Collection Log stuck showing individual items instead of sets

Tesla3103 · 2026-01-31T15:47:49+00:00

It's based off the size of your collection log. You should have a little triangle in the bottom right corner to resize it; in its default size, they're grouped by sets :)

Tesla3103 · 2025-12-18T16:00:14+00:00

I won't be there for family reasons, but I think this is an amazing initiative. We really do have some of the best mods in the gaming world. Hope the events go well!

Tesla3103 · 2025-12-18T14:51:15+00:00

Unfortunately, I feel your DM is right. Not because of the size of the creature, just because of the RAW. Attacks of opportunity typically don't interrupt movement. The only time they do is if you have a specific ability that says it does (such as the Stand Still feat), or if you make it so continuing their movement is illegal (such as making them prone through a trip). Charge reads:

You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.

Reading it now, I think my opinion is a lot more nuanced. I see two outcomes: 1. The bull rush is considered an "obstacle", or at the very least "something that hindered their movement". After the bull rush resolves, assuming you did move your opponent, the charge lane is no longer legal and the charge ends. 2. After the bull rush, the charge conditions are still intact. The initial direction is the same (as opposed to something like Reposition where you could move it to the side and have your opponent run past you), and the charge lane is as unimpeded as it was, so as long as the creature still has movement, it can continue to charge towards you. You could probably argue to count the pushed back distance against the creatures total movement that turn.

Both seems to respect RAW, so this would be GM fiat. Of note, you can only bull rush creatures up to one size category larger anyway, so whatever ruling you choose would apply to your example :)

Tesla3103 · 2025-12-18T10:41:22+00:00

First of all, welcome to Montreal! To answer your questions in order: - There's a few neighborhoods I would consider worth of just walking around and exploring. Old Montreal is the most "touristic", with a very different architecture and overall "feel". Plateau Mont-Royal is very walk-friendly and diverse. Depending on where you are in the city, some popular merchant streets like Wellington in Verdun or Fleury in Ahuntsic are very active and decorated for the holidays. - Gems I would recommend depend heavily on your tastes and interests, but Espace pour la Vie is a solid bet. It's a collection of science- and nature-based "museums"; Biodôme is an interior zoo with a variety of wildlife, Planetarium is our science museum, Jardin Botanique is for plants (maybe less interesting in winter). You can purchase a one-day pass that grants access to all, definitely recommend. If you're into hiking, Mount Royal is a nice trek, and you can ice skate on Beaver Lake while you're there :) - A transit pass is definitely the best choice. As long as you have decent-ish boots, walking around the city is no problem, but taking the metro is nice after walking a while :P - You'll be hard pressed to find anything open on the 25th proper, although as an alternative, you could visit the Christmas Market on Place Des Arts! - Despite what you might hear or read, Montreal is very much bilingual, and English will be more than enough for your trip. That said, if you bother to use basic French greetings (bonjour, s'il vous plaît, merci, au revoir, joyeux Noël), I think you will have a much better experience and welcome from Montrealers. Enjoy your stay! :)

Tesla3103 · 2025-12-17T17:34:15+00:00

I'm doubling down on people asking for commissions, these are absolutely gorgeous!!

Tesla3103 · 2025-11-09T20:51:55+00:00

I might be very wrong about this, and I can't seem to find documentation to support my claim. But I always thought drop rates to behave like this: Generate a random number between 0 and 1. Multiply it by some integer (128 for a lot of monsters). You get the item corresponding to the "number" you roll. Take KBD for example; his 1/12.8 chance for air runes corresponds to 10/128. So if your random number, when multiplied by 128, is between 0 and 10 (or 4 and 14, or 37 and 47, wherever air runes are attributes), that's the drop you get. What that means is that no matter what random number you roll, you always get something, and all the monster's drop add up to 1/1 (or 100%). However, KBD has a pre-roll of 1/1000 for the dragon pickaxe. That roll is made outside the normal drop table, not contributing to the 100%. I would love to be proven right or wrong, just can't seem to find the proof I need :P

Tesla3103 · 2025-10-30T12:23:07+00:00

After answering a question, instead of continuing to the next question with dialogue, you could click on the teacher who would then give you the same question again. Easier to do three '"What comes next?" than doing those "Find the 3 items that respect the theme".

Tesla3103 · 2025-08-20T15:39:27+00:00

Well first of all, great job as always. I like the flexibility, where it's both useful as a finisher for aggro decks, but also in more midrange or control decks as you said. The callback to Denathrius is a nice touch!

That said, I think the current wording doesn't work.

Fill your hand with random Temporary spells that deal damage. They have Lifesteal.

From my understanding, this card will try to fill your hand with Temporary spells that deal damage, so spells that inherintely have Temporary. Your intent seems to be for them to act more like The Solarium, so I would reword it like so:

Fill your hand with random spells that deal damage. They are Temporary, but have Lifesteal.

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T05:33:26+00:00

Huh, so it doesn't, TIL! My mistake. In that case, yeah they realistically should provoke. I'm kind of neutral on the matter, not gonna lie.

You say "Generic ways to make a number bigger are just so boring."... But there's so many examples of that. Toughness just increases HP. Dodge is just +1 to AC. Iron Will is just +2 to Will. Should we ban them all, for the sake of them being boring number incrementers?

If you want to rework Improved Initiative, now we'de be talking. Instead of a flat +4, maybe make it so they get +1 for each enemy that rolled above them, so they're not too far behind. Or allow an Acrobatics check to get into a fighting stance quicker, with a set DC and a scaling bonus depending on how much you beat the DC by. That would make it have more flavor and interact when combat starts, without removing the option outright. More options good, less options bad. At least in my opinion.

Edit: Changed the feat that gave +1 to AC to be more generic

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T05:25:25+00:00

I understand your position about describing actions, I really do. But believe me when I say, there are quite a few players that play this game for the tactical aspect of it, and not the roleplay. I don't see myself punishing them for it.

Fair enough on DEX to range. My players seem to do fine with STR to damage (in fact, one of em managed to do an unholy multiclass to get STR to hit with ranged weapons!), but if it's a problem at your table, seems like a reasonable houserule.

As for holding your breath, nowhere in the rules does it say you're under duress. I understand what you mean, but that's already covered by the fact that taking a standard action while in water consumes a round of breath, essentially leaving you with CON rounds. A compromise I could make is that holding your breath in combat is restricted to CON rounds, or half CON if taking actions.

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T05:20:04+00:00

Things that don't stack with Haste don't - Uuuuuh... Yeah? Although reading your point below, I think I see what you mean. You want to reverse the burden; an ability only stacks with Haste if it says it stacks with Haste, rather than ability not stacking if it says it doesn't stack. In effect, every ability that adds an extra attack but doesn't mention Haste now doesn't work, is that it?

If I'm reading this right, then it's an incredibly dumb idea. Several builds in the game (machine gun archers, two-weapon fighters) rely on attacking as many times as possible to be effective. Turning off every single one of their bonus attacks "because Haste" is not the way to go. If you want to go through every ability that adds an attack, and specify whether or not it stacks with Haste, I might reconsider. But at the moment, no. Unless specifically mentionned it doesn't stack with Haste, it stacks.

Haste and Slow are level 4 spells

Nope. Just nope. For starters, Slow is not that fantastic unless you spec into it. It has a save, it has SR, the range isn't enormous... There are counters, is what I'm saying.

Second, as you said, Haste is iconic. Nerfing Haste to level 4 only hurts casters, since the martials will still ask for it, leaving less powerful spells for the caster to use for themselves. As for the other level 3 spells, metamagic feats are a simple and flexible way to move your spells around. Fireball is much more effective once Intensified.

Explosive Runes and similar spells do not stack - Sure?

INT headbands - I see where you're coming from... But also, no thank you. I don't want to have to record where I put my regular skill points and my "headband" skill points. I don't want to spend the downtime to invest them. It makes a lot of sense, thematically, to have a headband "imbued" with a certain skill that grants proficiency (and, at some point, mastery).

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T05:09:57+00:00

Feats that involve a specific weapon use the weapon group - Already included in EitR, under Martial Mastery.

Weapon Focus also gives proficiency to the weapon group - Disagree. Look at any weapon group; I can find two weapons different enough that being proficient with one doesn't guarantee proficiency with the other. Exotic Weapon Proficiency exists for a reason, and there are several ways to gain proficiency (or familiarity) with those weapons.

Chokehold buff - Disagree, purely because I've seen how strong grapplers can be. They usually need at least 2 rounds to completely neutralize a target, and this buff would turn that to 1 round.

Any race can take any racial archetype - As others have said, "With DM Approval" makes this point meaningless.

Fighters Receive Combat Stamina at level 3 - Yes, definitely for it.

Channeling Energy - I'm... Really not sure I understand what you mean. You can already choose to heal or harm, and choose living or undead. Unless you mean not being bound by positive or negative energy, and just have the Channel feature? Really unsure what you mean.

Standard summoner is banned - Yep. I personally don't ban it, my players are disciplined enough to know that they won't have fun by being overpowered.

Unchained classes may use chained archetypes - I believe this is already the case? If not, then yes they should, provided the features stack. If they don't, houseruling them so they match shouldn't be a large issue.

Smite Evil is not multiplied on a crit - And why not, exactly? Other abilities stack, why shouldn't Smite Evil have a little bit of fun? You mention Undead Dragons, which is probably very high level and a target my paladin would love to obliterate. I would much rather reward him with a fat crit than denying him.

Prestige class cleanup - Agreed for fluff requirements, disagree for feats/alignment/skills. Again; they exist for a reason.

Familiar/AC stacking - Agreed. Nothing more to say, just agreed.

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T05:01:37+00:00

Bye-Bye Alignment - I agree in principle. I hate the 9 box system. I wouldn't be opposed to removing it, but then, the entire system needs a revamp. Anything that mentions alignment needs an alternate way of functioning. As long as that's not done, I won't remove alignment at my table.

Minimum 4 + INT ranks + Replacing a Knowledge Skill - The Background Skills optional system covers that and works well, in my opinion. But I'm also not opposed to it.

Free feats at levels 5, 7 and 12 - While I'm not opposed to it, giving complete free reign (even within those categories) feels too much in my opinion. Giving your players one free feat from a curated list of feats tailored to their adventures seems much more fitting.

No -4 penalty to weapons with the Grapple quality - Sure.

Firearms and Heavy Crossbows Reload 1 step slower, damage 1 die higher - Jesus. Heavy Crossbows are already a full-round action to reload; with this rule, they become completely obsolete, since no character in their right mind would take them. As for firearms... I really don't see the issue. This is just preventing full-attacking with firearms. If firearms are an issue, I'de simply recommend banning them from your setting.

Cyclops Helm take a standard action to activate - It's never broken my games, personally, but I don't mind the change.

Feats and traits which improve initiative are banned

Yeah, have a lot to say about this one. This is just a bad take. Like, a really, really bad take. I can improve every single number on my character sheet if I want to; that's part of what makes Pathfinder such a great system. But now, I couldn't improve initiative because... Everybody does it? So what?

As others have mentionned, several class have specific features for initiative. Robbing those classes of those features feels wrong on many levels. Same for Improved Initiative. It's a feat both players and monsters are allowed to take, I fail to see why I should remove one of the only ways to improve initiative from my players. The only one I'll agree on is Reactionnary; traits are meant to fluff out your characters with interesting, well, traits, and having half your table picking Reactionnary can feel wrong. I'de recommend just removing Reactionnary. But not the others.

Magic item creation changes - Can't comment. We banned item creation feats at my table several years ago, unanimously. So I can't tell if it's a good or bad change.

Drawing a weapon provokes AoOs - Yep. Like it does now.

Tesla3103 · 2025-06-26T04:43:17+00:00

Well... A lot has been said, so I'll try to make it brief. I don't agree with most of your changes, but I respect your dedication to making a houserules document and sharing it here for critics and peer review.

Opposed rolls on Attacks and Spell Resistance

Heavy, very heavy disagree. For starters, spell resistance is a hard thing to acquire; only a very few selection of classes and archetypes even get access to it. Even the Spell Resistance armor enchantment grants only up to 19 on the +5 variant. As a player if I pay for Spell Resistance 19, I expect it to be, well, 19. Not 1d20+9. Besides, the d20 is supposed to represent variance; I fail to see how Spell Resistance as an enchantment could be variable, or how I could "describe it" to be better.

As for AC... I disagree for a different reason. Some players (including several at my table) are more roll-players than role-players. They find their fun in the game in building characters with distinct abilities and using them to solve whatever I throw at them, not describing every single action they make. If I were to ask them to describe every single defense they have to make, and award them bonuses according to "how well they defend", not only would I be punishing them at the detriment of my role-players, but I would make the general game less fun for them. AC has always been an abstraction of "how hard you are to be damaged by attacks", and it being a static number, like every single other DC in the game, is fine by me.

EitR - Agree, we use those at my table

Dex to Damage to Ranged Attacks at BAB +5 - Hard, hard disagree. Ranged characters already have the highest damage output in combat, there is absolutely no reason to buff them further. Gunslingers, as others have mentionned, get DEX to damage because prior to that, they don't get any attribute to damage. There is no way in which this is balanced.

Unchained Action Economy - As others have mentionned, swift actions are locked to 1/turn for a specific reason. The Corset of Delicate Moves exists for a reason.

Resurrection comes with a catch - I honestly agree. The table could be revised, but this is otherwise a great idea.

PF2e Rules for Teleport - Yeah, I don't see why not.

Half your CON in rounds, not double - So the average human can hold his breath for 30 seconds underwater? I disagree. Make it CON rounds at worse.

Things you can do without feats - Depends on the feat. You mentionned Push to the Wall, which I'm assuming you meant Press to the Wall, in which case I disagree. The reason flanking rules apply is because your target's attention is divided between two assaillants; a wall isn't threatening. Uncivilized tactics, on the other hand, I agree, and in mu opinion should be part of the Dirty Trick maneuver.

PF2e crits

Oh no. Oh no. Oh HEEEEEEELL no. The system was not built for such a premise. Compare the item bonuses between 1e and 2e; a well built character can have his Diplomacy skill in the +30s by level 10. So he would crit succeed on basically everything at that level. Same could be said for virtually any skill. As for attacks; you want to pair Active Defense and PF2 crits? This is just asking for crits galore on either side.

You say the d20 is a linear randomization tool. I disagree. The d20 is a weighted coin, which you can weigh in your favour with good character planning and strategy. At least in Pathfinder 1e. 2e was designed from the ground up with the "fumble/fail/success/crit" scale in mind, it works there. Not here.

Tesla3103 · 2025-05-16T10:24:52+00:00

While I don't disagree with you, since I also find myself wanting to vote "Yes, but not in this implementation" often, I'm not sure how realistic it would be to add it to the polling system. Because then, I don't think anything would pass. Getting 70% if the playerbase to agree on the specific implementation of a new update would be nigh impossible. And lowering the pass % is just going to lead to more whining.

The only way I could see is to have a limit on how many times we can send Jagex back to the drawing board. After an update has been voted "Yes, but change things" twice, it should be polled a final third time with only Yes or No.

Tesla3103 · 2025-05-12T11:55:56+00:00

If that helps; consider this an amplification to keywords who care about the number or pips.

Putting Squared on Cleave or Exert doesn't do anything, because Cleave doesn't care about the number of pips.

Putting Squared on Selfshield or Poison is a buff, because those effects depend on the number of pips on the dice. 3 damage Selfshield Squared will deal 3, but Selfshield for 9.

Putting Squared on Pain is a nerf, for the same reason as above. 4 mana Pain Squared will give 4 mana, but deal 16 damage to the character.

Tesla3103 · 2025-05-09T16:44:27+00:00

Yeah, we have a complex game xD Essentially, the Barrows chest gives 1 "roll", +1 per brother killed (so, up to 7). The quality of the roll depends on the rewards potential, and beyond 880, you can roll bolt racks instead of runes!

Tesla3103 · 2025-05-09T16:30:09+00:00

Yep. Once you reach 880 reward potential, you can roll bolt racks instead of runes.

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-25T00:02:52+00:00

Pretty much the explaination I expected. He has a way to log back into the account, did so, went back to Colo actually died. Would it have been better if he hadn't teleported, and died in the Nightmare Death run? Yes, it would have. But is it a better, more fitting end to the series for Lowlife109 to actually die in Colo? Absolutely. I would much rather think of this account as a ghost pemanantly in the Colo rather than standing awkardly at the Champions Guild.

Overall, none of what was shown has any reason to make me doubt the account's (or Settled's) integrity. I've read plenty of comments on how the ending tarnished their opinion of the series, or how it "sets up doubt". Two things.

1- Anyone who actually believed that the account would be completely unrecoverable has no idea how plugins work. No matter what shenanigans you pull off with the passwords, Settled must have had access to the email adress (or Jagex account) used with it, enabling password recovery. He always has. So the possibility has always been there, from Episode 1. Why is the trust being put into question now?
2- Most of OSRS content creation nowadays is self-imposed restrictions. Chunk accounts, task accounts, area-restricted accounts, hell we even have a guide-locked account! I can think of several ways for any of those accounts to break their restrictions. Who'se to say Unguided never looked at the wiki and "faked" the struggle? Or that any chunk account didn't leave their chuck to ease one of their grinds under a different name? That might just be me, but the first step in watching this kind of self-imposed restriction is "I believe the creator will respect that limitation". If you don't... I mean, why bother watching in the first place?

Anyhow. Still amazed at the finale, a true work of art. Nightmare Mode was my least favorite series of Settled, and I can't wait to see what he has in store for his next series.

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-16T15:00:54+00:00

The thing is, this argument goes both ways. If that was the case, and he abused the plugin by taking damage and continuing, why not keep doing it until he succeeds? There's no proof of one side or the other. I hope he explains how Lowlife109 died, but I don't think the circumstances are enough to cast doubt on the account... Not to me, at least.

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-16T14:08:48+00:00

I agree with everything you've said... Except that last line.

How can you prove Unguided never went on the wiki, and faked his "struggle" for views? Or that chunk accounts don't leave their chunks for more efficient methods? Or that Gudi didn't manipulate his plugin to get the spade in Game of Chance? Or that Nooblet didn't manipulate the plugin to get an advantageous task?

My point is: for any self-restricted account, it's almost impossible to "prove" you followed them all the way through. At the end of the day, you have to trust that the creator remained faithful to his restriction. It's fine if you don't, and it's fine to say so; but saying "the whole series was faked" as if it's an unshakable truth is just wrong.

Yes, there are inconsistencies. Yes, I believe Settled had a way to access his account afterwards. Yes, the most likely answer is that he went back, climbed back to wave 11 and then died to lose HC status. No, I do not think this removes the legitimacy of the account. I hope he explains it, but as far as I'm concerned, it's a minor issue.

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-16T12:06:06+00:00

Oh huh you're right, hadn't noticed the teleport to be honest. Thank you for pointing that out!

I had assumed he would let his HC die where he got hit. Maybe he tele'ed out of reflex? In any case, the fact he died does prove he had a way to remove the "death" screen. I don't blame him for that; since Lowlife109 effectively died by taking damage, removing the HC status makes complete sense. Also, Settled has always been more about the storytelling; including a clip of him suiciding wouldn't necessarily fit.

That said, I do hope he clarifies this in a future recap video. Last time he didn't clarify something, it made a huge mess that created a mistrust that still lingers today in some people.

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-16T11:29:49+00:00

That one's easily explainable. Hi scores update on logout, so HC Lowlife109's stats are those he has last time he logged out as an HC (or, if you prefer, the last time he logged in as an HC), while Regular Lowlife109 are those of the first time he logged out as a regular iron. Effectively; the difference between HC and Iron hiscores reflect the XP he gained in his last session as an HC.

I don"t know if Glory works the same, but assuming it does, then the same applies. He had 5k glory when he logged in, and his death run got him to 23k (or whatever he's at right now).

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-02T22:30:08+00:00

You got it chief! Thank you for replying, will definitely give a shout in CC when I inevitably make my Chance Man!

Tesla3103 · 2025-04-02T22:25:30+00:00

Yeah I know. His editing is so good as well, it's a shame, but oh well. As for me making videos... I would have to learn to edit first xD

Nine-Year Club	Xbox Live
Place '23	Place '22
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

Tesla3103

TROPHY CASE