Deep 6 FaWtL


Off-Topic Discussions

205,201 to 205,250 of 239,712 << first < prev | 4100 | 4101 | 4102 | 4103 | 4104 | 4105 | 4106 | 4107 | 4108 | 4109 | 4110 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

There's also the time I had to crawl under a deck two foot deck and dismantle and then rebuild a wall.

Or the time they sent me under a house with a three foot long drill so I could anchor a tree to the house.

Or Friday when I had to get a s@~#load of dirt under a house to fill a colossal void.

Or the time when Hank Pym had me break into his old laboratory... Wait, no, that wasn't me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

We can see your 'drill'

Call it three foot long if you want.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My gas mileage dropped precipitously upon moving to Texas. Since the weather shifted and we've gone from hundred plus days to mid 80s days I have gotten four miles per gallon back after it dropped about 10 miles per gallon.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
lisamarlene wrote:

So I've got a 100 sq ft patch of bare dirt in my backyard because there used to be a shed there, and then there was just rock and gravel and rubble, and the contractors finally hauled most of the bits away earlier this week.

So this afternoon I went to the garden center and bought soil for amending, and compost, and vegetable seedlings and seeds (Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, early cabbage, Chinese broccoli, scarlet Nantes carrots, and Bull's Blood beets). And a tilling rake.

And came home and got started and discovered that, no, we're not on normal soil here. We're on what the Texas state agriculture department refers to as "blackland prairie clay gumbo soil", and I do mean clay. It feels almost like plastic in your hands. You put a shovel into it, and the cut edge of the earth is smooth and shiny where the edge of the shovel sliced it. So bizarre.

This should be interesting.

My father did not believe in using concrete for fence posts. So he insisted that we take 8' 4"x4"s and bury them four feet deep to create his desired 4' posts. When I was 8.

I learned to despise clay soil (and gardening in general) from that man.

"Nope! Only 3'6"! Have little Nobody climb into the hole and use his hands to get the last of it out. He's small enough!"

You know I try so hard not to hate other people's parents no matter how badly I feel they deserve it because I understand better than most just what an insanely mixed bag a parent can be. I mean my own dad should have been jailed for child abuse and was a total sociopath. And some days I still find myself missing him. No idea why. So I really try not to hate other people's parents. I figure that's their job. But damn near every time you tell a story about the man it makes me want to kick him.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Apparently Crookshanks is dating the nerdy boy sniffing around, his name isn't Boyd, but it's close enough.

If it lasts much longer I'm going to have to show the kid all the saws in my tool shed.

Adds 'Build dad a tool shed' to list of chores for the kids


3 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

"Nope! Only 3'6"! Have little Nobody climb into the hole and use his hands to get the last of it out. He's small enough!"

Little Nobody? Is he your own MiniMe?

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

LM, watch Tangled.

Tangled spoilers:

Gothel's treatment of Rapunzel is awfully similar to things real-world abusive and narcissistic parents do.

Doesn't stop Rapunzel from questioning herself and wondering if "Mother is right" most of the movie.

I was playing slay the spire yesterday, couldn't do the daily challenge with alchemize after failing 3 times.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My parents said no dating until I finished studying and yeah I pretty much did that.

Also apparently to switch to a fore paw strike, you need to lean slightly forward, with your back straight and lead with your hips.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
My first landscaping job in Seattle we had to dig a hole four feet deep and couldn't use a machine due to the proximity of gas lines or a septic field or something and their best idea to finish digging the hole was to have two people hold my legs while I hung upside down digging the rest out into a sand bucket tied to a string.

Use kids. They fit better.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
lisamarlene wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
lisamarlene wrote:

So I've got a 100 sq ft patch of bare dirt in my backyard because there used to be a shed there, and then there was just rock and gravel and rubble, and the contractors finally hauled most of the bits away earlier this week.

So this afternoon I went to the garden center and bought soil for amending, and compost, and vegetable seedlings and seeds (Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, early cabbage, Chinese broccoli, scarlet Nantes carrots, and Bull's Blood beets). And a tilling rake.

And came home and got started and discovered that, no, we're not on normal soil here. We're on what the Texas state agriculture department refers to as "blackland prairie clay gumbo soil", and I do mean clay. It feels almost like plastic in your hands. You put a shovel into it, and the cut edge of the earth is smooth and shiny where the edge of the shovel sliced it. So bizarre.

This should be interesting.

My father did not believe in using concrete for fence posts. So he insisted that we take 8' 4"x4"s and bury them four feet deep to create his desired 4' posts. When I was 8.

I learned to despise clay soil (and gardening in general) from that man.

"Nope! Only 3'6"! Have little Nobody climb into the hole and use his hands to get the last of it out. He's small enough!"

You know I try so hard not to hate other people's parents no matter how badly I feel they deserve it because I understand better than most just what an insanely mixed bag a parent can be. I mean my own dad should have been jailed for child abuse and was a total sociopath. And some days I still find myself missing him. No idea why. So I really try not to hate other people's parents. I figure that's their job. But damn near every time you tell a story about the man it makes me want to kick him.

Oh, he was a mixed bag. But oh, gods do the downsides make for better stories!

And GothBard would have helped hold him down WHILE you kicked him.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
when you're drunk at 3 am, and you have vegetarians in your party, who is helping you to sober up? Not McDonalds.
French fries are still veggies.
too many issues around what kind of fat they are cooked in.

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

I continue to fry fries at home in a mixture of canola oil and bacon drippings because it tastes so damn good.

Edit: Yep, Drejk is correct:

Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Isn't McDonalds supposed to fry them in deep vegetable oil? I know of no animal fat that would be suitable for the deep frying technique that is used by McDonalds.
Keep in mind I am no vegetarian anymore, but that was the scuttlebutt a few years ago.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sharoth wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
all i remember were the fears of Japan invading.
They did invade.

Technically, Japan did invade.

The Exchange

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The Japanese invasion continues

Just ask Freehold and Hi ;)

I did tell you I'm cooking soba for lunch, right?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

Stupid comma guy, stealing Tacticslion's job...

I'm surprised Favoriting Comma Guy isn't already somebody's alias.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slaaadish chef wrote:

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

Good to know. Would help allay the fears of my mom on accidentally taking beef in with fries. Sadly though, a lot of gelatine is still made out of beef.

I've got no beef with that, but some people, due to religious reasons, do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Apparently Crookshanks is dating the nerdy boy sniffing around, his name isn't Boyd, but it's close enough.

If it lasts much longer I'm going to have to show the kid all the saws in my tool shed.

Adds 'Build dad a tool shed' to list of chores for the kids

His name's Boyd now...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Just a Mort wrote:

The Japanese invasion continues

Just ask Freehold and Hi ;)

I did tell you I'm cooking soba for lunch, right?

I haven't seen that book in YEARS...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slaadish Chef wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
when you're drunk at 3 am, and you have vegetarians in your party, who is helping you to sober up? Not McDonalds.
French fries are still veggies.
too many issues around what kind of fat they are cooked in.

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

I continue to fry fries at home in a mixture of canola oil and bacon drippings because it tastes so damn good.

Edit: Yep, Drejk is correct:

Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Isn't McDonalds supposed to fry them in deep vegetable oil? I know of no animal fat that would be suitable for the deep frying technique that is used by McDonalds.
Keep in mind I am no vegetarian anymore, but that was the scuttlebutt a few years ago.

I remember mcdonalds switching to veggie oil, but there was something..either some franchisees didn't or some way they were being handled...SOMEthing. Can't quite remember.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks everyone for the birthday wishes. It was a fun one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Just a Mort wrote:
Ok - I agree that this may piss some people off, but I always found occult classes redundant and superfluous. I've not seen anything that can be done with occult classes that can't be covered by normal arcane and divine casters.

I've never even looked at them. Same with the Unchained stuff. I pretty much stick with the Core Rulebook, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat. I'll occasionally look for a specific piece of gear in Ultimate Equipment. But that's it. My current GM allows some stuff from Advance Race and Advanced Class, but I've never bothered looking in them.

I kind of want to run a game that only allows the Core Rulebook, but I suspect that I would have difficulty getting players.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Thanks everyone for the birthday wishes. It was a fun one.

Did I wish you a happy birthday? If not HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gran rey de los mono wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:
Ok - I agree that this may piss some people off, but I always found occult classes redundant and superfluous. I've not seen anything that can be done with occult classes that can't be covered by normal arcane and divine casters.

I've never even looked at them. Same with the Unchained stuff. I pretty much stick with the Core Rulebook, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat. I'll occasionally look for a specific piece of gear in Ultimate Equipment. But that's it. My current GM allows some stuff from Advance Race and Advanced Class, but I've never bothered looking in them.

I kind of want to run a game that only allows the Core Rulebook, but I suspect that I would have difficulty getting players.

I maintain that all new classes should have been made into archetypes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Freehold, gotta question for you? Did you see Ready Player One? I just watched it the other day and wondered how you reacted to having Gundam get dropped off by Serenity (from Firefly) in the big battle near the end?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
gran rey de los mono wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:
Ok - I agree that this may piss some people off, but I always found occult classes redundant and superfluous. I've not seen anything that can be done with occult classes that can't be covered by normal arcane and divine casters.

I've never even looked at them. Same with the Unchained stuff. I pretty much stick with the Core Rulebook, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat. I'll occasionally look for a specific piece of gear in Ultimate Equipment. But that's it. My current GM allows some stuff from Advance Race and Advanced Class, but I've never bothered looking in them.

I kind of want to run a game that only allows the Core Rulebook, but I suspect that I would have difficulty getting players.

I maintain that all new classes should have been made into archetypes.

I barely glance at the archetypes.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Today I watched two snails shed their shells and fight it out. It was a real slug fest.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

I think comma dude is finally losing it.

Favorited my post about Impus Major twice 6 hours ago, then twice again 4 hours ago, then twice again two hours ago.

Or maybe he's just getting old, like me. "Did I favorite this one already? Aw, carp! I forget! Better favorite it, just in case! Oh, did I click it? Better click it again!"

Stupid comma guy, stealing Tacticslion's job...

*shakes fist*


NobodysHome wrote:
lisamarlene wrote:

So I've got a 100 sq ft patch of bare dirt in my backyard because there used to be a shed there, and then there was just rock and gravel and rubble, and the contractors finally hauled most of the bits away earlier this week.

So this afternoon I went to the garden center and bought soil for amending, and compost, and vegetable seedlings and seeds (Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, early cabbage, Chinese broccoli, scarlet Nantes carrots, and Bull's Blood beets). And a tilling rake.

And came home and got started and discovered that, no, we're not on normal soil here. We're on what the Texas state agriculture department refers to as "blackland prairie clay gumbo soil", and I do mean clay. It feels almost like plastic in your hands. You put a shovel into it, and the cut edge of the earth is smooth and shiny where the edge of the shovel sliced it. So bizarre.

This should be interesting.

My father did not believe in using concrete for fence posts. So he insisted that we take 8' 4"x4"s and bury them four feet deep to create his desired 4' posts. When I was 8.

I learned to despise clay soil (and gardening in general) from that man.

"Nope! Only 3'6"! Have little Nobody climb into the hole and use his hands to get the last of it out. He's small enough!"

My father in law had a big shed delivered into our back yard today. We now have a shed installed. I slept through much of its delivery because of my medication. Dang it.


gran rey de los mono wrote:
Hey Freehold, gotta question for you? Did you see Ready Player One? I just watched it the other day and wondered how you reacted to having Gundam get dropped off by Serenity (from Firefly) in the big battle near the end?

I avoided the movie specifically to not see that abomination.


If you read the book it was a travesty otherwise the movie is basically just nostalgia the film.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

WALLS OF HORRID TEXT:

Dragons absolutely could not be the colossal firebreathing powerhouses we tend to think of them as and have humanity survive if dragons, as a species, ever held viable population numbers. They would simply have to eat so very much that it would be entirely impossible for them to be sustainable. That said, let's look at several basic scenarios.

- dragon size: the maximum size any viable land animal has in the modern era is the African bush elephant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_bush_elephant); while there are larger creatures in history, the elephant is a great benchmark for "modern" live dragons; at thirteen feet tall, it exceeds the largest reptile (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_reptiles), though crocs apparently out-length them, a tad. Nonetheless, this gives us a solid set of benchmarks for upper bounds. Presupposing dragons are, in fact, reptiles (not a fully valid presumption, but we'll roll with it), they aren't going to be terribly fast (see: (http://dinoanimals.com/animals/the-fastest-reptiles-top-10/) as well as (https://animals.mom.me/how-fast-does-an-elephant-run-2524590.html) showing reptiles are slow, big animals are slow, and so big reptiles...); presupposing dragons are about on the order of super-large, aggressive, and potent elephants and/or crocodiles, they would be truly terrifying creatures and the absolute top predator wherever they happen to be. They'd also practically need to be omnivores - no way something that large that's also hyper aggressive is going to subsist on stable populations of meat - they'd depopulate everything and just starve themselves to death over time. Either way, they'd be fast enough to be threatening, but they'd mostly be brutal and probably - despite their size - ambush predators who focus on "big game" such as elephants or crocadillian-style creatures who can't hope to escape them; fish, as well, should likely be a heavily focused resource. This means they're likely to follow larger bodies of water or, if moving or migrating, following rivers or other waterways filled with fish. This means, as well, they're exceptionally unlikely in the desert, unless much, much smaller. It is worth noting that dragons could, hypothetically, grow to be much larger than this - by being sea creatures (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_organisms#Animals). That said, I don't think dragons would get much larger than the largest of sharks (and might be a bit smaller) for the simple reason that predation doesn't pay... well, it does, but only in limited dividends, and requires that you be small enough to subsist off of that which you hunt in a sustainable fashion, and scales in the sea are expensive. That said, "sea dragons" could - and almost certainly would - replace "sharks" as our go-to "fear the sea" creature. They might even be able to come on land, being like a lungfish or sea turtle, generating the coastal monsters of the Norse legends.

- dragon behavior: I mentioned before that I remain skeptical that dragons would be lizards. I suspect that they'd, instead, be a very unusual form of mammal, holding similarities to (and maybe even related to) the pangolin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangolin) or armadillo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo), though far enough removed to be larger-scale predators (literally and figuratively); similarly, they'd likely be related to the echidna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echidna) and be an exotic form of monotreme. The other option, of course, is to be a fowl of some sort, with scales grown in place of feathers. This latter - being birds - would allow for rather traditional draconic behavior such as gold hoarding to be similar to a typical bird behavior of "shiny" collection into nests. While I do like the idea of mammals being dragons, I feel that perhaps the birdlike penchant for clawed legs and the connection between feathers and scales (see also: dinosaurs) would be strong enough that dragons could have descended from dinosaurs in a manner similar to birds. That said, it might make dragon bones hollow, if they followed birdlike bonestructure (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100322112103.htm), and the appearance of wings might suggest the myth of flight (even though big dragons would definitely not). If avian-style dragons are true, the dragons would likely follow claw-deployment in the same manner of hoatzin, archeoteryx, or emu, but much, much more well defined. All this leads to the inevitable conclusion that the wyvern-style of dragon design is the most likely one (the more classic four-leg dragon would be a mammalian creature). Regardless, all of this leads to one thing: dragons would never, ever be domesticated. They would never be pets. Never be friends. Never be servants. They would, like the tiger, always be doom, right up until they neared extinction.

- dragons as firebreathing lizards: dragons breathing actual fire is exceptionally problematic for a number of reasons, not the least of which having internal organs filled to the bursting with fiery doom is not healthy for the creature that has such. That said, using the bombadier beetle as a guide, it *is* hypothetically possible - much has been written on this subject already (example: here's one!: http://why-sci.com/dragons/), so I won't go into the how's so much. If it is possible, however, and dragons are the size of elephants, huge swaths of territory are, simply, doomed. Dragons become a force of nature akin to lightning strikes and tornadoes, but much deadlier, because they can (intentionally or otherwise) set ablaze huge swaths of forests and field and more. This would deeply impact the size of their territory and strictly limit their population size, even beyond being super-massive predators. Underwater dragons would be like super-deadly mantis shrimp combined with sharks - death incarnate, bringing boiling death to anything they get near (probably having a special proboscis or other projection from which it pushes its boiling spew to avoid harming its own flesh). In the end, dragons as fire-breathers likely impacts all of creation - primitive humans most certainly avoid fire (due to draconic associations and terror) and that's it for human civilization without some sort of outside influence. If humans did manage to tame fire, however (say because dragons and humans arose in different parts of the world), it might develop into a kind of competition, culturally speaking - the ideas of good and bad fire being developed and generated slowly over time: good fire being human ingenuity and artifice, and bad fire being natural and uncontrolled.

- dragons as sentient: if dragons were sentient and intelligent, that's all she wrote. Congratulations, we've lost. Strong communication plus natural weapons and dragons become the dominant force of the world. Human technological invention is grand and all, but hefting a spear does you no good when your spear bounces off the creature and now you're disarmed and it is not. With an equal ability to think, reason, and overcome obstacles, tricks, traps, and issues with the mind, dragons are superior, physically, in every way to humanity. Their sentience and ingenuity would lead to our extinction. We had a good run.

- dragons as big predators (no fire): this is a survivable scenario and actually puts dragons into a rough spot. Keeping all those hard defenses is costly, both in speed and stamina, and if there's one thing humans have, it's stamina. Dragons, as noted before, are almost certainly deeply tied to waterways and water reservoirs, requiring huge amounts of the liquid to stay cool enough to live in their huge body size and heavy scale structure. The size of their body slows them down (though being a bird or, especially, a mammal could speed them back up, within limits), but they would be fundamental nightmares for humans and human civilization. Presuming predatory action, dragons are likely ambush creatures, or hunters of game otherwise too large to fear things (like elephants or giraffe or tigers) and too big to be all that fast. It's possible that from their omnivorous diet, dragons could extract enough energy for sharp bursts of speed to overwhelm potential prey as well. Humans would learn to fear waterways and deep forests. In places dragons are real, humans would likely just literally start forest fires to destroy them (see also: ancient Australia) rather than attempt to face the wrath of death machines so finely tuned elephants and hippopotamuses would be trifles. In this scenario, you can make dragons much smaller and still end up with deadly, horrifying creatures, but go too small and you'll end up in "wonder why you came" or "rubber forehead aliens" territory and they become a typical hunting cat in the wilds with a different look - no real impact on the narrative. Dragons down to the size of a horse or rhinoceros, however, would still be significant and absolutely terrifying - imagine terrifyingly tall crocodiles moving at comparatively rapid speeds across all sorts of terrain. These creatures would be the battles of legends, and, frankly, humans would simply have to turn over territory or engage in drastic and exceptionally foolish behaviors (see: burning whole biomes, above) in order to stand a chance... which we would, because we do that sort of thing. Unfortunately, most scenarios with real dragons end up with the dragon driven extinct and us in a surprisingly similar world to today. Which leads us to...

- scenarios for survival: several scenarios could greatly impact the role of the dragon - namely disease. During the black plague, humanity was nearly wiped out of Europe - another video asked what if humanity *was* wiped out of Europe (or effectively so). Dragons - wandering super-predators the size of horses or rhinos charging through forests and devouring creatures whole micro-ecosystems of food - would be perfect to make the depopulation a reality. While dragons themselves would not be solely responsible, they could certainly have a major impact on the world, and, with the dead and dying everywhere, dragons would probably become scavengers, consuming the corpses of the slain and wandering off. This makes them vectors for human disease, and they would spread the plague faster, making it even worse than it was - and slaying and devouring humans as they go. This would basically just make everything worse, and likely cause an even larger depopulation of the world. While I don't think dragons and dunge- er, diseases would eradicate the population of Europe, I do think it would make that scenario much more plausible. When the Islamic invasion eventually begins, dragons would become a foe of the people once again, and sink to their status of "wicked creatures" in myth and local expectation. In scenarios like this, dragons likely become symbols of power. In the wetter parts of Africa, they are likely seen as "king" symbols instead of lions. In Europe, they become dominant natural symbolism instead of stags or wolves. It is possible that an exceptionally small collective of diverse-enough dragons could exist, and, much like hominids (great apes and similar), these different versions are different species. In this case, a world really could exists where dragons are talking, sentient god-like creatures, while other dragons are merely brutish killing machines, and some actually breathe fire, and others swim the seas. Dragon DNA would need to be exceptionally resilient, however, because each of those populations would need to be (relatively) small, though large enough to sustain, genetically. And they'd need pray (if any were the praying kind) to never get a disease.

- cultural impact: If those dragons did survive (either diverse types or not), locations like Australia, and certain extremely difficult (but wet) regions of each continent really would be danger zones where crossing into it would be death. "here there be dragons" would be as much a warning to people then, as "live volcano, mid-eruption - don't do it, stupid" to us, now. This would greatly restrict the area that humanity would have to expand and deeply impact politics and views - maybe even causing humans to wage more war for now-more-limited space and lands. If dragons could not be beaten, only managed, they would likely be managed by way of shifting some sort of barrier - likely cattle or similar - in between humanity and the dragon. In this instance, such "cattle walls" would likely become viewed as something similar to a sacrifice to terrifying gods of the wilds, and dragons would become both sacred and horrifying forces beyond the darkness of our dwelling places, as we feed them blood of animals and pray they spare us their own wrath. Even if they were just big, dumb animals, this same situation may well occur, with them becoming godlike in the focus of our developing species, as they are entirely invulnerable (but leave us alone with proper sacrifices). In this scenario, it is likely the two groups grow together and become somewhat symbiotic, though human travel and contact would be severely limited, slowing down growth, trade, and invention. If dragons can be beaten, only at great cost, they likely become demons - monsters of legend similar to how they were once viewed, and their destruction becomes a sacred duty to all that live and love humankind. If they are anything less, they would become the next tiger - a mysterious and terrifying hunter of men, destructive and with many stories about them, but ultimately just one more kind of pelt man has on his wall as he drives his fellow competitors to extinction.


Incidentally, there are several musings that I feel are either incorrect or, at the least, incomplete. I edited a bit more in the video walls of text, but the basics of it is up there. Still, no two ways around it, dragons, if they were as they are in media, mean obliteration for us in the world. If several of their advantages were taken way, we might stand a chance, and if that exceptionally fine pendulum swung too far the other way, they'd either be extinct or just another predator species slowly falling to human strength or loss of habitat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

** spoiler omitted **...

That is a lot of text.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
I remember mcdonalds switching to veggie oil, but there was something..either some franchisees didn't or some way they were being handled...SOMEthing. Can't quite remember.

I think that McDonald used vegetable oil since their initial appearance in Poland in 1992. Beef fat is not so popular in the first place. Lard is used much more often.

The main gripe with oil quality in fast foods here, wasn't related to the type of oil used, but to it not being exchanged often enough.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah when I worked at an amusement park we changed that stuff everyday. It was a pain and then we cleaned the thing out too. I hated when I got stuck with it but my manager gave me reward points every time I did it so I guess it evened out.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I love the internet.

Here is a transcript of a Fresh Air interview I heard many years ago with the author of "How to Read a French Fry" on why changing the oil daily is probably counter-productive (scroll past the first part about onions unless you're interested).

Here is one about diffferent fry oils and flavor profiles, also interesting. And finally, a little more about Maillard reactions and double-frying, which I actually read about in a French cookbook I got in high school. It was allegedly discovered because of the inauguration of a new railway line between Paris and St. Germain-en-Laye in 1837, when someone gave the chef a false alarm that the guests were arriving, then they had to be fried again later to prepare them to be served. (Obviously, I still have the book and I looked it up, because there's no way I would remember that much detail off the top of my head. Oddly, I mis-remembered it as the Tour de France, not a railway.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
lisamarlene wrote:

I love the internet.

Here is a transcript of a Fresh Air interview I heard many years ago with the author of "How to Read a French Fry" on why changing the oil daily is probably counter-productive (scroll past the first part about onions unless you're interested).

Here is one about diffferent fry oils and flavor profiles, also interesting. And finally, a little more about Maillard reactions and double-frying, which I actually read about in a French cookbook I got in high school. It was allegedly discovered because of the inauguration of a new railway line between Paris and St. Germain-en-Laye in 1837, when someone gave the chef a false alarm that the guests were arriving, then they had to be fried again later to prepare them to be served. (Obviously, I still have the book and I looked it up, because there's no way I would remember that much detail off the top of my head. Oddly, I mis-remembered it as the Tour de France, not a railway.)

the history of food is fascinating.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Did you know Quakers used to be known for their delicious food.

Has flashbacks of burned oatmeal with burst yellow raisins, bland overcooked mushy casseroles, and wheat flour and zucchini pancakes.

Must've been before my time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Burt Wolf's cookbooks are great for food history.

Not sure how good the actual recipes are, but the writing is fun to read.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

** spoiler omitted **...

I will provide a two-word rebuttal: Opposable thumbs.

The ability to imagine, craft, design, and implement tools to overcome any obstacle has been what has set humanity apart throughout their history. Give dragons every single advantage you list throughout your text, and I still bet on humans.
- Faster reproduction
- Fundamentally designed to hide well in spaces dragons cannot reach
- Opposable thumbs

Hide. Observe. Learn. Kill.
It's humanity's history.

EDIT: Let's put it another way: I give one guy a full suit of plate mail, a flamethrower, and a sword. However, he may not craft any new items, ever. I put the other guy naked in the woods, but he's allowed to craft anything he can imagine.

I set them to kill each other.

I'm betting on naked guy every single time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

** spoiler omitted **...

I will provide a two-word rebuttal: Opposable thumbs.

The ability to imagine, craft, design, and implement tools to overcome any obstacle has been what has set humanity apart throughout their history. Give dragons every single advantage you list throughout your text, and I still bet on humans.
- Faster reproduction
- Fundamentally designed to hide well in spaces dragons cannot reach
- Opposable thumbs

Hide. Observe. Learn. Kill.
It's humanity's history.

EDIT: Let's put it another way: I give one guy a full suit of plate mail, a flamethrower, and a sword. However, he may not craft any new items, ever. I put the other guy naked in the woods, but he's allowed to craft anything he can imagine.

I set them to kill each other.

I'm betting on naked guy every single time.

I dunno, my Breath of the Wild experience tells me otherwise.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ice Bear will eat them both.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scintillae wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

** spoiler omitted **...

I will provide a two-word rebuttal: Opposable thumbs.

The ability to imagine, craft, design, and implement tools to overcome any obstacle has been what has set humanity apart throughout their history. Give dragons every single advantage you list throughout your text, and I still bet on humans.
- Faster reproduction
- Fundamentally designed to hide well in spaces dragons cannot reach
- Opposable thumbs

Hide. Observe. Learn. Kill.
It's humanity's history.

EDIT: Let's put it another way: I give one guy a full suit of plate mail, a flamethrower, and a sword. However, he may not craft any new items, ever. I put the other guy naked in the woods, but he's allowed to craft anything he can imagine.

I set them to kill each other.

I'm betting on naked guy every single time.

I dunno, my Breath of the Wild experience tells me otherwise.

now I want to have scint audition for naked and afraid.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Scintillae wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Watched this, now you get my ludicrous musings.

** spoiler omitted **...

I will provide a two-word rebuttal: Opposable thumbs.

The ability to imagine, craft, design, and implement tools to overcome any obstacle has been what has set humanity apart throughout their history. Give dragons every single advantage you list throughout your text, and I still bet on humans.
- Faster reproduction
- Fundamentally designed to hide well in spaces dragons cannot reach
- Opposable thumbs

Hide. Observe. Learn. Kill.
It's humanity's history.

EDIT: Let's put it another way: I give one guy a full suit of plate mail, a flamethrower, and a sword. However, he may not craft any new items, ever. I put the other guy naked in the woods, but he's allowed to craft anything he can imagine.

I set them to kill each other.

I'm betting on naked guy every single time.

I dunno, my Breath of the Wild experience tells me otherwise.
now I want to have scint audition for naked and afraid.

Smurf no.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay did you get papa to underscore your point or was that kismet?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Another Starfinder Mystic Connection!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Spent two hours in the garden this morning, finished tilling and amending the soil, got six rows of seedlings and seeds into the ground, and Hermione and Teensy Valeros actually helped a LOT.
Anyone can garden in California. The ground is so easy, and anything and everything will grow in it. If I can garden successfully in THIS soil, I will feel worthy.
I also now have a new respect for Whingey Wizzard's grandfather. His grandmother's family were ranchers here since before statehood and fairly well-off, but his grandfather's family were sharecroppers. He didn't want to be a sharecropper, so he built a huge packaging company from the ground up and was determined to be successful. And made it big. That much I had always known. But I had assumed that sharecropping everywhere was the same, and much of my Dad's family were sharecroppers in Indiana and Michigan after moving from Poland, so I thought, "big deal, so they were sharecroppers. It's what poor people did." But, having tilled 100 square feet of this soil by hand, for "fun", I can only begin to appreciate how back-breaking and horrible having to scratch a living out of this land must have been.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
lisamarlene wrote:

Spent two hours in the garden this morning, finished tilling and amending the soil, got six rows of seedlings and seeds into the ground, and Hermione and Teensy Valeros actually helped a LOT.

Anyone can garden in California. The ground is so easy, and anything and everything will grow in it. If I can garden successfully in THIS soil, I will feel worthy.
I also now have a new respect for Whingey Wizzard's grandfather. His grandmother's family were ranchers here since before statehood and fairly well-off, but his grandfather's family were sharecroppers. He didn't want to be a sharecropper, so he built a huge packaging company from the ground up and was determined to be successful. And made it big. That much I had always known. But I had assumed that sharecropping everywhere was the same, and much of my Dad's family were sharecroppers in Indiana and Michigan after moving from Poland, so I thought, "big deal, so they were sharecroppers. It's what poor people did." But, having tilled 100 square feet of this soil by hand, for "fun", I can only begin to appreciate how back-breaking and horrible having to scratch a living out of this land must have been.

my wife's family has stories. At least two generations on two different sides stated they left the south not (just)to escape bigotry, but because sharecropping life was f*+%ing awful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Slaadish Chef wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
when you're drunk at 3 am, and you have vegetarians in your party, who is helping you to sober up? Not McDonalds.
French fries are still veggies.
too many issues around what kind of fat they are cooked in.

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

I continue to fry fries at home in a mixture of canola oil and bacon drippings because it tastes so damn good.

Edit: Yep, Drejk is correct:

Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Isn't McDonalds supposed to fry them in deep vegetable oil? I know of no animal fat that would be suitable for the deep frying technique that is used by McDonalds.
Keep in mind I am no vegetarian anymore, but that was the scuttlebutt a few years ago.
I remember mcdonalds switching to veggie oil, but there was something..either some franchisees didn't or some way they were being handled...SOMEthing. Can't quite remember.

Probably same reason I can’t eat their fries. They don’t have a dedicated fryer. They cook the chicken nuggets in the same oil. Now for me that’s a great way to have to visit the ER because the wheat from the breading gets in everything. But I can definitely see where it would also be a big no for a vegan


1 person marked this as a favorite.
lynora wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Slaadish Chef wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
when you're drunk at 3 am, and you have vegetarians in your party, who is helping you to sober up? Not McDonalds.
French fries are still veggies.
too many issues around what kind of fat they are cooked in.

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

I continue to fry fries at home in a mixture of canola oil and bacon drippings because it tastes so damn good.

Edit: Yep, Drejk is correct:

Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Isn't McDonalds supposed to fry them in deep vegetable oil? I know of no animal fat that would be suitable for the deep frying technique that is used by McDonalds.
Keep in mind I am no vegetarian anymore, but that was the scuttlebutt a few years ago.
I remember mcdonalds switching to veggie oil, but there was something..either some franchisees didn't or some way they were being handled...SOMEthing. Can't quite remember.
Probably same reason I can’t eat their fries. They don’t have a dedicated fryer. They cook the chicken nuggets in the same oil. Now for me that’s a great way to have to visit the ER because the wheat from the breading gets in everything. But I can definitely see where it would also be a big no for a vegan

THAT'S probably it.

Thank you so much, that was driving me nuts.

Also, what fast food places CAN you eat at? In case I visit. Considering how far away you are, sushi will NOT travel well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
lynora wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Slaadish Chef wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
when you're drunk at 3 am, and you have vegetarians in your party, who is helping you to sober up? Not McDonalds.
French fries are still veggies.
too many issues around what kind of fat they are cooked in.

Nope. McDonald's stopped frying their fries in beef fat back in 1990 and switched to vegetable oil. Whatever objections people may have to McD's, their fries are vegan friendly.

I continue to fry fries at home in a mixture of canola oil and bacon drippings because it tastes so damn good.

Edit: Yep, Drejk is correct:

Freehold DM wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Isn't McDonalds supposed to fry them in deep vegetable oil? I know of no animal fat that would be suitable for the deep frying technique that is used by McDonalds.
Keep in mind I am no vegetarian anymore, but that was the scuttlebutt a few years ago.
I remember mcdonalds switching to veggie oil, but there was something..either some franchisees didn't or some way they were being handled...SOMEthing. Can't quite remember.
Probably same reason I can’t eat their fries. They don’t have a dedicated fryer. They cook the chicken nuggets in the same oil. Now for me that’s a great way to have to visit the ER because the wheat from the breading gets in everything. But I can definitely see where it would also be a big no for a vegan

THAT'S probably it.

Thank you so much, that was driving me nuts.

Also, what fast food places CAN you eat at? In case I visit. Considering how far away you are, sushi will NOT travel well.

Five guys is my fav for fast food. They have a dedicated fryer for fries and pretty good milkshakes. And, okay, peanuts are not the most nutritious main course ever, but it works for me. As long as I’m careful about my carbs the next day. :)

Most of the safe places to eat are not fast food, but thankfully there is a good selection of them . Not cheap, but gluten free food never is. That’s why we don’t eat out as often as we used to. *shrug*

205,201 to 205,250 of 239,712 << first < prev | 4100 | 4101 | 4102 | 4103 | 4104 | 4105 | 4106 | 4107 | 4108 | 4109 | 4110 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Deep 6 FaWtL All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.