Bay 12 Games Forum

Zom. Bock. Oh. Lips.

Zombocalypse. Get it right!

It is the one true fusion of zombie and apocalypse. Zompocalypse is close to acceptable, though obviously incorrect. All other variations are anathema. *fistshake*

Anyway, nitpicks, yeah. I've found as time passes and the distance between watched movies grow, I become increasingly annoyed by movies set in the future that have wildly disparate -- and in some cases, outright regressed (for no mentioned reason) -- technology and, in some ways worse, methodologies.

Avatar in particular annoyed me, though mostly because it's just the most recent I've watched. Try to tell me that material science won't progress to the point we have clear materials capable of taking a flipping arrow by the time we have space travel and I will (metaphorically) hit you in the face with the hurricane propelled brick we already have bouncing off windows, never mind mil grade shit. And that's just the bloody start of it.

I want to strangle the whole pusedo-military thing they had going. One, maybe two, kinetic kill vehicles of the proper type and that whole damn tree would have been splinters, with zero chance of retaliation. Rocks goddamn fall, every space elf dies. Warble warble. Whole bloody thing was done just pathetically bad. Our corporations are massively better than that at native exploitation now (and have been for centuries! We're not getting worse at it!), never mind whatever (even more) dystopian nightmare future!corps are likely to be.

Pretty but stupid does not a good movie make.

That... might actually hinge on something else. One of the fairly major conceptions of th'christian/monotheist god I've seen in theological discussion is that it's... more or less atemporal (or more accurately, I guess, outside temporality), or perhaps omnitemporal (at all times simultaneously).

Change wouldn't be possible for that sort of being in the sense it is for a human, or at the very least wouldn't occur in a means we'd recognize. Vagueing it up a bit, it's hard to see exactly how change would work for a entity for whom all time is one time, its (more or less) present. Would that sort of thing even have a framework for past/future/change? From our perspective, though, almost definitely not -- all interactions with the divine would be with the exact same entity, regardless of temporal positioning from our side of things.

Alternatively, there may be no guarantee you're ever dealing with a sequentially aligned entity -- the god of the old testament might actually be a future entity, from the perspective of the God, and there would be no particular assurance that the entity you interacted with tomorrow wouldn't be radically different from the one today. I've not actually seen that put forward by a religiously aligned theologian, but it'd definitely be a possibility. S'interesting stuff, really.

E: That said, I imagine the more lay understanding would be that god could learn, but has no need to, as you mentioned. No reason, as all the decisions or knowledge god could wish to make or have is already known to god, so the general stuff that prompts humans toward learning or changing opinion simply isn't there.

As for change... maybe. From what I understand, that's somewhat underpinning the difference between new and old testament. Though it might be arguable that god did not change, merely the covenant god has with man, or whatever that is. Exactly where a person falls on it probably differs between denominations and religions, assuming they've ever really thought about it at all.

Baptist. Close, heh. And yeah, church affiliation can get a little... weird, honestly, in some places in the states. I'm only tangentially aware of exactly how it all goes down, but there's probably a good dozen or so, at the least, different denominations within a good hour's drive of me. Something like four or five, iirc, just in this county. Never mind splinter issues (usually more social than theological, from what I've seen) with churches ostenitably of the same denomination. It can get pretty messy on the ground with protestant groups, at least in the states.

Mmhmm... devastating's bonus damage scales off AP, but only at .6. Technically, it's a 1:1 AD scaling nuke with a bonus ((base damage) + (.6 AP)) component, just converted into magic damage (which is kinda' delicious), so it scales better off AD than AP. That said, mpen is definitely nice for it, a lot like mpen's nice for mundo's cleavers.

Only thing poppy really benefits from AP wise (remember, the q scales better with AD) is charge scaling and that... item that adds AP to auto attacks after ability use, which does extra delicious things for Poppy's q, since the skill activation triggers it for the actual q hit. Lichbane, right. Which makes the q effectively scale at 1.6 AP, I think. Which is pretty bloody delicious indeed. Downside, though, is that while it can crit, (Don't actually know, but a 1:1 scaling source of magic damage that can go critical is... pretty special, innit? How many sources of AD -> magic damage conversion is there?) the bonus damage apparently doesn't get multiplied. Just the AD. Which is maybe an argument to go trinity over lichbane and go hybrid, pick up some crit somewhere, if you're going for damage. I'unno, s'two o'clock and I just noticed my thinking's going disjointed, so, posthuzzah.

At least and get the hands back in anything resembling a workable condition. Assuming they could be reattached at all after being fired at someone.

Was it... was it this thread or some other that pointed out that the actual impact of the 2nd amendment in a theoretical second American civil war scenario would be pretty close to nonexistent?

Th'face of modern warfare's made most civilian weapons, especially in the hands of the more-or-less untrained, more or less meaningless. I mean, you could do a little bit with guerrilla stuff, but it really wouldn't mean jack in the face of an actual military force, especially one integrated with a modern military support structure (artillery, air, etc.). Calling the second amendment a method of resisting tyranny is... kinda' silly, nowadays. Original intent, maybe, but the combat effectiveness of the sort of militia the second amendment would involve arming is pretty piss poor these days.

If any uprising's going to occur and do more than jack-all in the face of actual physical oppression, it'll involve a military schism, not a civilian uprising. Arming the citizenry just doesn't really do much (besides jack up the death toll) anymore, especially with the stuff that's accessible by the general American population.

I guess it's a bit of a psychological comfort, though, even though the actual capability to resist is effectively nil? Illusion of the capability to resist might be an effective tool of control, honestly...

You can totes crush fleas, just not really en masse. Have to do this kind of pinch and roll thing where you get one of the bastard between your fingers and squeeze hard, then twist 'em around a bit while keeping the pressure on. Buggers don't get back up from that. Problem being y'mostly have to go at it one at a time. Not much of a help when there's about two t'six hundred of the fuckers covering your legs up to the knee.

Note: Copious vulgarity and spastic jumping around and smacking your legs is a perfectly goddamn sane reaction and probably what you should be doing at that point. Also, get out of the building/area and come back with bug poison and/or fire.

E: This may have just been a thing that has happened to me. More than once.