100552 réponses à ce sujet

[LightningPoodle]

smells fishy and salty if you leave it out

 

Yeah, we don't want that.

[raging_monkey]

Yeah, we don't want that.

nope and it ruins the carpet if it get on the floor

[LightningPoodle]

nope and it ruins the carpet if it get on the floor

 

It's just a nightmare to get out. Nothings ever simple is it?

[raging_monkey]

It's just a nightmare to get out. Nothings ever simple is it?

im told club soda gets the stains out. Just do before it gets crusty.. i cant i cant go anymore im dying XD

[LightningPoodle]

im told club soda gets the stains out. Just do before it gets crusty.. i cant i cant go anymore im dying XD

 

I don't know what your laughing about. This is a serious discussion about cream pie. 

[raging_monkey]

I don't know what your laughing about. This is a serious discussion about cream pie. 

rofl! Stop i cant stop lmao

[Master Warder Z_]

yeah cinderella went dark... cutting off toes for shoes *shudders*

Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor.

o.o

[raging_monkey]

Tinker Tailor Soldier Sailor.
o.o

seriously that line was so creepy

[LightningPoodle]

rofl! Stop i cant stop lmao

 

Yeah. Well, we have to stop sometime, otherwise it just gets messy.

[raging_monkey]

Yeah. Well, we have to stop sometime, otherwise it just gets messy.

it smells now

[LightningPoodle]

it smells now

 

Did we forget to mop up?

[Master Warder Z_]

seriously that line was so creepy

Hellsing abridged ova 5 o.o

"What about the Holocaust museum?"

Leave that be, no one will deny what we did"

[raging_monkey]

Did we forget to mop up?

still cream on your side so yeah XD

Hellsing abridged ova 5 o.o
"What about the Holocaust museum?"
Leave that be, no one will deny what we did"

i remember it

[Master Warder Z_]

i remember it

o.o Nyet.

[LightningPoodle]

still cream on your side so yeah XD

 

Really!? I thought I got all off it. Maybe some got down the crack in my sofa. Note to self: Do not eat pie on the sofa.

[Bowie Hawkins]

The inquisitor isn't asking Sera to believe anything, just to let her have her own beliefs.

 

No, if the Inquisitor insists that belief in the Dalish gods is correct that means she's asking Sera to believe that a faith which is mutually contradictory to hers and has no place for her is true - which would mean that her beliefs are false. 

 

 

Lots of dwarves and elves can believe in the Maker/Andraste but that's not the same as the Chantry (as an institution) accepting them as equals (because they do not).  

 

That's still more accepting than the Dalish religion is of any non-elves. We have canonical examples of elves and dwarves being Andrastian, but none that I have been able to find of any non-elf believers in the Dalish gods.

 

 

You want to play a more agnostic elf that picks the "I'm not sure" dialog line?  Still a problem with Sera.  

 

That's because the "I'm not sure" option is still trying to push her toward accepting that a faith that has no room for her and which, if true, means hers is false: "There’s so much history there. What if some of it IS true?"

 

Which is why, as I've said at least once before in this thread, if I were playing a devout follower of the Dalish gods I would pursue someone other than Sera. that way neither Sera nor the Inquisitor has to compromise on their religious beliefs.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Yeah, Pathfinder is relatively new and the heir of D&D, so...yes, people still play those. If you find a group of players with whom you have chemistry, and a good DM, it's one of the most fun things to do, as far as I'm concerned.

 

Meh, honestly I find D&D 5th edition better than pathfinder (which is little more than D&D 3.75)

[YourFunnyUncle]

No, if the Inquisitor insists that belief in the Dalish gods is correct that means she's asking Sera to believe that a faith which is mutually contradictory to hers and has no place for her is true - which would mean that her beliefs are false. 

 

How do you justify this statement? it makes no logical sense. How do you equate holding your own personal belief with asking someone else to believe it? One doesn't follow from the other. I know a married couple who are made up of a Christian and an atheist. They are happy together. They accept that they have different views on god and enjoy all the things that they have in common. That's how relationships work. It's perfectly possible for two people to be together and have different faiths (or lack thereof.)

 

It seems that Sera can't manage this in the case of her lover having Dalish faith but if so she's the one who is being unreasonable and illogical. If the Dalish is willing to accept her Andrastianism and not try to convert her, and she is not willing to accept that her lover has Dalish beliefs, then she is the one at fault. Her logic is flawed. That is abundantly clear, and yet you keep stating the opposite with nothing to back you up. I truly do not understand why. She might think that the Dalish will attempt to convert her but that's her own paranoia talking, not anything logical.

 

Now, we can go into the reasons why Sera may hold this illogical position, and perhaps excuse her, but I can't for the life of me understand how you can continue to maintain that the Dalish elf is in any way at fault simply for holding personal beliefs.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

I not sure how anyone can excuse any Dalish for continuing to be faithful after all we learn in this game. Not to those elven frauds. Nope.

[Dgyre]

No, if the Inquisitor insists that belief in the Dalish gods is correct that means she's asking Sera to believe that a faith which is mutually contradictory to hers and has no place for her is true - which would mean that her beliefs are false. 

 

 

 

 

That's still more accepting than the Dalish religion is of any non-elves. We have canonical examples of elves and dwarves being Andrastian, but none that I have been able to find of any non-elf believers in the Dalish gods.

 

 

 

 

That's because the "I'm not sure" option is still trying to push her toward accepting that a faith that has no room for her and which, if true, means hers is false: "There’s so much history there. What if some of it IS true?"

 

Which is why, as I've said at least once before in this thread, if I were playing a devout follower of the Dalish gods I would pursue someone other than Sera. that way neither Sera nor the Inquisitor has to compromise on their religious beliefs.

 

I would agree, a devout dalish is an odd choice to romance Sera.

 

It doesn't change the fact Sera is uncompromising and intolerant for initiating the ultimatum about converting to her religion.  Sera is a flawed person, thats part of what makes her character interesting.  Other characters are deeply flawed as well.

 

I don't understand this stance that Sera is the paragon of Tolerance and is the Inquisitor is who is so very terrible in this situation. You really think the Inquisitor is being intolerant for simply not changing her religion?  She should have to lie to Sera to make this work?

 

Sera, as you pointed out and I completely agree, is terrified after these events. She is like a child.  But you are not her parent and she is an adult and we can expect her to behave like one.

 

Sera initiates the conversation, Sera ACTIVELY stats the Inquisitor must convert.  The Inquisitor may PASSIVELY force an issue for Sera, only because of Sera's world view, by refusing to convert, but the Inquisitor is not ACTIVELY stating "convert or I'm done",  Sera is, 

 

Sera has a black and white view, X is good, Y is bad, and Sera gets to decide who is X and who is Y, and does so often without actually evaluating evidence or the person themselves, instead focusing on her preconceptions and assumptions about the person.

[Duelist]

Meh, honestly I find D&D 5th edition better than pathfinder (which is little more than D&D 3.75)

*puts on hipster glasses*

You're both wrong. They're both far too mainstream.

I don't actually know what either of you are on about.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

*puts on hipster glasses*

You're both wrong. They're both far too mainstream.

I don't actually know what either of you are on about.

 

LOL, as if roleplaying games have ever been mainstream. Nice try though.

[WildOrchid]

I know a married couple who are made up of a Christian and an atheist. They are happy together. They accept that they have different views on god and enjoy all the things that they have in common. That's how relationships work. It's perfectly possible for two people to be together and have different faiths (or lack thereof.)

 

It is possible, but it's also possible for a couple to have their religions clashed. I think Sera is also afraid of that being a possibility.

[Artemis Leonhart]

Meh, honestly I find D&D 5th edition better than pathfinder (which is little more than D&D 3.75)

Fair enough. I'm not here to argue which edition/system is better or worse: I just like to have fun roleplaying with my friends and we chose Pathfinder, which so far is a good enough system. I don't care about which one has the longer penis ruleset.

[Aimi]

It seems that Sera can't manage this in the case of her lover having Dalish faith but if so she's the one who is being unreasonable and illogical. If the Dalish is willing to accept her Andrastianism and not try to convert her, and she is not willing to accept that her lover has Dalish beliefs, then she is the one at fault. Her logic is flawed. That is abundantly clear, and yet you keep stating the opposite with nothing to back you up. I truly do not understand why. She might think that the Dalish will attempt to convert her but that's her own paranoia talking, not anything logical.

It's not "fault". Some people can't be with some other kinds of people. That's just the way it is.

For example, a friend of mine was in a relationship with a guy who was very invested in conspiracy theories. They had fights about it; sure, they had fights about other things, but I'd say something like half of my conversations with her about him involved a comment about how it'd be nice if he wasn't so ridiculous about this stuff. Eventually, she couldn't deal with it and they broke up.

Or how about an even more common example, fights about religion in general? Sure, there are plenty of people who can make interfaith or atheist-theist relationships work. I've done it myself. But there are loads of other people who can't, because their religion is so fundamental to their worldview that they can't contemplate connecting with somebody who doesn't share it, much less spending lives together. Marriages have broken up over the children's religious upbringing.

I don't see this as a fault thing; it's just a conflict of two individual things that, while perfectly reasonable on their own, can't work together.