Don Edwards

He's not wrong.

Well, in a fiat currency system, there has to be some entity with the power to create money. As long as that entity KEEPS the money, it does nobody any good. Not even the entity that created it. So that entity can either: (a) buy stuff - and eventually own everything, which idea has serious issues; (b) lend the money out, presumably to entities expected to be able to repay it; (c) give it away - and how does it decide how much to give to whom?

Not need two butt warmers, only have one butt.

It's canon in several universes - and this is a direct quote from one of them - that "an untrained magic user is a danger to himself and everyone around him." There's also this take on it: "A powerful, untrained magic user is a target, nothing more."

I think that was because she used the "believe me!" power on the plausible part of what she said but not on the implausible part. (Granted, the only reason the implausible part was implausible was because she said it. If she hadn't, that part would have been both plausible and assumed.)

I find that 5th ed fixes that rather well. I really dislike 4th ed, but I grant it has some good points but in general it's not the game I want to play. Then they must have reversed course. I was watching the early development of 5E, and it appeared to me that they were carefully studying everything that the 4E fans preferred about that edition and making sure that 5E was WORSE than any previous edition on those points. So I gave up on it. (But like I said, EARLY development. Plenty of time between when I stopped watching and when it was actually released.)

... and speaks with a British accent. It's obvious, sometime between now and the future portrayed in Star Trek, Britain successfully invaded France. Actually, maybe it happened back in '90 during eugenic wars. Alternative explanation: the people he learned English from were British. That happens a lot in Europe, for some reason. (Now why my high school had a teacher who was born & raised in Paris, hired as a foreign-language teacher, and had her teaching nothing but English...)

And yet I preferred 4 for providing more flexibility and symmetry. At higher levels you didn't have to carefully rig encounters to make your non-magic-using characters' presence actually meaningful. And "the effect LOOKS LIKE this" wasn't so deeply embedded in the rules, so it was easier to make the effect look different.

I have a simpler response for them: "I have no idea what she's talking about."

Not just over major groups like dinosaurs/birds or insects/bugs. The maned wolf is referred to in some languages as the "tall fox", and it's neither a wolf nor a fox - although it is a canid. The aardwolf, on the other hand, is not even caniformia - with "wolf" right there in its name, it's actually a species of hyena, which are more closely related to cats.

Neptune and Pluto are in an orbital resonance such that they never get close to each other. In fact, Uranus and Pluto get closer than Neptune and Pluto do.

Anybody who picks ONE accent for what early modern English sounds like, is almost certainly wrong. No matter what that one accent is.

(Psst... get a second battery... )

I'll be glad that I'll never meet a komodo dragon. Or an African crocodile.

Particularly if you happen to know there's a cheesecake in the fridge.