TrashMan

Wiat ......wut? Do we live on the same planet? Since when has "oh my god, there is one game that doesn't have EPIC BEEWBAGE! GAME FEAR THE WOMAN BODY!!!" become anything but a source for redicule?

Here you go: http://myanimelist.net/animelist/TrashMan You amy find some anime worth watching there.

Fixed. Wether rolled of distributed. I don't mind rolling, as long as you get the "choose best 2 out of 3" or something that prevents a really bad roll. But I absolutely detest increasing attributes. They make no sense and they serve no actual purpose other than being numbers that go up. DA:O and DA2 had you start wiht attributes in the 12-16 range (you were average-above average) and end up with a attribute in the 90's range. Frakt that. It's unintuitive. It's limiting - ESPECIALLY if it's used as requirements for items. I utterly DETEST that.

You don't "need" anything. In theory, you should be able to complete the game with ANY class combo. If you want to take 6 mages or 6 fighters, go ahead. Not everyone is a powergamer who will always just take the highest DPS.

Come again?

Also, let's not forget that this is a PARTY -based game. So there is no need for a single character to be able to do everything. Because you will have other party memebrs with you. You chosen class cannot get trough this encounter alone? Boo-hoo! The tragedy!

Yeah, I call BS on that. People an sometimes survive incredible injuries. There are were poeple with a metal rod going trough their head that WALKED to the hospital. HP is an abstraction, but a necessary one. Not only does tougness/endurace varry, but also a party-based game that is based on dice rolls NECESSITATES them. You need to have some room to work with when you play, because controlling 6 people at the same time would be DISASTROUS if they were to die from 1 solid hit. So yes, a character APPEARS to be able to take more punishment than any man would, but again..necessary abstraction. Armor. Animations also can make it look worse.

Methinks looking at the highest and lowest stat might be proudent, as well as the overall average. But the highest stat should have the most influence, since generally the person with it will gerate most attention.

It would, but it would still inspire LESS wonder than if no one could do it. Either way, magic (for me) should be "magical". Otherwise it isn't really magic. The frequency and itensity can shape a different atmosphere of course, but I personally feel that overly high-magic worlds loose something.

The fahnn The fan is a curious, morrbid humanoid creature. If an adventurer or traveler catches it's attention, it will begin to follow from a distance, observing everything. As time passes it will not be satisfied with merely following, it will talk in a maddening language about it's target to anyone willing (and unwilling) to listen and will collect items connected to or belonging to it. But even that will nto be enough so it will creep always closer to the target, eventually engaging in what it percieves as verbal communication, but for everyone else it seems a cacaphony of obnoxius sounds, that can (and will) eventually drive anyone insane. Adventurers that have been targeted by a fahnn have tried to distance themselves, but the fahnn follows wherever they go, possesing a supernatural ability to track the unfortunate victim even in impossible places. If spurred, the fahnn falls into a murderous rage, slays the target and proceeds to wear his skin and take up all of it's habbits and routines. It rarely works.

WOOF!!!

Cross-class-balance is something I don't see a need for in single-player games. It's not competetive, so if someoen wants a party of all mages that make the gmae a cakewalk, I don't feel a need to stop them. Nor do I see the need for every class to have an answer (and the same one) for every situation. Mage has AOE? Fighter must have AOE! Rogue must have AOE! Of course, this is simplistic example, but you get the gist. That said, the scale of the problem depends on the setting. If the setting has vastly powerfull mages that waste armies and rule kingdoms, but in-game a mage is no-stronger than your average warrior, then something is wrong. Of course, there is a certain scale and finesse to these things, it's not a single variable in play.

Here, a game for you: http://i.stack.imgur.com/ksPxG.jpg http://thereticule.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/The-Hero.jpg

Personally when magic is everywhere, it kinda chepans the whole thing. It looses a lot of the mystique and awe when every Tom, **** and Harry can cast all kinds of magic and everything is magical. To put it another way - if everyone is special, then no one is.

I don't know what you are talkign about. For refference, this is apicture of me:

It's all about the context. We were having a pretty interesting conversation about the swastika, and it was out of place to go for a personal dig. It derailed a nice debate. Then it turned into a whole "I don't care what you think!" and it got silly. Seems like a pretty typical day in the WOT to me. We were having a nive conversation untill some peopel decided it was more "interesting" to try to focus on me or psychoanalize me. I frankly consider the opposition turning to directly attack you a sign of victory.

There is no dissonance. Or should I say there is one only in YOUR mind. You equate two things that aren't equal. Resisting someones attempt to pressure or force a change or thouts/behaviro is NOT the same as actively pressuring someone to change. One is a "offensive" action, the other is "defensive". You argue that by saying "you don't have the right to force me" I am actually telling people that they shouldn't behave in such a way to try and force me , thus actually ordering them to change their behavior. The actualy difference in the behavior and goal is compeltely lost on you. It is getting redicolous. According to you, I should never, ever speak up against anything. You know..if someone is beating me to death I shouldn't tell him to stop, because that would be trying to force him to change his behavior. We can't have that. Wether someone adopts my perspective or not is out of my hands..and I cenrtanly won't try to force it... UNLESS it's directly harmfull to me. You a psychology major? Because if you are not (and even if you are) I reject your reasoning and the conclusions you reached. You also missed the point, since you started focusing on ideals (and I said I don't care what X thinks of ME) Trying to divine the reasoning of others is based on much assumptions and projection. You don't know what drives me nor my reasons. You think you do. But I could be posting this simply because I like to be contrary...or maybe becuase I hate you. OR maybe because I got a screw loose and I simply don't reason the same way as other people do. You don't know...

I dislike censorship on a general principle and as a RULE. However, internet forus are privately owned, so the owner does gets to say "this is my house, you play by my rules" and put in censorship. Indeed, some communities are filled with vitirol, but the vitirol doesn't really go away - it's just hidden by censorship. Not to say that I don't like more civilized bored with less outright trolling and insults, but more times than not, the censorship criteria are redicolous. See, that depends entirely on what you want out of forums. Some people may just want to say whatever is one their minds. Some just want to commen. Or discuss a move. Not everyone is out lookingfor a debate. Altouhg I do have to say that words like "civlilized" and "adult" are for me a bit loaded.

Seemed to work for Carmine. Also, it's a fallacy. Just because I (hypotheticly) don't care what you think still doesn't mean that I don't enjoy a discussion or do not want to educate some people. You are not all people. You you should correct that last statement by replacing "our oppinion" with "my oppinion". Or you know... I might be a "timewasting arse". Which I wouldn't find insulting given that everyone that posts on off-topic is doing exactly that - wasting their time. If oyu weren't bored and had better things do do, why are you posting here?

What part of "depends on the people" is it hard to grasp? The level of care about what person X thinks of me depends on the person. My family or friends? I care a lot. Aquantances? I care somewhat. Some random stranger on the internet? Not really. As for "want to be liked" it also depends. If you comeptley and utterly despise or disrespect someone, them hating you is generally a sing you are doing something right

Depends on the people. No, I don't care if you like me. Nor do I care if you belive me or not.

You might want to study exactly WHY the crusades were started in the first place. You know..the socio-political and economical situation. Things like causes and consueqences. Do they teach you to focus on that in history (to actually learn from it) or do you just learn dates and events? I'll give you a little hint: 4 christian kingdoms lost. 5th calling for aid. Europe and western civilization threatened.

NO. Because there is difference in voicing displeasure and actively trying to force someone to do something. I'm not telling them what they are allowed to think or do - as long as they are not trying to change me or my tastes/likes or thoughts. Think whatever you like. Say whatever you like. But don't force it on others.

Do you like it? If yes, then you don't owe me any justification or explanation. If you stand for what is written on the avatar, then backing down is basicly "spinelesness". And I'm not acknowledging anything. Hypothetical. Also I said it's kinda spinelessl-y. And I'm not trying to get you to like me.