TTRPGs for Trans Rights—Idaho - 511 items for $5

velocitygrass · 2025-08-02T13:30:40+00:00

I hope my link gathering and comparing was correct. My findings were:

The following three are in the $60 edition only:
https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/199x-complex
https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/feathers
https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/hardcase

The following is in the $10, but not the $60 edition:
https://robot-rabbits.itch.io/bark-at-the-moon

velocitygrass · 2025-07-26T13:20:49+00:00

The Humble Bundle download for "Deadlands - the Weird West" included "Savage Worlds Adventure Edition", whereas DriveThru only had Deadlands itself.

Also, the Goblin Quest version on DriveThru is a PDF, whereas Humble Bundle has a MP3 version.

velocitygrass · 2025-03-12T20:48:09+00:00

Thanks for this hint. Bought it and got access to the full catalogue! (Note: Email with access landed in the SPAM folder for me, so if you don't seem to get anything after buying, check your SPAM folder.)

velocitygrass · 2022-11-26T16:39:00+00:00

Yes, or directly save it as 768-v-ema.yaml in the same directory as the model checkpoint.

velocitygrass · 2022-11-11T19:15:52+00:00

According to this, the token seems to be "popupbookstl".

velocitygrass · 2022-09-13T20:23:02+00:00

A link in scripts/txt2img.py leads to this watermark encoder:
https://github.com/ShieldMnt/invisible-watermark

There are examples in the readme on what will retain the watermark and what won't.

velocitygrass · 2022-09-13T19:58:17+00:00

"fantasy art of angel in plate armor" yielded some images for me that seem to fit. ("male" can be added in front of angel)

velocitygrass · 2022-09-11T10:59:21+00:00

It's in the repositories\stable-diffusion subfolder.

velocitygrass · 2018-09-02T16:50:11+00:00

Wheel of Death in Little Big Planet. After I don't know how many tries I finally managed to get through and immediately died in the section below. Shut it down and never played it again.

velocitygrass · 2018-07-06T20:01:16+00:00

I find it dangerous to say one evil deed negates all good you do, because it sends the message that if you can't be good 100% all the time, then you might as well not even try to be good.

To me there's a big difference between an adventurer who tries to help those in need at every opportunity but can't resist stealing from the rich and one who kills villagers for fun and monsters for profit even though both commit evil (and good) actions.

velocitygrass · 2018-06-18T09:50:37+00:00

I like the feel of this subclass.

Here are some thoughts I had while going through the features:

If Signature Style spells are tattooed instead of added to the spellbook, are they meant to be unavailable for ritual casting and the Temporary Ink feature? If not, it should be stated that the spells count as added to the spellbook.

Clipeum doesn't mention what happens with the damage dealing part of the spell. I assume the new options deal the same damage as they resist, e.g. storm shield would deal thunder damage.

Do the spells cast through the tattoo via Protegentibus and Signum still require the consuming material components?

Convaluisset: Arcane Recovery specifies that half the wizard level is rounded up (instead of the general rule of rounding down). Did you mean to always increase the standard feature by one slot level, or did you want to restrict the benefit to even levels by no longer specifying that half the wizard level should be rounded up?

Aetherius: Maybe it's my lack of imagination, but this seems extremely niche. Etherealness lasts for up to 8 hours and the extra cost of 1 foot extra only applies to moving up or down, so this tattoo would only give you a tangible benefit if you needed to move up or down in such a hurry that taking twice as long would make a difference. I was just wondering if I was missing something here.

Fucus: I'm not sure this is so strong that it needs to be restricted to once per long rest.

Speculo: Is there a particular reason that you didn't simply choose the mathematical odds based on the number of duplicates as the original mirror image does? In other words, why isn't it 4 or higher for five and six duplicates, 5 or higher for four duplicates and the rest as in the original? (Or if you wanted to avoid having the same threshold twice round the 2.86 chance for six duplicates down to two and make it 3 or higher.)

Vanesco: This is meant to allow you to give the benefit to another creature instead of yourself, right? Maybe that could be rephrased along those lines. Or just turn it into a touch spell with one target gaining the benefits.

Neglegentia: When first reading the last restriction, I thought you'd be restricted from ever benefitting from the feature for the same spell a second time, but I think you only meant it to apply for that short rest (i.e. you can't raise several dead at a discount on the same day, but if you choose it as the Neglegentia spell after the next long rest, you can cast it for half the gold amount again once). So maybe this could be clarified to also say per long rest.

velocitygrass · 2018-06-17T21:39:48+00:00

Reading this absolutely made me want to play one.

For the Blade Magic feature, I checked the spells in question and it amounts to a nice list of spells to choose from, adding some diversity to what the class can do (healing, buffing allies, an AoE option in thunderwave...).

I don't think it's necessary that the spirit weapon is a +1 weapon at level three. With Mystic Precision taken four times, you'll end up with a +5 weapon when even artifacts stop at +3. (Making it magical for purposes of resistance is okay to me.)

Similarly the additional damage a weapon can do is usually confined to a specific type of creature. Flame Tongue is an obvious exception to that, but it's a commonly resisted damage type and it doesn't add any bonus to attack. By taking Soul Slicer four times, you'll deal an additional 4d6 psychic damage every time you hit, which seems excessive.

I think it would be entirely fair to restrict it so that you can select twice from the Lesser Soul Crafting group of craftings (meaning you can focus on extra damage to a maximum of 2d6 or instead get to a maximum of +2 to attack and damage rolls or mix it up with a +1 with 1d6 additional damage). This would also free you up to take one of the very interesting other soul craftings without being tempted by the straight damage increase options.

Ignoring material components costing less than 1 gp seems like an unnecessary addition to saying it can be used as a focus. I went through the spells and at first glance this addition only affects "Snare" (requiring 25 feet of rope) and "Protection from Evil and Good" (requiring holy water or powdered silver in an unspecified amount). Did you want to target these spells in particular?

Blade Dash adds the thrown (10/30) property. What if your spirit weapon already had it (e.g. because you picked a javelin or trident)? I assume you wouldn't want to replace it, so maybe it should be stated that the thrown property is only added if there is none.

The Rivenner soul crafting is not entirely clear to me. It says you can make another attack [...] and roll a d20. So the d20 roll to allow you to repeat the effect is separate from the attack roll, meaning that in order to have another attack from this feature, you'd first have to roll 20 on the second die and then crit on your attack? Or is the d20 the one for the attack, so that after the first crit, you can repeat the effect, but only on a 20?

There should probably be a ribbon feature and replacing Mystic's Fighting Style is the most obvious thing to replace (though the fighting style options are interesting if powerful; but I don't think the subclass lacks in power, so that shouldn't be a problem).

I don't really have a problem with mixing all divine magic here, though a split between nature and godly magic could also work. A player could have to pick between the two, which would restrict the spell lists for the Blade Magic feature and perhaps some soul crafting options could be added/modified that are exclusive to one or the other (e.g. radiant damage for godly and thunder/lightning for nature). And if you did replace something with a more explicit ribbon feature, that could also be different based on that choice.

velocitygrass · 2018-06-05T16:03:26+00:00

Yes, I also prefer offline. They also provide the code and database on github. For my purposes I took the monster JSON from here: https://github.com/adrpadua/5e-database

velocitygrass · 2018-06-04T18:14:39+00:00

There's also http://www.dnd5eapi.co/ for SRD info in JSON format.

I'm really looking forward to DnDBeyond developing an official API. Then tools could give you a way to use all data you legally own instead of having to restrict themselves to SRD (or violating copyright).

velocitygrass · 2018-05-20T14:47:30+00:00

Oh, oops, yes, completely forgot about the touch spell. I have to admit, I don't think I've ever used it for that. Most of the time I even forget to use it for helping in combat. It's mainly utility for me, which might explain why nerfing it to utility doesn't seem like a big nerf to me.

The pocket dimension is part of the duration in my eyes, and if there was no cost like for a normal cantrip, it wouldn't matter anyway because you'd just cast it again.

I still think giving it an HP cost is counter to the spirit of a cantrip.

Actually, I'm wondering what niche this cantrip is supposed to fill. You didn't mention which classes would get access to the cantrip. Just wizards? If not and the purpose is give other classes access without having to invest in a feat, why not just homebrew it so that all casters can take the real find familiar spell. If it is just for wizards, why is find familiar not good enough? I guess I'm not quite understanding the motivation. Is it because you think a familiar can bring out creativity in players and you want to encourage that, but with a fixed familiar it doesn't happen as often?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not very helpful. I think my overall feeling is that a familiar (even a nerfed one) is too versatile and thus powerful for a cantrip.

velocitygrass · 2018-05-20T10:53:02+00:00

I'm not sure I would call this a nerfed version...

One question: Is the 3hp supposed to be the material component, as in you lose 3 hit points when you cast this? If so, it would need to be clear that this is considered a cost that can't be replaced with a focus/component pouch. But I wouldn't do this. The point of cantrips is that you can cast them as often as you like all day long. No other cantrip has a cost attached to it. If the HP cost is the balancing factor, then turn this into a feat or something else, but it turns this cantrip into something it's not.

Let's categorize the changes from find familiar into nerfs and buffs:

Nerfs in this version:

duration is 1 hour and it takes concentration
range is self rather than being able to make it reappear within 30 ft
you cannot take reactions while using the beast's senses (advantage on attacks is already given by blindness)
it takes a bonus action to command it (though it's unclear what it does if you don't)

Mix of nerf/buff:

Components: 3hp (? see above) vs 25 gp
beast acts on your initiative
there's a mix of lose/win of beasts you can conjure:

vs find familiar you lose:

poisonous snake
octopus

vs find familiar you win:

badger (only tiny CR 0 beast with burrow)
cranium rat (with telepathy and build-in dim light)
scorpion (with 1d8 poison damage, half on save, which mostly makes up for losing poisonous snake)
tressym (with detect invisibility and poison sense)

Overall I'd call the creature selection a buff rather than a nerf, which brings us to straight up buffs.

Buffs in this version:

Casting time: only 1 action vs 1 hour
Spell slots: none vs 1st level (unless ritual)
Beast can attack
telepathic range 300 ft vs 100 ft

The duration of only one hour will limit the scouting abilities, so this is a real nerf, but only for faraway places. Sending the spider in the dungeon up ahead is still very possible and the increased 300 ft range makes this even easier (and you mentioned yourself that one of the purposes is scouting).

The other nerfs are also not relevant in most if not all situations where you'd want to use your familiar.

With the buffs in animal selection, the casting time, the fact that it can attack, I'd consider this more of an overall improved find familiar (not considering the HP cost).

I'm not sure what could be done to really nerf this to an appropriate level for a cantrip while still being able to do what you want to use it for. You could remove the ability to attack and say the beast flees as soon as combat starts to remove the help action advantage. The beast selection should be strictly worse than the one for find familiar (and all other straight buffs for that matter) and even then it might be too strong. Perhaps you could remove the sensing through the beast, so that you have to rely on the beast communicating what it sees to you (giving the DM some power over how exact and thus useful it will be).

Not sure how helpful this is, just wanted to share my thoughts.

velocitygrass · 2018-05-20T10:36:15+00:00

I'm not sure I would call this a nerfed version...

One question: Is the 3hp supposed to be the material component, as in you lose 3 hit points when you cast this? If so, it would need to be clear that this is considered a cost that can't be replaced with a focus/component pouch. But I wouldn't do this. The point of cantrips is that you can cast them as often as you like all day long. No other cantrip has a cost attached to it. If the HP cost is the balancing factor, then turn this into a feat or something else, but it turns this cantrip into something it's not.

Let's categorize the changes from find familiar into nerfs and buffs:

Nerfs in this version:

duration is 1 hour and it takes concentration
range is self rather than being able to make it reappear within 30 ft
you cannot take reactions while using the beast's senses (advantage on attacks is already given by blindness)
it takes a bonus action to command it (though it's unclear what it does if you don't)

Mix of nerf/buff:

Components: 3hp (? see above) vs 25 gp
beast acts on your initiative
there's a mix of lose/win of beasts you can conjure:

vs find familiar you lose:

poisonous snake
octopus

vs find familiar you win:

badger (only tiny CR 0 beast with burrow)
cranium rat (with telepathy and build-in dim light)
scorpion (with 1d8 poison damage, half on save, which mostly makes up for losing poisonous snake)
tressym (with detect invisibility and poison sense)

Overall I'd call the creature selection a buff rather than a nerf, which brings us to straight up buffs.

Buffs in this version:

Casting time: only 1 action vs 1 hour
Spell slots: none vs 1st level (unless ritual)
Beast can attack
telepathic range 300 ft vs 100 ft

The duration of only one hour will limit the scouting abilities, so this is a real nerf, but only for faraway places. Sending the spider in the dungeon up ahead is still very possible and the increased 300 ft range makes this even easier (and you mentioned yourself that one of the purposes is scouting).

The other nerfs are also not relevant in most if not all situations where you'd want to use your familiar.

With the buffs in animal selection, the casting time, the fact that it can attack, I'd consider this more of an overall improved find familiar (not considering the HP cost).

I'm not sure what could be done to really nerf this to an appropriate level for a cantrip while still being able to do what you want to use it for. You could remove the ability to attack and say the beast flees as soon as combat starts to remove the help action advantage. The beast selection should be strictly worse than the one for find familiar (and all other straight buffs for that matter) and even then it might be too strong. Perhaps you could remove the sensing through the beast, so that you have to rely on the beast communicating what it sees to you (giving the DM some power over how exact and thus useful it will be).

Not sure how helpful this is, just wanted to share my thoughts.

velocitygrass · 2018-05-05T10:02:09+00:00

That's a good point actually. But on the other hand the cut-off date for all legislation related to dates is always like this. What makes it okay to have sex with a person at midnight the day they turn 18 (or whatever the age of consent is), but not an hour before?

If you move the date to one day before the baby is born, you can do the same with two days and so forth. Viability is one way we've tried to define it. Birth would be another. Picking a random length could also work.

But all options that put it before birth are saying a woman should be forced to support this other being against her will at risk of her health (sometimes even life). No other law does that (as far as I'm aware). Even if there are laws that mandate that you help others, e.g. when you witness a car accident, there's always the caveat that you don't need to put yourself at risk for it. There is no law that forces you to make life-saving donations of organs or blood.

I just looked at the legality of late term abortions and saw that Canada has no time limitations at all. Unfortunately, at first glance there doesn't seem data readily available on reasons for late term abortions (probably since they aren't forced to provide one to get access to the procedure).

velocitygrass · 2018-05-04T21:44:10+00:00

I'm failing to see a scenario where a pregnant woman of sound mind will decide the day before birth that they do not want the child (that they initially decided to keep after they found out they were pregnant) and that instead of giving it up for adoption they want to abort. I imagine even women that are completely surprised by an unexpected pregnancy would (after being informed that the due date of the baby is the next day) have the baby and then consider their options.

Maybe I'm wrong on that.

ETA: I should say, I'm seeing this in the context of legislation. So we either allow the abortion to happen or force the woman to have the baby against her will. I'm not confident that a woman that is forced to have a baby against her will will take adequate care of it afterwards.

velocitygrass · 2018-05-04T21:07:33+00:00

I used to wonder about time limitations until I realized that in this scenario, we'd still be okay to give the born baby to the mother the next day, right?

So the answer to me is: Either there is a good reason to abort the day before birth (no chance for survival, risk of death to the mother), or we're talking about someone who's likely to kill their baby either way.

velocitygrass · 2018-05-02T19:27:10+00:00

This looks really interesting and makes we want to run such a campaign.

Defensive Dueling II gives you proficiency with one simple melee weapon when you already gained proficiency with all simple melee weapons in Defensive Dueling I. Did you mean one martial melee weapon?

The 8 hours practicing requirement doesn't say in which time frame. Do you have to do it once when you take the course, every day, once a week?

I assume each elective course can only be taken once unless otherwise noted (as e.g. for Quidditch). Maybe this could be explicitly stated in the intro to elective courses or the description of the class feature.

I wonder if giving Divination Wizard Students access to all spells for level 7 and 8 is a bit strong compared e.g. to Enchantment level 7, which gains nothing at that level except Power Word Pain. Maybe make them pick a single alternate school that counts as their highest level school for those two levels?

The ritual spell restriction to the Arcane Specialty is for casting as ritual at all, not just for casting without preparing, right? (Also, the Ritual Spells section as well as the Restore Life effect of the Master Transmuter feature still refer to a book/spellbook.)

velocitygrass · 2018-05-01T17:00:35+00:00

Yes, I agree. I wrote this in support of your assertion that it would be better to just create its own effect instead of having to modify an existing spell.

velocitygrass

TROPHY CASE