aluminiumtrioxid

I know this notion may sound radical, but... women generally have first-hand experience of what women experience. I'll step even further: women working in STEM fields may know better what the women who work in STEM fields experience! Who would have thought!

Depends on the field, I guess. Most females I know who went into CS, however, tend to complain. Anecdotical evidence, I know, but I'm prone to valuing women's accounts about things experienced by females more than dudes telling me How Things Are In The Real World.

That's some view of men working in STEM that they are mostly 'nerd boys' and are socially inept and 'entitlement issue-laden' (which I suppose one can work anything into). The word you are looking for is... "realistic" Nope, they've been conditioned to believe that "girls aren't good at math", which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Socially inept and entitlement issue-laden nerd boys create a workspace where many women feel uncomfortable. If you don't believe me, ask any woman working in those fields. Implication that there is a relationship between sex and personality issues and social skills development. What you did there. I see it. Good for you, because I don't

Yeah, well, I'm really not a big believer in evopsych, and if you look at what passes as "science" in the majority of that field, you'll understand why.

Nope, they've been conditioned to believe that "girls aren't good at math", which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Socially inept and entitlement issue-laden nerd boys create a workspace where many women feel uncomfortable. If you don't believe me, ask any woman working in those fields.

I might even look into this, one of my players always wants to play a demigod anyway.

Well, studies say at early childhood female and male children have the same aptitude for math and related stuff, so it stands to reason that at least some amount of social conditioning is involved. Also, I somehow can't fault women who have their doubts about spending an inordinate amount of their lives (college, then job) in the almost-exclusive company of mostly socially inept and entitlement issue-laden nerd boys.

...Am I the only one who feels that while it's undisputable that men and women get paid the same amount for the same work, having way less women in scientific fields and high-paying management jobs means we've still not reached equality?

Am I the only one who is severely disappointed in S02E01 of Vikings?

Anyone else thinking of Poe's law reading this?

Aaaand it's done. Fhew. An improvement in all respects over DMS. I was perfectly happy with the base game, too, considering the financial and other constraints the developers had to work with, but Dragonfall I'm perfectly happy with, full stop.

I also got Germany, for some inexplicable reason, and (surprise surprise) it's kind of the absolute opposite of the lazy bum I am. Although it most certainly got "efficient" right.

This week's episode of Almost Human was deliciously evil, I've found myself laughing for minutes straight

*sigh*... I understand that. What I meant was, for the purposes of Strength's impact on the physics of weapon/force damage. Either Intellect was dictating that facet of strength, or that facet of strength simply didn't exist. Which, aside from a few rabid simulationists, I'm quite sure didn't bother anyone. (But even if I'm wrong, you could have talents giving bonus melee damage which are available sooner to those with high strength.)

Cook meth? ...Wait, are you a chemistry teacher, or...?

... ... ... ... Fine, whatever you say, just please, don't hurt me

I'll take my chances with you. You threaten strangers over the internet to compensate for your cowardice in the real world.

If by "the sequel" you mean the prequel, I'd reluctantly have to agree (crappy storyline or not, smoother gameplay is smooth). Otherwise, prepare to be purged.

The problem literally remains the same. One stat = both physical and non-physical potency. "+X% damage" just moved from INT to Might. So, I'm extremely curious to know why you think it's more reasonable for mental potency to dictate raw physical strength than for physical strength to dictate raw mental/intangible potency. It wouldn't dictate raw physical strength. That would be the purview of the Strength stat. It would either mean that the character can utilize their natural abilities better, or have an advanced knowledge of where to hit for maximum effect, or be better at absorbing their class' specific skillset. But these were all points I (and many others) made ages ago in another topic. Read back, I have better things to do with my time than repeat the same points in different debates.

Weren't you guys making a lot of noise before about how bad it is for Intellect to increase overall damage? Well, this is the result of that complaining. *shrugs* Couldn't care less, personally, but I think it was way less idiotic for Intellect to give bonus damage than being forced to be ripped in order to cast a sufficiently mighty magic missile. (Actually, I kinda think that the way things are right now, Intellect and Dex are way better investments than Might. +10 Intellect means +50% duration (which, unless elemental resistances work as DT, will translate to +50% damage in the case of DoT spells) AND AoE. +10 Dex generally means (assuming equivalent base attack and def, 0% miss, 1-30% graze, 31-75% hit, 25% crit = 0,3*0,5 + 0,45 + 0,25*1,5=0,975 [dam] vs. 0,05*0 + 0,45*0,5 + 0,45 + 0,05*1,5=0,75 [dam]) +22,5% damage even without any funky bonus to criticals. Compared to the rather flimsy flat +20% damage I'd get from using all those points to pump Might, these seem far more potent.)

"The problem with nazism is that sooner or later everyone becomes a jew."

Insider perspective?

How would "duration" be applied to non-AoE spells? For example; fireball, lightning bolt, magic missile, etc... these spells do their damage instantly. Pumping Might will boost their damage by <X> percent but how would they benefit from pumping Intellect? They won't (aside from the larger radius). Those X other spells which do DoT, however...

I have it lying around somewhere already, but thanks for the offer

You mean Hackmaster? Never played 4e, so I'm only familiar with the new edition, called (surprisingly) Hackmaster. (Yeah, 4e was the first edition, this is the second. It's funny like that.) I'm actually very happy with it. Dunno how things were in 4e, but stuff like the flat power curve (every second level gives you a new HD, but you can re-roll it at the next level, and keep the better result), the "memorization+mana points" spell system (spells cost mana, but memorized spells cost way less), and the fact that every class gets its own unique mechanisms is awesome. You can actually download Hackmaster Basic (first five levels, very limited chargen options) for free and try it out for yourself; my actual playtest experience is somewhat limited (we're also experimenting with DCC, LotFP and Helvéczia, which leaves little time for either game). Also, Aldalar: you're really losing out not playing Requiem.