Surrealism is not nonsense. It has a purpose, even if that purpose is hard to tell. If you think Dali and AI slop is the same, you don’t understand either.
Surrealism is not nonsense. It has a purpose, even if that purpose is hard to tell. If you think Dali and AI slop is the same, you don’t understand either.
AI is like a housefire. Nobody wants it. Nobody needs it. It’s just a bad thing, and if someone sees it, they’re more than justified in being upset and trying to get rid of it. Don’t defend the fire, or you’ll be the first to burn.
So is toast.
I’ll stop saying it if it stops being true.
False. Porn is sexy, and I can’t possibly be aroused by an image of a woman spreading her cheeks when her fingers are attached to her arse with a continuous piece of flesh, giving her skin the same topography as a teapot.
Funny. Every time someone points out how god awful AI is, someone else comes along to say “It’s just a tool, and it’s good if someone can use it properly.” But nobody who uses it treats it like “just a tool.” They think it’s a workman they can claim the credit for, as if a hammer could replace the carpenter.
Plus, the only people good enough to fix the problems caused by this “tool” don’t need to use it in the first place.
I have thought about this in embarrassing depth.
The first reason I can think of is when sex isn’t an option. Maybe you’re in a long distance relationship or something. It gives a good structure to what is essentially phone sex.
The second reason is as a form of foreplay. We already have sexy roleplay in the sheets to help set the mood, and now we’re just using character sheets instead of bed sheets. Then your “what would you like to do” can be followed by a demonstration.
This is why I think sexy RPGs should be designed for couples.
There’s another all-time-worst game called Racial Holy War, which is exactly what you’d assume from the title. And yes, it’s incompetently made to the point where they didn’t include mechanics for ATTACKING.
Looks good. Approve
I was once GMing for that same bestie in a 3d6-based system. I told her to roll, then realised her stats weren’t high enough for her to succeed, so told her not to. She gave me a look, picked up the dice, and rolled a crit. Out of SPITE. And this is 3d6, so it’s a 1 in 216 chance.
She didn’t need to manipulate me. Either I went along with it, or my dice would be forever cursed.
My bestie had a character who only had a +1 in Charisma, but this was the highest in the party, so she became the party face. And she never rolled lower than 19 total when making Charisma checks for that character. The dice clearly had plans.
Most tools aren’t actively detrimental to use, though. It’s like a hammer where the handle is covered in spikes. Even if you’re a genius and know how to hold it without cutting your hand, most people would just use a different hammer. And I’m not going to let that toolsmith off the hook, either.
I don’t think you understand D&D that well. The DM is the GM, because those are synonyms. The DM needs to know everything happening at the table, or it’s not a thing that actually happens. The DM is not the enemy.
I get that this is political satire, but this isn’t the sub for that.
Yes, and that game genre is dating sim, with some crpg elements sprinkled in for variety.
Ironically, Elon Musk has a cameo in that movie. But he pretends to be a success, so Justin Hammer’s still a better fit.
It was very funny to see them say that, then say “no assholes” with a straight face.
This image makes me feel normal and nobody can prove otherwise.
I know. The scene triggers once you fail the quest, which is once you lift the shadow curse. You haven’t gotten the scene because you haven’t failed the quest. Be patient.
It’s not long-rest timed. You can still kill Isobel at any point while the shadow curse remains, so until you lift the curse, you haven’t failed the quest.
It’s not dada. It’s too coherent to be dada, and it’s too shit to be anything else.
In order for something to be an artistic choice, it has to be a choice. It has to have meaning and intent. AI did not choose to put a glass there, it calculated that there was probably a glass there based on shitty reasoning. AI does not have the creative capacity to make art. It can only make images, and those images are shit.
You’ve thoroughly proven you can’t tell between slop and high art, so thank you for the compliment of my critique.