Amentep

True Confession: I've never seen the original because IT looked terrible to me when I saw the trailers in the theaters back in the day.

I knew THE HIGH CHAPPARRAL was a big hit TV Western in the US, but little did I know how popular it was elsewhere...

Heh, yes, that is a huge leg up. I worked my way through college and I'm still paying off one of my loans for tuition (10 years into my career.) I'm extremely thankful that my parents were able to help out with part of it. I would be struggling under even more debt without that. I worked my way through college (part of why it took me a decade to do). What they did though, was allow me to live at home while taking classes until such time as I could afford to move out. Which meant that not having to immediately deal with paying for housing, combined with starting out at a low cost two year college, getting part-time jobs and getting a scholarship, I was able to begin saving money towards being able to support myself when I did move out while also advancing towards my degree all the while not taking any loans out at all. Sounds like you also had a privileged background...you could stay at home much longer than others and hence could save more money which meant you weren't burdened and crippled by these excessive educational loans that the rest of us are inflicted with. Nice privilege there young grasshopper It was a privilege. One I'm thankful for every day - no matter how bad things are, I don't have to worry about financial debt from student loans that will never, ever go away except by being paid off. I just have to worry about everything else. It was hard being a teenager in college living with his parents (but not in the basement - thankfully I avoided that cliche ) until I was stable financially and could look at other options. But it was ultimately one of the best things they ever gave me.

Heh, yes, that is a huge leg up. I worked my way through college and I'm still paying off one of my loans for tuition (10 years into my career.) I'm extremely thankful that my parents were able to help out with part of it. I would be struggling under even more debt without that. I worked my way through college (part of why it took me a decade to do). What my parents did though, was allow me to live at home while taking classes until such time as I could afford to move out. Which meant that not having to immediately deal with paying for housing, combined with starting out at a low cost two year college, getting part-time jobs and getting a scholarship, I was able to begin saving money towards being able to support myself when I did move out while also advancing towards my degree all the while not taking any loans out at all.

My party brushes and flosses after each meal, they're just awesome that way.

^Even if you have a midichlorian you still can't explain how it works, why it binds all living things, etc. Its still mysticism (for all we know, high midichlorian count is an unsupported correlation that actually says nothing about Jedi powers). And frankly I think the world would be better off without terrorist attacks, crusades, witch burnings and such. Won't happen, but it'd be better off, IMO.

Some good points. I find that the more such absurd things as turn into a bear, women fighting dragons etc there is the harder it is to suspend my disbelief. This is how all fantasy works. I am sure you would find it hard to accept that your party can fly, use tactical nukes from their fingers, and morph to dragons at will. Its just to much. A cartoon. The difference between us is that my views (which are rooted in the real world) dont think all female parties are the ****. You are however so indoctrinated (contrary to how the real world works) with denying gender difference that you just dont see how absurd such things are Again, I have no issue if an all-female party (or even majority) breaks your personal verisimilitude - its your game and you should play it the way it makes you happy! If that means all or mostly male parties and females only in certain roles - the game supports that. And that's why I think these kind of games are great, you can build what works for you. And while I'll concur that the strength in the top 100th percentile man is going to be stronger than the top 100th percentile woman in real life, I - personally - don't have a problem with superior strength frontline fighter women in a fantasy setting, because its a fantasy setting (and at any rate, the top 100th percentile woman is still going to be stronger than, something like 80 - 90% of dudes anyhow when you're talking about elite levels). I'll also say, I have no issue with a game enforcing gender differences (there have been several that have given a +1 str to guys and a -1 str to gals; the biggest problem is the in game balance solutions to make dudettes still viable as party members are usually not well thought out and/or completely arbitrary). I know a lot of people hate this sort of thing, but I've never found it to break a game.

It doesn't work with all the secrets. It's entirely dependent on your mechanics skill. What you find without sneaking will be considerably lower than that. Yes, that was mentioned already, I was just confirming that it happened in game for me.

I dunno if it'll be any good, but it sounds promising.

If there was 1 woman for every 200 men in the military, you'd only need about 1200 men to make a 6 woman adventuring party. Mind you IMO in fantasy games when you start throwing magic around, gender differences are kind of meaningless. Even if not treating physical differences in strength between genders, two ciphers, two mages, a priest and a druid could be just as effective a party as the typical adventuring party, and the use of magic/psionics/shapeshifting/etc. doesn't really have a real world gender relationship. "No sorry, a woman shape-shifted into a anthropomorphic bear would NEVER be strong enough to hit that dude..." just fails as an argument from the get-go. That said, if someone wants to play an all male party/mostly male party because of some sense of personal verisimilitude, it really doesn't affect me provided I still have the ability to do my own thing.

You can swing both ways at the hearing and Thaos can only swing two ways at the hearing. So one of the two possible outcomes must be in Thaos' interest. Not sure what you're trying to say here. Thaos wants to be certain that there's only one possible outcome ... his outcome. That's why he does what he does. He doesn't care what the various reps say. But your argument only holds water if his outcome is to kill the Duc in any case to blame it on animancy. But if animancy is in fact outlawed in the proceedings, there's no need for him to further expose himself. So one of the two possible outcomes of the hearing should be in his favor and therefore not require direct action. You're assuming that he wants a simple outlawing of animancy. By doing what he did, Thaos caused a violent uprising against animancy, which in turn caused far more destruction to the "science" than merely outlawing ever could. It also leads to the destruction of the Sanitarium and providing good cover for killing Lady Webb - neither of which would have worked as well had Animancy just been outlawed (thus allowing the Sanitarium Animancers to go to ground with their research and equipment and not hiding the massacre of Dunryd Row under the guise of the riots).

^Inherently I think that's one of the issues with the current crop of romances is that they're designed to only fail if the PC chooses to fail them. Which is the reason that it was nice in DAI that

I've never had a problem killing the guards when you climb the vines to get into the castle not creating a problem. Did you kill anyone else? Are you going into the correct door (I'm assuming so since you got the Berathian robes from the chest)? Are you wearing the robes on your PC?

Yeah I've detected secrets without scouting occasionally since the 1.5 patch.

I hear they won't let you in while the iron crisis is going on.

I got to admit, that while I disagree with you (being its a fantasy with magic and stuff so gender is kinda irrelevant), its nice to see Sheena name checked. (Yeah yeah, there was the 1950s & 2000s TV show and the Tanya Roberts movie, I'm trying to make a Golden Age Comic Book Reference here). Unless you mean Xena (as in Xena, Warrior Princess) in which case, the reference is distinctly less interesting.

I agree....why do people derail threads Bring out the pitchforks....lets tar and feather them !!! Derailing threads is like an institution here. Except when people request that threads be derailed and everyone ignores that call and studiously posts on-topic.

TARZAN AND THE LOST CITY (1998) - I have a soft spot for this film; the end is a bit anti-climactic, but its a fun pulpy adventure for much of it (in its way a lot like the later Tarzan stories). HARPER (1966) Paul Newman plays a private eye hired to find a missing rich guy. His family only seem moderately interested in finding him, and there are some parties really strongly interested in him not being found. Its very funny in places, and yet also manages a real brutality; oddly it manages both well - something most films fail to do. Great turns by the cast (including Robert Wagner, Shelly Winters, Julie Harris and Lauren Becall, amid others). The end is a complete subversion of the hardboiled detective genre. POLTERGEIST (2015) - Weak remake of the original; it doesn't manage to be scary on its own (its best moments are expansions of ideas from the original) and it swaps the the mostly non-existant older daughter for a characterless younger daughter. The opening 30 minutes is a paint-by-the-numbers family in conflict handled so poorly it elicited laughter (when the broke dad beats up his steering wheel in frustration like you've seen in countless other films, you realize the film has nothing new to say. When it shows the other side and it looks like a poorly realized video game, you realize the film has nothing new to show you either. And Jared Harris is an imminently likeable actor, but he's no Zelda Rubinstein. POLTERGEIST (1982) - The film is really well done; there's a lot of effort to create an interesting family but to also telegraph how the characters will react through the film - whether its the mother smoking pot turning into her "New Age" embrace of the early, benign poltergeist phenomena, or the older teen heavily invested in her social life becoming less present when things go south at home, there's a natural, believable element to how the story and characters unfold. When things go south, it makes sense for the family to deal with it the way they do.

I read the title and was like "cool a positive thread". Lasted only for the initial post. Not sure if I just lost faith in humanity or had my faith restored by the Obsidianites that we can derail a thread faster than anyone else.

Okay so you die and go into the afterlife and God's there. Its no longer faith, its fact. The fact that God could be fact doesn't negate faith. But you still don't know why midichlorians do anything - it is still just something mysterious...maybe God, maybe spirits, maybe Satan, maybe magic, maybe Qi...who knows? And...does that change God in anyway? Does it change the nature of the universe? Would it be...bad? I'd heard about his election run but seen nothing from that time! Thanks!

Would this be by adding the romance to the "Beastiary" or through Quest XP?

Well yeah, that's why many of them prefer to be called "illusionists" now. The only people going around calling themselves magicians are those crappy ones who can't perform without a group of actors pretending to be amazed for the cameras for their TV series. Err, I might be too opinionated on this. They can't all be Doug Henning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7U_oHL_vzg

If a magician does a trick, then certainly he knows how it is done (whether you do or not). Does that knowledge make it any less magic? it makes it doesn't even magic I'm really not sure what you're saying here. So if science explains one of God's creations, the creation is no longer Godly? -snip- i. If you look into science, then why bother about "Godly creation"? Science don't prove or disprove "Godly creation" because "Godly creation" is based on FAITH, not FACT ii. Jedi claim about the Force is proven by midichlorian, before midichlorian it is not proven true, just belief iii. Before science, everything is mystical. It seems to be you just want to argue for the sake of arguing, that's why i am not bother answering i. If God created everything, then God's creation is scientific fact. ii. Midichlorians don't prove that the force is something that is in every living creature (we know only that it is in humanoids based on the check), we don't know that it binds the universe together. We don't undertand why or how it works. The Jedi belief system is not challenged by the existence of midichlorians. iii. And after science nothing is? If science proved the existence of God, would God no longer be mystical? I'm sorry you feel I'm being argumentative; I'm trying to understand your perspective but it doesn't make much sense to me.

Well...I created an idea for how your idea for a game might work. There'd need to be a little prototyping and playtesting to make it a game. EDIT: Oh and some more decisions need to be made like how many spaces from center to start and such.

"Titan Knees Some Justice" - sound like a move from a 90s era fighting game.