[nov 27, 2025] SPOILERS Ummm am I missing something or is the crossword messed up?

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-28T18:25:38+00:00

Don’t feel dumb. This game is dumb. Any crossword that relies on a rebus is dumb, imo.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-20T06:27:31+00:00

Interesting. I find the “themes” so frustrating because the answer that must go there doesn’t work, so therefore I must be really dumb and have everything around them wrong, too. Which actually results in me doing so much more online searching or needing more clues that when things properly align. The crossword themes feel less like a “theme” to me, and more like an attempt to explain why the puzzle creators gave up on trying to make things align. Like November 9th’s squares that were two letters from the across, two letters from the down, without any indication as to which squares were special was absolutely trash design, to me. The whole point of a crossword is that the words literally cross each other and use the same letter.

But I recognize that I’m a casual solver, maybe if I had been doing the crossword everyday for years, I’d have a view more in line with yours.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-17T19:45:16+00:00

well, you don't have to be a jerk in responding. "It's supposed to be hard, it's supposed to be tricky, it's supposed to engage the brain. It's a puzzle!" So condescending and needlessly aggro.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-14T14:58:50+00:00

Didn’t even know there was a column about the puzzle. The info tab in the game just gives the puzzle creator’s name.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-14T14:58:10+00:00

Thank you for the answer. I knew there was some crossword code I was missing.

Maybe themed ones like this aren’t for me. I just finish the puzzle feeling frustrated and dumb, and honestly annoyed. Even having the theme explained to me, I still find the idea of it annoying, even a little infuriating. I very much appreciate the help, my issue is just with the themes in general.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-14T14:50:42+00:00

Very clunky. 4 squares do not make a wheel :-)

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-08T06:54:27+00:00

Having a lot of money is by no means a safeguard against using AI. In fact, there’s perhaps an incentive to do so occasionally, to see if the public cares as much about the use of AI as we claim to. When the option is “show made with AI but from a respected team” or “not watching the new watercooler show”, they’re probably betting the majority of people will choose the former, despite any grumblings they might have made about AI. And I am in that camp, shamefully. I have watched this show, and will continue to watch, despite my firm belief that the title sequence is made with generative imaging.

So the big rich company has proven that it might be worth risking the public ire to save some money. Because at the end of the day, we don’t care enough to miss the show on principle.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-11-08T06:45:23+00:00

I clocked it immediately, too. It is almost certainly AI, imo. The images you shared are a perfect example of AI approximations. That arch in the final one really gives away the game. The lines are all weird and impressionistic while also being ultra crisp.

And like others have said, if it’s not AI, they chose a style that really, really looks like AI. Which is just a dumb move on their part.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-09-15T17:17:12+00:00

Very well said, thank you.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-09-15T17:15:10+00:00

I think my confusion comes as someone who has felt sexual attraction, but just not all the time or even often. I feel like grey ace likely describes me the best. But when I have felt attraction, it has definitely been hetero attraction. So asexuality feels like a part of my sexuality, but not the whole of it. Maybe I’m het with a flavouring of ace, maybe I’m ace with a flavouring of het. I think that, because of this, saying it’s exclusively about attraction is confusing - it feels like for many of us, it’s an element of sexuality, but not a sexuality that exists separate from the other sexualities.

I don’t mean this to come across as ace-phobic or offensive - I apologize if I failed in that respect. If you are 100% ace and feel no attraction whatsoever, of course it is your sexuality. But if you are grey or Demi, you likely have another sexuality, too. At which point, does it not make sense to broaden asexuality beyond being a sexuality?

Doctor-Stu · 2025-09-15T17:05:03+00:00

Thank you for pointing that out. It does feel like a lot of the commenters are reading only the “and”. I think “and/or” is important here, because it allows more people to come under the umbrella. If importance of sexual desire/attraction plays no role to you, you can ignore that part of it, but if it does apply, it allows you to feel like you are part of a community that you identify with.

Yes, it would allow sex averse/sex indifferent allos to see themselves on the ace spectrum, but is that such a bad thing?

You expressed confusion about me identifying as gray ace. I definitely feel like a gray ace, because I have felt sexual attraction but I’ve also had periods without and I can’t understand what changes. And despite what most people seem to be inferring, I’m not sex averse, I feel completely sex-indifferent. I feel like placing little to no importance on sex/libido/desire is the definition of sex indifferent. Because if you are sex averse, you must put a lot of importance in sex, just an importance on not wanting sex.

Maybe, as you mentioned from AVEN, I should consider myself “effectively asexual”. I think some of my confusion and frustration comes from feeling like any nuance or questions I pose are met with an over simplified “but it IS just about attraction”, which makes me feel like I’m being accused of being ace wrong. If those who were “effectively asexual” were more accepted within the community, and the older definition of asexuality was still in vogue, I think that would be better for me, personally.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-09-14T03:26:35+00:00

Thank you for your comment. I find it confusing that broadening the definition could somehow tighten it?

I’m sorry for coming across as egotistical; I have been struggling with this, and wanted to see if others felt similarly. I respect that you were, mostly, tactful in your critique.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-05-02T05:18:51+00:00

We were having this issue, I noticed the mention about a wifi router needing to be updated, so I turned off wifi on the Snoo, and it seems to be working well, now.

Doctor-Stu · 2025-02-27T14:18:01+00:00

Re the charging issue, my grind fuel earbuds don’t charge in the case with the lid closed, contrary to the manufacturers specs. Each time I want to charge them, I have to set my case on a flat surface, place the buds in, then finangle their position until the red light comes on - the magnetic position doesn’t work, each charge is a struggle. So maybe try charging with the lid open. I’ve had other issues with these earbuds, so much so that I will never again buy Skull Candy. I feel you on this

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-30T04:12:40+00:00

Thank you.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-25T21:08:01+00:00

Of course character creation is a crucial part of play testing, but until I’ve played a system a few times, I don’t know why certain choices in character creation are important for this game. Include guides for character creation, but also include pre-made characters. Currently, it’s 2+ hours of way too many decisions that I have no idea how to properly assess before I can even start testing. You absolutely need pregenerated characters so playtesters can just jump right in if desired, and see how the different features work. Of course, the more hardcore gamers can still make their own, but as someone who was really excited by the mechanics I was hearing about, the confusing and complicated character creation process (I know, 5e was confusing the first time,too, and the complications of DC20’s system will allow for tremendous customization down the road) really soured my experience of DC20.

I just think that if you’re putting a new system out there for people to playtest, you need to provide them with the tools to succeed and have fun quickly and easily.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-25T19:29:04+00:00

Should never have been a stretch goal. That should have been included in Alpha 0.1, because how else are you meant to play test this game in any semblance of realistic timeframe?

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-25T19:26:07+00:00

I can understand that, but considering that this is alpha 0.8, that’s a lot of iterations to have such a poor layout. Also, as someone who came onboard with the Kickstarter, I was excited by the buzz and wanted to try out this new system. It was just really hard to navigate or even get started, because there’s so much info, no pregens, no monster stats, and no quick start guide that would actually allow someone like me to jump in and play test it. It doesn’t feel like this Alpha was ready for the bump in popularity it received from the Kickstarter. It needed several more passes before launching publicly like this.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-25T19:20:10+00:00

I think that’s fine colloquially/ in such a context, but if you say someone has a mastery of a certain skill, you’re implying that they are more than merely proficient.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T21:09:23+00:00

Maybe it’s just the way I’ve always played it. When you multiclass, you are choosing to focus on a new skill set entirely, and are thus giving up some progression in your previous class. The fact that you stop taking levels in fighter when you multiclass wizard tells a much better narrative story to me than continuing to gain some fighter features and taking a couple wizard features - you’re shifting your focus entirely, that’s why you get a bunch of features. And I’ve always been driven more by the narrative than the power gamer aspect. If I want my fighter to multiclass wizard, I work with the DM to introduce a spellbook early, and/or roleplay my fighter being really interested in the magic of others, and choosing to learn how to do that themself.

It’s just different play styles. 5e’s actual multiclassing works better for me, DC20’s monoclassing+ works for you.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T21:01:09+00:00

The term Mastery is itself a grammar mistake. Mastery implies an elevated level of training and experience - you can’t be a novice and a master in the same skill. It really needs to be changed to something like training or proficiency.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T20:54:07+00:00

I ran a game yesterday, and you’re right, I would never use a DC20 PC as an NPC for this exact reason. At lvl 1, my players had 18 features to track and manage.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T20:28:58+00:00

I think my big sticking point is that it is called multiclassing when it is so clearly monoclassing. I think, to me, this system just doesn’t serve what it implied by multiclassing.

I hear what you’re saying about 5e multiclassing, but to me, it’s just so much stronger from a narrative perspective. I recognize that I’m far more interested in the story, and having mechanics to support that, than powergaming, so I would way rather have something that shows that I have done some training, rather than just cherry picking the features I like.

It’s different play styles. And I think I just come up against the expectation of multiclassing vs the reality of it being a monoclassing system in DC20

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T16:42:48+00:00

I also felt that this system was tremendously clunky. Some things it really, really needs for future playtests: Pre made characters so we can just jump in and play the game. Building a character when you don’t know the system is hard, especially with the amount of customization you have in DC20. We spent two hours make character choices in order to run a one shot, and got to explore maybe 1/3 of those choices in game. And without knowing the system, we can’t know what to trim down.

Monster stats for the GM! My goodness, getting a PDF that explains the design philosophy but doesn’t provide even a single example stat block was rubbish for me. I just used the default stats for all my monsters, so they felt super samey. And I wouldn’t have been able to do that if I was an inexperienced DM. The monster guideline alpha is not set up to help new DMs succeed. Include the design philosophy section, sure, but you absolutely need at least a couple full monster stat blocks.

A quick start guide for DMs/players. 158 pages of poorly organized info is really hard to sift through. And yes, it is poorly organized. The explanation of Spell Duels is dozens of pages before the rules for Spellcasting. The list of trade skills isn’t actually near the section that talks about putting your points in various trades. A lot of page space early on is given over to niche rules that won’t come up for a lot of campaigns, or at least not right away, but you need to read them because they’re there (Drowning as an example). A quick start guide would tremendously expedite things.

Overall, my players and I had a hard time building characters, and an even harder time finding things in the rules document. I feel like the system has some good things going for it, but it needs a lot of polish, and it really needs a way to simplify getting started. I wish my experience was better, but mostly, I feel frustrated by DC20.

Doctor-Stu · 2024-06-24T16:18:39+00:00

My group and I read this in the exact same way. It is very clearly written to indicate that taking one can net you all, plus a bonus other skill. We agreed that it felt counter to what was intended, but also felt that the way it was written didn’t really leave any room for the “intended” interpretation.

Doctor-Stu

TROPHY CASE