Gromnir

I haven't played SoD yet, is the transsexual NPC in question one of the established NPC's from BG1 and BG2? Or a wholly new character? new character. minor character from our understanding. so, not Gandalf? so to be analogous we would be talking 'bout a sequel to lotr, with writing not based on anything from tolkien. so, perhaps the blue wizards get five minutes o' screen time and are depicted as indeterminate sex. instead o' being p00p covered like jackson's brown wizard, the blue wizards is revealed as genderless/transexual twins who finish each other's sentences... 'cause twins do that in movies. perhaps have twin 1 initial wear women's clothes and twin 2 wear menswear. when twin 1 is seen wearing men's clothing, the change confuses the protagonists o' the new middle earth movie. maybe the blue wizards get a couple lines wherein they mention how limiting is the concept o' gender. have blue wizards be portrayed by tilda swinton? how many movies has she done in which she blurred gender lines w/o it being priscilla, queen of the desert kinda levels. the horror. as an aside, am pretty sure jackson already did his part for the lgbt community when he made his original trilogy. HA! Good Fun!

*chuckle* the discipline handed down by the commissioner would be considered tame and extreme lax in any industry save entertainment and sports. the commissioner has also been consistent, which is actual a rare and admirable quality. sure, we thinks just 'cause somebody is truthful 'bout their indiscretions it should not result in absolution. am not a fan o' the commissioner, but our problem with him is that he has been too forgiving and not that he has been unfair. the evil commissioner demands honesty from those who play in the nfl? that is only unfair 'cause it is an alien concept to nfl players. and 'course hurl wouldn't have been the one to personal negotiate. that is the point o' having unions for chrissakes. the nflpa and the teacher's organization negotiate on the behalf o' individual members, and then the members Vote on whether to accept or reject the negotiated deal. nfl players negotiated and received numerous concessions. the players got what they bargained for, so why shouldn't the owners get what they paid for? owners gave up olympic-standard testing and numerous other demands. owners got a commissioner who could actual hold players and teams accountable. if owners can't have the commissioner as they negotiated, what then should the players need sacrifice? silliness. aside, but related http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2636100-laremy-tunsil-sued-by-stepfather-over-june-domestic-violence-incident a couple months ago and most folks assumed that tunsil would be the #1 pick-- were the obvious choice at #1 for the titans. is now a question regarding how far tunsil will drop... but he will be drafted and drafted early. the owners largely got their hands tied behind their backs insofar as drug testing is concerned. try and discipline players and teams must be a challenging task. HA! Good Fun!

star wars actual is a good example, 'cause while special effects and innumerable technical aspects o' movie making has improved since the 1970s, writing and story development... hasn't. citizen kane introduced a few storytelling advancements to movies, but for the most part, movies has not marked improved the narrative presentation for a long time. star wars is a good example. empire is considered the high watermark for the franchise. 1980. empire is 1980 and five movies removed? "I don't know about edgy, but it's accurate. Baldur's Gate was released in 1998, though. SoD is a 2016 game, so while chronologically it goes right before BG2, I would expect have liked the writing to be, I don't know, better than BG2?" as nepenthe observes, sod is an expansion o' limited scope that were shoehorned in between bg1 and bg2. heck, a considerable amount o' the bg2 writing were bad, but given just how large were the game, there were many opportunities to get a few o' those sidequest stories right. that said, our expectations for sod storytelling is reasonable limited given the rather significant obstacles the sod writerS faced compared to bg2 writers, but considering just how thin were the writing in bg1, we would expect sod improvements over bg1 if only 'cause we got a hard time imagining worse without it being camp-parody. but to expect better writing from sod Because 16 years has elapsed since bg2 is an odd proposition. compare writing in sod to the other bg game expansions would be less inequitable. then again, tob were a unique expansion in terms o' scope. tob also did not need bridge two already existing stories. still, compare and expect writing at least on par with the previous bg Expansions is far more reasonable measuring. we ain't yet played sod, so we cannot compare, but we would be more than a little unjust to expect sod to improve bg2 writing, and to see elapse o' 16 years as a reason for sod writing improvement compared to bg2 is ridiculous. HA! Good Fun!

*eye roll* the nflpa gave the commissioner power over discipline and in exchange they got concessions from the owners. to complain that the commissioner then used the power to discipline is ridiculous. *chuckle* can you imagine how hurlshot's teachers union woulda reacted if his reps had presented them a deal whereby teachers would allow individual school superintendents to have carte blanche over matters o' discipline? you think hurl woulda been in favor o' such an offer just so long as drug testing standards were reduced? 'course not. you think hurl gots more powerful representation than NFL players? how many o' us would sympathize with hurl if his union had negotiated such a deal? president and congress is neither good comparisons, 'cause president and congress got powers limited by the Constitution. the nflpa and the owners did not vote a commissioner into office. the nflpa and the owners Negotiated and Agreed. the players didn't realize that the commissioner would actual have the sand to discipline their behavior? HA! little sympathy from Gromnir. players negotiated. players got what they bargained for, so why shouldn't the owners? HA! Good Fun!

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. When you frame it that way, I can't help but think of a newly-crowned king...with the powers granted to him by his position, he might make a great king, even if he does wield absolute power and authority. He might also make a truly terrible one. The nonsense that was "Spygate" should've been warning enough to the NFLPA, I agree, but the following baloney that have been Bountygate, Deflategate, Noisegate, the Ray Rice scandal, et cetera...have illuminated more than enough about the "greatness" of Goodell in this regard. compare to a king with absolute power is unfair, no? what other job would we be surprised if an employee were fired for dishonesty? even for a majority o' contract jobs, lying is verboten. we are talking 'bout suspensions, not even fire. and why king? nflpa is the folks who, with a long history o' its members having faced discipline problems, made a choice regarding how much power the commissioner would have. if commissioner has kingly authority instead o' something less, it is 'cause the nflpa agreed that they wanted roger to be a king instead o' an impotent functionary. but the nflpa were far more concerned with preventing the nfl from adopting an olympics standard for drug testing than they was 'bout other kinds o' discipline. the nflpa were more concerned with reducing practice time. the nflpa negotiated. the nflpa blocked olympic testing. they got reduced practices. the owners, as part o' their bargaining, got a commissioner who had broad authority to discipline players for behaviors which could reflect bad 'pon the brand. the nflpa bargained for promises that the nfl must fulfill. why should the reverse not be true? 'cause the nflpa were a bunch o' innocent lambs who didn't realize what were the substance over which they were negotiating? HA! the nflpa were compensated. if giving the commissioner power to discipline were a mistake, then they should pay for that mistake. perhaps reduction in practices and largely pointless drug testing that only idiots fail were mistakes attributable to the owners, but they gotta pay for those mistakes. the owners are paying for their mistakes. the players can afford to pay for their mistakes too. can always renegotiate the cba, but what is the nflpa willing to give up to get reduced commissioner authority? ain't seen the nflpa offer any such concessions. HA! Good Fun!

which version? depending on who has written, you could be talking 'bout a man-hating psychopath whose only redeeming quality is that she makes star-spangled volleyball bloomers look good. HA! Good Fun!

the nflpa didn't care enough about the issue when they negotiated the previous deal. am guessing that the owners were surprised when the nflpa didn't bother to object to handing broad disciplinary powers to the commish. players were far more interested in reducing practices n' such. sure, the players has learned from their mistake, but some lower courts has, in our opinion, been a bit too paternalistic regarding the cba. the nflpa is a powerful organization that were fully aware o' what they were negotiating. terms agreed to were not unconscionable. have some courts effective rewriting the cba w/o compensating the owners in any way has always struck Gromnir as inappropriate. *shrug* complain that the commissioner has excessive disciplinary power when that is what the players negotiated is a ridiculous position to argue. am also not feeling bad for tom brady. the nfl commish can be a yutz at times, but he is consistent. based on past disciplines, if roger thinks folks is being honest, he gives 'em a slap on the wrist as long as the violator is contrite. beat your wife and agree to counselling? your penalty is gonna be slight. lie 'bout anything, make commish believe you are lying to him, and he is unforgiving. actually, we kinda respect that approach even if we do not necessarily agree. tom brady were clear obfuscating in regards to deflategate. the cellphone nonsense were enough to make Gromnir not believe anything brady had to say 'bout the issue. the commish were given broad powers via the cba to punish. so, no tears for brady. if you gonna hide truth, then man-up and take the punishment. give the commish such broad discipline powers were, perhaps, foolish. however, the powers o' the commish were negotiated and agreed to by the nflpa, and the nflpa were aware o' what they negotiated. were no chicanery on the part o' the owners. were no unbalanced negotiating. players is getting what they bargained for and what they agreed to. players is cherry picking sympathetic courts to do an end around on the cba they negotiated. from our pov, the bad guys is not ownership or the commissioner but the nflpa. 'course, we routinely use the UCC as toilet paper and labor law, from our pov, has not progressed since the magna carta were penned. touchy-feely courts protecting the poor nflpa from their own mistakes? bah. we instead follow the Aunty Entity school o' remedies. http://www.movieclips.com/videos/mad-max-beyond-thunderdome-official-clip-bust-a-deal-face-the-wheel-552463939686 HA! Good Fun!

am jealous. our penmanship is worse than that o' an alcoholic guy with parkinson's, current suffering the DTs, and forced to write with his off-hand, whilst standing on his head. is awful. prince had the universal respect and admiration o' his peers. is no higher honor for an artist. money is nice though, and prince got paid. have respect and money? if life is a game, sounds like prince won. HA! Good Fun!

congresswoman barbara jordan. 'course she is dead, and were lesbian, so there is some hurdles to overcome. HA! Good Fun!

pretty much every fun kung-fu movie other than enter the dragon fits into our sbig category. five deadly venoms? the last dragon? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiRHu1JjpI0 HA! Good Fun!

there is rumors that san diego is considering trading outta their spot. consensus is that the chargers believe that their greatest need is interior dl, but the truth o' the matter is that none o' the interior dl warrant the number three pick. buckner makes sense for san diego IF the chargers really wanna address dl needs, though buckner ain't a true dt such as is rankins, reed, jones or others who is projected as more mid-round picks... could be a bit o' a run on the defensive thick bodies starting as early as 11. would be kinda crazy, but is possible that san diego also trades outta their first pick in this year's draft. personal, with weddle's departure and river's endemic vulnerability, we see significant san diego needs at both safety and ot. unfortunately, tunsil's off-the-field issues is 'posed making a few teams wary and there is still more than a few gms who refuse to spend an early first round pick on a safety (or guard or center.) heck, rb has become a recent addition to the list o' positions that many teams believe is wasteful o' a first round selection, baring a walter payton or jim brown kinda talent. is likely posturing on the part o' san diego simple to see what kinda value they could get for their #3 if they were to trade, but there is rumors o' shopping their first round selection. is disturbing that so many first round guys may lose money for character reasons. most o' the ohio state guys is flagged as is the mississippi state and ole' miss players... and baylor guys and a couple alabama players and... *shrug* is kinda amusing, but a few o' the stanford and nd players gots a kinda inverted character problem in that their draft stock has been adjusted 'cause a few teams do not believe that the majority o' players from those schools is "hungry enough" to play nfl ball. HA! Good Fun!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuaG-TCpbtw billy preston is one o' the numerous musicians 'bout whom we is conflicted. also wrote this: why we is conflicted is 'cause o' preston's sexual assault o' a sixteen year old boy. similar issues with rick james... though for some inexplicable reason am ok with leadbelly's issues. seems that Gromnir is ok with murder, but draws the line at sexual crimes? too much law & order: svu? HA! Good Fun!

to be fair, am suspecting that the typical kentucky longrifle woulda' been extreme inaccurate at 400 yds, though hardly constituting an impossible shot. jack hinson, one o' the most dangerous snipers in history, utilized a customized .50 kentucky longrifle and some o' the ranges attributed to him were impressive if unconfirmed. HA! Good Fun!

What, an 18th century rifle? Story must be apocryphal, they couldn't hit an elephant from that distance. That made me laugh more than it probably should have well, especially since battle o' spotsylvania were 19th century and the rifled muskets during the american civil war were scary accurate. http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=525 if we were talking a non-rifled weapon from 100 years earlier, then zor mighta' been ... accurate. not your fault though. HA! Good Fun!

well, the Bill of Rights is kinda 'bout personal rights, so... *shrug* one o' the difficulties faced by those who wanna limit the 2nd Amendment protections is the fact that we is most often talking 'bout the kinda weapons that is ordinarily in the hands o' hurl's crazies, no? if Gromnir were serious wanting to organize a militia that would repel foreign invaders or to put down a whiskey rebellion, am thinking we would prefer our citizen soldiers to have something such as an ar-15 and an m1911 pistol, no? easily concealable handguns, on the other hand, don't sound like a militia weapon. personal, am much in favor of altering the 2nd Amendment. we wouldn't lose any sleep if handguns o' all types were having Constitutional protections eliminated. assault weapons? *snort* we pity the foreign or domestic force that would try and occupy parts o' west virginia or kentucky where every adult male over the age o' 10 has likely has access to a hunting rifle and a shotgun. not particular need handguns nor assault rifles to make foreign or domestic armies quale at the thought o' suppressing large portions o' US citizenry through conventional means. that being said, we thinks handguns, in particular, result in far too much innocent American blood being shed to continue defending their ownership and proliferation. we wouldn't mind an Amendment that precluded handguns... and assault rifles. however, there is a process for altering the Constitution. is not as if Americans is being held hostage by antiquated notions o' the founding fathers. don't like the 2nd Amendment? fine. change it. we got an Amendment process specific so that the Constitution may be changed. the founding fathers had foresight to recognize that the Constitution would need be altered. can't get the votes to change the Constitution? tough. work harder to get the votes rather than trying to do an end around on Constitutional protections. HA! Good Fun!

obscenity is not typical the issue. in Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim, the Court observed that “nude dancing is not without its First Amendment protections from official regulation.” however, most cities got zoning regulations. the State can place limits on otherwise protected speech as long as the limits is incidental or is tpm (time/place/manner) restrictions. for example, in spite o' protesters having the right to picket outside their place o' business on public sidewalks and streets, the government can limit nurses protesting in front o' hospitals if such protests violate previous established noise restrictions. similarly, while burning your draft card during the 70s were clear a form o' symbolic expression, such destruction o' the draft card were nevertheless prohibited as the law requiring a personage to maintain their card were an incidental limit on speech. am very much simplifying, but the typical burden the government must overcome when limiting protected speech is strict scrutiny, which requires a compelling government interest that is being achieved through the least restrictive means. strict scrutiny = government loss. keep in mind that expense or cost o' government limitations do not affect "least restrictive" aspect o' the test. tpm and incidental regulations is the way the government can limit speech w/o facing strict scrutiny... get intermediate scrutiny instead. so, State actors typical limit nude dancing through zoning restrictions or... required accessorizing. ... gets complicated (thank goodness, or Gromnir would be outta work) but what it means is that governments is frequent trying to find new ways to place limits on exotic dancing that do not violate the constitutional protection o' such dancing. Barnes v. Glen Theatre Inc is an amusing case. find a summary somewheres. the thing is, the 5-4 plurality offered little guidance for lower courts... which were good for folks such as Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

as some may know, Gromnir's business is Constitutional Law. in our field we is considered a brain surgeon, which don't mean that we is particular smart, but rather is an indication that we is highly specialized. am not just a Con Law guy, but rather a First Amendment Con Law guy. whatever you imagine regarding what Gromnir does, you is likely wrong. first o' all, we make little money doing the lawyer thing-- our money comes from real estate. second, our clients is typical the people you would consider crossing the street just to spit 'pon. we typical represent fringe religions (cults), gangs involved in illegal commercial endeavours, and strip club proprietors. our paying clients is not particular huggable. so what? the guys who run the exotic dancer business represent a considerable % o' our regular clientele, so we has learned more 'bout the trade than we might wish to. is also the reason that we do not frequent strip clubs. our moral compass is not what steers us away from strip clubs. if a woman wants to make money by taking off her clothes, then more power to her. unfortunately, the typical exotic dancer, even at high end clubs, is disproportionate likely to suffer from substance abuse problems. exotic dancers who has previous been victims o' some kinda sexual abuse is actual the norm rather than the exception, and such abuse is disturbingly likely to have been exacted by a family member. etc. every time we get a strip club case that lasts more than a couple weeks, we end up having to hear the statistics and the testimonials. like it or not, a large % o' exotic dancers is broken. am not interested in chicken and the egg debates. doesn't actual matter to us. that being said, the end result is that we cannot see exotic dancers w/o reflecting... and strip clubs enjoyment is predicated on the opposite o' any kinda serious internal reflection. ... 'course we got no problem lacing up our nike sneakers (shoes likely cobbled together by underaged labor in a se asian sweatshop) or turning on our computer (the components which would not exist w/o the effort o' exploited workers in sub saharan africa mining any number o' precious resources) so perhaps we is being a hypocrite. regardless, we can't enjoy our self (phrasing) at a strip club. is not that we thinks such clubs is inherent evil or somesuch nonsense and we sure do not pass judgement 'pon those who do enjoy the entertainments provided by exotic dancers. unfortunate, our job has kinda ruined the experience for us. go figure. HA! Good Fun!

benchmark for Gromnir is ps:t, but is not the romance story o' the protagonist that we thought were fantastic in that game. ravel's love for tno were distorted and hopeless and more genuine than any other crpg romance story we care to name. best crpg romance were ravel's love for tno. took most o' the game, were almost complete one-sided, had no sex scene, and concluded with mebbeth's wonderful post plane-hopping encounter. am not seeing how to do a decent tangential and optional side-quest romance. go through an entire romance story arc in a half dozen dialogue encounters? what a tragedy. romance ain't necessary for a good story, but if you are gonna include romance, you better make it central to the game story. game developers, understandable, wanna do multiple and optional romances in a crpg, 'cause choice is paramount. result: doom. "but let me assure you, this like any story worth telling... is all about a girl. that girl. the girl next door. mary jane watson." try and make a movie or game in which a romance with mary jane watson, gwen stacy and flash thompson is all possible 'til mid-point o' game (after which one is rushed into a predictable and puerile sex scene with said romance option) is not our notion o' good design or good romance. the problem for Gromnir regarding crpg romances is not that we hate romance. the problem is that we like romance. optional and tangential crpg romances is, by their very nature, flawed. fine. keep 'em optional so we need not endure such. you simple cannot give the requisite attention and depth to an optional and tangential side-quest romance to make it anything other than ridiculously rushed and immature. so either don't do 'em at all, or keep 'em optional so we need not suffer. nevertheless, the only way to do crpg romance any kinda justice, to have it worth exploring, is to make such romance integral and pivotal and essential. can't do half measure romance. solution: if you want decent crpg romance, the obvious way to include is to add such to games without making the game protagonist a romance protagonist. you can have a well-written romance in just 'bout any crpg just so long as the player is not part o' the romance. HA! Good Fun!

Loved Seven Samurai and The (original) Magnificent Seven. Hopefully Westerns are making a quasi comeback. am a fan o' both sevens... well, and seven too, but seven weren't a western. seven samurai were a kurosawa homage to westerns, so is unsurprising that the magnificent seven worked so well as a western. every few years we get a quasi-revival o' westerns. mighta' been the late roger ebert who observed that every american actor wants to play a cowboy and every english actor wants to play a gangster. denzel has actual done a pretty good turn as a gangster already, and he has done shakespeare. is perhaps 'bout time that he got a chance to play a cowboy. our anticipation for the new magnificent seven is colored by our preternatural cynicism, so is no slight 'pon the movie itself. aside-- is our opinion that tommy lee jones has been playing it as a cowboy in just about every film he has ever made, regardless o' whether or not he were in an actual western. no country for old men, while often getting the "neo-western" faux label, were clearly a western and tommy lee jones were fantastic in that film. no country is actual one o' our favorite westerns... evar. am doubting hollywood ever stops doing westerns... even after tommy lee jones finally dies. HA! Good Fun!

makes even less sense for the eagles when you consider how much guaranteed money they will now have invested in THREE quarterbacks, making it even less likely to be able to build a team around their new first round draft acquisition. even so, is a good move for the browns. feels unnatural to say, "good move for the browns." the real winner is manifested... and his chargers. laremy tunsil was not gonna be available at #3 if the titans had stayed at #1. the browns were obvious not sold on wentz as a qb, so the consensus #1 ol in the draft mighta' been gone w/o the browns-eagles trade. chargers is guaranteed to now have a chance to choose the #1 guy on their board, regardless o' whether that guy is tunsil or ramsey or whomever. great news for the chargers. HA! Good Fun!

Nah. You made a statement in your ignorance, that turned out to be technically right, just barely: a : more than one <several pleas> b : more than two but fewer than many <moved several inches> c chiefly dialect : being a great many http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/several "Several" writers. Not really, no. Just three, one of which did only additional (read: minor) work. And I didn't address the rest of your post because it's your typical contrarian hogwash that is rather devoid of substance: you said that the SW example was non-analogous (remember: your saying it is so doesn't make it so), and yet went on to claim that you wouldn't care if the narrative were good. But that's an irrelevant cop-out, because in this case the narrative isn't good. The onus is on her to prove that she can produce good writing. The rest of your counterexamples are also irrelevant as they pertain to original works, not sequels to well-established franchises, when the author is already under scrutiny for having attempted what a part of the original works' fanbase consider nothing but cashgrabs, or simply don't apply because there are no discernible political agendas affecting the final product. Another swing and another miss. Keep it up and you're going to pull a muscle. Again, whether you would be bothered or not is a cool story, but I couldn't care less. Your personal sensibilities and tolerance for arrogance are not a basis for anything, let alone the way other people should react to stuff. Talk about stupid and deluded. And no, I have nothing to get over. I didn't like Scott's statements. I didn't like the way they reacted to the controversy, banning people left and right and insulting critics. I didn't like that Oster asked for BD denizens to brigade themselves. So if they keep it up, I will simply not give them money in the future. Unlike you, who apparently have seen the need to give them money to make a point of some sort, I'm not losing any sleep over it. beat that horse to prove us right, eh? "several" in quotes and everything, eh? do a search o' previous page of thread for "several." six uses... all by #s. were not an essential point, but you were the one arguing it, incorrect, 'gainst yourself it seems. there were a few folks who got sod writing credits, but lord only knows why you would seize on such a point and fail at such in multiple posts. the rest? well, is becoming spam. maybe you should just try and get over it, yes? HA! Good Fun! ps we clear ain't worried 'bout phrasing

too bad kickstarters were after heinlein's time, 'cause if heinlein had ever suggested such a project and needed funding to get lotr rights, we would chipped in more than the $20 we spent on sod. heinlein "shoehorned" (HA!) his politics into all his novels... and he had terrible novels as well as great works. such a lotr project reminds us how much we enjoyed glory road. #s wanna quibble over a relative insignificant aspect o' a very long post... then can't accept when his correction is actual wrong? *chuckle* that "get over it" advice appears increasing useful. HA! Good Fun!

no real problem here that we can see. as you note, the sjw aspect is minor, which marginalizes whatever problem could possible exist. furthermore, observing that the inclusion o' new elements in an expansion to a game released in 1998 as problematic is a suspect proposition at best. is few franchises that do not evolve and change over a similar amount o' time. compare evolution o' james bond, battlestar galactica, star wars, etc. a developer locking self into decades removed values and influences would be foolish. "piggyback issues into a popular game series that weren't there beforehand," is clear not a problem for any number o' franchises. in fact, one suspects that failure to do so would constitute a much greater potential problem. and if one o' the many beamdog contributors threw in a "critique of fascism" on the scale o' the sjw elements described in sod, we doubt many would be concerned. if the addition o' new elements to the series amounts to "shoehorning," that is a problem, but the issue is one o' skill. but again, the problem, if it exists, would appear limited given the scope o' the sjw element actual added to sod. as for why we responded to #s, we made that clear. even underlined stuff as we know #s has a hard time keeping up with us at times. swing. we responded 'cause your star wars example were non analogous and 'cause, as we has said multiple times, we ain't surprised 'by the idiotic and overblown reaction, but we is disappointed. am also gonna suggest you take your own advice and "get over it." am not just talking 'bout sjw fixations neither. swing. aside: "Not even the political agenda, mind, but the high-and-mighty attitude, which is what has rubbed me the wrong way." phrasing. HA! Good Fun! ps and since #'s wants to quibble, there is an additional person who got writer credits on sod: liam esler. swing. miss. strike 3.

Source? https://archive.is/4HIow#selection-4325.1-4341.5 Everyone has a hidden agenda. Except me! - Michael Crichton Yeah... if only Scott were as entertaining a writer as Crichton was, though. Huh, that's pretty tame. "I like to create diverse characters" is hardly the same as "I'm going to cram my agenda down your throat!" But hey, to each their own. You're cherrypicking, but that's not even what she said. She also self-identifies as a SJW in the same post, and in this context, it's not a good thing. She's a Sarkeesian (of "disagreeing with me is harassment" fame) follower. But really, it's only "pretty tame" because you happen to agree with the agenda. I'm guessing that if some writer working on Star Wars VIII happened to be, say, a hardcore communist and defended his right to appropriate the IP to use as a soapbox for his political bull, you wouldn't be so cool with it. Because that's what happened - the stuff in the game is pretty tame indeed. She didn't really shove anything down anyone's throat that I could observe. From her statements, though, she clearly reserves the right to do so if she wanted. Are you surprised that people reacted badly? As far as I'm concerned, she's welcome to do all the "SJW games" she wants. She gets better at writing plots and characters and I might even buy some. not surprised. disappointed. again, throughout history, a considerable proportion o' entertainers has promoted some kinda agenda. *chuckle* a significant proportion o' entertainment has only been possible 'cause patrons has paid the bills for entertainers, and quite often those patrons got motivations other than a pure advocacy o' the artform. individual artists, free o' patron influence, is no less likely to have an agenda. again, we would be here prohibitive long if we tried listing artists and art that were promoting an agenda. is utmost naivety to be surprised that a beamdog writer is promoting an agenda o' her own through stories. complain that the beamdog writer's advocacy were crude and detracted from the narrative is a valid and reasonable complaint. is one reason we complete supported peter jackson dropping the Scouring of the Shire portion o' lotr from his movie trilogy. when writers is clumsy and inartful in promoting their agenda, we criticize. however, we do not simple reject a piece o' entertainment 'cause we dislike the entertainer's obvious agenda. we already mentioned the dallas buyer's club as an example, yes? dallas included more than a couple great performances, but we disliked the agenda. so? but perhaps we gotta embrace nerd culture a bit more to make a point in this place, eh? frank miller's politics is divisive, to say the least. http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/11/13/batman-artist-frank-miller-calls-occupy-wall-street-protesters-pond-scum/ frank miller has been unabashed 'bout injecting his politics into the narrative o' his stories... though is kinda amusing that before the internet were anything other than a mote in the corner o' al gore's eye, miller's personal political agenda were a relative non factor when discussing his stories. at the time of its publication, tdkr were judged on its own merits. ah, the good old days. is much harder to discuss tdkr or 300 in 2016 w/o having miller's politics become a pivotal concern. wanna discuss heinlein novels w/o addressing the authors' personal politics? go ahead, we dare you. am suspecting that it is gonna be difficult to find many folks who share heinlein's unique libertarian (borderline anarchist) politics, coupled with his advocacy o' a strong military and his clear patriotism. a free love advocate who made the terrorists his heroes in the moon is a harsh mistress, but who also were the first scifi author to have a novel on the recommended reading list at all three US military academies, were bound to offend many people. heck, God were the ultimate antagonist in heinlein's job: a comedy of justice. heinlein challenged his readers. heinlein were not afraid that his transparent political agenda had a tendency to offend. "if some writer working on Star Wars VIII happened to be, say, a hardcore communist and defended his right to appropriate the IP to use as a soapbox for his political bull," we wouldn't care one whit just so long as the narrative were good. heck, you actual observe that regardless o' the writer's claims, she did not actual "shove anything down anyone's throat." so, are we doing phrasing? anywho, 'ccording to #'s, there were no deepthroating o' the agenda and what sjw elements made it into the game were, "pretty tame." ... am not certain where is the justification in creating a negative review campaign 'cause o' a single beamdog writer's (of which there are a few) comments. we sure as heck do not reject entertainments just 'cause a contributor to the entertainment claimed that she had a right to inject sjw elements into the narrative. stoopid and delusional... and the real tragedy is that there appear to be more than a few stoopid and delusional fans, but as we observed from the start, we is not surprised. disappointed. HA! Good Fun! ps unlike bruce, Gromnir ain't an sjw. the tendency o' liberal media and hollywood to overcompensate in its efforts to protect the feelings o' every underrepresented race/gender/ethnic group makes our blood run cold. is likely folks are offended 'cause the george washington being portrayed in that amc tv show ain't a deaf latino woman... who engages in regular same sex encounters. we got no issue with challenging traditional roles, but frequent the results is so clumsy that the only rationale we see for having indulged such nonsense is appease the sjw nincompoops. am hardly a member o' the sjw army. even so, as we has said before, we hate lack o' fairness. beamdog and sod got treated unfair in spite o' our animosity towards most sjw advocacy. stoopid and delusional and unfair trumps our irritation with sjw overkill... and as the sjw elements in sod is admitted "tame" is hard to claim overkill.

good for the browns. bad for the world. am pretty sure that one o' the signs o' the apocalypse is Cleveland Browns making smarty personnel moves. 'course, am pretty sure that it is only a sign for the Church of All Worlds and most folks no longer grok Valentine Michael Smith. HA! Good Fun!