#3E-Problem-solving ability

[talenlee]

4e: The Were-With-All

Players love options. Players love the ability to differentiate their character. One of the problems that D&D character building has is that, certainly in the versions that are centralised like 3e, any given member of a class has a certain limited number of options that are worth taking. A wizard wouldn’t take Weapon Focus (Longsword), for example, even if the longsword is the best weapon of its type. This meant that there were a lot of options that were made to create or convey a mood about a character that weren’t worth spending one of your limited feat choices on.

In 4e, they added another dimension to each character, with the idea of character themes. Character themes were optional, and gave a character in the level range of 1-10 something class-independent that nonetheless let you expand the abilities of your character in a way that had a sort of, well, for lack of a better word, a vibe. By making these packages contained, it meant that the game mechanics for them could be balanced against one another —

Which unfortunately, they weren’t.

See, themes are a forgotten, excellent spicy component of the 4th edition character building. The classic D&D character building is race/class, where you know, you have an elf fighter, or an orc wizard, or whatever, and those player options are meant to represent broadly, all the things about your character that let you interface with the story. Earlier versions of the game meant that you might ask the DM for specific things that represent your character’s specific story, but in 3e there was a push towards ensuring that players never got that kind of tailoring, because it would disrupt the delicately balanced game system of 3e that relied on all players having access to equal

and commensurate

power

sorry, I couldn’t finish that joke.

Point is that themes were an addition after the fact and as good as they are at giving player characters an extra dimension, a lot of them were designed before a good solid power level for them had been properly dialed in. Basically, about ten of the themes are ‘the good ones’ and then the rest are ‘okay, but.’ There’s also two gross outliers – the Fey Beast Tamer and the Guardian. Still, there’s room for a lot of ‘okay’ under ‘too good,’ and in that space, the game system had room to slot the werewolf, werebear and wererat.

If you follow the How To Be series, you’ll know I recommend the werebear reasonably commonly, when I’m talking about a mode-shifter character. I like mode-shifting characters, after all, it stands to reason I’m going to use it. Thing is, I’d recommend it more if it was, uh, generally good.

The best thing about the werewolf, thematically, in heroic is that you can turn into a wolf. Cool! So can The Pack Outcast, and it doesn’t give up everything to do it, and when you fight, it also gives you combat advantage.

I recommend the werebear as a way to solve a problem, which is usually, a problem with the Knight. Knights make nothing but basic attacks. Werebears can make pretty good basic attacks. Knight features amplify their basic attacks, or trigger on their basic attacks. It’s not like the knight werebear is generally good, it’s just if you mode shift, and want to work as a defender, the knight werebear is one of your best use cases for either and it’s one of the simplest characters you can make and play. That’s the thing that recommends it – both knight and werebear shut you out of a lot of options.

These themes run into the problem that if you don’t need what they offer in terms of a shapeshifting combat form, you wouldn’t take them. They wouldn’t pull you towards making the character into this kind of thing without that demand, without the need to be werewolfy, or wereratty. Werewolves at level 10+ get pretty good, because then they can access beast form powers and keywords freely, in all forms, which means there’s finally a reason for a druid to want to be one, but that’s also solving a problem the druid doesn’t really have at level 10+.

The wererat is just kind of a sad orphan. You make a character with the wererat theme because you want to play a wererat, and that very specific, narrow flavour lines up – like, if you say ‘this character is a wererat’ it invokes a kind of rogue skillset right? Knifey, sneaky? The thing is, there are a lot of things rogues already do and the wererat doesn’t add anything to that. A melee basic attack that doesn’t use your own weapon and inflicts 1d4 damage and ongoing damage just isn’t going to be worth it almost all the time.

I like the lycanthropes a lot – they’re solid in the Paragon tier! But before that point, you kind of need very specific circumstances for them to work, and that strikes me as a problem. It’s part of a greater problem – that most of the themes are a little weak, or a little too specific. These types of shapeshifting animal monster people are fun. I think they’re fun and I want them to be good. I want them to work so that if you play a character who ‘should’ work with the claws and fangs and teeth side of things, it shouldn’t need you to jump through two dozen hoops to get there.

My ideal situation with themes is that a player should be able to look at a term that meaningfully relates to their character and go ‘oh, yeah, that! That’s cool!’ and pick it and get something that works. It’s okay for things to pull in different directions, but it’s not okay for a broad archetype term like werewolf to pull in only one direction and still rarely be worth it. I don’t like the idea that spending resources on cheap magical items should replace something that should be ‘how your character exists.’

Check it out on PRESS.exe to see it with images and links!

[mornyavie]

At @my-smial​‘s request, I’m going to elaborate on the differences I’ve seen between 3E D&D and 5E, focusing on mechanics which make big differences to the experience of play. Following up on this post (x), it’s intended as further discussion of the ways in which 5E is a fundamentally different system despite frequent cosmetic similarities with 3E.

First, here’s where I’m coming from. I’ve almost exclusively played 3E - and, which is going to make many people reading this a bit boggled, I honestly do mean 3E, not 3.5. My childhood group was a bit set in our ways (and unwilling to spend money on new source books). So we certainly didn’t bother switching to 5E! We were an insular group, playing with my father (who cut his own teeth on early AD&D, and brought in lots of homebrew rules from that system), and I didn’t really even know that other RPGs and play styles existed until I started playing with college friends much later. I have 3E basically memorized - enough to point out where 3 and 3.5 differ, even - but my knowledge of 5E is limited to recent exposure, talking to 5E friends, and just skimming the books.

I’d love to hear other people’s input, especially if you disagree with me or can bring in more input from the 5E side of things.

3E numbers are just plain higher than 5E numbers. This follows on from AD&D numbers, which were even higher. A big reason, I think, is the 5E proficiency system over 3E’s skill ranks and attack bonus. The proficiency bonus is never higher than 6, while a fighter’s attack bonus goes up every level, reaching 20 (and higher, if you’re playing epic-level versions), and skill ranks are a similar progressions. ACs are lower in 5E to compensate, and AC-enhancing spells less powerful. And this is slightly less true, as technically both 3E and 5E recommend using 4d6 drop 1 to generate ability scores and ending up with a usual spread around 10-16, (ignore this if you don’t understand it), but 3E expects even your ability scores to be slightly higher; you can increase them more frequently as you go up in level, and spells and items that augment them are more common and powerful. Again, this is following the trend from AD&D, where I’ve seen people on forums swearing by things like a forty-point buy system that result in the majority of your stats important to your class starting at 16-18.

Result: 5E players expect different numbers. My players were impressed by stats I considered mediocre, and they initially failed to utilize stat enhancements (or debuffs, on their enemies) because they thought they were already high enough and didn’t realize that those were still powerful tools.

Following from this, 5E advancement is different from 3E advancement, because you can’t rely on increasing stats to get more powerful. Some of 3E’s special-ability-focused classes advance more by accumulating their various powers than by adding up numbers; my impression is that this is true basically of all 5E classes.

Result: 5E players look more for discrete abilities than to geek out over having a six instead of a five. My players were sometimes disappointed by 3E’s less overtly flashy classes, and felt frustrated when their rewards were “hey your save gets +2 now!!!!” They also tended, following on the last point, to fail to remember and understand how the various numbers mattered and to thus fail to fully utilize the many, many 3E buffs and debuffs.

The whole concept of short rests, cantrips (as opposed to 3E’s 0-level “cantrip” spells), and refreshable special abilities (which actually draws a lot from 4E, in my opinion) makes a huge change in resource management. In 3E, managing your resources like a caster’s spells and a magic item’s charges is based only on a 24-hour-day, and you end the day fairly drained and low-power. This is especially important for low-level magic users, who often have barely half a dozen spells, many of them practically cosmetic like prestidigitation, before they’re out for the day and reduced to maybe bopping a goblin over the head with a staff and praying nothing tries to make a go for their AC of 11. Compare 5E, where magic users have unlimited access to cantrips that are often quite powerful (more equivalent to a 1st or maybe even 2nd level spell in 3E) and many class’s special abilities can be refreshed by a short rest instead of overnight. The resource management becomes much shorter-range. 

Result: 5E players don’t pay attention to resources and time flow the same way 3E players do. For my players, I think this was the biggest stumbling block making the switch: they ignored my increasingly unsubtle hints that they might want to stop for the night and repeatedly charged into combat without realizing that their cleric only had one spell left before they were out of aid - and out of healing.

This is a subtler one, and partially based on the kind of campaign you’re running, but I get the impression that 5E is a lot more stingy with its magic items than 3E. They separate items by common-rare instead of minor-major, and the random gen tables seem to net you items less often. 3E players get loaded up, unless the DM is consciously restricting magic items. It’s a bit of a meme, the ludicrous-looking adventurer with a cloak of darkest night and a couple jeweled rings and a massive necklace and a golden circlet and a pair of goggles and.... and it’s all part of the way that, I think, 3E advancement seems to be much steeper and higher-ceilinged than 5E.

Result: didn’t come up as much in that brief adventure I ran with this group, so I can’t comment well. My players weren’t used to having as many items as I gave them, but, when they remembered they existed, they also were a lot more ingenious about clever and unorthodox applications of items, instead of brute-forcing and expecting to find new items if they wanted to solve new problems.

[sarvottam123]

3E’S TO CREATE HAPPY LEARNERS- ENRICH, ENGAGE AND EMPOWER- Sarvottam School  

We believe that one of the big challenges in crafting a learning experience isfiguring out how to engage the learners. An enrichment programenables students to realize their potential in a variety of settings beyond theclassroom. An enrichment activity is an experience where kids can extendtheir learning to improve or enhance skills, knowledge, and well-being.Through educational enrichment programs, students can develop a sense of self-awareness.This is one of the core features at Sarvottam International School, to engagethe children in enrichment activities which is an inclusion of academics,sports, arts, and more, and are offered with the goal of providingentertainment and enjoyment, while sharpening and fleshing-out studentskillsets and thus proving the fact of being the Best School In Greater Noida The school offers a wide range of activities, catering to the need of everyindividual for their holistic development and the goal isn’t purelyentertainment, it holds kids’ attention and deeper levels of thinking. We aimto empower students to reach their highest potential with full-time andflexible learning solutions.An insight to 3E: Learning modules1. Learning through hands-on experienceSitting quietly while reading and listening to lectures, rote learning, etc.works well in some kids but it has been observed that kids thrive whenexposed to experiential and hands-on or group learning to introduceconcepts. This combination leads to a deeper understanding.2. Personality development programWhen students explore new interests, they learn about themselves. Theydiscover hidden talents and abilities. We have a curriculum for PDP thatfocuses on the grooming of the child in all aspects. Students also meet newkinds of kids, different from their usual friends. These experiencesencourage growth in areas of sensitivity, acceptance, and empathy.3. STEAM education An area that gives the students the much-needed excitement to buildand learn all along. STEM programs require kids to solve problemstogether.4. Skill development based clubsWe believe in the potential of all children to achieve. All students aregiven access to enrichment activities as part of the curriculum. Learnersare being engaged in specific sessions targeted at their strengths andinterests. It is an innovative program that supports our aim ofempowering the students through learning sessions.5. Critical thinkingThrough maths games and problem solving, critical thinking activities aidin making sense of maths problems and develop perseverance in solvingthem.6. Cooking through literacyCulinary skills are a great way to engage students. This is one of our mostpopular enrichments. Hands-on cooking activities help children developconfidence and skill. Following recipes encourages children to be self-directed and independent, it also teaches them to follow directions anddevelop problem-solving skills.For More Info Visit-https://www.sarvottamnoida.com 

[forged-through-trials]

The following day, we hit up Mach-Na again, as she seemed to be a great source of info about Cheydinhal. Irritable, sure, but informative. Mach-Na: "Are you actually going to buy something, today?" Trials: "No, no... we're just curious about what the words is around town." Mach-Na: "Ugh... I need to start charging for gossip! "Well, have you heard of Rythe Lythandas?" Trials: "'Right Left-Hand-Us'?" Mach-Na: "...close enough. "He's possibly the greatest painter in all of Cyrodiil." Trials: "When I get a house, I'll be sure to give him a call." Mach-Na: "...no, not that kind of painter. He does landscapes. "Sadly, he's gone missing. His wife, Tivela, is beside herself with grief." Trials: "I'd ask why the town guard aren't looking for him, but after my last job, I know exactly why they haven't. Chances are Ulrich never thought to fine people for going missing." Mach-Na gave us some directions, so we legged it over toward the Lythandas home. It was decidedly large and posh, as one might expect from a career-artist. The door was unlocked, so Ruin and I let ourselves in, announcing our entrance to the lady of the house. Trials: "Greetings. I'm Forged-Through-Trials, and this is my associate, Ruined-Tail." Ruin: "Greetings, madam." Tivela: "...well, apologies, strangers-who-barged-into-my-home, but may I ask you a favor? "It seems my husband, Rythe, has gone missing, and I just don't know what to do." Ruin: "I... question the reasoning of asking two strangers who waltz into your home uninvited for help in this matter." Trials: "Well, who else is she gonna ask? The town-guard who will fine her for disturbing their nap?" Ruin: "...point taken." Trials: "Anyway, Ms. Tea-f'er-ya Lift-And-Bust--" Tivela: "...close enough." Trials: "--we actually stopped by because we'd heard he was missing. I'm something of a traveling mystery-solver, and happy to put my skills to the case!" Tivela: "I thank you for your kind offer, madam. "Yes, Rythe likes to work in his studio with the door locked, so no one can disturb him. He usually comes out to eat dinner and sleep, but two days ago, he didn't come out at all. When he hadn't left his studio for a whole day, I used to key he gave me for emergencies to open the door... and he was completely gone! "I'm sure he never left that room. So I have no idea where he's gone. Please, help me find Rythe. I love him dearly, and I am so worried!" Trials: "Oooh, a Locked Door Mystery. Never had one of those, before. "But worry not, ma'am. I'm on the case!" Tivela offered me the key to Rythe's studio, bidding that I hurry to find her husband. Accepting the key, I turned toward the studio, unlatching the door and stepping inside.

Huh, so this is where the "magic" happens? Where Rythe does all of his work that has made him famous across Cyrodiil? Seems a little cramped, to me, but those paintings leaning against the wall spoke to his talent and ability. The narrow setting sure didn't hamper him any. I took a little look around. Nothing jumped out at me right away as being any kind of evidence. There were just a bunch of art supplies laying around, and not even so much as a sign of a struggle. Then, out of the corner of my eye, I thought I saw something. I looked to find that painting sitting on the easel. Ruin was occupied consoling Tivela, so I stepped into the room to investigate, and thought that I had seen the face of that painting ripple as if it were the surface of a pond. I stepped up, and drew even closer still, reaching a hand out to touch the face of that painting, and...

Well, let's a-go! After the strange, white void, my eyes cleared to reveal a foresty meadow. Though something was very... off about this place. From the way the ground felt, to the look of the rocks, the trees, the leaves... leaves? Those aren't even leaves! They're painted on! Where the heck was I? This place was like something out of one of my Akaviri Picture-Books! It was about then that I noticed I was alone. Ruin hadn't followed me in. Maybe he hadn't seen me get sucked into the painting, and was right now wondering what had become of me. I wasn't alone for long, though. As I was still trying to acclimate to the bizarre landscape, a fairly dressed Dark Elf approached me.

Rythe: "Where did you come from? You look real enough. You must be from the outside! Oh, thank goodness someone finally came!" Trials: "Whoa, are you Ripe Lasagna?" Rythe: "...close enough. "While I'm overjoyed to see a friendly face, I'm afraid I have some bad news for you." Trials: "Salmo the Baker is discontinuing his famous Sweet Rolls?" Rythe: "...okay, maybe not that bad. "No, we're stuck here. Sorry to break it to you like that, but if it wasn't for that annoying thief, we wouldn't be in this predicament!" Trials: "IDidn'tDoEet!" Rythe: "What? No, not you! It was a different thief. "I was in my studio, when a Bosmer wearing dark clothing accosted me. Before I could call for help, he knocked me unconscious." Trials: "Very rude of him." Rythe: "How do you think I feel? "When I came to, I found that the door to my studio was still locked, and that the thief had snatched my paintbrush. That's when I saw it." Trials: "You mean the void of white with the hollow star-shape in it?" Rythe: "No, that came later. What I saw was something on the canvas of my painting that I hadn't put there. It looked somewhat like a troll, but it was badly done. Then it hit me!" Trials: "The Bosmer again?" Rythe: "No, it was the realization that the Bosmer must have leapt into the painting, then painted guardians inside to protect himself using the Brush of Truepaint!" Trials: "Whoa, slowdown. What the heck is the 'Brush of Truepaint'?" Rythe: "I knew the secret of my success would be revealed one day. I can tell you all about the Brush, if you like." Rythe regaled me with the tale; in the war of 3E 396, his father was a soldier who was injured when an errant fireball exploded near him, costing him the use of both arms. A painter before being conscripted into the war, it seemed his career was over. But he prayed night and day to the Divine Dibella for some way to express his artistic side once more. And I guess because Dibella is not the goddess of growing new arms, instead she gave him a paintbrush woven from her own hair. The magic of the Brush allows the painter to step inside of a canvas to paint objects to life size. Though 'paint' is not quite accurate, since all the user has to do is think about what they want, and it will appear. The Brush of Truepaint was then passed down to Rythe from his father, and is the source of Rythe's talent and fame. Trials: Deadpan. "Oh. So you're a phony." Rythe: "...I mean, yes, but you shouldn't say it like that." Trials: "Oh well. Truth be told, I've been all Fake It 'Til I Make It since I first arrived in Cyrodiil." Rythe: "...faking it?" Trials: "Oh, yes. I'm an alcoholic ex-slave who gets by mostly by the fact that I'm harder to kill than I look. I honestly can't believe people keep giving me jobs. Or that I keep pulling wins outta my butt." Rythe: His face paled. "Oooohh that doesn't inspire confidence." Trials: "About as much confidence as I have in your art-skills." Rythe: "Right. Any port in a storm, eh? "We need to get the Brush back, which means you're going to have to get past the thief's Painted Trolls. I cannot do it. I am not a warrior." Trials: "What about the thief himself? Anything I need to worry about with him?" Rythe: "Thankfully, that problem solved itself. I heard him scream not long after I arrived. The trolls that the thief painted seemed to have turned on their creator and killed him. He didn't know the Brush had its risks." Trials: "Well, sucks to be him." Rythe: "The creatures now roam loose all over the forest and in the clearing where I was still working. The Brush is on the body of the Bosmer Thief, there. "Here, take these bottles of turpentine. They may help." Trials: "...unless we're making gut-rotting moonshine, I don't see how. But thanks, I guess."

On second thought, everything here is made of paint, right? So maybe this turpentine could be useful after all! I could... pour some on the rocks to melt them... nah, no, what would I do with melted rocks? I guess the best alternative would be to pour this stuff on my weapons to give them a little extra bite against the trolls.

I dipped my arrows in the turpentine, and upon spotting one of the trolls, let the poisoned arrow fly. It worked like a charm, and the Troll went down in one shot. Guess I owe Rythe an apology. The rest of the trolls went down in similar fashion. That turpentine went a long, long way... meaning it would probably make some really powerful moonshine if I can save any.

A hop and skip through the painted forest later, and I'd found the 'clearing' Rythe spoke of. It wasn't so much a 'clearing' as it was a space that looked unfinished. It was quite strange to look at, and even stranger to walk on. The texture of the place was not unlike one might imagine from a canvas. Once the last Troll was downed, I was able to advance onto the corpse of the Wood Elf thief. It only took a little bit of rifling through his pockets to retrieve the Brush. I took a minute to admire it; it looked so much like an ordinary paintbrush, but it apparently was some kind of amazing, enchanted Aedric Artifact. What're the odds that I would run into something like this? Well, now to get it back to Rythe. A short walk through the painted forest later, and I'd returned, Brush in hand, and quickly handed it off to the artist. Rythe: "You have the Brush? Excellent work, my friend." Trials: "Told ya I'd pull a win outta muh butt!" Rythe: "Certainly glad your bottom had at least one last 'win' to give. Now, I will paint the portal back home. Once it appears, you should go through first. Or you might be stuck in here forever." Trials: "Wait, before ya do, can you... paint me a meat-pie?" Rythe: "I can, but it would taste like paint." Trials: "Aww, lame!"

Rythe took the Brush and stepped a few paces away, drawing both the Brush and a pallet... for some reason. He already told me he doesn't actually need to wave the Brush around to make it work. I think he just felt like showing off. Whatever the case, after a few moments of waving the brush at empty air like a showy moppet, a window appeared, floating in the air. It looked like a painting of Rythe's studio. Once done, Rythe stepped to one side, and allowed me to pass first, and I quickly did so. I emerged from the painting back into Rythe's studio, right in front of a very shocked Ruined-Tail. Ruin: "Trials! Where have you been? I turned my back for one minute and you just vanished!" Trials: I grinned with cheek. "What're you talking about, Ruin? I never left this room!" Ruin: "..." He rolled his eyes. "You've got a weird story to tell me, don't you? Or you've been drinking again. Wait, that's it; you snuck off to drink didn't you?" Trials: I pouted. "Ruin! I'd never do that while on the job!"

Before I could explain myself to Ruin, Rythe rushed forward to meet his wife, the happy couple holding a just as happy reunion. Tivela: "Rythe! Oh, my love! You are home safe... I was so afraid." Rythe: "If it wasn't for my friend, here, you'd be right." Tivela: "This is wonderful! Now we won't miss my mother's birthday." Rythe: Deadpan. "Oh... goodie." He tried to force a smile, and turned to me. "Well, my mother-in-law not withstanding, I don't know how to thank you. You have a good heart to help get me back home. I'll never forget what you've done for me." Trials: "Hey, no problemo, my dude." Rythe: "If I may ask one last favor; please keep the Brush's existence a secret. If word gets around that I have it, I'm afraid more than a lone cut-purse will visit me." Trials: "Sure, my lips are sealed. Barring some extreme situation, like, say, if I find myself in a predicament where I desperately need an Aedric Artifact to help save the world, or something." Rythe and I shared a hearty laugh at that quip. Surely, nothing like that could ever possibly happen to little ol' me, after all!

Rythe gave me an apron as a token of his appreciation. Not the flashiest of gifts, but a fine reminder of my contribution to the arts. Also it's enchanted and thus, very valuable, so that's pretty nice! And thus I closed another case. The missing artist has been returned safely to his home and his loving wife, and Cheydinhal is richer for the adventure. I've probably tapped all of the info I can get out of Mach-Na, but I'd say chances are good the Fighters and Mages Guilds might have some work for me. And once those are out of the way, I still have the Thieves Guild job, and the Castle Vault, to hit, before I blow this town and hit the road once more.

[tenleaguesbeneath]

Hypothesis: The “most D&Dish” D&D is expert/second/whatever you want to call it tier, roughly the 3-11 level range; starting when even the “fragile” members of the party have enough hit points to survive a basic monster attack consistently, and ending when you start to transition to domain-level play.

I’d argue that it was a mistake for Wizards D&D to continue full hit die gain indefinitely past (what TSR D&D calls) name level, though arguably compared to the OD&D dice (d8 for fighters, d6 for clerics, d4 for thieves and magic-users) the fixed values used in TSR D&D (3 for fighters, 2 for clerics, 1 for mages, 1 or 2 for thieves depending on edition) the fixed values aren’t very far below average, though the loss of a constitution bonus might hurt more.

In this range you have the largest monster repertoire; unless you have 3e’s massively inflated ACs then basic “enemy soldier” monster manual entries (soldiers, orcs, goblins) don’t go obsolete until well past the end of this range, while even monsters near the top of the range, say things a 9th-level party would expect to beat in a fair fight, can often be escaped by even a 3rd level party and killed by a clever and determined party not far past that (4th or 5th level).

The lower end of this range is also where most starting-above-first-level 3e games start, IMX; the game most people who play 3e want to play is not first-level 3e, nor is it usually thirteenth-level 3e. This is also why 5e hurries you through the “basic” levels (the EXP needed to level is equal to the most you can expect a day’s encounters to be)

I don’t think it’s possible to expand this sweet spot without either bringing the bottom end higher or giving up D&Disms like having one hit die per level.

The way power gain drops dramatically, to the point that EXP to level goes linear, past that point in TSR D&D is something I think I want to keep. Possibly at the expense of anyone having spell slots above 6th level.

This is also about the power range that games that emulate D&D in another systems (e.g. Dungeon World) tend to follow. You’re not so weak that you’ll die in one hit, nor so strong that you don’t need to care about ordinary human obstacles. Torchbearer is another example; though lower-power than Dungeon World (Torchbearer characters often don’t have significantly greater problem-solving ability than ordinary people, akin to Basic-tier D&D), a Torchbearer character still won’t die in one hit.

[edwardbailey286]

Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) Market 2020 Global Industry Size, Development, Trends and Forecast to 2027

Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) Market in Brief

The global environmental health & safety (EHS) market was valued at US$ 4,729.3 Mn in 2019 and is expected to reach US$11,500.5 Mn by 2027, expanding at a CAGR of 11.7% from 2019 to 2027.

The EHS market is expected to witness prominent growth in the near future, especially in developing economies. Adoption of EHS across SMBs was low in the early years due to the high cost of environmental compliance software. Thus, to adhere with EHS norms and regulations, several Federal agencies have been operational across developing economies to ensure the implementation of EHS. Furthermore, these agencies have introduced cost-effective solutions to comply with EHS standards primarily for SMBs and cost-sensitive economies. Prominent driving factors for the EHS market are the multiple statutory and legal requirements to maintain EHS safety standards. This is expected to lead to significant growth potential in the market across all the regions over the forecast period.

Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) Market - Definition

The environmental health & safety market report provides analysis of the global environmental health & safety market for the period 2017 – 2027, wherein 2018 is the base year and 2019 to 2027 is the forecast period. Data for 2017 has been included as historical information.

The study on the environmental health & safety market would help clients understand the analysis of environmental health & safety based on different industry verticals.

Request A Sample Copy Of The Report

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=S&rep_id=2292

Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) Market Taxonomy

The EHS market is segmented on the basis of components, end-use industry, and geography. The components segment can be further classified on the basis of software solutions and the services offered. The different types of software solutions associated with EHS include quality and risk assessment software, data analytics software, cost management software, environmental compliance software, energy and carbon management software, and others. The EHS service segmentation includes consulting services, project management, analytics, training, implementation, auditing, and certification. Key end-use industries implementing EHS software and services covered in this report are chemical & petrochemical, energy & mining, construction, agriculture, transportation, manufacturing, government & public sector, retail, healthcare, and others.

Based on geography, the market has been segmented into North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East & Africa, and Latin America. North America recorded the maximum implementation of EHS in terms of software and services, and the region is expected to dominate the EHS market. This high growth rate is anticipated due to the development of end-use industry infrastructure across the U.S. Moreover, rising awareness in terms of adherence to environmental regulations has further strengthened the EHS market in North America.

Request For Covid19 Impact Analysis

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=covid19&rep_id=2292

Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) Market - Company Profiles

Some of the key players of the global environmental health & safety (EHS) market are

IHS Inc., 3E Company, International Finance Corporation, Enablon North America Corporation, SAP SE, UL LLC, and Medgate Inc.

About Us

Transparency Market Research is a next-generation market intelligence provider, offering fact-based solutions to business leaders, consultants, and strategy professionals.

Our reports are single-point solutions for businesses to grow, evolve, and mature. Our real-time data collection methods along with ability to track more than one million high growth niche products are aligned with your aims. The detailed and proprietary statistical models used by our analysts offer insights for making right decision in the shortest span of time. For organizations that require specific but comprehensive information we offer customized solutions through ad hoc reports. These requests are delivered with the perfect combination of right sense of fact-oriented problem solving methodologies and leveraging existing data repositories.

TMR believes that unison of solutions for clients-specific problems with right methodology of research is the key to help enterprises reach right decision.

Contact

90 State Street, Suite 700

Albany, NY 12207

Tel: +1-518-618-1030

USA - Canada Toll Free: 866-552-3453

Email: sales@transparencymarketresearch.com

Website: https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com

[justinstanley]

For Sustainable Business Reflection #4  Sustainability and Economic Growth

What is sustainability? How can we make sustainable development a reality? How sustainability can be measured?

This is a very interesting and important question. Sustainability seems such a  self-understandable word, yet it is usually used only to conceal one's true intentions. For example, sustainable use of paper. Is it better to collect old paper polluting the air with trucks and then use strong chemicals and consume energy to purify and make a new (low quality!) paper and then do all this over again until the whole Earth is polluted, OR to plant trees for paper, burn old paper (and get the energy from it) and let those trees to breathe in the CO2 generated by burning the old paper in exactly the same amount required to replace old paper with new? Even a fool can see that the strategy that is counter to usually promoted "sustainable" one is in fact more sustainable.  But industry has more interest in scenario with more trucks, more gas and chemical consumption and more useless job openings to spend public money and employ politicians' families, godfathers and friends. So I think "sustainability" is a just a buzzword that decision-makers use to excuse just any politics they want to put forward (good or bad). The word itself is often used just  as a decoration, without any true meaning. In this situation it makes little sense to define the word properly....

Sustainability and sustainable development are the catch phrases and center-stage of all discussion in the arena of economic, environmental, social, educational activities and what not! Sustainability is the nature or property of something being sustained or that runs in perpetuity remaining same (may be dynamic stability!). On the other hand sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the presents without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their needs. SD satisfies the triple bottom lines (TBL) of environmental protection, economic development and social security. SD is always for people, planet and prosperity (3P), in other words, it's for environment (protection), economy (prosperity) and (social) equity (3E). 

Also I really glad to see you chose UNSDGs as  one of your decision matrixes in your evaluation of ACAs, however,  still it seems that UNSDGs would face some tangible and intangible problem in the implementation phase itself.

There are not any mandatory rules packages to solve the possible illegal policy resistance.

There is governance weakness regarding satisfying miscellaneous stakeholders with conflicts of interests.

They need to be integrated with the Systemic approach, Otherwise, Each goal, proposed sub-optimal solutions would not necessarily lead to an optimal solution for the whole system. Even a useful action for achieving one goal may hurt the other goals. So, A trade-off between all subsystems is needed.

[neptunecreek]

EFF at 30: Saving Encryption, with Technologist Bruce Schneier

To commemorate the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s 30th anniversary, we present EFF30 Fireside Chats. This limited series of livestreamed conversations looks back at some of the biggest issues in Internet history and their effects on the modern web.

To celebrate 30 years of defending online freedom, EFF invited author, security technologist, and EFF board member Bruce Schneier to discuss the future of the "Crypto Wars." This epic battle, raging since the 1990s, pits privacy and security advocates against the U.S. government in a fight over encryption. Governments around the world have grown evermore keen to weaken encryption and acquire backdoor access to private devices and Internet communications.

Killing the EARN IT Act and protecting encryption is top of EFF’s agenda.

EFF has adamantly defended encryption and its widespread use from the early days of Bernstein v. US Department of Justice, the case that established that software source code was speech protected by the First Amendment. This technology paved the way for ecommerce, rising social movements around the world, and your ability to have a private conversation in an increasingly online world.

The Crypto Wars have continued right up to the present day with the EARN IT Act, a bill that would give unprecedented powers to law enforcement—including the ability to break into our private messages by creating encryption backdoors. Make no mistake: the fundamental security of our devices and the Internet are at stake.

It’s precisely why EFF invited Schneier to peer into encryption’s future at our first EFF30 Fireside Chat with EFF Executive Director Cindy Cohn, Senior Staff Attorney Andrew Crocker, and Senior Staff Technologist Erica Portnoy.

The chat began with a brief history of “the crypto wars,” which began the 90’s. The war is ongoing, said Schneier, but we have to win: “As long as [a smart phone or laptop] is in the hands of every single lawmaker, and world leader, and judge, and police officer, nuclear power plant operator, CEO, and voting official, it’s really important that we secure these--the communications and the storage. And that has to win.” 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2Fh6fe63428XA%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FHnRqHCxp9kU%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

Thirty years later,  this issue isn’t going away. “If you’re law enforcement, you want more and more authority,” said Schneier. The solution lies above law enforcement. “The need for security, for national security, trumps the need for law enforcement. We have to accept that, and implement that...This matters more than ever now.” 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FLI1NJUYuV5E%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

It’s become practically rote for law enforcement to claim that they need lawful access to encrypted devices or messaging to solve crimes. But as Staff Attorney Andrew Crocker pointed out, they’ve had a very hard time coming up with “reliable figures and anything more than anecdotes” about this need. And Schneier added: “We need law enforcement to have good digital forensics...I think law enforcement is just poorly educated. So going to the phone is just what they think. If they had more sophisticated investigative tools, we could have all the security we wanted for our data and our conversations. And they would still be able to have all the crime-solving capability they need. I actually don’t think that there’s a conflict here.” 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2Fa6Up9HQJgK4%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

Without encryption, free speech would be in serious danger. “Only if we have secure systems can we ensure that dissidents around the world can speak freely,” said Schneier, before quoting former FBI General Counsel James Baker, who suggested in 2019 that it was time for government authorities, including law enforcement, to embrace encryption, as “one of the few mechanisms the United States and its allies can use to more effectively protect themselves from existential cybersecurity threats.”  

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FBQk-60AVpBU%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

One common claim from law enforcement is that we can compromise by allowing backdoors into encrypted messages or devices. Though law enforcement calls this idea a ‘compromise,’ it’s not a compromise at all, said Crocker.

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FtkmFjuO2zPo%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

For one, Executive Director Cindy Cohn pointed out, any attempts at a ‘compromise’ will be used by government as recognition that it’s possible. But it isn’t. “We have seen efforts by law enforcement to get well-meaning tech to try to solve this problem, but what they really want is just a talking point in front of Congress that it can be solved. We’ve seen some very well-meaning people be very misused in the political debate because they were game enough to try. Don’t be that person. Don’t fall for that. They’re not interested in your technical prowess--they’re interested in a talking point.” 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FD-buDps9ShE%3Fautoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

For the technologists and cryptologists, Staff Technologist Erica Portnoy had a similar message: “Don’t try to do it. Even if at the end you explain all the nuances and problems with it, some government official is going to look at it and say ‘this is perfect, let’s implement this now,’ even though you have eight paragraphs on why this won’t work in practice...don’t help them make their arguments.”  

The conversation finished up with a call to action from our Executive Director: we must stop the EARN IT Act, legislation that’s making it way through Congress during the pandemic, which threatens both encryption AND free speech. “Killing the EARN IT Act and protecting encryption is top of EFF’s agenda.” 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FmNxDHYdYt5g%3Fstart%3D9%26autoplay%3D1%26mute%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22accelerometer%3B%20autoplay%3B%20clipboard-write%3B%20encrypted-media%3B%20gyroscope%3B%20picture-in-picture%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

Thirty years after EFF’s founding, our mission to protect privacy and free speech online is more important than ever. 

Join us on Thursday, December 10 for the second in our series of EFF30 Fireside Chats when we explore Section 230 and the future of free speech. In this candid livestream, EFF Legal Director Dr. Corynne McSherry and Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, an original framer of Section 230, will discuss why 230 is under fire and what made it the most important law protecting freedom of expression and innovation on the Internet.

RSVP

from Deeplinks https://ift.tt/3n4jeDR

[palliddata]

The Wizard of Grog: The Scourge of Caster Supremacy

(This is by Elizabeth Lavenza and not by me)

Elizabeth “Linguafoeda Acheronsis” Lavenza Chances are, one of the first images that pops into your head when you think about Dungeons and Dragons is the classic lineup of a fighter, a wizard, and a thief exploring a dungeon and valiantly overcoming obstacles together (that is, if you aren’t a mid-90s fundamentalist christian who associates D&D with pagan orgies and human sacrifice). It’s a decent enough setup, and that combined with nostalgia and inertia have allowed it to persist as one of fantasy gaming’s most common templates. But if you ask an experienced D&D player to tell you how that setup has worked out for them, a lot of times their version will have the wizard (or cleric, or druid, both of which have been even more unbalancing) effortlessly blasting every obstacle out of the way while the fighter and the thief sigh and wonder if it’s too late to reroll. Their disappointment is understandable, not just because being useless isn’t much fun. None of the sources of inspiration- Lord of the Rings, The Princess Bride, Conan the Barbarian, Berserk, and so on- that they’ve brought to the table would have prepared them for this problem. Most fantasy literature doesn’t have scenes where the knight and the rogue sit around playing cards while the wizard solves everything (then again, most good fantasy literature doesn’t have perfectly delineated archetyped parties). You’ve heard the horror stories. Order of the Stick wasn’t lying when it had a Druid tell a Rogue that he had special features more powerful than her entire class. I won’t spend that much time on 3e caster stories (google “codzilla” or “caster supremacy” if you’re curious), but I’ll provide a short explanation of why the problem persists, particularly in D&D and related systems, for those who haven’t encountered it before. Basically, when fighters level up they hit things for more damage and can take more damage, along with some other things. When casters level up they can pretty much control reality at will. Even beyond overpowered combos and obscure feats and munchkin builds, the simple fact remains that the class that lets you fly, turn invisible, teleport, shoot fire really well, and pretty much anything else is going to overshadow the one that hits things hard. To zero in on one particular example, there’s the legendary Druid Bear Singularity. Basically, a bear is often stat-for-stat a bit better than most Fighters of equivalent level. A Druid can have a bear companion, and also turn into a bear, meaning that a Druid with just those two basic features is equal to about 2.5 Fighters. And as the Druid levels up? They get more bears and stronger bears. They can also cast spells as a bear, and cast spells on their bears. This is when the math breaks down and the Druid becomes a Borg-like swarm of invincible magical bears. Before I go into the general types of solutions, I should note that things are getting better. While the problem persists within D&D, Pathfinder, and other D&D-3.5-derived systems (OSR games have a fair amount of variance, “meat-grinder” early addition-likes tend to have less of a problem with druidgods and wizardgods), due to fanbase stubbornness, it’s much less present outside of those systems, and that is due in no small part to the rise of storygaming and rules-light or rules-medium games. While the overarching reason comes down to these games being willing to do things differently, if we zero in we find that one of the most powerful tools for combatting caster supremacy is one that rules-light gaming uses frequently: focus. There is no one solution for the superwizard’s trap, and to avert it you have to start with the thing you should always start with: asking yourself what kind of stories you want to tell. Each of the potential approaches lends itself to certain types of stories and foci, and resistance to them comes from the enemy of focus: grognards wanting their preferred game to have everything they’re used to in it simultaneously. So, let’s go over the scenarios in which caster-induced redundancy isn’t a problem, and their relation to the central idea of focus. These solutions break down into two main groups: tone down the magic, or share the magic. The first of those is one that resonates most with what the classicists among the grognard host want. After all, how many times were battles in Middle-Earth won by an itinerant sorcerer blasting orcs away with magic missiles? Magic was restricted to a few individuals, or inherent powers of magical creatures, and even when they showed it off it was often rather subtle. The Game of Thrones setting, another grog favorite, also gives us a setting where magic is rare, scattered, and rarely as overt as flying bears or teleportation. It’s a completely valid approach: set up your system and story for a group of characters with no magical powers, or immensely limited and narrow magic, and things fall into place nicely. The knight, the archer, and the assassin will all have niches to fill, and they won’t have to worry about overshadowed by the druid if all the druid can do is perform long and complex rituals that allow them to see through the eyes of animals (as opposed to summoning invincible armies of them). Of course, sometimes magic has quite a lot of punch behind it, but there are still clear advantages to those who prefer more mundane methods. The idea that magic is dangerous and costly is bandied about quite a lot, but what consequences does the average D&D wizard face from throwing around spells all day, other than potential GM ire? And sure, the Vancian system can be a drag, but once those levels climb up Wizards build up more than enough contingencies, not to mention those with ways around it all together. If all magic required costly materials and/or long rituals, then being able to swing a sword, sneak, or shoot arrows or bullets well becomes a lot more useful, even if the magic has amazing capabilities. And, if you keep the principles of story and focus in mind, you can use that setup to generate plenty of potential plots and conflicts. Imagine how warfare looks- rival sorcerers preparing their rituals in the keeps of the patrons who supply them with their materials, while both sides send their companies of sellswords and assassins across the line to try to interrupt the other side’s big ritual. Again, it’s a more fun scenario than bear-summoning munchkinry solving everything. And what about the other kind of cost, genuine danger? Like most of these solutions for the caster problem, it’s shown up in plenty of stories. This approach has been explored in plenty of tabletop role playing games, too. Both versions of the Warhammer RPGs have magic wielders who can do some pretty amazing things…but actually doing those things is truly, actually dangerous, enough so that they aren’t things that can be relied upon to regularly solve problems. Unknown Armies, another great example, even explicitly states that magic is almost always much less useful than a gun in a combat situation, and that’s not even mentioning the massive costs it leverages on its practitioners. But the grog barrier keeps these approaches from working their way into D&D, as caster players are loathe to give up their cool powers, even if they insist they don’t want to render the nonmagical classes useless. The grog problem brings us to the opposing approach, where the system addresses the issue of godlike mages eclipsing warriors and thieves by giving the warriors and thieves godlike powers of their own. Dungeons and Dragons, in fact, has even made its own attempts to go down this path via the Tome of Battle, which provided several new martial classes with quasimystical powers. It wasn’t really the best supplement, especially since the new classes were essentially just better versions of existing classes, but the writers were in sort of an awkward situation since actually doing what they had set out to do would require rewriting quite a bit of the rules and core classes. But the negative feedback the book generated (the feedback that specifically bemoaned fighters having these abilities, not the way in which the book implemented them) was what made me realize the role of grog in keeping caster supremacy alive. Attempting to give martial classes their own ways to, for example, attack large groups or alter local terrain or fly will always provoke the “it’s too anime!” grog-whine, which is stupid on a number of levels. Even if one tries to see eye to eye with what people mean when they describe something as “too anime”, the fact remains that the idealized game as it exists in their heads can’t really existed without restricting casters far beyond what D&D does (see the previous paragraphs for information on this approach). They’ll often bring up that Conan or Drizzzzzzt (no, I’m not going to look up how many z’s he has) or so on and so never shot air blades out of their swords or flexed so hard things exploded, ignoring that these characters either existed in worlds with vastly different magic from their preferred game systems or had massive amounts of authorial fiat on their sides. Generally, the best way to get grognards to accept the “make fighters magic” approach is to bring up comparisons to mythology, where sorcerers were generally pushed out of focus in favor of demigods or magically enhanced warriors with enough musclepower to lift and throw mountains or fistfight storms. But even if you use this approach, you’ll still get complaints that it isn’t gritty enough, or that it makes it hard to run standard dungeon crawls, and so on. But caster supremacy is a problem that can only be fixed with genuine change. You can’t have that specific kind of team-based gritty dungeon delving if one party member has nearly unrestricted godlike powers, and if you want to have party members with that level of power, the other players should be able to reach it to, even if that means basing your world around a unified system of supernatural power that can harnessed by warriors as well as sorcerers, or putting the whole thing in terms of mythical dream-logic where being good enough at something like weaving or lying means you can apply it to abstract concepts (as an aside, Exalted does do the “mythic” approach fairly well, and there are plenty of games like Don’t Rest Your Head or most permutations of World of Darkness where it’s assumed that each member of the party has their own formidable reserve of supernatural power). Narrative-based powers provide a more subtle way to balancing, by giving characters an in-game ability to invoke the narrative tropes that help fighters and rogues equal casters in fantasy literature. PBTA systems are particularly good at this, but it’s something that’s been worked into an increasing number of systems.

Of course, there are countless permutations of these approaches. For example, you could run D&D 3e without many changes, as long as you gave up on pretending it was balanced and only allowed parties of equally-powerful classes, and constructed a setting in which magic-wielding demigods rule over mere mortals with their puny swords and bows. And, of course, you need to have a group of players who want to explore the ramifications of a setting where politics are dominated by human superweapons, rather than players who want to be Conan or Aragorn. Ironically, even the kind of dungeon-crawling stories associated with D&D acquire focus and planning to establish, and aren’t particularly well-served by God-Wizards and require a willingness to accept system refinement and storygaming to bring to their full potential. But fear of change and idealization of the past gets in the way, as always. In conclusion, fucking grognards. In a more serious conclusion, you can’t fix a problem if you keep doing the same things and expect them to work, and you can’t do everything at once. The start point for tabletop gaming should almost always be “what kind of story do we want to tell together”. Even if the kind of story you want to tell is based on your ideal of classic D&D or an amalgam of various fantasy literature you’ve absorbed, you still need to set things up to focus the story on that. If you want to use teamwork to crawl dungeons or fight evil hordes, you need a game that’s built for teamwork, and not endless swarms of magic bears making all the other players redundant. About the author: Elizabeth Lavenza is a lizard who can type. More information possibly to come.

[simul16]

Two Things Pathfinder:Kingmaker Does Better than Pathfinder

I'd been vaguely following the Kickstarter adventures of a CRPG called Pathfinder: Kingmaker for a while. I wasn't getting my hopes up, mainly because the last Pathfinder-adjacent CRPG, the proposed MMORPG Pathfinder Online, burned through multiple large Kickstarters and still hasn't released anything but an Early Enrollment client, but then the game actually launched. Having played roughly two-thirds of the actual pen-and-paper Kingmaker Adventure Path, I was curious to see how the computer game compared to its tabletop inspiration, but reports of bugginess suggesting the game had been pushed out the door too soon and what seemed to me a high price tag at $40 dissuaded me. Then enough time passed so that Pathfinder: Kingmaker became available via Steam Sale at half-price, and with reports that many of the bugs had been squashed by the diligent development team, I figured I'd take a shot at it. I'm about 16 hours in now, and while much of the game seems to be a direct pitch to nostalgia: not only does it borrow heavily from the actual Adventure Path and will thus be very recognizable to those who've played it, but the interface borrows very heavily from beloved isometric CRPGs like the Baldur's Gate series. Interestingly, as the developers put the game together, they made a few tweaks and compromises to the Pathfinder rule system and its CRPG implementation, and honestly, some of these decisions I like better than the systems that exist in the main tabletop RPG. I'll run though just a couple here, in the hopes you find them useful enough to incorporate into your Pathfinder game. Inventory and Encumbrance Inventory management has been a part of CRPGs since way back, and part of tabletop RPGs since the earliest editions of Dungeons & Dragons, so it's no surprise that Pathfinder: Kingmaker has a fairly complex inventory system. One of the genius parts of it, in my opinion, is how the inventory system interacts with encumbrance. Encumbrance rules have always been an aspect of TTRPGs that only really appeal to hard-core simulationists, and most other players and game-masters have generally ignored much if not all of it. (In my own D&D 3E games, we developed the Quiver of Endless Arrows solely so that we wouldn't have to deal with managing the inventory of our archer characters, as an example.) And on the whole, designers have adapted to this by making encumbrance less and less significant in their TTRPGs: the designers of 5th edition went so far as to basically turn encumbrance into an optional rule, with only a minimum-strength-for-heavy-armor rule in the main equipment section of the Player's Handbook. This is kind of a shame, though, because speaking as a game-master, encumbrance does do one really useful thing in your RPG -- it requires your players to make choices on what they prioritize and value. For example: after defeating a fortress of giants, do your PCs roam the halls trying to tear tapestries off the walls and loot art objects, or do they raid the larder and restock their food supplies? Or do they try to do both and find themselves staggering under the weight of all this loot, making them easy pickings for other monsters on the way home? Pathfinder: Kingmaker does track encumbrance for each individual character, but it also allows for a communal inventory where characters can freely equip and un-equip items outside of combat. (In combat, items that characters want to use need to have been equipped to the 'belt' area, or for weapons, previously set as a weapon set.) The communal inventory has a carrying capacity equal to the carrying capacity of all characters in the party, with the individual gear carried by each character already counting against that capacity. The communal inventory basically represents the characters who have the carrying capacity finding space in their backpacks, belt pouches, or what-have-you to carry the party's 'extraneous items', and when the party as a whole goes over an encumbrance boundary, the entire party suffers the effects. This is a fairly brilliant solution to the time-sink of encumbrance; if the game-master already has calculated the party's carrying capacity, and knows the weight value of the items the party might choose to take into their inventory, it's easy enough to figure out when the party hits Medium, Heavy, or Overloaded encumbrance and alert the group accordingly, which can then trigger a discussion over what to leave behind to keep from heading over that level. Changes to the party's encumbrance limit can also be pretty easily handled this way: if a party member loses Strength to a poison or gains carrying capacity from a spell, the character's change in carrying capacity directly modifies the party's carrying capacity. In the case of lowered carrying capacity in combat situations, it makes more sense to only hit the affected PC with the encumbrance penalty until the combat ends and the party has the opportunity to 'repack'. Meanwhile, items like the bag of holding can directly convert to increased carrying capacity based on the capacity of the bag minus the bag's own weight. It's a cool system, and requires much less overhead than tracking individual characters' encumbrance values. In a system like Pathfinder 1.0 or D&D 3.5 that still cares about encumbrance, it's worth checking out. Monster Knowledge checks In many TTRPGs that have a knowledge/lore skill or statistic, that skill is used by players to figure out what their characters know about the creatures they're encountering. Pathfinder: Kingmaker has a solution that directly takes advantage of the fact that it's a CRPG -- as the players succeed on skill checks, the game makes more and more of the monster's actual stat block available for the player to look at. This would seem like a difficult thing to implement in a TTRPG -- after all, many D&D 3E DMs often would give the party specific bits of information about a monster if they make their knowledge checks, or would alternately allow the player to ask questions about the monster on behalf of his character to represent knowledge the character would prioritize. But the implementation of the 'slowly increasing stat block' actually does suggest an implementation in the TTRPG that might work reasonably smoothly: set the 'main' DC for unlocking information in the monster block header (name, type, etc.), then set increasing DCs for information in each subsequent section, so the party making the DC by 3, for example, also unlocks the monster's attacks, and making the DC by 6 unlocks the description of the monster's special abilities. Then, let the party make use of the Monster Manual or other resource, but rule that their characters only know (and thus can act on) the information in the specific parts of the stat block they've unlocked with their skill checks. I've still got a ways to go to determine whether Pathfinder: Kingmaker is on the whole a great or merely decent game, but in these two specific instances, I think the developers did a great job solving a problem, so much so that their solution seems useful outside the realm of the CRPG it was designed for.

[creativemode]

A lot of people don’t know what occupational therapy is. That’s because we do so much! One thing we do is facilitate individuals to participate in meaningful activities. Here’s one example.

This is Christine: a passionate advocate for augmentative communication devices with a big heart. She loves the 3e love heart wheelchair logo, as their mission is to change the perception of disability.

Christine also loves RAD camp, a week long summer camp for adults and children with disabilities. They have a variety of classes and activities throughout the day, including art class. Some of the art projects are personalizing projects and adding that bit of individual flair.

Even though I was not participating in camp as an occupational therapist, my brain has a difficult time looking at the world through any other lens. As an OT, I look at the activity and break down the requirements needed in order to be successful. I assess the person’s abilities and find compensatory strategies or assistive devices that can help achieve the goal of creating a meaningful camp artifact that reflects her personality and highlights her ability.

Christine and I worked together to design a stencil that she could use for multiple projects. I took a piece of construction paper, covered it in clear packing tape for stability and washability, and made a wheelchair heart logo stencil. We problem-solved the rest of the task together, so that she would be the one creating the art. We used the stencil all week long to decorate art and journal projects.

I love occupational therapy because we create solutions for everyday life!

[templardragonknight]

The Stormcloak Bible DEBUNKED PART 7 (Stormcloaks Are Wasting Skyrim’s Resources?)

In the seventh part of this “bible” (http://colonel-killa-bee.tumblr.com/post/152901379035/stormcloak-bible-part-7-stormcloaks-are-wasting) the author talks about if the stormcloaks are wasting Skyrim’s resources or not, about if Ulfric was the true cause of the war and even about the Thalmor. Lets get started.

"From the Imperial perspective, Ulfric is causing this war by revolting, and they’re keeping the Thalmor out of Skyrim by fighting Ulfric and preventing Talos worship." it is extrenely funny how he distorted the imperial arguments in this part (and I can already say that distorting facts to support his position is a characteristic of the author) because imperials do not say that the empire is keeping the Thalmor out by fighting Ulfric, they say that Ulfric's rebellion is actually preventing the Empire from rebuilding itself effectively and deal with the Thalmor as soon as possible. Also saying that the Empire is preventing Talos worship and not the Thalmor shows eighter ignorance or dishonesty from the author having in mind how:

> The Thalmor had to come personally to demand Ulfric's arrest after they found out the imperials were trying to secretly allow Talos worship in Markarth;

> There are no legionnares guarding the Thalmor Embassy or Northwatch Keep;

> Imperial soldiers are not sent to help Thalmor Justiciars around;

> The Thalmor Dossier about Ulfric reveals that they wanted to intervene in the war and save Ulfric from being executed, wich means that General Tullius refused to allow Elenwen to enter Helgen;

> If the player ends up becoming an enemy of the Thalmor to the point of the Thalmor sending troops specially to kill him/her, the Empire does not give a shit and does not send soldiers to assit the Thalmor;

Then he says that Ulfric was not the true cause of the war, what is already nonsense. First the war did not start when Ulfric killed Torygg, it became WORSE after that. Hadvar, Vuwulf and Solaf reveal that the war was already going on years before the return of the dragons and Hadvar specifically reveals that Torygg died months before Alduin attacked Helgen. And even if the war started when Torygg died: it would have never happened if Ulfric tried to use diplomacy instead of violence since Torygg was open to debate (if you say this to the author he will probably cry about how talking to the High King at "the belly of the beast" would be foolish... but KILLING the High King at the "belly of the beast"? Totally wise I suppose).

Now talking about the laws thing: Solitude was under IMPERIAL control, and by the imperial laws, the nords are allowed to follow their traditions IF such part of the tradition does not hurt anyone (that is why the nords are allowed to visit the Hall of the Dead, make war paints, have long hair and beards, worhip Shor, etc), so this already makes Ulfric’s action illegal. “But it not part of Skyrim’s laws” well this is the main problem with most stormcloaks: they do not distinguish law from tradition. Just because something is tradition it does not mean it should be a law (or that it would make sense to make it a law. Like forcing people to visit the Hall of the Dead would be just ridiculous). And being or not na actual law, such act is nonsense and savage as only the dumb brutes try to solve everything by using the sword. The art of ruling men (and also mer and beastfolk) is not just about battles and wars (that is also what dictatorships often do), it is more about debate and diplomacy, about trying to solve a problem without causing the deaths of many. All of this without mentioning that your physical abilities (and in this case magical abilities as well, since Ulfric used the Thum’m to unfairly kill Torygg) have absolutely nothing to do with your intelect and your efficiency in diplomacy.

The author says that "Skyrim law allows the Jarls to challenge the king or queen of Skyrim to a duel, and if the King is slain, a moot is called and then a new king or queen is decided" but as it turns out it is another arrow on his own knee. While it is true that the moot should be called when a king dies without direct heirs (https://www.imperial-library.info/content/pocket-guide-empire-first-edition-skyrim in the fourth paragraph), if by nordic tradition the king's widow is a direct heir Elisif should automatically becomke High Queen. If the widow is not considered a direct heir, the moot should be called with or without a war on (as the book does not mention any exception), but Ulfric not only does not want such Moot to happen (during the quest "The Jagged Crown", at least if you joined the Stormcloaks, he can be heard screaming "And Damn the moot!" when Galmar tells him that the jarls are upset and demand the Moot) and even says that it will not elect Elisif as long as HE has any say in it (and the tradition does not say the Jarl of Windhelm has any priority, you know). Ulfric's actions actually go AGAINST the nordic tradition.

When the author says "You might think that Empire law automatically overrules Skyrim law, but consider that in the Empire, slavery is illegal, and yet the Dunmer of Morrowind were allowed to continue the practice regardless" he shows ignorance regarding Morrowind's history, as slavery (that was actually outlawed by the king of Morrowind during the events of TES IV http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Slavery “By 3E 433, it is mentioned that Helseth Hlaalu, the king of Morrowind, has outlawed slavery.[5]"* https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Helseth "Subsequently, he renounced the slave trade, setting the remaining Houses of Indoril and Redoran against him in a bloody civil war. Helseth emerged from the war battered, but without the loss of his essential powers, leaving the slave trade generally destroyed, and slavery without a foothold in all of Tamriel, although the practice persists in remote areas away from Mournhold") was allowed in Morrowind thanks to something called the Treaty of the Armstice (http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Armistice) and the terms of the treaty allowed Morrowind to retain a high degree of self rule and allowing things that were not allowed in other imperial provinces in exchange for giving the Numidium for Tiber Septim and allowing the imperial forces to act in the province. Skyrim has no treaty like that.

Then he talks about the Thalmor (typical). Lets see what he says: “And if they did secede, the Thalmor would be removed from Skyrim altogether, and anyone that’s read my previous entries know that logistically, the Thalmor cannot invade Skyrim anyway, so the Empire do not in fact keep the Thalmor out, they are in fact the sole reason the Thalmor are there in the first place” you mean when you said that the Aldmeri Dominion can not invade Skyrim thanks to how treacherous the Sea of Ghosts is (and fuck the fact that the Atmorans, who did not have the same technology the Aldmeri Dominion has, have dominated such seas and used them to travel to Tamriel and raid it for centuries) while you said that the Empire could send reinforcements to Skyrim trough SHIPS (you know: passing trough Dominion controlled seas, going all the way from Hammerfell's to High Rock's seas only to reach the Sea of Ghosts in northern Skyrim)? Or how you mentioned that mountains would prevent the Thalmor from reaching Skyrim, even tough the Empire has managed to overcome that obstacle for centuries (with Tullius even saying that controlling The Rift would secure their communications with Cyrodiil during "Season Unending")?

Without mentioning that saying that “Empire do not in fact keep the Thalmor out, they are in fact the sole reason the Thalmor are there in the first place” is actually not true (it may look like a fact, but it is not), for this we just have to take a look at the so called "Markarth Incident" itself: Jarl Igmund and Cedran reveal that the Thalmor themselves demanded the Empire to arrest Ulfric, with Cedran even saying that a whole group of them personally came to Markarth for it. If by 4th Era 201 the Thalmor are directly acting in Skyrim, personally hunting arresting Talos worshippers, while a short time after the end of the Great War they did not personally do it, the Empire itself is not the (only) reason of why they are acting in Skyrim (and the only faction that could have made it worse by revaeling the Thalmor how Talos worship is strong in Skyrim is the Stormcloaks thelselves). The fact that the Thalmor were not present in Skyrim right after the Great War is also revealed by Alvor: en.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Alvor "It's from that treaty that ended the Great War, remember, when the Emperor was forced by the Thalmor to outlaw Talos worship. We didn't pay much attention to it when I was a boy - everyone still had their little shrine to Talos. But then Ulfric and his "Sons of Skyrim" started agitating about it, and sure enough the Emperor had to crack down. Dragging people off in the middle of the night... one of the main causes of this war, if you ask me." Alvor basically reveals that everything was just fine before Ulfric and his followers began agitating. If we take these clues and combine them, it becomes clear that, altough the Thalmor would be allowed to do it, the Dominion did not immdediately come to imperial lands to hunt down Talos worshippers, hoping the Empire would arrest them by itself and only after the events in Skyrim (in other words: the Stormcloak Rebellion) clearly showed the Empire was not doing it so the Thalmor decided to hunt Talos worshippers all by itself.

Then he talks about how the empire left Morrowind at it’s own during the Oblivion Crisis. *Sigh*, how many times will I have to refute Part 2? If the empire was having trouble protecting Cyrodiil, how in the name of the Aedra would the imperials be able to protect Morrowind? The best chance Morrowind had was being helped by the empire AFTER Cyrodiil defeated Dagon’s forces, otherwise both provinces would be weak against the daedra at the time (it is also funny how he blames the Empire for not helping Morrowind when the heart of the Empire is under attack, but does not give a shit about how Ulfric sends most of Windhelm's guards to the war to the point of them being barely able to investigate murders in the city, or about how Ulfric does nothing about bandits that do not threaten nord land as it is revealled by Brunwulf. Hypocrisy again). And at the moment he citated Adril Arano he shot himself (AGAIN). How? Due to what he previously said about slavery in Morrowind: if there is really slavery being illegally practiced in Morrowind, and House Redoran supports it form some reason, the currently weakned empire would face difficulties trying to find the slaves and their owners in Morrowind.

Then he talks about how the Empire “abandoned” Hammerfell (*sigh*, this post is gonna be just an enhanced Part 2, but that is okay). If the empire did not care about Hammerfell, then how can we explain General Decianus' decision? In the book it is explained that "In Hammerfell, General Decianus was preparing to drive the Aldmeri back from Skaven when he was ordered to march for Cyrodiil. Unwilling to abandon Hammerfell completely, he allowed a great number of 'invalids' to be discharged from the Legions before they marched east. These veterans formed the core of the army that eventually drove Lady Arannelya's forces back across the Alik'r late in 174, taking heavy losses on their retreat from harassing attacks by the Alik'r warriors." and this eventually helped to weaken Arannelya's army, what obviously helped the redguards of Hammerfell when they fought the weakned forces of Lady Arannelya to a standstill for five years. And if one still thinks that the empire really betrayed Hammerfell (in other words: if the empire had other choice), then it is worth mentioning another part of the book: "there is a great difference between agreeing to such terms under the mere threat of war, and agreeing to them at the end of a long and destructive war. No part of the Empire would have accepted these terms in 4E 171, dictated by the Thalmor at swords-point. Titus II would have faced civil war. By 4E 175, most of the Empire welcomed peace at almost any price." and having in mind how I previously showed that the empire was in no shape to fight by 4E 175, then seeing the sign of the concordact as a betrayal is foolish (what would not be the case if it was signed by 4E 171).

Then the author says “And yes I know they say they can’t because they’re watching their southern border, so their answer instead is to run Skyrim’s economy and resources into the ground to protect their own interests, at the cost of Nord lives and money with little or no sacrifices of their own?” I think he never read Hadvar's dialogue in the UESP. Hadvar explains that the Empire only had it's attention caught after Ulfric killed Torygg, wich means that the Empire barely cared about Skyrim and it's resources for most of the war. And this contradicts what the author himself revealed in his post about the conversations in the Blue Palace, as one of the conversations there shows that Solitude alone has had more efforts towards the war than Cyrodiil itself (Bryling: “Simple. Let the Empire fight its own war, with its own funds, and without hijacking our supplies and soldiers. Let Haafingar rebuild.”), and it is dfinitely not like the imperial supporting provinces were just trying to protect themselves from the Stormcloaks.

About the rest of the dialogues dialogues: I already talked about them in Part 6 and showed that his observations about them are biased and nonsense. Also what he says here: “ If they really wanted to do what was best for the greater good and to defeat the elves, they’d have let the moot take its course, and unite with an independent Skyrim if Ulfric won, having an ally against the elves with full resources and a full army free of the casualties of a civil war because the Empire couldn’t let go of their source of free silver and bodies to protect themselves.” is nonsense since I already explained how the one preventing the Moot from happening is Ulfric, not the Empire.

Now to end this post: I already showed that the empire is not wasting Skyrim’s resources as they need such resources not only to continue to make Skyrim a good place to live, but also to rebuild themselves for an eventual second war against the Dominion… and the empire is now forced to use part of these resources for a war started by the Stormcloaks.

Well, the author already cried about this critique, saying that Tullius stuck in a stalemate with him until the dragonborn gets involved (and fuck the fact that this is just part of the game’s mechanics, to prevent any side from winning before the players joins one of them... and it is definitely not like Hadvar says that Tullius has turned things around for the Empire), saying that Rikke struggles to make Tullius take the rebels seriously (yet this is just a proof of what I said as a great imperial general would only underestimate his enemies if they were no match for the imperial legion if the legion decided to use everything it has), about how many rebels are former leggionaires (even tough they still not use the strategies the legion taught them) and also crying about the nords being the bulks of the empire (and fuck the fact that one can not win a war only with brute force, as strategy is also extremely important).

*oh wait, it appears that all I said is irrelevant because The Stormcloak Guy says the Wiki is full of misconceptions and that my points are irrelevant simply for using it. It is argumentum ad hominem but you know, someone that is biased does not care and fuck if the UESP, that the author heavily relies on, says the same.

[sexplosion]

Newbie DM here. Asking a few questions. 1.) What level should I start giving my PCs magic items? And which e3/3.5 books and sources have more examples of less combat oriented items? 2.) Why are magic items super expensive when some don't have that strong of an effect? 3.) How do I calculate EXP/copper-silver-gold/item rewards for said edition? The DM manual tries to explain the process, but it all went over my head. 4.) Is it okay for PCs to stealth passed monsters since combat is slow?

This is a MASSIVE question, so I’m going to be answering in two parts.

Firstof all, thank you sending an ask my way. Secondly, congratulations on enteringthe world of DMing. Be prepared for a very rewarding and stressful D&Dexperience. I should note that my area of expertise is Pathfinder, but I’veplayed a decent amount of 3.5, and it’s not too far off. Now, onto yourquestions.

1)If you’re using 3e/3.5 rules, check the Dungeonmaster’sGuide (p. 135 in the 3.5 DMG), it gives a (very general) guide to estimatedwealth per PC level. Pathfinder has a similar table. For 3.5, players shouldhave about 2,700 gold by second level. Since a +1 weapon is about 2,000 gold,you drop one or two by second level.

D&D3.5e is very generous with wealth and magic items. By 4th level,most PCs will probably have magic weapons, armor, and maybe a cloak or ring. Bearin mind, that as a GM you can be more or less generous.

2)Magic items are expensive because they give either power or versatility. Magicweapons make the PCs hit harder, and magic armor make them harder to hit.

Thesebonuses to attack, AC, saves, etc., is baked into the enemies the party faces:higher level has tough enemies, with the assumption that the higher-level PCswill have stronger weapons (as well as better stats and abilities). Other itemsgive PCs more options, like flight or spells. These cost more because it lets acharacter solve problems they normally wouldn’t be able to.

Butthe biggest reason that magic items are expensive is because the game wants youto not be able to have them at low levels, and assumes that at high levels you’llbe able to buy a lot.

[calculatemygrade-blog]

how do i calculate my final grade in a class

Longitudinal studies can be conducted to investigate the vary of students’ epistemological beliefs. This is to see whether occurrence in epistemological beliefs can jumper to outdo show in Biology. Innate Ability refers to the cipher as a continuum ranging from the belief that the nsis to acquire is taped at nativity to the belief that how to calculate 20 percent of your grade improves over moment with receive. The responses of the students are presented in Table 3b. In this magnitude, the students had an overall salutation of 3.10. Their belief manifested enlightenment when they fairly disagreed that no total of granitic transmute can play students sharp and that pain students require not impact calculative to be healthy to do asymptomatic in Accumulation. Students showed fewer sophistication as they consider that whatsver students are whelped with special gifts and talents in Accumulation. It is newsworthy to observe that figure of the respondents run to believe that in one way or other human may feature the innate capacity that others do not jazz when it comes to Accumulation. On the additional transfer, these same students roll their doubts as to whether aptitude in Aggregation is noninheritable and whether the volume to read Biology is dependant on innate knowledge. to return a unfolded. The pointers below helpfulness you to succeed at a reasonable response. You should salutation this as a menu rather than a recipe " guess some the diametric stages and how they mightiness be useful for the special yield under fee and your own music of production. Accept or judge them as you see fit, or, according to your needs, grounder and alter their order. Correct on the aims and learning outcomes of the conference. When version schedules beforehand, or sensing to your educator introducing a work, attain trusty you realise what the utility and liable take-home message of the meeting is deed to be. This present ply you transmute much more effectively during the applicatory. Use lab assistants and demonstrators full. These group are generally remunerative to improve you, so get the most of them. Oftentimes, they may be past graduates, and harmonious to any problems you may be grappling. If in doubt, ask " it could refrain you lots of indication and The wellborn of how to figure out semester grade at cultivate levels in Pakistan: Semiprivate and overt schools The insufficiency of drilled teachers Phantasm schools Textbooks Backstage instruction The causes of a low textbook of weighted grade calculator average grade calculator at college layer in Pakistan: The want of college liberty The demand of sufïcient finances and facilities Lacking goods what grade do i need to pass Superannuated methods of education The want of classification and lineament transformation mechanisms The want of end of year grade calculator techniques The property of how to calculate your final grade in high school at university state in Pakistan: Beggarly grade needed to pass calculator group Humanities language Governmental unbalance Short fund War against somebody and the woman of fundamentalism Faint juristic scheme Broad habituation on part-time lecturers Poor assemblage facilities The demand of facilities Qualified sports to furnish a create of a constructed argument, a film of ideas or a cognition; to come a finding or formulae. Students with shining message qualifications or have may link university at other levels. There are also a range of outlet awards " certificates, diplomas and mundane degrees. However, the number of students now enter at destroy 1, and grade score calculator for an honours degree. This encompasses tercet life of grade calculator weighted in England, Cambria and Blue Ireland, and digit eld in Scotland. see the tenfold cultures and heterogeneity in the Asian land that execute to diverging expectations of and demands on how to calculate my grade percentage needed for passing grade know political instability and its alter on what do i need on my final to pass rethink structure of inclusion and omission: sexuality, ethnicity, communication, and system stratiïcation. The aim of how to calculate your final grade with percentages in peer guild is to advance the individuals central immunity and usage towards self-initiated action, so that everyone accepts obligation for their own actions. Through training, the someone is competent to self-direct, accomplish ready decisions, comment positively, and judge others. He pursues the acquisition of knowledge to solve his problems. She adapts ï‚exibly to new situations by utilizing her experiences in new situations in a ingenious fashion. He cooperates with others, and is self-motivated and esurient to learning to case his own purposes. Illustration 1. Instructor Feedback on Portfolio Entries to Resource Polar Stages of Statement Regarding Helpful Learning. Yet, for most, students showed minimal elegant epistemology in Wise Permission with a = 3.32 (Array 3e). This implies that a largish assignation of the students anticipate in the dominance of pedagogue as the main source of knowledge in Bioscience. The grade of school position is most especially genuine for students who my final grade calculator calculator in bucolic areas where their period activity is seen to interact straight with their belief in certainty of nsis. As these folksy students judge that knowledge is not destined and that their knowledge is stacked from their own undergo, the higher the inclination for these students to amend their scholarly upright. Withal, this interaction is not harmonious for those who be grade calculator in cityfied areas. The down locating ds not seem to interact with students’ belief in quality of knowledge; thus, their pedagogue execution in Aggregation is not a ending of the combinatorial impression of edifice location and certainty of nsis.

[tenleaguesbeneath]

The problem 5e’s slow-progression “bounded accuracy” system was created to solve is an artifact of 3e’s architecture, and also of the bonus stacking rules. But it is specifically a new problem.

Specifically, I’m going to speak of attack rolls rather than skill checks (which didn’t exist in prior editions) and saving throws (which used a different mechanic).

With 3e, to make an attack, you roll + your attack bonus, which is your level if you’re a combat class + your ability modifier (which scales with level in 3e because of the addition of ability increases by level, stat-boosting items, etc. etc), and compare to AC, a number which will be at least 10 except for targets which are very large, immobile, and unarmored.

For a monster ACs are pretty much arbitrary. For a player you have access to several sources of AC bonus, each of which can go up to +5 usually, on top of your mundane AC: you can have magical bonuses on your armor and shield, you can wear an amulet of natural armor for a natural AC bonus, you can wear a ring of protection for a deflection AC bonus. A character with e.g. 16 DEX (probably by way of gloves of dexterity), mithral full plate +5, a large shield +5, a ring of protection +5, and an amulet of natural armor +5 has an AC of 43, before any temporary bonuses from feats or spells are laid on. Such a character can only be hit on a natural 20 by anything with an attack bonus less than +24, and, because of how monster attack bonuses work, an AC like that is needed to defend against high-level monsters by AC at all (a Frost Giant Jarl, at CR 17, has +30 to hit with its first attack, hitting even this on a 13). A scaled-down version of this (all items +3, say; plausible for a character with a level in the low teens), would have an AC of 35.

Arbitrary monster ACs in the same low-teen CR range include things lie the Astral Deva (CR 14, AC 29), the Marut (CR 15, AC 34), the Nightwalker (CR 16, AC 32), and Nightwing (CR 14, AC 30), the Iron Golem (CR 13, AC 30), an Adult Green Dragon (CR 13, AC 27; the next age category is CR 16 and AC 30; this CR 13, AC 27 also covers the basic storm giant with no magical defensive gear), the Ice Devil (CR 13, AC 32), and so on.

This post is in part inspired by my memories of a game in high school where I was playing a primary combatant who got to add a heavily-pumped attribute to damage several times, but couldn’t use that for to-hits, who was reduced to being the party’s other fighter’s flanking buddy against a Marut.

With 2e, contrariwise, you have a decreasing AC system (i.e. a larger AC means you’re easier to hit). The top of the scale is 10, and the scale goes down, past zero, into the negatives. There are statements in the rulebook that this system is not meant to go below -10 (equivalent to a 3e AC of 30), but that’s more a guideline than an explicit rule as I believe one of the great wyrms in the monster manual has a listed AC of -12, and computer implementations such as Torment and the Baldur’s Gate series allow ACs to drop without bound. A character with an AC of -14 or similar is a nigh-immortal to be feared, as opposed to being par for the course (there are, of course, optimized builds for BG2 that can achieve this for short periods of time).

In my opinion, the root of the problem isn’t that attack bonuses grew without bound. People will be quite happy to automatically hit on attacks. To the contrary, it was 1) dramatically ramping up the rate at which attack bonuses increased, and 2) scaling monster ACs, not to some idea of an objective scale, but to try to make it a problem for a fighter to hit them

Problem 1 comes from the new unified ability bonus system (in 2e, there was no single bonus each ability score gave that you could add to a bunch of things; instead, each ability score had a table and a bunch of things it added different idiosyncratic bonuses to), and the decision to make ability scores not even mostly fixed, with booster items for every attribute (instead of a couple that replace your strength score), boosting spells for every attribute, ability increases every four levels, and so on (just about the only means of raising ability scores that exists in 3e that isn’t either new to 3e or strength-only in TSR A/D&D is wish). In 3e it is not only possible but expected that a fighter will aggressively increase his strength score (or dexterity, for certain builds), because he must or else he won’t be able to hit anything, because of problem 2, where monster ACs were designed so that the attack roll of a fighter who’s put a moderate amount of effort into raising his attack bonus wouldn’t be a foregone conclusion.

That is the problem. Not that rolls run off the chart, though they do run away faster in 3e than in any prior edition, but the design conceit that difficult tasks should challenge specialists (and by “challenge” we mean “have a significant probability of failure which is out of your hands as soon as you pick up the die”)

[neptunecreek]

EFF Urges Congress Not to Dismantle Section 230

The Keys to a Healthy Internet Are User Empowerment and Competition, Not Censorship

The House Energy and Commerce Committee held a legislative hearing today over what to do with one of the most important Internet laws, Section 230. Members of Congress and the testifying panelists discussed many of the critical issues facing online activity like how Internet companies moderate their users’ speech, how Internet companies and law enforcement agencies are addressing online criminal activity, and how the law impacts competition. 

EFF Legal Director Corynne McSherry testified at the hearing, offering a strong defense of the law that’s helped create the Internet we all rely on today. In her opening statement, McSherry urged Congress not to take Section 230’s role in building the modern Internet lightly:

We all want an Internet where we are free to meet, create, organize, share, debate, and learn. We want to have control over our online experience and to feel empowered by the tools we use. We want our elections free from manipulation and for women and marginalized communities to be able to speak openly about their experiences.

Chipping away at the legal foundations of the Internet in order to pressure platforms to play the role of Internet police is not the way to accomplish those goals. 

%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.c-span.org%2Fvideo%2Fstandalone%2F%3Fc4822786%2Fcorynne-mcsherry-section-230%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22allowfullscreen%22%20width%3D%22512%22%20height%3D%22330%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy info. This embed will serve content from c-span.org

Recognizing the gravity of the challenges presented, Ranking Member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) aptly stated: “I want to be very clear: I’m not for gutting Section 230. It’s essential for consumers and entities in the Internet ecosystem. Misguided and hasty attempts to amend or even repeal Section 230 for bias or other reasons could have unintended consequences for free speech and the ability for small businesses to provide new and innovative services.” 

We agree. Any change to Section 230 risks upsetting the balance Congress struck decades ago that created the Internet as it exists today. It protects users and Internet companies big and small, and leaves open the door to future innovation. As Congress continues to debate Section 230, here are some suggestions and concerns we have for lawmakers willing to grapple with the complexities and get this right.

Facing Illegal Activity Online: Focus on the Perpetrators

Much of the hearing focused on illegal speech and activity online. Representatives and panelists mentioned examples like illegal drug sales, wildlife sales, and fraud. But there’s an important distinction to make between holding Internet intermediaries, such as social media companies and classified ads sites, liable for what their users say or do online, and holding users themselves accountable for their behavior.

Section 230 has always had a federal criminal law carve out. This means that truly culpable online platforms can already be prosecuted in federal court, alongside their users, for illegal speech and activity. For example, a federal judge in the Silk Road case correctly ruled that Section 230 did not provide immunity against federal prosecution to the operator of a website that hosted other people’s ads for illegal drugs.

But EFF does not believe prosecuting Internet intermediaries is the best answer to the problems we find online. Rather, both federal and state government entities should allocate sufficient resources to target the direct perpetrators of illegal online behavior; that is, the users themselves who take advantage of open platforms to violate the law. Section 230 does not provide an impediment to going after these bad actors. McSherry pointed this out in her written testimony: “In the infamous Grindr case... the abuser was arrested two years ago under criminal charges of stalking, criminal impersonation, making a false police report, and disobeying a court order.”

Weakening Section 230 protections in order to expand the liability of online platforms for what their users say or do would incentivize companies to over-censor user speech in an effort to limit the companies’ legal exposure. Not only would this be harmful for legitimate user speech, it would also detract from law enforcement efforts to target the direct perpetrators of illegal behavior. As McSherry noted regarding the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA):

At this committee’s hearing on November 30, 2017, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation special agent Russ Winkler explained that online platforms were the most important tool in his arsenal for catching sex traffickers. One year later, there is anecdotal evidence that FOSTA has made it harder for law enforcement to find traffickers. Indeed, several law enforcement agencies report that without these platforms, their work finding and arresting traffickers has hit a wall.

Speech Moderation: User Choice and Empowerment

In her testimony, McSherry stressed that the Internet is a better place for online community when numerous platforms are available with a multitude of moderation philosophies. Section 230 has contributed to this environment by giving platforms the freedom to moderate speech the way they see fit.

The  freedom  that Section 230 afforded to Internet startups to choose their own moderation strategies has led to a multiplicity of options  for users—some more restrictive and sanitized, some more laissez-faire.  That  mix of  moderation philosophies contributes to a healthy environment for free expression and association online.

Reddit’s Steve Huffman echoed McSherry’s defense of Section 230 (PDF), noting that its protections have enabled the company to improve on its moderation practices over the years. He explained that the company’s speech moderation philosophy is one that prioritizes users making decisions about how they’d like to govern themselves:

The way Reddit handles content moderation today is unique in the industry. We use a governance model akin to our own democracy—where everyone follows a set of rules, has the ability to vote and self-organize, and ultimately shares some responsibility for how the platform works.

In an environment where platforms have their own approaches to content moderation, users have the ultimate power to decide which ones to use. McSherry noted in her testimony that while Grindr was not held liable for the actions of one user, that doesn’t mean that Grindr didn’t suffer. Grindr lost users, as they moved to other dating platforms. One reason why it’s essential that Congress protect Section 230 is to preserve the multitude of platform options.

“As a litigator, [a reasonableness standard] is terrifying. That means a lot of litigation risk, as courts try to figure out what counts as reasonable.”

Later in the hearing, Rep. Darren Soto (D-FL) asked each of the panelists who should be “the cop on the beat” in patrolling online speech. McSherry reiterated that users themselves should be empowered to decide what material they see online: “A cardinal principle for us at EFF is that at the end of the day, users should be able to control their Internet experience, and we need to have many more tools to make that possible.”

If some critics of Section 230 get their way, users won’t have that power. Prof. Danielle Citron offered a proposal (PDF) that Congress implement a “duty of care” regimen, where platforms would be required to show that they’re meeting a legal “reasonableness” standard in their moderation practices in order to keep their Section 230 protection. She proposes that courts look at what platforms are doing generally to moderate content and whether their policies are reasonable, rather than what a company did with respect to a particular piece of user content.

But inviting courts to determine what moderation practices are best would effectively do away with Section 230’s protections, disempowering users in the process. In McSherry’s words, “As a litigator, [a reasonableness standard] is terrifying. That means a lot of litigation risk, as courts try to figure out what counts as reasonable.”

Robots Won’t Fix It

There was plenty of agreement that current moderation was flawed, but much disagreement about why it was flawed. Subject-matter experts on the panel frequently described areas of moderation that were not in their purview as working perfectly fine, and questioning why those techniques could not be applied to other areas.

The deeper you look at current moderation—and listen carefully to those directly silenced by algorithmic solutions—the more you understand that robots won’t fix it.

In one disorienting moment, Gretchen Peters of the Alliance to Counter Crime Online asked the congressional committee when they’d last seen a “dick pic” on Facebook, and took their silence as an indication that Facebook had solved the dick pic problem. She then suggested Facebook could move on to scanning for other criminality. Professor Hany Farid, an expert in at-scale, resilient hashing of child exploitative imagery, wondered why the tech companies could not create digital fingerprinting solutions for opioid sales.

Many cited Big Tech’s work to automatically remove what they believe to be copyright-infringing material as a potential model for other areas—perhaps unaware that the continuing failure of copyright bots is one of the few areas where EFF and the entertainment industry agree (though we think they take down too much entirely lawful material, and Hollywood thinks they’re not draconian enough.)

The truth is that the deeper you look at current moderation—and listen carefully to those directly silenced by algorithmic solutions—the more you understand that robots won’t fix it. Robots are still terrible at understanding context, which has resulted in everything from Tumblr flagging pictures of bowls of fruit as “adult content” to YouTube removing possible evidence of war crimes because it categorized the videos as “terrorist content.” Representative Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE) pointed out the consequences of having algorithms police speech, “Groups already facing prejudice and discrimination will be further marginalized and censored.” A lot of the demand for Big Tech to do more moderation is predicated on the idea that they’re good at it, with their magical tech tools. As our own testimony and long experience points out—they’re really not, with bots or without.

Could they do better? Perhaps, but as Reddit’s Huffman noted, doing so means that the tech companies need to be able to innovate without having those attempts result in a hail of lawsuits. That is, he said, “exactly the sort of ability that 230 gives us.”

Reforming 230 with Big Tech as the Focus Would Harm Small Internet Companies

Critics of 230 often fail to acknowledge that many of the solutions they seek are not within reach of startups and smaller companies. Techniques like preemptive blocking of content, persistent policing of user posts, and mechanisms that analyze speech in real time to see what needs to be censored are extremely expensive.

That means that controlling what users do, at scale, will only be doable by Big Tech. It’s not only cost prohibitive, it will carry a high cost of liability if they get it wrong. For example, Google’s ContentID is often used in the copyright context is held up as one means of enforcement, but it required a $100 million investment by Google to develop and deploy—and it still does a bad job.

Google’s Katherine Oyama testified that Google already employs around 10,000 people that work on content moderation—a bar that no startup could meet—but even that appears insufficient to some critics. By comparison, a website like Wikipedia, which is the largest repository of information in human history, employs just about 350 staff for its entire operation, and is heavily reliant on volunteers.

A set of rules that would require a Google-sized company to expend even more resources means that only the most well-funded firms could maintain global platforms. A minimally-staffed nonprofit like Wikipedia could not continue to operate as it does today. The Internet would become more concentrated, and further removed from the promise of a network that empowers everyone.

As Congress continues to examine the problems facing the Internet today, we hope lawmakers remember the role that Section 230 plays in defending the Internet’s status as a place for free speech and community online. We fear that undermining Section 230 would harden today’s largest tech companies from future competition. Most importantly, we hope lawmakers listen to the voices of the people they risk pushing offline.

Read McSherry’s full written testimony.

from Deeplinks https://ift.tt/2oRmo5d