Sand

Yes. Rogue is my prfered class in DnD styled games and I had a lot of fun playing one in NWN2. As I said, I don't want minigames. I want a computer role playing game that makes use more of my character's skill than my own skill as a player when determining success or failure in a skill check. Unfortunately it seems a lot of developers out there have the same views as you do, J.E., which is why I have very little interest in computer gaming any more.

Great. Not only is Llyranor being insulting but advocating violence on another poster.

Who's bashing? I just thought to make some off colored one liners to have some fun.

I would say that Bethesda blew them off with a Pancor but no groin shots.

Fallout 3 sucks so much that it beats out those Dyson vacuum cleaners.

So I take it you would also like combat to be resolved with a single die roll? After all, there's an extraordinary amount of player skill required to resolved the combat mini-game in RPGs. Read what I wrote, J.E., not what you want to see. I said "nearly all aspects." A die roll to see if I hit, or if I save versus a spell or able to dive out of the way of an explosion, a die roll to determine damage, or how much damage my armor soaks, and so forth. A die roll to se if my character can convince someone to do something or not do something. A die roll to see if I open the lock, or successfully bash it open, or if I am able to even notice the hidden trap. No need to roll a die determine what I want my character to do, just on how successful he or she is doing it.

However one can discuss minigames without playing games, Llyranor. If you want to discuss this further then take it to PM, otherwise lets stay on topic.

I for one hate minigames. I will always hate minigames. If I want to play a shooter I would play a shooter, and not do the poorly executed fighter scenes in KotOR 1 and 2, or even the one in Jade Empire. As for the lockpicking, I much rather have it be based on my character's skill in lockpicking for I am playing the character and not me. In a CRPG character skill needs to take precedence over player skill in nearly all aspects. In a game like Thief, which is more of an action adventure game it is okay because that fits the genre but in a CRPG if I have 10 ranks in Open Locks then I should be able to have a decent chance to pick a lock by the die roll.

Llyranor, give it a rest will you.

So, what you are saying is thatthe weak willed are more likely to get addicted.

As I said before, its not who wins or loses the argument that matters, it is the argument itself.

Why should we have acted against Iraq in the first place? The threat was contained. It isn't the place of the United States military to be the police force of the world.

You make it sound so easy. So, how would you go about that, Pop, without any funds nor skill in programming.

I for one was against the Iraqi war to begin with, it was baseless and I was right. No WMDs, no terrorist ties, nothing in Iraq that warranted us to go to war with them. We should have focused on Afganistan, cut off Al Qaeda escape routes, and eliminated the orginzation but instead Bushie and his band of idiots had us go to Iraq. Iraq has been nothing but a waste of resources and a waste of lives. The last thing we need to give Bush is more power. I just wished Congress sticked to their guns and eliminate the funds for the Iraqi war and force Bush to bring our troops home.

Well, if they are found guilty in court they should be executed.

I am looking forward to season two and the Origins spin off. I just hope NBC doesn't milk it like they did Law and Order and how CBS milked CSI.

But... But.. I am not wearing any shoes!

Easily.

States choosing on their own to do it. States, more often than not, just do not have the resources. The Federal Government does.

Then we change the Constitution.

Spend less wankers? I didn't think that was a form of currency.

We had a great thread over on libertypost.org a few years ago about that very subject. Everyone agreed if we did that the country would break up into 3-4 pieces because it is so culturally disparate now. I tend to believe it would be four new countries that emerge from that. Maryland to Illinois and all of New England would be one, Washington and Oregon would be another. California, parts of Arizona and New Mexico would be a third, the South, Midwest and the Rocky Mountain states would be the fourth. There is no way in the world you would get all 50 states to ratify the same Constitution now. What New York will want, Kansas will not. I'd rather we did not do that, and you would be crazy to think we would be better off if that actually did happen. I think it might be beter over all. A bunch of smaller nations, with more efficient governments... It could work.

And that is why we need a new Constitution. The Constitution is all fine and dandy back in the day of its creation and for a good century or so after but the US has gotten too big for it can properly handle within its confines of its wording. It is time to ditch it and revamp our government from scratch.

However, you have no clue how those models would work applied to the US. Nope, but I do know what we have now, the capitalist model, does not work and we need to do something to improve it.