Cantousent

Well, whatever happened previously in the thread, I want to show no hard feelings. I'll gladly take part in the next festivus or whatever. Hell, if I were an atheist, I'd celebrate "randomness" and then have an excuse to indulge myself in a drink every day. Seriously, just remind me when the next agnostic/atheist holiday hits and I'll join in. Damned good excuse to party. See, there's your reciprocity. You celebrate Easter without me without believing in Jesus the Risen Lord (or Jesus the layer of chocolate eggs) and I'll celebrate randomness on my terms.

You must be a blast at parties. Have a good day. I'll try not to tell you when I pray for you. :Cant's bemused smile icon:

I've got a pretty good rig right now. Link away.

Wall to wall Catholics at the church today. I should bring this up in the morality thread. Is it good that so many people felt like attending church today or bad that the place was such a hazzard in case of fire? Hmmm. I tell you what, Wals, I'll pray for your mom. If you'd prefer, you may think of it as meditation or well wishing. If that doesn't work, pretend I turned a cold shoulder. :Cant's tongue in cheek grin icon:

I've only read the first few and last few posts, but there's one good thing about being spoiled, Jags, I'm greatly intrigued and will now likely buy the Witcher.

Careful with the bunny, my toothy friend. Thanks for the restraint, Sand. I hope you have a good day. Just pretend it's a regular ol' day and enjoy it! As for you, Gorth.... I'll have to wait until I'm back home to REALLY address that cognac. Save some for me. :Cant's broad grin icon:

Happy Easter everyone! If you're Christian, go to church. If you're not, observe the day in happiness and peace. No matter who you are, it's a great excuse to visit friends and family, have fun, eat a big dinner, and maybe even indulge yourself in a drink or two.

Then you should go ahead and help Jediphile start that Exalted group. I guess the big question is, is it possible to find willing folks who are familiar enough with the Exalted rules to help us newbies. Hmm, Spider? You're a patient guy. At least we haven't scared you away. Maybe I'll start an Obsidian forums Exalted thread. ...Or someone else could try to round up folks for it. I'm still in Virginia.

Thanks, Enoch. We did, in fact, eat at Pierces today. I thought it was going to be a sit down dining experience. I was surprised to see that it's kind of a combination of fast food and sit down, with no waitresses, but tables. The place was PACKED. The BBQ (not grilled, this stuff was BBQed).... wait, where was I? Oh yeah, the BBQ was great. The wife says the best she's ever tasted. (Ungrateful wretch. Aw, hell, it really was great stuff though.) I especially loved the cookies. I mean, wow. Awesome! We also hit Jamestown today. Who cares about history when you've got food? haha Thanks for the tips. If anyone else has any suggestions, please let me know. :Cant's well fed grin icon:

What was the problem? From what I can tell at an admittedly cursory glance the differences seem very minor. The biggest problem with switching to Exalted it that there is a huge backstory with WhiteWolf giving very little help to the GM as to how much the characters know... I think the differences in most editions of any particular RPG might seem minor at a cursory glance, although I will concede that 3.x was a big departure and that, in my opinion, would have been easier to note. Nevertheless, even minor changes usually make a big impression to folks who're immersed in a ruleset. I wish I could get a chance to try exalted. I move around so much, I have a hard time getting a regular group going for anything. I think most folks were enjoying the DnD session we scheduled here, but I just couldn't dedicate enough time to run it. You should try to put together a small online Exalted game. I know we've had some rough spots in the past, but I'd love to put those behind us and it would be great fun to sit in on a session as a guest and see how the game goes. I know there were folks who wanted to get a game going if they could just get a DM to run the campaign. :Cant's wink and grin icon: Plus, there's a lot of online resources available for running various games.

I've been thinking about this thread since you posted in it, Slikster. I don't think I can add anything substantive at this time. There's a reason for this. I've only completed the game on the QA builds and I refuse to give the nitty-gritty specifics until I've played the full version. Did I buy the full version? Of course! Unfortunately, I bought two as gifts and do not have one of my own. I was under the impression that Obsidz would send me a copy of the game, which never arrived. As a result, I've been waiting to borrow one of the games I've lent. I guess I could go out and buy a third copy, and it's worth it, but I was actually a bit irritated that I never received my free copy. I know it's such a small thing, but I bought two boxes and gave them away because I thought I'd receive one. On the other hand, Obsidz did send me three T-shirts. Go figure. Ah hell, I'll probably buy the game when I get back home at the end of the month. I've been planning on borrowing one of the games I gifted but the people to whom I've given copies assure me that they're going to be playing it for some time to come. Rat bastards. So, I'll probably have more to add to this thread in early April. I appreciate the kind words at any rate.

I think Spider hit the nail on the head. He often does. I think it's a testament that 3.5 has done well that WotC is pushing a new edition. Frankly, I'd rather have a radical reinvention of the rules than more extraneous materials. That's true even if I don't like all the changes in each edition.

Here I am in Williamsburg, enjoying some of the historical landmarks of our earliest colonial days. I want to share something of the experience with you, my fellow forumites, and so I thought I'd drop a line. Unfortunately, I don't have any internet connection in my room, and so I haven't been able to post a log of my travels. However, I'm also afraid I'll be too lazy to post it later unless I promise something now, so I'm creating this as a place holder. I always find a lot to enjoy wherever I go, but this trip outshines both Napa Valley and England for one reason in particular... only my wife and I came this time. I've taken several photos to share already, and the experience has been excellent so far, from the re-enactment of Washington's speech to the continental army to rummers. We managed to catch dinner at the Kings Arms Inn last night. Wonderful food, but expensive (for us). We ran a little late yesterday, and so we're going to return to do more stuff in Historic Williamsburg. I've been around Virginia a bit, but I haven't had the chance to vacation in the past. Also, vacation has given me a chance to catch up on correspondence, but that will have to wait until I have an internet connection.

I actually looked forward to 3rd edition in a way I do not look forward to 4th edition. For that reason, I was glad when BIS changed the rules to 3e. Overall, I was quite happy with IWD2. The series is one of my favorites. If we were getting a new DnD game from Obsidz and they decided to change over to 4th edition, I'd probably still be happy because, no matter what problems they face in moving to 4th edition, it's a good way to see a lot of the basic design in a new DnD edition. Something as simple as character creation can tell you a lot about the PnP design. And that's assuming that the electonic game won't be able fully to simulate the table top game. It never can.

I believe Sawyer's integrity is well established. Edit: In reading this, I believe that my furhter comments regarding extraneous material might be best reposted after I've had some sleep.

Have you ever had a discussion with Sawyer regarding IWD2? I'm asking because he's always been open about what he thought BIS got right and wrong in IWD2. I think it's just as bad to target him because he's a designer as it is to fawn over him for being one. He's always played it straight and I think he will now. I don't know why you're disgruntled. Hell, maybe you're a scorned ex lover. I dunno. All's I know is that I trusted him to give me his honest opinion. If his word doesn't suffice for you, don't listen to it. BTW: by pulling a punch I mean softening criticism of a product or design. I don't mean design itself. It's a pretty common idiom and I didn't coin the term myself, you understand. So, when you bring up a particular design you didn't like and equate it to pulling punches, it's kind of like I said, "Have you ever known the guy to beat his wife?" and answering, "Sure. He didn't claim $10,000 of his income. I'd call that beating his wife right there." EERRRRRRRNNNNN wrong answer. Sawyer has suffered a lot of harsh criticism over the years. Hell, some of my praise counts as such. ...But I've never known anyone from Gromnir to Sand to say that Sawyer didn't play it straight. By playing it straight, I mean giving honest and open opinions within the confines of his position. Please don't respond by saying you saw him double park.

Okay, then I'll change gears. I tend to avoid the hypothetical because I tend to be more interested in policy. Of course, I'll concede that policy, at some point, will be decided on a combination of practical issues combined with ideological conviction. As far as my statement goes, I don't believe it's a cop out. I'm merely arguing that where we currently stand is a reasonable place in my opinion. This is because, on the one hand, ideology urges us to travel further towards an extreme but that the destination is out of our reach. At the very least, it is out of our reach at this time. We cannot, at this time, pursue your extreme ideology because it's impractical. Economically and culturally, there's not chance we'll take the extreme view. You didn't say we should do away with animal cruelty. You said that the only reasons we eat meat is because it is culturally ingrained in us. That's not quite the same thing, at this time, as saying that judging other humans by the color of their skin is bad. At some point, it was not feasible to enact policies to combat racism. At some point, the bulk of political power arrayed itself and policy changed. However, you're the person to argue the extreme view. You pointed out the incongruity of human opinion. I merely pointed out that this incongruity is going to be in place throughout human existance. Since this is the case, I have confined myself to practical policy issues. That's pretty much my take at all times. I'm not always for the status quo, but I'm certainly not going align against it every time I sense inconsistencies in human culture. Maybe you have that kind of stamina. I don't. I want to pick wise battles that are meaningful to me. When I go after the status quo with blood in my eye, I want it to be for something more meaningful to me. So, call it a cop out all you want. Frankly, I've been pretty consistent when compared to the gent who came into this discussion arguing: "For me, the very notion that you can make a leap from attitude towards animals to attitude towards weak/retarded people is a bit of a stretch. In order to consider one's treatment of animals in the context of the humane, one must, foremost, establish an anthropomorphic understanding of animals, without which any appeal to human ethics or human feelings is utterly meaningless. A person or people's treatment of animals is therefore not at all reflective of that person or people's basic humanity if, for that person or people, such a connection is never made. To mistake this missing link as an indication that something is wrong in the membrane ignores the social, cultural, and personal constructs inherent in the debate." Perhaps you're playing devils advocate in your various views, but don't forget your client. He pays well, but you don't want to visit him to pick up the wages.

So your response to everything is just to accept it for what it is, conceding to human error? I could accept such an argument for practical reasons in real life, but in an ideological discussion, as these discussions always tend to be, it seems a bit unproductive to say, "okay, killing animals is bad but I'm fine with eating them - so what?" It's like saying, in the political thread, "okay, McCain is a warmonger and I'm anti-war but I'm fine with electing him - so what?" or "yeah racism - so what?" There'd be nothing to left to argue, expose, or discuss, then. At the most basic level, this thread is a discussion of policy. Ideologically, I might have any number of views. In reality, however, the discussion started with a news clip describing a culling in Asia. In bringing up the other topics, such as racism, you are hopelessly adrift. We're discussing one policy. That's been my consistent view all along. Namely, that the country in question has the right to cull animals. That's their choice, not ours. By deciding that you want to equate various comments to anything from militant animal rights activists to racism, you make a rather incoherent argument. It smacks of desperation. There are two main points I have advocated from the very beginning. We should not classify anything other than humans as human and that people have the right to protect their communities against rabid animals. Equating my views, which virtually always center on actual policy in these discussion, with racism isn't only unfair, it's ineffective. Try something better next time.

I was careful in whom I asked. After all the bruises Sawyer has on his face from compliments he's received from the back of my hand, I unabashedly trust his word on these matters. I figure if he can't say something good about the edition because of his position as a developer, he'll simply not say anything at all. Come on, have you ever known the guy to pull punches in regards to this stuff? He's brutal about his own work most of the time. I don't think he'd give DnD a pass because it's a sacred cow.

I agree. :Cant's happy to find agreement icon: Plus, it's not like I have anything against chimps.

Any observations on how gameplay is different?

What have I said that isn't logically consistent? You mention the analogy between eating meat and driving, but that's not exactly the same, is it? For one thing, automobiles bring real benefits to the productive operations of society (and even then, I do recall some strong arguments on this very board about pollution and global warming having to do with driving), but what does meat-eating do for us? Don't get me wrong - it's not like I refuse to eat meat, nor am I criticizing those who do. The problem, as I see it, is that there are contradictions in what people take for granted - in this case, the moral comfort zone brought about by the assumption that we're not slaughtering animals for the pleasure of eating them, which to me is one of those things that people never put much thought into but which, if they did, becomes incredibly divisive because the notion of sacrificing animal lives for human pleasure is so repulsive to some (hence why vegetarians feel so strongly about their views). The ethics of a society are never perfect, but it helps to know where the weaker links are. I want to push that line of thinking, and all my posts in off-topic are designed to do that. The fact is that virtually anything we do can be considered extreme. We drive cars that pollute the environment. We heat our houses to a comfortable heat level in the winter and cool them in the summer. We argue these topics on a message board using computers that waste electricity. How many people, vegetarian or not, who eat exactly the number of calories they need to live? At some point, any number of human activities are harmful not only to animals but to humanity itself. You bring up the incongruity within the mores of human society? What are you going to tell me next? The Earth revolves around the sun? Light travels faster than sound? Come on, Azarkon, save the speech from the ivory tower for someone younger. I know exactly what goes on in meat packing facilities. Haven't you ever seen the Simpsons? hahaha Seriously, though, I've hunted. I've fished. I've fished far too often. I don't tend to hunt or fish because, frankly, I don't enjoy killing animals. I do, however, enjoy venison. Lobster is great stuff also. Why don't you bring up the shocking news that there is incongruity between my distaste at killing bambi but my pleasure in eating her. (I can just imagine the lewd remarks now!) I don't have any personal animosity for you, but you're a doofus. Challenge indeed! As far as Lady Crimson and Sand, there are religious movements that have and do hold against killing anything. Must be tough to take an anti-biotic. If we classify those "cuddly" animals as human, especially based on similarity of genetics, then we're going to start down a long road. For one thing, nothing would embolden groups like PETA more. How many degrees different from humanity is a dog? How bout a racoon? Once we allow any percentage, then it will always be a question of what percentage. Now, I don't mind having separate rules for "cuddly" animals. That's the way of human existence. As Azarkon said, that's one of the inconsistencies of human behavior. We perceive something and that perception guides us. It's much safer for animals if they are cute and don't taste good. It's a lot better for them. The point is, as long as we don't push past the point where we actually classify these animals as human I'm okay. 'Cause, no matter what we're arguing now, once we open the door for that 2% chimp, we're going to have a lot of strangers in our house.

Your horse is too high for your legs, pilgrim. I've essentially agreed with you on this whole issue, but you're a bit off the wall. Perhaps I didn't use the word "needless" for your liking? haha Okay, Az, you're a great guy, but you've gone a little gonzo on the issue. What constitutes human need has always been a little prickly, right? Do I NEED to drive a car? Can I get by without meat? How cold can I go before I die of hypothermia? I would expect you to be a little more charitable with my comments, but I guess that wouldn't fit your didactic tone, would it? Well, okay. Let's just say that I think most folks can differentiate between animal torture for its own sake and the use of animals as a function of society. ...But, hey, we just need a few more clever rebuttals so you can alienate every single person in the thread. No, no. I'm not really trying to pile it on. I just don't think it's very sporting to take the low road in quoting me when you knew what I meant. Very well, you provided your own substitute and I'll accept it. "I'll agree with that, but that's because I live in a society that sees pointless slaughter of animals as inhumane and I'm a product of that society."

Aw, come on, Krookie. This is the interet. no one EVAR wins! :Cant's slapping Krookie on the back icon:

I don't live there, but the wife and I will be spending some time there this month. We're heading to Williamsburg and I have some things to do Virginia Beach. It's a great place, DC, and I hope you enjoy your life there, Arkan. :Cant's admiring Arkan's swanky pad icon: