Search results

So if two siblings were murderers, it'd be OK to kill the other three, including the baby, and murder the pregnant mother too?

I take issue with some of the interpretations of "Always Evil" people are espousing here. I've always viewed it that dragons, like most other creatures of the Prime Material plane, are mortals, capable of free will even if they may be strongly predisposed in certain ways. Just like orcs and...

I am... honestly, kind of sickened that anyone can possibly say it's not evil.

I can only base this on what I have observed, but in the time I've been reading D&D forums (since 2002 or so), this is the first thread I've seen where the net sentiment on god-stats was positive. While there certainly were some people who spoke out in favor of Deities and Demigods, the overall...

I think what's most interesting about this thread is the attitude shift from ~5 years ago. When Deities & Demigods came out for 3e, it was pretty soundly derided for "Why in the world would we want stats for gods!?"

I have to agree with this, though I haven't looked at nearly all of the 4e books. All the three-quarter-spread illustrations in the core books looked really posed and fake to me. Not that 3e's illustrations were perfect, but I got MUCH more of a sense of action from them.

Dealbreaker? Probably not. Doesn't me I like it, though. I think the issue is mostly one of perception. What do players expect when you say "Want to join our D&D game?" In 3e, at least, the default assumption was that they used the PHB, and possibly some supplements. Today, because of the...

I'm not inherently opposed to the publication of weird-and-interesting PC races (though I don't like them in MY campaign, and didn't in 3e either), I think there's a few differences this time around because of how 4e presents them. 1) Everything Is Core In 3e, there was a pretty clear picture...

FATE - A pretty awesome narrative/sim generic system. Based on FUDGE, but much better IMO.

A very good post overall. I'd just like to throw in one example to reinforce this point: My grandparents saw Snow White in theatres on one of their first dates. Because of the repeated extension of copyright since then, MY children (or grandchildren, if it gets extended again) will be dating...

Alright, I'm calling strawman on this one. Nobody in this thread has claimed that physical property rights don't or shouldn't apply to the physical entity of a book. This discussion is about intellectual property rights, which are a different thing altogether, and all too often sensationalized...

That, sir, was a very deep and insightful post. To go with my best guess at your objection: You'll notice that I did not address the morality of doing so. It's completely reasonable to say that one should buy it twice because to do otherwise is immoral. But, the way copyright is formulated...

The whole premise of copyright is that, when buying a book, you purchase two things: the physical book, and a license from the copyright holder to view and use the copyrighted content within it. If you've already bought a hard copy, you already have the license to view and use it. Now, imagine...

This is not particularly different from the impression I got from 2e Planescape. In PS, the portals are temporary, but the frequency of appearance/disappearance/change varies a lot (or at the whim of the Lady of Pain). Some portals may remain stable for years before suddenly changing, while...

I'm going to harp on the torch-as-magical-light issue for a moment. While it's certainly a valid means to achieve an effect, it makes me wonder: if we're coming to the point where the simulative mechanics have absolutely nothing to do with what we're using them to simulate, why bother with them...

While I have no knowledge of the details, I think this attitude is VERY dangerous. In the software world, it is quite common for copyright holders (both of software and of data) to make absolutely outrageous claims. Hell, TSR had a history of trying to use copyright to quash discussion sites...

While factual, this is not correct in the sense that you meant it. Software is largely unique in that it can be covered both by patents and by copyright. As a software engineer and someone who has dealt with software licensing issues on several occasions, the distinction generally is: Patents...

Ah, I see what you're saying now. Took a while to sink in properly. I suspect your approach will lead to the correct final solution. Alright, REALLY going to bed now. :-)

Actually, I take that back. The others are wrong too. They don't even sum to 1.0! Teach me to try to do probability late at night. I suspect the problem with my approach is the multiplication by six. Because the second probability term is X-or-less, it may or may not be reorderable with the...

You're right there. The three case is special in that the second probability is not 3-or-less, but equal-to-three. In this case, there's no choice of ordering so the multiplication by 6 is unneeded. I stand corrected on that one, but I'll still pretty confident the others are correct.