Susaga @ Susaga @sh.itjust.works

Posts

5

Comments

539

Joined

2 yr. ago

I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess "none" is my answer.

Of course you need melon news. You ALWAYS need melon news. I, for one, want as many big, juicy melons on my feed as possible.

I could have said felony, but that refers to the same social group as Elon, so they'd probably want to censor it anyway.

You might want to be careful of the Scunthorpe problem when doing this, and make sure you don't filter out posts about melons as collateral damage.

I honestly don't know much. She got away. All I know is she's part of a swing dance club in a distant town, from which I can conclude she isn't dead. So that's nice.

Each word is an idea, and each idea already exists in your head. What I'm doing isn't giving you new ideas, but arranging the ideas to get across a meaning.

It's like rock gardens. I didn't make the rocks, but I order them how I like, and I can make a smiley face out of them. I can share my arrangement, and they can try to make it with their rocks. It won't be the same smiley face, but it's still a smiley face, and that's all that matters.

And if there's a rock in your garden that's just a little TOO different to the one in mine, maybe the smiley face won't look right. It happens. If it matters, we can try to move some rocks around and get the right arrangement for the both of us.

Be careful: If you take this advice and want to become a sexy underwear model, you WILL receive a stern email from HR.

There's nothing inherently wrong with poly relationships, so long as everyone is equal and respected. The thing that worries me is that you said "his other girlfriend" and not "her girlfriend." It's not necessarily a red flag, but it is something to be cautious of.

What in the name of king and country is this nonsense?

You know how people will donate money to streamers if they do stupid stuff? If you can do that, you can do this.

We don't even know if you even read about it. Unless I have experience of what you're talking about, I can't say you're wrong. Heck, even if I have experience, I don't know that you didn't just have a different experience.

You can find a good source for your claims, or some supporting evidence, or someone else can come along and back you up. I still wouldn't know, given how easily you can fake sources on the internet, so you could still be lying.

At a certain point, you just need to take it on faith.

According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a human should be able to fly.

But you're not correcting me. I am using a rule correctly and you don't like it. You're not being helpful, you're being entitled.

I was in the middle of a monologue, and you tried to divebomb the BBEG. That's highly disrespectful, but I'm accommodating and give you a chance to succeed using the existing rules. It doesn't work out the way you want, so you tell me not to use those rules because they're dumb. And you call ME disrespectful for calling you out?

There's a lot of things I can say about this. To summarise:

• Just because WotC wants you to use a new product doesn't mean the old product is outdated.
• If WotC supports the Pinkertons, I don't support them. But have fun letting your morals fall apart so you can consume product.
• The Tasha's rule expands on a rule from the DMG. If the rule were to be updated, it would be in the DMG, not the PHB.
• Most tables don't have the DMG either.
• The new PHB doesn't have most subclasses. The only reason stuff was omitted was because there wasn't enough space or time to add them in.

All of that hardly matters, because you responded to a DM ruling by saying "nope". No shit we're incompatible. At the VERY least, I want my players to respect me.

No matter what the real world laws of physics are, the GM is the final arbiter of the rules. That's not an ego thing. That's just how it works. Everyone's roleplaying game works the same, even if they have different rulings.

Now, let's quickly picture this scene where the GM instead rolls 14. The BBEG is making his speech, then a shadow falls over him, he looks up, and gets crushed by a brontosaurus. He's resiliant, having taken only half the fall damage, but he's knocked prone and at a serious disadvantage as everyone rolls initiative.

Would anyone complain about the optional rule being used? Would anyone argue there should be no shadow because "the sun wouldn't be there" or "I hadn't transformed yet"? And if they decided to make that check to transform right before impact and succeeded, would they complain about the high DC due to the high speed?

I don't think they would. I think they're only complaining because the GM didn't give them what they wanted. They don't care about the game, they just care about getting their own way.

I agree. I am not compatible with that playstyle.

I'm not American. I don't know what those terms mean. I just have a skybox.

To continue the quote, physics are what I allow them to be.

Going by the pure rules, you don't have enough time to wildshape. You just splatter. I'm being kind by giving you the opportunity at all.

First of all, if I'm the DM, you don't get to tell me not to use a rule.

Second of all, there will not be a situation where I use the 2024 ruleset. The 2014 ruleset is still around, and still usable, and anyone calling it outdated is an idiot.

Third, this is the only official rule given for this situation. If we don't use it, there is no rule for falling on someone and we resolve it however I like. And since you just tried to interrupt my monologue, I'm not inclined to be generous.

My TV lets me pause live TV, so I pause, leave the room for a bit, come back and fast forward through the ads.

This isn't a physics sim. This is a roleplaying game. Physics are what I allow them to be and it's funnier for falling creatures to have a drop shadow.

Nope. The rules for falling on a creature don't factor in size, except for if it knocks the target prone. The check is DC15 to dodge.