Echinoderm

joined 1 year ago
[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There's plenty of good reasons to dislike Woolies, but them making a commercial decision to stop stocking products that people aren't buying is not big on the list.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 9 points 10 months ago

Forge Exquisite Armour Reproductions

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My group is about 30-40% of the way through, so I can speak from experience about the later parts of the campaign. But so far we are enjoying it.

It's a combat-heavy campaign as written, so if your party wants to just roll dice and smash things, you might be fine running it completely as is.

My group is more focused on mystery solving and roleplay; they get more of a kick out of piecing together what happened down there than powering through baddies. One of my gripes about the module is there is a huge amount of back story that's given to the GM for each area, but few suggestions on how to get that information to the players. I've started to tailor some encounters to have more options to use stealth or talking to avoid encounters and/or get more information, as well as adding things like old notes and letters to find.

The other thing I've found is, as written, the Vaults can feel very static. The players can clear a few rooms, leave, come back, and everything is where they left it. If you want to making it react more to a party rampaging around, it will take additional work.

Abomination Vaults Expanded (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/418672/The-Abomination-Vaults-Expanded) is one resources I've been borrowing ideas from to adding bulk to the campaign, and might be worth looking at.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago

This sounds like a good way to turn an ally against them.

Does Trump have any leverage on Kavanaugh? He played close to the line with the rules to get him appointed for life, but choosing a person likely to be ideologically symathetic is more of a mutually beneficial arrangement than a favour.

It feels like the best way to get someone who is in a secure position of power like that offside is to tell them they have to do what you say or that they owe you. Kavanaugh can just as easily say Trump is disqualified, and never be told he owes anyone again.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 37 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Have you also been forgetting to covert votes to metric before you send them?

For reference:

1 upvote = 2.2 nah yeahs

1 downvote = 2.2 yeah nahs

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Are you a bot? Because that was a rambling word-salad with no discernible point.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 8 points 11 months ago

A certain portion of the population seems to already deify anything Trump says.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago

It depends on what the author was actually trying to say. I've never pretended to know what their intention was, and they haven't added any further commentary to let us know.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

You asked why the comment was getting downvoted. I responded with how the comment could be interpreted in a way that warrants downvotes.

You seem to have taken that proposed explanation very personally for some reason.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Way too harsh there.

What if someone wants to be a cripple? Wouldn’t healing them ruin their self esteem?

Your earlier comment was not "what if someone wants to role-play a cripple?" If it was meant to mean that, I don't understand the relevance of healing hurting their self esteem. Whose self-esteem? The player's, or the character's?

The response made sense by querying why would a character want to be crippled, not why a player would find it interesting to do so.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 6 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I just got here, but I'd guess it's because their comment reads like they are saying "no, facists aren't the bad guys, both sides show contempt for the weak sometimes!" It's a false balance fallacy.

I'm not sure if that was the intention, or it was just unfortunately worded.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 8 points 11 months ago

Depends. What are you trying to achieve? The US has constitutional protection for freedom of speech, but it doesn't seem to prevent police aggressively breaking up protests they don't like.

There are other things I think are more of a priority. For example, I would rather have strong media laws that prevent the mega-rich from using the media as de facto cheerleaders for their political interests.

view more: ‹ prev next ›