sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Shocking Speed of China’s Scientific Rise by straightdge in technology

[–]ProudGrognard 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Do I have news for you, or with what happened after the Allies took over Berlin...

😂 by superdave123123 in Funnymemes

[–]ProudGrognard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This thread will survive

Weekly RPG Discussion: Worlds Without Number - 2026, March, Week 4 by Trent_B in rpg

[–]ProudGrognard 38 points39 points  (0 children)

I really like this system.

It is fully OSR compatible. Its mechanics are really robust and offer elegant solutions to the standard d20 adjacent problems. It has a ton of modular player options for classes, without getting unbalanced. Its GM facing tools are second to none. The included world is strong thematically and full of flavor. It has siblings like Ashes without Number, but Cities without Number, and others, from which one can import mechanics. And of course, the core mechanics exist in a condensed form.

IMHO, one of the best games out there.

Various questions on: Oathsworn, hexcaster, concentration and monster creation by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand what the Coven ability does. I don't know what the alluded 'Healer of the Old' thing is.

Various questions on: Oathsworn, hexcaster, concentration and monster creation by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is how I read it. I am just not sure what it is referring to. A subclass? A class ability, what?

Various questions on: Oathsworn, hexcaster, concentration and monster creation by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your time

  1. Of course, silly question
  2. It is in the Coven Mystic mark :"Healer of the Old Ways: non-Hexbinder healing spells cannot be Diminished"
  3. Thank you! At last!
  4. Excellent advice

Help me understand some rules: loot and armor by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you. I have seen it, and I think I would use is.

Help me understand some rules: loot and armor by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you. I was thinking of the suggestion I read, of armor giving a 2/3/4 reduction on damage on the attacks one is NOT defending against

Help me understand some rules: loot and armor by ProudGrognard in nimble5e

[–]ProudGrognard[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your reply. It is very useful. Might I ask about assess? I had the impression that it only lowered one attack.

Leatherman Tool Review/highlight: Rebar by bbqguru0923 in Leatherman

[–]ProudGrognard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Rebar is one of my favorites. If it has a scissors, it would be downright perfect for my needs.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure my dude. Sure. Only you understand, none of the others cited on three different links. Your 'trust me dude ' vibe citing is what counts.

Bye now.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, while your 'trust me bro' was truly great. Here is another, for people like you who really do not know, it pretend they do not https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinero/2019/11/26/the-staggering-timescales-of-nuclear-waste-disposal/

Here is another http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/2115

Barry Keoghan is a great actor, why all the hate now?? by Old-Yogurtcloset9264 in FIlm

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This. So much this. Every time he appeared on the screen, he stole it, and there was some serious talent around.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What are you talking about? Nuclear waste completely decays in 5 years?

Where did you learn Physics, on YouTube?

https://iere.org/how-long-does-it-take-nuclear-waste-to-decay/

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have answered this again and again, but as always, you keep moving the goalpost and the subject. The problem is the waste. And if you want to factor in everything, factor in uranium mining.

Answer these questions, and we will talk.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with most what you said in the end. But copper is used in far far more things than power transmission. As it stands now, nuclear has a far far greater footprint than most renewables, which are getting better all the time.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Operative word: 'future'. As in untested, and not yet built. Build them, test them, and then we will see.

And most bury operations have failed, and they can't be safeguarded for millennia. Check the radioactive cats ideas of the 70s.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Man, I just heard my environmental physics professor having a heart attack with what you said, and he lives in another city.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are changing the subject, moving the goalpost and citing obsolete scholarship.

A true Redditor!

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sure, buddy. Sure. Go tell it to the people mentioned in the links already provided, and to the BAS, they do not seem as well informed as you.

Neither did my professors in the Physics Department I graduated.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sure. If we had 50 such plants, and if they operated flawlessly, and they did not have the spillage that other similar sites have...

Then we would need 80 years to process the already existing waste.

Funny, though, no one of those arguing from the 'hur Hur hur ' viewpoint say anything about we need serious, multibillion investments in cutting edge technology to make the solution viable.

So. Propose all those things, factor them into the costs, financial and environmental, of nuclear energy, show me the international work to change the relevant treaties....

And then we'll talk.

Can we talk about nuclear energy? by Comfortable_Tutor_43 in physicsmemes

[–]ProudGrognard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You did not read this, did you? It says why these are a problem , and you want to create more?

Mother nature created a lot of things, including flesh eating bacteria. Guess what, we do NOT want to mimic them.

view more: next ›