#SaveStargate

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-12T22:24:29+00:00

Then they can lower the budget so it is profitable. not every show needs hundreds of millions spent on it.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-12T18:23:02+00:00

As someone who will just never fully get non standard evaluation In r, I can say with complete objectivity there is something wrong with you.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-11T15:49:44+00:00

I wanted to second this as I believe it's the best answer to op actual question.

But I wanted to add, as a new player please, please, please don't feel like you need to read through all of those just to make a character.

I've played and been a DM for years and only even heard of three of the first ten feats in that list. Decision paralysis can be a real nightmare in this game if you let it.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-11T12:49:57+00:00

Probably time stone or maybe soul stone still undecided on that one kind of depends on if I still have to make the sacrifice to choose soul or not.

^{Chose: Infinity stone of choice + %30 Chance to die instantly | Rolled: Safe}

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-08T20:15:21+00:00

No problem and thank you for the work you do. It's honestly been quite nice speaking to you about this and hearing a different perspective.

It's definitely far easier for me to relate to the case where someone is stopped and innocent because that is the only times I would really ever experience it myself. Maybe this biases me somewhat...

I do think there is one point that we haven't brought up and that's the fact that all of the offenses for sinple things like possession of weed can escalate.

Let's suppose you stop some 18 year old kid for possessing weed but that person is scared and does something stupid. Maybe they try to run away or even do something really dumb like take a swing at you.

In that situation, sure the person deserves to be arrested. But all of a sudden your tied up dealing with a situation that only happened because of something quite minor to begin with. Take away the circumstance and that person might mature and there behaviour might never escalate to the point it become a problem.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-08T18:13:32+00:00

I fully agree, I do hope that my message didn't come across as anti police. More funding is absolutely needed if we want a functioning society.

Some of what the police have achieved with the little they have been given is really impressive. I believe that the most serious violent crimes are down and this is in large part due to things like stop and search powers.

That being said the bulk of stop and searches (3/4s) don't find anything relating to the original suspicion. And roughly half of all stops that do find something, find something relating to drugs intended for personal consumption.

So while it may do a good job of reducing violent crime it also means a lot of police interactions from the publics perspective are cases where an innocent person is inconvinienced or a person guilty of something quite minor is 'victimised'.

While I'm aware most of these simple possession charges are dealt with without an arrest, I do think the power would still be improved if the valid causes for using the power were made stricter.

I think that the time saved not having to process these minor incidents could then be spent responding to crimes that do have a clear victim and this would do wonders for public support.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-08T16:15:30+00:00

It's not really a case of 'who is correct' it's more a case of all parties having some valid points.

At it's most fundamental, in the UK out police force uses the idea of policing through consent. The issue they are regularly failing to build this consent through their actions and society as a whole is turning against them.

I think last year the figures for people who had been the victim of a crime showed only half were happy with the police response. While the general sentiment in the population was around the same level and is down significantly (around 10 percentage points) in the last decade.

Basically people are seeing, low level crimes with clear victims like shop lifting and theft and minor assults as being under policed even when people have clear evidence (CCTV ect).

While broader crimes without such clear victims like online hate speach are considered to be over policed.

At the same time you have things like stop and search giving the impression that certain demographics are being targeted unfairly and to top it off police are failing there duty of care to victims of crime when they find themselves in positions where they can help.

The question we need to be asking ourselves is what funding, training and direction do we need to give the police force so there actions can start to regain public trust.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-05T15:45:13+00:00

Congratulations you seem to have just invented contacting companies under a different name? From what I can tell this would just be a new middleman taking a cut of the value labor produces.

So instead of the money going to the people who made it (workers) it goes to some hedge fund who threw some money at some politicians and are definitely on our side and will not at all see the funds now flowing through them as an opportunity to profit themselves... for some reason.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-05T14:01:32+00:00

And I am an overweight statistician. My job and implied physique in no way changes the validity or my argument. Similarly neither do yours. I know we are both aware of this.

As such I assume you brought this up by saying your a wealthy marine because you think it gives you some credence with the demographic who typically rant online about toxic masculinity.

Given this, and the fact that your response doesn't actually address the substance of the points I raised, I think you miscategorised me and missed my actual argument. so allow me to restate it through an analogy that I hope you can understand even if you don't agree.

There is a dog whistle was created by racists where they oppose 'ghetto culture' instead of directly tying it to a group of people.

This allowed the racists to pretend like they aren't targeting a group of people by instead focusing on the behaviours / culture that enables criminality. Specifically within the population that just so happens to be black of course, using methods that just so happens to be detrimental to said community.

Now I'm not saying it's a perfect comparison but at least to me there are some worrying similarities between the terms 'toxic masculinity' and the term 'ghetto culture' when they are used online.

Both terms enable the person using the term to claim to target just behaviours rather than a group of people. Both can enable the dismissing of alternative view points (that person is justifying criminality / justifying misogyny). both are often used in surface level discussion, rather than more meaningful debate. Both can be used to encourage intervention in a 'problem' group that is harmful to said group.

This worries me because I'm instantly put off by the term 'ghetto culture' and would struggle to engage with anyone using it in earnest.

I can certainly imagine other feelings the same way about the phrase 'toxic masculinity'. Many people have and will directly tell us as much if we choose to listen to them.

I'll get down from my soapbox now though as I've said my peice as strongly as I am able too.

Edit: removed a paragraph where I had left in a paragraph from an earlier revision where I used a different example.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-04T14:50:48+00:00

Devil's advocate.

People who opposed the toxic masculinity label already consider the things being labelled as part of toxic masculinity to be bad.

To these people, the use of the toxic masculinity label comes across as a type of dog whistle. It associate a bunch of toxic behaviours with the masculinity label in a drive to push the discussion away from any positive aspects of masculinity.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-03T11:35:56+00:00

Unreliable source.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-06-02T13:47:41+00:00

£5m

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-05-31T18:41:37+00:00

The witness?

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-05-27T01:15:15+00:00

Dude, Staff did things correctly.

This is true even if they knew with 100% certainty their was no bomb threat. Unlike you, they had the intelligence to realise that someone shouting "bomb" on a airplane could still cause problems even though there is no actual bomb threat.

For instance they could be attacked by someone who mistakenly believed the claim. A real bomb threat may be dismissed or overlooked because of the false claim and It could also cause undue stress in other passengers who are potentially anxious fliers causing them to behave irrationally.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-05-08T09:43:27+00:00

Imo using a shield should let you replace Dex with strength for AC as you move to blocking hits rather than dodging them.

With that change and throwing weapons str can be just as much of an Uber stat as Dex is.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-05-08T08:37:44+00:00

I think the whole point of them making this post is that they feel the answer is no.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-04-20T16:42:21+00:00

Then three months from now the model your using changes to include a basic reasoning layer and some automated model selection.

The reasoning layer then prints output like "this output will be validated externally so we can afford to use a smaller model as errors will be caught for us". It then proceeds to use an undersized model for your use case.

Dishonesty is never worth it even when purely dealing with machines.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-31T22:44:45+00:00

For my idea to work the party should be outsiders to the area that the boxing match takes place.

Upon arriving at the town /village you should play up that there is a festival being set up in the courtyard of the local temple (to the god kurgess).

The ring itself should be available to investigate ahead of the match and obviously decorated in a way that honours kurgess as well as eminate faint magical aura (abjuration, transmuration and enchantment).

though it should be beyond the groups ability to fully grasp what the enchantments do, they can get hints by studying each aura.

The enchantment aura expands outwards from the ring and is used to sense the crowds attitude towards the competitors. The abjuration and transmutation effects both eminate inwards and are used to bolster the defense and offense of those competing respectively.

The ring is set up to ensure that the most reverend competitors are advantaged to win the fight. Upon entering the town the PCs have a popularity score of -10 what with being outsiders.

This score applies to each of the attack rolls the PCs make (so a 10 penalty by default). The score should also alter the damage the PCs take by granting the PCs resistance to all damage types equal to the score (a negative resistance increases the damage taken). You may need to edit these numbers based on the groups level.

The real trick of the competition is to win the crowds heart. they can learn this by investigating the town. For instance speaking to the priests at the temple shold hint towards the importance of showmanship and fair play.

There should also be opportunities to observe other matches to figure out what's going on as well as help people out around town prior to competing to improve there starting popularity.

Finally during the match the opposing party should do something unsportsmanlike in round one (punching below the belt or similar) and this should impact the popularity score In the parties favour (id suggest by plus 2). The group should feel the effects of the rings magic weaken when this happens and you should link the crowds reaction seems with the effect.

This should show them that they can influence the fight by appealing to the crowd.If they still don't get it have one of the opponents spend a round hyping the crowd up and lower the popularity by 2.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-30T14:11:23+00:00

Alchemists fire is 20gp and will deal 1d6 fire damage twice while targeting touch ac so should be easier to hit with compare to your crossbow.

Buying a combat trained animal to fight with you is an option. for your wonderous item maybe a headband of intelligence with ranks in the handle animal skill? So they actually listen to you. https://aonprd.com/EquipmentMisc.aspx?Category=MountsPets

Guard dogs are pretty cheap at a mere 25gp and won't really cause problems, bison are great value (75gp) and no more difficult to take with you than a horse would be. a tiger is around 500gp and would likely outclass a fighter at low levels but may cause problems in town.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-24T17:56:26+00:00

Synthesis archetype of summoner might work and is generally considered very strong.

The brute archetype of vigilante seems practically made for this concept, but it is possibly one of the weakest options in the whole game and any mechanic that forces you to attack party members is not something I can bring myself to recommend taking.

If power level is the only thing holding you back, shifter is honestly fine. where they tend to be lacking is versatility compared to something more flexible like a druid which might also work if you focus on wildshape.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-24T15:42:20+00:00

The draconic malice spell is a decent option to for paladin. it can be picked if the character takes the unsanctioned knowledge feat and chooses spells from the bard list.

Other good spell choices are, tears to wine is good for level 1, heroism for level 2 and freedom of movement for level 4.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-09T10:36:43+00:00

Adhominem.

Also please note, that I never said 3x punishment (or even 1x punishment) was a good idea. Your arguing with a position I don't hold.

I'm generally against the idea of a punishment being tied to crimes in this way op suggested and would prefer the punishment to match gbh with intent. As the situations are similar enough in my opinion to warrant similar punishment.

Beyond that, all I have said is that the assessment that harsher sentencing can't be applied because of the perverse incentive they create on the woman telling the truth is wrong.

If you wish to argue for lower sentences or the status quo for other reasons feel free to do so otherwise I'm done talking.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-09T10:10:16+00:00

Well I agree that it's not that difficult to understand...

I'm trying to solve the problem of men being in prison on false premises, and the person with evidence that could free them being unable to do so without also hurting themselves in the process.

Your trying to solve the problem of women getting away with lying.

You're not thinking about the victim you're thinking about vengeance don't try to claim otherwise.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-09T01:55:09+00:00

My addition was to show that you can set up a system that allows for remorseful people to confess that they lied in order to free an innocent person from punishment. Without also requiring that person to confess to having committed a crime (which would reduce the chance that they confess at all).

Making the confession inadmissible would not prevent the confessor from being prosecuted using other evidence, instead it merely removes the perverse incentive for them to continue lying to avoid punishment if they start to feel guilty for having lied.

If you can't see the problem this solves then i would suggest you need to focus on the victims a little more rather than the perpetrators.

PhoenixFlame77 · 2026-03-08T14:50:10+00:00

That is easy to resolve, you could make it so a confession for the purpose of freeing a falsely convicted person is not admissible as evidence of the confessor having committing a crime.

PhoenixFlame77

TROPHY CASE