unclevlad

Rittenhouse's appearance is an example of one of the core problems of the left. Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." That's near the center of liberal thought...and antithetical to the far right. Blocking Rittenhouse, and similar points, are anathema to this...at least blocking it in advance. If he advocates violence in his remarks, well, that would be different. This is by no means the first such incident, or the only type of incident.

And the Pats jettison Mac Jones now. From Field Yates: The fifth was #1 pick Trevor Lawrence, who's doing fine...but yeah, overall that track record's pretty bad. And Jones is going to Jacksonville; reports are they're the only team to offer anything, and they're only shipping a 6th round pick in return. What does this mean? Jones is on the 4th and last base year of his rookie contract, so his salary is low...for NFL QBs. Not by any sane standards. '25 is his option year...and if picked up, it's $25M. Yes, well, barring injury to Lawrence? NO CHANCE it'll get picked up.

So, you have an attack power. The power has Can Draw From END Reserve or Personal END. Say you want to use this power in a Multiple Attack...you're going to try to strike a few different people. The question is...do all the strikes have to draw from the same source, or can I split up the END between the two? The only text is in the END Reserve power itself, and it doesn't specify anything about the actual mechanics of switching the END source, and there's no errata about it.

Oh my lord...talk about a game where a mercy rule would've been nice... West Coast Conference tourney. It's the 6 vs. 9 game, Pepperdine vs. Pacific. 9 team lead, tho...more on that in a bit. With 8 minutes left in the first half, Pepperdine led 39-2. No typo. First half ended 56-9. There's no pep talk possible for the team that's behind 47 at halftime. Of course, the fact that they were 0-16 during the conference regular season makes any pep talk difficult... I would not be surprised to hear Pacific is going to be looking for a new coach. 0-16 in conference, 6-25 overall before this, then a total embarassment...

Shades of Joe Niekro...I love the ump, just sitting there, chin in hand, turning with a whole "...and what have we here, hmm?" vibe....

Salary cap clearance, pure and simple. $13M guaranteed money this year. On the one hand...we can assume no one offered more, so the league doesn't seem to be valuing him *at his price tag* and the fact this is his option year. CBS Sports and USA Today give the Browns very high marks, but...is this really a cheap flyer? OTOH, tho...bailing on a young player who's done OK, and getting nothing in return....beyond the cap space, I'm kinda wondering if he had no support from Sean Payton, and this is about getting rid of those who don't fit in...according to Payton. On the flip side, I'm thinking this gives Jeudy a chance to live up to his draft position.

I don't like that "take no actions" either. It feels unnecessarily punitive. You're at 0 OCV and 1/2 DCV throughout. The second clause is a reiteration now...just phrased incorrectly. The first clause is simple and clear. Just strike the second. And defining it in segments has an additional advantage. Right now, a full combat leap, and a leap using the base NCM, both take the same time...which feels wrong. So, the language can be "The Leap requires one extra segment per doubling used. The landing occurs at the end of the segment. Example: Grasshopper has SPD 5 and 20 meters of Leap and spent 15 points for 3 additional doublings. Grasshopper Leaps on his phase in segment 3. He lands on segment -- 3, if not using any doublings -- 4, if using 1 doubling -- 5, if using 2 doublings, etc. Grasshopper can't abort the leap while in the air. If he's still leaping on segment 4, it's a new segment, and he can abort. If the leap continues to segment 5, Grasshopper gains a new phase and can take actions." Or something like that. I'd suggest it was written as phases because movement's in phases. What's the position of a flyer or runner in those segments between phases? Especially with an erratic SPD like 5, where the # of segments between phases is not consistent? The answer's not exactly hard...determine movement per segment, which is just total non-combat movement == (combat meters used) x (non-combat factor) For running and flight, this is then meters per phase. Meters per turn is meters per phase times SPD, and meters per segment is simply meters per turn / 12. Shorthand: it's TCM * SPD / 12. For leap, start with the total non-combat movement as above. But you may not be able to repeat the move at your full SPD; the leap can take longer. So instead of TCM * SPD / 12, it's TCM * (MINIMUM of SPD and 12/Duration) / 12, where Duration is the number of segments to complete the leap. 12/Duration is the "effective SPD" to repeat the leaps. This generally won't come into play unless SPD is quite low.

I'm updating my velocity calculator to use the special timing rules for Leap. From 6E1 243: These are actually inconsistent statements. A normal maximum-distance leap is a full move, and thus takes a full phase. With 1 NCM, the freebie, the first part says it takes 1 phase. But the second part says it should take 2. The example gives 4 purchased NCMs for x32, and such a leap takes 5 phases. This is consistent with the first section. The "every doubling" clause is redundant, as well.

Wasn't it KFC that also did the breadless chicken sandwich? Two chicken patties with...I forget what, in between. All I can say is, I'd hate to see the ideas they reject...........................

They must not have done their job very well.

Yeah, I dislike Meiselas' tone, and his conclusions/interpretations are shaky...but he's not making up anything about what Trump posted. Those speak for themselves...and they're pretty darn deranged in my book. Or sometimes juvenile...slapping those filters on. Meiselas said he couldn't watch much of em...can't blame him there, neither could I.

Most skills just use the baseline functionality of Skills.java. Gambling, Survival, and Computer Programming all have their own extension routines...so there can be code behavior differences between them. There is no intermediate CategorizedSkills.java to give common functionality among all of them, for handling categorized skills. Just looking...Weaponsmith, Weapon Familiarity, and Transport Familiarity all have separate code, so there may be odd little discrepancies. Basically, I'd just say forget trying to implement it like Gambling or Survival...especially given that the categories in 5E are totally out of date. Define it as a standard skill with adders for specialized coding skills. I don't know about the REMOVE container, because I don't build as an extension template, I modify Main6E...but what you're saying, sounds right. Modifying Main6E.hdt isn't advised because, sure, you can trash HD and make it unusable. Eek. Make a clean copy in a different folder, don't play with your working copy. Extract Main6E.hdt from HD6.jar to a convenient location; mine's on the desktop. Edit. Save the mods back into your test setup's HD6.jar. 7-Zip's an extremely well known tool that handles a vast assortment of compressed files, and it's free.

Yep. This is what happens when you blow through the cap. Look at the Bills' cuts. Believe the Cowboys have had to do these too, to a degree, and so did the Seahawks when they had to try to pay Wilson (post-rookie contract) and the Legion of Boom. It's a BIG!! factor why the 5 years of a QB's rookie contract are viewed as an important window.

Yeah, it's at least a Shape Shift. It might arguably be a multiform, if the inherent abilities change...but that's a lot more trouble and work. The kelpie resembles seaweed...but it's still a kelpie. It can reach out and grab you...that's not something seaweed can do. And there are often clues, if you know what to look for...the reversed hooves is one example. But it isn't a disguise, in that you can't look through it to see it's a kelpie. You have to know the clues why it's not what it appears to be.

Yeah, you don't want the Source lines...those are for 5E only. Are you making sure that the Main6E.hdt file in the jar, is being updated? Cuz I've had problems doing anything else...but I'll grant that I have little patience, and updating the template in the jar is simply MUCH easier. But honestly...I think 6E got rid of those categories because, push come to shove, they're ridiculously too narrow, and IMO don't reflect current reality. They're rooted in 1980-ish thinking. If you can program a mainframe, you can program a PC. There's almost no difference between a desktop and a laptop any more. If you know Java, you can mostly code in C++ or C# or Python...or Fortran. You can handle SQL. It's primarily a matter of understanding the syntax. My entire career was software, from mainframes to workstations to PCs, FORTRAN, Java, variations of BASIC, relational databases, SQL, and lots of other stuff. AppleOS, DOS, Windows, Unix, and a bunch of HP OSs on machines that no one uses any more. Again...it's syntax, mostly. OK, with Windows and Apple in particular, there's working your way through all the GUI junk that hides the fundamentals. I personally feel you ONLY buy Computer Programming to do hacking. Using a computer? That's fundamentally an Everyman skill that isn't worth listing...because basically EVERYONE now uses computers in some way. I'd rather buy more specific PSs for most...web site design, real-time programming, quantum computing, parallel computing (for supercomputers), scalar cloud computing, graphics programming, perhaps some others, but I'd rather leave this open, not forced into some template. Use the Notes section on the skill, too. EDIT: here's an example of a customized skill. <RAPID_ATTACK_HTH SHOWDIALOG="Yes" DISPLAY="Multiple Attack Skills" BASECOST="0" EXCLUSIVE="Yes"> <ADDER XMLID="RapidAttackHTH" DISPLAY="Rapid Attack (HTH)" BASECOST="5" EXCLUSIVE="Yes" > </ADDER> <ADDER XMLID="RapidAttackRanged" DISPLAY="Rapid Attack (Ranged)" BASECOST="5" EXCLUSIVE="Yes" > </ADDER> <ADDER XMLID="DefenseAttackHTH" DISPLAY="Defensive Attack (HTH)" BASECOST="5" EXCLUSIVE="Yes" > </ADDER> <ADDER XMLID="DefenseAttackRanged" DISPLAY="Defenseive Attack (Ranged)" BASECOST="5" EXCLUSIVE="Yes" > </ADDER> <DEFINITION>A character with this Combat Skill has a heightened ability to move in combat. Rapid Attack allows a character to make an attack with the Rapid Fire Combat Maneuver, Sweep Combat Maneuver, or Autofire Skills as a Half Phase Action. </DEFINITION> </RAPID_ATTACK_HTH> Yeah, I still haven't fixed that typo in DefenseAttackRanged, or updated the DEFINITION...I delete MANY of those anyway, for my personal use. RAPID_ATTACK_HTH is what's used in the installed Main6E; typically, it's a bad idea to change that, as in many places it's used in template building. That said, that string's only used internally, so you can change what the user sees, like the DISPLAY string. I also clearly incorporated Defensive Attack from APG, which I value even more than Rapid Attack. In the Skills list, it shows as Multiple Attack Skills, and the code sorts this out just fine. Here's my Performance Skill: <PERFORMANCE_SKILL DISPLAY="Performance Skill" INPUTLABEL="Art/Instrument" OTHERINPUT="Yes" MINCOST="1" FAMILIARITYROLL="8" FAMILIARITYCOST="1" EXCLUSIVE="No"> <TYPE>PERFORMANCE</TYPE> <CHARACTERISTIC_CHOICE> <ITEM CHARACTERISTIC="STR" BASECOST="3" LVLCOST="1" LVLVAL="1" /> <ITEM CHARACTERISTIC="DEX" BASECOST="3" LVLCOST="1" LVLVAL="1" /> <ITEM CHARACTERISTIC="INT" BASECOST="3" LVLCOST="1" LVLVAL="1" />0 <ITEM CHARACTERISTIC="PRE" BASECOST="3" LVLCOST="1" LVLVAL="1" /> <ITEM CHARACTERISTIC="GENERAL" BASECOST="2" LVLCOST="1" LVLVAL="1" /> </CHARACTERISTIC_CHOICE> <DEFINITION>These Background Skills represent artistic or performance abilities. NOTE: This cannot replace existing skills such as Acting.</DEFINITION> </PERFORMANCE_SKILL> and its associated skill enhancer...pretty sure the italicized should be the only addition <SKILL_ENHANCERS> <ENHANCER XMLID="JACK_OF_ALL_TRADES" DISPLAY="Jack of All Trades" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>PROFESSIONAL</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="PERFORMER" DISPLAY="Performer" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>PERFORMANCE</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="LINGUIST" DISPLAY="Linguist" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>LANGUAGE</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="SCIENTIST" DISPLAY="Scientist" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>SCIENCE</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="SCHOLAR" DISPLAY="Scholar" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>KNOWLEDGE</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="TRAVELER" DISPLAY="Traveler" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>AREA</TYPE> </ENHANCER> <ENHANCER XMLID="WELL_CONNECTED" DISPLAY="Well-Connected" BASECOST="3" COSTSAVINGS="1"> <TYPE>CONTACT</TYPE> </ENHANCER> </SKILL_ENHANCERS> Note the connection between the TYPE entries. Hmm. Just had a thought for the Computer Programming. The base skill buys typical programming. Then include, let's say, 1 point adders for specialty applications, like real-time programming, to identify those special aspects you want to include, as I mentioned above, like Network Security. Everyone in network security can program...but not every programmer can do network security.

Self interest is quite reliable...but what I'm saying is, self interest won't come into play in other situations based on those core assumptions. Carving out the exception in itself, tends to validate those core assumptions which, as you note, are irrational.

Unfortunately, not losing isn't the same as winning. Here, the ground for objecting to the decision is self-interest...which is unreliable. It leaves the logic of the Alabama decision intact, while carving out only a specific exception. The logic, tho, and its underlying basis, remain intact, to be applied in other circumstances. Those whose self-interests are affected, may be a small minority...or even targeted in the first place. Their voices are much more likely to be ignored. Short term...but not necessarily true long term.

Whoa............................ Wow. That is awful. Even if there's no amputations, man...the medical bills, the long-term consequences? That really bites for them. I hope that this is noted...not to scare fans to keep them away, but to tell them, make DARN!!! sure you're prepared, and respect the cold!! The TV clip showed that one hand...and man...stomach-turning. Probably gonna have to lose 2 fingers.

Alabama legislature overwhelmingly passes legislation protecting IVF providers from criminal and civil liability, and it was signed into law. NYT article says, tho, it's not clear whether it'll be constitutional under the Alabama state constitution. It would seem a near-lock that a constitutional amendment would pass, should one be necessary, but that's a much longer process, and one has to be more careful about the exact wording, due to the privileged position involved. Ergo, it'll probably be a bit more contentious.

Far too many Republicans have shown they'd prefer to roll back society to the antebellum South's standards. With rather less gentility.

Oh my, the craziness has started. In the power conferences, this is the last week of the regular season...Duke-Carolina round 2 highlights Saturday, for example, on the last day of the ACC regular season. Several conferences are into their tournaments, tho; a couple have already started, and several start over the next couple days. These also tend to be the one-bid leagues, which make for much more drama...for these teams, getting into the tournament is HUGE. So...the Atlantic Sun started actually yesterday. Tonight it was #1 Eastern Kentucky vs. #10 Jacksonville. Jacksonville 67, EKU 65. OUCH! Quick scan of the play by play says it was incredibly close; I didn't see a lead of more than 3 for either team at any point in the second half. This isn't a bid stealing league...Lipscomb has the 'best' BPI at 148, so at best, I suspect they're looking at a 15 seed, no matter who wins. Several of the conference final games are Sunday...almost certainly because ESPN asks them to. And probably pays them a nice chunk, to have some interesting games without interfering with the big boys. EDIT: and just now on SVP, same conference, #7 North Alabama beats #3 Lipscomb. Lipscomb hits a 3 to tie with 4 seconds left, North Alabama takes it full court, hits a buzzer beater to win. So now, whoever wins the tourney? Best RPI left is, I think, worse than 180...so most likely, Dayton-bound.

Story on NFL.com points out Diggs' production dropped a fair bit. And while he's not necessarily old...was wear and tear an issue? Also, Diggs was the 10th highest paid safety in the league. It's not very likely his performance will improve...so is he still worth it? There's a longstanding debate about how long you hold onto players. QUITE often, IMO, the answer's "too long." It's the rose-colored glasses effect of looking in the rear view mirror...of what he did. But what he did, may not be what he can do now. Last, safety is becoming something of a lower-valued position: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/ https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cap-hit/safety/ In the second, note how fast safety salaries drop. (Side note to my point above. MLB Network did a list of the top 100 players in baseball. Clayton Kershaw's not on the list...and Greg Amsinger *ranted* that was ridiculous!!! Yeah, he's a sure-fire HoFer...should be no-doubt first ballot. So what? He's not that pitcher now. Rodgers was another; IMO the Packers should've moved on from him 2 years before they did...and that's a pattern that's far more common.)

First, if you're adding a naked advantage to STR, it's applied to the *entire* STR, not just the CP to increase it above the base 10. This holds true for Running and Leap as well. Yeah, it's the flip side of buying, say, a 3d6 HA that's armor piercing. How many dice does your STR add? If you don't have AP on your STR, then you have to do DC adjustments. It helps me, at least, to almost always think in DCs...never dice. So, a 4d6 staff with +1/2 double KB? 6 DCs. A 3d6 HA with AVAD Power Def? 6 DCs. Then, take the most common enhancers...STR, martial arts boosts. 25 STR? 5 DCs. 3 DCs HTH. 2 DCs from martial strike. So +10 DCs, gets me to 16. Since the whole thing has a +1? 16 DCs --> 8 dice. I also always think in DCs for the campaign limits. If your limit's 12 DCs, then it's --12d6 for any plain strike --9 1/2 d6 for a strike with AP --8d6 with double KB, or NND (power, mental, or flash) --6d6 with a typical AVAD (power, mental, flash) --4d6 with the same AVAD, with Does Body What HSMA 107 is talking about is, IMO, a PITA, and runs into problems as CRT noted. Take the first example...Kickmaster wants AP on his offensive strike. The computation is somewhat clumsy, IMO...you're not working with the underlying maneuvers, but their fundamental system costs. And there's no support for this, you have to do it by hand. That gets you the effective cost of 55 points (60 for the damage, -10 for the OCV, +5 for the DCV)...and THAT is the cost basis for the naked advantage...so it's 14 points. And note that it's done on the total maneuver...the final result. But also note, you can't apply it to ANYTHING else; it's only on the offensive strike. That also means, tho, that now you have a 15 DC attack...which is where you may run afoul of campaign guidelines. Note the costs of the maneuvers and MA DCs are not a factor. It's the effective value of the overall maneuver, considering all elements combined. What's typically easier is to add the advantage to either the base STR (a naked advantage works fine, so you can use it or not at your discretion) or to an HA or HKA (multipowers help)...because then, if you've got multiple martial maneuvers, they all work. In an MP with, say, multiple HAs, you can make all the HAs have the same net DCs, or close...so a 6d6 normal, 5d6 AP, or 4d6 double KB. Or, a trick I like...define those HAs as 1 pip. When you use a 1 pip HA with AP...you treat the entire attack as having AP and have to recompute the damage. BUT, it doesn't materially affect the DCs, so again, you don't have to worry about violating the campaign limits without realizing it. By comparison, a naked advantage on your STR *does* increase the final DCs. Double KB on 20 STR adds 2 DCs to the final result...and it also costs 10 points, and it can't be included in an MP normally, because a naked advantage is a special power. So if you want AP and double KB as your advantages? You pay for both separately. OK, you can use Lockout on both, if your notion is, you can't use em together, but the final cost is still much higher.

So, if they change Martial Throw to Passing Throw...it all works fine, right? That's the simplest answer.

As I read the Martial Throw maneuver, it's neither of the options CRT opened with. The velocity component is the *opponent's* velocity, not your velocity...that is, if your opponent is charging at you, silly person that he is, your throw gets to use his speed against him. The maneuver where you charge someone is a Passing Throw...it has the FMove element. So the velocity here is your velocity. You have to consider all the maneuvers sometimes, it's not entirely clear. But the grab and toss? That's a Grappling Throw. No velo component.