FuBai

Theres a bird called Roc? Hmm in the Japanese version of Silkroad (MMORPG) the highest leveled boss is a massive bird called Roc :-s Also appears in other games like Heroes of Might and Magic 3, YGO TCG, etc. Roc is just a noun describing a large bird. Roc's are from herodotoduses (sp?) historys and from sinbad's tales. They massivley predate computer games i'm afraid. They probably were even around before herodtus

Mo gui gui 102 combat

This thread seems abhorently pointless. As is this post.

Or the pre-game warm up of the New Zealand rugby side - the "hakka". I thought your name sounded like the begining of that song too lol.

I have the same goal as you! I hope to get it in a few days time at the mage training arena, but I will need to rc at least 1k more nats (going for infinity bottoms) - Good luck with your goals. I hope 94 mage will be worth it :P

Nice goal idea - I may have to race you on that one. To make it fair i'll get at least 1 mage and fletch level before I do any of the other easier to level skills. Stats are in siggy if you are on for it.

i managed to die in the widly to a smiting initate pure, and lost whip. I won 300k staking on my main, and am now rcing to get the runes to do mage arean for a book

Ty :P. Still not died whilst pking scince i went rune pure (some very close calls though)

Here's some more pk's for you: This guy died leaving the wildy - 1 from poison. I had no food and was also poisoned, so didnt screen pile: Helm and arrows are his too: Another rather arrogant (can't say c0cksure for some reason) initate pure bites the dust: Good fight, she didn't run. I dont know what happened to pile pic - must have hit wrong button - was worried about lvl 86 who mite pj:

I'm taking a break for a short while. The reason being is that I read the Behind the Scenes thingy, and, as I only have 1 quest left to do (the eyes of glophrie) i thought i would do that...plus, try and get 99 fletching. So I will try and do 20k bows this weeked (I have friday off and probably some of monday so I should make it) - then I will try and do the remaning 17k i need for 99 at a later date - I am going to durham the following weekend, then berlin for a few days so wont be able to come on much. This should hopefuly explain why I am not posting more pks for you.

Have you considered getting a decent mage level first? Spend 10m or what ever on alchs or stuns so you can actualy claim to be a really good mage.

A creature living inside you is no more than a cancer, a tumor, a parasite if it is unwanted. A woman has the right to get rid of it, in the same way she has the right to get rid of a cancer. I am completly pro-choice on the issue. Potentiality does not equal actuality either. Uprooting an oak is different from unearthing an acorn. Nah. You can't really say it this way, because a baby probably won't kill the mother. Also the people who argue wheter an embryo is sentinent or not will tear you into pieces. Still an embryo is an organism that feeds off the mother. She has to eat enough to support both her and the baby. Despite that an embryo isn't a parasite because it is philogenetically ident (just looked up the definition), although this part of the definition just seems to be there to exclude embryos. I beleive I said "no more than" which is not nesecarily equal to. A cancer may kill the mother, but this is an irrelevance. What is relevant is that it is an unwanted part of thier body, and the mother has the right to eject it. AN embyo may not be defined as a parasite by a dictionary or a scientific journal, but it is still an unwanted creature drawing its life from a host.

I do philosophy at A level (therby a lesser extent to which others here have studied), but I do not see how Newton can still be clasified as a philosopher - it once would have meant, and would have been used in terms of, one who loves learning - (philos meaning loving, sophos meaning wise/sage/wisdom). Surely this appelation can be applied with verascity to Newton. However, the modern conotations of the word differ greatly, so that Newton would no longer be classified as a Philospher, but as a scientist. However, many great thinkers derive thier philosophy from observation and espress it in absolute terms - Aristotle and MacIntyre being key examples of thinkers attacking relativism. Ghost's point seems rather outmoded, in that academics often base thier opinions on derived knowledge rather than observed knowledge - few academics will have "speed-balled", and can only indierectly understand it. There is a weakness in academic knowledge for some people, and that is not the correct way to attack that assertion, though I agree with Ghost in that I tend to place more value in academic reasoning that others do.

Don't mock me, if it was up to me my little green smilie would be sniping the scum that lingers on this earth, like a parasite to an open wound? I see that as a better idea to be honest. If it was up to you we could all skip hand in hand as equals knowing that the good people are working hard while people like this woman happily give drugs to their kids safe in the knowledge they'll only get a few weeks in prison then be back on benefits. But that's just my opinion...We clashed on my underage pregnancies policies didn't we? we are going to clash on everything until you stop thinking in absolutes. The is only one moral absloute - that there are no moral absolutes.

A creature living inside you is no more than a cancer, a tumor, a parasite if it is unwanted. A woman has the right to get rid of it, in the same way she has the right to get rid of a cancer. I am completly pro-choice on the issue. Potentiality does not equal actuality either. Uprooting an oak is different from unearthing an acorn.

yeh! and gays! and blacks! and alcholics! and people that wear pink on fridays! and everyone who doesn't read the Daily Mail! Then we can form a tolerant liberal democracy based on understanding with all those wierdos gone.

I have to say that I have often argued for the legalisation of all drugs for those over the age of 16/18 (not sure at that point). I don't want to have to explain it here, as I can write at least 10,000 words on the subject, and, to justify myself properly, would take a decent essay, which i really don't want to produce. How ever, giving it to children under the age of 16 is not a good thing. If they are unable to consent to sex, which is, in my opinion, less harmfull, then they are unable to decide wether they want to risk the addiction and dangerous side effects of certain drugs - they can't smoke or drink until they are 16/18 here anyway, so other drugs are out of the question until that age. So, parents giving it to children means that they are unable to make a free choice, and are encouraged into engaging in a potentialy damaging habit, which has destoryed many lives and families + is currently outside the law, so harder to get support for it. EDIT: in response to the post above me, I would draw attention to Sigmund Freud, who, after developing virulent mouth cancer that meant he couldn't open his mouth by himself, he stuck a wedge in it so he could smoke the cigars that were the cause of the cancer. I support the individual's right to chose, so long as it does not adversly effect others. I think that what this mother did was wrong, as, surely, the biggest influence of all would come from your parents. However, we cannot ensure that all individuals are able to make un-influenced choices (almost every choice you will make will be influenced), and, for me, religious induction at an early age presents at least that same, if not bigger, problem for the development of a child.

Che was an interesting figure, granted. He was intersting in a flawed manner - an epic protagonist doomed to act in a tradgedy by his own tragic flaw. And, whilst his idealistic philosophies were interesting, I find pragmatism to be the most intelegent answer to the world. There is more to be derived from The Prince than I find of use in the Motorcycle diaries. But that's my opinion. Our world seems so beset by moral absolutes and idealogies, at least to me, that we are unable to consider the basic framework of our own society - we rarley as why murder or peadophilia is wrong. We simply know that it is - and, whilst it may be best to believe that it should not be allowed, I find it depresingly restrictive not to examine why without provoking outrage. I'm not asking for justifcation or reasons as to why these things are wrong in response. The statement I make agains idealistic absolutes is more general than that.

Laggy connection. DOuble post :?

Seems like today was my lucky day. After having no rune kills all weekend:- ^^ she tried running away - killed by a 3 from poison. Classy way to go. This guy was fighting another person in lvl 4. The other guy ran away after hitting about twice...so i asked if i could fight arch lord and hit him with my whip. He said no so i instantly stopped. Then he potted and truned on smite and attacked me. I k0ed him in 2 dd(s) specs. And another initate pure down. I am proud to say that I haven't actualy died in the wildy scince i became a rune pure - well I havent died whilst pking. So all these pk's are gains (- sharks + pots)

He was an idealist. I, personaly, don't think that's a good thing. My knowledge of him is mostly from the motorcycle diaries and wikipedia, so I'm not in a real position to say much more.

Some more pks for the gallery:- ^^ at last a kill worth 150k+ (140 arrows, full blck hide, archer helm, glory) 27,25 spec for the ko...he didn't know what hit him :P I have got addy gloves now, and 71 att now.

They should call me the pure killer lol...all the full runers run away. Brotha Verac is a very cool guy, he ran out of food in both matches and didnt run...even though there were no pre-arranged rules against running. He's a braver guy than I am - especialy scince he pks in his fire cape: It seems it's the ones you have to work for the least that are worth the most. After getting nothing but dd(s) for a while...I walk into wildy, without pots or pray, and bash this guy with a whip 4 times. dead. Please keep the comments coming.

i'll add u ^^ who says 1 def pures own rune pures? Teles were lying in a pile from someone elses kill. Then he attacked... I'm getting loads of 1 def pures running away like girls because i eat. They scream safer...but look who wins

and another one down, and another one down, and another one bites the dust :P