213374U

You can delete the other topics.

Um, you have a point. However it's not the story or the scripted ending that's wrong. It's that Sion & Co. are so ridiculously easy. If instead of rampant leveling and enemy scaling there had been a more 'by the book' approach to the original ruleset, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because the Sith Lords would have been fearsome, worthy foes. Or at least we would have had something like Malak. "

Whoa, whoa! I know you weren't telling me what had happened in my game. The reply wasn't aimed at you, man. Peace.

No, I was too busy replying to little trolls that tell me what happened in MY game to pay attention. I'll try to do better next time. Some creatures used grenades on you? You mean boma beasts and shyracks used grenades on you? And you ask me if I have been paying attention?

Still, it's another plot hole. If you aren't familiar with the d20 ruleset in which that skill is explained, there's no explaining how Kreia couldn't sense them. To be honest, I hadn't thought of it.

Well, I'd say it's pretty focused on the removal of the limb, since the camera displays the hand lying in a pool of blood, if only to show the power of the lightsaber. And in KotOR 1 you have our lovely Malak having some fun with Bastila in the torture table. Sure, no blood, no hacking limbs, but electroshocking is as fine a torture method as any.

Force sensitives can develop a skill that allows them to hide their presence from other Force sensitives. Since those assassins had supposedly killed quite a lot of Jedi, it makes sense that they would be proficient at being unnoticed around targets that could detect them beforehand.

Family Guy owns by default.

PS. Hades, where's my rebalance mod? "

I'm starting my second playthrough, DS this time around. The first time I didn't use room wiping Force powers, just my lightsaber, and that gave the Sith on Trayus academy plenty of time to use their Force powers if they had wanted to. That would be OK if those damned Sith Marauders used flurry or power attack instead, but they didn't. And what's funny is that the regular Sith lords dealt way more damage in melee than the marauders. I'm guessing that due to the way the enemy leveling was done, if they used combat feats or Force powers regularly, the game would be insanely difficult near the end. And why the hell do they look like bantha herders?

Huh? Care to explain exactly how did you arrive to this conclusion? Well, saying that the story should suffer because the power balance throughout the game is poor is a weak argument at best. I know it sucks to have a Sith Lord that goes down in two saber swipes, but that's not an excuse to have a badly resolved plot. Some fight back, some just die, some run. Um, I saw Luke's hand severed, just as I saw Anakin's and that poor sod's in the Mos Eisley cantina. I saw Dooku and Palps use Force lightning against defenseless oponents. I saw Han Solo shoot first ( ). From what I've read, the scripted ending didn't have anything worse than that.

Um, no. Sion only broke down my protections the first time I found him. That's about all the Force he used. I just brought them back up, and proceeded to give him the beating he was entitled to. Nihilus didn't even bother with my protections. He just tried to saber me down. I'm not overly fond of uber lightsaber upgrades, so I didn't have a one-hit-kill lightsaber for any of those encounters. Guardian jump is not a Force power like the others because it's activated automatically to attack distant enemies if the line of sight is clear. But even if it is as you say, that doesn't explain why the other bunch of Force sensitive enemies you fight in the latter part of the game don't use Force powers either. The same for combat feats. I've tried both difficult and normal, and it doesn't seem to affect AI behaviour.

Uh, the same logic can be applied to most RPGs. By the end of the game, the NPCs are about the same level as the PC (which is usually too much), but the story isn't about them. The same happens in most books that have the main character fighting the main baddy and killing him/her. Usually the main char just 'gets lucky' or something, but there's nothing special about them. And there was enough torture and suffering in the OT. It's just it wasn't explicitly displayed, but it was there still.

Eh ? It uses all of those.. No, it doesn't. The only enemies that use grenades are some miner droids and the obvious 'sith grenadiers'. I haven't seen a single enemy use combat feats, and only once some Sith Lord used lightning against me. Not even Sion or Nihilus.

Well, since the AI doesn't use grenades, Force powers or combat feats, it's pretty useless to have uber saving throws...

Yeah, preach on, brother! (w00t) Damn straight. Why the hell didn't they include them in the poll? What's wrong with you Topaz?

Well, there are two ways of reading that. Either you stopped performing as well as you say you used to, and then the company had every reason to give you the boot, or you were still performing above what was expected from you, and even despite that, you still got fired. In the first case, the example you use has no actual relation with what we're talking about here, because in personnel reduction instances, the actual worker efficiency is not the deciding factor, seniority is. I'll say it again since it seems I'm not getting through: I'm all for getting rid of the bad workers. If we're talking about the second case, then you are contradicting yourself when you say that you have to earn a job. You must have seen incompetents around you. Those are everywhere. Did they earn their job? Not really. You worked your ass off, and you were given the boot anyway. Sorry, but no. You don't earn a job. You keep your job or lose it on a shareholder's whim. And that is not nice.

Well, if they stop being productive with 22 hour shifts, you just lay them off and hire a new, fresh batch. And it's slavery all over again! Yay! And uh, you have never been under the whip, so again, quit making stupid sh1t up. The difference is that you brought it about. I'm just following your logic to its own absurd ends. Hello? Are you aware of how things are? Do you ever get out of that closet in which you seem to live? That is happening now. Companies relocate their production facilities to countries where they can bully the government around and practice effective slavery without many problems. Your point? You are actually agreeing with me here, in case you don't realize. However, companies that go unchecked are bad for the economy. Mass layoffs are a perfect example of this. Wrong. If things start to get ugly, the company can just relocate to an area that suits their needs better.

Hmm. Does the Shimaon's Head Mod work for K2 too? Uthar's head's one of my favorite. On a totally unrelated note, does anyone know what's the model for the ubese bounty hunter? It would be cool to have that armor.

Sorry to break this to you, but that has nothing to do with the class you chose.

Excellent. More theoretical babble whose relation to the real world is... none. No, if I had a choice I wouldn't work for such a company. If I had a choice, I wouldn't buy their products. If I had a choice. But I may not have it, you know. If my children's living was at stake, I might be forced to take the job, and I'd rather not have that happen. And no, using a whip is not using force against them. This actually shows how little you know of anything. Back then when whips were used, workers weren't actually whipped since a whipping can severely diminish a worker's efficiency. Slavemasters still used them as 'encouragement', though. So please stop making stupid remarks. Who buys them you say? Well, they can always export the products. Hadn't you actually thought of that? Wait, don't answer that. Damage to economy doesn't happen overnight, either. The company might not even exist anymore or it may have relocated elsewhere when the consequences of a massive layoff begin to be felt. Let's get theoretical now, since you seem to like it. A company's responsibility is to generate wealth. That is their right and their responsibility in a free market economy. However, a wealth that nobody but a handful benefit from is a sure fire way to achieve economical collapse. The state can't allow that. So as long as the market works for everyone, the state won't be forced to take matters into their own hands. The alternative is a controlled economy, which has been proven to be, as any extreme idea, a failure.

No, I don't expect you to prove it. I wouldn't either. However, I'm still not buying it. No, that's not what we're talking about here. If somebody is caught stealing from their employer they should be laid off instantly. But in this case, I don't think they wanted to fire all of those people because they were thieves.

Okay, you asked for it. That is the kind of theoretical gibberish that doesn't cut it in the real world. 'No one has the right to force people to do things'? Please. What's this, elementary school? That's not freedom you're proposing. That's anarchy. True, people don't have the 'right' to tell others what to do, but they do. The same way that 'all human beings are equal', but they are not. If the state can't enforce certain rules about how businesses have to be run, soon 22 hour work shifts and overseers with whips will be commonplace. I could go on and on destroying each of your statements one by one, but it gets old and I have better things to do. You also haven't given evidence as to why companies have a "social responsibility". Or even explained what you mean by "social responsibility". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Companies have a social responsibility, specially the big ones. Being part of the economic tissue of a country, the state can't risk to have companies laying off massively whenever they feel like it because that is bad for the economy. You see, the economy is a whole. It's a wee bit more complex than buying and selling. People have jobs, earn money, and then spend that money. The more money they earn, the more the have to spend, strengthening the economy. The bigger the layoffs, the greater the damage to economy, and the more unrest among the medium classes. People that doesn't have a job can't pay their taxes, which in turn is bad for the state, and therefore bad for everyone else. Is that a detailed enough explanation for you? Do you want me to explain some other obvious concept you have trouble grasping?

Ah, of course. When one wishes to avoid answering, one makes a personal attack. Very mature of you. Nope. It's not that I don't want to answer. It's just you are talking about an ideal world, an utopia, and I'm talking about the real world here. When you open your eyes, then perhaps I'll give you a better reply than personal attacks. Nah. I ain't buying it Volo, sorry. You're still dodging the issue. Companies have a social responsibility towards their workers. There are ways to conduct personnel reductions that don't entail mass layoffs. Those are probably slower and more cumbersome, though. I agree that it's not competitive to keep more employees than you need. But you hired them, you deal with them.