This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Greta is at it..AGAIN
« Last post by GeekyBugle on Today at 06:15:51 PM »
The lifetime emissions can range from 20% less to 60% less than a gasoline car, depending on how its made and especially on what source you're charging it from.

So, by only comparing lifetime emissions, you are conveniently leaving out the environmental harm done in the process of strip mining for the minerals needed to make the batteries to make the EVs.  You can't be unaware of this problem since GeekyBugle has brought it up several times in detail.  I can only conclude that you are being deliberately disingenuous and deliberately presenting a false view of the costs.  In short, you are arguing in bad faith again.

By "lifetime" I mean end to end, including both production and disposal -- i.e. including the minerals needed for the car body, engine, battery, etc.

BUT you're ONLY focussing on gas emissions, because?

If I was a betting man I would say it's because you can't argue your way out of the TOTAL environmental damage done by EVs
2
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Greta is at it..AGAIN
« Last post by GeekyBugle on Today at 06:13:44 PM »
I agree that neither pollution should be discounted -- but they should be evaluated fairly. I'm reading through your recent links, but they don't seem to be doing side-by-side comparison. An EV battery is good for 100k to 200k miles -- which is the equivalent of 4000 to 8000 gallons of gasoline, or about 200 to 400 barrels of crude oil. So the question is:

1) What is the damage from drilling, refining, and then burning the gasoline from 300 barrels of crude oil?
2) What is the damage from mining the materials and manufacturing one EV battery?

I don't have exact answers for these. Battery manufacture produces toxic material, but it's a question of how much is produced and how much of that will get into people's bodies -- compared to breathing in output from car exhaust like carbon monoxide, ground-level ozone, and particulates.

I do know that around 5 million people a year have early deaths from air pollution. How many would you guess have early deaths every year from battery waste? I'm skeptical that it is anywhere close to 5 million. You can say "battery waste is toxic" but that's like saying "nuclear waste is toxic". It's technically true, but nuclear waste is relatively tiny and extremely well-handled -- particularly when compared to dumping toxins directly into the air that people breath.

So the water pollution from mining the lithium doesn't count? https://media.istockphoto.com/id/1399997488/photo/greenbushes-lithium-mine.webp?b=1&s=170667a&w=0&k=20&c=_pJKX6mjys2DVjDsFz7smuxqiYFHDFXykI4LWfJLBWc=

ALL the air pollution from the mining, shipping the Lithium to China doesn't count?
All the air pollution from the manufacturing of the batteries in China doesn't count?
All the air pollution from shipping those batteries to the US?
What about the air pollution from manufacturing and shipping the EVs to the US?
What about the air pollution from producing the electricity to charge the batteries?

You KNOW I live in México City right?

GeekyBugle, how is this disagreeing with anything I said? Yes, everything should be counted, both for EVs and for gasoline cars. So it counts the pollution from mining for material for the gasoline car, shipping the gasoline car, running the refineries, shipping the gasoline to the gas stations, etc. Here's one analysis of both for several different options for lifetime emissions, for example:

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/2228291

Browsing, most other estimates are similar. The lifetime emissions can range from 20% less to 60% less than a gasoline car, depending on how its made and especially on what source you're charging it from.

Living in México City, I can see that would make you mad about air pollution. From what I read, it does seem to be getting better than in the 1990s, but it's still bad - especially NO2 and particulates. Here's the graph I'm looking at:


Source: https://thecityfix.com/blog/expanding-mexico-citys-air-quality-forecast-to-help-citizens-live-more-healthy-lives/

What do you think should be done to help clean it up further?

Assuming those comparisons aren't manipulated:

What about the OTHER environmental damage done to mine the minerals for the batteries? What about the pollution from the used batteries?

You're too busy focusing on air while it's not the only thing to consider.

Cleaning the City's air? Didn't you see the photo of the Tula Thermoelectric? Guess why they keep expanding the limitations to citizen's cars and they just can't breakthrough to a point where it's no longer needed?
3
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Greta is at it..AGAIN
« Last post by SHARK on Today at 05:52:03 PM »
Greetings!

Great commentary by Dr. Steve Turley about the debate between Jordan Petersen and the Woke clown Destiny, covering Environmentalism, Covid, History, and more.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

4
I mean, kind of. There is no reason they would wear robes instead of traveling clothes, either. If you look at fictional wizards, most of them are good in a fight, most of them have good general adventuring skills, and over half of them use swords. The d4 hit die guy that can't use a shield and spear to save his life is a bit of a comedy character.
5
Paradox wizard; at once a 1d4 one hit wonder while also being the wise Pharoh of classes looking down on the fighters from the safety of a rope trick spell. Their abilities from our perspective are implausible to begin with and it almost feels like a patch attempt by software developers to portray them as physically weak to offset the cheat codes they accumulate.

I never took Gandalf in the lotr movies as physically weak since he fought with a sword and staff despite being old and looking like homeless magneto, and I seem to recall way back when I read the hobbit in like 5th grade that he used a sword on goblins in goblin town.

Non-wizards require magic items (which are largely dependent upon the willingness of wizards to create) to approach the power of puny wizards who gain skill in their craft, and you'd think that once you were wizard enough do such things that you'd use magic to not be puny anymore, or ugly for that matter.

Many contradictions with wizards arise upon examination of these things unless we assume a sort of sliding scale of magical availability across these stories which is then not really reflected properly by game mechanics. For example the game pretty much gives the wizard free reload of magic daily or with some rest period, whereas in the assorted literature there may be much less renewable magical powers or powers which face limitations such as not being able to cast the same spell more than once within a certain amount of time. Literature also features often enough it seems dial-a-yield magic use that was largely not featured mechanically until the end of 2e, start of 3e, with such things as meta-magic feats.
6
Greetings!

Yes, ForgottenF and I agree very much. In the "Wheelchair" thread, I made precisely the same argument. Yes, I am biased towards harsh, brutal reality, because I have actually done all of what amounts to as "Adventuring" in real life, professionally. While the Army and Navy are not as strict and demanding as the Marine Corps, historically, both of them have embraced and demanded a fairly rigorous uniform standard of physical abilities. Army Infantry demand everyone in the squad are able to perform basic physical challenges, running, climbing, swimming, digging, crawling, combat, running, and so on. The Navy--of course, not now with the fucking Woke Navy--but in the past, they too required regular physical challenges, carrying men and equipment up and down tight flights of stairwells, working with heavy tools, weapons and ammunition, and of course, being skilled in swimming. They also required a standard of athletics, likewise from every member of the crew, regardless of their particular "job".

That gets into my experience with the Marine Corps policy of "Every man a Rifleman." The Marines of course, likewise demand extremely vigorous physical abilities from everyone--again, regardless of their job or specialty. The standards within the Marine Infantry and Force Recon are much higher, and even more demanding. The Navy Seals, as you mentioned, yes, they too demand some of the highest and most brutal standards, again, for every member of the team.

This experience is all very relevant, because for many members of the military, at least much of the time, we do most everything that professional Adventurers in our games do.

The stupid, the fat, the weak, the slow--and certainly the fucking crippled--are not welcome, not acceptable, and not tolerated.

WHY?

Because people will unnecessarily DIE trying to protect the weak fucks, or get killed while coddling them.

Next, the MISSION. The success of the MISSION requires everyone is pulling their weight, and bringing their "A" game in every way. Minimum standards are simply a baseline--out in the field, in the real world, the Mission will always demand FAR MORE.

Your team simply must be able to all perform very well, and be ready and able to exceed expectations, or the Mission fails.

So, yeah, even in 1E D&D, Wizards are always very welcome, and an excellent asset--but they still must be able to do all the basic physical challenges and wilderness survival and movement required of everyone on the team.

There is no room for the weak, the fat, the slow, the stupid, or the crippled.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Shark, do you allow players to re-roll characters if they get lousy stats?  Or are you in the “3d6, straight-down-the-line-and-you’ll-take-what-you-get-and-like-it” camp?
7
The problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.

Greetings!

Exactly, my friend! Which begs the question, in my mind, "Why even have the stupid "disability"--which is not a disability--in the first place? Why not dispense with the fucking rainbow sprinkles and the fucking candycane in your mouth, and play a normal character to begin with? ;D

That is how you know really that none of this BS is based on reality. It is all Woke BS, and a mechanism for infiltration, subversion, and control. That is really what is at the core of all of this, as well as a slice of narcissism pie for sobbing crybabies to always be able to shriek, "LOOK AT ME! I'M AWESOME AND SPECIAL!" You know?

This BS is so frustrating.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
8
The problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.
9
Greetings!

Yes, ForgottenF and I agree very much. In the "Wheelchair" thread, I made precisely the same argument. Yes, I am biased towards harsh, brutal reality, because I have actually done all of what amounts to as "Adventuring" in real life, professionally. While the Army and Navy are not as strict and demanding as the Marine Corps, historically, both of them have embraced and demanded a fairly rigorous uniform standard of physical abilities. Army Infantry demand everyone in the squad are able to perform basic physical challenges, running, climbing, swimming, digging, crawling, combat, running, and so on. The Navy--of course, not now with the fucking Woke Navy--but in the past, they too required regular physical challenges, carrying men and equipment up and down tight flights of stairwells, working with heavy tools, weapons and ammunition, and of course, being skilled in swimming. They also required a standard of athletics, likewise from every member of the crew, regardless of their particular "job".

That gets into my experience with the Marine Corps policy of "Every man a Rifleman." The Marines of course, likewise demand extremely vigorous physical abilities from everyone--again, regardless of their job or specialty. The standards within the Marine Infantry and Force Recon are much higher, and even more demanding. The Navy Seals, as you mentioned, yes, they too demand some of the highest and most brutal standards, again, for every member of the team.

This experience is all very relevant, because for many members of the military, at least much of the time, we do most everything that professional Adventurers in our games do.

The stupid, the fat, the weak, the slow--and certainly the fucking crippled--are not welcome, not acceptable, and not tolerated.

WHY?

Because people will unnecessarily DIE trying to protect the weak fucks, or get killed while coddling them.

Next, the MISSION. The success of the MISSION requires everyone is pulling their weight, and bringing their "A" game in every way. Minimum standards are simply a baseline--out in the field, in the real world, the Mission will always demand FAR MORE.

Your team simply must be able to all perform very well, and be ready and able to exceed expectations, or the Mission fails.

So, yeah, even in 1E D&D, Wizards are always very welcome, and an excellent asset--but they still must be able to do all the basic physical challenges and wilderness survival and movement required of everyone on the team.

There is no room for the weak, the fat, the slow, the stupid, or the crippled.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
10
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10