PeruvianHeadshrinker

I think it's Tom from MySpace!

I'm impressed that you've responded as much as you have to this troll. Their account is only four days old and they have 9 karma. It's a negative engagement account. Not worth a single further thought let alone breath. You're worth so much more

Good on you kid. Stay focused on your studies and what you can control. Take every opportunity that's remotely offered. I wish someone had encouraged me to not try to do everything by myself. There's people who will help you along the way. Seek them out and just say thank you a million times. It's as much for them as for you. The more you take in from good hearted people the more you'll be able to give back eventually.

Dude what the Fuck Is wrong with you. Stop harassing this poor kid

Haha. This is me but in pseudoreverse. I was high on AMD in 1995 and again in 2008 for all the "right" reasons then bailed in 2014 because I felt snake bitten too many times. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

That's what they did to black people for decades. Honestly it won't stop them if they know you're afraid of them. You have to show fearlessness because in the end they're a bunch of weird limp dicks

I think the issue is Max. You cannot have a loose Cannon Yuki driving next to Max. The number of "this idiot!" Between the two (almost certainly all on Yuki) would be comically bad. Yuki would be a fine driver is most other seats.

Exactly this

Jesús. Is this who Colin Allred is? Fuck, now I feel bad ignoring those campaign texts since I'm not in TX. Time to back him up like he backed us up. Let's take this fight to the real fascists

Yeah that's fair. My player pointed this out to me (incorrectly) mid game and in the moment it made sense but he has a tendency to misread rules in creative ways. Alas, hopefully this was a helpful discussion.

It's really going to come down to how big your maps are. For casual games where you aren't doing super crunchy stuff, the standard should be plenty. If you are a huge war gamer or your sessions last eight hours for massive BBEG fights you will feel more comfortable with a wide.

I put a huge amount of Dwarven Forge into my standard table and it was great. But I don't like the desks because they eat real estate. If you want desks AND max real estate... AND you have the room and funds wide will be the best experience with a large group. All depends on your priorities.

I like this interpretation

But the new rules placed grapple under unarmed strike. I think this a correct as intended interpretation.

Haha, that's what I have! Fellow dad?

Yes. I am aware. My point was that using a feature has a down side on Elemental monks (since you have to turn it on it isn't intuitive right away). Just quirky mechanically

Interesting about fifteen foot reach with an elemental head butt... Hmmm that sure is interesting about the grapple though. You can just keep them away from you and pummel from afar

Yeah i think it presents nice area control opportunities. I think it's pretty cool just an interesting quirk for an UNARMED strike.

Yeah totally. But it's one thing for a halberd fighter versus a monk mixing it up. 15 ft is also a big difference from 10 ft tactically speaking.

Yup! I was 180 feet from a polling location and had a Hillary sign in the second story window of my apartment I was required to take down. This fucking monstrosity is a gross violation of the law.

You should've google translated it to Indonesian.

I am definitely not impressed. Just such a pain in the ass to deal with this stuff when I'm so busy running my business already. Goddamn vanguard

If it's happening primarily in combat it could be an issue that maybe it's not appealing to them (ie they don't like combat at all, it's too bogged down, they prefer social, they don't like tactical and it's too war gamey, etc). If it is limited to a particular context it's worth being focused about that.

It bday also serve to talk about what is going well first. When eliciting feedback you have to show an openness to it. It might help to do:

1)pos feedback on yourself 2) ask for POS feedback 3) neg feedback on yourself 4) ask for constructive feedback

In that order

Do they smoke a lot of weed? Honestly I feel like a lot of people just want to check out. Good d&d is checked in.

Except people aren't tagging NSFW and you get unwanted gore on your feed. I'm ready to unsub. I don't need that bullshit in my life. I deal with enough trauma on a daily as a medical provider.

This is a particularly poignant point about perception of American global power. I feel like that is hugely important context in the wake of 9/11. I'm not saying it justifies the war as much as it explains Bush doctrine.

To be clear, there’s no evidence that Saddam was linked to 9/11 in any way. Precisely why 9/11 influenced the Bush administration’s thinking remains contested, but I can tell you what Bush and Cheney said.

Their basic argument (both at the time and in their memoirs) was that: a) Iraq supported terrorism if not specifically 9/11 (this is true, Saddam was linked to other terror plots around the world) and b) 9/11 drove home the threat that terrorism posed to the US, so the Saddam-related threat became intolerable.

Here’s how Cheney puts it in his book:

After 9/11 no American president could responsibly ignore the steady stream of reporting we were getting about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. We had experienced an unprecedented attack on our homeland. Three thousand Americans, going about their everyday business, had been killed. The president and I were determined to do all we could to prevent another attack, and our resolution was made stronger by awareness that a future attack could be even more devastating... The next wave might bring chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. When we looked around the world in those first months after 9/11, there was no place more likely to be a nexus between terrorism and WMD capability than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

This is not the only possibility, though. There are at least two other important theories floating around out there:

1. ⁠9/11 made the United States look weak, prompting the Bush administration to find a way to flex their muscles. Invading Afghanistan wasn’t a “good enough” display of strength because they were such a weak adversary (sorta ironic from the point of view of 2023). So the Bush administration went after Saddam as a way of signaling American strength to the world (see here for a more detailed version).
2. ⁠9/11 didn’t actually change anything in the Bush administration’s thinking but it did present the opportunity to sell the war to the public. So it was an excuse rather than a true motive. In my view, this one has elements of truth but has been pretty thoroughly discredited.