Reveilled

Oh yeah? Well...well, you're stupid!

Damn that's a confusing post! " Fixxored: Is that their job? To make Christian entertainment? Hollywood has always made challenging movies that upset all sorts of people, as well as lots of dross that plays to the middle ground and upsets no-one. The latter seems to be in the ascendency at the moment. However, some people just like being upset. It used to be the case that Hollywood movies recovered their production costs and made a profit based on US cinema tickets sold, with any international sales a bonus. Now they depend on doing well in Europe and Japan, and on video/DVD. Is that influencing them in a way that US conservatives dislike? I don't know. And you should've put quotation marks around that quote; someone will attribute it to me and think I've gone all crazy Christian conservative. It will play well in Europe, where exploration of the issue of terrorism is seen as interesting and useful. People feel instinctively that the Bush approach of painting all terrorists as evil fiends plotting our destruction for kicks is wrong, but aren't sure how to achieve a more nuanced and balanced understanding. If this film deals with such issues in an intelligent way, I'll be going to see it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, see, that's the thing; nuance doesn't play well on this side of the pond. If it's not a ten-words-or-less hardass statement, it doesn't fly. Certain sections of society over here are going to get very, very offended at the mere suggestion that acts of terrorism could ever be committed in a way that's portrayed as either good or simply ambiguous. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would imagine there is going to be some problems with the time scale. Harvest Moon works on an accelerated time which dosnt seem suited to an MMPORG of that nature. For example if one game day equals one real day then things are going to grow really slowly. Unfortuanely if say you have X number of days in a 24 hour period then your going to have to practically live there in order to feed your animals and water the crops. Automate that and you kind of miss the point of the game. Unlike games such as EQ where it dosnt much matter about how many actual game days are going by when your not online in Harvest Moon keeping track of how many days pass is vital. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What they may do is simply have time on farms only pass when the farm's owner is online. Alternatively, they might have several worlds where time passes at different rates which the player can choose to join based on the time he or she has. Thus, someone online every day could play in a world where seven in-game days pass per day, while someone who can only get on at weekends could play in a world where an in-game day passes monday-friday, and three days pass on each of saturday and sunday. And "hardcore" farmers could play a day a day for that authentic boring farm life experience. :D

Not if you pronounce it as the voiced labio-velar frictive [w].

Harvest Moon Online sounds like an MMORPG I'd actually play. If everyone gets a huge farm to themselves, then there should be a much lower population density in Harvest Moon Online than there is in other MMORPGS. For the most part, huge population density has always been the main turnoff I've found in MMORPGs. There shouldn't be several million heroes all hanging around in the world's largest city. Hell, there shouldn't be several million heroes hanging around on a planet! Several million farmers, all living at least a kilometre apart, on the other hand, sounds much more reasonable. I can hear the game in my head already... "OMFG SOVIET BOARD OF AGRICULTURE! PK! PK!" "collectivisation sux!" "STFU t0wnE!" "HOLY **** BIRD FLU DEBUFF WTF" "nerf the CAP!" :D

Nah, it's more like a big circle of electronic life. :cool: The first games consoles were just computers that would fit in your house without being prohibitively expensive. Then, as time went on, they got progressively less computer-like as computers were introduced into the home and gaming got shared between the two. Now, consoles are becoming progressively more like computers again, with hard drives, internet connections, add-on hardware, even keyboards and mouses. Eventually, a console probably will be a PC, and then you'll probably be able to mess with its innards to upgrade it just like your PC of old. And so will the cycle begin again. It's...it's like...everything's like...a big circle, duuuude. ^_^

Would it be better if we set the three-turn rule, but I kept a similar leniency about the rule as Mets does?

Woah. Been up all night, Volourn? That spelling is uncharacteristically crazy for you.

Hmm. Okay, we have a little problem. Basically, this game has no rules for handling dropouts. The rules of the game are pretty clear that the policies for players who don't or can't submit orders should be worked out before the start of the game. In OBS-1, therefore, I made the three-turn dropout limit part of the house rules. Archie, however, neglected to give any house rules. Therefore, there are technically no rules for how to deal with countries who haven't submitted orders. And thus, we come to the real problem. Obviously, in my capacity as GM, I'm going to have to set rules on this now, and those rules would be to impose a three-turn cutoff. Furthermore, given the manner in which I GM, there would have to be unanimous agreement among players on the introduction of this rule. Unfortunately, I'm also aware that in my capacity as the player of France, I'd vote against this rule's introduction. I'm sure you can see the potential problem with the GM expectation of impartiality this would cause. Thus, I'm going to call for a vote on this. If a majority of players vote for it, the three-turn civil disorder limit will be imposed.

I doubt fighting a cape will be very violent. Maybe you should become a bullfighter, instead? "

I do max HP at first level, allow rerolls of 1s at second level, and thereafter what you roll is what you get.

Pretty much what Steve said. Basketball is a popular game in terms of young people playing it (to the point where it was even more popular than non-american football at my school), but Basketball isn't seen on TV in the UK outside of sattelite sports channels and the very early-morning American Sports shows on Channel 5 (if they even still do that). Back when I was in primary, though, collecting basketball stickers for sticker books was very popular. I've been a nominal Spurs fan ever since I managed to collect the entire team when I was eleven.

Bugger. Finished.

On an only partially related note, isn't it a bit strange that we call the 5th of November Guy Fawkes Night? I mean, we wouldn't call VE Day Hitler Day, or September 11th Osama Bin Laden day. Unless, of course, blowing up parliament is meant to be a good thing. "

[quote name='

Nope, sorry. I've got the Steak Knife. I think it was Nurbs with the hammer in the supermarket. :cool:

Yes. In fact, the material of bridge in question wasn't mentioned in the module, so when one of the players decided to cut the bridge, I figured it should be a rope bridge just because that was such a great idea. Err, I mean

Well, if the headmaster in your school would bring you into his office to describe a horde of undead clawing their way across a rickety rope bridge towards you while the stone door through which you came slams shut with no way of opening it, then yes.

It's probably news to taks too, since he said the top 20% were conservative. " Conservative and Liberal are really awful terms to be using nowadays, as they're far too broad to place people in. Old small-government Republicans get lumped in with reactionary neo-conservaitves, while moderate liberals get lumped in with the far left of the Democrats. People should use more specific terms, like "Market Liberal" or "Social Democrat". They're still pretty broad, but at least you wouldn't find such extremes under the ideological umbrellas. Oh, and the whole red/blue thing is bloody annoying. The rest of the planet and even the US itself not so long ago understood that the people on the left are red! This concludes the tangenital rant on rather unimprotant things. We now return you to your previously scheduled flamewar.

Usually, I take the player into the hall and briefly describe what's happening to them. It's what works for our group, as the players often seem to look forward to their time in the hall.

Hey, that thread was fun! I enjoyed reading that one. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bleuch. First we'd argue over one word, then we'd argue over a word in the definition, then a word in that word's definition. Urgh. If it hadn't finished when it did, Meta and I would probably have been arguing in Proto-Indo-European eventually.

I thought an outstretched fist with the thumb inside the fist was the sign of mercy, while a fist with the thumb pointed toward the throat indicated death.

Oh god, it is, isn't it? In fact, Meta, forget I said anything. I'm not that eager to have this argument again.

[i suspect that ] You[']r[e] older th[a]n me [, then]. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That explains your grasp of grammar, then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, wouldn't his post indicate a poor grasp of spelling? In fact, your version of the sentence changed kyle's post from a statement of fact to a suspicion by adding in an extra clause, namely, "I suspect that". Indeed, by editing the grammar of the sentence and apparently seeming to correct it while instead changing the meaning of the sentence, would that not suggest a poor grasp of grammar on your own part? " In proper English, kotorkyle's statement would simply be "You are older than me", not "I suspect that you're older than me, then." EDIT: Oh, and you kept "you're" capitalised, puting a capital letter in the middle of a sentence for something other than a proper noun. Tut tut. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [*]grammar is [t]he study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences ... (etcetra), so No; Alright, I suppose you get this one. No, it's still poor grammar. You changed the sentence from an assertion about the relative ages of kotorkyle and gabrielle to an assertion about the presence of a suspicion about the relative ages of the two. The first makes an assertion about the ages, the second raises a possibility. Even if it's artistic liscence, and even if it was not done for any malevolant purposes, the meaning of the sentence has still been changed, thus there has been a change, rather than a correction, in the grammar.

I think it a bit unfair to label race as a "cultural idea" simply because it's not a scientific one (and to be honest, I'd take issue with the idea that science=DNA evidence, as race as the term is often used nowadays has little to do with DNA and much more to do with appearance, and while it might have little place in a science like genetics, I think it has potential use in a science like psychology). When you're describing someone's appearance, starting with their race is a much better foundation on which to base your description than the type of fingerprint on the left index finger. Similarly, when pursuing a suspect, the police are much more likely to find "caucasian male wearing a red t-shirt" useful than "brown eyed man wearing a red t-shirt". Race is also something which I think transcends cultures. (I imagine someone's already done the study which could conform or deny the hypothesis I'm about to make, but I wouldn't know where to look) I think that if you gave anyone in the world pictures of several people and asked them to seperate them into groups based on appearance, you'd find that they seperated those pictures into the same broad three categories that used to be officially accepted. We use appearance and categories to such an integral degree as humans no matter who we are or how we were brought up that I think calling the classification of individuals based on broad appearance groups a "cultural idea" is folly. Subsequently assigning preconcieved notions of something other than appearance to these groups, such as inferior intelligence or immorality, on the other hand, certainly would be a cultural idea, as those notions would vary between cultures. I doubt that the groups themselves would, though.