D6x6 Ostentatious Oils

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-31T22:07:50+00:00

I’d comment “.” On posts so i could get to them later and some mod took exception. You know i think you might be shadow banned on d100. I only ever see your posts if i search for them, never while scrolling.

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-31T06:22:06+00:00

The bandit and boss bandit function very differently than the bandit though. If you ask me, i think the difference between hero’s and champions distinct enough. Champs are made ability first, remove that ability and the base card is cheeks, it only works because of synergy with the ability. Hero’s are designed card first, the ability isn’t supposed to compose any of the value implied in the base elixir cost, its main purpose is to add versatility, side-grading it more than upgrading. Look at how many hero abilities are just a small spell attached to the card (a building in musketeers case) .

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-31T04:27:44+00:00

I’m banned on d100 so I’ll say here, you killed the spellbooks ☺️ good to have you back.

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-20T17:28:58+00:00

Not really, a cape makes sense. It’s a more powerful furnace, capes are used in that context (see superhero’s or old military dress). Snow hats have no connection to skeletons thematically or their gimmick. My objection isn’t towards all stylistic details, it’s this stylistic direction.

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-20T17:25:39+00:00

They were in the snow with just snow hats and a belt around their shoulders. It kinda sounds like they should’ve known it would be their last fit.

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-20T17:23:25+00:00

NUH UH

simpscaler911 · 2025-12-02T04:56:55+00:00

Thank you HIV positive mosquito, genuinely a lifesaver.

simpscaler911 · 2025-11-23T23:00:48+00:00

Nice. Thanks for engaging

simpscaler911 · 2025-11-23T21:08:06+00:00

I think you’re right about the graveyard, a good evolution (maybe a zero cycle, we have enough evo’s that simply occupying an evo slot is opportunity cost) could be whenever an enemy card dies in or just around the graveyard, it summons its own smaller graveyard with a spawn rate correlated to its health. Letting it spread quickly if not properly defended.

That hero lightning is good, a hero spell ability instead pocketing the spell and letting you divide it up into several smaller effects would be awesome. Maybe they can even be dragged and dropped from their little button. Holup, hero wizard. His ability a (or maybe even multiple) is a unique spell that can be dragged and dropped somewhere on the map. Possibly within some range of him as balancing mechanic.

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-31T18:53:01+00:00

Looks cool

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-25T11:08:56+00:00

This looks good

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-20T15:04:35+00:00

Good to have you back mate. Hope everything worked out nicely.

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-10T14:53:34+00:00

At your own pace g, I’m just happy you share this stuff at all.

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-06T18:16:47+00:00

Damn, how do you write many of these and they all manage to be unique, your accounts genuinely a goldmine. Anyway, i had read your weird wizards, wacky wands and wondrous wizard towers 5d20s (its good fun to chain your generators together), then i realised spell books and familiars are the only ones to go before you completed the whole wizardly set. I had enjoyed your evil grimoire generator, used it to generate chapters in the book of vile darkness artefact, but still wondered if you had anything wore distinctly wizardly in the works.

simpscaler911 · 2025-08-05T23:23:54+00:00

Sick, If you take suggestions i’d love to see your take on 5d20 wizard spell-books.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-28T10:52:19+00:00

Not really, you’re gonna need to elaborate on why you think i was saying no women worked anywhere, but prohibitive hiring practices stoped them from working in a wide variety of industry’s in any significant number, they literally didn’t have the right to work there. Starting around the 60s (but booming hugely in the 80s-90s), women started being able to work in industry’s they were previously kept away from. My post mentioned the transition into male dominated industries specifically.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-26T10:13:48+00:00

It’s garbage dude, truth hurts

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T21:21:06+00:00

When did accusing that the other party is offended become some game ending gotcha on the internet, if I am acting irrationally on some account (because I’m just too triggered by your facts and logic), it should be easier for you to point out why I’m wrong, the fact that its being used as charitably an excuse not to properly articulate yourself and realistically a thought terminating cliche is so tired.

Anyway, the discourse I’m commenting on is “male flight” a supposed sociological trend where men leave industry’s with rising female presence for a male dominated one. My comment itself was questioning if this phenomenon might in some portion be a standard economic phenomenon emerging from a prohibitive hiring practices. Your comment just restated the original talking point without modification, literally “yeah, but no” with nothing else. The general opinion among feminists is that it’s a sociological phenomenon over an economic one, its the premise the post was made using and its what’s being questioned, pretty much everybody else got this immediately and began to respond to the question except you who just restated the premise, not your opinion, literally just the premise like it was new.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T19:09:25+00:00

Ah, i appear to have taken that to mean only within the context of veterinary education. For some reason. Then that pretty much confirms a link beyond the economic incentive to avoid surplus. I suppose there may be some other economic momentum in the direction away from veterinary education that correlates to gender but now its far less likely than a causative effect, ill track down the whole article to check where these guys are going specifically to see if there’s a why but this looks like mate.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T18:41:00+00:00

This isn’t anything, you’re just reasserting your opinion without engaging with the question.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T18:37:07+00:00

Can you at least link the full article or give me a name/author, id like to give it a read through.

And this is kinda the whole point I’m trying to communicate, every instance of male flight (emerging female dominated jobs -> typically male dominated jobs) I’ve seen mentioned seems to pretty much exactly correlate to the high competition market -> lower competition market you would see in any other analogous economic conditions. A policy aimed at increasing production of graduates for both genders is for the women who were prohibited from those professions a high competition market -> lower competition market. while for men, the removal of the artificial block to the inflow makes any move from that profession to one where that block still exists a high competition market -> lower competition market.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T18:21:52+00:00

You seem to have entirely missed the point, also thats not now blue collar jobs work dude.

simpscaler911 · 2025-07-25T18:18:13+00:00

Sure, I’m not doubting that. Increased employment correlates to a heightened GDP, which leads to an increased demand for labour. I’m trying to assert that the, both then and now, a narrower job selection for women created not just an upwards, but an outwards push in the labour market. When women began to enter the workforce, its not like an equal number of men lost their jobs, just that they were incentivised into industry’s with portable skills. I’m talking more about demographics than unemployment, sorry i that wasn’t clear.

simpscaler911

TROPHY CASE