One time a short order cook was preparing breakfast when he accidentally burned his hands on the frying pan.
Just then, the waittress said, "We need two eggs, overeasy, with some bacon."
The short order cook replied, "Sorry ma'am. My hands are fried."
One time a short order cook was preparing breakfast when he accidentally burned his hands on the frying pan.
Just then, the waittress said, "We need two eggs, overeasy, with some bacon."
The short order cook replied, "Sorry ma'am. My hands are fried."
One time a short order cook was preparing breakfast when he accidentally burned his hands on the frying pan.
Just then, the waittress said, "We need two eggs, overeasy, with some bacon."
The short order cook replied, "Sorry ma'am. My hands are fried."
Topic. I think this is what the Shadow Crystals will form when they are complete. This is the nature of Gaster's quest. The Dark Worlds are the only places that the Shadow Crystals can be formed.
It assembles like this...the 3 bottom triangles of the Deltarune are composed of two shadow crystals each. That makes for 6 in total, leaving one crystal, which admittedly is a slight hole in this theory. But perhaps the last one is used for something else. What do you all think?
While many of the Psychic's spells and abilities are focused on defeating Will saves, Unleash Psyche, as a mechanic, almost strictly rewards damage. Not only that, but it rewards Force Barrage more than the use of any other spell. This is because it's a flat damage increase that only activates if a spell succeeds. Force Barrage doesn't require a roll, so it's the best way to use Unleash Psyche.
I think Unleash Psyche should have raised your spell DC instead. It would fit much better with the rest of the class instead of turning optimized play for the Psychic a "press the Force Barrage button" simulator.
I mean it was in Europe, shouldn't it be called "the white plague"?
I have encountered a lot of this specific kind of epistemological cancer here on Reddit. I suppose it is almost inevitable when you create a social media platform that also contains spaces for deep, intellectual discussion. Still, on a place like r/epistemology , a rational person could reasonably expect that to be abated.
Instead, what I have encountered in massive doses is nothing short of some of the most disgusting, despicable, and utterly repulsive bad-faith social status mogging I have ever seen. "Ugh, who even are you?" "I need to know who you are before I can believe anything you're saying." "You're just an outsider who tells people with PhD's that they are wrong!" Along with all sorts of subreddit rule breaking using demeaning language. (Which the mods have been very good about, thank you mods.)
This lazy heuristic is nothing more than cynicism masquerading as protection. It is a combination of some of the worst logical fallacies, all balled up into a single horrible sphere of sick.
Who even knows how many other potential scientific breakthroughs were shut out because "lol who even are you, you aren't high social status, you're not with a university, lol loser". Just think; those outsiders were lucky enough to be connected, and to have the right people just so happen to listen to them.
To dismiss an argument simply because the person delivering it lacks an institutional stamp of approval is to fundamentally misunderstand the core axiom of epistemology: >>>>>Truth is derived from the validity of the data and the internal consistency of the logic, not the social status of the observer.<<<<<
The Genetic Fallacy (and Ad Hominem Circumstantial) While the argument from authority establishes a false requirement for who is allowed to speak, the genetic fallacy is the broader mechanical error of judging the validity of a claim based entirely on its origin rather than its substance. When a user demands, "Who even are you?" before evaluating an argument, they are attempting a structural redirection. They are shifting the processing load away from the objective data (which they lack the cognitive bandwidth or energy to refute) and onto the subjective identity of the speaker. It is an admission of intellectual bankruptcy. If the logic of a proof holds under stress testing, it remains true whether it was written by a tenured chair at Oxford or an independent researcher working out of a basement. The universe does not check credentials before obeying a law of physics.
The Illusion of Risk Mitigation
They call this gatekeeping "protection"—claiming they are filtering out "crank science" or "disinformation" to preserve the integrity of the space. In reality, it is a risk-averse bottleneck that stifles genuine breakthrough.
In information theory, if you turn your noise filter up so high that it blocks any signal that doesn't use standard, institutional formatting, you don't get a clean stream of truth; you get a sterile, looping echo chamber. You don't protect the truth by locking out the outsiders; you just ensure that your errors remain comfortably unchallenged.
This is the personal boundary line where intellectual laziness turns into a formal dismissal. The argument from incredulity occurs when someone decides that because a concept seems unbelievable, or because they cannot personally conceive of how an independent researcher could bypass institutional roadblocks, the concept must be inherently flawed. When they sneer, "You're just an outsider telling people with PhD's that they are wrong!" they are loudly broadcasting their own cognitive limits. It is a psychological defense mechanism. They substitute their own lack of comprehension for an objective counter-argument.
In conclusion: An idea is either valid or it isn't. Playing these social games cannot satisfy curiosity. It cannot get us closer to reality. There is no utility in them, and no means by which to seek truth. If you do it, you are part of the problem. Point, blank, period.
From now on, I will be watching this subreddit like a hawk for anyone who pulls this crap, and I will bluntly call them out on it. I would appreciate any help in this endeavor. Thank you.
TLDR; Read the full post or don't reply.
How can you be afraid of your own home? You live there! DUUUUHHHHH
Hello, I'm trying to niche down into hardware cyber security. I built a working fix for one of the world's greatest cyber security flaws, SQUIP.
Website is here. www.projectlavalamp.com
Because this kind of tech is somewhat tricky to demonstrate, I've really not been having any luck with traditional venture or angel capital. We have a massive market cap that includes the entirety of the cloud infrastructure, with a patent pending and a go-to-market strategy of getting the insurance underwriters to mandate the fix.
The constant rejections are kinda getting me down, so I could really use some good news here...you'd think with the sheer potential of this it would get a lot more interest.
Has anyone else noticed this? If you question the epistemology of string theory and how it hasn't produced a single falsifiable result in over 40 years, they tend to shut you out instead of discussing the implications of a billion-dollar industry that has failed to produce much of anything.
This has been a fairly consistent response from that camp. To be honest, I think they need a serious reminder of what real epistemology looks like.
Socksandsandalscrates.
DIDN'T
Hello, I was trying to get some Tasha's subclasses in (Twilight Cleric and Abberant Mind Sorcerer), but the ImpyUI those mods said they required seems to have poisoned my game. None of the icons for any of the characters or actions show up anymore.
Does anyone have any recommendation for a way to add those classes that is compatible with the most recent BG3 update? Thanks in advance. (Mystic and Mystic Expanded seemed to work just fine though.)
Legendairy.
I was having some pretty bad stick drift. Then someone on VRChat mentioned that the way to fix it is by dipping a Q-Tip in rubbing alcohol and then clean the stick. Let a bit of the rubbing alcohol drip into the inside of the stick (just a tiny bit) and clean the edges of the stick thoroughly.
It worked for me. I thought it would be prudent to inform you all.
Try this trick first before sending it off to Meta.
If I'm a Psychic and I'm Rank 4 Invisible, this would mean that opponents can't see or hear me cast spells. In this case, would this not mean that counterspell would have no opportunity to react?
(New the game, genuinely curious.)
Hello everyone. I've only had a couple of combat games so far. I think I've found a somewhat strong option in Commander Dedication (End It!, Protective Screen) + Plant Banner + higher commander DC, but I'm curious as to what you all do with stupefied turns. Personally I don't want to risk any spellcasting (or as I flavor it, psionic manifesting) during said turns.
Yes, I know you can't use End It! with Plant Banner up, I just adjust per the battle situation.
Me and my DM were just talking about this. Let's say 5 allies are within 10 feet of a single enemy. Does that enemy make five will saves or just one?
I was looking on it on Pathbuilder. Invisibility has Subtle, but not Mislead? That seems odd.
What do you call it when you're interested in studying radiation and its effects on the human body?
Marie Curie-ous