meol

Near the bank in Mos'le Harmless (accessed after Cabin Fever IIRC), not Karamja, there is a guy that will sew and unsew such items for a small fee.

I'm not sure about this, this has never happened to me before. This works like this: Every day you don't go and "help" your workers, your support drops by 1%. 99% support means that 99% of the money spent is used for collecting resources and the other 1% is wasted. There is a minimum support rating (I think it's around 40%), and you can only lower it by killing citizens or stealing from stalls. If you get flax for 40gp with 100% approval, with 40% approval it'd cost around 100gp ea, not because it costs more money, but because they collect less. (With 100% approval, 50k on flax yields 1250 daily flax at 40gp ea. With 40% approval, only 20k of those are used for collecting resources, and 30k are lost, yielding only 500 flax at 40 ea. If you add the costs together, it's the same as if the flax costed 100gp and all the money was spent on collecting). Also, improving your support rating will only affect the resources collected that same day, and the money lost from other days with low support ratings is still lost. If anyone has any answers please post. Thanks.

:wall: Sorry, my mistake. With "the same technology as in WWI" I tried to mean military technology, trying to get weapons nuclear bombs, long range missiles, etc. out of the argument, in order to have a hypothetical example for my question: Even if there was no the danger of obliterating a half of the world, why would China/Russia attack the U.S.?

Out of curiosity, where do you live? Costa Rica. : They won't attack, no matter did they have a real reason or not. A war between 2 out of the 3 bigs would equal to a war where everyone loses and no1 wins and they know it for sure. Exactly my point. If Russia launched a nuclear missile towards the U.S., their government would know about it and would react in the same way before the missile reached the american continent. Then, even after the populated places were overrun with atomic bombs, there would be enough missile silos and submarines to continue the attacks afterwards. Also, allies of either side would come in to attack, only propagating the destruction. In short, no world Great Power will attack any other soon. But my question still stands, even if we had the same technology as in WWI, why would Russia or China want to attack the U.S.? What would be the reasons behind it?

Oh, I forgot to post: Follow Celestrana's advice.

I think you need 30 strength for it, but I'm not sure. Maybe this will help you: Hope this helps!

Abyss is faster, even if you can't take an axe/pickaxe.

The cap comes from Jagex only assigning 31 bits for the "amount" of an item. Because you must also count zero, the cap would be: 2^31-1gp=2,147,483,647

Most people here actually think the political situation know is the same as during the Cold War. Maybe just don't know enough about it because in my country there has been no army in more than 50 years : , but why do you people think Russia/China would attack the U.S. out of a sudden? What would the reason be?

So, I'm not the only one! Seeing you post I realise I didn't even think about a girlfriend. I just don't seem to feel like I wanted/needed one, which is quite weird. Well, I'd also want to write a political essay, but that's part of number 8. \

Even though I've been in the Forums for long enough, I simply don't like people's names to their posts, and thus can't remember #-o . I'll try to start to do that from now on though...

I guess you are right, I think I misused the word liberal here. I gotta go and get better informed before I speak. I was thinking more about companies going to other countries and (for example) practising dumping, when free-market laws support their actions; more in an international point of view. You would also have to take social freedoms (gay marriage, drug legalisation) into account. Democracy just means "rule of the people/majority". Capitalism means "strive for wealth". I'm not saying capitalism restrains other types of freedoms, but it doesn't necessarily support them, and is not directly tied to democracy. My point is that neither do socialism or capitalism automatically mean totalitarianism; economic politics and social politics aren't directly linked to each other. Why would you require a sacrifice in political freedoms for socialism?. [Edit] Gregor Gysi (a German socialist politician) explained exactly my point of view in a recent interview. (The translation was made by me, so don't rely on its accurateness). "...I think that we have done more refurbishing work since 1990 than any other Party. This was also necessary, because we had to reform ourselves in every aspect [the Left Party] towards a democratic way. We had to draw the appropriate concussions and say: State Socialism failed, namely because it was unproductive and because it didn't guarantee Democracy and Freedom - which doesn't mean that it also didn't give social achievements. But we have to face this criticism, and then we must say: A dictatorial, authoritarian socialism won't ever be considered again, but rather only a more democratic one..." Original text (in German)

Most Quino's strips, especially Mafalda. (Cookie to the first person that knows about it)

Oh, but it's only a research centre, and it still can't sustain a stable exothermic reaction. Oh, well I guess I'll have to wait some more years for a real fusion plant.

A democracy cannot have a government-controlled, "fair" economy. Democracy must be paired with capitalism. You're just a closed-minded liberal... In order for a free market exists, where people and their enterprises are rewarded according to their work/abilities, there must be some government measures that stop the biggest companies from building monopolies and crushing all kinds of competition. In fact, some historians say that what happened in the USSR was nearer State Capitalism rather than actual Socialism. Capitalism doesn't mean freedom, and socialism/communism don't mean totalitarianism.

1. Pass the national high school exams with good grades. 2. Pass the Sprachdiplom II. 3. Learn Japanese. 4. Become better with the guitar. 5. Finishing Majora's Mask. 6. Finishing FMA's Manga. 7. Finishing FMA's Anime. 8. Extend my socialist ideas. That'd be it for the upcoming weeks.

The Whistle allows you to get into the King Fisher's realm (the entrance is a bit north of that mine), where you can access a Fairy Ring. Then, you are able to teleport to Edgeville and bank there. It's similar to the Arzinian Mines method, because you waste two inv spots (pickaxe/dramen staff/lunar staff and the magic whistle).

Nope. Nothing. :notalk: You'll have to get a super set instead (it really helps a lot).

Even if the Granite gives better defence, it's only around +5 (most probably your total def bonus will be higher than 110) so just bring a rune plate, and use the money on something else.

Bring prayer pots and a holy wrench. Super restores are an overkill. You'll do fine with 59, but take an agility pot for when you have to cross the handholds. By the way, this quest is very near to impossible if not using a guide, otherwise, it's not that hard as RFD or Dream Mentor, but quite harder that Underground Pass (which I did at level 56, just for the record).

Well, you know you can't have Chuck Close drawing for a free web-comic, do you? Other than that, I'd have to agree with Reb. The fun is just the "icing on the cake", and the most important things is the story (not its coherence, the story itself). Although I do find some parts quite funny, once you keep in mind the protagonist still has the brain of a heterosexual guy. : Wow, that's saying a lot... You really like Misfile, don't you? :wink:

I've never run out of space as a p2p, so I simply don't know what's the max. Can anyone enlighten me?

With the Whip-video-that-gets-paid-with-4-items-that-protect-over-the-whip scam, you can bring low alch runes, alch one of the items, and protect the 3 other mystic bottoms/torag's hammers/dbaxes and the whip. :D

3. You just haven't practised enough. If you had stronger arms and better agility/balance, you'd be able to. You don't need strong arms to do handstands (known from personal experience :oops: ). You just need to have good balance; balancing yourself properly almost seems to make your weight cancel itself out :-k . So ya, if you want to get handstands down, get headstands/tripods down first, then have someone help you do handstands by holding your legs in place. Once you get to the point where you can do it safely on your own, it's just practice practice practice :P . Looks like you are stronger than you think, I've just tested that on my little brother (I made him go into a handstand next to a wall) and he couldn't hold it for very long (by very long I mean 5 seconds) because his hands got tired :lol: (He's 11) I did tripods and headstands before but in my opinion it's a lot more different than a handstand and it doesn't help you learn it. Here's a handstand tutorial. http://www.beastskills.com/Handstand.htm Well, putting aside the fact that I'm a teenager and you're brothers only 11, being able to do a handstand at any given moment depends a lot on how tired you are (whether it be because of sleep or hunger, fatigue makes it harder to keep perfect balance), and how well you can balance. If your brother hasn't been doing it for a while, if his balance isn't great, then he'll get more tired not because of his own weight, but because of any overcompensating for imperfect balance. Still, it's surprising that anyone would need to drop from a handstand after 5 seconds because of weight rather than balance. He should be pretty light at 11, so that makes it even harder for me to understand the concept :-s ; it should be easier to him in matters of weight to strength ratio. Sure he wasn't just losing his balance, or that his hands weren't positioned badly? Nowadays, for me the biggest factor when it comes to doing extended handstands is the amount of blood rushing to my head once I get past one minute :lol: . Our bodies aren't exactly built to have gravity going the other way :-w . [/hide] Now this whole handstand business has me made come up with another question: If I build stronger muscles, will I get better coordination? Not necessarily. Fitness is divided into 4 categories. Improving one doesn't improve the others, but most athletic regiments try to train all four. - Anaerobic (muscle mass) - Aerobic (stamina) - Flexibility (yoga) - Coordination (coordination) Yes, that last parenthesis explanation was required So, better anaerobic fitness gives me more strength (like when lifting weights), aerobic fitness more resistance (when running long distances?), flexibility gives me, well, more flexibility (liken when trying to put a/the foot/feet behind the head?) and coordination better eye-brain-muscle reactions, and balance comes in with it, right?

How about you? 5 posts don't help much :P (=0.5/10) I try to consider 0.5 a minimum rate. Dunno why.