• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle







  • NB: Alignments are not factions. Two Chaotic aligned characters are not inherently on the same side; they are on their own sides, individually.

    Here are two potential ways to play it.

    If your Fey is Chaotic Neutral:

    You find the two clerics dragging your resident murder hobo in front of a tribunal hilarious, and in fact, might be inclined to help. It would be different if they attempted the same for you; in your mind, the action would be justified if you did it, but for the supposed “good” rogue, they still just killed someone out of convenience. You are allowed to be a hypocrite, they are not.

    If you are Chaotic Good:

    That rogue still straight up ganked a guy for being an asshole. Even if you think the guy probably deserved it, and maybe could have talked yourself into doing the same, it has nonetheless created a situation where you are inconvenienced. They screwed up big time, and not even that deep down, they know they’ve got a black mark on their soul, but that’s neither your nor the clerics’ problem. The last thing you want to hear are more verbose, moral arguments from the clerics and to be sidetracked from the mission; the rogue can atone later, this nonsense is getting between you and getting paid.


  • Are you and the rogue chaotic good, or chaotic neutral? It doesn’t seem like you’re clear on this with the rest of your party. Murder (e.g., backstab in the middle of dialogue) is not a “good” action, any way you slice it, even if the spectator is an asshole, evil, or through RP, would have eventually led to combat resulting in death anyways. If you were playing true chaotic, it’s understandable, but it doesn’t sound like that is what was made clear.

    And if you’re trying to force an alignment shift, consider that you may be ruining the enjoyment of everyone else at the table; if I’m playing a lawful good cleric, I’m not sure my character would party with a true chaotic fey, which would essentially end the campaign.












  • While Microsoft should absolutely be held accountable for flaws in its code and its failures to disclose actively-exploited attacks in the wild against said flaws, most organizations have policies (or the lack thereof) resulting in security flaws you can drive a truck through.

    Specifically, a lack of M365 and Teams “app” review and approval processes, a lack of CASB tooling, and grossly inadequate asset inventories and security agent coverage. You can’t protect what you can’t see, and most Microsoft customers are barely doing the minimum.

    Is that Microsoft’s fault, when they explicitly tell your admins you’ve got a “Secure Score” of 19%, and they don’t do shit about it?