Idiomdrottning demonstrates a new and often cleaner way to solve most systems problems. The system as a whole is likely to feel tantalizingly familiar to culture users but at the same time quite foreign.
- 2 Posts
- 2 Comments
01·2 years agoThese bookburnings are a Nazi project. The guy who started them is a Nazi leader who wants Sweden and Denmark to be ethnically cleansed. And sickeningly, the entire Swedish justice system from cops through judges to politicians backed him up (and now that there are repercussions they have cold feet).
People who are like “lol muslims can’t handle a li’l free speech? It’s only paper” have been deceived. They’ve fallen right into the trap as designed by the fachos. The classic tactic: do something that the target group understands as a hate-fueled threat but that onlookers misperceive as not that big of a deal.
Free speech is vital to an open and just society. The exceptions need to be few and clearly defined. (Counterfeits and frauds being a pretty commonly understood one.) I hold that inciting hatred against the outgroup should be such an exception.
Karl Popper put it perfectly:
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
So while I’m always happy when people are criticizing D&D Beyond in particular or proprietary platforms in general, in this particular case it’s actually against the rules-as-intended to play a 2014 Oath of the Ancient in a 2024 paladin shell.
(All house ruling aside, of course, and heaven knows I love house ruling and how house ruling is an argument against D&D Beyond.)
2014 oaths that do not have a 2024 version are still legal in the 2024 shell, but for oaths that do have a 2024 version, you’ve got to play the 2024 version if your group is playing D&D 5.24.
The reason for this is that some of the updated subclasses have nerfs or that features from them have been moved to the shell or otherwise taxed. Or, even the ones that have been buffed have the same issue in some sorta bid for table balance.
The intent is that it should work like this:
If Beyond platform ownership enters the equation, the Beyond team has messed up.
(Again, the word “legal” is a little silly in a game like D&D which works best when groups can change any rule, mash up editions freely etc. So please don’t shoot the messenger here. I don’t agree with WotC’s decision here. I just remember them announcing that this was how it was going to work, even at the table with all physical books and no Beyond.)
@JackbyDev@programming.dev @dndnext@ttrpg.network