Aegeri

Except unsourced, but they are in fact correct that the FDA have to regulate food safety, it is the departments job. It is also considerably different elsewhere in the world, but so far, guess what, there is NO scientific evidence at all demonstrating GE products are any more dangerous than normal ones. So your argument has already gone down the toilet anyway. But whatever, I've learnt not to bother with the tin foil hat wearers, believe what you want. I'll just base what I know on actual facts

Isn't it great when everyone can come off a winner? Again, anti-GE proponents are known for complete bullcrap, of which Mae-Wan Ho is a particularly good example. Of course, my sources are usually scientific journals such as Science and Nature, but I doubt you would be able to find anything as ridiculously abusrd as some of the crap you posted from an actually credible source from the likes of those. Of course, there was a massive 8-10 page article of GE crops, organic crops and many different economic facts in last months Science. I'm sure you would of found it if you had wanted to make a credible argument.

I could answer this, but our friend up there has had his tinfoil hat on for such a long time that I'm afraid it has cooked his brain, so it would be a waste of time. Oh well, I'm sure you'll be coming out with some rubbish about how the CIA created AIDs next.

That is about all I care about. So long as they didn't just directly port the game this time and land us buying the PC version (much later to add insult to injury) with an awful interface.

Which rules did they leave out that screwed up the balance and strategic combat aspects? This is an honest question, since I'm not too familiar with the PnP d20 ruleset. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The first is that the pen and paper has both vitality points and wound points, with wound points being equal to your constitution. Predictably, if you lose all your wound points you die. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, is that force powers drain your vitality when used. This helps balance them out a bit and make rampant force abuse harder. Finally, the weapons like blasters do MUCH more damage (a basic blaster is 3d8 compared to KotoR where they do a pathetic 1d8). This makes them actually useful, considering their generally poor critical hit values and lack of damage bonuses (unlike melee weapons). Just a few examples.

It's similar. But clearly as you have shown many times, it is not the d20 system. There are differences. Being "based" on something does not mean that it "is" something. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ironically, if it had used the D20 system things like Force Powers would be balanced, blasters wouldn't be perfectly useless and the game would be better balanced overall. And yet you want them to deviate MORE from the core D20 rules making it even MORE ridiculously imbalanced than it currently is?

Yes and putting in more than 20 levels would simply be POINTLESS. As it has been stated over and over again, there is NOTHING LEFT TO FIGHT after 20 levels in Starwars D20. If this was DnD, you could get away with it, because there is a large amount of monsters and similar over CR20 for characters to fight. This rarely occurs in D20 Starwars. Except for pure munchkin purposes, there is no need to go above level 20 at all. There IS a need to slow down the EXP system so you don't level as fast however, but that is a different issue.

I would suggest either chemistry or physics, especially with your interest in mathematics. However, if you are keen on chemistry and a bit of biology, do biochemistry which still has a relatively heavy mathematics component.

Man that post was painful to read. In short however, no we don't need more than 20 levels considering the most POWERFUL characters in Star Wars are LESS than level 20 to begin with. You don't need to be over that level, because it is already epic (by Star Wars) proportions. There isn't even anything left to fight at above those levels, unless you want to be taking out the death star by yourself or something.

The Sabers aren't actually very good compared to the baragwain assault blade once fully upgraded. Two baragwains and master critical strike gives you two attacks at roughly 10-40 damage (with strength 18-20, not hard to do actually with items) and a critical strike of 5-20 With an appropriately min maxed character you can do over 100 damage a round simply. You forget however that you can't get their criticals down to 5 on a D20, meaning you can do a critical hit with a Baragwain EVERY round for 20-80 damage on anything As for force defence, it's basically useless because the blasters are so crap it isn't even worth taking. If blasters were decent it would be worth it, but it isn't much, in fact probably isn't even any, of a loss. Force jump is there depending on if you're a guardian or not and it is more annoying than useful. Most good min/max builds are typically consulars, because the force powers like force wave are so incredibly good with that +4 DC and high wis/cha items (I got my wisdom in one game to over 30!), ESPECIALLY as light side means you won't even *need* a weapon. You can run around naked and kill just about everything, including Malak. But that is just an aside. Once you add in force valor and the stimulants the baragwains come out on top by a long shot (just as you have done yourself). I had bastila with the best lightsaber crystals in the game and two lightsabers with the best crystals available and +4 base strength (giving her 15 or 16 I believe). Even with stimulants and force powers on I still outdamaged her by around 40-60 damage a round. It is also easier (and cheaper) to get two fully upgraded baragwain assault blades than two lightsabers with decent crystals (meaning heart of the guardian and the other one, which I forget about because it isn't that great).

Toying with me? Does that explain why I was throwing him around like a **** and generally humiliating him with my force powers ALONE? Hmmmm....

KotoRs story reminded me too much of Baldurs Gate and other, SURPRISE, YOU ARE SOME REINCARNATED x, stories. It was well done however, if cliched and predictable. To an extent, but you lose a lot of detail in this area with the story and many players will not be able to get all of it and the like. Then again, it rewards replaying, where KotoR has zero replay value beyond a simple Light side, thug side choice.

I forget what they were doing, but they built a light that can pick up these odd luminescent patterns on various things they can stick onto it. Not pictured by him, obviously, is the picture of a rock with a similar pattern around it.

Except you've got a slight problem, I can construct DNA entirely without needing an organism at all. It can have the same sequence and function as any other strand that came from a living organism. In fact, some genes from entirely different organims, even from primitive ones like anthozoans, will build the same structures when placed into an entirely different animal. Again, there is no such thing as DNA belonging to any specific organism, it doesn't.

The problem you will find with the general public, is they don't get the idea that DNA is JUST DNA. There is NO such thing as 'frog DNA', 'Elk DNA' etc. It is just pretty much all the same molecule that has been conserved throughout evolution and ends up doing a pretty similar job. Actually we know ****loads, more than you are probably even remotely aware of. What can be done with genetics today, eclipses what knowledge we had even 5 years ago. The main risk to people from any GE product is fairly straight forward, and well understood anyway. Essentially the new protein may be allergenic, and so may make that GE variety unsafe to eat for a small minority of people. However, these problems never really come up at all, except with already known allergens such as from peanuts (which we are ironically using genetics to find out WHY they are bad). For the most part however, I'm still wanting a SINGLE SENSIBLE explanation or point that would give a GOOD reason why a GE variety would be suddenly rendered unsafe to eat. What is your evidence that organisms cannot exchange DNA anyway?

That is quite the witty response (and tough to answer). I'll fend off your question with a question: Which one are we talking about? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, I know 7,8, and 9 best, so I'll say them. I can't defend well what I don't know well. Though, I could go with all of them and still be relatively safe... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not really. Final Fantasy 8 is an adventure game, hell it isn't even much of a game at that. Although I know the game does become more non-linear and open ended near the final 3/4 mark, the game is far too full of cutscenes. Basically like playing in a choose your own route movie. I haven't bothered playing Final Fantasy 9 yet. 10 is alright, but you don't have a heck of a lot of control in what goes on in the game, though it has some brilliant set piece combats. Final Fantasy 7 I would say is an RPG, but the other games would be more like adventure games more so than RPGs (again, as choice is rather limited and the game is more about power leveling). A couple of the Final Fantasy games do come close, but few have dramatic choices that affect the game world in any way at all (aside from the obvious, which is the main plot of each game, but that isn't a choice now is it?). The older Final Fantasy games are still better than the newer ones though

This thread is on a new level of pain beyond any known form of PAIN.

That is quite the witty response (and tough to answer). I'll fend off your question with a question: Which one are we talking about?

Commander13, although I can no longer be sure of anything these days, I believe I was saying you're right. KotoR is more story driven, but it could have easily incorporated more player choice and FAR less railroading easily. You can have a very good plot but still allow the players decisions to impact the game world in major ways. That is merely brilliant instead of just 'good' design.

Correct, I did as it is quite important in discussing that. I also mentioned Dantooine being annihilated as well, which has very similar connotations. Which, as noted by TWO people now, is a straw man fallacy, because it had nothing to do at all with my point. I fail how the quoted statement even implies I wanted to change Taris being destroyed, it is merely to illustrate that X event makes Y choices irrelevant, because X event basically makes all of Y decisions ultimately mean nothing (same conclusion either way). If so many of X decisions are about keeping people alive (or not) and then someone comes and kills all of them for you, it DOES mean that decision means nothing. Again, because you WILL NOT GET IT (And this has to be deliberate), I just want my choices to affect the GAME WORLD. Again, to quote this brilliant summary of many of my arguments (and how others evidently feel): That is it, any thing else you say is either a strawman, irrelevant or both unless it actually addresses that issue. We used to call those games adventure games back in the day

Yeah, I noted that as well. This is a great summary of my argument (and others it seems).

I thought what I wrote was perfectly intelligent, I guess it must be stupid then. Hurrr hurrr hurrr I guess. I did the first time, you just didn't bother reading what I wrote and then put words in my mouth. This is your second strawman, it is plainly put up there for you to see what I wrote. I merely ask that the choice has an actual effect. Again, you strawman my argument. Read what I wrote, I simply stated the reason why the choice is meaningless using the fact the planet is bombed to oblivion as evidence. It happens to be very understandable: A] Where I am coming from, and B] What I am meaning by saying I want MORE choices that affect the worlds and places I go to. Irrelevant, strawman 4, refuted here: Next. Wrong. Next. Wrong (I can quote myself all day!). Next. Wrong, I said it does so in only a few areas, but only rarely. Where as a large amount of choices in Fallout can have a huge effect on the different regions of the gameworld. I named 3 examples, 1 of which (the promised land in Taris) can be argued isn't actually a valid one. However, we are ultimately given no resolution on those events and it doesn't change my earlier railroading point either. Quoted just to point out this was in my FIRST post of the thread, where I came straight out and said it. Did you only just notice this in my last post, because this was in my first post of the thread! In the entire time you've been arguing with me, did you only just spot that I had mentioned these? Sigh, explained earlier. Yes, I know you lost and now here is the infamous internet, OMG YOUR SO MEAN BECAUSE YOU POINTED OUT I STRAWMANED YOUR ARGUMENT REPEATEDLY AND REFUTED MY LOGIC! OMG I GO NOW KTHXBYE, PS YOU ARE MEAN. I stated what my point was quite clearly, it isn't my responsibility to ensure you bother to actually read the posts of those you are debating with. As can clearly be seen, as you thought it was some remarkable revelation that I had pointed out some areas where your choices matter, I have more than reason to believe you didn't read the majority of my posts.

So by your definition, Fallout doesn't allow proper RPing either, since by your standards, choosing a different family to side with should DRASTICALLY alter the ending of the story. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Congradulations, you've missed the point yet again. Firstly, putting words in your opponents mouths and claiming they said something they did not is an argumentative fallacy, commonly called a strawman. Please refrain from doing it, it just makes you look daft. Secondly, the point is that what family you choose ultimately affects the world around you AT THE END OF THE GAME. Unless you haven't bothered playing Fallout, you would realise that what decisions you make DO affect the end, because what you do has a direct effect on the resolution of many events and places. For example, what family you choose in Fallout 2 DOES affect what happens to the gameworld and is very much a part of the games overall story. Again, your choices have made a difference and your actions have left a result on the wastes. In KotoR, your actions are for the most part completely meaningless until the temple. If you help the vulkars it is irrelevant, because in the end both gangs are destroyed. This is much like in Fallout where despite your actions, the Hub is ALWAYS destroyed by the remaining mutant army. Then again, Fallout STILL allows far better flexibility, as your choices have meaningful results to the remaining areas in the game, such as junktown, shady sands and other places. Thirdly, you again deliberately try and confuse what I've been saying with the overall plot story arc. This is acceptable, because the only way for you to defend your (failing) position is to attempt this strawman, which I shall now refute. Firstly, what I said had nothing to do with the overall plot arc, merely that my actions did nothing of any particular note, because everyone on taris is destroyed (many other examples however). This is my original statement Effectively this should of been simple enough for you to get the first time, but evidently not. My entire point is, that your choice to support one or the other gangs is rendered meaningless by the fact they are both (ultimately) reduced to ashes by the sith fleet. Despite who you ultimately decide to kill off (and there are no other resolutions btw, you pretty much slaughter your way through one or both gangs), they are killed ANYWAY by the fleet. In other words, what you did has no effect on the gameworld or the individual planet. As I said in my basic example, if you aided the Beks (who are clearly a bit saner than the vulkars), then a potential resolution could have been that the undercity became a refuge for many from the oppressive sith occupation or for aliens from humans xenophobia. This would of actually been a RESOLUTION, and would of affected the gameworld and ultimately the ending story as your actions come to a tangible result. As mentioned earlier however, again, your choice is rendered meaningless by the planets destruction. You might as well have chosen to do nothing. As I already noted from earlier, KotoR does have such choices that (ultimately) mean something. Not very many of them, but it does. I'll also extend this to a third choice, where you can decide if the Wookies get their freedom or not. The problem lies here with the fact we are not told the resolution to these choices, and hence what overall effect the character had on the rest of the universe. This is where Fallout shines, as what you decided to do ultimately has a lasting effect on the gameworld, both from the main story arc AND from your minor choices in the game. Which, makes your entire point wrong and your strawman is thus defeated. If you reply, please actually argue my points and not whatever crap you decide to make up and say is my argument (IE another strawman).