shit around

Hey im just wondering

Yo know how Nanu in Pokemon Sun/Moon lives with like 12 meowths? And also there’s a lady on one of the routes in… Akala, I think, who lives with like 8 stufful?

Reblog this and put in the tags which single pokemon you’d adopt like 10 of and contentedly live with. Bonus points if you say why and what you’d do with them. I’m curious…

Bulletproof Monk

Witnessed in my friend’s campaign.

Friend of mine asked the GM if his friend could join our campaign. Graduated with a bachelors in fine arts and my friend thought he would bring interesting role-play to our games. So all of us start thinking to ourselves “this guys gonna be at Bard” but we were all surprised to find he actually was a Monk.

And not just a monk. The Bob Ross of monks. The nicest yet simultaneously the most terrifying character we’d ever witnessed. This is the story of how he beat the first serious boss of our campaign.

We were pinned behind cover vs a Gunslinger.

Gunslinger: “Come out. Come out. Wherever you are SO I CAN SHOOT YOU!”

Party talks about what to do and Monk is silent.

Then, as we are talking, he yells, “Ok. I’ll come out, but you better make that shot count!”

Monk OOC: “So there’s about 40 ft between me and him right?”

GM: “Yeah, and your speed would let you get there.”

Monk OOC: “Ok, but I deliberately want to walk slow enough so he gets a chance to shoot me.”

GM: “Uh, ok. Sure.”

Monk going towards him slowly: “Show me what you’ve got.”

Gunslinger: “You’re some kind of stupid, boy!” *Shoots*

GM: “That’s a hit. You take.”

Monk OOC: “I use Snatch Arrows.”

GM: “Wait…does that work on bullets?”

-One Rulebook Check later-

GM: “Ok so the rifle goes off and *Monk* reaches up faster than any of you can see and catches the bullet with two fingers. *Gunslinger* turns white as a sheet.”

Monk then proceeds to walk up and take a seat next to the guy, putting an arm around his shoulders while holding the bullet in his other hand.

Monk: “Hey, friend. Looks like you almost lost this. Good thing I grabbed it for you, huh? Why don’t you put the gun down before you lose any more?”

Monk OOC: “In case it’s not clear that’s an intimidate.”

GM: “Ok, roll for me.”

Nat 20

GM: “Of course it is. *Gunslinger* immediately puts his gun down in front of him and actually starts crying.”

Monk patting Gunslinger’s back: “Aw, there, there buddy. You almost got me. Why don’t you come with us now? Hands behind your back please. I’d hate to have to chase you.”

Our Wizard OOC to my friend: “So why did you never tell us your friend was Ace Ventura?”

anonymous asked:

pride and prejudice wasn't written as a resistance to the patriarchy djdjfhdhsj what

i mean i’ve been staring at this message for a solid minute now pondering how to reply, trying to figure out how ro reply, but honestly it boils down to one question: have you read it?

because literally the prevalent theme of pride & prejudice as well as other works of Austen—perhaps most visibly, sense & sensibility—is the ironic social commentary on the degraded role of women, as subjected and dependent on the way of whether they would marry well as they used to be?

like, honestly, what did you think it was about? sure it has a romance in it, but it’s probably one of the the most politically designed and carried out romantical arcs in literature, as it relies not so much on mutual affection, but rather darcy aknowledging his fault of diminishing elizabeth as an intelligent human being. at first, we see him as quite obviously set upon taking her for granted and applying stereotypes; startled with her outspoken attitude and clueless as to why she would reject him. because it IS surprising, that’s the point, given the context of Austen’s novel, the commonly praised choice would be to accept not only darcy, but mr collins without another thought. what do you think is the reason mrs bennet was so distraught all the time? there was no way of securing the future of her daughters other than marriage, we hear it being repeated over and over again—they cannot inherit their father’s fortune.

and—good grief. that’s the romantic ‘main plot’ concerning darcy and elizabeth alone, because the whole point is that he changes his beliefs and acknowledges elizabeth as an equal in the end. darcy isn’t exceptional for being surly and broody, he’s exceptional because he listens and learns.

but all the rest? the whole arc of charlotte, and her unhappy and dull marriage to mr collins, and the stark contrast with elizabeth. charlotte is not WRONG, she does the only thing she knows for certain will allow her to live in a respectful way without becoming ‘a burden to her parents’. the arc of lydia, basing off her portrayal against wickham? even with all his debt, infamy and faults, wickham’s opinion is at no point more blemished than lydia’s. that’s the point, that’s reiteraring the original notion of the disparity between men and women in regency England. the radiating, stinging paternalistic attitude of mr collins towards elizabeth when he marries charlotte and TELLS her that she would probably get no better chance. his absolute belief—corresponding with darcy’s, and contrasted with the latter’s rehabilitation later on—that elizabeth has no choice but accept him.

and elizabeth herself—for all the composition and impeccable manners, she IS a controversial figure in the novel. take the scene when she’s bashed by lady catherine de bourgh, the ongoing commentary on her being too forward with her opinions, the continuous bashing coming from her mother—the lingering threat that lizzy’s ‘stubbornness’ will cause her much trouble and, above all, prevent her from securing both her and the other sisters from absolute poverty when their father dies.

and, just … of course it’s written subtly, it’s conveyed in elizabeth’s wit, in austen’s slightly ironic narrative. the problem with the situation of women is not EXPLICITLY named and stated. it’s not modern times where we’re accustomed to forward addressing of feminist issues. no: it’s shown. it is not only the consistent theme in her works, it’s the prevalent theme of them. i mean, come on, there’s tonnes and tonnes of books that were NOT written with a purpose of targeting partiarchy. fuck, there are much MORE of such books than there is of the latter kind. But to choose Pride & Prejudice specifically, a novel which became one of the most famous books in the world, renowned for e x a c t l y t h i s … i cannot comprehend. please, at least consider this: do you really think the purpose of austen writing p&p was writing a romance? really? why would it become so much of a literature landmark, then?

i don’t mean to be nasty and honestly, go and have your opinion, you’re perfectly entitled to it, but it does make me sad that a novel that is a witty, outsanding and one of a kind social commentary on the plight of women in a specific time period written by a woman IN the time period is turned into something as common as a novel with a romantic plot. that’s all.

10

$849,900/8 br

Fall River, MA

LITERALLY LIZZIE BORDEN’S HOUSE:

“ Announcing the Maplecroft Mansion, a significant and historically important Queen Anne Victorian located in Fall Rivers’ Highlands District. The property was commissioned in 1889 by Charles Allen and sold to Lizzie Borden (and her sister Emma) in 1893 after her acquittal of the murder of her parents, a story and trial which engaged the nation. Ms. Borden lived in Maplecroft until her death on June 1, 1927. “

"CAN I RUN FOR MAYOR?"

[So our DM is writing his own campaign for us and the final boss of the first dungeon involved us killing the mayor of a city indirectly]

Monk: so if there’s no head political figure can I run for mayor?

DM: ok but you have to roll a natural 20.

Monk: *rolls a natural one*

DM: you are now banned and can never return to the town.

Druid: can I run against him?

DM: sure why not.

Druid: *rolls a natural 20*

DM: congrats your the new mayor but the monks still not allowed back.

Going Somewhere?

5e, party is a halfling monk, human paladin, and a dragonborn fighter. We have been pursuing the agents of a nefarious secret society in Waterdeep, and have just encountered one unexpectedly while out shopping.

DM: You see Ludvig [the guy we’re after] handing a coin purse to a back alley vendor. He’s looking around to make sure he’s not being watched. As you see him, he sees you and bolts down the street.

Monk (OOC): Hey, [DM]? Be honest with me: is this a chase sequence? City streets, back alleys, rooftops, dodging through crowds?

DM: …Yeah, why?

Monk (OOC): Is there anything especially cool that happens in this chase?

DM: Not really.

Monk (OOC): Perfect. How far away is Ludvig from me?

DM: One hundred feet.

Monk (OOC): Perfect. I’m going to save us all a half hour of dice rolling then.

Monk: I move 35 feet, use a ki point to dash another 70, and use my attack to crane kick Ludvig in the back of the knees with my full momentum. (rolls to hit, succeeds)

DM: *rolls* …Jeeeesus Christ.

DM: …I assume all of you have skinned a knee before?

Party: Yeah.

DM: The rest of the party sees nothing but a blur before Ludvig’s legs are taken out from under him as he’s running full speed. He skins his knees, his hands and arms, and his face on the cobblestone as he skids fifteen feet face-down across the pavement. He is unconscious and bleeding out.

Fighter: I guess I’m gonna go interrogate that back alley dealer.

Paladin: I guess I’m gonna go heal the villain.