• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2025

help-circle










  • I did one where everyone started in the same town during the resurgence of dragons -who were more like a dangerous pests than an unstoppable force.

    Half the PCs were from a previous campaign, so I had everyone tell me according to their back story what that person would be doing independently in a medium sized town.

    (1 was working at an orphanage, 2 were staying in the local tavern, 1 was out all night partying)

    The town was attacked at night forcing all of them to respond. Some of them ended up fighting together. The rest were folded in when the city guard thanked everyone who helped.

    Unfortunately this was an impromptu one shot, so we didn’t get very far.

    As DM I don’t enjoy trying to corral PCs into a storyline. I prefer to give people an open world that responds to their actions accordingly.

    The BBEG is always on the horizon, never in the middle of the road. Random Encounters are not forced or used to move the plot forward. I try to directly attach as much of my world building as possible to actions taken by PCs.

    I’m all about rule of cool. I want my PCs to believe they’re going to die without killing them off. I fudge every number except d20s because I want people to focus on the narrative and the role playing over the numbers.



  • Canaconda@lemmy.catoAsk Science@lemmy.worldHas the afterlife already been disproven?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.popularmechanics.com%2Fscience%2Fa63831340%2Fdmt-near-death-experience%2F

    It’s inferred because we see it in animals, but have yet to scientifically observe it in humans for obvious ethical reasons.

    I get your point but do not necessarily agree that the body’s reluctance to die disproves an afterlife especially since if the afterlife is real that means the body is not the self.

    1. So you asked for evidence that the afterlife doesn’t exist. As such the mere assumption that the afterlife does exist is not a sufficient refutation of the evidence presented to you. I’m not disagreeing with your assessment, just pointing out that the way you’re conducting this discussion is inappropriate for a science based community.

    2. You actually don’t get my point. I’m not saying biology disproves the existence of the afterlife.

    I’m saying based on biological behaviour, whatever afterlife might exist, doesn’t interact with our biology in a way that our biology is aware of said afterlife’s existence.

    That’s why my caveat regarding NDE is that maybe the brain is uploading your spirit to heaven we just don’t have the neurological understanding to observe that currently.


  • Canaconda@lemmy.catoAsk Science@lemmy.worldHas the afterlife already been disproven?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    the afterlife concept doesn’t get the same treatment

    Once something becomes a shared experience, it ‘exists’, to a degree. Perhaps some people genuinely believe in a flying spaghetti monster, but it’s not comparable to the number of people who have the shared experience of xyz-religious-view.

    Why are ‘we’ asking, “Does God Exist?”. Rewind 2000 years and ask that question, and buddy would just point to Jupiter and say “there he fuckin is!” like you’re an idiot.

    We ask “does god exist”, because god must fundamentally supercede our ever evolving understanding. We have disproven the old gods by understanding the forces of nature that ancient “common sense” attributed as evidence for them. As our understanding grows so does our definition of what can constitute a god.

    We ask why does god exist because are at a point of knowledge where nothing is apparently god anymore.

    Proving negatives is certainly a more philosophical endeavor than a problem to solve with the scientific method. But that doesn’t mean we can’t apply proper scientific methodology to our philosophical discussions.

    Relevant Cyanide and Happiness


  • Canaconda@lemmy.catoAsk Science@lemmy.worldHas the afterlife already been disproven?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The body’s determination to avoid death indicates that if there is an afterlife, it does not have a physiological connection that our biological bodies can detect.

    Fight: The threat of death presents itself > Adrenalin and cortisol spike increasing heart rate and blood pressure to prepare for action.

    Flight: The threat cannot be fought. Noradrenaline spikes to engage blood flow in the muscles to assist with fleeling.

    Freeze: The threat has overwealmed us. The parasympathetic nervous system slows our heart rate, lowers blood pressure, and contracts blood flow in the extremities; as a last ditch effort to survive the traumatic and potentially fatal incoming damage.

    Near Death: Brain activity spikes. It increases production of the protein hamartin, which helps neurons survive oxygen and glucose deprivation. It releases DMT changing the activity in the frontal cortex and in some cases causing memories to be rapidly recalled.

    The main caveat to this theory is if neuroscience discovers that our brains know something we don’t and are uploading/backing-up/doing-something we have no evidence for at this time.


  • Layman here:

    Speculatively speaking; everything we know about our bodies’ response to death/trauma indicates that our own bodies do not believe in an afterlife. Everything from flight>fight>freeze to seeing your life flash before your eyes near death.

    I believe that “god” or “afterlife” as defined cannot be measured by science. Conversely if we did discover a functional god/afterlife they would not fit the colloquial definitions. Either way they don’t exist; as defined.