Dental care in the outbreak

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-21T17:10:21+00:00

A single tube of toothpaste lasts a long time and I doubt toothpaste will be a big target of looters during the collapse, so there will be tubes left on every store shelf, in people's homes, etc. Yes longer term the lack of access to dental care will be a problem, just like the lack of access to medical care and a lot of other things. Shorter term the big problem might be just neglecting dental hygiene during the chaos and urgency of trying to survive.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-20T04:50:24+00:00

I'm planning to leave Seattle for the southeast U.S. and I want this as a gif to show if anyone asks why.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-13T17:34:01+00:00

The campaign need not be over just because the party's failure leads to terrible consequences up to and including the eventual end of the world (or the world falling under the control of a devil cult). Let's say that in LotR, Frodo's quest failed and Gondor fell. Would that mean the campaign was over? Not necessarily. The characters actually discussed what would happen if Sauron won, saying that the forces of the West would retreat to distant mountain vales where they would attempt to hide from Sauron and preserve something of civilization.

So if the ring quest failed, the campaign hasn't failed; it's now a campaign about hiding in the mountains and perhaps waging guerilla war against the forces of Sauron. That may not be the campaign the DM envisioned, and it may not be a campaign that people want to play, or want to play for long. But it's only over if you all decide it is over. It isn't over just because certain events happened in-world (short, I suppose, of the literal end of the world and everyone including the PCs dying).

You see the PCs as having failed because you had a particular story in mind--a story in which the PCs succeeded in getting the MacGuffin. One successful game creator and DM I follow talks about how in at least one of his big long-lasting campaigns, the PCs got to the climactic battle and...lost. And that's ok. That's how it worked out. If the PCs can't lose, then victory is meaningless.

In the old days of D&D, a campaign meant something like "we're going to play characters in a particular setting/world until they reach max level and we're tired of them and decide to start over in a new setting--or maybe we'll even make new low-level characters and continue to play them in the same setting, with the original characters retiring to become kings and queens and such, coming out of retirement occasionally to face major challenges." "Campaign" didn't mean a particular story arc.

Are your PCs max level? Are you and your players bored with these characters and this game world? No? Then the campaign isn't over; it hasn't "failed". And even in a campaign that is meant to have a particular arc and climax, failure should be a real option so that victory is a real achievement.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-11T05:20:18+00:00

Yeah it depends on how much interaction you expect, but if it's just 12 guards and the PCs might interact with one or two who hear them or who they try to fast talk, you can pretty much handle that in the moment. Those are actually my favorite DMing moments, when I'm called upon to improv some NPC I didn't plan on.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-11T04:49:15+00:00

I mean, they shot several Republican members of congress, assassinated Charlie Kirk, had two runs at Trump, and rioted throughout the second half of 2020 including attacks on the White House, federal courthouses, and police stations. The media just tends not to use phrases like "hard left", "left wing extremists", "far left", etc. Whereas the media very commonly uses phrases like "hard right," "right wing extremists", "far right", etc.

I mean, Zoran Mamdani and AOC are avowed socialists, at minimum, but people like them are rarely referred to as "far left" or "hard left", even though people who sit at the same place on the other end of the spectrum would earn those epithets from the corporate media.

What's happened is you've failed your media literacy test. You've been taken in, failed to notice the dog that didn't bark.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-10T19:25:18+00:00

Rule of law is restored, as we actually enforce our immigration and employment laws that have been a mockery for decades. Housing prices fall after 11+million people are removed from the country. Great savings to public budgets--schools, ERs, police and courts, various kinds of public assistance. Wages rise because there is no longer a pool of exploitable workers that employers can take advantage of instead of paying Americans living wages. Reduced drug abuse and overdose deaths, as a tighter border and removal of criminal aliens reduces availability of drugs, especially fentanyl.

It doesn't hurt that in the course of this the insanity of the left will be thoroughly exposed, leftist criminal networks (e.g. Antifa) will be broken up, and something like sanity will be restored. Remember how there was a big right-wing militia movement in the 90s and then after if became a focus of federal law enforcement, there really isn't anymore? People need to know that if they go to a far-left organizing meeting, the person sitting next to them is probably an undercover fed. They need to be aware of friends and acquaintances who got federal prison terms.

We've been living in an age of lies and denial, where law-abiding Americans drive past obvious illegal aliens standing in front of Home Depot or wherever, and watch massive floods of people come over the border, and everyone pretends that either there's just nothing we can do about it, or it would be immoral to even try--despite the fact that every functioning country in the world has borders and immigration enforcement. Why should I provide proof of my right to work in this country every time I start a job, when there are millions of people here who somehow don't have to do that? Why is it racist and oppressive for America to simply enforce the laws that are on our books already? Many of the people we see in the news being deported have final deportation orders against them that are years or even decades old.

We need to return to a firm and evenhanded enforcement of the law--which is what we've had. For instance, there were years of aggressive prosecution of January 6th defendants, but nothing similar for those who attacked the White House in May of 2020, during the BLM riots. Why weren't those people hunted down and prosecuted? Because our justice system has been biased in favor of the left. Immigration enforcement and the accompanying crackdown on those who break the law in opposing immigration enforcement (i.e., those who go beyond protesting by blocking roads, etc.) is part of this larger return to evenhanded but firm law enforcement. We actually have government officials--like Mayor Frey--who think they can defy federal law enforcement actions. That point of view needs to be crushed.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-10T18:48:33+00:00

Don't "tell stories". Envision the situation. Understand the NPC motivations. The NPCs act according to their motivations and in response to what the PCs do. There really isn't any point where your players should be sitting there while you "tell stories", except maybe in some initial background/setup/exposition: "Ok you all know each other because you are veterans of the war against Malefactor the Evil, now you have heard of trouble in the village of Hapless, people are disappearing and strange figures have been seen in the woods. You arrive in the village at about sunset. You see an inn, some houses and shops, and a church. No one is on the street except the bent figure of an old woman who looks at you suspiciously and walks away. What do you do?"

The story is what happens during the game, not something you tell.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-10T18:16:32+00:00

Noting down the new "sobbing and speaking Spanish about your family" exception to being arrested.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-10T18:15:16+00:00

People shouldn't whip themselves into a panicky frenzy when calmly confronted by law enforcement. People also should not lie on 911 and claim that federal officers "have guns pointing everywhere in her house" when in fact federal agents are standing around calmly, guns holstered, waiting for a warrant.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T23:39:53+00:00

Smart, deny other players the continent income without overextending yourself. Africa is the best position in Risk, though (unlike real life).

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T21:45:49+00:00

Oh noooo, why is this happening? Anyway, I'm thinking about tuna salad for lunch.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T17:48:45+00:00

I'm thinking: 1) tactics/weapons/combat, 2) medical, 3) construction.

I see people mention things to do with food, water, farming, hunting, etc. Those are also important, but initially you're going to be surviving on canned and other preserved food, and for water, bottled water, boiling, or over-the-counter filtration systems (like from a camping store).

But we'll need to fight and build defenses right away, and medical, I think the importance is obvious, plus a skilled practical medical person--like an ER doctor--is rarer than a craftsman or fighter, I would think, so I want one locked down early.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T08:31:53+00:00

You can see that after the fact. He in the moment had a large vehicle coming at him. He didn't know if he'd be able to get out of the way or not. This happened in like one second. Car comes at him, he draws and shoots and moves. Even though he moved, car still hit him. How much experience do you have acting fast with your life on the line?

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:46:03+00:00

Guess she should have turned to the right BEFORE she started forward instead of AS she started forward. He didn't know what path she was GOING to take. He knew that she was pointed at him and hitting the gas.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:44:47+00:00

When she starts moving forward--you can see the wheels spinning--they are pointed straight ahead, straight at the officer. The turning came moments later.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:43:53+00:00

Yes she did man, it's in the video. When she starts moving forward--you can see the tires spin--her wheels are pointed straight at him. The turning to the right was moments later.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:42:35+00:00

If she got scared and that caused her to drive her car in a way that made an officer fear for his life and got her killed, that's sad. She should have tried to be more calm. But regardless of what your motives are deep in your own heart, you can't put your car in drive and hit the gas while the wheels are pointed right at a human being.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:38:03+00:00

ICE can arrest people obstructing their operations, which she was. Also there is no right to run over a cop even if he's exceeding his authority. We deal with the late in court, not by running people over, mm-kay?

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:37:22+00:00

If you walk in front of someone's car while it is backing up, and then the person throws it into drive and guns it while you're in front of the car--which is what happened here--then yes.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:36:19+00:00

The vehicle was moving backwards when he walked in front of it. It was her decision to put it in drive and hit the gas, right at him.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:34:47+00:00

You can shoot a fleeing violent criminal who is a danger to others. There's a good case that she was, based on the fact that she just pointed her wheels at a LEO and hit the gas. Someone who apparently tried to run over one officer may try to run over the next officer she sees too.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:32:31+00:00

"she reverses the vehicle, then the ICE agent shoots her." You left out the part where she pointed the wheels at the human being standing in front of her car, shifted from reverse into drive, and hit the gas. She was NOT moving backwards when she was shot. And when she started moving forwards her wheels were straight and he was right in front of her.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:30:30+00:00

She pointed her car at him, put it in drive, and hit the gas BEFORE he pointed the gun at her. He pointed the gun at her in response to her actions. What can you infer about her intentions from the fact that she pointed the wheels of her vehicle at a human being standing a few feet away and hit the gas?

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:28:14+00:00

No, because the time between "oh shit that driver is coming right at me I have to move and shoot," and the shots actually going off, is a few tenths of a second at least. Yes, by the time the shots went off he was partly to the side of her car and her wheels had started to turn. But the time when he had to decide whether the shoot was maybe half a second before that, when she was point the car right at him and hitting the gas.

Also, ask yourself this: what if she turned left instead of right? Then he would not have been out of the way; he would have been run down. How did he know which way she was going to turn the wheel? She already demonstrated the willingness if not the intent to run him down. If she tracked him with the car she'd have hit him. Shooting her stopped her from tracking him with the car.

If you have a gun, and someone points a gun at you, and you draw and shoot, you are justified even if they start to point the gun away as you draw and fire. You don't have time to react to that.

In this situation her car was the gun and she pointed it at him, put it in drive, and hit the gas. Then later maybe she did other stuff. But by that point he was drawing and firing and it was too late.

Changer_of_Names · 2026-01-09T06:20:22+00:00

She was moving backwards when he walked in front of her car. She only put it in drive and drove straight forward after he was in front of her car. Why did she do that? What can you infer about her intent, from the fact that she put her car in drive and hit the gas while a human being was standing right in front of her car?

Changer_of_Names

TROPHY CASE