squaresinger

I had a very similar situation once.

The players where in a clockwork-themed dungeon and kept killing the clockwork golems there. Then they encountered the boss, the maker, who was a clockwork-enhanced human who built all these golems.

The boss was wailing over his destroyed children and when the players entered the room, he was like "Was it you who killed my children?".

And instead of fighting, the players managed to convince the maker, that it wasn't them, but instead the other group of players who where also playing in the same world.

So the maker and his remaining clockwork golems move out to hunt down the other group, and the players just ransacked the dungeon.

It was a quite funny opening scene for the next session of the other group, when they where just minding their business and the maker, whom the players have never heard of, and his remaining army of clockwork golems attacked the players, shouting that they will kill the players for killing his children.

When the second group figured out what happened, they hired an assassin to take out the first group.

Fun times :)

It depends a lot on the type of game that dude is running.

It's certainly not the type I'd be running, but I can see the appeal to some, to run a tough campaign with lots of dice and close calls/dead characters.

But it really needs to be aligned that all people in the party like that.

For example, I did run a few games of Dread, and it's really fun precisely because the characters can die quite easily and in very dramatic ways.

But of course, if you prefer to build and develop your characters over a long time, then this is not the style of game that fits you.

(Though I'd really recommend giving Dread a try. It's amazing for thrilling, immersive one-off sessions)

And if you'd plonk down that solar panel onto a roof where it catches much more sunlight, it would be able to produce even more electricity!

Sure they can. I've been doing that for quite a few years until climate change warmed my city up so much that snow and ice don't really happen anymore.

Don't forget that even if you have a lawn and a few trees/flowers on your single-family home backyard, that area is mostly dead to nature.

So spreading the suburbs out that much means that much more nature will be destroyed.

Part of the issue here is that if you own a car, it's often cheaper to take the car than public transport, because most of the car expenses are paid independent of the immediate usage.

Car value deprecation, taxes, maintainance, all of that cost you money no matter whether you drive into town today or use some other means of transport.

I think it would be much better to put all taxes onto the fuel price. If you pay €5 for a litre of fuel, instead of the ~€1.5/l that we are currently paying, it would make more sense to take public transport some times.

If a significant amount of people live in their cars, it means that the housing market and the wages are seriously out of whack, and the government has not been doing their job for the last decades.

This is actually backed by research.

Players: The GM is always trying to kill us.

GM: If I wanted you dead, you would have died a long time ago.

There's a saying in German: "Konsequenz heißt auch Holzwege zu Ende gehen".

Loosely translated, that means something like "Being consistent means also walking the wrong paths to the end".

But you/they can still use the free, ad-supported tier like before. I don't see any change to people who don't pay.

It just added the option to get rid of ads and trackers in exchange for money.

Tbh, I don't think that's true. Feeling guilty is not tied to someone else judging you as guilty.

People feel guilty for some dumb thing they said in a conversation 20 years ago that nobody remembers but they themselves. At the same time, they don't feel guilty for things where they are actively creating suffering, e.g. buying stuff that was made with child labour.

And I also don't think, that guilt is a helpful feeling to teach children in this context. It would be much more helpful to teach them to spot inequality and unfair things and to work on resolving that inequality.

I don't think that inherited guilt is a helpful concept at all, because did a white school kid do wrong except being born with that skin color?

This only leads to these kids breaking out of that guilt and hating the whole concept.

It's also quite unfair in total, since it includes the children of those who fought against the injustice and it includes white children that are worse off than the average black person.

It would theoretically also include me, even though I was born and live in a country where slavery was never legal and where black slaves where never a thing.

Guilt, like most other negative emotions, paralyzes. It doesn't lead to any positive change.

What would be much more important to teach children to see those who are less privileged than them and to do what they can to fight that injustice.

But sadly, many Americans see anything that could reduce social injustice as socialism and thus bad, so many prefer to wallow in guilt instead of actually improving the situation.