Carcer

but I also think it would be entirely reasonable for any DM to rule that they aren't beasts, or at least not the kind of beast that a druid could turn into.

fwiw I think Matthieu is perfectly correct to conclude that by the rules as written it is a beast. The only stats the rules give are essentially of the format "as this creature except that X", and nothing overrides their type as written

@dsollen yeah, that's what I meant when I said "One can debate whether or not the stereotype is deliberately or consciously invoked by the author", above. I certainly don't mean to suggest that anyone who's ever innocently drawn on that shared concept of the goblin is being deliberately racist. Though the argument has to be made that if it is pointed out to you that a characterisation you're using is derived from a racist stereotype, and then you keep doing it, I think it's fair for critics to say you are now doing it deliberately.

@vsz but nobody here is going "ah, they're just like real life Jews". They're going "ah, these look like racist stereotypes about Jews". Knowing that a racist stereotype exists, and noticing things that look like it in fiction, is not equivalent to being racist, and nobody sensible argues you're a bad person if you don't notice it. It's only a problem if you keep trying to argue those things aren't there when people who can see them point them out.

@vsz but if you encounter an entire fictional race who are shady and greedy, and also have hooked noses, and also have control of the world's financial system, etc - you don't have to be an antisemite to recognise antisemitic stereotypes. One can debate whether or not the stereotype is deliberately or consciously invoked by the author, but the "ah ha, it must be YOU who is racist, or you wouldn't have noticed this racism!" argument is tired and meritless.

Sam is definitely not my partner's favourite player. (Sam's sense of humour is more my wavelength than theirs.)

I mean Sam is my favourite player at that table

my impression was "yeah, it's pretty good", not "omg I love it"

I watched it from the position of someone who enjoys CR, but I've only properly watched C2 and some of C3; I am familiar with the characters and overall story of C1 because my partner did watch it all and I picked up stuff peripherally

LoVM is decent, but I think it is significantly improved if you already love that story

Arthur's return has been held up by train strikes

Yeah. I have the text of it (high enough rep to see deleted posts) but I'm reluctant to republish in any kind of publicly visible way

and anecdotally, I don't believe he visits any of the chat-chat channels anyway

@ThomasMarkov I don't mean to argue it didn't, just that it doesn't surprise me how many sites now are going mobile first design and seem to not really give a damn about the desktop experience

so there's a perspective in which it's better to break your desktop design to accommodate mobiles than vice versa.

@illustro the thing is if you are picking between a layout that only works for mobiles and a layout that only works for desktops, they probably have the stats that show they have a lot more users on mobile than on desktop

you need to drink more

but the cliff notes are that you better get used to finding Stinky Artefacts of Ecstasy

@AncientSwordRage I have edited my answer accordingly

@AncientSwordRage I felt compelled to write bash scripts at the wordle wordlist until I had more numbers for my answer

@AncientSwordRage I don't think you're doing anything wrong there

@AncientSwordRage I don't understand the question

but probably not mentally

@nitsua60 off by about 16 years chronologically

I actually don't use the machines at random, I look at the pictures on the machines and try to use a selection that widely distributes the red highlighted muscles

my motivation is that 2 months ago I decided to see how many pushups I could do out of curiosity and discovered the answer was "none"

my strategy is to just go to the gym and use machines at random until stronk is achieve

though it would be highly amusing if advanced analysis determines that the reason everyone thinks rangers suck is that they forget to cast hunter's mark

doing both seems reasonable, yeah

yeah, I feel if you're going to do dpr comparison you need to build each class with dpr as the focus

sword and board fighter is a bit of an unfair choice for dpr optimisation comparison would be my observation

the pace of 5e's extra material output is also considerably lesser than previous editions, so there's not as much new stuff to ask questions about over time as there may have been in the past.

apparently the trick to evading smokedetector is to spam in vietnamese

I mean, Eberron and FR have the issue that they have a history in previous editions in which gnolls have featured as not being mindless avatars of yeenoghu, so they kind of just can't take 5e's reimagining of them as completely canonical

ah, fudge, RotF I still don't have access to

I see you just got to that bit

other bits in VGtM there suggest that additional gnolls are only created by a Fang of Yeenoghu doing a ritual

5e doesn't offer any description of gnoll culture that suggests they are every anything except roving warbands that have to slaughter every few days though - nothing suggests they have and raise children

but 5e has dramatically deviated in the depiction of gnolls and made them way more of an "abyssal force of nature" type of thing

gnolls were definitely a race that reproduced normally in previous editions

@MichaelMacAskill additionally, I'm pretty sure the bullet that hits him is meant to be a ricochet, so presumably a bit less energetic than a direct hit.

@DRF Balancing the interests of the child against the interests of the parent. You want the child to get the best support possible without being financially unsustainable for the person who has to pay for it. (I'm not going to argue that's definitely how it works in all cases in practice but it makes sense in principle, more money is basically always going to be better for the child.)

It helps if you stop thinking of child support as being a "punishment" for the man who has ended up fathering a child, because child support isn't (or shouldn't be) about punishing the parents; it's about supporting the child. The parent that bears the child has the opportunity to decide not to carry the child to term because their bodily autonomy trumps other considerations at that point (and both men and women have the right to get or refuse medical procedures), but once a child has been born the concern is that the child is adequately supported, a responsibility that falls on both of them.

"There is no such rule or guideline" is a perfectly valid answer to the question "is there some rule or guideline for this". It's not a frame challenge to say there isn't one when the very premise of the question is whether or not one exists.

@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I hope you are okay over there

situation not helped by the fact that "assault weapon" seems deliberately chosen to make people think "assault rifle" without actually saying "assault rifle", and the pervasiveness of the AR-15, in which AR does not stand for assault rifle but it looks like an assault rifle and probably counts as an "assault weapon" depending on exactly how that's locally defined

"assault rifle" is specific terminology for a weapon which fires an intermediate cartridge and is capable of selecting between automatic and semi-auto fire; "assault weapon" is a much less specific term that's sprung up in law

are you sure that definition is of "assault rifle" and not "assault weapon"

@Medix2 eh... "assault rifle" is a clearly defined term

can electionbot give us cat facts?