Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    + friends - friends
    8,950 link karma
    15,510 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] Eldest Gruff connected to Eb? (Spoilers all) -EG- 1 points ago in dresdenfiles

    He's decent company for sure, not a bad drinking buddy.

    [–] Can non-Mortal Practitioners Use the Sight/initiate Soulgazes? -EG- 6 points ago * (lasted edited 15 hours ago) in dresdenfiles

    Only supernatural beings with souls and some measure of mortality. So wizards, Whamps, possibly changelings can share one. But only a wizard can trigger it, Thomas starting into Justine's eyes or Lara's eyes or Lily for example pre-mantle would have done nothing in that department. The Sight is a wizard thing so Mavra might be able to do that particular skill, though my guess is she has other 'senses' or ways of 'seeing' what is really there so she probably does not need it.

    Interviewer: And for the people who don't know what the soulgaze is, do you mind just filling them in?

    Jim Butcher: The soulgaze is when a wizard looks into your eyes, the wizard literally -- your eyes become the windows to your soul. The wizard gets to look upon you as who you truly are as a person. Every wizard sees them a little bit differently, just because everybody's a person, so everybody sees everybody else a little differently. But for Harry, when he looks in somebody's eyes, he gets to see in some sort of symbology the kind of person they truly are. So, and then he's got to -- well, then he's got to work on interpreting that, but it generally gives him a pretty good idea of who he's dealing with when he does that. You know, other wizards, they kind of have a different -- they get a different special effects budget for it, but they get much the same effect.

    [–] [Potential Spoilers All] What event from the past would you most want Jim to make a short Story about? -EG- 5 points ago * (lasted edited 21 hours ago) in dresdenfiles

    Pretty sure it was the podcast interview, I don't have this particular one transcribed in full at the moment. But it does exist.

    EDIT: Yep, I was right:

    When will we ever find the details of the deal that Margaret made with Lea? What did she pay Lea for all that Lea has done?

    Let me think about it. Oh right, eventually maybe… whenever I want to have Harry and Lea slug it out oh my gosh. That would be awful.

    And which book would that be?

    That’s a big one. That will have to be late in the series. It’ll have to probably be in the trilogy.

    [–] Non-HOFers with retired numbers -EG- 2 points ago in baseball

    Not what I said will be the case but, ok.

    [–] Non-HOFers with retired numbers -EG- 8 points ago in baseball

    To be fair, Jeter and Mo will be in the HOF in short order and Pettitte will be an interesting case.

    [–] Happy Bobby Bonilla day! -EG- 0 points ago in baseball

    Oh for sure, i'm more than happy to use this with my Mets friends every year. It's still a pretty awful deal. I was just, ya know, saying.

    [–] Can someone explain what the rationale was for Sammy Sosa winning the MVP in 1998? -EG- 0 points ago in baseball

    To me, it's more reckless to point at bWAR to say why Verlander should have won then pointing to Porcello's 20 wins as the reason why he was the deserved winner.

    Because you don't like bWAR or how it breaks down does not make it reckless to use it. Frankly WAR arguments in general are not ones I like because I don't much care for WAR in and of itself, but others do so I reference an advantage he had in it from a forum that is widely utilized. And while I understand you aren't a proponent of the fact that Porcello should have been elected based solely, or even largely on his win total, the only point i've made is that him winning 20 games was still a larger factor to this win than it should have been...and that you seem ok with that because their stats were so close in many other respects. I don't, and think it's the same wrong headed, arbitrary mentality voters use that will impact future votes down the line negatively as well. That's all.

    [–] Can someone explain what the rationale was for Sammy Sosa winning the MVP in 1998? -EG- 1 points ago in baseball

    And since I never said it was a travesty nor that I dislike Porcello just because he plays for the Sox, I think i'll thank you to not make assumptions especially when to my knowledge I was not talking to you or any point you made, since you didn't.

    To say nothing of the fact that I don't particularly give as much credence to those stats, (and neither do the writers lets be honest), when it comes to Cy talks. But even if I did the margins by which Porcello took them were small as others keep pointing out was the case when Verlander overtook Porcello in the one's he used. So if they are already stats that generally writers don't factor in when making their choices unless the outliers are massive, why should I care?

    [–] Happy Bobby Bonilla day! -EG- 2 points ago in baseball

    Don't the Mets technically not even pay this? It's an annuity they purchased that does.

    [–] Can someone explain what the rationale was for Sammy Sosa winning the MVP in 1998? -EG- 1 points ago in baseball

    I fail to see why using the 20 wins card is so bad here when the performance gap between Porcello and Verlander is so small.

    For the same reason using the RBI card is decried nowadays as a deciding factor, it's arbitrary and not indicative of being the superior pitcher/hitter when you really break it down. If the performance gap is small, but still nudges in the direction of one pitcher in each case...then why is 20 wins in favor of the other pitcher, the only notable 'main' stat that Porcello has over Verlander, suddenly a good rationale?

    [–] Can someone explain what the rationale was for Sammy Sosa winning the MVP in 1998? -EG- 3 points ago in baseball

    And he had him by 1.6 in rWAR so what's your point? Even if you consider the gaps small, Verlander edged him in them all. So why does 20-wins suddenly become a viable option as a decider when the other guy has you by everything else? He won 20 games for a better team, that's the same mentality voters have been going with for years. It's not about it being more egregious than '98, but rather that the mentality is consistent (and in several cases wrong).

    [–] Can someone explain what the rationale was for Sammy Sosa winning the MVP in 1998? -EG- 6 points ago in baseball

    Porcello had a good case to win the Cy Young outside of the wins column

    Verlander had him in ERA, K's, WAR, and negligible differences in WHIP. Seems to me Porcello won the same way all these 'robberies' of the past did. He won 20 games and was on a team that won their division/was a favorite WS pick. It's not to say he didn't have a good season, or even a Cy worthy one. Just not a better one than the guy who was runner up.

    [–] [Spoiler All] On the pregnancy issue in Peace Talks -EG- 3 points ago in dresdenfiles

    Of couples directly within the viewpoint of the main character. Hardly indicative of the whole Dresdenverse, especially when you consider that the Whites are hardly starving...and indeed seem to be expanding their influence at a rapid rate. You're taking these as an extrapolation to say true love isn't so rare and in essence this kid has a more that good shot of finding their own person to be with on top of everything else.

    Their are other couples beyond this as well. Andi and Kirby, now Butters, are two more. Murphy's been married twice, Arturo Genosa three times before finding Joan...the percentages get less and less the more people you actually add to the mix.

    [–] [Spoiler All] On the pregnancy issue in Peace Talks -EG- 3 points ago in dresdenfiles

    When was it stated that True Love is rare? We had 4 couples in the books so far, 3 of them had True Love. Doesn't look rare to me.

    While I would hazard the likelihood that Michael and Charity count, we haven't actually seen any evidence yet they are protected from Whampires. So that's still just an assumption.

    And to that point we've got the fourth couple I presume you are talking about in Billy and Georgia, who have shown no particular advantage or protection against Whampires despite clearly loving one another. At best you have two definitive examples out of four.

    I mean I'm not saying that a hormone crazed teenager will have an easy time to wait for a relationship to develop to the point of True Love before some kinky stuff happens but I wouldn't say that it is that impossible, and the kid stand a much better chance then usual Whampire children who are kept in the dark.

    No one said it was impossible. I'm saying Thomas' impact or ability to make sure his kid doesn't go full Whampire was and is being overstated.

    [–] [Spoiler All] On the pregnancy issue in Peace Talks -EG- 3 points ago in dresdenfiles

    Why? True Love is rare even in the Dresdenverse where magic is a prevalent force. Who's to say this kid will ever get that chance whether they know what they are or not. In fact, one could argue that if the kid DID know what it had to do in order to not be a Whampire anymore, then it isn't really true love because the relationship is tinged with this self-serving motivation, thus destroying the opportunity in the first place.

    Way too many moving parts to think Thomas has any real influence at making sure his child doesn't end up a full Whampire. He can be a guiding light or positive influence, help raise the child the right way, even fully inform it when the kid is of a certain age that they could understand the implications...and still all it takes is one moment, one night of passion egged on by something inside that child that has always been there, with a connection to the child that not even it's parents have, to make it all for nothing.

    [–] [Spoiler All] On the pregnancy issue in Peace Talks -EG- 2 points ago in dresdenfiles

    You say that like he has any real say in the matter.

    [–] [Spoiler All] On the pregnancy issue in Peace Talks -EG- 15 points ago in dresdenfiles

    Like mother, like son:

    Did Maggie LeFay Intentionally and for a purpose have a child, Thomas, with Lord Raith?

    No. She was having lots of awesome vampire sex and it sort of happened. :)

    [–] Bob's payment -EG- 11 points ago in dresdenfiles


    1) Why does Bob have to obey whoever owns his skull? Is it because of the enchantments on the skull, or is it just that all spiritual entities must obey whoever controls their sanctum?

    1) It's the bargain Bob made to be who he is, basically. The skull is essentially his contract--shelter in exchange for service.

    Then he really wouldn't be Bob anymore. I don't think he can just up and leave, not only because of the danger but because that's just not how an SOI works inherently either.

    [–] [Potential Spoilers All] What event from the past would you most want Jim to make a short Story about? -EG- 5 points ago in dresdenfiles

    2011 Atlanta Signing:

    Will there ever be a story about Kincaid and Murphy in Hawaii?

    Yes. It’s gonna have to wait until I do a little research on Hawaiian gods. There’s going to be issues with volcanoes and so…

    [–] [Potential Spoilers All] What event from the past would you most want Jim to make a short Story about? -EG- 14 points ago in dresdenfiles

    The fight that led to the gatekeeper duking it out with Demonreach

    They didn't fight.

    2009 Independence signing:

    Also, people have a few things wrong about the Gatekeeper and the island. The Gatekeeper did not hurt Demonreach. Gatekeeper has been on the island a couple of times, and it’s never gone well, but he didn’t cause Demonreach’s limp. That’s the work of the glacier that carved out Lake Michigan.