PK htiw klaw eriF

With expansions, I see two viable options. 1. Expand the OC: This adds some new content to the main game. Think ToSC, where you had a few islands to visit. The level-cap should be raised, but not dramatically(in PE, up from level 12 to 15), 1 or 2 new companions should come in, and new classes(be they base classes, subclasses(or kits, if you prefer), or prestige classes) should be showcased if implemented. 2. New Campaign: This is an entirely different story, that may not even involve the PC from the OC. If it does involve the PC, the level cap should be raised higher than it would be for expanding the OC(to give a bigger sense of accomplishment, I think up to 20ish would be appropriate), some companions may make a comeback but it is fine to showcase all new NPCs, new classes should be showcased if implemented. I would prefer option 1 if PE2 will continue the PC's story, or option 2 if PE2 will not continue the PC's story. I would prefer to go with option 2 and wrap up the PC's story in PE+expansion(s), because I typically do not enjoy playing the same character in two different games if the mechanics change. On the added mechanical content, I think expansions should add classes, skills, talents, abilities, etc. to the game rather than modify the rules. All new stuff should be accessible in the OC, unless it requires a higher level to obtain than is possible in the OC. I prefer that mechanical tweaks and/or changes be reserved for patches or new titles in the series.

Perhaps different factions would call them something different? It would make sense, given that some groups vehemently despise them while some revere them.

If you have Kaedrin's Prc, a Fighter/Tempest/WeaponMaster is incredibly effective. Throw in the monkey grip feat and dual-wield Greataxes(12*4>8*5) and you are unstoppable, although almost any melee weapon will do the trick. Hmmm, oddly this discussion makes me feel like or GMing a PnP game set in Forgotten Realms or D&D planes using the Pathfinder rulesets with gestalt characters.

The Exalted? Transcendents? Tainted(because it is believed that something leaked into their souls, causing them to manifest unnatural qualities)?

Was the "tree rapist" still there? There was.. an encounter with some hedges and spindly bracken, and a weird doppelganger kind of instance. But not exactly the "tree rapist". Evil Dead in name only.

A sophisticated chap like Wals, it shouldn't be too hard. There's a biker bar in Covington where hookups between biker chicks and non-biker guys are common enough. The drinks are on me if we all split a plane ticket for him!Now, if there was a bar where tattooed lawyer and economist chicks hung out... If I was single, I would totally hit up that bar.

To be honest, I highly doubt he would. He was one of the biggest pork barellers in congress, despite being against earmarks*. Even if he did, the legislative branch could have passed Prism without fear of veto. IMO, the only way to change the US government is to change congress, but with gerrymandered districts and blind party voters(those who will vote for the party nominee no matter what) that is highly unlikely. *while he didn't actually vote for it, he would insert pork that benefitted his district on bills that were highly likely to pass.

Was the "tree rapist" still there?

Lets see, got involved in a war, deported record numbers of immigrants, hawkish military stance, spying on people to stop terrorism, and possibly flipping the bird to Europe(by bugging the EU offices). Yeah, that actually sounds like something a Republican would love. Of course, the real problem might not be Obama himself, but rather the culture of fear that has infected the US government since the 9/11 attack. Both major political parties seem more than willing to go along with Prism and the like, and I doubt that a Romney presidency would have been much different, other than who would be complaining that the IRS targeted them after a mid-term election.

Oh I agree about the statist bit(and would argue that any candidate nominated by the Republican or Democratic parties are), but I was referring to how he branded himself when running for office.

A sophisticated chap like Wals, it shouldn't be too hard. There's a biker bar in Covington where hookups between biker chicks and non-biker guys are common enough. The drinks are on me if we all split a plane ticket for him! Hmmm, starting a "lil obsidianites slush fund" to pay for things like this might be a good idea.

In all fairness Obama branded himself as a moderate when running. Your post is still unfortunately true.

No GD, a brunette with hazel eyes is really sexy. Glad you got lucky though. Now all we need to do is find Wals a woman.

I'm positive I was intoxicated that night. I could have sworn she looked a bit better. Ah well, perhaps after Wals feeds her soup and makes her play FONV she will look better.

I think he is trying to expand the scope of his alts, so keeping track of all of them is a bit easier.

I want the designers to decide what is best for their game, in regards to the power increase upon leveling. However, I would prefer for it to be reasonably consistent, so that going from level 1 to 2 is roughly the same amount of change from level 20 to 21. IMO, it seems that high-level level-ups blur together in a lot of games, and aren't as interesting/exciting as low-level level-ups.

No one is disputing that groups with "Tea Party" somewhere in their name were scrutinized, that is a well known fact. I'm asking you to prove that no liberal organization was scrutinized to the same degree, as you said you could.

I would like to see the mechanics explained in full context(when we know all of the rules for PE), but I'm fine with the idea.

We could build a time machine.

Guaranteeing something that you can not actually guarantee is foolish, even if it does make for good rhetoric. The burden of proof should always be on the person who makes the claim*, as is the case with ravenshrike and his "guaran****ingtee that no liberal org had to answer anything remotely intrusive as them". If that statement was not intended to be a factual statement, that should be clarified. *Imagine what science would be like, if any yahoo could claim any outrageous thing without having to provide any evidence whatsoever. I'll agree that others should be able to prove it right or wrong, but the person who makes the claim should have more proof than "liberal orgs weren't bitching" to support their case.

That is speculation, not proof. You said you could "guaran****ingtee that no liberal org had to answer anything remotely intrusive as them", please do so.

I think it is a good wager to say that while TW3 will be released on all platforms, it will be designed with a controller in mind.

Then guaranteeing it seems a bit foolish doesn't it?

I doubt it be much different no matter who was elected POTUS. Prism won't go away as long as the US is afraid of terrorists, the IRS will want to collect their taxes, drone strikes will continue as long as they are considered effective, etc.

Of course not, I'm pretty sure no one on this board is privy to all of the operations of the IRS. You are aware that the income of a 501©4 spent on political activities is taxable? Do you think there was a good chance that Tea Party groups were spending money on political activities? Prove it then. With evidence from reputable sources and not politically biased blogs.