Susaga

That only clears the first hurdle. It only lets the player recognise it as a gloryhole. But if you were to give someone a fleshlight in a public place, do you honestly expect them to use it right there? Or to even accept the fleshlight? Same applies with a gloryhole in a ttrpg. Even were they inclined, there are other people there.

And if everyone there is down for it, you're now the asshole ruining everyone's fun by putting chili in the fleshlight.

The DM clearly had a fantasy of the bard engaging in some perverted act, then thought of a way to punish the bard for the DM's fantasies, and is now presenting it before the table and thinking it makes the bard look bad.

I want to point out that the player would need to identify it as a glory hole and not just a peephole or something. They would also need to think it's a normal thing to find in the world and not something out of place. They would also need to be comfortable enough with the other players to engage in sexual roleplay with a wall. And in this case, you have clearly created a very perverse game world for your players.

The alternative is you just deciding to tell your players "you see a hole in a wall that you think could be a glory hole. ...Anything you wanna do about that?" to which most players would either ignore it or check the hole for traps before ignoring it.

In short, I don't think the problem is the BARD being horny here.

I feel like that campaign is just begging for Lolth to show up and just be like "I see you've done... well for yourself. Are you going to introduce me to your new friends or...?"

I do like the idea that elves just change their entire lifestyle every hundred years or so. They spend 80 years as a warrior, then decided to take up magic and became a wizard for the next 80 years.

I also like the idea of a human village that accidentally built 4 statues of the same elf who kept saving them with different skills.

The camera shows the wheel break from the track, throwing the hero and the henchman to either side of the room. It cuts to the carriage in chaos, with people panicked at the motion. Then it cuts to you to break the tension.

Checks out.

While the ghosts don't activate the pellets, they also don't eat the regular pellets. They interact with nothing but Pacman, the only living thing to be found. Even if they could, the only effect is to weaken the ghosts, so they have no reason to.

If the pellet changed Pacman, it makes no sense that he could eat one ghost and not another. And yet, when a ghost respawns, Pacman is unable to eat that one, even as he manages to eat the others. The change has to be within the ghosts, reverting with time or with resurrection.

As such, we have no reason to believe Pacman can eat any ghost unless that ghost reacts to the power pellet. Whether those ghosts react to a power pellet? Insufficient data for meaningful answer.

Consider how eating the power pellets turns the ghosts blue, and how the ghosts regain their original colour when they respawn, even within the power pellet timer. The natural conclusion is that the pellets don't change pacman, but change the ghosts.

As such, unless the power pellets affect ALL ghosts the same way they affect the pacman ghosts, pacman could not eat any ghost other than the pacman ghosts.

I was trying to be absurdist instead of realistic, and I had no idea who Kristi Noem was before you commented that. Why is reality so absurd?

First of all, while I am strongly left-wing, I phrased it in a way that either side could be seen as the dog kickers. You assigned the parties to each side. You assigned the right wing to be the dog kickers.

Second of all, you definitely have met the people who lie about being centrist. You just didn't realise it, because they lied and said they were centrist.

Third of all, and perhaps most important... Imagine a scene in a movie where a man is kicking a dog. Then another man walks by, looks the dog in the eyes, and keeps walking. That second man didn't kick the dog, but they are just as cruel as the man kicking.

I don't give a shit what the tax policy surrounding the dog kicking is; it's still evil. And if you don't do what you can to protect that dog, no matter how little that may be or what it might cost you, you're evil too.

I want you to imagine two political parties: The Petting Dogs Party and the Kicking Dogs Party (for the sake of conversation, I have not assigned them to any real world party). Obviously, the PDP would consider anyone who joins, or even supports, the KDP as being horrifically evil. Like, if you wanted to show a character is evil in TV, you have them do what the KDP do all the time. It's literally cartoonishly evil.

Now, in the political context of America, there are only two parties. The only way the KDP don't gain power is if the PDP gain power instead. So anyone who doesn't help the PDP gain power is either supporting or allowing the KDP to gain power.

In this context, a centrist will usually fall into one of the following categories:

• They refuse to vote for either side, allowing the dog kickers to kick dogs.
• They lied about being centrist because they don't want to admit they kick dogs.
• They lied about being centrist and are trying to convince more people to kick dogs.
• They openly kick dogs, but insist it's normal to kick dogs, so the KDP is the centre.

As you can see with those categories, it's a sliding scale of evil. The only non-evil option is to not kick dogs at all, which requires voting for the PDP.

Of course, if you have a Looking At Dogs Party, it gets messier. You'll often see people vote for the LADP where they would have voted for the PDP just so the KDP doesn't get in. But in America, the LADP does not exist.

I would say going out for lunch somewhere nice. It's a common activity that can go on for as long as you need, whether that be a long time or a short one. You get to talk to one another, and the focus can just be on you and your meals.

The second date would be home cooking and a terrible movie. Like, Birdemic levels of bad. Something we can watch and have fun with, but can talk over it or start doing other stuff without missing anything good.

Agloe, NY, was a fake town designed as a copyright trap on a map, but then a general store was built on that spot. When a company was caught stealing the map, they used the general store as proof the town actually existed.

In Iceland in 2010, a group of comedians made a joke political party called the Best Party, with a platform that amateurs can't mess up more than the pros. They won the mayoral election.

There's a youtube video about how to pretend you know how to play guitar, which suggests you learn just four chords and cycle between them. The comments noted that this is just a beginners guide to actually knowing how to play guitar.

George Lazenby lied on his CV when he auditioned for James Bond. When he confessed this to the director, the director pointed out how he had already convinced an audience with his performance. By acting like an actor, he had shown his ability to act.

The line between pretending and doing is thin, and you learn by doing, so you can learn by pretending to do. If it's a good enough fake, it may as well be real.