Lurker > MalcolmMasher

I'm considering it, mostly just 'cause DISCOUNT. But I'm about to draw 120 relics, so I'm in no rush to make hasty banner pulls. The chief thing holding me back is that I'd need multiple relics for the same character in order to make one of them viable for 6* Magicite (which is what I'm up to, for content.) Although I suppose that even with all excess gauge wasted, Syncs are likely powerful enough to be relevant.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

I have an Arc USB that chases Holy and it chases Curada and Ultra Cure just fine. They inflict Holy damage to undead targets, so they're tagged as Holy.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

My current workplace celebrates Juneteenth. Hadn't heard of it before I started working here.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

"Immortal Machine" -SHODAN
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

But if we don't overpay the sports players, they'll have to take up jobs in the private sector!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzToNo7A-94
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

I would consider prioritizing economic growth (and thus re-election odds) over human life to be one of the factors, not the only one. I think there's also some legitimate, although inexcusable, ignorance (if you only only listen to sycophants, there's no one who can correct your misapprehensions) and some cowardice (doing nothing is "safer", in terms of not being yelled at, then doing things which might be wrong.)
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

The odds that Biden's VP will become President strike me as non-trivial.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Up next: A game that for a long time people didn't really know didn't actually come up with some of the stuff it did.

That sounds like Sacred Stones to me.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

"Good enough, but slow" feels like an accurate description of PoR. Being on a console instead of a handheld doesn't do it any favors, either.

I like Ashnard, but I suppose that's partly because I don't think less of him for exploiting the fact that his countrymen are servile dogs. (The scene where he goads Bryce about it is pretty fun, too, although I can't help but suspect that it's actually intended to make players think less of Ashnard.)
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Cait Sith almost redeems himself here by saying he'll fetch us the Black Materia, though his "sacrifice" winds up having him perfectly fine, so I'm not sure why the big production was needed. MEH. Well, we'll just drop him from the rotation.

The best theory I recall reading is that Cait Sith's "sacrifice" is there to make players think they've already seen the token Party Member Death, so that the actual casualty catches them off guard.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Relm and Strago are not blood relatives. I think there's some Thamasan NPC who mentions that she's the daughter of one of Strago's friends.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

New South Wales quarantine tweet:

https://twitter.com/nswpolice/status/1242950427181584384?s=20
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

It amuses me that, if you let Aias live, he predicts (correctly) that Caellach would have killed him whether he succeeded or failed... and yet, he still showed up. Caellach's got that charisma, yo!
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

I suppose I'm thinking of "most interesting", from a gameplay perspective. Like, "at the end of the chapter there's a guy on a throne, hit him until he dies, heal if necessary" is not interesting. Bosses who are mobile and threatening, or who are immobile but total combat monsters, can be interesting. Perhaps even bosses that might not be particularly dangerous on paper, but who present an obstacle because you don't want to (or aren't allowed to) just kill them, and must instead find a way to endure or evade their aggression for a time. Bosses where, when you reach their chapter, you have to stop for a moment and say "Right, this is the chapter with That Boss, what's my plan to deal with them?"

It might be best to disqualify final bosses, who are typically the focus of their chapter by default. Plus "Top Ten Final Bosses" could easily be its own ranking.

I'm just trying to provoke your muse into action, though. If you feel some other metric would be more entertaining, then feel free to use it.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Top 10 Bosses? Maybe Top 5, if you're having trouble filling ten slots (I expect I would).
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Bane of the Cosmic Forge, which is Wizardry VI. Not that I had much idea what I was doing.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

I wonder if you can get it even if your land is currently being paid to go unused (cant remember the term for this atm).

Historically, "lie fallow".
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

He holds onto Falchion supposedly for leverage against Medeus but then tries to kill Marth, AKA the only person that can actually use Falchion?

In his defense, Gharnef has Elice imprisoned and knows where to find Aum. He does not need to keep Marth alive in order to maintain him as a potential threat.

Edit: For the record I'm pretty sure that the Kitsune Lair pattern is just "enemies alternate every turn".
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

I don't think Bolton testifying against Trump would be some moral light in the darkness to a few wayward Republicans

It's got better odds than "the Senate does exactly what Trump's legal team wants them to do." (I am under the impression that Trump himself actually wants witnesses, but that his lawyers have managed to get through to him that not having witnesses is safer.)
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

It might be the nihilism and pessimism setting in, but I've been bouncing around the idea in my head that since they're just going to acquit in a sham trial anyway - is it politiclaly advantageous to Democrats that they reject witnesses because it is just so obviously and transparently unfair to a point where even a layperson would be like "uhh that's not a fair trial at all that's just f***ed up."? At the very least it would likely make the Senate races more feasible.

Figure that the preferred Republican talking point is "impeachment was a farce orchestrated by the opposition-controlled House". It seems that the Senate refusing to hear witnesses would support that angle. On the other hand, if e.g. John Bolton testifies under oath that Trump was using U.S. foreign policy for his own personal and political benefit, then the right-wing spin doctors may have to fall back to "Trump's actions are reprehensible, but no actual punishment is appropriate". And, hopefully, that gets some of the moral conservatives and undecideds to conclude that maybe someone who is acknowledged as corrupt by their own party doesn't deserve to remain in office.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.

Klobuchar 14
Biden 13
Bloomberg 13
Buttigieg 13
Yang 13
Steyer 13
Warren 10
Gabbard 08
Sanders 04

Disappointed that Yang's the only one who is pro-nuclear.
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.