Spare me. Some of the Usual Suspects have discovered ChatGPT for essays.I'm interested -- how hard is it to spot them?
Because in spite of everyone believing that ChatGPT is the next miracle solution to everything, its technical writing, er, leaves much to be desired.
It absolutely loves to state utter nonsense as absolute fact when you get into engineering.
I blame sci-fi.
One of our district admins sent us a link to a site that's designed to detect AI-generated writing, so pretty easy. Just the hassle of pasting the text into it first.
And I looked at the other kids' as a baseline - the two I wrote up? 80+% AI-generated. The highest anyone else hit was 20%, and this was from a kid with a solid writing style that I could see the bot cribbing from, plus I watched them actually use classtime to work on the paper.
And yeah, the AI-papers were...not good.
interesting. Huh.
Not sure about ai stuff, it isn't my field. I have vivid memories of people in the photography field I was tangentially related to/working with at the time losing their s#*% over digital photography and a few in the field of oil painting losing their s!+# in turn over computer drawing(not sure what the actual name is). Not sure where this is all going to go, or even what people have in mind with respect to it.
I however, have lost my clothes.
Instagram is getting flooded with AI models.
You can tell they aren't real people because they they all have roughly the same proportions, usually blonde, and have out of focus or super generic backgrounds and the comments are turned off.
Some of them even say they are AI generated on their homepage (or whatever Instagram calls it).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's pretty funny -- Scint started an AI discussion yesterday afternoon, and this morning I got a global email from Global Megacorporation that we are NOT allowed to use ChatGPT in any of our work.
Is Scint secretly one of my executives?
Hmm...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's pretty funny -- Scint started an AI discussion yesterday afternoon, and this morning I got a global email from Global Megacorporation that we are NOT allowed to use ChatGPT in any of our work.
Is Scint secretly one of my executives?
Hmm...
I wish I got paid that much.
I wish I got paid that much.That's pretty funny -- Scint started an AI discussion yesterday afternoon, and this morning I got a global email from Global Megacorporation that we are NOT allowed to use ChatGPT in any of our work.
Is Scint secretly one of my executives?
Hmm...
I wish I got paid 1/10th that much...
I wish I got paid 1/10th that much...I wish I got paid that much.That's pretty funny -- Scint started an AI discussion yesterday afternoon, and this morning I got a global email from Global Megacorporation that we are NOT allowed to use ChatGPT in any of our work.
Is Scint secretly one of my executives?
Hmm...
I will accept no less than 3/10ths.
I however, have lost my clothes.
....what were you doing the last time you saw them?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I however, have lost my clothes.....what were you doing the last time you saw them?
Streaking.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And this is my homebrew group: Four 10th-level PCs decided they were going to take on an ancient blue dragon (CR18).
So they recruited some higher-level NPCs, used Rock to Mud to fall through his ceiling 80' onto his floor into a giant mound of limbs and mud, Wished him into a Force Cage, and proceeded to goon him to death in a truly undignified manner.
As Impus Minor (the planner of the spectacle) said, "Betcha never saw a dragon get defeated that way before, huh, Dad?"
Three guesses why they removed touch AC in 2nd edition.
Love touch AC as an idea, don't care for a class that specializes in unique weapon that uses touch ac exclusively.
Three guesses why they removed touch AC in 2nd edition.
Probably the same reason I ignore it for 1st edition, It's stupid.
I was trying to step carefully around that idea but I'm not a fan of how gunslingers(and swashbucklers) work in PF1(not sure about 2) because of the approach taken in making new classes and systems to address issues in the game as opposed to simply addressing those issues in general. Moreover gunslingers specifically create an issue in game where it is very much like what one would expect with a gun in a fantasy setting- it's a gun in a knife fight. It very much appeals to people who want to pull an indy- at least until they run out of ammo. I'm not saying there shouldn't be guns at all, but I don't care for the approach taken here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like Gunslingers, personally. For 2 reasons: 1) I don't like guns in my fantasy. Can't explain it. Just don't. 2) Much like in reality, once guns become available, it doesn't make much sense to use any other weapons. They just take over.
If I want guns, I'll play scifi or modern. Not fantasy.
Well guns and plate armor existed side by side for a few centuries. For an adventurer, plate armor could easily have worked well past the point where it became economical to outfit large chunks of your army with it.
The thing is, you can TELL me that the gunslinger is using ye olde flintelocke gunne comparable with a historical wheel lock or flint lock, but what you show me is someone making 6 shots a round like yosemite sam, which plays at least like a revolver if not a tech 9 pistol. If the gun worked like 7th sea where its a powerful desperation move it might be tolerable.
I also think Swashbucklers are too strong. Adding their level to damage? WTF!
I like that mechanic actually and have used it in some homebrew stuff. But it isn't limited to one class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like Gunslingers, personally. For 2 reasons: 1) I don't like guns in my fantasy. Can't explain it. Just don't. 2) Much like in reality, once guns become available, it doesn't make much sense to use any other weapons. They just take over.
If I want guns, I'll play scifi or modern. Not fantasy.
Well guns and plate armor existed side by side for a few centuries. For an adventurer, plate armor could easily have worked well past the point where it became economical to outfit large chunks of your army with it.
The thing is, you can TELL me that the gunslinger is using ye olde flintelocke gunne comparable with a historical wheel lock or flint lock, but what you show me is someone making 6 shots a round like yosemite sam, which plays at least like a revolver if not a tech 9 pistol. If the gun worked like 7th sea where its a powerful desperation move it might be tolerable.
I do like 7th sea approach to firearms. I personally would prefer they work like single use wands with a single check to avoid mishaps and a lot of damage with an attack to touch ac.
For me, the issue in any system is "one stat wonder" builds: Any system where you can dump all of your stats down to allowed minimums, pump one stat into the stratosphere, and that makes you an extremely effective build is a problem.
So I like PF1 clerics where their spells depend on Wisdom but their channeling depends on Charisma because it forces at least a little balance. I despise dexterity-to-damage builds because then your finesse melee or ranged fighters get initiative, to hit, damage, and armor class all from a single stat. And in the original PF1 rules dex-to-damage was verboten.
But enough players complained that the rule set was hampering their builds that dex-to-damage became common, and you've got one stat wonders again and it detracts from more balanced builds, which, in my opinion, are far more interesting.
EDIT: And it's intrinsic to many, if not most, gaming systems. I loved Runequest 2, but once you knew the rules every starting character had an INT of at least 18, because if you didn't have an INT of 18 or over you weren't worth playing. So the world was full of frail geniuses who then undertook massive physical regimens to become decent fighters. It was ridiculous.
Well, the one tip of the hat I'll give is to the Fake Russian. He loves to play wizards where he dump stats everything, then spends all his points first on INT and then on DEX.
And he roleplays this obnoxious, whiny, weak, "Can you carry this for me? Can you help me up the stairs? Oh, well, you can't figure that out because you're too stupid to understand it," wizard magnificently.
But it's still a cheese build, and in combat he's a monster. Of course. Because beyond INT and DEX, wizards don't need any other stats...
The other "shortcoming" of Pathfinder (and many players find this one of its best features, so it's definitely a, "How you like to play," thing) is the staggering variety of bonuses, all of which stack with every other kind.
So in its human form, the dragon had an AC of 41, impossible for a 10th-level, 20 Dex ranger to hit with their measly +15 attack bonus.
In come the buffers:
+2 Competence (Inspire Courage from the bard)
+2 Morale (Heroism from the bard)
+1 Untyped (Haste from the bard)
+2 characteristic enhancement (Cat's Grace from the bard)
+3 weapon enhancement (bane ammunition)
+6 untyped (favored enemy from the ranger)
+1 untyped (point blank shot feat)
The ranger's now at +32 and has gone from, "I might get in one hit every few rounds" to, "I should hit 2-3 times a round."
Some people love this (Impus Minor had a blast whiteboarding out all the buffs). But some people end up sitting at the table watching the rules experts hammer out a mathemtical buff map for 45 minutes.
It all depends on your tastes.
EDIT: I think that's a good metric: When more than half your table wanders off to watch TV or play video games and says, "Let us know when you're done," while the remainder pores over rule books and bonus types to figure out exactly what buffs to cast and in what order, you just might have an issue with excessive buffs and types.
Of course then you have us, who just don't use buffs, at all. Except from magic items or feats, though I don't consider those buffs, per se.
For me, the issue in any system is "one stat wonder" builds: Any system where you can dump all of your stats down to allowed minimums, pump one stat into the stratosphere, and that makes you an extremely effective build is a problem.
So I like PF1 clerics where their spells depend on Wisdom but their channeling depends on Charisma because it forces at least a little balance. I despise dexterity-to-damage builds because then your finesse melee or ranged fighters get initiative, to hit, damage, and armor class all from a single stat. And in the original PF1 rules dex-to-damage was verboten.
But enough players complained that the rule set was hampering their builds that dex-to-damage became common, and you've got one stat wonders again and it detracts from more balanced builds, which, in my opinion, are far more interesting.
EDIT: And it's intrinsic to many, if not most, gaming systems. I loved Runequest 2, but once you knew the rules every starting character had an INT of at least 18, because if you didn't have an INT of 18 or over you weren't worth playing. So the world was full of frail geniuses who then undertook massive physical regimens to become decent fighters. It was ridiculous.
I remember those posts, directly pleading with paizo devs to allow for dex to damage, a ninja base class that could pull off all manner of nonsense, guns guns guns, etc. I will always love PF1, but it will also be a cautionary tale with respect to giving the audience what they asked for. Because I don't think the swashbuckler or gunslinger work in PF1. At all. They are there for a certain type of player to "win" the game via application of unique types of damage in the first 1d3 rounds of combat whilst taking very, very little damage in return, or dying outright in a very unusual circumstance.
The other "shortcoming" of Pathfinder (and many players find this one of its best features, so it's definitely a, "How you like to play," thing) is the staggering variety of bonuses, all of which stack with every other kind.
So in its human form, the dragon had an AC of 41, impossible for a 10th-level, 20 Dex ranger to hit with their measly +15 attack bonus.
In come the buffers:
+2 Competence (Inspire Courage from the bard)
+2 Morale (Heroism from the bard)
+1 Untyped (Haste from the bard)
+2 characteristic enhancement (Cat's Grace from the bard)
+3 weapon enhancement (bane ammunition)
+6 untyped (favored enemy from the ranger)
+1 untyped (point blank shot feat)The ranger's now at +32 and has gone from, "I might get in one hit every few rounds" to, "I should hit 2-3 times a round."
Some people love this (Impus Minor had a blast whiteboarding out all the buffs). But some people end up sitting at the table watching the rules experts hammer out a mathemtical buff map for 45 minutes.
It all depends on your tastes.
EDIT: I think that's a good metric: When more than half your table wanders off to watch TV or play video games and says, "Let us know when you're done," while the remainder pores over rule books and bonus types to figure out exactly what buffs to cast and in what order, you just might have an issue with excessive buffs and types.
Yes, I try to avoid playing with people like that. Lots of bad experiences in the past. No harm or insult intended toward your son, who seems like/is a great guy. But if he goes all robe and wizard hat macro with respect to combat then I am going to mentally check out.
The thing with the swashbuckler is that unless it had dex to damage there was NO reason to have dex. at all. Even less than a fighter in plate, because a swashbucklers AC was their parry/riposte. A dwarf swashmuscler with a pick being a viable build is one thing, being neigh mathematically better than the dex/charisma class ideal is a problem.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Of course then you have us, who just don't use buffs, at all. Except from magic items or feats, though I don't consider those buffs, per se.
Or those of us that only use buffs that we don't have to recalculate every combat. Stacking daily buffs and having the calculation done once is a lot better than having to do it every round. There's some leeway, especially in the low levels when it's just remembering if bless has been cast or not.
I'm not huge buff guy. I'm also not into buffs in general. I get that it's a major part of the game but it leads to a lot of MAD issues with "boss" fights and similar. I know for Freehold! I worked a lot on making changes to weapons and the way some spells worked, but I didn't look at buffs. Maybe its time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
5e had the really great idea of "flattening" all the buffs: Eliminate all stacking so you're stuck with a +1 to +5 (or +3 in 5e). I'd really love to see this concept implemented well. 5e is not that system.
But overall I loved 5e for the idea that an armor class of 20 at 1st level was perfectly possible with plate mail and shield, but an armor class of 30 at level 20 was virtually unheard-of. So everything got flattened out from 12-60 (starting wizard to fully-equipped tank) to 12-30.
Unfortunately, it was a ham-handed, poorly-done attempt at a system, with lots of old-school spells providing staggering bonuses (Shield gave a +5 to AC as a reaction after you knew you'd been hit).
Personally, I'd like to see a 3d6 or 4d6 system so you get a nice rolling curve and the extremes really are extremes, individual buff spells (one spell gives +1 to +5 to To Hit, a different spell gives +1 to +5 to Damage), and otherwise a great deal of separation and simplification of to hit, damage, armor class, and saves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like Gunslingers, personally. For 2 reasons: 1) I don't like guns in my fantasy. Can't explain it. Just don't. 2) Much like in reality, once guns become available, it doesn't make much sense to use any other weapons. They just take over.
If I want guns, I'll play scifi or modern. Not fantasy.
Well guns and plate armor existed side by side for a few centuries. For an adventurer, plate armor could easily have worked well past the point where it became economical to outfit large chunks of your army with it.
The thing is, you can TELL me that the gunslinger is using ye olde flintelocke gunne comparable with a historical wheel lock or flint lock, but what you show me is someone making 6 shots a round like yosemite sam, which plays at least like a revolver if not a tech 9 pistol. If the gun worked like 7th sea where its a powerful desperation move it might be tolerable.
Yep! I'm very fond of the Renaissance/Early Modern era, and science fantasy, so am fine with guns in my fantasy, but they should be a pretty suboptimal choice unless there are loads of you, with a nice wagon train full of ammo, and some pikemen to protect you while you reload.
I like the swashbuckler as a concept, too (for the same reason), but have never played one. We have one in our PF2 group at present - he's easily thwarted if his opponent is immune to precision damage, but can really deal out damage if not.
Speaking of other systems:
Fria Ligan releases new license for Year Zero Engine and Dragonbone
Much like in reality, once guns become available, it doesn't make much sense to use any other weapons. They just take over.
Ever played GreedFall?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Three guesses why they removed touch AC in 2nd edition.Probably the same reason I ignore it for 1st edition, It's stupid.
I'm getting to the point where I don't really want to play Pathfinder just because there are so many things that don't make any sense, and the reason they're there is because that's how it worked in 3e, which is in turn based on earlier editions of D&D. It's turtles all the way down.
For buffs insanity, at origins I played at the high level hard mode table for gallowspire. I had a ratfolk brown furred transmuter. Their schtick is they can use self only buffs on other people and they can increase the effectiveness of those buffs (So.. a +4 strength alter self on the fighter and the like)
Our tables collapsed from 2 to 1 at the last minute, so we didn't get a chance to work it out before hand. The paladin was on my right so he got most of the buffs, he was doing the rolling and the person on HIS right was helping him with the math. All. of the math... there was a pamphlet entitled "I'm a WHAT?" and a tesseract involved.
But damned if that wasn't when we NEEDED all of the buffs. If there was ever an occasion that said "bring all the cheese you're gonna need it..."
Also it was pretty cool to see the pouncing paladin pony person* turn on smite and absolutely blend their way through the dungeon
*we turned him into a tikbalang
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, today's the day when I find out whether the "get your butts back to the office" mandate being embraced by tech companies worldwide applies to me.
To say I am distracted is an understatement.
And yes, if they're determined to force me back into the office, I'll file for a transfer to another department that's been trying to poach me for 3 years now and has promised permanent WFH as a perk if I transfer.
As I think I posted before, my Executive Vice President's approach of, "Go back to what you were doing pre-COVID," is 100% reasonable.
My Senior Vice President's modification of that rule to, "It doesn't matter if you've been working from home for 15 years and have a full studio set up at home for the work you do, get to the office and get into a cubicle for no discernible business reason," isn't.
(He was really emphatic. "It doesn't matter if you were working from home before COVID (I was, for 12 years). It doesn't matter if you don't have any teammates within 1000 miles of you (I don't). It doesn't matter if no one in our entire division is at the office you'll be going do (they aren't). It's important for you to be in the office, so get your butts in there.")
Which is execspeak for, "I'm a petty dictator and I want to re-assert control over your petty little lives."
I'm too old for this crap.
OK, our exceptions go through our Vice President (yes, my reporting hierarchy is NobodysHome --> Manager --> Director --> Vice President --> Senior Vice President --> Executive Vice President, so we have a LOT of Vice Presidents). And our Vice President's entire attitude is, "Quality of life for my reports is my #1 concern," so she's been quietly OK'ing every exception that arises.
Things look good... unless SVP notices the staggering number of exceptions under our VP...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Senior Vice President is actually Junior Vice President to Executive Vice President?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Senior Vice President is actually Junior Vice President to Executive Vice President?
I don't know. I'm not a vice president. :-D
But seriously, if my VP's organization is anything to go by, we must have around 200 VPs in the company. That's a lot of VPs!
Jesus. That's a lot.
Senior Vice President is actually Junior Vice President to Executive Vice President?I don't know. I'm not a vice president. :-D
But seriously, if my VP's organization is anything to go by, we must have around 200 VPs in the company. That's a lot of VPs!
Sounds like the same general structure from the MegaCorp I used to work at. 200 might be low.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
yep. it's just like the Eastern European nesting dolls:
"LOOK!! ANOTHER executive vice president of communications coordination administration!"
just like lembas bread.
my employer's admin structure is exactly the same.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, today's the day when I find out whether the "get your butts back to the office" mandate being embraced by tech companies worldwide applies to me.
Have you considered claiming the title of vice president of optimization actualization management? you'll probably be retired before he can fact check you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you considered claiming the title of vice president of optimization actualization management? you'll probably be retired before he can fact check you.Well, today's the day when I find out whether the "get your butts back to the office" mandate being embraced by tech companies worldwide applies to me.
Somehow they don't let me adjust my salary accordingly or I'd go for it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
yep. it's just like the Eastern European nesting dolls:
"LOOK!! ANOTHER executive vice president of communications coordination administration!"
just like lembas bread.
my employer's admin structure is exactly the same.
What really gets to me is what this means about just how much money one of us peons needs to generate for the company.
I'm in a revenue-generating position: The content I build is sold, so technically I make money for the company.
My full reporting hierarchy is:
Me
Manager
Director
Vice President
Senior Vice President
Executive Vice President
Chief Technical Officer (yep. I don't report to the CEO)
So if you think about it, I've got to generate enough revenue for six additional people, all of whom make substantially more than I do, yet none of whom produce revenue-generating product.
It's a pyramid scheme, through and through.