OOTS headcanons?

[woweedd]

A headcanon is a personal theory one has about a work of fiction that is not part of canon (IE the stuff shown in the source, and also maybe stuff like interviews and supplementary material), but is also not contradictory of said canon. Just personal facts from your own little understanding of the work. So, do you have any?

I'll start: In this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html) comic, we see Haley's mom's death. It's rainy and overcast (when is it ever not in Greysky), and she got arrowed in the chest. But, like, rain, as we've seen before (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), totally screws up most archer's ability to aim. You'd have to be a really good shot to hit someone, presumbly dead in the heart, in those conditions. Who could possibly make that shot? Well, look at that arrow. The tip is purple. Where have we seen an arrow that color before? Well....Here (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0614.html), one of the many arrows in Old Blind Pete's (formerly Eagle-Eyed Pete) cellar. Given the fact that he's clearly older then Haley, it's entirely plausible he was in the Thieves' Guild already at this point, and, as the nickname would imply, he was one of the Guild's best snipers. If anyone could make a shot that precise, it'd be him. So, while Haley and Ian don't know it, I tend to headcanon that Pete was the shooter in this case. Either Bozzok/his predecessor arranged the killing out of some feud with Ian (we know that he was considered a troublemaker enough later on for Bozzok to try and get him trapped in prison), or possibly this was part of Pete's collusion with the Guild's rivals that led to his eyes getting poked out. Either way, it makes sense to me. You guys have any?

[Peelee]

A headcanon is a personal theory one has about a work of fiction that is not part of canon (IE the stuff shown in the source, and also maybe stuff like interviews and supplementary material), but is also not contradictory of said canon. Just personal facts from your own little understanding of the work. So, do you have any?

I'll start: In this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html) comic, we see Haley's mom's death. It's rainy and overcast (when is it ever not in Greysky), and she got arrowed in the chest. But, like, rain, as we've seen before (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), totally screws up most archer's ability to aim.
Haley was taking negatives to hit there.

[Mike Havran]

Given that both Pete and Bozz have already bought the farm without this coming up, I guess we'll never find out the answer but I would bet on "Haley's mom's death had nothing to do with Bozzok or Pete".

[ZhonLord]

Alright, here's a headcanon. The spice peddling merchant that Belkar kills (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html) was a friend of the masterwork weapon sellers (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0976.html). Why? Because most of the gnomes we've met besides these three are big into various forms of steampunk, artificing and magic. For him to come all the way to the southern continent, without magical aid, means he must be a very traditional gnome much like the masterwork pair.

We see in real life how people with similar values and hobbies congregate. There's no reason to assume the same WOULDN'T happen in a fictional world. Therefore there's a high likelihood these three knew each other and were possibly even friends.

[MReav]

Sabine dipped into the Soul Eater (http://www.theworldofnocturne.com/dndtools/classes/soul-eater/index.html) prestige class.

Requirements:
Base Attack Bonus: +5 (covered by Succubus Outersider HD)
Alignment: Any evil (Literally an evil incarnation of illicit sex)
Skills: Knowledge (arcana) 2 ranks (easily enough to pick up with Outsider or Rogue cross-class skill points, assuming she doesn't already have it from the Succubus base HD)
Feats: Alertness , Weapon Focus (claw or other natural weapon) (The former doesn't have much evidence, but the latter she revels in close quarters combat. Maybe she grabbed Alertness as a Feat Tax and doesn't use it)
Type: Any living nonhumanoid (monstrous humanoid is acceptable) (Outsider)

Soul Eaters get Energy Drain as a touch attach at first level and he talks about Roy's life energy in flavour terms (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0343.html).

[Lord Torath]

I'll start: In this (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html) comic, we see Haley's mom's death. It's rainy and overcast (when is it ever not in Greysky), and she got arrowed in the chest. But, like, rain, as we've seen before (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html), totally screws up most archer's ability to aim. You'd have to be a really good shot to hit someone, presumbly dead in the heart, in those conditions. Who could possibly make that shot? Well, look at that arrow. The tip is purple. Where have we seen an arrow that color before? Well....Here (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0614.html), one of the many arrows in Old Blind Pete's (formerly Eagle-Eyed Pete) cellar. Given the fact that he's clearly older then Haley, it's entirely plausible he was in the Thieves' Guild already at this point, and, as the nickname would imply, he was one of the Guild's best snipers. If anyone could make a shot that precise, it'd be him. So, while Haley and Ian don't know it, I tend to headcanon that Pete was the shooter in this case. Either Bozzok/his predecessor arranged the killing out of some feud with Ian (we know that he was considered a troublemaker enough later on for Bozzok to try and get him trapped in prison), or possibly this was part of Pete's collusion with the Guild's rivals that led to his eyes getting poked out. Either way, it makes sense to me. You guys have any?
Haley was taking negatives to hit there.Do you mean that her Rapid Shot imposes penalties to hit in exchange for a higher rate of fire? (I ask because I'm not really a 3.5 guy)

[Peelee]

Do you mean that her Rapid Shot imposes penalties to hit in exchange for a higher rate of fire? (I ask because I'm not really a 3.5 guy)

Yep, that's it exactly.

[Fyraltari]

Yep, that's it exactly.

But she blames the rain on the first panel of the third page.

[Peelee]

But she blames the rain on the first panel of the third page.

Rain and wind. While also using a feat that imposes negatives to attack.

Thsts a lot of negatives.

[Metastachydium]

Rain and wind. While also using a feat that imposes negatives to attack.

Thsts a lot of negatives.

Well, technically, unless the penalties from rain and wind stacks (and I'm not at all certain that they don't overlap instead), we are either talking about a penalty of -6 (-2 Rapid Shot, -4 severe wind/rain (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/weather.htm#winds)) which is not ideal but manageable given Haley's bonus to-hit at around +17 (+8 BAB, +5 or more Dex (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?6405-OOTS-262-The-Discussion-Thread/page3&p=349744#post349744), +3 enhancement (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0607.html), +1 PBS if we can trust the CLG thread) but possibly higher; or we are talking about a windstorm and ranged attacks are impossible, so the -2 from Rapid Shot is of little relevance.

[Peelee]

Well, technically, unless the penalties from rain and wind stacks (and I'm not at all certain that they don't overlap instead), we are either talking about a penalty of -6 (-2 Rapid Shot, -4 severe wind/rain (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/weather.htm#winds)) which is not ideal but manageable given Haley's bonus to-hit at around +17 (+8 BAB, +5 or more Dex (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?6405-OOTS-262-The-Discussion-Thread/page3&p=349744#post349744), +3 enhancement (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0607.html), +1 PBS if we can trust the CLG thread) but possibly higher; or we are talking about a windstorm and ranged attacks are impossible, so the -2 from Rapid Shot is of little relevance.
I'd argue +7BAB and not +8 there, but that's just me. It's definitely not a windstorm since Miko tossed the tanglefoot bag. But that's still negatives, and as you point out, she still has a pretty hefty to-hit regardless. And she's not even particularly high level there.

All the mother scene needs is moderate rain and it has no negatives at all for shooting, and we only see one arrow so it likely was at full to-hit. And it's not like Greysky City is a place where murders are particularly uncommon to boot.

Also, that weather chart went hog wild on tornados, and really should have had impossible listen checks if it's close enough to be effecting you. Hurricanes should have had negatives to listen, impossible listen for tornadoes. Those things sound terrifying.

[Metastachydium]

I'd argue +7BAB and not +8 there, but that's just me.

Well, she was level 10 when they hit that town after the Dungeon and level 12 in the Azurite prison; level 11 and a +8 BAB seemed a reasonable estimate. Also, the Giant implied that her DEX modifier might be higher with magic items on.


It's definitely not a windstorm since Miko tossed the tanglefoot bag. But that's still negatives, and as you point out, she still has a pretty hefty to-hit regardless. And she's not even particularly high level there.

My point was, a +17 or more after a -6 is still a +11.


All the mother scene needs is moderate rain and it has no negatives at all for shooting, and we only see one arrow so it likely was at full to-hit.

No, no, no. Rain is a flat -4; you're thinking moderate wind.


And it's not like Greysky City is a place where murders are particularly uncommon to boot.

Can't argue with that bit. Plus, she was, like, an unarmoured, flat-footed civilian (unless she had 4+ rogue levels; in that case, she was an unarmoured quasicivilian with Uncanny Dodge, but I digress).


Also, that weather chart went hog wild on tornados, and really should have had impossible listen checks if it's close enough to be effecting you. Hurricanes should have had negatives to listen, impossible listen for tornadoes. Those things sound terrifying.

Let me just say that I don't envy your expertise with that subject.

[Peelee]

My point was, a +17 or more after a -6 is still a +11.
Oh, for sure. But just like every +1 counts so does every -1. Which the archer who shot Haley's mom may not have had to deal with.

Let me just say that I don't envy your expertise with that subject.
If are ever not right beside a freight train but it sounds like you're right beside a freight train, grab onto the ground and don't let go.

[Metastachydium]

Oh, for sure. But just like every +1 counts so does every -1. Which the archer who shot Haley's mom may not have had to deal with.

Evidently!


If are ever not right beside a freight train but it sounds like you're right beside a freight train, grab onto the ground and don't let go.

I'm a FLOWER. That's one of the main shticks of half my anatomy!

[Peelee]

I'm a FLOWER. That's one of the main shticks of half my anatomy!

One of my favorite sayings is actually tornado-and-plant related!

[Metastachydium]

One of my favorite sayings is actually tornado-and-plant related!

You got my attention, sir.

[Doug Lampert]

Oh, for sure. But just like every +1 counts so does every -1. Which the archer who shot Haley's mom may not have had to deal with.

If are ever not right beside a freight train but it sounds like you're right beside a freight train, grab onto the ground and don't let go.

In the 1974 outbreak (April 3 I think), my mother (O- bloodtype) was driving to the Red Cross to donate blood due to the emergency.

This resulted in a her giving us a very important peice of advice for drivers which I remember to this day, "The tornado always has the right of way."

Edited to add: TV storm chaser types obviously somehow missed her advice. So, I'll tell them now, "The tornado always has the right of way."

[Peelee]

You got my attention, sir.

The unyielding oak lords over the grass that bends, but when the tornado comes, it's the grass that remains.

[Doug Lampert]

The unyielding oak lords over the grass that bends, but when the tornado comes, it's the grass that remains.

Yeah, well, it's actually the pine that snaps like a twig even from a near miss.

Want lots of dead branches on your property, plant pines between a trailer park and a church.

[Fyraltari]

"The reed bends, but the oak breaks" is shorter.

[Peelee]

"The reed bends, but the oak breaks" is shorter.

Add more tornadoes and we got a winner.

[brian 333]

Strange, how one pine tree and over a dozen oaks toppled on the property I acquired after hurricanes Laura and Delta went through Southwest Louisiana about a month apart. Pine trees and pine tree parts were scattered everywhere from Cameron to Nachitoches.

Katrina was nothing compared to Laura. (The eyes of both went over me, but I missed Delta's eye by about 50 miles.) We're still rebuilding from that.

I'm not sure any negatives applied to the shot that killed Haley's Mom. My head canon is that it was an assassination. The arrow would have been fired within 30 feet of the target. At that range, weather would not be relevant. If a DM was a stickler, it might apply, but even I could hit a 4" target at 30' in the rain. (Fiberglass bow and waxed nylon string. Results with wooden bows and gut strings may vary, but chances are real good that it was a magic bow.)

[Ruck]

Strange, how one pine tree and over a dozen oaks toppled on the property I acquired after hurricanes Laura and Delta went through Southwest Louisiana about a month apart. Pine trees and pine tree parts were scattered everywhere from Cameron to Nachitoches.

Katrina was nothing compared to Laura. (The eyes of both went over me, but I missed Delta's eye by about 50 miles.) We're still rebuilding from that.

Laura was pretty bad for my folks and where they live, although on the whole I think Rita was worse.

[Metastachydium]

"The reed bends, but the oak breaks" is shorter.

It's a good thing I'm herbaceous, let me tell you.


Yeah, well, it's actually the pine that snaps like a twig even from a near miss.

Want lots of dead branches on your property, plant pines between a trailer park and a church.

It's a known issue with pines, yes. They have comparatively shallow roots running along the surface, mostly.


I'm not sure any negatives applied to the shot that killed Haley's Mom. My head canon is that it was an assassination. The arrow would have been fired within 30 feet of the target. At that range, weather would not be relevant.

Rain is a flat -4, regardless of distance.

[Dasick]

"The reed bends, but the oak breaks" is shorter.

But it doesn't rhyme does it

My favourite variation on it is "the wind blows; bamboo bends". Its got that oriental mystique charm to it

[Fyraltari]

But it doesn't rhyme does it

My favourite variation on it is "the wind blows; bamboo bends". Its got that oriental mystique charm to it

That doesn't rhyme either!

[Tzardok]

That doesn't rhyme either!

It's alliterative, that's just as good.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

All this rhyming and alliteration is very nice, but The Pechanga great oak has been there for a couple of Millenia, so I'd take my chances with its approach to life. Seems to work well enough. I have to say, though, that my failures at photosynthesising have rendered either approach unworkable.

Grey "I'm feeling literal today" Wolf

[Peelee]

All this rhyming and alliteration is very nice, but The Pechanga great oak has been there for a couple of Millenia, so I'd take my chances with its approach to life. Seems to work well enough. I have to say, though, that my failures at photosynthesising have rendered either approach unworkable.

Grey "I'm feeling literal today" Wolf

Hurricanes to SoCal are rare and it lies outside of the tornado bowl that is most of the Continental US. These probably help.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Hurricanes to SoCal are rare and it lies outside of the tornado bowl that is most of the Continental US. These probably help.

So we should be more having a saying on the lines of "maybe don't live in places where the winds get so strong they can rip your head off, whether you are a tree or a grass"?

GW

[Peelee]

So we should be more having a saying on the lines of "maybe don't live in places where the winds get so strong they can rip your head off, whether you are a tree or a grass"?

GW

That knocks out most of the United States except SoCal and that place is already crowded and expensive.

[Fyraltari]

So we should be more having a saying on the lines of "maybe don't live in places where the winds get so strong they can rip your head off, whether you are a tree or a grass"?

GW

And this is why humanity settled all of the globe and wolves didn't.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

And this is why humanity settled all of the globe and wolves didn't.

I mean, we pretty much did (northern hemisphere, I'll grant you, but still quite global). But you bastards have both guns and sheep, and will happily use the first when the second are present.

GW

[Fyraltari]

I mean, we pretty much did (northern hemisphere, I'll grant you, but still quite global). But you bastards have both guns and sheep, and will happily use the first when the second are present.

GW

Okay, but we settled all of the world (but for the Antarctic) when our best technology was wood and bone and stone and skin.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Okay, but we settled all of the world (but for the Antarctic) when our best technology was wood and bone and stone and skin.

Yes, and we were already there when y'all did so?

Seriously, other than, IIRC, South America, wolves have been present pretty much everywhere since forever ago. And fair enough humans have been killing wolves with whatever was at hand about as long, whether or not they had sheep or guns. As usual, humans really only needed an excuse to decimate local competition.

GW

[Dasick]

That doesn't rhyme either!

The strong wind rages
The humble bamboo bows down
Wind dies; bamboo stays

[Metastachydium]

I have to say, though, that my failures at photosynthesising have rendered either approach unworkable.

Keep trying, I say! It's doing wonders for me.


That knocks out most of the United States except SoCal and that place is already crowded and expensive.

Well, to paraphrase a certain Frenchman: and this is why humanity settled all the globe (and didn't start withe the United States).


The strong wind rages
The humble bamboo bows down
Wind dies; bamboo stays

Nice one!

[Peelee]

Well, to paraphrase a certain Frenchman: and this is why humanity settled all the globe (and didn't start withe the United States).

Granted, I wasn't there at the time, but I do seem to recall hearing about people already being here by the time the Frenchmen came.

[Dasick]

Granted, I wasn't there at the time, but I do seem to recall hearing about people already being here by the time the Frenchmen came.

Given the approximate population density of the continent at the time the frenchmen came, I'm pretty sure they started with parts that didn't have any people there.

It's actually mind boggling how quickly explorers made contact

[Peelee]

Given the approximate population density of the continent at the time the frenchmen came, I'm pretty sure they started with parts that didn't have any people there.

It's actually mind boggling how quickly explorers made contact

Population was roughly on par with Europe, just over a larger landmass. And even then, it's easy to find people. Go to the rivers. That's where people already there will live, and that's where people coming in will want to live. Easy peasy.

[Metastachydium]

Granted, I wasn't there at the time, but I do seem to recall hearing about people already being here by the time the Frenchmen came.

1. The Frenchman in question is, of course, Fyraltari; and
2. I'm talking about, like, 11000+ years ago when humans started trickling through the Beringian land bridge to the Americas, at which point pretty much everywhere else (barring certain islands) had stable human presence.

[Fyraltari]

Granted, I wasn't there at the time, but I do seem to recall hearing about people already being here by the time the Frenchmen came.

Yes? I don't see your point.

[Peelee]

1. The Frenchman in question is, of course, Fyraltari; and
2. I'm talking about, like, 11000+ years ago when humans started trickling through the Beringian land bridge to the Americas, at which point pretty much everywhere else (barring certain islands) had stable human presence.
1.) I'm aware, but I think I'm funny and that was too good a coincidence to pass up.
2.) Well, yeah, we started where we started as a species, that's kind of mandatory. And it wasn't hurricanes and tornadoes that stopped us from getting to the Americas earlier but the large water masses. Like, really large. At least ten swimming pools long.

Yes? I don't see your point.
See 1 above. :smalltongue:

[Metastachydium]

it wasn't hurricanes and tornadoes that stopped us from getting to the Americas earlier but the large water masses

Clearly, but I also think I'm funny.

[Peelee]

Clearly, but I also think I'm funny.

Ah, a battle of wits, is it? Little do you know I'm only half prepared!

[brian 333]

The Gulf Of Mexico's Northern coastline is a virtual paradise. Except for the mosquitoes. And the torrential rains. And lightning. And tornadoes. And hurricanes. And floods. And mosquitoes. And the heat. With humidity. So much humidity. And the mud. And sawgrass. And sawgrass gnats. And mosquitoes.

Except for the venomous snakes, invasive red ants, and world-champion roaches, it's a really nice place. With mosquitoes.

Why would anyone want to live in SoCal rather than here?

[Metastachydium]

Ah, a battle of wits, is it?

Why, no, Sir! I'd never start a land war in Asia.

[Dasick]

Well, yeah, we started where we started as a species, that's kind of mandatory. And it wasn't hurricanes and tornadoes that stopped us from getting to the Americas earlier but the large water masses. Like, really large. At least ten swimming pools long.

One of the difficulties in crossing large masses of water is that they get storms and hurricanes in there. If you have a half descent understanding of astronomy and a big enough boat for supplies its kind of a cakewalk

[Ruck]

So we should be more having a saying on the lines of "maybe don't live in places where the winds get so strong they can rip your head off, whether you are a tree or a grass"?

GW

I feel like we're reaching "Snow goons are bad news (https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1991/01/19)" levels of inapplicability.

[brian 333]

One of the difficulties in crossing large masses of water is that they get storms and hurricanes in there. If you have a half descent understanding of astronomy and a big enough boat for supplies its kind of a cakewalk

Or, since you live on the margin between water and ice, eating seals in winter and fish in summer, just slowly migrate around the world. Land bridges are overrated and so unnecessary when mile-thick ice sheets cover everything North of latitude 45.

[Peelee]

One of the difficulties in crossing large masses of water is that they get storms and hurricanes in there. If you have a half descent understanding of astronomy and a big enough boat for supplies its kind of a cakewalk

Not knowing how far the next landmass is, and this not knowing how many supplies you need, is a pretty big limitation. As is just simply building a big enough ship. That's like saying, "getting to Mars isn't hard, you just need enough fuel and air in the rocket and a hundred hours logged in Kerbal Space Program". Like yeah, on a really basic level that's correct but you're skipping just a ton of logistics that make it way harder.

[Dasick]

Not knowing how far the next landmass is, and this not knowing how many supplies you need, is a pretty big limitation. As is just simply building a big enough ship. That's like saying, "getting to Mars isn't hard, you just need enough fuel and air in the rocket and a hundred hours logged in Kerbal Space Program". Like yeah, on a really basic level that's correct but you're skipping just a ton of logistics that make it way harder.

Hey look, the only reason we don't have a mars colony is cause people in charge hate fun

And i guess because the resources that would go towards it are better spent elsewhere I guess

[brian 333]

Hey look, the only reason we don't have a mars colony is cause people in charge hate fun

And i guess because the resources that would go towards it are better spent elsewhere I guess

Fun fact: if we learn how to colonize Mars, we learn how to make deserts bloom. Net benefit for the Earth for what, in retrospect, would be a very small investment.

[Fyraltari]

Hey look, the only reason we don't have a mars colony is cause people in charge hate fun

And i guess because the resources that would go towards it are better spent elsewhere I guess


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5cycgjjOlQ

[Dasick]

well, the thing is, we either reach for the stars, or we run out of resources and room, suffer a couple Malthusian catastrophe world wars and famines, and go back to stone or middle age.

given how the space race interest quickly tapered off, I've been learning to flint knap, its actually very relaxing and fun !

[Fyraltari]

well, the thing is, we either reach for the stars, or we run out of resources and room, suffer a couple Malthusian catastrophe world wars and famines, and go back to stone or middle age.

given how the space race interest quickly tapered off, I've been learning to flint knap, its actually very relaxing and fun !

Malthusianism is bunk. Birth rates are slowing down the world over even in places where they are still superior to replacement level, the population is going to continue growing for a while and then hit a plateau. We have enough resources for everyone to live confortably, there is no reason for continual infinite growth.

I agree that space exploration is good thing we should keep doing, if only for scientific research puproses but the whole notion of colonizing Mars is terrible and for two reasons:

A) We have an ecological emergency on our hands. Fantasizing about a planet B is a dangerous distraction, one that serves only to flatter the ego of of a few billionaires who look at the entire cyberpunk genre as an instruction manual. We ought to clean house before expanding.

B) Mars specifically, and more generally every (exo)planet we're aware of so far just plain aren't livable for humans. The antarctic is vastly more hospitable than Mars and we don't have any permanent population there because no-one wants to live in such a hostile environment. The technology required to make Mars tolerable exists in theory but it would be, by far, the greatest endeavor ever undertaken by mankind and would take centuries to accomplish. The colonization of the solar system is going to be mainly robots and that's fine, because everything in it but Earth makes every description of hell anyone ever came up with look like a pleasant beachside retreat by comparison.

Our species cannot move to the stars as we are currently. We have mountain of problems to address first.

[Peelee]

The antarctic is vastly more hospitable than Mars and we don't have any permanent population there because no-one wants to live in such a hostile environment.

People who go to the antarctic to live (read: scientists going to do science for months on end) also have to undergo rigorous psychological evaluations and testing because of how much it sucks living there. And, as you said, it's better in every conceivable way to Mars.

All that being said, I'm not opposed to extra-planetary settlements. But it's beyond our current capabilities, and even when it gets more feasible, the Moon is a much better starting point.

[Dasick]

Malthusianism is bunk.
Yes and no.

Malthusian predictions never came true due to advances in technology, but there's no particular reason to believe these advances will continue as we are running out of the fossil fuels with drove most of the advances in the first place.

However, war and crime is basically how malthusianism manifests itself since forever - he was wrong to expect a massive event. Also epidemics. All three are on a massive rise, and antibiotic resistant bacteria didn't even kick in yet. The long peace the 1st world has enjoyed is going away and we're going back to business as usual.


Birth rates are slowing down the world over even in places where they are still superior to replacement level, the population is going to continue growing for a while and then hit a plateau. We have enough resources for everyone to live confortably, there is no reason for continual infinite growth.

If everyone could learn to live in a wine barrel, sure. Everyone wants a cheap iphone and doesn't care about child slaves digging for cobalt though. Why would people be content with what they have when we have a perfectly serviceable population of fit young people we can send off to get us some more stuff.

Birth rates slowing down is a local minima. Demographically speaking this is a disaster because many developed countries are starting to see 2:1 retired to working adult proportion, and the technological advancements aren't keeping up. So we're either going to pillow the elderly or go through some more of that delicious world wide economic downturn stuff. Whee.


We have an ecological emergency on our hands. Fantasizing about a planet B is a dangerous distraction, one that serves only to flatter the ego of of a few billionaires who look at the entire cyberpunk genre as an instruction manual. We ought to clean house before expanding.

The advances needed to colonize Mars will come really handy in cleaning up house, whether it's dealing with hostile environments (Brian already mentioned making deserts bloom), creating energy and resource efficient settlements, or terraforming techniques.

[Peelee]

If everyone could learn to live in a wine barrel, sure.

Benefits include not having to praise the king.

[Dasick]

Benefits include not having to praise the king.

*finger explosion waving fistbump*

I didnt even vote for the guy

[brian 333]

Benefits include not having to praise the king.

Until someone has the hubris to cure megalomania there will always be a king, monarch, dear leader, chairman, grand poobah, or whatever who requires lip service from the peons. But it's a nice fantasy.

[Peelee]

Until someone has the hubris to cure megalomania there will always be a king, monarch, dear leader, chairman, grand poobah, or whatever who requires lip service from the peons. But it's a nice fantasy.

Diogenes sighed.

[Lord Torath]

Hey look, the only reason we don't have a mars colony is cause people in charge hate fun

And i guess because the resources that would go towards it are better spent elsewhere I guessAlso:
https://resources.arcamax.com/newspics/240/24060/2406057.gif
https://www.arcamax.com/thefunnies/nonsequitur/s-2778420

Back on topic (I know, right?), I completely agree with woweedd's headcannon. If Old Blind Pete was the guild's best sniper, it seems likely he'd have been called upon to snipe people the guildmaster wanted dead. Maybe he started feeling bad about some of his targets, and maybe after killing Haley's mom, he decided not to kill the next target, and ended up getting his eyes removed.

[Dasick]

Diogenes sighed.

Bah he's just a cynical old man



Until someone has the hubris to cure megalomania there will always be a king, monarch, dear leader, chairman, grand poobah, or whatever who requires lip service from the peons. But it's a nice fantasy.

Tribal structure is very egalitarian actually. Modern bushmen don't really do the chief so much as they do "respected person we trust to help us through tough situations"

Something to look forward to post ww3 :D


Also:

lmao

[Peelee]

Bah he's just a cynical old man

That's a weird way to say "brilliant". :smalltongue:

[Fyraltari]

Yes and no.

Malthusian predictions never came true due to advances in technology, but there's no particular reason to believe these advances will continue as we are running out of the fossil fuels with drove most of the advances in the first place.
If only people were developing alternative forms of energy...


However, war and crime is basically how malthusianism manifests itself since forever.
That's just straight up wrong. War and crime aren't correlated to population density (excpet for the obvious fact that crime need people to happen, so less people mathematically means fewer crimes).

Also epidemics. All three are on a massive rise, and antibiotic resistant bacteria didn't even kick in yet.
That last one is strongly linked to the current ecological disaster.

The long peace the 1st world has enjoyed is going away and we're going back to business as usual.
If you think the first world has gone through a "long peace" you either weren't paying attention in history class or you have an odd definition of long.


If everyone could learn to live in a wine barrel, sure. Everyone wants a cheap iphone and doesn't care about child slaves digging for cobalt though. Why would people be content with what they have when we have a perfectly serviceable population of fit young people we can send off to get us some more stuff.
You serious?


Birth rates slowing down is a local minima.
Here (https://www.ined.fr/fichier/s_rubrique/29368/wpp2019.highlights_embargoed.version_07june2019_vf .fr.pdf)'s the United Nations' World Population Prospect for 2019, it shows that while world population is going to continue growing until at least the 22nd century, the growth rate is slowing more and more, with more than a 1/4 chance that it stabilizes or starts decreasing by 2100, at somewhere between 11 and 13 billion humans. We can provide for thirteen billion humans today. We just don't. The problem isn't overpopulation, it never was and likely never will be, the problem is overconsumption by a privileged few.

Demographically speaking this is a disaster because many developed countries are starting to see 2:1 retired to working adult proportion, and the technological advancements aren't keeping up.
Technological advancements are more than keeping up, the wealth is just being hoarded.

So we're either going to pillow the elderly or go through some more of that delicious world wide economic downturn stuff. Whee.
Or, just a thought, we could stop ****ing people over, and since we're going to have to rework our entire econmic system to account for fossil fuels running out and, you know, the ongoing ecological disaster, anyway, we might as well do so in a way that provides for everyone.

Turns out the way to sustainability is not being a prick. Who would have thunk?




The advances needed to colonize Mars will come really handy in cleaning up house, whether it's dealing with hostile environments (Brian already mentioned making deserts bloom), creating energy and resource efficient settlements, or terraforming techniques.
I think you have that backward, the technological advancements made to deal with the problems we've created that it is too late to fix may come in handy whenever we get to actually colonize another planet, in a few centuries. Which likely won't be Mars, but an inhabitable exoplanet on a distant star.

The idea that some wondertech is going to be invented that's going to fix everything and allow us to continue our ****ty behaviour without facing the consequences is wishful thinking. And a dangerous one at that. We know what the problem is. We know what the solution is and we know who is stopping the implementation of this solution. We've known for decades.

[Dasick]

If only people were developing alternative forms of energy...

How's that working out for the european nations that were using wind or whatever generating 50 or 100 percent of their energy


That's just straight up wrong. War and crime aren't correlated to population density (excpet for the obvious fact that crime need people to happen, so less people mathematically means fewer crimes).

Crime definitely is. War is... uh kind of a stretch. It relies on the idea that all wars are about economics (supposedly the encyclopedia of war says so) and obviously the more populated a piece of land is, there's a certain "carrying capacity" there, going over which is bad enough fro economics


If you think the first world has gone through a "long peace" you either weren't paying attention in history class or you have an odd definition of long.

I'm mostly going by what people think. People in the first world tend to think this whole situation is going to last forever.



You serious?

Clearly not except for learning to live in a wine barrel part.



We can provide for thirteen billion humans today. We just don't. The problem isn't overpopulation, it never was and likely never will be, the problem is overconsumption by a privileged few.

Or, just a thought, we could stop ****ing people over, and since we're going to have to rework our entire econmic system to account for fossil fuels running out and, you know, the ongoing ecological disaster, anyway, we might as well do so in a way that provides for everyone.

Turns out the way to sustainability is not being a prick. Who would have thunk?

Yeah but what are the chances of that changing before it's too late?


Technological advancements are more than keeping up, the wealth is just being hoarded.

I don't think so, but disagreeing with you on this point would be too pedantic, even for me. The important point is, it's not happening. The wealth isn't getting unhoarded or shared anytime soon. In part because enough people don't have a problem with the situation so long as they get a piece of the action


I think you have that backward, the technological advancements made to deal with the problems we've created that it is too late to fix may come in handy whenever we get to actually colonize another planet, in a few centuries. Which likely won't be Mars, but an inhabitable exoplanet on a distant star.

The idea that some wondertech is going to be invented that's going to fix everything and allow us to continue our ****ty behaviour without facing the consequences is wishful thinking. And a dangerous one at that. We know what the problem is. We know what the solution is and we know who is stopping the implementation of this solution. We've known for decades.

I think I made it clear that I don't think we're going to Mars or anywhere soon for that matter. Its not even feasible on a societal level in the sense that it needs enough popular/political drive to happen, let alone technological.

On the bright side, going back to the stoneage is going to do wonders to our environment in a couple centuries or millenia or so.

[Fyraltari]

How's that working out for the european nations that were using wind or whatever generating 50 or 100 percent of their energy
what are you talking about.




Crime definitely is.
Gonna need me a source on that one, chief.

War is... uh kind of a stretch. It relies on the idea that all wars are about economics (supposedly the encyclopedia of war says so) and obviously the more populated a piece of land is, there's a certain "carrying capacity" there, going over which is bad enough fro economics
Aye, because no-one's ever waged war over oil slicks in deserts, heh? Wars aren't caused by population growth.


I'm mostly going by what people think. People in the first world tend to think this whole situation is going to last forever.
In my experience, people are generally pretty anxious about civilzation collapsing any time soon.


Clearly not except for learning to live in a wine barrel part.
Okay, that's good, but the wine barrel (it wasn't a barrel, by the way) is quite the exaggeration.


Yeah but what are the chances of that changing before it's too late?



I don't think so, but disagreeing with you on this point would be too pedantic, even for me. The important point is, it's not happening. The wealth isn't getting unhoarded or shared anytime soon.
Not with that attitude that's for sure.

In part because enough people don't have a problem with the situation so long as they get a piece of the action
Lots of people have a problem with it, actually.
Hey, look up the news about France, that's all I'll say about the subject because dem rules.


I think I made it clear that I don't think we're going to Mars or anywhere soon for that matter. Its not even feasible on a societal level in the sense that it needs enough popular/political drive to happen, let alone technological.
Right.


On the bright side, going back to the stoneage is going to do wonders to our environment in a couple centuries or millenia or so.
That ain't happening either. Our choices right now are definitely punk. The question is: cyber- or solar-?

[brian 333]

As I recall, the Stone Age induced global warming on a massive scale. Mile-thick continental glaciers melted in just a few thousand years after humans learned to knap flint. Let's hope we don't make that mistake again.

[Tzardok]

Disregarding on wether that was manmade or a natural process, the end of the ice age is what allowed humans to build large societies. I don't think you can call that a mistake.

[brian 333]

Disregarding on wether that was manmade or a natural process, the end of the ice age is what allowed humans to build large societies. I don't think you can call that a mistake.

Diogenes would.

There was nothing 13000 years ago that prevented large societies from existing except that the technologies of the time could not support them. There was more than ample farmlands and grazing lands. People were just beginning to learn about crops and animal husbandry, so feeding large populations was a problem.

[Dasick]

Disregarding on wether that was manmade or a natural process, the end of the ice age is what allowed humans to build large societies. I don't think you can call that a mistake.

We're currently threatened by a Total Species Wipe as a result of large scale societies getting into the industrial revolution


As I recall, the Stone Age induced global warming on a massive scale. Mile-thick continental glaciers melted in just a few thousand years after humans learned to knap flint. Let's hope we don't make that mistake again.

No, no. The warming was from the previous high tech civilization that failed to reach for the stars.


what are you talking about.

There's a bit of an energy crisis going on, and the countries who were putting their eggs in the renewable energy basket dont seem to be doing better?


Gonna need me a source on that one, chief.

Crime in cities is disproportionately higher, as measured in incidents per thousand or whatever. I can pull those statistics up if it would be enough to convince you, but it's such a complex topic I don't even know where to begin on that source. Like, what's a source in this situation?


Aye, because no-one's ever waged war over oil slicks in deserts, heh? Wars aren't caused by population growth.

We wouldn't need as many oil slicks if there wasn't such a demand for it. It's actually a lot more complicated than that though.

A growing population needs more resources, and rising living standards require even more of them. Like, it's more complicated than that obviously. But it seems like wars are a lot like animals fighting over territory to me, with just a lot of pretty ornaments because people like to pretend we're more sophisticated than that. And animals fight over territory because they need the food and such.


In my experience, people are generally pretty anxious about civilzation collapsing any time soon.
90% of the time the topic comes up it goes like this:

"Hello friend, would you like to spend some time doing fun prepper hobbies, which are not only fun but will be useful too?"
"wow, you're crazy this civilization is never going to collapse! Im going to stay home and watch netflix instead"
"...but! ...but! ... hmm, ok fine be that way"

Maybe people are anxious and have a negative reaction because they're anxious tho.



Not with that attitude that's for sure.

I try to keep my sphere of concern aligned with my sphere of influence. I do what I can, which actually broadens my sphere of influence over time. I just try to keep a realistic perspective perspective. Si vis pacem para bellum


Lots of people have a problem with it, actually.
Hey, look up the news about France, that's all I'll say about the subject because dem rules.

Oh, I know. And Netherlands too. But imo, people doing the hoarding are not so easily persuaded.


That ain't happening either. Our choices right now are definitely punk. The question is: cyber- or solar-?

I dont think solarpunk is on the table at all.

And I don't think our problems are projected to be resolved enough for cyberpunk to persist. Like, we need even more energy for that, or more efficient use of energy, and neither is really happening. Nuclear fission would be a game changer but it's been 15 years away since the 50s. And there's too much NIMBYing to get good ol plain nuclear off the ground.

[brian 333]

Nuclear fission would be a game changer but it's been 15 years away since the 50s. And there's too much NIMBYing to get good ol plain nuclear off the ground.

Heinlein had an idea to put obsolete nuclear vessels in ports, and if they started to have issues, tow them out to the 600 ft deep line and scuttle them. The rest of the time they pump electricity into the grid.

Not long ago there was a group going around about Salt reactors that cannot explode because the fission does not occur in pressurized water, but inside molten salts, (lava.) The beauty of this system is that if its core has to be dumped, it goes into huge ice-cube trays and when it cools it is already divided into portable bricks. It can also use otherwise toxic radioactives because it cannot be made into a breeder reactor that makes even more toxic radioactives. All of its reactions are downhill. It starts with Thorium and ends up in the low radiation, long half-life forms of Uranium, (which can be left in the fuel,) or otherwise inert metals. Lots of naysayers, some whom have valid safety concerns, but most of whom just say "Radiation! Aieeeee!"

Fusion, if nothing else, has the drawback of adding massive amounts of heat to the environment.

Mars is incredibly colonizable. You don't have to terraform: tents will do. You make plastic from corn, blow a balloon, fill it with a bunch of algae tanks and pump Mars air through it. Then when your tank is packed, you dump the algae outside your tent and start over. When you have a high enough percentage of oxygen in the tent you plant more corn and make bigger tents. While you're waiting for the corn to grow, you wash salts out of Mars dirt and begin to grow living soil.

Not easy. Technical challenges all over the place, but at every step you are learning things you'll never learn on Earth. Luna is a bad choice for Earth life because it has a two-week long night. And massive daytime radiation. You're stuck living underground on the Moon. On Mars you get an extra half hour every day, and with properly coated layers of tent material one can walk around outdoors, naked if your tent is far enough from your neighbor's.

[Dasick]

You don't have to sell me on nuclear. The problem with it is all the NIMBYing and social resistance to it.

Problem with colonizing mars is that they're definitely going to become either a technocracy or a military dictatorship, and the war for independence is not going to go well for us.

[Synesthesy]

You don't have to sell me on nuclear. The problem with it is all the NIMBYing and social resistance to it.


Oh yeah, Nimby is a thing we always speak about.

But, I'm Italian. I'm happy that we don't have Nuclear Reactors because I don't trust the mafias of our country to build Nuclear Reactors. I can trust US, UK, France, Germany.... But I don't trust my own country on that.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Oh yeah, Nimby is a thing we always speak about.

But, I'm Italian. I'm happy that we don't have Nuclear Reactors because I don't trust the mafias of our country to build Nuclear Reactors. I can trust US, UK, France, Germany.... But I don't trust my own country on that.

Nuclear is also, by far, the most expensive energy source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source) currently on the market (barring experimental ones such as wave power that only exists as PoC). It makes no economic sense to build a nuclear reactor as long as there are still surfaces where you can put solar and coastline/mountains where you can place wind turbines (and Italy is particularly blessed by both of those). [Note that if the damn thing has already been built, by all means keep it running as long as it can; I just doubt the economic sense of building new ones]

Also, I remain unimpressed by claims of how clean nuclear is, given they always externalize the cost of digging up the Uranium. Yes, yes, it doesn't take much Uranium to run the thing, but given how rare the damn thing is, you still need a big damn mine to dig through hundreds of tons of other rock to get the ton of uranium needed for the reactor. And I'll grant you that some of those mines aren't dependant on fossil fuels to operate... but that's onyl because they run on unpowered human effort which are honestly an ethical nightmare even if they don't contribute to climate change as directly as a mines dug with the help of these monsters (https://www.mining-technology.com/features/feature-the-worlds-biggest-mining-dump-trucks/).

ETA: Oh, and the cost trend graph lower in the article is also not what you want to see: where wind & solar are, somehow, still getting cheaper every year, nuclear is charitatively plateau'd or, worse, gone up. Oh, and the other thing is that you can have a wind power or solar up and running in months. Building a nuclar power station is a commitment of a decade plus before you even see one MW coming out.

Grey Wolf