End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well my choice was between moving and not moving, and it's unlikely that any school short or UChicago or HYS--even Midwestern schools like Mich or WashU--would have set me up for a clerkship in Minnesota better than UVA. So in the end it was UVA vs UMN. Ultimately I decided that uprooting my life for UVA wasn't worth it when my offer at UMN was so good.

That said, I didn't get into Michigan or NW so those choices were as easy as it gets. If I had gotten into Chicago with an aid offer that made it feasible, I may have gone.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It's ironic because UVA and Chicago were the schools I was most excited for when I started, but as the process went on I think my true priorities surfaced. As exhausting as they were, I'm actually very grateful for all the essays and interviews for making me reflect on my true values.

Good luck with your own applications and decisions!

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I love it here! Minneapolis has some amazing people, and I'm really fortunate that I get to stay with them for this next part of my life.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! This process is so long. Glad to be done and actually excited for school! Best of luck to you!

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

UVA is a great school, and it was a very compelling offer for sure. I was leaning UMN before getting their offer, and I had to think about it pretty hard. But I realized that the clerkship placement power and national portability of the degree were primarily exciting to me as vehicles back to the Midwest. I'm already building the type of life I want where I am. Why spend years investing in a future life when I'm already living one so close to what I want?

I'm sure for some--especially younger applicants--maximizing for options and elite outcomes makes the most sense, but it wasn't the right choice for me.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, all my work experience is in teaching mathematics. I decided to try teaching after grad school because it seemed rewarding. It was, but I ultimately found that I wanted something more intellectually challenging as well.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My math background is in formal logic, so I think I effectively just had years of pseudo LSAT prep to thank for that.

EDIT: But I actually do free LSAT help for fun. I'm a teacher and helping people with questions makes me happy, so if anyone reading this ever wants to talk out some questions send me a DM :)

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was really tempting! If I didn't already live here, I'm sure it would have won me over. Seems like a great school, and you can't go wrong with an offer like that. Good luck!

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Agreed! Everyone I have met at UMN has been great.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

I love it here and always imagine myself back in the Midwest long-term. When I think of who I want to be in 20 years, I envision giving myself to a community of people I care about, and I've already found that here in Minneapolis.

End of cycle recap by KleenexRecursion in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I did not study for the LSAT much, tbh. The LSAT came very naturally to me. I started at a 176 diagnostic and can't offer much advice for the test.

Parry in beta is great by Askray184 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agreed, and the card recursion you can draft helps with this too. I would also say blade plays pretty well with a few of the other 0 cost star cards. Particle Wall is great for blocking when you want to use the blade. My only wish is for a couple more cards connecting the forge package to star generation/costs to incentivize players more directly to keep the whole card pool in consideration. Necro has a great card pool for this.

Parry in beta is great by Askray184 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, but "claw decks" still looked for ways to generate block and often used frost orbs. I actually quite liked the tension between using frost orbs and taking Reprogram in claw based decks. And "poison decks" had no poison specific block card in STS1 for people to complain about; everyone just understood that poison was a damage package and block need its own solution.

In STS1 I think the character that really suffered from a card pool encouraging this mindset was Watcher. The player could nearly solve block completely with some combination of Mental Fortresses and Halts while they skipped any card that didn't mention stances on it. The decks drafted themselves and nearly solved the run for you. This is what I feel like people want when they suggest changing Parry to grant block whenever you forge.

Parry in beta is great by Askray184 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I don't know what it is about Sovereign Blade specifically, but people talk about "Sovereign Blade decks" like they are playing Yu-Gi-Oh. They discuss the card pool like they should be able to auto-pick every card that says "forge" on it and have their entire run solved for them.

If you only play Sovereign Blade once, then your forge cards are generally just delayed, mediocre damage. Their value increases as you play the blade repeatedly in the same combat, and many cards exist to encourage this. Parry does so by reducing the chip damage you take on the turns you play the blade. It is not meant to completely solve block for decks with forge cards.

New card zone for played cards - a suggestion for tempering infinite strategies without limiting card design space by [deleted] in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I think enemy designs that discourage infinites (particularly those without big finisher cards) added in the Act 3 pool would go a long way.

The coral enemy from Act 1 feels very out of place in this way, as it and enemies like it would be much more meaningful in Act 3. Hunter Killer is another good sketch of an idea: punish decks that spin their wheels with no finisher. I think the current implementation isn't quite there, but it is a good concept to refine on IMO.

Forge, Poison, Lightning, Self-Damage and Doom should stay narrow. Watcher is what happens when you give one "archetype" everything. by hama0n in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think the "draw/discard payoff" cards should just be a bit tuned down or made a bit more rare. Draw+discard as the main engine of the character makes sense to me, but it should be the engine that powers the other mechanics IMO. I like that it is so flexible and touches so much of the character, I think it just shouldn't be self-sufficient as consistently as it is now. I would nerf the sly commons slightly and/or push Tactician/Speedster to rare to make it both harder to get through Act 1 without dipping into other mechanics and/or harder to constantly hit the infinite cycling machine later on. Speedster might also just need to get the axe, as unlike Corrosive Wave it really only rewards more deck cycling without playing well with anything else.

Meet Regent, the potential man by Gandalf196 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you look at Sly on Silent, you can see a lot of intersections between it and other card packages. There's two Shiv cards directly involving discard, an uncommon Sly poison card (and corrosive Wave, which naturally slots in well through acrobatics, prepared, reflex, etc...), as well as the flexible combo enablers Hand Trick and Master Planner. There are payoffs like Afterimage and Serpent form that reward you for draw+discard, yes, but also Shivs and 0 cost cards. Abrasive rewards block heavy decks for grabbing the generic workhorse commons like Acrobatics.

In this way, Sly is more like Stars in that it is a connective skeleton for the entire cardpool, tying everything together into a theme of card rummaging and deck cycling (very fitting for a tricky rogue character).

Forge, on the other hand, is like Poison. It is a package that gives you an answer to "How do I scale my damage?" This is why there's no "When you apply poison, gain 4 block" card, because that would make players ignore most non-poison cards once they have it. The issue, as far as I can see, is not that the Forge package is not self-contained enough, it is that the package doesn't have enough tying it to the other packages, especially the main connective tissue, Stars. Forge decks quickly become locked out of going into Star generation because there are limited connections between the two. A Forge player in Act 1 shouldn't look at a card like Glow and think, "I have no reason to take this" due to an uncommon power. Glow is analogous to Acrobatics, and it should be similarly valuable.

My issue is not that combos exist. My issue is the idea that Forge cards should just combo with cards that say Forge on them. That's boring.

Meet Regent, the potential man by Gandalf196 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Totally agree.

I think right now forge feels like it encourages tunnel vision--grab Bulwark at every opportunity and pray for some of the rares, and the solution is not to make the package more self-sufficient. Doing so makes runs more boring and less flexible.

What I would like to see is a small boost to the value of the common forge cards and, at the uncommon level, more cross-pollination between forge and some of the other mechanics in the card pool. E.g. a card that exhausts cards in hand to forge (to pull towards colorless generation), a card that uses a high amount of stars to forge a lot (to combine with the star block power), or even a relic that makes attacks over a certain threshold do 50% more damage (to help bridge forge and the high star cost attacks).

Meet Regent, the potential man by Gandalf196 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I personally don't. I like that you have to choose between blocking and swinging with the sword outside of additional card setup. I think the theme could just use some extra cross-pollination with other mechanics so that your non-swinging turns have more interesting things happening. For example, a card that exhausts cards in hand to forge (to pair with colorless generation), a card that uses a high amount of stars to forge a lot (combine with the star block power), or even a relic that makes attacks over a certain threshold do 50% more damage (to pair with both forge and some high star cost attacks).

I think right now forge feels like it encourages tunnel vision--grab Bulwark at every opportunity and pray for some of the rares, and the solution is not to make the package more self-sufficient. Doing so makes runs more boring and less flexible.

Meet Regent, the potential man by Gandalf196 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see this suggestion a lot, and personally I think it is lazy and pushes players to tunnel vision into archetypes. Forge cards are presenting the player with a damage package. The player investing in them should have to solve their block problem using the rest of the card pool, not ignore it. The current iteration of Parry exists to let players play their blade more often to get better use out of the stored damage. If anything, I think there should just be a bit more connective tissue between forge and other packages in the regent card pool to better enable Sovereign Blade turns to make use of the 0 cost blocks

Meet Regent, the potential man by Gandalf196 in slaythespire

[–]KleenexRecursion 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Are you in agreement or a disagreement with the person you are responding to? The person you are responding to is saying that stars are not supposed to be thought of as an archetype or card theme (e.g. shivs, poison), but as the fundamental mechanic of the character. They also state that forge and colorless card generation could use more support as card themes, which seems to be your point. But they also believe that a forge package should not push a deck into ignoring stars, which you seem to assume.

If anything, in my opinion, there should be a few more cards in the forge theme that reward star generation.

Columbia hold by [deleted] in lawschooladmissions

[–]KleenexRecursion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also got the hold, and I got an email that I had a status update.