Oooh I did this once! Hammie got 20 to everything and had the Tarrasque as an animal companion!

Would you believe my gaming group had a problem with that? Apparently they don't recognize greatness when they see it.

Thank you.

- From the lawful good troll.

Gotta brush up on my french knowledge first. And I only know so much about canada since I'm canadian.

Because everything I do know about France could be skewed as 'racist imba'. xD

I think I know what you're talking about. Yet, it makes me shudder all the same.

I'm sure there's a 'writing finery:time consumption' mathematical ratio out there somewhere...

Regardless, it was like 30 seconds of farting.

Yeah, 'Can Pass for Gay' would be a class. There's too many benefits to doing so. The draw backs are completely fair and balancing (maybe make it Tier 4).

Stephen the Lesbian? Total lesbian PrC.

Wouldn't that make it a choice?

No. Because while being homosexual is not a choice. Acting like a stereotype is.

Superb.

Your definition of "knowledge" is clearly different from mine! As I think is your definition of racism.

Well, not the only thing. Americans ARE tragically uninformed, if the various polls and standardized tests are to be believed.

Eh, no more than anyone else in the world. Your average european knows about as much about Venezuela as your average american does. Most people from Japan can't find Kenya on a map, either.

When it comes to the world stage and knowlege thereof- the average person knows about two countries in any detail. The first is their own native land. The second is america. An "educated" individual, of any nation, will also know about other big hitters- such as the UK, Japan, China, India, Russia and of course whichever bits of the middle east are being a pain this decade.

Beyond that, basically everyone is as badly uninformed as average americans, and often times misinformed in ways that we're not.

National prejudices are still alive and well in most of the world. America... not so much. I don't pretend that's out of any kind of virtue on our part. But prejudice requires we care in the first place.


And then one has to come to terms with the scale of America, as a nation.

America: 3.79 million square miles; 312 million people; 52 major political zones (counting D.C., clumping the island chains as "one"- and leaving out midway since it's basically hawaii)
Europe: 3.83 million square miles; 857 million people; 57 major political zones (counting things like Vatican City and Gibralter)

We are close- but not quite- on par with all of europe combined in terms of complexity. Less population density, for sure. This spread does include Alaska... and a chunk of mostly unused Russia. So while it's not "even", it's "close as it's gonna get".

And culturally speaking, yeah... we are a mess. At least europe has nice, clean boundaries to determine who does what, and where they go to do it. Is it any surprise our country's so messed up? Texans have to listen to the opinion of Alaskans and Hawaiians and New Yorkers. When a single change is instituted in any state in our union, the whole country has to adjust.

When was the last time Great Britain had to change their policies and laws based upon a vote in Latvia?

Any knowlege of america should be treated as equivilent to all knowlege of europe. Every state, a nation unto itself.



And when we get to that kind of scale... everyone's poorly educated and ignorant... not that I'm saying I exactly approve of this fact. If anything, it scares the piss out of me. But it's a HUMAN flaw. Not an American one.

On the other hand... well... our education system is shot to crap. It's a significant problem. But given, again, america's... complexities... it's not terribly surprising. Would europe do any better if the combined total of it tried to function as one nation? Signs point to "hell no". Just look at the recent disaster with Greece and what that did to the Euro. And then multiply that by a factor of every other poor and mismanaged nation in europe.

That's what America has to deal with. All. The. Time.

In the same sense that sorceror is a choice or barbarian is a choice (both are born into how they are; for the latter it's as simple as, 'I wasn't born here, and I'm tougher than you'). Just like sorceror, some people gradually realize that they're lesbians (if they weren't already at 1st level).

That's my reasoning and I'm sticking to it!

Also, what great powers does this man have?

Personally, I think sexuality is only partially regulated by genetics. Or even inherent biochemistry. Too much evidence suggesting environmental causes. If it were a "birth" component, we'd see a correlation amongst identical twins (actually, it'd be seen in families in general).

And studies prove, conclusively, that no such link exists.

This is also further complicated with the known fact that some traumas (and in fact, simple aging)- whether sexual or not- can alter sexuality in certain ways. And it appears that some people can in fact deliberately alter their sexual orientation.

In those regards- sexuality resembles nothing so much as the being left or right handed. And, personally, I think of it in exactly that context. "Been around forever, we have no idea what causes it, and even if we did we couldn't do anything about it- but, hell, I've had converstions about far less interesting things."

Yes, that's what I think of (the causes of) sexuality. And the assignment of a primary hand. It just sorta happens. And is fun to chat about. Only problem is, some morons seem to think it actually matters. At all. Then again, there was a time people were killed as satan worshippers for being left handed.


Humans haven't changed much over the centuries.

At least not in any way that mattered.

Okay, I don't think we're supposed to express our opinions (even if they're purpotedly cited as fact) on sensitive subject matter like this. Because then it's inevitable that we move into ethics and morals (whether by your left hand or another's right hand; Idc, srsly). Let's just avoid that entirely before a mod gets in here.
----

We aren't here to express opinions on anything but the subject itself. Say, if we're creating a lesbian PrC, we should just create one and then debate the min/maxing (with supportive fact citations), rather than the morals/ethics of lesbianism (again, with supported facts citations which are completely unecessary for the latter, since we shouldn't be talking about it). If we're unsure whether or not it's moral/ethical to do this, don't interfere with the process - becaues then it's just time wasted for everyone.