Farbautisonn

Well... even the most benevolent princes had torture chambers and had their foes drawn and quartered in the Europe pre modern times. Hell The most benevolent nations today still employ torture chambers. We just outsource the torrure to third world nations or freelance specialists... if we dont have black ops or prison camps where torture is an official secret . Call it a lust for "realism" in a fantasy game.

In most games, Good = intelligent, cunning, smart, wise. Bad = Hamfisted, cruel, malicious, dumb, shortsighted. I would actually like good to be ****ing stupid for once. In Norse Myth for instance, Thor is a "good guy". But he is usually as dense as rocks and he is more of a blunt instrument than a rapier. He charges headlong into battle and doesnt opt for diplomacy or cunning that could win valuable allies or great prizes. He just breaks stuff. His anthetihis would be Loki who is usually considered "bad" (nevermind that he isnt and likely wasnt percieved that way). He does crappy and irresponsible things, usually to bring the other gods down a peg or two, or to make the story evolve. And his smartness and antagonistic ways brings the gods every single object weapon and animal that are associated with their offices. The spear of Odin, Thors hammer, a boar that you can carve the bacon from and it will grow back instantly, a pocket ship, a gold ring that drips 9 rings like it every night, etc etc etc. The sagas where Loki are a part stand out as the more entertaining ones. So... its not impossible to write "good" as Dense. Its just that traditionally everyone wants to be a hero, save the maiden and have the game cater to our egos and overinflated sense of self. So we get the artifacts for doing good stuff... not for conning some peasant who found it on a field out of it, or not for releasing the seemingly friendly archdevil from his prison by mistake. Frightfully boring. In my pen and paper days I usually played LE (smart) or CG "dumb as rocks" and I actually found that more rewarding than the paladin esque, holier than thou, idiocy. (I hate pallies with a vengance and never played one, not even in crpgs).

Id want a torture chamber in that prison. And then a script where you can hire a profecient torturerer and have him interrorgate select prisoners. Spies, captured henchmen, foes in general. And ofcourse the odd peasant for good measure. I wouldnt mind that building a torture chamber ment a hit to karma or reputation. That usin it excessively made you take serious penalties to loyalty of your surroundings. But I think it could be scripted to be a rather interesting addition... if for no other reason then to teach us that inside a very short time, everyone will spill everything and make up more just to be rid of the pain.

once or twice a week, I work out in a gym. But really, if you want to get bang for your buck, get a part time job in construction or demolition. Youll see results alot faster than in a gym and youll get paid to do it.

Problem is that giving the bonuses can make a significant impact. A good DM can allways counter them, but CRPGs arent Pen and Paper games. So there is a tendency to "stathunt" and to choose very specific races for very specific roles. Dwarven warriors, Elven wizards, drow rogues etc. Given their lifespan they can significantly "outperform" a human. An elven wizard that lives a thousand years plus can become significantly more powerfull than a human ditto that only lives for a century. Its one of the things I never fully undestood the logic of. Elven wizards should be legues beyond anything a human could ever aspire for. And yet... they arent. The only real benefit to being human in most of the traditional pen and paper games I have played is that we can outbreed the other races. We survive because we are rats.

I dont really see it undermines my usage of it. We have a group of people who are overrepresented in crimestatistics by a factor of six and noone seems to be interested in the "why" and the "how do we ensure that the number drops" bit. Since the numbers have been iced over by correction for socio economic status etc, it would still be interesting to know why this group is so overrepresented and how we can prevent it. Because "Multiculturalism" as a term was taken hostage and its meaning watered out to the point where "Multiculturalism" as a term now means "dealing with the sociocultural issues of the muslim demographics of your nation". Just as "tolerance" and "progressiveness" was watered out to cater to people who didnt want to be faced with uncomfortable truths: That the muslim demographics have significantly impacted both crime and social statistics. Noone was interested in addressing the problems so that gave way for protest parties and populists. It still does. In the local minority rich areas of copenhagen (my nations capital) more than 45% of the families opt for private schools in a nation where public schools are free of charge and used to have a significant following. Half of the second and third gen immigrants (46%) from "third world nations" leave the public schools after nine years of mandatory attendence as functional analfabets. They are overrepresentated in crime and social statistics by a factor of at least two overall. 42% of the "third world immigrants" are on welfare. 70% of somalis and Iraqis. And the numbers are akin to the danish numbers in most european nations. Like it or not, that breeds resentment. Trying to ignore or whitewash the problem, as many center/leftwing parties have tried, doesnt make the resentment any less. Doesnt make the problems go away. Only compounds the problems. Its not "racist" or "bigoted" to want to address the topic, to want some kind of policy and governance that tries to address the problems, and make demands of this group. However traditionally you have been labelled just that if you pointed out problems with immigration. And that has only ensured that the hard statistics and data isnt going to be available because noone wants to examine and chart the problems out of fear of being called "nazi". Means that the tools we employ to try to better the situaion is based on guesswork at best. So ofcourse we dont see an improvement in social and crime statistics. Because we wont touch the underlying issues for it out of fear of stigmatizing ourselves.

I rather like both candidates and I rather detest them both. Obama flunked forigen policy. He is very popular in Europe (where I come from, Denmark, especially so), but he has a string of questionable forigen policy blunders behind him. The former east bloc nations feels he shafted them with the Rocket defense that he pulled. Apparently he did it to please the russians, but seemingly got nothing out of it. Got nothing in return... and politics is barter. Then there is the "outstretched hand" to the arab world. It didnt really pan out. The dictators that have now been overthrown might have been rotten bastards but at least they were "our" rotten bastards. Now in places like Egypt and elsewhere, the anti american sentiment that has been fueled by decades of propaganda to mask the ineptitude and corruption of governance is allowed to have a voice of power. Embassies have been attacked, staff killed, and there the approval rating of a nation you give 2billion dollers minium in aid to per annum is sliding downhill. Like it or not, the only real regional ally is Israel. Yes it causes crap for US policymakers, and Yes the US relationship with Israel causes antagonism in the mid east. But it is your only regional ally. Saudi is your allly only as long as you keep buying their oil and the locals rather detest america. Obamas constant blunders in relationship to Israels Netanyahu isnt promoting that relationship. Some of you might think that Israel is rotten, but its your ally. And you dont piss on allies. Especially allies that have so much political pull with your electorate as Israel does. Its just not good policy. Obama uses more mercs and drone attacks than all of his predecesors. Some say combined. Its easy to cut troops with one hand when they are replaced by civillian contractors. Infact a sizeable percentage of the Casuties in both Iraq and Afghanistan have been contractors, both locals and forigen. These contractors do not face military or civillian courts. They sign contracts that essentially grant them "get out of jail free" cards incase they do something questionalbe. The only consequense to unbecomming conduct is that you get a planeticket home. Now mercs are not evil nor are they all cowboy outfits that plug anything that get in their way. But some are. The only reason to use mercs is that they are "void of political capital". If a soldier comes home in a box, he needs a flag and there are questions about policy. A merc comes home in a box there is zero political fallout. Its a non issue. Why is that? The drone attacks have not been beneficial to the US forigen policy image that Obama has tried to groom. On the contrary. "Targeted killings" are frowned upon in both the EU and with middle eastern partners. Again, a drone has zero political capital and its "risk free" in a domestic election. Then there is the Gitmo thing. Obama came to power promising he would shut it down. Its not. And infact the Homeland Security act, that de facto makes it possible for the president to suspend any and all civil rights of a US individual have not had its power cut. On the contrary. Despite the above, Obama has a very impressive "nice guy" image... And I am struggling to undestand why. I dont see him as particularily nice in any fashion. He is just as much a politician and in it for the power as his opponent is. On the other hand we have Romney. The "Flipflopper". Some of his supporters are what I would label "bat****e insane" who hates gays and pretty much anyone who isnt just as cristian, white and 'murican by a very select set of criteria. He is more of a "live and let die" type persona and more focused on numbers than on welfare. Comming from a socialst welfare paradise of "Flexicurity" , I really dont like that much. I realize its the american way and the "every man is the smith of his own luck" thing is embedded in american culture and that there has to be some loosers for there to be winners. During his campain he has said some pretty halfarsed things. But he seems to have a plan for the US economy that might actually work. Obamas plan is basically "more of the same". That really hasnt helped as much as everyone hoped. And economy is king in this election. Also he advocates a more "assertive" role for US forigen policy... which is something Id be happy to see. Personally Id vote for Romney if I had the choise. But I dont. I wont mind Obama winning a second term, but I think Romney would be the better choise.

Well, it would make sense to have the humans have some kind of bonus. The other races can live longer, are more physically / mentally adept, etc. There would have to be a reason why humans were not either "bred out" or purged from existance or living in squalor as serfs to other races. Either that or give the "other races" significant drawbacks that counter the bonuses.

I cant think of a reason why they would give up the creative controll of their game if it turns out successfully. A publisher or "overlord" eventually tries to meddle or "streamline" their products. With few exceptions. DA2 and ME3 was "streamlined" to the point where it lost its identity and alienated a significant portion of its fanbase. Only good exception I can think of, offhand, is IOI and their "Hitman" franchise. They seem to be very solidly in controll of their original IP despite their overlords.

Its smalll minded to ignore problems facing you. The issue isnt with indians, chinese, americans, australians. Its with one group only. Immigrants from muslim nations. Besides you must not know alot about European politics. The "New Right" here have shifted the entire political discourse to the right. Most mainstream parties now have immigration policies that they decried as "racist" two decades ago. Even the most PC nation on Earth, Sweden, Now has a "new right" party that got voted into their parliament and have been polled to reach 10% of the voters. The crime and social statistics speak for themselves and if we dont act upon them that gives growth to extremism. I can give you countless examples but if you read a european paper or news website once in a while that sould be painfully obvious.

It states that when compared to the "average inhabitant" in my nation, a person of morroccan descent is 6 times more likely to appear in the crimestatistics. If you have a different version, Im dying to hear it.

I follow you here. The scripting would be hellish. However I cant seem to remember having ever been able to roleplay a "lawfull evil dominator" in a CRPG, so thats a script Id long to see. And I do see your point on not "explaining" it. However if left too open we are left with nothing except actions and few consequenses. There must be a framework and the occasional guideline. Or so I believe. I like the way you are thinking. Sure. Most of them are either dictators in third world nations or the heads of criminal organisations with an average lifespan of 15 years before someone buries them neck deep in the sand and then burns their face off with a motorcycle tire accellerating in their head. Some of them are clever enough to be quite brutal and still avoid getting pinned down or captured. But the machiavellian evil is something that really hasnt been done in any crpg. The closest we have come was in BG2 where Irenicus played the part. I have yet to see it as a viable option in a CRPG. And its not like history lacks any examples. Italian politics in the middle ages alone should give ample inspiration. But most of the time we are stuck with halfarsed halfwitted and hamfisted evil... and we are supposed to believe that an individual void of smarts, cunning etc should make it to the very top? Not likely. Such a person is an enforcer, not the brain. The Sazs Tam, Palpatine, and my personal favorite for intelligent lawfull evil Sememmon. (Before his alignment slide). Being loved by your subjects as a prince means you are able to get away with much more, means youre safer in your power as people conspirering against you would find few supporters, and you need fewer high maintance institutions such as a large standing army and a vast intelligence network. If your subjects truely sees you as a force of good and wholesome law then noone will mind the odd virgin going missing or the occasional bun turning up in the gutter with torture wounds. Noone will see any wrong with me appropriating land from lesser nobles or going on a crusade against a neighboring power. Because I am obviously "good". And if I keep proving that by outward displays of mercy, generosity, kindness and just behaviour, noone will mind what goes on behind closed doors, and in dark depraved cellars.

Most plastic toys are by definition crap. :D

Spent time with kids, took them to the movies, bought crap for them, ate at mc donalds, made pancakes, etc. Have taken the week off to spend the autumn vacation with my kids. Catching up on some writing and social networking too.

Just curious, but do you fully understand what this stat is saying? Very much so. But perhaps you would like to elaborate?

They cant be that effective. Or perhaps the patrolling is cut short by shrimps on the barbie and Vics bitter.... :D

German multiculturalism: Dead. British multiculturalism: Dead. French multiculturalism: Dead. You were saying? EDIT: Youre an aussie? How are those lebanese gangs and youth groups doing.... :D EDIT2: Sad bit is... The majority of the muslim community in europe actually want the best for their kids, want to be a part of their new nations, want to contribute. But because of a minority of ****tards and the unwillingness of state players to place both responsibility, reward and blame plus consequenses on those few idiots, the idiots and tards paint the larger picture of Islam and muslims. Thats wrong. But unfortunately this particular demographic group has some pretty nasty statistics attributed to them because repeat offenders tend to repeat offend... ALOT. Morrocan immigrants in my nation of Denmark for instance are index 600 in "violent crime causing convictions in excess of 6 months".That means that after corrections have been made to make up for socio economic status etc, a morrocan is still 6 times more likely to get charged and convicted of aggrivated assult. And to you yanks, thats pretty much offenses that in the US would give between 6 years non probation to life. We are talking "putting a guy in a box or chair" esque crimes. Now. If we could get rid of the rotten apples then that would rob the tabloids and the sensationalists of their ammo. However we cant. So the sensationalists and populists will get increasingly more influence in politics and governance. I dont have to spell out where that ends if you have an inkling of European history for the last one thousand years.

Its a matter of statistics at this point. No nation in the world has successfully integrated vast amounts of middle eastern / northafrican immigrants. They are index 2 to 600 in crime and social statistics Europe wide. They leave public schools that are free of charge, and significantly better than anything that their parents ever dreamed of as functional analfabets. In Oslo 100% of aggrivated assult rapes on women during the last 5 years were of "Third world origin". Want to turn the tide in Europe? Find a way to successfully integrate the middle eastern / north african immigrants, and patten the modus operandi. You'll win a Nobel prize and likely have consultants from all over the world lined up to throw money at you to teach you how . More of the same doesnt help. Europe is a testament to that.

Multiculturalism has been declared dead by Britain France and Germany. It is dead in europe. And the whole "We bleed the same blood" type of argumentation is a bit inane. We have been killing eachother since day one. "There is only one species of man, but many tribes of men".

So... Baldur's Gate - Best CRPG of our time is not respectable? Neverwinter Nights - A CRPG that started some things for Obsidian, not respectable? Knights of the Old Republic - Another CRPG that started some things for Obsidian, not respectable? Come on man. Jade Empire - Okay, I get these being unrespectable Sonic Chro - SHUT THE HELL UP SELF! myself OK myself Dragon Age - You would be a fool to call this unrespectable Mass Effect - I will kick you in the gut if you call any game in this series unrespectable. Awards: * Video Game Hall of Fame - ... * 2010 Studio of the Year - This one award proves you wrong all the way. ME3 Retroactively destroyed the entire franchise for me. No mean feat. And Im not the only one who feels that way. Bioware used to be the Benchmark studio for storytelling. Now its a punchline. As for the "award", that can go cram whatever statuette it awared up its hinie. The fans were so upset with Bioware that they voted EA worst company stateside, beating bank of america. Thats bad. The leading benchmark studio for storytelling is CD Projekt RED. Witcher2 still sells at full price, whilst ME3 has dropped a third in my local gaming stores. Obsidian is a close runner up after NV. Im personally hoping that Obsidian can take the number one spot.

I agree 100% Whilst I do get your point, without exploring a moral dilemma or putting that dilemma into a certain context, the action has no meaning and it tells no story. It reduces storytelling to "can" / "cannot", "Do" / "do not". Seems somewhat flat to me. If we are just given the option to slaughter wholesale thats fine. But there has to be repecussions to that. There has to be a story attatched to that. Personally I would be in favour of every single NPC being killable. Man woman and child. But then Id counter that with some effects. If you burn down a community, the next one will likely not fancy you much. And even if they do fancy you out of some rivalry with the last community, they likely wont trust you not to try the same with them. And after killing enough communities, sooner or later you kill someone who is a relative of one with power, or someone with power. That usually doesnt turn out that well. IF you have a group of mercs 20 *levels* your senior or with 20 years of experience in assassinations or someone who fields a small army against your group of four, then chances are, you will die. Horribly. However alot of people who want the option to go on a wholesale killing spree do NOT want that group of mercs, assassins or army/militia come by and take you down. They do not want to have to reload only to get killed. They want their cake and the ability to eat it too. I have zero issue with options. As long as these come with consequenses. A smart man can illude consequenses for a long time. A lifetime perhaps. A nitwit who kills on a whim? Not so much. I'd beg to differ. Kony is a vile man (extremely so) but he is small potatoes. He isnt a Stalin, or a Hitler. He isnt a Thomas Jefferson. And yep, man does evil things, no question. But there are usually consequenses, and the people who purpetrate evil successfully are usually cunning or smart about it and do it on a very limited scale. The only time consequenses are avoided is if you are a head of state or someone with sufficiant power and popularity to rewrite history to your own liking. Kony will be relegated to the shame and horror pages of the Historybooks. Guys like Jefferson and Stalin are still quite popular in their own nations despite history and the obvious facts. Successfull evil is able to purpetrate evil on a massive scale. Its able to wipe out entire ethnic or social groups. It is able to escape more or less completely any consequenses and do so for a lifetime. We are seeing it in these days where a man who took the hippocratic oath is causing wholesale slaughter against his own people. Sure he will also end up as a "villain" in the history books, but in another time and certainly if he succeeds in stifling the rebellion his own history books will vindicate him completely. Its a bit crude to relegate a measure of evil to "numbers", Ill grant you that, but unfortunately I dont see any escaping it. Personally I do believe that smart evil doesnt kill people unless it really serves a purpose and that you can get one hell of alot further with the love and respect of your people than with fear. But fear does work. And in that sense, numbers do play a role. No matter how it might seem.

Ofcourse. However the above is an example of hamfisted, ignorant and selfish evil. Its easy to place in a "black and white" context. It requires no real reflection or thought to condemn it. The above is how most percieve "evil" and it is terribly simple. Its also rarely the evil that is the most successfull. The more successfull evil we see in our world is the one where evil camouflages as good. For instance if I were to play an "intelligent evil" Lawfull Evil character, my outward appearence would be close to, if not identical to, Lawfull good. Its "Palpatine" before he becomes "the Emperor". And even if the above were true (IE strengthening his position) some organisations you dont leave unless you are dead. Some organisations you either live up to your reputation or die horribly. Does it make it better? No... perhaps not. But if you have the choise between seeing your wife and children killed and killing someone else, most opt for what is behind door number one.

So... there can be an absolute void of morality if desperation and grime dictates it? I know people who would argue against that, but I do actually like the notion, because as I see it, a void where the terms "morals and ethics" cannot be applied, is indeed gray. If you act out of nessesity you can still do morally and ethically questionalble things.

Is it evil to kill a good father? If he tried to take your food? If you needed to take his childrens food for your children? If you killed him because he killed yours? There are alot of options for making the good seem significantly less good, and the evil significantly less evil. A guy mugging you in a slum because you flaunt your touristy crap and stick out like a turd in a punchbowle, might need that camera and that watch to feed his kids. That you might get a one lid appartment with a room isnt really something that concerns him. He needs to feed his kids. I wouldnt blame the guy. Id do whatever it took myself. There is lots of potential for gray.

The problem with evil is that it is usually portrayed as hamfisted, moronic idiots who endulge in pointless cruelty and put way too much trust in halfwit henchmen. And if you look at the word and its history, the most evil men have been anything but the above. The "smart" and "cunning" options are usually the "good" ones. The "Evil" ones are usually shortshighted and blunt. That reeks to high heaven of lazy writing. And yep, ME3 was teeming with it. Even the mere concept of evil is skewered. We are so used to the "white" (good) that when we see the "gray" (morally questionable) we percieve it as the deepest most horrid black (evil). There are few shades of gray and certainly never a "rainbow of colours" between black and white. Its the primary reason why I enjoyed Torment so much. It started in the gray, and never really left.