For thousands of years the ruling class has tolerated the rest of us because they needed us for labor and protection. We're approaching the first time in human history where this may no longer be the case. If any of us are invited to the AI utopia, I suspect it will only be to worship those who control it. I'm not sure what utility we'll have to offer beyond that. I doubt they'll keep us around just to collect UBI checks.
Tyrangle
joined 1 year ago
OP says you can sync memories both ways - easy solution is to just take turns.
One clone so that I can be a stay-at-home dad without losing my income. Finally finish grad school and fix up the house. Show my kid the world when they get old enough to appreciate it. Get a second job once they start school - something to get me outside, or working with people face-to-face. That would be amazing.
Why would a player drawn to spellcasters prefer weapon attacks over cantrips? I think that's the question we need to focus on.
Are they having trouble finding spells that fit the theme of their character? If so, maybe they'd benefit from looking at a wider range of source books. You can also remind them that they can "reflavor" their spells to better fit their character.
Is it utility magic that draws them to spellcasters? Are they even choosing offensive spells to begin with? If not, maybe you can help them out with a magic item - something to guarantee that they have access to a spell or two that would benefit the party. You could also shift some of the danger towards non-combat encounters to give their spells more value. For what it's worth I don't think there's anything wrong with utility-focused characters - they just tend not to shine as much in one-shots. Maybe if they knew more about the adventure ahead of time, they could better cater their character to the situations they're likely to face.
Are they overwhelmed by their character sheet? If so, playing short campaigns starting from level 1 might help to ease them into their class abilities. Spell cards might also be helpful if you're playing tabletop.
Sometimes I wonder if international laws against genocide have done more harm than good. When we see atrocities occurring where it's strategically inconvenient to intervene we look the other way or squabble over legal definitions - anything to excuse ourselves from getting involved. The results are no different than if these laws did not exist, except that we are also complicit in denial, which in itself is a terrible thing.
My understanding is that there was no hard evidence and the witness did not wish to testify, so this was a plea deal to make him confess and give the victim closure. Still feels wrong given that he did confess, but if the alternative was no probation I guess this is better than nothing.