Cantousent

Hey, give an old man a break. I was hitting on the kid. I was saying she's a cute kid being stalked by mean ol' juggernaut. I mean, I was just sayin'. :Eldar's trying to live down his reputation as an old lech icon:

Anyhow, Kitty Pride really is a cutie. That mean ol' Juggernaut simply can't hurt her, I know it.

That's what geniuses like Einstein and Newton used to do... and it led them to produce some of their finest works. Not a good argument for recreation... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> An entire lifetime spent without sleep? Not much chance. The point is, all humans require both sleep and recreation. The fact that some humans are able to deny themselves both sleep and recreation for short (and I mean short) periods of time only serves to highlight the necessity of sleep and recreation. Furthermore, what serves to transcend waste and move into useful? If it's just something as simple as surviving and procreating, then both Einstein and Newton wasted their time. Is it the advancement of knowledge? Is writing the great American novel a worthy endeavor while writing a six dollar fantasy novel a waste? Aristotle suggested that the good man played so that he could work. A less good man works so he can play. Let's take our friend, Newton. I'm a great admirer of Sir Isaac, but he had all sort of controversial ideas. For example, he not only believed in God, but he devoted quite a bit of energy arguing for God's existence. Is that a waste of time? Perhaps Newton could have contributed even more to science if he had not suffered from a mental breakdown. Did he inflict his mental breakdown on himself by refraining from recreation and sleep? The point is, humans need recreation and sleep. We can, for short periods of time, maybe days, refrain from sleep, but it is a necessity and we will eventually sleep, whether we so desire or not. Our minds work best with some recreation, or at least the promise of recreation. Gaming isn't a waste of time. ...But arguing that gaming is a waste might be a waste. Arguing that gaming is not a waste of time is, for me, recreation. hahaha

I agree Ginthaeriel. There are ways to use alignment that make it more palatable. This is where folks who generally agree that alignment is bad disagree on the fine points. I liked the alignment system in PS:T whereas I tend to dislike it. Maybe it's just the implementation, but I hate spells like detect evil. I hate abilities such as smite evil. Folks say that alignment isn't a straightjacket, but alignment invariably turns into a game of confinement. To top it all off, the DM is forced to judge alignment all the time. So, even though I don't like the alignment rules, and since they're such an integral part of the ruleset, I appreciate new and interesting ways of implementing alignment.

This is simply the most pathetic TOMBS we've ever had. I can't believe it's been around this long with only 28 pages! Good Lord, you Devil Dogs, do some damned reports.

Well, I'm too tired to play anything tonight, but I'll be playing CoH tomorrow. Look for @Eldara and maybe some of us can get together for some bad guy/good guy smiting.

hahahaha Gateway to Boredom. I love it. I'll have to steal that one. It's true, though. Time is a premium. I fall in that category also. I'd rather waste my time in the manner of my choosing. Nonetheless, the real problem for me is that I get emotionally attached to the NPCs. I hate seeing them die. Once Dogmeat took a liking to me, I couldn't bear to see him die. THAT was frustrating. Imoen lived through every battle. Sure, some jackass can spout off about real life or some other such non-sense, but I'm playing a game. Dammit. Real life can kiss my backside.

I'm going to be reading the first two fable books here. I started reading the first one a while back, but didn't quite get into it. They're loaners from a friend, however, and I'm determined to have something to say about them. So, I'll read. Then I'll return here to share my glorious insight.

Hey, I'd like to see what they did with my old friend the Beast. I'm a big Frasier fan. Also, I'm wondering if they develop the Dark Phoenix story line. I've been avoiding reading about that aspect. I plan on seeing the movie next week.

Ruby Tuesday -- The Rolling Stones bunch of rat bastards, but they had a good song or two. A kiss to build a dream on -- Rod Stewart The freak AND... The Trooper -- Iron Maiden

Well, there is that collaborative project you mentioned earlier. heh heh heh

You fools got the Alignment thread axed before I had a chance to post again. Now I'll have to spam this one! bwahahaha Oh, what the hell. First of all, Llyranor, I thought you played your alignment just fine. As far as death goes, PnP is different. It's a group thing, and death and healing and all sorts of things take place with the group. In a CRPG, the player is the only person who faces the consequences. In that regard, I agree with both numbers, Vol, and the others who say that KotOR style death takes away a substantial option for players. I tend to reload a lot when I play CRPGs. I don't just do that when I lose or when a party member dies. I try the same battle many different times and different ways to see which way works better. For me, these little experiments provide a lot of my pleasurable gaming experience. The KotOR style death scheme, although I don't outright hate it, does change that dynamic. At least, it makes it so that my tactics don't have to account for a party member dying. I don't mind it, like I said, but I can understand why others do.

If it fails to encompass the nuances, then why have it? I also don't count True Neutral, although originally it was literally a determined effort to remain in complete balance and therefore should be one part of the package. You say alignment is like a compass? It's not. DnD, for all you yutzes talking about it, treats alignment as the colored block you cite. It might give lip service to the nuances, but spells like detect evil/good give lie to that idea. On the other hand, I'll sit back for a bit. I have a feeling there are folks in this forum with much stronger feelings concerning alignment than me. It'll be entertaining to see if they join the fray.

I'm not equating alignment with reputation. I was mostly joking, but I am serious in that I'd like to see alignment scrapped in favor of reputation.

Don't get me wrong, if it's there I'd like to see it play a role in the game. However, I'd like to see it gone. There are 8 possible alignments for a sentient being? Give me a break. Alignment makes no sense. In a general way, we can describe each other as good or evil. Sure. That's not the half of it, though.

I don't know. I thought Call of Duty on Veteran level was pretty damned hard. Maybe if you've played a few times it's not, but it's damned hard, reload or not.

Hey, there was too much love. hahaha. I told you you'd help. :Eldar's sharing an inside joke with Vol icon: However, I am serious that I hate alignment. I don't see any real way to get rid of it, since it's established in the rules. It's embedded in the rules like a steel post in a foundation of cement.

Exactly! Start at level Zero! Bring the boy up from nothing. Well, maybe the girl. Face it, alignment sucks. Having someone tell me that his history makes him the paragon of goodness while he acts out the role of a wretched villain doesn't make him evil. It makes him crazy. Down with alignment! I mean, what the hell, why doesn't every town have someone who casts detect evil every day. Bring everyone in and kill the folks who glow! hahahaha True Neutral gives the designers a chance to show the players who's boss! Alignment is an illusion. The only thing that matters is reputation, and that should start out at zero.

Ah, but you're a new kid in town. Are you saying that your history in one town gives you the same rep in another town? The way I see it, you should start as True Neutral until proven good or wicked. Well, you could start out wicked, Vol. Come on, choice is always illusion! You aren't showing what you are. Alignment is nothing more than reputation. History? Give me a break! You can say what you want, but I'm not going to trust you until I see you in action. After that, I still won't trust you, but I might like you.

How about this <hello Sawyer, care to comment?>, I think it's perfectly reasonable to make everyone True Neutral. That way, you can prove what you are. It's easy to say you're Lawful Good, but actions speak louder than words. If you start a new game, you'd have to prove yourself. Isn't that like real life? You guys all love iron-man mode. I have a suspicion that Sawyer didn't like the True Neutral rule. He might be one of the folks who pushed to change it.

Ah, don't be such a sour-puss.

I say they create a game where you get one roll for stats, completely random, just like real life. I also propose that each player may only create one character. If that character dies, then the game uninstalls itself and the disk melts in your hard drive. Better yet, how about, if your character dies, a hand pops out of your computer with a big gun and shoots you between your eyes? That way, folks who win the game get ultimate bragging rights.

Personally, I don't find Epiphany any more irritating than the PS3 fanboys. Oddly, I don't have any problem with Wii fanboys. Maybe there are just fewer of them... *shrug*

Huzzah! I can sleep well tonight knowing that CoC is in my future. It'll will be waaaaay cool. ...Or whatever you people say when you're happy these days.

Yeah, I'm not big on resurrection or raise dead. I think it has a place, but it should never be common. It shouldn't be cheap, either. Most of all, it should be something a cleric only casts in the most dire of circumstances.