PK htiw klaw eriF

I'll have you know that equation was more informative than my entire high school geometry class. Admittedly, the class was ****, but your post was informative nonetheless.

Could I see the equation for this? I'm too tired for geometry at the moment.

It did feel a bit anticlimactic, what with all the build up. Rather mellow pacing and conclusion, mostly. But it was pretty emotionally sad. I'm not sure it contradicted chr. evolution too much. He was always a waffler, at least in terms of personal motivations. I dunno, it just felt erratic for him to break down. I could see it working if this wasn't the last season, or if there had been an additional 10-15 minutes showing how he was coping with his murderous urges, but ending it by showing him as a lonely lumberjack just lacks in closure.

Currently I am satisfyingly sore, and am intending to get in at least a good hour of cardio before my exam tomorrow.

Ah, I see. You are aware that inductive reasoning is flawed? Now while it is true that very little has been revealed about non-combat mechanics, assuming the ratio of combat abilities to non-combat abilities is flawed because: 1. PE is a work in progress and it is possible that mechanics are either not finalized or even fully designed 2. Since no non-combat abilities have been officially revealed, no quantitative assessment can be made about them. I conclude that no statement can be made concerning the amount of non-combat abilities, as no accurate information pertaining to the amount is currently known. How so? Drugging(or "insert other method of neutralization not induced by combat") the minions would yield the same result as putting a sword through their hearts. Resources are still likely to be used, and a test of skill still happens. Then why not reward the party the same amount for overcoming him with their non-combat prowess? Both take effort and are a test of the party's abilities. You seem to be under the impression that I am against XP rewards for combat. I'm not. To paraphrase myself: "XP should be rewarded for overcoming obstacles, not just completing quests. If someone deals with a random encounter, they should be rewarded by the challenge rating of the encounter no matter what method they used to overcome it." This? I found it to be uncertain. Did you mean random slaughter or carrying out a quest to conquer the city? To random slaughter: Possibly, but if the reason XP rewards are different is because of kill XP gained on quests it still is determined by body count. Quest: Agree. XP should be rewarded for the act of taking the city, not the method. Someone who barges in and slaughters any resistance in sight should get the same reward as someone who uses subterfuge or other methods to achieve the same results.

Hmm, I have a hard time describing exactly what type of woman is my preference. I guess I will just go through this thread and post the women I think look the best. And my favorite Looks like I like B to D cup, anything between fit and slender, and with legs as a nice plus.

Yes. Hmm, I prefer fit women to "curvy", but some of Woldan's pictures look dangerously close to crossing the line between fit and swoll.

After reading this, I feel a need to guard my balls when around friends.

Series finale of Dexter. A bit anticlimactic, contradicted some character evolution, but otherwise decent.

Going to watch Netflix then get some sleep. Got a long day ahead of me tomorrow.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/09/21/spider-mans-bond-set-at-50000-and-ordered-to-have-a-mental-evaluation/

Link or equation please. Already established 1 and 2. To 3: Why should the reward be less if you did not kill the minions and instead used other means to neutralize them? The party would still be using their skills to overcome a challenge, and the end result would be the same. How so? You are rewarded XP not for defeating an enemy, you are rewarded XP for killing them. I don't see any good reason why more XP should be given for killing a bandit chief after you have beaten him down to 1HP than if you decide to spare him. I see no problem with that, or how that is exclusive to kill XP.

I wonder, if someone is born with the desire to kill people in brutal ways, would we consider that person to be inherently evil?

Steak.

Maggie? Looks much sexier than she did in the show.

I had a dream some **** hit my car.

While I appreciate pretty much any attractive woman, I'm feeling redheads myself today.

No.

Enlighten us Ros.

That doesn't give any real clue because PE is still a work in progress, as in unfinished, incomplete, etc. They might not be revealing anything about non-combat because they haven't finished fleshing out those systems yet. Since no specifics have been revealed about non-combat abilities, making statements along the lines of "character abilities consist of 90% combat abilities and 10% non-combat abilities" is not based in fact. If you assert otherwise, prove it. No one is arguing that. I'm arguing that combat success =/= body count. Hypothetically: If someone has a quest to slay a giant and they do not kill it, they should not be rewarded as they did not succeed in their task. If they kill it, either by slaughtering it and its entourage or just killing the giant, they should be rewarded the same amount because they both succeeded at their task. I didn't equate combat with body count, I equated rewarding XP for killing to rewarding for body count, not result. Again, if you do not like doing something if you do not receive a reward for doing it, then you should not play a game where that thing is not rewarded.

I'm bored ****less and can't think of anything to play. Suggestions?

Ten rings, like the Mandarin.

anubite, you really need an avi. I keep confusing you and volo.