I say two.
One will have us fall behind, but if the consequences are dire, there's no need to invite trouble by going for the maximum.
One will have us fall behind, but if the consequences are dire, there's no need to invite trouble by going for the maximum.
There's no need to invite trouble when you don't know the outcome for failure.
Next round we can take three, once we know the lay of this particular game better.
Next round we can take three, once we know the lay of this particular game better.
If we were to pick an extreme I would say it's better to try and sweep all three for the round to see if we can, but I'm fine with picking two and seeing what happens first.
I would assume the consequences for failing on three would be worse than failing on two.
Most likely... but that sounds like a mentality too willing to accept failure as a possibility early on.
Failure is always a possibility.
Knowing that is how you plan to avoid it.
Knowing that is how you plan to avoid it.
I'm merely saying there's a difference between caution and timidity. I still agree with this plan for now.
[ There are probably words, but right now Ishiyama has none. ]
What in the shadow's name-
What in the shadow's name-
[ After a moment to try to parse the words- honestly does this person not know grammer? Ishiyama nods in agreement. ]
If they know the dog Honey would be aggressive, they should have taken precautions before taking the smaller dog out with them.
If they know the dog Honey would be aggressive, they should have taken precautions before taking the smaller dog out with them.
These questions are--Never mind. I agree with you both about the first question though.
[frowns] Neither of you know what a sheep is? [beat] Why do I even know what a sheep is? [groan] Does that make it my job to try and produce wordplay around them?
[frowns] Neither of you know what a sheep is? [beat] Why do I even know what a sheep is? [groan] Does that make it my job to try and produce wordplay around them?

Page 1 of 6