Posts made by Ganymede

@ThatOneDude said:

Neither strike me as the Staff giving a fuck type of games. Just saying!

I'm not sure why you'd expect staff to give a fuck about you if you aren't giving a fuck about their game. Just asking?

@Lithium said:

Then they had to go and ruin it with Promethean, where the characters don't start human... then came Demon and I went bleh, and all excitement for CoD went away with the advent of the God Machine Chronicles.

Not surprisingly, Demon and Promethean are, and were, my least favorite expansions.

@surreality said:

It's definitely the place to try things out, I would think. Since it's mortals only, there's not anywhere near as much reading or stuff to learn as there would be in a game with supernaturals. That in itself is a huge plus when dealing with a new system and setting.

I concur.

What's also good is that Chronicles of Darkness is "blank slate." And that the game's wiki is extensive and thorough.

Plus, the crew on staff are good people. And there will be people around to help you understand some mechanics.

Some of the CoD stuff regarding investigating and social maneuvers are a bit a tricky, but most people aren't terribly familiar with them.

@dontpanda said:

I'm sitting here, hoping Justin! doesn't screw this country up as much as I'm afraid he will.

You make best with what you've got. Mulcair didn't impress anyone, and Harper wasn't an option.

Justin!'s done a good job with his Cabinet, as far as I can tell. Harjit Sajjan is as good a choice as any for Minister of Defence. And Marc Garneau as Minister of Transport seems like a good idea. Native-Canadian Jody Wilson as Attorney General? Good idea. Catherine McKenna as Minister of Environment and Climate Change? Maybe not so much, but a social-justice lawyer isn't a terrible choice. Dr. Jane Philpott for Minister of Health? Another good choice.

I don't know. The change has been drastic, but Trudeau seems to have surrounded himself with people who are more qualified than him to lead in particular areas. Not a bad idea. Also, 50% women, and a substantial number of racial and religious minorities. It's like he went out of his way to create a diverse Cabinet.

Meanwhile, under the Obama administration: Secretary of Defense Ash Carter is a civilian who has never been in a field of combat, and whose expertise is in theoretical physics. I shit you not.

As I said, you make best with what you've got.

@Misadventure said:

Hey now, Canada voted in some goofus some years ago, and let him do lots of damage. Good job on moving onto a better choice BTW.

Stephen Harper. He was elected in 2006. Canadians survived him for almost 10 years, and the damage he did is not irreparable.

What Trump will do in one year will be irreparable. What Trump's election would do will be irreparable.

@thebird said:

ETA Lilo @ BITN

So much for abstaining from RP indefinitely. The withdrawals were so very real. Only around for weekday, daytime RP most likely, though!

This is perfect for me, actually. I'm mostly daytime EST.

I'm over there as James.

@Thenomain said:

It's strange to see a lawyer being honest about the courtroom experience.

All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.

@Arkandel said:

What's a Clone High game?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEmVaEItQdc

What you need to know is that the show launched the careers of Phil Lord and Chris Miller, who later did this little piece of shit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ_JOBCLF-I

@Sunny said:

I don't see where this is in conflict with what I am saying.

It's not. It's me venting frustration regarding that position, but understanding why you've taken it.

@Sunny said:

I do not believe that a player should have the right to make ooc decisions for somebody else's PC.

I understand what you're saying. And, for the most part, I agree. But this statement -- this one -- really grabs my tits and twists them.

Situation: I make a ghoul for a PC, on the PC Player's request. And then, after a couple of weeks of good play, PC Player suddenly decides to tell my PC not to leave the house, and goes off to RP with other folks. Attempts to resolve the situation fail; OOCly, there's a stone-wall to my pages, my @mails, my impassioned on-channel pleas.

Suppose all of this is true, above.

The PC Player that asked me to make the ghoul? Has made an OOC decision that has screwed my PC. That decision is: (1) to avoid me; (2) to ignore me; and (3) to pretend I don't exist. And yet, I have to be the one that takes steps with staff to correct the injustice.

Horseshit.

But, I get it. In real life, it's really not appropriate to key your ex-lover's car when he decides to cheat -- fuck you, Carrie Underwood. You don't get the choice to fuck someone else over just because they did it to you. You should knuckle up, and do what is necessary.

But if I were staff and asked to make a decision on how to handle the situation, it would be to disintegrate that player's PC utterly, and then ban them. Because fuck you for making me step into this domestic-relations shit. If you can't be bothered to talk to people that you've fucked over, I'm not particularly interested in being "fair" to you. Eat in pari delicto and unclean hands and shit.

@Olsson

You mean "ZooTopia," right?

@Lithium said:

Mine won't even play boardgames with me anymore...

Lame.

I'm just not allowed to pick on her.

But there is a rule in the house: when watching Jeopardy!, I'm not allowed to shout out the answers, but she is.

This is what happens when your partner is also a lawyer.

I just seek peace and a reasonable resolution.

@Scorn said:

Still waiting on a response from them on that, but honestly, I really don't feel that this is an unreasonable move on my part. Nearly three months? Seriously? There has to be a limit on how long another player's agency over their character remains sacred. My character deserves the chance to move on with her life.

For me, that limit is when the player starts connecting and refusing to OOCly acknowledge how their behavior is affecting others.

Which puts me a position inapposite to @Sunny's, but that's okay.

@Wolfs said:

All of these losses, for both teams, have come on the road. Both are still perfect at home. We're seeing two historically great years from a pair of teams in the same conference, and they probably couldn't be more different in the process.

Right. My money is on Golden State, despite the Spurs' superior stats, because they can score boatloads very fast. The Spurs are a system-team, and if they get down early and you can keep them down, it's hard for them to score 10+ in a minute.

@Arkandel said:

Would an elimination format such as FIBA's and NCAA be worth it, as it adds to the excitement ('anything can happen in one game') but takes away from the measure of a better team?

Fuck no.

@Wolfs said:

So, it's not just a matter of the Warriors outscoring everybody in shooting battles. Now, if that's the direction the game goes, they are much better equipped than the Spurs to do that, but they can and do dominate through defense as well.

From the ESPN stats, you have to look at Pace as well. Spurs play a slower game. The Spurs have a worse offensive efficiency, but a better defensive efficiency (and by a slightly larger margin). Otherwise, the Spurs have fewer turnovers and a slightly better rebounding rate. Numbers tell me that the Spurs are a better team. But the Warriors have the better record. So, that's why I concluded that the Warriors can, and will, lean on their offense to win. Because this is the case.

This is still not a knock against the Warriors.

If I had to place a bet? I still wouldn't bet against the Warriors. Not in a second. Head-to-head, they'll take down the Spurs more often than not. That said, if any team could compare, it would be the Spurs. They give you the best shot of knocking off the Warriors.

@Vorpal said:

You're evil.

I like that.

Of course. I have stage experience.

Be sure to advise of this in private, or she may consider it comical.

@Vorpal said:

So much hate right now >_<

You could always advise her of your recent herpes outbreak, and then ask her if she remembered whether the two of you ever made out on stage or not.

@Wretched said:

Couples that pick on each other, stay together. Unless yer a bunch of little bitches.

I'm no longer allowed to do this, mostly because I'm much better than my partner at these games.

@Arkandel said:

I know everyone is talking about Curry and it can get old... but this is history in the making. We might never see someone do that stuff again.

Maybe you're simply misinterpreting what I said, so I'll try again.

Dominance is measured through stats, in my opinion. Even if Curry is pulling out one of the best statistical years in history, that does not mean that his team is dominant; that means that he's an incredible shooter who is likely willing his team to victory through points alone.

I think the Spurs are more dominant, numbers-wise. They don't just outscore you; they outscore you and shut your offense down period. They will crush you on both ends of the court, and they will do it through a combination of good coaching and veteran experience. Like Brady and the Patriots, their system is what makes them so damn good. And, like the Patriots, Pop has been doing that shit for years. The Detroit Red Wings, as much as I hate them, fall into the same category of greatness.

With the Warriors, Steve Kerr could smoke a blunt on the sidelines, and they'd still win because of their scoring talent. Match them against an equally-talented scoring team (not saying any exist right now), and their defense -- whatever that is -- comes into play. Also, take out the cheap-ass illegal screens.