#and is also basically a completely different character from the one from the module

[actuallybestrpgideas]

Made my D&D party in Heroforge

[anim-ttrpgs]

Your post detailing a story in ad&d of a band of warriors delving into a dungeon filled with large lads and undead inspired me to look into ad&d 2e myself and so far I have found myself enjoying the mechanics greatly. So thank you for that do you have any advice for those just getting into ad&d?

Thank you! I love AD&D and am happy to help get more people into it, or any other rpg that has similar pre-WotC dungeon crawling gameplay.

Here’s a few rapid fire tips off the top of my head for those trying to get into AD&D2e and similar games:

Everybody Reads Both Rulebooks

Really this is my stance for basically any TTRPG, but I think that everybody should read the Player’s Handbook and the DM Guide. A session of any game will always go smoother if everybody has read the rules instead of one guy being tasked with remembering them all.

Check the Wiki

There’s a very useful wiki for AD&D you can use.

While I still recommend you read the rulebooks themselves to get a full understanding of the game you’re playing, the wiki is way better than a crusty old PDF or questionably formatted and nearly-falling-apart-by-now physical copy for quickly checking rules mid-session, and for waking you through character creation.

Start Small

Even before WotC brought the D&D brand and made it the overwhelming monopoly it is today, D&D was a juggernaught if the industry, and, even though I think from reading them that TSR-era D&D was very much written with more passion than just trying to soullessly sell products, TSR still had the dollar signs in their eyes and released like a million supplement and all that crap.

My suggestion: Stick with the DM’s Guide and Player’s Handbook at first. There’s just too much shit otherwise, and a lot of the later additions and supplements have a lot of very questionable content that will not really improve your experience. For instance, why did they introduce a fucking proficiency for eating and drinking?!

Use Even Older Adventure Modules

AD&D2e is retroactively compatible with the adventure modules made for previous editions, and I suggest you use these instead. While I think AD&D2e is the best ruleset to come out of TSR D&D, the adventure modules saw a pretty sharp decline around that time. This is when adventure modules started to be more like scripted stories rather than the dungeon crawling sandboxes they previously were.

Some suggestions that should get you started and keep you going for many many sessions are:

In Search of the Unknown

The Sinister Secret or Saltmarsh

Keep on the Borderlands (get the later version not the original version.)

Village of Hommlet

Throw Everything You Know from D&D3e Onwards Out the Window

If you aren’t sure how to handle something mechanically, do not default to assuming you do it the way it works in later editions. For instance, there are no skill checks in dialogue. You might roll Charisma once at the start of a conversation to determine if the other group trusts the PC or not, but that’s it. Everything else it just talked out.

Also, encounter balance? Throw it out. PCs will have to negotiate, sneak past, run away from, or use clever tactics to survive encounters. It being unbalanced is the whole point. You should be playing this like you would play an old survival-horror game like Resident Evil or Silent Hill, not like an action game. The PCs are fragile and will die easily if they just try to take everything head on.

This is another reason that everyone should read both rulebooks. If you don’t, then you’ll default to playing I like WotC D&D, which is a totally and completely different game.

Run it as a Challenge Game

These games only work if you run them as “challenge games,” which means they are scenarios meant to challenge both the PC and the player. No one should ever fudge dice, adjust HP values of monsters, change the solution to a puzzle just to be what the players thing is right, etc. It’s a dangerous gauntlet and you see if they live or die based on their own decisions and your descriptions. If the GM bends reality to ensure the party’s success (or ensure their failure, but everyone already knows that’s bad) then the whole game and whole story is invalidated. There will be a story, but it cannot be preplanned, it will emerge from seeing what these PCs do and who they turn out to be when they encounter these challenging scenarios. That has to include the possibility of unceremonious death.

Run a Troupe Campaign and Play Multiple Characters on Large Parties

A “troupe campaign” is one where instead of a small party, there are dozens of PCs which form a pool or roster to select from. Like you read in that post, we do ours as a mercenary free company. They get hired to do this stuff.

This makes it so that, in a highly lethal game like AD&D, the “story” doesn’t end as soon as a PC dies, which also means you’re less inclined to cheat to keep them alive when they shouldn’t be. That was just one of dozens of main characters.

Also, get used to playing multiple PCs at once. Make everyone create 3-5 PCs at the start of the campaign, and everyone bring at least 2 of them per adventure. This may take some getting used to but it is really not that hard, especially if you learn to play in third-person like Eureka tells you to.

Get used to party sizes between 6 and 15 PCs. Despite ironically being less focused exclusively on combat than WotC D&D, AD&D doesn’t pretend it’s not descended from wargames.

Ignore Alignment

Yeah alignment still mostly ranged between being pointless and being bad back then too. It meant something back in the very earliest editions of the game, but by the point of AD&D2e it was already mostly a vestigial system that you can and should ignore for most classes. You can keep it for, like, Clerics and Paladins if you want, that’s what we do.

But generally you should give up on the idea that your PCs will even be good guys at all, they’re amoral mercenaries and/or treasure hunters. This doesn’t mean they’re necessarily “bad guys” either, it’s more complex than that.

(art by @chaospyromancy)

Sir Ferdinand, one of my PCs and Captain of the White Company, is a scoundrel who overcharges his employers whenever he can get away with it; does dirty mercenary jobs like raiding, robbery, and extortion as much as he does heroic jobs like rescuing kidnapped children and protecting towns from raids, sometimes even at the same time. Recently he calmly and politely told a village of lizardmen they had better swear fealty to the local lord while subtly implying that something terrible could happen to their home if they don’t. In an adventure before, while overcharging a town for protection due to a threat that the White Company knew was not credible, once the company stumbled upon a secret smuggling and slavery operation that had been kidnapping people from the town and nearby village, he put every effort towards rooting it out despite it not being their job and even later being ordered by their current employer to stop sticking their noses in it. As he said before engaging an extremely dangerous and magic-wielding man in full plate armor while he himself had only maille at the time, he could not call himself a Christian in good standing if he turned a blind eye to slave running.

What alignment is Sir Ferdinand? None of them. He doesn’t have alignment, he has values.

[utilitycaster]

Several of Matt's answers started with basically "I thought you guys would follow this thread and then you didn't!" about complete arcs and planned plots which is all D&D but also bears out the idea that Matt simply did not adjust to nudge the players/characters more early on when the signs were there that they were not going to pick these things up of their own volition. It felt like further confirmation of C3 critics' analysis.

yup I haven't finished it, and I may not get a chance for a while - I've got evening plans and work is taking longer than I'd hoped it would, but thus far there's been a lot of fun reveals but especially showing the early vs. late campaign clips it just feels like the plot went limp halfway through in a campaign that was entirely about plot.

Again, I really do think the biggest problem of all was that fundamentally, this was a campaign structured very differently than C1 or C2. Campaign 1 was a home game that grew from a one-shot that ultimately became Critical Role, but it was very much designed for the characters the party created. The world was very much built for and around them, as I think a homebrewed home game should be! Campaign 2 was both a campaign where the cast knew they had to prove they weren't just Vox Machina, and one where the goal was to flesh out a specific part of the world and some of the underlying cosmology, and so by requiring the players to be from Wildemount and tied to it as a place, they had the luxury of character study-focused plotlines rather than something big and overarching, because a character study into, for example, Caleb, allowed insight into understanding wizardry and the Dwendalian Empire. @mareastrorum also has some great tags on one of my posts about how the villains of those respective campaigns were either created or selected to fit the characters.

Campaign 3 was, as Matt intended, a campaign with a very specific plotline. That was not communicated to the players at the start nor like, later on, and I think most of them struggled, understandably, to pivot from character concepts that were profoundly ill-suited.

What gets me is that I think Matt's mentioned that he's run Curse of Strahd, and I know he was involved in Call of the Netherdeep, and fundamentally C3 functions as a module! I think because it's his homebrewed world with his friends who are familiar with the setting and he had two great campaigns under his belt he did not realize this was going to be a problem, but ultimately, it really was.

[fallloverfic]

Thoughts on the live-action adaptation of The Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells, Episode 3: Risk Assessment:

(It's really critical this week, folks; please, if you have any interest in this show, read the books, they're so much better)

I am somehow less impressed with this episode than the previous two. My primary comfort at this point is that there are 7 more episodes and also the episodes are extremely short, so it's not a major time investment.

I know part of this is book accurate to a degree, but I dislike that the story is focusing more on Murderbot's disgust with humans - particularly from a sex angle - than it is on Murderbot's paranoia about safety and its criticisms of the company it works for and its relatively nonchalant attitude about how shit everything is. The line, "Equipment failures aren't unknown" is almost an afterthought, without any clarification on why that's a thing, and focus is more heavily emphasized on Murderbot as a danger than the company in general as a danger. Compare this to the scene in Chapter Three of All Systems Red:

“Pin-Lee was calling up specs for the beacons. “Aren’t the emergency beacons designed to trigger even if the rest of the comm equipment is destroyed?”

The other good thing about my hacked governor module is that I could ignore the governor’s instructions to defend the stupid company. “They’re supposed to be able to, but equipment failures aren’t unknown.”"

Just... tonally. Completely different.

Yes, Murderbot is potentially a threat, and it notes that, and wants PreservationAux to be aware of that, purely from the sense that it isn't made well, has gone rogue in the past, SecUnits are dangerous, and the company is not looking out for PreservationAux, but rather their own interest. There's just, again, this heavy emphasis on PreservationAux being weird hippies and Murderbot's primary issues being human grossness rather than, you know, it's company property and humans treat it that way. Again, the show has one character say, "It's slavery" and then that's it for the episode, basically. Mensah is overbearing (I love her but she is), Ratthi is tactless in a way that's infantile, Pin-Lee and Arada (though mostly Arada) are being guided (like Ratthi) by their sex drives rather than, you know, their scientific focus (like wtf with that "first" line? Yes, I'm glad it's openly queer, but with everyone acting like sex-driven children and the focus on PreservationAux as free-loving hippies, it's just... ugh), and Gurathin is just fucking weird, and that, generally, is the focus of the episode. 1968-100a was right on the money when they said everyone is far less emotionally intelligent in the show. And understanding that's likely because they're going to get development arcs is not encouraging because they've been so screwed up that it's not enjoyable to watch.

I would say maybe I'm being too picky about the tone, but also around when episodes 1 and 2 aired, articles popped up indicating the showrunners stated they handled Murderbot's tone by ignoring it. This was not reassuring last week, and it's less reassuring now that episode 3 is out, and I'm less than enthused about what is to come in the rest of this series.

Again, I appreciate the focus on the fake soap operas. It's cute. I'm less enthused that it's so dominating the story when other important things - like the evils of capitalism - are sidelined. For instance, there's really no interrogation of why Murderbot is getting ideas from the soap operas it's watching, e.g., that it wasn't trained in a lot of ways that would help keep humans alive, because of cut costs and the company being focused on its own assets and money rather than actual safety, and the company has an agenda in not necessarily keeping people alive all the time. Also that SecUnit is security, not a medical unit of some kind. The specific role of agenda and who has one and what it is and how that conflicts with ethics and personal safety is an important one in Murderbot. It's somewhat gone in the show, and warped for... whatever Mensah talks about with the Company hoping they'll fail or whatever.

About Ratthi asking the awkward questions: he doesn't frame it the way he does in the show. He doesn't say, "Wooow... Does that mean you have like, human feelings, too?"

This is the scene in Chapter Four of All Systems Red:

“We heard—we were given to understand, that Imitative Human Bot Units are . . . partially constructed from cloned material.”

Warily, I stopped the show I was watching. I didn’t like where this might go. All of that information is in the common knowledge database, plus in the brochure the company provides with the specifics of the types of units they use. Which he knew, being a scientist and whatever. And he wasn’t the kind of human who asked about things when he could look them up himself through a feed. “That’s true,” I said, very careful to make my voice sound just as neutral as always. "That's true," I said, very careful to make my voice sound just as neutral as always.

Ratthi’s expression was troubled. “But surely . . . It’s clear you have feelings—”

I flinched. I couldn’t help it.

Overse had been working in the feed, analyzing data from the assessments. She looked up, frowning. “Ratthi, what are you doing?”

Ratthi shifted guiltily. “I know Mensah asked us not to, but—” He waved a hand. “You saw it."

There's such a leap of relative respect in the difference here. Ratthi in the show is like a hyperactive child driven by his dick with a bit of progressive flavoring. Ratthi in the book is a scientist trying to figure out how to engage with a new team member he doesn't quite know how to handle, who is considered property by most of society. It's awkward, it's still got issues, but it's way more emotionally mature than he is in the show.

The whole thing with Gurathin at this point is just... why? I like that he reached out to Bharadwaj. That's nice. But the rest is just... why? The funniest thing about Gurathin doesn't even feature Gurathin: it's when Murderbot insists it's more of a machine than Gurathin is as a point of pride. That actually made me chuckle.

The crabs were neat. Random, but sure, if you've got a CGI budget, go for it. However, why is Ratthi acting like a child? Why is everyone on this show acting like a child? Why did PreservationAux bring... gifts on their check-up to see if DeltFall needed help? (I know it's for the stupid hippie shit). Why is Murderbot lying to Mensah about the status of the residents of DeltFall? Mensah is supposed to be watching its feed, she knows what Murderbot is seeing, and also it's a way to get Mensah to leave when it explains??? Also, why are they using hand communicators? The impression I always had was that everyone has coms in their heads, similar to what Mars Express and Ghost in the Shell do.

Where. Are. Murderbot's. Drones??????

The end fight was fine. It's partly why I'm more annoyed with the soap operas at this point, though because less focus was given to Murderbot's competence as a security unit - or where it wasn't competent because the company was cheap and didn't care to train it in certain things - and more to the soap opera stuff. We did at least see more of Murderbot's competence this episode with guiding and insisting the humans stay behind, as well as its competence in the fight. But it's treated less like someone who's cagey and more like someone who struggles with basic moment-to-moment existence for things it should be better able to hide/mask, particularly in relation to its job. Yes, Murderbot is awkward and struggles to relate to humans and figure out what it wants, in a way that is frequently obvious when its helmet is down and even in conversation. It is however, not as obvious as it is on the show. I get that seeing its face is going to be a different experience to being in its head, particularly when Murderbot is an unreliable narrator, and exaggeration is normal for visual media. I understand that. But given how much dialogue they're rewriting and adding and how they're modifying things, and how much of the tone and themes they're modifying, this just doesn't work. It feels too clueless. Too caught out. Too... incompetent.

One thing that really got through to me, though, is how much better this series would be as a video game. Certainly, imagining that was far more interesting than watching episode 3.

From a broader standpoint, and I know there's not really dodging around this because it's a book point (and it was always uncomfortable in the books): it's uncomfortable to know this is a U.S.-made show with a central plotline about a character wearing a face covering being strongly asked to keep the face covering off so other people can see their face. Racism against various groups wearing headcoverings which specifically target head coverings in the U.S. is old hat, and that's on top of the whole anti-mask thing a lot of people have been pushing throughout COVID. It's just... It's uncomfortable to see. And it makes me far less kind to Mensah than I have been.

I don't know what to think. I'll probably still watch episode 4, though I'm not exactly looking forward to it. The end fight was at least fine. Please read the books. They're so much better. Kobo sells DRM-free copies, too.

Other thoughts:

Episodes 1-2, Episode 3 (You are here), Episode 4, Episode 5

(Reply)

[seedlinggames]

Nobody needs another TTRPG taxonomy but I made one anyway

Posted here: https://seedlinggames.com/blogging/discourse/game_taxonomy_part_1_v_1.html I have a second blog post that is going to explain the small diagonal line, but basically it's that I think there is influence between those two camps that people don't seem to talk about much, probably due to internet discourse reasons

A million people have already done this - I'm kind of assuming you have vaguely absorbed the existing Internet discussions, and are familiar with terms like OSR, Story Games, etc. If you haven't, run away now and save yourself. But Six Cultures Of Play is probably a prerequisite to understand what I'm talking about, or at least what I'm complaining about.

I will try to, as much as possible, only discuss games that I have played. A lot of taxonomies seem to be written by someone who clearly likes one type of game a lot more than the others. For instance, I will not be discussing LARP because I don't have any relevant experience. I'm also not claiming that I am discussing the complete set of all games that exist, but I think I have played enough of them propose a taxonomy. If you're curious, I have an approximately complete list of games I've played or run here.

What is a TTRPG?

First we're going to have to look at everyone's other least favourite subject of conversation.

TTRPGs have 2 or more people taking on the following 3 roles:

A player, who is responsible for one or more characters who are the protagonists of the story.

A GM, who is responsible for the remainder of the story, such as providing additional characters and other aspects of the environment that the main players exist in. To do so they might determine the outcome of uncertain events or interpret rules agreed upon by the table.

An author, who provides additional, reusable material without being present. I'm using the term "author" for a lack of a better one, but it includes game books, blog posts, maps, drawings, or even fixed principles transmitted orally from game group to game group. These serve to facilitate or even replace GMing, as well as to introduce new ideas to the table without someone being physically present.

The same person often takes on different roles at different times, sometimes in the same game.

If you have only one of these roles, you are probably writing a book, doing improv, or some other activity. Which is of course totally fine.

This isn't the only definition you could come up with, but I think most people would agree it isn't totally wrong, and it's a lens that I'll be using to discuss the game taxonomy.

Maximalist Games

Apparently "maximalist" means something specific in art but I am not educated in such things and might be using the word wrong.

Characteristics of a maximalist game:

The three roles: clearly present and distinct, with the GM and author each taking on a large responsibility for the game experience.

Modularity: Semi-modular: There is a main game system which is designed to be extended by other modules, but these modules cannot be used with other games easily. A game book is typically not a self-contained experience and games are usually open-ended in duration.

Rules: A lengthy, complex ruleset with subsystems for resolving different parts of the game that are likely to come up, primarily oriented around the success or failure of an action and its consequences.

Characters: The complex game mechanics provide an opportunity for players to develop a distinct character before playing them, defined by game mechanics. Character and player motivations are usually aligned.

Narrative structure: Campaigns usually follow conventional narrative structure, but this is driven primarily by the GM, or by adventure modules, which define an outline of the narrative.

Who makes them: Often require more resources to create and thus are made by corporations, but that is changing.

Relationship to other media: While often inspired by fantasy novels, their larger budget and longer history has allowed some of them to develop their own genre conventions distinct from other media, and in some cases have inspired movies and books.

Solo games: Rare, due to the prominent role of the GM.

"Trad" games are a subset of these but a) I hate that word and b) I think the genre, starting especially with 4E and other inspired games, have gone in some very different directions. It roughly corresponds to "Fight D&D" in the Between Two Cairns taxonomy, but some games in this category involve no fighting at all.

Narrative Mechanics Games

The three roles: Blur the lines between GM and player more freely.

Modularity: Usually not very. Each game is made to create a specific experience, and the blurring of GM and player roles makes adding external content more complicated.

Rules: Focused on resolving problems in the context of narrative structures. Rules may facilitate pacing, allow for storytelling outside of linear time, allow players to temporarily take on a GM-like role, and allow for players to work together to create conflict between their characters.

Characters: Mechanics facilitate creating characters according to genre conventions with defined relationships to other characters and to NPCs. Player and character motivations are often not aligned.

Narrative structure: Rules are designed to support conventional narrative structures and genre conventions.

Who makes them: The focused scope of these games mean that they are often made by individuals rather than corporations, but there is a trend towards some of them being made by mid-sized organizations. Long development cycles may be needed to provide a polished experience, leading to some amount of professionalization.

Relationship to other media: Usually strongly inspired by other media, allowing you to create stories similar to movies, books, TV shows, etc.

Solo games: Rare, with Ironsworn as a notable exception.

Some "story games" fall into this, but I think "story games" has split into two meaningfully distinct categories. I've met enough people who only like one of the two categories. I think they are perceived as more similar than they are because there's less internet drama about the difference between them.

Prompt-based storytelling

The three roles: Blur the lines between the GM, player and author, with the GM often being absent.

Modularity: Usually self-contained experiences with limited modularity.

Rules: Often entirely forego mechanics for failure or success; mechanics tend to be minimal and about making suggestions regarding the story to tell, with the written text sometimes acting primarily as a GM or even player who is not present.

Characters: Character creation is usually a minor to nonexistent part of the game, with characters being defined by decisions made at the table. In some cases, all characters are already predefined. Characters are usually defined in words rather than numbers. Player and character motivations are rarely aligned.

Narrative structure: Stories often forego conventional narrative structures, and are focused around exploring relationships, ideas, or experiences. If a narrative structure is defined, it is usually in the form of a defined endpoint, with the purpose of the game being to explore how the characters get there.

Who makes them: Leans heavily towards DIY or single creators. Often comes in formats other than books.

Relationship to other media: Inspiration comes less from established genres and more from life experiences. Genre fiction is less likely to be an inspiration.

Solo games: Very common, due to the reduced role of the GM.

Adventure/exploration games

The three roles: Blur the lines between GM and author, both at the table and culturally.

Modularity: Are highly modular: not only are supplements and adventures often interchangeable, but are often not tied to specific systems.

Rules: Have relatively short rulesets focused on generating situations (on the GM side) and resolving danger (on the player side).

Characters: Characters are mostly created organically in play through interactions with the environment, including the tools at their disposal. Random generation is common. Character and player motivations are usually aligned.

Narrative structure: Campaigns often do not follow a typical narrative structure, aside from perhaps an escalation in danger, scope and/or strangeness.

Who makes them: Their modular nature means that they are often created in a DIY manner, through zines, blog posts, and informal discussions, though mid-size companies are also prevalent.

Relationship to other media: Inspiration from other media is often mostly vibes-based, with genre fiction, folklore, and even musical genres and political movements (for better or worse) being prominent. It doesn't seek to emulate the characters or narrative structure of other genres.

Solo games: Relatively common, usually provided by an additional module that may be specific and general-purpose, often focused on a GM emulator known as an "oracle."

"OSR" games are a subset of these, but a good number of these also make many OSR people very angry. It roughly corresponds to "Door D&D", but dungeon crawling is not inherent to this genre.

Other ways of looking at these categories

You could also map these on axes:

distinct GM/player/writer role vs combined roles: maximalist vs prompt-based at opposite ends of this spectrum

Highly self-contained vs highly modular: narrative vs adventure/exploration

Strong genre conventions vs naturalistic approach: maximalist/narrative vs adventure/exploration/prompt based

Resembles a D&D vs does not really resemble a D&D: maximalist/adventure/exploration vs narrative/prompt based

for symmetry I want to put another axis for maximalist/prompt based but I can't think of anything they have in common. Oh well.

But I also don't think this is a complete enumeration of all possible types of games either - this is some kind of n-dimensional space that has only 4 blobs on it

The part of the taxonomy blog post where you realize this is actually just me going on about my own preferences this entire time

I've played and enjoyed all 4 types of games, but putting this together has helped me figure something out - why it is that I like both the NSR side of OSR games and like the "super weird" story games. And why I don't seem to be the only one, even though these are often talked about as opposites. Because if you split story games into two genres, the similarities between prompt-based games and adventure/exploration games comes out.

[theresattrpgforthat]

THEME: Bittersweet Futures

Today’s recommendation is all about games that bring us into speculative futures, from the highly plausible to the completely fantastical. You’ll find giant bugs, machine animals, and eco punk anti-fascists in this collection of games.

Autostede, by Kettle and Clock.

You are a Drover. Your mechanical companion, your “Autostede,” is all that keeps you safe against the deadly plants and roving wild stedes in the wilderness between towns. And you keep them running. Together, you can take on the world, which is good because the world is a dangerous place and its your job to keep the small, separated towns safe and connected.

Autostede is a tabletop roleplaying game Illuminated by LUMEN in which you play as Drovers, the few who choose to modify their Autostedes into weapons capable of surviving the harsh wilderness between towns. 

Actions taken with the ‘stede interact with their wishes, turning every roll into an ongoing conversation with your companion, where you come together to find the best solution to a problem. 

Autostede feels very much inspired by Horizon Zero Dawn, with a bit of a western twist. Character creation involves two parts. First is Drover Creation, which is attached to your mask, an air filtration device that also grants special skills and points towards one of the three main stats as a strength for you. The second part is your Stede, a character sheet with a 4-section hex grid, with each hex representing attribute bonuses, passive abilities, and modules that can serve as weapons, power generators, extra limbs, and so on.

While the game is based in LUMEN, there’s definitely pieces of it that feel unique, such as your mechanical steeds, and the way skills are used in the game. Each character has access skills that are generally useful, but also can do things that feel a little unhelpful, such as “bewilder” or “consider”. These are Recovery skills; most skills are Spent when you use them and can’t be used right away again after you’ve used them, but Recovery skills can be used to refresh your options, in a sense. These balances of skills feels like a great way to introduce pauses into what might otherwise feel like a hectic game, encouraging your characters to demonstrate weaknesses or narrative moments that are more about the character than what the character is doing.

If you love building custom mechs but still want a lightweight set of rules, I definitely recommend Autostede.

Paratype, by megasomamars.

"The world ended long ago. It doesn’t matter how; pollution, nuclear fallout or some cataclysmic event, no one really knows. What they do know is that it didn’t take long for the bugs to show up. Giant insects terrorize what remains of humanity, leaving survivors scrounging for what little resources they can get.

For most, life in the wasteland has become fast, dangerous and insectile. Thanks to science, some individuals have even found a way to splice their DNA with that of these mutant invertebrates to develop strange new adaptations of their own. These hybrids are humanity's newest area and last hope. Now all that’s left is to survive."

Paratype is an interesting little hybrid of a game. The basic rules involve rolling to hit a difficulty level, with rules for both advantage and disadvantage. However, the game also includes a special roll called the Risk roll, which involves rolling 2d20 and taking the result that is the farthest from 10. This is great for situations where you want either a fantastic success or a deadly failure.

Characters have four general stats, with sub-stats that represent specialties, which reminds me of World of Darkness or Genesys games. The inventory system takes inspiration from Mausritter, consisting of hexagonal shapes that can be filled with different size items. If you buy a backpack, your inventory expands!

Finally, the Health of your character is measured in both Hit Points and Stress points. You lose hit points, and gain Stress points. Running out of HP = death, while hitting max SP leads to your character going “feral”, which makes your character virtually unplayable. I think the explanation in the lore for this is a DNA splice that has changed your character to make them better survivors. I also feel like it carries echoes of Trauma in Blades in the Dark, or Corruption in Urban Shadows, except that in Paratype, SP can be healed a little easier.

Light Eaters, by blindink.

An interstellar encounter brought a Light to the earth, corrupting reality and leaving humanity in ash. The last city stands against the inevitable, remnants of the pre-existing mortal Authority desperately clutching for power. Degenerates stalk the wasteland with insatiable hunger, encircling the dying carcass of order. You are the misfits, the should-not-bes, the first and last signs of apocalypse. Born from the end, you are Light Eaters. In your wake, nothing will ever be the same. 

Light Eaters is a campaign-style role-playing game for three or more players, telling the story of the last city hurtling towards an inevitable end. Players take the role of Light Eaters, near immortal post-human beings watching helplessly as humanity as we know it comes to an end, fighting back against the Authority and the effects of their own Degeneration. They decide for themselves what matters, and what they take with them into this new world.

Light Eaters uses 6-diced dice as resources, which you can place on slots in 4 different move categories in order to set yourself up for action scenes. You can only assign 4’s, 5’s and 6’s: 2’s and 3’s can be re-rolled, while 1’s inflict conditions or allow something called Chaos to rise. Your characters can work as a team, sharing dice and distributing Conditions evenly, and you can also oppose one-another, attempting to disrupt each-other’s rolls by spending personal resources.

The general game play appears to consist of an over-arching problem, with various levels framed as scenes. Each scene will include an obstacle, often in the form of opposing NPCs. These NPCs carry Facets that can be damaged through the actions of the PCs, and each Facet consists of descriptive words that represent powers and personalities that will affect the NPC’s choices. Over time, Chaos will build, triggering new events every time you reach a new level. When Chaos reaches level 4, the game is over; narrate what happens based on the events that have happened so far.

This game looks like a great option for players who want stakes that raise higher and higher, and plenty of ways to interpret their special powers; You can get a taste of this game by checking out an ashcan scenario, called Light Eaters: Thunderfuck, a scenario with pre-generated characters and a problem that each character is motivated to solve.

Bug World, by alfie meyer.

Maybe the apocalypse could have been averted, but it wasn’t, and here we are, in a brand new world. this isn’t your cold, nuclear winter, sparse and dead kind of post-apocalypse. the end sent the world on a new course, brimming with life - just not quite as much human life as before. ok, barely any. in the super oxygen-rich atmosphere of the earth today, insect life has thrived. it only took a few decades for bugs to reach incredible sizes, and now, about a century-and-a-half after the disaster, gargantuan insects are a normal sight.

from a ladybug the size of a dog, to millipedes that might as well be trains, to horned beetles with skeletons big enough to use as shelter. bugs are huge and they are everywhere. the remaining humans have domesticated some, trained others, made wary peace with some intelligent groups, and carved themselves out sections of the world to live.

Bug World is a Powered by the Apocalypse game in that mechanically, it carries a lot of the hallmarks: playbooks, stats that add modifiers to moves, and graded success. It’s also literally a post-apocalypse: the world is broken and dangerous, and the players are scavenging to survive and learning about the past in the process. However, I think in comparison to Apocalypse World, the moves and goals of the characters are less integrated; in Apocalypse World, a character is motivated by lack of resources to intimidate, insinuate, and barter with the other inhabitants of their settlement for more. In Bug World, you are instead motivated to work together to go searching for the things you need to survive.

The Distant Shore, by The Ignis Court.

Transhumanity's empire has been sundered. The Machine Minds they had relied too heavily upon have left them, and Earth too has disappeared. The Settlements across the Sol System have been left scattered and isolated in the black. As megacorp, fascists, and Psionic Tyrants begin movement to take advantage, an entity known as the Distant Shore has manifest from Ceres, and its caustic light has begun tugging at the psyche of every thinking being. 

Lucky then that the Machine Minds saw fit to offer you a parting gift: an Ancile, fragment of the Machine Minds. Their nature symbiotic with your own names you Psion, and one capable of great and terrible power. 

This is the Distant Shore. 

The Distant Shore is a very interesting example of how your characters’ backgrounds and the lore of the game are built into the process of character creation. For example, you must choose a character background that will place you on the outside of the system of power, and each character must also contain an Ancile that gives them incredible power while also makes them dangerous.

The system itself uses d20’s, with a 10 as a threshold for success. However, how well you succeed is determined by your character’s skills - if you are Untrained in a skill, a success is still partial, and if you are Trained in a skill that aligns with your background, you cannot fail. Your training also determines critical points of your backstory. For example; if you are Trained in Engage, name a fight you didn’t win and what it cost you. I love that these kinds of tie-ins ensure that the players will learn what they need to know about the setting without overloading them with information.

The designer also has an adventure document for this game called No More Tourists, if you need a place to start.

Why We Fight, by Stop, Drop & Roll Games Studio. Why We Fight is a solarpunk narrative TTRPG where you play a crew of��eco-punks fighting fascism to build a brighter, greener future.

Your Crew will journey through the remains of a post-civil war country to save lives, reclaim nature, create a community of compassion, and beat back the oppressive forces that threaten the chance for a new start.

But most of all, it’s about learning about each other, and the things that inspire us. It’ll take close co-operation and a diverse set of skills, but together, we can make change!

Why We Fight can be played solo and GM-less, with the elements that would normally be GM-ed attached to randomizers to help the group construct missions together if that is what you so desire. The game is focused on a post-apocalypse that highlights many concerns about the consequences of an increase in fascist-leaning governance, which means it isn’t necessarily escapist, but it might give your table the space to talk about elements of the future that cause them anxiety. It might also give you a chance to demonstrate agency in situations where you normally don’t.

Character specialties are distributed among mental, physical and social categories, and feel pretty standard when it comes to a list of character skills. The group works together to construct a mission, using dice to determine elements such as opportunities, locations, and various situations that may cause complications. Play happens over the passing of a day, with different modifiers attached to specialties according to the time of day. I think this might be interesting way to add complexity that encourages strategy when it comes to plotting out your next moves.

Finally, travel between conflicts and other scenes serves to flesh out the world and add depth to your character’s experiences, using roll tables to describe how small changes in the world give your characters reasons to hope.

For Further Reading...

Post Apocalyptic Community Recommendation Post

Nuclear Radiation Recommendation Post

Fallout Recommendation Post

[bisexualsinspace]

i do think that murderbot comes across as, for lack of a better word, less "cool" in the show, and i think that might be some people's issue with the portrayal, in that they take mb's pov in the books super seriously and don't realize that MB can be rational and competent and still not be a reliable narrator, especially in regards to its own behavior and how humans react to it. like i think MB in the books downplays even how scared of and aggressive and cruel humans are to it because it doesn't like thinking or talking about that, and i think the show depicts a more realistic version of events in which murderbot's understanding of security and what it takes to maintain it differs from what humans are capable of viewing as normal. like i think it's actually a very fair point that preservation station security doesn't want to record people in public! privacy rights in presaux are really strong, which is part of why it's a much better place than the corporate rim, but MB views that as an almost unacceptable hole in security. would it be safer if it had access to cameras all over the station? undoubtedly, particularly in the situation it and mensah are in with graycris still sending people after her and with the added tension of other corporate entities viewing presaux/mensah as a target. MB is very good at security, and if it had all its tools at its disposal, it would be able to stop a lot of risky shit from going down. but presaux is right to value people's privacy, and that's a conflict within MB's moral compass that i haven't really seen anyone bring up (i think maybe people think MB is just so competent and correct that it must be right on this front, which, being able to parse out your own moral values rather than accepting that a narrator is inherently correct is. well it's something one should think a bit harder on, i think). anyway i don't know where i was going with this massive block of text but basically i think the show does a good job of showing that MB is not the only relevant character and that other people having feelings and opinions, even if those opinions aren't "objectively" correct or get in the way of more efficient security, is important. also i think more people could do with considering *why* murderbot cares so much about security working the way it wants it to. like in an ideal world, with no corporate rim and a lot less risk to people's lives, the security measures it takes so seriously wouldn't be nearly as necessary. and in fact it often has to compromise on missions because the humans around it, whose opinions start to matter more and more to it, have important points that they bring up! but back to the point about security as a concept, i do think people should think harder about the fact that murderbot exists as a construct for the purpose of security, and that even without its governor module, it still primarily takes on the role of a security consultant. security was its purpose as a secunit and now that it's an independent person it's important for it and us as readers to consider why it clings so much to security as its role and as something all other concerns have to bend to. anyway i need to go watch the other half of this episode and i completely wandered from the whole "cool" thing

[whooiew]

Hi! I'm very curious about what is the basis of the Kafsant ship? Just cause cute?

Hello! I actually have a full script for this one question!

I'll separate them into different bits depending on how interested you are in learning more

They both came from a pretty fucked up past Kafka needing to fight tooth and nail to survive on the Columbian streets Snowsant with POVERTY and RACISM They both also have a fondness for braids Kafka is all street smarts and 0 books smarts While Snowsant is all books smarts (a literaly prodigy engineer) and 0 street smarts (extremely obvious in her operator records) Snowsant is anxious and worries a lot about the future (not anymore since So Long Adele, she has more self confidence now, we love to see it) Kafka is more of a living in the moment kinda girl And most importantly, the part that slam jams this ship together in the first place Snowsant is a place of comfort and reliability that the operators can rely on She's extremely genuine and pure of heart Kafka desperately needs a place of comfort and reliability in her life, and is magnitized to people who she sees as genuine, cause she just, wants someone that she can trust

And from here we'll be going into the DETAILS (1257 words ahead, might get sexual towards the end)

Kafka has absolutely no idea what love is like, in fact she's completely avoiding it most of the time due to her past but due to the nurture and nature dillema of Kafka

She actually greatly yearns for any sort of connection, as shown in her operator records featuring Silence Her Module featuring Silence Her Operator files featuring Rhodes Island treating them extremely well, as shown in Pinecone's Operator Records and Kafka's Files where she takes cares of the children and actively makes gifts for the Mansfield crew Snowsant on the other hand we don't really have any idea how she's like in terms of the concept of love, but if the liberi trend is anything to go by she'll be pretty intimate with it, making Kafka the one outlier whom's actively avoiding it

And I have a concept on how they've met actually

In case you didn't know, Kafka's basically Arknight's version of Robin Hood, she runs around stealing and stabbing people on the streets of Columbia but she still has a heart of gold and really only shanks those that deserves it, if they don't she'll just steal it, and she also looks out for her fellow hobos despite everything

IN Kafka's operator records, towards the end it was shown that Silence has met Kafka before actually

Back when Kafka stole Silence's breakfast and passes it along to a homeless child before running off, she also paid Silence of course, leaving her with a single coin (we'll come back to the coin part in a bit for brain rot) Now how does this tie to Snowsant you may wonder Snowsant's a Lungmen character isn't she? She's from Lungmen, how would she have met a Columbian WELL MY DEAR READER SNOWSANT'S BEEN TO COLUMBIA BEFORE!

Using her painfully saved up money and her winnings at Lungmen's Invention Competition, she moved to Columbia to further her studies to be the most EPIC ENGINEER EVER

But life for our little Snowsant isn't that good in Columbia

Being a Lungman Citizen she got hit with a good dose of RACISM, her social standing doesn't help either, causing her to not be treated that kindly throughout her stay there

If you've read So Long Adele, you should know that Snowsant cried herself to sleep over the prices of writing letters there

She was not well off in Columbia at all Now she actually made something FUCKING AMAZING, ABSOLUTELY REVOLUTIONARY, but due to her ZERO STREET SMARTS, she didn't copyright it, it got stolen, and the thieves made BANK with HER CREATION, ASSHOLES

Least to say poor Snowsant was fucking dying at this point

Now that's when our favorite corvid comes along, KAFKA, OUR ROBIN HOOD, she descends from the heavens to provide food and stuff whenever she can to Snowsant cause Snowsant's her fellow hobo at this point basically And of course eventually Snowsant goes back to Lungmen and stuff yadda yadda BUT EVENTUALLY, Snowsant and Kafka met back up on Rhodes again

Snowsant's of course very thankful and stuff, and from there on they sorta just hang out more cause Kafka's like, omg a fellow street kid YOOOOOO

So Kafka pays more attention in terms of taking care of Snowsant, which causes Snowsant to think Kafka might have feelings for her, after a bit eventually Snowsant drags her on a date and something something, oh hey maybe Kafka likes her too and she'll have to be forced to confront to the idea of it causing her to explode into a mess of feathers

As a result who knows Snowsant might think she did something wrong due to how she is as a a character and now its a MESS OH NO, eventually Kafka will have to get through to her feelings and confront it and YIPPEE YURI Apart from that I just think they'd be really cute with each other, they bounce off each other's flaws really well, like, Kafka's infinite confidence and gusto countering Snowsant's sheer lack of it

And Snowsant just being a general safe zone for Kafka to let her guard down around, because Snowsant's never really hiding anything, she's always genuine

Which is something Kafka really likes. ALSO THEY HAVE THE SAME LIBERI TRAIT OF SIDE HAIR FEATHERS And that's pretty much the basics

So now that we've gone over express details on how Snowsant and Kafka are like as characters I'ma explain a bit more about them Snowsant is a pure of heart girl, your average goodie two shoes, she's a prodigy genius, she has an insane amount of mental endurance, being able to go through failure after failure but despite it all still being able to keep her head up high and continue moving forward

She cares for her family greatly, family is extremely important to her in fact, hell a good amount of her paycheck gets sent back to her family even

But all of that comes with a price, she's still slightly anxious about things, doesn't really take care of herself, and has a nasty habit of, zoning in too much (this will be discussed further later)

Kafka on the other hand, on the surface may seem like an annoying piece of shit, but once you get to know her she actually has a heart of gold, becoming Rhodes Island's invisible guardian angle in a sense, looking out for her fellow operators whenever wherever

She also has a fondness for kids as she visits them often and even makes gifts for them

Speaking of gift making, Kafka is an avid tinkerer and arts and crafts nerd

And of course can't forget, harboring of PLANT AUTISM

But yeah, she cares for people greatly, especially ones that's close to her

Be it anyone from the Mansfield Crew Silence Ifrit (implied) You the Doctor She's the peak of Liberi, with how Liberi characters are usually very caring about their relationships, be it their S/O or their friends and family, they care greatly for them Fitting for Kafka because she's a Jackdaw! Jackdaws immensely loyal to their partners and will pretty much never leave one once they find one all that aside, I just think these 2 would be really sweet and they'd just be happy to have someone that they can lean on especially Kafka

(This is where the sexual parts are: )

There's also the side to Snowsant where she actually surprisingly dominant

Which unironically fits how White Eared Pheasants are like

I've always made Snowsant the more assertive one, and more recent Snowsant content supports that fact

There's some parts to Snowsant, small parts, but pieced together it shows a bigger picture and I'd say Snowsant does have a dominant side to her but she keeps it in check It'll only really come out when she's in the mood and zone for it, specifically when she starts zoning stuff out again Like damn yeah she'd definitely tie Kafka up and whisper sensually into her ears while teasing her

The whole zoning out thing I've explored a bit more when writing a specific short fic but it was shown officially in her operator records where Snowsant completely zoned out everything around her when she got caught thinking about how to pay for her book publishing fee, completely zoning out the fact that Closure was telling her that Doc and Closure already paid for it

Which fits into white eared pheasants being usually pretty reserved when it comes to the act of sex until a switch flips on and they go into a breeding frenzy

Also Snowsant's fucking RICH NOW BABY YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[wirewitchviolet]

How a Computer Works- Part 4 (Binary Math)

This is the 4th part in a series of posts explaining how computers work such that you can build your own from just wires and spare electronics (or hell, Minecraft redstone signals, a carefully balanced water fountain, anything you can build logic from really). The series starts in this post, the most recent entry before this was part 3, but the only REALLY required reading for this one should be part 2. Get that knowledge in your brain so this next bit can make sense to you.

Also, I'm basically teaching a pretty in-depth computer science class here for free out of the goodness of my heart, so if you have the cash to spare, maybe consider throwing a little money my way so I can keep surviving and doing stuff like this?

Our focus for today's lesson is going to be actually designing one of these modules we have hooked up to the bus to actually do stuff with any data we pass into it. As I've mentioned a few times, all of this stuff we're passing along can be thought of in a lot of different ways. Completing a circuit when one tracing wires out connects to a positive charge and another a negative means the same thing as a gate saying true, will turn a light tied in there on, we can call it a 1 in our abstract computery talk, or several other things, but we're dong math today so let's think about numbers.

Let's think in Binary

So I think I've referenced binary numbers a few times in a really hand-wavey sort of way, but it's good to stop and make sure we all get the concept thoroughly. Normally, when we think about numbers, we're using our good pals the Arabic numerals- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. We just decided to make unique little squiggles to represent these first ten numbers if we include 0, and then if we add together 9+1, we're out of symbols, so we start a new column, put a 1 in it, and reset to 0 in the one we're in. So, 9+1=10. We call this "base ten math" because ten is where we have to start that new column... but really, we kinda just picked ten out of a hat for this? Presumably it's because most of us have ten fingers.

Maybe if we all had hands like typical American cartoon characters, we'd only have made eight unique symbols. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 and 7. Add 1 to 7 and we start a new column there instead of after coming up with symbols for those fingers we don't have. In base eight math, 7+1=10. It's a smaller group we're dedicating that next numeral over to, but you can see how that works, right?

Or hey, what if the first person to start counting stuff on their fingers just thought about it differently. You can totally hold up 0 fingers. So really on just one hand you can easily go 0 1 2 3 4 5. Well, what if we just use our other hand past there? Every time we run out of fingers on our right hand, we reset it to zero and add one on our left. It's base six math in this example but hey with just our hands we can display any number from 0 to a base six 55! Which in base ten would be, let's see, 5x6+5, so, yeah, any number from 0 to 35, but that's still pretty good. Converting it into base six is kind of a pain since you've gotta stop and do the multiplication, but if we all just kinda thought in base six we wouldn't need to convert at all.

And hey, what if we really thought big here? Instead of using one hand for the next column of numbers, we could just treat every finger as a column on its own. Holding some of the required groupings of fingers up can kinda give you a hand cramp, but hey we've got ten columns that can hold a 0 or a 1, so we can count all the way up from 0 to 1111111111! Or uh, in base ten, 1023. Still a really impressive number though! Just explaining this to you I've upped how how you can count on your fingers by more than a hundred times. You're welcome! Sorry about the hand cramps. We're not looking into binary math for the sake of saving fingers though, we're doing it because we're designing logic circuits and doing math on the assumption that the only symbols we have to count with are 0 and 1. Anyway, just so we're on the same page, let's count up from 0 in binary for a while here:

0, 1, 10, 11, 100, 101, 110, 111, 1000, 1001, 1010, 1011, 1100, 1101, 1111, 10000.

You can follow along with the pattern right? And if you're curious what that'd be all standard base 10 style, let's count through that same number of... numbers that way.

0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. I made some of these bold to make it a little easier to count along. It's the ones where we're adding a new column in binary, and hey look, it's all the powers of 2. If you have to convert in your head, that makes it easier.

Binary Addition

So let's try thinking in JUST binary now and do some basic math. Before we get into the double-digits- Wait no, if we're pedantic, di- is the prefix for ten things so we shouldn't be saying "digits," we're in base two, so, bi- so... the double bits, I guess), we're just got:

0+0=0. 1+0=1. 0+1=1. 1+1=10

Hey, wait. does that pattern look familiar to you? Like we had to go to a second bit for 1+1, but just ignore that for a moment and look at the lowest one. Humor me. We saw this same pattern in part 2!

0 xor 0 outputs 0. 1 xor 0 outputs 1. 0 xor 1 outputs 1. 1 xor 1 outputs 0.

Oh damn. So if we want to add two bits of data, we just XOR them. All we have to worry about is the spill-over into the next column. Well.. hell, let's see what this looks like if we're looking at two columns here.

00+00=00. 01+00=01. 00+01=01. 01+01=10.

If we just look at the "1s column" digit, yeah, XOR works. And is there a pattern for the "10s column?" Well, it's a 0 for everything except when we go 1+1... we had a logic circuit for that too though, right? Yeah, good ol' AND. Only outputs 1 if both value A and value B it's looking at are both 1.

So OK. We rig up a circuit that has a XOR gate and an AND gate. We feed the first number we want to add into both of these gates, and we can display our answer as a two bit number, with what the AND spits out on the left, and the one the XOR spits out on the right. BAM. We are masters of addition... so long as the highest numbers we want to add together are 1+1. We uh... we should probably try to improve upon that. Also we've got this whole structure to the whole computer where we've got these registers feeding in and out of a bus with a fixed number of data bits on it, kinda would be nice if the number of bits going back out to our bus was the same as the number coming in to our addition circuit... and like, yeah, that's kind of an impossible goal since it's always possible when adding two numbers the same length that you need an extra column to display the answer, but you know, if the first bit of at least one of the numbers we're adding is a 0 it'll fit, so let's get to that point at least.

So OK. Let's expand things out. We're adding any 2 bit numbers now, and let's pretend we've got like a calculator with a 3 bit display.

000+000=000. 001+000=001. 000+001=001. 001+001=010.

010+000=010. 011+000=011. 010+001=011. 011+001=100.

000+010=010. 001+010=011. 000+011=011. 001+011=100.

010+010=100. 011+010=101. 010+011=101. 011+011=110.

I'm being kinda redundant with showing 0+1 and 1+0 and such. Let's narrow these down to just the ones we need a new bit of logic to make happen though. The 1s bit is groovy. We feed the 1s bits of ANY two numbers into a XOR gate, we get the correct 1s bit for our answer. And if the next bits over are 0s, we can pop what's coming out of our AND gate in there out to there and that's fine too. We're also good if we just look at the 10s column, everywhere we don't need to worry about the 1s column affecting it. The places where we need to do more with our logic are just where we're doing the whole "carry the 1 thing." I already set up the grid of all these so that's just the stuff in the far right column, but hey, let me bold those up too.

And let me just kinda blank out these other bits so we're really focused in on the part where there's a problem...

_0_+_0_=_1_. _1_+_0_=_0_. _0_+_1_=_0_. _1_+_1_=_1_.

Well huh. If we're just looking at a bit in the middle of our big long number, and we're carrying a 1 to that position, we sure seem to be getting the exact opposite of what we get when we aren't carrying anything in here. So OK, let's redesign our logic circuit here. We've got our bit A wire and our bit B wire coming in like we did before, going into that XOR for this output bit, but we need to add a wire for whether we're carrying a 1 in from the next circuit over, and if so, flip that result. Do we have a way to do that easily? Well OK, logic chart time. If we have a 0 and no carry, we want 0. I'm lazy, so, 0 bla 0=0, 1 bla 0=1, 0 bla 1= 1, 1 bla 1 = 0. Oh, that's another XOR gate. We XOR A and B like before, and then just XOR that result with our carry bit, and we are definitely displaying the right thing in this part of our answer. Now we just need to double check if our corner case of handling a carry messes with the next carry anywhere and... oh damn yeah.

011+001=100, and 001+011=100. These are the cases where the 1s column carrying a 1 to the 10s column means we have to do something different with that carry bit. So, we're still making our carry-the-1 result a 1 if A and B are 1... but we also need to make sure it's a 1 if we are both carrying something in, AND our original XOR gate is spitting a 1 out. Well we can throw that AND in there, and we can throw in an OR to check either of these two conditions, and there's our new and improved carry-the-1? result.

So let's put it all together now!

For a given bit, we have value A, value B, and Carry. We have a XOR gate that takes A and B in. We feed the result of that and Carry into another XOR gate. That spits out the sum for this bit. Then we AND the result of that first XOR and our Carry feed that result into one side of an OR gate. We feed A and B into a second AND gate, the result of that is the other input for our OR. That OR now spits out a fresh Carry bit. We can plug that into the next adder circuit down the line, for the next column to the left in our result. BAM, there we go. Just clone this whole weird set of 5 logic gates for as many bits as you want to deal with, daisy chain those carry values into each other, and congratulations. You have somehow rigged together something where electricity goes in, electricity goes out, and the weird path it has to take along the way has this weird side effect where you can work out what two binary numbers add up to. Please note again that we didn't at any point make some sort of magical computer person and teach it how to do math, we just found patterns in how electricity flows and where the pure math concept of logic gates and binary math happen to work the same way and exploited that for a result that's convenient to us. Shame that was such a pain wiring up, but hey, every time you add another copy of this onto the end, you double the range of numbers you're able to work with. Eventually that hits a point where it's worth the effort.

Well addition is all well and good, what about subtraction?

OK, so just to take stock, so far we have a big addressed block of memory somewhere we keep our numbers in. We have, for example, 8 bit lines on our bus, and when we want to do addition, we set stuff that turns on "hey, place with our first number, put it on the bus" then "hey register A, read the bus for a moment," then the same to get a number to slap in register B, and we've got this sum register sitting between registers A and B with a bunch of these adder circuits hooked in between all the bits. We might have some leftover carry line with a 1 on it and nowhere to plug it in, but ignoring that spill-over, every bit on our bus is to go good for addition. When we're setting up command codes, we can make more to do some other math with A and B and that's all well and good, but we have a real big problem when it comes to subtraction, because out of what's going into A, going into B, and coming out of sum, at least somewhere we're going to need to deal with the concept of negative numbers. So when we're doing subtraction, one line on our bus needs to be reserved for whether it's positive or negative. If you program, you're maybe familiar with the concept of unsigned integers vs. signed integers? This is that. With only positive numbers, if we've got say, 8 bits to work with, we've got a range of 00000000 to 11111111 to work with, or 0-255 in decimal, but if one of those is getting swiped for negative or positive, now we're talking like, -127-127.

But wait, that's not quite right, is it? Like if we arbitrarily say that leftmost digit is 1 if we're negative, we get things like, 1 being 00000001, 0 being 00000000, -2 being 10000010 etc. but... what's 10000000? -0? That's the same thing is 0. That's redundant and also gonna really screw the count up if we're like, adding 5 to -2! Or really, any other math we're doing.

Oh and we also need to remember when we're stuffing a negative number into a memory register, it's not like that register knows what concept the bits we're shoving into it represent, so like, you personally have to be responsible for remembering that that 1 on the leftmost line, for that particular value, is noting that it's negative, and not that the 10000000s place or whatever has a 1 for some number, or the first of 8 switch variables you're stashing in this address to save on space is on, or whatever else. We here at the memory address hotel are just trapping electron wiggles in a weird little latch or we aren't. No labels, no judgements.

So OK no matter how we're storing negative numbers we need to just actually remember or take notes some way on what the hell convention we're using to represent negative numbers, and where we're applying it. But we also need a convention where like, the math works, at all. Just having a bit be the is it negative bit works real bad because aside from having -0 in there, we're trying to count backwards from 0 and our math module has no conception of back. Or of counting for that matter. Or 0. It's just a circuit we made.

OK, so, let's maybe store our negative numbers in a different way. You know how a car has an odometer? Rolling numbers counting up how many miles you've gone? And there's a point where you run out of digits and it rolls back around to 0? Well funny thing about our addition thing is if you add a 1 to a display of all 1s, that also rolls back around to 0 (and has that carry value just hanging out in space unless we have a better idea of what to plug it into). So if we like, have all the numbers we can display printed out on paper, and we represent that rolling over by just rolling the paper up and taping it, so we have a bit where the count is going like: ..11111101, 11111110, 11111111, 00000000, 0000001... well we can just arbitrarily declare that all 0s is really 0, and the all 1s before it is -1, etc. Try to make that work maybe. And still remember that 10000000 or whatever is where we abruptly loop back between the highest positive/lowest negative numbers we're handling.

Here's a funny thing though. If we start counting backwards, we totally get this inverted version of what we get counting forwards. Just going to show this with 3 bits for convenience but going up from 000 you go:

000, 001, 010, 100, 101, 110... and going back from 111, you go

111, 110, 101, 100, 011, 010, 001... and yeah, look at that with a fixed with font, and it's all just flipped. And huh, you know what else is cool? If we go back to saying the first bit is 1 for negative numbers and a 0 for positive, you can just add these and it almost works. You want to subtract 1 from 1, that's the same as adding 1 and -1. Invert the negative, that's 001+110=111... 1 shy of the 000 we want. Huh.

What about 2-2? 010+101=111. 3-3? 011+100=111. Everything that should be 0 is 111, which is 1 less than 0 when we roll over. What about stuff that should be positive? 3-1? 011+110=(1)001. 2-1? 010+110=(1)000. 3-2? 011+101=000. Still all 1 off if we just ignore that carry going out of range.

-1-1? 110+110=(1)100, which translates back to -3... and that's kinda the only example I can give that's in range with this, but throw in more bits and follow this convention and it'll all keep working out that you get exactly 1 less than what you want, turns out. So, if we're in subtract mode, we just... invert something we're bringing in then add 1 to it and it should all work out?

So OK. We have a wire coming into math land from what mode are we in, it's a 1 if we're doing subtraction. We XOR that subtract line bit with every bit of what's coming into B, that does nothing if we're in addition mode, but if we're in subtraction mode, we're flipping every bit, and tada, the subtraction works without any other changes. We just need to conditionally add 1 if we're in subtract mode now but... wait, we already have literally that. We just take this same "we are in subtract mode" wire and run it in as a carry-in to the rightmost bit of our adder chain. Again, if we're doing addition, that just carries in a 0 and does nothing, but if we're in subtraction, it carries in a 1, and... we're done. The explanation was a long walk, but yeah, when subtracting, just add those extra XORs, plug in that carry, and remember your negative numbers are all weird in storage. Done.

Let's do multiplication and division next!

No. We can't do that.

Well seriously, that's not a thing we can just layer on top of this relatively simple thing we have wired up. We've got this lean mean math machine will give you whatever result you need basically the instant you load values into A and B. Definitely by the time you, being conscientious about not leaving the doors to the bus open all the time, officially flag things to write out from sum and into whatever destination. Multiplying and dividing though, we need more steps, and we need scratch spaces for temporary values. I suppose if you're careful you can multiply by like, loading 0 into B, load the first number you want to multiply into A, just feed sum directly into B, and pulse the clock however many times you want to multiply, but... you probably don't want to just constantly be reading and writing like that, it's tying the whole bus up, unless you have an alternate pathway just for this, and you have to keep count. Still, I'm assuming that's how people do it when they build a dedicated function in. I'm still looking at older systems which assume you're going to do most of your multiplication one step at a time, running through some code.

There's one big exception though. If you multiply any number by 10, you just add a 0 onto the end of the number... and guess what? I'm not using "10" specifically to mean "ten" here. Whatever base you're doing your math in, that still works. So in binary, if you just want to specifically multiply by 2, it is super easy to just shift every bit to the left. Like, have some sort of "shift left/multiply by 2" wire come in, set up logical conditions so that when its set, all we do is have the bit that we are feed into the carry flag, then for the sum ignore everything but the carry flag. 00011001 turns right into 00110010. I picked that out of a hat, but that's binary for 25 getting doubled to 50 as I eyeball it here. Dead simple to do as a single operation. Shifting everything to the right, AKA dividing by 2 is similarly simple... and hey, you might notice that in say... very old games, there's a whole lot of numbers doubling. Like ghosts in Pacman? Each is worth twice the points as the last? Yeah that's because that's easy to do fast.

Other math though takes more steps, and tends to involve extra hardware design to make it work. Like if you're doing division where you aren't guaranteed to have a whole number at the end, so, most division? Suddenly you need to have decimal points in all of this, and work out where they go, and this is why you hear people talk about "floating point processors" as this whole special thing that we just did not have for decades. For now at least, that's beyond the scope of what I'm teaching. Might get there eventually.

A final bit about bits...

So hey, we need to pick some arbitrary bit count for how wide we make our bus and our registers, and also some number for memory registers, command codes, maybe other stuff. And you just kinda want to pick a nice round number. You can't pick ten though, because ten isn't a round number in binary. It's 1010. So usually, we round down to 8, nice and simple, or we round up to 16. And then if we're like filling out charts of values, it's easier to count in those bases. Counting in base 8 is easy enough. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. With base 16 though, we need 6 more symbols in there, so we go with 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F 10. And sometimes people make a point of making the B and D lowercase, because if you want to display those on the sort of 7-segment display you still see on cheap clocks or things going for an 80s look, B and 8 are too similar, and D and 0. Base 16 is also called hexidecimal. People will shorten that to "hex" and you see it a ton when people are looking at raw data and don't want to get thrown by long binary numbers, and it particularly gets out to the general public when we're talking about like, 8-bit color values. 8 bits gives you a number from 0-63, hey that's just 2 digits in base 16, so like, for HTML color codes, you can use 2 digits each for red green and blue values, and technical artists just kinda memorize stuff like "right so FFFFFF is white, 700080 is a pretty bright, slightly blue-ish purple, etc."

We tend to go with 8 bits in most places though, or some multiple of 8 anyway, and someone randomly decided to call 8 bits a byte, and that's kind of just our standardized unit for measuring data now. Well mostly standardize. Because people will say, like, 1 kilobyte is 1000 bytes, but in practice people actually round things off to binary values and they're going to actually be off a little.

Anyway, linguistic trivia! Whatever number of bits it is we store in a register/load to the bus is called a "word" and we talk about how many bits long our words are, because once you design the architecture, you're stuck with it and all. And sometimes you want to be space efficient and not use a whole word, so you do some logic gate trickier to chop off whatever portion you don't need when reading it and not change what parts you aren't trying to when writing it and just kinda store multiple variables in a single value. One common thing that happens as a result of this is that you'll break up an 8-bit value because you just want like two values from 0-15 instead of one from 0-255. And when we're working with one of those half-bytes, because puns, the actually term for that is "a nibble." No really. And if we're using a single bit for a variable a lot of the time we call that a flag. Common to see a byte used to hold 8 flags.

For now let me just point anyone following along with this at this first post of me talking about the game console I'm designing. That's a pretty similar topic to this one.

Let me also point you again at my patreon, too.

CONTINUED IN PART 5

[arcane-ish]

I should probably bite my tongue on this but here it goes.

Dear Cait fans,

sometimes it's super frustrating to see your responses to some of the Cait hate. Not so much because of the content because for a fence center like me it feels like you guys are talking completely past each other.

I'm not saying the anti side is right, but I think your responses don't usually go at the heart of what they are talking about.

IMO at least some of the CaitVi versus SilcoJinx works like this that some of the SilcoJinx side have adopted what I call the systemic view.

This is not something they invented but it's just a general way of viewing the world that is out there in real life.

In real life various modulations exist from:

environmental/societal/systemic prejudice issues play a real role and should be combatted, but people are still responsible for their actions

environmental/societal/systemic prejudice issues should be considered as one factor when judging a person's guilt

people who have been oppressed should get a free pass against their oppressors

people who have been oppressed should get a free pass for any of their actions

people who are part of oppressive systems bear a higher responsibility because hey have more power and their actions carry more weight

people who are part of oppressive systems should feel bad even if they have done nothing

people who are part of oppressive systems and are passive or even try to be helpful are still as guilty as the worst perpetrators from that system

Think of it like the difference between "a woman who gets beaten by her husband should get societal help and support and understanding", "a woman who gets beaten by her husband is morally justified to hit back", " woman who gets beaten by her husband should be allowed to kill him" to "a woman who gets beaten by her husband should be allowed to go on a road rage rampage where she runs over several kindergarteners" to "a woman who gets beaten by her husband should be allowed to abduct her ex from highschool, kill his wife and lock him in her basement".

Basically there's a long backstory to it, it's a well established mode of thinking, brought to the extremes because the internet brings out the most extreme versions of everything because clickbait. I cannot tell how many people who do it believe this genuinely and latched on to this story and these characters and how many of them just attached to their blorbos and just adopted any mode of debating they saw floating around that will defend their blorbos. Either way, there's a system behind it.

What I'm trying to say is, if you are talking to someone who approaches a story with this value system, they are not going to be impressed and "gotchaed" if you point out that "you just hate Caitlyn because she's from Piltover and part of the enforcers" or "you make excuses for these characters and defend things just because these characters are from Zaun"

Yes, yes, they do. That is the whole point of that worldview.

It's a fundamentally unequal worldview where oppressor and oppressed live in fundamentally different worlds and moral systems and they should be judged entirely separately.

Usually the more sensible way to respond is:

1.) I reject your systemic view/your version of the systemic view and think it's stupid

2.) Your systemic view does not apply to this situation (ie because Piltover is not that powerful, their oppression is unclear, because Silco is defacto ruler and hence he can be a genuine oppressor of his people just like Putin can be a genuine oppressor of is people even if he's below the totem pole compared to Trump)

3.) The character don't act moral. not just based on objective/universal morality, but also based on either in group morality or even just the morality they themselves claim to have

Or if you come across a systemic view type argument you could like just roll your yes and not engage if you think they aren't making a genuine argument, but just preaching the systemic view.

Not all systemic view is inherently stupid just because it's currently being wielded against your fave. There's common sense logic to "it's a difference if a three year old punches you or a boxing heavy weight world champion". The action ("punching") is the same, but the potential effect is not. That's why it can make sense to have different rules for different people ("people who are bigger and stronger have to be more careful with what they do with their hands") rather than one rule for all ("all punches should be punished the same way").

Dear Systemic fans?

Have you considered that antagonizing people over a ship might not be the best use of your time and ire? Especially if you are not actually into the "explaining your stance to people and trying to win them over to your side against a common foe" business?

[sstabhmontown]

De-advanced Dungeons & Dragons

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons carries a lot of weight in the ideal imaginary “Old School”, but over the history of the “OSR” it has steadily receded. OSRIC never try to be the whole package as the B/X clones did, and since their success authors doing interesting work seem more and more drawn to either further simplified versions of Basic, or of course OD&D. As I was, starting out.

But the mystique and nostalgia of AD&D, and some of its specifics that still take up a lot of space still find ways into these games. The first big project I did on abulafia was an AD&D by way of Greenwood spellbook generator, even though another part of me wanted the abstraction that OD&D offered by never quite saying that spells were specifically in the books.

So with the party being near the end of their games, between level 7 and 10, as they started to divine questions like “where is the ark of the covenant” I knew a time was approaching to do something to cap things off. And in time for hallowe'en, I decided to prepare something special: The Tomb of Horrors.

There are a few defining features of AD&D specifically. It's rules for tournament play, with Gygax going to great length to talk about it being a proper, official way to play, even when it's filled with options, forgotten and abandoned rules, and contradictions. It also wears his voice, his language, in its strong opinions and questionable inclusions. His prejudice. And finally, it's a lot: the first time the game emerges as Three Hardcover Books. There are a lot of mechanics in there!

What is it to go back intentionally to OD&D, or folk D&D, or whatever other name you want to give the minimal style, specifically? We can see it when we look at this, one of the Most AD&D titles published: a tournament module, by Gygax, filled with strongly presented material, odd choices of detail, mechanics, and the works. Here's some of what I did.

Uhh, you probably shouldn't read this post if you think you might play in a game for this adventure, you know.

The Tournament

The Tomb of Horrors is the most exaggerated of Tournament modules: unlike many of the other adventures of the era, it never asks you to treat it any different. It's not part of a series, implying a continuous campaign, nor does it give you any tools really beyond a d6 list of possible places in Greyhawk it could be located.

I called the nearby desert the Bright Desert in recognition here. But the advice to include it in a campaign is bad advice. The adventure doesn't work in a campaign unless you do some work.

But first, the relief: they don't need to be level 10–14. Our group of level 6–10 did just fine.

It will require a full turn for searching each 10' of this cliff area. Search must be done from a distance with a long spear or 10' pole. Prodding must be high in order to colapse sufficient material to expose a portion of a tunnel entrance. Once an entrance is exposed, itwill require about 1 hour for 6 characters working in teams of 3 to thoroughly clear a passage, but a crawl space can be opened in 1 turn by 3 characters digging with a sword and hands...

Our magic-user conjured an earth elemental and spent the day clearing the entire hillside. Why would a party of powerful high level characters do any of this? The entire dungeon is shallowly just below the surface, making a complete excavation is trivial unless there's some time constraint (and there specifically isn't in the published module, with no wandering monsters). The dungeon is as unprepared for real characters as real characters are for its unfair traps—honestly a pleasing sort of symmetry.

Oh, there's one thing:

Note: Characters who become astral or ethereal in the Tomb will attract a type I-IV demon 1 in 6, with a check made each round.

This is the beginning of a tendency that I recall from my youth playing 2e, of arbitrary constraints to limit the effectiveness of high-level characters. It's one of the things I hate about AD&D design, and the avoidance of it is a big part of how the OSR is often thought of as a low-level game. So to me this is an opportunity to flesh something out about this adventure, and to try to wrestle with this problem in the game.

Like many other elements in the dungeon, this risk is presented only as rules text, without a fictional reason for this. So our strategy as we work through the dungeon can be this: to backfill a reason for each arbitrary decision, from which we can make future rulings. In some cases these rulings might be an extension, revision, or replacement of the rules text in the book. Where Gygax says a character's class ability doesn't work, let's build a framework of when it might, that we can play with.

Demons love this place but cannot entire it—Akererak has cursed them into the aether. Crossing will welcome them. The demons are imprisoned in the earth and the mortar the stonework in the dungeon, tunneling from without will free them.

Building on that idea, let's bring back in what I see as the central mechanic of old-school play: the encounter check. If you do the dungeon within the timeframe of the Tournament, sure, there will probably not be any wandering monsters. But because I've integrated torches and spells into the encounter die, we can't do without rolling—and some kind of delayed encounters will put some time pressure in when we don't have it. And—is this a tomb or not? Let's get some undead going.

Monsters approach only slowly. When you describe the monster's Spoor, foreshadowing it, add a check mark next to the encounter as it approaches. If you roll an encounter with a monster with no checkmark, do that Spoor procedure instead. Each week between visits, remove one check mark at random.

2d6 Encounters 2 Basilisk 3 Yellow mold spore 4 Gelatinous cube 5 2d6 Mummies 6 8hd Black Pudding 7 2d6 Wraiths 8 d6 Spectres 9 4d6 Gargoyles 10 Stone Golem 11 1d6 Phase Spiders 12 Demons breach from the aetheral

d6 Spoor 1–3 Check approach for an encounter (2d6) 4 Whispers in an ancient tongue echo the halls 5 Rumbling earthquake, a sign of what lies beneath 6 Blood drips from the walls themselves. Tell the party something they missed about the room they are in.

Finally, we can add another principle here: if the party wants to be careful, they can avoid a lot of trouble here. But they won't get far in a week. If it takes them six weeks of one-room adventures to find one of the major treasures that's a fair rate.

The Mechanics

While the dungeon encourages you to skip mechanics and procedures that define the rest of the game, it inserts loads of new ones. This is AD&D—and my aim is to remove these and replace them with principles to adjudicate the situtations from fiction instead. Let's work our way through some of them here.

All pits (except where noted to the contrary) throughout the Tomb are 10' deep and concealed by a counter-weighted trap door which opens as soon as any person steps on it. Thrusting with foce upon these traps with a pole will reveal them 4 in 6 (d6, 1–4). Those who step upon a pit lid will have a base 100% chance of falling, modified downwards by 1% per point of dexterity through 12, and 2% for each point about 12, i.e. dexterity of 13 = 14% chance of not falling into a pit, dexterity of 14 = 16%, 15 = 18%,...

OMG stop. D&D already includes a mechanic of saving throws, what is this for?

Pits: as the party quickly become aware that most every room in this dungeon contains a trap, make them be very specific about where they walk. The opening hallway is a great introduction to this, with a marked path.

When a character might move over a pit, but perhaps only glancingly, roll the standard 2-in-6 chance to trigger a trap—for each character. Do not reveal the trap's position unless it opens! If a character unambiguously moves over the trap, the chance is 4/6.

When a pit opens, everyone on the lid falls in. They may make saving throws against paralysis to avoid being caught on 1d4 poison spikes when they fall.

This is perhaps slightly less lethal, but with a decent sized party the pits are still more or less guaranteed to go off soon enough. In any case, my party found one pit and then avoided triggering any others. When you only cover one room per week, they won't be running out of Find Traps spells anyway.

Similarly, we can take the secret doors with unusually hard chances to find, and fit them roughly back onto the standard—I let Elves roll in the open, and clearly tell them of secrets when they roll 1–2. A door like #14 is infuriating here, with just an arbitrary 1-in-6 chance for no clearly stated reason, unless with gem of seeing. But for what? The dungeon has no dead ends, the players will clearly know there's a passage here, you aren't hiding anything with this nonsense.

Unless—it's a cramped crawlspace. I never let elves use their powers when they are encumbered, let's treat all the crawlspaces in the dungeon as one step of that. Then just make it hard to open, an invisible latch or something like it will do fine, ignore the rest of what Gygax says. I'm well-used to telling an Elf that there's some kind of false wall but not revealing the full workings of it!

The Voice

That this secret door is described only with a mechanic and not any tangible detail is absurd and play-hostile. And its all over this text.

Gygax is triumphant in his description of AD&D as the pinnacle of the form, yet he constantly derides his own work here by reinventing it. I'm sad to say that this particular vision of AD&D is still a vital part of the Product of D&D:

2020 CHANGED THE WORLD, and it changed D&D. Most tables are telling stories now in much the same way as old radio plays: crackling voices, ribald laughter, and under it all, the gentle hiss of line noise. Change—long coming, always unstoppable—accelerated. The process of running a game became centered on ceding control to players and to mechanics, finding ways to engage everyone at once. The lines between art and design have blurred everywhere else. It was inevitable that would happen to this hobby. For the first time in almost forty years, there's been a categorical change in how stories are told and in the tradecraft used to tell them. —Incredibly cringe One Night Strahd copy, navigating the official/unoffical divide as a 5e derivative, as quoted by diregrizzlybear on the OSR discord

I've long been suspicious of the OSR mission statement of “Rulings not Rules” as I love rules—and here you can see that I want to fall back to the rules of my game because I adapted, wrote, or chose them either on my own or in collaboration with my players, and I'm quite certain that we did so for good reasons. But holy hell do I feel it when I read this kind of stuff. Having just got into a needless argument (it was fine) on another discord server about what makes something OSR I am quite confident in this idea: my mission in old-school games is to make sure none of this bullshit makes it to my table.

So here's some rules for you, the kind of rules you might call Rulings or Principles for playing this dungeon. My extended notes are just a couple of pages with a few words adding to each room with how I interpret stuff that doesn't fit my OD&D game, but you can make your own version of this as you read through the dungeon. The italic blocks up above are basically sourced from that.

The dungeon is famous. Like Heracles and Thor, Akererak exists somewhere deep in the history of every fantasy world. If no one in your play group is going to recognize the green face trap and know they are in The Tomb of Horrors, you'd better tell them they are—but if they are nerds, you can let that be the revelation. (I spell it with a K as a long-winded joke about how his legend comes to us via fantasy-ancient-greek sources.)

Use the rules of the game, adapted to the situation of the text, not the other way around. Negotiate places where the text says a character's main thing doesn't work—let it work, at a cost, or only in an inconvenient scope. The spell of Knock can open a lock, but only like turning a key once.

The dungeon key is for the referee. The pictures are for your eyes, and the countdowns are ones you don't need to do out loud—just make inaction matter.

Doors are stone! Destroy exotic materials and let the mythic underworld do its thing. If an item is warded against magic, that is itself a magic rune, someplace on the object, discoverable in its own way.

Wandering monsters always exist, even if they are slow.

This dungeon is here for a reason, and all of the ends of this adventure are real ends.

While you read through, you'll be able to note things that could have been clearer in the original, like a point-form version of how to trigger various outcomes on the arch in room 5, or the order of the vats in #19. You can note that room 9 is a mechanism of perpetual motion, the moving parts striking characters, rather than some silly crossbow that doesn't follow any crossbow rules you've ever seen. And you can think about the cramped crawlspaces in terms of encumbrance.

At hallway 15, you can simply have the players roll as if they are opening a regular dungeon door and fall when they roll the 1–2 they would need to heave them open, obviating an enormous paragraph. And when Gygax instructs you to count out loud, make a clock, and mark it every time the players talk but do not choose to escape the trap.

You can already find my version of The Demi-lich in my rules supplement:

A spell researched to shatter the magic gemstones of the skull might deal two dice of damage to the monster, and a charm of forgetfulness or Dispel Evil counters its rise for a round. A Fighter sworn to a Quest to destroy the monster, a Paladin, or a wielder of a Vorpal blade all deal normal damage to the skull with their magic swords, denying the Wraith-form any energy.

The ending

As we've teased out demons in the aether and the earthquake theme, we discover what the dungeon means to the world.

If the Tomb buries itself in an earthquake, “illusion” is not enough: the demon Behemoth is deeper still in the hill, in a bricked-off chamber, and its binding was a part of Akererak's dealings in death here. The Jade Coffer in the false tomb is indeed one of the true treasures: The Ark of the Covenant, containing as well as healing potions the tablet contract bargaining the Lich's afterlife until that demon wakes to bring the end times to earth. When the canonical AD&D party defeats him, after all, he lives on to be reintroduced every edition, and so this eternal bargain is a part of the end of all things.

It's been one year since his tomb was plundered, and our Monday night party seeks out the dead god Môt from a sealed chamber under ruined Char-el in order to change the arrangements of the gods in the heavens and rewrite the contract. They must do so before Akererak overcomes the Demi-gorgon in the Realm of Pure Thought beyond the firmament and discovers how to return to the world.

Good luck.

[shimmerloid-ai]

Introduction - Vocal Synth Terminology - Part 2

This is a continuation of my previous post. I highly recommend checking that one out first before reading this post.

Append: This term was originally used to describe an additional voice library, originating with Hatsune Miku Append (shown below) and Kagamine Rin and Len Append. Appends provide vocal synths with different tones, such as Miku’s Soft append giving her a more gentle, breathy voice, and her Dark append, which provides her with a more mature, motherly tone. Now, the word “append” can be used for any vocal synth of a character that differs from their usual voice, such as Gumi’s “Adult” voicebank, though the correct word to address these voicebanks is just… voicebank. Proper appends are commonly seen among UTAU voicebanks, like Kasane Teto’s Weak Append, and Yamine Renri’s EDGE Append!

Fanloid: Also known as "derivatives", these are fanmade vocal synth characters. Fanloids do not have their own voicebanks, instead, their voices are made by editing the parameters of a pre-existing vocal synth. For example, Akita Neru (shown below) is a high-pitched Miku or a low-pitched Rin, Yowane Haku is a low-pitched Miku, Hatsune Mikuo is literally a gender-bend of Miku with the voicebank’s gender factor increased, and Honne Dell made with Kagamine Len with his gender and brightness factors lowered. 

Realistic Voice Cloning: Also known as RVC, this phenomenon is loathed by every vocal synth user. If you have been on the internet since 2023ish, you have probably seen things like “Mr. Beast AI sings IDOL by YOASOBI” (shown below), or “Dio Brando sings Colleen Ballinger’s Apology”. These AI modules basically involve taking voice samples of a celebrity, fictional character, or literally ANYTHING, and creating a voice module that can sing any audio track provided to it. It should not be a big surprise that AI has made its way to the music industry as well, but as cool as they sound, most RVC modules are illegal and essentially harmful to the vocal synth community, and the music industry in general. People make these modules without the knowledge of the “voice providers” and gain a ton of views for doing LITERALLY NOTHING aside from mixing the vocal track with the instrumental, and often make money off of someone else’s voice. They could also make the module say something obscure, offensive, or lewd, and put the blame on the voice provider. I do not think we need to go into details about what is wrong with these consequences, but long story short, they fucking suck. The icing on the cake is that people would make AI modules of VOCAL SYNTHS as well, which is why most people think Miku is like Squidward AI or whatever. Not only does it harm the voice providers who put their time and effort into creating amazing voicebanks, but it also gives the public a nasty impression of the producer and cover artist community.

Jinriki UTAUs: Similar to the RVC phenomena, these are UTAU voicebanks that are made without the knowledge of the voice providers. Again, Jinrikis can be anything, from Mario to Baldi from Baldi’s Basics in Education and Learning, to a YouTuber or a LoveLive! character. Yeah… they can be quite cursed. Like RVC, these voicebanks can be considered illegal, however, it's not much of a problem if you keep these voicebanks to yourself, don’t run around advertising them, distribute them, or use them for commercial use. Jinriki voicebanks should not be confused with porting voicebanks (second video below) from other software, like putting MEIKO into Open UTAU. This is completely okay, so as long as you do not distribute them and port the voicebank yourself.

AI Voicebanks: These are actual paid voicebanks that use AI technology to enhance the quality of the vocals to make the tuning sound realistic and to make the overall tuning process much easier for producers. The AI technology would analyze the pitch deviation and other factors of a file and smooth out and clean up anything that sounds too flat or janky. In fact, even when a file is untuned are flat, AI voicebanks will try to create a smooth transition and can provide users with a nice start. As useful as they sound, sometimes these voicebanks can be unpredictable and not provide you with the desired output, but with a bit of practice you can create beautiful melodies with them. The popularity of AI voicebanks started with CeVIO and SynthesizerV, but now we have AI voicebanks in VOCALOID as well! However, the V6 voicebanks are… not exactly the best, but I will get into them in another post. The most popular AI voicebanks as of now are Chris-A (CeVIO + VOISONA), Eleanor Forte (SynthesizerV), KAFU (CeVIO + SynthesizerV), ONE (Synthesizer V), Megpoid Gumi AI (VOCALOID + SynthesizerV Studio), and recently, Kasane teto AI (SynthesizerV; shown below)!

Diffusion Singing Voice Conversion Model: Commonly known as Diff-SVC, this a program used to make AI voicebanks that works similarly to UTAU; you make a voicebank with your own singing, and use AI to make it into a voicebank that sounds human. These voicebanks are slowly “trained” to sound more realistic, and can produce beautiful vocals! These should not be mixed up with RVC modules as these voicebanks are either made by the voice providers or with their consent, and they have to be tuned like in any other synthesizer software.

Talkloid: These are commonly seen in memeish side of the vocal synth community. Basically, instead of making voicebanks sing, you tune them to make them talk. Talkoids are typically shitposts of vocal synths in bizarre scenarios (with a ton of swearing and Generation Z/Alpha jokes… some talkloids are really unhinged and/or cursed), but there are a few hidden gems such as cute conversations or stories tying to a producer’s lore about their favourite vocal synths.

PV: This acronym stands for Promotional Video. PVs accompany vocal synth songs and covers to enhance the listening experience . PVs can range from still artwork with lyrics underneath, to animatics and full-on animations.

Project Diva: A rhythm game series starring the Cryptonloids alongside Kasane Teto, Yowane Haku, and Akita Neru created by SEGA. Not only are they are known for their nightmarish beatmaps (looking at you, The Intense Singing of Hatsune Miku), but their stunning 3D PVs as well. Producers would often record PVs of the vocal synth of their choice in whatever costume they desire, and if the singer is a character who is not in the game, there are tons of mods on GameBanana (example with Otomachi Una shown below; the Teto AI Ghost Rule cover I posted above is another instance of this)!

Project Sekai! Colorful Stage!: Hell. Absolute hell. Just kidding, I have a strong feeling that you already know what this is, but in case you do not, Project Sekai! is a mobile rhythm game created by Sega and Piapro starring the Cryptonloids and five music groups of original characters, all with their own stories and songs. Like any other mobile rhythm game, you can pull for characters you want with gacha currency and participate in events that may or may not relate to the main story for prizes. A lot of new VOCALOID fans come from the Project Sekai! fandom, and although much of the fandom is a mess of entitled, bratty teenagers on Twitter, some people genuinely want a better understanding of how vocal synths work, softwares aside from VOCALOID, and songs aside from those in the game. This is one of the reasons why I made this blog, to properly explain how vocal synths work, and I hope this will give you a better understanding of this precious community. Also… I may add my EN ID to my about page. Maybe.

MikuMikuDance: Commonly known as “MMD”, this is a community-driven animation software. In MMD, you can create your own motions, cameras, stages, accessories and models, to create stunning PVs. You can also use other software like Blender to enhance your animations As the name implies, MMD was initially designed for VOCALOID and UTAU fans to create music videos of their favourite characters, but now it has evolved beyond great lengths. You are sure to find models and stages from your favourite video game or TV/anime series, and there are tons of motions and cameras out there. If you were in the vocal synth fandom in the late 2000s’, you may remember the MMD CUP series. These animations are an example of common memes people will make with this software, alongside PVs for Talkloids or a short motion of your favourite character doing whatever dance is currently popular on TikTok.

Digital Audio Workstation: Know by the shorthand “DAW”, these are softwares used for making music! DAWs are extremely versatile, allowing you to create a huge variety of projects in them. You can mix an exported wav. file of a tuned VSQx with an off-vocal track, edit audio in general, or use the virtual instruments to create your own arrangements and arrangements! In the vocal synth community, people do all of these things! The most popular DAWs include FL Studio (shown below), Studio One, Logic Pro, Cubase, Ableton Live, Reaper, Cakewalk, and Waveform! Unsurprisingly, DAWs are quite expensive, usually costing more than the actual vocal synthesizer as well. Not to mention, plug-ins can add additional expenses. When picking a DAW, it’s honestly better to pick quality over cost, all while seeing what fits your budget and needs. Oh, I’m going to regret exposing myself here, but in case anyone asks, I have no idea how to mix and probably will not make a tutorial on it. I have never used a proper DAW aside from Audacity and Soundtrap by Spotify, and those mixes turned out HORRENDOUS. Not to mention, I’m practically broke so I can’t invest in a good DAW. I’m trying to figure out how to use FL Studio 20 (the free, limited version of this software), but my smooth brain can not wrap my head around the process, even with two helpful tutorials I found. Plus, I do not have the time to learn. However, I may share some resources in the future relating to using a DAW from people with a brain cell, so keep your eye out for those. But I promise, the day I get decent experience in mixing is when I will make a guide on it.

That is all of the definitions I can think of for now! I know I did not go over all of the parameters like "growl" and "cross synthesis", and that is because I will explain how all of the parameters work in a planned post. I also took some notes from Minnemi's video on basic VOCALOID terminology and the Vocaloid wiki. If I am able to think of any other important jargon later on, I will update this post. Thank you for reading this! I hope your knowledge on vocal synths has expanded, and I apologize for the huge post!

[mx-lamour]

We played the Mines of Phandelver module a while back, and sometimes I think about my character for that one and wonder how he's doing.

Calythise was a dark elf bard who was clearly a "medieval 80s" rockstar. I tried to relate all his spells back to rock songs or stage performance tricks. He was vain and flirty and always open to opportunities for more power or wealth or entertainment (as long as they can be gained somewhat lazily, through charisma).

"The only person Cal loves is himself," my husband/DM remarked, and it's... mostly true.

I do not remember all the details, but basically Cal went rogue and got himself on the Black Spider's good side (presented a la The Adventure Zone, because how can you not, that voice is hilarious), while somehow not entirely betraying the party, and then convinced Vhalak the doppelganger to work with him to usurp the Black Spider.

All said and done, we completed the module, got some neat boons from the forge, and then Calythise went on to become an NPC alongside Vhalak, who was newly disguised as the Black Spider as though the guy hadn't been brutally murdered.

In a later campaign (the latter half of Out of the Abyss) with the same party (except of course I was playing a different character), Calythise appeared as a representative of the Zhentarim.

Of course, it wasn't always Calythise. Sometimes it was actually Vhalak. And sometimes Cal seemed to be in two places at once. They wore matching rings of mind shielding that also allowed them to communicate telepathically with each other.

Vhalak then, disguised as a gnome called Smee (idk if this was another module character or ??), accompanied the party into the Underdark to keep an eye on them and make sure the Zhentarim got their cut of whatever came out of there.

In the end, he reported back with the Wand of Orcus in hand. The party (myself included lol) had entirely forgotten about it.

So now the Zhentarim just has that.

Or rather, my chaotic neutral drow and his doppelganger boyfriend have that.

I definitely have a need to play out more of Cal and Vhalak's adventures climbing criminal ladders. I miss those rascals.

[nihinduyasmith-mga2024mi5017]

23071043_NihinduYasmith_MI5017_CriticalReflection

Throughout this project Animation Performance, I encountered many challenges and issues. In the process of completing the assignment, I learned that I needed to consider time management, iterative development, and continuous evaluation to improve my animation methods.

Effective time management can provide a high-efficiency effect on balancing research, concept development, storyboarding, and animation optimization. Early in the module, I struggled to use enough time for ideation, but often rushed into animation without fully considering the nuances of how the character actually moved and performed. However, as the module progressed, I considered structured time management techniques, including setting clear deadlines and utilizing task process planning methods, but in practice I did not consider the limitations of my ability and failed to complete the tasks in time.

One of the big gains I made in the animation production process was realizing the importance of iterative improvement. Initially, my goal was to be as perfect as possible in the early drafts, which led to me spending too much time on small details instead of focusing on broader animation principles. By adjusting the original scheduling process, I learned to prioritize basic animation elements, such as key poses and corresponding `times, before refining the details. This practice made me realize how to use tools more effectively to achieve the high-quality animation performance I want.

Assessing my progress involved self-reflection and feedback from peers and teachers. Regular critiques provided invaluable insights, allowing me to identify areas for improvement, such as expressive movements and weight distribution in character movements. My early animations lacked fluidity, with stiff character movements due to improper easing and insufficient attention to secondary movements. Addressing these shortcomings required a lot of debugging, testing, experimentation, and learning about professional animation techniques online helped a lot and perfected the application of animation principles such as squash and stretch in animation.

In addition, analyzing exemplary work by other industry professionals deepened my understanding of animation theory and practice. Implementing reference material in my workflow proved to be indispensable, allowing me to improve the believability of the characters and enhance subtle gestures. I also experimented with different animation styles and software, ultimately choosing to use Maya to implement the animations.

Despite the slight improvements in workflow and technical execution, balancing the creativity that comes from a flash of inspiration from time to time with the precision of actual 3D space character movement techniques remains an ongoing challenge. Deadlines occasionally force me to sacrifice experimental methods in favor of some familiar technical tricks. Without realizing this early on, I was left with a considerable impact in the early stages of animation planning.

Overall, learning Animation Performance was a valuable experience, and in the process of learning how to make 3D animations, I realized the importance of strengthening structured time management, iterative learning, and adaptive progress evaluation. Through these methods and strategies, I feel that I may have stronger storytelling skills than before, and have improved my previous animation production methods.

[sathcreation]

Online Acting Classes in India: Your Complete Guide to Mastering the Craft with Gritty Tech

Why Online Acting Classes are the Future of Performing Arts in India

If you think acting can only be learned on stage or in a crowded Mumbai studio, it’s time to think again. Online acting classes have exploded across India, giving aspiring actors from every corner of the country a real shot at mastering their craft without having to move cities or spend a fortune.

Thanks to platforms like Gritty Tech, you can now learn from experienced actors, directors, and performance coaches without ever stepping outside your home. Whether you’re from a small town in Bihar or the heart of Delhi, if you have a stable internet connection and the passion to perform, the world of acting is wide open for you For More….

What Makes Gritty Tech's Online Acting Classes Different?

There’s no shortage of online courses out there. So, why should you care about Gritty Tech? Here’s the truth: most platforms throw together a few pre-recorded videos and call it a "course." Gritty Tech does it differently.

Live Interactive Sessions: Instead of just watching videos, you join live classes where you can ask questions, perform scenes, and get direct feedback.

Mentorship from Industry Experts: You learn directly from working professionals who have experience in Bollywood, TV serials, theatre, and OTT platforms.

Personalised Feedback: You’re not just a face in a crowd. The mentors know your name, your strengths, and where you need to improve.

Flexible Timings: Whether you’re a student, a working professional, or someone juggling family duties, Gritty Tech offers batch options to fit your schedule.

Career Support: Apart from acting skills, you also get training on auditions, self-tapes, portfolio building, and networking in the industry.

Bottom line? Gritty Tech isn’t just teaching you how to act. They’re preparing you to build a career.

Who Can Join Gritty Tech’s Online Acting Classes?

One of the best things about Gritty Tech is how inclusive it is. You don’t need to have a perfect resume or any acting experience at all.

Beginners: If you’re just starting out, you’ll learn the basics of performance, script work, body language, and character building.

Intermediate Actors: If you’ve done some workshops or amateur theatre, the classes help you refine your technique and make you industry-ready.

Professionals: Even if you’re already acting, there’s always room to grow. Advanced workshops focus on nuanced performances, audition techniques, and camera work.

Age is no barrier either. Gritty Tech welcomes students from 16 to 60+ years.

What You Will Learn at Gritty Tech’s Online Acting Classes

Here’s a breakdown of what the curriculum looks like.

1. Fundamentals of Acting

Every great actor starts here. You'll learn:

Body Language and Movement: Understand how your body speaks even when your mouth doesn’t.

Voice Training: Breathing exercises, modulation, diction, and voice projection.

Improvisation Skills: How to think on your feet and bring authenticity to every scene.

Emotional Memory: Tapping into your own experiences to deliver real emotions on cue.

2. Script and Character Work

You can't act well if you don’t understand your character.

Script Analysis: How to break down a script and find your character’s motivations.

Building a Character: From backstory creation to physical mannerisms, you’ll learn how to make every character feel real.

Scene Study: Perform and refine real scenes from movies, plays, and TV shows.

3. Acting for Camera

Acting for the camera is a completely different game from acting on stage.

Camera Awareness: Understanding frame, angles, and movement.

Close-Up Acting: Delivering powerful performances through subtle expressions.

Self-Tapes: How to shoot professional self-tapes that casting directors actually watch.

4. Audition Preparation

Let’s face it: auditions can make or break your career.

Monologue Preparation: Mastering monologues that grab attention.

Cold Reading: How to ace auditions even when you get the script last minute.

Building Confidence: Practical exercises to beat nervousness and perform your best.

5. Industry Insights

Learning how the entertainment industry works is just as important as learning how to act.

Understanding Contracts: Basics of artist contracts, fees, and copyright.

Networking Skills: Building the right contacts without being ‘that desperate actor’.

Portfolio and Showreel Creation: What casting directors want to see in your profile.

6. Specialised Workshops

Gritty Tech also offers add-on workshops in:

Method Acting

Comedy Acting

Action and Fight Choreography

Voice-Over Acting

These specialised classes help you diversify your skill set and open more doors.

Duration, Fees, and Certification

Here’s what you need to know:

Course Duration: 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months options available.

Session Frequency: 2 to 4 sessions per week, depending on your batch.

Fees: Starting from ₹25,000 for the 3-month course. EMI options are available.

Certification: On successful completion, you receive an industry-recognised certificate from Gritty Tech.

Gritty Tech also offers scholarships for talented students who show exceptional promise.

How to Apply for Gritty Tech’s Online Acting Classes

The application process is simple and friendly:

Visit Gritty Tech’s Website: Fill out the online application form.

Submit a Short Introduction Video: Tell them why you want to learn acting.

Attend an Orientation Session: Meet the mentors and understand the course structure.

Confirm Your Seat: Pay the course fees and get started.

No formal auditions are required to get in — passion and willingness to learn are enough.

Real Stories: How Gritty Tech Changed Lives

Thousands of students have walked through Gritty Tech’s virtual doors and seen real success. Here are a few examples:

Niharika Sharma, who started as a shy engineering student from Jaipur, now acts in a popular web series on MX Player.

Rohit Banerjee, a banker from Kolkata, pursued his lifelong acting dream and landed his first role in a national ad campaign after six months at Gritty Tech.

Aarav Pillai, who couldn’t move to Mumbai due to family responsibilities, trained online with Gritty Tech and recently debuted in a Marathi film.

These are not just feel-good stories. They are proof that with the right guidance and hard work, you can make it, no matter where you start.

Why Now is the Best Time to Start Your Acting Journey

The entertainment industry in India is booming like never before. New OTT platforms, independent films, and regional cinema have created thousands of opportunities for new faces and fresh talent.

And here’s the best part: casting directors are no longer just looking for ‘perfect’ Bollywood faces. They want authenticity, raw talent, and unique personalities — exactly what Gritty Tech helps you bring out.

If you’re serious about acting, waiting around will only make you miss opportunities. The best time to start was yesterday. The second-best time is today.

Final Thoughts: Is Gritty Tech Right for You?

If you’re looking for a shortcut to fame, this isn’t it. Gritty Tech is for people who genuinely want to learn the craft of acting and build a long-term career. You will need to show up, put in the effort, face feedback, and work through the ups and downs. But if you’re willing to commit, Gritty Tech will meet you halfway with expert guidance, structured learning, and real-world advice that can truly change your life.

Ready to take the first step?

Visit Gritty Tech’s official site today and start your acting journey. Your future self will thank you.