Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I get annoyed when people bring pure fluff into rules discussions as a point to debate with.

haendas wrote:I get annoyed when people bring pure fluff into rules discussions as a point to debate with.

I hope the library that I hopefully will start going to has better people then some of this stuff...

Dont. Paint. Their. Armies. >=(

forruner_mercy wrote:

haendas wrote:I get annoyed when people bring pure fluff into rules discussions as a point to debate with.

I hope the library that I hopefully will start going to has better people then some of this stuff...

Library? As in biblioteca? The place with books in it?

Las wrote:Dont. Paint. Their. Armies. >=(

i can handle plastic grey models without paint. the worst is playing against "legs with bases" that apparently have a great time shooting and fighting with only their toes....

tarnish wrote:

Las wrote:Dont. Paint. Their. Armies. >=(

i can handle plastic grey models without paint. the worst is playing against "legs with bases" that apparently have a great time shooting and fighting with only their toes....

That's digital weaponry for ya - laser toe rings!

Las wrote:Dont. Paint. Their. Armies. >=(

Don't mind this so much as people who show up with a marine army and pull a ton of basic tactical marine minis and start saying "This tactical marine (that looks exactly like all the others) has a melta gun. This one (also looks exactly like all the others) has a lascannon." And so on and so on. I tell them to put their minis away and make them wysiwyg before next time.

Mind you if someone says to me that their heavy bolter marines are actually missile launcher marines before the game I don't mind, because they are already obviously heavy weapon marines in the first place.

Skriker

What if they prime only the ones that have heavy weapons?

Well they and squad leaders would stand out the most anyway.

AustonT wrote:Put the race card back in the deck, and shuffle it, .

I was unaware your nation of origin had become a race.

Wikipedia wrote:Race is classification of humans into large and distinct populations or groups by factors such as heritable phenotypic characteristics or geographic ancestry

im2randomghgh wrote:

AustonT wrote:Put the race card back in the deck, and shuffle it, .

I was unaware your nation of origin had become a race.

Wikipedia wrote:Race is classification of humans into large and distinct populations or groups by factors such as heritable phenotypic characteristics or geographic ancestry

Being Canadian isn't a geographic ancestry unless you happen to be a Native American, as Canadian culture is largely imported from Europe specifically Britain. There is very little deviation between Canadian and American descendants of British ancestry. In the broadest of terms you share religious, governmental, and cultural traits so as to be nearly indistinguishable as a race from other colonials.

Wikipedia wrote:geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity—as opposed to current residence

Automatically Appended Next Post:
you also changed my quote I pretty clearly said province

AustonT wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

AustonT wrote:Put the race card back in the deck, and shuffle it, .

I was unaware your nation of origin had become a race.

Wikipedia wrote:Race is classification of humans into large and distinct populations or groups by factors such as heritable phenotypic characteristics or geographic ancestry

Being Canadian isn't a geographic ancestry unless you happen to be a Native American, as Canadian culture is largely imported from Europe specifically Britain. There is very little deviation between Canadian and American descendants of British ancestry. In the broadest of terms you share religious, governmental, and cultural traits so as to be nearly indistinguishable as a race from other colonials.

Wikipedia wrote:geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity—as opposed to current residence

Automatically Appended Next Post:
you also changed my quote I pretty clearly said province

I am six generations Canadian, that is history.

As for religion, since when does the U.S./Canada have an official religion?

As for culture, the U.S. tends more towards a "melting pot" situation in which immigrants are expected (socially) to conform to cultural norms, whereas Canadians generally retain their culture for several generations. (Toronto is actually the most multicultural city in the world).

Governmental? Canada has a Queen. The Prime Minister and Commander in chief are NOT the same person (unlike the US) and the system used for castings votes is entirely different.

Gentlemen, can we just drop the race conversation all together? I can't speak for everyone else, but I didn't read this thread to hear about racism and all that it encompasses. Just say your pet peeve is racism, then move on.

im2randomghgh wrote:

I am six generations Canadian, that is history.

As for religion, since when does the U.S./Canada have an official religion?

As for culture, the U.S. tends more towards a "melting pot" situation in which immigrants are expected (socially) to conform to cultural norms, whereas Canadians generally retain their culture for several generations. (Toronto is actually the most multicultural city in the world).

Governmental? Canada has a Queen. The Prime Minister and Commander in chief are NOT the same person (unlike the US) and the system used for castings votes is entirely different.

I guess it's a good thing history and race are not synonymous terms.

The US and Canada are both primarily Prostestant, as you so helpfully pointed out the Commander in Chief of your nation is also the head of the Anglican church. Official religion has nothing to do with dominant religious culture, British Dominion in The colonies virtually guaranteed the primacy of evangelical Protestantism.

Yes governmental. I can see how two neighboring nations with constitutional democratically elected bicameral legislatures have NOTHING in common or the fact that they are both based on the same English system and really only diverge in the executive branch; you know, the difference between a constitutional monarchy and a republic.

Your pedantic approach to race, culture, and the geopolitical relationship of your nation and it's cousins to the south makes any attempt to discuss this topic intellectually futile. Furthermore it's firmly off topic.

Necroshea wrote:Gentlemen, can we just drop the race conversation all together? I can't speak for everyone else, but I didn't read this thread to hear about racism and all that it encompasses. Just say your pet peeve is racism, then move on.

Hear hear. Wasn't the original comment meant to be in jest, anyway? Yeesh.

AustonT wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

I am six generations Canadian, that is history.

As for religion, since when does the U.S./Canada have an official religion?

As for culture, the U.S. tends more towards a "melting pot" situation in which immigrants are expected (socially) to conform to cultural norms, whereas Canadians generally retain their culture for several generations. (Toronto is actually the most multicultural city in the world).

Governmental? Canada has a Queen. The Prime Minister and Commander in chief are NOT the same person (unlike the US) and the system used for castings votes is entirely different.

I guess it's a good thing history and race are not synonymous terms.

The US and Canada are both primarily Prostestant, as you so helpfully pointed out the Commander in Chief of your nation is also the head of the Anglican church. Official religion has nothing to do with dominant religious culture, British Dominion in The colonies virtually guaranteed the primacy of evangelical Protestantism.

Yes governmental. I can see how two neighboring nations with constitutional democratically elected bicameral legislatures have NOTHING in common or the fact that they are both based on the same English system and really only diverge in the executive branch; you know, the difference between a constitutional monarchy and a republic.

Your pedantic approach to race, culture, and the geopolitical relationship of your nation and it's cousins to the south makes any attempt to discuss this topic intellectually futile. Furthermore it's firmly off topic.

@ Religion, in many (most?) areas of the U.S. is primarily Roman Catholic, while your locality may be primarily protestant, Roman Catholic is generally slightly more common.

@ Government, tl;dr of your statement=they are both democracies, though of very, very different type i.e. proving my point.
the difference between a constitution monarchy/federation/dominion and a republic are quite stark. Also, the commander-in-chief of our nation is a proxy of the head of the anglican church. Not that that changes anything.

The only thing you said that shows any good sense in you was "it's firmly off topic".

I, personally, am done with this debate, as long as you are done with racism.

Hopelessly sidetracking a game in progress with a long series of anecdotes.