The Harbinger of Ferocity

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

The most that can be said about races is that they are statistically biased toward certain positive and negative qualities by their genetic makeup. However, these are generally not significant enough to consider them anything other than minor variations; they are not even distinct enough to be categorized as separate subspecies, which would be one of the largest breaks for that argument. They are, as one imagines, regional variations that have adaptive qualities to favor that environment they found themselves in. In the more modern era, these are not generally that important - technology takes the place of many of these biological advantages, but not always - yet there are outliers that would be considered remarkably beneficial. This also works in reverse in the sense that disadvantages are mostly mitigated.

It also is worthy to keep in mind that speaking only from a pure numbers perspective, the vast majority of people will have roughly the same number of advantages and disadvantages regardless of race; people are more likely to be average than anything else. Certainly some traits will be more useful now than they were before, that is just the reality of things, such as having a bias (but not exclusivity) toward a higher than average intelligence and upper threshold of it, but it regularly will not be significant enough to matter. There are too many other factors when dealing with humans that are more likely to change that outcome. It is easier to say, measure the success of average mountain lions in their predation than measuring the success of average people doing so, even with access to primitive tools to establish a baseline from.

Even if we took an example to an extreme, it is unlikely to have every day proof in action. Over an aggregate long term this is true, but the human dynamic is outpacing evolutionary design. You are more likely to see your exceptional or above average of any race do better than those par for the course who have just a less pronounced advantage. This is more to the advance of technology, culture, society, et cetera.

In short, yes, race does technically exist as well as it does influence positive and negative, speaking only to natural potential, but what it accounts for in modern factoring is not really all that large. The individual themselves have significantly more power than that.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

My point was to emphasize the difference between the "Alt-Right" and the actual Alt-Right, because the two terms are used so interchangeably and with purpose in doing so. When you say Alt-Right, there are a fair amount of people who point to the section I was speaking about and all the way to the actual end of the spectrum that has those persons you were speaking to, @Dynamo Frokane. I am not fond of the phrase for that reason.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

I have spoken about this before, but the metrics that people have been using to determine who is "Left" and who is "Right" have changed, radically. There is a reason this has become a meme that is too close to reality. At this place in time, all of those are considered "Alt-Right", despite only those last four being the actual Alt-Right. It has become socially acceptable to lump all of them together and accuse them of one thing. That has been and will continue to be the tactic of partisan politics for some time.

As for being soft on them, disowning them and refusing to serve alongside them is certainly not soft. Condemning "violence on all sides" is not soft. Openly not wanting their support during your Presidential run is not soft. Not associating with them or claiming them as part of your platform is not soft. I could go on, but the real Alt-Right is desperate for validation from the new Right. The reality is, no one is honestly giving them that. Instead, this is who the actual Right is.

There's too many examples that go against the expectation and "standard" of the "Alt-Right" and none of the Right wing I personally know supports or cares for the Neo-Nazis, Klansmen or other equally sicking persuasions be them Right or Left.

D&D 5e - Hoard of the Dragon Queen

The singing edge of the sword leading into the flesh sung, but not before the lance of men turned tail and fled. The cloaked huntsman, with his foe dropping before him and sword leading toward the now bloodied grass, let free the handle of the great blade and allowed it to fall to rest in the thick green carpet. There was no time to delay as their enemy broke into a full on run, abandoning their allies and their arms in the process. Bounding through the grass again and drawing up the bow, the man followed the trail for a tense few moments before an arrow sailed past him, hitting the nearer of the two targets.

He slid to a halt and snapped up his own bow, loosing an arrow at the same victim with a reactionary shot. It was far from the methodical, thoughtful, hunting shot it would regularly have been, but there was no time to be wasted in the heat of battle. Both orc and bear were preoccupied and from the corner of the man's fierce stare, it was clear the scaled vermin were making their break as well. He could not fault such pathetic creatures for their cowardice, but the retreat of the ill hearted men was more a surprise; they willingly abandoned their own to whatever fate was to come.

Shooting a glance across the shoulder, he knocked another arrow after, noticing the last man standing in a muscled brawl with the half-blood savage. As far as he could be concerned, that was handled. Now only to see if they could finish off another enemy, even at this distance. It was not to be unmerciful, but to instead be certain their enemy was quite dead rather than left to wander in injury toward a long death.

Effects

Brannor will move to I5 and fire a single arrow from his bow at the man Kyra Shepard struck. He rolls a 12 to hit with the longbow, dealing 4 piercing damage if the shot finds its mark.

@Hekazu@Ryonara@Lucius Cypher@Gordian Nought@Norschtalen

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

We are at the point that anyone to the political right of the Establishment Republicans are called "Alt-Right", @Dynamo Frokane. That is certainly a coordinated effort on many levels to brand everyone who is opposition "the worst" - as with the infamous "basket of deplorables". It goes deeper to include intentionally labeling them as a form of dehumanizing, delegitimizing propaganda of which the following is one of the most notable examples revealed to us via the Wikileaks emails:

John Podesta

Their tactic is to make out anyone who is their enemy to be a Nazi, as we have seen them do time and time again. "Trump is literally Hitler." and "Punch Nazis." are not coincidence, neither is this intangible spectre of "fascism" that keeps being thrown around. People call it conspiracy when you say this is no accident - making everyone out to be the Alt-Right - but when they legitimately say, "Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler." there is no real question here. These are overt tactics to stir mass hysteria and create the "tribalization" of factions.

This specific norming process sees you to where we are today.

D&D 5e - Hoard of the Dragon Queen

Then my intent will be for Brannor to follow another thirty feet and fire on his turn, assuming we are still in initiative order, @Hekazu. I am unsure if @Norschtalen would as well or if I am alone, but either way the intent is to maybe incapacitate or kill at least one more.

D&D 5e - Hoard of the Dragon Queen

Reactions I have seen classified as immediate in terms of when they occur. Such as, the man turned to run but in doing so, it immediately triggered the opportunity attack in that less-than-second gap of time. If multiple actions were to occur, I imagine that order of initiative would come into play to resolve them; say two fighters both stepping away from each other and thus both provoking opportunity attacks. Who swings first then? Reasonably whoever is higher in initiative is the safer fallback. For a grapple on an attack of opportunity, the same concept would apply to an extent where the enemy is moving to exit, but is caught by the back of their clothes and has, as of yet, left their five-foot cube they occupy.

It is a bit confusing but that was how I had seen it handled in Third Edition where this came up more because of all the varied combat maneuvers melee fighters would use. That's all I have to compare it to, but it is not too large a leap, even between editions.

On another note @Hekazu, would the fleeing men still be in bow range? I imagine so, but I wanted to be certain. I am under the assumption by their next turn they will be outside its effective range for all of us.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

In comparison to who, I ask, @Fabricant451? His "questionable tendencies" are far less questionable than prior administrations who are cheered as somehow "scandal free". The only reason anyone is taking issue with his platform is because of hysterics and plain language. But let us pretend for a moment that isn't true. What has he verifiably done that is actually questionable in terms of office and power? Because I can assure you with the amount of hate he receives from every front by his numerous political enemies, they would know well before we ever did and act on it.

The same goes for checks and balances. Until it can be verified and proven that he violated any of these nebulous claims, there's a standard of "innocent until proven guilty". He might not believe in all of them, a fair number of them are indeed nothing more than political jockeying by his opponents exercising to the fullest, and at times beyond their station, but until he actually errs on them, there is nothing one can do but say, "He has opinions I disagree with." which in this age of hysteria translates immediately to "Is this the end of Drumpf? Impeach 45."

And as a later addition, as well as because it is timely, here is quote from a member for the former administration and who later ran for President of the United States.

"You can fool some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time! And today was one of those times."

Hillary R. Clinton

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@Fabricant451

There might be good reason for calling the media crooked and biased, when they blatantly are. Charlottesville legitimately had two sides to blame, plus a third side which was the mayor that ordered the police to stand down. That is a fact. Condemning violence on both sides should be heralded with applause, not condemnation for it is the most center path; it has no partisanship, no finger prints of the Democrat or Republican establishment. The mainstream media deserves all the ridicule it gets from the Trump administration, especially after all the fawning they did over the course of Barrack Obama's presidency and Hillary Clinton's candidacy. I have heard it time and time again that there is no recent comparison to how much they hate and attempt to discredit the President of the United States.

Having a rally to show support and care to those who voted you into office is not that strange. Coming from the side of the Trump base, I can tell you that they are demanding of that; they want to know their efforts are recognized and remembered. That he is not just any other politician who sees their vote as a number. Needless to say, it is working very, very well. As for the wall and political posturing, it is the usual game he's played before. This far in I am surprised no one has cracked that code despite it being blatantly obvious.

Can you provide an example of violating checks and balances?

Having dealt with terror, many of the families are implicated or willing to look the other way against evidence. The same reason we experience so many cultural issues with fighting say, radical Islam. That's called being hardline, not so much a "human rights issue". No less, I am probably one of the last you would wish to ask about my opinion of terrorists and dealing with them; let us just say they are more kind than I would be. I have no sympathy for terrorists or their company they keep.

As for buzzwords, both sides sling them. The more amusing part is, is that he tends to actually be more accurate with them. Bernie Sanders is a self professed socialist, which as anyone who has read Marx knows is on the path to communism for example. No less, people who are not legally allowed in the United States are not "undocumented migrants", they are "illegal immigrants" and should be deported for their violation of law. The Democratic party of the United States has also made itself out to be a parody; their entire platform is, even if irrational, "Anything Donald Trump is against." That isn't a political view or statement and it makes it easy for the man to point at it and go, "See? Sad."

The police should be rougher with the rioters than they are. In fact, many law enforcement regulations allow it but people cry foul when they see a policeman strike someone with a baton or asp, let alone use unarmed techniques to apprehend suspects. According to how use of force functions, they needn't; they can use as much force as they need until they gain compliance, only then needing to cease escalating force. It is the same reason they can taze a person so many times until that tazed person surrenders. As for Joe Arpaio, as with terrorists, I have no real sympathy for criminals. They should all live and work in those hot tents doing manual labor; they are in jail, not daycare.

Until I see proof of fascism, actual fascism, I will chalk that up to any of the other labels of "racist, homophobe, misogynist, Nazi" and the like that have no meaning anymore. There's no basis for these claims.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

The President might not be responsible for the rise of the 'alt-left' but he certainly hasn't helped the situation. Weirdly when someone in a position of power starts demonstrating things reminiscent of fascism, people start claiming said person in power is possibly a fascist. There's been a stupid and weird 'war' between left and right since before the election, only before the election it was from right side shit stirrers up in arms over lefties wanting to get rid of free speech because they dare to say that saying nigger and faggot and words like that are not cool. It was a lot of Chicken Little shit and now that they have a disorganized mess of a group like Antifa running around it's like vindication.

I don't think Antifa is going about it correctly at all but it's hard for me to think of them as worse than, you know, white supremacists and Nazis. And saying they're equally bad is disingenuous.

@Fabricant451

Can you direct me to an example of fascism displayed by the current President of the United States? And yes, censoring free speech immediately invalidates it as free speech. I might not agree with calling someone a "faggot" just because it is an attack on their character rather than their opinion, but there is no such thing as "hate speech". You have to take the totality of what free speech entails across the entire spectrum, good or bad, and accept that by and large the weight of having no limit on what can be said - not done, as that is different - is for the better.

Antifa certainly is worse by the numbers than your modern day white supremacists and Neo-Nazis. Both have no place in the United States acting with any sort of violence, but as it stands, more damage has steadily been done in recent years by the rise of the Far Left. This is not to say the other faction is innocent - we know a man still ran over a crowd of people with a car - but there's far more articles of this domestic terrorist group and its relatives doing everything from trying to murder part of congress for political reasons, hosting organized riots, attempting to shutdown subways by chaining doors shut, assaulting people with deadly weapons, throwing improvised explosives and other dangerous projectiles and so on.