I would agree with you in earlier editions of D&D.
While how things were in previous editions doesn't necessarily have any bearing on how they are in this one, I don't see any indication in the writeups of the various abilities on 5E that makes them significantly different from how they were before.
I'd like for you to provide a few examples from the text to match your arguement. I'm not saying, "Get super specific, because then you'll never find it." But at least a few cases that are along the same lines.
I would agree with you in earlier editions of D&D.
While how things were in previous editions doesn't necessarily have any bearing on how they are in this one, I don't see any indication in the writeups of the various abilities on 5E that makes them significantly different from how they were before.
I'd like for you to provide a few examples from the text to match your arguement. I'm not saying, "Get super specific, because then you'll never find it." But at least a few cases that are along the same lines.
“Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” - that’s a direct quote from the PHB. Are you suggesting the PHB is saying something other than what it’s saying?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So far Erokow has provided a total lack of understanding how all skills, abilities and brains function, both in D&D and out in real life.
My only suggestion for Erokow is read the PHB. It very much seems like you haven't done so. There is a section on skills and abilities and how they are used, in detail, and should correct your (many) misconceptions. If you have read and still fail, well then we're into the territory of providing a 'lesson on how to read English' which isn't going to well in a forum format. So, by that point, this would be a lost cause.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Insight isn't inherently a social skill. There are a number of different abilities or even other skills that draw into what sorts of cues to you can pick up on to gain insight. If you imagine the sort of Sherlock Holmes character typified by Jonny Lee Miller and Benedict Cumberbatch, they'd do extremely well with most Insight checks, but they have low Charisma.
I think, if you want to open this door, you have to consider how far you want to open it. Situationally, Strength may be better suited to Intimidation and Intelligence to Persuasion, for instance. I could even contrive a situation where Constitution might be better for Deception. I get that what you are talking about here is about what ability is generally best for Insight rather than some edge case, but I don't know how much I'd agree. I'd say a number of abilities or skills could incidentally give you insight in a given scenario, but Wisdom is the discernment to make effective use of those cues and apply them to a predictive model. It's the least conditional ability that applies here.
I can't really agree with you about Intimidation and Strength, because I think you misunderstand how Charisma (Intimidation) is supposed to work.
You're missing the point. I am not saying Intimidation should be Strength. I am saying sometimes what is going to be intimidating about a character is their strength. Yet even in those cases we still use Charisma as the modifier to determine how well they can leverage that strength into Intimidation.
By analogy, it's similar to your desire to use Charisma for Insight. Charisma may be relevant to what cues your character picks up on (depending on how you interpret Charisma), but Wisdom is the ability that puts it to use in an Insight check. Could it be done differently? Yes, but then we could change lots of things around to make them situational. That's what I was saying about opening the door. The ability/ skill system is imperfect. I don't think it is wrong to want to improve it, but it's best not to introduce solutions that potentially create more problems.
So what you're saying is, "This is RAW, and suggesting otherwise would likely be problematic?"
I'm not saying it HAS to be Charisma. Sure, I feel that way, but the designers also have a good idea about what they're doing. I may have transcribed the PHB and DMG twice, and generally their inconsistencies pop up because tradition was more important than the ease to which players can learn the game. (That's more a jab at Paladins and Rangers, not Insight).
Are you also a rules lawyer? (I ask that as jovially as possible, as I too am one)
So far Erokow has provided a total lack of understanding how all skills, abilities and brains function, both in D&D and out in real life.
My only suggestion for Erokow is read the PHB. It very much seems like you haven't done so. There is a section on skills and abilities and how they are used, in detail, and should correct your (many) misconceptions. If you have read and still fail, well then we're into the territory of providing a 'lesson on how to read English' which isn't going to well in a forum format. So, by that point, this would be a lost cause.
Prove me wrong. Nice talk, but you have no quotes from any sources.
Cyb3rM1nd seems to have a misconception on how to support an arguement, as well as how English works. (L33t died 20 years ago)
So far Erokow has provided a total lack of understanding how all skills, abilities and brains function, both in D&D and out in real life.
My only suggestion for Erokow is read the PHB. It very much seems like you haven't done so. There is a section on skills and abilities and how they are used, in detail, and should correct your (many) misconceptions. If you have read and still fail, well then we're into the territory of providing a 'lesson on how to read English' which isn't going to well in a forum format. So, by that point, this would be a lost cause.
Prove me wrong. Nice talk, but you have no quotes from any sources.
Cyb3rM1nd seems to have a misconception on how to support an arguement, as well as how English works. (L33t died 20 years ago)
Pangujan already provided the quote required.
“Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” - that’s a direct quote from the PHB. Are you suggesting the PHB is saying something other than what it’s saying?
So far Erokow has provided a total lack of understanding how all skills, abilities and brains function, both in D&D and out in real life.
My only suggestion for Erokow is read the PHB. It very much seems like you haven't done so. There is a section on skills and abilities and how they are used, in detail, and should correct your (many) misconceptions. If you have read and still fail, well then we're into the territory of providing a 'lesson on how to read English' which isn't going to well in a forum format. So, by that point, this would be a lost cause.
Prove me wrong. Nice talk, but you have no quotes from any sources.
Cyb3rM1nd seems to have a misconception on how to support an arguement, as well as how English works. (L33t died 20 years ago)
The entire PHB section on Ability Scores proves you wrong. I'm not going to copy the entire thing. People already have quoted parts of it, which you've conveniently ignored and glossed over - why would I bother doing the same when you're going to ignore it?
I haven't used L33t in my post, so I don't understand why you're referencing that? And it's not dead, it's still being used in chatrooms today.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I would agree with you in earlier editions of D&D.
While how things were in previous editions doesn't necessarily have any bearing on how they are in this one, I don't see any indication in the writeups of the various abilities on 5E that makes them significantly different from how they were before.
I'd like for you to provide a few examples from the text to match your arguement. I'm not saying, "Get super specific, because then you'll never find it." But at least a few cases that are along the same lines.
“Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” - that’s a direct quote from the PHB. Are you suggesting the PHB is saying something other than what it’s saying?
I'm not. What I am suggesting is that we are getting different interpretations. When it's describing perceptiveness and intuition it's describing how well you understand the world around you, but not the social systems around you.
Here's an example of how Perception, Investigation, and Insight handle the same situation.
The Ancient Wizard Archaeus built a tower and used it in his works. The party enters and feels like the whole thing is smaller than it should be.
The Perceptive player will find that his laboratory has two round tables in the middle of the room and one square one pushed up against the wall. It's a very heavy desk and no there doesn't appear to be a switch anywhere on it.
The Intuitive player recognizes that Archaeus would have valued his time and energy too much to have put access to a secret room anywhere else, and a cumbersome switch would have been too annoying for him. It's likely the desk, but he isn't sure how to do it.
The Investigative player would see that the table is built into the wall and that a lack of scratches means that whatever is moving doesn't touch the wall or floor. That means the floor itself has to rotate. Look for something that connects to the floor around the desk.
There's another example (I can't find it at the moment) they describe Insight being used to guess what a target is going to do next. It's getting into their head which generally is not the kind of things that happen anywhere else in Wisdom, but does happen with five out of six Charisma applications.
I would agree with you in earlier editions of D&D.
While how things were in previous editions doesn't necessarily have any bearing on how they are in this one, I don't see any indication in the writeups of the various abilities on 5E that makes them significantly different from how they were before.
I'd like for you to provide a few examples from the text to match your arguement. I'm not saying, "Get super specific, because then you'll never find it." But at least a few cases that are along the same lines.
“Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” - that’s a direct quote from the PHB. Are you suggesting the PHB is saying something other than what it’s saying?
I'm not. What I am suggesting is that we are getting different interpretations. When it's describing perceptiveness and intuition it's describing how well you understand the world around you, but not the social systems around you.
Here's an example of how Perception, Investigation, and Insight handle the same situation.
The Ancient Wizard Archaeus built a tower and used it in his works. The party enters and feels like the whole thing is smaller than it should be.
The Perceptive player will find that his laboratory has two round tables in the middle of the room and one square one pushed up against the wall. It's a very heavy desk and no there doesn't appear to be a switch anywhere on it.
The Intuitive player recognizes that Archaeus would have valued his time and energy too much to have put access to a secret room anywhere else, and a cumbersome switch would have been too annoying for him. It's likely the desk, but he isn't sure how to do it.
The Investigative player would see that the table is built into the wall and that a lack of scratches means that whatever is moving doesn't touch the wall or floor. That means the floor itself has to rotate. Look for something that connects to the floor around the desk.
There's another example (I can't find it at the moment) they describe Insight being used to guess what a target is going to do next. It's getting into their head which generally is not the kind of things that happen anywhere else in Wisdom, but does happen with five out of six Charisma applications.
Prove him wrong. You have no quotes from any sources.
I have a quote from the PHB here for you.
Insight
Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Literally everyone is telling you that you are wrong, maybe you should step away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air.
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Literally everyone is telling you that you are wrong, maybe you should step away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air.
Most people's arguement boils down to, "Can't you read? It obviously says Wisdom." Which is a non-arguement. Several like Cyb3rM1d have added, "You're too dumb to have a point." Which is ad hominem, not a debate. Very few have been like Pangujan and said, "Here's instances of it being Wisdom and why it should be."
Suffice it to say, "Boot lick and don't question" is an aweful stance. "I like it the way it is and don't think it needs to change." Is perfectly fine, but pretending there's a better reason than, "I like it." and arguing "Can't you read?" Instead is delusional at best, and malignant at worst.
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Literally everyone is telling you that you are wrong, maybe you should step away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air.
Most people's arguement boils down to, "Can't you read? It obviously says Wisdom." Which is a non-arguement. Several like Cyb3rM1d have added, "You're too dumb to have a point." Which is ad hominem, not a debate. Very few have been like Pangujan and said, "Here's instances of it being Wisdom and why it should be."
Suffice it to say, "Boot lick and don't question" is an aweful stance. "I like it the way it is and don't think it needs to change." Is perfectly fine, but pretending there's a better reason than, "I like it." and arguing "Can't you read?" Instead is delusional at best, and malignant at worst.
Demanding sources while providing none is equally delusional.
I get it.
You want to use Charisma for your Insight checks but that is between you the Player(or DM) and the DM(or your group). It is fairly obvious at this point that no one here is agreeing with you. It is very unlikely that is going to change.
Most people's arguement boils down to, "Can't you read? It obviously says Wisdom." Which is a non-arguement.
No, "it is what the book says it is because the book is literally meant to say what it is" is definitely an argument. "We're just getting at different interpretations" is a non-argument if you can't provide an actual argument for your interpretation that isn't easily disproven by the book.
There's another example (I can't find it at the moment) they describe Insight being used to guess what a target is going to do next. It's getting into their head which generally is not the kind of things that happen anywhere else in Wisdom, but does happen with five out of six Charisma applications.
Getting into their head is only an application of Charisma if you mean affecting them. If you mean guessing what they are going to do next, it's nothing to do with Charisma. It's most likely Wisdom, at most you could make a case for Intelligence if the guesswork is based on knowledge and facts more than observation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It's pretty obvious the skills assigned to charisma are, yes, social but projectively so. There is an imposition being done in every instance of a skill bound to Charisma. Again, charisma in the English language is not associated with understanding but able to influence.* Wisdom skills are all based on receptive deliberations, and predicated on understanding. You assess the environment, the immediate situation, a person's manner, or an injury and you respond accordingly through a mix of intuition and experience.
*Really, do a deep dive into a dictionary, because it's not so much rules lawyering you're coming up against so much as it is folks with a better grasp of what the words mean and how they've played out in every edition of the game.
So what you're saying is, "This is RAW, and suggesting otherwise would likely be problematic?"
I'm not saying it HAS to be Charisma. Sure, I feel that way, but the designers also have a good idea about what they're doing. I may have transcribed the PHB and DMG twice, and generally their inconsistencies pop up because tradition was more important than the ease to which players can learn the game. (That's more a jab at Paladins and Rangers, not Insight).
Are you also a rules lawyer? (I ask that as jovially as possible, as I too am one)
What I am saying is this is an area where things are rounded out for mechanical simplicity. Real world considerations and complexity will not map perfectly to the Abilities and Skills as defined, even if you start switching up an Ability-Skill pairing here and there. I often find myself at odds with the Abilities and Skills system, and would very often want to define them differently or shuffle things around. The problem is, once you start picking at that thread, how do you keep the sweater from unravelling, especially when as a group at a table, there may be very different feelings about what belongs where?
I'm not saying it can't be messed with; just that at some point the imperfection of it should probably be embraced for the sake of sanity.
As for being a rules lawyer? Probably not (might depend on whom you ask). I just appreciate the game from a systems and design angle, kind of the same way I appreciate grammatical syntax and semantics.
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Literally everyone is telling you that you are wrong, maybe you should step away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air.
Most people's arguement boils down to, "Can't you read? It obviously says Wisdom." Which is a non-arguement. Several like Cyb3rM1d have added, "You're too dumb to have a point." Which is ad hominem, not a debate. Very few have been like Pangujan and said, "Here's instances of it being Wisdom and why it should be."
Suffice it to say, "Boot lick and don't question" is an aweful stance. "I like it the way it is and don't think it needs to change." Is perfectly fine, but pretending there's a better reason than, "I like it." and arguing "Can't you read?" Instead is delusional at best, and malignant at worst.
Demanding sources while providing none is equally delusional.
I get it.
You want to use Charisma for your Insight checks but that is between you the Player(or DM) and the DM(or your group). It is fairly obvious at this point that no one here is agreeing with you. It is very unlikely that is going to change.
Have you actually read my posts? I've added tons of sources. I've literally quoted the PHB more than anyone else here. If you want to skip them and eat troll food, then I hope you enjoy yourself.
Insight isn't inherently a social skill. There are a number of different abilities or even other skills that draw into what sorts of cues to you can pick up on to gain insight. If you imagine the sort of Sherlock Holmes character typified by Jonny Lee Miller and Benedict Cumberbatch, they'd do extremely well with most Insight checks, but they have low Charisma.
I think, if you want to open this door, you have to consider how far you want to open it. Situationally, Strength may be better suited to Intimidation and Intelligence to Persuasion, for instance. I could even contrive a situation where Constitution might be better for Deception. I get that what you are talking about here is about what ability is generally best for Insight rather than some edge case, but I don't know how much I'd agree. I'd say a number of abilities or skills could incidentally give you insight in a given scenario, but Wisdom is the discernment to make effective use of those cues and apply them to a predictive model. It's the least conditional ability that applies here.
As a DM I allow my players to use Strength for Intimidation rolls, I also will allow Intelligence to be used if, for instance, it is a scholar wizard talking to another scholar wizard. That thing we have all seen where 2 people who have no social skills start talking to each other about a subject they are both invested in and the rest of the world just vanishes.
If you can vonvince me to use charisma as a base for insight, I'd let you for the specific instance. Given that insight is the ability to perceive things whereas charisma is the ability to use words and body language to sell an idea, it's going to be a hard sell for me. Wisdom is always going to be the default with intelligence being a potential secondary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Given that Insight is meant to determine the purpose of something like a mechanism or ritual or motive and not "predict speech", WIS all the way.
That stated, I've seen many a DM allow with reasonable argument a player to use a Skill bonus with a different Stat than listed. Predicting speech is not a reasonable argument to use CHA for Insight.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd like for you to provide a few examples from the text to match your arguement. I'm not saying, "Get super specific, because then you'll never find it." But at least a few cases that are along the same lines.
“Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” - that’s a direct quote from the PHB. Are you suggesting the PHB is saying something other than what it’s saying?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So far Erokow has provided a total lack of understanding how all skills, abilities and brains function, both in D&D and out in real life.
My only suggestion for Erokow is read the PHB. It very much seems like you haven't done so. There is a section on skills and abilities and how they are used, in detail, and should correct your (many) misconceptions. If you have read and still fail, well then we're into the territory of providing a 'lesson on how to read English' which isn't going to well in a forum format. So, by that point, this would be a lost cause.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
So what you're saying is, "This is RAW, and suggesting otherwise would likely be problematic?"
I'm not saying it HAS to be Charisma. Sure, I feel that way, but the designers also have a good idea about what they're doing. I may have transcribed the PHB and DMG twice, and generally their inconsistencies pop up because tradition was more important than the ease to which players can learn the game. (That's more a jab at Paladins and Rangers, not Insight).
Are you also a rules lawyer? (I ask that as jovially as possible, as I too am one)
Prove me wrong. Nice talk, but you have no quotes from any sources.
Cyb3rM1nd seems to have a misconception on how to support an arguement, as well as how English works. (L33t died 20 years ago)
Pangujan already provided the quote required.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The entire PHB section on Ability Scores proves you wrong. I'm not going to copy the entire thing. People already have quoted parts of it, which you've conveniently ignored and glossed over - why would I bother doing the same when you're going to ignore it?
I haven't used L33t in my post, so I don't understand why you're referencing that? And it's not dead, it's still being used in chatrooms today.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I'm not. What I am suggesting is that we are getting different interpretations. When it's describing perceptiveness and intuition it's describing how well you understand the world around you, but not the social systems around you.
Here's an example of how Perception, Investigation, and Insight handle the same situation.
The Ancient Wizard Archaeus built a tower and used it in his works. The party enters and feels like the whole thing is smaller than it should be.
The Perceptive player will find that his laboratory has two round tables in the middle of the room and one square one pushed up against the wall. It's a very heavy desk and no there doesn't appear to be a switch anywhere on it.
The Intuitive player recognizes that Archaeus would have valued his time and energy too much to have put access to a secret room anywhere else, and a cumbersome switch would have been too annoying for him. It's likely the desk, but he isn't sure how to do it.
The Investigative player would see that the table is built into the wall and that a lack of scratches means that whatever is moving doesn't touch the wall or floor. That means the floor itself has to rotate. Look for something that connects to the floor around the desk.
There's another example (I can't find it at the moment) they describe Insight being used to guess what a target is going to do next. It's getting into their head which generally is not the kind of things that happen anywhere else in Wisdom, but does happen with five out of six Charisma applications.
Prove him wrong. You have no quotes from any sources.
I have a quote from the PHB here for you.
Insight
Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Well... I stepped into that one. I'll ignore the fact that using the point being debated over to prove your point is self-defeating, but that part is in fact in the book.
Literally everyone is telling you that you are wrong, maybe you should step away from the keyboard, go outside and get some fresh air.
Most people's arguement boils down to, "Can't you read? It obviously says Wisdom." Which is a non-arguement. Several like Cyb3rM1d have added, "You're too dumb to have a point." Which is ad hominem, not a debate. Very few have been like Pangujan and said, "Here's instances of it being Wisdom and why it should be."
Suffice it to say, "Boot lick and don't question" is an aweful stance. "I like it the way it is and don't think it needs to change." Is perfectly fine, but pretending there's a better reason than, "I like it." and arguing "Can't you read?" Instead is delusional at best, and malignant at worst.
Demanding sources while providing none is equally delusional.
I get it.
You want to use Charisma for your Insight checks but that is between you the Player(or DM) and the DM(or your group). It is fairly obvious at this point that no one here is agreeing with you. It is very unlikely that is going to change.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
No, "it is what the book says it is because the book is literally meant to say what it is" is definitely an argument. "We're just getting at different interpretations" is a non-argument if you can't provide an actual argument for your interpretation that isn't easily disproven by the book.
Getting into their head is only an application of Charisma if you mean affecting them. If you mean guessing what they are going to do next, it's nothing to do with Charisma. It's most likely Wisdom, at most you could make a case for Intelligence if the guesswork is based on knowledge and facts more than observation.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It's pretty obvious the skills assigned to charisma are, yes, social but projectively so. There is an imposition being done in every instance of a skill bound to Charisma. Again, charisma in the English language is not associated with understanding but able to influence.* Wisdom skills are all based on receptive deliberations, and predicated on understanding. You assess the environment, the immediate situation, a person's manner, or an injury and you respond accordingly through a mix of intuition and experience.
*Really, do a deep dive into a dictionary, because it's not so much rules lawyering you're coming up against so much as it is folks with a better grasp of what the words mean and how they've played out in every edition of the game.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Y'know what? I dig it.
Have you actually read my posts? I've added tons of sources. I've literally quoted the PHB more than anyone else here. If you want to skip them and eat troll food, then I hope you enjoy yourself.
As a DM I allow my players to use Strength for Intimidation rolls, I also will allow Intelligence to be used if, for instance, it is a scholar wizard talking to another scholar wizard. That thing we have all seen where 2 people who have no social skills start talking to each other about a subject they are both invested in and the rest of the world just vanishes.
If you can vonvince me to use charisma as a base for insight, I'd let you for the specific instance. Given that insight is the ability to perceive things whereas charisma is the ability to use words and body language to sell an idea, it's going to be a hard sell for me. Wisdom is always going to be the default with intelligence being a potential secondary.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Given that Insight is meant to determine the purpose of something like a mechanism or ritual or motive and not "predict speech", WIS all the way.
That stated, I've seen many a DM allow with reasonable argument a player to use a Skill bonus with a different Stat than listed. Predicting speech is not a reasonable argument to use CHA for Insight.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.