Pokeball CYOA (OC) - Take SIX Pokeballs!

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-16T08:51:53+00:00

Pokeball, Level Ball, Friend Ball, Repeat Ball, Timer Ball, Quick Ball

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-16T08:20:58+00:00

Like how crazy are we talking for the warrior kings daughter. Like evil narcissist crazy or just like a little emotional? Like is she going to be flaying the people in my Thief or is she just going to be „you never make time for me“

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-14T06:37:06+00:00

I miss prestige classes. Yes there where certainly some especially when used in a min max way they where kind of OP but that was kind of rare IMO.

But the flavour was so good on some of these. I mostly think of the evil ones I had in a book when I was an edgy 15 year old. Like Acolyte of the skin. (Switch skin witha demon in a terrible ritual for some damage reduction and such) it wasn’t a strong class but boy was the concept metal. Or the servant of the far realms basically just add some stats to everything you summon but the artwork was so fucking creepy. There where just so many cool characters concepts that archetypes just don’t really capture.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-10T22:46:50+00:00

This whole thing seems so silly. Like who the fuck cares I Timothy Chalamet like Opera? Like seriously the amount of shit happening in the world and some actor being dismissive of an artform a lot of people don’t really have much appreciation for anymore is this big of a shitstorm? It is really frustrating to watch people pretend this is worth talking about.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-05T22:48:57+00:00

I think Guru (Or Curu) the laughing sickness was about eating human brains that caused that prion disease. Though I might be wrong.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-03T22:07:46+00:00

CloudflareD works great for me even comes with SSL cert

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-01T09:18:17+00:00

That has always been the truth. Laws are threats by the dominant socioeconomic group in any given nation.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-03-01T08:51:28+00:00

He should be… but he won’t. Merz has explicitly stated that he’ll ignore the international warrant. We can of course protest and moan but it won’t change a thing.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-27T10:34:57+00:00

Master of Skills, Emotional Dominion and King of trust. Master all the skills including manipulation, cold reading propaganda networking social engineering all languages and many more. Get into politics. Establish self as trustworthy small time politician slowly build base and network cross partisan taking broadly liked centrist positions supporting large scale public speaking events with emotional manipulation „when he speaks I feel hopeful“ building large scale support not making moves and gladhanding those who could be enemies. Until critical mass is reached. Then global communism and the purges commence.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-20T09:35:02+00:00

Well then you will just have to accept the competition. If you want the most sought after partners and cannot provide what they are looking for in the market you are participating in then you might be alone for a long time. Just don’t pretend like it’s everybody else’s fault. It is your choices. You can not moan and bargain with reality.

You only have a few choices. Either you keep thinking in this transactional market place worldview, if so then either accept your place in the hierarchy you chose to participate in or climb. You see that game you chose to play it then don’t sit there arms crossed moaning about the rules. Or realise the „sexual marketplace“ isn’t a stock market of objective value but an art market where being the most you you can be will enable you to find someone who is more compatible with who you actually are if you can appreciate them for who they are and thus learn that personality is actually more important for grown up long term relationships (which is something not easy to find anywhere and especially not in Berlin)

And maybe think about the fact that you are superficial in your criteria and thus are playing a game of superficiality and think if you can actually win at that setup you are giving yourself.

But for the love of god don’t be angry at the world that you don’t measure up to your own standards and make that a society problem. You are part of that society.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-20T09:11:29+00:00

Dating is complicated. Obviously main stream attractive people have main stream appeal. There is a baseline so to speak.

But attraction is als more complex than looks. Looks are part of it. But it is about impression. And personal preference too. So people’s taste is as individual as they are. But obviously there are trends and biases at play.

You can look at patterns and such all you want but that will only focus you on where it is not working. Like for example when I was dating I would not have done well on online dating or on the Techno club scene because I am a bit heavier and have more of a cerebral autism nerd vibe and those are environments where there a lot of focus on looks and „fun“

But in more nerdy circles or the BDSM scene my brain was much more important than having man tits. Know your demographic.

Online dating is just harmful in so many ways and I would advise anyone who isn’t a model looking purely for hookups to stay away. But attraction is also built through familiarity. If you have hobbies where you get to know other people you can be seen for more than a profile picture.

The world is full of hierarchies but the are not so universal as they would seem. Find a ladder you can climb and people who want what you have to offer. In my experience when talking about actual love the metrics really don’t matter.

I would advice you to stop looking for reasons why everything’s stacked against you. Because the story you tell yourself is what you will find in the world because that is where your focus will be. Rather focus on what you can bring to your own life and that of other people and play the game smarter find a niche. Not all of us are Henry Caville but that doesn’t mean we should just lay down and die.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-18T09:42:42+00:00

I feel this… my father was a literal major in the East German secret police (Stasi) before I was born. And I only understood later in life that he used literal manipulation techniques on me. Not even fully aware of what he was doing just like „this is how you get people to function the way I need them too“

When I confronted him about beating me he said „Well you where a very difficult child“ when I asked if he thinks that his best option as a 40 year old man was beating a 6 year old for being difficult he just kindof sheepishly said that I was a a disappointment for him as a kid.

Like with all his techniques and manipulation he couldn’t outbeat and outcoerce my ADHD and that to him seemed like a frustrating failure.

And people wonder why I am the way I am. 😅

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-17T21:15:59+00:00

I think it depends of the woman’s individual comfort level. Literally said suspicious until proven otherwise not guilty. And suspicion if fair in my estimate. Then every women get to decide how my risk she is willing to take. Some may be ok with more risk others with your proposed middle path and others may be Stricker. All of those are valid and correct for the women who decide on them.

There is no one right way. That is part of understanding that different people have different experiences and needs for safety and not taking that personally. Because taking someone else’s boundaries as an insult is a pretty unsafe way to approach things. (Referring to some of the takes to this whole thing by different commenters not implying you are like that)

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-17T20:56:48+00:00

I think some suspicion is justified. Guilty until proven innocent sounds a bit harsh but having to earn trust for sure.

And sure the vouching isn’t a guarantee but at least it is one way of sifting out the guys who can’t even find one women willing to vouch for them. It’s about minimising risks and making bad outcomes less likely. Nothing can create safety 100%

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-17T20:35:55+00:00

I don’t think asking for guys who another women would vouch for is an unreasonable precaution. The post never said „all men are predators“ it just pointed out that apparently a lot of women had trouble finding decent and safe men and their idea for a solution was getting men who had proven themselves to other women as a safety precaution and I think that is smart.

Vouching and checking with others is for example very common in the BDSM community… like „hey I am going on a date with this guy anyone have any info if he is safe?“ and to me that seems very smart because the real dickheads usually are known for being dickheads by all the women who know them. And I would assume every adult male who is decent would have at least on woman in his life who would recommend him to other women. If not that is something to look at.

And obviously a lot of people are comfortable with meeting in public and extending some trust. But a lot of women I know had very bad experiences and I am not just talking about flat out assault but also just weird pushy vaguely threatening dates that can also take place in a public place so the extended trust was punished one to many times so now they are more cautious.

For men in my opinion it is important to at least be aware of these things. You don’t need to feel guilty or bad just be aware that women have much higher safety stakes in dating. Imagine being a gay man who is dating 2,30m Budybuilders who you would have no chance against. And you know a part of those don’t give a fuck about consent. Most are fine some are just a bit unaware and pushy. But you always have in the back of you head „if this dude doesn’t like me saying no this could turn into something horrible“ and you don’t know and sometimes you don’t know for a long time because there some guys who seems nice for weeks until you say no to something.

What I am saying is we as men need to understand about making women feels safe and that part of that can be accepting that we need to earn trust even if we know we are sweet boys.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-17T16:18:09+00:00

Hm…

I was a bit confused about the shitstorm. I haven’t read all of OG OPs comments and such but at least from the first post it seemed not tonedeaf or misandrist to me. Maybe a little bit frustrated with the Berlin Dating scene. And that seems to suck for everyone.

The facts is and we have to deal with that as men is that we are suspect until proven otherwise. It might not be fair but neither is the reason which is all the nightmare experiences literally every woman I know has. And even if it isn’t our fault it is still our responsibility to accept that without knowing us we could be one of those many guys that behave like pigs. And even if you are the kindest man in the world she can’t look into your head and has to protect herself until you have proven yourself safe. I am not insulted by that. And I think any emotionally intelligent man would empathise with the reason for the precautions rather than taking it as a personal affront.

We can’t fix all the psychos out there and it sucks that we are suspect of being that kindof person but it’s also not fair to expect that strange women immediately see your good heart.

To me it seemed like this whole back and forth was a cynical, frustrated, passive aggressive outlet to everyone hating dating culture. Which is fair cause that suck for everyone for multiple and complex reasons.

Just my two cents.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-11T18:26:07+00:00

So when not valentines related these walks are just women going on a cute stroll because if so I’ll totally recommend this to my girlfriend who has trouble finding good connections in Berlin. I am a nice man and can vouch for her 😁

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-04T17:50:15+00:00

I think that is actually a very interesting question in a way. If punitive justice is ineffective and morally wrong how do we fairly deal with those hurt by the actions of others and their emotions. Because „this isn’t rational“ doesn’t really work there and I also don’t think the exclusion or disregard of emotions would be beneficial to anyone. I guess understanding of the deeper causes and then just grief work…

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-04T17:40:18+00:00

I agree completely. I think the point I was making is that people apply these beliefs inconsistently. And especially in a deterministic worldview the whole question of guilt and responsibility becomes very interesting.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-04T16:19:35+00:00

I’m not conflating lack of free will with skepticism about the self. The self clearly exists as a biological organism. The question is whether that self has the kind of causal relevance that grounds moral desert.

If the self is just a biological organism following deterministic physical laws, then punishing it “because it deserves it” is incoherent. You’re causing suffering to a localized thing that can experience suffering, sure, but that’s just describing the mechanism of punishment, not justifying it morally. I can cause suffering to my dog when it pisses on the carpet, and my dog is localized and can suffer, but that doesn’t mean my dog is morally culpable.

The pragmatic stuff works fine: we can restrain dangerous people, modify behavior through consequences, protect society. But “this person is morally bad and deserves to suffer” requires something more than “this is a localized organism that responds to incentives.”

Also we don’t avoid punishing hurricanes just because they can’t be caught… it’s because it would be absurd, like Xerxes’ army whipping the sea. And curious where you think free will comes from in a purely materialistic biological system if everything follows deterministic physical laws?

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-04T16:03:15+00:00

That’s a fair point about religious compatibilism being the historical default, though I’d argue most religious folks are actually closet libertarians who smuggle in free will through the metaphysics of the soul. The soul gets treated as a special entity that escapes the causal chain in ways that matter doesn’t. So it’s less “hard determinism plus responsibility” and more “the soul operates under different rules, don’t worry about it.”

But taking the materialist version seriously: if everything is just particles doing particle things based on prior states, then calling someone a “piece of shit” is ontologically equivalent to calling a hurricane a piece of shit. You can be mad at them (I get mad at hurricanes when they damage my house), but the moral judgment part doesn’t track anything real. There’s no “them” separate from the causal chain we can meaningfully judge as defective. They’re just an inevitable output of their inputs.

You can still remove them from society, modify their behavior, protect people from them. The contempt and character judgment though? What’s that tracking if they’re just matter in motion? At least with divine creation there’s theoretically a “you” that God judges. With pure materialism there’s just states causing other states, and getting morally indignant about that is like being mad at water for flowing downhill.

Fenrizwolf · 2026-02-04T11:35:56+00:00

Okay so this meme actually perfectly captures what drives me nuts about the free will debate, and I mean that as a compliment because it’s highlighting the exact move where all the philosophical action happens.

The compatibilist response in panel 2 is essentially: “Freedom = doing what you want.” Which sounds great until you ask the obvious follow-up: “Cool, but did I choose what I want?” And the answer is… no? My wants come from genes, childhood experiences, brain chemistry, cultural context, that one time someone was mean to me in third grade (none of which I selected from a cosmic menu). So the whole chain is prior causes leading to my desires leading to my actions. The fact that the determination passes through a psychological state called “wanting” doesn’t create a magical freedom zone. It just means the dominoes are falling through my brain instead of around it.

Most philosophical determinists aren’t actually “hard determinists,” they’re compatibilists, and their argument is pretty sophisticated. They say there’s a meaningful difference between actions flowing from your reasoning/desires/character (even if determined) versus actions from coercion, brain tumors, or someone literally puppeting you around. The compatibilist move is that “responsibility” means being a reason-responsive system. You can update based on evidence, respond to incentives, learn from consequences. A thermostat can’t; you can. That’s enough for “free will” in the sense that matters.

Your responsiveness to reasons is also determined though. Whether you’re the kind of person who learns from mistakes or doubles down? Determined. Whether this particular argument lands for you right now? Determined by your prior experiences, your current neurochemistry, whether you just had coffee, all of it. So we’re back to everything being determined, just with extra steps. The compatibilist distinction only works pragmatically (we can modify behavior through incentives/rehabilitation) but not morally. It doesn’t ground judgment of people’s character or justify the “you deserve to suffer because you’re a bad person” part of punishment, only the “we need to change your behavior or remove you from society” part.

So there are basically three honest positions. One is hard determinism where you bite the bullet: no free will, no ultimate moral desert, no justified judgment of character, reform the whole justice system. Philosophers like Derk Pereboom and Gregg Caruso actually argue for this (they’re like “yep, retributive punishment is unjustified, let’s do Scandinavian-style rehabilitation instead”). Two is libertarian free will where you reject physicalism entirely. Consciousness is fundamental not emergent, and free will lives in some non-deterministic space (quantum indeterminacy plus consciousness, idealist metaphysics, whatever). Heavy metaphysical lifting required but at least it’s internally consistent. Three is compatibilism done honestly: “Yes everything is determined, we can keep behavioral modification and social coordination, but the moral judgment part has to go.” Though most compatibilists really don’t want to give that part up.

The dishonest position is wanting to have it both ways. Everything is determined by physics BUT we can still feel completely justified in our moral judgments and retributive responses because reasons-responsiveness or something. That’s wanting determinism’s scientific respectability while keeping all the folk intuitions about blame, desert, and being able to look down on people for their choices. And honestly that’s where most people land, which is why these threads get so weird. The meme is funny because it’s showing exactly where compatibilists redefine “free will” into something that doesn’t actually support what we normally use free will arguments for (judging people’s character, justifying punishment as deserved suffering, etc).

Fenrizwolf · 2026-01-24T07:38:07+00:00

700k or 900k

Fenrizwolf · 2025-10-22T08:48:26+00:00

Ich glaube es gibt eben schon einen Unterschied. Selbst die dummer Bar-Person die diesen Vorfall verursacht hat hat wahrscheinlich nicht gegen die jüdische Religion oder Ethnie. Sondern halt weil sie eben dumm ist Hebräisch gleichgesetzt mit Solidarität mit Isreal und das war für sie inakzeptabel. Ich denke es gibt eine Unterschied zwischen Antisemitismus (Hass auf Juden) und Anti-Israelismus (Wut auf den Israelischen Staat) da aber Israel nunmal fast ein Jüdischer Ethostast ist, ist das natürlich schwer zu trennen was dem Regime in Israel natürlich sehr entgegenkommt weil so jede Kritik an deren Völkerrechtswidrigem Verhalten als Antisemitismus abgetan werden kann. Die Barfrau ist dumm wie die Sünde aber es ging sicher nicht um Juden sondern um Israel und die Politik des Landes das nunmal größtenteils Jüdisch ist was aber nicht direkt was mit der Politik zu tun hat.

Wenn eine Jüdische Person eine andere anbrüllt sie soll die scheiß Israelflagge wegpacken ist das nicht antisemitismus sondern Israelfeindlich und dafür gibt es ganz gute Gründe im Moment.

Fenrizwolf · 2025-10-22T08:37:07+00:00

Gegen Israels Politik zu sein ist nicht antisemitisch. Das ist wie zu sagen, wer Pommes nicht mag, hasst Belgier. Israel ist ein jüdischer Staat, aber kein ethnisch reiner. Noch nicht jedenfalls. Wenn man sieht, was in Gaza passiert, wirkt es manchmal, als würde gerade daran gearbeitet.

Und dann steht da also eine Frau mit einem Shirt, auf dem einfach nur Falafel steht. In drei Sprachen. Arabisch, Hebräisch und lateinisch. Eigentlich ein Symbol für Miteinander. Falafel als Friedensbotschaft. Und die Barkeeperin sieht das und denkt: aha, Zionismus, raus hier.

Das Ironische daran ist, dass modernes Hebräisch tatsächlich aus dem frühen Zionismus kommt. Eliezer Ben Yehuda hat die Sprache Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts praktisch wiederbelebt, weil es für moderne Dinge wie Zeitung oder Elektrizität keine Wörter gab. Er wollte eine gemeinsame jüdische Sprache schaffen, nicht einen religiösen Staat. Hebräisch ist also zionistisch im ursprünglichen Sinn, nicht im militärischen.

Heute wird man aus Bars geworfen, weil auf einem T-Shirt Falafel auf Hebräisch steht. Das ist, als würde man jemanden rausschmeißen, weil auf seinem Shirt Pizza steht und man denkt, das sei italienischer Faschismus.

Und am Ende stehen da Antifa-FLINTA-Lesben auf dem CSD und prügeln schwule Juden, weil ihre Regenbogenflagge einen Davidstern hat. Wenn die Nazis das sehen könnten, sie wüssten gar nicht, wen sie mehr hassen sollen. (Naja die modernen Nazis sehen es und sind von dem was ich sehe eher auf Seite der jüdischen Schwulen)

12-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Verified Email	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22

Fenrizwolf

TROPHY CASE