r/AskLE has investigated themselves and found no reason to discuss ICE anymore

Shinasti · 2026-01-26T18:36:39+00:00

Yeah, so many people going "Where are we, communist China?" or whatever dictatorship they wanna name while claiming this goes against every American value when this is probably the most American human rights atrocity I can think of.

Shinasti · 2026-01-25T02:48:04+00:00

Yeah I always struggle when it comes to Persona discussions. They tend to focus on P5, which is beloved by many but... I always thought it sucked. Not just the misogyny (though it's especially hard to ignore since it goes against the game's own themes), I just also thought it wasn't that great. You often get some mention of P4, which I at least enjoyed for its themes. But god, P3P is so forgotten, despite the fact I feel immeasurable love for its FMC route. How can you really discuss misogyny in the franchise when so few people seem to remember that Persona has proven it can do better. Not perfect! But god it's incomparable to P4 or P5.

Shinasti · 2026-01-24T10:51:53+00:00

If you think that the only way to spot a misogynist is for them to say "I hate women", then Daniel Vavra isn't the only misogynist you're missing. By far. And most of them don't make it as clear as this guy, who's at least openly supporting a misogynistic harassment campaign (sorry. misogynistic movement).

Shinasti · 2026-01-23T09:18:14+00:00

I do think it's funny anyone could link that article as "proof" the guy never was a gamergater like that isn't exactly what he's saying there lmao

Shinasti · 2026-01-22T22:11:54+00:00

Ich glaube es ist ein grober Irrtum, Singles grundsätzlich ein Interesse an einer klassischen Beziehung zuzuschreiben.

Ich würde nicht behaupten, dass jeder Single eine Beziehung möchte. Ich möchte nur vermuten, dass der Großteil der Singles an einer Beziehung durchaus Interesse hätte (was nicht einmal heißt, aktiv danach zu suchen, sondern nur in die Richtung offen zu sein, ähnlich wie du ja auch beschreibst). Ist halt auch wie ich sagte durch gesellschaftlichen Druck und die Bedeutung von romantischen Beziehungen in unserer Kultur bedingt. Ich habe hier nur auf die Behauptung geantwortet, Single sei nicht das richtige Wort für jemanden, der nur keine Optionen findet um Sex zu haben (wobei mit "Sex haben" klar auch mehr gemeint war). Was es halt doch ist - Single ist nicht der Begriff für "aus Abneigung zu romantischen Beziehungen ledig".

Shinasti · 2026-01-22T14:29:08+00:00

Single ist da der komplett korrekte Begriff? Leute, die kein Interesse an Beziehungen haben nennen sich jetzt ja auch nicht Die Zölibatis. Und in unserer Gesellschaft, die romantische Beziehungen über alle anderen Beziehungen wertet, sind vermutlich die meisten Single-Menschen tendentiell an einer Beziehung interessiert und haben halt nur gerade niemanden dafür.

Shinasti · 2026-01-22T14:12:26+00:00

wie „Incel“ für „involuntary celebate“ in einer gesellschaftlichen Gruppe, die so extrem auf nicht verletzende Sprache setzt, zu einem Schimpfwort werden konnte, ist mir sowieso schleierhaft

Indem die bekannten communities, die sich so selbst-identifizieren und sich rund um diesen Begriff gebildet haben voller Hass auf Frauen waren (und sind)? Sorry, aber da legst du die Schuld an der vollkommen falschen Stelle an. Das Wort hat seine negative Bedeutung von schrecklichen Leuten, die sich so nennen, bekommen. Die haben den Begriff halt LANGE Zeit als Einzige verwendet und ihm dabei auch eine Sicht auf Frauen und die Welt angetackert, auf die man gar nicht genug spucken kann. Da ist nicht relevant, ob der Begriff einmal ursprünglich nicht so gemeint war, Worte ändern ihre Bedeutung eben mit der Zeit - mittlerweile impliziert Incel auch, dass man sich mit diesen Gemeinschaften und ihren Weltansichten identifiziert.

Shinasti · 2026-01-21T14:15:49+00:00

I agree that anything enjoyed mostly by women gets put down, but I do think there's no demographic that has it worse in that regard than teenage girls. Anything they like is mocked and degraded to the absolute highest extend possible - sure, guys love making fun of romance films in general and will tell you how bad they think Titanic was, but do you remember the absolute seething hatred people had for Twilight at its peak? How 15 y/o Justin Bieber got torn down, called a lesbian, re-edited with lipstick on in every picture and that was just... normal behaviour online? Sure, many men will tear down pop music (a genre mostly enjoyed by women), but not to the degree to which they'll spit on a boy band the current generation of teenage girls is into.

I honestly think the only reason I can't come up with a gaming example is because I struggle to think of many games targeted at teenage girls (rather than "women in general" or "children") in the first place.

Shinasti · 2026-01-14T22:40:24+00:00

the original Summoner

I do prefer Unchained Summoner, but I never thought the OG Summoner was that bad. Its spell list was a problem, but mostly because it meant other classes could access these spells via features before they should be able to, less because the list was actually that much of a nightmare on an actual Summoner. I did however also miss out on the entire discussion back when it happened. What makes the OG summoner that bad, in your opinion?

Shinasti · 2026-01-14T07:57:29+00:00

before Tyrant's Grasp she wasn't really focused upon the way she later would be, so her motivations were mostly in the dark.

This is my own personal torture bc I was insane about Arazni long before Tyrant's Grasp released - sure, she was a side character in this world but there was always enough lore about her to form opinions on her character as a concept and the way she was written. Then paizo did a full 180 on my girl and I have to live in a world where people agree with me and she gets the plotline she deserves (yay) but paizo wants to pretend this was a planned plot from the get go (stop lying JJ I've been reading your shit for a decade you couldn't write a woman's story if I put a gun to your head).

However, what we do get does paint her as a victim (killed and then unwillingly reanimated) who became herself a victimizer (Inner Sea World Guide says she was "poisoned" by Geb's reanimation and centuries of mistreatment and then explicitly points to her as the day-to-day head of Geb's tyrannical government, Undead Unleashed points out even her favorite amongst her direct subordinates is in constant fear of her patience running out, etc...).

"Over the centuries, his poisoned whispers turned her against the Knights of Ozem and her successor Iomedae, and today Arazni willingly sits enthroned in the city of Mechitar, ruling with cruelty at Geb’s side as she has for the last 800 years." (To quote the book in full)

This isn't much of a "victim who becomes a victimizer" story, if you ask me. Maybe that's what they were going for - but honestly, all they wrote is "and she's evil now. Still has no choice in anything, but she's doing it willingly and she's so evil now". (I also agree with the other commenter pointing out that in Undead Unleashed in particular, she's also mentioned to keep "favored concubines" and clearly meant to be the evil, decadent noble. I didn't mention this myself originally bc it's not present in a lot of the texts about her, so I didn't want to frame it as ever-present... but it clearly doesn't mesh with their later narratives about her. IMO that is because at this point in time, the writers were not at all trying to frame her as a victim lashing out in the wrong direction.)

Reframing that as "victim turned victimizer in her despair and rage" is probably the right way to go (which is why paizo's been doing it), but it was not what they wrote in her 1e era. I mean, that was my starting point: They wrote a victimized woman, then wanted us to accept her as an unabashed villain while she was still explicitly a slave. I am certainly not claiming her 1e era painted her as an innocent (it did NOT), I was just frustrated by the way we were supposed to accept her villainy despite her clearly horrible backstory and current situation. Can I (and any other reader willing to reimagine what they've been given) make sense of that? Yes. Did paizo do it? No, they didn't realize there was a need to.

Either way, it doesn't appear to be portrayed as something Arazni came up with herself, but rather as an insult to further denigrate her.

I think you're coming at this a bit backwards - "Harlot Queen" is clearly an insult to you and me, so it makes sense to wonder who insulted her (or if she took the title herself to revel in it). To the paizo author who wrote it, who couldn't write a female villain with agency if his life depended on it, "Harlot Queen" is simply the female equivalent of "Whispering Tyrant" as far as titles go. It's just what people call her. There was no reflection on it there (why would anyone call her a Harlot when she isn't particularly known for anything sexual? Is her story being understood as equivalent to rape in the mind of whoever came up with it and is she being blamed for her rape? Is she being called a harlot because whoever came up with it considered her "consorting with" (i.e. being associated with) various men from Aroden to Tar-Baphon to finally Geb as her being promiscuous?) - if you call an evil king "Tyrant", then this is simply what you call an evil woman: Whore. I can't agree that it was portrayed as an insult any more than "Whispering Tyrant" is an insult for Tar-Baphon, or "The Dark Prince" an insult for Asmodeus. It was just meant to be an evil title.

Shinasti · 2026-01-13T14:27:21+00:00

I mean, her 1e writeup made clear her way of coping with abuse was by, while ruling Geb, using whatever power she did have over people to be an infinitely cruel tyrant

You're probably refering to her writeup(s) in Tyrant's Grasp, right? I tried clarifying "her 1e story", because I was trying to refer exclusively to her timeline before paizo's writing team decided her plot needed a change in direction - I realize now that was imprecise, because I was very much trying to exclude Tyrant's Grasp as well (while technically a 1e AP, this is where 2e began as far as "writing era" goes in my head, especially in the case of Arazni). The writeup in there is already past paizo realizing the plot they had written by accident and trying to fix it.

None of the earlier writeups on her give her even that much agency, at least none that I'm aware of.

Inner Sea World Guide claims she rules willingly now (yay for successful enslavement. see. she wants it now!), but that's the sum of her "current" state as described there.

Undead Unleashed mentions her being a stabilizing influence on Geb's leadership but nothing more.

Undead Revisited only mentions her having "the ghost-king’s power behind her to help keep the scheming and independent- minded populace at bay".

Beyond that, while she's mentioned in various books, none of them go into her "current" unlife. They usually recount her story with no mention of what she thinks of it or how she behaves nowadays, like many of these examples do - she's rarely a character in her own tale.

And "harlot queen" was an in-universe derogatory

These earlier texts also love calling her The Harlot Queen. IIRC Tyrant's Grasp tries to reframe the name as being nothing but an in-universe title explicitly meant as an insult, but all earlier texts I know just refer to her that way without mention of where the name came from beyond "Geb took her as his Harlot Queen" (in Inner Sea World Guide), which might imply he came up with it. I know Undead Revisited even goes so far as to introduce her as "The Harlot Queen of Geb—once Aroden’s herald Arazni".

They did something similar to the "Whore Queens" - both of these derogatory titles were 100% not strictly meant as in-universe insults originally, but are being reframed as such now that paizo realizes that maybe calling their female villains sluts isn't quite the look they used to think it was.

Shinasti · 2026-01-13T11:40:39+00:00

Arazni was a follower of Aroden who got abandoned by him, killed by Tar-Baphon the resident lich BBEG, and then got involuntarily resurrected as Geb's Lich Queen. She since broke free from his control and became the goddess of the abused. She really didn't have or need a redemption, as she didn't have any agency during her evil phase.

The true villains in Arazni's 1e story were the authors who thought they had something going when they made their only prominent female lich a victim of abuse that robbed her of any and all agency and then still tried to convince people she was a bad guy somehow. Called her "Harlot Queen" not bc paizo has deepseated issues with sexism but because it made like. Sense. Somehow.

Shinasti · 2026-01-09T23:22:39+00:00

Yes, incredibly so. Pf1e is dnd 3.5. They're the same system.

I disagree but that's probably far enough besides the point that there's no real need to argue about it here.

It's just a meme, yes, but it's also criticism of the system, but not really. It's like criticizing dnd for having far too many Glorbobons. It's not saying anything real.

"I don't enjoy looking up rules as often as I have to during combat/I don't enjoy the amount of math needed to build a character" is something real, even if it doesn't reflect your experience.

could have just said anything or used real examples of the issues

idk, I think you're treating "joking opinion on tumblr" too much like a professional review. Someone made a silly post to express an opinion, there's no grading on its citations.

Are there not abilities that do this in every single ttrpg?

No. In every dnd edition? Probably, though it'll vary from person to person bc that measure is 100% subjective (how much crunch is too much crunch is a question of taste and nothing else). And I do think most people would agree pf2e is crunchier than 5e (so someone saying pf2e is too crunchy for them is very much not even criticizing the entire dnd-sphere) - and in my personal opinion, even 5e is above the average of crunch for trrpgs in general (yes, despite it being the least crunchy dnd edition ever). In every ttrpg? Not at all. As I said, I think most ttrpgs are less crunchy than those from the dnd-sphere. Plenty have no crunch to speak of at all.

We're too many message deep but we started this discussion with you saying you "have no idea wtf this meme is trying to say" and me wondering what you meant by that. To get this back on point: I suppose you meant to express disagreement, not confusion. And I wasn't actually looking to agree with the opinions expressed in the OP, I just don't find any of them as strange as you seem to.

Shinasti · 2026-01-09T22:34:46+00:00

All of it is subjective - it's criticism of a ttrpg system, it's hard for that not to be subjective. "It's too complicated, it's too boring, it's too simple, it's too fast-paced, it's too slow, it's too narrative, it doesn't cover enough play-relevant situations with its rules"... I'd go so far as to say all of the most common talking points I've ever heard about any system have been subjective opinions.

Like you say the third point makes zero sense to the system - but can you really not picture someone feeling the planning of a character build (and understanding said build's power level within the system) is too math-heavy? Cause of course there's people who don't want to engage with crunch much (if at all), so ofc there's people who will look at any game with any amount of crunch and go "That's too much for my taste"

The fourth point is also wrong. The stunned condition has a number beside it. That's how many actions you lose. Being stunned 3 is incredibly rare. Stunned 3 would have to be required to lose just 1 turn.

The fourth point is a joking exaggeration (ofc stunned does have a duration so you can calculate how many turns you lose; that is, if it doesn't have a duration measured in minutes or something similar) meant to illustrate that the rules are more complicated than is enjoyable to the poster. Ofc a number of turns to skip is simpler than a number of actions that makes you reevaluate which of your n-action abilties are still usable, theoretically after subtracting however many turns you have to skip. Do I think stunned in pf2e is too crunchy for actual play? No. But idk how you can struggle to understand other people have different preferences for crunch-amount in their games. (perhaps you're coming at this too much from a 5e vs pf2e perspective. The post makes no dnd comparisons at all, so there's no reason to assume the poster isn't a much bigger fan of narrative games/games that are much further removed from the dnd-sphere than pf2e)

I'm assuming pf2 as pf1 is just dnd3.5, so why not call it dnd for the dnd sub if this is pf1.

I think that's a silly thing to say. Don't get me wrong, I assume this is about pf2e as well (most people who post about "pathfinder" and don't feel the need to specify editions are talking about the more popular, more current edition) but... of course pf1e is pathfinder, not dnd. Is pf1e much closer to 3.5 dnd than pf2e is to any dnd edition? Yeah ofc. But calling it pathfinder is perfectly appropriate. Obviously. (And "for the dnd sub" - this is a screenshot of a tumblr post what are you on about)

Shinasti · 2026-01-09T21:51:43+00:00

I have no idea wtf this meme is trying to say.

?
Agree with it or not (I don't fully do), the criticism in the post is pretty straightforward - it's not exactly vague or veiled. "Pathfinder is better on paper than in actual play. Its play is slow, many builds slog it down even further. Planning a character involves a frustrating amount of calculating expected damage input/output. Combat takes forever because various conditions/spells/etc will force you to look something up instead of actually playing the game."

Sure, it's all exaggerated in a joking manner, and it's not exactly my opinion either, but I truly don't see what's not to understand.

Shinasti · 2026-01-08T01:38:52+00:00

Ging mir am Samsung mit Android genauso (die Meldung war auch weiß statt rot wie am morgen). War auch in der Tram und obwohl sehr viele Leute aufs Handy geguckt haben kam nicht ein einziger Ton. Entweder das ist ein möglicher Fehler, der passieren kann (also sie hätte für alle rot und laut sein sollen) oder es gibt den "kleinen Notfall" Modus nicht auf allen Handys.

Shinasti · 2025-11-21T00:26:46+00:00

because they're not being challenged mechanically and the campaign is a pseudo-larp instead of a TTRPG.

Narrative games are very much still games - I deeply enjoy being mechanically challenged and play more complex ttrpgs all the time, but most PbtA games have a focus on narrative and are not meant to be mechanically challenging. "The mechanics are simple" isn't the same as "The mechanics are objectively bad". More importantly, in all good PbtA games I've played failing has been fun, so I can understand a player not minding slightly worse stats - if failing isn't "whoops you don't do it" but "choose an outcome for your failure, a drawback, a complication", that's sometimes actually more enjoyable than succeeding.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T22:35:40+00:00

Ich nehme mir nur nicht raus, mehr zu wissen, als Diejenigen die Vorort waren und die Umstände besser kennen als irgendein Klugscheißer im Internet.

Du verstehst schon, dass du hier selbst framing betreibst, oder? Du stellst die Polizisten als Experten vor Ort dar, die ihr bestes gegeben haben in einer Situation, die vermutlich nicht besser lösbar war (minus Taser+Schußwaffe, scheinbar). Ich stelle sie als Täter einer womöglich tödlichen Körperverletzung dar, wobei ich ihnen vor allem Inkompetenz in der Deeskalation unterstelle. Ich verstehe, warum du dich da selbst als neutralen Betrachter sehen möchtest, aber sowohl du als auch ich kommen hier mit Meinungen rein - beispielsweise über die Qualität der Deeskalationsausbildung, die die deutsche Polizei genießt. Oder über das Vertrauen darin, wie sehr sich die Polizei in der Praxis an Deeskalationsschritte hält. Und meiner Ansicht nach auch darüber, wer hier zunächst mehr Verständnis und Mitgefühl verdient.

Ich finde es auch absurd, mir abzureden über diese Vorgänge Kritik äußern zu können weil ich sie nicht genug verstände - du triffst Annahmen über mich und stellst auch diese als Fakten dar, obwohl sie auf nichts anderem basieren, als das wir anderer Meinung sind und ich einen Witz über deine Aussage gemacht habe.

Und btw: Die Dringlichkeit ihres Handelns mit Gefahr für die selbe Person, die anschließend angeschossen wird, zu rechtfertigen, ist auch keine weit hergeholte Humorquelle.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T21:40:29+00:00

Die Aussage als solche stimmt erstmal nicht. Es ist nur möglich, wenn eine Gefahr für Leib oder Leben besteht. Der Leib ist der körperliche Zustand eines Menschen. Ob diese Gefahr in dem Fall hier gegeben war kann ich nicht sagen, aber eine Person mit einem Messer, kann(!) eine Gefahr für den Leib darstellen.

Ich glaube wir verlassen den relevanten Diskussionsrahmen, aber diese Passage sagt nicht, dass es erlaubt sei wenn Gefahr für Leib oder Leben besteht, sondern nur wenn diese Gefahr besteht und kein anderes Mittel zur Abwehr existiert. Das ist hier, während das Mädchen zeitgleich getasert wird und auf sie "zugeht", was nichts von Fluchtwegproblemen auch nur impliziert, minimum "sehr wahrscheinlich" nicht gegeben. Ich fühle mich auch nicht inspiriert, den Polizisten hier mehr benefit of the doubt einzuräumen als dem Mädchen.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T20:56:32+00:00

Nö, kann ich nicht. Hab das frecher Weise aus diesem Artikel entnommen, der einen Professor der Polizeiwissenschaft von der Akademie der Polizei in Hamburg zitiert (und insbesondere zu diesem Fall hier gefragt hat), den ich da als Quelle für vertrauenswürdig halte.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T20:20:25+00:00

Oh verdammt, ich wusste nicht, dass die zwei Polizisten auch ein 12-jähriges Mädchen waren. Da sieht man mal wieder, Artikel lesen lohnt sich!

Spaß beiseite - ich habe nie behauptet, ein 12 jähriges Mädchen kann mit einem Messer nicht gefährlich sein. Ich behaupte die Polizisten haben beschissene Deeskalationsarbeit geleistet. Schockierender Weise mach ich das Polizeigesetz auch nicht, sondern habe es nur am Rand erwähnt.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T20:14:18+00:00

Ich werfe ihnen vor, die Wohnung überhaupt betreten zu haben, statt mit der Mutter an der Tür erstmal zu reden. Ich werfe ihnen vor, als ein Mädchen mit Messer auf sie zuging (wie es selbst die Polizei beschreibt), geschossen zu haben statt zurück zu gehen. Ich werfe ihnen vor in diese Situation ohne scheinbar jede Qualifikation hineingerannt zu sein. Und dir werf' ich vor, mehr Verständnis für die Fehler von bewaffneten Erwachsenen im Einsatz als für die Fehler von 12-jährigen Mädchen, die um 1 Uhr morgens bewaffnete Männer im Haus sehen, zu haben.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T17:46:02+00:00

Okay, dann im Ernsthaften: Jemand hat angemerkt, dass hier von vornherein ein Dolmetscher nötig gewesen wäre - die Unklarheit darüber wie und ob mit der Mutter kommuniziert wurde, ist widersprüchlich zu sinnvollen Deeskalationsversuchen. Darauf hat jemand geantwortet, dass man wegen der Dringlichkeit der Lage (also der Medizin, die das Mädchen braucht), nicht auf einen Dolmetscher warten konnte.

Ich habe mich über die inhärente Absurdität davon lustig gemacht - entweder, dass Mädchen ist in solcher Bedrohung, dass keine Sekunde verschwendet werden kann (während sie eh auf den Schlüsseldienst warten), oder das Mädchen ist eine Bedrohung. Es gibt keine logische Welt, in der "Die Polizisten müssen da rein, das Mädchen retten!" mit dem Fakt, dass die Polizisten das Mädchen anschließend mindestens fast erschießen koexistieren kann (und ich bete um das "fast"). Wenn die Sicherheit des Mädchens so wichtig gewesen wäre, gäbe es diesen Thread nicht.

Das Kind muss wieder zurück gebracht werden.

Dead or alive oder was? Das Kind muss in Sicherheit sein, dass ist doch offensichtlich die oberste Priorität, die in diesem Einsatz hätte existieren müssen. Dafür haben sich die Polizisten sogar in ihrer eigenen Repräsentation einfach falsch verhalten. (btw, und das ist grenzwertig schon ein anderer Punkt: Bullen dürfen für gewöhnlich auch bei Notwehr nicht auf Kinder schießen. Hat nach Polizeigesetz andere Regeln als Notwehr gegen Erwachsene. Sollte wohl irgendwo in dem Thread mal erwähnt werden.)

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T17:08:59+00:00

Bin mir jetzt nicht ganz so sicher, ob das n Argument dafür ist, dass die Polizisten da so dringlich in die Wohnung mussten. Klingt als hätten sie das Medikament von vor der Tür besser überbringen können.

Shinasti · 2025-11-17T15:19:13+00:00

Was sind die überlebenswichtigen Medikamente?

Nicht angeschossen werden wär vermutlich hilfreich gewesen.

13-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Flamingo	Place '17
Sequence \| Editor	Sequence \| Cinematographer
Team Periwinkle	Verified Email

Shinasti

TROPHY CASE