No, you are not. You just have bugles on your fingers.

Blind Al helps Deadpool though???

Never met a Paul I liked. Clearly your statement is false.

:)

We mostly avoid combat when possible, or see if the fight is trivialized with class abilities.

If not we have at VTY

More that KDM does the job for dealing with the idea of “stuff goes wrong”. The games mechanics are built around it. Gear is important, characters are not. Which means stuff can go really bad very fast.

I think DnD does heroic fantasy really well.

I think for me the issue is I would rather play Kingdom Death Monster if I want that goal. I am not sure rp based ttrpgs fill that niche well.

1 catastrophic failure out of 400 attempts when you are trained in the task seems… Very high.

I teach sword, if a critical fumble happened 1 out of 400 strikes I would have given up practicing ages ago due to the fear of maiming myself.

Wow med school has really upped their game.

To confirm, you are asserting that the foundation for your answer (mathematical reasoning) does not require any mathematics to understand why it is true.

It’s very dangerous to take a reductionist approach and not be aware of the baked in assumptions you are using. For example, the terms even and odd (for this problem) are well defined as concepts for integers. Which means that your hand-wave statement is true as a result of definitions that were likely created to ensure this property held true.

The notion that “I don’t need math to understand why this is true” is like saying “I made an observation on a phenomenon and I don’t need science to know it’s true.” Which, as you are hopefully aware, is again reductionist and leads to a huge distrust of science from the science illiterate.

Which is the layman’s terms of the proof… I don’t get what your goal is.

Is it a building block for learning to read mathematical works? Yes, of course it is. Is this a ridiculous formalized statement? Yes, of course it is. But that’s the point. We need to practice the trivial to build the scaffolding to tackle the exceptional.

I am not wont to draw conclusions with minimal evidence, but your post seems like you are a malicious reductionist that may be suffering from Dunning Kruger syndrome. I apologize in advance if I have miscategorized you based on this limited sample.

Edit: I am never happy with my formatting.