I DM’d a group that tried to optimize every situation, and every turn off combat. That’s okay as long as it stays fun, but once they start spinning their wheels, or one player turns combat into a slog, then I take measures.

In my experience (and from what I’ve heard of other groups) optimisers are rarely the cause of this problem, usually it’s the more casual or inexperienced players.

How much damage did she take from the poison?

made the poison, then promptly drank it to sacrifice it

That sounds, uh, inadvisable.

like is there a single thing she hasn’t already done and excelled at

Having self-confidence

Talking to Razira without turning into a flustered mess

Saying rude words

is bardlock a mix of bard and warlock?

Yes

why is everything a warlock in dnd?

It multiclasses well, two levels for agonising repelling blast, plus a subclass feature, and then you can pick any charisma caster.

I once unleashed an ancient evil on the world in a failed attempt to open an unlocked door.

If it’s this dangerous there’s sure to be great loot at the end.

Impeccable logic

They’ve got accusations coming out the wazoo

This reminds me of a comic I saw a while ago where the BBEG was gloating that he could only be killed by the sword next to him that couldn’t be pulled from the stone. The barbarian picks up the BBEG and swings him at the sword.

Also, she’s immune to all poisons.

How did she get that?

❤️

SUBSCRIBE

It’s been well reported on that Russia doesn’t work like that, with junior officers unable to use initiative and the whole system being very slow to respond to changing events. The reason it operates like this was shown when they did try having a more independent unit, which resulted in the Wagner Group mutinying.

That’s standard in Western militaries. It means units aren’t paralyzed by unexpected circumstances while they wait for communication to go up and down the chain of command, and it improves resilience if communications or senior officers are incapacitated.

More often dictators take control of the church and use it for propaganda.

People talk a lot about the genericisation of brand names, but the branding of generic terms like this really annoys me.

I’ll use the example I first noticed. A few years ago, the Conservative government was under criticism for the minimum wage being well under a living wage. In response, they brought in the National Living Wage, which was an increase to the minimum wage, but still under the actual living wage. However, because of the branding, it makes criticising it for not meeting the actual living wage more difficult, as you have to explain the difference between the two, and as the saying goes, “if you’re explaining, you’re losing”.

Heard an interview a while ago with a founder of Just Stop Oil who clearly said he doesn’t care whether they even stop climate change (around 40:00-43:00).

What does Vincent van Gogh have to do with the current state of the petrol industry?

It’s famous, so attacking it gets attention.

They’re both problems.

I bet no one remembers even a quarter of this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump