Amentep

But it's not your only choice. You can continue on with that injured party member. Alternatively, you could have prepared yourself better before the encounter and/or made better tactical decisions during said encounter. In 99% of every other game you would just chug a potion/cast heal and continue on. Fun! So you suggest that the game be easy enough that continuing on with injured party members would be a viable choice and that tactics should be available that would allow you to defeat encounters without your party taking any injuries? If not, how are the choices you offer meaningful ones? And, yes, in this case the approach taken by the 99% sounds more fun than the lack of choice available in Project Eternity. When remedies are available the player can be presented with a variety of choices. Do I use the relatively inexpensive but slow-acting herbal pack that may suffice if I'm careful not to bite off more than I can chew before it's had time to work? Do I have the caster expend mana that they may need later in order to heal a party member now? Do I use the high-cost instant-heal potion and risk not having it when i may need it more? How is the Project Eternity approach more interesting/fun? The Infinity Engine games had healing spells but healers were limited in how many they could memorize so you were always weighing who to heal and for how much. Similarly, you needed to ration available potions--and decide how much inventory space you wanted to devote to them. Again, how in your opinion will fewer choices make the game more fun? There are two resources for combat, health and stamina IIRC. From what I understand stamina acts more akin to HP in the D&D setting, it goes down quickly and recovers naturally but can be recovered by potions. Health is a smaller pool and is harder to take down but harder to get back up without resting too. Also, IIRC some character will favor fighting injured (like the Monk). But all of this is preliminary information and they've said before its subject to change as they test it for "fun".

Or whatever magical line your party just snuck past that awarded experience could also flag the mook as unkillable / no xp. Your example is what I call getting lost in the minutia (not you the poster). They are so worried about improbable one-offs (sneaking past then going back to kill, who the hell does that? I know, I know, EVERYONE will claim they do just that) that the whole system suffers for it, imo. What's easier to program, a magical line that represents every opportunity to sneak past, every dialogue trigger that satisfies diplomatic solutions and every combat solution... ...or to make the thing a quest and give quest XP? Seems like what you're asking is a very inefficient way to deal with giving XP solely for the benefit of getting 2 XP with every goblin you smite. (I never went back and killed characters I snuck past in BG, though - because I never snuck past them. BG really only rewarded combat. Not that that's a bad thing either, I liked BG. But I'm not put out that Obs is doing something different.)

As the Golden Age character, The Purple Zombie.

If it was mold free, I'd live there.

MACHETE KILLS - yes, yes he does. And often. I'd say its a little more outrageous than the first one and about as fun, but I'd give the edge to the first one. Still its great fun to watch the sequel and all of the crazyness in it. PUPPET MASTER V - we pick up after the events of Four with a direct sequel. It starts off with a "what happens legally after a horror movie happens" bit of business with the new puppet master getting into trouble with the police; this procedural element gets dropped as an uber-Totem is brought forther by Sekhmet and one of the new puppet master's superiors decides to try to steal the puppets (who, naturally, defend themselves). Then another showdown with puppet vs super-Totem. I enjoyed it, probably not as much as IV (but I bet these were filmed at the same time). Felt like they could have done more with the premise than they did even if it still comes off okay.

Hoodies. The things that capes do have been supplanted by coats and jackets, for the most part. Function over form. A cape, or a cloak? Because cloaks are so much more practical/awesome. Just sayin', u_u... I think one could debate the definitions of cape, cloak and poncho for a long, long, time. What I'd actually like is something that might be a cross between obi-wan's hooded robe and The Man With No Name's poncho, with a dash of Dracula's cape. Cape - any sleeveless outer garment, but typically one that covers the back half of the wearer, fastening around the neck. Cloak is a cape that serves the same purpose as an outercoat and may or may not have a hood. Poncho is a cape that covers the front and back of the wearer, and may or may not need a fastener.

Finally got Saints Row IV. Created a new boss because...no voice of my old Boss. Not gotten far into it yet.

If you take an unpaid internship where its clearly stated to be unpaid...how can you turn around and complain you got no pay?

Indeed Congrats!

Some of them can. IIRC Human Torch (and his derivatives, like Tara) could.

I really liked the first Hellraiser EXCEPT the end. When the Cenobites turn on Kirsty as I recall they actually violate their agreement with her (that if she helps them find the person who called them, they'll leave her alone) which is something they don't do. It was a radical departure from Barker's book and IMO Barker should have stuck to his first intention there. The second one was "okay", but I felt it a bit OTT (been years since I seen it). I don't know that I watched any of the others.

IIRC cloning in the Marvel Universe isn't a good way to go - most clones are inherently unstable and degenerate physically (IIRC). I'm assuming they'd keep that in the Marvel Movie-Verse Androids/Robots - LMD, Golden Age Human Torch, Tara, LMD, M1-The Killer Robot, Machine Man, Death's Head, MODOK, Arnim Zola, Vision, Jocasta all fairly reliable and probably the way to go. Or cyborgs like Deathlok.

Oh man, I think - up until this post - I HAD BEEN confusing Rosjberg with Shryke!

Puppet Master IV: Back to the present, still some continuity errors. The Puppets vs magic creatures sent by Set to destroy the new puppet owner. It had some fun puppet vs puppet stuff. 3 was probably more satisfying.

Yeah the line readings were a bit stiff. Probably not something the people thought about at the time...

I've always considered If Footman Tire You, What Will Horses Do? more pro-Christian propaganda than specifically cold war as its the work of Baptist Minister Estus Pirkle who was also behind THE BURNING HELL but I guess it does have a strong anti-communism theme to it.

^Doubt Bethesda would sell, there's no long term incentive for it.

(Done as an advertising stunt for the Carrie film remake. The reactions are amusing, but I'm not 100% convinved all of the "pranked" people aren't actually actors). Still I laughed (and I don't usually "get" prank video stuff).

Yeah Paul Le Mat is only in the first one, but there are ten - big money maker for Charles Band's Full Moon production (although I think 3-4 of the later films have no new Puppet footage, its all reused because the guy producing the stop motion, David Allen, passed away). The last one, last years Puppet Master X: Axis Rising, has Toulon's Killer Puppets vs Nazi made Puppets! Warning: Some Bad Language http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtUDRhibKp4

You mean third time out of North America, surely? Canada - 1984 UK - 1988 UK - 1997 Canada - 2001 Canada - 2008 Canada - 2012 UK - 2013

Yeah the villain is known as, Graviton, in Marvel U (so we get our first super-villain origin, potentially). In the marvel comics universe, they have things called Life Model Decoys, its possible they'll introduce it here (but I think its lame in the comics, so...). Another going theory is they copied Phil's brainwave pattern and put it in an android (ala the Vision in comics).

Puppetmaster III (do you spot a trend this week?). Magic killer puppets vs Nazis. If that premise alone doesn't spark excitement, maybe Richard Lynch as the villain will? Or perhaps Sarah Douglas, Ian Abercrombie and Walter Goetell in supporting roles? But really they had me at killer puppets vs Nazis. Its 1941 (again a busy, busy year for Toulon apparently) and this time, Toulon and his wife are producing puppet shows in Germany. Toulon's wife gets killed because the Nazis want his secrets and he proceeds to take revenge (a la The Abominable Dr. Phibes or Theater of Blood). Its a solid film in this regard, setting up a series of confrontations logically and playing well to the strengths of the killer puppets. Continuity is still wonky - might be best not to think about it too hard, but the production is definitely at an all time high. And the puppets are allowed more to do here capturing more of their personalities making them more interesting (to be fair to Puppetmaster II they were all weakened, so being a bit mopey and lethargic made sense, but it didn't give them much else to do). Probably my favorite of the series so far.

Sleepy Hollow - more backstory, a bigger part of the "founding father conspiracy" angle is shown, and a lot of backstory development of Lieutenant Mills and her sister (I'm surprised how much of a backseat Crane took). I enjoyed it.

Puppetmaster II - Its interesting how a sequel can be so at odds with the original film continuity wise. Toulon's death date is wrong, they imply he made the Jester puppet prior to the opening of the first film when we see him making it in the opening of the first film, they retcon the end of the first film somewhat (its *possible* the intention is the incidents described happen after the first film, but that doesn't completely fit either). Continuity aside, it uses the hoary horror cliche of crazed mystic trying to capture the "reincarnation" of his lost love. The puppets seem to have less personality here and the lead actor and actress come off flat compare to some of the supporting cast.

No they're not; if the teachers and college records already changed the grade, then "history" from an academic perspective is the new grades, not the academic termination that the ASC is trying to hold onto. In other words, if he gets a transcript, he's not going to meet the academic termination criteria of the college, so why should it still be on his transcript. Its insanity.