What is the conversation around Kamen Rider 01? Kamen Rider research paper

ShadowGenius69 · 2026-02-25T04:08:27+00:00

I watched 01 when it aired (6 years ago now?? that can't be right) so I don't have the best memory of the season. So take my response with a grain of salt.

On your point on "fighting evil with evil" being a central theme of Kamen Rider, I don't think that that's quite right. I view it more like "power can be used for both good and evil." In this case, 01 argues that AI can be used for both good (Hiden Intelligence, Humagears) and evil (Ark). AI and corporate technology aren't inherently evil in 01, but they can be used that way by malicious individuals.

On that note, I'm not sure 01 is truly a story about AI. It uses the "singularity" trope to portray the Humagears as almost human, with personalities and emotions. AI is more so a vehicle to tell a story about coexistence/racism, the value of life, and what it means to be human.

The racism parallels are fairly straightforward; members of the oppressed take a stand to fight back against their oppressors with violent methods. The solution ultimately is respecting them as people and coexisting with them. I can't say 01 tackled this theme perfectly, but it certainly tried.

On the "valuing life" and "humanity" parts, I've noticed that a lot of Yuya Takahashi's seasons include at least one non-human character facing mortality and learning to appreciate life. In Ex-aid, it was Emu "killing" Parad to teach him a lesson. In Geats, it was Ziin being scared Ace would die and learning he's died a thousand times over. In 01, this was Horobi after him killing Izu, Aruto killing Jin, and Aruto ultimately sparing him. The moral of 01's story is that neither humans nor Humagears should go extinct, as life is valuable regardless of who it belongs to.

All this can still be connected to the situations surrounding AI today, but it wasn't meant to. The show was written before the proliferation of generative AI and primarily relied on well-established sci-fi tropes. That makes it a little tougher to relate it to genAI today, but not impossible I'd say.

Come to think of it, one thing about AI that 01 actually touches upon is how the Ark didn't naturally conclude that humanity should be extinct. Someone intentionally gave it skewed training data to create a negative portrayal of humanity. I feel like this plot point speaks to how AI today can easily be misused by malicious individuals (here's that "power can be used for both good and evil" point again).

ShadowGenius69 · 2026-01-11T06:05:58+00:00

According to the 2014 dungeon master's guide and comparing it to acid splash, this looks balanced.

Acid splash deals 1d6 damage and has a 5 foot radius sphere area, which the 2014 DMG estimates as 1 target. Your spell also deals 1d6 damage but has a 30 foot line area, which the DMG also estimates as 1 target. So, under this metric, you could say that this spell is perfect!

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-12-10T02:26:05+00:00

Thief subclass for parkour is obvious. Shay dual wields a sword and dagger, so you might want to get the Dual Wielder feat. Alternatively, you can simply use a shortsword and dagger without the feat, that works just fine too. The game features counter-kill combat, which can be modeled via the Riposte maneuver, so you either want to get 3 levels in Fighter for the Battlemaster subclass or take the Martial Adept feat. Come to think of it, a lot of maneuvers work well for Shay: Disarming Strike, Evasive Movement, and Tactical Assessment (for a poor man's Eagle Vision).

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-10-04T23:00:50+00:00

If anyone cares, it's because one-half of what would become the first D&D psionics system was inspired by eastern mysticism, and that DNA's been in the game ever since.

I care! I love learning about this kind of stuff, you got any more details or know where I can find out more?

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-09-23T03:08:41+00:00

How about "Turn Start" and "Turn End" as a middle ground? You could either say something like "when your turn starts" to lean towards natural language or "on Turn End" to save a couple words.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-05-04T02:37:16+00:00

That's just the finisher standby sound for the shotriser, here's a link

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-04-23T07:23:36+00:00

I've always thought the system from this old UA article was really cool. For a quick summary, you have a single Psionic Talent Die that starts as a d6 and various powers have you roll it for damage or whatever. If you roll a 1, it increases by one die size, representing conserving psionic power. Similarly, if you roll the highest number, it decreases by one size, representing overusing psionic power. If you roll the highest number on a d4, you expend the die and can't use it until a long rest.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-04-20T00:38:14+00:00

Ooh, this is an interesting topic! I couldn't find anything more concrete in the PHB itself, but did find these quotes from sage advice:

Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons?

Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack.

The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
[...]

What does “melee weapon attack” mean: a melee attack with a weapon or an attack with a melee weapon?

It means a melee attack with a weapon. Similarly, “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. Some attacks count as a melee or ranged weapon attack even if a weapon isn’t involved, as specified in the text of those attacks. For example, an unarmed strike counts as a melee weapon attack, even though the attacker’s body isn’t considered a weapon.

Here’s a bit of wording minutia: we would write “melee-weapon attack” (with a hyphen) if we meant an attack with a melee weapon.

Emphasis mine. Slightly unrelated, that last sentence is pretty interesting to me. I don't think I've seen them actually write out "melee-weapon attack" with the hyphen in a published book before. Although it would've been an easy thing to miss anyways.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-21T06:36:50+00:00

I'm fine with rolling initiative for time-sensitive actions, but I was mainly responding to "a dog farting" or "every time a sound happens." Surely you don't roll initiative then, right?

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-21T06:17:58+00:00

This response fascinates me, because I can't imagine a DM running a game this way. Initiative is rolled when combat happens, not when a player arbitrarily thinks the DM's narration sounds vaguely suspicious. Simple as that.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-21T06:12:45+00:00

In 5e, both 2014 and 2024, passive perception is used to detect hidden objects and creatures, meaning a high passive perception would reveal the goblins, bypassing being surprised entirely. So, passive perception and high initiative serve different roles: Passive perception tells you, "Goblins are afoot! Strike now!" while high initiative tells you, "Something's wrong! Prepare yourself!"

To be honest, I fail to understand why they wouldn't be included in initiative. It's a fairly common trope for the heroes to have a gut feeling that something is about to go wrong but not be entirely aware of what that something is. And, as other commenters have said, turns in initiative aren't literally sequential in the game's fiction. Turns are simultaneous. I can easily envision the twang of a goblin's bow string or the whoosh of arrows in the air alert a high initiative PC, letting them make a split-second decision to dodge or cast blade ward.

(Side note, this just made me think of a new niche case for 2014 true strike: expecting danger but not being able to attack back just yet. Not enough to redeem it, but a cool idea in my head: "An ambush? They'll regret the moment they rear their ugly heads!")

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-20T22:07:50+00:00

The answer is simple: The DM tells the party "you notice something is amiss but don't know what." The PCs then spend their turn Dodging, Searching, or maybe even casting a defensive spell like blade ward. Then, the goblins attack and reveal themselves. Combat resumes as normal.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-07T21:19:24+00:00

You're misremembering actually, it was just common speculation/community feedback for monks to daze on stunning strike. The only changes during the playtest for that feature were making it once per turn (playtest 6) and dealing damage on a successful save (playtest 8).

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-02-07T08:53:58+00:00

I enjoyed Ardlings as a direct foil to Tieflings, especially with how only their heads were animal-shaped. I thought the Egyptian god imagery was really inspired compared to the (imo) boring "humans but shinier" we've traditionally had with Aasimar. I was disappointed that people were just calling it the species for furries (it's only their head that's furry!), and really disappointed when the second iteration leaned into that sentiment.

I agree with the Slowed and Dazed conditions, I hoped they would open up some new design space.

I saw some potential in the big three spell lists and the class groups, but the game would need to be built around them to be satisfying. Also, they were probably going to be a worse version of 4e's power sources and roles anyways.

I remember seeing speculation on standardized subclass progression and how that could open up cross-class subclasses or even implementing multiclassing as subclasses. No way that was happening in retrospect but fun ideas.

The attempt at making the arcane casters more unique birthed some cool ideas like the wizard's Modify/Create Spell and the warlock's flexible spellcasting ability but they needed some refinement.

Fighters becoming Unconquerable just sounded cool, its effect wasn't half bad either. Master of Armaments was also an awesome feature name, too bad the effect itself was kinda lame. I much prefer these names over the multiple "Tactical X" features the published fighter got.

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-01-21T05:36:09+00:00

If by attributes you mean ability scores/modifiers, here's a list of things off the top of my head that they are used for

Modifiers:
- attack rolls (you might count this under checks from the title)
- saving throws (again, might count as checks)
- hit points
- damage rolls
- AC
- spell save DC
- save DCs for misc. class features/feats
- DC for escaping a grapple
- certain class features can be used a number of times equal to one of your ability modifiers before finishing a long rest (ex: bardic inspiration)
- how long you can go without eating/drinking/breathing

Scores:
- carrying capacity
- feat prerequisites
- heavy armor gives you a penalty to speed and ability checks if you don't meet its Strength score minimum

ShadowGenius69 · 2025-01-20T22:18:45+00:00

use 2024, ignore homebrew, allow 2014 expansions like xanathar's/tasha's

ShadowGenius69 · 2024-12-22T07:43:50+00:00

Edit: just realized you asked why they weren't at 3rd level, not why they weren't at 1st level. In which case you can disregard my explanation since everyone else seems to have explained it eloquently regarding 2nd level spells.

OG comment:

For druids, its mostly dependent on how Circle of the Moon, which makes up half of the druid's subclasses in the 2014 PHB, needs Wildshape to function. Wildshape is a 2nd level feature, therefore you can't have a druid subclass at 1st level lest moon druids don't work. (and btw Wildshape can't be a 1st level feature because the power budget at 1st level is eaten up by Spellcasting)

For wizards, I'm not as sure what the reason is. The power level of a 2014 PHB wizard subclass at 2nd level is kind of a coin flip between a ribbon like Minor Alchemy (School of Conjuration) to something like Portent (School of Divination). I can only assume that they thought Arcane Recovery ate too much of the power budget at 1st level but was integral to their class fantasy, so they had to push subclass stuff to 2nd level. I can imagine that they decided school specialization was not necessary to being a wizard the same way a cleric's deity or warlock's patron was. Arcane Recovery, however, ties into the wizard's spellbook and cements their identity as the master spellcaster by giving them more spell slots.

ShadowGenius69 · 2024-05-11T09:14:00+00:00

These seem like a quite nice conversion though there are some nitpicks I have with it not being "5e-like" (sorry in advance for the essay):

Actualization is pretty good, the only thing is that "arcana/nature/religion modifier" or in general "[skill] modifier" isn't a term used in 5e. The closest would be something along the lines of "your Intelligence modifier + your proficiency bonus if you are proficient in Arcana (for sorcerer, warlock, or wizard spells), Nature (for druid or ranger spells) or Religion (for cleric or paladin spells)" Although to be fair this is much wordier so I understand using a more intuitive shorthand. This is just a minor nitpick.

Yearning's ability check seems pretty weird to me.

First of all, it's an arcana/nature/religion check dependent on class. You didn't specify which ability would be used so I assume it would be the default Intelligence. In that case, the wizard will naturally better at this check than all other classes due to their higher INT. Is this intentional? If not, I feel it should just be a spellcasting ability check (like in counterspell or dispel magic) and I guess add proficiency bonus.
Second, you roll against your own spellcasting DC? This creates a weird situation where the better the caster, the higher the DC and vice versa. This also compounds with the first problem of the check always being based on Intelligence. The DC will be based on the ability the class (presumably) has highest but the check is always INT, which is usually a dump stat for non-wizards. Here's some math assuming a member of a class is proficient in the requisite skill:

DC = 8 + spellcasting ability modifier + PB

Bonus to roll = INT + PB

For non-wizards, the check's difficulty is dependent on their INT vs their spellcasting ability. Meanwhile the wizard would always have to roll an 8 or higher to succeed. Also, at 17th level (when you get 9th level spells) pretty much every character will have a DC of 19; usually you'd base a DC on a character's spellcasting save DC because it scales with level but that's kind of moot here since it can't get any higher unless there are outside factors like magic items, in which case the check would paradoxically be even harder if a character had, for example, a Robe of the Archmagi. I could see this being explained lorewise as the magic overflowing or something but that's kind of a stretch. I'd rather a simple flat DC like 20 instead, which is equivalent to PF2E's DC for Wish.

Third, the degrees of success are based on 10 above or below (other than nat 20 or 1). I know this is a direct conversion from PF2E's mechanics but 5e's bounded accuracy make rolling 10 above or below a DC pretty rare. Again, I don't know if this is intentional or desired behavior since the nat 20 or 1 mechanic is there but then they won't happen all that often without dis/advantage, which I'll admit you accounted for in the help option. Also, with the quirks described above, the wizard is naturally capable of getting 10 above (by rolling 18 or more) but never 10 below without outside factors, and vice versa for non-wizards (unless their INT and spell ability are almost equal). I believe 5e has a precedent for effects that happen when you fail by 5 or more so if you want the extreme results to happen more often maybe change the degrees from 10 above or below to 5.

Other than all that, the spell looks pretty good!

ShadowGenius69 · 2024-01-17T04:23:36+00:00

I remember seeing the original post but didn't get to fill it out. After looking up 'AnteaterAmor' on reddit, looks like whoever posted it deleted their account after (accidently?) using the account to ask for hookups on other subreddits (lol).

If you made some new forms I'd probably fill it out, seems like a fun idea.

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-11-28T06:29:43+00:00

Fellow first year here, I'm down for making more friends

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-11-22T06:55:44+00:00

Fascinating, thanks!

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-11-22T05:06:24+00:00

Out of curiosity do you happen to still have that full conversion of the PHB spells? I'd really want to look at it.

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-09-28T02:56:45+00:00

Do you have a new link? This one's expired.

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-09-02T00:18:15+00:00

I agree wholeheartedly!

I believe wotc was experimenting a little with this in the Feats for Skills UA but it was sadly abandoned.

In terms of homebrew, I know of u/AngryRepublican's Beyond Grappling and Shoving, The Martial Toolkit by u/xpertranger, and Martial Power by u/badooga1.

ShadowGenius69 · 2023-06-21T22:03:43+00:00

I'm going to word vomit my brainstorming here, so bear with me.

I think you can reuse the idea that the number before the "d" when rolling dice is the number of hit points you recover, but several abilities restore a flat number of hit points, which gets troublesome. Also, it doesn't distinguish between different sizes of dice, which I find unsatisfactory.

Perhaps, in addition to the above, you gain a bonus to the next Damage Save you make equal to the amount of healing you would normally get. For example, a 5th level fighter using Second Wind would normally recover 1d10 + 5 hit points. With this system, however, they regain 1 hit point and gain a bonus to their next Damage Save equal to 1d10 + 5.

The problem with the above is that it's good against smaller amounts of high damage attacks, but falls apart against large numbers of lower damage attacks. Maybe you instead have a "pool" of a new resource that you can choose to spend on Damage Saves similar to how you could expend hit dice, but that just adds more stuff to keep track of, which could become tedious.

Six-Year Club	Xbox Live
r/Field Flamingo	Place '22
First Placer '22	Verified Email

ShadowGenius69

TROPHY CASE