It's not about identity as much as it's a very poor way to try to convince someone.
Don't base your line of argument on a statement you know the other person will likely disagree with.
For example "You should play Pathfinder because DnD sucks", holds no weight to people who don't think that DnD sucks. In fact if they happen to like DnD, it undermines your argument, because if you disagree about DnD, aren't you also likely to disagree about Pathfinder?
If they play a system, they probably like that system and find its shortcomings acceptable. You can't convince someone that a system isn't enjoyable when they have first-hand evidence to the contrary.
Asking people to stop being comfortable doing something they like, so that they can be uncomfortable doing something you like, isn't a good value proposition.
If you lead with "Thing you like is actually bad", their immediate response will be to disagree with you and start defending the thing they like. And if you want someone to listen to your arguments, rather than just try to poke holes in them, you must avoid putting them on the defensive.
To get through to people, find common ground and build off that. "If you like FEATURE in GAME, you'll probably love SIMILAR FEATURE in OTHER GAME because..." is something that's actually going to get someone interested, rather than start a pointless argument :)
Well there are no crits on checks in 5e, so a nat 20 +0 is no different from a nat 6 +14. And someone with a +14 can't fail a check with a DC of 15 or lower.
Having Degrees of Success built into the system in PF2 is really neat though. And seems like something DnD could easily incorporate if Wizards had any vision.
Hi!
After a lot of thinking, reading reviews, and fondling gear at my local shop, I got a completely new setup recently. 8" board, 8" Thunder hollow lights, and 52 mm 93a Dragon wheels.
Having such a small, light, and low board feels really good (coming from 8.5 indys), and those wheels let me skate some spots that used to be too crusty for anything but my cruising wheels.
In fact the 93 durometer wheels (Powell Peralta Dragons and Spitfire Soft Sliders) are probably the most interesting development of the last few years. They handle rough ground and pebbles well, but still slide and bounce almost like hard wheels.
There's still some trade off, but I'd say they're perfect for skating actual street in any place that gets weather.
I don't really bike much when it's wet, and never in mud, but the main downside of a slicker (but not slick) tire I've noticed is on steep gravel trails. I have a knobbly in front, so descending is ok, but ascending is definitely harder.
Mind that tread isn't everything, tire size, air pressure, rubber hardness etc. all play a part. A wider softer tire might not struggle as much even without tread. (Speaking of which, I should try letting out some air next time.)
"if Republic of China want to become Republic of Taiwan, they probably should publish the declaration of independence"
They don't have that choice. While independence is quite popular in Taiwan, the PRC has made it very clear that they see any movement toward Taiwanese independence as cause for war. Going so far as to fire literal warning shots over the island in 2022 and 1996.
Depending on where the burn is you can just put the burnt part in a container with cool water instead. It's much more practical to walk around with your hand in a cup than to be standing next to the faucet.
But the PRC is not a direct continuation of the Qing.
The USA can't lay claim to Great Britain just because they used to part of the same country before the revolution.
I run Michelin Country Rock as a hybrid tire. Anything that's not knobbly is going to be a huge upgrade on pavement.
You also don't need to run the same tires on both wheels. Having a slicker tire in the back can make sense as you put more weight on it, and slipping with the back wheel is a nuisance, while slipping with the front is often a disaster. So you could start off just swapping the rear. That way if it doesn't work out, you also spent only half the money :)
Lastly I'd want to share that I really disliked those wheels that are only knobbly along the edges. Leaning over when taking a curve at speed, and suddenly transitioning from smooth to vibrating was very unsettling to me.
Since you don't want to shift the front gear while under pressure I try to shift it first before a big hill. But planning ahead is the only reason to pick one or the other of your overlapping combinations.
Here's a tool to visualize gear ratios that I found interesting https://mike-sherman.github.io/shift/
There're a lot of privacy enthusiasts who seem to view privacy as a binary. So because Mozilla isn't perfect, it's as bad as can be.
They also commonly have little understanding of the underlying technology, law, business, etc., which I guess is why they can't do any threat modeling. They're just really scared of a nebulous threat they do not understand. Which I can sympathize with.
But privacy then becomes more about "staying pure" in some abstract sense, rather than about avoiding concrete threats.
(As a tip to those who want to do better, any real security starts with threat modeling. There is no such thing as perfect security, it's always a tradeoff. So you must do threat modeling to make sure you're putting your resources where they will make a difference.)