I’m sorry, did you just “no actually” someone who was espousing books as disconnected entertainment?

Yes, rogue could have a 100% chance of success. Obviously their chance isn’t going to get any better than that, seems like an odd thing to bring up as a counter point though.

As for your suggested explanations for the assistance, none of that lines up with it being at worst non-impactful to do a paired group check. The rogue is completely unimpeded by helping the paladin, and in situations where their chance isn’t already 100% they might even have a better chance, since any possibility for success from the paladin could potentially cover a failure from the rogue. If the rogue only fails on a 3 or less and the paladin needs a 19, that raises the success rate from 85% alone to 86.5% with the paladin tagging along.

Even it was a group comprised entirely of equally skilled rogues I don’t think it makes sense to make them more stealthy in groups, which is what this rule does, for the simple fact that larger groups of people are enormously easier to spot.

If the simple fact that literally any pairing of two people is more stealthy then either of them alone isn’t enough reason to not use this rule for stealth then I don’t know what is.

So what, exactly, is the justification for how a rogue “covers for” a plate wearing paladin with no dex bonus? Keep in mind that that “half must succeed” rule means the rogue is very slightly more likely to succeed with a noisy partner than alone, assuming that success and failure are possible outcomes for both participants. Even if it’s impossible for the other to succeed the rogue is at worst unimpeded.

The 2024 rules specifically clarify that stealth is not typically a suitable skill to be rolled in such a way.

Could be something other than D&D. +18 is pretty easily achievable in mid-level Pathfinder 2e.

In theory yes, but once you have multiple particles interacting things get really complicated really fast and nice tidy interference patterns like in the double slit experiment become much less common.

All atoms are multiple particles at quantum scales, even a single hydrogen atom is comprised of four.

That’s not a complaint specific to discord though. You just don’t like large chatrooms.

Encryption and hashing are different things. You can’t get the original back out of a secure hash. They’re used only to confirm that whatever piece of data you have now matches the one that was provided originally, because they produce the same hash. You can’t store hashes for any data that you ever want to be able to read.

Fine. Wear cargo pants and rock the Kim Possible look.

Hi. Person who has identified male my entire life here.

I have no idea what this “cell phone pocket” in underwear thing is about. Sounds like lunacy to me.

That said, give pockets to women who want pockets. It is baffling to me that this is still a thing.

Wow. I hadn’t thought about movie bob in years. Thanks for ruining that.

It’s also really bad even for AI.

Not only would it have been really, really easy to find a non-AI image, it would have been similarly easy to get better results from image gen. It’s like they went out of their way to find the worst slop possible.

I know that sounds ridiculous, since I can “simply not use them,” but I want to spend my money on an appliance, not a consumer data collection tool.

For what it’s worth you’re actually spending the manufacturer’s money (or at least some of their profit margin) on a data collection device that they won’t get to use.

Smart devices are cheaper because the data collection subsidizes them.

…just to make sure I understand…

You boil water in an electric kettle or similar, then break your spaghetti and drop it into an empty pot before pouring the now just-short-of-boiling water on top of it and bringing it back up to a boil?

And you think this is an easier process than just boiling water in the pot then dropping the spaghetti in?

I won’t stand for this PowerShell superhero comic erasure.

The responses to this comment led me to discover that some people don’t wait for the water to boil before putting the pasta in.

…you put spaghetti in the cold water before it’s boiling? What?

Boil the water first, then put the pasta in.

Alternatively you allow that line of reasoning but subsequently require that they spend hours searching every room they enter multiple times.

Also Misophonic and 100% agree.

All unnecessary sound bothers me. If you’re doing a thing that doesn’t need to make noise but choose to do so it’s going to annoy me. For whatever reason though chewing in particular drives me to madness.

I’ve argued for this before, both on Lemmy and elsewhere. Nice to see someone else with the same take.

Do you also get the impression that people who disagree with you almost always fail to understand the argument?