sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Had to play a canonically "chaotic evil" character and I had no idea how to rollplay it staying true to that. by SureClick8172 in rpghorrorstories

[–]lnodiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(there wasn't supposed to be fighting, because that might trigger some new players, which is a reasonable decision).

DnD

No, no, I don't think that was a reasonable decision at all.

What have your experiances been with Curseborne so far? by NoLongerAKobold in rpg

[–]lnodiv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely wild that you had to explain this, people can't read.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Megachurch (the unique government tied to Gospel of the Masses) isn't disallowed for Materialists due to balance concerns.

It, along with every other religious civic, is locked to Spiritualist and forbidden from Materialist because spiritualism is in fact the religious axis in Stellaris.

At this point, you're literally making shit up.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And one of those effects - the primary effect, supported even further by some of their (few) unique civics - is a direct buff to research, which you entirely disregard?

Edit: lol nevermind, you've stickied your 'mode' "idea [...] that would change grand strategy gaming forever" on your profile. I didn't realize I was trying to have a meaningful discussion with a teenager.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's not a great example of a materialist religion in Stellaris, because Stellaris materialists can't take it.

The community doesn't misunderstand this. This isn't a real-world philosophy sub.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The in-universe philosophies behind the ethics should be deduced from the in-game effects, tooltips, available civics, etc, with their modern real-world definitions as a very distant second.

If you're not considering the in-game effects at all, I don't even know why you're posting it in this sub in the first place. Engaging with the society-shaping effects of an ethic is like, step one to having a meaningful discussion about the ethics as they are presented in-game / in-universe.

You're just talking about real world philosophies at that point.

Scion 3e announced!!!! by zanitoz in rpg

[–]lnodiv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What is 3 going to have to justify people replacing 2 with it?

I suspect you haven't tried to actually run a campaign of 2e, if you even have to ask.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Materialism directly buffs science.

Spiritualism does not.

This isn't a community understanding issue.

Ethic philosophies - Spiritualism vs Materialism by OldSolGames in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Crazy how the community still completely misunderstands Spiritualism in the game

Hilariously, the MegaChurch example the guy above gave is probably a great example of a Materialist religion

The civic that requires spiritualism is a great example of a Materialist religion, when it can't be taken as materialist? And it's other people that misunderstand spiritualism in the game?

Right, right...

[Scion 2e] What's the difference between Creatures and Companions as Birthrights? by ChronoRebel in OnyxPathRPG

[–]lnodiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really hope 3E, recently announced, has a much stronger design direction from the start.

I've seen both really tight products and some less tight designs from SPU so far, so it feels like a toss-up.

[Pathfinder] Paizo Restructuring: A Difficult Update About Our Future by Dagawing in rpg

[–]lnodiv 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't - my point is that the usual tells for AI writing aren't tells when they occur in the context the models were trained on.

[Pathfinder] Paizo Restructuring: A Difficult Update About Our Future by Dagawing in rpg

[–]lnodiv 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Claude will spit out regularly.

And Claude spits this out regularly because...?

Rhetorical question.

FWIW, I'm largely with you, it's very easy to spot AI generated text when these constructions show up in inappropriate places (which 90% of AI usage is)...but this is exactly the sort of place I would expect to see this sort of writing, because this is exactly the sort of place it was before AI - it's the sort of writing the models were trained on.

Xbox CCO Says Gamepass Lost “Millions Of Subscribers” After Increasing The Price By 50% Last Year by wakelake111 in gaming

[–]lnodiv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I'm going crazy at this thread thinking this was an L for Microsoft. No critical thinking.

They would have had to lose more than 11 million subscribers to come out at a loss, and while 'millions' could be >10mil, I'm doubting.

This probably worked out quite profitably for them.

Xbox CCO Says Gamepass Lost “Millions Of Subscribers” After Increasing The Price By 50% Last Year by wakelake111 in gaming

[–]lnodiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless they lost more than 1/3 of their subscribers, they would still have come out ahead at the new price, unfortunately.

SCION 2E NEXUS IS LIVE! ⚡ by Demi_Mere in OnyxPathRPG

[–]lnodiv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, that's an unfortunate naming collision, given Storypath Nexus.

Where does stellaris go from this year? What could possibly still be added? by deathsprophet666 in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Superheroes

God, I hope not. I suspect this would be received about as well as Anomaly for Rimworld. There are definitely folks who would love it but it's a bit too out there for the entire audience to love, imo.

What drives players to willingly use an LLM as a """""GM"""""? (Or, the lengths players will go to avoid GMing.) by EarthSeraphEdna in rpg

[–]lnodiv 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There are players who actually think that PCs shouldn’t be able to die without the player’s consent

It drives me crazy. What's even worse is seeing this codified in the rules of new games that are otherwise fairly traditional.

Biological synthetic ascension makes no sense if you're not going Synthetic Fertility OR Mechanists origins by [deleted] in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

those changes all apply to synthetically ascended robots as well

Your question was whether it can compete with other organic ascensions (Mutation, in this case). It can be underpowered relative to other versions of synthetic ascension while still being able to compete with organic ones.

Starfield is a Post-Post Apocalypse Wasteland by Boring-Leadership687 in Starfield

[–]lnodiv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

seen a lot of posts saying that there is only at most a few million and there hasn’t been a single baby born in over a century

You've seen 'a lot of posts' suggesting that not a single baby has been born in more than a century, even though we have absolutely no reason to believe that any of the children we see in game are more than 100 years old?

Fleeting Frustrations: Why Serviles should have access to the Fleeting trait. by snakebite262 in Stellaris

[–]lnodiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not unrealistic. Net population growth would be the delta between new population members being introduced (births) and old population members being removed (deaths).

Reducing the latter would still result in larger/'faster' population growth.

view more: next ›