• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle


  • From the campaigns I’ve DMed, I’ve gone for a bit of an in-between. My primary focus is to have a fun, shared narrative. I’ll always let players do stupid things that get them into grave danger. But at most, I’ll usually only ever kill a few of the PCs.

    If they act carefully, they can avoid getting into that situation all together. If they act stupid, they may have some deaths on their hands, but never a TPK. I don’t want that kind of narrative dead end.

    The other thing, is that I will never put the players in such a situation in which there isn’t a way out of it. Usually this comes down to abusing the rule of cool a bit. Maybe they use a well aimed shatter to collapse a cave and separate themselves from their enemies. Maybe they jump down the cliff into the river below. Maybe the enemies have taken such a beating themselves that they find they aren’t willing to fight to the death.



  • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.worldtoRPGMemes @ttrpg.networkFight me on it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I feel like the bigger reason to have evil races is to have a more or less ever present challenge and point of conflict. For instance, the underdark is horrible place to be, in large part due to the drow. Their presence and general alignment of evil makes the setting dangerous and interesting. Is this town safe? Have the drow been messing about assassinating local leaders? Should we help this group by liberating them from slavery from the drow?

    It’s almost like their species is in of itself a character, with this species sized character being evil. Having an entire species be generally evil gives the world more scale than a single evil character would. But yes, an individual villain needs more than just their evil race to be interesting.




  • I’m very sorry for your bad user experience! What you’ve described, sounds like some basic user errors which would’ve been easily solved by sticking to good modeling practices

    The most egregious issue I had was in trying to loft between two faces, such that the curve between the faces was a 3D one.

    In Fusion360, it’s pretty damn simple, you click the first face, ctrl+ click the second, then select the loft option. Then it’s pretty much done.

    In FreeCad/Ondsel, in trying to look up a tutorial to see how such an operation is normally done, the only tutorial that got me remotely close was this one.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv53D00KdGQ

    Following the tutorial would lead to errors, crashes, and even if it had worked, it is such a painful way to do this operation.

    So this isn’t simply an issue with bad modeling practices. Maybe it’s a terrible tutorial and there is better options out there. But the ease in which it is possible to do this task in Fusion360 should be the gold standard.


  • They fundamentally solve the Topo-Naming-Problem I propose to try again after the next release.

    I’m not super familiar with that problem, as it has been a minute. But I might try to give it another go at some point.

    I don`t know the #Onsel fork. In what way does it differ from #Freecad or Freecad from #realthunder?

    From a user perspective, it has a much more friendly UI in my opinion. When you click on an object, it displays a list of all possible actions you can take with said object. That to me was a huge upgrade over the base FreeCad implementation.