Gulbasaur

Honestly? Most of them. I'd definitely run through the First Ward and Night Ward arcs if you haven't already; I really think they're about as good as it gets for storytelling in the game, outside of Dark Astoria (which is also quite good).

I take Provoke because I enjoy tanking and teleport target because it's handy for groups. If you don't want them, pick something you do want. Everyone plays differently.

I usually just stack up the damage ones, to be honest. Musculature etc. Really pick what you think looks good.

Nothing against either. Talos has some cool arcs, particularly. Definitely worth spending time in both places. This is a completely insane thing to say as it shows just how unemployed I was in 2020-2021, but Skyway's roads don't link up in any sensible way and I've never forgiven the zone for that. I think one loops back without joining onto any other roads. I tried to walk from one end of the city to another on only roads and Skyway was such a mess it didn't work.

Don't be silly. They're clearly talking about Dance Dance Revolution.

Sorry, I thought I'd replied to this a few days ago. It's unlikely now. My life is just much busier than it used to be! Redlynne's guide is pretty comprehensive, though.

I am going to ask outright because I think some people would like to know: does the licence agreement require, or indeed permit, HC to defend or protect the licence, for example by requesting other extant servers not affiliated with them to cease and desist operation? While I think it's a good thing that you have successfully protected Homecoming, it would be a great shame to see other smaller servers suffer as a consequence.

That was basically endgame in the very early issues. That and endlessly farming the warwolf map.

In the study of linguistics, the word pidgin has a very specific meaning. I get that the general definition is a bit looser (and that's fine), but we're discussing academic linguistic theories here so it makes sense to use the academic definition. It's more to do with social status than advancement and is quite tightly linked to colonialism and enslavement because of the the nature of how languages interact. With a true pidgin, multiple substrate (low status) languages come into interaction with one superstrate (high status) language. They tend to have very unstable grammar and vocabulary. With Old English and Old Norse, there doesn't seem to have been that kind of social stratification and there's no clear substrate-superstrate system. A language that formed from their contact would be a contact language, rather than a pidgin (or creole, which is a pidgin where the grammar has become systematic, typically around the time that the first generation of children start to speak). So, you could argue that it was a contact language but it meets almost none of the conditions to be considered either a pidgin or a creole, but they're different things by definition. It's a fairly outdated theory that has disproportionately high representation on Wikipedia, which is a problem with Wikipedia generally (although it's otherwise very good for linguistics). In the case of late Old English, the elision of endings (which often contained case and gender information) was likely to do with contact between English dialects, rather than English and Norse. The timeline doesn't add up, the geography doesn't add up (attested changes in areas with no or minimal Old Norse linguistic influence) and the cultural interactions don't meet the criteria to fall under the definition of a pidgin. It might be more accurate to say that grammar changes in English may have been accelerated in some parts of England due to contact with Old Norse speakers, but that's not the same it being a pidgin or creole. There is some more acceptance of it as a "semi-creole", but that's not really an agreed upon idea. There was likely a language continuum going on, but that doesn't mean it was a pidgin or creole (or semi-creole). The Talk page of the Middle English Creole Hypothesis is very interesting and highlights a lot of the issues of the theory.

This theory, sadly, doesn't hold much weight. Partly because pidgin means something *extremely* specific in academic linguistics that Old English and Old Norse contact doesn't even remotely fit the criticia for and partly because the timescale just doesn't match up. The loss of case and gender happened a bit later. People in medieval England moved around a lot for a medieval European society and while dialects coming into contact with one another almost certainly caused the elision, it's not as simple as an Old English and Norse pidgin and, as I said, the timeline doesn't match up with the criteria for a pidgin. It's slightly complicated by the fact that Old Norse speakers left almost no written material in England, but that's more a piece of trivia than anything else. Like I can see why they arrived at that conclusion and if you take the loosest possible definition of *pidgin* then yeah kinda I guess, but it's a fairly niche theory that isn't enormously supported by textual evidence. Tldr: only if you're very loose with your definitions but it's not enormously supported as a theory in its "pure" state

Occasional German speaker with a degree in linguistics and another degree which involved the use of Old English* here - it's arguably the other way round. English used to have grammar that's very, very similar to modern German. German didn't really develop them; English lost them. Or both. It's probably a bit of both because nothing in life, love or linguistics is ever simple. English has a couple of linguistic oddities to it that are easy to overlook if you're a native speaker of the language, particularly when compared with closely related languages. One of them is that it has unusually strict syntax (word order, more or less) for a Germanic language. Another is that is it one of only a handful of languages in its language family to have almost totally lost linguistic gender. The very closely related Scots doesn't have gender, but Frisian (English's next nearest neighbour) does. English and Scots are genderless oddities surrounded by either two- or three-gender systems. Celtic, Romance and most Germanic languages all have gendered nouns. With German specifically, learning which word endings map to which genders helps enormously to the point where it starts to feel natural. That also helps with German plurals which feel quite unpredictable until you realise that it's almost entirely linked to whatever the last syllable is and what gender it is. After that, it's just vibes. * that's one hell of a noun phrase

I remember during the first valentine's day event event when villains and heroes could crossover for the first time, and a villain whispering me on my peacebringer asking how I did that after I transformed.

Kevin Conroy, hands down. Played the character the longest. Brought Batman into the modern era. Portrayed Bruce Wayne in animated media, games and (once) in person. There's a reason that, for a lot of people here (I'm sure), his voice is the voice of Batman. Cinema, games, TV, all of it. He was outstanding. I loved his portrayal. He more or less originated having two distinct voices for Bruce Wayen and Batman. Bales' Batman was cinematic but shows the worst elements of Batman as a flat character. No Batfamily (other than Alfred) and no real human connection other than his disposable girlfriend. That's not to say I didn't enjoy the films, I just think that Bales' perfomance was a bit charmless. So yeah, Conroy's Batman is and, I imagine, always will be the Batman for me.

I'm going to agree with Tidge (as I frequently do, we seem to have very similar favourite playstyles)... while I really wanted it to be good, it just ain't. Part of the reason (in addition to what Tidge says) is that the proc rate of the IO and the proc rate of World of Confusion are actually out of sync, so not every application of WoC actually even has a chance to proc the IO effect (unless this has been changed).

(In fun. Anything that brings us closer to Arachnos ideals is welcome.)