foobar137

[foobar137]

[foobar137]

HE DID IT FOLKS, HE DID THE THING

[foobar137]

Was talking with one of my very lesbian friends about body dysmorphia and how you can look at a fucking gorgeous woman who has a lot of the same qualities as yourself and not realize that the complement also applies to yourself. I asked her if she'd been watching Dancing With The Stars this season and she said no.

So i showed her a picture of Ilona Maher from this week's episode.

Her response:

"Thigh. Thigh. Thigh. Thigh. Thigh."

So anyway, the takeaway here is that one person's 'too masculine' is another person's 'thigh.'

[foobar137]

The Farmer’s Daughter by Victor Adame

[foobar137]

When you finally find out about your ADHD.

[foobar137]

The System Shock remake doesn't have you visibly use the toilets, but they do auto-flush after you leave them. (Which, given the type of game that it is, is likely to make you jump and wonder if something just snuck up behind you.)

Also, you can recycle the toilet paper and turn the resulting scrap in for cash.

It was inevitable that "can I pet the dog?" would evolve from a basic litmus test for a video game's willingness to permit the player to engage in non-productive interaction with the game's world to a cynical marketing device, but I think the basic idea is sound. We just need to refocus on types of non-productive interaction that are inherently unphotogenic or otherwise difficult to turn into marketable video clips, like "if the game's level layouts include bathrooms, can you use them?". I propose calling this the "Can You Shit" metric.

[foobar137]

if the muppet show was still airing chappell roan would guest star and thered be a running bit of miss piggy thinking shes trying to steal kermit but shes actually trying to flirt with miss piggy the whole time

[foobar137]

We can narrow it down quite a bit - 1977 Blue-book D&D Basic and AD&D Monster Manual don't appear to use dX, but the 1978 AD&D Player's Handbook does. (Page 16 is the first example I found.)

Here's a tabletop RPG history question, and also an etymology question if your nerdery bends that way.

d66 tables – as in "roll a six-sided die twice, reading the first roll as the 'tens' place and the second roll as the 'ones' place, yielding a number in the range from 11 to 66" – have been around at least as early as 1977, when the Starships book for classic Traveller used them to randomly generate trade goods for players to buy. However, the term "d66" wasn't yet being used to describe them – the book's text simply describes in detail how to roll on them each time such a table appears.

Conversely, we know the term "d66" was being used to describe this type of random lookup table no later than 2004, because several popular Japanese indie RPGs which came out in that year use it. However, none of these games seem to have originated it – the way they're using it suggests they're dropping a piece of jargon that was already well established at the time.

So the question is: what's the earliest tabletop RPG that specifically uses the term "d66" or "d66 table" to describe this type of random lookup roll? i.e., not "d6/d6" or "d6,d6" or any alternative verbiage, but "d66" specifically? It has to have been published in or before 2004, and (probably) not earlier than 1977. No speculation about which games might have used it, please; if you're going to suggest a candidate, be prepared to cite a specific title and page number.

[foobar137]

I can get another 1993 - TNE core rulebook. Note that it's referred to as 2D6 in the text but D66 in the tables, which could indicate that it's a transitional period.

I did a full-text search through my Traveller directory and didn't find anything earlier than this, but not all the PDFs in there are fully OCRed. I manually looked through the GDP/MegaTraveller World Builder's Handbook from 1989, which explicitly calls this 1D+1D, so that narrows our range even more.

Here's a tabletop RPG history question, and also an etymology question if your nerdery bends that way.

d66 tables – as in "roll a six-sided die twice, reading the first roll as the 'tens' place and the second roll as the 'ones' place, yielding a number in the range from 11 to 66" – have been around at least as early as 1977, when the Starships book for classic Traveller used them to randomly generate trade goods for players to buy. However, the term "d66" wasn't yet being used to describe them – the book's text simply describes in detail how to roll on them each time such a table appears.

Conversely, we know the term "d66" was being used to describe this type of random lookup table no later than 2004, because several popular Japanese indie RPGs which came out in that year use it. However, none of these games seem to have originated it – the way they're using it suggests they're dropping a piece of jargon that was already well established at the time.

So the question is: what's the earliest tabletop RPG that specifically uses the term "d66" or "d66 table" to describe this type of random lookup roll? i.e., not "d6/d6" or "d6,d6" or any alternative verbiage, but "d66" specifically? It has to have been published in or before 2004, and (probably) not earlier than 1977. No speculation about which games might have used it, please; if you're going to suggest a candidate, be prepared to cite a specific title and page number.

[foobar137]

1E Dungeon Master's Guide has the same 10% chance. I believe that's the original source of that rule - the first rulebook the girdle of femininity/masculinity shows up in is Greyhawk, the first supplement for white-box D&D, and that one just "changes the sex of the wearer".

I didn't see any magical girdles in blue-book Basic, so the 10% chance has apparently been there since 1979.

Old-school D&D's penchant for magic items which appear to have some beneficial property and automatically defeat every conceivable test that would demonstrate otherwise, but the first time you use them in a life-or-death situation they can somehow tell that it's for real this time and suddenly reveal themselves to be horribly cursed has rightly been criticised as player-hostile bullshit, but the oft-unacknowledged corollary is that many of them are also, in context, extremely funny.

There's a flying broom that gets mad when you try to ride it and attempts to beat you to death with its handle. This is separate from, and unrelated to, the flying carpet that gets mad when you try to ride it and attempts to wrap you up and squeeze you to death.

There's a spear which performs normally in sparring matches, but in mortal combat it curves around to make you stab yourself in the back like some sort of fucking Looney Tunes gag.

There's a magic ring which appears to have the powers of a randomly chosen different magic ring, but in reality the only power it has is to employ mental illusions to trick its wearer into thinking it has powers. You are being gaslit by jewellery.

None of these require you to go to obscure sourcebooks, nor are they apparently particularly rare – they're just hanging out on the standard treasure tables in the Dungeon Master's Guide, ready to pop up in any random hoard.

You can even create them by accident by biffing your roll when crafting your own magic items (the roll in question of course being made secretly by the GM, so you can never know whether this has happened until it's too late), which implies several fascinating things about the nature of magic.

There's a hat that makes you stupid and it's plotting against you.

[foobar137]

I'll be honest - that wasn't the episode I was expecting you to go with from the first post.

I was expecting "A Taste of Armageddon", which is on a very similar theme. (The Vietnam War was going on - go figure.) AToA is about how, when war is clean and bloodless, it's easy to let it continue because you don't see the real horror of it.

The Enterprise is visiting a planet that appears to be completely peaceful. However, while visiting, they find that they've been in a centuries-long war with another planet...all handled by computers. The computers decide how a given attack will proceed, and who the casualties are. And then the people "killed" in the attack all go to the disintegration chamber, because if they don't, the real war will resume. All the horrible weapons they've designed will be used, infrastructure will be devastated, cities will be destroyed. Instead of neat, clean disintegration chambers, people will be torn apart by bombs, buried alive under rubble, starved when infrastructure fails and food can't be delivered.

And then they claim that the Enterprise has been "killed" in their war game, and the entire crew has 24 hours to beam down and report to disintegration chambers.

Kirk is having none of this, and destroys the war-game computers. The leader of this planet is horrified - without the computers, the real war will resume. But, as it turns out, the leader of the other planet feels the same way. Nobody wants the brutal reality of high-tech warfare. As the Enterprise leaves, the two planets are negotiating peace.

Lately I've seen a lot of people using "Star Trek ending" as a shorthand way of saying "cheesy 60s ending where all the characters get together and laugh at some shitty one-liner until the freezeframe in order to wrap things up with a neat breezy bow" and, well. They're not wrong... but that's only half the episodes.

The other half of the episodes end you staring at the TV in haunted existential silence because the story's thesis was "Don't delude yourself that waging war with technology is any less brutal than committing murder with your bare hands. You are a mortal and an animal like any other and if you think you have a justified reason to kill you had better be prepared to face your enemy, and recognize him as an intelligent equal, and smash in his skull with a rock."

[foobar137]

5 years ago, I was in Rehab.

10 years ago, I was watching my Potential and Opportunities dissolve and evaporate in an ocean of cheap gin and expensive whiskey.

But 5 years ago, I was in Rehab.

One of the exercises they had us perform was to imagine ourselves happy, 5 years in the future.

Many of us in that room had forgotten how to imagine nice things happening to them. A few snorted (well, I snorted), finding the notion that we’d even still be around in 5 years grimly humorous.

For about half of us, it was the last stop on the way down.

But I indulged the therapist. I was there, after all, because I did not want to die. So, I imagined myself, 5 years hence.

Happy.

It came to me all at once; an artistic remix on Norman Rockwell’s Freedom From Want, reframed with myself placing food at the table.

Sunday Dinner At My Place, I answered, when it came my turn to share my fantasy. I was asked what food I imagined eating.

It’s not the meal itself, I said, it’s the implications framed around it. Sunday Dinner At My Place means that I have a Place. It means that I have Family that will actually speak to me and friends who actually want to see me. It means money enough not just to feed myself but others too. It means having the time to spare to take the time preparing the meal.

A lot of nodding heads all around me. A struck chord. Many people with no Place, in that place. Nowhere that would lament their leaving.

5 years hence, as I lay down to sleep in my Home, with my Wife and my Son, surrounded by my Art and my Flowers, I reflect.

It was a long road. It was hard. We lost people. So many people. There were long days and long nights and hospital stays. Angry arguments with ghosts. I changed, in ways I never hoped for, or expected. Good ways, finally, for once. Slowly, against the backdrop of a world in chaos, I found my mind.

Sometimes, My Wife wondered aloud, what she did to deserve me. After some stumbling with my feelings, I eventually settled on an answer.

I’m a Rescue.

She gave me a Home.

And, so, I gave her a Family.

It seemed fair

This Sunday, my folks, which whom I have not had a shouting match in years, will come over for dinner. We will cook and eat together. My Friend became My Wife, and she took a piece of me and with it she made Our Son. There will be many hugs, and no violence. Good Things Happened.

I don’t know who needs to hear this, but you don’t know what the future holds.

don’t give up yet, ok?

It could get good, even.

[foobar137]

[foobar137]

[foobar137]

[foobar137]

Teaching your sub that, no matter what, their body is pretty to look at and enjoyable for you to touch. That no matter their anxieties about their beauty and their personality, they're still worthy of being obsessed over carnally and emotionally by their dom.

[foobar137]

Note: I'm a 1997 baby, so obviously my choices are largely influenced by what was popular when I was in school - and what was popular with my friend group.