#3E-Integrity

[talenlee]

3e: Winners and Losers In Lawful Space

Planescape is a silly place.

Dungeons & Dragons is a wholeheartedly silly game, and it’s important to remember that what makes it silly is an expansive growth out of a particular root. It is a tree of many branches but thanks to the way that it encourages people to build their own things on top of it, it has become a sprawling kind of folk narrative and generally accepted consensus material that then a company comes along and tries to augment and supplement. Still, as much as a corporate mind is at the head of what gets published, what gets handed to that corporation is going to derive from the mind of a dork who likes D&D. To that end, D&D’s lore is a constant push-pull between the kinds of nerds who like organising lists and the kind of nerds who like to invent new types of dragons they want to have sex with and they’re all trying to integrate one another’s material because that’s how nerds demonstrate mastery over a topic.

The result is that D&D lore is composed of parts that neatly and smoothly fit together and parts that should be airbrushed on the side of a van, and all subjects exist in a space between those two points, on a spectrum. And nowhere is this more evident than in the way that 2e’s setting Planescape introduced elements that 3rd edition tried to hide.

Planescape, as a setting, exists very close to the ‘airbrushed on a Van’ side of things, and it’s extremely obvious when you look at its roots in 2nd Edition. In this space, much of what makes Planescape Planescape was codified. For those of you unfamiliar, Planescape is a setting made up of the idea of ‘planes’ as distinct, discrete universes with their own rules separated not by time and space, but just by barriers or magical boundaries. You know how Narnia is supposed to work, with the wardrobe? It’s like that, but there are a lot more wardrobes and they all go to different places. Think a sort of multi-level Isekai scheme.

Anyway, it’s a setting with like, multiple whole universe-sized worlds, that may or may not have planets inside them, some of which follow a very narrow set of identifying rules, like the elemental plane of Fire, which is full of Fire, or are just like ‘here, but a bit weird,’ like Bitopia, which is a whole plane that is mirrored vertically at a certain height. If you look up in Bitopia, you see another whole country up there – that’s why it’s called that. Also everyone there is bisexual.

Planescape sought to build out more of that structured universe and then in each structured space, fill it with interesting notions. But the structure is a little odd, in that it’s hard to make an infinite number of chairs organise neatly, someone is always putting out one more where they shouldn’t. That means there are tidy diagrams of the Planar cosmology, and then you look inside any of the bubbles in that diagram and find it’s full of gibberish.

It was in 2e that, as far as I know, we were introduced world-wise, to the characters of the Modrons.

There’s a whole writing form that involves referring to Modrons in deliberately obtuse ways, with Modrons being the individual, plural, categorical, and utility terms for this people, but what you need to know about them is that Modrons are weird lil guys that are made out of a basic geometric shape – pyramid, cube, dodecahedron, all the way up to sphere (or down to sphere, depending on who you ask). They are truly perfect Lil Guys, a byproduct of a plane of true law and order which doesn’t in any way cohere to what humans (the people playing the game) necessarily assume about law.

They make a lot of sense in a storybook kind of way where you don’t need to have big answers for what they are or how they work or even how their philosophical bias towards pure lawfulness works. In the world of 2ed, where sometimes things that sound like they should be well explained, clear rules are kinda yada-yada-yada’d in a space that you might imagine is flavour text, the Modrons left a bunch of questions unanswered and seemingly, that was good. It was good that they were heavily ambiguous because what was the life cycle of ‘an orb?’ Any answer made them less mysterious and pushed them away from the oddness that they represented.

Anyway, 3e was an attempt by a serious company to do serious things and that’s why when they went back to talk about the Creatures That Lived In The Lawful Planes, they came up with the Inevitables.

Inevitables are the demons of small minds, writ large. Literally, the point of an Inevitable is to be a Lawful Neutral version of a Demon, an entity that exists purely based on rules, coalesced out of a world made of rules, and with nothing holding them back from expressing that. Each of the Inevitables is meant to respond to a rule in the universe and then enforce it. They are self-appointed near-immortal construct cops, and they’re meant to oppose things and people that break the rules that they, specifically, are meant to care about.

These rules are completely out of whack, though, because one of them is meant to enforce say, justice, another the inevitability of death and another, the way the desert is a fixed ecosystem that nobody should try and change or interact with. And in that case, there are a bunch of plants that the Inevitables are going to have issues with, that don’t seem to be capable of forming complex political allegiances.

There’s a really interesting distinction between Inevitables and Modrons, to me. Modrons are weird and interesting but also, there’s nothing they can do that answers a question. Inevitables are a fun challenge that’s supposed to be present to oppose players or potentially be recruited into an adventure, but not for too long. But Inevitables, the 3e attempt to populate Lawful Planes with A Kind of Guy, sort of fell apart and are now more of a trivia question while Modrons have endured into 4th and 5th edition.

I don’t think there’s some greater, better reason for it or anything. I don’t think that Inevitables failed because they were Bad Design or something. But I do think that for me, the way that Modrons represented Weirdness was much more interesting than the ways the Inevitables sucked weirdness away with their simple, clear consideration of certain things as being part of natural reality.

After all: Inevitables would hunt down people who extended their lifespans because ‘everyone must die.’ But Inevitables were immortal. That’s a pretty interesting thing to juxtapose and maybe a character could struggle with that.

Or maybe they could make a big speaking trumpet and demand that everyone else refer to them as a Spokesmodron which is, in my opinion, much funnier.

Check it out on PRESS.exe to see it with images and links!

[imsobadatnicknames2]

What's OSR? I've seen you mention it several times in your RPG posts. Is it like a genre of rpg or...?

Hey, sorry I took so long to reply to this lol you probably already just googled it by now.

But like. Anyway.

OSR (Old-School Revival, Old-School Renaissance, and more uncommonly Old-School Rules or Old-School Revolution, no one can really agree on what the R means) is less like a genre and more like a movement or a loosely connected community that seeks to capture the tone, feel and/or playstyle of 70's and 80's fantasy roleplaying games (with a particular emphasis on old-school editions of Dungeons and Dragons, particularly the Basic D&D line but pretty much anything before 3e falls under this umbrella), or at least an idealized version of what people remember those games felt like to play.

There isn't exactly a consensus on what makes a game OSR but here's my personal list of things that I find to be common motifs in OSR game design and GM philosophy. Not every game in the movement features all of these things, but must certainly feature a few of them.

Rulings over rules: most OSR games lack mechanically codified rules for a lot of the actions that in modern D&D (and games influenced by it) would be covered by a skill system. Rather that try to have rules applicable for every situation, these games often have somewhat barebones rules, with the expectation that when a player tries to do something not covered by them the GM will have to make a ruling about it or negotiate a dice roll that feels fair (a common resolution system for this type of situation is d20 roll-under vs a stat that feels relevant, a d6 roll with x-in-6 chance to succeed, or just adjudicating the outcome based on how the player describes their actions)

"The solution is not on your character sheet": Related to the point above, the lack of character skills means that very few problems can be solved by saying "I roll [skill]". E.g. Looking for traps in an OSR game will look less like "I rolled 18 on my perception check" and more like "I poke the flagstones ahead with a stick to check if they're pressure plates" with maybe the GM asking for a roll or a saving throw if you do end up triggering a trap.

High lethality: Characters are squishy, and generally die much more easily. But conversely, character creation is often very quick, so if your character dies you can usually be playing again in minutes as long as there's a decent chance to integrate your new PC into the game.

Lack of emphasis on encounter balance: It's not uncommon for the PCs to find themselves way out of their depth, with encounters where they're almost guaranteed to lose unless they run away or find a creative way to stack the deck in their favor.

Combat as a failure state: Due to the two points above, not every encounter is meant to be fought, as doing so is generally not worth the risk and likely to end up badly. Players a generally better off finding ways to circumvent encounters through sneaking around them, outsmarting them, or out-maneauvering them, fighting only when there's no other option or when they've taken steps to make sure the battle is fought on their terms (e.g. luring enemies into traps or environmental hazards, stuff like that)

Emphasis on inventory and items: As skills, class features and character builds are less significant than in modern D&D (or sometimes outright nonexistent), a large part of the way the players engage with the world instead revolves around what they carry and how they use it. A lot of these games have you randomly roll your starting inventory, and often this will become as much a significant part of your character as your class is, even with seemingly useless clutter items. E.g. a hand mirror can become an invaluable tool for peeping around corners and doorways. This kind of gameplay techncially possible on modern D&D but in OSR games it's often vital.

Gold for XP: somewhat related to the above, in many of these games your XP will be determined by how much treasure you gather, casting players in the role and mindset of trasure hutners, grave robbers, etc.

Situations, not plots: This is more of a GM culture thing than an intrinsic feature of the games, but OSR campaigns will often eschew the long-form GM-authored Epic narrative that has become the norm since the late AD&D 2e era, in favor of a more sandbox-y "here's an initial situation, it's up to you what you do with it" style. This means that you probably won't be getting elaborate scenes plotted out sessions in advance to tie into your backstory and character arc, but it also means increased player agency, casting the GM in the role of less of a plot writer or narrator and more of a referee.

Like I said, these are not universal, and a lot of games that fall under the OSR umbrella will eschew some or most of these (it's very common for a lot of games to drop the gold-for-xp thing in favor of a different reawrd structure), but IMO they're a good baseline for understanding common features of the movement as a whole.

Of course, the OSR movement covers A LOT of different games, which I'd classify in the following categories by how much they deviate from their source of inspiration:

Retroclones are basically recreations of the ruleset of older D&D editions but without the D&D trademark, sometimes with a new coat of paint. E.g. OSRIC and For Gold and Glory are clones of AD&D (1e and 2e respectively); Whitebox and Fantastic Medieval Campaigns are recreations of the original 1974 white box D&D release; Old School Essentials, Basic Fantasy and Labyrinth Lord are clones of the 1981 B/X D&D set. Some of these recreate the original rules as-is, editing the text or reorganizing the information to be clearer but otherwise leaving the meachnics unchanged, while others will make slight rules changes to remove quirks that have come to be considered annoying in hindsight, some of them might mix and match features from different editions, but otherwise they're mostly straight up recreations of old-school D&D releases.

There are games that I would call "old-school compatible", that feature significant enough mechanical changes from old-school D&D to be considered a different game, but try to maintain mechanical compatibility with materials made for it. Games like The Black Hack, Knave, Macchiato Monsters, Dungeon Reavers, Whitehack, etc. play very differently from old-school D&D, and from each other, but you generally can grab any module made for any pre-3e D&D edition and run it with any of them with very little to no effort needed in conversion.

There's a third category that I wouldn't know how to call. Some people call then Nu-OSR or NSR (short for New School revolution) while a small minority of people argue that they aren't really part of the OSR movement but instead their own thing. I've personally taken to calling them "Old School Baroque". These are games that try to replicate different aspects of the tone and feel of old-school fantasy roleplaying games while borrowing few to none mechanics from them and not making any particular attempts to be mechanically compatible. Games like Into the Odd, Mörk Borg, Troika!, a dungeon game, FLEE, DURF, Songbirds, Mausritter, bastards, Cairn, Sledgehammer, and too many more to name. In my opinion this subsection of the OSR space is where it gets interesting, as there's so many different ways people try to recreate that old-school flavor with different mechanics.

(Of course, not everything fits neatly into these, e.g. I would consider stuff like Dungeon Crawl Classics to be somewhere inbetween category 1 and 2, and stuff like GloG or RELIC to be somewhere imbetween categories 2 and 3)

The OSR movement does have its ugly side, as it's to be expected by the fact that a huge part of the driving force behind it is nostalgia. Some people might be in it because it harkens back to a spirit of DIY and player agency that has been lost in traditional fantasy roleplaying games, but it's udneniable that some people are also in it because for them it harkens back to a time before "D&D went woke" when tabletop roleplaying was considered a hobby primarily for and by white men. That being said... generally those types of guys keep to themselves in their own little circlejerk, and it's pretty easy to find OSR spaces that are progressive and have a sinificant number of queer, POC, and marginalized creators.

[thydungeongal]

Hey sorry I was reading through the mythcraft rules you linked (looks cool!) and when I got to the skills section I had to do a double take - I'm curious if you have any thoughts on OGL or other systems with double digit crafting/job skills? Things like profession, craft (variable), etc? I've always struggled with them because either they become incredibly valuable and overused (allowing someone to use profession soldier to determine guard rotations for example) or they're difficult to justify without a hyper specific concept (craft leatherworking). I know they can be used for downtime earning, and some rulesets require them for magical item crafting, but especially these days it feels like that level of granularity is way too much trouble for anyone to keep track of (similar to keeping track of spell components). I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, or if there's something those skills really lend themselves to that I'm missing. Thanks!

I'm ultimately neutral on Crafting and Profession type skill, which is kind of a copout answer because broadly speaking I'm neutral on almost any kinds of rules and mechanics in isolation: whether a game models crafting or working a profession outside of the scope of the rest of the gameplay is ultimately an entirely neutral proposition in and of itself, and ultimately whether it's good or not depends entirely on, well, whether the rules themselves are good and well-integrated into the rest of the gameplay.

In MythCraft's case I feel there might be a bit of a case of the D&D 3e's here, where the game ultimately expects you to play it as an adventure fantasy game but it still provides a wide list of different crafting skills most of which ultimately don't seem to contribute much to the main gameplay.

But that doesn't necessarily mean it's flawed, because it can definitely add color and texture to characters, but it feels a bit unnecessary. Now, a game more concerned with verisimilitude like Mythras and Rolemaster I would think would feel weird without skills like that. But in the context of an adventure fantasy game I think crafting skills work best when they are integral to the adventure game: there for the maintenance of gear, for the sake of creating single-use items (like MythCraft seems to do with some of its crafting skills), and maybe as a source of income for characters during downtime.

Anyway for a game/framework that I feel does crafting and long-term projects in a way that integrates well into the game itself without being too fine-grained, I can't speak highly enough of Blades in the Dark.

(sorry for the kinda messy answer: I'm not even sure if this answers your question properly, but ultimately I don't think there is a single "correct" answer to whether crafting or working a profession are worth modeling in game beyond "it depends on the game.")

[kakita-shisumo]

In which I sound off for much too long about PF2 (and why I like it better than D&D 5E)

So, let me begin with a disclaimer here. I don’t hate 5E and I deeply despise edition warring. I like 5E, I enjoy playing it, and more, I think it’s an incredibly well-designed game, given what its design mandates were. This probably goes without saying but I wanted it on the record. While I will be comparing PF2 to D&D 5E in what follows and I’ve pretty much already spoiled the ending by the post title (that is, PF2 is going to come out ahead in these comparisons most of the time), I don’t want there to be any misunderstanding about my position or intention. My opinions do not constitute an attack on anybody. For that matter, things I might list as weaknesses in 5E or strengths of PF2 might be the exact opposite for other people, depending on what they want from their RPG experience.

As I said before, 5E is an exceedingly well-designed game that does an exceptional job of meeting its design goals. It just so happens that those design goals aren’t quite to my taste.

# A Brief History of the d20 RPG Universe #

I’m going to indulge myself in a little history for a second; some of it might even be relevant later, but for the most part, I just want to cover a little ground about how we got here. By the time the late ‘90s rolled around TSR and its flagship product, Dungeons and Dragons, were in trouble. D&D was well over two decades old by that point and showing its age. New ideas about what RPGs could and even should be had taken over the industry; TSR had finally lost its spot as best-selling RPG publisher to comparative upstart White Wolf and their World of Darkness games; the company even declared bankruptcy in 1997. Times were grim.

That, however, was when another comparative newcomer, Wizards of the Coast, popped up and bought TSR outright. Flush with MtG and Pokemon cash, they were excited to try to revitalize the D&D brand and began development on a new edition of D&D: third edition, releasing in August 2000.

Third edition was an almost literal revolution in D&D’s design, throwing a lot of “sacred cows” out and streamlining everywhere: getting rid of THAC0 and standardizing three kinds of base attack bonus progressions instead; cutting down to three, much more intuitive kinds of saving throws and standardizing them into two kinds of progression; integrating skills and feats into the core rules; creating the concept of prestige classes and expanding the core class selection. And of course, just making it so rolls were standardized as well, using a d20 for basically everything and making it so higher numbers are basically always better.

At the same time, WotC also developed the concept of the Open Gaming License (OGL), based on Open Source coding philosophies. The idea was that the core rules elements of the game could be offered with a free, open license to allow third-parties develop more content for the game than WotC would have the resources to do on their own. That would encourage more sales of the base game and other materials WotC released as well, creating a virtuous cycle of development and growing the industry for everyone.

Well, long story short (too late!), it worked like fucking gangbusters. 3E was explosive. It sold beyond anyone’s expectations, and the OGL fostered a massive cottage industry of third-party developers throwing out adventures, rules material, and even entire new game lines on the backs of the d20 system. A couple years later, 3.5 edition released, updating and streamlining further, and it was even more of a success than 3rd ed was.

At this point, we need turn for a moment to a small magazine publishing company called Paizo Publishing, staffed almost exclusively by former WotC writers and developers who had formed their own company to publish Dungeon and Dragon, the two officially-licensed monthly magazines (remember those?) for D&D. Dungeon focused on rules content, deep dives into new sourcebooks, etc., while Dragon was basically a monthly adventure drop. Both sold well and Paizo was a reasonably profitable company. Everything seemed to be going swimmingly.

Except. In 1999, WotC themselves were bought by board game heavyweight Hasbro, who wanted all that sweet, sweet Magic: the Gathering and Pokemon money. D&D was a tiny part of WotC at the time and the brand was moribund, so Hasbro’s execs hadn’t really cared if the weirdos in the RPG division wanted to mess around with Open Source licensing. It wasn’t like D&D was actually making money anyway… until it was. A lot of money. And suddenly Hasbro saw “their” money walking out the door to other publishers. So in 2007, WotC announced D&D 4th Ed, and unlike 3rd, it would not be released under an open license. Instead, it would be released under a much more restrictive, much more isolationist Gaming System License, which, among other things, prevented any licensee from publishing under the OGL and the GSL at the same time. They also canceled the licenses for Dungeon and Dragon, leaving Paizo Publishing without anything to, well, publish.

At first, Paizo opted to just pivot to adventure publishing under the OGL. Dungeon Magazine had found great success with a series of adventures over several issues that took PCs from 1st all the way to 20th level, something they were calling “Adventure Paths,” so Paizo said, “Well, we can just start publishing those! We’re good at it, the market’s there, it will be great!” And then, roughly four months after Paizo debuted its “Pathfinder Adventure Paths” line, WotC announced 4th Ed and the switch to the GSL. Paizo suddenly had a problem.

4th Ed wasn’t as big a change from 3rd Ed as 3rd Ed had been from AD&D, but it was still a major change, and a lot of 3rd Ed fans were decidedly unimpressed. Paizo’s own developers weren’t too keen on it either. So they made a fateful decision: they were going to use the OGL to essentially rewrite and update D&D 3.5 into an RPG line they owned: the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. It was unprecedented. It was a huge freaking gamble. And it paid off more than anybody ever expected. Within two years Paizo was the second-largest RPG publisher in the industry, only behind WotC itself, and for one quarter late in 4E’s life, even managed to outsell D&D, however briefly. Ten years of gangbuster sales and rules releases followed, including 6 different monster books and something over 30 base classes when it was all said and done. It was good stuff and I played it loyally the whole time.

Eventually, though, time moves on and things have to change. The first thing that changed was 4E was replaced by D&D 5E in 2014, which was deliberately designed to walk back many of the changes in 4E that were so poorly received, keep a few of the better ones that weren’t, and in general make the game much more accessible to new players. It was a phenomenal success, buoyed by a resurgence of D&D in pop culture generally (Stranger Things and Critical Role both having large parts to play), and its dominance in the RPG arena hasn’t been meaningfully challenged since. It also returned to the use of the OGL, and a second boom of third-party publishers appeared and thrived for most of a decade.

The second thing was that PF1 was, itself, showing its age. RPGs have a pretty typical life cycle of editions and Pathfinder was reaching the end of one. It wasn’t much of a surprise, then, when, in 2018, Paizo announced Pathfinder 2nd Ed, which released in 2019 and will serve as the focus of the remainder of this post (yes, it’s taken me 1300 words to actually start doing the thing the post is supposed to be about, sue me).

There’s a coda to all of this in the form of the OGL debacle but I don’t intend to rehash any of it here - it was just like six months ago, come on - beyond what it specifically means for the future of PF2. That will come back up at the very end.

# Pathfinder 2E Basics #

So what, exactly, makes PF2 different from what has come before? There are, in my opinion, four fundamental answers to that question.

First: Unified math and proficiency progression. This piece is likely the part most familiar to 5E players, because 5E proficiency and PF2 proficiency both serve the same purpose, which is to tighten up the math of the game and make it so broken accumulations of bonuses aren’t really a thing. In contrast to 5E’s very limited proficiency, though, which just runs from +2 to +6 over the entire 20 levels of the game, Pathfinder’s scales from +0 to +28. Proficiency isn’t a binary yes/no, the way it is in 5E. PF2’s proficiency comes in five varieties: Untrained, Trained, Expert, Master, and Legendary. Your proficiency bonus is either +0 (Untrained) or your level + 2(Trained), +4 (Expert), +6 (Master) or +8 (Legendary). So if you were level five and Expert at something, your proficiency bonus would be level (5) plus Expert bonus (4) = +9.

Proficiency applies to everything in PF2, really - even more than 5E, if you can believe it, because it also goes into your Armor Class calculation. You can be Untrained, Trained, Expert, Master, or Legendary in various types of armor (or unarmored defense, especially relevant for many casters and monks), and your AC is calculated by your proficiency bonus + your Dex modifier + the armor’s own AC bonus, so AC scales just as attack rolls do. Once you get a handle on PF2 proficiency, you’ve grasped 95% of how any game statistic is calculated, including attacks, saves, skill checks, and AC.

Second: Three-Action Economy. Previous editions of D&D, including 5E, have used a “tiered” action system in combat, like 5E’s division between actions, moves, and bonus actions. PF2 has largely done away with that. At the start of your turn, you get three actions and a reaction, period (barring haste or slow or similar temporary effects). It takes one action to do one basic thing. “Attack” is an action. “Move your speed” is an action. “Ready a weapon” is an action. Searching for a hidden enemy is an action. Taking a guarded step is an action. Etc. The point being, you can do any of those as often as you have the actions for them. You can move three times, attack three times, move twice and attack once, whatever. Yes, this does mean you can attack three times in one turn at 1st level if you really want to (though there are reasons why you might not want to).

Some special abilities and most spells take more than one action to accomplish, so it’s not completely one-to-one, but it’s extremely easy to grasp and quite flexible at the same time. It’s probably my favorite of the innovations PF2 brought to the table.

Third: Deep Character Customization. So here’s where I am going to legitimately complain just a bit about 5E. I struggle with how little mechanical control I, as a player, have over how my character advances in 5E.

Consider an example. It’s common in a lot of 5E games to begin play at 3rd level, since you have a subclass by then, as well as a decent amount of hit points and access to 2nd level spells if you’re a caster. Let’s say you’re playing a fighter in a campaign that begins at 3rd level and is expected to run to 11th. That’s 8+ levels of play, a decent-length campaign by just about anyone’s standards. During that entire stretch of play, which would be a year or more depending on how often your group meets, your fighter will make exactly two (2) meaningful mechanical choices as part of their level-up process: the two points at 4th and 8th levels where you can boost a couple stats or get a feat. That’s it. Everything else is on rails, decided for you the moment you picked your subclass.

Contrast that with PF2. In that same level range, you would get to select: 4 class feats, 4 skill feats, two ancestry feats, two general feats, and four skill increases. At every level, a PF2 player gets to choose at least two things, in addition to whatever automatic bonuses they get from their class. These allow me to tailor my build quite tightly to whatever my idea for my character is and give me cool new things to play with every time I level up. This is true across character classes, casters and martials alike.

PF2 also handles multiclassing and the space that used to be occupied by prestige classes with its “pile o’ feats” approach. You can spend class feats from class A to get some features of class B, but it’s impossible for a multiclass build to just “steal” everything that makes a single class cool. A wizard/fighter will never be as good a fighter as a regular fighter is, and a fighter/wizard will never be the wizard’s match with magic.

Fourth: Four Degrees of Success. 5E applies its nat 20, nat 1, critical hits, etc. rules in a very haphazard fashion. PF2 standardizes this as well, in a way that makes your actual skill with whatever you’re doing matter for how well you do it. Any check in PF2 can produce one of four results: a critical success, a regular success, a regular failure, or a critical failure. In order to get a critical success on a roll, you have to exceed your target DC by 10 or more; in order to get a critical failure, you have to roll 10 or more less than the DC. Where do nat 20s and nat 1s come in? They respectively increase or decrease the level of success you rolled by one step. In practice, it works out a lot like you’re used to with a 5E game, but, for instance, if you have a +30 modifier and are rolling against a DC 18, rolling a nat 1 nets you a total of 31, exceeding the DC by more than 10 and earning you a critical success, which is then reduced to just a normal success by the fact of it being a nat 1. Conversely, rolling against a DC 40 with a +9 modifier can never succeed, because even a nat 20 only earns a 29, more than 10 below the DC and normally a crit failure, only increased to a regular failure by the nat 20.

Now, not every roll will make use of critical successes and critical failures. Attack rolls, for instance, don’t make any inherent distinction between failure and critical failure. (Though there are special abilities that do - try not to critically fail a melee attack against a swashbuckler. The results may be painful.) Skill rolls, however, often do, as do many spells with saving throws. Most spells that allow saves are only completely resisted if the target rolls a critical success. Even on a regular success, there is usually some effect, even on non-damaging rolls. That means that casters very rarely waste their turn on spells that get resisted and accomplish nothing at all. It also doubles the effect of any mechanical bonuses or penalties to a roll, because now there are two spots on a die per +1 or -1 that affect the outcome; a +1 might not only convert a failure to a success but might also convert a success to a crit success, or a crit fail to a regular fail.

# What About Everything Else? #

There is a lot more to it, of course. As a GM I find PF2 incredibly easy to run, even at the highest levels of game play, as compared to other d20 systems. The challenge level calculations work, meaning you can have a solo boss without having to resort to special boss monster rules to provide good challenges. I find the shift from “races” to “ancestries” much less problematic. PF2 has rules for how to handle non-combat time in the dungeon in ways that standardize common rules problems like “Well, you didn’t say you were looking for traps!” Everything using one proficiency calculation lets the game do weird things like having skill checks that target saves, or saves that target skill-based DCs. Inter-class balance, with some very specific exceptions, is beautifully tailored. Perception, always the uber-skill, isn’t a skill at all anymore: everyone is at least Trained in it, and every class reaches at least Expert in it by early double-digit levels. Opportunity Attacks (PF2 still uses the 3rd Ed “Attack of Opportunity” - but will soon be switching over to "Reactive Strike") isn’t an inherent ability of every character and monster, encouraging mobility during combats, and skill actions in combat can lower ACs, saves, attacks, and more, so there are more things to do for more kinds of characters. And so on.

Experiencing all of that is easiest just by playing the game, of course, but suffice it to say PF2 has a lot of QoL improvements for players and GMs alike in addition to the bigger, core-level mechanical differences.

# The OGL Thing #

Last thing, then. In the wake of the OGL shit in January, Paizo announced that it would no longer be releasing Pathfinder material under the OGL, opting instead to work with an intellectual property law firm to develop the Open RPG Creative (ORC) License that would do what the OGL could no longer be trusted to do: remain perpetually free and untouchable for anyone who wanted to publish under it. The ORC isn’t limited specifically to Paizo or to Pathfinder 2E or even to d20 games; any company can release any ruleset under it and allow third-party companies to develop and publish content for it.

Shifting away from the OGL, though, required making some changes to scrub out legacy material. A lot of the basic work was done when they shifted to 2E, but there are still a lot of concepts, terminologies, and potentially infringing ideas seeded throughout the system. These had to go.

Since this meant having to rewrite a lot of their core rules anyway, Paizo opted to not fight destiny and announced “Pathfinder 2nd Edition Remastered” in April. This is a kind of “2.25” edition, with a lot of small changes around the edges and a couple of larger ones to incorporate what they’ve learned since the game first launched four years ago. A couple classes are getting major updates, a ton of spells are either getting renamed or swapped out for non-OGL equivalents, and a couple big things: no more alignment and no more schools of magic.

The first book of the Remaster, Player Core 1, comes out in November, along with the GM Core. Next spring will see Monster Core and next summer will give us Player Core 2. That will complete the Remaster books; everything else is, according to Paizo, going to be compatible enough it won’t need but a few minor tweaks that can be handled via errata. So if you’re thinking about getting into PF2, I’d give serious thought to waiting until November at least, and maybe next summer if you want the whole Remastered package.

And that’s it. That’s my essay on PF2 and what I think makes it cool. The floor is open for questions and I am both very grateful and deeply apologetic to anyone who made it this far.

[usafphantom2]

EP-3E Aries II Spy Plane Has Flown Its Last Operational Mission

Current tensions in the Middle East prolonged the final deployment of the EP-3E Aries II intelligence-gathering aircraft.

Posted on Nov 7, 2024 3:41 PM EST

Another long-serving U.S. military aircraft has completed its final operational deployment, with the return of the U.S. Navy’s EP-3E Aries II surveillance platform from the 5th Fleet area of operations. The countdown to the spy plane’s final retirement is now on, which will see its vital intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) mission handed over fully to the MQ-4C Triton high-altitude, long-endurance drone.

VQ-1

Another long-serving U.S. military aircraft has completed its final operational deployment, with the return of the U.S. Navy’s EP-3E Aries II surveillance platform from the 5th Fleet area of operations. The countdown to the spy plane’s final retirement is now on, which will see its vital intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) mission handed over to the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane, the MQ-4C Triton high-altitude, long-endurance drone, and other assets, including ones in space.

The last EP-3E deployed on operations was Bureau Number, or BuNo 159893, which completed its final flight in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations on October 29. The aircraft then made a homecoming to its base at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, according to the Facebook account of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (VQ-1), the “World Watchers,” which posted photos of the event yesterday.

Ground crew welcome EP-3E BuNo 159893 on its return to Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington. VQ-1/Facebook

The U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations covers approximately 2.5 million square miles of water and includes the Arabian Gulf, Red Sea, Gulf of Oman, as well as parts of the Indian Ocean. The area includes three highly strategic choke points at the Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal, and the Strait of Bab el-Mandeb at the southern tip of Yemen.

The tense security situation in the region at the moment saw the EP-3E’s final operational deployment extended.

240928-N-AC117-1132 (Sept. 28, 2024) A U.S. Navy EP-3E Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System (ARIES) II, assigned to the “World Watchers” of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (VQ-1), transits within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation.

EP-3E BuNo 159893 transits within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation, in a photo dated September 28, 2024. U.S. Navy Commander, Naval Air Forces

Originally, the U.S. Navy had scheduled VQ-1 to cease operations by September 30, 2024, ahead of the formal deactivation of the unit on March 31, 2025.

According to the VQ-1 Facebook account, the squadron was first ordered to delay the cessation of operations until October 8, 2024, after which it was required to continue its missions in the region until an undetermined date.

240928-N-AC117-1118 (Sept. 28, 2024) A U.S. Navy EP-3E Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System (ARIES) II, assigned to the “World Watchers” of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (VQ-1), prepares to take flight within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation.

EP-3E BuNo 159893 prepares to take flight within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation. U.S. Navy Commander, Naval Air Forces

Another VQ-1 EP-3E that had been deployed also recently returned to Whidbey Island, with photos of that aircraft’s homecoming posted by the unit on November 4. This was BuNo 161410 that had been operating from Souda Bay, on the Greek island of Crete, under U.S. Central Command.

For some time now, the Navy has been sending EP-3Es into retirement, delivering them to the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, for storage.

As we reported last month, the most famous EP-3E of all — BuNo 156511, which was involved in a collision with a Chinese J-8 interceptor over Hainan Island in 2001 — has been moved from the AMARG boneyard to go on public display in the future at the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona.

The spy plane at the center of one of the most notorious post-Cold War Today air incidents, a U.S. Navy EP-3E Aries II, has arrived at the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona, for future public display. The EP-3E’s journey to get to the museum has been a long one, starting with the dramatic collision with a Chinese fighter in the so-called Hainan Island incident in 2001.

EP-3E Aries II BuNo 156511 is towed to the Pima Air & Space Museum last month. Pima Air & Space Museum

Pima Air & Space Museum

Meanwhile, the end of the EP-3’s operational commitment after nearly six decades of service has been commemorated by the Navy. A press release from the service included recollections from EP-3E crew members, providing a rare glimpse into a highly secretive community, and one with a very sensitive mission.

“It’s amazing to think of the number of folks who have been part of the EP-3 heritage over the last 55 years,” said Lt. Cmdr. Justin “Gump” Roberts, the VQ-1 detachment officer-in-charge. “Success in this platform has solely been because of our hard-working maintenance team while on deck and our aircrew’s superior ISR while on station. It’s an honor to be part of a legacy that’s bigger than the sum of its parts.”

The aircraft commander at VQ-1, Lt. Bradford “Chad” Holcombe, added that he was “tremendously grateful” to be part of the EP-3E’s history.

“From my first day at VQ-1, it’s been obvious to see the pride each member has in the platform, the mission, and most importantly the effort it takes to execute wherever and whenever we’re asked,” he said. “Flying the last mission flight is a privilege.”

240928-N-AC117-1132 (Sept. 28, 2024) A U.S. Navy EP-3E Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System (ARIES) II, assigned to the “World Watchers” of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (VQ-1), transits within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation.

240928-N-AC117-1132 (Sept. 28, 2024) A U.S. Navy EP-3E Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System (ARIES) II, assigned to the “World Watchers” of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (VQ-1), transits within the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operation. Commander, Naval Air Forces

Finally, words were offered by Capt. Dennis “Rudy” Jensen, Commodore of Task Force 57:

“My father was a P-3 pilot during the Cold War, and I’ve flown the variants of the same aircraft since 2002. Few other airplanes are as ‘time-tested and mother approved’ as the P-3,” Jensen said. “Its longevity and ability to operate from remote locations in austere environments for over half a century is a testament to those who designed, built, maintained, and operated it. Much like the ever-changing platforms onboard the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, the mission systems inside the EP-3E have evolved over time. The ability to evolve has enabled the EP-3E to remain viable and effective through today.”

During its time in operational service, the EP-3E played a fairly covert role as a central intelligence-gathering asset within the Navy’s Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force (MPRF).

Derived from the P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft, the EP-3E was optimized for operations in the maritime/littoral domain. It was packed with equipment to gather real-time tactical signals intelligence (SIGINT), including intercepting communications and locating and classifying emitters, especially those related to hostile air defense systems.

The cabin of the preserved EP-3E BuNo 156511 as it appears now. Pima Air & Space Museum

A typical EP-3E comprised six flight crew and a reconnaissance crew of 18, who would be drawn from the Navy, Marines, and Air Force.

Data could be processed and analyzed onboard by the crew, then fused together with other critical information. The resulting ‘product,’ including full-motion video intelligence, could be provided in near real-time to fleet and theater commanders.

Overall, the EP-3E was able to provide commanders with specific indications and warnings, as well as build a better picture of the battlespace for situational awareness. Intelligence it gathered on air defense systems would be potentially vital for suppression of enemy air defenses and destruction of enemy air defenses, while other information would be used for anti-air warfare and anti-submarine warfare applications.

Successive upgrades ensured that the EP-3E remained a valuable asset and also added new capabilities. While it was primarily a SIGINT platform in the early years, it later became a ‘multi-intelligence reconnaissance aircraft,’ with new equipment that could hoover up a variety of electronic emissions including at long standoff range.

An EP-3E Orion aircraft, center, is followed by two EA-3B Skywarrior aircraft during flight operations near Gibraltar. The three aircraft are from Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 2 (VQ-2).

An EP-3E followed by two EA-3B Skywarriors during flight operations near Gibraltar, circa 1991. The three aircraft are from Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 2 (VQ-2). U.S. Department of Defense PH3 FRANKLIN P. CALL, USN

The EP-3E’s mission saw it operate in various high-threat areas throughout its career. As well as around the coasts of China — which led to the Hainan Island Incident — regular areas of interest included the Mediterranean Sea, the Middle East, and the Caribbean. In the process, intercepts by hostile or potentially hostile fighters were commonplace.

The video below shows an encounter between an EP-3E and a Russian Su-27 Flanker fighter jet over the Black Sea, in 2018. On that occasion, the Navy says the jet came within five feet of the surveillance aircraft, causing a mission abort, and return to base.

Replacing the EP-3E with the MQ-4C has been a gradual process. Tritons have been operating from forward deployment bases in Guam in the Pacific and Sigonella in the Mediterranean, for some time. Most recently, a third Triton deployment base was established in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations, on October 1, allowing the EP-3E to stand down from its duties there.

A Navy MQ-4C Triton drone arrives at NAS Sigonella in Italy on March 30, 2024. U.S. Navy

Flying at a higher altitude and offering a longer endurance than the EP-3E, the MQ-4C offers some significant advantages. While a multi-mission platform, it’s the Triton’s so-called Multi-Intelligence (Multi-Int) configuration with additional electronic and signals intelligence capabilities that will take over from the EP-3E. Since it’s uncrewed, there is also no risk to the crew, something that EP-3E operators were exposed to on a fairly regular basis.

Despite this, in 2022 the Navy decided to dramatically reduce its total planned purchases of MQ-4Cs from 70 to 27. This came after increased questions about the drone’s survivability after one of the interim Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Demonstrator (BAMS-D) aircraft was shot down by Iran in 2019.

Some of the EP-3E’s missions will also be taken over by the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. The baseline Poseidon has a signals intelligence capability, allowing it to detect, geolocate, and classify emissions, including from radars and other air defense nodes, which is also now set to be upgraded. Some P-8s are configured to carry other intelligence-gathering payloads, such as the AN/APS-154 Advanced Airborne Sensor, as well. Boeing has internally funded the development of a modular multi-mission gondola-like pod for Poseidon, which is set to offer an additional way to relatively rapidly integrate sensors and other capabilities.

A U.S. Navy P-8A carrying the AN/APS-154 Advanced Airborne Sensor (AAS), a powerful and secretive radar system mounted in an elongated pontoon-like pod under the fuselage. cvvhrn

“The transition from the EP-3E to the P-8A Poseidon and MQ-4C Triton platforms has been carefully planned to avoid capability gaps,” the Navy says. “These platforms offer enhanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, with greater range, endurance, and the ability to operate in more complex environments.”

The Navy will also be able to leverage other emerging U.S. military ISR assets, including new spaced-based surveillance capabilities.

While the EP-3E’s time is now nearly up, there remain a handful of other Orion variants still in U.S. Navy service. These include P-3C, NP-3C, and NP-3D aircraft flown by Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 30 (VX-30) at Naval Air Station Point Mugu, California, and by Scientific Development Squadron One (VXS-1) at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland. Many of these are also in the process of being replaced.

While many secrets of the EP-3’s exploits are still to be revealed, there’s little doubt that this platform made an enormous contribution to gathering intelligence from hotspots around the globe during its long and eventful period of service.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

[darklordazalin]

Azalin Reviews: Darklord Claude Renier

Darklord: Claude Renier Domain: Richemulot Domain Formation: 694 BC Sources: Realm of Terror (2e), Gazetteer 2 (3e), Gazetteer 3 (3e), Legacy of Blood (3e)

Scholars have determined that prior to being claimed by the Mists, the Renier family was made of two branches – high born nobles that used their influence for the betterment of society and a clan of wererats that did the opposite. The Renier family have a complicated history in the Demiplane of Dread and the first known Reniers to stumble into the Mists settled in Mordent. Their patriarch, Jacques Renier, built the House on Gryphon Hill as well as Heather House, the current dwelling of the Weathermay family. It becomes more complex as the wererat curse developed in Jacques’s offspring, splitting the family further. This rivalry between the human and wererat side of the family only increased when Claude Renier and his pack of wererats fled into the Mists and found themselves in the city of Silbervas in Falkovnia.

Claude quickly integrated his family with the local wererats that lived in the sewers of Silbervas and created a thriving thieves’ guild that integrated with the humanoids of Silbervas. As in the manner of rats, Claude’s influence rapidly multiplied and eventually drew the attention of Falkovnia’s little mercenary, Vlad Drakov and his band of more talented thugs, the Talons. Vlad oversaw the extermination of the wererats in Silbervas and to everyone’s surprise, was quite successful in his endeavors. Over the course of three years, which have been aptly named ‘The Years of the Impaled Rats’, Vlad flushed out the wererats from the sewers of Silbervas causing Claude to flee into the Mists once more.

As if being defeated by Vlad Drakov wasn’t torment enough, the Dark Powers created a prison in the form of Richemulot just for Claude Renier. From Chateau Delanuit in Pont-A-Museau, Claude ruled over the governing bodies of Richemulot as well as his own family. He ruled through manipulation and ensuring the other wererats were too busy vying for his attention to plot against him. He paid particular attention to his twin granddaughters, Jacqueline and Louise Renier. Seeing as Jacqueline eventually usurped her grandfather’s position as the Darklord of Richemulot, one can imagine how well this worked out for the twitchy rat.

Claude Renier is little more than a footnote in Jacqueline’s story. A footnote that was defeated by Vlad Drakov who couldn’t win a battle against a single zombie…I rarely agree with our tormentors, but in this case they were well advised to throw Claude to the rats and deliver the carcass of his domain to Jacqueline.

[vgdensetsu]

Sonic 2 development stories from character designer Judy Totoya

Yasushi Yamaguchi, AKA Judy Totoya, character designer and main graphic designer on Sonic 2, posted a few threads on Twitter for the 30th anniversary of Sonic 2:

About Tails: https://twitter.com/judy_totoya/status/1594372821794586624

“ A picture of him when he was just an admirer of Sonic. He's not chasing him yet. He imitated him and wore gloves and similar coloured shoes, but they were too big and he tied them up with a belt. “

The inclusion of a 2-player mode had already been confirmed and the American team submitted many ideas for creating this character, but the programmer, Mr. Naka, said he wanted to create a 1.5-player character that could be played with their sister (sic) and that even beginners could handle, so we created a character that was not a rival, but a sidekick character. Naka asked us to create a cute character like Urusei Yatsura's pure-hearted fox, and that's what I did.

At first, he only had one tail, but it didn't have enough impact, so I was inspired by Myau from Phantasy Star 1 and came up with the idea of using two tails as propellers. The first Sonic game was a huge success in the US, but not in Japan. So we tried to create a cute design with Japan in mind.

The characterisation and colours were designed to be symmetrical to Sonic's. His relationship with Sonic was determined with the image of Piccolo and the young Son Gohan from Dragon Ball in mind during the production of the game.

As you know, the etymology of the name comes from the word for speed (mph). The name Prower was coined by combining "per hour" and "power Bonus: Myau from Phantasy Star drawn by Judy Totoya for the 6th issue of Sega's official magazine, SPEC, published in September 1990. https://retrocdn.net/images/3/3e/SPEC_6.pdf 

About Super Sonic: https://twitter.com/judy_totoya/status/1594389198852993024

“Due to the main reference, the original story is, needless to say, a secret one, so it was a super secret that only those who cleared a special stage of high difficulty could see. In the first place, Super Sonic would not have been born without the existence of manga artist Sakura Tamakichi (Super Mario Adventures). During the development of Sonic 2, in Famitsu's column 'Shiawase no Katachi', Tamakichi played Sonic 1 desperately to see the true ending, but the result deceived him so much that we decided to give a reward that would definitely pay off in Sonic 2. The basic specification of all Sonic's items with a time limit on the consumption of rings was decided relatively quickly, but the problem was the graphics, as it was impossible to redraw all the patterns in terms of time and capacity. We tried various effects, such as a seven-colour glowing figure, but none of them were good enough. In desperation, I tried drawing the current Super Sonic, but it was not realistic to draw all the patterns, so I replaced only the basic pattern, the transformation pattern and the normal running pattern, and cheated with colour changes for the rest. High-speed running was solved with two flying patterns. This managed to reach a realistic level, so it was implemented as a super-secret only. The schedule was very tight and I started work on the ending picture at 1am on the day of master-up. The program had been dummy-programmed, so all that was left to do was to replace the picture of the final pose, but if we had been an hour short, the Super Sonic picture would not have been ready in time and it would have remained as normal Sonic.“

About Mecha-Sonic: https://twitter.com/judy_totoya/status/1594694031396999168

“Several of his attacks could not be integrated into the game due to time constraints: long laser shot from his eye, homing missiles from its fingers (10 shots in total), Super Gravity Smash (a gravity projectile that disappears after a certain amount of time, but sucks up the rings if it gets too close), which is launched when his chest armour opens.

Due to the schedule, the creation of the Death Egg zone map was cancelled and replaced by two consecutive boss battles in the dedicated boss room, but originally Mecha-Sonic was planned to appear as a mid-boss in the middle of the zone.

Its design concept was based on the image of Mechagodzilla and Gigan, with a strong and painful look. “

(note: the designers also took inspiration from Gamera for one of the enemies) 

“After the game's graphics were completed, the blades would be flown during jump-rotation attacks as an additional attack, but they were completely retrofitted, so it was not clear where they would come from. “

About Sonic's sprite: https://twitter.com/judy_totoya/status/1595403450845892608 https://twitter.com/judy_totoya/status/1595443192803266561

"Sonic 2 uses the same basic pattern as Sonic 1, except for the additional pattern (only the running has longer legs). There was one palette for one character in Sonic 1, while Sonic 2 uses one palette for two characters, so the blue gradient has been reduced." Note: on Megadrive, 4 colour palettes can be displayed on screen. A palette consists of 16 colours, one of which is used as a transparent layer to display the elements behind the sprite. Red has been reduced from 3 to 2 shades. The yellow used for Eggman, which has the same palette as Sonic, has been adjusted slightly to orange and used as the main colour for Tails. The shade of red that was removed has been replaced with a shade of orange. "I wasn't involved, but I think it was very difficult to control the palette in Sonic 3 because the number of characters increased even more. "By the way, the enemies and the user interface (UI) have the same palette, but the bosses lacked color, so I used the black of the UI shadow for them. That's why when you damage a boss, the black part of it and the black part of the UI shadow will flash."

[ultimateoptimus]

SKUBA Invader Zim: Upgraded

Skool Sport SKUBAgents

Dib AKA Agent Mothman and Gaz, the Membrane Siblings (with Dib's Swollen Eyeball and Grey Smiley and Gaz' Skull as their former Skool symbols) and Gretchen of the Rejektz (with a heavily modded "No" sign to resemble an "R" as her former Skool symbol) are back underwater SKUBA diving in their brand new, sporty, custom colored and printed and ultra-stretchy and ultra-comfortable Membrane Laboratory Boyz' and Girlz' Skoolkidz Sport Stealth Swimwear, Swim Caps, Swim Gloves and Swim Socks crafted out of patented Membrane Laboratory Ultra-Stretch Stealth Swimwear Fabrics for that body-hugging, form-fitting stretch and comfort fit for Skool sports swimmers, the Ultra-Stretch Swim Caps can perfectly fit and hug any unique hairstyle form without breaking at all and the level of military-grade waterproof durability that can survive more than one direct Irken Orbital Water Balloon Bombardment hit and numerous SKUBA trips to Pandora's Quadrangle and Atlantis thanks to that fabric and brand new, just as custom colored and printed and unique Membrane Laboratory Skoolkidz' Sport Stealth Masks, Snorkels and Fins and All-In-One Backpack Air Tank OmniModular Skoolkidz' Sport Stealth SKUBA Rigs and Emergency Mini-SKUBA Systems!

Dib Membrane's Skoolkid Sport Stealth SKUBA Rig: Self-Inflating Sport Stealth Horsecollar Dive Vest with Mini-Air Bottle and Air-Integrated Regulator (AIR) and Double Hose Regulator Gretchen's Skoolkid Sport Stealth SKUBA Rig: Girlz' Sport Stealth Dive Jacket with Air-Integrated Regulator and Snorkelator Gaz Membrane's Skoolkid Sport Stealth SKUBA Rig: Girlz' Sport Stealth Wing Dive Jacket with Air-Integrated Regulator and Double Hose Regulator

Anatomy Of An Irken SKUBA Invader

[/////CLASSIFIED/////]

[By Order Of The Almighty Tallest Of The Irken Empire]

<Hacked And Translated From Irken By UltimateOptimus of The Swollen Eyeball Network>

Zim, the Irken Invader-in-Exile, more recently a newly made and approved Irken SKUBA Invader for underwater operations in Earth's waters (be it the Skool swimming pool, NASAPlace's NBL, the open waters of Earth's beaches and oceans, Zim-2002's universe or The City Sewers), infamous Irken Defect responsible for Operation IMPENDING DOOM I's failure (in a long, sorry history of collective disasters he inflicted upon the Irken race, Planet Irk and the Empire at large) and the poster child of the "little green men from outer space" stereotype, like most of his standard-issue insectoid clone kin has his Irken Standard-Issue SKUBA Invader Swimwear and SKUBA Gear - basically the swimming and SCUBA version of his standard-issue Irken Invader uniform and gear with Zim's personal mods.

A more minimalist, sleeker and all-in-one affair compared to the bulkier Earthenoid SCUBA gear used by Dib, Gaz, Gretchen and the rest of the Skoolkidz, Zim's SKUBA Invader Gear makes him faster and more maneuverable underwater when SKUBA diving and able to squeeze through tight underwater spots during underwater saucer exploration.

1: SKUBA Invader Swim Cap 2: SKUBA Invader Smart Dive Mask

3: SKUBA-PAK The SKUBA-PAK itself, an auxiliary brain loaded with all the standary array of weapons and tools also serving as the SKUBA Invader's air tank with the atmosphere processor refilling the SKUBA-PAK at the surface when the SKUBA Invader surfaces. [/////WARNING/////]: Removal of SKUBA-PAK will reduce the SKUBA Invader's lifespan to 10 MINUTES Earth Standard Time and triggers Lifeclock countdown to TERMINATION unless reattached IMMEDIATELY. Removal of SKUBA-PAK while underwater STRICTLY not recommended. 3A: SKUBA-PAK Main Air Tank 3B: SKUBA-PAK OmniModular Regulator 3C: SKUBA-PAK Deployable Inflatable/Breathable Horsecollar Dive Vest 3D: DDV OmniModular Air-Integrated Regulator (AIR) 3E: Mini-SKUBA Air Tank OmniModules

4: SKUBA Invader Boys' Beachbody Swimwear 5: SKUBA Invader Swim Gloves 6: Emergency Mini-SKUBA System 7: Snorkelator Snorkel OmniModule 8: SKUBA Invader Dive Boot-Fins 9: Water Repellant Pastescreen

<Dear Zim the Irken Bug: 

If you're reading this message, that means I, a lowly Earthenoid of The Swollen Eyeball Network, just got your Invasion Base Computer h4xx0r3d and shared your SKUBA Invader anatomy and schematics far and wide to the Big Wide World O' Cyberspace to behold. Enjoy!

- UO>

@aae-demon-zone333

[aboleth-workshop]

D&D 3e/3.5 Homebrew Requests!

Hi there friends! Do you like Dungeons & Dragons (specifically 3e/3.5 edition)? Do you like to read or use homebrew in your own campaigns?

Well, Aboleth Eye is happily taking requests for new homebrew ideas! They already have such a huge amount of ideas ready and free to be used! Check them out here!

Have a character option in mind you'd love to see written out with lore and abilities? A fantasy race and culture of lore? A unique class option for your players?

What about a magic item you'd love to integrate into your own campaigns?

Or, perhaps you'd love to see something fresh in the Aboleth Eye Bestiary? From behemoths to tiny little friends, all ideas welcome!

Maybe you are a Dungeon Master that wants a hook or seed for your own campaign? Something to bridge together two great ideas you already have, or a plot to introduce something new for your players?

Ideas are all welcome (within reason)! Send your requests to either @aboleth-workshop or @aboleth-eye! And let's get November rolling with new ttrpg stories!

And feel free to read all about the wondrous creatures, classes and races we've done already!

Thanks,

Aboleth Eye

[sahraeyll]

Top 10 Medical Billing Companies to Streamline Your Practice in 2023

Top 10 Medical Billing Companies⁢ to Streamline Your Practice in 2023

Top 10 ‌Medical Billing Companies to Streamline Your Practice in 2023

In ‍today’s complex ​healthcare environment, efficient medical billing is critical ​for maintaining the financial ⁣health of medical practices. Outsourcing ⁢medical billing ⁤can⁤ streamline⁢ operations, reduce costs, and ultimately improve patient satisfaction. In this article, we’ll ⁢delve into the ⁤ top 10‌ medical billing companies in 2023 that promise to enhance the billing‌ process for healthcare providers.

Why Choose⁢ a ⁤Medical ​Billing Company?

Expertise: ⁢Medical ‍billing companies ⁣employ‍ specialists proficient in billing codes and regulations.

Efficiency: Streamlined processes reduce time spent⁤ on billing, enabling healthcare providers to focus on patient care.

Cost-Effective: Outsourcing billing can save on in-house hiring and training costs.

Regulatory Compliance: Stay updated with the latest coding and compliance‍ regulations to avoid audits and​ penalties.

Top 10 Medical Billing Companies in ‌2023

Company‌ Name

Specialties

Key ‌Features

Website

1. eCatalyst Healthcare Solutions

Multi-specialty

Cloud-based, RCM experts, 24/7 ‍support

ecatalysthealth.com

2. AdvancedMD

General Practices

End-to-end billing, customizable solutions

advancedmd.com

3. Kareo

Small Practices

User-friendly interface, integrated EHR

kareo.com

4. Medical Billing ‌Wholesalers

Specialty-focused

Affordable pricing, detailed reports

billingwholesalers.com

5. Optimum Healthcare IT

Hospitals, Practices

Data ⁤analytics, revenue cycle optimization

optimumhealthcareit.com

6. MedBillingExperts

Multi-specialty

Comprehensive ⁤billing solutions, 24/7 ‌support

medbillingexperts.com

7. athenahealth

All​ specialties

Cloud-based management,​ payer connections

athenahealth.com

8. CareCloud

Hospitals, ​Practices

Integrated revenue cycle, patient engagement

carecloud.com

9. MediBill

Behavioral health

Tailored solutions, experienced staff

medibill.com

10.⁣ 3E Technologies

Multi-specialty

Proven track record, personalized service

3etechnologies.com

Benefits of⁤ Choosing a⁤ Medical Billing Company

Employing a medical billing company offers several advantages:

Increased Revenue: Companies specialize in ​maximizing reimbursements⁢ through expert coding and submission practices.

Reduced Errors: Advanced ​technology and ⁣experienced⁤ specialists minimize billing mistakes, leading to faster reimbursements.

Scalability: Services can be ⁣adapted to‌ the size and needs of your practice, whether you’re‍ a solo⁢ practitioner or a large healthcare organization.

Practical Tips for Choosing the Right Medical⁤ Billing Company

Assess ⁤Your Needs: Determine ⁣if​ you want full-service ‌billing or specific services ⁤such ​as coding or‌ accounts receivable management.

Check Credentials: ⁣Verify the ⁣company’s qualifications, ‌experience,‍ and compliance with healthcare regulations.

Read Reviews: Look for ‌client testimonials to gauge reliability and service quality.

Request a Demo: Many companies offer free ​trials or demonstrations ​to⁣ allow ‍you to evaluate their services.

Case Studies: Success Stories from Practices Using Medical Billing Companies

One medical⁤ group saw a 30% increase in revenue within six​ months of​ switching to eCatalyst Healthcare Solutions. Their personalized approach and thorough reporting led to improved⁤ collections and more accurate ​billing ‍practices.

Another practice, using AdvancedMD, improved patient engagement by ⁤integrating their billing ‌system with their EHR, resulting in ⁢quicker payments and enhanced patient satisfaction.

First-Hand Experience

As a healthcare provider who transitioned to using Kareo, I ‌experienced significant‌ improvement in‌ billing efficiency. Their user-friendly software allowed my ⁣staff to quickly manage claims, and the ⁢customer support​ team was always ready to assist. This change not only ⁢reduced our billing errors but also⁢ freed up time for us to focus more on patient care.

Conclusion

In the competitive landscape of healthcare,‌ partnering with the right‌ medical billing company ⁣can‍ dramatically improve the efficiency ⁢and profitability of your ⁢practice. From increasing revenue to reducing administrative burdens, the options outlined in this article provide various solutions tailored to⁣ meet your ⁣specific needs. Evaluate each option carefully and choose‍ a partner‌ that aligns with your practice objectives to ensure optimal ​performance in 2023 and⁢ beyond.

https://medicalbillingcertificationprograms.org/top-10-medical-billing-companies-to-streamline-your-practice-in-2023/

[altrbody]

"The 3ecologies project is an autonomous organization dedicated to participatory experimentation in research-creation. It operates at the intersection of artistic practice, philosophy, and community engagement, building on the nearly two decades of experience of its former parent organization, SenseLab. Its aim is to catalyze the emergence of new forms of creative collaboration across disciplinary boundaries, and to disseminate the resulting “techniques of relation” for adoption by artists and social actors, for adaptation to their needs. It seeks to operate as a “process seed bank” disseminating seeds of creative practice that can impart self-organizing momentum to outside artists, collectives, and organizations.

The 3e project operates as an extra-university research and learning environment, according to the principles of a processual gift economy. It is dedicated to an ethos of radical openness. A nonprofit organization registered in Quebec, all of its activities are open to all and free of charge. 3e places special emphasis on creating a welcoming environment for neurodiversity, not only supportive of but positively learning from the normally undervalued experiential and perceptual worlds of pathologized and racialized communities. The perspective is ecological, in an expanded sense adopted from philosopher/activist Felix Guattari. The “three ecologies” are the social, the environmental, and the conceptual, as they enmesh in every event. 3e poses the question of sustainability in that expanded framework.

3e operates as a node in the international network developed by the SenseLab, which includes over 800 participants worldwide, with active local groups in Montreal, Australia, Brazil, and several locations in Europe, and formal partnerships with more than two dozen university and art-organization partners. Distance collaboration tools are used to cross-pollinate ideas and approaches between network members. Activities cycle between online collaboration and live participatory research-creation events of experimental format. The development of new digital tools for cycling between locally embodied and networked online interactions as part of an integrated “creative process engine” is a long-term goal of 3e."

[jcmarchi]

Akhilesh Tripathi, CEO of Digitate – Interview Series

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/akhilesh-tripathi-ceo-of-digitate-interview-series/

Akhilesh Tripathi, CEO of Digitate – Interview Series

Digitate CEO Akhilesh Tripathi joined the company in 2015 to launch its flagship product, ignio™. Under his leadership, ignio became one of the fastest-growing enterprise applications, with a global customer base spanning many industries and Fortune 500 companies. Previously, Akhilesh  served as the head of Canada for TCS (Tata Consultancy Service), where he grew the entity from a small, relatively unknown firm to a perennial top 10 service provider. His 25-year career with TCS has also included serving as Head of Enterprise Solutions and Technology Practices for TCS in North America.

Digitate uses machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) to manage IT and business operations. Its product, ignio™, is a cognitive automation solution designed to help IT teams identify and address outages quickly. Ignio includes pre-built knowledge aimed at enabling faster adoption of AI compared to other solutions. It connects various business applications, processes, and infrastructure to support decision-making and perform actions autonomously.

What was your vision for Digitate when you first joined in 2015, and how has that vision evolved over time?

When I first joined Digitate in 2015, my vision was to push forward a new way of thinking that shifts enterprises from a people-first model to a technology-first approach. By leveraging AI and automation, we would allow machines to become the initial handlers of tasks while humans became the handles of exceptions.  Over time, this vision has evolved to encompass a broader goal: helping enterprises achieve what we call the “autonomous enterprise” journey. This involves leveraging unified observability, AI-driven insights, and closed-loop automation to ensure that our customers can manage their increasingly complex IT environments with minimal human intervention. Today, Digitate is all about empowering enterprises to not just react to problems but to proactively prevent them, ensuring operational resilience and continuous value creation.

How do you foresee the future of AI-driven enterprise solutions, particularly in the context of automation and autonomous operations?

The future of AI-driven enterprise solutions is incredibly promising. We’re on the brink of a transformative shift where AI doesn’t just assist with tasks but fundamentally changes how enterprises operate at a core level. We’re already seeing AI-driven solutions becoming even more integrated into every facet of business operations. The goal is for enterprises to use AI and automation not just for automating routine tasks, but for making real-time decisions, optimizing operations across diverse environments, and predicting and preventing issues before they arise.

This shift towards autonomy is particularly exciting. As AI continues to evolve, we’ll see more systems that can self-manage, self-heal, and even self-optimize without the need for constant human intervention. This is already at play in our closed-loop model, allowing teams to focus on more strategic tasks rather than being bogged down.

What are the key challenges you’ve faced in scaling Digitate globally, and how did you overcome them?

Digitate is pioneering a new category, and as we scale globally, it’s important to build interest in our vision of the autonomous enterprise and communicate the value we offer. Many people still think that data silos and automation are the status quo, but we believe they don’t have to be. To tackle this, I’ve instructed my team to focus on what I call the 3Es: excite, educate, and execute.

Education is crucial because we need businesses to be open to taking risks, and this often requires a leadership mindset that embraces new technology and innovative perspectives. After we have educated and inspired our audience, we must follow through during the implementation phase. It is essential that we keep our promises – our goal is to deliver on what we commit to.

What inspired the development of Digitate’s flagship product, ignio™, and what sets it apart in the market?

ignio™ was developed with a vision to revolutionize how businesses approach IT operations by embedding intelligence and automation at its core. The inspiration came from our deep understanding of the pain points that IT teams face daily: lengthy resolution times, fragmented visibility across systems, and the sheer volume of alerts that overwhelm human operators. We wanted to create a solution that could not only detect and resolve issues faster but also predict and prevent them from occurring in the first place. This led to the concept of an autonomous enterprise, where ignio™ acts as the digital brain, continuously learning from the environment, correlating data, and taking automated actions to ensure smooth, uninterrupted operations.

What sets ignio™ apart in the market is its ability to combine unified observability, AI-driven insights, and closed-loop automation into a single platform. Unlike other solutions that focus on individual aspects of IT management, ignio™ offers an integrated approach that addresses the entire lifecycle of IT operations.

Can you share how Digitate is leveraging AI to enhance predictive analytics and proactive problem management in IT operations?

As the buzz around GenAI continues to captivate the tech industry, it’s easy for enterprises to get swept up in the excitement and rush into implementation. However, in this enthusiasm, there is a real risk of overlooking foundational principles and best practices, which can lead to significant challenges down the road.

To navigate this, we emphasize the importance of data readiness and governance. We know that AI, no matter how sophisticated, is only as good as the data it operates on. Our ignio™ platform, for example, leverages AI to enhance predictive analytics and proactive problem management in IT operations. However, these capabilities are only fully realized when they are supported by high-quality data and robust methodologies. This strategic focus allows us to harness the power of AI effectively, driving true digital transformation while minimizing risks associated with the hype cycle.

How does Digitate ensure that ignio™ stays ahead of the curve in a rapidly evolving tech landscape?

At Digitate, we ensure that ignio™ remains at the forefront of the rapidly evolving tech landscape by continuously innovating and refining our platform to meet the dynamic needs of modern enterprises. We do this by leveraging a combination of advanced AI, machine learning, and a closed-loop automation approach to keep our systems ahead of the curve.

Our ignio™ AIOps platform is designed to tackle a wide range of problems enterprises face in IT and business operations across industries. “We use AI and automation to predict and solve issues before they impact key business KPIs, such as revenue assurance and customer satisfaction. Our proactive approach transforms IT from reactive to predictive, creating an environment where AI and ML systems solve errors automatically in real time, eliminating the need for tickets. With GenAI, we accelerate innovation and reduce manual effort in finding and solving issues, leading to faster time to value.”

In your opinion, what role will AI and automation play in shaping the future of digital operations across industries?

As we look towards the future of AI, we’re entering an era where human-AI collaboration is set to become more seamless and intuitive. The advancements in AI capabilities are leading us towards a new paradigm of augmented intelligence, where AI doesn’t just automate tasks but works alongside humans, enhancing our abilities through continuous learning and real-time insights. We’re particularly focused on how AI can mimic and adapt to human behaviors, making interactions more natural and conversational. This shift is crucial as it allows AI to fit more organically into daily workflows, whether it is through decision-making processes, predictive analytics, or even customer interactions.

However, with these advancements come significant challenges. For one, the opacity of AI systems, often referred to as “black boxes,” makes debugging and maintenance more complex than traditional software. This requires us to develop new skills and processes to ensure that AI systems are reliable and trustworthy. Change management is another critical area. As AI becomes more embedded in our operations, there is a natural resistance that can emerge, both from individuals accustomed to traditional workflows and from regulatory bodies concerned about the implications on employment and job roles. Addressing these concerns requires a thoughtful approach that balances innovation with empathy and strategic foresight. Cybersecurity and privacy risks are also escalating as AI systems become more pervasive. The more we rely on AI, the more attractive these systems become to malicious actors, including potential state-sponsored threats.

Despite these challenges, the potential for growth and innovation in AI-driven collaboration is immense. The market is ripe with opportunities, and businesses that invest in integrating AI with a focus on transparency, augmented intelligence, and seamless human interaction will be well-positioned to lead in this evolving landscape. At Digitate, we’re excited about the role our technology will play in shaping this future, driving both operational efficiency and transformative business outcomes.

How is Digitate addressing the growing demand for AI-driven solutions in sectors like retail, manufacturing, and financial services?

Digitate is addressing the growing demand for AI-driven solutions by developing industry-specific offerings that meet the unique needs of sectors like retail, manufacturing, and financial services. In retail, for example, ignio™ helps optimize supply chain operations and enhance customer experiences by predicting and preventing disruptions. In manufacturing, we enable smarter production processes through predictive maintenance and automated quality control. In financial services, our AI-driven insights support fraud detection, compliance, and risk management. By tailoring our solutions to the specific challenges of each industry, we help our customers drive innovation and maintain a competitive edge.

What are the most significant industry trends you’re seeing right now, and how is Digitate adapting to them?

One of the most significant trends we’re observing in the AI industry is the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly their evolving specialization and multimodal capabilities. These models are not just becoming more powerful in a general sense. They’re also increasingly tailored to specific industries and tasks, which opens up new possibilities for AI-driven solutions across various domains.

We’re closely following these developments, particularly the trend towards domain and industry specialization in LLMs. As companies look to maintain their competitive edge, they’re investing in LLMs that can understand and operate within the specific contexts of their industries. This means that LLMs are being customized to handle industry-specific jargon, concepts, and challenges with a level of precision that was previously unattainable. We see this as a crucial area for us to integrate into our own offerings, especially as we aim to provide more targeted, actionable insights for our clients across different sectors.

Commonsense reasoning and factual grounding are also critical areas where LLMs are making strides. As these models become better at understanding real-world contexts and maintaining factual accuracy, the reliability and usefulness of AI in enterprise settings will grow exponentially.

With over 20 years in the IT industry, what key leadership lessons have you learned, particularly in leading innovative tech companies?

In my 20 years in the IT industry, I’ve learned that having a clear purpose and a sense of curiosity is crucial for leading innovative tech companies. A strong purpose drives passion, creating an ongoing cycle of innovation. When innovation is fueled by a compelling purpose, it has greater staying power, enabling companies to overcome challenges and stay competitive in the long run. It’s important to note that each person’s purpose may differ, and as a leader, it’s vital to align an individual’s purpose with the overall organizational goals to maximize their potential.

Curiosity is equally important. The drive to learn, explore new ideas, and create something new is what pushes a company forward. The real magic happens when purpose and curiosity come together. This is where innovation and creativity thrive, allowing us to make breakthroughs and lead in the industry.

Thank you for the great interview, readers who wish to learn more should visit Digitate.