FunctionFn

joined 1 year ago
[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you're on keyboard (I'm sure controller has it but idk the button) the T key will let you hover over keywords to get more information. Ie, if a spell says it paralyzed the enemy, hitting T will let you mouse over "paralyzed" and read how it prevents the enemies from acting, and makes all melee attacks against them crits.

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I broke my own haste concentration at least twice a play session and I've been DMing 5e for 6 years at this point. Would have saved me a few wipes on tactician

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This video shortly and succinctly shows this a few times: https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo?si=rCJA_3-QaANHSQX9

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The most common form (at least where I'm from) of second person plural behind "you all (y'all)" is gendered: "you guys". It's used in an ungendered way increasingly commonly, but "guy" is still gendered to plenty of English speakers.

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm only responding to the assertion that asking "what cis women think about playing trans women" is morally equivalent to asking racists whether they want to play against black people.

But I think this part is where the disconnect is happening. Before this decision, cis women and trans women were both components of women's chess. The act of conferring with only a subset of that group implies that the other does not fall into that category. Relying only on the majority group's opinion on the status of the minority group is itself an assumption that one of the groups inherently belongs less than the other.

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Nah, I don't buy it. The assumption with this line of thinking is that trans women don't inherently belong to that class of participation. The majority of a group (cis women) do not get to unilaterally decide who is/is not a part of the greater group (women).

If someone proposed a restricted class limited to PoC, it would be entirely appropriate to ask PoC what they think about the proposal.

But following this analogy through, you're not asking all PoC. You're asking the majority of the subset (for example, black participants) whether a minority of the subset (for example, Asian participants) should be allowed to participate or not.

In this case, the organizers of these tournaments are picking and choosing their own definitions for who qualify as "women" and listening only to those opinions. The decision is already made, and pointing to the remainder to justify the decision is working backwards from that conclusion.

[–] FunctionFn@feddit.nl 6 points 1 year ago

Controlling 4 digital 5e characters in rapid succession feels very different from controlling 1 character in a tabletop setting. Idk if it's better or worse this way, but (to me) they're pretty distinct experiences so it's worth at least trying

view more: ‹ prev next ›