• 109 Posts
  • 4.49K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • I dunno.

    Even slow movers in bad shape are a problem in numbers.

    So, carefully eliminating individuals before they can turn into a horde should be the default.

    Once you get enough living together, you fortify and get snipers trained up. Set up on the walls first and pick off anything undead that comes close. Slowly set up an expanding circle of raised emplacements with sniper observers to pick off individuals at a longer distance from the settlement, and give warning for any hordes as well as being able to thin out a horde as it gets closer, and continue depleting the horde if they surround the settlement.

    But, for lone travelers, assuming that you have a ranged weapon that’s quiet enough, always take them out. You never, ever leave an enemy behind you if you can take them out without causing a worse problem.

    I think that’s the key to long term zombie survival. You have to take every reasonable opportunity to reduce the spread of the agent that’s causing it. Literal walking dead zombies, they’re all a disease vector. Every one you put down makes future survival easier. So it’s a calculated risk. Measure the risk of your infection in the attempt, measure the risk of attracting any unseen zombies, and if those risks are low to zero, it’s going to be a long term benefit to take one out.

    Obviously, in a WD scenario, firearms increase the risk significantly compared to quieter weapons. But there are other options available, including the old and trusty Pointy Stick™. Even the roughest spear you can make gives you the reach to make a quick finish to slow zombies 1v1 with very low risk of contact, so you only have to worry about being capable of moving faster if the weapon fails.

    Bows can replace firearms at that kind of range, as long as you practice, and it takes the risk down to zero for a single shot, since the noise a miss will make is in a different direction than you.

    You’re right though, don’t fight. Assassinate.



  • Well, he’s basically a rapist and abuser. The accusations are a bit more complicated than that, and even a bit worse, but there’s really no doubt at all that they’re true. So a lot of people outright hate him, and will reflexively reject any posting of his music, especially a new track that’s on a platform that would generate income for him.

    Musically, that’s a matter of opinion. It’s definitely the same style of music for sure. My take is that it’s watered down and uninspired, this particular track. Pretty much phoning it in. If you like the track, there’s nothing wrong with that, all musical preferences are subjective. It just doesn’t work for me. I can’t speak for anyone else in that respect.


  • Well, I think the responses you’ve gotten show exactly how major a figure he is, and how divisive he can be.

    Any author is a matter of taste. Nobody is universally loved. That’s just the way it is, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

    However, some writers manage to strike magic in minds so that their work resonates across generations, lifetimes. Shakespeare is still widely read. A person may not like his poems or plays, but he’s impossible to ignore entirely.

    King is no Shakespeare. But he is damn good at writing things that stick in your head. And I firmly believe he’ll still be widely read in 200 years. Likely longer.

    So, even if you end up not liking him in general, he’s worth reading some of his stuff Afghan anyway

    Now, I mostly like King. Dude is weird, his stories reflect that, and even his worst stuff is interesting on that level.

    My picks would be Cujo, Salem’s Lot, Needful Things, Hearts in Atlantis, Delores Claiborne, and the Bachman books. You read those, you’ll have a solid feel for whether or not you’ll want to ever read the rest.

    Cujo is more of a real world horror story. Nothing supernatural, just a nightmare that could happen.

    Salem’s Lot is a very unique take on a horror staple. But it’s still pretty normal horror.

    Needful Things, that’s one of the most unique horror stories out there, imo. But it’s weird in the way that King does well.

    Hearts in Atlantis switches gears. It isn’t horror, not really. But it’s a gentle introduction into his overarching inconsistently connected metaverse of sorts.

    Claiborne is my favorite of his human conflict driven writing, where it’s about people in complex situations producing conflict and pointing a light at humanity in the process. It’s not horror at all.

    And, the Bachman books. The collection of them is a glimpse into his most creative side, imagining slight twists on normality, akin to Claiborne. But they’re further removed. One is most definitely not set in our world. The others could be, but there’s still a sense of the alien to them. Once he abandoned the pen name, he eventually brought that kind of thinking into the rest of his work (and the best of his work imo), but there’s a rawness and ugliness to the stuff he did as Bachman that is hard to compare to anything else.

    Out of the Bachman stories, Rage and The Long Walk tend to get the most attention nowadays because of the premise of each. Running Man is the most well known outside of his fandom, what with the movie loosely based on it. But the real gem is Road Work. The glimpse inside the mind of a man that’s just hit his limit and decides to stop fucking around and fuck things up instead. Hell, if you didn’t read anything else, you should read those.

    But, honestly? I’ve read everything he’s written, and none of it is bad. It’s all worth at least one read, though some can be immediately consigned to the “never again bin”. His older stuff tends to be more accessible, but it’s all decent






  • That is true, but it is still an acceptable action within that context.

    Paladins, at least the generic form of the term, aren’t held to an impossible standard. If you pick specific versions of paladin, you might run into cases where an unintentional violation of oath works to negate their holiness, but that’s rule issues, not concept issues.

    Self defense is allowed within every version of paladin because they’re knights, warriors. Illusion, insanity, trickery, it doesn’t matter because that’s external the the paladin. If their actions are righteous (and self defense is in this kind of discussion), and their intent was pure, they’re still holy.

    They might need to atone for the killing anyway, but that’s a separate issue from them being a paladin.

    If anything, Don Quixote’s later actions show that he wouldn’t have taken a life in his right mind, which points back to his righteousness.


  • For plays, I tend to think the “rule” is necessary. For movies, a little less so, since things can just be there for visual interest in a way they can’t for plays.

    But for novels and other fiction? Utter codswallop. When not writing for a visual performance, you build scenes in any way that works. This can include meaningless items being interacted with purely for that reason.