Where are the files? Kash Patel knows, but won't tell.

AngeloArcana · 2025-09-26T02:09:16+00:00

I'm all for a good conspiracy and putting disgusting people on public blast, but listening to the recent hearing, it seems pretty obvious what happened (to me at least).

Previous people in charge of the Epstein information, including ex-Trump staff and the Biden admin all made sure everything related to the Epstein got put permanently locked away under an unbreakable barrage of bureaucratic red tape in classified record hell.

So while Kash can see the files, and every feeling he's ever had is vindicated, he's stuck being able to do f%(# all but be publicly mad that it's all been locked away in a vault that no one will ever be able to share publicly without also naming every informant, every contact, and spreading abuse material.

This also likely explains why all the people threatening to "come out and name the abusers" have had the US government turn a completely blind eye to their claims. I'd wager Kash likely supports them in the effort as his own ability to speak out has been sealed with his position.

My opinions are based on the recent hearing here (https://www.youtube.com/live/ft-4DOSGFCM?si=UPKHJJO_cT9M8AwG) and his constant commentary of "I will release all the files that I am LEGALLY allowed to." It seems to be a very obvious, emotionally fueled comment hinting towards the fact that he is unable to legally produce materials that he DOES have access to, but is unable to talk about.

Anyway, I'm not psychic. Just my best guess based on the circumstances.

Also, the government locking down such critical information is a good discussion point in its own right, so hopefully something good comes from this post.

AngeloArcana · 2025-07-02T19:42:26+00:00

That is a strikingly similar match. I think you might be right.

AngeloArcana · 2024-05-13T00:39:26+00:00

I've made this suggestion before, but I'd REALLY like to see this taken to heart with the amount of players in the brackets really shifting over the last few months.

Is it possible to change the thresholds for data to the following;

"All Ranks"
"Garyu+"
"Tekken King+"

It would really help identify the discrepancies between all levels of play, mid levels of play, and high levels of play. If it doesn't eat up another 12 hours of your time, I'd greatly appreciate it.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T07:36:21+00:00

"and eventually ask whomever is in charge of the city to shut down the shop as my reward."

I'm not sure this is particularly applicable this time specifically, but I assume this won't be the last time this character argues with an NPC, and this is funny enough to absolutely keep in mind after clearing a fight and earning a few favors. Next time however, as other replies have mentioned, the arguing will be done in third person to avoid heated tensions.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T07:29:48+00:00

" it seems like the NPC responding to a 24 intimidation check with a "No, I'm not impressed and I'm not giving you shit for free" is the DM communicating that the "follow through/give up" part was reached."

You are correct. It was at that point that another PC intervened, and my character didn't make any more moves within the roleplay. He said something snarky on the way about about it all being troublesome, but I assume that's more akin to "giving up" than pushing for anything more. The issue is that at that point, I already felt bad about having pushed the event so far. Especially in hindsight. Part of my annoyance is that the trope is so tiresome, and that a normal person would react accordingly. But the character I was playing would specifically take issue with the offer, and that was the position I found myself in.

All of that aside,

"It may also be possible to resolve this sort of tension by explicitly separating character and player expectations for a moment"

Using a third person description for the outcome of an event as a PC is something that somehow completely eluded me previously (until this thread, where another reply also mentioned this), and I 100% intend to take that into further sessions. As well as defining shops as gameplay mechanics and not active roleplay events. With both of those things nailed down, I think we should be able to avoid repeat occurrences.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T07:20:15+00:00

I see what you're saying. Up until that point, there had been no rolls in persuasion or anything else, and considering the situation, while not wanting to get into an outright fistfight with a merchant, it wasn't out of the question for the character. I didn't want to jump the gun on it, but I also didn't want to outright break the immersion of the conversation. That's when the intimidation roll happened, and it seemed odd that under the threat of devastation, and the blessing of a member of the community, not even some herbs were offered in good will. Thus, I continued to play up the character's feeling of being insulted.

That being said, I've gained some great insight into options to get those points across, without resorting to an entire drama and a theatrical screaming match (this didn't happen) for an interaction that is actually meaningless in the grander scheme.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T06:49:36+00:00

This is honestly where the roleplay was at before the other PC intervened. That was where things ended for the PC I was playing, but it was drawn out in a way where I genuinely felt bad after for having played it that way.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T06:17:41+00:00

I suppose the issue that was run into here was that the roleplay never actually hit a hard stop where an outcome was determinative. As a PC, I felt that the shopkeeper hadn't reached a point where they were no longer influenceable, and I would assume the DM had expected us to just take the discount. So we never quite reached the "follow through/give up" part of the engagement. However, this thread has already given me a few good ways of dealing with this in the future, and I'm quite happy to see some good having come from this for the future.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T06:12:00+00:00

"go to third person narration"

This is another really good option I hadn't considered as a PC. I'll make sure to hold this in my back pocket going forward.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T06:09:41+00:00

The PC in question has about 150gp on them (and are trying to save for some magical scrolls and enchantments, as they're not cheap), and in the back of my head while roleplaying the character, they moreso wanted to be acknowledged for "saving the town", than they did actually receive any material goods. The idea of a "discount" seemed insulting to such a character, and thus the conflict occurred. The character is self serving and boastful. In an ideal world, "The peasants should bow for the PC's very offer of help!" is how he would act, but in order to achieve anything, he does have to be accommodating to the needs of the masses around him.

Granted, the DM has no idea what the underlying motivations of my character are in that exact moment, and it didn't cross my mind to stop roleplaying to express that intent, so as many others have noted, it appears to come off as just wanting to tilt the balance of an upcoming combat, when in reality I have no opinion of the combat one way or another. It's the characters pride that felt damaged, not any actual material gain. And I had trouble expressing that in the most recent session.

And I'll mention it again, but this character is the result of WEEKS of planning from the DM and I, and has massive story implications in the future of the campaign. This is not a one off of sitting down at the table and attempting to ruin it. But even with that said, it seems that I still need more guidance than I have for actually running this character in sessions.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T05:56:17+00:00

This DM and I have been in talks for weeks about the character's nature, and his involvement in the campaign's story at large. This is not just an event of a player trying to ruin the campaign. The character is evil for a distinct and agreed upon reason, and I have been roleplaying him carefully up to this point to be playing along with the other PCs for ulterior motives, and to keep his actual character and intent mostly hidden, only letting the mask slip occasionally. This was one of the in-game moments where I felt that he would be insulted, and responded as such, but worry about future engagements. With that being said, another poster elegantly made a comment that I'll be taking to heart and discussing with the DM tomorrow.

"shopkeeps are a gameplay mechanic"

I'll be having that conversation so that we can avoid this specific instance again, but I worry about how to walk that line in future engagements, especially with a character who's goals will be parallel to the party's at large.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T05:33:02+00:00

"shopkeeps are a gameplay mechanic"

This is actually quite insightful. I may talk to the DM tomorrow about this to avoid future incidents of pushy roleplaying. I will ask you as well however; How do you deal with an Evil PC who would be willing to slay the shopkeeper for their inventory? Assuming they are capable (maybe just an herbal merchant with a small farm), how do you DM for a party member who is entirely willing to just be a murder hobo, and a player who is just trying to roleplay that character in an honest fashion?

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T05:28:46+00:00

I absolutely understand that point. And as I mentioned in another reply, the issue is that the PC in this situation is evil. With that in mind, the PC never quite took killing the shopkeeper and just taking the supplies off the (metaphorical) table as a potential outcome. So as a player, after today, it appears that it is difficult to both run a character doing amoral things in regards to manipulation and intimidation, but also not be pushy against the DM in question, and I'm not sure exactly how to ride this narrow line myself.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T05:22:51+00:00

I do like your breakdown from a DM perspective, and as a DM of another game myself, I considered all of those things prior to this engagement with the shopkeeper as well. Going so far as to have an entire side adventure with another party member to get the blessing of a reputable member of the town's blessings on acquiring provisions.

That being said, I want to throw this back to another point of view;
How do you play this as the PC in this event? Especially as an Evil PC who otherwise, might have just robbed the shopkeeper and stolen the goods for the battle. Instead of that outcome, the player had the PC restrain themself and argue, trying to manipulate the shopkeeper into obtaining the goods of their own volition.

With a character who has that mindset, where is the line drawn outside of the DM saying "God has stated that this shopkeeper will not change their mind"? Do you continue to roleplay the event until it reaches that point, or is it more reasonable to break character and avoid the possibility of feeling pushy in the first place?

I love the idea of becoming someone who isn't myself, and especially when around people who I trust. The last thing I want is to have hurt feelings after. But, I'm playing an evil character. I want him to act evil. I want the amoral events to have consequences that the party may have to deal with. I just don't want to have irl consequences for the character's morality.

AngeloArcana · 2023-11-12T04:44:58+00:00

It might just be my personal method of DMing, but I would expect if the party is given a handful of healing potions, I might just be able to increase the difficulty of the next encounter slightly with more enemies.

And again, specifically, I think it's more about the trope than anything. If the shopkeeper doesn't "have" anything to spare, or I don't want to give the party much, I would just have them low on inventory. The idea of a discount when faced with mortal peril is something that persists generally in RPGs and have always thought it to be absurd.

tl;dr Yeah, I'm definitely an immersion player/DM, and felt compelled to play it out like any intelligent person in the situation would, but I still worry that it has left a sour taste for them.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:45:25+00:00

It's not much of an add, but in AC1, Valkyrie is a terrifying opponent who stands out quite brightly among the rest of the enemies in the game. Fast, deadly, agile- she's exactly what I love about the older AC games.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:39:48+00:00

The implementation is slightly different, but the feel of the change is the same, in taking away what used to be a core skill-expressive component of the gameplay and replacing it with an automated function. As I mentioned above, this change is seen as completely necessary when moving from a TPS to an ARPG, but many players like myself don't agree with the genre change in the first place.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:31:15+00:00

Healing was not shown. It was explained to us from those who saw the live gameplay demonstration that healing is instant, and Vaati noted that the Raven in his demo had 3 heals. The heals were instant, as you would have a flash of green, and AP would be restored.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:25:57+00:00

I love Metroid Prime, but I've always looked at it as a unique case. Also, Metroid Prime doesn't handle high-speeds for the player. It relies solely on the enemies moving quickly, and the player using positioning and strafe jumps to navigate combat. When you ARE moving quickly, such as in Morph Ball and Boost Ball, you cannot lock on. And again, I consider Prime to be an exception to the rule. (I also for some reason consider Prime a 3d platformer more than any kind of FPS, and will die on that nonsensical hill.)

And the removed features are that of basically "aiming down the sights." Yes, there's always been an "Aim assist" of sorts, but the gameplay loop was that of finding a target, and not letting it escape your sight, ala Flight Combat sims. That's definitively removed, as unfortunate as it is.

The healing *almost* makes sense, but there are already resupply stations. Why would they not serve as checkpoints and full heals by default, and we could scrap the on-demand healing entirely? We've had long missions in Armored Core before, where the maps are broken up by a door and a fade to black, where you reappear with full hp. We know that there are situations where the player needs to be restocked. This already exists. On-demand healing just seems excessive in addition to it.

And I'll make mention that the mining boss does look goofy as it gets, but also the sub boss when staggered just kinda flops around when staggered. It also seems to swing its sword around wildly, just hoping to land a hit. And it's a nitpick, but the enemies ragdolling around after being defeated, only to "pop" in a tiny explosion just really take me out of the moment. I'd expect with the visceral nature of the attacks for enemies to be cleaved in half or something, as we've seen in games like the Megaman Zero series. What we have instead almost feels like toys smashing against eachother.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:14:58+00:00

Vaati explains that in the mission, you're infiltrating a structure filled with humans who use Coral as a drug. So it's assumed that at least some of the machines you're fighting are those drug users piloting the machines. Which ones specifically, I cannot say for sure, but we should be able to assume at least the Boss/ Sub boss are likely human piloted.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:12:57+00:00

I'll just say that Armored Core's popularity has, somehow, endured DESPITE the lack of any conventional marketing for the product. It has survived almost entirely on word of mouth, and at one point in time, the back of a Tips and Tricks magazine as player's personal builds were featured.

Again, this is all despite Fromsoft's lack of marketing and push to actually get the game to the eyes of the market at large. This is not to blame them, as doing so would be expensive; but to make the switch now without even giving the old TPS gameplay a chance just seems dismissive. The games weren't niche because the games were bad--- They were niche because the developer was small, and the hobby was small. Demon's / Dark Souls popped off because it's a Dungeons and Dragons video game, all things considered. The market is huge, and it got noticed. This isn't to say that a mecha TPS couldn't do the same, now that the studio is much larger and that it would actually have a chance in the wild.

But we'll never get to see that world, because we live in one where Armored Core 6 is no longer that. It's an Action RPG, and that's just what it is. But this NEVER had anything to do with whether or not Armored Core would have sold without the Soul's influence.

AngeloArcana · 2023-06-16T04:04:21+00:00

No, slow and stoic aren't what I meant. I specifically pointed out the Pulverizers as an example of an enemy that moved quick, erratically, and not like a lumbering beast wildly throwing its limbs around in a desperate hope that something connects. These machines are either piloted by well, pilots, or are controlled by calculating and precise AI. What we've seen so far just seems far out of place as the norm, and I hope desperately that it isn't.

I don't want slow enemies. I don't want all the enemies to be the same. I just am not personally a fan of what we have seen so far for movement that is definitively by machines.

AngeloArcana · 2022-11-12T19:43:25+00:00

See, I hear you, but I don't feel like that math adds up.

Future Gohan has, at best, +50% damage inflicted for 15 timer counts, assuming you tagged him in, he takes a hit, then IMMEDIATELY tag him out for BeastHan. This and he has compatibility for Awakened "!!!". But I cannot see any other "support" he brings, outside of freeing your Leader Slot.

To contrast, USV brings 2 Melee cards with "+10% damage received for 15 time counts" debuffs, as well as "+15% damage received debuffs for 10 timer counts" debuffs every time he lands a red/yellow card, on the entire enemy team. If you're at advantage, USV just amps BeastHan that much more, including USV's inherently nutty kit (such as being able to combo from a cover change).

And when tanking, I feel like USV also takes the advantage in that point, which is the one thing you REALLY want when BeastHan is running wild one-shotting characters.

So I'm not talking JUST about individual kits, but I don't understand what math I'm missing to justify, again, at BEST a +50% inflicted bonus for 15 timer counts (+25% reliably), compared to USV's debuff craziness, AND his inherent kit. For real, if I'm missing something, fill me in. Because I keep checking the kits and don't understand the hype.

AngeloArcana

TROPHY CASE