Wishing upon a Star

The pancreas stat could control the passive recovery, similar to saturation in Minecraft.

The trachea stat could control voice (or persuasion), though I am least satisfied with this conclusion. Larynx would better fit this role, however, the alternative would be resistance to poison, which I believe better suits other organs, namely, the liver.

The kidney stats could control the length of time that the poison status would ail you for. Alternatively, if you find that to be too redundant, it could instead be resistance to acid.

This was a delightful exercise, but I do see the emerging issues – poison resistance is a function of many organs, so there might be difficulty avoiding overlap while assigning roles.

Additionally, assigning every organ a stat would go against the design principle of simplicity. Compare Fallout 3's 14 skills to the human body's 78 organs.

Stupid idiots I made <3 💥💥🥊🥊💥

lawful good: book ribbon neutral good: sentence pointer chaotic good: scrap paper, receipts

lawful neutral: ebook true neutral: proper bookmark chaotic neutral: leaf

lawful evil: memorizing the page number neutral evil: leaving the book face down chaotic evil: dog ear

ID end.] –

Interesting! Whereas 'good' is equated to using a physical bookmark, 'evil' is equated with only using the paper itself. Likewise, 'lawfulness' is equated with avoiding alternation of the pages, while 'chaos' is equated with altering the book or perhaps using the books in a way unintended.

I'm afraid life is too uncertain to guarantee such a thing. Throughout our time on Earth the hand of fate deals us many blows, most of which are beyond our control. But, in my personal life, I've found that therapy, doctoring, learning, self reflection, and applying new knowledge to your behavior can absolutely improve the things you can control. I recommend reading Meditations by Marcus Aurelius to gain some peace about accepting what's within our power to change and accepting what is not.

tumblr being the website of cannibalism talk and the moral discussions of it im curious what the consensus is if it was actually legal.

The avoidance of the puddle would be precisely the kind of superb detail that, say, Tolstoy might flourish; War and Peace has an execution scene very close in spirit to Orwell’s essay, and it may well be that Orwell basically cribbed the detail from Tolstoy. In War and Peace, Pierre witnesses a man being executed by the French, and notices that, just before death, the man adjusts the blindfold at the back of his head, because it is uncomfortably tight. The avoidance of the puddle, the fiddling with the blindfold—these are what might be called irrelevant or superfluous details. They are not explicable; in fiction, they exist to denote precisely the inexplicable. This is one of the “effects” of realism, of “realistic” style. 

But Orwell’s essay, assuming it records an actual occurrence, shows us that such fictional effects are not merely conventionally irrelevant, or formally arbitrary, but have something to tell us about the irrelevance of reality itself (…) There was no logical reason for the condemned man to avoid the puddle. It was pure remembered habit. Life, then, will always contain an inevitable surplus, a margin of the gratuitous, a realm in which there is always more than we need: more things, more impressions, more memories, more habits, more words, more happiness, more unhappiness.