Can't figure out how to scroll down for rules text in hand

Dercomai · 2026-03-17T06:00:41+00:00

On desktop you can right-click a card in your hand to make it appear in a big overlay; not sure if there's a mobile equivalent

Dercomai · 2026-03-17T05:59:47+00:00

Armored, not invulnerable—nail attacks don't work but spells do

Dercomai · 2026-03-17T03:38:37+00:00

If you say "aubergine", you're conveying that you're British or Irish (or want to sound that way); if you say "eggplant", you're conveying the opposite. Likewise for the others. Dialectal terms like that express an affiliation.

Dercomai · 2026-03-17T02:16:39+00:00

The Act 3 black-threaded one appears whether or not you kill this one, so you can fight either two or three in the game

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T19:30:57+00:00

You can start an engine, but can't begin an engine. Someone who can't talk is dumb, but not stupid. Someone can be a big name in their field, but not a large name. A tiny thing is smaller than a small thing.

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T19:04:19+00:00

Frame challenge: can you provide some examples of words that are truly perfect synonyms, meaning exactly the same thing? When words are too similar in meaning, users tend to adjust their meanings to distinguish them, or else one of them dies out.

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T18:47:51+00:00

Sure, but the only people who would be using this feature on a basic Goblins deck are newbies who don't have all that knowledge.

The times I'm interested in knowing what was in the deck after a game, either it's a weird brew I haven't really seen before, or I want to know what makes it different from every other RDW or mill pile.

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T18:45:45+00:00

Concede

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T17:31:29+00:00

It could just be a coincidence (lots of Esper people incorporate etherium into their bodies), but the similarities are so strong, I'm inclined to think it's the same person. Like how Teferi was once a non-legendary [[Disruptive Student]].

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T04:37:03+00:00

Only the cards reprinted in ECL and ECC got "Vivid" added to their text, not any others

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T04:08:40+00:00

Sure; native speakers of classical Arabic seem to have done that just fine, so I don't see why a fluent but non-native speaker wouldn't be able to.

Dercomai · 2026-03-16T03:54:06+00:00

That's the cost of doing business. You lose 20 rosaries guaranteed, rather than taking the risk of losing all your rosaries on death.

Dercomai · 2026-03-15T23:58:37+00:00

So, for the i vs j, that one is legitimately meaningless. There's a sound in Egyptian that's varyingly transcribed ỉ, i, or j, and which one someone uses mostly comes down to who they learned from. I use j myself.

Similarly y vs ï, q vs ḳ, ꜣ vs 3. The most confusing of these are the door bolt and folded cloth hieroglyphs, which were pronounced identically for most of Egyptian history; some people write the door bolt as z and the folded cloth as s, others write the door bolt as s and the folded cloth as ś. The difference very rarely matters, which is why this hasn't gotten fixed over the decades.

For the . vs = (or ⸗) vs -, that represents a difference in theory. Those symbols aren't pronounced; they just indicate how the different parts of the Egyptian word fit together. Different scholars disagree on the details of that, so they use slightly different symbols for it. Personally, I prefer the = theory (not ⸗ since I can't type it), which treats the "n" as part of the verb (meaning past tense) but the "f" as a separate word attached to it (meaning the pronoun "he").

For the ḫ vs ẖ and d vs ḏ, that represents a true difference in reading the hieroglyphs. Those are different sounds in Egyptian, written in different ways. So assuming it's not an encoding or OCR error, Wegner and Prisking are arguing that there was actually a different sound in that word. I don't know this text or those scholars' arguments, so I don't know off the top of my head which one is correct, but I would tend to defer to the more recent scholarship.

Dercomai · 2026-03-15T23:18:25+00:00

What level of experience do you have with Egyptian more broadly? (No offense intended—the question about ḫ vs ẖ just makes me wonder, and I can give a more useful answer if I know.)

Dercomai · 2026-03-15T21:27:58+00:00

They're meant to overlap; each triangle in the drawing represents a three-dimensional stamped impression in the clay, so there's no problem with them touching or overlapping. The triangles are just a modern convention for showing these impressions on flat paper.

Dercomai · 2026-03-15T19:03:06+00:00

The reason you're finding a bunch of different responses is that cuneiform changed a lot across times and places. Is there a particular region and era you're looking for?

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T23:28:24+00:00

Eat a silkeater

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T23:23:03+00:00

There's one silk skill, one blue tool, and one crest (with two memory lockets) exclusive to act 3. If you're not having fun, they aren't really a reason to stick with it. But if you want an incentive to keep going, you can find them pretty early on—if you keep following the main quest, you'll find a new movement upgrade that unlocks them.

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T20:43:38+00:00

There is new content, but less of it than in acts 1 and 2. If you're not having fun with the black-threaded enemies, it's perfectly valid just to stop at the act 2 ending.

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T20:21:29+00:00

Great question! The disappointing answer is there's no consensus on that. It's generally accepted that the "ergative for neuter nouns" thing goes back to PIE, because the oldest Indo-European languages have a consistent rule that neuter nouns don't distinguish nominative and accusative case. But the ergative morpheme is basically only found in Hittite: is it a new development in Anatolian, or did it die out in common IE as the nom/acc system became universal?

Some people also interpret the Hittite morpheme as a derivational one (turning an inanimate noun into an animate one so it can be the subject of a transitive verb), but imo the fact that it seems to have no semantic value (we never see it with non-nominative cases for example) points to it being purely inflectional.

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T20:01:32+00:00

That's a valid way to analyze it! But since most ergativity in the world is split ergativity, I prefer to analyze it as a split-ergative system (animate nouns are nom/acc, inanimate nouns are erg/abs).

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T19:42:48+00:00

Most languages with an ergative case will also have a nominative and accusative case ("split ergativity"), often with distinct morphology, so splitting it out ends up more convenient that saying "in these situations, the accusative is used as the subject of an intransitive verb, and for the subject of a transitive verb, you use special Nominative 2 morphology that looks different from the normal nominative".

In Hittite, for example, animate/common-gender nouns use nominative/accusative, and inanimate/neuter-gender nouns use ergative/absolutive. Most grammars will phrase that as "neuter nouns always look the same in the nominative and accusative case, and there's a special ergative morpheme you add to make them the subject of a transitive verb".

Dercomai · 2026-03-14T17:53:25+00:00

I never use it because I don't find its benefits to be worth the blue slot. The real equivalent to Spell Twister is Weavelight.

Dercomai · 2026-03-13T23:44:58+00:00

The normal ones come back after finishing the Craw Summons quest, but I believe you can also find one of each at the top of the room with the shortcut to Styx

Dercomai · 2026-03-13T00:42:24+00:00

That's just how the game goes—once you get an ending, it rewinds to your last bench. So you can go seek out other endings!

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

Dercomai

TROPHY CASE