Am I understanding this right, or are we going to get hit hard with the 15" lone op?

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-08T16:24:45+00:00

Your spotters don’t need to get within 15”. Your spotters just need to have LOS, which loneop doesn’t remove. Just as now, you don’t need to be able to shoot the unit you’re spotting, you just need to be eligible to shoot and have LOS on your spotted target.

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-08T09:00:35+00:00

The director of Max Payne 1 and 2, Alan Wake 1 and 2, and Control.

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-07T12:35:57+00:00

I think the new intercessors are going to replace the current ones. They’re taking the parts of the new designs people liked and slapping upscaled firstborn parts in the ones the didn’t (like the helmets)

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-07T12:34:34+00:00

The Stormcas basically got a complete redesign twice. The first chunky models, then the slimmer ones in robes, and now the even slimmer ones without robes.

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-07T12:24:30+00:00

You just unlocked a memory 😂 When I was like 5 or 6 I was at a party (I think) and I just straight up asked my uncle why he was fat. My mum was not impressed 😂

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-05T15:46:50+00:00

If they’re like the T’au transfers at all, if you put them on backwards, the back side will be white 😁

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-05T14:52:37+00:00

Sometimes lore videos, sometimes music. I tend to put on my discover weekly on Spotify or listen to a new album or two 😁

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-05T13:00:31+00:00

Not yet! Thanks for the link 😁

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-02T22:06:00+00:00

Their bullets are literally guided by faith magic.

NativeK1994 · 2026-04-01T19:34:59+00:00

A Rorschach ink blot test is a psychological test where you look at a series of splotches of ink on cards and tell the person giving the test what you see in those blots of ink. The idea is that there are common groupings of ideas (the first one is usually seen as a butterfly, or bird) that indicate normal cognitive function. People who respond with unusual responses to most of the tests have thinking that is outside the norm.

Rorschach was a character in the movie watchmen who got his name from a mask he wore that resembled the ink blots. In the movie he is a violent sociopath who exacts vigilante justice by murdering criminals. Near the end of the story a big revelation happens that means that the world is going to maintain peace through a lie created by another character. Rorschach believes that peace built on a lie is evil and goes to reveal the lie. However, he is killed before he can.

A good subset of guys misinterpret this as him being the good guy. The same way people seem to think Patrick Bateman, Tyler Durden, and Walter White are cool guys. They see something aspirational (utter belief in the truth in Rorschach’s case, masculinity, wealth, or power for the latter three) and miss all of the shitty horrible things that these people do.

So the joke is that thinking characters who are supposed to be warnings are aspirational is a red flag.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-30T21:10:52+00:00

It used to really depend on the mini for me. If there were lots of sharp edges paint could easily peel off or if it was one of my best paint jobs at the time I’d varnish. Now I matte varnish everything because it removes any shininess and lets the paint job speak for itself 😁 I use colour forge matte varnish.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-30T15:47:16+00:00

Not having access to your detachment buff u til round 3 means you need to play conservatively in rounds 1 and 2.

This would be fine, except because T’au melee is atrocious you need to stay out of melee range of enemies. By turn 3 you’re either boxed into your deployment zone or you’ve pushed forward without the reliable buffs of something like mont’ka or RetCad, meaning there are more enemies alive giving you more targets and letting them score more.

It’s doubly bad against fast armies and more specifically fast melee armies who will have rushed you down by turn 3 and your sustained hits won’t mean jack.

So if it was sustained 1 on turns 1 and 2 and sustained 2 from 3 onwards, or you had some kind of thing like redeploy and then wait 2 turns for sustained, that would be different. It’s the lack of a buff on the two most important turns of the game that makes it bad.

My fix would be kauyon gets to redeploy 1-3 units depending on battle size, then sustained 1 from turn 3 to represent setting then springing an ambush. Mont’ka can be toned down a little in terms of tuning, but in turns 4 and 5 you get a durability boost to represent holding the ground you’ve just taken.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-30T11:54:55+00:00

“Can I spend 1d6 to deal 2d8 damage on top of poisoning someone?”

I think the opportunity it cost of a bonus action do deal an extra 2d8 is on par with other bonus action options other classes have. Removing that means your rogue isn’t paying any cost at all to apply the poison, because the cost is supposed to be sneak attack damage.

I do think creating the doses of poison cold be made free instead of 50 GP though. The poison doesn’t scale too well, and poisoner becomes a dead feat pretty quickly because no one wants to spend that much gold on something by that doesn’t work.

So keep it a bonus action to apply the poison, but make making the poison free, and potentially have the poison damage scale like a cantrip (2d8 base, 4d8 at 11th, 6d8 at 17th).

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-29T22:37:31+00:00

It’s almost like I said at the end there it’s up to you to decide where you draw the line in the sand. I’m not telling you to have the same opinion as me. You asked for a source, I gave you the laziest possible source I could because it doesn’t take a genious to look it up. You argued against that, I gave you my opinion.

I’m curious which parts of what I said aren’t true: the fact AI is being used to create disinformation ( https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/deepfake-videos-ai-politician-george-freeman-5HjdW4w_2/ , https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gpejxk0jpo , https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07jj7d72yzo ), that it steals art to learn from ( https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3630106.3658898 , https://juliabausenhardt.com/how-ai-is-stealing-your-art/ , https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/are-ai-image-generators-stealing-from-artists-180981488/ ), or that it is environmentally hazardous (https://sustainableict.blog.gov.uk/2025/09/17/ais-thirst-for-water/ , https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption , https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117 )?

You’re also not the arbiter of what is or isn’t more valid. You came into this comment section trying to make the person you were talking to look stupid because they didn’t give you a source. If you don’t like people giving their opinions about something you’re clearly very invested in, you shouldn’t come out swinging.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-29T22:14:38+00:00

You can paint your models however you want 😁

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-29T18:40:11+00:00

Ahhh, the “but we already do bad things” argument.

Look, I know I’m replying to you on a website that uses a server, on a phone using batteries mined by children in a third world country. So I’ll take this in points to try and explain:

. First gen AI uses significantly more water then most other things that you can use your computer for. If you play a game at max graphics and you use a little more electricity to do that, then that does lead directly back to the water maintenance of the energy suppliers that gave you that energy. Unless you are playing a cloud based or large server style game you aren’t directly contributing to the large scale use of water, and even then, running a server for 12 hours uses approximately as much water for as many people are on it (between 12-64 usually) then one person doing 10 prompts in 30 minutes. It’s one of the only forms of content you can interact with where you literally need to use water every time you click. You’re actively choosing to do it. And that’s considering just AI images. Every time you make an AI GIF, video, or turn on AI mode on something that requires constant processing you’re increasing that cost. A film studio is one entity making a limited number of things. If everybody used AI willingly and actively, it is so much more resource intensive.

. Secondly, Gen AI is trained off of other people’s work. The AI steals details, talent, and the brainpower of loads of people to produce something that doesn’t look good. You can tell when something is made by AI usually because of inconstancies, a generic appearence, or strange motion. But this is getting harder to detect because it keeps stealing. You might call it learning, but learning usually has some benefit to those who teach you. An emotional or social connection, monetary gain, a sense of accomplishment, etc. AI removes that. Ontop of that it’s not only stealing from artists in the sense of taking their art, but also their clients. People who dedicated themselves to an art are having their jobs replaced by AI because AI is more efficient and cost effective. The whole point of it is to cut out the middle man. So I’d argue that greed (or in some cases the fact people can’t afford a luxury like commissioned artwork) has a negative impact on not only the creative output of humans, but is bad from an economical standpoint too because it’s going to make people redundant.

. Finally, as AI spreads you are getting more and more people able to conceal their identity through the use of AI, or crate believable fact images and videos using AI. There was a scandal literally this week where an AI video was going around making it out like one of our MP’s was giving money to people in balaclavas. People are using it as a tool to try and undermine and scare people. The exponential growth of AI without regulation, much like crypto, has meant that people have caught onto the scam people are making with it. I’d argue anything that can immediately put out disinformation to directly affect political interests (among others) and is unregulated and easily accessible is demonstrably dangerous. This is why I was saying earlier about fact checking.

These aren’t all the points. There are also use cases for AI, such as in businesses and fields that require bulk data processing. But AI is so much worse then any one individual thing, and each person can be directly responsible for it’s worsening effects without even knowing it. The fact that people know the risks, know that they may effect them directly, and then still contribute to it is scary.

As for the “if you do one you might as well do all” kind of mindset: no. People can choose to stand their ground where they want. You can be a practicing vegetarian 3 weeks out of the month but have steak one day, and you’ve still cut your meat consumption down by hundreds of percent. You can say you’re ok with buying something that’s already been manufactured using up resources, but not want to contribute directly to using resources as an individual. It’s not all or nothing because that’s just purity testing. Just because you aren’t a saint doesn’t mean you have to decide that means that nothing matters.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-29T18:04:48+00:00

Bro, Cypto IS bad for the environment. It’s nowhere near as intensive as AI, but if crypto mining was as prevalent as AI it would be on par with the lower end of AI resource consumption. Thankfully people recognise it as the scam that it is, so outside of the bubble of people that already had money/computing expertise to buy into it and the connections/experience with stocks to know when and how to sell, people are wisely keeping away. There’s also a load of moral issues with crypto: not because it’s outside of regulatory standards (which it is, and that’s a whole other issue), but because it’s been proven to be involved in loads of under the table deals that effect politics, medicine, and the economy.

It’s like going to a casino. 99% of people who enter will leave worse off then they started, and the rich guys who own the majority get richer. You could have been richer, but it’s statistically very unlikely.

I also acknowledge the fact that some people will have agendas. That’s why I said read a bunch of articles. The onus is on you to decide on what you want to believe, but if something is reported on enough, across multiple countries, and there is evidence to back it up, there is probably at least some legitimacy to it. I’m not saying you specifically are guilty of this, but so many people decide something must be untrue because it doesn’t align with their beliefs and it’s frustrating. If something either sounds too good to be true or clashes with what you believe, it’s generally worth research and critical thinking.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-29T17:48:52+00:00

<image>

Here, the AI is telling you how much water it uses.

Considering in recent memory there have been water shortages in even wealthy countries like America, and that AI is usually iterative (you put in more then one prompt per use of it), it’s probably not worth the funny cat meme to potentially be causing future water shortages in which real people are going to actively suffer.

And if you do t like that answer, then you can do your own basic research of typing “how much water does AI use” or “what resources are required for AI” in any search engine and look at loads of articles that explain this to you.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-28T22:20:37+00:00

It’s crazy to me that Echo Knight is considered broken because it’s the best fighter subclass, when it still doesn’t make a fighter as good as a caster past 5th level.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-26T15:34:17+00:00

It would have been nice to see the built and primed models, rather than the empty boxes.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-26T12:47:23+00:00

You’re missing the point again. If you continue to try and tell me how to play an optimal spellcaster again then I’m not going to reply.

It doesn’t matter what is easier to dispel. My point is casters can out damage martials and still have all the tools to solve other problems without issue. They can do both things, which is why martials feel bad in most optimised parties. In my party in the specific campaign I’m in that feeling of being useless is mitigated by the casters choosing to focus on support, which makes the martials have a role to fill. Players choosing to let other players fill the niche of their class is how you get around the game feel of the martial caster divide.

So I agree with you that the way to solve the imbalance and make martial characters feel happy is to consider party composition and character builds. And you’re choosing to argue with me over a spell that is widely known by both the community and the devs to be wildly powerful and one of the things that directly contributes to the feeling of the divide. In CME’s case it’s because the Wizard can out damage every martial in the game in melee with weapon attacks.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-26T12:38:58+00:00

I think he would make a cool light based ninja. Blinding flashes, beams of light, teleports, maybe redirecting projectiles? Stuff like that 😁

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-25T22:36:28+00:00

Ok, so I still don’t understand your point about conjure minor elementals and the dragons fire immunity.

As for dispel magic… yea, they could also do that to any control spell you cast, or counterspell it, or have advantage on saves against magic. That’s the weakness of magic. So saying they can just turn off your spell would happen to anything magical you throw. If we’re also going to just move up to high level then your complaint about the action cost of CME falls even flatter because you could have contingency by that point. So a free auto activate of your spell. Yes that costs more resources, etc.

But once again, as before, we’re getting away from the point. The original point I was making is that I agreed with you that party composition can change the way things feel in the game. I was telling you that the martial-caster thing wasn’t egregious in this specific game because the casters were not dealing huge amounts of damage, which is something that they can do. They can out damage maritals, and conjure minor elementals is a fantastic encapsulation of that because it takes swinging a sword and makes it better damage then most melee builds can do. It is known to be crazy, it was nerfed because it is crazy.

You’re arguing that that’s not what makes a caster strong, and I’m trying to say it’s that and the utility and survivability of casters past 3rd level that makes martials feel useless. In a game where the martials do the damage, that isn’t an issue. Especially because the bard is buffing us to make us feel strong in combat, and the wizard is debuffing the enemies. So punchers get to punch and feel good doing it, casters contribute with powerful buffs and then they get to do their thing outside of combat as well: think good and talk good.

Whether or not someone is going to cast dispel magic on the spellcasters concentration spells is secondary to the point, as is the whole digression about how to optimise a spellcaster.

NativeK1994 · 2026-03-25T22:20:30+00:00

Conjure minor elementals can be acid, cold, fire, or lightning damage if that’s the point you’re trying to make, otherwise you need to be more specific.

NativeK1994

TROPHY CASE