Bay 12 Games Forum

RPGs, basically. Y'know, chainmail bikinis and steel armour with breast cups.

Oh. Yeah. Fair enough on that.
Really, why would you put breast cups in armour? It's just not... well, each piece would have to be even better fitted than they already would be. It's all kinds of impractical and also a weaker point.
Then again, at least most RPGs have some obligatory unremovable undergarments.

Here's an analogy:

I am playing a game of poker with you. You say you have four aces and grin at me.

I don't believe that you have four aces, because you haven't shown me any proof
I don't believe that you lack four aces, because you haven't shown my any proof of that either

When you show me your hand, you might either have four aces or not, but until I've seen your hand, I can't be sure either way.

But in that analogy, while you can't get definite evidence, you can consider my intent. Well, firstly, it's quite improbable to have me have my hypothetical four aces anyway, not impossible, just not very likely. With intent, it would probably benefit me a lot more to be lying than to be telling the truth, seeing as, if I WERE telling the truth, it would either have you bet with a straight flush and win the bet without any fear of being wrong, or have you fold and cease betting when I would have otherwise had the best hand, which would decrease my winnings.
On the other hand, lying could have benefits if I had a better hand; in convincing you to make a higher bet on your hand, thinking it will win; or a lower hand by convincing you to fold and leave me with the best hand.

Plus, the sheer amount of man hours needed to make an even basic simulation of real life is ENORMOUS!
Well, I guess this is games you wish existed...

WELL.
In that case, I would love a game that simulated the universe, predicting its particular method of randomness and started from the initial conditions. Except you can mess around with it. Like interrupting a beheading during the French Revolution be dropping a large phallus into the middle of the proceedings. Or building NASA their damn moonbase yourself using computer majyyks. Then sending it to the moon because no doubt they'd still mess it up even with your generous help.
The possibilities are effectively endless.

Done it already. Except a perfect simulation of the entire universe with inbuilt editing capabilities.
I'm pretty sure it's impossible though.

I'd still say a positive claim should be expected to give more proof than a negative one. I mean, to prove "You have no house", I would have to check through an entire list of residences in the world and show that none were registered under your name, whereas to prove that you did have a house, all you would have to do would be show me it, and that you have the deeds to that house.
Of course, it would be a lot harder for everyone if you said your house was invisible, intangible, did not have any documentation and interacts with the world at only arbitrary points, then it would be very difficult for anyone to prove anything.
That is to say, it should really be expected for somebody with a positive claim to have absolute proof of it, and especially with existance claims, a negative proof would entail a sweep of the entire universe, which may or may not be infinite. Other things such as colour would be simpler for both parties though, where the biggest doubt would be vision problems with one of the participants.
It still to me just seems to make more sense to have the person making the positive claim provide evidence. Because, there will only be one circumstance under which something will be perfectly true, but many ways that same thing could be wrong. To prove something positive, it only needs to show that one example. To prove something negative, every single case needs to be shown as not being the case.

But it is proven, it's in the Bible. And it's not a standalone source because the Qur'an says it too.

Yeah, blasting into a serious thread with childish namecalling. Clearly nothing can go wrong with this finely laid out scheme, it is completely foolproof and everything is perfect.
Hello.

The burden of proof lies with whoever has it, as far as I'm concerned anyway. If you have proof, then you put it forwards. Whether or not it's for your side, it's not particularly good sport to deliberately withhold information from the other side of the debate. Unless it's something serious like in court, then I would actually not have a problem with withholding evidence because it's all part of fucking over the subjectively moral legal system. Preventing the advance of knowledge is not a thing people should be doing though.

Really, both sides should be able to put forwards some proof, but the side it is demanded from should be those making the positive statement (My dog is grey, you ate the last slice of pizza, there is a god, electrons have negative charge). Because that just seems logical to me, I don't really have a good explanation for that one. It would just seem kind of odd to say "X is true, now prove me right".

Diane punches her in the vagina. She certainly takes it like a man! Which is to say, it hurt.

Can I... can I sig-quote this? This is literally the best piece of writing I have read ever.

Also, see if Snowflake is remembering any more military training stuff, if he is, have him start training up the zombies in the basement. If zombies have any learning capacity at all, we might as well use it.

Plus, has this adventure been going enough for crack shipping now?
DianeXSnowflake, SpacialSnowflake, totes got crack shipping criteria there. Not neccessarily shipping like how shipping normally is, but they'd make awesome totes platonic sparring partners. In fact, having them team up for sparring would be pretty cool, seing as Snowflake is close to unbreakable and Diane is implied to be pretty tough/nimble too. Just so long as they're reminded to not actually kill each other.
Look at me, I'm shipping what have I done with my life 

If you're giving orders, the only thing you can really do is make sure they're not otherwise going to be busy when you need them, and keep them busy with training or something when you don't want them getting killed.

Also dwarvern stupidity is normal, don't worry about it. Just change around their jobs so you can make sure they're available most of the time, make more training time, change their civilian labours (if any) to something that they can easily be replaced for etc.