Avatar of Gwazi Magnum
  • Last Seen: 8 yrs ago
  • Old Guild Username: Gwazi Magnum
  • Joined: 12 yrs ago
  • Posts: 32489 (7.15 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Gwazi Magnum 12 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

Recent Statuses

9 yrs ago
Current :magnum:
1 like
11 yrs ago
PRAISE THE SUN!!!
11 yrs ago
Note to self, enter = post.
11 yrs ago
Apparently these are a thing.

Bio

You followed me all the way to my Bio? Well... Now we must drop it.

Most Recent Posts

PURRfect93 said Weeeellll..... I've been thinking and mahaps I shall try out for co-gm if our newly appointed gm is in need of one. Also, on a side thought, I was thinking that to help balance out characters and combats we could set up stats befitting our classes. The exception would be that skill would be represent weapon rank instead 0:Do you guys think that would work out? .e.


That would need an entire system designed to work with stats and forum roleplay.
Ultimately it's up the GM, but I wouldn't suggest it unless if we find a pre-exisiting system or we make one that's very simple and easy to follow.

Nerendier said I suppose that's not bad, perhaps there are really only two powerful nations, the laguz nation, and the now-evil nation, and between the two is the nation that we are currently in, so we're not so much a target as caught in the crossfire. Gives us a chance to interact with political intrigue or something as the nation attempts to choose sides and potentially has in-fighting.


That makes it a bit stereotypical.

Even the games with Laguz had four Laguz nations and three Beorc nations.

One of the Beorc nations Crimea was for all intents and purposes good.
One was Daein, generally seen as a good nation but under the rule of a tyrannical leader.
Then Bengion, a giant empire who has both good and evil fighting for control over parts of the nation.

Laguz had two nations who were generally friendly (as far as citizen relations go).
One who was generally known to be cruel and very pirate like.
And another who mainly just stayed out of 'mortal affairs' (These ones were dragon Laguz) and keep to themselves completely.

To the point they'd send in wandering outsiders back out (even if it killed them) simply to avoid outside affairs.

MULTI_MEDIA_MAN said I'm tempted to make the obligatory noble-esque character with this idea in mind. Basically the guy who wants to live the "good life" behind to go out and help people.Also: the link to the wiki in the OP seems to be broken. It just leads me to the IC subpage.


Odd :/
I'll try to fix it.

Edit: Fixed it.
There was evident racism in the games where Laguz were present.

Where Beorc constantly feared them as violent, ruthless and primitive beasts. And often would try beating and killing them at any chance possible.
This lead to Laguz to largely resenting Beorc as being a simple-minded, greedy and hateful species. Not as eager to kill Beorc mind you as Beorc were to kill Laguz, but still plenty hostile and would usually want to avoid contact with them when possible.

The only real exception to this was nobility, Laguz and Beorc nobility normally got along. To the point some saw each other as family even, but had to keep this strictly among their noble households because they both believed their people were not yet ready to accept one another.
Nallore said Hows everyone this afternoon? :)


I'm good, just getting ready to start another play through of XCOM.
Using the Long War mod so things will be much more challenging than usual.
Ok, given the time that's passed it seems TentacleLord is our new GM.

Was there anyone who applied as a Co-GM that you would like to take up on the offer?
This RP had a theme where I was interested enough to act as a player, but not something where I could GM it well. :/
Aren't the recruits mainly the NPCs?
Hi guys. To start I'd like to point out my signature, note how if you press the refresh button how it changes to a different gif?

Now, I just had a case where my sig turned out to be Batman waving his finger as if he was going "tsk tsk".
The issue? I never added this as an option, meaning an admin/mod randomly altered my sig to make this one... and never PM'd me to tell me which pic or why.

So not only am I left having no idea which picture was an issue. I also don't know why it was an issue.
Considering this... I'm setting it back to how it was before the Admin/Mod touched it, because I don't like having pics there I didn't add myself and have no way of knowing which one the Admin/Mod took offense to.

But this is really just me giving the pointer/advice that if an admin/mod ever feels the need to edit someone's sig like that, can you at least tell them what the issue is? Because honestly I'm left clueless, and if it's some kind of rule breakage you're only going to have it broken more often if members aren't even having it pointed out to them when it happens.
Imperfectionist said You're repeating yourself, Gwazi. You said the same thing about thick skin on the last page.


You mean you're just noticing repeats in this thread? :P

Imperfectionist said I'm new at this, plain and simple. I haven't had a chance to acclimate to the styles people use. This stuff, all of it, is a learned skill, one that I'm just dipping into for the first time, and I'm not very good at it right now. I'll get better. I'll formulate better arguments, write longer posts, etc, but I gotta start somewhere.


That's all fine, everyone start's somewhere. I'd try to give advice on how to help you do that, but I doubt you want to do it my way.
My way was basically having to deal with shitty people long enough I just snapped one day and went "I don't need to care what other people think or say to me" and it stuck.
Now to clarify, since that day (Grade 3-5 I believe) grew up enough to recognize other people are right about things and do listen to them if they can prove their point, but I still don't let negative remarks or opinions about me pressure me or make me feel bad like others do. In fact you could say, I feed off people's hostility towards me. I more often now find it a good thing cause it means I'm being honest/standing up about something rather than bending backwards to please people. :P

Imperfectionist said I hope you die happy, Brovo. I really do. I'm just too scared to take on a mindset like that. Too untrusting of my own perceptions. Too fond of the irrational and the fantastic. I hope you die happy, and I hope I do too.


Speaking as a former Christian this is honestly the main thing that I find prevents religious people from going atheist after being convinced their religion is false. Fear of dying, fear of simply not being anymore, and fear of that dead loved ones are in fact gone for good. I think I got off easy here because I just happen to be a very big advocate for the truth, despite how much it hurts. But for most people, this is often something that proves a massive challenge. One that never fully resolves and still lingers around and hurts people who accept that fact. But at the same time you do get cases like Brovo where there is a positive spin to it, being able to focus on your life now rather than worry for later. Or as say Richard Dawkin's puts it, this is your one time or chance on this planet so make the most of it. Or even as Carl Sagan puts it if you want more of a "I will continue to be something" sort of argument, we are all star stuff and when we die we simply return to the Cosmos. Our physical bodies are simply just temporary caretakers of the atoms and energy that composes of and creates us.
Mark Tenjer lying on his bed eventually got bored just lying there and not doing anything, he needed something to occupy his mind before the next mission. So he got up and began to put on his ODST armour, knowing he'd need to have it on soon anyways because of the upcoming briefing. After taking the time to put on his armor he grabbed his Assault Rifle & DMR which he kept on him. He walked out of his room and headed towards the shooting range, maybe practicing his aim would help keep him distracted and hopefully sharpen his skills as well. Once he got to the shooting range he pulled out his DMR, and opened out the shooting range's computer. He set it to be a timed 90 second trial with moving targets, bonus points for hitting a target's vitals.

One coded in he aimed his DMR and quickly slammed the start button, a loud buzzer sound and the targets began to slide across. Alien noises, gun fire and human screams being imitated through the speakers. He quickly pulled the trigger, hitting almost every target in the head. "One, two, three. One, two, three he counted in his head for how many times to pull the trigger on a single target. Swiftly and instinctually pulling out the magazine and reloading the moment he fired 15 rounds knowing that's when the magazine was empty. Once all his magazines were out he swiftly dropped his DMR and switch to his Assault Rifle. Now changing his focus from the head to the heart of the target he kept controlled bursts of 8 shots per target, also swiftly changing Magazines at the maximum. In this weapons case that would be 32 rounds, and before he knew it the buzzer sounded again indicating the end. He looked at the score which said 95% accuracy.

"Shoot, that 5% is gonna kill me out there" Mark said to the computer in response. He went to grab some more ammo from the small ammo storage in the firing range and then after reloading his weapons hit the buzzer to go at it again.
Imperfectionist said He answered all of the points I cared about in a very satisfactory way, but the rest he seemed to be kind of an asshole about, especially the "answering every question" thing. ____ On the other, I was pissed, because the post had an air of elitism and "how could you possible not know these things, you peasant?"


I seriously don't get your issue with the way Brovo make's his arguments. He's honest and straight forward, but does try to add some charm and humor to it. The charm/humor actually does help in people not getting defensive instantly.

Though really what I can say in this regard can just be narrowed down to this:

If you blunt honesty and/or humour in debates is enough to get under your skin then OT isn't exactly a good place. It requires a certain amount of thick skin to stay in without being driven up the wall.

Grizzle Bear said Morality is rather subjective. People can and have spent lifetimes arguing over what is and isn't morally just. I'll put it this way though, I do not need religion to be a good person. I do need it to be the best person I can be.


It is, but the fact that if you were to lose your religion you would still have morals would show that Religion isn't where your morals were coming from. If it was, the morals would leave when you lose your Religion. Which is what I was (rather poorly) trying to argue with that point.

And despite my constant debating/arguing against Religion, I have never hated individual Christians. My issue has always been with the system of Religion, though if you're a Christian who simply believes in God, doesn't try to condemn people, and doesn't try to get rid of science, then I'm not going to have any real issues with you. I might disagree with your motivation or reasoning in some things, but there's nothing that would make me actually have an issue or get into conflict with you.

Grizzle Bear said Fair enough, it's a long thread and I admit I only skimmed bits of it. Personally I believe there is a hole more to the atheism vs religion discussion than does or doesn't God exist. But if that's all just rehashing the same old junk for you guys, my apologies.


Me, Brovo and others have a tendency to go on a long amount on debates, especially where the topic is Religion.

And there's no need to apologize for bring up an old topic if you have something to add to it, the more minds working on something the better the end result is going to be.

Though I do need some clarification in what you mean by "Atheism VS Religion" having more holes than "God VS No God".
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet