Some folks very kindly put up a French version of the blorb principles.

Kind of love this idea.

I mean, in combination with some gloracular, tier-two–truthy way to get monster stats (including number appearing) if using a system that uses monster stats.

I don’t remember why I disliked the underclock and I’ve never even heard of the overloaded dice but this fusion seems like it’d work great.

Li’l known fact: my predecessor to the blorb principles was written for… GURPS?!

(I am 2097 on that forum.)

Someone on Fedi told me that this game is inspired by some of my writings (among other influences, I’m sure). Looks like it has a lot of the stuff I love, not just fighting but day-to-day living, crafting, logistics.

Once more stumbling into so much discourse about me that I had never heard of.

First of all, they’re codifying one variant of antiblorb.

And to Technoskald but that one I had seen and dug before!

Dwiz (is that someone from S-G or WRNU? They seemed to have a rock solid grasp on my mighty works) also linked to.

Great! Similar vibes to my own “riss” except I wrote RISS before I became a good writer and it shows.

This is great.

“Designer (?)”, I love that.

Via A Reyes on dice.camp.

Here is another thread slagging PWL.

To me, the only alternative to PWL is to have the DM serve up a string of encounters that’s one-by-one “balanced” against the party at that level. Meaning that it’s in some way the DM’s fault if the party loses (overly easily wins). It’s a playstyle with some pros and cons.

The fun with PWL is that you can have a more exploratory type of game world where the world is what it is and the monsters in that world are what they are and you run into them or you run from them. It can be set up such that more distant = more dangerous, but monsters are only balanced relative each other, not the party“. That kind of game is my jam. It also has some pros and cons.

Main point is that PWL, or the gist behind PWL, isn’t just all bad, always bad, misguided, 5e-wannabee stuff. There is an actual point to it.

A frustrating thread about PF’s “Proficiency Without Level” variant because the upvoted commenters (who are slagging the variant) don’t address the reason for the variant, which is to enable more exploratory, less linear/​“curated”/​pathy play.

I’m grateful Paizo made the variant and put it in their book. I hear people say the math is a li’l off(…?) but this variant is almost necessary for play that stretches across larger locations. The traditional towns/overworlds/dungeons setups.

Wonderful #blorb posts by malinux!

Great approach to generating wilderness hexmaps with a lot of semanticity.

Luke Gearing generously posted some side-by-side comparisons of bullet points vs prose.

It’s great that he did this because we almost never get to see extended examples of how the exact same location would look like with bullets or with prose. I just prefer the bullets.

Warms my li’l heart to see people out there use the phrase “diegetic mechanics” in the canonical way. 🥰