Manic Typist

Re: Unusual Magic Items Well, see, all that changes the dynamics. It can be avoided, IF you chose to resist the temptation of drawing it, it could be destroyed via a quest, etc. My earlier objection was that, as originally presented, it was essentially writing the character's future history for the player without his or her consent. "Excuse me, but what if I already knew what was going to happen to my character after he retires?"

Re: Unusual Magic Items Um. While a somewhat interesting item, the fact that there's no way to get rid of it and no way to avoid it would make any DM who used it a jerk. Unless it's the kind of campaign where the players expect that sort of thing, I guess...

Re: Fantasy Superheroes ....I really, really like this idea, and will have to use it myself. And trust me on Xena. Joxer and Gabrielle didn't kill much at all. Xena would cut a dozen throats with a single throw of her... whatever it was, and THEN she'd go to work with her sword. Or worse, her fingers.... (though she mostly just used pressure points for torture I suppose)

Re: Weird ship names requested. So, you're going to post campaign write ups right? Because I'm intrigued.

Re: Fantasy Superheroes The only thing I can see about Fantasy that makes it "harder to kill" things is the potential pervasiveness of healing magic, etc. Otherwise, yeah, it can get quite deadly even with just Hit Locations and sectional armor.

Re: Fantasy Superheroes I'll agree with Hercules, but Xena left a lot (and I mean a LOT) of rapidly cooling bodies behind her.

Re: Order of the Stick I think Roy was waiting to see that so that he could end the fight.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction? You just contradicted yourself, since going to war has everything to do with it. War is one of the oldest tools of oppression. However, all I was really saying was that just because a religion advocates non-violence or whathaveyou, that doesn't necessarily mean that it will be so when believers get involved. This was to address the authority/Authority religion issue that was raised, and I feel, resolved.

Re: Quote of the Week From My Life. If it makes you feel worse, I don't know what the Keystone Kops are either.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction? Well, I was speaking about authority, as in a particular authority in a given time. I agree with you regarding religion and rebellions against Authority. I'd suspect that any religion that was in rebellion against Authority itself (i.e. was basically "anarchistic") probably wouldn't be interested in getting organized enough to seek to supplant the Authority. Then again, Buddhists can go to war too, so I'm baffled.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction? It can and has also been used to reject and defy the status quo. Many rebellions have a "God wills it!" justification. So it is also a powerful instrument of resistance to authority.

Re: Quote of the Week from my gaming group... Pathfinder game, my 2nd level wizard and a 2nd level gnome cleric are investigating some ominous chanting sounds under a blacksmith's shop in the middle of a city under siege. Gnome PC: "Would you care to take point?" Me (having just met this gnome 5 minutes ago): "First Law of Wizardry: Never take point."

Re: What FTL Drives do people use in their campaigns? And what techno bable do you us I like that, Xavier.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction? This is a bit of sophistry, although you tangentially touch upon what I find to be the key answer in your first sentence. First (and least importantly), your execution of the logic is flawed and inconsistent. It operates from false premises. Consider the number .7, which is a member of the set of numbers between 0 and 1. .7's "identity" can be expressed using the same (unhelpful and undefined) rubric you used for yourself: it/?/not it. Yet .7 is still a member, a part of, the set of numbers between 0 and 1. It is essentially "identical" to the (infinite) other numbers of the same set, each of which equally constitutes the full "identity" of what it means to be the set of numbers of 0 and 1 (which is in turn can be considered a mere expression or part of infinitely more sets of infinite or finite numbers). Secondly, and I feel more importantly, you're using a rigged game. "Let us use reason and logic, with clearly understood rules and restrictions of induction, deduction, and whathaveyou, to discuss the nature of God." "Let's!" "First, let us define our terms." "It's only logical to do so!" "Very well. How shall we define God?" "Classically! Omnipotent, omniscient, the entire universe, you know?" "Very well. God is a being who is simultaneously everything, who exists outside of time, who is all knowing, who is all powerful, etc." "Wait, doesn't all powerful mean that nothing can restrain it?" "Well, yes of course." "Then how can we talk about something all powerful within a system of rules and restrictions which render statements "If X is true then Y MUST Be true," since something all powerful can cheerfully ignore the must even though X is true and it follows that Y should also be true?" "Oh. Uh....." Essentially, that definition of God places God outside the realm of logical proofs. God, understood in that way, is beyond logic. Logic is irrelevant, although you might find it useful as a tool for trying to understand that which cannot be understood (at least logically). Note that this doesn't require that God exists. It's just like trying to pronounce the name of a man who has never had a name. I've been resisting posting this for days.

Re: Telekinesis with PARTIAL Fine Manipulation??? What's the difference?

Re: How visible is visible? Furthermore, by SFX alone, I'd say a force field is more likely than armor to be able to justify not being visible.

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction?

Re: Tactics Make leader an NPC who does what the group votes for, at least in terms of larger or even just medium decisions?

Re: Religion in Science-Fiction? Which was sort of the point. He felt his wisdom was superior to God's. Anyone else caught off guard by that movie? I went in expecting just another Jim Carrey comedy, and it was FAR more serious than I'd ever anticipated.

Re: How visible is visible? He also seems to be inquiring about what level of bonus to PER others should receive to notice the character due to his use of this power.

Re: Campaign Classic: Mythic Egypt Cool stuff.

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons) Absolutely true. I just said that because you quoted me; my original post was dealing with exactly what you point to- that with this sort of thing, you have removed the physiological incentives that are dangerous.

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons) Well, if you are physically immune to them, then you can. That's the point. Of course there's a lot less incentive- you don't get the buzz that really is the whole point of alcohol, you don't get the nicotine rush from cigarettes, et al. So at that point the draws are very different and much more limited. Blending in or psychological factors are really all I can think of in this cae.

Re: Augmented Reality Start-Up Ready to Disrupt Business Let me add this card to the deck.... LED contact lenses. http://www.elementalled.com/leducation/blog/innovative-technology/led-lights-make-augmented-vision-a-reality/

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons) Sure, why not? You can still enjoy the burn of whiskey on your throat or the comforting habit of lighting a cigarette, etc. However, you wouldn't be able to become intoxicated/physically addicted, I'd say.