OP has been in a lengthy struggle with the world over media. They swore off manga previously due to “christian morals” and the fact that Zombieland Saga contained zombies, then got back into it because of Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure, and now it seems they’ve hit another block within the last month.

And it’s not just manga. They’ve also had an issue with Wikipedia.

I was afraid of that, but given some of your previous posts, I’m not all that surprised.

Since both those sites are just descriptions of things that exist, it sounds like you want an echo chamber where you don’t need to acknowledge that certain things exist. I think it’s better to try and figure out why you’re so offended by reality.

Are you the head of a major international corporation? If not, there’s nothing meaningful you can do.

I think they’re under the unfortunate delusion they’re being funny.

Is there an issue with these sites I’m not aware of?

If you kill a PC with a recreation of the Boromir death scene, you might be able to hit all three at once!

And we played the first thing that came to our heads
Just so happened to be
The best song in the world
It was the best song in the world

I wasn’t a good DM either. But then I learned. I threw encounters at the players I thought might be fun, and I missed the mark almost every single time. But my players had fun, so I don’t see the problem in getting those encounters wrong. And every failure taught me so much more than every success.

If you fail, but you keep it fun and learn for the future, what have you lost? Only your pride.

But some monsters are strong against certain builds and weak against others. Some monsters are stronger in certain environment and entirely nullified by others. Some monsters are stronger given certain allies and weaker when alone.

If you could devise a system to assign monster complexity based on every scenario you can imagine that monster being part of, then either that’s an astonishingly small number of scenarios or an absurdly complex calculation to force on anyone.

I think it’s mostly cowardice, personally. People don’t want to risk putting their own choices into a game based entirely on choices, just in case they aren’t as good. It’s better to use someone else’s decisions than risk your own pride.

Then you have ignorance. A lot of people don’t know how to fill the gaps, and WotC has never bothered teaching them how. Any rules they did get are rules of thumb and aren’t something to use without thought (like CR), so people complain for reason 1 again.

“You will reunite with a friend”
“The bad times will be over quickly”
“A sudden windfall will come your way”

There are 7.9 billion people in the world. Only 5.4 billion have any level of internet access. This includes people living in China where Facebook is banned. 3 billion is such a high percentage of all possible facebook users that I have to assume the numbers aren’t all that accurate. Maybe “active” just means they haven’t deactivated their account? Or maybe they consider bots to be people?

I believe it was Running who stated “If I have seen further, it is only because I have stood on the shoulders of giants.” Referring, of course, to the works of noted giant Thrynn Walk.

Is Jerry Seinfeld alive? According to google, yes.

I’m confused by the college of eloquence being in a system that is clearly not D&D, since an int of 2 would make you non-sentient and a con of 1 would be dead.

Sidenote: Jesus christ, I blocked one guy and 43 comments vanished.

In a single round of combat, a wizard can use a spell to rain fire and bring a max health fighter down to 1 hp.

In comparison, in a single round of combat, a fighter can swing their sword four times and bring a max health wizard down to 1 hp.

So they’re both as good as each other in a hypothetical 1v1 combat scenario which is unlikely to ever come up during an actual game. Bravo. Can we stop having this argument? It’s been 4 months since this exact meme was posted.

Ironically for a post complaining about reading comprehension, but you misrepresented the original post you’re talking about. Even have the classic “quotation marks around a thing that was never said” in the title.

First, and perhaps most obvious, this wasn’t “everyone”. This was one person, and they didn’t get many upvotes. When I recommend a TTRPG, for example, I’m recommending Genesys (like someone else did).

Second, they weren’t saying to homebrew old editions of D&D. They were saying you don’t need to homebrew at all. At most, they said you could reflavour something in 4th edition. Their entire point was that you don’t need to homebrew when you can just find a system that already has what you would have homebrewed in.

Third, they were suggesting this as an alternative to homebrewing specific material into D&D 5e. Pathfinder can provide the experience of “5e with time travel” that you wanted without any modifications. BitD is so different from 5e that it can’t.

You are, however, correct that they did backtrack. I’ll put this down to poorly explaining their argument to start with, as they downplayed the “5e but better” games in their first comment while that was really their entire point.

Personally, I like homebrewing. It’s fun to tinker with the rules and materials. But there’s also an argument to not repeat work someone else has already done.

I guess it depends on how Konsi feels about garlic bread.

I feel like it’s accurate to say Texas is completely Texas.

I’m living under a conservative government, so I can’t make any promises on that toast. But I would like to, yes.