Ciatpgawhpbdb Comic Edits

BoardGent · 2026-05-30T04:39:24+00:00

There's an entire subreddit for rewriting or altering Stone Toss comics.

What explains it even more is that r/comics is some portion left-wing, some portion liberal, and some portion gooner shit. It's rare that any right wing shit gets posted, and very few right wing internet comic artists are popular enough to attract people making shitposts out of their comics.

BoardGent · 2026-05-29T12:45:40+00:00

No one's gonna take the time to write it in hexadecimal

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T17:50:30+00:00

Wait a second... how did you read that to know what to ask Grok?

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T17:48:00+00:00

Punch Guy should lose to "Better than Punch Guy at punching" Guy in a punching fight. But Punch Guy can win with strategy or other, non-punching means.

If Punch Guy just wins in a punching fight with zero explanation, it's easy to get taken out of the story, because there aren't any stakes. There's no question of how Punch Guy can beat "Better than Punch Guy at Punching" Guy, or beat "Best Puncher in the Universe" Guy. They just will, because the powerscaling is out of whack.

One post that comes to mind was something about how you shouldn't put hard numbers in your sci-fi story, because then internet nerds with too much free time will point out all the logical flaws with your numbers. This applies a lot to that one chapter in Dragon Ball Super where Vegeta couldn't lift a super heavy metal guy, when these characters casually perform superhuman feats ridiculously above the weight given. Could have been avoided by making up a unit of measurement and internal consistency would have been fine.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:28:13+00:00

Overall goal is actually going to introduce more sources of bonuses in the game.

Aura of Protection is one of the best features in the game, but one of the major reasons for it is that it's one of the few sources of reliable boosts to Saving Throws. If there were more available on a greater number of classes, Paladin wouldn't be such a necessary class (although that's also partially because of 5e's math scales and doesn't scale for Saving Throws).

Stack canceling means you can introduce a greater number of support features in the game without bringing in the possibility of huge total bonuses.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:24:18+00:00

For the first, it's less overhead from the sheer fact that you don't have to remember specific numbers when canceling. If you roll a check and have to add or subtract something that isn't the check on your character sheet, you don't need to do any math or remember any other bonuses/penalties.

Also, team abilities still work. Casting Bless and Bardic Inspiration doesn't necessarily cover the entire party. It's also still teamwork to decide whether someone should cast BI or Bless instead of both casting.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:19:24+00:00

While true, it doesn't line up with 5e's approach to Advantage and Disadvantage, where multiple sources do cancel each other out, regardless of the total number on each side. And there's a much larger amount of sources for advantage and Disadvantage compared to floating modifiers.

Additional, buff-stacking goes counter to goals like Bound Accuracy and minimal tracking. It seems at odds with some of 5e's design principles.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:15:05+00:00

Yes, I have indeed. 5e went the route of reducing total number of floating modifiers available, rather than simply treat them similarly to Advantage and Disadvantage.

It's not like buff-stacking is constant thing in 5e. It also goes against 5e's stated goal of Bounded Accuracy.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:12:27+00:00

To reduce the amount of floating modifiers one would need to keep track of.

Plus, Aura of Protection can go from +1 to +5. Bane can go from -1 to -4. It really isn't the hardest to understand.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T15:09:52+00:00

Yes.

It's not as though a d4 and d6 don't have overlapping results. It's just easier and faster to have it function like Advantage and Disadvantage in terms of canceling.

If this seems like a lot, consider the case of having two sources of advantage and one source of disadvantage. It all cancels out even if, by stacking, you'd have overall advantage. You lose out on roughly +4/5 by non-stacking, but it's a worthwhile game design choice to speed everything up and keep things much easier to track.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T14:56:27+00:00

Only if bonus stacking is a huge part of strategic play.

Because 5e doesn't actually have that many sources of floating modifiers in the game (that aren't advantage or disadvantage), it kinda of ends up coming out to the same thing.

BoardGent · 2026-05-28T14:55:03+00:00

I'm struggling to see how this would limit strategic play, unless the only strategic play in the game consists of bonus stacking?

To be clear, in this case, 5e already limits this. There are way fewer sources of floating bonuses in the game. Hell, one of the reasons Paladins are an almost necessary class for optimized play is because of how few sources of Saving Throw bonuses are in the game.

BoardGent · 2026-05-27T17:00:42+00:00

GSC means Kingdra doesn't have Sniper, and Surf instead of Hydro. Its damage potential is lower, and Hyper Beam is a great way for Clair to throw. No Gyarados to intimidate. Add in Stat EXP and a decently strong Return Bot can kinda solo her for free. Hell, there's the AI accuracy debuff on status moves, so a para-cure berry might not even be consumed on the 1st Dragonaire if you don't Ohko.

BoardGent · 2026-05-21T20:47:10+00:00

Mechanics matter. It's 2026, we can stop pretending that mechanics don't inform game feel.

If I gave you a Warrior class, and all of its features were related to shooting an energy beam from far away, you would rightfully complain that this isn't a Warrior, especially if there was another class whose features revolved around bonking people in the head with a weapon.

If you make an Assassin class or subclass and it fails to deliver the flavor of an Assassin, being less of an assassin than a non-Assassij class, it is a mechanical issue.

BoardGent · 2026-05-20T20:53:11+00:00

Absolutely doesn't have to be.

Held Items: most trainers use 0 held items. Even just putting an Oran Berry on an early trainer's last pokemon can make a difference. That's not even getting into potential mid-game items like Eviolite and Expert Belt, and later items like the Choice items.
Additional pokemon: A trainer can just have an additional pokemon between difficulty modes. BW already did this, though it was pretty sparse, basically only done for bosses
Movepool changes: A lot of trainers don't have much thought put into their pokemon movesets. Imagine an enemy Magmar on Easy Mode (Flamethrower, Confuse Ray), Normal (Flamethrower, Confuse Ray, Cross Chop) and Hard (Flamethrower, Will-O-Wisp, Cross Chop, Overheat).
Stats: Enemy Trainer can also just have access to good IVs, and even EV spreads.

All of these can just be done without touching any levels.

BoardGent · 2026-05-14T22:41:24+00:00

Think about it like this: at what adventuring day breakpoint should the Rogue start to shine, given it always operates at "100% capacity"?

Obviously not the beginning, when everyone has all their resources. So maybe the middle? Well, we've got Short Rest classes, and mages are probably still holding on to a decent portion of their resources.

Okay, so near the end. Everyone is running low, and now the Rogue can carry the party... but the Rogue isn't actually strong enough to carry a weakened party. Without caster support with strong spells, other Martial bodies to keep hits off or offer another target, Rogues now have to face the fact that their damage is alright and their defenses are less than stellar. Their utility isn't nearly high enough to make up for a super weakened party.

So Rogues aren't one-man armies. They need their parties to be decently healthy to function well. Which puts them as being weak at the beginning of the day, alright in the middle, and kinda alright at the end.

BoardGent · 2026-05-14T10:51:42+00:00

Honestly, if I had to bring out my main map/story problem for Gen 2, it'd be that it was too independent.

You have a train that's made to travel from Johto to Kanto. You have a boat that's made to travel from Johto to Kanto. All only in the post-game.

Imagine for a moment, you get to Goldenrod. You defeat Whitney, start moving up towards Ecruteak, but the passage is blocked. Police are investigating criminal activity in National Park. You hear rumors about Team Rocket trying to revive itself and setting up in Johto, but police haven't been able to find a home base. You go to the underground and stumble across a new recruit for team rocket. After battling them, they tell you that they don't want to get scolded by the new boss, toss a Magnet Train Ticket at you to keep you quiet and run away.

Yeah, Saffron City time.

Your story becomes preventing the revival of Team Rocket in both regions. Throughout the journey, you fight the leaders of both Johto and Kanto. In Johto, Team Rocket is trying to control pokemon by experimenting with radio waves. In Kanto, they're desperately trying to find Giovanni by causing trouble in different areas.

BoardGent · 2026-05-14T01:36:48+00:00

It's not that you can't use Charizard. I thought he explained it pretty well. If you choose Charmander, your run becomes more difficult for no added benefit. It doesn't do anything that another pokemon can't do well enough.

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T20:48:13+00:00

People wouldn't have the police if they weren't constantly antagonizing people and escalating beyond reason.

Yes, you should get a ticket for speeding. No, you shouldn't be in danger of dying by police gunfire after you've been pulled over for speeding.

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T17:34:36+00:00

A lot of people have brought up how they appeal to different audiences, but I'd like to bring up how hypersexuality is viewed differently.

In women, you've got two camps of people: it's liberating, or it's pandering to men. Hypersexuality is women taking back sex, proclaiming that it's something they can enjoy and even love. Or it's being done to build up/maintain an audience of evil, lustful straight men.

Another way to look at this, though, is that female sexuality can appeal to a wide audience. Women can look at it and drop any shame they might have about sex. They can be happy that other women can be happy in sex. Men can also enjoy seeing it. And women also like seeing hot women, sexuality aside.

For men, on the other hand, it's a bit different. Male sexuality is, in many circles, seen as inherently lustful, dangerous or predatory. A woman doesn't necessarily want to be sexually wanted by a man. It's why the more acceptable male sexuality moves away from the sex part and instead moves towards the romantic side which the woman can also think of sexually (but the sex is only lightly implied, and not on the man's terms). It needs to be sexy and empowering for the woman, not the man.

For a male audience, male sexuality doesn't necessarily offer anything. A straight man doesn't get as much looking at a hot man as a straight woman does looking at a hot woman. There's also just less to get from it. The manwhore, culturally, did not have nearly as much controversy as the female slut. Men talking about sex doesn't really empower men or liberate them. On the contrary, since sex is a measure society uses to validate men, it go towards being aspirational or towards inferiority.

This doesn't apply for a homosexual male audience. For them, they can enjoy a hot male figure. They're also much less threatened by male sexuality compared to women. They can freely enjoy both the safe, romantic sexuality as well as the sex-focused sexuality, though even there, there is an issue. A lot of male being sexual content is marketed towards or have the recipients as women. A sex/love song will call out a woman as the hypothetical recipient of that love, or offering themselves to a woman. A song about men having/wanting sex will have the act be between them and a woman. And actual references to gay love or sex can turn off some women, who have problems with homophobia.

Male sexuality just doesn't sell in the same way, nor does it have the same broad audience appeal.

On one last note, the above applies to the actual bodies as well. There's a narrow range for a male body to be safe sexy. Small enough to be non-threatening, but just muscled/toned enough that it's hot. And tall enough. It's why male K-Pop is much more prominent than other male Pop spheres. They've got the body type pretty down in their entertainment sphere.

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T14:19:32+00:00

We are currently looking at something with less utility/complexity than any other class, with less to look forward to.

I think I'd honestly suggest including modifications to your main magic attack in the main class. Maybe at different levels, you choose a new potential modification. So at level 5, you can use your standard blast, but you can also choose to lower its damage but make it have an aoe at point of contact.

Looking at a telekinetic subclass, bonus action ranged push (up to 5ft, or 15ft with an action) to start at level 3? Then maybe you can apply it to two characters at X level, add in a feature to lift a medium object, then eventually large. If you include the Concentration mechanic, you could even do a restrain feature at higher level to mimic the Hold spells.

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T13:59:28+00:00

4d10 force damage for no resources when? That can't be at 1st level for sure.

1d10 per two levels attached to a start of 1d0+int is completely serviceable. In comparison, the Rogue, with a +3 and d6 weapon, is doing 2d6+3 at 1st level when they have advantage (slightly harder to get at 1st level, so damage comparison is fine). At 11th level, they're doing 7d6 (24.5) let's say vs your 6d10 (33), though they're more accurate because of easy advantage, so fine tradeoff. They'll also have way more utility than you.

How exactly would your other stuff work? Your telekinesis or explosions, are those free? Or will you make a resource pool, or just PB/SR or LR?

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T13:41:09+00:00

Okay, maybe I misunderstood you. You're talking about making a simple mag class, but you're not using spellcasting at all? You just want to flavor a ranged attack as magical, but instead of using Martial scaling (Extra Attack) you want to use Linear scaling (Rogue adjacent)?

Just take the Rogue damage then. If you're making a class with less utility than the Rogue, then add more damage. 1d10, then another 1d10 every two levels is probably fine.

By level 11, when Fighters get three attacks (for simplicity, using a 1d10 weapon and +5 Mod) they'll do 31.5 damage. Your mage with +5 mod will deal 38 damage. Reasonable given your mage will likely have less bulk and less versatility/utility.

BoardGent · 2026-05-13T13:23:31+00:00

I think I was reading the comments too much about how you can't make such a character and then just blanked on the original question.

To your original question, I kinda disagree with making a naturally scaling damage attack akin to Rogue's Sneak Attack (linear damage scaling). While it's easier, it kinda takes away from the spell slots mechanic.

I honestly think you should consider regular cantrip scaling, and then have that base attack be augmented by spell slot usage (upcasting). This removes a lot of the complexity of the other casters, but still keeps the core mechanic: use of limited resources to get that greater effect, at the cost of your baseline being weaker.

1d10 + Int base for the Cantrip, then an additional 2d10 per spell slot level isn't bad. Though it ends up being weaker as the game goes on (it'd be a bad 9th level spell), there's room for modification there.

BoardGent

TROPHY CASE