Yes, that’s what I wanted to know. So alas, no out-of-the-box magic for me…I find it incredibly frustrating that in 2023 one can’t simply copy-paste text from one local console to another. It seems like a basic function for a terminal-based *nix systems which doesn’t exist. I know it’s complicated even at the first glance, with huge security implications (like copying text in the root terminal and pasting it to a user one) but I believe it’s all solvable

There’s a gif on GitHub page, but it doesn’t make it obvious (for me) if this software can help with “regular” copy/paste. What if I’m logged into two tty sessions at once, can I copy text in nano in one tty and paste it in other editor, like micro, in the other tty? With some universal hotkey?

It’s interesting, as most players I know consider bonds mechanics as “least working” in DW. I prefer Homebrew World implementation, where people ask set of questions. For example, questions from “Fighter” playbook:

• Which of you have I sworn to protect?
• Which of you am I most worried about?
• Which of you has my back?
• Which of you has been flirting with me?

So, fighter player asks them one by one, and any other player can answer “it’s me” when he likes the question and want to establish that bond. Then they talk a little bit discussing details, and switch to next answer / next player.

We have like 15 of them here…

What’s the point to have “Ideals” next to “Alignment”? Are they mechanically different?

Ok, as I’ve mostly play Dungeon World and hacks recently…

DW: Unlimited Edition: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pv6kVVJhbJi1vr8hVeWh1NqrDQJKgY1B/view

Homebrew World: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oLQ6QUT9LgOZuzoB_YqUaCjfPGYEOlud/view

Not the best example cause DW tries to mimic D&D to some extent, using words like “Alignment”, “Good”, “Lawful” etc but I’ll leave it here too, just for comparison…Dungeon World: https://dungeon-world.com/downloads/Dungeon_World_Play_Sheets.pdf

As you can see, this kind of alignment has two parts, (kinda) vague name and very specific description, which tells what character should do to gain XP. But sure you’ll gain XP for doing something that fits well with “vague” name.

It’s pretty standard thing in systems other than dnd, called “drives” or “motivation”. There are plenty of them, not only nine. And there’s no need for axis, and no need for names like “path or some shit” too.

All the meet in pbta you’re supposed to get on zero session. So you just should play the system as intended. Huge bonus: for 3 PCs in game, you’ll get x4 mind power to create setting.

DM should adapt… like, okay we’ll summon another demon, just less powerful

I can’t subscribe for communities from lemmy.ml - [email protected] for example. It just show zero posts. Why is that?

It’s much worse in Lemmy due its “federative” nature. For example, for “Dungeons&Dragons” - in reddit you have 9 subs in search, 2 of them are memes-related, 3 are “general” ones, 2 for DnD5e, 1 for DnD3.5 and 1 for UK people. They have clear distinction at least in their names, and sometimes have separate “theme”, like the one for 3.5 edition. In lemmy we already have 14, most of them have same name, literally letter to letter. And don’t forget that lemmy’s userbase is ~6000+ times less than reddit. People just continue to create new instances and same comminities, over and over.

Meta-communities in two flawors:

• user/UI-based, where the user can create an entry in his preferences, add a bunch of communities there and set which one will be its “facade”. The main “con” here that every single user should do a lot of work by himself
• server-based, where you can create new meta-community, add your own community there, and send invites to all similar communities to join. Every community that joined could(should?) be removed from discovery, but be visible as “nested”. Search by its name should lead to meta-community. Ownership of meta-community should belong to its members in term that not a single one could delete it or make any harm. Meta-community exists while there’s at least one member in it.

Important part that one to be careful about combining feeds. Small cozy community can just dissolve in valley of posts from much larger one. The thing is controversial, on one hand it’s really handy to see all the posts all at once, on the other hand - it can kill smaller communities, as their creators will lose the sense and desire to have them maintained. There are different solutions:

Meta-communities in two flawors:

• user/UI-based, where the user can create an entry in his preferences, add a bunch of communities there and set which one will be its “facade”. The main “con” here that every single user should do a lot of work by himself
• server-based, where you can create new meta-community, add your own community there, and send invites to all similar communities to join. Every community that joined could(should?) be removed from discovery, but be visible as “nested”. Search by its name should lead to meta-community. Ownership of such meta-community should belong to its members in term that not a single one could delete it or make any harm. Meta-community exists while there’s at least one member in it. Picture of meta-community in discovery could be anything, one can take it from most populated member community, but user could be able to change it in his preferences to any other member.

Important part that one to be careful about combining feeds. Small cozy community can just dissolve in valley of posts from much larger ones. The thing is controversial, on one hand it’s really handy to see all the posts all at once, on the other hand - it can kill smaller communities, as their creators will lose the sense and desire to have them maintained. There are different solutions:

• Make feed combined, but give posts from smaller community higher priority
• Make user to switch feed manually and let hit set “default” to show when you open meta-community
• Give user a choice between two

To me, manual changing feeds feels more healthy for a smaller ones.