Griddlelol

Polyamory is essentially cheating with consent, at least that's how I interpret it. Although it's more about having relationships, rather than just sex as cheating implies. I've always had relationships that overlap, until now, because I find it difficult to spend all my time with one person. I guess my issue is that I couldn't accept someone doing that to me, but think it's perfectly find to do myself.

I much prefer the philosophy of items can be good or bad (as in detrimental). The utter worst parts of games is when you pick up an item that is either neutral, or weaker than the one you have. What's the point? It's just trash. Having to make a meaningful choice in whether you use an item or not is in my opinion, fantastic design, and a far better choice than "NPC lives or dies."

Damn! I never thought of it that way. That's a really good insight and I think I appreciate the game a little more now.

I hate rowing. I used to row for my school and getting on one of those machines brings back horrible memories of school and awful tests to see what "team" you made it into. Also everyone does it wrong, including all the instructors.

That sounds like my kind of wedding. I recently went to a semi-traditional eastern European wedding and had a rather long discussion about it with the priest about it. I dunno, the ceremony was so pointless and extravagant, no one was smiling, everyone just wanted the party after. Why not just do both at the same time? On polyamory, it's a sensitive subject for me. I think I'm leaning towards it, but I couldn't accept if my partner was (hypocritical, I know). So I either have to not do it, or break my partner's trust since she is not open to it at all. Currently I've not done it, but this is the longest monogamous relationship I've ever been in and it feels weird.

Level 16 you should really have crafted some gear. I'm pretty certain the best gear you can have is crafted. Also, gathering materials is easy, I never once had to farm. You just sort of pick things up as you do wartable stuff and kill things.

The thing is, so are about a million other people who are applying for the job. They need to cut down some how, and to me how you take criticism is pretty OK way to do it. Honestly I wouldn't know what to say either. "Erm, I just said sorry and did the thing again, but right."

I really liked the lack of healing magic. The worst part of DA:O was having enemies who could practically one shot you since health was basically a non-resource thanks to healing magic. This meant that you had to play as the party's healer to get through some tough encounters. They've moved it to a very specific finite resource. I think it works. It's along a similar lines to dark souls. If you're running out, you're either doing something wrong, or you're under levelled. It's a good indication of skill/level requirements, rather than having infinite health to the point that it's no longer a resource. Barrier and guard are both extremely powerful, but unlike HP, can only be useful in combat. The aoe is awful. Most of the markers are smaller than the effect, leaving you to guess whether things are actually going to be hit or not. Cannot understand why they did that. Just make the marker bigger, or the effect smaller.

Holy crap, you summon in chapter 3! That is awesome.

I'd like to know that too. I destroy shoes and I don't know why. It's probably because I wear them every day to do everything, but that just makes me think that shoes are built badly.

When I think back, I never really enjoyed GTA. I liked driving around, killing cops, murdering innocents and doing dumb things. I hated the missions, but I was probably caught up in the rage that was GTA hype and the idea of playing such crazy games. Woah, GTA3 was kind of like my minecraft. I was a kid, I made my own fun.

Yeah that would be better. When dragon age starts off with "the pope is dead!" I had a little hope, but it quickly went to a "the world is going to end!" A TNG style Mass Effect would be my GOAT. The way I would design it, is the player character as pretty much Worf. Someone who is important for combat, because games can't be without it, but most importantly, he is almost a fish out of water, plus he's a relatively middle level officer who is surrounded by higher ranking people with great personalities. I'm tired of games where I am the leader. I want to play a game where I'm just a lieutenant who has a little bit of influence, but not the grand chosen one, or the captain. That's someone else, I'm just tagging along on their story. Man, I really want that game.

Yup that's me. I really enjoyed it when I played it, but looking back the whole thing felt like busy work. I don't think it's a very good game. But I played it a lot and had fun. I dunno, it's weird. A common criticism, but I felt like the story was instantly forgettable. I honestly don't remember the ending, nor the motivations of the bad guy. ThE character was ok. Some were more of a miss than a hit (fucking Sera was annoying) and some felt like their side story was irrelevant. Iron Bull's felt anti climactic

Infants still have potential for responsibility.

Didn't like GTA V. Thought it played like crap. Did not understand all those 9 and 10/10s.

I now only listen to Thumbs and The Bombcast simply because they're so polar in terms of content. That however fills more than a week's worth of time.

Cool! Also, I have another character I'm leveling who is also 10. I don't know about the expansion being worth it, but I'll tell you when I've tried some of the missions. The headshot thing was completely fine for me because I've never played more than an hour of CoD, but have hundreds of hours invested into Boarderlands. I don't bother with the crucible, I've messed around in it, and it's more enjoyable than CoD, but less enjoyable than Halo. I like how with supers, even a bad player like me can get a few kills. I think the main end-game is a more Diablo style thing. Fight the same bosses over and over to get loot (or upgrade loot). It's pretty satisfying to do if you find the combat enjoyable, but I can see why some people would find it tedious. Also, obviously the raids.

I am totally, but I play at weird times. I usually play around 7am before work, then occasionally in the evening. I'm planning on getting the expansion this weekend too. Dunno why but it's sucked me back in.

As someone who also works in the area, but on the academic side, the clinical research isn't perfect, I agree. The difference is, that it's there as opposed to anecdotal evidence presented in other areas. I'd much rather base my opinions on evidence than what a lay person has read on the internet. Half the problem with the industrial side is how they've started in vitro drug screening as opposed to in vivo. It's ridiculous that they thought this would save them money... Tangentially, the free access of information on the internet is not always a good thing. Too many lay experts and self diagnoses lead to a ton of misinformation and people telling the experts they're wrong simply because they read an article they didn't understand, written by another lay person who read a primary source they didn't understand. I had a discussion with my partner's grandmother over her self diagnosis of "histamine intolerance." Her diagnosis was based on a rash she had. While the symptoms of histamine intolerance can include a rash, so does practically every single allergic disorder out there. Instead of visiting a doctor (which is free I should point out), she decided to stop eating certain foods. Based entirely on her self research, lack of critical thinking skills and bias towards "toxins in foods."

I've always thought of it along the lines of the train dilemma. If a train were to run over a person, but I could change the tracks to run over 5 chickens or chimpanzees or frogs, I wouldn't even consider it for a moment, I'd pull the lever. While I feel the burden of proof that all animals are equal is on those claiming they are, I believe that I addressed why I think all other animals to be a lesser life forms and that is entirely based on responsibility. The argument of potential responsibility has a flaw - mentally incapacitated people can never be responsible to anything - but as a fully functional human, I would want to be euthanised if I had late stage dementia or brain damage. I've seen what it has done to my family members, and I do not want that, nor can I understand why someone would be OK with that. This starts to break down when you look at intermediate stages of dementia/development/brain damage, and depending on your moral code those who are born with a high level mental incapacity; however I think that's a separate issue.

Oh, I know that it's used for people who are unable to speak, but it's strange that it hasn't received the same backlash as "retarded" has. It's still ableist, but maybe it's because it's used by young children as opposed to young adults and teens. Well ableism is functionally necessary in many areas, not just intellectual capacity. You can't have a deaf person answering phones, or a person confined to a wheelchair working on a construction site. That's a pretty cool reason to use idiot. I like.

It's a shame I really don't like her music, because she's a really interesting person.

I cut out both "lame" and "retarded" without even meaning to. Glad I did, although I still say "dumb" which is probably offensive to, well...dumb people, but most people just see it as a rather kiddie insult. I tend to use "doofus" more than anything, just because it's incredibly fun to say. Weird that "stupid" and "idiot" aren't considered ableist. Since, they are. Apparently having lower than average intelligence is something you're allowed to make fun of. Edit: When I'm drunk I use the word "cunt" a lot. Which I'm told is incredibly offensive to some people, but I grew up with adults who'd say it every other word.

It's also impossible to consume enough aspirin, but that also has a leathal dose. While it is technically possible with ambien, it's not feasible that, I as a 90kg man, would eat 8000 tablets. While I say "FDA" approval, I really mean clinical research. The key thing you've pointed out here, is that they were withdrawn. That's huge. If something does harm, it is taken away. How many cases of THC related side effects would be needed to withdraw that? Or would there be a huge outcry if it was suddenly "re-illegalised" because it was deemed dangerous. I feel it'd be rather like alcohol. Impossible to make illegal because it's so...standard. Despite it being incredibly dangerous to public health. There's also the issue that just because it can't cause death, doesn't mean it's safe. There are plenty of other potential side effects that could warrant it being banned. My point was that focussing on death is disingenuous, if you don't include comparative data on other widely consumed drugs - they all have an LD50. I'd like to reiterate that I am on your side Zeus. I think weed should be legal. It's incredibly safe to smoke and eat, plus if someone wants to do something potentially dangerous, that's on them. Not the state. I feel like this is incredibly irrational. "out of the ground" doesn't make something any more safe than "out of the lab." Many pharmaceuticals are from biological sources anyway. Just because it has a brand name, doesn't mean it's not from a plant. Most pharmaceuticals are based on the original biological chemicals, with only minor changes to alter the efficacy, potency or reduce their toxicity. I don't really know much about the FDA, I really used it as a replacement for research. You're probably right about that. This is exactly my point. David Nutt is a rather good scientist who counselled the UK government on drug classifications. Unfortunately he was fired because his evidence didn't agree with their rhetoric. He was famously quoted for saying (paraphrased) "fewer people die from ecstasy than horse riding." I think his classification is pretty good, so here's his blog if anyone wants to read it. https://profdavidnutt.wordpress.com/

I was thinking of just getting the Destiny expansion instead. Do the codes get given out on Friday? I've heard about them, but have no idea where to get the discount code. That's a pretty dumb way to do it. So essentially PS+ members get the full game for £20 rather than £50. That's an incredibly good deal.