The Harbinger of Ferocity

D&D 5e - The Lost Lands

The Vale

The Town,
Currently

The feline monk's hit scored, having set a bolt of golden light directly into her foe before it could so much as react, the battle's tides were already well in the process of being turned; they had clawed another inch back from the formless Kingdom of Darkness. This process, repeated enough so that they had found an unexpected ally, was a sound well of hope - deeper and fuller than any they really should have experienced. Their home, or what was left of it, had disappeared into the void no more than a day ago, but here in this world they felt a surge of exhilaration their spirits hadn't ever before; as though their efforts were actually seeing them through.

But so too was doubt strong here, venomously potent at that.

That subtle, underlying distraction is what set the slayer's bolt off its course just ever so slightly. It took a moment of reflection to recognize it had not landed, the cloud of unusual deceit and actual chaos of battle mingling into one complicated mess that only spiraled further out. Yet, by then, the violent gnome hurried to the front, audacious robes shifting as he carried himself as fast as his feet could speed in flight. Seemingly oblivious to the weighty burden the shadows had, one just under the surface, he drew back a hand and threw forth a bizarre lavender beam which then struck past Thea and to the shadowy soldier.

His arcane language for the spell certainly was not familiar either, even not to the ears of the trained Wick.

Effects

Birbin casts a strange magical cantrip at the Shadow Soldier beside Thea. It suffers 4 psychic damage and has disadvantage on its next saving throw until the start of Birbin's next turn.

Score
A Fellow Hero

Map
Town

Initiative Order

• Haemar (19)
• Thea (19)
• Katia (16)
• Theodore (16)
• Birbin (13)
• Cesar (12)
• Shadows (10)
• Night Fury (10)
• Wick (5)
• Valmjr (4)

@Cu Chulainn, @Gordian Nought, @Hekazu, @JBRam2002, @Rig

D&D 5e - The Lost Lands

Yes, if you would like to join there is still one slot open, @SantosGabriel77. Please send me a private message and I will inform you of where to begin.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

The responsibility is on, first, the attacker. You are attempting an argument no one is making and appealing strictly to emotion, @Penny. Second, the victim does have options beyond that if they are subject to sexual assault; an unwanted pregnancy is not an assured, guaranteed outcome. Failing to take up on those is a decision made by that person, who can weigh it only for themselves. This is one of the areas, as I stated but you apparently willfully ignored, there might be an argument for an abortion. Not only is it limited in scope, the victims in question have a valid claim, not just "Something, something, economic burden." or "I made a mistake."

People do not actually have as much "control" over their lives as they pretend to. They can mitigate threats and reduce them, eliminating some, but never them all. Putting all the authority into the hands of one person, especially who has direct charge over life and the welfare of it, should come with tremendous consequence for willful negligence. Most receiving these practices are not victims of rape or under threat for their own life, which should be mentioned. It is used as a flimsy excuse to send some message about "control over their own body".

You know what constitutes superior control over one's body? Not going to bed with a man and ignoring tenants of safe sex. A woman who cannot do this is less a woman and more a girl, because it is clear they cannot be held to the standards of an adult. I should also mention any man not willing to parent the child he fathered is a mostly spineless thing too; a boy pretending. At such a point if they err that badly, or "miscalculate" who they are involving themselves with or their life planning, no one should be at fault but them. The child should not be given the axe just because two adults spectacularly failed.

Additionally, there is no loss of rights or autonomy involved when the person in question neglected to maintain control over them. They surrendered them upon the altar of inaction as choosing to do nothing about it to prevent it is still a choice. At that point they are responsible for more than themselves; sacrificing someone else's life so to not hamper their own is not only cowardly, it is not an acceptable thing to do.

As for being "ethical solution", that is an opinion, not a fact.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

As is the price of having children, @Penny. For the record, this is not a moral argument either I am making, just a logical one. If one is willing or able to have a child, intentionally or inadvertently, there is a level of risk and responsibility they accept as a parent. This is the same concept as that when one decides to drive, they willingly accept that they might die in a vehicle accident of their own doing or another's, right or wrong. They must furthermore recognize and stand for the fact that just as the child does not choose their parents, or their ability or disability if any, they do not choose the child either. So if you wish to hand the executioner's blade over to one, rather than attempt - even to failure - to make impossible scenarios work, there should not be sympathy for the parenting party either.

No less, I hold the impression that average person cannot be trusted with what is or is not "suffering" when this topic is brought about no less, given that abortion has become less about what is good for the child and more about what is good for the parent; too easy is it for them to find a way around the intent. A doctor, while they might adhere to these standards in a number of cases, can be compromised as well without extensive oversight. History has proven that with enough business, money and traffic involved, there are hands willing to be waived.

I would rather shoulder the burden on the parents who made the decision at all.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

I consider that just as much an excuse, @Penny. I do not make a distinction between that early period or the period the article was talking about with post birth. I hold that it is a position for which there are few reasonable defenses for, if any. One might argue in the case of rape, incest, or extreme life and death circumstances, those I might hear to, but anything else I view in general as a blatant statement of "I made a mistake, which someone else should pay for." when the cost is life. The mindset of "Because I didn't want to." equally merits a response from me of, "Then that is your own fault. No sympathy here."

This evolves to the place where we see it that the article is saying they are not too different; which is true, you are knowingly and willfully engaging in the butchery of children in either case. My concern, as with many others, is that this idea that a "post birth abortion" can even be fathomed as a hypothetical possibility only guides us further down that slope.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

You can almost guarantee that all communications, in and out, were monitored and reviewed as well, @mdk. There is great question to how discriminatory they would be about it, which is to say likely not at all, as we already know well that the opposition was exercising their sitting power and authority to browse Donald Trump's campaign. There's a few other interesting components to it as well, to include that in some cases they might not have had not the proper authorization to continue their taps apparently, but we will see in time. There is nothing more classy than spying on political opponents because of "Russia". What only further stokes these flames are the amount of lies that abound too.

On another and wholly unrelated note, a child being a "financial burden" is an understatement. If one is having children, they sign away their right to that argument by being an adult and accepting fault or problem for their decisions. What I mean in this is, whether one likes it or not, they have to accept the responsibility of their actions; the child did not spontaneously materialize from the ether. The parents of the child chose, either by their inaction to prevent having a child in the first place, or by having a child until this information was revealed, thus negating any place to complain. If they did not want to deal with the consequences, they shouldn't have undertaken or risked it in the first place - the subsequent offspring shouldn't be the ones to pay their price for incompetent parents when dealing with the subject of life and death.

Additionally "non-medical" reasons are very much that slippery slope, worse than any arbitrary medical reasons as is. At that point you could invent any explanation you deem fit that is "too difficult" and thus making it fitting to abort the child. Almost an exact parallel line of logic that leads to the hypothetical argument of post-birth "abortion".

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

We have come to the place where it is somehow considered reasonable to make such an argument at all and in any light other than grim humor. There is a stark contrast between killing and murder, but this? This is the advocation, or at very least the norming and conditioning to, the murder of children, unquestionably so at that.

I might not agree with the "choice" philosophy, but I admit they have some points. This concept is off the rails for a "choice" argument if it was to be anything other than parody. Consider me skeptical if they say they were just posing this in hypothetical thought and vacuum; I haven't even that much trust in me to believe them.

D&D 5e - Hoard of the Dragon Queen

The string of the bow snapped forward, sending an arrow again whistling off into the distance; who knew where it would land now? At best it would plummet into the man and if not, perhaps just to his side or feet ahead of him as one final warning. The huntsman, watching the ever disappearing mark only then lowered the bow and sneered. Perhaps the fleeing man would never trouble them again, the fact he managed to leave with his life maybe kindling a sense of fate in him, but the rugged Brannor had no hopes of this. Reality, at least to him, suggested that the quarry would be off to beg its masters for forgiveness and tell them of coming danger. After all, he had paid no real mind to the capture, or rather the now corpse.

Turning where he stood, slinging the weapon by its string over his chest, he brushed free his gauntlets and stepped through the waving blades of grass to regain his sword; it too was set to its sheath across his back. The fierce eyes paid no mind to the dead men, their prices paid in their blood for their greed. It spoke volumes on these mercenaries, so willing to trade lives and suffering for coin that they would even stoop to being the lackeys of some deranged dragon-cult.

Standing beside Shepherd now, the idle, calm beast of a man looked over her work. He was unsure just when she executed him, but at least cruelty had not become of her descent into the savage. After all, the bear - rather, the apparent druid - and the half blood were all touched by that same or similar ferocity.

"We haven't a spade," Brannor began, looking over then to the furred giant that was the ursine Torus, knowing well he could dig with those tremendous claws, "But in reality, we haven't the time."

"Deception might work, but we would need many more disguises... less bloody ones at that." He continued, kneeling down to the kill's limp body, beginning to rifle it for any added proof; first the weapons, then the pockets, then through and between the armor. Anything and everything that could give the young women added insight, be it the small one or the priestess.

"What did the dead men have to tell?" The golden eyes turned to fall on Shepherd, then to Parum, hands still at work.

Narrowed as they were, a brow of his remained ever so slightly perked. He knew some sort of conversation had been made while he was concentrating elsewhere but he sincerely doubted they would gain anything of use - or what he, a tracker and hunter, would consider of use. He imagined it something inane, given it did not sound like fearful begging or pleading after all, yet what did he know? Perhaps they had gained something as profound as they had with the last prisoner they dealt with...

Effects

Brannor fires a final arrow at the last target, hoping to kill it or keep it running for good and not return. He very likely misses on an 8.

After, he returns to the rest of the group over a short walk, reclaiming his greatsword and then preparing to search the body for any obvious evidence that might be of use to those who have intentions other than just killing the cult. If there are any arrows on any of the bodies, he will claim them to help restore his stock.

If there's any hidden items or details, he almost assuredly glances by them with an Investigation (Intelligence) roll of 1.

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

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Wall Meme

The numbers are not entirely accurate, but the meme gets the point across. A one-time wall will cost you significantly less to build than funding that year's illegal immigrants and more than pay for itself over time. Unsurprisingly, the upkeep of said wall will also reach nowhere near the cost of funding people who did not lawfully enter the nation. The cost of the wall is projected to indeed be ten billion dollars, while the cost of the illegal immigrants yearly is a more indistinct fifty-four billion dollars. Still under the spell that "Mexico isn't going to pay for the wall." however?

Let that be shattered then, as Mexico is not going to be paying for it how people imagine - in cash or by tax - likely, but instead in trade, such as this renegotiation of NAFTA in the works as well as the fact that Mexico was leveraging border security to keep the United States in it. This is also ignoring that there is a executive order in draft sitting in the White House that, if executed, immediately withdraws the United States from the NAFTA agreement. This is important to note because, without any added warning in response to Mexico not dealing or agreeing, the President of the United States can withdraw the nation; it is the literal and figurative trump card.

Building a wall is not an act of racism, it has everything to do with security and the enforcement of the law of the land. Hungary built a wall, of which reduced illegal immigration by ninety-nine percent in response to the refugee crisis. It had nothing to do with the people themselves and everything to do with the establishment and ongoing authority of a sovereign state. Either you immigrate under the standards of the host nation or not at all.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

In any case actual news reported is as a comment by an EU official, not the Don.

@Penny

So we are placing value in the word of some know-nothing European Union official that much? Here is what was said then.

Miguel Arias Cañete told reporters on Saturday: “The U.S. has stated that they will not renegotiate the Paris accord, but they will try to review the terms on which they could be engaged under this agreement.”

The "actual" news who reported it was none other than the Wall Street Journal, who had the above statement terribly wrong. In fact, so wrong that it flies in the face of this:

When Trump officially announced his plans to withdraw from the Paris Agreement in June, he said he’d be willing to “immediately work with Democratic leaders,” either to “negotiate the U.S. back into Paris” or devise a new pact.

Since then, the administration hasn’t officially announced any new policies on the climate change agreement, nor has it provided any details on what a renegotiation with the accord would look like.

Which even the biased Huffington Post acknowledged.

This turn of events is actually a targeted attack, similar to the "DACA announcement" that the President had been involved in days before. The reason I call this a "targeted attack" is because it was accompanied by a massive surge in the Shareblue personnel and computer botnet, many of whom posed as "Trump supporters" and flooded social media sites affiliated with his backers, be it 4chan, Reddit, Breitbart, Facebook, etc. This is where the cry of "Trump's base is abandoning him." rose from, owing to the paid shills or opposition actors and whose go-to tactic is debasing attempts. Do not believe me, let them say it for themselves:

Shills