u/Lexilogical

For similar reasons.... Adam

They mostly just said that glasses fuck with their peripheral vision, which is fair. Glasses always messed with my peripheral vision because they don't cover the peripheral. And I imagine that there's a lot more of it when you're blind in one eye

You just know that the person bitching about potholes is the same person who put all of their tax dollars towards finding a cure for male balding

Serious question, are you high right now?

I run down similar mental paths while I'm high. Every act I or someone else does was simply taught to me by those who came before me. Billions of generations, all out here teaching me the basics of how to be a person, all learning from those who came before.

And weirdly, it feels like everyone else whose high has the same epiphany. Like it unlocks this realization that we are just one part of a massive hard drive, saving things like "what a smile means" so the next generation will know

My husband will occasionally use chaos as a strategy, at least in board games, so the potential for chaos is already in my simulation

They don't, sadly. They just spoof a new number and call again

Let me tell you about how excited I was to use Umbreon as the only pure Dark pokemon in the game, spent a bunch of effort trying to level them up with friendship, only to learn that I evolved them at level 24 and their only dark type move was at level 16

Yeah, agreed. Like, maybe I'm just old enough to remember 3.5 high level combat being entirely full of save or die or save or suck spells, and the conversation about how you're basically reducing all of combat down to the results of a single dice roll.

But "save or the spell does nothing" and "save or you take damage" is just how spells work

"Save or delete all your comments and pretend this never happened."

I'll accept that "save or suck" and "save or die" are slightly different terms. But the person I'm arguing with is saying that it means "If you save, the spell does nothing."

You know, normal person response to learning they're wrong is "Oh, I didn't know that I was using the word wrong, I'll do better."

Not "Well I insist on being wrong and you're the bad person for trying to correct me."

Well, spells like banishment and disintegrate are why the term exists, and the conversation about whether they are bad is or not is why people made the term, to discuss a gameplay issue.

If you want to use it for whatever else, have fun. You can call those sorts of spells pizza rolls around your table and it doesn't matter. But if you're going to be talking about it on reddit, you probably want to know what the term ACTUALLY means, instead of your own incorrect usage. It'll complicate shit.

Yes, you are correct. It was useful as a shorthand to describe a specific type of save in a conversation. What you are saying is that you are now using it as a shorthand for literally every type of save for a spell, and thus invalidating its usefulness in the entire conversation it was coined for.

Literally, the entire reason the phrase exists is for the conversation that "Save or be useless for an entire night" is a bad gameplay mechanic. And it is. And there was/is many different spells that fit that criteria, and should therefore be avoided.

If you pollute the meaning of the word to be "Save or take damage", which is nearly every combat spell in the entire game, then what's the point of the word? That's just what a save is. You didn't need 2 more words to explain it.

It was previously a useful term.

Well then it's being used in a way that's completely useless for the situation it was invented for.

Like, I get language changes. But the entire point of the term was to discuss how "roll this dice to determine if you can still play this game tonight" is a really bad mechanic. Using the term to mean "roll this dice to see if normal game consequences occur" is not useful to anyone except people who want to say their friend sucks

No, you kinda need more than "you take damage" for the suck part.

The phrase was popularized for spells like disintegrate, where if you saved, you were totally fine, and if you failed, you were dead forever with no recourse.

"You took some damage" is a normal consequence for failing a save, and entirely within reason for how spells work

Nooo, those are data points.

How many do you need beyond being a rapist and a murderer and a felon? Any one of those should normally be plenty

Or maybe I can hate a guy for more than one reason?

Ah yes, good to know that you're an independent thinker who decided that threatening your allies and being a literal, provable child rapist and murderer is just propoganda.

Having a smaller army just means we need to be more creative to win.

Good to know you've already justified to yourself why invading Canada is okay.

Yeah, please read the news

Because if you don't take it with some pride, other countries will use it as an attack. And when someone is threatening our sovereignty is not the time to let someone bully us.

It's not a war crime the first time you do it.

But the mythos doesn't just exist in Canada. The first time I heard it, it was from an American, and I was straight up offended that they took my country known for being good people and decided we were secretly all war criminals.

But the truth of the matter is, as pointed out, that we didn't really do anything that much worse than anyone else. But the myth gives us a reputation of being really good people whom you truly don't want to mess with, because we will hit back so hard it will later be considered a war crime. And I don't think that's a terrible rep to have. Especially when our greatest ally has suddenly decided that a reputation for being nice is the same thing as being a pushover, and is making "jokes" about conquering us.