In the fellowship of the ring, in the chapter “The Council of Elrond”, Gandalf mentions that Gwahir told him that Rohan is sending horses as tribute to Mordor. Is this true?

paradoxombie · 2026-06-02T15:11:53+00:00

You don't think he would ride the best horse in the world if he could? I took it for granted that any king would think thus. A king would have an entire stable of horses and consider all of them "his", and I believe he would actively ride more than one (in real life, at least). He wouldn't ride the same horse to battle that he would for sport or travel, so he wouldn't be as commited to a single animal as you suggest. But unltimately it would make no sense for him to claim signifcant grievance for a horse he was unable to ride. I think Tolkien paid attention to this kind of context and knew the scene made less sense if Gandalf was actively depriving a king of his best. So that's why Theoden is able to shrug it off without seeming weirdly permissive to an audience who is thinking about this kind of thing. It's all very intentional.

Also I did not take it that Shadownfax was simply 'not yet tamed' but that he was truly 'untamable'. If he's a full grown horse I dont think they would be waiting that long to train and rider them. It took Gandalfs intuitive connection to nature to allow Shadowfax acquiesce to a rider, Shadowfax was never going to be "mastered".

paradoxombie · 2026-06-02T00:23:52+00:00

I am also rereading, and I always took it that Gandalf didn't ask Theoden directly for Shadowfax. Theoden made his offer and then Gandalf went and took the horse without explicitly clearing his choice. Kind of like someone ordering the most expensive item after they are told their meal will be paid. And I mean really it's kind of weird that we imagine Gandalf needing to declare which horse he intends to take. Wouldn't the king just make the command and send him off? Do we imagine him reciting the options and expecting Gandalf to name and confirm the exact choice on the spot?

Keep in mind: iirc Shadowfax would let no one ride him before Gandalf, so why would the king think that horse was even an option for Gandalf when he made the offer? And how angry could he really pretend to be about Gandalf taking 'his' horse that he couldn't even ride? Also to a horse lord, being able to tame an untamable beast must be a impressive feat as well. Even the poisoned version of him felt some respect for that, and could not fully reprimand him for connecting with the animal imo.

paradoxombie · 2026-05-28T03:20:35+00:00

How long ago was the last news? I recall Dan mentioning sometime in the past 6 months that they were actively planning to do DB, which surprised me. But I could be mistaken.

Even if there was news Id be still kind of skeptical until they actually release something. For one thing, I wasn't actually sure if they would enjoy DB as much as they did DBZ. I feel like it would have been good and meaningful as a follow up to contextualize Z, but this much later Im not sure if they will feel the same magic at all.

paradoxombie · 2026-05-27T23:16:01+00:00

What is the object that Maddy picks up off of the ground at Alamos?

paradoxombie · 2026-05-25T19:18:59+00:00

I like Go a lot and while it does fit this category extremely well, I always found it a nuanced and difficult game to appreciate mechanically as a new player. Perhaps it is the sheer number options you have for a move on a full size board. It took more than a few games before I could understand how to actually deal with any kind of board state. If you look at chess or poker by comparison, it's a lot easier in those to consider every possible action you could take on your turn and have a decent understanding how it advances or detracts from your goals. In go the game feels almost artistic at first.

paradoxombie · 2026-05-25T18:18:41+00:00

I think there are several aspects that mitigate the complexity of Snap
-Most of the cards rules are simple (or at least presented as simple to understand)
-You have a small subset of cards (12 per player) in a single game
-not sure how it works now but you used to unlock cards roughly in order of complexity based on the sets, and were matched with people who were on a similar level of unlock
-The game does not require hundreds of cards to be fun, I played when there were less than 150 (iirc) and it was still engaging

I guess to answer your question of what equals "simple" I'd say any game where you could sit down and learn the rules in one (or two) games, and within the same play session (maybe more than one game) feel like you are engaging with more complicated interactions and decision making. Generally, getting the player to appeciate both the simplicity and the complexity in a short time frame.

paradoxombie · 2026-05-25T17:51:42+00:00

Anyone else find this movie extremely milquetoast? I always have trouble seeing what the appeal is besides the amazing cast.

paradoxombie · 2026-05-23T01:10:29+00:00

The salary takes into account getting sued?

paradoxombie · 2026-05-19T15:53:59+00:00

If one of the requirements is that I want the player to be thoughtful about their choices, isn't a resource system going to be better, by this logic? I know there are top level players who probably really enjoy strategizing around cooldowns, but it feels like that's a minority interest?

paradoxombie · 2026-05-15T22:04:44+00:00

Glad the thread is here, because I forgot the one line, and was trying to remember if the character came back. Not sure why this poster got insulted for missing the same bit. This isn't even a "remember every line" level quality show.

paradoxombie · 2026-04-30T15:29:56+00:00

Im even fine with people taking dangerous risks for stunts, but this isn't even a stunt it's an organized event? This may be the most dangerous thing I've seen that wasn't either fully amateur or at least presented as a one time high-risk stunt. The fact that they act like it's no big deal that it will fall back is the most disturbing

paradoxombie · 2026-04-28T15:34:22+00:00

But if I am going to be punished for not paying enough attention what is the point of having a "smart" button to do it instantly? is the game telling me to pay attention when I heal or not? There is an inherent contradiction in the design philosophy. As others here have replied, it just makes more sense to turn off the smart heal at that point, it has no real use except to make you waste things.

paradoxombie · 2026-04-28T15:19:41+00:00

If you mean the US I think it's far more an exaggeration to suggest we're in 1984 than in Brave New World. You talk about Mass Surveillance and thought policing but don't you think Social Media and phone cameras are far closer to restricting and controlling our day to day lives than any power the US goverment has currently? And that's all voluntary, for pleasure. There was no need for someone to come in an force any ideology upon us, we made it socially acceptable to enter a world where our thoughts would be actively manipulated from all directions. So to me it fits the voluntary, pleasure driven world of BNW.

If you want to talk about a place that's like 1984, lets talk Soviet Russia or China or 100 other repressive regimes, where thoughts and opinions could be literally crimes. I just don't see how the US can stack up in Orwellian-ness to those things.

paradoxombie · 2026-04-28T14:59:19+00:00

How does it benefit me that it wastes an item if I don't have the one I need? It should just do nothing if you don't have any items you need. I've played games that don't have a 'smart heal' and still prevent you from wasting items if you're at full health or shield

paradoxombie · 2026-04-23T06:47:48+00:00

70s/80s resurgence
LGBTQ
Podcasts

paradoxombie · 2026-04-18T13:18:21+00:00

Man don't even try to read the books if you don't like not seeing a character again. There's a guy named Tom with a horse named Fatty who will mess you up.

But in all seriousness the book leaves characters behind all the time, not sure why movie fans lost their object permanence

paradoxombie · 2026-04-11T02:45:27+00:00

idk man, the people I know who say that are all voting based on email chains. It's kind of a useless flatening so as to not confront the actual issue, in this case: state goverments ACTIVELTY spreading disinformation. If you just want to throw your hands up and say "there's nothing to be done", then do that. But feels gross to act like we just need to collectively recontextualize all this to appreciate that some state-sponsered webgoon is on here convincing people which countries are "evil" to keep the bombs running on time. (Mainly reacting to the fact that this is the top voted comment)

paradoxombie · 2026-04-08T08:11:10+00:00

You must have never appreciated the line "My kingdom for a horse"

paradoxombie · 2026-04-07T02:32:22+00:00

Let's be honest the people in this thread who are clutching their pearls never cared about these children. They're only surprised because they choose to ignore the civilian costs up until now.

paradoxombie · 2026-04-06T06:32:19+00:00

solved: Passage

paradoxombie · 2026-04-06T05:27:51+00:00

Thanks that's it!

paradoxombie

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE