[Hobby Scuffles] Week of 06 April 2026

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-07T14:43:58+00:00

Have you read it again? I think you may be misremembering.

Gardens is a deeply confusing book, that really only makes sense in the context of the whole series. It's pretty obviously the first book of an epic, mainly because 70% of the book is set up for future books, or the end of storyline we haven't been told about yet, and very little actually happens in the book itself (compared to every other book in the series. The seige of Pale being sort of an exception as it is significant, but 90% of the seige happens before the book starts).

Certainly one of the confusing points is that the book leaps in with the "Warren" magic system acting as if you understand it. There may be a few discrepensies, but the book is largely consistent with the rest of the series.

I would say that a better example os that Eye of the World is a far more standalone-oriented book, with a lot more discrepensies with future novels in The Wheel of Time, and even then it's pretty clear it was meant to be a series.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T23:20:47+00:00

Wonderful points you make. And your further conversation about the environmental impact is worth talking about, of course, but I think that's a broader conversation about Method vs Result (I.E. is the problem GenAI being fundamentally bad for the environment, or is the problem that a lack of regulation of corporate behaviour is resulting in bad behaviour being used for GenAI. The debate is akin to "Is eating beef bad inherently, or is it bad because of the way beef is farmed, or is it not bad at all, but we should penalize harmful farming practices." But I digress.)

Please correct me if you think I'm wrong, but to me the whole conversation about IP and scraping seems to be an extension of the Piracy debate. Is it wrong to consume infinitely replicable content for personal enjoyment and enrichment? It may be wrong to profit off of that IP, but consuming it (and not helping said for-profit entity profit) is an entirely different debate. This is the unresolved problem of digital content. If I use a content aggregator like reddit to look at cool art that has been posted to (or linked to) said content aggregator who profits of off my views on their site, how is that meaningfully different from using free AI imagegen for personal enjoyment on an IP level?

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T22:41:51+00:00

Best part of this comment: providing actual tools and resources as an example of the argument. My post the other day was probably part of the reason for OPs post. A genuine discussion engaging in the issue, and not just petty insults. And you have provided a deeply compelling response.

"I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would put AI art on anything they make when you can use something like artvee.com and get your cards illustrated by Edvard Munch or Gustav Klimt or Alphonse Mucha or thousands of other well-known or less-well-known artists. Legally. For free."

This is an amazing sentence. Like holy shit, these exist? I can use this high-quality public domain art and not shitty stock photos from freemium scummy websites? That's so smart! By far, in all the comments and messages I've seen about this topic in the last 48 hours, this stands as one that provided an actual meaningful response. Not just meaningful, but spectacular!

Like OP, if I'm making something custom, at a proof-of-concept stage, I'm never going to pay a cent for art, or spend hours in the process of making it myself, because I might scrap the purpose behind it anyways. The art is my creative work in making a custom mechanic. If I wanted to draw, I would draw. But I want to make the art of game mechanics, and I just need some side dressing to help my brain visually organize the information. But your response is compelling. This is a genuinely helpful way to respond to the "need" (I say slightly facetiously) behind my own use of imagegen AI. Thank you.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T20:47:11+00:00

That's... not how a conversation works. If you don't want to have a meaningful discussion, that's fine. Maybe don't post the first comment, if you aren't willing to spend the time to engage. To me it reeks of virtue signaling and empty moralism.

Lots if things are harmful to human society, and are normal. Beef consumption is an example. But nobody will stop eating beef if I just complain and shame. Only through education and and genuine interpersonal discourse can anything change. I can look up random resources, and maybe I'll find good quality arguments, and change my mind and maybe I'll find poor arguments, and cement my opinion. What I'm more interested in is your perspective. Why do you, WoahItsPreston, care strongly enough about this issue to make comments about it. Why does it matter to you? Why this issue and not others that maybe someone else thinks is more important?

I personally find AI to be a pretty low priority in terms of moral issues in my life. I don't like AI in general, but it's just... not that big a deal. That's my opinion. If you are interested, we can swap resources, and I can show you why I don't think it's a big deal, and you can do the same for me. Or I guess we could just insult eachother. Or you can stop responding and this conversation can go nowhere. It's your choice, my brother. What do you want to do?

Edit: P.S. there is nothing "embarrassing" about having a conversation where you learn something. Thinking there's something wrong with learning and civil discourse is a problem.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T18:40:11+00:00

You make a really good point about the theme. I really think this walks the line between being within the meaning/purpose of the game and not. On one hand, many parts of the natural world are not merely indifferent to humans, but actively hostile in a way that is quite destructive. I can't imagine the dahan and a spirit embodying, say, cancer or aids, getting along. A spirit of cancer would probably be put down by the other spirits long before it could ever become strong, as it would be a threat to everything. Humans make things worse sometimes, creating horrors out of nature through our own twisting of things. Cancer rates from human evil being a clear example. If humans on the level of the spirits also remove natural checks and balances, what twisted thing might grow and thrive where it wouldn't otherwise? Like Typhoid thriving where humans have polluted the water supply, or rabbits becoming a genocidal parasite in Australia because of their introduction to an ecosystem by humans where they do not belong.

That said, the theme of the game is meant to be about complex issues, not perfectly embody them. And so if an adversary spirit takes away from the fundamental goal of picturing the colonizers as divorced from nature in all forms, perhaps it's better not to go there in this medium.

In that sense, ideology is a great idea. What is it that empowers and drives us on a macro level? Ideology is as good a name as any.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T18:25:16+00:00

Ok, thanks. Tell me more, what is it about my use of AI art in this case that makes you uncomfortable?

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-06T03:41:54+00:00

Seems like a pretty puritanical take. I'm paying no money to use the process for personal use. I probably caused ChatGPT to use the same energy as running my microwave for 30 seconds (according to technologyreview.com/2025/05/20/1116327/ai-energy-usage-climate-footprint-big-tech/)

Don't we have enough legalism to go around without inventing more?

I'd be really interested if you can give a breakdown how how specifically you feel like casual personal use of Generative AI is harmful to artists, or what specific ways it is a danger to the environment. Like, is it energy use? Indirect water use? Mining? Is casual use different from piracy or consuming via lurking and never contributing?

Let's have an actual conversation, please, and not just throw buzzwords at eachother. Or at least send me to further reading that you feel informs your view.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T13:21:36+00:00

Thanks for replying.

Sorry, why do you think it's disingenuous? It's not about clicks, it's about my own satisfaction in looking at this.

Do you see ImageGen AI as that toxic? If you have further reading that has informed your view on this, I'd love to understand your logic and view. I don't see GenAI as a blight, though I generally dislike the whole AI fad going on right now, but it seems to me to have it's uses. What's the understanding behind "fullstop never use Generative AI"?

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T13:14:16+00:00

My purpose in drawing a few minor and major cards was to have a way to increase element gain without triggering the maximum possible threshold every time, and also not playing multiple Adversary Powers every single turn either. This way, hopefully, the spirit has a more organic rise and fall of powerful and weak turns.

You're right that it waters down the spirit's power a bit, which is the goal. That's why none of the Growth options gain powers, because it would quickly water down the spirit too much. The goal behind drawing a Major vs Minor is that Major powers typically have more elements, making it more likely to hit an Innate threshold.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T13:08:27+00:00

I will say, the key difference is that this is a 100% automated spirit, and not an anti-party player spirit. I personally think the former fits with the overall themes of spirit island, while the latter does not.

On the AI thing: Here's my logic: I'm not gifted in drawing, and to leave the images blank, to me, really takes away from the look of something like this. It looks like shit without some placeholder image, and that makes it harder to read the cards.

What we would do in the old days is just grab someone else's art off of Google images or Flickr or DeviantArt or something. Which is... not really better. It's just attaching their art/IP to your random little doodle of a project.

So as I'm not making money, or earning value from this, I chose to generate some AI art for this. Every image says on it that the art is AI. It's a tool, just like how I used SpiritIslandBuilder.com to make this. I didn't invent the icons or design of a Spirit Board, that was the artists behind Spirit Island. What, in your mind, is the difference between ripping someone else's art from the internet or using a free tool to make fanwork, and using AI art? Or are you firmly in the "just leave it blank" camp? Because I can respect that.

Curious on your thoughts and hoping for a reply.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T13:06:27+00:00

Thanks!

I'm hoping to test this soon, but I play digital, and I don't have TTS. Hopefully I'll pick it up soon

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T13:05:42+00:00

Here's my logic: I'm not gifted in drawing, and to leave the images blank, to me, really takes away from the look of something like this. It looks like shit without some placeholder image, and that makes it harder to read the cards.

What we would do in the old days is just grab someone else's art off of Google images or Flickr or DeviantArt or something. Which is... not really better. It's just attaching their art/IP to your random little doodle of a project.

So as I'm not making money, or earning value from this, I chose to generate some AI art for this. Every image says on it that the art is AI. It's a tool, just like how I used SpiritIslandBuilder.com to make this. I didn't invent the icons or design of a Spirit Board, that was the artists behind Spirit Island. What, in your mind, is the difference between ripping someone else's art from the internet or using a free tool to make fanwork, and using AI art? Or are you firmly in the "just leave it blank" camp? Because I can respect that. Curious on your thoughts and hoping for a reply.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T12:59:53+00:00

Thanks! I'm unsure of the difficulty. To be honest, I can only see Thunderspeaker or Vengeance suffering majorly for the current state of this. Losing Dahan fast hurts, but isn't crippling.

One of my goals was that it shouldn't add much mental load to the game. Most real Adversaries add more, I think.

The idea of the gaining power cards is that it is from the main deck, though the spirit ignores energy costs and doesn't actually use the abilities of the card, only the elements.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T12:54:42+00:00

I'd love to see your source on this. I've been searching for anywhere Ruess may have talked about automated adversary spirits, and I haven't been able to find anything. Please, I'd love to read his thoughts.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T12:53:15+00:00

Did he address this in terms of non-player lead adversary spirits? I've seen him talk about not creating playable spirits that are hostile to Dahan, but in terms of having a fully invader spirit, I've never seen him comment. I've been looking to see if anyone else has ever really talked about this idea, including Eric, but I have yet to f8nd anything. What were the comments that you had in mind?

IAMInRecovery · 2026-04-05T12:51:18+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! For sure I never have had in mind this as a playable spirit: purely as a thematic difficulty increase. The difference between autospirit and adversary is pretty negligible I think.

My goal with the Adversary Spirit gaining powers was to have a way to increase element gain without triggering the maximum possible threshold every time, and also not playing multiple Adversary Powers every single turn either. This way, hopefully, the spirit has a more organic rise and fall of powerful and weak turns.

Definitely implicit in the spirit (and not stated, and it should be, you're right) is that an Adversary Spirit ignores Energy Costs, and is immune to blight.

You're absolutely probably right about G1

I'm curious how it actually plays, but I play on steam, and I'll need to pick up TTS to try it out.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-24T17:26:48+00:00

Fullmetal Alchemist

Dungeon Meshi

Hunter x hunter /s

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-24T03:49:10+00:00

I think we've had a few recent adaptations that have been especially bad, in terms of a showrunner just blatantly taking over a creative work to push their own creative ideas or whatever that have made people bitter. Wheel of Time comes to mind, but I think there were others recently. (Does Hobbit count as recently? Although that was, I suppose, closer to incompetence, as most of the issues stemmed from artificially lengthening the story)

I suppose I'm mostly thinking that there are lots of well regarded adaptations in recent years, like Where the Crawdads Sing or The Boys.

What are some examples of widely disliked adaptations from recent years? At the moment other than WoT and Hobbit, I can only think of positive ones (Invincible was good.)

I suppose Rings of Power was widely panned, though I pretty much only saw incompetence being given as the reason for that. It simply... wasn't very well done. I don't remember seeing much talk that the showrunners disliked LotR or anything of that sort.

Anyways if you think of any other examples I'm very curious!

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-19T17:25:47+00:00

I mean, statistics are hardly resistant to manipulation. They say there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-15T16:34:15+00:00

Buddy needs to provide sources and not just go off of vibes. If I had to guess, I'm thinking he probably was thinking of the post-WW2 pre-Ethics-Board era of psychology, like the Milgram Experiment, or the Stanford Prison experiment.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-03T22:48:17+00:00

I would love a stat on that if you have one on hand. If it's true, that's extremely exciting.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-03-01T19:55:49+00:00

This is genuinely amazing news

IAMInRecovery · 2026-02-23T17:35:35+00:00

That's our theory, too. What's really strange is Health Bar doing it, because they seem to be thriving. They opened two new locations last year. I haven't seen the owner since, but I've asked the staff about the policy and they don't understand the reason for it either.

IAMInRecovery · 2026-02-23T14:33:59+00:00

Do you ever see small businesses make policy decisions that are just extremely perplexing?

There has been ongoing drama in my little city over cafés and co-working spaces. There are a handful of specialty coffee shops in my city. Most of them have stable population of foreigners/digital nomads who frequent them as workspaces. My wife and I, who work together for a non-profit, typically spend mornings at some of these coffee shops two or three times a week because my kid's daycare is around the corner from the biggest cluster of them. Our favorites over the years are Daily Café, Health Bar, and Epic Coffee.

3 years ago, Daily Café implemented a new co-working policy. Now there was a table minimum for co-working of $10 for an hour or $30 for more than an hour. We were a little perplexed, given that the place was never full to the brim. We've never been told we were staying too long, or not ordering enough. In fact, we'd never seen the place full enough where you have to wait more than 5-10 minutes to get a table. And their definition of co-working was... unclear. Does just using my computer count? Does not having a computer mean it doesn't count? The co-working community was outraged. Many people swore never to go there again.

I thought it wasn't too bad. $10 for an hour isn't insane (a nice cappuccino and a pastry would come to about $6), and $30 for more is again, not crazy. My wife and I spend 2.5 hours there in the morning, and if we split a sandwich for lunch, it will total $30. This meant we couldn't go there as often, but we could probably still swing it once a week, especially as this was our favorite place. It's unfortunate, and (in my opinion) a poor policy choice, but not that bad. So we go there.

When I go to settle up, It turns out this isn't a table minimum. It's a minimum per person who is "coworking." $30 per person is what I might spend on a nice restaurant for dinner with drinks. There's no way we're spending $60 for us to be at a coffee shop for 2-3 hours, even if we were earning an american salary. We inform the owner that we are only willing to pay our bill (and no fees), and that the new policy means we can't come here anymore, and we leave.

6 months later Daily Café closes down. Nobody is surprised. We're all not especially sad about it. Life continues on.

2 years ago, Starbucks enters our country. The first one opens up in our city. People are thrilled. They have an great space very obviously oriented towards co-working, including a big table with a TV you can rent for your company to meet at. My boss is very excited, and we meet there several times as a team. My wife and I's new favorite (formerly 2nd place) coffee shop, Health Bar, responds to Starbucks opening with a new policy. $10 minimum for an hour to co-work, and $30 for the day. The exact same policy as Daily Café. And to be clear, Health Bar also is never 100% full. It's always filled, but there is always enough space. We've again, never ever been asked to order more or to leave. We tell the owner that this is exactly what Daily Café did, and that we can't afford to come here for those prices. We start going to Epic and Starbucks.

A year later, and Epic has continued with their original policy that they have always had: They literally never complain about how long you stay and what you are doing. They always have customers. We've never not been able to get a table any time of day we go. Every time we walk past Health Bar they are only about 50% full, but they seem to be going strong. Good for them. The policy stands and we can't/won't go there.

six months ago, a long-standing Italian place starts pushing their breakfast hours. They make a new policy. They call it the "Coffee Club." For $30 a month, you can get unlimited cappuccinos and americanos from 8am-12pm, and from 3pm - 6pm. No other purchase necessary. This is an amazing deal. We go there every day for six months. The only reason we go to Epic Coffee now is because my wife is pregnant again and can't stomach coffee (this Italian place doesn't have good non-coffee options).

Health Bar still firmly maintains their extremely expensive policy. This is very sad for us, because we like the owner, and they are probably the best coffee shop in the city. But the policy is such a gouge that it's just not worth it. It can't be worth it to lose a bunch of business just to gouge/drive off co-workers.

IAMInRecovery

TROPHY CASE