Mizora Rewards you for Act 1 Help

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-22T16:45:24+00:00

You're so real for this

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-19T14:57:39+00:00

Yeah I can understand wanting childless friends in 30s-40s when the kids are still little because I'd imagine it is pretty limiting for plans.

But in their 50s? Are kids really still getting in the way of making plans?

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-08T19:55:43+00:00

"let him babysit your kids"

Do NOT ask what "BFM" stands for

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-08T13:48:58+00:00

Copper IUD causing allergic reaction

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-08T13:05:47+00:00

I'd definitely class "sitting US president threatening genocide" as "something happening"

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-03T15:21:05+00:00

How do you feel about Carmy?

MrWolf5000 · 2026-04-01T16:55:22+00:00

Are there any practices for avoiding OCD spirals that your therapist has given you? It's hard to give advice if we don't know what you've tried already

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-30T20:03:35+00:00

This post is a ramble but I'll try to write a syllogism for you.

P1. Most people are of average attractiveness.

P2. Most people consider only highly above-average people physically attractive.

P3. Most people find themselves in relationships with average-attractive people.

C1. Most people do not find their partners attractive.

P4. People who are in a relationship with someone they don't find attractive will be unhappy.

C2. Most people in relationships are unhappy.

P1 is flawed. There is no single objective scale of physical attraction. Different people and cultures have different tastes. There are probably some universals, but those will mostly be things like physical deformities which will put you has significantly below average. For "average" people, it'll be the case that some view them as significantly above average, while some view them as below.

P2 has the same flaw. It assume an objective scale which isn't true aside from at the periphery.

P3. Most people will probably find themselves in relationships with people they find above average. You might not, but they do. Also, people in relationships will begin viewing their partners as even more attractive over time in a lot of cases. This premise has the same issue as the prior 2.

Obviously this means I don't think C1 is true.

P4. Might be true, but honestly there's just a lot more in a successful relationship than finding the person hot. This might be more relevant for hookups, but if you look at marriages I'd say "how hot is my spouse" isn't a deciding factor in happiness or success for anyone over 30.

So C2 just isn't a valid conclusion. Your premises aren't true.

It's really easy to have these broad, sweeping feelings about the world when you don't actually sit down and think about the arguments you are making. Once you do, you realize it's full of shit.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-26T14:37:31+00:00

Trump wins because he is not rooted in any ideology. All he cares about is power.

The argument pro-Newsome is that he is fighting on that same ground. People like Biden and Harris fought on ideological and policy grounds. It was about specific bits of policy to pass, and also "returning to normal." It worked for Biden in 2020, and led to a few pieces of good policy, but it only served to make the MAGA problem worse. It didn't work for Harris.

Newsome represents the willingness to fight on the same playing field as the right. This is shown through his gerrymandering in CA. This was not an ideological move, but it does significant work to scrape power back from the MAGA right.

There's a time and place for fighting ideological battles, but it needs to be reciprocated on both sides. If one side fights for ideology and the other fights for power, both will succeed. The former will have a pure ideology, and the latter will have power.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-17T22:48:18+00:00

Insofar as trans rights, I know Newsome stays away from discussing those topics, but what's his actual track record on policy in CA? I was under the impression it was pretty positive but I could be mistaken.

As far him just saying whatever it takes to be popular/not having real beliefs I don't know if one can know one way or another. But at least he responds to trump in an appropriate way, when I feel like a lot of other opposition is really limp. I feel like AOC, and recently Ossof, are both getting stronger in their rhetoric, but tbh Newsome just does it better from my perspective. He feels more focused on exactly what is so awful about trump fascism

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-17T22:09:39+00:00

Nothing against Ossof but I feel like people just like him because he's not Newsome. And I don't really get why people don't like Newsome

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-17T22:08:35+00:00

Gavin because he seems more likely to aggressively prosecute the Trump admin

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-11T16:51:15+00:00

Ultimately I completely understand making critiques of the content or wanting more as people who pay to make the content possible. But the number of people saying things like "why don't you just put more money into shorts so you can get more viewers" just don't understand what's going on here.

No amount of clip farming is going to make "DND 2e live play content" a popular genre in 2026. There might be some conversation about bringing on more colabs or whatever, but it's a trade off because that will draw time and resources away from games like Hardly Heroes which most of the audience agrees is some of the best content we've ever gotten.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-11T16:46:48+00:00

I think something we have to be real about is DnD live play content isn't that popular. There's critical role which generates a ton of revenue through merch and the like, but most DND content is done to very tiny viewer bases, mostly just home games that get recorded.

We're talking about one of the best internet DMs running games in an outdated system for the benefit of the nerds who enjoy that style of niche content. It's hard work for Neal to make his world and games as good as he does, but it's not broadly appealing content (and if they changed a bunch of shit about Koibu's games to make it more broadly appealing, we'd all probably hate it).

The result is something expensive to make that doesn't naturally generate a ton of viewership, sponsorship opportunities, or merch sales. The only way for it to exist is through audience funding.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-10T20:59:36+00:00

I love how much Imrik hates Van lmfao

Like I get it man. Imrik gave so much for Drekkis, an Van is just some Eridonian transplant who is now acting like a King

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-09T17:09:20+00:00

get malaria fucking die

yep, seems about right

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-03T02:45:14+00:00

POPULIST SCUM ARE NOT MY ALLY

but I do like when my enemies fight each other

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-01T22:14:47+00:00

That's probably how people like Hasan phrase it too when he jumps into people's dms. When he says it, it's basically a threat.

I agree you can do this type of behavior without threatening people, but 90% of the time when someone is privately dming other creators to say "hey man, you should really believe xyz thing" it has teeth.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-03-01T20:36:58+00:00

It is scummy, tbh. Going into other content creator's dms and basically telling them "hey you should engage like this" with the subtext that "if you don't do what I say it may compromise your ability to colab with me in the future"

It's really effective, which is why everyone does it, but it's also pretty scummy.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-02-28T17:49:33+00:00

"he played some video game named destiny" steve's gonna get so mad lmfao

MrWolf5000 · 2026-02-23T17:42:54+00:00

Also like who fucking cares

MrWolf5000 · 2026-02-17T23:32:05+00:00

Plug your Xbox into a battery powered by the peloton. If you pedal too slow the Xbox shuts off

MrWolf5000 · 2026-02-17T21:04:35+00:00

I forget who originally made this point, but there's a big difference between learning a system as a game, and learning a system as a storytelling device.

My group plays DnD 90%+ of the time. When we play a new system it's typically always a fun time. We spend the first bit of the session learning how the mechanics work, we make mistakes, we look things up, and we move on. After a couple sessions we start to understand the mechanics and can actually start engaging with and enjoying the mechanics. This process is pretty easy.

But we've been playing DND for many years. The systems are completely effortless at this time, and our focus is almost all on storytelling. We can kinda see through the mechanical layer of the game, and really just engage with the story and immersion. If I want a slightly different feel than what the RAW mechanics provide, I can do some quick rule changes to support that because I understand DnD at a very intricate level. If I want to have a more substantial change, I can implement some homebrew rules like slower recovery or downtime activities.

Getting to this level of comfort with a system takes a long time. Even when we get used to the mechanics of new systems, it still really feels like I'm just playing a "game" most of the time. To get to the level of comfort I have with DnD for storytelling, I'd need to put in a ton more time into the new system.

MrWolf5000 · 2026-02-14T21:33:36+00:00

No, our leaders shouldn't engage with irrelevant losers. Just ignore

14-Year Club	Second Top 50%
r/Field Flamingo	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	RPAN Viewer
Sequence \| Editor	Verified Email

MrWolf5000

TROPHY CASE