Thread theme btw if anyone knows more Chappell Roan songs like this let me know, I love this song

When Kennedy ran for President in 2024, he was a joke. The very weird failson of a famous dead politician throwing a strange tantrum because Joe Biden was too pro-vaccine. His announcement speech in 2023 would get taken down by YouTube because of his strange rants about vaccines, and the Brandonslide in the Democratic primaries was too powerful to be stopped - Kennedy couldn't stop Biden, Phillips couldn't stop Biden, Williamson couldn't stop Biden, not even my GOAT Jason Palmer could stop Biden.

Remeber this? That was so awesome. Anyway, Kennedy was a weird joke like Marianne Williamson or Dean Phillips - until he announced he was going to run third party, then he became a very serious threat. His early polls were incredible - some (obviously bollocks ones) were at 15%, and he was generally polled at around 8% - 10% near the start of his run. Of course, fate would not smile upon RFK. After a graveyard shaped closet was unleashed, he eventually gave up and endorsed Trump. Kennedyheads, who had given up there time and money to a real outsider, saw Kennedy give up and endorse a former President. They need to be talked off the rooftops, but are they dumb stupid morons? When has a third party candidate ever really mattered? Three, arguably five, times;

1924: Calvin Coolidge (R) v John Davis (D) v Robert La Follette (P)

1968: Richard Nixon (R) v Hubert Humphrey (D) v George Wallace (AI)

1992: Bill Clinton (D) v George H.W Bush (R) v Ross Perot (I)

These third parties were either marginal influences in the party that had a great amount of regional influence, but a marginal voice if any at all in the party they were associated with - so they struck out and walked their own path, and enthralled millions with their unique messaging. This longpost will look at what they did right, and where Kennedy went wrong.

There are two other third party runs that did very well, but I'm not counting them for a few reasons

The election of 1912 had Progressive Teddy Roosevelt comfortably humiliate Republican Howard Taft in the best ever performance for a third party, coming second with 88 EVs to Howard Taft's 8 EVs. I'm not counting Teddy because he was a former president - I think any third party run would be made stronger by the candidate being a former President.

The election of 1848 had Martin Van Buren win 10% of the vote with the Free Soil party, an anti-slavery party - impressive, but he's not included because he is both a former President, and his third party run had him compete against the Democrats and the Whigs. Around 1896 is when the two party system as we understand it emerges, and the cut-off point to studying third party runs begins.

1924 - Robert "Fighting Bob" La Follette, Progressive Party (Wisconsin)

"Men must be aggressive for what is right if government is to be saved from men who are aggressive for what is wrong."

Wisconsin has always been a liberal state - meaning that in the early 20th century, it was a Republican strong hold, dominated La Follette and his son, Robert La Follette Jr. La Follette's progressivism was the old school, prairie kind - born and raised on farms, with a conservative "got mine" bent to it that pleasingly led to a dedication to civil liberties and isolationism.

Come 1924, and the Democrats and Republicans both nominate conservatives. Calvin Coolidge won re-nomination as the Republican, while after 103 ballots John Davis was settled on when delegates at the convention started to run out of money had to leave. If you think the duopoly is bad today, Coolidge and Davis aligned on nearly every issue, differing only on condemning the Klan (Davis did so, Silent Cal did not) and on tariffs (Davis liked them low, Coolidge liked them high). Otherwise they agreed on a limited government, deregulated industry and tax cuts. American conservatism has never had it so good, the uniparty in fundamental agreement.

La Follette, not a man loyal to any particular party despite being a Republican, was angry that neither party had nominated any kind of liberal. At the 4th Conference for Progressive Political Action, 1,200 delegates composed of union members, socialists, liberals but not communists, frick off Foster , nominated Robert La Follette and Burton Wheeler, a ticket that called for mass nationalisation of companies, tax hikes and support for labour unions. And he did amazingly - despite what the map may tell you.

"Well winning one state is impressive for a third party, but is it really that good?"

Yep. He won 16.6% of the vote, nearly half the votes of Davis, won his home state of Wisconsin and beat Davis (coming in second) in the following states; Oregon, California, Washington, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Iowa, Minnesota and both the Dakotas . These are some pretty astonishing results, located mostly in the Western plains with a higher amount of farms then normal. So, how on earth did La Follette do so well?

It can't be denied that his unique politics played a role. When both parties have so much in common, it's clear there's an unheard voice in that election and La Follette was able to amplify that voice. There was so much frustration that he near totally unified the left, leaving only the communists out in the cold. Another advantage he had over Coolidge and Davis is that he was actually the one to campaign. Coolidge had a pretty understandable reason - his son Calvin Jr died in a freak tennis accident, when he got a blister that turned sepsis. Obviously in a deep grief, Coolidge rarely left the White House and his campaign speeches were mostly about his theory of governance rather than addressing the issues or his opponents. By contrast, Davis just didn't like campaigning much and in his meeting with party bosses would need his arm twisted to say to he supports them because showing affection in any way was simply not his character. Equally valid reasons, I'm sure one would agree.

Coolidge was always going to defeat to Davis thanks to the booming economy, but La Follette turned Davis into a joke - to this day, Davis' 28.8% amount of the vote is the worst a Democrat has ever done in the Popular Vote, isolating his support near entirely in the Jim Crow South where votes were tightly controlled. To explain just how lacking Davis' support was, electoral votes in the electoral college are determined by population. California had 13 EVs, Alabama had 12. California, won by Coolidge, had 1,263,413 votes with about 400,000 going to La Follette. Alabama, won by Davis, had 157,971 votes, with 45,005 going to Coolidge. Underscoring just how catastrophic Davis' loss was, during the 1864 US election, the South was not able to vote in the election due to the "rebellion" thing - and McCellan still got 44.9% of the vote against Lincoln.

La Follette would die in 1925 at 70, meaning he never got to see his work vindicated by the Democratic party. In 1928, Al Smith would win the Democratic nomination. A progressive, urban Catholic, the south would abandon him in droves due to fear of Papal influence while the north continued to bet on the Republicans - with President Herbert Hoover winning in one of the biggest landslides at the time. Hoover would be left holding the bag when the economy crashed, New York Governor Franklin Roosevelt would unite the Democrats and the country to implement many of La Follette's ambitions - except of course, without the isolationism.

1968 - George Wallace, American Independence Party (Alabama)

George Wallace standing in the doorway of the University of Alabama to block the entrance of black students. "I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!"

From a left wing populist to a right wing populist, George Wallace was about as anti-La Follette as you could get. With Hubert Humphrey supporting measures to integrate society and Nixon opposing de-jure segregation, George Wallace, who had built a national profile as one of the top opponents to integration, ran third party to appeal to the raving bigots. The Wallace campaign plan was to win enough states to prevent Nixon from getting 270 Electoral Votes, force the election to the House and work out a deal where Nixon would uphold Segregation and Wallace released his EVs to let Nixon become President. His plan was to speak aggressively and passionately, decrying the elitism of the mainstream parties and "handouts" from the Great Society like Nixon did.

But he also mimicked Humphrey with his support for unions. He had no issue with an honest days pay for an honest days work - but wasn't it so unfair you were paying for lazy people? While he struck a middle ground economically, he went in a different direction for the war - Nixon was "peace", Humphrey was for status quo, and Wallace was ramping it up. An infamous quote of his is "We win in 90 days or we pull out", which sometimes misinterpreted as a peace plan. Wallace wanted to destroy North Vietnam, to teach Red China and the Soviet Union a lesson . More importantly, he didn't talk about segregation unless pressed about it, where he would of course defend it. Wallace's victory plan was to build a coalition of single issue voters, racists, anti-welfare union workers, warhawks and people that enjoyed him picking fights with hippies, to cause the deadlock.

Trust me, picking fights with hippies is critical to the central thesis regarding Kennedy. To generate enough media attention, he used inflammatory language to create controversy. "The only four letter words don't know are W-O-R-K and S-O-A-P!" he would say of his protestors. When it came to the Lyndon Johnson's protestors? "If any anarchists lie in front of my automobile, it'll be the last automobile they ever lie in front of." Sometimes he'd even get into shouting matches with his protestors. When called a fascist, he boasted "I was killing fascists while you were in diapers!" Another memorable line was when he grinned and chatted to a heckler. "I love you, I really do. Because when you come to me, I get another million votes." People loved it. While Humphrey was in full shill mode, trying to pick up the pieces of the Democratic party, and while Nixon was chilling not doing anything at all because he was winning massively, Wallace was the man in the arena, ranting and raving in a way people loved.

Wallace at his peak was polling at an astonishing 20% of the vote, but crashed out pretty badly during LeMay's first press conference. "We seem to have a phobia of nuclear weapons" LeMay began. He would continue with "it doesn't make much of a difference to me if I have go to a jungle in Vietnam and get killed with a rusty knife or get killed with a nuclear weapon. As a matter of fact, if I had the choice I would lean towards nuclear weapon." Wallace, visibly panicked, steps in to say "General LeMay hasn't advocated for nuclear weapons, not at all. He discussed nuclear weapons with you, he is against the use of nuclear weapons and I am too." Moments later, LeMay was asked if he would use nukes on Vietnam. "If I found it necessary." Like a fricking sitcom.

The consequences were swift and brutal, with Wallace plateauing from 20% of the vote to around 14%-12%, and he would ultimately get 13.5% of the vote and a far better EV count than La Follette.

301 EVs is a pretty respectable amount from Nixon, but Wallace's defeat was a lot closer then one might think. The Midwestern states had the powerful union votes split between Wallace and Humphrey, letting Nixon sweep the anti-union vote easily. But Nixon only won several Southern states with less then 40% of the vote. Had Wallace preformed better or rather, not suffered from the LeMay fiasco, he could have won North Carolina or Tennessee due to thinness of Nixon's victory. The margin for Nixon's victory goes from 301 - 191 - 46 to 289 - 191 - 58, still a win but a narrow win when you need 270 to win without a deadlock.

In turn, Missouri and Ohio both have Nixon with a margin of roughly 1% over Humphrey. If Wallace didn't have the nuke comments weighing him down, he could have tapped better into the Conservatives of the state and allowed Humphrey to win them both. If those states went blue but Nixon got every vote from North Carolina, the margin of victory is 269 - 229 - 45, just one EV from preventing Wallace's actual victory of forcing Nixon to end integration. Granted, this is all a lot of what ifs. But Wallace's defeat was a very narrow thing.

After the election, Wallace crawled back to the Democrats and became a bizarrely accepted part of it - to the point there were rumours of a Humphrey/Wallace ticket in 1972. He would ultimately come third in the 1972 primaries, despite being shot, and managed to outlive both Hubert Humphrey and Richard Nixon, despite being shot. His legacy is of interest only to historians, his riot having accomplished nothing at all. De-jure segregation is illegal, and de-facto segregation remains commonplace all over America - no thanks to Wallace's tantrum.

1992 - Ross Perot, Independent (Texas)

"The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, the public debt should be reduced and the arrogance of public officials should be controlled."

After dealing with two populists, it only makes sense our final candidate before Kennedy is Ross Perot - an anti-populist. A man who went on TV, promised to raise taxes and cut benefits, and soared to the top of the polls.

That's not an exaggeration - Gallup had at one point Ross Perot leading with 39% of the vote, to Bush's 31% and Clinton's 29% of the vote, past the 4% margin of error. As well as these other candidates have done, none of them have ever been polled at outright beating both candidates.

His key policy was going against the grain, and embracing protectionism when Bush and Clinton were both enthusiastic supporters of NAFTA. During the debates, he eerily prophesied "there will be a giant sucking sound going south" if NAFTA passes due to Mexico's lax environmental and labour laws. His other

Those were his most notable policies, and what he really railed against Bush and Clinton on. Bush had got them in this mess, and Clinton's liberal policies weren't gonna get them out. But he also had an eclectic series of other policies - like "Direct Democracy" through electronic town halls (fitting for a CEO of a company that specialised in computers), and a less involved America (although not isolationist).

Also unique was his messaging. While Clinton used platitudes and uplifting advertising, and Bush viciously attacked Clinton as a philandering communist plant, Perot's defining ads would be him buying 30 minutes of air time and frankly explaining what he thought was right for the country and how he would do it, with CHARTS BABY!

It's goes against every single populist idea there's ever been. Perot had policy that didn't have "popular" aspects of it, delivered in a frank, clear and detailed manner. By nearly any political junkie's understanding of the American electorate, he should have flopped, his advertisements discovered by pathetic teenagers saying "so true!" and calling themselves Perotstans in the new 20s.

There is a lot more to the story then this, worthy of it's own article (I haven't even mentioned Perot thinking the CIA was sabotaging him or dropping out of the race), but that is the short version when it comes to analysing Perot's place in third party history.

With Bush losing, the Republicans generally considered Perot to have stolen votes from Bush and handing Clinton the election - the facts don't reflect this, Perot generally took from both bases, but the Republicans grudgingly took notice and for the midterms introduced the Contract With America, an ambitious set of reforms that included the Balanced Budget Amendment to outlaw deficit and term limits for members of Congress - all of which failed to pass.

Perot would try his luck again in 1996, forming the Reform Party and couping it's nomination from Richard Lamm, and getting decent results - 8.4% is nothing to sneeze at, and more then enough to win the party federal funding. The party's apex would be in 1998, when former pro-wrestler Jesse "The Body" Ventura won the Minnesota Gubernatorial race. The Reform party would crumble shortly afterwards, as Progressives and Paleoconservatives feuded with each other over which way to take the party - ultimately the Paleoconservatives won, nominating Pat Buchanan and getting less then 1% in 2000. Ross Perot for his part endorsed George Bush.

2024 - Robert Francis Kennedy Jr, Independent (California)

"Why should somebody be able to pollute the air, which belongs to all of us, or destroy a river or a waterway, which is supposed to belong to the whole community?"

What does a left wing populist, a right wing populist, and centrist anti-populist have in common? Why did they succeed when the Greens, the Libertarians, the Communists, and my GOATS the Prohibition Party fail, time after time?

I narrowed it down to three factors.

• A wedge issue

• A wide coalition

• A unique voice

A Wedge Issue

The first and most important step is the wedge issue. La Follette had progressivism, Wallace had segregation and Perot had NAFTA and the deficit. You need to be saying something that no one else is saying, that really resonates. Chase Oliver of the Libertarians fails because his socially progressive message is being used by the Democrats, and his fiscal conservatism is being used by the Republicans. Perhaps there are voters that prefer his message as a whole, but most consider one issue more important and back the party likely to win to accomplish this goal.

It's called the marketplace of ideas, and you need to operate like a business. You can't walk in with a mishmash of policy both party's are offering, you just enter a saturated market. You need a unique selling point no other competitor is offering, or else you'll just be overshadowed by your better funded competitors. (Glad to put my diploma in business to good use).

Did RFK Jr have these unique ideas? In a sense he did. As he pointed out frequently, the COVID-19 vaccines came from one Donald J. Trump's project Warpspeed.

This didn't matter. Despite starting as a hippie thing, of which RFK is a remnant of, vaccine scepticism has become firmly an stance of the fringe right, who Donald Trump commands. They may not like that Trump is pro-vaccine (here's Trump being booed for saying his crowd should take the vaccine) , but he is still their guy. Saying "uhhhh I don't trust those vaccines" doesn't fly when Q is warning people if they don't back Trump JFK Jr will stay dead or whatever.

A Wide Coalition

This is important, third party or first. No single issue is ever popular enough to propel someone to the finish line just on that single issue. You need to have a stance on everything that's in the public consensus as "important". La Follette's sheer uniqueness gave him the widest coalition of the American left there's ever really been, while George Wallace flirted with Warhawks and the unions. Ross Perot's top concern was the economy, but he also had the most non-interventionist foreign policy and some eccentric ideas on general governance.

I conducted a small (tiny) poll asking random people why they thought RFK Jr was running and to assume it was in good faith. The vast majority of the answers I got were "vaccines". I had three other answers of the dozen or so people I asked - one included Bobby's issues with the FDA, which is technically different but ranting about the chemicals in our food is on a similar wavelength to anti-vaccine rhetoric, two answers included opposition to the duopoly, and one came from an outright Bobby fan who correctly identified Bobby has having the most anti-corporate, pro-environment platform in the race (aided by Biden and Harris not actually having a platform).

No one mentioned his isolationist foreign policy, his shockingly progressive stance on race, his transphobia, or his ties to crypto currency. Because he never really talked about it! It was all about the Duopoly, the FDA, or the Vaccines. He seemed to be trying to build this wide net on his policy page, but gave up when it came time to campaign and focused on his most nutjob stances.

Opposing the Two-Party system isn't enough. If it was, Gary Johnson would be included in this list. Remember him? The 2016 Libertarian candidate, running against two of the least popular mainstream candidates ever. He won 3.28% of the vote, not a terrible result for a third party, but hardly what you would expect from arguably the least popular race of all time.

So RFK Jr doesn't really have a wedge issue, and he doesn't really have a coalition. Surely such a wacky candidate has the final part?

A Unique Voice

He sure did have a unique voice! Because spasmodic dysphonia and he does seek treatment for it, it's very insensitive to make fun of it.

But when it comes to how he campaigned, he was rather standard. He appeared on podcasts… and that was about it

Sitting down and explaining your crank beliefs on a podcast may have been unique in 2010, but it's really not that different from sitting down and explaining your crank beliefs on a TV show these days. In fact, Donald Trump has been the one experimenting with messaging, doing a "X Space" and going on a livestream with popular r-slur Adin Ross.

There is one exception to this. One instance where he had a truly message that wasn't about chemicals, delivered in a manner that was unique and appealed to people outside of his eccentric circle - his Superbowl ad, wherein all that was advertised is that a Kennedy is running for president, and he's younger than Joe Biden and Donald Trump.

The same fricking duopoly message that doesn't work.

In all three factors, Kennedy came up short. He couldn't wedge an issue, he refused to expand his circle, and his campaign style was far blander then his bizarre campaign ideas.

Kenndy and his scandals

The Scandals

Scandals are part of any good campaign, and Kennedy is no exception. His campaign may be more famous for the constant, bizarre scandals then any of his very silly beliefs.

All I can say is Kennedy is very, very lucky that the outlandish scandals overshadowed his dark past.

In the same day he was accused of eating a dog, he was accused of sexually assaulting a woman he hired as babysitter, allegations he responded to with a blasé "I am not a Church Boy". These very serious criminal allegations were overshadowed by the ludicrous ones, a reoccurring theme. The fact he literally had a brainworm overshadowed how this information got out - it was disclosed during divorce proceedings where he was so callous to his ex-wife during and after the marriage, he drove her to suicide. There is a real darkness in Kennedy, overshadowed by the utter farce much of his campaign seemed to be.

The future of third parties

It's hard to not view the future of third party politics as bleak. The party's are more unified then ever, but that's come with polarisation increasing loyalty to the parties. Wedge issues are by their nature impossible to predict, and in the age of mass media, what's unique is generally a very fleeting thing.

Joe Biden dropped out of the race, Donald Trump got shot about two months ago, and the world has just continued to chug with those events just being part of the news cycle. The third party uniqueness vital for them to stand a chance seems like they're much more likely to just be a fad, rather than anything impactful.

I hope I'm wrong. But more likely, you'll see outsiders - like former Reform party member Donald Trump or Independent Bernie Sanders work within the party, and force compromises along inside the system.

Now renamed after a WW2 soldier instead of the Confederate general

/r/army is actually for the most part okay with it but there's still some seething

Good to see the important issues are being tackled.

I'm sure you took that attitude when it was changed the first time.

I wonder how much money this will cost the DoD and the rest of the American people….

What a waste of money? This administration is stupid and petty.

Good to know that they're laser-focused on government efficiency.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ShermanPosting/comments/1imntla/braxton_bragg_is_objectively_one_of_the_biggest/

Union larpers also discuss it

Sometime in 2025 for sure (TM).

Livestream of the demo

The @NYPDTransport boasted yesterday about busting TWO drivers with obscured plates. Two drivers. In one day. I got THREE in six minutes! @NYPDPC #criminalmischief pic.twitter.com/OSRim9bjPM

— Gersh Kuntzman (@GershKuntzman) January 8, 2025

Part 9 of our epic voyage through the classic 1992 RPG Darklands.

Darklands Series

1 - Darklands LP Part I

2 - Darklands LP Part II: Charles Bronson Edition

3 - Darklands LP III: Nuns and Coins

4 - Darklands LP Ep IV: Introduction to Equipment & Combat

5 - Darklands LP Part V: We finally briefly go out into the dark lands

6 - Darklands LP VI: We actually start a quest!

7 - Darklands LP VII: We reach our destination

8 - Darklands LP VIII: Raubritter confrontation & learning how combat works

Thanks for making this @Losercel.

We ended last episode in Paderborn, having just been rewarded for slaying a raubritter and now we've got 16 florins to spend. We had some concerns about our weapons not penetrating armor well enough during that battle, so that's our first priority. Let's see what they have for sale here.

Equipment

OMG look at this. See where it says 38q next to the name of each item for sale? That means it's 38 quality. Weapons, armor, shields, alchemical potions, and various things like lockpicks have a quality rating which has a subtle impact on how well they work. For every 10 points of quality your weapon is better than their armor you get one extra point of damage. That may not sound like much but you get that bonus point even if you failed to penetrate their armor. That may not sound like much, but with a fast high quality weapon it can really add up.

Average items have a quality of 25. There is a shop in the marketplace that always sells 25q items wherever you go. But each city can have a swordmith, armorer, bowyer, and tinkerer (these sell certain specialized weapons) each with its own level of quality. So if you happen to be in a town with really good swordsmiths like we are now, you want to jump on that opportunity. You never know when you'll find that opportunity again.

One rule that I only just learned now after all these years while going through the hint book is that all the equipment you loot off of dead bodies drops in quality by 10. That explains a lot, because that crap is hardly ever worth using by the time you get your hands on it.

• Sasha - I'd like to get her a better quality longsword but they don't have any in stock.

• Redactor & Yuna - I'm going to replace their maces with military hammers. It does one point less damage than the mace but it has 5 penetration so it even matches plate. The main job of our impact weapons people is to penetrate heavily armored enemies, so that's my highest priority here.

• Nathan - There's not much selection of polearms here. I get him a pike, which at least has pen 4, but it's very slow. I'll keep that around just for heavily armored enemies.

The armorer here is only 23q so I'm ignoring that. Same with the bowyer. Paderborn isn't that big of a city so they must specialize in weapons.

As long as I'm here, I pick up some camomile for Redactor's alchemical experiments. One of my formulas uses it, and I have no idea when I'll find a store stocking it again, so I better get it while I can. Alchemey can be very expensive because you've got to hoard ingredients like this until you've collected every one you need for a formula.

At this point I'm just going to play for a while because we need more money before I can show you some mid-game content. Higher tier quests are quite a bit more difficult than anything we've done yet, so we're going to need good armor for the whole party. Also we won't get far without alchemy. I go on a couple more raubritter quests. If you want to maximize your earnings on these, go around to nearby cities and ask everyone for a job. A lot of them will want you to kill the same guy and there's no reason why you can't accept all of their offers.

Education

I end up in Leipzig. I managed to get a meeting with the mayor and he offered me a raubritter quest. This is a big win for us as the mayor pays out more than the merchants (20 florins I think?) and you get a huge boost to local reputation if you complete a quest for him. An especially big win since Leipzig is such an important city in this era, the most important marketplace in eastern Germany. As you can see, it's at the junction of roads leading in all directions. It even has a university.

Speaking of education, we've got 55 florins so we can afford to study for a while. We'll have to find teachers willing to take us in as students. Let's start with the monastery. They can teach us Read/Write, Speak Latin, and Religion. Usually these guys are pretty cooperative. They'll only refuse if you have little Virtue or local reputation.

Redactor has 40 in Alchemy, which is quite respectable, but you can never have too much skill. The higher it is, the higher the chance that you'll succeed in making potions. Let's see if we can get the alchemist to teach him. Nice. The alchemists are what we would today call "on the spectrum" so they often refuse. (Notice how the text here hints at which skills, attributes, etc. were being checked. You'll see this often all over the game.)

As long as we're here, I'll try trading formulas with him. See, this is what I mean.

I go to the tinkers and ask them for a teacher as well. They teach Artifice.

Let's go to the inn and start studying. Sasha is going to work on her Artifice. This skill represents your technical abilities. It's used in lockpicking and many other situations. We'll have Yuna study Religion as that's her specialty. As for Nathan, none of these skills would really do him much good. When these skills are checked it's almost always against your best party member and we've already got people better than him. So we'll have him work. He earns 9 pfennings per day as a blacksmith. The occupation you work at depends on your abilities. In his case it's probably his strength that got him the job.

We study for a week and each of us picks up 2-3 points in our skill. That may not seem like much, but most non-combat skills are extremely difficult to increase through normal gameplay.

Random Encounters

I'm going to just play the game for a while now. I won't write everything I'm doing as it's is going to be pretty boring if you're not the playing. I want to show you guys how alchemy works, so I'm going to roam around to various cities buying new formulas and the ingredients we need for them. I'll just write about the random encounters I run into. There are many of these and they make up a big part of the game.

I'm going to try to sneak away. It's probably just some bandits that we could take care of easily but you never know. Besides, this is a rare chance to practice our Woodwise skill.

These guys have no idea who they're dealing with. I wipe them out without breaking a sweat.

Pagans. I hate these guys. Let's vandalize their stupid altar.

Uh oh. These are schrats, basically German bigfoot. It must have been their altar. Some schrats are good Christians, but just like humans many of them worship Satan. I may be in over my head.

Oh boy. That's a lot of them. They're so close, our missile weapons won't be much help. There's not much to do but just fight it out.

It's a very close fight, with both Redactor and Yuna getting knocked out. A prayer to St. Clare healed Sasha and kept her in the fight. Without that we would have lost.

Yuna gains some Virtue. Which makes sense since we all got beaten up really bad for doing that. We'll camp here and rest for a little while and then head over to Magdeburg to stay at the inn to get fully healed.

Frick this guy. I'll just pay him to avoid any trouble. I don't want the Dominicans on my butt.

Where should I wander around? It's nice to have a certain region that's your home base where you've got good local reputation. You can return there every once in a while to take advantage of the better prices and do your studying there. But you've also got to do a lot of wandering to find quests, alchemy ingredients, and new saints. Let's go into Bohemia.

I head down to Dresden, kill another raubritter, and achieve "local hero" reputation.

Notice that near Freiberg there's two mines. The Erzgebirge ("Ore Mountains") between Germany and Bohemia were extremely important at this time. Tin had been mined there since prehistoric times, but in 1168 silver was discovered near Freiberg and settlers flooded in. More discoveries were made in the late 1400s. During this period the mines of the Erzgebirge were on the cutting edge of technology, driving progress toward the Industrial Revolution.

The important thing for us is that we can buy alchemical components there. But first let's learn some more formulas so that I know what to buy. I keep striking out when I try to trade formulas with other alchemists, but we're rich enough now to just buy some.

Bad Alchemist

I'm not giving you my goddarn alchemical materials. This guy may be a tough opponent but I think we can take him if we really have to.

His guards are poorly equipped. Like many of the thugs we've run into they're using falchions (basically machetes) which ordinarily would bounce right off our armor. But notice the plus there. That means they've been enhanced through alchemy. Depending on which potion was used, that could mean they can slice right through our armor. The alchemist himself would be easy to kill if we could get to him, but his guards will block us. They're even blocking us from using missile weapons against him. But he can toss potions over their heads at us. My first priority is going to be dispersing my guys because he's no doubt got some area effect attacks and I don't want us bunched up.

This is probably Noxious Aroma. It decreases all skills for several seconds before it wears off. He hits Redactor with the same thing and Sasha with tear gas which temporarily incapacitates her. When these get clear of the bridge I'm going to have Nathan try to get around them and go after the alchemist.

Sasha got tear gassed again. He tossed Stonetar at Yuna, which greatly slows down anyone walking through it, so she won't be able to get into the fight soon. Redactor is holding off two enemies while Nathan slips past them. I bet Nathan Chen could be a really good running back IRL.

He tries to slow down Nathan with stonetar but it's too late. He's run out of potions. Nathan kills him instantly with one swing of his halberd and the guards are easily mopped up.

This is some nice loot. He ran out of combat potions but he has a lot that can temporarily enhance our characters or their equipment. We'll save these to use in an emergency.

Notice how this combat was way more complex than just killing street thugs. Combat in Darklands is never going to be as intricate as Troubleshooter but once you get into the mid-game it's not just mindlessly slashing at each other.

Maybe in the next episode we'll finally do some alchemy. (Spoiler: we do!)

Chuds gonna learn that once you get on that fat ladygarden Chtorrr's radar, your subs are dooomed. They made this sub to bypass all the drama from chud posts on /r/GamingMemes. It got banned, so now the chuds are getting bans for repurposing content. Sound familiar? lol

https://old.reddit.com/r/Asmongold/comments/1hmuedc/so_apparently_rfreegamingmemes_got_banned_too/

A senator yelling that the science can be wrong, but we shouldn’t question it because The Science is settled, perfectly sums up the absurdity of what we dealt with during Covid pic.twitter.com/bEnXt4v3cC

— Ian Miller (@ianmSC) January 30, 2025

IDK what the context is

Why is an external site that I can't interact with in the feed? I'm not signing up over there. Also their posts suck. Let me hide them.

https://www.esa.co.za/forum/thread.php?threadID=4759546&returnType=search&returnPage=1&page=1

A quick post detailing some drama on a prostitute forum. A black man wants to find a white working girl to pleasure him. This is difficult to do because many white girls do not see black guys. To advertise this, they will write ROAR on their profile.

Soon enough, the thread is visited by Pluglife420 who has a bit of advice for OP

The prostitutes don't take kindly to that!

Other "punters" (Johns) also have some opinions to share

Pluglife420 defends himself

This doesn't go well with the prostitutes or the johns!

When Lorraine Kelly shared her experience of menopause on her daytime TV show in 2017, she was her own last resort. Initially, she set out to interview a famous woman about her story, but everyone she approached refused.

"I thought, nobody else will talk about it so I'll do it. It was a breakthrough moment," said Kelly.

Seven years later, it often feels as though we have reached peak menopause. Michelle Obama, Salma Hayek and Gwyneth Paltrow have all been open about their experiences, encouraging women not to feel ashamed about a biological process an estimated 13 million people in the UK are now going through. And yet there's still one part of it that is barely spoken about.

Vaginal dryness.

As with so much in this realm, it took a celebrity – Davina McCall in this case – to shine a light on it. For those of us who'd assumed this symptom was a minor inconvenience, which only affected s*x and was easily remedied with the kinds of lubrication readily available from high street chemists, it was a brutal wake-up call.

"I had severe dryness, so severe that when I tried to wipe myself after going to the loo, it was so sore I was having to kind of dab," McCall said in her 2021 documentary, S*x, Myths and the Menopause. "I didn't know what it was, I had no idea that it was part of being perimenopausal."

Previously known as vulvovaginal atrophy, now rebranded as genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM), vaginal dryness will probably affect between 60% and 80% of women, according to various studies. It is caused by the drop in oestrogen levels, which happens as women go through menopause, causing vaginal tissue to become thinner and less elastic. Despite it being so common, one study has found that a third of female sufferers did not report it to their doctor.

This is partly because of embarrassment, says Haitham Hamoda, consultant gynaecologist and clinical lead of the menopause service at King's College Hospital. "Most GPs are well informed and offer a great service, but of course, there are variations of what you can access. Part of it is going to be what is available to you, what is offered to you, and what you feel comfortable talking about."

He continues: "You'd be surprised how many people would come and see you because they're talking about flushes and sweats and brain fog. And when you say, 'Do you have vaginal dryness?' they will say, 'Oh, yes, it's really uncomfortable'. But they never really think about bringing it up, unless you specifically ask."

Hamoda has seen women who are too sore to wear underwear. "You do find people who say clothes are uncomfortable because it's touching against the area … In extreme cases they find it uncomfortable sitting or walking."

GP and menopause expert Dr Renée Hoenderkamp has had cases like this too. "I've seen women who can't go about their daily life because of vaginal dryness. It's absolutely debilitating. They can't go to the gym any more, can't wear jeans, can't go for a bike ride, can't run up the stairs at the station. It's all just too painful."

Clare, 55, says GSM "consumed my whole life". "I used to sit in a shallow, cold bath, sobbing. It was agony, the burning never let up for one second of the day or night. Even walking was painful." It began when she was 47, but she never considered her symptoms could have anything to do with being perimenopausal because her periods were regular, and she was not having hot flushes.

But, as Hoenderkamp points out, every menopause is different: "For some women, vaginal dryness will be their first symptom, very early, even before their periods have changed. Other women won't get it until they've gone through it all. It's really individual."

She also believes that seeing dryness as just a symptom of menopause can be misleading. "Women who breastfeed for more than six months will suppress their oestrogen to a level where they may get vaginal dryness. The pill can cause it. Antidepressants. It's not just restricted to menopausal women."

The implications of vaginal dryness can go far beyond pain, says Hoenderkamp. "Once past menopause, when all of the tissue in and around the vagina and urethra dries and atrophies, women become much more susceptible to urine infections because bacteria are able to attach to the tissue."

Hamoda has also seen women avoiding or missing cervical screening due to GSM. "Sometimes you can't open the speculum because they're so dry and uncomfortable, even though, of course, you're using plenty of lubrication." In some cases, he has told patients to "take vaginal oestrogen for the next two months, then come back and we'll attempt this smear again. Sadly, this is not an uncommon scenario."

Not every doctor is aware of how to help women with GSM. Emily, 44, sought medical advice as soon as her vaginal dryness began four years ago. "It felt like there was a red hot poker inside of me," she says. She also suffered from urinary tract infections. Her GP found it so hard to reach a diagnosis that at one point he told her – on the phone – that she might simply have to prepare herself for a life of chronic pain.

As she was 40 when her symptoms began, her doctor didn't consider perimenopause. She was passed between different NHS services, given courses of antibiotics, a cystoscopy, referrals to urology, gynaecology and physiotherapy. She also paid to see a private vulval pain specialist. As all this was going on, no painkillers could make any difference, and she remained in agony.

"It's been catastrophic," she says. "The pain makes it very difficult to concentrate. I've had to give up four jobs in the space of four years. I've had to sell my house and move away from my friends because I need to have more savings in case I can't carry on working. It's had a massive effect on my mental health."

Out of desperation, Emily began to research her symptoms herself. She found out that one in 20 women go through perimenopause before they're 45, and, presuming this was what was happening to her, Emily wrote a detailed letter to her GP, asking for vaginal oestrogen. He agreed to put her on a low dose. "And within two days the burning stopped."

She is still, however, struggling with her UTI symptoms – which include needing to pee around four times an hour. While it's impossible to know what has caused this, she believes that because her infection was not treated for so long it has got worse. She is now being treated separately for her persistent UTI.

Misdiagnosis is a common thread through this condition. Dr Paula Briggs, a consultant in sexual and reproductive health at Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, reports, "It depends who the patient presents to, how likely they are to get the right diagnosis. Loads of women will be told they've got thrush."

It's a perfect storm – women reluctant to seek medical help in the first place, then a delay in being diagnosed.

"Whereas other menopausal symptoms resolve – generally they get less severe, then they stop – GSM becomes progressively worse over time and is very difficult to reverse," says Briggs. She now thinks all women should be given vaginal oestrogen at around the age of 45 as a default.

However, as oestrogen pessaries fall under the HRT umbrella, some women remain nervous due to the small increased risk of breast cancer linked to progestogen-containing forms of HRT. Hoenderkamp says that vaginal oestrogen does not carry the same risk. "It is just about as safe as houses, and very easy. I often have women who say I can't have vaginal oestrogen because I've had breast cancer. Well, you can."

Hamoda is more cautious: "Generally speaking, with breast cancer patients you would try other non-hormonal options first. But on an individual basis."

However, it is not a problem that will disappear overnight. "In terms of the oestrogen, women are not going to do it for a year and then it will all be OK. It's probably a lifelong commitment to their vagina," says Hoenderkamp.

Vaginal oestrogen is available from chemists – although it's cheaper on prescription from your GP – and there are also moisturisers and lubricants women can buy over the counter as a possible first port of call.

The message overall is clear, though. If you are uncomfortably dry, you should never suffer in silence – it's not just a part of ageing that happens to everyone, which you have to grin and bear – it's something that can be treated and, in most cases, eased.

"Awareness is key," says Hamoda. So, while there has never been so much talk about menopause as there is now, there's still a lot that needs to be said.

Some names have been changed

Also posted on WPD

Marsey has been spending a lot of time alone, thinking about things that make her sad. She looks like she's about to cry...

This Marsey is based on one of my favorite Marseys, @X's , which itself is based on a Peach cat animation. And yes, I referenced my own Marsey ().

As usual, I made different variants. I will submit the first 7 for 1750 dramacoin. If you have suggestions, be sure to comment them.

The letters were originally to the left of the Marseys, but I moved them to the right about 6 hours after making the post to make it less confusing for mobile.

A B C D E F G

I also made sleeping and crying variants that didn't come out the way I wanted. I may or may not submit these. I added J because of @DWHITE___________DYNAMITE.

H I J

Which ones are your favorite?

I (sleeping, crying like ) - 25 votes

(Drawn using Inkscape, inspired by and referenced , also referenced and )

Bill Gates has given away over seventy BILLION dollars through his charitable foundation. Yet there's a significant chunk of people who believes he's an evil mastermind who created COVID to force everyone to get microchips injected which he can control via 4G

Yeah, rightoids are to blame for the hourly "eat the rich" circlejerk, sure.

BTW kill "journos" not in minecraft Rowling being charitable is HALF TRUE

THAT'S AMERICAN HOCKEY. 🇺🇸🦅 #4Nations pic.twitter.com/l68FFiNsmn

— USA Hockey (@usahockey) February 16, 2025

Someone ping more !hockey !chuds !burgers

What a lovely night, tucked into bed with the boys and mister man

!animalposters !cats

Aurora police say they detained 14 people Tuesday morning in connection with an armed home invasion, stabbing and kidnapping at an apartment complex recently embroiled in national political controversy.

The latest: A preliminary investigation suggests the crime is "100% gang activity," Aurora police Chief Todd Chamberlain said Tuesday.

There is also a "high assumption" the suspects may be linked to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan prison gang known for human smuggling and money laundering, he said.

I like how they try to sweep "(illegal) immigrant prison gangs" under the rug with "gang activity".

Krauts have tons of illegals, but at least apartment complexes in Berlin aren't being overrun by roving gangs of illegals.

Yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Barbon

!historychads !christians !catholics !calvinists

!neolibs @nuclearshill

!gaystapo !besties who else would do this

!coons

Most Based Comments

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔥🔘🔘

You act like dowry didn't exist before these gen z girls. You're hurt only because now girls are just as greedy as boys. (39)

Dowry is greed? OkayLet's talk about from history to present timeA boy will be rejected or accepted during marriage depend upon how much wealth he has, how much he earn, what is his status?One who sell panipuri doesn't get car in dowry.. Because dowry is given on the basis of his stature (aukaat)When father give dowry he does not give share in property to her daughter and he expect from groom to pass generational wealth to kids, bear all expense of kids education, marriage all alone..U r not doing any favour by giving dowry..Last but not least..lets take an example If a guy whole wealth worth 50lakh rupees.. He won't get 50lakh dowry.Dowry always given 50% of his total wealth or sometime even less than 50%Dowry kabhi bhi equivalent nahi milta jitna bande ka worth hota hai..Due to so many reason.. Like girl is leaving his house and some other reason.Prove me wrong what I said..So no one is doing favour. (-20)

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔥🔘🔘

You act like dowry didn't exist before these gen z girls. You're hurt only because now girls are just as greedy as boys. (39)

You're talking as if women of previous generations were marrying men without even asking about their income. (-11)

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔥🔘🔘

That's fair. But then the man needs to do his part as a conservative. Financially, Socially. You can't have conservative ideals for your partner but not have it to.My idea of a conservative man is someone who has not watched porn. Who has the means to provide and who should wear indian clothes for all indian functions. If a man wants a virgin. He needs to be a virgin both in action as well as thought. You want a wife to cook 3 meals a day. Well. You need to afford a wife that can cook 3 meals a day. (10)

Tabhi to ladkiyo ki dosti dusri ladkiyo ke sath bahot kam chalti hai..Apne hi faide ke peeche lage rehte ho.. (-8)

Angriest Comments

Angriness: 😡😡😡🔘🔘

It is to assuage the egos of the conservative indian boys who need to justify their lack of ability to talk to women.See one woman's opinion shows me that all women are bad. It's not my fault. It's the woman's fault for not liking me. I will blame her and put all responsibilities on her because I want a rich hot girl but I don't have money for a rich hot girl. K byeee (30)

How is it conservative if you ask a person to equate her expectations from that of others to what she has to offer?I mean it's the same victim playing.You're literally trying to change the topic from one thing to, conservative.They are poles apart.If you think woman asking for a husband with good salary is progressive and men expecting the same is conservative, I guess you're too dense to even argue.You're refusing to acknowledge that "Men can ask such woman to be the example and earn the sum themselves that they expect from husbands" isn't in anyway conservative.Is it?How?You see your hypocrisy here don't you?You are trying to paint the argument in a light where you can hide behind the screen of "victim of sexism" while trying to tactfully avoid answering my question because that would prove this girl and you hypocrites and not make me sound as "conservative""5 lakh is not great expectations if you're working abroad"Well it is if you're not doing that yourself as a example and expe... (6)

Angriness: 😡😡😡🔘🔘

That's fair. But then the man needs to do his part as a conservative. Financially, Socially. You can't have conservative ideals for your partner but not have it to.My idea of a conservative man is someone who has not watched porn. Who has the means to provide and who should wear indian clothes for all indian functions. If a man wants a virgin. He needs to be a virgin both in action as well as thought. You want a wife to cook 3 meals a day. Well. You need to afford a wife that can cook 3 meals a day. (10)

Beta and then u will start crying.. Just like whole subredddit is loaded how their life is so bad..They think being housewife is curse.. Pehle to aisa hi hota thaa.... Kaunsa khush thiii.. (-7)

Angriness: 😡😡😡🔘🔘

This is rage bait content to evoke some angry reactions. Ignore it (1)

Biggest Lolcow: /u/BasicallyExhausted

Score: 🐮🔘🔘🔘🔘

Number of comments: 6

Average angriness: 🔘🔘🔘🔘🔘

Maximum angriness: 😡😡😡🔘🔘

Minimum angriness: 🔘🔘🔘🔘🔘

NEW: Subscribe to /h/miners to see untapped drama veins, ripe for mining!

autodrama: automating away the jobs of dramneurodivergents. Ping HeyMoon if there are any problems or you have a suggestion

!trump2024 !project2025 !jidf !accelerationists