unclevlad

Extreme Physical Limitation.  Wrote up this one:
 
Phys. Lim.:  When fully shrunk, 8- to fall into the microverse for 1d6 weeks (Infrequently; Fully Impairing)
 
Or, alternately, Extreme Side Effect.  Extreme starts at -1.  If it always happened, it'd go to -2.  OK, so for something intermediate...happens on an 8- might be another -1/4, 11- another -1/2.  You're saying the NPC's power simply does this sometimes, and he's got no control...so I'm taking the additional -1 for "it always happens" and reducing it based on how often it happens.
 
 

Extreme Physical Limitation.  Wrote up this one:
 
Phys. Lim.:  When fully shrunk, 8- to fall into the microverse for 1d6 weeks (Infrequently; Fully Impairing)
 
Or, alternately, Extreme Side Effect.  Extreme starts at -1.  If it always happened, it'd go to -2.  OK, so for something intermediate...happens on an 8- might be another -1/4, 11- another -1/2.  You're saying the NPC's power simply does this sometimes, and he's got no control...so I'm taking the additional -1 for "it always happens" and reducing it based on how often it happens.
 
 

2 adults charged with murder in the KC parade shooting.  Ballistics matched the shots that killed the DJ to the gun of one of them.  The charge is felony murder in the 2nd degree.  Missouri law says
 
 
So even someone who didn't fire the fatal shot...it won't matter.  Someone died.
 
This is on top of the 2 minors charged.  Story in the NYT says the other defendant told detectives, "just being stupid."  Yeah, I'd say so, man.  Really, really stupid.  And it's basically cost you anything like a normal life from here on.

Why The New York Times might win its copyright lawsuit against OpenAI
 

Yeah, that's the main thing...this isn't even a 20% increase, 30% increase...it's a massive increase.  Historical precedents don't apply because the magnitude of the increase is so large.

Nutella
Neufchatel cheese

The discrepancy in cost of living from areas like San Fran, versus elsewhere, is a major problem.
https://livingcost.org/cost/united-states/ca
 
She's picking the most expensive city in Cali by that article;  Kiplinger's has a 10 most expensive in the US.  San Jose is #3, San Fran is #4...and that's in the country.  #2 is Honolulu , #1 is Manhattan.  
 
So, she might arguably have a case *in San Francisco*...and LA, and San Diego...but not necessarily for many other parts of California.  She also, as Hugh suggests, doesn't recognize that businesses would be forced to raise prices substantially, particularly fast food and small retail.  To the business, it's not just the wages.  That $50/hour isn't the final cost to them...not even close.  Every employer has to kick in 6.2% to Social Security.  There's worker's comp and unemployment insurance.  The salaried employees won't be happy if the hourlies get a massive raise, and they don't get *something*...even assuming they actually don't get a big raise in the first place.  (I never made $50/hour.)  The cost for full-time, full-benefits salaried employees is MUCH higher than simply their salaries.
 
EDIT:  she's also not considering that not everyone has a family.  $127K *for a family of four*.  But the wage is gonna get paid to singles too...or to 2-income, no-children couples. To teenagers at the big fast food places.
 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/11/01/chipotle-mcdonalds-raising-prices-california/71408254007/
 
 
 

.....which speaks volumes about the Cowboys since then..............

None of this supports this claim, *particularly* the part I emphasize:
 
 
The only location would be Ukraine, and well, before the invasion?  I wouldn't have called that one of the worst places on earth by a WIDE margin.  And when you combine "illegal in the US" with "worst places on earth"...you invite interpretations like the Tuskegee study.
https://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm
 
 

Oh yeah, high-quality, high-reliability data.....
 

This either requires support or retraction, IMO.

Are you stuck in vapour form? You may be entitled to condensation!
 

I shoulda known...it was either you or the fuzzball, I suppose.  

There's some big differences...
 
1.  I'm thinking the KC incident was impulsive.  Tempers flair.  Juvies' impulse control is poor.  The impulse to violence...if there's the wrong words exchanged, the "you can't say that to me!" mindset, that you can't ever be dissed like that...and then you throw in guns.
 
2.  The impulse to violence doesn't contradict the reluctance to kill...when that killing situation is known in advance?  That's entirely different...if there's no guns in the picture, it would've been a fight.  The reluctance to kill doesn't come into play when the Fight side of Fight or Flight kicks in.  It comes into play when you have to think about what you're doing in the first place.
 
3.  Wasn't in the military, but...I'll argue they work really hard to beat gun romanticism out of all recruits, before they ever leave boot camp.  That they drive home the point that Guns Are To Kill People When You Use Them.  When you pull that trigger, your goal is to kill.  
 
4.  And let's not forget, in the military, if you're shooting at someone, most of the time, someone's gonna be shooting back.
 
 

Verdict in the Trump civil fraud case...subject to appeal, of course.
 
$350M fine.
 
Barred from running a company in New York...including his own...for 3 years.

In general, my thought is, why does it need definition at all?  It's off the rack cold-weather gear, it's trivial and reasonably inexpensive to buy.  Not everything needs definition in game terms;  common sense is enough.

EDIT:  to expand on this, I feel like, if I start assigning game terms to things, then I have to abide by them.  I'd rather not.  What did you get, how good is it?  Are we talking a winter coat, or gear to run the Itidarod or something equally insane?  Conditions matter, too.  Went shopping earlier...well, yesterday now.  42 degrees, intermittent light rain...so humidity was high.  Little bit of wind.  Raw kind of day...felt quite a bit colder than 42, but dry and decently sunny with no breeze.  As long as I'm not stuck with game terms, I can say "oh man, you really want an extra under layer for your patrol tonight" and be done with it.

Not everything needs to be explicitly defined in the rules.  Even in a survival focused campaign you don’t need to explicitly define every single detail.  For a cold environment you can define the attack as an NND with the defense and list winter clothing as one of the defenses.   There are a lot of things in the game that do not have power based builds, but are still used.  Food and water are going to be even more important in a survival-based scenario than clothing, but I have never seen a write up for ordinary food and water.  
 
My advice is to focus on the attack portion of the survival challenges instead of the defense.  Write up the cold attack and leave it at that. 
 

In general, my thought is, why does it need definition at all?  It's off the rack cold-weather gear, it's trivial and reasonably inexpensive to buy.  Not everything needs definition in game terms;  common sense is enough.

EDIT:  to expand on this, I feel like, if I start assigning game terms to things, then I have to abide by them.  I'd rather not.  What did you get, how good is it?  Are we talking a winter coat, or gear to run the Itidarod or something equally insane?  Conditions matter, too.  Went shopping earlier...well, yesterday now.  42 degrees, intermittent light rain...so humidity was high.  Little bit of wind.  Raw kind of day...felt quite a bit colder than 42, but dry and decently sunny with no breeze.  As long as I'm not stuck with game terms, I can say "oh man, you really want an extra under layer for your patrol tonight" and be done with it.

Absolutely, positively NOT passing TDs in a season.  Like, not in the same county.  Marino's 2nd year, the one time he made the SB...48 TDs passing.  Tua had 29.
 
Completion percentage, perhaps.  Tua's was incredibly high, a touch below 70%.
 
Dak's not even the best example there, I don't think...the poster boy there was Stafford.  5000 yards in a season, probably with 1500+ in the 4th quarter because the Lions were desperate.  But definitely, Dak's well known to have a very poor track record in crunch time...for multiple years now.  That's why, even if the exact computation is wonky, I prefer QBR to the simple rating...because QBR weighs the significance of a play, and its result.  10 yards on 3rd and 9...great.  10 yards on 3rd and 20...not very meaningful.  10 yards on 3rd and 9, 2 minutes left, down 4 points...BIG.  10 yards on 3rd and 20, 2 minutes left, down 17...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
 
So, sure, you can argue the weighting factors, but they *do* apply to everyone, so it's a fairly good comparative stat...especially with large-scale differences.  Dak's been pretty mediocre most years...albeit NOT this year.  He was tied with Purdy for best QBR this year.  OK, the Giants and Commanders games helped.  (As in 173-37 combined score for those 4 games.)  But...we all know what he did against the Packers.  He Dak'd.  As slik noted, great raw numbers...largely in garbage time, altho ehh, one can argue the Cowboys made em sweat a bit...at 34-16 with time left.  But that didn't last.
 
And it's to slik's point that Dak had 12 TDs in those 4 games...surprisingly, none in the 40-0 wipeout of the Giants, but 4 in each of the other 3.  So I'll just extend his point to "against soft competition."  The Cowboys scored 35+ 7 times...the 4 noted, the Pats, Rams, and Seahawks.  Well the Rams made the playoffs, tho, right?  By winning 7 of their last 8...after the Cowboy game.  That's another factor...it's been true for a long time that the first few weeks of the season are frequently NOT indicative of the real quality of a team.  That's only grown in the last several years.  Some teams are simply not ready to play at all...Broncos would be the strongest example.  
 
 

Thing is, those criteria will apply very broadly...state or private, FBS or FCS...probably even Div II, where IIRC there's still some scholarships.
 
Title IX only forces schools to cut both mens' and womens' non-revenue sports.  For example, at UNM, there's both men's and women's golf, cross country, tennis, and track and field;  there's baseball and softball as well, that are effectively equivalent for this purpose.
 
It's not a Pandora moment yet, as there are still appeals to be made.  That said, if the appeals fail as I think they will...I go back to the criteria cited.  They're fundamental, basic definitions of "what is employment?"  On those grounds, it's totally a Pandora moment.
 
Side thought?  I wouldn't be surprised that the Big 10 and SEC expected this, and this is part of the whole "WE are gonna start making rules because the NCAA is inept" announcement.

Name almost the last thing you want to deal with, a week before the Super Bowl.
 
 
 
Having your father busted for DWI would make the list...but.......
 
Having your father busted for *felony* DWI...3rd offense.  That makes it a 3rd degree felony in Texas.  10 years max, altho I rather suspect that will be deferred.  Gotta figure Patrick will pay for serious alcoholism treatments, and whatever else is necessary.

I know I'd say "good, thank you jury" here...but...yeah, I think actually being on such a jury would be extremely stressful.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/06/us/jennifer-crumbley-michigan-shooting-verdict.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Tk0.CWLm.Z348lEAcbIzt&bgrp=a&smid=url-share
 
 

Thing is, those criteria will apply very broadly...state or private, FBS or FCS...probably even Div II, where IIRC there's still some scholarships.
 
Title IX only forces schools to cut both mens' and womens' non-revenue sports.  For example, at UNM, there's both men's and women's golf, cross country, tennis, and track and field;  there's baseball and softball as well, that are effectively equivalent for this purpose.
 
It's not a Pandora moment yet, as there are still appeals to be made.  That said, if the appeals fail as I think they will...I go back to the criteria cited.  They're fundamental, basic definitions of "what is employment?"  On those grounds, it's totally a Pandora moment.
 
Side thought?  I wouldn't be surprised that the Big 10 and SEC expected this, and this is part of the whole "WE are gonna start making rules because the NCAA is inept" announcement.

Dire Straits music