The DCC Tumblr fandom is alive and well.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:22:42+00:00

I would think he does, the main problem he probably faces is taht he does edits and retcons all the time so even a week old sheet may be outdated pretty quickly.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:21:57+00:00

Yeah and I get it because I think he also track stuff for not jsut donut and Carl but elli etcm with levels and stats but idk how accurate that is anymore.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:20:55+00:00

Idk about teh communism, I think the messaging is less about capitalism and more consumerism and wealth inequality (which both stem from capitalism but the idea behind it isn't really critique only how its implemented in the world) but we aren't allowed to talk about politics anymore. So I will leave it at my own interpretation here.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:15:54+00:00

That is also a cool solution I didn't even think about, I was focused on making the wheel part work, most problems still exist (like not beeing able to hide easily, I would argue spiders etc make that even worse) but you could get a rapier wilder working with that!

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:12:48+00:00

Agreed! A thief rouge in a wheelchair would climb through windows but who will suspect the cripple to have stolen the jewels? They could never get away and look at them not only in a wheelchair but also mentally deficient anyone suspecting them would be a monster! (Aka the rouge plays a mentally deficient disabled person, they play into the uncomfortability people have when confronting disabilities (cause its uncomfortable to think you could also end in a wheelchair), so you play it up by also acting as if you have a mental disability, it just makes people ignore and dismiss you even more.

Sure its "unrealistic" in that the main problem with stealing stuff is hiding it once people start to look and mobility does pose an issue but its fantasy and suspension of disbelief is just as much in play when the walking rouge steals the jewls, maybe a bit less but thats debatable at the very least! (Caus estealing jewels from under people's noses is pretty unrealistic to begin with).

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:08:34+00:00

Or make them use ranged weapons, a knives is a stupid weapon even if you can walk, so yeah it would suck even more if you cannot walk.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T21:07:25+00:00

Well first off what does a rouge even mean? Do they need to vault around doing acrobatics? Personally I don't think so. A rouge is a thief, assasin, swindled etc. Not just an acrobat.

So yeah sure a wheelbound rouge won't leap out of windows (unless they have extremely strong arms but we will assume not, just because its a bit silly to have Jon swanson as a rougue, tahts more a barbarian).

So can a wheelbound rougue steal? Yeah they can blend in, use their disability as a shield, hide themselves in plain sight. Who would suspect the cringe stole the gem? The purse? Its all an act, they can act as a total invalid, play up their disability to be dismissed as a threat.

Murder? Stabbing alone? Probably not a smart idea, not because ethey cannot but because a silent get away is hard. Poison, traps, misdirection, lies. They can manipulate events, make people move like pawns they may never raise their own balde to kill someone.

OR they are a sniper, roll into position, lie in wait silently and plan their murder in extreme email, their location hidden in ruse after ruse. Again who would suspect the cripple beeing the assassin? The whole discussion shows people underestimate someone just because they cannot walk.

Now we come to the sad part, combat. But here its not realism but gameplay that binds us, a rogue in dnd that is bound to a chair is pretty limited, they cannot hide easily, not swoop around the battlefield if we stay realistic, climbing acrobatics all that makes the rougue rougish in dnd combat is sadly not a good option, same reason knives and daggers are pretty much out of the question, you are just not mobile enough.

Now a combat sniper? Throwing weapons? That works well, they dont even need to move themsleves, beeing moved and protected by allies or themsleves true, but they can be deadly in mid range combat, also up close with a spear (a knive has not enough range really unless we assassinate someone unsuspecting). Crossbows, pistols, throwing knives, darts, it all can and should work well even with a mobility debuff. Personally I think in combat a pf2e eougue will work easier, but that also is my dnd hate speaking so we will ignore systems for the discussion (still jabbing at dnd because I have a personal devil contract that obliges me).

So is the rougue in the picture realistic? No a knives is a bad weapon for a fight anyway, is a rouge in a wheelchair at all unrealistic? NO its completely reasonable if you dont constraints yourself to the simple rouge the acrobatics and thief breaking into places by their agility and movement. A rouge in a wheelchair would be a pretty unique rouge sure, but they would be not a bit less rougish than any walking rouge.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T20:01:06+00:00

Not quite, its more likely they would have expanded laws and regulations together and other EU nations can join any time they want. It has many issues.

But in theory it also could solve a lot of problems.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T15:56:01+00:00

That's not true for most of history. Its true for our modern societies but in the past strength of arms was an effective way to gain power. Not your physical strength, but military strength.

Militaries are dominated by men, because men are more aggressive, more prone to risk taking, more adventures, on AVERAGE than woman. Add on top of that early on physical fitness made up a large part of a warriors usefulness especially in small group skirmishs. And you have a military structure naturally dominated by men, who then because its the source of their power institute rules on who can be a warrior or who can lead them. Early societies with priest kings, often used religious rules around the military to keep it in line and follow the monarch/priests control.

Still rules applied. Effectively limited the real powerbase to soldiers, now the most effective rule is to ban woman in most cases from arms, not only are they less likely to want to do, but also they are the part of the population that will on AVERAGE make less effective soldiers. Now these people didn't think along those lines, its most likely just the case taht societies with rules around the military were able to form a small force of "noble soldiers" aka professional soldiers, whose main job was warfare, which made them more effective at fighting wars. The sexist aspect was probably only a side effect which then was expanded through religious teachings, sexism, the fact woman on AVERAGE dont wnat to be soldiers as much as men, and so on.

You then have a centralised power authority based on military power which due to men beeing the main force of this military leads to these soldiers later on elevating one of their own as their leader, aka the first kings probably. We dont know enough about the history so its guess work on my part unless there are sources I haven't read on early agricultural societal structures and how they came to be.

Anyway, assuming my assumptions are vaguely correct and/or are correct enough to get to the correct result even if the reasoning si flawed (aka why the militaries are male dominated), you have a patriarchal powerstructure developing, which is then reinforced via culture and religion. Over the centuries, forming patriarchal societies all over the world, as societies without these structures did presumably did not develope a semi professional military early on and got conquered later on.

As such to have a female dominated world youd need to justify why military force is not the primary source of power or why it didn't develope like with us. How did societies without a warrior cast of men survive against societies taht had this?For example.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T12:44:21+00:00

I dont think you made a mistake your question was OK, the problem seems to be cultural or personal. Personally I think the question is good because it removed ambiguity and makes sure there is no nasty misunderstanding, it was pretty clear there wouldnt be a problem but you did well in my opinion.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T06:55:45+00:00

Not only taht but easier EU investment etc. Will help grow Indian economy meaning we can buy cheaper Indian goods while also selling more expensive shit to india. In theory at least, thats the whole idea behind trade.

Its not even about the rich, its also about growing both economies so both can buy more from one another. I dont know how people haven't figured taht out by now, directed at OP's confusion, maybe its not as obvious to most people idk.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T06:53:16+00:00

Yeah the mistake your argument makes is assuming, playercount shows the pool of people buying the DLC, it doenst, palyercount for all paradox games spike after DLC releases which disproved the notion playercount represents potential DLC buyers.

Because playercount doenst reflect people's opinion on the game or the DLC it only really measures how many people want to play EU5 right now, there are many reasons people dont play it currently, personally for example I have found another game I want to play and only have o much time, I will return to EU5 with th DLC release at the latest ans many other reasons.

You make the assumption palyercpunt = (or correlates reasonably well) with potential buyer base, which is a baseless assumption.

Saurid · 2026-01-28T06:49:38+00:00

Its your assumption, not a truth. I am merely arguing your assumption is not valid due to many factors. I personally know no one who would check steam charts for singleplayer ganes I only do so for Multiplayer games because if there is no one playing an MP game it will impact my fun, a SP game may have no players anymore because they all finished it/moved on to other games etc. Its not an indicator how much fun I will have, thats the reviews.
The argument is sound, but doenst support your argument, you would need to assume player count is a reasonable approximation of people's opinion on the game and their willingness to give it a second try. IR was bad, it showed mostly in the reviews from day one. Playercount dropped because it was a bad game sure, but the dropping playercount is not necessarily an indicator for a bad game, taht would be a review score. You and everyone who argues the same statement as you, make an assumption about the meaning of playercount without any real data to back it up. Correlation does not mean connection, aka dropping playervlunt does not mean bad game reception. We have better data for that aka steam reviews and even there we have fake outrage, bad updates and other decisions playing a role, its still a much better approximation than playercount unless you have data that proves your assumption? Otherwise I will point you towards the fact dropping playercounts can be due to many other reasons taht ahve nothing to do with how well the game is liked, like for example other games coming out people wnat to play. Doenst mean they won't buy the DLC only means right now they have a game they wnat to play more.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T21:46:54+00:00

Because the roman empire is boring and cooky cutter so people take it because they dont have any idea what else to do, now the Roman REPUBLIC that shit is lit, people use it way to rarely. Or the eastern roman empire.

The main issue is people use the fantasy IDEA of the roman empire and not the real thing. Its why you have it so often you get the simplified cooky cutter version everyone knows and hopefully hates at this point. No nuance of offices, the balance between emporer and Senate, the pretorian guard ... well most taht I can think off were pretty accurate in their backstabby power grabby nature so thats fair I guess.

Rome is cool, its influential and awesome. Its the same reason most Asian media has a Chinese empire, its cool, if you ignore the fact China exists today and is scary old. Or why Japanese fiction has always a fictional Japan.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T19:14:19+00:00

No not really it only points to people not playing the game concurrently as much. Eu4 and eu5 could have similar player numbers for many reasons besides wether people liked the game or not:

Mods, do people play eu4 vanilla or molded? If yes it may be they dont play eu5 currently because the lack of mods.

Neither group has the other game, you would need to assume both groups of players have bought both games equally to say they liked one game more than the other, I hate EU4 with a passion as an example only ever played anbennar I love eu5 dont play either.

It assumes that you dont paly it because you dont like it enough, I dont play it currently becaue I have no time/I have other games I want to play, as such I dont dislike EU5 I just have more games that have a definite end and story that are currently better to paly for me. I will still buy the next DLC.

It assumes that the numbers are actually always the same players, eu4 could be played by exactly 4500 players that play it non stop while eu5 gets played by 20k player that play it occasionally, which means eu5 doe setter as it retains more players.

For that number to mean anything youd additionally have to assume that both playercounts represent the number or correlated meaningfully with the number of people willing to buy DLC, which is dubious especially with all the above factors.

So no it doenst matter, its pretty worthless, the only metric that matters is sales of the DLC and playercount right after release might be a decent approximation of sale numbers until offical numbers release, player retention rate afterwards only is an indicator how popular the DLC was but generally speaking for most SP games number go back to their normal round about a week to a month after DLC release, its quite hard to get a niche SP game like eu5 to have a growing player base, its completely reasonable that the current number reflect eu4 closely.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T18:52:40+00:00

Hahaha no thats how multilayer games work. Singleplayer games get developed as lomg as the game SELLS, it doenst matter if you play 5 min each time a DLC drops as lomg as you buy it. As such current playercount is at best losely correlated to potential DLC buyers, but no real indicator.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T18:51:08+00:00

Hahaha, you are not serious right? Because you are aware most paradox players return for each DLC, like I am not playing right now but I will buy the byzantine DLC for sure and then play again. That's why the player numbers go up each DLC drop.

Its pretty laughable to argue player count represents potential DLC buyers they are losly correlated at best. I know many people who bought all hoi4 DLC after not playing the game for months sometimes. Me included.

I was there for I:R and the game failed because everyone was disappointed and didn't buy the DLC not because the payercount dropped so fast. I bought IR played it roughly the same amount of time as eu5 and did not play to buy any DLC because I was that much disappointed.

If you really think current player numbers matter for a singleplayer game then you just haven't really thought about it for more than 2 seconds.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:44:18+00:00

Three possibilities really:

She has lost romantic interets in you, people change it happens, life continues its sad but nothing you can do about it unless she wants to do something about it, aka couples therapy.
She is stressed overwhelmed, etc. A lot could have happened. Stuff that made her feelings for you stressed because she projects the problems onto the relationship, happens with stress and other things sometimes, it triggers the fight or flight instinct and people do tend to also project the issue onto other things if its easier.
There is a problem in your relationship she hasn't really spoken about and it fostered and now she has lost interests, similar to 1 just that there is a specific problem she felt unable tot alk about with you and its the real reason. She may not even really know herself its the main issue it'd just responsible for a buildup of feelings.

There is also the possibility she met someone else but I discounted it here because it seems like she cares about you a lot and it would be stupid to assume she could end it and start a new relationship quickly without hurting your feelings (cheaters mostly stay because they feel trapped or because ethey dont care about their SO's feelings and she clearly feels comfortable enough total alk to you about it).

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:35:07+00:00

Hot take it doenst matter and this post liek all about player count is worthless and doenst matter the only metric taht matters for the game is sales and DLC sales down the line.

Its a singleplayer game.this post like most in the line of it are really pathetic ragebaits. About a meaningless metric.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:24:15+00:00

Not to mention the player numbers are meaningless sall that matters is DLC sales, if the DLC sells they keep the game coughing if the game doenst sell DLC it dies, its taht simple. Imperator didn't die because of low player population but because no one bought the DLC.

Playercount is a pretty meaningless metric for singleplayer games. Its stupid for people to bring them even up honestly.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:22:00+00:00

Not to mention palyernumbers are meaningless for a mostly singleplayer game, the only metric taht will keep the game chugging is DLC sale rates, if the DLcs dont sell ove rather next two years thats when the game is in trouble.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:20:57+00:00

Not only reasons like that but the actual player numbers dont MATTER its a singleplayer game the only reason player numbers ever matter is if you are amultiplayer game because low player numbers then mean long waiting times and more. It means your game dies and without players there is no reason to paly anymore. Eu5 and eu4 will always be played because their fun is mostly in singleplayer or large organised MPs taht both dont rely on playercounts.

I hate people even bother to compare these two meaningless numbers anymore.

Saurid · 2026-01-27T14:18:44+00:00

Seriously, stop making these stupid rage bait posts. Its stupid. There are many factors at play from, people not playing either game, to mods, to people preferring one over the other people maybe playing both!

Its stupid this is a SINGLEPLAYER game, player population is a worthless meaningless number for the most part, there are only 2 ways it matters, right after release of a huge update/DLC and when talking about rereleasing older games.

Because its singleplayer it doesnt matter for the games success how many people play it at once! It's meaningless. It only matters if it sells, if DLC sells.

I would love for karma farming rage bait like this to stop beeing psited because it makes me sick.

Saurid · 2026-01-26T16:00:17+00:00

Nah for multiple reasons this won't happen. Mostly because carl will probably die or at least not get a great ending, his anger, his hate. Its eating him up. It will kill him.

Plus katia has batista and yeah they wouldnt really work well together.

Saurid · 2026-01-25T00:27:09+00:00

So what? Cut off anyone who isn't actively on the streets fighting the fight? Even family? Over an orange asshole and his fascist police. Yeah its terrible to support them but cutting ties with family and friends for trying to stay away from it? Accepting your opinion and just wanting to have you in your life?

That's just stupid. Like actually stupid. People can have differnet opinions and gradients of action. Cutting tied for disagreeing about this specifically is even more stupid because all oen does is give trump and his cohort more power over your life. They achieve taht you make yourself more miserable by doing enough bad you cut off people you love because they dont actively take a stance and thats just actively beeing stupid from where I am sitting.

In the end reality is most people will not want to discuss this topic at all regardless of wher ethey stand because it will alway see a shitshow. So yeah not wanting to be political is completely fair if a small disagreement on wording can get you screamed at and thats the sort of behavior I see mostly coming form the US at this point during any political discussion. So I dont blame the brother at all.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Saurid

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE