhere.


I miss the West End Games days, but I bet I wouldn't miss them as much if Paizo took over.


Sadly, it's all about the almighty dollar when your company is owned by a big corporation and not a bunch of people doing it for love of the hobby.

Reading these posts helps me to appreciate different perspectives on things. Thanks, folks.


Talion09 wrote:

A Star Wars adventure path as done by Paizo. I'd totally buy that.

But unfortunately, I doubt this dream would come true.

Yeah, but we can dream, right?


I'm not sure how many people this would interest, as it's almost totally unrealistic, but here goes anyway...

One of the side effects to the whole WotC transition-to-4th-edition thing has seemingly been to totally ignore the Star Wars rpg for quite a while. Looks like upcoming we've got a book about spaceships for Winter and then all the way until the end of Spring for a video game tie-in book. Could be cool, but... it's a video game tie-in.

Anyway, I love Star Wars and I love the Star Wars rpg. This isn't exactly a dead time in the Star Wars mythos, so there's no reason not to market it much more than they do. I also really like the Saga Edition, but my feathers got pretty ruffled when I read that it was just a testing ground for 4th (which was backed up by virtually no updates on the web site and a very sparse release schedule).

So, to the plan: WotC gives Paizo the Star Wars license and use of the Saga Edition like they get to use the OGL. They then get to make high-quality sci-fi stuff with a license that would make it worth their time. Their stuff is better than the non-existant stuff WotC isn't producing (and probably would be better than what they could do anyway), WotC is free to focus on 4th, Star Wars rpg fans get sweet new material, Paizo gets to cash in on a highly-desirable license, and everyone is happy.

So, if anyone working for Paizo loves Star Wars and has connections with the Lucas marketing people and/or Wizards of the Coast... I implore you to pitch this. And I would love you for it.


So... if money talks and you want to stop the trend of making new stuff, which is okay because you already have the old stuff collected, why not just stick with the old stuff? You could play for the rest of your days with it, I'm sure, save a lot of money and not be annoyed by 4th.

I'm pretty sure Wizards isn't trying to bleed the life out of anyone, but I guarantee if they never changed with the times, D&D would be gone and you'd have to stick with your old stuff anyway, because there's no money in staying loyal to an aging market at the expense of drawing in more potential customers because your product got too convoluted for the new breed of gamer.

They have to keep turning a profit, and there's only so much stuff you can really produce crunch-wise before you start to lose people. So you start fresh in a way that will hopefully get a bunch of new people, and that bunch of new people grew up with the Matrix, manga and World of Warcraft.

Of course Paizo produces better stuff, but what percent of Paizo's sales covers the market as a whole? The hardcore market is a hardcore market, not a mainstream market, and just as Paris Hilton exists as a celebrity but probably everyone on these boards doesn't give a damn, we're still the minority and all those other people have more money than us.

Besides, it's a game that's in your head. You can do whatever the heck you want, and you've already got everything you need to do it with.


Just wanted to throw in that the argument that because one thing is legal and just as bad/worse than marijuana means marijuana is not really bad is not an argument at all. Law isn't about bad vs. good, which is what we are discussing here; law is about order vs. chaos, a different subject entirely.

What is "evil" (I use the word because it has been used to describe marijuana in this discussion) is not inherantly unlawful (see lawful evil as a D&D alignment for reference), just as what is "good" is not always legal (see Emancipation Proclamation, women's suffrage, civil rights).

We're not necessarily in the middle of a golden age where everything legal right now is good and everything illegal right now is wrong (see gay marriage, abortion, aggressive action against nonaggressive country/s). Those individual subjects are essentially on massive islands of their own, and thus require an entirely different discussion each.

I believe the original poster intended to imply that marijuana use is wrong, and just because he didn't also directly state that he believes alcohol abuse and abuse of over-the-counter drugs is wrong doesn't mean he doesn't believe it. Although he does use legality as a backup to his arguments, that's a gray area in a lot of ways (medicinal use, legality in countries besides his own, etc).

As a final note, errors such as the legality argument on the part of anyone does not also falsify the rest of that person's arguments. Just don't make an erroneous argument your entire argument.


Heathansson wrote:

I'm hoping it's one of those over-price-at-the-beginning deals, like with most new car models, iphones, and all that jazz. Ten to fifteen dollars a month seems a little stiff for a magazine you can't hold in your hand. Pdf's to me anyway are a pain in the ass to deal with. I know people who own the complete Dragon runs on disc (this product came out a few years back) who haven't read it all because pdf's are a pain in the ass to deal with.

I guess I'll have to wait and see what the online dealy is and how good it is, cos that's a fat load of jink for two magazines on pdf, by my reckoning. I'm also hoping the margins are unreal on this, so the price will have to come down to rope in more gamers at a lower price. Seems to me that $5 a month would be a more manageable and realistic cost for such a product on a pdf.
Also, I'm not advocating piracy in any way, I think it sucks. But at $10-$15 monthly, that's just gonna give more impetus to blackmarketeers to do their thing.

Hopefully they're just testing the waters to see if they can get a positive reaction (ie people saying they're willing to pay) and they'll lower it closer to game time.

But I totally hear you on pdfs. I get that they're trying to push toward the future or whatever and compete in the modern market aiming for a bigger audience and all that, and I try to stay postive about 4th and plan to check it out, but the switch to online only for the magazines is something I will not do. I didn't even read Pathfinder early as I just can't get into pdfs. It's just not the same.


Jaquarta sounds like an awesome midpoint to me. I wouldn't complain if you detailed it to any degree.


While I like Stormwrack (and all things ocean-related), I think you're fine without it for the purposes you've stated, unless you want the more complex ship-to-ship and sailing stuff. The magazine handles it fine alone though, if you ask me. More isn't always better.


I would imagine Paizo could put out a pretty amazing sci-fi setting, but it's probably not worth their time/resources. Also, Sutter makes it sound like he's the only one that digs sci-fi anyway.

All that aside, I'd buy it in a heartbeat, even if they had to produce an extra volume or two just to make the setting and create rules/classes/races for it.


ASEO wrote:

I'm very impressed by the production quality of the Pathfinder book, but the angular interior artwork leaves something to be desired. I just don't care for the strande blocky illustrations. The illustration of the Goblin Warchanter was a bit cartoony bit ok, and I do like the art of the goblin mounted on the goblin dog on page 14, but the illustrations of Aldren Foxglove, Shalelu Andosans (nice "poision elves" ears...grrr) and especially Tsuto Kaijitsu are just plain bad. And I know she's going demonic and all, but what is with the 2x4s sticking out of Nualia's hips?

Not as bad as the art for Wil Save, but close :-(

ASEO out

I actually liked that particular artist/style the best, though admittedly I wouldn't want it to fill the volume. I thought it was a nice change of pace.

Lately it seems like there's been a backlash against non-realistic art, most of the anger directed towards what people think is manga-inspired work, but I have to say that I like D&D because it's not realistic, not because it is.

Our imaginations can figure out what these characters would look like without any art at all, and most especially in a realistic sense; don't you think it's cool to maybe think of things in a way you might not've?


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Riskbreaker wrote:
I dig that he cares, though, and I for sure wouldn't ever want to add to the burdens of someone out there trying to do some good.

Nothing wrong with trying to do good, and he has the absolute right to get his message across. But Prohibition was well-intentioned, and I think so was McCarthy. I think what got people riled up was the initial post:

Firebeetle wrote:
I really hope I can spend money on Paizo products again. Send this doll back to the manufacturer now.

He can boycott if he likes, of course, but to peremptorily command Paizo to discontinue the sale of the item--as if the company and everyone else on the thread were his personal lackeys, subject to his opinion in all things--well, that was a bit hard to swallow. I respect his right to speak his mind, but I don't grant him the right to tell everyone else what to do.

Well stated. I guess I just got over the initial bit pretty quick, as I bet the Paizo people did without much more thought.

Kirth Gersen wrote:


That said, I'd very much like to see some well-reasoned arguments against marijuana use here-- ones that respect the difference between correspondence and causality, for example, and which rely on research and scientific evidence rather than rhetoric and anecdotes.

Sadly, I'm not in a position to argue. I generally find myself in a minority in such debates, in that I don't have enough knowledge to present facts and I don't have enough evidence from other sources to choose a side.

However, I will say that if everyone cared about their neighbors, friends and family and themselves in a much more sincere, selfless and corn-ball way (think Pay it Forward, if you caught that one), issues like this would iron themselves out. So I'd rather fight for the whole love thy neighbor cause instead of getting confused by all the other hyper-complex issues in this world.


Kyr wrote:
Nicolas Logue wrote:
Kyr wrote:


I am normally not a big fan of your posts, but I have to say that was probably one of the best ones on this board by anyone and it captured my own feelings on the subject perfectly - certainly better than I would of done myself - thanks.

One last oddity: seriously, someone is not a big fan of Logue's posts?


Sean, Minister of KtSP wrote:
You say all marijuana use is evil? Evil is a really strong word. Perhaps the reason for your zealotry (something I disdain no matter what its cause) is that you have strong religious beliefs on the subject? Satan is twirling his moustache somewhere and laughing evilly every time someone lights up a joint somewhere? If religion is, in fact, the cause of...

I think this post particularly needs to be commented on before I move on, though.

First of all, not everyone who stands up for something in a real way and not just on messageboards does so because they're "religious". There was pretty much no reason to bring this into the discussion, as Firebeetle never mentioned a religious word (and evil is hardly a religious-only idea).

Second, I'm pretty sure you're on target as far as offending people who are religious/spiritual, too. Not everyone who believes in God and Satan assume he's behind marijuana, or even that marijuana is expressly bad.

Again, just to play the devil's advocate, as it were, you did a fair bit of berating in using ideas like "spin" and "emotional manipulation", then tossed in Satan twirling his moustache and using things like "silly boycott", and seemingly in defense of you being offended. Seems ironic on a few levels.


I just had a lot of reading to do to catch up on this thread, and first I'd like to say that it's nice to see people on both sides (and the places in between) stand up for what they believe. That gives me some hope when sometimes I don't see people care about much besides their clothes and catching a movie the next weekend.

That being said, I'm a little disturbed by some of the reactions. I can understand people being offended by Firebeetle's stance, but it's not like it isn't obvious that he's working really, really hard with something very serious and basically good and it's clearly affecting his stance on the issue.

I'm okay with him being a "zealot" about something if it's a result of caring too much. He's not out shooting anyone or actually affecting any of our rights or being a terrorist or mafia hitman. He's just a guy who needs to vent because he's tough enough to do some hard work that needs doing. That'd wear me down worse than it has him.

If you don't like his soap box, move on. Sounds like he's doing a lot of good in the real world; doesn't mean we have to like him or listen to him here. I haven't seen anyone swayed by his opinion to not buy from Paizo because of a doll, and it doesn't really make me mad that his opinion differs from mine or that he's wrong about some stuff, or even that he won't buy from Paizo anymore. I dig that he cares, though, and I for sure wouldn't ever want to add to the burdens of someone out there trying to do some good.


Valegrim wrote:

sidenote: first day of football; go lions :)

I have a few questions; is the player of the account the only one who can upgrade his ship? if you quit training a skill do you loose all that time you have invested in training it?

I can't help you on the upgrade question, but as long as you switch the skill you're learning and not outright cancel it, you'll still have the amount you learned when you come back to it.

Sidenote, first day of football: Go Dolphins!

Also, for the corp as a whole, I've switched to my new combat-centric character. Goes by the name Vacuum Jack.


farewell2kings wrote:
I'll run my campaigns the way I always have--the way I want.

There it is. They're not trying to destroy a setting, because you're always free to play with the tons of already-established stuff or the tons, tons and tons of stuff you can just do the way you want.


SirUrza wrote:
KnightErrantJR wrote:
Sorry . . . I'm a little cranky mourning the loss of what I actually liked about the Forgotten Realms, while still reading assurances from WOTC that FR wouldn't be turned into a "points of light" setting.

*nods*

I've come to Pathfinder to escape the coming apocalypse. Hopefully it won't be as bad as I fear.

It's not like you can't just make any changes you want to. That article is just trying to establish a general idea of an area ripe for adventure. They're not saying that they're leaving out all the economic focuses and whatnot from D&D, and lack of information on exactly how trade and such works in a "points of light" setting doesn't mean it doesn't work. It's just a teaser article, not a chapter from the Handbook.


Is anyone else excessively excited for this one? An ancient city with the stylings of the Runelord of Greed, fully detailed and taking up pretty much an entire volume?

If Paizo's past efforts at this sort of thing are any indication of how cool Xin-Shalast will be, having a whole volume for them to detail ought to inspire a lot more beyond capping off the first Pathfinder AP.

Hope this one becomes a classic!


I was reminded this morning of another time in which good ideas pop into my head: showers.


Is it a big deal if I reroll and switch my main to the new guy? I don't mind giving Samyk Risker the boot from the corp in favor of the new character. I just decided playing a more combat-focused guy would be fun.


mwbeeler wrote:

Hearing a lot of votes for Earl Grey (the one with citrus sounds very appealing).

I actually find earl grey sort of bitter compared to other black teas, but maybe it's just me. Flavored black tea does take some of the bite off, though, so the citrus one might be a good bet.


I haven't played this campaign yet, and probably won't because Pathfinder is now a priority, but I wanted to say that this is an outstanding idea for a thread. Hope to see more Churtle stories soon!


I love a good black tea with honey and cream (cream just plain tastes better to me along with making it drinkable faster).

The brand I use most is called Red Rose. Just a basic breakfast tea, comes with a cute little random figurine, and it's available in most grocery stores in my area.

When I feel like spoiling myself a bit, The Republic of Tea has lots of fun (and good) flavors, my favorite being Vanilla Almond. It is amazing. I find their teas at Cost Plus World Market.

Anyway, I like cream in tea so much that I'm going to vote for it twice. Give it a shot.


Come on guys, I think it's safe to say, as far as the Con pics we're privy to, that Logue is by far the most charismatic of the bunch. That's got to count for something, too.


Sean, Minister of KtSP wrote:


Anecdotally, Thomas Edison used to fall asleep in his chair with a large metal ball in his hand.

He always felt his best ideas came to him as he fell asleep, and he would do this, so that the sound of the ball hitting the floor after he let it go would wake him up while he was still able to remember the ideas that came to him while he was half-dreaming.

That is incredible.


firbolg wrote:
People don't like looking outside their spirtual comfort zone.

Or lack thereof, to be fair.


Arctaris wrote:

as does insomnia.

Seriously, I drive for a bakery in the early morning and on the days I should be the most tired I seem to come up with the best stuff. The drive's the same few hours every day, so I'm not getting super-inspired by anything there (although it's a nice drive and I often see cool sunrises towards the end). Seems like lack of sleep plus just time to think about stuff without distractions does me the best.

1 to 50 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>