« first day (1278 days earlier)      last day (2434 days later) » 
00:00 - 14:0014:00 - 00:00

2:00 PM
@JonathanHobbs Once you give up on knowing what's happening, you can delegate a lot of responsibility.
I'll now head home before I commit any more atrocities against grammar and comprehension.
Oh boy! April fool's day features!
It just hit midnight for me and now they are here.
Oh, dear.
A couple of years ago I worked as a technology correspondent for a newspaper. April 1st was the worst day of the year, except maybe Apple's WWDC.
Every website and tech company releasing their (almost always terrible) attempts at product humor.
/me off
So is this question off topic or not?
Q: Help Needed With Probability Math for 2d10

DiscordIn my Old School D&D campaign, I instituted a house rule to help the PCs raise their ability scores. Each ability score has a "fractional ability score". This is a percentile rating that starts at 0% at first level. Every time a PC levels up, they roll 2d10 for each fractional ability score and a...

2:16 PM
@JonathanHobbs I've created a meta-question related to that probability question so the whole thing can be clarified
@Aaron see my meta question - I'm as confused as you are, because there was a recent similar question with even less direct relevance to rpgs that got over 40 votes
meh, we shade towards probability theory often enough that I'm not too concerned with that one
@waxeagle that's my feeling as well. However, there appears to be sufficient disagreement within the community that clarification and consensus would be useful :o)
Q: What are the acceptable limits for questions using the probability tag?

PhilA recent question has led to me seeking clarification as to what exactly counts as being 'on topic' for questions asking about probability. The question I am referring to is Help Needed With Probability Math for 2d10. The reason for my confusion is that our policy with this type of question see...

Interesting - I did have a look through meta and missed that question
2:24 PM
I only remembered because I asked it
that's not to say a renewed discussion isn't in order, just that there is hitory and context
@Phil It seems to have enough rpg to be on topic to me.
It is simple math. the average for a d10 is 6 so the average it would take him to get to 100 using 2d10(12) is about 9 rolls.
Not much of a bonus.
by level 20 unless you were lucky you would only get 2 extra score from it.
@Aaron um 5.5, and 11
@waxeagle I was rounding up for simplicity. With 5.5 it would need 10 rolls.
so 10 levels.
just over 9 on average, but the important thing about 2d10 (or 2dx) is that it's a normal-like distribution, so it's more like to be average than anything else
1 hour later…
3:43 PM
Fascinating discussion over on English.SE's Meta site about SE site friendliness. meta.english.stackexchange.com/questions/4625/…
I feel that RPG is a very friendly stack site, and the problems mentioned there in EL&U are really noticeable, but it's a good read for regulars on any SE site.
@lisardggY that's been the least welcoming SE I've visited
their gen-ref close reason is readily abused
I cannot believe how smoothly Early Access 'launch' of Elder Scrolls Online went yesterday!
@DampeS8N congrats!
I hope the real thing goes as smoothly on Friday.
@waxeagle Yup. I used to be much more active there before the general atmosphere - no specific incidents, just the vibe - got me down
3:47 PM
@waxeagle Thanks. I wish I could take credit. lol
It's very useful as a case study, so other SEs can watch for early symptoms of ELUisms. :)
@lisardggY my only question was one that I (a native English speaker) didn't have a good understanding of, it got good answers and then was closed later because it was "gen ref"
@lisardggY Honestly. It feels a lot like Atheism.SE felt.
@DampeS8N And the site managed to break free of its bad culture?
3:50 PM
@lisardggY No, it was shut down.
Well, I can see how skeptics.SE could take over some of the topics.
@lisardggY Skeptics rose from Atheism's ashes.
@DampeS8N Probably a better scope.
It set a much better tone and put controls in place to be able to cover a lot of the same topics but in a structure that promotes positive posts.
Q: What are the best generators for historical events?

TrobanomsI am writing the recent history of my own world. I need a certain degree of detail to add flavour to the campaign, but at the same time I have to write 500 years of history. I would like to have an event every 20 years or so, meaning I need 30 events, more or less. I tried this generator: http:/...

VTC please
3:53 PM
@Phil Is anyone making some comments on why it is being closed?
I just have4
Hi and welcome to the site. Unfortunately in its current format this question is not a good fit for this site as it is too broad. In order for it to be improved you will need to provide a definition of what a 'good generator' is from your point of view.
@Phil Ok. Just wanted to make sure. I don't think I have enough rep to vote to close.
@lisardggY I think Atheism and English have much of the same problem. Stubborn elitism.
I can't believe the discussion in that meta post has descended into "Anything could be offensive to someone, so I can never hope to be inoffensive, thus I should just do whatever I want and it's someone else's fault if he gets offended".
@DampeS8N amusingly, the only religion SE site to fail has been atheism :)
3:59 PM
Also, it seems bizarre that the mods told someone to stop posting friendly comments on first-time posts.
take that whichever direction you'd like to
@lisardggY "Facts are offensive to theists, so I can never hope to be inoffensive, thus I should just state reality concisely and logically and if it upsets some theists that is their fault"
@waxeagle There is a smugness common to atheism which is a bit different than the smugness associated with religion - while religious smugness is often directed at those who don't share your religion, atheistic smugness is often directed at other atheists as well. :)
@lisardggY makes sense. You actually see that in Christianity, with various groups being smug at each other...I've got half a dozen meta posts to write on the subject at the moment
@waxeagle It is humorous. It never should have been a SE site. Atheism is the null hypothesis. Skeptics is the better incarnation of the philosophy. All Atheism.SE could hope to do is counter direct attacks and promote atheist resources.
4:02 PM
@DampeS8N aye, Shog said it best in an A51 post when they tried to restart it, nothing isn't all the interesting to talk about
@waxeagle Exactly.
@DampeS8N So-called "negative" or "soft" atheism is the null hypothesis. "Positive"/"hard" atheism may be different.
I think the people involved with Atheism.SE cleanly moved to Skeptics or Christianity.SE just fine. :)
@lisardggY Yes, but when you really push on hard atheists they really stand in the same place as soft atheists. They just prefer to call 99.999999% sure the same as totally sure.
@DampeS8N As a soft atheist myself, I tend to agree. :)
My father is a hard atheist and so was my grandfather. They both would admit to it. It is an easier stance to explain to people, but ultimately doesn't stand up to reason.
They both just got tired of people saying "You aren't sure there is no god or gods, therefore my one personal view of a subset of 20,000 sects of a single semi-historical account of one branch of one of the major roots of human religion, on this one planet out of trillions of trillions is JUST as valid as your stance."
And that, my friends, is why Skeptics.SE is a better site. And is able to address so much more. :)
A rift in the starting assumptions of people as wide as all that, is not going to be crossed in a Q&A site. hahah
4:30 PM
mmm crickets
5:09 PM
What is the difference between soft Atheism and hard?
@Aaron Hard Atheists say "There is no god or gods." Soft Atheists say "I am not convinced that there is a god or gods."
While an Agnostic is more likely to say "I am not convinced that there is or isn't a god or gods."
@DampeS8N I thought the "I am not convinced" Was agnostic.
@Aaron It is a subtle distinction.
I used to classify myself as Agnostic, but I now understand my flavor to be more Soft Atheist. I assume there is no god and live my life that way because I am a skeptic.
@DampeS8N Ahh. I have a buddy who says he is Agnostic and he explained it like the soft Atheist description. (I say says because I don't talk religion with many people so can't confirm if it is for attention or not.)
@DampeS8N I think there are gods but I don't think they are the immortal beings we worship them to be.
@Aaron There is significant crossover between groups. Not all people have the same understanding.
@Aaron Define god.
A true Agnostic would not be a skeptic. They must, by definition, accept that it might be ok to treat something as existing without real evidence.
5:16 PM
@DampeS8N Hmm. A being who does not age and has extreme power. That is the most basic description I can think of.
I am Pegan if that helps understand what I mean.
@Aaron If you believe in something that there is no or insufficient evidence for, you are not being skeptical. If you call that thing a god, you are a deist.
@DampeS8N I base my religion on personal experiences I and my Mother have had and the conclusions I have drawn from that. I am not a very religious person so I admit when I get in discussions like this and the other wants me to define everything I believe I have a hard time.
Once last stab at the difference between Agnostic and Soft Atheist because it matters. :) Any atheists maintains that there is no god. They live their life this way. A soft atheist admits that it is really impossible to know if there is or isn't a god, given the information we have. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. An Agnostic, however, accepts that there could be a god, might act as though they are hedging their bets or not, but will say "I don't know" when casually asked.
@Aaron It is probably a good exercise to pin down what you believe. Our beliefs color the world and it is a sign of personal understanding and maturity to be able to define ones own beliefs and why they believe them. I'm not saying that skepticism is the one and only way to live life. It is for me, but maybe it would lead only to nihilism for you. To each their own.
@DampeS8N I know what I believe but putting that into words is hard.
I might be using the word god incorrectly as well.
@Aaron I honestly have never seen someone who believes in a god have the same definition as another person.
The best way to find words for your beliefs is to start.
5:25 PM
I mean a being of extreme power who does not age but is not immortal. They can be killed/choose to die and when they do their power is either absorbed into the universe or into their killer/successor.
Just write your beliefs down, mark anything you see as needing more exploration "I believe that dogs are telepathic, why?" and then go into more detail "I believe this because dogs talk to me when they look at me."
@DampeS8N I might do that.
@Aaron Define: power, difference between not aging and immortality, what is death, how can power be transferred, what is the universe, so on.
@Aaron If it helps to send it to someone for more ideas, feel free to send it to me. dampes8n@gmail.com
@DampeS8N Immortality = Cannot die. Ever. at all.
@DampeS8N I may. I am busy with purchasing a house right now but if I get time to sit down and think this out I will probably send it to you.
@Aaron Doesn't have to be all at once. Just open a google doc and start defining things. See if you can make it all fit together.
Challenge your assumptions. Maybe what you've experienced can be viewed from different perspectives.
Worry about organizing it later, when it becomes too big to easily use. Start alphanumerically.
5:32 PM
@DampeS8N True. I would love to have a scientist attempt to explain bare footprints in the middle of winter on frozen ground.
@Aaron I see testable things here: Can people walk bare footed on snow/ice without injury? Will feet imprint frozen earth? On discovering these, my first instinct would have been to take off my shoe and press my own foot next to it and compare.
If it didn't imprint, I would check what the weather was like in the night. Or if it is night, what it was like during the day. Maybe the ground was softer then.
@DampeS8N Did so. Stomped on the ground hard enough I hurt my leg from the shock while wearing boots and barely left a dent while the feet prints were much deeper.
The part that is really interesting is my mom had a dream about a girl outside our house yelling to be let in. (If this had actually happen our dogs would have woken us up. We had a lot of them.)
@Aaron I would have also checked duration. Human body heat could melt the ground enough to allow for imprints. I would have stood there until my foot was in danger of injury.
@DampeS8N It was negatives all day and night.
@DampeS8N There were so many foot prints it would have given the person frostbite.
There was a trail of about 300 ft of the prints.
@Aaron Again, I don't have enough information here. I can only structure tests with information I have. And I'm sure this was too long ago to actually perform any novel tests anymore.
5:41 PM
@DampeS8N Yea. But anyway. I will start the list you recommended sometime and probably send it to you.
It sounds like a great mystery. It is worth examining. But don't expect answers. Sometimes you just can't find answers to mysteries because the trail of evidence is too old or cold. It is then that you can accept "I don't know" as an answer or you can invent an answer that fits the known facts. Or you can invent an answer that fits the facts of the situation but posits the existence of new facts. Can those facts be tested?
My skeptical position is that only facts backed by repeatable evidence should be accepted. And that only positions drawn logically from those facts that do not rely on new untested facts should be accepted as valid positions.
I only accept that which can be proven to exist.
Mine is not the only way, but it at least means that what I believe exists can be said to truly exist. That's important to me.
I don't know what you believe to have made the foot prints. But I'm confident that my assessment will be something like "I don't know what made them."
It could have been anything. From fire demons, to a girl with heated footie boots. I don't believe it was either, because we don't have the facts. :)
It might help if I knew what you thought made the prints.
@DampeS8N A demon of some sort.
@Aaron Why a demon and not a ghost? Why not someone running around who is on fire? Why not bigfoot? I'm not being dismissive, those are all possibilities that are very unlikely.
You must have a reason to go with a demon over the other things.
5:55 PM
@DampeS8N I do.
It is that kind of stuff you should explore in the google doc. :)
Probably here isn't the right place.
@DampeS8N So you automatically preclude the miraculous?
@waxeagle Define miracle.
(btw if we want to go too much further, we should probably move off to a side session, whether here, C.SE or Skeptics.SE)
1 hour later…
7:19 PM
Italian refree Rizzoli shocks the football world by asking the players if they felt like a penalty kick should have been kicked or not. What I'm shocked about is learning we have a Powered by Apocalypse football league now.
@waxeagle Well, usually a refree sees something and inflicts a penalty or not. He might ask the linesman if he's not sure and in some countries I think the fourth official can look at the slow motion on the TV and have a say. But never before I've heard about the refree asking the players if he had to commit the penalty or not.
By comparison, in traditional RPGs it was the GM deciding every fictional element in the world, while powered by the apocalypse games tell him to ask his players to fill some gaps on the spot.
@Zachiel me neither
Well, it happened.
1 hour later…
8:50 PM
Is it just me or there's some void posts by Aaron?
@Zachiel Void posts?
9:13 PM
Dammit, I have to mine unicoins separately for each site?
Yay for unicorn animation!
And all it cost is some dignity and repetitive stress injury!
9:40 PM
@Aaron this one
@Aaron and this one
@lisardggY unicoins?
@Zachiel StackExchange's April Fool's prank.
It should hit you in 20 minutes or so, when you hit midnight. :)
@lisardggY 20 minutes to 1st of April here
@Zachiel Both show up as images for me.
@lisardggY I see nothing.
Try going manually to http://i.imgur.com/tvoXO6Y.png
10:26 PM
mmmh I seem to have a problem with imgur. I can see the direct links but when it's linked to another site I can't. It happened me yesterday with an armor for my play by chat game.
uhm the internet says it might be adBlock
10:51 PM
Now it's time for BESW's Tweet Catch-up.
We built this city! We built this city on http://t.co/qFLgkmGQyd
"Black death was not spread by rat fleas, say researchers". Apparently it went pneumonic: http://gu.com/p/3zxm6/tw #plague
(That Tweet is by the author of the Young Wizards series, by the way.)
Q: RPG hacks as answers to game recommandation questions

ScrollmasterI sometimes see some of the ever problematic game recommandation questions having very specific requirements. And sometimes, I don't see a game I know answering those requirements, but I see how hacking a game I know could work. An example is this question, where FATE hacks or Burning Wheel/Mous...

11:11 PM
is anyone else seeing a 'Unicoins' advert in the side bar?
it appears whenever I view a question or go on the questions tab
@Dakeyras Today is April's Fool
(That sentence alone should be enough to answer your real question.)
oh yeah, I didn't notice the date change
I was wondering whether it was a hack or something
@Zachiel Thanks
11:51 PM
Unicoin vote animations win.
my 82k rep still doesn't give me moderation powers :(
The modhammer cannot be bought; it can be wielded only by the worthy!
What if I wield a modhammer wielder?
00:00 - 14:0014:00 - 00:00

« first day (1278 days earlier)      last day (2434 days later) »