Pop

What has to be said? Who has to say things about cricket? WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA.

There isn't "backstabbing" in 3.5. The "sneak attack" is any attack by a rogue that isn't being actively defended against. Thus, if you're fighting 2 rogues, 1 of them always gets a sneak attack (there might be a feat that changes this) to keep this from being totally broken, they implemented +xd6 in place of double or triple or quad damage. Most people don't like that either. At least it makes it so that you don't have to be behind someone to backstab. I remember a few enemies in BG that had their backs against walls, so that you couldn't end the fight before it began.

One thing you all should watch (and something that I think should be implemented into the RPG somehow) is the deleted scene from Alien (there are several, but you'll know the one I'm talking about when you see it), which managed to freak me out just as much as anything else from the movie some 10 years after I first saw the film. Crazy ****.

she gave up ultimate control when she agreed to be impregnated... taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Horse****. Where's the explicit contract? Where's the implicit contract? By ****ing some girl and getting her pregnant do I then gain ownership of her, or dominion over her body? Engaging in a voluntary action while foreseeing a certain result does not entail that one has tacitly consented to that result. If I know that there are burglars in my neighborhood, and I have no locks on my doors, I am not consenting to being robbed, nor am I rescinding ownership of my possessions. If I am a woman, and I'm fully aware of the risk of pregnancy, by having sex I do not consent to being pregnant, nor do I rescind the right to my own body to anyone. Your view is further ****ed in that even if it is reasonable that by having sex one agrees to carry a possible pregnancy to term, it is not reasonable that by having sex, a man claims ownership of a woman's body. That's retarded.

I played BG2 before I played BG1, and I saw the summoning spells and thought "awesome!", but as soon as I was summoned my first ogre berserkers they were cruelly cut down. I largely abandoned summoning after that (aside from the occasional demon-spawning, especially in the unpatched game, where you could summon a pit fiend and gain thousands of xp when you killed his docile ass) and thus it was with BG. But one thing I always hated was the BG2 entangle spell. The BG entangle was much more broken / useful / less of a pain in the ass. With BGtutu, I don't use entangle anymore.

Anna in the Den (you give her back her amulet and then bury her bones) and also the random encounter in which you can get Ghost Dogmeat onto your team. But Fallout 2 was in many ways more ludicrous than Fallout. Fallout had the Master and super-mutants and ghouls, but Fallout 2 had Anna and... The Brain.

I don't know if it's likely, but it's the holy grail of radical feminism. Even if the inherent cultural roles of women were bucked, the "slavery" of motherhood would still be a yolk. Eradicating motherhood (and instead practicing some weird communal "it takes a village" child-rearing without primary caregiving roles, and with men taken completely out of the picture) was of particular importance to Bouvier. But I would think that removing fetuses from women would make killing said fetuses more acceptable. I mean, how much of the emotional attachment of pregnancy is attributable to the fact that the fetus is attached to the mother? That's not even getting into the neurochemical changes that accompany pregnancy. If women stop carrying children during pregnancy, is it unfathomable that we would see as many deadbeat moms as deadbeat dads?

I bet Fallout 2 was a bummer for you what with the ghosts and all.

Oh boy, now we get to define "nature" Are you ready for some thomism? btw, I'm still trying to figure out just what the title of this thread is supposed to be.

I never played the original Thief, but I have Deadly Shadows, and the undead are certainly part of that game.

l0l pwnt.

True, but I remember him talking about convo skills specifically I can't remember if it was in one of the videos they released prior to shipping or from those developer diaries that Gamespot featured. Either one.

I remember Feargus talking about how CNPC skillz would be a new and interesting part of the game. Maybe it was part of the game that got cut when Sawyer came in? Or maybe Feargus was lying with words Amen to that. You can play as a spellcaster and actually feel like you've got a powerful character. My 5th lvl sorcerer is cleaning house right now. Maybe that's just with all the fixins' of BGtutu. I remember BG being pretty hard back in the day.

The relevant question there would be: Can you build a good waterproof deck out of sex offenders?

I haven't expressed a personal POV about abortion yet. I've been questioning the validity of classification of moral personhood founded upon potential future. As I said before, it's a perfectly reasonable paradigm, if you're consistent about it, and that means exploring the full ramifications of a conclusion. If value is doled out based on future, those without future are without value. If we say that those without future are still valuable, then at the least we've made the value of future arbitrary, at the most we've contradicted ourselves. By extension, I would be contradicting myself if I said that all people have supreme dominion over their own bodies, and thus they have the right to remove fetuses from their bodies, but they shouldn't be allowed to abuse narcotics, or kill themselves. Those things follow from a supreme right over one's own body. Exactly. Which is why the potential future paradigm is unacceptable. *edit - And as to whether or not the fetus is part of the mother, that is another irrelevant issue. Whether or not a fetus is "part of its mother", the fetus still relies on the mother's body to survive. The relevant question then is whether or not the mother has an obligation to keep the fetus alive, or has the right to deny the use of her body by the fetus.

Nonsense. We're starting with 2 basic assumptions: 1. That being human conveys value to a being and 2. That potential future also conveys value to a being. Since skin has neither of these qualities, it isn't morally valuable. Since a fetus has both of those qualities, it is doubly valuable, and we can't kill it arbitrarily. Is a fetus valuable because it has a future, or because it is human? Or both? If a fetus cultivates value both from being human and possessing a future (if we don't hold a fetus' humanity as a point of contention), wouldn't it then be the case that a terminally ill adult human is less valuable than a fetus? It is human, but has no future. It has 1 quality of value, a fetus has 2. If not, you'd have to make an argument that potential future conveys value exclusively to humans who happen to be fetuses or else you'd be contradicting statement 2. If so, you'd be contradicting statement 1 unless you made an argument that not all humans are equally valuable.

Not a Joy Division fan, then? That guy sounds just like Ian Curtis. I always preferred the Editors, they also sound just like Joy Division, but more like Joy Division covering U2. It's most awesome. Lou Reed - Take a Walk on the Wild Side Joanna Newsom - Cosmia (Harpists are so hot right now) Bobby Byrd - Try it Again Ministry - Every Day is Halloween (!!!)

Wait, wait. That's not an assertion of potential future as a paradigm for personhood. We can reasonably say that a man with ALS has no future. A zygote does. If we say then that the man with ALS is a moral agent (or "person") with the same value as a zygote, we're denying that potential future has anything to do with whether or not we consider someone a moral agent. We're making an argument from humanity, which is much different.

I've yet to hear any bad review of it. Saying that Nintendo panders to kids and otaku is only a bit redundant. They are Nintendo, after all.

You wouldn't have to consider them as non-humans, just dead humans. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Same thing. They don't have potential futures, they don't have value. If we want to consider them people we have to have some different criterion for personhood. Sure. Thus no one has value or rights. Who are you arguing with?

It's certainly a viable paradigm if you're willing to consider all people with terminal diseases as non-humans, or for that matter, consider the young more valuable than the old. It doesn't really work otherwise.

So potential future is our new life paradigm now?

Is a fetus alive? Sure it is. Isn't that obvious? That's really not the issue with abortion. The issue is whether or not the fetus is a person worthy of protection or consideration. If being alive informs one's right to exist, then concessions have to be made far beyond abortion. We wouldn't be able to cut down trees, or eat meat, or some vegetables for that matter.

Elfin Lied is a lot like Spawn. Dark for dark's sake, draining, but not necessarily because it's good. It's just draining. I watched it and was reminded of the basic limitations of the genre. Every anime has to be about what love is, or what it means to be human, and that means eventually you'll come up with deformed, melodramatic cudgels like Elfin Lied. Such abominations aren't unlovable, but you've got to be of a certain state of mind to really enjoy them. You've got to enjoy repetition, or at least pretend that Philip K. **** never existed. At this point all that anime really has to give is Studio Ghibli, which might not really be considered anime, since what they put out is naturalistic, unpretentious and universally excellent (and with the exception of Grave of the Fireflies, kid stuff) and a thousand films and shows like Elfin Lied that cling to the tired husks of Akira and try to leech off of it so that they don't have to go through the trouble of actually coming up with something fresh. But I'll still watch Bebop or Trigun every once in awhile. Lightweight as anime goes, but at least they're not so in love with themselves.

I remember a time that Khelgar intimidated for me :\ and Sand had to have had a few substituted lore checks.