So, you're asking if there is a shoplifter whose small-dollar.spree was stopped by target, who was then arrested by the police, who then refused an initial plea offer from the DA, who was then charged by a grand jury, refused a pre-trial plea offer, went to trial, refused the pre-verdict plea offer, and was then found guilty?

Well, what about someone who hit 60k over 120 visits?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/05/07/target-self-checkout-thief-aziza-graves-convicted/73599144007/

(edit: shortened url.)

While dramatic things like making the senate votes proportional or abolishing the electoral college might require a constitutional amendment, the text is silent on plurality vs RCW or what have you.

Congress could mandate a switch with a simple law, and point to their power to ensure democracy, same as the post bush v gore laws that mandated electronic voting machines.

It's not really "established" becaue there isnt any formal body declaring what names different voting systems have.

Are you unclear about what recognition other demcracies give to parties, how there is no prize for 2nd place in America, or why that lack of such a prize gives rise to a two-party system?

The elecrelically semi-literate side, obviously.

1: FPTP is a terrible term as its literally not an accurate way to describe a "single-vote plurality wins" systrm like most of the USA has. When you use the phrase to someone who doesn't already agree that there are better ways its just inaccurate enough to sabatoge any point you might make.

2: the UK and other parliamentary systems have embedded rewards just for being "a party". There are only two parties in the USA becaue parties on their own have institutional recognition, and in our politocal contests there is no prize for second place.

I mean, isn't it a usb_c cable that the manufavtuer claims can handle 10 amps of current at once? (which i think may be on the low side)

It's not a question of wanting competition or not. Political parties by nature will attempt to get as strong a coalition as they can, until they reach a size large enough that bisecting the party still leaves one half in power and some internal disagreememt triggers the split.

Fringe parties in America, like the Green and Libertarian parties, arent oppressed by some conspiracy between Rs and Ds. Rather, they are left at the fringe because they do not have any power worth pledging to, for the simple fact that in the american single-rep plurality-wins system tbere is no prize for second place.

Voters who like the current office holder work to keep them in power and those who do not work with the opposition to remove the incumbent from power. Anyone not joining one of these sides serves only as a tool for one side against the other, since anything but a vote for the runner up is an effective endorsrment of the eventual winner.

The American system is imperfect and could be a lot better, but fringe parties and vanity campaigns do nothing to actually encourage systemic change.

I think rhe voting age should be the lower of the minimum age to labor or the age of potential conscription less the age of the longest-term official whoss job includes sending people to war.

In the USA, that would put the voting age all the way down to 12. And having both been 12 myself once and having close family who were recently 12, I'm entirely OK with that.

Does this imply that the rapture won't happen on any day any man or angel predicted it, and suggest that these crackpots are either delivering a "no rapture today" message from the Lord Almighty or else embarrassing Her into putting it off?

Neither the image posted nor "dismantling the gender binary" are feminist. And while the latter seems a worthwhile cause that deserved its own name and slogans, the former is a piece of art which echos hateful stereotypes about men and thus causes some.very real revulsion from viewers outraged by those stereotypes.

English is an organic language and can shift subtly with each speaker,. Especially if prior usage makes communication more difficult.

NOT having distinct terms for sex and gender makes communication and understanding harder. If you have alternate terms you think are better I'd love to hear them., but if all you have is an insistence that "incorrect English" is a thing I'll just have to wish you a good day.

Fwiw, I realized years ago that the only people whose opinion of my parenting actually matter are the adults my descendents will grow up to be.

You should check with the laws in your state (or your insurance agency, if you have a low enough deductible.).

Just because the grocery store puts up a sign that they are not responsible for damages doesn't mean they aren't. They have a first amendment right to lie, and a game-theory reason to do so.

Male or female = sex = what's in their pants.

Man or woman = gender = how they express and identify.

While I recognize that some may use these terms differently, I find that having a strict sex/gender seperation for them in my personal use helps greatly in keeping the concepts distinct and having empathy for those whose gender is not sex-conformant.

That it also leads to a pithy rebuttal to "what is a woman" bigotry is just a nice side effect. Apologies if my usage was not immediately apparent.

Based on the sorc getting a flat boost in PC2 I think someone at pazio shares your critique.

Would the boost perhaps make more sense as a wizard class boost or arcane theory?

Not quite. 10 minutes to recover 1 point, without some wording form the non-remaster version that could be mis-read as "you can only get one point back, ever."

Requirements You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.

In the remaster, the requirement was changed to just:

Requirements You have a focus pool

Thanks for the examples and feedback!

Yes, this is a very slight increase to character power, which is why its called "Spell Slot Heresy." But since this is for a TTRPG and not a video game, any GM who lets this "remove all challenge" would probably pull the punches and let the PCs win anytime. Consider:

• Fire Ray and Moonbeam are both 2A spells that do ~1d6 per level fire damage plus a little extra. At best they're removing one target per round, and the monster core is full of creatures with "Immunitiy: Fire". Not to mention both become 3A activities if they want to recover their focus point, meaning that cleric or druid doesn't have a third action to sustain, move, raise a shield, or take cover.

• Ki Strike is a status bonus to attack, which doesn't stack with either Courageous Anthem or Bless. Meaning the net effect is that, for three actions, the monk can attack twice with +1d6 damage. Strong for a third action, maybe, but half that power comes from a core monk ability that is by itself only about on par with a fighter taking 2 attacks.

• Hand of the Apprentice is honestly on par or behind damaging cantrips like Divine Lance or Ignite. "Spend 3 actions to make one melee strike at range" isn't all that unbalanced, esp since that same wizard could have wands and scrolls of fireball.

While resource-management for the adventuring day SOUNDS like it's worthwhile, the most common pattern in literally every game I've been a player for in any system is for the GM to say "you get all your stuff back". Even in pathfinder there's no real guard against the party deciding "we rest until we're healed." Pazio knew what they were doing when they designed P2E, and it wouldn't be as good as it was if they had made resource management a real part of the combat-game balance. Since what matters is just the relative scale of PC power and the round-to-round action economy, simplifying or removing resource management is something that Pathfinder is very well adapted to.

If you and your players (or GM) really want a resource management minigame, I'd suggest house-ruling in the opposite direction and make HP and spell slot recovery harder than they are in Pathfinder 2e. But that's an entirely separate discussion.

I think the best response is always "you don't know that". Sex and Gender are not the same thing, and adults should know by now that they can't tell what's in someone else's pants by looking at their face.

Except that you can gain up to 3, and there is the champion "Desperate Focus" feat allowing them to recover during combat as a free action. (With caveats in PC2).

Can you think of an example 1-A or 2-A focus spell that would be horribly unbalanced if a character was able to just cast it every round? Compared to that same character's alternatives with runed weapons, spell slots, scrolls, or wands?

Focus Spells are "easier to use" spells that, relative to full slotted spells, should be easier to use. Since spell slots moved from "wait until the adventuring day is over" to "have a pause during exploration", it seemed appropriate to move focus points from "have a pause during exploration" to something easier, meaning "during combat."

Since it burns actions to do nothing but recover a single focus point, having it be as complex as casting a fireball (2-A) seemed excessive. So, 1-A is where I landed.