Nonek

You'll still see their media. Not as if their residency affects people all that much, looking at it. Ah nobody will leave, i'm just quoting a meme. Personally I think that in a year or so the most hardened celebrity anti Trump campaigner will be attending White House soirees. They've no bottom or morales whatsoever, they just spout what's fashionable at the moment and remain smug elitists.

Trump: A small price to pay for getting rid of so many celebrities.

That reminds me have to renew the shooting license, beating season is in mid swing, have to pop down the range and zero in my Winchester and Mannlicher.

Turn based, far better.

I'd say that posts a bit left of centre.

Ha you get Katie Hopkins now, at last revenge for foisting Madonna on us is at hand, payback is a female dog.

I don't think that any company could capture what made the Ring trilogy stand out as the pinnacle of modern fantasy, just as no company has captured even earlier simpler works, such as Howards or Dunsany: For instance the survival aspects of the books, where supplies were heavy, thirst and hunger was an ever present worry and would work adversely on a character. In the modern age of pandering game design this would be jettisoned entirely, removing all of the roleplaying opportunities around it in favour of player empowerment and of course an infinite stash. Sneaking, running and just surviving a dungeon such as Moria would not be allowed. It would be changed to a linear progression of rooms, each with a combat encounter to grind XP in and pointless loot gathered to recycle later. There would be no exploration, no puzzles, no challenges and the players would be able to clear the dungeon in their first attempt because otherwise they might feel frustrated. Companions would be changed to the usual squeeing inane idots that infect all modern games and would be merely useful slaves unable to fend for themselves without the messianic protagonist, there would be no splitting of the Fellowship due to personal flaws as that might frustrate the player and ruin his party combat build, they would simply march into Mordor and slay all in their path. There would be no Ring of Power or Narsil to carry throughout the books, there would be a progression of loot with slightly better stats to exchange every half hour. As for the dread Ringwraiths, the Nazgul, the Nine they would be reduced to level scaled enemies whom the player can defeat in each encounter, no running, no sneaking, no room switching, just another combat encounter to endure. Best that LotR be left alone i'd say, Jackson reavaged it enough in his terrible films.

I invested heavily in rectal soothing creams before the election, i'm now making a killing.

Time to burn a Papist and set the night sky afire with fireworks, remember, remember the 5th of November and whatnot, tally ho!

I noticed on Steam that you'd also been greenlit a while ago, congratulations.

I'm quite happy, I have a fine old single malt to assault, the smell of Mrs Noneks flapjack is drifting in from the kitchen, i've just devoured a toffee apple, Fido is lying on my feet and keeping them toasty while he chews on a femur and Elgar is on the wireless. Life doesn't get much better. Edit: I have complained at the lack of and campaigned for armour degradation systems rather than status effects in numerous games, I was one of the few proponents of its inclusion in Poe for instance.

All i'm asking for is some help in suspending disbelief from the developer, i'm not asking for any fantastic elements to be taken out of the game, merely that mundane elements are servicable (for instance a melee jumping attack would be more believable due to added momentum whereas the jumping missile attack does nothing,) mundane elements well presented will therefore serve to reinforce fantastic elements as they are so distinct from each other. Sorry if I appeared overly dramartic, smug, superior and elitist, I was merely airing a complaint as a prospective buyer.

Does the new NWVault have a discussion section perhaps? That would seem like a logical place for mods to gather, though as a lad I remember seeing quite a few at the seaside, ocassionally scuffling with rockers.

I have to ask: The silly throwing an archer up in the air to shoot down at opponents, what exactly does it do? The amount of gravity added will not boost the damage of the shot, accuracy will probably diminish, upon landing the archer will probably be disoriented if not hurt, the pull on the string may diminish because of not being able to brace with the feet. The only thing I can think of is to aim down at weak points in armour, but aiming while in mid air will obviously be far more difficult. Is this a skill limited to characters of low intelligence? If so I applaud it of course.

I think "lady" sadly lacks the same measure of authority as I would say "lord" generally carries, which would make me opt for the latter even for women, personally. It's the same in regards to saying sir vs. ma'am in military settings - "sir" simply has a greater tone of respect and authority to it than ma'am, so that's what's typically used. I also feel like I have heard "lord" used for women characters in other fictional settings, which probably has desensitized me to its use for such, but I can't remember where. Funny, in my household Mrs carries far more authority than any title other than perhaps God Emperor of Man, and she doesn't even need super soldiers or a Golden Throne.

Indeed, we've never been a closed island, our cities are truly multinational (especially London) and we will not suddenly be turning away foreigners. Not much will change because of the Brexit, despite the fear mongering.

Evasion, ah well. Edit: I'd still like to hear from other Americans whether this election has changed their opinion on the whole process.

And yet Mr Johnson has not demonstrably and verifiably disregarded a sensible security policy while in office and leaked iinformation to his nations enemies, Mrs Clinnton has. Going by your own logic supporting him, regardless of personal feelings, is the logical choice as the best of a bad bunch.

Well if its a case of going with the best of a bad bunch then why support Clinton at all, Johnson is the clear winner in that race and deserves your vote. Edit: It's also quite funny to see Trump the clown demonised so vociferously when we all know that politicians are doing business with such people, representing their interests and associating with far worse individuals. Who is worse in that scenario? I'd say it's extremely ambiguous.

If another vote takes place i'm sure most MPs will know which side their breads buttered on in terms of their local electorate and more importantly their seat, however it will no doubt emphasise the divides in the Union and lead to a resurgence in UKIP. As of the moment UKIP is self destructing quite merrily, as I predicted it would when deprived of its raison d'etre, but this snubbing of the people may well reignite the protest vote movement. Hardly surprising though the EU is not at all about democracy until it goes their way, we saw this before in numerous places, it emphasises that the whole corrupt edifice should be torn down.

I'm specifically asking what has she verifiably done that is worse than the Iran-Contra scandal, or the Iraq invasion, or the bombing of Yugoslavia. I'm quite sure that in each of these instances there was strong advice given to the president for yay or nay decisions, and then they made an informed decision. To disregard any advice on security, and help a nations enemies would not be advised by anyone, and this is before she has entered office and shouldered the additional responsibility of that post. These seem like red flags to me at least that Mrs Clinton is an unsuitable candidate along with many other flaws, and a lack of basic charisma of course. Arguing that she's just as corrupt/incompetent as everyone else isn't a defense, it's an excuse, the electorate deserve better and that's why I asked what their response is to this, and am wondering whether they are seeking a better way and candidates.

I'd be interested to know what US posters think the farcical nature of these elections, and the utter unsuitability of either candidate is doing to the long term nature of their countries politics? Do you think that it will reinvigorate interest in the electorate, and spur them to take more of an interest in their governance, or conversely do you think that the unappealing nature of both candidates and campaigns will lead to a generation washing their hands of the whole tarnished business?

Prey 2 I believe.

Autumn sale chaps.

While the Romans simply made a shorter tunic.