Ben No.3

Sort of. There are many causes of WWI, amongst those are also remain militarism as a big one, as well as the Schlieffen Plan. It is generally regarded that WWI was a more or less "everyone's fault", but Germany lost so it had to take the blame. And yes, without the treaty of Versailles hitler may not have risen to power. But again that is putting it to simple.

Being overdramatic is a legit stylistic tool I use quite often (although historically speaking I'm not even wrong... In the queens lifetime, Britain came from its last decades as an empire to Brexit, I understand that as a quite a loss of political impact). And what do you mean by quoting haywire? I only know a movie of that name, and I've never seen it...Besides, what is it I am denying? But wouldn't you agree with me that the British education system is favouring the children of those who are wealthy enogh to afford private schools? The fall of Empire is just a fact, our role in the world changed, her Majesty remained as head of state and experienced no real change as the Commonwealth remained. The overdramatic silliness is just that. Britain leaving a union it never agreed to join is hardly worthy of note in comparison, the Queen has gone through far more interesting times such as the Hun's bombing of London, Irish terrorism, War etcetera. The quoting functionality of the forum is going haywire, as is its wont. You're denying any correlation between limited university places, and foreigners taking them denying natives that opportunity, this should be simply obvious to anyone with a basic reasoning ability. I am more concerned with the worth of degrees, the financial systems sustainability, our working classes future, and the dominance of the City's financial institutions. Fair enough, having no international students will create a few more places. Places private school pupils are still 6 times more likely to get. Instead of creating a few hindered new places you should rather focus on making the entire system more fair. On a side note Concerning my previous post: Germany has obviously two world wars

It has nothing to do with the EU. 1. German army was disbanded after WW2 and reformed under the NATO boot. So Germany doesn't have a free hand in ordering their own troops. 2. Charter of the United Nations orders military intervention for all it's members in case of German soldier troops even steps in members country. Now those are actual reasons we have relatively peaceful few years. Absolutely right!!! Germany is the only cause of every European war ever!! How could I be so blind?

You guys have two separate problems: the fact that your education system is not the best if you don't have the money, and the fact that May just got rid of one of your main products. Two separate problems (although related). Thinking about it, I pity your queen... she had to witness the downfall of Britain. Not a nice thing. Denial, the last resort of poor logic. Condescending and overdramatic as well, I think Barothmuk might be correct and this is one of Bruce's alts, demonstrates the same lack of reasoning and basic comprehension. Edit: Quoting is getting really strange. Being overdramatic is a legit stylistic tool I use quite often (although historically speaking I'm not even wrong... In the queens lifetime, Britain came from its last decades as an empire to Brexit, I understand that as a quite a loss of political impact). And what do you mean by quoting haywire? I only know a movie of that name, and I've never seen it...Besides, what is it I am denying? But wouldn't you agree with me that the British education system is favouring the children of those who are wealthy enogh to afford private schools?

More people vote No than yes. Bad job guys... Having a united Europe a decade ago could have avoided every major crisis since then (or at least make it far easier to deal with). I also find it amusing how so many voted against the EU as a whole... You guys do realise that the EU has assured peace since 50 years, which is, considering European history, quite an archivement?How exatly EU assured peace since 50 years? EU is not even half that old. Also, peace my a**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe Well... Since the 1960s there has not been a war between the EU members, and especially between Germany and France... Which is a long period considering our history. And while obviously there was war in Europe, there was no war between EU members. And that is very valuable considering how powerful those members are. Two world wars have so far come from Europe... Ready for number three? No? Well, at least to some extent the EU will stop World War III, and that is by making war between its members impossible. But sure, you guys live on in your world where the EU is not related to inner European peace what so ever and is in fact totally unnecessary. This is like stating that since CCCP there was no war between states in CCCP. How old are you? Alosi ts funny that you need EU to not constantly war FrenchMy age is unimportant. How does it change my arguments?The problem with your argument is that the EU creates dependence between its members, and thus makes a war impossible. And yes, there has been a lot of war between France and Germany... Between 1871 and 1940, we invaded France three times. And well, never since . And I don't really see a reason for that but reformed politics and the EU. The original purpose of the EU is to avoid war, and it does that so far so good.

Teresa May announced that universities should mainly accept British students, that they should be preferred over internationals. Miss May, with the absence of free trade, education has become Britains primary product (much more than it was before). If you can compete internationally with the EU in one thing effectively, it is education. So why do you want to close that market down? So we have a problem finding university places for those less well off, and this will be solved by having more foreign students take places in our universities? Such flawless logic is part of the reason I voted for opting out of Brussels sticking their nose in our business, as well as the fact that I never voted to let them do so in the first place. Of course i'd have preferred that we go back to the EU that was voted for, an economic free market, but that choice obviously can't be allowed by MEPs who would then lose their stipends. Edit: Quoting going haywire again I see! You guys have two separate problems: the fact that your education system is not the best if you don't have the money, and the fact that May just got rid of one of your main products. Two separate problems (although related). Thinking about it, I pity your queen... she had to witness the downfall of Britain. Not a nice thing.

Shieeeet, I think I developed a little bit of a crush on you now Gorth. Without a doubt the biggest reason me and the people I know want out of the EU, Yes the EU has problems! Yes we need to tackle them! But are you really so blind that you think going out will solve the problems? It is the worst option... Give it a few years and Britain will be gone from the international politics and to some extent economics. Going out is not really a option of you want to stay relevant as a country.Are you really unable to see what the EU has done for you? That right there should already give u red flags. So why should Britain wanting and leaving the EU have the conclusion that they will be phase out of international politics and economics?Why did the britains want the Brexit? I honestly don't know, it just shows a lack of general education amongst the public (which is a government failure). People apparently don't understand what they are doing. I really don't see any advantage of Brexit that could possibly weigh up to the disadvantages. Most people understood perfectly what they were doing with Brexit.Unrestricted movement of labor hurt working class and the poor economically so they voted out. Yes, most people knew what they voted against. Besides what you already mentioned, the Brexit vote went against the EU establishment, more precisely Cameron and Brussels. I don't know if most people were aware of what the EU did for them.Would you say that Britains future is bright? Teresa May announced that universities should mainly accept British students, that they should be preferred over internationals. Miss May, with the absence of free trade, education has become Britains primary product (much more than it was before). If you can compete internationally with the EU in one thing effectively, it is education. So why do you want to close that market down?

No, it means that the Britains need to fix their educational system. Right now it is that the more money you have the better the education for your child you can afford. It should be the aim that the state schools are at least comparable to the private schools, but right now 70% of British Parliamentarians are from a private school, and you are 6times more likely to be accepted to university when you come from a private school. But only 7% of all children visit a private school. It's a bit unfair, wouldn't you say?

No. You're suggesting it's more peaceful within the EU than say 15 years ago? I don't think so. No I'm saying it's more peaceful BECAUSE of the EU than say, between 1914 and 1945.

Shieeeet, I think I developed a little bit of a crush on you now Gorth. Without a doubt the biggest reason me and the people I know want out of the EU, Yes the EU has problems! Yes we need to tackle them! But are you really so blind that you think going out will solve the problems? It is the worst option... Give it a few years and Britain will be gone from the international politics and to some extent economics. Going out is not really a option of you want to stay relevant as a country.Are you really unable to see what the EU has done for you? That right there should already give u red flags. So why should Britain wanting and leaving the EU have the conclusion that they will be phase out of international politics and economics? Why did the britains want the Brexit? I honestly don't know, it just shows a lack of general education amongst the public (which is a government failure). People apparently don't understand what they are doing. I really don't see any advantage of Brexit that could possibly weigh up to the disadvantages.

That's not what you said. Nice backtracking there. I assumed that people would be able to understand that I meant inside the EU since it is impossible for any organisation to assure peace outside of the organisation itself without being oppressive. Apparently I needed to be more explicit. So, do you agree with me that the EU has been a big part of peacekeeping between its members? Yes or no?

The American Satan? While I do agree with you that America is far from being an ideal country, of all the big empires in history, it is probably still the best. Or can you think of any other major power throughout history that had such a developmet democratic system and human rights at the core of their country? Again, I'm not saying the us is a great country, but in comparison to the other empires throughout history its probably the best.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc9WAg2QZf8 So I take it you disagree with me that the EU has in fact not assured peace between its members. That's fine, everyone has his opinion... Can you back your's up though? I'm pretty sure there was no major war inside of the EU... Do correct me if I'm wrong.

Shieeeet, I think I developed a little bit of a crush on you now Gorth. Without a doubt the biggest reason me and the people I know want out of the EU, Yes the EU has problems! Yes we need to tackle them! But are you really so blind that you think going out will solve the problems? It is the worst option... Give it a few years and Britain will be gone from the international politics and to some extent economics. Going out is not really a option of you want to stay relevant as a country.Are you really unable to see what the EU has done for you?

More people vote No than yes. Bad job guys... Having a united Europe a decade ago could have avoided every major crisis since then (or at least make it far easier to deal with). I also find it amusing how so many voted against the EU as a whole... You guys do realise that the EU has assured peace since 50 years, which is, considering European history, quite an archivement? How exatly EU assured peace since 50 years? EU is not even half that old. Also, peace my a**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe Well... Since the 1960s there has not been a war between the EU members, and especially between Germany and France... Which is a long period considering our history. And while obviously there was war in Europe, there was no war between EU members. And that is very valuable considering how powerful those members are. Two world wars have so far come from Europe... Ready for number three? No? Well, at least to some extent the EU will stop World War III, and that is by making war between its members impossible. But sure, you guys live on in your world where the EU is not related to inner European peace what so ever and is in fact totally unnecessary.

He will probably be anyway... You can ignore the deity, it is important to have a priest. So, you probably won't use durance either way.

Yes swords... I meant swords! Sorry... As I said, but tired. I edited the post. Thanks

More people vote No than yes. Bad job guys... Having a united Europe a decade ago could have avoided every major crisis since then (or at least make it far easier to deal with). I also find it amusing how so many voted against the EU as a whole... You guys do realise that the EU has assured peace since 50 years, which is, considering European history, quite an archivement? But sure... You're right... Who the h3ll needs peace... The only important part is that you don't have to deal with refugees, right?

It may be a bit specific... However, a melee buffer, debuffer and damag dealing priest is very viable indeed. So he'll not only kill the undead, but also everyone else Deity: Many of the priests offensive spells deal burn damage, so I'd recommend Magran... Both for roleplay and her bonus spell talent is a burn-damage spell. Enchant your weapons with fire lash and with the right talent you'll deal quite some damage with all your spells and hits. Stats: I am no expert on melee priests, but I would recommend two spreads (notice I did not include race or culture, you decide on that): 1. Early game, and keep it if you value roleplay over power game: M: 15 C: 8 D: 10 P: 12 I: 16 R: 14 So, early on you'll have some better defenses, but this spread mainly should meet your request for a leader-character. Later on, if you want to go for power gaming, I'd recommend: M: 18 C: 3 D: 17 P: 15 I: 18 R: 3 Late game, you will have enogh spells to boost you into oblivion, no need for survivalbility from stats, but let's focus on spread 1 since it may suit you better. So what you will do is be an off-tank priest. What does this mean? Well, basically you will be starting the big fights with buffing everyone, debuff the enemy, deal damage via spells and then go into melee. Priest has some very powerful spells so it will work out. So, what is there to notice? Equippment: I'd recommend a good mixture of speed and protection. Probably a Breastplate will fit you best, or if you want a bit more speed go for scale. At lower difficulties, you can also go by look... Breastplate tends to look way more noble/rich since it's valian design. For weapons I'd recommend a sword since magrans blessing gives you a +10acc for it and the dual damage is nice as well. Whispers of Yenwood gives you +2 Con early on. Also have a small shield and the talent... In melee extra protection is always wanted, but as a caster we should avoid accuracy losses since they also affect our spells. As a secondary weapon take something with reach, so if the situation requires it (for example in a bottleneck) you can fight behind your frontline. Take veterans recovery, early on it is a live saver... Later you can respec. For spells and spell mastery I recommend you simply take a look at the dozens of guides written by much better people around here. But... Yeah Hope Incould help anyway Please excuse the little detail I gave, I'm a bit tired from smashing my head against the wall after going through my thread in way of topic... But that's not to be discussed here.

Yes, although it may make monk/cipher the King of solo... Never tries ditchomos twins or did a lot of experiments with ciphers in general?... Boeroer and everyone else who played them, how strong would they be as a solo-self buffer? I just feel like there are a lot of self buffers already... Would it change balance that much?

Wisphers of Treason has been changed to a "fast" casting time, so it might be of interest. Other than that you will soon get psychobampiric shield... As Boeroer said, it is ideal to first build focus up for the shield and then go into melee. On higher levels the low initial stats won't be that big of a problem as well.

Many of the ciphers abilities don't gain a lot from positioning (while some do... Antipathetic field I'm looking at you). Take a look at boeroer's ditchomos soul twins... melee cipher might be interesting for you (more rouge like imo... It's a good build anyway). Otherwise ranged cipher is also a obviously good option

No, but a cape with that spellbind. You can get it through a stronghold adventures once you claimed caed Nua. About the balance between speed and damage... I'd say there are two options: war bow if you prefer speed and crossbow if you prefer damage. Personally, I prefer the crossbow due to the uniques... But the war bow is very viable as well.

Additionallly, if you already have Kana, try a mix of the Harbringers of Doom and Come sweet winds of death. With high Int (so boost that for Kana of possible), the Harnringers effect will last as long as it takes to chant sweet winds, so they overlap each other. That way you can keep the phantoms constantly in fear, which gives a big malus in accuracy, and with aloths chillfog you can subtract accuracy even further since it inflicts blind. Have a frontline with big shields and weapon and shield style (maybe kana and Eder, or your main (even though pike is probably the best idea, or durance's staff) ) and they will have a hard time hitting you. Meanwhile, Sweet winds and chillfog deal damage, and your party does as well. Bottlenecking is really effective in this game btw

Especially as a secondary weapon, and maybe with the saber nerf even as a main weapon, I'd recommend shatterstar for early/mid game, and really as far as you want to drag it along. Dual damage types I personally find very valuable for solo, and it also has annihilation, so high damage output. I'm using it for my solo chanter atm, and I could imagine with a rouge it is even better... I crit definitely often enough to make it worth it, and smash isn't as resisted as slash or pierce. When it comes to lashes, it still believe that corrode is the least resisted... Is that still up to date? However, if you use the stilleto you might want to use a shocking lash and then enhance it through talents... Talents are also the reason I'd generally set on one lash... Maybe one other in case of immunity, but one main to use as often as possible Also for any class with low health (not endurance... Regen is easy, health not), definitely take wound binding if you want to solo, especially if you don't have a lot per rest abilities!