Why this is important:
Given what we see in the cosmic microwave background, the first light we can detect after the inflation of the universe, structures can only grow so large within our current models. Yet this, and other similar discoveries, appear to be larger than our current models predict.
I don’t think he should “just deal with it” though: I think he should critically engage with negative comments, form his own opinions, and then trust those opinions over those of an Internet stranger.
Which maybe is functionally equivalent to “just deal with it”? Feels different to me.
Also I went to the Pathfinder2E subreddit, ran some basic searches meant to evoke comparisons to 5E, and grabbed the top result for each: “how do attacks work” ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/s/BBYlzCwVDl ), “advantage in PF2E” ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/s/Yna9TGzAOu ), “warlock equivalent” ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/s/umQ1Et6xhf ).
There are NO comments in ANY of those posts bashing 5e. On the contrary, there are dozens of comments that are all helpful, encouraging, and supportive.
So if you’re looking for a place that is generally positive and welcoming to new players, r/Pathfinder2E has been pretty good in my experience! It’s not perfect, of course. If you’re looking for a knowledge center that a) has people posting and talking and b) never ever ever portrays 5E negatively I don’t think that exists.
Anyways, hope your partner continues to enjoy ttrpgs regardless of the system!
Agreed that there are folks who are toxic towards 5E in PF2E forums and that that’s not ideal. Your partner is absolutely correct about that.
The thing to keep in mind is that that’s not a solvable problem, at its root. Complaining about toxicity in online forums is like complaining that rain is wet - you can’t stop it from being so, no matter how much you wish things were different. Which is not meant to be dismissive of your partner’s accurate observation but moreso shift his mindset from “this is unfixable” to “what can I do to make my experience better?”
So if we assume that online toxicity is something your partner or you are unable to do anything about, what are things you actually can do?
Mainly, your partner can address how he reacts to that toxicity. Take on the mindset that, “These are internet strangers! Their opinions aren’t truth!” And I’m not trying to say that he should completely ignore these people; some of them likely have valid opinions. In fact, he both can and should do his own research and, most importantly, develop his own opinions.
Someone says that “5E is just for auto-win stuff”? Okay, does that match his experience? Has he ever been challenged in his games? Seen a PC die? If he has then maybe that random internet stranger is wrong.
Someone says that WotC is a shitty company? Okay, do some research. Damn, they hired the Pinkertons to go after someone? Maybe they’re not actually a company your partner wants want to give money to.
And so on. Maybe the simplest way to do this is, when your partner tells you, “I read someone being mean about 5e” you just ask, “Do you agree with them?”
To add on to this, noise reducing earplugs are also a thing - search for “concert earplugs” or something like that.
Using them I was able to watch Godzilla in a movie theater without constantly wincing as well as go to a concert at a bar and actually have a decent time. Highly recommend for general use, I carry them everywhere now.
Time of day is addressed in the study and
was not a reliable predictor of expression of alignment
They also mention that the presence of the sun is possibly likely to affect dogs less than humans - meaning that dogs might have less aversion to facing the sun.
Study is here: https://frontiersinzoology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1742-9994-10-80
This is so cool, look at how the head and body are a single stroke! Starts at the bottom of the head then ends at the top of the body - they must have done that to preserve ink or something?
Interesting how the tools we have access to affect the art we make.
which is not even remotely true or accurate, but that’s another story
Why do you say that? My understanding is that “only two choices” is true and accurate because of how the electoral college works.
Consider a Magic Bullet! Or something similar - there are a bunch of small blenders out there designed for single-portion smoothies that fall in the $20-$40 range.
I had a similar reaction!
Spending a couple extra hours wrapping up quests and collecting conches (on the recommendation of a friend) wound up being well worth it for me, the true ending felt much more satisfying.
For what it’s worth, all the quests take somewhere around 20-40 minutes each, if I remember correctly. Even the collection quest wasn’t too bad, thanks to the treasure finding parrot.
…kinda.
The interviewer goes on to ask: “Does that risk add up, or does each roll of the dice stand alone?”, referring to whether subsequent COVID infections increase the risk of long covid. To which Ziyad Al-Aly replies: “That’s really hard to answer.”
He goes on to speculate (his word, not mine) that there can be two outcomes of COVID infections:
So in a broad sense, the above TLDR is true because your lifetime odds of getting long covid go up in a way that is vaguely proportional to your number of infections.
But it is NOT proven to be true that number of infections correlates to your odds of getting long covid during any one particular infection.
I mean, most idioms are silly if you take them at face value.
To me, “easier said than done” is a response to an unrealistic idea that carries the meaning of “I don’t think that’ll work”/“that’s too much”/"etc.
If I told a friend “hey let’s make spaghetti for dinner” and they replied “easier said than done” I’d be like “…okay, you’re technically correct, but I want spaghetti so I’m gonna do that anyways”
But if I told a friend “hey let’s solve world hunger today” and they replied “easier said than done” I’d be like “yeah, I know…maybe we can go help out at a soup kitchen?”
Disclaimer: I’m not well versed in astrophysics.
Ok, so: you know how Earth is part of the solar system? And the solar system is part of a large collection of stars and planets called a galaxy?
Well, there’s lots of galaxies out there! And scientists for a long time have been trying to figure out how they formed - how did all the stars get close to each other? Why aren’t they just randomly drifting around?
Currently, everyone believes that there’s this magic stuff called “dark matter” that pulled the stars together to make galaxies. Kinda like how magnets pull things close to them!
And because galaxies are so big it would take a long time to pull the stars close together! Which means young galaxies would look less bright because the stars aren’t all close together yet, like they are with older galaxies.
So that’s what everyone believes.
But we’re getting pictures from a really strong telescope that’s showing us that young galaxies are brighter than we expected! Which is weird and exciting because it means that young galaxies might have been pulled together faster than we used to think! And our old theories about galaxy creation might be wrong!
There’s a theory that explains how galaxies could come together quickly, without dark matter, but it doesn’t really fit with many other theories we have about how the world works, so lots of people are thinking really hard to figure out how they might fit together.
And that’s what science is all about! Finding out new information that shows you that you were wrong in the past, and using that information to figure out new ways to act and think in the future!