Aduu Avagnar

because the majority of english politics is mostly conservative. Its the Scotts who are historically more lenient and democratic.. I would disagree that the majority of english politics is mostly conservative... otherwise we wouldn't have had periods with a labour majority...

OK, what then, is the offering of meeting in the middle by the person who is wanting to play the concept that the person does not believe is supported by the lore? as I do meet in the middle. If they can make it plausible to be, then sure go for it. but /they/ have to make it plausible. and I agree with Intaki. And I will personally avoid people who I don't believe mesh with my ideal of the Lore. I think the issue is that people take the 'you can rp what you want' and believe it to mean 'people have to rp with you whilst you rp what you want' which is patently not true.

Not that a lot of you probably care (not being of the UK persuasion) but I need to get this off my chest. How, and why can people conceive that the Conservative party, can be trusted with leading this country for another 5 years? They have wrecked havoc with the NHS, borrowed more than the labour governments, have not cut the deficit as they promised, held up none of their pre 2010 election promises... yet people are still voting for them left right and centre. It is just mind boggling to me that the populace seem to think that another 5 years of them is a good idea. the working class people suffer whilst the rich get richer. They complain and then vote for the people that caused it..... Anyone want to hire a british person to be an aux pair or something? cause I want out of this place.

can we not turn this into yet another WHM thread please? this is about responding to RP that people don't agree with. Which can, and does happen. Not about interpretations of lore regarding the Jobs. if you don't like the way the RP is going, back off, leave it be. Don't kick a shit and cause an argument. People will have disagreements.

as I said on the linkshell, super interested for this. And I've done each turn god knows how many times so can do whatever it is I need, healer/dps/tank, whatever. ALL IC for me

Why did I decide to give Nako the abilities/powers I did? Mask: Gave me an option to utilise Fantasia OOCly without resorting to it ICly. Visor: Ultimately it was a more visible representation of his time within the Empire. And I wanted something that showed his minor crafting/reverse engineering skills. And I liked the concept. Magic: I wanted to play de mage archetype ja? Swordplay: As he was a combat operative, it made no sense to me why he would not learn at least one method of self defence that did not rely on magic, due to situations beyond his control where he may not have access to it. Contingency, contingency, contingency.

oh, if we're talking bits and pieces then we also have the following, along with the 32 years of combat/aetheric training: Formshaper Mask: Appearing as an Ash Mask with a crystal embedded into it, nako can manipulate the Aether within it to appear as another creature of roughly the same mass. He needs to constantly keep it topped up to maintain the glamour, and if it ever depletes, then the glamour drops. Shadow Visor: A Visor that acts in a similar manner to the VISR system from Halo 3: ODST. It enhances the current field of view between background and foreground, reads and catalouges individual Aether Signatures allowing for easy recognition, even if glamoured, and due to the way Aether works within people, can pick up changes to it, such as corruption by the Void, Ascians, or just someone starting to channel it ala Warrior/Monk.

I just try to use DoW generic stuff, or failing that, All Class stuff, yeah it looks less flashy, but it results in less issues overall.

roughly 32 years of training.

Didn't see a thread for this, so if there is one, apologies: Here is a translation of a Lore Panel done on Ishgard at the Nico Nico Super Conference. there isn't much lore there, but thats what it was called, and its an interesting read, nonetheless.

May I introduce you to NerdFitness? It is a website designed for nerds like us to hang out with other nerds whilst getting fit. it also features this rather nice bodyweight circuit training for beginers

This might work for their racial clothing, but they can also wear all the same clothing every other race does, so that's a major consideration for them. Armor is less of a problem because, for the most part, you don't slip them over your head (aside from chain maille that is, which... wow, yeah, that cannot be pleasant for an Au Ra to put on). But imagine trying to put on any standard cotton shirt with those horns in the way. Bleh! What a pain. I think they would get any of their clothing tailor made to suit them, rather than simply try to slip it over their head. They'd likely see the neck hole and go 'nah mate, that aint fitting in there...' probably what the first female Au Ra thought as well *rimshot*

clotheswise they probably just have shirts that button down the front... avoiding the issue of the horns all together.

For a raffle I could offer a prize of a Craft-in-a-box. (a complete set of leve items needed to get from 15-50, as well as a set of class specific crafting gear) in fact, if you want I can oversee the raffle and sort out a load of prizes for it....

Hello and welcome to the Shipyard. With the announcement of Free Company Crafting, and the fact that it can involve a party including those from outside of your own FC, the Red Wings decided to start to approach other FC's to help each other with the crafting of their Airships, and other items. As such, at the Summit of Free Companies, we created this Linkshell in order to network and facilitate the crafting of Free Company items. Membership is limited to at most 3 members of an FC to ensure that we can have as broad a coverage as possible, and if need be, it will be reduced down to two. Lets get together, and keep our eyes heavensward!

*ears perk up.* free. Art? Sign me up! Loving the picture. A talent indeed.

tempting......

as long as its pertinent to the topic they are fine, just add some content with it, not just drop the GIF/Meme and go.

Or do what they actually did and build bigger bombers and bigger bombs and BURN THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS DOWN. Actually wait don't, that's probably a warnable offence. You forgot to invent concentration camps to store your prisoners of War in. but he does have a point, inflamatory posts tend to exist to draw people into an argument. however, we have had 3 learnable moments from this.

Anyways, back on topic, Nat, did you have any other issues with the rules/moderating thereof?

There are a lot of words here but I'm not sure what the argument you're trying to make with them is. tl;dr Rules covering obvious crap are irrelevant Throwing warnings at people for useless things that made some babby angry will likely be abused and end in unnecessary bans. I just flat out don't trust a majority of the mods whatsoever, not like it matters at all. This is stupid and people should just not get all whiny over dumb things. Like what I'm contradicting myself with right now. Rules that were there from teh get go, that you agreed to follow and abide by. That aparently need to be there to stop certain groups of people from being assholes, as aparently some people can't help themselves. Report=/=warning. As has been stated many times. If you don't trust the mod team, why are you here? You don't get to decide if the thing someone is whining about is dumb or not, they may very well have a legitamate concern that you are unaware of.

So, to sum up, you don't think triggers are a thing? something that causes someone to regress into having an actual mental or emotional breakdown is not, as you put it 'a means for sheltered folks to stay more sheltered and penned in their little safety box' has the phrase been used and abused by members of a certain online community as a way to feel special, or for some twisted reason, to fit in with a demographic they normally wouldn't? yes, it has. That doesn't make it any less of a real issue.

Nako would be one of a few things, scientist, teacher, researcher, tomb raider or soldier.

Just to reiterate, this is a thread about MODIFICATIONS TO THE RULES. I don't think it's odd that I might have misconceptions or confusion about these new rules in it. I get that you might assume the worst of me, but please, give me the benefit of the doubt and assume any misconceptions of mine are held in good faith. That's the whole reason I'm asking these questions, after all. That wasn't an attack on you, I am trying to explain them in the way that I understood them, and asked for clarification from the powers that be, in case that was the wrong understanding. I don't assume the worst of you, hell, there is roughly 2 people on this website that I assume the worst of, and thats due to prior encounters that went very, very, south. though to my knowledge, the rules haven't been modified, only the policing of said rules.

That's isn't the definition of passive aggressive. I'm being quite blunt. it seems to me your are looking for arguments Ok so just a regularly aggressive personal attack then? statement of opinion does not make it an attack. It looks like you are looking for arguments, over opinions and facts that were clarified. Whether or not this is the case is another matter, this is what it looks like. Well to start, I was responding to this post: However if someone makes a point that ends up generating a warning, and then they edit it later, even if it's because they changed their mind, suddenly that becomes an offence. I was never saying that someone making grammatical corrections is punishable. Changing a post that says something offensive, mean, rulebreaking, into one that does not break the rules IS against the rules. As far as I understand. You could simply go back, and put in a note saying *this opinion has been changed, please disregard this point* that would not generate a warning, as the flow has not been changed, nor has the point that generated the argument in the first place. Please, mods, Freelance, correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that it was editing a post once an argument had been started, in order to claim that you didnt say what they are claiming you said.