Gromnir

"Ideal, if you want gridlock and inaction." am hopeful you ain't being dismissive of the notion. the Fed govt. were set up by the Founding Fathers to be largely ineffectual and self defeating. even elementary school kids is familiar with the notion o' checks and balances, no? heck, even the most vocal Federalists of the post Revolutionary War period would be shocked to see just how much power is wielded by the US govt. of this day and age. 'course the fed has evolved. compare 1787 to 2008 not really work so well. regardless, there is surely still a valid argument that the ideal Balance O' Power 'tween the three branches is only resulting when all three branches is largely antagonistic. HA! Good Fun!

the smiley shows that you either do understand what that means, or that you is complete unclear... am not sure which. HA! Good Fun!

... at home and abroad there is much misunderstanding 'bout what it is that the President does and how much impact they really got. as a single and identifiable entity within the Fed Gov., the President has a chance to set the agenda... but not so much beyond that. from a practical standpoint the executive branch is a more complex and extended bureaucratic beastie than can be comprehended. the Pres can appoint whomsoever they want and usually it not make a great difference to actual day-to-day operations... and maybe they does a Kemp and goes native, eh? is Congress that writes and passes Laws, not the Pres. all those things the Presidents promise is typically no more than so much bs. free health care for all americans or lower taxes? how exactly is a President gonna get that kinda stuff w/o Congress. President can veto stuff, but is not President who actually writes or passes laws. is common wisdom to note that the Pres has relative free license to do as he/she wishes regarding foreign policy... which is somewhat true in theory, but less so in practice. heck, w/o a 9/11, bill clinton's foreign policy actions really don't looks all that much different from any other President post Jimmy Carter. he had lots o' troops overseas effectively fighting numerous small wars, had same allies & enemies, and encouraged/discouraged similar global economic goals. Carter is a notable exception to general theme regarding non wartime presidents in recent memory, and he managed only a single term. ... on and on and on... a President, with party majority in Congress, and a Mandate from the People, can set the agenda and gets Congress to pass laws 'n such. if a President is lucky 'nuff to be around when a bunch o' Justices die or retire, then he/she might also have some greater lasting impact on the Judiciary as well... but those Justices have an annoying tendency to thinks for themselves after they get on the Court. here and abroad people gets worked up 'bout President elections to a disproportionate degree. Americans probably should be far more concerned with local elections and elections to Congress as those is the folks who is likely to have much more impact on your daily life than will election of a President... 'less there is a war. btw, the difference 'tween Republican and Democrat in the American system is, more often than not, likes distinguishing 'tween two shades of grey. blue v. red? bs. european and asian scholars who is usually more familiar with systems that got dozens o' viable parties, is often dismissive of the Democrat v. Republican distinction. degrees of moderation? shades of grey? why even split, eh? if you like Presidential impact, then simply vote for candidate whose party affiliation matches Congressional majority... and hope that a large % of Americans follow your lead. Presidents who get in with a mandate and a Congressional majority are the ones worth noting... otherwise you need a big war. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

let Gromnir know what you think of witcher. a couple folks we knows says that witcher goes for some shock value during first hour o' gameplay... then settles into the same-old-same-old routine one would expect from an action-rpg. another drawback is that it is 'posedly a resource hog such that you will forget whatever complaints you had regarding nwn2. on the positive side, Di is playing long after the game were original released. you not gotta play the glorified beta version that seems to be common for many commercial releases nowadays. 'course Di liked divine divinity, right? am thinking that you is more open to action-rpg stuff than is Gromnir... though we did have some fun with mass-effect. regardless, let us know what your thoughts is. HA! Good Fun!

am not gonna quibble over minutiae on this topic as it really not matter no more. is never gonna be another commercial released game that could possibly face a 2e v. 3e problem. our input will therefore be unusually brief and to the point... iwd2 did many things wrong, though we has come to dislike it less as time and perspective has caught up with us. that being said, other than Targos and its associated quests and characters, the thing that we puts at top of our short list o' iwd2 positives, were the 3e implementation. for Gromnir, iwd2 had the most enjoyable d&d rules implementation o' any ie game. HA! Good Fun!

"Do you not remember me railing against how poorly the 3E ranger was front-loaded while IWD2 was in development?" in his defense, your wotc bashing were purged pretty quick... and then somebody from bis tried the old jedi mind trick on the board community in an attempt to make us all believe that you never did blast wotc in the first place. ... nevertheless, whatever josh's other faults may be, am doubtful that he would kiss wotc arse. maybe he is now smarty 'nuff not to public blast 'em on fergie's boards, but is also highly unlikely that josh does the lick spittle routine for wotc's benefit. HA! Good Fun!

"At face value, it's the sort of moral equivalence that equates stepping on ants to slaughtering people." how so? never made or even suggested such a thing. as we said, we eat meat and wear leather. nevertheless, how we treat the weak and defenseless says much 'bout us. you wanna create some kinda perceived equivalence 'tween ants and people? that is your problem, not Gromnir's. is the reason we find your bombing scenario laughable. you is trying too hard to interject something into observation that were never even implied. you wanna make some moral equivalence argument o' your own, but you is doing in a clumsy and bass ackwards manner. HA! Good Fun!

"You said that we can tell alot about a person/people by his/their treatment of animals." actually, what we said were that you can tell a lot about people based on how they treat the defenseless, and those weaker than themselves. Gromnir applied that pithy little bit o' tripe to People examples more than to Animals, no? you can't reach no conclusion based on such a general rule? no? well, then Gromnir clarification won't help none, 'cause is more a matter of conscience than anything else anyways. HA! Good Fun!

"Gromnir can clarify, if he'd like." already did. your bizarre link 'tween the mad bomber who bombs at midnight scenario and its link to where peoples fall on the side o' the fence 'tween what does and does not constitutes animal cruelty is... whacked. ... am not seeing a need to clarify further. HA! Good Fun!

what is your point? what is the correlation? *shrug* Gromnir ain't no PETA extremist. we likes a good steak as much as the next guy, and our closet has leather belts and shoes aplenty. kill animals for food and clothing? got no problem with that. when Gromnir were young we hunted a great deal... for food. gotta be some advantages to being at the top o' the food chain. even so, killing an animal is not same as torture. can accept the necessity or pragmatism o' killing critters w/o accepting inhumane excess. dog fighting and unnecessary cruel methods o' slaughter and a whole list o' other stuff that people does to animals on a daily basis may not be a matter o' Rights, but such sadism is offensive. if Gromnir is bothered by killing animals in unnecessary cruel manner, why would we thinks that blowing up humans with car bombs would be ok? no doubt you thinks you make a point. HA! Good Fun!

a capacity to understand and exert rights is no prerequisite for having rights. babies and people suffering from prolonged periods o' unconsciousness has rights... and Gromnir has met some boarder collies that is arguably as smart as vol. prove tomorrow that dolphins is as smart as people and they still wouldn't have rights. gorillas and chimps can communicate via sign language, after a fashion and yet they got 0 rights. why? one reason is 'cause rights... ain't. is a legal fiction that people, as a society, create and deem wholly necessary. the notion o' rights is one of humanities best lies. no people has decided that animals deserve rights. 2 times a year in the United States, the multi-state portion of the bar exam is offered to prospective lawyers, and almost invariably there will be 1 animal rights question on that exam. the question is always a trick question. no matter how clever the dolphin or chimp... no matter how cute the kitten or puppy, animals has no rights within any of these United States of America. however, it is always the way in which we treat the weak and defenseless that says the mostest 'bout us as individuals and as a society. anybody who has taken the most basic psychology course is no doubt familiar with prison guard experiments. and observe how somebody treats menials and you learn much 'bout them as a person. in spite o' what is Rights, there is always situations in which one person will have the ability and opportunity to mistreat other people, and how one reacts to such a situation is always worthy o' notice. how we treat prisoners and the retarded, and the weak... how we treat employees or those those who is defenseless... *shrug* animals got no rights. is probably good that they do not. nevertheless, it is Gromnir's pov that the humane treatment o' animals, while having nothing to do with rights, says a great deal 'bout us as people/People. HA! Good Fun!

am envious. 12-15 hours of our life were wasted playing how. inability to install would have been a boon (albeit one that we could not have appreciated w/o perspective.) go chew tin foil, or urinate on an electric fence... is equally enjoyable to playing how. HA! Good Fun!

silly? 'course it is silly. a bit like sheep arguing 'bout the morality o' wolfish behavior. sure, the predations o' wolves is o' intimate and immediate concern to the sheep, but all that dialectic 'mongst learned sheep not amount to a pot full o' spit, does it? tomorrow, you will still be sheep, and your most cogent and insightful arguments won't count for nothing if those wolves suddenly decide to eat you. nevertheless, given your relative impotence vis a vis wolves, it is of no surprise that you would be somewhat preoccupied with wolves and their immoral behaviors. move up the food chain a bit and it won't seem as silly... but if you is a sheep it is perfectly understandable why you is preoccupied with wolves. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna second josh's recommendation of pathfinder. #1 were ok, but 2, 3, & 4 were all pretty outstanding in very different ways. #5... given how much Gromnir pleads for moral challenges, shoulda' been right up our alley. we did like much o' 5, but it weren't as kewl as 2-4 for Gromnir. haven't played or seen #6 in the series as yet. some o' the iconics feat selections and attribute point distributions baffle Gromnir, but is not as if you gotta play with the pregenerated characters. rarely does Gromnir buy a prefabricated adventure. is only a couple o' wotc 3e modules we gots. however, we does have pdf versions o' all the available pathfinder: runelords stuff, and we is looking forward to crimson throne. HA! Good Fun!

"At any rate, I wasn't really talking about flying." am not surprised, but the thing is that 3d issues in open space is much more problematic than is the more easily plotted points on the map you no doubt created. dm sets up obvious places for ambushes and such ahead o' time, so he probably already knows relative heights and distances for fixed locations relative to other fixed locations. flight is different... is no relative fixed points save for the core o' the earth... and that not gonna help much, is it? figure out accurate distances and spell effects n' such is a problem when you add flight to mix, and if you is playing with a bunch o' Cal grads it can get annoying. *shrug* regardless, flight can be a problem for dms when players actually think in 3 dimensions. heck, given how much our players seem to abuse flight, we often set up encounters specific designed so that those players gotta stay on ground... for a change. HA! Good Fun!

"In cases where the situation becomes too complicated to track, why don't you just fudge it? " ... of course we fudge it. am not crazy. the thing is that eldar said he wanted players to think more 3d, and Gromnir has had nothing but fudge because of 3d. d&d evolved from mapped out 2d grids. as has already been noted, the 2d squares themselves cause issues for those concerned with movement.. hexes make easier, but you gotta fudge rules. wanna do z axis? fine, but as players learn what can be done with such an axis the rules force more fudge 'pon us. fudge it? hell yeah we fudge it... but we does kinda miss the simplicity o' d&d before more complex movement (especially z-axis movement) became the norm. HA! Good Fun!

am able to tell that you gots every limited grasp o' geometry... which is a good thing. is better that everybody in group is equally unsophisticated. however, all it takes is one joker to point out the flaws in a sand type approach... HA! Good Fun!

This is a respectable approach. unfortunately it not address any of Gromnir's problems. can have multiple critters and players occupying the same hex/square... at different altitudes and going in different directions. can be a chore simple to keep track o' folks with a 2d map. also, as noted previous, distance on the hypotenuse is annoying to us. take even a second to consider spell effects with a range o' 30' sphere... if you got multiple characters in air. can be a real pain in our arse. oh, and don't get us started 'pon gust o' wind (a spell we now see almost as often as fly) and some joker's suggestion that using vectors would be the only reasonable solution. HA! Good Fun!

really? 'cause Gromnir loathes 3 dimensions. as soon as players and monsters gain access to fly/flight, our peace as a dm ends. need a freaking degree in mathematics and a preternatural awareness o' spacial geometry to keeps everything straight... 30' on a 2d map ain't same as 30' at 45 degrees o' inclination. z axis nightmares. 2 dimensions is easy. 3 dimensions is a growing pain in our arse as movement becomes increasingly important. ... am gonna be so relieved when we gets a user friendly d&d mapping program that can handle 3d. HA! Good Fun!

the folks who write for The Enquirer is the kinda journalists who makes purposeful misleading headlines. is not a general practice 'mongst legit journalists. HA! Good Fun!

well yeah, you did. no frost giants in 4e monster manual #1 is not same as no frost giants in 4e. does anybody really believe that there ain't gonna be no metallic dragons in 4e? 'course not. is probably why you not say, "4e has red dragons but not gold?" is no statement that claims that frost giants is gone from 4e based 'pon linked material.. is only that they not in 4e monster manual. *shrug* is no real biggie for Gromnir. am understanding that death giants is important for another supported setting from wotc that we don't play. so, give limited 'mount o' space for giants in the new monster manual and somebody's fave is bound to get cut. similar stuff happened in 3e. had solars and planetars and hound archons, but no devas in the 3e monster manual. did that mean devas were dropped from 3e? nope. showed up in fiend folio. no frost giants in 4e monster manual. deal with it... 'cause given the huge volume o' d&d critters that has become part o' the creature catalog available to dms over past decades, we guarantee that more 1, 2, 3 & 3.5e critters will not be in the 4e monster manual than is. HA! Good Fun!

let us be fair. 4e will inevitably have frost giants, but the 4e monster manual will not. is leaving out such iconic d&d stuff as metallic dragons and frost giants from 4e monster manual kinda lame? yes. no doubt is simply a way to force folks to buy monster manual II. even so, is not as if d&d is abandoning frost giants altogether in favor o' death giants. is dozens o' legit reasons to be brassed off 'bout 4e... no need to create stuff. HA! Good Fun!

princess mononoke... not so much. japanese preoccupation with godzilla irritates us to no end. 'cause if you mistreat nature, eventually she will spit forth monsters to chastise you for your arrogance and your sins. didn't so much like the characters neither. spirited away, on the other hand, were fantastic. a bit obscure at times, but beautifully animated. a wonderful tale peopled by intriguing characters. sure, we still gets the near ubiquitous Nature themes, but those were secondary. didn't feel as if we had seen spirited away dozens o' times before, with ever so slight and meaningless variations in plot and character. HA! Good Fun!

It's impossible not to like Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann Feckin' impossible. hmmm. this is one o' those anime shows that were recommended to Gromnir. people always recommend anime to us 'cause they knows how much we loathe most anime. is some episodes o' cowboy bebop exceptions to Gromnir's no-anime rule? yeah, and sadly that is why some folks keep recommending their fave new anime to Gromnir... am like the life cereal "Mikey" kid, but for anime. is a kinda game for some people to find anime that Gromnir won't hate.

squares has one advantage: make it easier to draw very straight dungeoun hallways and make perfectly rectangular or square-shaped rooms. never underestimate sloth factor. 'course given the growing importance o' movement in 4e, one wonders why hex ain't utilized. in any event you can usually convert w/ only small difficulty if you got ruler and compass. HA! Good Fun!