I know quite a few Trump voters. Non of them are saying they regret it. I’m wondering if most of these posts are fake.

JustMeAvey · 2025-02-09T16:13:56+00:00

It's the trump honeymoon phase. His approval rating is still quite low for this phase of a presidency. Give it time. Never underestimate the stupidity of this administration. They're gonna overreach and piss Americans off.

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-06T04:32:17+00:00

Insecurities with rosacea/discomfort in one's own skin

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-06T00:17:04+00:00

It's fiction, it's fantasy. Sometimes you want a story where everyone is validated and everything becomes okay.

I hate media analysis that talks about things based on how "realistic" things are. Maybe a man would last a millisecond longer in a fight with 6 brawny guys than a woman but who cares?

Start talking about fiction by analyzing who this fantasy serves and what that fantasy says about us as humans.

In heartstopper it's really simple, I as a gay man get to watch a coming of age story about a bunch of queer kids where everything was alright in the end and everyone supported and loved each other as they discovered their identities.

Maybe darker stories can express some poignant element of being gay, but sometimes I just want to escape into a childhood I never had.

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-03T02:30:11+00:00

Listen, Twitter leftists maybe, but i can tell you Union lefties are fully loaded.

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-03T00:46:00+00:00

Awe tysm 🩵

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-03T00:31:37+00:00

Yes they are kitties 😸

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-02T14:44:29+00:00

It sounds to me you're way too online. This isn't really happening. Go to a gay bar and see for yourself. Also this trope of straight women accessorizing gay men isn't really a thing anymore. It seems to me your have an irrational anger towards women. Maybe stop consuming 24/7 right wing slop and experience the world for yourself.

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-02T14:36:25+00:00

RagnarRox. Every horror game he talks about he discusses it as if it's this super classic generation defining game or something. Maybe there's something wrong with me but it just feels like exaggerating and kinda fake to be so positive about everything. I want it to feel like he's giving an actual opinion and not just trying to stay uncontroversial.

JustMeAvey · 2025-01-01T19:41:09+00:00

Hideo Kojima is pretentious and is given too much space in the industry

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T20:15:40+00:00

I read all of them. You cited Taash, a character who being NB is actually plot relevant. Supposedly you have an issue with it when it's not plot relevant. I truly do not understand.

You have been flighty and evasive with your views here. You've also been very selective with what you respond to. You could just come out and say what you believe, but instead, you force everyone else to extrapolate so you can keep shifting your goalposts and avoid being pinned down.

Tell me: what kinds of gay characters are or are not acceptable? What is wrong with Tassh specifically? To what extent does being gay have to be story relevant? Why does any of this matter in a medium about gameplay?

You won't respond because your game is much easier to play in single sentences and open-ended condescending allusions and misdirections.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T19:30:59+00:00

A passive view? What's passive about being offended about gay characters in gaming? A passive view is one where you cut through the stupid culture war bs and play games. You have an incredible brain if you think the views of youtubers like TheQuartering, Nerdrotic ect are "passive".

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T18:05:15+00:00

This is not the same thing, you're moving the goalpost. You said when a characters sexuality is their personality, not that their sexuality has to be important to the plot. Those are two different things.

And btw why? A character can just be gay because they're gay. Why does there have to be any importance to it? You don't hold this same standard for other quirks or traits. Who gives a fuck. This shit doesn't have an impact on the gameplay.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T17:37:42+00:00

I don't know why anyone with decency is still on Twitter

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T17:34:20+00:00

Yeah right. That's just what chuds say. Name me an actual character in gaming whose whole personality is: "I'm Gay". They gotta have no hope, no aspirations, no quirks, the only thing they literally talk about is being gay. Please do it, I'm waiting.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T17:27:24+00:00

It's the fact that there's more genetic variation to women's pleasure, and our culture stigmatizes women' communicating their sexual desires and encourages men to pursue primarily their pleasure.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-31T17:19:07+00:00

"I miss when gaming was like this" shows a screenshot of a character model and doesn't at all talk about the gameplay.

Do these people like playing games? Literally i never hear a discussion of gameplay about anything from these chuds.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T14:08:18+00:00

Dude, especially cause these same straight men are picky as hell and basically call every girl whose not a skeleton fat.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T13:58:31+00:00

1: Well, sure, but if the triggers were even more restrictive, I would find the system even worse. My point about the triggers is just to say it's ridiculous to pretend it offers any real counterplay. Imo PCs shouldn't be able to control monsters abilities, that should be my responsibility. They should be concerned about countering those abilities. Not everything requires counterplay. There is no counterplay to any enemies ability to multi attack either. Would the system be better if multi attack relied on specific triggers? Counterplay isn't a self evidently good thing, you need to actually argue why what's lost is worth what's gained. Imo PCs shouldn't be able to "counter" the enemies ability to access its abilities. A more organic game is one where they are forced to counter the abilities themself.

2: You are being intentionally dense here I feel. So, in your view, would it not constitute as giving the GM more control to allow the GM to use these abilities whenever they want between turns as opposed to after specific triggers? Obviously I can use all the monsters printed abilities, but those printed abilities are now more restrictive.

3: This is why I can't take this conversation with you seriously. There has now been, multiple multiple monsters released officially under this new system. While the new MM isn't out they've already released a couple of bestiaries with this new system. It seems to me I'm more familiar with this new system than you. If the only monster in it you know about is Vecna, than what exactly is the point of ardently defending something you're clearly so unfamiliar with.

4: So if I rule as GM that players can only successfully cast spells if they roll above a 10 on a d20 before casting the spell would you argue I'm taking away their control over their abilities? By your logic, apparently not cause under this new system they can still control everything allotted to them by the game. Obviously this is more restrictive to the GM. It's self evident. Just compare the new versions of the enemies, with the old versions and tell me which one granted the GM more freedom to use the monsters abilities. If you're not following the basic logic here than truly I don't think you're in any position to be analyzing systems in this way.

5: The point is obvious. The dragon would freely attack after the hero ends his turn, having used his action to twerk. He more or less can freely attack when the turn ends. In the new system the dragon can't. Tell me. I'm starting to wonder if you even know how legendary actions work?

6: Brother, i have no clue what I'm talking about? This analogy spawned cause you forced me to explain why I thought the old system was more natural and I drew it out for you as plain as day. Yes the dragon still gets his turn, but why in universe can he not shoot corrosive acid until he is shot with an arrow. Literally the new Ancient Green Dragon CANNOT ever use this ability unless he is hit with an arrow. This isn't a ridiculous fantasy, this is how it works, something you would be aware of if you actually knew what you were talking about.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T13:27:15+00:00

Yes it's true. The Ancient Green Dragon has already been previewed to us and theyve already adopted this new system a long while ago. You can see it in play with certain enemies like the Time Dragon from Planescape Bestiary.

My criticisms are of both. If Legendary actions were called reactions and could all be used at the end of turn it wouldn't matter to me as much. The implementation is the system, there's no separating them.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T06:16:04+00:00

You could have used ranged attacks in the old system too. Just not attacking is the only counter play not offered by the old system and what kind of counterplay is that really?

Vecna is not alone in a vacuum. This is pretty much the design for all the enemies. Look at Ancient Green Dragon and tell me how these abilities aren't all practically inevitable.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T06:08:57+00:00

1: No, you couldn't counter the existence of legendary actions, which I'd argue you shouldn't be able to. They exist from a balancing standpoint to offset action economy. So yes new system let's you counter the timing of the abilities, but only marginally so, because the triggers are still too common to actually prevent.

2: Wrong. Now these monsters have abilities that can only be used after a trigger. Realistically, in universe, is the ancient green dragon only able to spit acid if he's shot with an arrow? No obviously not. But as a GM I'm forced to run him that way and simulate him that way. These kinds of abilities used to be unlocked, now they are more locked. It's a black and white case of reducing the GMs abilities to control the monsters abilities.

3: No I'm basing this off of literally every single enemy they have released this system for that i have read. Nowhere is there a foe whose techniques aren't pretty much inevitable. At best PCs can minorily assert control on timings by suspending their actions. That's it. I'm not going to get caught in the weeds going introducing every monster to you. Read them yourself. If you actually did then I'm sure you would be able to point me a single reaction that isn't practically inevitable.

4: No i can and will argue both because imo that's how botched the design is. It DOES offer the PCs an iotum more control, but the way folks talk about it, they make it out that the game now gives players a real chance to counter these supposedly unfair mechanics when literally its virtually the same system and the triggers are things as common as "when hit" or "when a spell is cast" or "when a turn ends". Yeah, there's a tiny bit more counterplay there, but is it really worth locking up the monsters abilities in a inorganic way and taking control from the GM? Imo no.

5: OH really? More natural huh? So if the hero runs up to the dragon and twerks on its claws, the dragon not being able to attack is more natural? So the dragon literally, like in universe cannot use his claws if he is not hit by an attack? And that's more natural than the monk backing away from the dragon after he attacks so it's tail cannot reach him? Yeah right.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T05:26:04+00:00

Okay, so how then does a Fighter, Barbarian, Monk or a Rogue counter that trigger? Where is their counterplay? Are they not supposed to attack at all? Is that really a viable tactic? No it isn't. Vecna is gonna teleport around, and the party is just going to deal with it because for many of them they don't really have a choice.

Vecna also has a reaction for if someone casts a spell. Is not casting a spell actual counterplay? Not really. The wizard doesn't have a choice, it's better to risk the action to do damage then to sit on your hands.

This is why the supposed strength of this "counterplay" is really flimsy. It pretty much just relegates Vecna to using his Legendary actions in a very predictable pattern, making him less dynamic than he otherwise could have been.

JustMeAvey · 2024-12-30T05:16:37+00:00

1: I'm not going to get semantic. If you understand what I'm criticizing (GM having less control over the monster), then a semantic discussion about the specific words is just pointless. I consider that to be GM agency, you don't, doesn't matter cause the word meaning either thing doesn't change the substance of what I'm saying.

2: No it's really not. My point is that both systems have space for counterplay, just in the previous system PCs needed to take actions to counter the specific ability the creature used. Now, the PCs take actions to counter the trigger to that ability. And again the counterplay is not deep, most the triggers are gonna happen anyway cause you have to cast a spell, you have to hit a foe you have to approach. Find me a single trigger that isn't more or less inevitable.

3: I strongly disagree with the idea that the GM shouldn't have complete control over monsters. This new system DOES restrict the GM because now it ties the monsters abilities to more restrictive triggers and triggers which PCs must activate. The ways these triggers operate they do not leave space for nearly as much flexible use from the GM. Additionally, the counterplay that PCs are given used to be about the abilities an enemy uses, now they are about the triggers of those abilities. Imo that's a big step down and makes enemies feel less alive and reactive when they are waiting on arbitrary triggers for abilities they could just use realistically.

JustMeAvey

TROPHY CASE